Newton starter vs Bengals, Week 1 starter TBD

[mav1234]

First, you quoted it like Rivera is saying the same thing yall are saying, nope. I haven't heard none of yall "haters" say his mechanics are improving or he makes good decisions. Just because he says he's showing promise and is improving doesn't mean he has a lot to work on. I know he's not fully developed, but you and TRD have been making him sound like he's the worst QB in the class since he declared. I'm not being a dick either just trying to make sure Rivera's words are heard clearly;). Second, everybody and their mother was on here screaming Cam is a project and will need at least 2-3 years including you.

Go read the article... I quoted it exactly as it is written... A different article wrote something different, I don't know why Joe Person chose to quote Rivera how he did, but they're from the same presser. I think it's implicit in saying "Cam needs to improve" that he is improving. Do you really think they'd start him if he hadn't improved? I didn't. At the same time, what I said still stands even with your post and bold-ing. Cam needs to improve on his mechanics, Cam needs to deliver the ball to the right place and to receivers in stride. To me, that says his footwork needs work, his accuracy is still lacking, and his ball placement isn't there yet... but that doesn't mean he can't get there and I've *never* said that he couldn't.

I've repeatedly said I was impressed with Cam and he made good throws etc. I'm fairly certain I've said I was glad he had improved, but no, I don't frequently laud his improvements because I don't get to see them as Rivera does, since I didn't see him in camp etc. But I'm not afraid to admit when he makes a mistake, unlike some of you. I apparently did see the same areas needed for improvement that Rivera saw, but as I'd said before it's not like I was sure on any of it since I didn't see coaches tape.

I said he was a project, I never said 2-3 years of him on the bench. I said we'd be a better team this year with a different player, and I think we would have. I have no idea where you guys are getting this 2-3 years thing from.

Mav, you and I both know there were plenty of people on here pre-draft saying Cam wouldn't be ready for 2 or 3 years.

While reasonable people knew that was not reality, many held that position.

And yes, you are correct that he was destined to see the field at some point this year no matter how bad he might play.

There were also people on this forum who thought he was going to be the greatest player ever to play the game or something, but I don't address posts to them regularly.

Now, it might take 2-3 years for Cam to be a competitive quarterback or something (I don't think you can really judge a guy until after that point anyhow) but I don't think ANYONE thought we'd draft him and bench him for 2-3 years. They're retarded if so.

edit: I did say the TEAM would take 2-3 years if we drafted him to be competitive, and I still stand by that...

I also think that it would have *helped him* to have someone capable of starting while he improved, but that goes back to my belief that rookies are better off sitting for a bit, something that people who know a bit more than me about QBs in the NFL don't always agree with, so :)

[ncmonzta]

People really need to learn the definition of "hater"

I know the definition of brown noser;) Stay out of grown folks business

[chef17]

Go read the article... I quoted it exactly as it is written... A different article wrote something different, I don't know why Joe Person chose to quote Rivera how he did, but they're from the same presser. I think it's implicit in saying "Cam needs to improve" that he is improving. Do you really think they'd start him if he hadn't improved? I didn't.

I've repeatedly said I was impressed with Cam and he made good throws etc. I'm fairly certain I've said I was glad he had improved, but no, I don't frequently laud his improvements because I don't get to see them as Rivera does, since I didn't see him in camp etc. However, I apparently did see the same areas needed for improvement that Rivera saw.

I said he was a project, I never said 2-3 years. I said we'd be a better team this year with a different player, and I think we would have. I have no idea where you guys are getting this 2-3 years thing from.

There were people who said Cam would be a 2-3 year project. I guess they took that as Cam wouldn't see the field for 2-3 years.

[chef17]

I know the definition of brown noser;) Stay out of grown folks business

Except I wasn't referring to you. Mind your own damn business ;)

[King Taharqa]

2-3 years to see the field? What? He was going to play his rookie year even if he stunk. I agree he's ahead, but you thought we were going to have him benched for 3 years? Why?

Thats what we were told pre-draft. We wanted to win "NOW" and Cameron would take 2-3 years to see the field. He was a "huge project" and Billy Volek and Matt Flynn were "safer" options via FA. For Cam to be on the cusp of being named starter after his first training camp was something alot of folks who did not want us to draft him could not fathom. Now its like he was always expected to be doing what he's doing. When do the goal posts stop moving backwards?

[ncmonzta]

Go read the article... I quoted it exactly as it is written... A different article wrote something different, I don't know why Joe Person chose to quote Rivera how he did, but they're from the same presser. I think it's implicit in saying "Cam needs to improve" that he is improving. Do you really think they'd start him if he hadn't improved? I didn't.

I've repeatedly said I was impressed with Cam and he made good throws etc. I'm fairly certain I've said I was glad he had improved, but no, I don't frequently laud his improvements because I don't get to see them as Rivera does, since I didn't see him in camp etc. But I'm not afraid to admit when he makes a mistake, unlike some of you. I apparently did see the same areas needed for improvement that Rivera saw, but as I'd said before it's not like I was sure on any of it since I didn't see coaches tape.

