Jim Harbaugh on Cam Newton

[ncmonzta]

Your logic is very flawed sir, but I respect your attempts to make Cam seem better than Luck.

I'm not getting into this argument again because it's been discussed plenty. I don't know how you can argue against it when I have actual backup and you have some random opinion which is biased to begin with.

You're fuging retarded, look at the teams stanford played and then look at the teams auburn played. I understand you cant come up with anything valid to say sometimes but when you're face with that problem just shut the fug up.:rofl:

[TheRealDeal]

You're fuging retarted, look at the teams stanford played and then look at the teams auburn played. I understand you cant come up with anything valid to say sometimes but when you're face with that problem just shut the fug up.:rofl:

What is retarted?

Does that mean I was first tarted then I was retarted?

I understand you don't respect the teams Stanford played but other, less biased calculations have spoken. Until you provide me with something other than your opinion, please stop talking...forever.

[ncmonzta]

What is retarded?

Does that mean I was first tarded then I was retarded?

I understand you don't respect the teams Stanford played but other, less biased calculations have spoken. Until you provide me with something other than your opinion, please stop talking...forever.

http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team

1.Aurnurn 2.Oregon 4.Stanford

Auburn vs top 10- 4-0 Stanford vs top 10- 0-1

Auburn vs top 30- 7-0 Stanford vs top 30- 7-1

In trd terms- Cam's team beat 4 of the bestes teams in the world and Stanford lost to the only bestes team the played. Correct if i misspelled "bestes" trd. I know you will

[Peppers90 NC]

You're fuging retarded, look at the teams stanford played and then look at the teams auburn played. I understand you cant come up with anything valid to say sometimes but when you're face with that problem just shut the fug up.:rofl:

I would actually argue Cam IS the better college QB. Note college is most important here, of course it will be proven in years to come who is better at the NFL level. What you said most importantly is teams. Auburn is stacked compared to Stanford, at pretty much every position, of course they are going to do better vs the better competition. But you can't argue the fact Luck kept them in every game and appears to be much better suited for the NFL. What that has to do with the Panthers? Nothing right now, other than the fact Cam is not the prototypical overall first pick type of QB.

[ncmonzta]

I would actually argue Cam IS the better college QB. Note college is most important here, of course it will be proven in years to come who is better at the NFL level. What you said most importantly is teams. Auburn is stacked compared to Stanford, at pretty much every position, of course they are going to do better vs the better competition. But you can't argue the fact Luck kept them in every game and appears to be much better suited for the NFL. What that has to do with the Panthers? Nothing right now, other than the fact Cam is not the prototypical overall first pick type of QB.

I think Stanford had a better offensive line,wr's and running game than Auburn as far as talent. Auburn had the better defense.

[TheRealDeal]

http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team

1.Aurnurn 2.Oregon 4.Stanford

Auburn vs top 10- 4-0 Stanford vs top 10- 0-1

Auburn vs top 30- 7-0 Stanford vs top 30- 7-1

In trd terms- Cam's team beat 4 of the bestes teams in the world and Stanford lost to the only bestes team the played. Correct if i misspelled "bestes" trd. I know you will

That wasn't so hard was it. Also, Stanford beat VaTech.

I don't really trust any rankings that don't have Oregon St in the top5 though, considering the schedule they played.

[Peppers90 NC]

I think Stanford had a better offensive line,wr's and running game than Auburn as far as talent. Auburn had the better defense.

I think they had smarter, more team-oriented players on offense plus a very good leader. This is important when running a pro style offense, as compared to Auburn with crazy athletes kinda going out there playing street ball, just running around using their abilities to make plays. Stanford was more a strategic team while Auburn uses their physical ability to outmatch other teams. Now I am not trying to downplay what they did or their offense at all, they were very impressive, just in comparison to Stanford and their game plans.

[Jerry]

We would be better off passing up Newton and getting

sure fire pro-bowlers right out of the box like Peterson or

Fairly or Dareus. Newton will take too long to develop.

My plan is to let Clausen play another year and load up on

defense and draft a QB in 2012. If all goes well it'll be Luck.

Luck will be in the pro-bowl while Cam is still learning.

[TheRealDeal]

I don't like how your posts show up

[monstercat]

Your logic is very flawed sir, but I respect your attempts to make Cam seem better than Luck.

I'm not getting into this argument again because it's been discussed plenty. I don't know how you can argue against it when I have actual backup and you have some random opinion which is biased to begin with.

LOL, you know damn well that I'm right.

[TheRealDeal]

That's just like saying Auburn would have had a tougher time scoring against all Pac10 teams because they had a tougher time scoring against Oregon that everyone else. Even Andrew Luck and the nerds put up 31 on them. The RB that carried Cam and the Tigers only put up 22. So using your logic, Luck is the better than Cam and Cam wouldn't do well in the Pac10?

[grateflday]

We would be better off passing up Newton and getting

sure fire pro-bowlers right out of the box like Peterson or

Fairly or Dareus. Newton will take too long to develop.

My plan is to let Clausen play another year and load up on

defense and draft a QB in 2012. If all goes well it'll be Luck.

Luck will be in the pro-bowl while Cam is still learning.

1) :eek: "if all goes well it'll be Luck" ........... Sorry, but I would much rather prefer enduring another brutal season knowing our QB of the future is already here then hoping to get Luck or some other QB nobody has done any evaluating on, etc.

2) No such thing a "sure fire pro bowler right out of the box". I dont care where your picked.

3) LOL at the "will take to long to develop" followed by "draft a QB in 2012"..... Cam will be ready before any QB drafted next year. Oh, I forget.. .the Panthers are getting Luck next year :cool: