Matt Maiocco has us taking Newton # 1 overall

[teeray]

Yay Cam Newton!!!!

[DaveThePanther2008]

i really wouldnt be mad with newton but if he does not work out....what then?

make him a te!!!!!!!!!!

[...]

its not a bold statement, its the truth. i never stated it was easy, and everyone is not doing it because they are set @ qb.

Everyone is not doing it because it's a lot easier said than done.

[panthers55]

It's called "difficult".

There's no tougher task in pro football than developing a quarterback. That's why the failure rate is high. Even guys that were already pocket passers and played in pro-style offenses in college aren't guaranteed to make the successful transition from college to the pros. For guys that play in spread systems where they're never under center or guys that have been taught to make one read and take off, that transition is even harder.

The league is full of guys who played in a spread offense as early as 30 years ago. Joe Montana played in a triple option which was the spread offense of it's day. Because of that and questionable arm strength he was picked in the third round.

Guys like Flacco, Orton, Bradford, among others all came from non-pro style offenses and have faired pretty well. The failure rate is high for quarterbacks in general regardless of their college style. There are also teams like New England for example and New Orleans who run out of the shotgun a majority of the time. It would not have to be that hard of transition really if the team and OC wanted to make it work.

[panthers55]

Stats in college are pretty much meaningless, ESPECIALLY when they're coming from a gimmicky offense like Auburns(yes Cam was phenomenal running it, but that stuff doesn't work against NFL defenses).

I still stand by wanting to draft Patrick Peterson because I feel that he(along with Green) are the closest to being "can't miss" as you can get. Newton, Gabbert, Fairley, etc all scare the hell outta me.

Again it wasn't gimmicky at all. He ran and threw depending on what he was given. You people forget he had 1 year in the system. If he had been there 3 years he would have been able to do more and develop his passing game to a higher degree. As it was it took him several games just to learn the offense. That is why some folks like me are high on his potential. He grades out well against other quarterbacks who had 3 or 4 years to learn 1 system. Sure he ran the spread but he wasn't so ingrained in it that he couldn't learn the pro game in a year or two. He is a very quick learner and will be able to make the transistion. THink of him like Flacco or Roethlisburger. His running will help keep safeties in the box while he passes down the field. His passing will burn defenses selling out to load the box. And if he can be elusive in the pocket and hard to bring down, he will be able to give receivers the time to get deep much like Roethlisburger does.

[Snake]

Great.... I love how the two words Cam Newton invoke outrages off base opinions and just sheer ignorance.

[Mr. Scot]

they would fold like an accordion b/c they don't know an NFL playbook.

lots of college kids are better than really bad NFL QBs on rosters. they get drafted and it shows when they sign w/ teams. Cam Newton w/ a training camp/preseaosn under his belt imo would be better than probably any QB on our roster and the end of last season heading into a week 1 of 2011.

The original question was whether Newton might be better than Clausen right now.

No college QB, not even Andrew Luck, is better than any pro QB "right now". Maybe after making the transition and getting coached up they can be, but to suggest that they might already be better than a guy who's experienced the pro game - even only in practice - makes no sense.

[panthers55]

With two or three years of coaching, some of these guys (Gabbert, Newton, Locker, Mallett) might develop into franchise QBs.

But I'll say before what I've said elsewhere. You simply do not take a QB that's a two to three year project with the number one overall pick unless you already have an established starter in place and you're picking his heir apparent.

That's not our situation at all :nonod:

You pick up Volek or someone like him and it is your situation. You have a veteran starter and Clausen and Newton to backup and develop. No reason not to develop your franchise down the road. Plus given that Newton mastered Auburn's easy offense in a few games, it isn't inconceivable that he could learn a pro offense motified for him in a season.

When will it be better? If Clausen plays better and we 6 or 7 games next year would we want to draft a QB project next year? The best time to develop a project is when expectations are very low and we have little to lose. The better we get the less folks will want to use a high pick on a project.

[Mr. Scot]

If we go out and pick up a vet starter in free agency, then this year is Clausen's chance to prove if he can start or not. The vet will be the failsafe.

It doesn't make sense to go that route and then also use the #1 pick on that same spot.

[mav1234]

It does if you are convinced that the best pick available is a quarterback and that quarterback has real potential to be a franchise changing, elite-level player. Then, maybe Clausen improves this year, maybe not... There's a competition in camp, and we enter the season carrying a vet, Clausen, and a rookie, in whatever order it falls based on how they do in camp.

...but yeah. I don't think that is going to happen...

[Mother Grabber]

You mean Andrew Luck? He's not coming out.

[Mr. Scot]

It does if you are convinced that the best pick available is a quarterback and that quarterback has real potential to be a franchise changing, elite-level player. Then, maybe Clausen improves this year, maybe not... There's a competition in camp, and we enter the season carrying a vet, Clausen, and a rookie, in whatever order it falls based on how they do in camp.

...but yeah. I don't think that is going to happen...

Neither do I.

With Luck, it would have, but nobody else.

[panthers55]

If we go out and pick up a vet starter in free agency, then this year is Clausen's chance to prove if he can start or not. The vet will be the failsafe.

It doesn't make sense to go that route and then also use the #1 pick on that same spot.

It really does revolve around Clausen. If the team thinks he is a franchise guy you are right you wouldn't spend a high pick on Qb this year or anytime in the near future. If you have serious doubts, you could certainly pull the trigger. The fact we were going to pick Luck says that if a better option is available we would pull the trigger. The debate is where you see Clausen in relation to the other QBs once Luck is no longer an option. Are guys like Newton the guy you have to have or just the best of the rest in an undistinguished group.

The reason I see it a possibility is because of how bad our offense was this year and Richardson's edict to fix it. How much it is a possibility will come down to Chud and Shula in discussions with Hurney about whether Clausen can be that guy or whether we have to go in a different direction.

[SmootsDaddy89]

Arguably the top 5 QBs in today's NFL, in no particular order:

Brady

Manning

Brees

Rodgers

Rivers

All of these QBs are accurate passers, none of them are known for being overly mobile. Definitely not runners, and Manning and Brady are downright slow.

If we take Newton at #1, I will pee on Hurney's head.

"Here's a list of QBs I ranked subjectively to prove my own pre-conceived notion that mobile QBs are not not any good, with a sample size of one year."

Also Aaron Rodgers rushed for about 400 yards last season, so if anyone hasn't already pointed this out yet, you're an imbecile.