I'm Going to Laugh...

[MHS831]

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.

Read it again--he did not guarantee anything. He said there is no guarantee. You twisted it.

[Marguide]

Read it again--he did not guarantee anything. He said there is no guarantee. You twisted it.

What follows is a direct quote.

Originally Posted by TheRealDeal

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

Okay, maybe I am dense. Explain again how I am twisting his words.

[mav1234]

there's a difference between good and bad.

...mediocre, basically.

[Catalyst]

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.

I didn't say he already had met with ownership or that we already had worked him out twice. I said these things were planned. All we've done with Gabbert is one private workout and IIRC Rivera said he'd also have a pre-draft visit.

To me, the fact that they didn't show up to his pro day in force the way they did with Newton tells me a lot. He's the only top prospect we didn't show up for. Newton/Fairley, Peterson, Dareus, & Green all had either Hurney OR Rivera show up.

But regardless, I can't believe anyone can sit there and honestly say that Cam hasn't had a LOT more reported visits and such with us than anyone else. It's clear that he has. He was the first (and IIRC the only one to date) who we have both worked out privately AND scheduled an official visit with. Rivera said we'd bring in Gabbert, but that was weeks after we scheduled Newton's visit.

I expect them to do their research, but everything I've read tells me that there's NO doubt we're going QB. Even people like Yas who once thought there weren't any worth taking are now saying we're likely to go QB. I don't think there's much question left as far as what position we're going.

To that end, I just think with the evidence that shows how much interest we obviously have in Newton compared to the pro day no-show with Gabbert - not to mention his issue with the deep passing game - that Newton is going to be the guy.

HOWEVER, I am fully prepared for us to go a different direction. I'll be a little frustrated if we go defense or Gabbert, but I'll support whoever it is and so long as it's not Fairley I think we'll be a better football team as a result. I just firmly believe Newton is going to be a MONSTER in the NFL and I'd REALLY like for him to be on our side as opposed to being yet another opposing team's QB that abuses our defense en route to the playoffs while our scrub passers can't crack 150 yards in a game.

Even if I do think drafting Peterson will only net us a Pro Bowl free safety for the next 7-8 years. I still don't buy him as an NFL corner. Sorry, I just don't.

[mav1234]

We had one private workout with Newton, one with Gabbert. Neither have been to Charlotte yet (our private workout with him in mid March was at Auburn, just like Gabbert's at Mizzou), and though Newton has had dinner with our guys that is the only advantage he has on them now.

We are meeting privately with them both a second time, in Charlotte, where they will be tested on the playbook and meet with owners.

Cam has NOT had more visits with us outside of dinners - which it is possible Gabbert has had but we just don't know. Gabbert spent a morning and early afternoon with our guys, and maybe he had lunch, who knows.

While neither Hurney nor Rivera were at Gabbert's pro day, rumors were Chud and Shula were there. Rivera was SUPPOSED to be. We don't know why. Maybe it is because he has already decided he doesn't want him - but if that is the case, why bother giving him a playbook? Why invite him back a second time?

You can think what you want, but if anything, your argument about showing up to Pro Days suggests we're taking Mallett. Hurney makes the decision, Mallett was in BEFORE Cam for a private workout, Hurney went to his pro day and brought the QB coach that will be mentoring him... All signs point to Mallett!

Seriously. All the QBs are getting pretty much equal love by our guys. It is the media that is spinning this as more than it is, pure and simple.

[Catalyst]

Your "all signs point to Mallett" counter-argument is flawed. Nobody considers Mallett to be even a top-10 pick so you assume we're only looking at him to cover all the bases. The only two who are possibilities at QB are Newton & Gabbert.

The biggest reason why I don't think we're serious about Gabbert is simply because of his issues with the deep ball. I seriously doubt we'd draft a QB whose biggest issue coming into the NFL is the one thing our passing game is going to be built around. Not to mention that one thing is a strength of Newton's.

[mav1234]

KC Joyner did a study that showed that Gabbert is more accurate than Ryan Mallett at under 30 yards against good competition and Gabbert just didn't throw past that distance often this year, and his pro day showed he can make plenty of deep throws. The idea that his arm isn't strong enough for the NFL is ludicrous. Hell, even Rivera defended him against that, pointing out the receiver corps that he had lending itself to a different style of game than in years past... for a coach that isn't interested in Gabbert he sure sounds like he's been thinking about him. (As a note, Gabbert dismissed this, saying he plays with great receivers who made all the plays and made him look good on Saturdays. This is not close to the truth, but I'm glad he didn't throw them under the bus. If he had, my opinion of him would have changed rather quickly.)

