What does Cam have to do

[TheRealDeal]

He is a rookie dealing with no OTAs, no mini camp. and some accuracy issues. You are asking me what I expect this season not 4 years from now. I have a hard time finding QBs with lower than teen interceptions their first year. Manning had like 28 for fugs sake.

He is a rookie. He is going to struggle like every other rookie QB in history. I don't have unrealistic expectations. Just make some plays and give me some moments to hang my hat on for the future.

He doesn't have accuracy issues, he was the second best passer in college football history and the best passer if it weren't for the NC game!

He completed 61% at Blinn and 66% in Auburn, why do you not expect 71%?

Why do you expect him to all of the sudden lose that accuracy that made him the best passer in college football history?

Unless you mean to say that you are agreeing with everything I said pre draft OR that you knew what you were arguing was wrong and now want to set the bar low because you know he won't live up to the hype?

Which is it?

[CRA]

He doesn't have accuracy issues, he was the second best passer in college football history and the best passer if it weren't for the NC game!

He completed 61% at Blinn and 66% in Auburn, why do you not expect 71%?

Why do you expect him to all of the sudden lose that accuracy that made him the best passer in college football history?

Unless you mean to say that you are agreeing with everything I said pre draft OR that you knew what you were arguing was wrong and now want to set the bar low because you know he won't live up to the hype?

Which is it?

again, when youyou take 1 posters crazy thoughts from an internet message board....and then continuious claim that is how everyone views Cam like you do (an example of it is in this post)......it just makes you a troll on the issue.

[TheRealDeal]

I'm talking to Teeray and it wasn't just one poster.

[Raleighcat83]

You are missing alot. Of course Cam's stats are better, he played with elite talent in the best conference in football. Many players Cam played will will be in the NFL, and he was only there 1 year.

Jake was in Washington for 4 years. So far, ZERO offensive players he played with have even been drafted, and ZERO current players are ranked in the top 25 at their position for their class. It is likely that Jake Locker will have spent his entire career with not one single NFL player on his team.

The fact is that Jake actually threw the ball with the regularity of a successful NFL QB (doesn't mean he automatically will be); while Cam ran the ball with the regularity of a typical running QB bust (which has shown 100% to mean failure).

You guys are really struggling here....the desperation is obvious.

The only offensive player Cam played with that was drafted was Lee Zembia, and that was in the 7th round. Auburn had better offensive talent to surround the QB with, but they also faced much better defenses. Had Locker been going against the likes of LSU, Alabama, South Carolina, etc, every week, his passing stats would have been worse. Locker's attempts per game were influenced by the fact that his team was often behind, causing them to have to throw more. But Cam was more effective on the throws he did make, against higher quality opposition. If you wanna make the case that being a running QB wont work in the NFL, fine. Evaluate his passing. But don't discount his passing stats just because they were combined with good running stats. You can think that running ability is helpful for an NFL QB, or, alternatively you can think that running ability is irrelevant. But I can't figure out how you can argue that running ability is a negative.

[mav1234]

tee, I think with the Obama thing you are missing the crux of his argument.

1) Quarterbacks who run in college a lot learn to rely on the run, and do not develop passing skills as well as they would if they didn't run so much

2) This means that "running quarterbacks" have a certain set of skills they have developed that is different from other quarterbacks.

3) No quarterback that has won a Superbowl has come close to that kind of ground production regularly in college (Though as you note, 1 has come close which weakens this premise).

If Cam Newton fits the bill of a running quarterback, and if running quarterbacks are defined by their college performances as having a certain skill set, then it is logical to conclude the likelihood of Cam winning a Superbowl is low because others haven't had success in his mold before.

My problem is more with premises 1 and 2... Premise 1 in that I think the same thing can be applied to a quarterback who has limited reps, and Premise 2 in that while I agree what offense a player in tends to showcase different skills etc, I just think it's too easy to lump any quarterback that runs for a lot into a "running quarterback' category because as offenses change, the amount a QB runs changes (Locker is a good example of this - nearly 1k yards, 170 some carries his freshman year...)

