Cam Newton is Not a Big Brock Purdy Guy, and Calls Him 'the 10th Best Player on the 49ers'

Kevin Sabitus. Getty Images.

Back in December, Cam Newton generated some noise, first with his festive seasonal color combinations, but also with his critique of Brock Purdy, along with Jared Goff, Dak Prescott and Tua Tagovailoa:

"These are game managers. They're not difference-makers. [They're just being asked] not to lose the game. I don't give a damn what you do. You don't have to score every time. You just don't have to throw a pick every time either. If we're going to call a spade a spade, a game-manager is different than a game-changer.

"Game-manager is not a negative connotation. 'Cam, what do you mean by game-manager?' My definition of that managing player is a player who has the ability to make the right play at the right time, protecting the football at all costs."

Those were considered bold words when Newton said them because the Niners were coming off a 6-game winning streak. And Purdy had three near perfect games in a span of four weeks down the stretch. 

But now that Purdy is the consensus choice for MVP, and led the league in: 

• Passer rating
• QBR
• Touchdown %
• Yards per attempt
• Yards per completion
• Passing success rate

… and finished in the Top 5 in virtually every other passing statistic, it was only right that Newton revisited his remarks. Which he did. And splashed his chips across the table and let it ride:

This is going to get even more play. And it should. It's not every year a former MVP says a presumptive MVP who's leaving for the Super Bowl this weekend isn't in the top 20% of his own roster. Purdy's about to be asked about it every time he sits behind a podium. So is every 49ers player and coach. And you can guaran-damn-tee that Niners fans have sunk their teeth into this bone aren't about to let it go until they've gnawed all the marrow out, like they did before:

But it begs the question, is Cam Newton wrong? 

Like he said, 'game manager' doesn't have to have a negative connotation. It's not necessarily an insult to say a quarterback took what was given to him, didn't make mistakes, took care of the ball, etc. You can come off the field for the punt team because you chose not to play Heroball on a 3rd & long without your manhood being called into question. The world used to get priapism every time Brett Favre completed some insanely risky throw. And then when he'd blow a playoff game with a stupid interception into tight coverage, praise him to the heavens as an Ol' Gunslinger who's just out there tryin' to make plays. But the 21st century saw Super Bowls rings being worn by "game managers" like Tom Brady (in his early days), Brad Johnson, Joe Flacco and Nick Folk. There's no shame in managing that game. 

As far as Purdy being the 10th best player on his team, is that such an insult? I mean, unlike Newton, I'm a Purdy Guy. His story is great. And I'd love to see him win. But arguing he's the 10th best 49ers player is not a pejorative. It's a compliment to the organization and how much talent they've assembled. Just to name nine guys who are arguably - and in some cases, demonstrably - better football players than Purdy, in no particular order:

• Nick Bosa
• Christian McCaffery
• Brandon Ayiuk
• Deebo Samuel
• George Kittle
• Fred Warner
• Charvarius Ward
• Trent Williams
• Arik Armstead

If it's an insult to say you're surrounded by talent, then you take that insult every time. I'd rather have someone tell me I'm the 10th best writer at Barstool than the Lord of the Manor at some failing shithole media outlet that's laying people off by the thousands. And if Brock Purdy is adding a Super Bowl MVP to his (probable) league MVP, then he'll prove what Newton said is correct: There's nothing wrong with being a game manager.