Skip to main content

Another quarterback getting paid too much (Cam Newton) (UPDATE)

It feels like I write a blog about this topic once a week and am the only one who feels the way I do, but here I go again.

First it was Baltimore's Joe Flacco, then Cincinnati's Andy Dalton, San Francisco's Colin Kaepernick, Miami's Ryan Tannehill, and now Carolina's Cam Newton. Over the past couple of off-seasons, while most ESPN commentators have claimed these teams made the right moves in signing these quarterbacks to big-time extensions, I felt like the lone doubter in the room, and the same goes with the most recent such case, Cam Newton.

Sadly, most of the before-mentioned commentators' rationale for the extensions seems to be, "Well, what's their other option? They could do worse." Yes, but despite what many seem to believe, quarterbacks don't make the team, and the thinking shouldn't be, "Well, they could do worse at quarterback," it should be, "Well, they could do better if they stock up at other positions and nab a cheaper, but just as capable quarterback."

Let's look at these high-priced quarterback extensions:

- Joe Flacco, after leading Baltimore to a Super Bowl victory, missed the playoffs the following year, in large part due to losing so many other key components following his big contract extension. The Ravens did make the playoffs two years after the extension, falling in the second round.

- Andy Dalton, following his extension, led the Cincinnati Bengals to yet another first-round exit in the playoffs.

- Colin Kaepernick, after leading the San Francisco 49ers to the NFC Championship game and being rewarded with an extension, saw his team crumble around him and miss the playoffs.

- Ryan Tannehill received an extension this off-season after leading the Miami Dolphins to a 23-25 record over a 3-year span, not reaching the playoffs in any of those years.

That brings us to the latest such quarterback - Carolina's Cam Newton, who just got signed to a 5-year, $103.8 million contract extension. Like with the other quarterbacks' extensions, I see a potential downside to this move. Newton is 30-31-1 as a starter and like the other mentioned quarterbacks, hasn't shown a great deal of progression from his first to his most recent year. His quarterback rating has been between 82.1 and 88.8 during all four of his years in the NFL, with his highest rating being two years ago and his lowest being last season. His touchdown to interception ratio this past season (18 : 12) was also his worst as an NFL starter. As a runner, he too had career worst showings in the 2014-2015 season, averaging 5.2 yards per carry, rushing for 539 yards, and scoring 5 touchdowns on the ground, while fumbling it a career worst 12 times. Carolina's offensive ranks this past season were: 16th in total offense, 19th in scoring, 19th in passing, and 7th in rushing. All the way around, those aren't eye-popping numbers by any stretch of the imagination.

Like with the other quarterbacks I mentioned, this lack of progression isn't all Cam Newton's fault. The problem is, Carolina's offense was average to sub-par last year before Newton signed the big contract extension. Without Steve Smith to throw to and with a regularly banged up backfield, not to mention an inconsistent offensive line, it was often times difficult for Newton to find a rhythm on offense, to perform consistently, and for the offensive coordinator to know how to utilize the dual-threat quarterback. The $103.8 million extension for Newton will make it more difficult for the team to provide him the help he needs on the offensive side of the ball, while keeping in tact what has been a fairly solid defensive unit these past 2-3 years. This isn't even taking into consideration the heightened injury risk of Newton over most other NFL quarterbacks. What Newton has going for him over most other dual-threat quarterbacks in the league is his size. Unlike Robert Griffin III or Michael Vick, Newton can be on the receiving end of some pretty big hits here and there and appear to be unphased. However, this kind of thinking can also become problematic for the Panthers' starter. Often times last year, even after returning from an injury, it seemed as though a decent percentage of the playcalling asked for Newton to run the ball up the middle, leaving him more at risk of getting hit and hurt than if he were to run to the outside, hand the ball off, or throw it. The guy may be bigger than most, but no matter how big a quarterback might be, he can only take so much.

While Cam Newton has proven he can be an average to above-average NFL quarterback without much help on offense, I have a feeling this huge contract extension is going to limit the Panthers on other moves they'd need to make to both take Newton's game to the next level, as well as the team's overall.

UPDATE: Through both hard work and the offensive coordinator finally learning how to best utilize the dual-threat quarterback, Cam Newton definitely moved his game to the next level this season. He and the offense found a perfect balance, a rhythm, and wound up having an MVP-caliber season as a result. Newton is still void of much help on the offensive side of the ball, though, and after this great season, I'm still hesitant this large deal won't have downsides to it in future years. For as great as Newton has been this year, no player can be a one-man team, no matter how hard they try. Just ask Tom Brady...

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12999264/cam-newton-carolina-panthers-agree-extension

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/N/NewtCa00.htm

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/total

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"