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!

     

Newton starter vs Bengals, Week 1 starter TBD

Sword

By Sword,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Jpjr Newbie

Jpjr

Posted
Posted

Simple. You don't name a "starter" before you have to, so that you don't have to "bench" someone when you absolutely have to.

With that said, the writing is on the wall people. Its Cam time. Lets see how he handles the load, and so long as he doesn't go out there missing we can expect the keys to handed over. For those saying its obvious what we want to do, we drafted the guy number 1 overall.

In other news, no mention of Gamble being out.

Actually it's simpler than that. They've wanted to name Cam the starter since they drafted him and he's played subpar at best. They had to hold thier nose and give him the nod today because they are out of time for him to prove himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ItsPantone278 Newbie

ItsPantone278

Posted
Posted

Actually it's simpler than that. They've wanted to name Cam the starter since they drafted him and he's played subpar at best. They had to hold thier nose and give him the nod today because they are out of time for him to prove himself.

Played subpar? I think he's been about as expected. They knew when they drafted him that they would have to coach him up, especially considering his no huddle, shotgun, no play calling background. Compound that with the fact that we couldn't work with him in the off-season and it makes sense that we would wait to see what he can take on before we name him the starter.

I think the fact that we are giving him another start is a sign that the coaches are pleased with how he has handled delivering the play call in the huddle, making the right calls under center at the line of scrimmage, and handling the snap.. you know, all that stuff the media claimed he wouldn't be able to do before the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

Actually it's simpler than that. They've wanted to name Cam the starter since they drafted him and he's played subpar at best. They had to hold thier nose and give him the nod today because they are out of time for him to prove himself.

He's not out of time to prove himself, he's a rookie going into his third preseason game.

You are partially right, they did want him to prove himself. But he hasn't.

They're giving him another test - see how he handles an entire week of 1s and game planning, then 3 quarters of play. How does he handle a gameplan that is tailored to him and to his opponent?

Even if he fails, he's still not "out of time to prove himself." The way Clausen has been playing, Newton WILL show up again this season no matter what happens against Cincy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
footballisasport Newbie

footballisasport

Posted
Posted

I look at it this way. U moving up in jobs and told that you not only have to re-adjust ur way of thinking and mechanically doing things, but ur doing it with no OTA and full training and ur told u need to be good enough to pass by a certain time. If after three weeks ur pretty much keeping up with the person who is the starter, what do u think is going to happen?

Cam's issue isn't mechanics brought on by bad habits learnt in collegeas some of you are trying to insinuate. It's learning and adjusting to a whole new system slightly different from what he is accustom too. Remember everyone was on the Jimmy bandwagon because he was familiar with the pro style offense used in the NFL. Thing is, he had already adjusted to habits. His saving grace is that he was/is a pretty accurate thrower but so is Mallett. Sadly, with Mallett, that is really pretty much his strong point.

The beauty about Cam, which seems to be going over the many paraniod heads is, Cam is raw but going to different colleges and winning championships under their system has shown that he is moldable. Vs. someone who stayed in the same school as a QB until entering the draft and forming bad habits no one felt the need to fix cause it didn't

affect the outcome of the game..

Case in point, The Golden Calf of Bristol. His throwing mechanics was something that he was able to get away with in college. Sadly, he isn't able to easily get rid of the mechanical issue. Cam doesn't bring that problem. His problem is simply learning a different style of play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
footballisasport Newbie

footballisasport

Posted
Posted

He's not out of time to prove himself, he's a rookie going into his third preseason game.

You are partially right, they did want him to prove himself. But he hasn't.They're giving him another test - see how he handles an entire week of 1s and game planning, then 3 quarters of play. How does he handle a gameplan that is tailored to him and to his opponent?

Even if he fails, he's still not "out of time to prove himself." The way Clausen has been playing, Newton WILL show up again this season no matter what happens against Cincy.

What is the benchmark to prove Cam hasn't proven himself in the eyes of the coaches?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marguide Newbie

Marguide

Posted
Posted

Actually it's simpler than that. They've wanted to name Cam the starter since they drafted him and he's played subpar at best. They had to hold thier nose and give him the nod today because they are out of time for him to prove himself.

Your comments above in bold tell me you either haven't watched much preseason football, or you just don't like Cam.

I am not saying Cam has significantly outplayed Jimmy, but what did you expect? Him coming out playing like Brady?

He has played pretty much like all rookie QB's play, and frankly about like many veterans play in preseason contests.

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

    • Jackie Lee
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By Jackie Lee · Posted

      Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...