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, the next Steve Young? But better?


nctarheel0619

Recommended Posts

Lotsa folks remember Steve Young being great. Few recall how long it took for him to get to that point.

There was a reason behind that 'monkey off my back' clip on the sidelines of the Super Bowl.

USFL plus Tampa Bay and he never was able to get it together until he got to SF (coaching definitely helped there).

Who did he play for in the USFL? The LA Express?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Cam was the QB of Youngs team he would have the kind of season he had at Auburn. 30 passing TDs, 20 rushing TDs. Go undefeated and win the Super Bowl.

Steve Young might make a Pro Bowl or two if he was the QB of the current Panthers in his prime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a 49 fan during that time. So I watched Steve Young, I rooted for Steve Young, you sir (Cam) are no Steve Young, you are better 

It's funny looking back on certain players and certain situations.  I remember two different occasions involving incoming quarterbacks where I thought "Well this team is screwed"  The first was Steve Young, the next was Tom Brady.  Now Young was following the great Joe Montana so it's easy to have this thought, but Brady was just following Drew Bledsoe...still I thought both would be bad transitions and I was wrong on both counts.  Of course Steve Young had a nice supporting cast in his early days if I remember correctly.

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...