Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Sam bradfords first preseason start VS Cams


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#46 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,530 posts

Posted 20 August 2011 - 08:44 PM

His point was, "Hey, don't panic, look how Bradford did in his first preseason start, clearly preseason doesn't predict the regular season!" He's right that we shouldn't panic, but come on, if you're going to make that point with numbers (which you don't need to, it's the f'ing preseason) you probably want to use the numbers that support your position and are actually correct. The real numbers for what he described don't support his position - but I'm being a smartass here, not trying to prove we should panic, I just hate when people misuse numbers (like saying "Jimmy is going to be Carr because he had lots of sacks!" or "Jimmy is going to be Aikman cause Aikman blew as a rookie too!")

The one thing to take from this is that Bradford didn't look ready to start in the preseason either for part of it and he improved quick, so our young QBs might too.

Also, while some idiot analysts may be saying that Cam will never be an NFL QB, the majority of people don't seem to be giving him a ton of poo and he seemed to actually get pretty favorable responses from his first game, and I've seen people say this last game he showed potential, so I don't get where all this "EVERYONE HATES CAM YOU GUYS ARE ALL SO MEAN TO HIM COMPARED TO HOW THEY WERE TO BRADFORD" is coming (which, btw, wasn't even true - bradford took lumps in his first 2 preseason games, too)

Edited by mav1234, 20 August 2011 - 08:47 PM.


#47 Ted Stryker

Ted Stryker

    Covetous Jew

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 141 posts

Posted 20 August 2011 - 08:49 PM

Thanks for missing the obvious point. If they gave up on him after one season, boy would they have looked like idiots.

Check out Troy Aikman as well.

If you were alive back then and lived it, then you'd know what you're talking about. If you were, then kuddos to you. I wasn't but I know he had a really bad season, Bradshaw I mean.


First, i was
Secondly, you missed the obvious point I made which was Bradshaw didn't struggle for lack of talent. He and Clausen were polar opposites. As a side note it would do some people well to look at each rookies struggles separately. There are no absolutes.

#48 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,530 posts

Posted 20 August 2011 - 08:56 PM

look at each rookies struggles separately. There are no absolutes.


agreed, which is why we don't really know if Clausen could improve in his second year given proper coaching etc, which was Ivan's point I suspect.

#49 Ted Stryker

Ted Stryker

    Covetous Jew

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 141 posts

Posted 20 August 2011 - 09:01 PM

agreed, which is why we don't really know if Clausen could improve in his second year given proper coaching etc, which was Ivan's point I suspect.


Basically, mine is Jimmy doesnt have comparable talent

#50 Carolinapanman

Carolinapanman

    Junior Member

  • NEWB
  • Pip
  • 14 posts

Posted 20 August 2011 - 11:44 PM

Basically, mine is Jimmy doesnt have comparable talent


True not to Bradshaw, but he does have talent and thats the thing almost everybody seems to be ruling out now that the number one overall pick is playing on the same team.

And i think ( just my personal opinion ) Jimmy has more potential at being a successful NFL quarterback than Cam will. Look back to when he played at a junior college note: for only one year, was it a pro style offense...no. Look back at Auburn note: for only one year, was it a pro style offense...no. Now look at Jimmy at Notre Dame note: for three years, was it a pro style offense...yes.

So ( once again my personal opinion ) Jimmy in the long run has more potential to help our panthers rather than hurt them, as what would happen if you were to just throw Cam Newton into the mix with a team that is still trying to find its identity.

#51 chef17

chef17

    Senior Asshole

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,503 posts

Posted 20 August 2011 - 11:48 PM

His point was, "Hey, don't panic, look how Bradford did in his first preseason start, clearly preseason doesn't predict the regular season!" He's right that we shouldn't panic, but come on, if you're going to make that point with numbers (which you don't need to, it's the f'ing preseason) you probably want to use the numbers that support your position and are actually correct. The real numbers for what he described don't support his position - but I'm being a smartass here, not trying to prove we should panic, I just hate when people misuse numbers (like saying "Jimmy is going to be Carr because he had lots of sacks!" or "Jimmy is going to be Aikman cause Aikman blew as a rookie too!")

The one thing to take from this is that Bradford didn't look ready to start in the preseason either for part of it and he improved quick, so our young QBs might too.

Also, while some idiot analysts may be saying that Cam will never be an NFL QB, the majority of people don't seem to be giving him a ton of poo and he seemed to actually get pretty favorable responses from his first game, and I've seen people say this last game he showed potential, so I don't get where all this "EVERYONE HATES CAM YOU GUYS ARE ALL SO MEAN TO HIM COMPARED TO HOW THEY WERE TO BRADFORD" is coming (which, btw, wasn't even true - bradford took lumps in his first 2 preseason games, too)


You should know better than to expect the huddle to use correct facts.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com