2020 Pats: QB Situation Beyond Cam

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,083
Santa Monica, CA
My suggestion: cut Hoyer. He brings nothing at all to the table if he can't be counted on to be a stable, low-risk game manager.

For this week, give Stidham 1st team reps and elevate Dolegala as the backup.

You could bring in a veteran FA, but:

1) No one is getting up to speed on the playbook to do much in 5 days, and;
2) Dolegala is 6'7, big arm, huge hands, and looked good in limited preseason action last year. He got stuck in a numbers game in Cincy behind two high round picks. If Stidham craps out again, I wouldn't mind seeing if maybe we have something there.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
44,514
Rotten Apple
There's certainly no reason to keep Hoyer, he offers nothing. Get a runner to match Cam's playbook or get a consistent game manager he knows how many timeouts he has. Hoyer is a neither.
 

Caspir

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
5,798
As long as Hoyer is gone, they can sign Johnny fucking Foxborough. That was a winnable game that he completely took us out of. I don't understand the reluctance to go with Stidham. They're not "damaging" him any more than they did by signing someone to take the starting job, and we need to see what he can do at some point. If they were scared to go with him until Hoyer literally shit all over himself then lathered his body in it, then when is the right time? Cam - Stidham - Dolegala - Literally Anyone else - Hoyer should be the QB pecking order.

Agreed with others that a vet signing won't help much at this point.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,468
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Hoyer is 0-11 in his last 11 starts for a reason. While I'm sure he's a good guy and knows the system very well, he cannot play QB at an acceptable NFL level and needs to be cut immediately. You cannot betray the rest of the team's work because your QB can't play at all. Cut him and give him a coaching/scout job.

They have to roll with Stidham until Cam comes back.

I'll say it, they might as well take a look at Kap. Obv he's been out of the league a while but it's simply not possible for him to be worse than Hoyer.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
10,249
Cut Hoyer. He brings nothing to the table at all at this point. Bring back the guy from Louisiana Tech to run the Cam offense, and elevate Stidham to #2 and roll with that.
 

Jinhocho

Dope
Dope
Jul 31, 2001
9,323
Durham, NC
It might be Hoyer is useful in practices given his brain, but he is useless on the real field. Stidham #2 and keep Hoyer around for practice or emergencies.
 

Ralphwiggum

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
6,546
Needham, MA
Given what we saw out there last night, I just cannot figure out what Hoyer was doing in practice that led the coaches to think he was the better option. Let's hope it was just a case of Bill thinking the veteran could execute the game plan better combined with Stidham being behind because of his injury, and not a real reflection on how Stidham has looked in practice because if that is the case, the cupboard is completely bare after Cam. If Hoyer starts again next week then you have to wonder what Stidham is even doing on the roster. It seems foolish to keep 3 QBs if two of them have no business playing in the NFL.
 

Mooch

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,922
Per Evan Lazar:

The #Patriots lost -0.404 expected points each time their QBs dropped back to pass last night. That's -15.8 expected points total.

Anything has to be better than what we saw last night. A league average QB might have won the game for the Pats.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
47,075
deep inside Guido territory
If the reason to keep Hoyer was for situations like last night, then what's the point anymore? His veteran presence didn't mean anything because he screwed up in the area that you would think a veteran would not. He's not as good as Stidham. I just wonder what they see in him.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,083
Santa Monica, CA
FWIW Bedard on BSJ had a piece on this today and one of the takeaways is that people around the team say the injury had nothing to do with Stidham losing the competition. He just didn't perform like they had hoped.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
27,531
Cut Hoyer. He brings nothing to the table at all at this point. Bring back the guy from Louisiana Tech to run the Cam offense, and elevate Stidham to #2 and roll with that.

Looks like J'Mar Smith is a FA still.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
25,645
Hingham, MA
I know this thread is "beyond Cam", but it was reported that Cam is symptom free today. If I understand the rules correctly, that means he can be back at the facility sometime mid-week this week with two negative tests, correct?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,305
I know this thread is "beyond Cam", but it was reported that Cam is symptom free today. If I understand the rules correctly, that means he can be back at the facility sometime mid-week this week with two negative tests, correct?
Yes.

Kyed had a piece that said Stidham's "accuracy percentage" last night was about 72%, which isn't awesome, but better than his raw numbers. Yeah, it has to be Stidham if Cam is held out unless they think that a week of work as the #1 would help Hoyer. But there's more upside with Stidham.
 

RorschachsMask

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2011
1,321
Lynn
FWIW Bedard on BSJ had a piece on this today and one of the takeaways is that people around the team say the injury had nothing to do with Stidham losing the competition. He just didn't perform like they had hoped.
Bedard has been pushing this for months.
Not saying he’s wrong, but he’s become such a clown that it’s hard to take anything he says seriously.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
26,536
306, row 14
I think the earliest Cam can come back is Thursday. I believe he was placed on the COVID list on Saturday. Then it is 5-days minimum plus 2 consecutive negative tests. Assuming he's texting negative, 5 days brings us to Thursday.
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
4,874
If Cam is out don't you have to keep Hoyer around? If Stidham starts v. DEN and twists an ankle in the first turning to a FA or a practice squad guy is beyond bad news. This is a very winnable game coming up- even without Cam.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,923
Practice, especially in these situations where training camp was only 4 weeks and there were no exhibition games, can be a difficult venue to judge a QB like Stidham. If he lit up the field in camp, it may have been different, but he didn't, and the team's priority was quite correctly getting Cam up to speed.

Throwing Stidham out there with essentially zero meaningful practice reps to start in KC does not seem to be the best way to bring him along. If there is a QB to be thrown to the wolves in that situation, it's Hoyer.

They should give Stidham all the practice reps this week and tell him the Denver game is his. Volin and Bedard are making way too much of Stidham's 2nd INT. The Pats needed two scores, clock was running, and the pocket was collapsing. Maybe there was a play for Byrd to make there was well. It's not a throw we want to see on a regular basis, but the game circumstances matter as well.

I would not be at all surprised if Hoyer is holding the clipboard on Sunday afternoon.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,083
Santa Monica, CA
Practice, especially in these situations where training camp was only 4 weeks and there were no exhibition games, can be a difficult venue to judge a QB like Stidham. If he lit up the field in camp, it may have been different, but he didn't, and the team's priority was quite correctly getting Cam up to speed.

Throwing Stidham out there with essentially zero meaningful practice reps to start in KC does not seem to be the best way to bring him along. If there is a QB to be thrown to the wolves in that situation, it's Hoyer.

They should give Stidham all the practice reps this week and tell him the Denver game is his. Volin and Bedard are making way too much of Stidham's 2nd INT. The Pats needed two scores, clock was running, and the pocket was collapsing. Maybe there was a play for Byrd to make there was well. It's not a throw we want to see on a regular basis, but the game circumstances matter as well.

I would not be at all surprised if Hoyer is holding the clipboard on Sunday afternoon.
Byrd was open, it was a good read. It was a terrible throw. Agree with your point, though - Stidham should start.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
1,965
Byrd was open, it was a good read. It was a terrible throw. Agree with your point, though - Stidham should start.
That throw was the best argument for Stidham to have started the game last night. If he was warmed up to a normal 4th quarter situation rather than on his second or third drive, I think he has a lot better result there. It was a great decision though, especially in light of the Chiefs being used to Hoyer checking down to a short throw seemingly every drop back.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,268
New York City
FWIW Bedard on BSJ had a piece on this today and one of the takeaways is that people around the team say the injury had nothing to do with Stidham losing the competition. He just didn't perform like they had hoped.
The PFW guys--who did get to watch all the practices--also thought that Stidham was probably the worst of the quarterbacks during preseason.

I wouldn't play Hoyer any more. Of course he may have a useful role on the team as a kind of veteran guy who knows the system so I'm not saying cutting him is a solution, but playing him is not.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,468
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I don't care who looked better in camp: after last night it would be sporting negligence to ever play Hoyer again when given a choice of any other available QB.

