Exhibit A of why you don't draft Newton in the 1st round

[Mvp2014]

That was something about Clausen as well-even though they're totally different quarterbacks, if you watch his highlights, his receivers were always getting super clean releases. Not so much in the NFL.

No doubt, 2 great receivers and a tight end that couldnt get covered if they tried. That was a knock on him coming out, that he didnt throw deep and mid range passes well or often. Oh yea and his throwing motion was awful

[Miaoww]

No doubt, 2 great receivers and a tight end that couldnt get covered if they tried. That was a knock on him coming out, that he didnt throw deep and mid range passes well or often. Oh yea and his throwing motion was awful

You might want to check how often they were on the field. Floyd and Rudolph are made of glass.

[Mvp2014]

You might want to check how often they were on the field. Floyd and Rudolph are made of glass.

I thought Rudolph was one of the top TE prospects and will probably go in the first 2 rounds, something doesnt add up

[Snake]

luck could be the next alex smith or ryan leaf.

Bad examples. Leaf had horrible attitude issues(why Indy picked Manning) and is way more like Newton and JaMarcus then Luck. Also Alex Smith came from a spread offense and most all QBs from spread offenses struggle.

[Miaoww]

They're both fantastic talents, but they're ridiculously injury prone.

[Mvp2014]

They're both fantastic talents, but they're ridiculously injury prone.

hmmm, nice to know

[SorthNarolina]

2010 micheal vick or randle cunningham would disagree.

for the most part especially recently most people assume a mobile QB on the level of vick isn't a solid passer. And for his entire career until now Vick wasn't a very solid passer.

I don't think if you have a mobile QB you have to center the offense around him. Let him make plays on his own, most QBs can roll out of the pocket just fine. There might be a drop in performance and it would effect the defenses gameplan. But I don't think a mobile QB needs another mobile guy behind him for the offense to work.

[bleys]

How will I ever recover those three rep points you stole from me due to your inability to detect sarcasm?

+rep

[pantherfan81]

Now I will spring open the second phase of the argument...

The other problem with running qb's (being more oft injured) is, if you properly center the offense around them, you must find a decent running qb willing to sit on the bench to back them up, which is extremely hard.

AE. I know I know, just sayin

[bleys]

Actually Vick was injured while he was in the pocket and got sacked not while he was on the run.

As for building an offense that needs similar quarterbacks, Green Bay went from Brett Favre to Aaron Rodgers or in other words a pocket passer to a guy who is mobile without changing offenses or personnel. You can put in plays for QBs with different skills without changing everything.

Aaron Rodgers is an interesting comparison.. I'm not sold that he is a good comparison..

Aaron Rodgers is primarily a pocket passer, they don't run draw plays or options because of his mobile ability like you would with Vick.. Majority of the time you only find him run as a last resort.. they don't build plays around him running the ball.

However, that last statement isn't entirely true.. The Packers have changed their offense slightly from Favre and you wouldn't see Favre run the same type of offense.. the slight change is in the form of roll-outs.. They do roll Rodgers out, and let's say Favre were backing up an injured Rodgers, you would see a change in playcalling in that aspect..

so the Packers haven't changed their offense to cater to a lot of QB draws like they would Vick, but they also have catered for more roll out plays that would have to be changed if Favre were in..

so Rodgers' playing style doesn't require much change from Favre, but also, his mobility allows for roll outs which has changed a bit from the Favre transition..

[rayzor]

Exhibit A = VY, JRUSS both big armed, big framed, running qbs with limitless potential that ran spread offense in college

see, the guy that i look at when people bring up russel is mallet. imo, he's a lot closer in comparison (that is, if you can get yourself away from the whole color thing).

i still also think that the best comparison of newton is big ben, only a lot more mobile.

[panthers55]

Aaron Rodgers is an interesting comparison.. I'm not sold that he is a good comparison..

