What is this UPSIDE that makes Cam better than Gabbert?

[iamcline]

All world quarterback Andrew luck was consider the 3rd or fourth best quarterback at best.

I sure hope you are saying Luck was 3rd or 4th best before the Season.

[CatMan72]

Take a look over the past ten to twenty years history of Heisman and National Championship winners, then come back and tell me again how well that translates into the NFL.

You're right, the Heisman infact has seemed to be a curse in recent history, but I don't believe in curses... I just think it's a byproduct of the fact that the things that make you a great NCAA football player don't necessarily make you a great NFL football player, especially in this day and age when the games are moving farther apart from one another.

Having said that, there is something to be said for a guy having winners DNA, and Cam has that. You hand the kid a football and he finds a way to win. I don't know if that will be good enough for the NFL, but combined with his physical tools it's a good place to start.

[MHS831]

Thats just it...its the past. Time to get over it dude. Will you still be bringing up the past if he brings a trophy here too? Hes got a few of those while dealing with his PAST

Listen, Dude, the past is the best predictor of the future. You are who you are and most people do not change. Got a better way to learn about character than looking into the past?

I imagine a defense attorney has tried that excuse on a jury: "My client is a good person now. What happened was in the past, dudes. Time to get over it."

If you don't think his past is significant, then I question how much you value character.

[ncmonzta]

Take a look over the past ten to twenty years history of Heisman and National Championship winners, then come back and tell me again how well that translates into the NFL.

I'll ask the question you didn't answer again:

Explain to me why I shouldn't be concerned about what a guy who could only manage 50% accuracy with no defense on the field will be like when he's up against pro level defenders?

(and again, the "not his own receivers" argument is stupid, so don't bother with that one)

You guys think Newton is good enough. I don't. Like I said, it's all judgment call. Mine is different from yours. We'll eventually find out who was right.

I've been wrong before - and am comfortable with that - but I've been right before too.

So now college "in-game" stats don't matter but combine and pro day stats do? lol @you:confused:

[MHS831]

If we drafted Cam, I wouldn't want to see him start right away unless Coach Rivera decided he was ready. I would like to see us bring in a vet QB as a stop gap while Cam learns how to get it done in the NFL.

In general, I think too many young QB's are asked to play right away.

Like Clausen.

[Mr. Scot]

Yeah Scot has zero credibility left on his QB analysis. He wrote his dissertations about how irrelevant the combine and private workouts were and how game tape was the #1 thing to go by BEFORE Cam had a disappointing combine. Now he's completely flipped on that one. I've seen him argue that what players did in college doesn't matter, their pro days don't matter, their combines don't matter, their measurements don't matter. Hell, I guess nothing matters and we should just go get someone to make the local good ol' boys happy. TJ Yates at #1 anybody? Is CJ Leak still draft eligible?

Credibility questions from the guy who told us it was a lock that John Fox was going to the Chargers (among other things) :lol:

Let's try this again...

My feelings about pro workouts are that they do not trump game tape. They can be used to differentiate between players of similar grades and/or test things that you have concerns about. And yes, if you have a bad one, it can be a red flag.

[Mr. Scot]

You're right, the Heisman infact has seemed to be a curse in recent history, but I don't believe in curses... I just think it's a byproduct of the fact that the things that make you a great NCAA football player don't necessarily make you a great NFL football player, especially in this day and age when the games are moving farther apart from one another.

Having said that, there is something to be said for a guy having winners DNA, and Cam has that. You hand the kid a football and he finds a way to win. I don't know if that will be good enough for the NFL, but combined with his physical tools it's a good place to start.

I don't believe in curses either.

What I do believe is that the college and pro games are very different, and success in one does not necessarily translate to success in the other.

I know folks hate to admit it, but when Real Deal talks about the important thing being having skills that translate to the pro game, he's right.

[Mr. Scot]

So now college "in-game" stats don't matter but combine and pro day stats do? lol @you:confused:

Try again (from the longer post).