Stidham has to get the start against Denver. At some point reality has to take precedence over any hypothetical concerns. Hoyer is a vet and that's who he is, he's never going to be anyone except the guy who froze in the red zone last night. They need better than that.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,268
New York City
I don't care who looked better in camp: after last night it would be sporting negligence to ever play Hoyer again when given a choice of any other available QB.

Stidham has to get the start against Denver.
No one is fighting you bro. Hoyer sucks and it loosk like everyone on this thread agrees that he shouldn't play.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,305
Stidham has to get the start against Denver.
It might be Cam. If he's truly asymptomatic then he should not be fatigued or anything if he gets the negative tests and is back later this week. He can get game plan work down virtually and I would think that between Stidham and Hoyer, you can game plan more closely with Cam and Stidham, so there would be less upheaval if Cam cannot go.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,468
Deep inside Muppet Labs
No one is fighting you bro. Hoyer sucks and it loosk like everyone on this thread agrees that he shouldn't play.
I know. I'm just beyond furious that the Pats had the chance to win a game under impossible odds and Hoyer singlehandedly ruined that for them. I don't understand how a QB could play so abomibably in the red zone like Hoyer did last night, and I'm profoundly uninterested in seeing him repeat that performance. He needs to be cut.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,083
Santa Monica, CA
I know. I'm just beyond furious that the Pats had the chance to win a game under impossible odds and Hoyer singlehandedly ruined that for them. I don't understand how a QB could play so abomibably in the red zone like Hoyer did last night, and I'm profoundly uninterested in seeing him repeat that performance. He needs to be cut.
It was really remarkably bad. It was like one a Ryan Lindley or Nathan Peterman level bad performance. I expected a little more from him.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,468
Deep inside Muppet Labs
It was really remarkably bad. It was like one a Ryan Lindley or Nathan Peterman level bad performance. I expected a little more from him.
It's like once they got into the red zone he forgot that the opponent would be sending pass rushers. I've never seen such total lack of pocket and game awareness. You might expect that from a rookie surprised by the speed of the game, but not from a veteran. It was absolutely shocking. If I didn't know any better I'd say he was concussed.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,561
Maine
I get what people like @Shelterdog are saying. But if a player is on the roster then he has to be playable.

He shit the bed last night. I would still keep him on the Roster and play him as the 3rd QB. 3rd QBs are going to screw up. He might be "one of the better" 3rd qbs. in the league (i ked I ked). Stidham should get all the practice reps and work this week. Stid seems to be "oh WOW"....followed by "oh man". Consistancy, exp and reps may help some of that. With Cam being out this was/is a perfect opportunity to get him those things.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,561
Maine
I think we are also over rating the "Winnable game" idea. I had zero confidence that they could win. Even at 6-3. I wouldnt be confident they would have won had it been 17-6 with 2 mins left in the 3rd. Mahomes is too good.

We WOULD have been more competitive sure. Say 26-20 or something. But win? I am not buying that we beat that team last night.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
1,965
The PFW guys--who did get to watch all the practices--also thought that Stidham was probably the worst of the quarterbacks during preseason.

I wouldn't play Hoyer any more. Of course he may have a useful role on the team as a kind of veteran guy who knows the system so I'm not saying cutting him is a solution, but playing him is not.
In retrospect, no matter the comparison of abilities we shouldn't have been surprised at a younger player underperforming veterans like Hoyer and Newton at camp. ~10 year vets are routine with their individual offseason preparation through every type of circumstance, and were better equipped to soldier on through the virus lockdown. Meanwhile this was Stidham's first pro offseason; without significant offseason team activities or preseason games to get feedback from (not even accounting for his injury issue).
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,083
Santa Monica, CA
I think we are also over rating the "Winnable game" idea. I had zero confidence that they could win. Even at 6-3. I wouldnt be confident they would have won had it been 17-6 with 2 mins left in the 3rd. Mahomes is too good.

We WOULD have been more competitive sure. Say 26-20 or something. But win? I am not buying that we beat that team last night.
Totally agree with that. If Cam plays, or even if Stidham started and came out hot, I think you see a different effort from KC. They were sleepwalking through the first half - as someone put it in the gamethread, "playing with their food".
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,468
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I think we are also over rating the "Winnable game" idea. I had zero confidence that they could win. Even at 6-3. I wouldnt be confident they would have won had it been 17-6 with 2 mins left in the 3rd. Mahomes is too good.

We WOULD have been more competitive sure. Say 26-20 or something. But win? I am not buying that we beat that team last night.
Mahomes was trash, Kelce did nothing, the Pats dropped two INTs, Edelman gifted KC 6, and the D had two laughably soft calls go against them. With average QB play they win the game.

Mahomes was held to his second lowest points total EVER (19). You bet that was a winnable game. With an average QB in there they win. With Cam in the there they kick the shit out of them.

That's why I'm so disgusted with Hoyer. He cost them the game with those red zone unforced errors.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
36,382
It was really remarkably bad. It was like one a Ryan Lindley or Nathan Peterman level bad performance. I expected a little more from him.
You don't even need to mention other QBs. It was a Brian Hoyer level bad performance. This is the same guy who once went 15-34 for 136 yards with 0 TD / 4 INT and 1 lost fumble in a 2015 wild card game against, you guessed it, the Chiefs.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,468
Deep inside Muppet Labs
You don't even need to mention other QBs. It was a Brian Hoyer level bad performance. This is the same guy who once went 15-34 for 136 yards with 0 TD / 4 INT and 1 lost fumble in a 2015 wild card game against, you guessed it, the Chiefs.
I am absolutely convinced he was playing that game with a concussion. I remember it well, I've never seen a QB play so poorly...and then last night he did it again.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
10,249
Guys, the defensive performance last night wasn't because KC was "sleepwalking". It's because NE's defense has got something going against KC. Last year, they played the Chiefs really well too. So to put it in context, here's how the Chiefs' offense has done against NE's defense the past two years...

2019
Chiefs (in Mahomes games against non-Pats opponents): 30 points, 388 yards
Chiefs vs. NE: 23 points, 346 yards
*NE held them to 7 points and 42 yards less than normal

2020
Chiefs (in games against non-Pats opponents): 30 points, 433 yards
Chiefs vs. NE: 19 points, 326 yards
*NE held them to 11 points and 107 yards less than normal

The Patriots have got something figured out against KC. Not that they've totally stopped them, but they do have the tools to slow KC down. This wasn't an aberration. Don't forget, in the AFCCG a couple of years ago, they shut KC out in the first half before Mahomes went crazy. So they're capable.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,561
Maine
Mahomes was trash, Kelce did nothing, the Pats dropped two INTs, Edelman gifted KC 6, and the D had two laughably soft calls go against them. With average QB play they win the game.

Mahomes was held to his second lowest points total EVER (19). You bet that was a winnable game. With an average QB in there they win. With Cam in the there they kick the shit out of them.

That's why I'm so disgusted with Hoyer. He cost them the game with those red zone unforced errors.
SMJH We can agree to disagree. I will take the last 4 years of KC and Mahomes domination as my evidence. As someone up thread said they came out flat because they figured they could. Seems like in a recent game or 2 KC came storming back in "Completely winnable games for the other team". Its what they do.

I am not arguing losing sucks. And yea any time over the last 10-20 years we win that game going away. But even with cam I am not sure they win it. KC is good and can turn it up when they need to. Thinking that Hoyer or Stidham turn all those RZ trips into TDs as opposed to fucking up at least one....and getting a fG or 2 instead is high....IMHO.... unrealistic expectations.
 

JokersWildJIMED

Blinded by Borges
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2004
1,859
The Pats have the skill in the secondary to play coverage and only rush 3 with lane integrity, which most teams cannot do...their defense is essentially built to beat the Chiefs passing game...where the Chiefs have hurt the Pats in the past has been in the running game, but last night the Pats did a great job considering their alignment.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
25,645
Hingham, MA
Yeah Phil Perry and Tom Curran were also on that bandwagon too. Stidham was just clearly #3 on the depth chart all summer.