Cam vs Tim

[AceMan]

No. I'm saying he should stop playing like Vick and worse than Romo. There is a middle ground, believe it or not. There's a whole bunch of levels in between where Cam is and where guys like Brady and Brees are.

He's not even yet consistently good. Let alone great. Let alone elite. Get consistently good. Do the basics. Protect the ball. Throw it away when you need to. Finish games. You know, basic QB play for the full 60 minutes. I don't need him to complete 70%. I do want him to do better than 4 incompletes in a row on 1st and 5 at the 27th yard line resulting in a turnover.

That's not even average. That's just plain bad. And it's happened far too many times this year late in the game. Inconsistent and it creeps up in the worst of moments.

Now can you understand that Cam is a rookie?

[TruCatzFan]

Not gonna bother reading this thread in it's entirety...

I'll say this though, this day and age, it's all about winning... The Golden Calf of Bristol is doing that, and it's hard to hate someone with his morals. I'd still take Cam over The Golden Calf of Bristol any day of the week!

Put Cam in that team and they're blowing people out, not just getting by.

[TheRealDeal]

Put Cam in that team and they're blowing people out, not just getting by.

You mean put Cam on that team, change the system they run, and have Cam stop turning the ball over...

[Porn Shop Clerk]

compared to the 70s when it was all about losing

[Showtime]

Now can you understand that Cam is a rookie?

Why do you keep asking me this question like I am not acknowledging he's a rookie? Can you understand that playing rookie QB's, even one as impressive as Cam, is a bad idea that doesn't really do anyone any good, including the rookie, and leads to losing seasons? Or are you still in delusional Colts fan mode where you blame everything on the defense, or coaching, or some other part of this team, and toss the rest of it up as some benefit to the QB's development excuse, while the rookie is making enough mistakes, you can't possibly end up winning? Colts did this same poo Peyton's first year, but in reality there was no way in hell they were going to win when Peyton played as bad as he did.

Maybe you need a third attempt and another poo season to come to that realization. There's a reason most teams are against playing rookie QB's their first year. A good one and the best one. You tend to end up with poo records like 4-9. Last year was enough for me. I don't like misery. I really do hate losing. And for me there really are no excuses. Not even rookies. I didn't ask nor supported the Panthers doing this two years in a freaking row.

Seeing so many guys get excited about the talk of elimination a losing mentality, meanwhile doing just that 9 weeks out of the season, while celebrating moral victories and rookie records has been pretty painful to keep up with.

I think if anything some of you have gotten better at accepting losing and having losers mentality. It's been quite incredible to watch guys try to change definitions, ignore facts, and go to great lengths to shut any common sense out, in order to continue making excuses for losing.

[Cat'sGrowl]

Why hasnt someone dropped the banhammer yet?

What happened to that mythical crackdown we were promised? Is a perma-ban not possible?

[Showtime]

Case in point. He hates losing: ban him. Loser fan above. This spreads.

[ed bell]

Why do you keep asking me this question like I am not acknowledging he's a rookie? Can you understand that playing rookie QB's, even one as impressive as Cam, is a bad idea that doesn't really do anyone any good, including the rookie, and leads to losing seasons? Or are you still in delusional Colts fan mode where you blame everything on the defense, or coaching, or some other part of this team, and toss the rest of it up as some benefit to the QB's development excuse, while the rookie is making enough mistakes, you can't possibly end up winning? Colts did this same poo Peyton's first year, but in reality there was no way in hell they were going to win when Peyton played as bad as he did.

Maybe you need a third attempt and another poo season to come to that realization. There's a reason most teams are against playing rookie QB's their first year. A good one and the best one. You tend to end up with poo records like 4-9. Last year was enough for me. I don't like misery. I really do hate losing. And for me there really are no excuses. Not even rookies. I didn't ask nor supported the Panthers doing this two years in a freaking row.

Seeing so many guys get excited about the talk of elimination a losing mentality, meanwhile doing just that 9 weeks out of the season, while celebrating moral victories and rookie records has been pretty painful to keep up with.