I would argue the Panthers aren't ruling out Mallett right now either based on everything we have seen. In fact, I would say they're quite high on him. I don't really think it matters much that Hurney was at his Pro Day, but it does matter that we brought him in to Charlotte first, and more importantly, it is most important that we're bringing him back for a second time, and this time with a playbook. That, to me, shows interest. Yes, we're showing interest in Newton and Gabbert too - but that's kind of my point.

The Panthers haven't decided on anyone yet and I do not believe they've ruled a QB out.

[Marguide]

There is no legitimate reason to think Gabbert can't throw the deep ball. Newton's arm may be a bit stronger, but they both have plenty of strength to make any throw on the field.

[mav1234]

As a note, I wanted to point something out. People seem confused about the kind of offense Chud has run in the past and how the QB prospects in this draft would fit into it. I have said before I would not take Gabbert, Newton, or any other QB with the #1, and I stand by that. However, it has nothing to do with the offense we're running. I know Gabbert can make all the throws in Chud's offense... if he runs it like he did at Cleveland.

It is not a pure deep threat passing attack. It is a vertical passing offense, sure, but it takes advantage of RBs out of the backfield and tightends in mismatches at short and intermediate range. It does not require a quarterback to routinely throw >30 yards.

For comparison's sake, let's check out 2007 Anderon to 2010 Jimmy Clausen. According to this board, Clausen's arm is weak and he can't make all the throws so he'd be a bad fit in Chud's offense. If we assume that is true, but assume that anderson is capable of making all the throws in Chud's offense, we should see a huge disparity in their deep balls, right?

Wrong. In fact, Clausen threw 3.3% of his balls >30 yards. Derek Anderson threw 2.8%. Oh, but, that doesn't matter. Obviously DA completed more of those passes! Woops, wrong again. They were equal on completion percentage - at 33%. When you expand it "down" to 21-30 yards, DA threw 5.1% of his passes that far compared to 3.8% of Clausen's! Ah-hah! well. Kind of. DA also had a completion percentage of 40% at that distance compared to Clausen's 54.5, and Clausen actually had 7 more YPA at that distance.

But Clausen was a check down king! Indeed, Clausen was. He tossed a ton of balls behind the line of scrimmage. No doubt about it. He also threw a ton of balls between 1 and 10 yards - which is often the distance people claim is some kind of west coat scheme and not a "vertical passing attack" like the AC. In fact, 51.6% of Clausen's passes were between 1 and 10 yards. Wow! That's crazy! ...Except that 52.9% of Derek Anderson's were, too. Not exactly sounding like the vertical passing attack that requires the biggest arm known to man, is it?

So what was so different? To oversimplify it by a great deal, it was the intermediate passing game, in the range of 11 to 20 yards. It was in this area where Anderson made his money, throwing 30% of his passes at this distance and recording 12 TDs. This is where Clausen struggled with terrible accuracy, only completing 37% of his passes at that distance. There are some very tough throws to make in that range, and Clausen just wasn't up to the challenge.

You know what a lot of people tout as Gabbert's strength? His accuracy in the intermediate passing game.

[OnlyPantherFaninMaine]

Deep breaths everyone we will be okay.

[YourMomsLover]

Your "all signs point to Mallett" counter-argument is flawed. Nobody considers Mallett to be even a top-10 .

Really? LOL I feel like going "Fiz" on you right now.

" Please log off your computer, and never post on here again"

[Marguide]

So what was so different? To oversimplify it by a great deal, it was the intermediate passing game, in the range of 11 to 20 yards. It was in this area where Anderson was money, throwing 30% of his passes at this distance and recording 12 TDs. This is where Clausen struggled with terrible accuracy, only completing 37% of his passes at that distance. There are some very tough throws to make in that range, and Clausen just wasn't up to the challenge.

You know what a lot of people tout as Gabbert's strength? His accuracy in the intermediate passing game.

Good facts to know. It's pretty rare to read something here and feel smarter afterward, but you delivered the goods.

[YourMomsLover]

Drafting Cam Newton will NEVER take this tattoo off my chest...just sayin.

[SmootsDaddy89]

The difference between the pro cam and anti cam groups is that pro cam people will concede that he could bust, whereas there is a very vocal group of cam haters who will never admit that he could be a good quaterback for non-bigoted reasons such as "He looks like Jamarcus Russell." and "I don't like 'running QBs'"