Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

"Cam isn't good at the short, quick throws"


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

One argument I have seen against changing up the offense a bit is that Cam isn't particularly good at short quick throws. 

Fug that. 

It might have something to do with Cam spending the entire OTA and training camp in a system that calls for him holding onto the ball for 4 seconds and throwing deep ball after deep ball. 

I have said since Cam was drafted every year in camp I am amazed about how long it takes for the plays to develop and Cam to throw the ball. It was not like that under the Fox regime. 

A new offensive coordinator is needed. One that can take an intelligent, physical freak like Cam Newton to the next level. Cam has hit his ceiling under the current regime, but personally he still has much more room to grow. 

There is no doubt in my mind that with a proper mentor, Newton could become that Aaron Rodgers type player. Deadly in the long game, deadly in the short game, and a threat to run. 

 

/rant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jeremy Igo said:

Consistent mechanics require a coaching staff with a keen eye and the balls to speak up. 

Could be chicken or the egg thing here.

What if, the staff does not hold the opinion that he can excel in a quick hit offense and therefore goes to his strong suit which is the vertical passing attack?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really think that an NFL coaching staff could not figure out things like this?  I know, quick and easy to say what we are not doing is what we should be doing and vice versa.  But, behind the scenes, is there a reason?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, stirs said:

You really think that an NFL coaching staff could not figure out things like this?  I know, quick and easy to say what we are not doing is what we should be doing and vice versa.  But, behind the scenes, is there a reason?

Man, I would hope that an NFL coaching staff would be considerably smarter than us.  Then again, as we have seen year after year, they are very mortal!

You have to wonder is it a player limitation?  Or is it a pride thing from the coaches?  Or do they really see this playstyle as the best thing for him and the team?

I have a feeling there is a good bit of everything in our arguments.  It's going to take work on Cam's part, the OC (Shula or not), and the rest of the team to turn things around.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing Cam needs to do is lighten up on those balls. If you look at guys like Rogers and Brady, they are able to almost float it to where the receivers are going to be on crossing routes every time. That takes reps, trust, and damn good accuracy. Cam on the other hand lasers his passes to the receivers whether it's 5 or 40 yards away. 

 

All I want to see Cam have a higher completion percentage by incorporating more crossing routes and 5-10 yard routes. Bad coaches try to fit their players into their schemes, and not mold their scheme around their talent. Our offensive line this year was not able to block like they did last year which greatly affected Cam's numbers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, stirs said:

You really think that an NFL coaching staff could not figure out things like this?  I know, quick and easy to say what we are not doing is what we should be doing and vice versa.  But, behind the scenes, is there a reason?

I don't give this coaching staff that much credit. Just look at the lack of halftime adjustments on both sides of the ball. Or the vanilla game plans week after week. 

I think a competent coaching staff could figure it out.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching that Packers game last night was kind of depressing seeing the work Rodgers WR's put in for him.

Many times he just put it in reach for them, and they made a sick catch, and got good YAC.

We have such little room for error in our offense, and Cam has to put his passes in the absolute tightest windows to ensure completions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Let's say we have a LT for 2026, because we do.  After that, let's say Ickey could be back and we would have the option of extending Walker.  That too is truth.  Don't get me wrong--I LOVE drafting OL, but drafting a first-round OT now is either wasting the money we just paid for a free agent OR it is like paying top dollar for a new car and keeping it in your garage for a season.  A first rounder should give us 4-5 years of cap relief by playing from day 1. I shall elaborate here: Teams obviously get desperate for OTs and if they enter the draft without 2 solid tackles, they are almost obligated to reach for a first round OT.  This year, I see 1 OT who is probably worth first-round consideration, and I am not putting him in the top 10 players in the draft.  Lomu, Freeling, Miller, and Proctor, for example, probably and arguably have second-round value.  So why would you reach for an OT in round 1 when you already have starters at both T positions but you have other needs? We do need depth, however, and I think there is decent OT depth that needs development on day 3. They are no slouches, by the way.   Drew Shelton (could drop to round 4): Surrendered 1 sack as Penn State's LT in 2025. 33 3/8" arms.  Pass pro improved every year (4 years--experienced).  "For a team running a zone-heavy scheme that values lateral movement and reach-blocking ability over phone-booth mauling, Shelton has real appeal. He is not a plug-and-play starter, but the athletic tools and the clear year-over-year improvement suggest a player who can develop into a capable starter if a coaching staff invests in his strength base and cleans up his technique. The ceiling depends entirely on how much stronger he can get and whether his feet can stay alive after initial contact."   Austin Barber  (could drop to round 4): I see him as a RT at best and a probable kick inside to Guard where his strengths would switch from secondary to primary tools.  Considering Lewis and Hunt may be gone in a year or two, this would give the Panthers a chance to work him at RT and then move him inside if he is not effective, and there is confidence that G may be his best position. Jude Bowery (4th round projection) was LT on a Boston College OL that was effective in the run game.  Bowery is one of the most athletic OTs in the draft.  His arms are not ideal but not too short (33.75") to play LT.  He surrendered 2 sacks. He is raw, and needs some technical refinement with his hands.  I think he has the best upside and value for this offense.   Dametrious Crownover  TexAM (5th round projection; 35 3/8" arms) is one of the more fascinating developmental tackles in this class because the physical tools are legitimately rare. A strong run blocker who should be better in pass protection with his tools.  "You do not find many 6-7, 336-pound men with that foot speed and who have the athletic background of a converted tight end. When everything clicks, he looks like a starting right tackle in a gap-heavy run scheme, smothering defenders at the point of attack and using his length to erase speed off the edge. The 2024 tape, when he anchored one of the best rushing attacks in the SEC, is the version of Crownover that gets offensive line coaches excited."  THIS is the kind of player our coaches could develop until Moton is done. Isaiah World  (Oregon, injured ACL in playoffs, 5th round projection--could slide to 6th).  World will not play much if at all in 2026, which is why he might fall.  For the Panthers' purposes, however, this would give the OL coaches time to work with him. "What made World intriguing coming out of Eugene was the untapped ceiling, a fifth-year transfer who arrived as the top-ranked offensive tackle in the portal and looked the part for stretches. The improvement he showed against Big Ten competition in his one Oregon season was real, and the physical foundation, length, athleticism, and improving technique in pass protection, is still there. The ACL tear suffered in the College Football Playoff semifinal against Indiana doesn't erase that, but it changes the conversation significantly." "That said, the investment argument isn't crazy for the right organization. This is still a tackle with first-round portal grades and the kind of athletic profile that doesn't just disappear. A team with patience and a strong offensive line room can afford to stash World on the roster, let him develop his lower-body power and pad-level consistency during the recovery process, and potentially unlock a starting-caliber right tackle somewhere in his second or third season. The path is longer now, but the destination hasn't changed for a scout willing to bet on the physical tools." You get the idea. If we do not need the OT immediately, draft one later and develop him as depth and for next season.  Most college players drafted in round 1 were not first rounders if they had entered the draft the year before,  so why not grab a player with upside?      
    • Its never the QBs fault, so if we get a new WR and he looks bad he must be a bust
    • Based on what? Its certainly not his in game coaching prowess. 
×
×
  • Create New...