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!

     

Tebow>Newton?


riddel

Recommended Posts

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2010/tim-tebows-2007-stats-vs-cam-newtons-2010-stats/

Let’s do a final comparison of Cam Newton’s current season’s numbers versus the Heisman season of The Golden Calf of Bristol in 2007. The results might surprise you.

Touchdown Totals

Cam Newton in 13 games put up 28 passing TDs, 20 rushing TDs and 1 receiving TD for a total of 49 touchdowns

The Golden Calf of Bristol in 12 games put up 32 passing TDs, 23 rushing TDs for a total of 55 touchdowns

Truly an astonishing total of touchdowns in 2007 for The Golden Calf of Bristol – Cam Newton got the extra game with the SEC Championship Game against South Carolina.

Rushing Yards

Cam Newton: 1409 total yards on the ground or 108.4 yards/game

The Golden Calf of Bristol: 895 total yards on the ground or 68.8 yards/game

This is where Cam Newton overtook The Golden Calf of Bristol – the yardage on the ground.

Passing Yards

Cam Newton: 2589 total passing yards or 199.2 yards/game

The Golden Calf of Bristol: 3286 total passing yards or 252.8 yards/game

Total Yards

Cam Newton: 307.5 yards/game

The Golden Calf of Bristol: 321.6 yards/game

The Golden Calf of Bristol shines in passing yards and total yards per game.

As incredible as Cam Newton’s 2010 season has been, you have to agree that The Golden Calf of Bristol’s year was even better back in 2007. He had more touchdowns in fewer games and more total yards per game than Cam Newton.

With that said, Cam Newton’s team went undefeated and The Golden Calf of Bristol’s lost several games that year. However, on an individual statistical basis, The Golden Calf of Bristol in 2007 wins out.

Serious question. If we wanted a The Golden Calf of Bristol type player, then why didn't we take him in the 2nd round last year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question. If we wanted a The Golden Calf of Bristol type player, then why didn't we take him in the 2nd round last year?

Not really wanting Newton, but it's a different situation this year. We had the coach last year that has stated his desire for starting a different QB over The Golden Calf of Bristol this year. That pretty much says it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, my problem here is this. Did The Golden Calf of Bristol have more pass attempts in 2007 than did Newton? If so, then the passing yardage is a moot-point. If not, then yes, The Golden Calf of Bristol had a better year. Also, he had a better supporting cast (all-around that is). So, taken all of those into account, I think he had as good a year as The Golden Calf of Bristol had, if not better, simply based on his supporting cast as compared to The Golden Calf of Bristol's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really wanting Newton, but it's a different situation this year. We had the coach last year that has stated his desire for starting a different QB over The Golden Calf of Bristol this year. That pretty much says it all.

We drafted 2 QBs in the 2nd round, even though Armanti isn't slotted as a QB and we knew Fox was gone in late 2009 when his contract wasn't extended, not to mention The Golden Calf of Bristol could have sat behind Moore until Moore got injured.

I know that Weiss and Davidson had a great deal to do with the Clausen pick, but it just really sucks that we are debating taking Newton who is not statistically or obviously better than The Golden Calf of Bristol. Newton was The Golden Calf of Bristol's backup for 2 years and had to leave Florida to get a starting job.

I don't want to draft Newton or any other Qb with the #1 pick, but this information makes it even tougher, when you realize that The Golden Calf of Bristol could have been had for a 2nd round pick and Newton may actually go #1 overall? That's just insane to me. The Golden Calf of Bristol proved 10 times as much in college.

Edit...got it...The Golden Calf of Bristol went 25th...ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pointless.....

The Golden Calf of Bristol is one of the greatest college football players of alltime (not just QBs).

You do a The Golden Calf of Bristol comparison in college w/ Peyton Manning to Andrew Luck and The Golden Calf of Bristol is going to beat them. Not sure what the point of this comparison shows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We drafted 2 QBs in the 2nd round, even though Armanti isn't slotted as a QB and we knew Fox was gone in late 2009 when his contract wasn't extended, not to mention The Golden Calf of Bristol could have sat behind Moore until Moore got injured.

I know that Weiss and Davidson had a great deal to do with the Clausen pick, but it just really sucks that we are debating taking Newton who is not statistically or obviously better than The Golden Calf of Bristol. Newton was The Golden Calf of Bristol's backup for 2 years and had to leave Florida to get a starting job.

I don't want to draft Newton or any other Qb with the #1 pick, but this information makes it even tougher, when you realize that The Golden Calf of Bristol could have been had for a 2nd round pick and Newton may actually go #1 overall? That's just insane to me. The Golden Calf of Bristol proved 10 times as much in college.

and has others pointed out, The Golden Calf of Bristol was taken in the first round

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok.

So The Golden Calf of Bristol goes 25th and Newton may go 1st. Let's redirect the debate.

If The Golden Calf of Bristol is the better QB (Florida believe so and stats say so), then why would we take Newton with the 1st pick in the draft? It's really crazy to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • No, the casual fan gets sucked into THIS^^^ kind of thinking, and it's so woefully incorrect that it's almost sad. The first is what I've said numerous times, NOTHING about non guaranteed contracts save the billionaire owners a single penny, because they still have to spend their cap floor, and the only reason teams ever don't spend the full limit, is to then roll it over into the next season to be able to spend more that year. But in the end, owners pay the same amount of money no matter what. The reverse is also the same, that the players in totality make the same amount of money as well, because in your example of Clowney not getting that money this year, it will go to another player, as the cap needs to be spent. And you say how we just cut Clowney after we gave him the 2 year contract, but everyone including Clowney's agent and himself, knew when it was signed, that it was more likely to be a 1 year contract than a 2 with how it was structured.  The 2nd year was just to be able to spread out the cap hit and he was always most likely going to end up getting traded or cut. It's why agents and players don't care about the total money in a contract, it's always and only been about the guaranteed money, as the years and overall value are meaningless, always have been, always will be.
    • Agents will have their 1st round picks hold out until the pay structure of their contract is to their liking, not how much money they'll get or even how much is guaranteed, just the when/how they will get the money over the course of the contract. If they're willing to recommend those players hold our, do you really think they won't do it for 2nd rounders to guarantee them an extra 10% of their entire rookie contract?
    • If BY continues to develop.  XL learns how to catch with his speed. Tet lives up to his hype... THEN Brooks comes back.. dammmmmmmmmmmmmm
×
×
  • Create New...