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!

     

Clayton Observations Panther's unlikely to select Cam

micnificent28

By micnificent28,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

teeray Rookie

teeray

Posted
Posted

He COULD be anyone in terms of production, but that's not what the original comparison of Luck and Manning was and you tried to do the same with Cam. It's cool if you want to change it now.

I'm pretty sure the comparison between Manning and Luck was about future production.

Or was it that Luck won't be as good as Manning but they will look and act the same? :rofl:

Your the best TRD. :rofl:

I don't feel bad for people who are ignorant. Just ones that are ignorant but still thinks they are smart enough to try and put other people down on a message board to feel better about themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

I'm pretty sure the comparison between Manning and Luck was about future production.

Or was it that Luck won't be as good as Manning but they will look and act the same? :rofl:

You're the best TRD. :rofl:

I don't feel bad for people who are ignorant. Just ones that are ignorant but still thinks they are smart enough to try and put other people down on a message board to feel better about themselves.

Fixed so when you call someone ignorant you at least use proper grammar.

I think the comparisons were about being a prototypical QB and their makeup in terms of IQ, Build, work ethic, character, etc. I don't think it had anything to do with future production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Rookie

teeray

Posted
Posted

Fixed so when you call someone ignorant you at least use proper grammar.

I think the comparisons were about being a prototypical QB and their makeup in terms of IQ, Build, work ethic, character, etc. I don't think it had anything to do with future production.

Oh, well when he said a "unique opportunity to draft the next Payton Manning" I guess I mistook that for someone who would be as productive as Manning, not a guy who has the same personal attributes of a Manning. TJ Yates has those same qualities. So would be drafting TJ Yates be the next Peyton Manning as well?? They have similar qualities. Since were not talking about production :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

Oh, well when he said a "unique opportunity to draft the next Payton Manning" I guess I mistook that for someone who would be as productive as Manning, not a guy who has the same attributes of a Manning like TJ Yates who has those same qualities. So would be drafting TJ Yates be the next Peyton Manning as well?? They have similar qualities. Since were not talking about production :rofl:

Yes, TJ Yates is in that category.

Just like Cam is on Vick's level of quickness and speed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Rookie

teeray

Posted
Posted

Fixed so when you call someone ignorant you at least use proper grammar.

I think the comparisons were about being a prototypical QB and their makeup in terms of IQ, Build, work ethic, character, etc. I don't think it had anything to do with future production.

And good burn on the grammar. You are so smart!! How did I ever doubt you about your football prowess with your supreme command of the English language. :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

And good burn on the grammar. You are so smart!! How did I ever doubt you about your football prowess with your supreme command of the English language. :rofl:

Can you get a new smiley? That poo is getting old.

I didn't mean to hurt your feelings man I'm just saying that Cam to Vick is not a good comparison on any level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

The comparison between Luck and Manning wasn't really future production but what measurables they have and what they bring to the quarterback position in terms of intangibles and the level of grasp they had demonstrated over the position in college. At least, that is what I thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Rookie

teeray

Posted
Posted

Yes, TJ Yates is in that category.

Just like Cam is on Vick's level of quickness and speed.

Just bc you compare two people's potential production doesn't mean that I said he was as quick and fast as Vick. I never said that.

At 6'6 250 he doesn't have to be as fast and quick to be as productive as Vick with his feet.

Again, just a little but above your pay grade. :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

Just bc you compare two people's potential production doesn't mean that I said he was as quick and fast as Vick. I never said that.

At 6'6 250 he doesn't have to be as fast and quick to be as productive as Vick with his feet.

Again, just a little but above your pay grade. :rofl:

You have the reading comprehension skills and understanding of a guerrilla.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Rookie

teeray

Posted
Posted

The comparison between Luck and Manning wasn't really future production but what measurables they have and what they bring to the quarterback position in terms of intangibles and the level of grasp they had demonstrated over the position in college. At least, that is what I thought.

