I'm Going to Laugh...

[Catalyst]

My question is: If they do not draft Cam. What will your reaction be? Still gonna laugh?

Depends on who we would actually take.

And let me just say something: I'm not saying the anti-Cam posters will all stop being Panther fans or anything. The point of this post was, more than anything, to say how far the anti-Cam crowd seems to be going to convince themselves that all the talk/rumors/reports we've heard are 100% smokescreen and nothing else.

It's like they don't want Cam so they refuse to let themselves believe he's actually in play to be the pick - despite ALL evidence to the contrary. I do want Cam to be the pick, but even I admit there's a chance we go Gabbert - or Peterson - or Dareus.

But my God, it's simply crazy to believe that all the signs that are pointing toward Cam as our top choice are just the organization running a smokescreen. Would I put it past them? Of course not. Do I think they REALLY want to trade down? Yes. But anyone with a half-objective eye here can see that he most certainly IS in play and likely at the top of our board.

THAT was the point of this thread, not to continue the endless debate about why we should or shouldn't pick Cam Newton. It was just me pointing out how much evidence there is to suggest that we WILL pick him and how many posters who seem to have gone to great lengths to convince themselves it's all just one big smokescreen.

[mav1234]

Nobody is saying that Cam Newton didn't light it up in college... just many of us don't believe lighting it up in college guarantees NFL success. While Cam had a great season, some of you apparently don't follow college football based on your reactions to it, no offense.

I understand people excited about his potential and I agree that if everything fell into place for him he'd be amazing, I just really struggle to understand why people are so excited about what he did in college when it comes to transitioning to the NFL. A few posters here have made arguments I understand about why you'd want him on your team, but ultimately I think it comes down to me disagreeing with them about what a #1 prospect is... since I really do not want to wait 2-3 years while we find out if he is going to transition or not. This same thing goes for Gabbert btw, I just have feelings about Gabbert that are not totally objective.

[TheRealDeal]

It's like they don't want Cam so they refuse to let themselves believe he's actually in play to be the pick - despite ALL evidence to the contrary. I do want Cam to be the pick, but even I admit there's a chance we go Gabbert - or Peterson - or Dareus.

But my God, it's simply crazy to believe that all the signs that are pointing toward Cam as our top choice are just the organization running a smokescreen. Would I put it past them? Of course not. Do I think they REALLY want to trade down? Yes. But anyone with a half-objective eye here can see that he most certainly IS in play and likely at the top of our board.

It depends on how you interpret the actions of the team to determine whether or not you believe "ALL" signs point to Cam.

You can interpret the actions any way you want but you have to also consider that the Organization themselves are still meeting with both other QBs and have said nice things about both QBs. They've also met with other players personally and attended their pro days.

Up to this point, all QBs are getting equal attention from the FO, except maybe Mallett. The media are the ones who are giving the extra attention to Cam.

[mav1234]

The point of this post was, more than anything, to say how far the anti-Cam crowd seems to be going to convince themselves that all the talk/rumors/reports we've heard are 100% smokescreen and nothing else.

But my God, it's simply crazy to believe that all the signs that are pointing toward Cam as our top choice are just the organization running a smokescreen. Would I put it past them? Of course not. Do I think they REALLY want to trade down? Yes. But anyone with a half-objective eye here can see that he most certainly IS in play and likely at the top of our board.

I don't think you understand - almost nobody actually thinks its a smoke screen anymore. The only posters who say SMOKESCREEN now are the Cam loving jackasses who think it's hilarious to respond to any news post about him with SMOKESCREEN!!!!

Well, not only, but you get the point. The vast majority of us know that Cam is being looked at, we just disagree if "all the signs" are pointing to him, or if that is just a matter of perspective and people reading into situations what they want.

Take the recent Schefter story - A week earlier he had reason to believe we were taking Gabbert. Now it's Newton. So when it was Gabbert it meant nothing, but now that it is Newton, some posters here think his world is gospel. The truth of the matter is he is speculating and he does not have inside information from anyone who actually knows who is currently the favorite to go #1.

Meanwhile, all we know is that all quarterbacks have had pro days, workouts, interviews, and are scheduled to come to Charlotte to meet here with our guys after studying our playbook. Yet somehow, all signs point to Cam Newton. What? All signs?? So are the other two quarterbacks a "smoke screen"? Or maybe the reality is they haven't decided yet and they are currently going through the process...