I said he was a project, I never said 2-3 years. I said we'd be a better team this year with a different player, and I think we would have. I have no idea where you guys are getting this 2-3 years thing from.

There were also people on this forum who thought he was going to be the greatest player ever to play the game or something, but I don't address posts to them regularly.

Now, it might take 2-3 years for Cam to be a competitive quarterback or something (I don't think you can really judge a guy until after that point anyhow) but I don't think ANYONE thought we'd draft him and bench him for 2-3 years. They're retarded if so.

Maybe you should've held off on that then before you went all "Rivera is a hater like us". I was just fuging with you anyway. You can't be perfect all the time,sheesh and yes don't try to seperate yourself from the 2-3 year project bunch now.

[mav1234]

Maybe you should've held off on that then before you went all "Rivera is a hater like us". I was just fuging with you anyway. You can't be perfect all the time,sheesh and yes don't try to seperate yourself from the 2-3 year project bunch now.

I didn't say a "hater like us," I was making fun of the people who seem to think that I hate Cam because I think he has flaws to work on and I think Jimmy has looked a bit better than him. Obviously Rivera isn't actually a hater and I'm not sure why I need to point that out.

As to separating myself from the "2-3 year project bunch," I'll be happy if Cam proves me wrong and makes us competitive this year. I just think that he isn't going to be complete enough this year, and the team has too many holes, for that to be the case.

[Oldschool Leroy]

I miss The Birdman

[mav1234]

Thats what we were told pre-draft. We wanted to win "NOW" and Cameron would take 2-3 years to see the field. He was a "huge project" and Billy Volek and Matt Flynn were "safer" options via FA. For Cam to be on the cusp of being named starter after his first training camp was something alot of folks who did not want us to draft him could not fathom. Now its like he was always expected to be doing what he's doing. When do the goal posts stop moving backwards?

I don't think anyone thought it would take him 2-3 years to see the field. If they did, they were foolish because he was going to play some downs even if he wasnt starting... I don't think I ever said that he'd be on the bench 2-3 years (though I did hope he'd sit a bit) but I did call him a project and I stand by that . Project doesn't mean he can't play at all, it just means it'll take time for him to get up to full speed, likely moreso than other rookies (though I think this class was pretty much chalk full of projects, so). I fully expected him to play in games. I think I even agreed with a post Teeray or someone said that it would be wise to get him game time in packages during the season even if someone else started.

The reality is I thought we'd be a better team with Dareus at DT and Flynn(or whoever - this wasn't meant to be my choice, and Volek was who I wanted as a veteran "mentor" sorta guy for young QBs, not as an actual long term starter) at QB this year, but perhaps not in 2-3 years.

edit: Also, Cam has been penciled in by just about everyone other than the Panthers organization (publicly anyway) as the starter from day 1. I believed there'd be a QB competition, and there has been, and I'm glad to see Cam is improving at a rate they think he should start. As I've said numerous times in this thread and others, I am excited to see what he can do given a full week with the 1s, a game plan, and 3 quarters.

[Catalyst]

This is a mistake, IMO. No harm in sitting him. Clausen's looked better slightly.

I worry that by starting him too soon we run the risk of screwing him up for good if he/the team struggles.

[mav1234]

This is a mistake, IMO. No harm in sitting him. Clausen's looked better slightly.

I worry that by starting him too soon we run the risk of screwing him up for good if he/the team struggles.

me too... but Cam did show a great resolve in how he has managed to compartmentalize and handle the personal issues in his life, so I think he's a tough guy mentally, so he'll probably be fine.

[ncmonzta]

This is a mistake, IMO. No harm in sitting him. Clausen's looked better slightly.

I worry that by starting him too soon we run the risk of screwing him up for good if he/the team struggles.

I don't think his mentality is like say a Carr. Whatever lumps he takes will make him better. The sooner he takes them the better. I say get it out the way unless he really looks bad which I can't see him looking that bad from games he's played so far. I'm just hoping for the best

[Marguide]

This is a mistake, IMO. No harm in sitting him. Clausen's looked better slightly.

I worry that by starting him too soon we run the risk of screwing him up for good if he/the team struggles.

That's been my fear as well. Maybe RR just believes we are going nowhere with Jimmy, so it's better to jump in the deep end.

The mistake may have been to get DA rather than someone better suited to fill that role. Like some others, I am just not sure what their plans are for making DA useful in some form, either as a mentor (not sure that is his strong suit), or on the field (in which case he should probably get some actual reps).

[mav1234]

I guess DA is insurance in case Newton and Clausen get hurt...?

Or maybe in case the season is going so poorly they wouldn't want to "risk" putting the young QBs back out there? I dunno, seems weird.