Aaron Rodgers is primarily a pocket passer, they don't run draw plays or options because of his mobile ability like you would with Vick.. Majority of the time you only find him run as a last resort.. they don't build plays around him running the ball.

However, that last statement isn't entirely true.. The Packers have changed their offense slightly from Favre and you wouldn't see Favre run the same type of offense.. the slight change is in the form of roll-outs.. They do roll Rodgers out, and let's say Favre were backing up an injured Rodgers, you would see a change in playcalling in that aspect..

so the Packers haven't changed their offense to cater to a lot of QB draws like they would Vick, but they also have catered for more roll out plays that would have to be changed if Favre were in..

so Rodgers' playing style doesn't require much change from Favre, but also, his mobility allows for roll outs which has changed a bit from the Favre transition..

I would agree that Rodger's does add quite a bit of mobility and expands the playbook. But as you say you aren't changing the whole offensive scheme. You are just playing to the quarterback's strengths.

On the other hand I don't know how many quarterback draws are called for Vick versus how many times he decides to run when the first option isn't open. I am sure some of them are designed run plays but other's are Vick's improvisation which is a formula for injury if you take enoughs hits. It is inevitable that eventually you will be hurt.

But I think that it is also incorrect to assume that Newton would be called on to run a spread or option scheme in the NFL. He would have to be able to pass and be accurate. He would need to go through his progressions as with anyone else. But he would have escapability, be able to elude defenders in the pocket to buy time, and run if necessary. But he would have to run the offense not run and be the whole offense. Things that may work in college but not the NFL. That is what the next 4 months are for, find out what he knows and what kind of learning curve he would need to be a franchise guy. I am looking forward to finding out what they find.

Newton doesn't have the football understanding that Luck has, but if Luck isn't available and he surely may not be, Newton would certainly be worthy of the number 1 pick. Particularly when you compare his potential worth to a CB or DE no matter how good. Those guys get involved in a dozen plays a game whereas the quarterback touches it in most every offensive snap.

[ZedLeppelin]

I think of Luck as kind of like an upgraded version of Rodgers. Both are smart, mobile, great armed, pac-10 QBs.

Newton is hard to predict. His upside is massive, like a mix between Big Ben and Vick but I think the chances he actually reaches that potential are pretty low. His bust rate is high but the guy has just destroyed college football this year without outstanding talent around him. When The Golden Calf of Bristol put up a statline like Newtons he had the Pounceys on the OL, 3 NFL WRs, an NFL TE, a 4.2 RB in the backfield and at least 3 pro bowlers in :Pouncey, Harvin and Hernandez, Newton didn't have close to that and went undefeated in the SEC while in Tebows best statistitical season he lost 4 games. I think when prople say Newton needs to sit and learn a lot they are wrong, if hes capable of learning the playbook and fully applying himself to learning to be a QB he could come in and be a monster and it wouldn't take him long at all. Dude was head and shoulders better then all of college football this year.

[pantherfan81]

I think of Luck as kind of like an upgraded version of Rodgers. Both are smart, mobile, great armed, pac-10 QBs.

Newton is hard to predict. His upside is massive, like a mix between Big Ben and Vick but I think the chances he actually reaches that potential are pretty low. His bust rate is high but the guy has just destroyed college football this year without outstanding talent around him. When The Golden Calf of Bristol put up a statline like Newtons he had the Pounceys on the OL, 3 NFL WRs, an NFL TE, a 4.2 RB in the backfield and at least 2 pro bowlers in Harvin and Hernandez, Newton didn't have close to that and went undefeated in the SEC while in Tebows best statistitical season he lost 4 games. I think when prople say Newton needs to sit and learn a lot they are wrong, if hes capable of learning the playbook and fully applying himself to learning to be a QB he could come in and be a monster and it wouldn't take him long at all. Dude was head and shoulders better then all of college football this year.

I've said before Luck is like Rodgers & Steve Young. It's a good comparison. Newton is such a ? but I would be happy as poo if they got him if Luck didn't come out. Dude is a beast.