[mav1234]

I didn't watch too many Missouri games...if somebody has please let us know but I'm pretty certain that they ran some of the same QB option runs as Auburn. Obviously they didn't run it AS much but they did run it and Gabbert didn't show the same burst, agility, or acceleration as Cam. He also doesn't have that same wiggle, the ability to break tackles and pick up extra yard. Maybe he didn't have the same chance to display those skills as Cam but I can only talk about what I've seen...everything else is speculation.

I also understand what was said about Gabbert's pro day but I watched both (until espn cut away from Gabbert's) and I thought from a footwork perspective cam was better. Newton also has a quick compact deliver and throws the ball with great velocity...I didn't see that with Gabbert although I will concede that Gabbert may be more accurate.

I just feel like Cam is a better fit for us...but I'd be happy either way. Don't get me wrong either...I would also be happy with Petersen, Dareus or Green. But I think if we stay at number 1 it should be Newton.

I am by no means a Missouri expert but I have watched Gabbert more times than probably any other quarterback in this draft... about a dozen games over two seasons, with most coming this season. I do not have them recorded, so I can't tell you specific plays on most things, but I really like him. Truth of the matter is, though, I am bias towards Gabbert because I have alumni family and since I was an undergrad at a school without a football team I have adopted a couple college teams, with one being Missouri.

Virtually the ONLY time Gabbert had a designed run was near the endzone, which is why he has some rushing touchdowns. Well, perhaps not the only, but just about - he had almost no designed runs outside of that which I remember, whereas in the games I have watched of Cam it was evident how many there were. Also, Gabbert was NEVER looking to use his legs to pick up yards, ALWAYS to extend plays, which sometimes got him in trouble - there were times where if he had scrambled past the line of scrimmage he could of gained yards instead of having to throw it away. He certainly didn't make people miss like Cam, but if he had been in an offense designed to run he could have put up some nice numbers.

[riddel]

... when we do take Newton on draft day and all the anti-Cam posters' heads explode because they had honestly convinced themselves it was all a smokescreen.

You shouldn't laugh, you should cry. The chances of Newton actually becoming a franchise QB are very slim and drafting the guy #1 could set the franchise back 2-5 years depending on how long the owner/gm/coach stand behind the pick.

Picking a QB with the #1 pick is extremely risky unless the QB's last name is Manning. Newton may be a very good QB, but does a good QB warrant a #1 draft pick?

Trade down or take Peterson.

[Stumpy]

... when we do take Newton on draft day and all the anti-Cam posters' heads explode because they had honestly convinced themselves it was all a smokescreen.

I am offended that you would laugh at the loss of life from multiple head explosions. Head explosions are no laughing matter.

My older brother was an accountant. He was working late one night, going over the books for the company he worked for. He wasn't paying attention, and carried a line wrong. He ended up dividing by zero and his head exploded. His wife is now homeless, selling her body to pay the medical bills. Their children are in foster care.

The lives of my entire family have been ruined by one, single head explosion. And here you are laughing at the possibility of multiple, simultaneous head explosions over something as trivial as who the Panthers draft. For shame, sir. For shame.:frown2:

[mav1234]

I was just grading a students ecology assignment in excel and I came across a #DIV/0 error. I foolishly clicked it to examine the formula.

I'm lucky my falling head hit the escape key or I may have fallen victim to the same tragedy as your older brother.

[nagai]

I'm looking forward to this either way. People are so adamant in their narrow views, it'll be fun to see whatever explosion comes on draft day :D

[Catalyst]

Up to this point, all QBs are getting equal attention from the FO, except maybe Mallett. The media are the ones who are giving the extra attention to Cam.

Not really. The media really wants to give us Gabbert. The VAST majority of NFL.com/ESPN/NFL Network mocks have either had us going Gabbert or DL. Only a couple have had us taking Newton.

Take the recent Schefter story - A week earlier he had reason to believe we were taking Gabbert. Now it's Newton. So when it was Gabbert it meant nothing, but now that it is Newton, some posters here think his world is gospel. The truth of the matter is he is speculating and he does not have inside information from anyone who actually knows who is currently the favorite to go #1.

What evidence was there last week that we were taking Gabbert? Was it the lone private workout (compared to Newton's official visit, meeting with the owner, & two private workouts) or the fact that Hurney and/or Rivera didn't bother showing up at his pro day?

With Cam we've been getting reports pretty consistently for the past month that he's right there in the mix for the pick if not at the top of it. There's been no other player we've shown that kind of interest in. Sure, we've attended some pro days and had a few private workouts and Rivera has had some nice things to say about them all, but Cam by far has been the guy we've shown the most interest in and it's not close.

Combine interview, private interview with J.R., Rivera's comments about him, the fact that Rivera spent so much time with him at his pro day, the private workout we've already had and the second one we'll have when he comes to visit next month, not to mention report after report that we've got him ranked at the top. With all the other players it's been pure media opinion that we're going to take them; Newton is the only player we've heard that these reporters have gotten from "sources" and such outside of I think one that said we're taking Dareus.

Look, I don't think they've made up their minds yet 100% either, but I do believe based on what I've been reading every day for the past month, that Cam Newton is at the top of our board right now and I honestly don't see anyone doing enough to leapfrog him at this point.

[mav1234]

You conveniently forgot that a couple days before Cam Newton's visit with us, we visited with Mallett, and that we sent our QB coach AND General Manager to check out Mallett's Pro Day. Our QB coach and GM... Don't you think if who on your staff attended pro days REALLY mattered that much, you'd bring your QB coach and GM to the one of the guy you are "leaning towards"? For that matter, who do you think REALLY calls the shot on this decision? Isn't it just as important, if not more so, where HE is?

At Cam Newton's Pro Day, everyone forgets how closely Rivera was studying Fairley and how much he talked to him, which even the broadcasters commented about. Nobody talks about the fact he spent as much time with Fairley as Newton because nobody thinks we'll take Fairley anymore. That's fine, but to act like Cam Newton was the ONLY player at that pro day that Rivera talked to is nonsense.

Where did you hear Newton visited with ownership? I thought that was happening April 5th.

Rivera was going to attend Gabbert's pro day but didn't for reasons we don't know. On the other hand, reports have claimed we've had any number of personnel there, and we certainly had all hands on deck for his private workout, after which Gabbert was given a copy of our play book and invited to Charlotte.... interestingly enough, it was only after this private workout that Schefter heard about it and said all 3 prospects got books and were meeting with us early April. Hell, Rivera came out saying how great Gabbert was when someone actually asked him about Gabbert. What does that tell you? That Rivera's opinion suddenly changes, or maybe that the questions hadn't been asked before?

Let's also forget how glowing Rivera was about Peterson. Or that they have met privately with him, attended his pro day, etc.

As far as I can tell, we've payed equal attention to several prospects when it comes to private workouts - which are most important.

I am curious where you got that we have worked Cam Newton out twice already, btw. I had thought we did it for the first time on the 15th, and are doing it again in a couple weeks. I also saw NO mention of him meeting with ownership when he was here - again, I thought that was for later on.

[mav1234]

btw, I am NOT saying we are not looking at Cam Newton. Nor am I saying we are "smoke screening." I am just saying that I do not personally think he has any particular lead or that all of the signs even remotely point to him.

[Marguide]

First of all drafting any QB this year doesn't guarantee we will be good for the next decade but it does guarantee we won't be good for the next 2-3 years.

You shouldn't laugh, you should cry. The chances of Newton actually becoming a franchise QB are very slim and drafting the guy #1 could set the franchise back 2-5 years depending on how long the owner/gm/coach stand behind the pick.

Picking a QB with the #1 pick is extremely risky unless the QB's last name is Manning. Newton may be a very good QB, but does a good QB warrant a #1 draft pick?

Statements like the two above are just are just as far out there as the most outrageous things we see on here from the pro-Cam camp.

No, there is no guarantee that we will be bad for 2 or 3 years because we pick Cam. That is absurd. You know it, and I know it.

There have also been many good QB's not named Manning worthy of the 1st pick. And yes, a very good QB for a team in desperate need is worth number 1. Not saying he is a sure fire very good QB, just responding to the argument above.

There are no absolutes in this debate. He may be a smashing success, he may be a huge failure, or he may fall somewhere in the middle. Guaranteeing anything is ludicrous.

[MHS831]

btw, I am NOT saying we are not looking at Cam Newton. Nor am I saying we are "smoke screening." I am just saying that I do not personally think he has any particular lead or that all of the signs even remotely point to him.

I think that right now, without a trade, we take Gabbert #1. I think they will be looking for a trade down 3-5 places. Then we get one of the following: Gabbert, Peterson, Newton, Dareus, Fairley.

Very good points.