Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The Myth of Cam Newton under pressure dispelled


  • Please log in to reply
116 replies to this topic

#76 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,018 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:16 PM

Last thing I will say about INT%. Terry Bradshaw had a career INT% of 5.4%

Different era and a different game back then but interesting nonetheless.

#77 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 25,379 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:19 PM

Point is, any example he will dismiss......he will claim they play too good of D and ST. Goes back to the 3 phases being what real football is about. Tom Brady, Brees, Rodgers, etc....are NFL greats in their prime of those QBs can play 1 phase football. That isn't ideal.

#78 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,018 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:21 PM

Firs of all, that is the exception to the rule. Show me ONE winning QB in today's NFL with that type of interception %. One.



Jay Cutler 3.8%?

#79 ReturnOfPFFL

ReturnOfPFFL

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 189 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:22 PM

Last thing I will say about INT%. Terry Bradshaw had a career INT% of 5.4%

Different era and a different game back then but interesting nonetheless.



He played in the fuging 70's!!!

Average back then was 4-5%. The league as a whole averaged that, so you could get away with that. In 1975 the league averaged 5.3%! In 2012 the league average is 2.8%.

Half! Today it REQUIRES 2.5%-3% TOPS!

I have told you before Teeray. You have no clue how to use stats.

#80 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,018 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:28 PM

He played in the fuging 70's!!!

Average back then was 4-5%. The league as a whole averaged that, so you could get away with that. In 1975 the league averaged 5.3%! In 2012 the league average is 2.8%.

Half! Today it REQUIRES 2.5%-3% TOPS!

I have told you before Teeray. You have no clue how to use stats.


Missed the "different era different game" part of my post. Just that it was interesting. And I think your post agreed that his INT% was worse than league average at that time and he won 4 SBs.

Reading comprehension is still below par I see. ;)

I also think it is funny that our of the several examples I gave; you pounce on only one of them on a technicality.

#81 MHS831

MHS831

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,035 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:35 PM

Bottom Line: We are all in with Cam. Nobody in college looks as promising. We need to get an OL, go back to our roots and run the ball. We need to move Smith to the Slot, find a stud #1 WR and let Lafell and Gettis play #2.

Cam needs to win to be a leader. So lets win.

#82 ReturnOfPFFL

ReturnOfPFFL

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 189 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:38 PM

Missed the "different era different game" part of my post. Just that it was interesting. And I think your post agreed that his INT% was worse than league average at that time and he won 4 SBs.

Reading comprehension is still below par I see. ;)

I also think it is funny that our of the several examples I gave; you pounce on only one of them on a technicality.



Stop looking at one exception of a HOF quarterback to make your point, when 99% of reality aligns with what I am saying.

The era of the gunslinger is over. Farve was the last remaining dinosaur of that era. When Aaron came in they won a ring with the same team. When Farve saw that and stopped slinging it he had his best year at 40 with the Vikings by becoming an efficient passer.

Sure, you can win in an inefficient manner. In technical terms, it's not impossible. It's just not realistic. It's also not practical, and definitely not sustainable. You certainly can't do it when you don't have the Bears defense to save you. And why would you want to? Why would you want to win DESPITE your quarterback's play? You want to become the Jets?

The reality is we don't have an efficient passer. We have a gunslinger in an era of sharp shooters. It just doesn't work.

#83 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,662 posts
  • LocationShallotte, NC

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:42 PM

Haha, I avoided this thread after reading the initial post. Somehow I'm not surprised it drug PFFL out from the bowels of retardedom.

#84 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 25,379 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:45 PM

Firs of all, that is the exception to the rule. Show me ONE winning QB in today's NFL with that type of interception %. One.


Well, 2012 isn't finished so let's go with what is in the books. 2010 is a good year since the champion meets your billing.


2010
Brees went 11-5 with a 3.3 % - Superbowl Champ (like Eli and Big Ben in recent prior years)
Eli went 10-6 with a 4.6 %
Cutler went 10-5 with a 3.7 %
Garrard went 8-6 with a 4.1%




#85 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,018 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:54 PM

Stop looking at one exception of a HOF quarterback to make your point, when 99% of reality aligns with what I am saying.

The era of the gunslinger is over. Farve was the last remaining dinosaur of that era. When Aaron came in they won a ring with the same team. When Farve saw that and stopped slinging it he had his best year at 40 with the Vikings by becoming an efficient passer.

Sure, you can win in an inefficient manner. In technical terms, it's not impossible. It's just not realistic. It's also not practical, and definitely not sustainable. You certainly can't do it when you don't have the Bears defense to save you. And why would you want to? Why would you want to win DESPITE your quarterback's play? You want to become the Jets?

The reality is we don't have an efficient passer. We have a gunslinger in an era of sharp shooters. It just doesn't work.

Well to be fair and to my main point I think we can agree that Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, and Drew Brees are the 6 best QBs in the NFL right now.

