Cam Newton vs Andrew Luck - Now who would you choose?

[panthers55]

yeah people who are calling luck a bust are just some spiteful motherfugers. he will be a great qb.

tbh the only thing i would rank him ahead of newton is his intelligence (not a racist comment btw, the guy was valedictorian and goes to stanford)

If a high IQ was important in football then Duke wouldn't be the basement team and they would have fantastic quarterbacks. When was the last time a Ivy League quarterback was a first round pick?? Serious question.

The last Ivy leaguer to win the Heisman at any position was 1951- Dick Kazmaier- tailback.

Last Stanford quarterback to win it?? Jim Plunkett- 1970

Will Luck win it- very doubtful.

IQ is fine if all other things are there but it doesn't rank that high.

[Jai.]

I can't possibly make that decision right now, Cam is the only one with any NFL experience, which is really all that matters.

[raleigh-panther]

Andrew Luck does not matter to me anymore.

I don't care if he ever plays pro ball or is the greatest QB to ever live.

The fact is we have, if all things remain the same, our QB for the next 10-15 years, and he is a damned good one.

...and I don't know who I feel better for, Cam Newton who went through more predraft crap analysis and critiques than any young QB I can remember or the fans of this team

who finally get to have a franchise QB.

Cam is special and Lord willing he will stay that way.

[footballisasport]

Wait a minute...Is "Meh" really beating out the "already choosen HOF before he even steps foot on an NFL field" Andrew Luck?

[edromeo]

why do you think people make big deal over the wonderlic?

I don't think its nearly as important to scouts/team officials as people think.

[The_Mango55]

Cam is a success?? I thought this team was 1 - 3 my bad. Heck at least Andy Dalton doesn't have a losing record.

I can't figure out why people use team wins and losses as an individual stat in Football.

And if they do it for Quarterbacks, why don't they use wins and losses to determine how good middle linebackers are? They are the leader of the defense right? Is Gary Brackett a better MLB than Brian Urlacher since he beat him in the Superbowl?

[edromeo]

Picking Luck over Newton in the draft was not about the physical skills. Everyone agreed that Newton was more physically talented and could do some things notably with his legs that Luck couldn't. The idea was that Luck was coming from a pro offense under Harbaugh and would be a no risk sure pick if you were drafting number 1. He had the skills, smarts, work ethic, and training.

Newton was a high risk guy who was going to need years to develop and had character issues. But since it turns out Newton has great character, is very hard working, is smart and has picked up a pro style offense is half the time it took Luck to learn, it changes the dynamics considerably.

Who will be better? Hard to say but what we do know is that the talking heads and supposed experts might now be nearly as smart as they think they are and all the buzz about Luck may be 50% truth and 50% hype.

You're also kind of making my point.

Relying on anything other then the observables is a joke when it comes to evaluation.

I think the intangibles are very important, but from my vantage point they're unknowable.

We don't get to meet the prospects or talk to them in person; we can only rely on hersey, which I'm not a big fan of.

If a prospect has a better physical skillset then for me they're the better prospect.

Everything else is just fluff.

Coaches/Scouts in the NFL draft for talent; their own coaching should provide the 'polish' or 'pro-readiness'.

Imo any draftnik/media type that didn't have Cam as the top prospect or at least one of the top QBs on their board was dealing with some type of dishonesty because Cam's (Lockers too) talent/skillset were so obvious.

[YoungPanthers89]

Cam sets rookie records=cam sucks because team is 1-3

[Porn Shop Clerk]

[panthers55]

You're also kind of making my point.

Relying on anything other then the observables is a joke when it comes to evaluation.

I think the intangibles are very important, but from my vantage point they're unknowable.

We don't get to meet the prospects or talk to them in person; we can only rely on hersey, which I'm not a big fan of.

If a prospect has a better physical skillset then for me they're the better prospect.

Everything else is just fluff.

Coaches/Scouts in the NFL draft for talent; their own coaching should provide the 'polish' or 'pro-readiness'.

Imo any draftnik/media type that didn't have Cam as the top prospect or at least one of the top QBs on their board was dealing with some type of dishonesty because Cam's (Lockers too) talent/skillset were so obvious.

The problem with evaluating Newton without talking with him or interviewing everyone who coached him is that it was hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. One side saying he was the real deal and hard working while the other side said he was insincere, a crook, and couldn't read a defense.

Obviously once Hurney annd Rivera spent time with him, they saw what we have come to know about Cam. His physical skills aren't the best things he possesses. Guys like Russell and Young had similar physical skills to Newton but both have struggled because of other issues. I can't really agree that talent or physical skills are the most important elements in a quarterback. Plenty of guys have average physical skills but were great quarterbacks. Montana comes to mind off the bat.

Physical skills are important and if all other things are equal, they can be the deciding factor. But unless a potential quarterback has the intangibles, leadership skills, and drive to be the best, all the physical skills in the world make little difference.

[Mr. Scot]

You're also kind of making my point.

Relying on anything other then the observables is a joke when it comes to evaluation.

I think the intangibles are very important, but from my vantage point they're unknowable.

We don't get to meet the prospects or talk to them in person; we can only rely on hersey, which I'm not a big fan of.

If a prospect has a better physical skillset then for me they're the better prospect.

Everything else is just fluff.

Coaches/Scouts in the NFL draft for talent; their own coaching should provide the 'polish' or 'pro-readiness'.

Imo any draftnik/media type that didn't have Cam as the top prospect or at least one of the top QBs on their board was dealing with some type of dishonesty because Cam's (Lockers too) talent/skillset were so obvious.

The problem with downplaying or omitting the mental aspect of things is that it leaves you to ignore red flags on players like Vince Young and Ryan Leaf.

[Tarheels23]

The problem with downplaying or omitting the mental aspect of things is that it leaves you to ignore red flags on players like Vince Young and Ryan Leaf.

And this is the only reason I feel the mental part of it is important, but not just for the QB position.

[Mr. Scot]

And this is the only reason I feel the mental part of it is important, but not just for the QB position.

Most important for quarterbacks definitely, but not to be ignored at other spots (Dimitrius Underwood, anyone?)

Absolute weirdest story in my memory is the guy that noodled his sister. Forget his name, but pretty much nobody was willing to take a flier on him. And if I recall correctly, no one did.

[footballisasport]

I can't figure out why people use team wins and losses as an individual stat in Football.

And if they do it for Quarterbacks, why don't they use wins and losses to determine how good middle linebackers are? They are the leader of the defense right? Is Gary Brackett a better MLB than Brian Urlacher since he beat him in the Superbowl?

Because it gives those who hate the fact that Cam is getting so much positive press some leverage to argue against him...As if Cam is the entire team...I guess Grit would be happy if Cam played everyone's position on the team....:puke: