Bedard's Breakdown (Offense): Jarrett Stidham provided evidence for and against him being Patriots' lone backup QB

If Bill Belichick went with rookie quarterback Jarrett Stidham — and not Brian Hoyer — behind Tom Brady against the Panthers in order to gain more evidence as to whether or not Stidham is capable of being the lone backup to Brady in the regular season, there was a lot there to like.

And there was an equal amount not to like.

Where that leaves Belichick and the Patriots in terms of this decision is anyone's guess — nobody can predict Belichick's personnel decisions. That's why he gets paid the big bucks and has all those rings.

All we can do is present some evidence, and hazard a guess.

THE CASE FOR STIDHAM

Third and 12, 5:02 second quarter

The Panthers — after not blitzing Brady once — bring pressure with five and left tackle Dan Skipper is leaking a little bit against Mario Addison on Stidham's blindside. The rookie does not panic one bit. In fact, I didn't even give Skipper a hurry on this play because Stidham was no unaffected by the rush. Most rookies would panic and take off, but Stidham just calmly climbs the pocket and delivers a 14-yard strike to a diving Jakobi Meyers (nice catch) for the first down. Now, could the pass have been a little bit better and allowed Meyers some YAC? Sure, but this was really good stuff in any event.

Third and 11, 2:53 second quarter

Panthers rush four and Cole Croston gives up a little pressure at right tackle, which causes Stidham to climb the pocket. James Ferentz has also lost his assignment and Bryan Cox Jr. is bearing down on Stidham up the middle. Stidham knows he's going to get hit yet he remains unaffected by the rush and he delivers a 10-yard strike to Meyers before getting hit. Tremendous.

Second and 10, 1:04 second quarter: Panthers again bring pressure but the Patriots pick it up well and Stidham has a clean pocket. I just loved the 19-yard throw to Meyers, which was strong and only where Meyers could catch it.



THE CASE AGAINST STIDHAM

It became apparent in this game that Stidham has some issues with a crucial part of the Patriots' offensive gameplan — throwing out of play-action. This is not a surprise considering he came from two college offenses that operate solely out of shotgun. That's not to say he can't operate the play-action game, he just struggled. One of the hardest thing for any quarterback, especially a young one, is to turn their back to a defense, reset and execute the play — especially against pressure. Stidham had issues with that in this game.

First and 10, 5:41 second quarter

Stidham, on his second pass of the game, barely goes through the play fake and he panics immediately when he sees Carolina bringing pressure at the top of the drop. He had an opportunity to climb the pocket and/or dump it off to Jakob Johnson but gets sacked.

First and 20, 0:33 second quarter

Panthers drop into zone coverage and Stidham forces a ball to Meyers that should have been intercepted by a squatting corner Stidham didn't see. Smarter play would have been to dump it off to either Stephen Anderson or Brandon Bolden and get back a chunk.

First and 10, 9:22 third quarter

Out of the shotgun, Hjalte Froholdt is immediately beaten and Stidham wisely scrambles. But he fails to secure the ball and fumbles.

First and 10, 3:20 third quarter

Another play-action play. Don't hate Stidham on this play because it seemed like more of a coverage sack, but perhaps he could have kept it alive a little better.

First and 10, 1:57 third quarter

Deep in the red zone, the Panthers have five on the line but the right end drops into coverage at the snap while the middle linebacker comes free on a blitz for a sack. A garden variety zone exchange pressure. We'll never know what the actual call was, but it sure looked like the line was blocking the five down linemen, meaning that linebacker was unaccounted for in the protection and therefore Stidham's responsibility.



So, just as in any evaluation, there was a mixed bag from Stidham against the Panthers, but it was good to see how he reacted to playing against some NFL-caliber players. Most of it was good as he continued to show much more advanced play at the line than the normal rookie out of a college spread offense. But there were also some things to give Belichick pause, if that's what he was looking for.

I think Stidham has shown enough, and the things he's struggling with can be cleaned up.

Here are the positional ratings against the Panthers:

Quarterback (3.5 out of 5)

Thought Brady played error-free in his limited time, including a nice deep comeback to Phillip Dorsett, his third-down scramble and that tremendous throw and catch to Ryan Izzo. ... Stidham had five plus throws in this game but also had six negative plays, including 2.5 sacks, a QB hit and the fumble. But he didn't look out of place. ... The Panthers brought pressure overall 22.5 percent of the time — but it was all against Stidham (33.3 percent of snaps).

Running backs (4.5 out of 5)

Sony Michel looked outstanding with four broken tackles and 38 yards brought back for bogus holding penalties. He looks lighter, quicker and more agile. Wait until he knocks the rust off for real. Michel the rookie was just a teaser. He should be better this season. ... Outside of his touchdown run, I thought James Develin looked rusty. He missed on at least three blocks.

Receivers (2 out of 5)

Even with his comeback with Stidham, Meyers was still a net negative in this game with a drop and two poor routes. We know about the skinny post, but on the later third down that was tipped away, Meyers needs to come straight across the field (toward the QB is better) to prevent the cornerback from undercutting the route, which he did. ... I really like Ryan Izzo, and his 18-yard catch was sensational and he drew a 29-yard penalty, but his blocking really took a step back in this game (had a part in four stuffed runs). That surprised me because he's the best blocker of the TE group (he had a great one on Michel's 30-yard run that was called back), but maybe he has issues against starting-caliber players. He also had a drop. ... Phillip Dorsett was old reliable, but I didn't think any of his catches were above what is expected. ... On 2nd and 28, it didn’t look like Ben Watson was very quick out of his break on the incompletion from Brady. A quicker cut and he’s probably in position for the catch.

Offensive line (2 out of 5)

[table id=346 /]

If you take out the pressure that appeared to be on Stidham (four plays, 3.5 QBP total), the rest of the blockers only allowed 25 percent pressure, which is solid. ... It just felt like a lot because Hjalte Froholdt wasn't good. He allowed two sacks, two hits, a run stuff and had a penalty. That's a hurry shy of the grand slam of struggle. A lot of his issues come from a bad habit where he tries to engage the defender with a headbutt. NFL players are too good for that, and once your eyes go down as a blocker, you're going to struggle. Dante Scarnecchia is going to have to break him of that before he can make real progress. ... Among the starters, Shaq Mason (four negative plays) struggled the most and looked rusty. The starters in order of effectiveness: Joe Thuney, Marcus Cannon, Isaiah Wynn (really good again), David Andrews and Mason. ... Ted Karras was clearly better than James Ferentz in this game.

THREE UP

RB Sony Michel: Looked really, really good in his first action. He might actually be the type of great back some people maintain he was last season, but he really wasn't (it was the line and scheme).

QB Tom Brady: An excellent debut for Brady. He's clearly comfortable with his offensive line. Hopefully some of his real weapons show up at some point.

LG Joe Thuney: First clean sheet (no negative plays) of the year. Mark it down!

THREE DOWN

OG Hjalte Froholdt: Not a good day at the office with four negative plays, and they all hurt.

RG Shaq Mason: Very surprising to see a player like Mason have four negative plays in just 28 snaps. But he is not a great summer player. In the season he's money.

QB Jarrett Stidham: Certainly had his share of really good plays, but he was involved in too many negative plays, including a turnover.