Well that is what i said originally Mav. Scouts said he could be the next Peyton Manning. and I agreed with that. My original point was when someone (not TRD who decided to take this off the tracks bc he isn't smart enough to understand the point) said "we missed an opportunity to draft the next Peyton Manning and all the scouts agree". He was suggesting it was a foregone conclusion. I said that was premature. Let him play some football before we declare him the next Peyton Manning.

Then to illustrate my point I said Cam Newton could be Mike Vick 2.0. In terms of production through the air and on the ground

I didn't say he would be. Just that he could be. We won't know until he is in the NFL

As usual TRD whiffed on the point and pulled me into a stupid argument that has nothing to do with the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Rookie

teeray

Posted
Posted

You have the reading comprehension skills and understanding of a guerrilla.

Guerrilla :rofl::rofl::rofl:

Love the command of the English language.

I have the understanding of a style of military war fare.

:rofl: :rofl:

I know you are tired of this emoticon but it best describes you sometimes

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

Well that is what i said originally Mav. Scouts said he could be the next Peyton Manning. and I agreed with that. My original point was when someone (not TRD who decided to take this off the tracks bc he isn't smart enough to understand the point) said we missed an opportunity to draft the next Peyton Manning and all the scouts agree. He was suggesting it was a foregone conclusion. I said that was premature. Let him play some football before we declare him the next Peyton Manning.

Then to illustrate my point I said Cam Newton could be Mike Vick 2.0. In terms of production through the air and on the ground

I didn't say he would be. Just that he could be.

As usual TRD whiffed on the point and pulled me into a stupid argument that has nothing to do with the point.

The whole problem is that you didn't say "in terms of production"

You need to get better at getting your point across.

When you say he could be Mike Vick 2.0, I think you mean in terms of everything that Mike Vick is and the style that he plays with. That's why I disagreed with the comparison. If you are saying only in terms of production, Cam can be anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • frankw
      Dave Tepper gives Canales and Dan Morgan vote of confidence

      By frankw · Posted

      You and I both know there isn't a coach we could or can still hire that can "fix" Bryce Young. Even at mighty Alabama with one of the best modern coaches in college football history Mac Jones was still a better QB than Bryce Young. Mac Jones.... We already know how you feel about Canales on a personal level so in that regard you wanting him fired is not news. You don't have to disguise it behind this shroud of rabble about not fixing Bryce Young. To his credit he somehow had us competive against the Chiefs and the Eagles on the road with #9. But no coaching staff can overcome their starting QB turning the ball over 4 times. We definitely have developed some of our younger offensive pieces. And as far as Evero goes he has earned criticism and if he's fired so be it but in his defense many of us said in the offseason this defensive roster was a disaster waiting to happen given the resources we spent on the offense while neglecting the defense. That was Dan Morgan's plan. He swung too hard toward offense to salvage the Bryce Young trade. That's on him. We can scream about XL all we want but at least he's actually been on the field for the most part. The Brooks pick was a luxury pick at the time and now it is a Hurney level blunder. Dan Morgan has gotten a lot of early praise here when in reality he's unequivocally deserving of significant criticism. But if you say that some people get up in arms because he's a former Panther. Big whoop. He has just as much to prove this upcoming season as Canales. That's why to me in my own personal opinion I say one more season and then if it's more of the same say goodbye to both.
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Mcshay Unsure T-mac is a wr 1 or X..

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      Tuka fan when a TMac thread pops up
    • TD alt
      Mcshay Unsure T-mac is a wr 1 or X..

      By TD alt · Posted

      It's a decent vid with compelling reasons for his opinion. But, my thing is is that you simply can't draft McMillan thinking he is a surefire WR1. There are questions. His 40---rightly or wrongly---will play a part. I'd think that his splits (which will speak more to his game translating to the pros in my mind) are more important.  As much as you're trying to sell us that McMillan is a don't-overthink-it-type-of-player, I wouldn't say that's the case. Workouts will play a part in all of this.  At this point, I like the thought of Tetairoa. That's as much as I can give you right now.
×
×
  • Create New...