I think if anything some of you have gotten better at accepting losing and having losers mentality. It's been quite incredible to watch guys try to change definitions, ignore facts, and go to great lengths to shut any common sense out, in order to continue making excuses for losing.

How about offering up the "veteran" you would have implemented? Simple question, no wall of text needed......BTW have you investigated the Colts QB situation in 1998 and the 10 years prior? They made exactly the right move....no question, just like Rivera has made the best decision as well.

[mav1234]

This team wouldn't have made the playoffs drafting Cam, sitting him, and starting Anderson anyway... and most veterans weren't going to come here to start for a single year.

[Showtime]

How about offering up the "veteran" you would have implemented? Simple question, no wall of text needed......BTW have you investigated the Colts QB situation in 1998 and the 10 years prior? They made exactly the right move....no question, just like Rivera has made the best decision as well.

Uhm Matt Moore, Mcnabb, Young, you name it. Even Jake Delhomme would have given us a better chance at a winning season this year. Any of those guys would have been a smarter decision day 1 than a rookie QB who self-admitted had no idea how to read NFL defenses in a lockout year.

This is all that translates to: " Since we ended up losing, it couldn't have possible been any better no matter what we would have done."

Harbaugh - 49ers. Winning

Cincinnati-Bengals. Decent.

Fox -Broncos - Winning.

I mean look around. Even Yates, a third string QB. Rode the bench all season long. Came in and won 2 back to back. Playing rookie QB's is not quite 100% guarantee you will end up having a losing season, but it's up there. It's pretty damn close.

Teams who went with rookies: Vikings, Jaguars, us...losers. Only Cinci pulled it off...barely and they are not done yet. Things are not looking so hot for them anymore either.

You really don't think we would have been better off in a lock-out year with a veteran QB? You don't think it would have been in everyone's best interest if we would have re-signed a vet, let Cam learn in practice or compete for the job? You don't think Cam Newton would have been better off concentrating in practice, learning the basics, before actually stepping foot on the field? Do you truly buy into this retarded mentality all this somehow helped Cam Newton develop into an elite QB in the long run? That this is how you develop elite QB's?

Give me a break. It has nothing to do with it. It's just an excuse. It's not backed up by anything. You think if the Colts didn't play Peyton and he didn't throw 28 picks his first year, he would have never ended up a good QB?

This is exactly what I am talking about. Sound logic. Common sense. It's just right out the window this year. It's gone for most people.

[usmcpanthers]

If Cam's kicker could hit a 59 and 51 yd field goal...his defense make multiple stops and cause a fumble in OT....then yes!

Do you guys really think Cam would have won the game if he had been in for the Broncos down 10-0 with 4 minutes left like The Golden Calf of Bristol did today? He probably would have the ability some day, but I don't think he'd have a chance.

[Porn Shop Clerk]

i was in favor of cam riding the bench this season, but i was wrong

[Showtime]

Because you have come to accept losing and traded winning in exchange for "watching the show". You are finding entertainment in moral victories or rookie records or watching Cam.

"We lost, but..." Whereas me I stop after "We lost". That means it didn't work. There is no "but". Nothing that comes after that really matters because whatever you plug in, is an excuse for losing.

[mav1234]

Harbaugh - 49ers. Winning

Cincinnati-Bengals. Winning

Fox -Broncos - Winning.

Glad you think the Bengals, with a rookie QB, are winning. There have been quarterbacks lately who have won as rookies, because the teams they play for are strong in other areas, so even if they turn over the ball, they can still win games. It's happened many times in the past. However, a bad team, with a rookie starting, will play poorly.

Anyways, it's funny you bring up those 3 teams... Did you know all three of those teams actually can survive turnovers their quarterbacks commit? Do you know why? It's because a decent defense can help make up for that. That's not to say that Cam's interceptions don't hurt us - but it is to say that even with a decent defense, you can win even with a turnover or two.