Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Cam Newton should be paid more than Luck or Wilson


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

Cam Newton should be paid more than Luck or Wilson. 

 

If you ask yourself what percentage of the overall offensive success is each QB responsible for, Cam Newton comes out well above Andrew Luck or Russell Wilson. Cam Newton and his legs are the main reason the Panthers offense had any success at all last season. If not for his ability to stay alive with his physical talents when linemen and linebackers are chasing him, the Panthers would have been ranked dead last in the league. 

 

In other words, Cam Newton is a huge band-aid holding together an inept offense. Partly due to lack of weapons, partly due to a below average coordinator, the Panthers offense was more of a hindrance than a help in the playoff race. Whatever the reasons for the bad offense, Cam Newton made sure it was at least competitive. 

 

I'm not saying Cam Newton will get more money. I'm not saying the Panthers will pay more money. 

 

I'm saying if you look at the situation objectively, Cam and his agent have a serious argument for more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree on the notion that Cam is more valuable and integral to our offense than Wilson from a casual glance. I have a hard time saying he is more important than Luck is to the Colts.

 

 

Which team would see more of a drop in offensive performance if they had to start a decent journeyman QB? 

 

The Colts would drop a bit, but not nearly as much as the Panthers would. I'm not sure a journeyman QB would even survive three games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Panthers were 2-0 with a second string QB fueled by conserveative play calls and strong defense.

Doubt INDY could pull a greasy string out of a cats rear without Luck. Seattle would still compete based on their stellar D

The Panthers barely squeaked by the team who has the #1 pick in the draft. Let's not get carried away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which team would see more of a drop in offensive performance if they had to start a decent journeyman QB?

The Colts would drop a bit, but not nearly as much as the Panthers would. I'm not sure a journeyman QB would even survive three games.

.

Both are critical to their teams offensive production. What sets Cam a little bit apart is what he does with his legs on the running game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The test for me, for fans is this:

 

Would you be happy or pissed if Newton signed with the Panthers for $17 million per year?

 

Most here would be ticked off and complain becuase they think he deserves more.  Same for Keek coming up, some peoples fandom of players gets in the way of their "big picture" team view in my opinion.

 

Go back just a few years to all the "Double Trouble ain't goin nowhere" discussions.  How'd that work out for us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What percentage of the salary cap are you willing to devote to just two of 63+ players (Cam and Luke)?

If we're going to go back to having massive cap devoted to just a few guys and having to skimp on the rest of the roster, what was the point of firing Marty Hurney?

Its not how much but where that money is tied up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DA won two games for us last year. Just saying. Cam went went 6-9-1 with the same offense. Cam is a very important piece to the offense and makes us better but he's not the end all be all. In no way should he get more than Luck. 18-19 a year and most of it guaranteed. Keep the cap hits low and spread out the guaranteed $$$.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...