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!

     

Sums up Cam's deal pretty nicely


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

As is the case with many quarterbacks -- usually more than most like to admit -- the success of Newton will hinge on how the rest of the roster is built. Newton had a new top receiver during 2014 in Kelvin Benjamin, and will need to get used to a new number-two guy in Devin Funchess in 2015. That will also come behind an offensive line that is expected to feature Michael Oher at left tackle. That’s not preferable for any quarterback, let alone one sacked on 7.8 percent on his drop backs last season.

To this point, Newton has shown the ability to lead the team on his own when needed. That’s something to look for with all too used “franchise player” designation, and something that can’t be said about enough of the newly paid quarterbacks over the past few seasons. Think to yourself the last time you thought Cincinnati won a game because of Andy Dalton, or the Chiefs won a game because of Alex Smith. Then go watch Newton’s Week 9 game against the Bengals this past season and wonder if Carolina feels comfortable with their investment.

Newton has been much better in his career than many have given him credit for. Out of the new mid-tier of extended quarterbacks, Newton sits on the top of the list of players likely to live up to the deal.

 

https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/5415/cam-newton-s-new-deal-is-really-not-as-bad-as-you-think

Fairly unbiased take on the contract. 

He has a point. The Panthers have won games because of Cam Newton and despite inferior O-Line and play calling. Not many QBs can claim that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that Cam has broken ANY records with the supporting cast he has had speaks for itself. He already earned every Penny IMO. The best part is, that he has barely scratched the surface to what he has yet to do.

​To be fair his line and receivers in 2011 were pretty damn good. Not elite or top 5 or anything like that, but to say that was a bad supporting cast would be unfair. The defense though, is another story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

​To be fair his line and receivers in 2011 were pretty damn good. Not elite or top 5 or anything like that, but to say that was a bad supporting cast would be unfair. The defense though, is another story.

Who? Legadu nanee and lafell? Shockey was a great piece but the receivers were pretty bad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

​To be fair his line and receivers in 2011 were pretty damn good. Not elite or top 5 or anything like that, but to say that was a bad supporting cast would be unfair. The defense though, is another story.

I understand what you're saying, but I was referring to the whole picture to include the O-line.

Statistically speaking he's been hit more than any QB since he's been in the League.  It's not even close either if you look at the stats/comparisons.

In that regard, it almost makes, no, it doesn't almost make, it absolutely makes what he has done with what he had had all the more impressive!

I think it's fair to say, that we ALL can't wait to see what he does with the plethora of talent at the WR position. I believe I'm correct in the assumption that he will most likely have his best year yet, due to him being healthy and the addition Funchess.

Lord knows we can't wait to see the show he's about to put on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...