"Cam looking at the film what do you need to do to improve?"

[AR-15 Panther]

You can't ask any more of someone than giving their all. Even if he somehow busts I'm glad we picked him first overall.

[PantherFanForLife]

Wow.

Didn't see this coming.

I argue some kind of way?

I change definitions?

Do you always assume that no one else knows anything when you post?

I should have my head examined for arguing on the internet.

Look, you can believe whatever you like.

If you want to believe that your mention of narcissism is everyone elses first encounter then vaya con dios.

But at least Have the decency to first admit that your assumption: that I thought narcissism was strictly negative was false then we can go from there.

So basically you aren't gonna respond to any of my previous post and just try to drown me out with a wall of text from some other thread?

Nice.

Anyway-

Cheers bro,

you little narcissist, :rolleyes:

btw-(having some of the traits of a narcissist doesn't make someone a narcissist, sociopaths share some of the same traits as heroic types does that make all sociopaths heroes or all heroes sociopaths?)

No Enromeo, I didn't assume anything. You basically proved to me you didn't know the definition on narcissism when you agreed right along with Flopping that what I was talking about was some new, unaccepted definition of the word. You carried on the idea that what I was talking about was some "new" or some "minor" interpretation of narcissism, which is also the same nonsense Flopping was spouting. It is wrong.

I simply pointed out that actual definition of narcissism has largely remained unchanged since the term first started being used. And Maccoby's definition of narcissism, is the same thing Freud, and other educated people in the field, more than you or me, have defined it as all along.

Because I used Maccoby's article where he points out that a lot of the great leaders were narcissists, along with other writers, to basically back up the claims I made, he decided to make the statement that Maccoby had his OWN definition of narcissism that he has his own obscure variation of the definition....and that's why he thinks great leaders were narcissists. But in fact no one else thinks this.

I simply pointed out that once again, Maccoby's definition of narcissism, isn't any different then the same definition that I have always known, that Freud has stated, and that it's been used in psychology for almost 100 years. And then also pointed out that it wasn't just Maccoby that thought narcissists made great leaders, but just about everyone in the field from the time of Freud himself first mentioned it, in 1931, to Maccoby's recent book and to the current definition on just about any dictionary site anyone can access or wikipedia page.

[bauss]

In the words of Bill Belichick, "Just STFU".

[JawnyBlaze]

Cam =

[Jackofalltrades]

Back on topic.

[Jackofalltrades]

The worlds about to end?

Damn, I need to go lose my virginity.

The sheep are there for the taking Achmed, do your thang.

[Fiz]

You cannot, I repeat - CANNOT - judge any athlete or even a team, on any level, of any sport by one or two games.

It's retarded. Just stop. The very minimum you should look at is 3-4 games. I swear it's like the concept of a "trend" or "good sample" just doesn't exist around here.

I don't mean to be a dick, but it really IS STUPID!

http://www.carolinahuddle.com/forum/carolina-panthers/48164-ok-this-forum-needs-to-stop-this-poo-right-now.html

[PantherFanForLife]

http://www.carolinahuddle.com/forum/carolina-panthers/48164-ok-this-forum-needs-to-stop-this-poo-right-now.html

I fail to see the connection.

[edromeo]

No Enromeo, I didn't assume anything.

Except for right here where you say:

I'm going to make an assumption here and say that your hypothesis that it is not the accepted view or definitions....

my actual statement:

Cam like many other driven and successful people share some of the positive aspects of a (Howard Roarkian) narcissist.

-Cheers

Notice: "positive aspects of a narcissist"?

Of course no comment about the above from you-

I simply pointed out that actual definition of narcissism has largely remained unchanged since the term first started being used. And Maccoby's definition of narcissism, is the same thing Freud, and other educated people in the field, more than you or me, have defined it as all along.

The part that you miss is that even their defintions of narcissism are (net)negative.

Further,if you try and paint Freud's view of narcissism as (net)positive then you don't know Freud or are misguided in your understanding.

(Notice that Freud and most other separate/qualify narcissism as either primary or positve when they are refering to the positive aspects?

If something is consider net-postive there is no need to qualify as such)

BTW-The definition you posted was not a defintion of narcissim it was a definition of a narcissitic leader.

Also, re:Alex the Grt; sharing the characteristics or traits of X doesn't make some X.

Its a point I mentioned in my last post that you of course ignored.

BTW-

I could care less about your argument with whomever else.

[Wyank]

:beatdeadhorse5::beatdeadhorse5::beatdeadhorse5:

[panthers55]

Maccoby talks about 3 types of leaders, erotics, obsessives and narcissists. As such he uses largely outdated terms more frequently in use 30-50 years ago when psychoanalytical thought was still popular. As such his use of the term narcissist is not the way in which most laypeople think of the term. He talks about productive narcissistics which is very similar in a business sense to what we now call visionaries. Big picture charismatic leaders who draw people to them who have a vision for the future and can elicit others in that vision. So it is understandable that this debate goes back and forth. The majority arguing that Newton is not a narcissist while PFFL argues he is using this largely obscure definition rather than use the term visionary which we all understand.

Maccoby also notes the negative side of most narcissists in his definition which is that they:

Are sensitive to criticism

Poor listeners

Lack empathy

Distate for mentoring

Intense desire to compete distrusting others even on the same team

Lets assume for a moment that we will accept this definition inserting the word visionary instead of narcissist since it has different connotations for most people, do we agree he is a charismatic leader who can bring people together with a shared vision. If so then we agree he could in fact be a visionary.

But who would agree he has any of the negative aspects. Everything I have seen or read suggests he seeks out mentors, ignores tons of criticism, is a very team oriented player and his desire to compete is centered on team goals not individual ones.

So until he exhibits these signs I would suggest we drop the narcissistic label and instead use the positive one such as he is a leader, shows great intangibles, has terrific character etc. That way we avoid the inevitable trap of the negative elements of narcissism and more clearly define where Newton is at this point.

http://www.maccoby.com/Articles/NarLeaders.shtml

For me I think the much bigger picture is that the narcissistic model doesn't really fits newton at all. Now if we were talking Richardson I could see it. But Newton is not the recognized leader of the team, Rivera is. Cam is the leader on the field with the offense but not the defense which again doesn't put him at the top of the heap which is the context in which most of Maccoby's discusses a narcissist or visionary. The CEO or head , someone like Richardson or even Hurney is what Maccoby is typically discussing not Newton who would be considered a mid to high level manager on the team. So honestly many of the correlations don't apply.

There are other models for those bored enough to read:

http://www.leadership-with-you.com/types-of-leadership.html

http://www.i-change.biz/modelsandtheories.php

In the end I don't think the narcissistic model of leadership applies to Newton nor does it define his role as quarterback very well.

I think that Newton is a positional leader based on his defined role as the leader of the offense. He is also a situational leader based on the fact that when the ball is snapped he the guy people listen to and follow unlike Clausen who never earned the trust of the team. Then again I subscribe more to a learned leadership model than a model stressing that people are born with the traits. That is why in psychology I subscribe to more cognitive behavior approaches rather than a psychoanalytic model.

[panthers04100]

gonna be hard to improve now that hes retired

http://www.sportspickle.com/news/8078/cam-newton-announces-his-retirement-from-the-nfl-theres-nothing-more-i-can-accomplish

[edromeo]

In the end I don't think the narcissistic model of leadership applies to Newton nor does it define his role as quarterback very well.

I think that Newton is a positional leader based on his defined role as the leader of the offense. He is also a situational leader based on the fact that when the ball is snapped he the guy people listen to and follow unlike Clausen who never earned the trust of the team. Then again I subscribe more to a learned leadership model than a model stressing that people are born with the traits. That is why in psychology I subscribe to more cognitive behavior approaches rather than a psychoanalytic model.

Good post.

This is more along the lines of the type of discussion I expected.

The often needlessly contentious nature of interent forum discussion is tiresome and to be expected, but it still catches me off guard at times.

I think your post wraps up the discussion in a nice tidy fashion.

I think where PFFL gets mixed up is that Macoby is talking about narcissism as it relates to leadership style not narcissism writ large.

I.e there is a difference between someone being a narcissitic leader vs a person being a flat out narcissist.

Finally; who's ready to talk some football?

[edromeo]

"Cam looking at the film what do you need to do to improve?"

My only gripes:

o understand/recognize and exploit the best pre-snap match-ups (e.g.-Smith vs Woodson or DeAngelo vs Hawk or Olsen vs Bishop) IMO he favors Smitty too much

o don't be afraid to be a playmaker or to pick up yards on the ground.

I'm not saying run all the time but on 2 of his INTs I think he would have been better served using his legs to make a play.

But, he gave the best answer to the question and hopefully that answer will happen come Saturday:

WIN

o