In Peyton Manning 4th year as a starter he had an INT% of 4.2%

In Eli Manning's 4th year as a starter he had an INT% of 3.8% and in 2010 it was 4.6%

In Big Ben's 3rd year as a starter he had an INT% of 4.9%

In Drew Brees' 2nd year as a starter he had an INT% of 4.2%

Tom Brady is the exception to the rule.

Aaron Rodgers didn't start until his 4th year in the league.

So 4 of the top 6 had a year worse than what Cam is doing right now.

So my major overlying point is that this is part of the maturation process that virtually every QB not names Tom Brady goes through. Cam is no different and it is part of the process of developing as an NFL QB.

If his INT% is still this high in 3 years then you may be right. But right now I think it is foolish to make any grand statement that it is anything other than what it is. A young QB developing.

#86 MaineManPanther

MaineManPanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,468 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:54 PM

Can you post a link to your numbers? They are not checking out with NFL stats that are available from other sites...Especially your rankings...


Not surprising, but I defer to Pff for stats as they watch the same every play in a game multiple times before they record it down as fact.

It's Profootballfocus.com but you need to pay for their premium stats to get the ones I'm referring to.
However here is a screenshot displaying the numbers and rankings I spoke of. Apologies for the size, but you can see it well enough.

Attached File  image.jpg   195.71KB   16 downloads

It's ranked in reverse order. As you can see the ratio on the far right gets higher( i.e. more efficent) as it goes lower to the better teams in the ranking.

#87 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    ayy lmao

  • ALL-PRO
  • 10,139 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:04 AM

teeray picking up right where he left off i see

#88 TonyN

TonyN

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:20 AM

Not surprising, but I defer to Pff for stats as they watch the same every play in a game multiple times before they record it down as fact.

It's Profootballfocus.com but you need to pay for their premium stats to get the ones I'm referring to.
However here is a screenshot displaying the numbers and rankings I spoke of. Apologies for the size, but you can see it well enough.

Attached File  image.jpg   195.71KB   16 downloads

It's ranked in reverse order. As you can see the ratio on the far right gets higher( i.e. more efficent) as it goes lower to the better teams in the ranking.


Thanks for the link.

Take a closer look, though....the bottom 10 teams (outside of AZ) are all very, very close in actual pressure allowed....so close as to be nearly indistinguishable in actual game fact...

So Cam Newton has been under less pressure than:
Andrew Luck and Sam Bradford and Blaine Gabbert, etc....

And virtually the same amount of pressure as:

Jay Cutler and Eli Manning and Matt Ryan and Tony Romo, etc...

The Gabbert comparison is especially embarassing...

Gabbert has been under more pressure and yet his NFL passer rating is virtually identical to Newton's and his total QBR is substantially higher....

I wish I had your numbers to start the thread...
They actually prove my "thesis" quite nicely...

Maybe an incendiary thread comparing Gabbert's play and Newton's play should be started by someone...LOL...

#89 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,600 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:25 AM

teeray picking up right where he left off i see


And still the same old PFFL (who apparently is not really a Panther Fan For Life). He throws out an overwhelming stat that trumps all. People then point out the fallacy of his stat, so he moves to another number to prove his point until that too gets blown out of the water. Rinse and repeat.

Reading this thread is like deja vu all over again.

#90 ReturnOfPFFL

ReturnOfPFFL

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 189 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:44 AM

Well, 2012 isn't finished so let's go with what is in the books. 2010 is a good year since the champion meets your billing.


2010
Brees went 11-5 with a 3.3 % - Superbowl Champ (like Eli and Big Ben in recent prior years)
Eli went 10-6 with a 4.6 %
Cutler went 10-5 with a 3.7 %
Garrard went 8-6 with a 4.1%


Even in 2010, league average was 2.9%. And do you notice a correlation there at all? Teams with exception defenses. But even with your numbers...


4.1% - 8-6
3.7% - 10-5
4.6% - 10-6
3.3% - 11-5.

Eli's the only excpetion but in general, that number goes down, wins go up. BTW check Eli's post season int%...one of the best int the league. He's a pretty crappy regular season QB but he doesn't throw picks in the post season. Same for Brees.

Of course those guys also have something else in addition to defense. Positive TD/TO ratios.

Which one of those guys had a 1-1 or worse TD/TO ratio? 0
Eli 31-25 1.2
Cutler - 23 - 16 - 1.4
Garrard 23 -15 - 1.5
Brees 34-11 - 3.1

But if you have both, a bad int% and throw more Int than TD's you're screwed. It basically means you are giving away posessions and also not scoring on the ones you have. How do you expect to win?

So if you want to win like that, trade Cam for the Bears defense, and it will matter a lot less who is playing QB.

Want more proof? Look at Alex Smith's int% before Harbaugh got there. Up to 2011 he was at 3.7% for his career. Chronic loser. Check his numbers last year. 1.1% NFC Championship game. This year? 2.3%. They're 6-2.

You can find exceptions, but you're still swimming upstream when you have to fight and overcome that as a team. That makes winning very hard.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com