The essence of his argument is similar to what I've felt all along; that Cam has had limited reps at the quarterback position throwing the ball so he is basically quite a bit behind in many ways. However, due to the fact he appears to be working hard at it, I'm not going to pass judgment on his likelihood of success because he seems to know he needs to get better

[TheRealDeal]

If you think Premise 1 can be applied to guys with limited reps, can't it be doubly counted for Cam?

[CRA]

I'm talking to Teeray and it wasn't just one poster.

whether it was 1 or 2....it doesn't matter. Fact remains you choose to be a troll on the topic and people don't force you into it like you have spun before and that post above is a perfect example of it.

You should go back to being the good poster instead of the Cam troll.

[mav1234]

If you think Premise 1 can be applied to guys with limited reps, can't it be doubly counted for Cam?

I don't think it is double counted against him. I do not feel that a quarterback rushing alone is what causes 'delays in development' (to oversimplify things). There's also the aspect of the offense they were running which plays a big role, the work ethic of the individual. Those 3 things alone are not sufficient to try to explain a quarterback in college obviously. Now, Cam COULD have worse issues from it because of the fact his offense called for him to open the defense up with his legs so much, but premise 2 is quite integral to the idea that he has a lower chance of winning a Superbowl than any other incoming quarterback based on college performance alone.

I just don't think that run/pass ratio is satisfactory in predicting NFL success... He spent 1 year at D1 level, and his "ratio" changed quite a bit from JC to D1. In addition, the vast majority of his runs were called runs, so not all of it was taking off when the passing game closed up. It was more running to set up the pass, lol. (Which brought with it a whole set of question marks, but... anyway...)

[TheRealDeal]

Panthro did you post your numbers?

[SCP]

I drafted Cam Newton in the 16th round of my fantasy draft last night. He's my back up to P Rivers and Matt Ryan.

boo ya ho's

[teeray]

He doesn't have accuracy issues, he was the second best passer in college football history and the best passer if it weren't for the NC game!

He completed 61% at Blinn and 66% in Auburn, why do you not expect 71%?

Why do you expect him to all of the sudden lose that accuracy that made him the best passer in college football history?

Unless you mean to say that you are agreeing with everything I said pre draft OR that you knew what you were arguing was wrong and now want to set the bar low because you know he won't live up to the hype?

Which is it?

What?! It was factually accurate to say his QB rating was amongst the best in FBS history but I never said he was a better pure passer than Sam Bradford.

I have said from the beginning that he has some accuracy issues on certain routes. My argument was that it wasn't as bad as you and others made it out to be and easily correctable. I still believe that.

I don't know what hype you think I put on him for his rookie year. I never said that he was going to come in and light up the scoreboard and the stats sheet. As a matter of fact I said I felt like it would have been beneficial for him to sit until he was ready. Now I never put an arbitrary time table on when he would be ready like 2 or three years. I simply said that he should sit until he is ready. If he was ready day 1 then great. If he was ready week 10 or next season, then great also.

But nearly every rookie has a tough time their first year in the league and nearly all of them have interceptions in the teens.

Why do you think Cam will be any different?

Again you were asking me about this year not where he will be in 4 years. I wanted to draft him based on where I thought he would be,not where he was at today. I gave my most realistic answer and you don't seem to like it :(.

[Panthro]

Panthro did you post your numbers?

1st page

<3

[Cat'sGrowl]

I drafted Cam Newton in the 16th round of my fantasy draft last night. He's my back up to P Rivers and Matt Ryan.

boo ya ho's

I did the same. Difference is he is my only back up QB. Aaron Rodgers is my number one guy, who I took with the first overall pick-QBs are worth a ton in our league.

First time I ever did an offline draft. Did it in a private room in Buffalo Wild Wings and had a blast.

[TheRealDeal]

1st page

<3

Thanks.

Can I ask what the edit was?

This thread is also pointless without the search feature btw