- Invoking college stats is meaningless too. Some of the most phenomenal statistical performances at the college level belonged to guys like Tim Couch, Colt Brennan and Chase Daniel. It doesn't translate to the pros (and don't bother bringing up the SEC; it's still nowhere close to pro level competition).

And again, tell my why I shouldn't be concerned about a 50% completion rate with no defense on the field?

When they play actual games, I'm pretty sure there will be a defense.

[Brooklyn Bully]

Gabbert is the best opinion for a pro-style quarterback in the draft this year, i think to be a quarterback in the NFL the best intangible to have is football IQ and from what i have heard Gabbert studies film like its a religion.

Guess who was said to be most pro-ready/pro-style last year other than Bradford? Yep, Jimmy. He didn't look too good now did he? Just sayin'. It means next to nothing unless the kid never did anything other than the spread in college. Then again, The Golden Calf of Bristol didn't look half bad with the Broncos.

You know, it's funny. Most of the "Cam hate" comes because of the media love affair with talking about, and trashing this kid. If very little had been said about him this season (like so with Blaine Who?), and his MONSTER EVIL CRIMINAL ISSUES (lol) were send to a back page by the media, then no one would even question his desire to study film, his role as a leader, and his desire to be a superstar. Sure, that last one is on him, but if you sheep wouldn't slurp up every ounce of media jizz on the kid, you'd let his performance be your judge. But damn that laptop stealin', money hungry, limelight wanting, dad-is-a-crook, punk! He'll never study tape! He'll be makin' it rain instead!

[monstercat]

I bet he can. You share his vision of Cam.

You're the one who's blind when it comes to Cam Newton. Obviously you either don't see, or don't want to see that his production on the football field was much higher than Gabberts' and that he was much more important to his team's success than Gabbert was. Chase Daniels put up better numbers than Gabbert in the exact same offense...the only difference is that Daniels is short and Gabbert is tall.

IMO, you could have switched Newton and Gabbert and Mizzouri would have competed for a NC with Cam running the show, while Auburn would have been a pretty average SEC team with Gabbert running their offense. Deep down inside, even the haters know this is true.

It's just too damn obvious that Newton is a playmaker when the game is on the line.

[CarolinaVeins]

Listen, Dude, the past is the best predictor of the future. You are who you are and most people do not change. Got a better way to learn about character than looking into the past?

I imagine a defense attorney has tried that excuse on a jury: "My client is a good person now. What happened was in the past, dudes. Time to get over it."

If you don't think his past is significant, then I question how much you value character.

Theres plenty of people that have mistakes they have done in the past and still become successful. You learn from all of that. It builds character. I have done things Im not proud of. Does that mean if I work hard at what I do it doesnt matter because of my past I wont see success?

[ncmonzta]

Try again (from the longer post).

And again, tell my why I shouldn't be concerned about a 50% completion rate with no defense on the field?

When they play actual games, I'm pretty sure there will be a defense.

Because you should be concerned with the 66% completion and 182.05 Qb rating, IN-GAME. All that hate is making slighty stupid

[MHS831]

So now college "in-game" stats don't matter but combine and pro day stats do? lol @you:confused:

Tony Pike had 29 TDs his senior year. He threw for 2500+ yards in a spread offense.

Take a look at Ryan Leaf vs Peyton Manning:

QB rating:

Leaf 107

Manning 101

Passing Yards:

Manning 3800 (more attempted passes)

Leaf 3600

TD passes:

Manning 36

Leaf 33

Interceptions:

Leaf 10

Manning 11

How much can it matter?

So, in-game stats mean very little. In college you can succeed by going on pre-snap reads, staring down WRs, running every time the first read is covered, having a slow release, etc. These characterstics relate to failure in the NFL.

The combine and pro days look at these fundamentals. Along with the interviews and background checks, they are more important than what happened in college.

[micnificent28]

I sure hope you are saying Luck was 3rd or 4th best before the Season.

I was. it was locker who was the number 1 pick if he came out with bradford, and since he went back was almost promised to be the number 1 pick this season before his stock shipwrecked. Kind of like what is being said about Luck.