Cam vs Tim

[Showtime]

I think the offense has been exactly what they wanted and will continue to be what it is with the hope that experience will allow Cam to cut down on his turnovers.

You know that I think our offense has been pretty good this year. If Cam cuts his turnovers in half it will become elite.

But either way we also have to get a lot better on defense and special teams. I think with a full offseason and a year of experience for everyone you will see improvements in all 3 facets. And probably some new faces on defense.

Yeah it would help but you still don't understand it's not primarily the interceptions and fumbles. Those aren't the turnovers that are killing us. Is he bad here? Yes. We could use cleaning up as always, but as a team, as a whole, they were not insurmountable in most of our losses. Just 2. For a rookie throwing as much as he does, he's actually not that bad in picks, imo. This is not what's keeping us from winning. The part some people keep saying that we can't win without him being perfect? We can't win unless he doesn't turn over the ball?

The reason for that is because of all the OTHER turnovers we have. 3 and outs and turnovers on downs. Failing to score. Penalties. Bad decisions. Incompletions. No rhythm. Inconsistency. That's actually the primary cause of our inefficiency. When you have this stuff down, you can overcome turnovers with a high powered offense. You can overcome a defense giving up a score or a big play. This team can and should be putting up 30 points a game even with a turnover. The reason we don't is because of all the other damn turnovers outside of interceptions. That's what makes us inefficient. For most teams it's interceptions. For us it's overall turnovers and other mistakes.

See Philadelphia. We're one and the same. Two very potent offenses that play with a poo ton of mistakes. And nobody here would say Philly has a bad defense. They are stacked with talent. They were the "dream team". It doesn't help when you make mistakes and don't execute. They are right there with us in inefficiency despite their yards and points. Defense can't help you. It doesn't help them. We can overcome an interception without Cam Newton having to play perfect or a new defense. I assure you. We just don't because we are so inefficient outside of interceptions.

We have so many things we can clean up to improve winning, and so much room for improvement on execution, there's no reason to start going for anyone's head at this point in time. So far when we have been efficient, we won. When we haven't, we lost. Simple freaking recipe if you ask me.

We have lost one game when we were efficient. Saints. It also happened to be a game where the coach gave away 3 points which had nothing to do with how our football team played that day. Saints couldn't have won without that. So when we play efficient not even the Saints can beat us without something like the coach making a boneheaded call interfering with the playing. We can beat anybody with this team IF they play good for a full 60 minutes.

It's like if you have a car that's chugging oil, has a leaky gas tank, two flat tires and you go and try to put in a new front seat without fixing that other poo first expecting it to fix your problems.

[bauss]

Yeah it would help but you still don't understand it's not primarily the interceptions and fumbles. Those aren't the turnovers that are killing us. Is he bad here? Yes. We could use cleaning up as always, but as a team, as a whole, they were not insurmountable in most of our losses. Just 2. For a rookie throwing as much as he does, he's actually not that bad in picks, imo. This is not what's keeping us from winning. The part some people keep saying that we can't win without him being perfect? We can't win unless he doesn't turn over the ball?

The reason for that is because of all the OTHER turnovers we have. 3 and outs and turnovers on downs. Failing to score. Penalties. Bad decisions. Incompletions. No rhythm. Inconsistency. That's actually the primary cause of our inefficiency. When you have this stuff down, you can overcome turnovers with a high powered offense. You can overcome a defense giving up a score or a big play. This team can and should be putting up 30 points a game even with a turnover. The reason we don't is because of all the other damn turnovers outside of interceptions. That's what makes us inefficient. For most teams it's interceptions. For us it's overall turnovers and other mistakes.

See Philadelphia. We're one and the same. Two very potent offenses that play with a poo ton of mistakes. And nobody here would say Philly has a bad defense. Defense can't help you. It doesn't help them. We can overcome an interception without Cam Newton having to play perfect or a new defense. I assure you. We just don't because we are so inefficient outside of interceptions.

We have so many things we can clean up to improve winning, and so much room for improvement on execution, there's no reason to start going for anyone's head at this point in time. So far when we have been efficient, we won. When we haven't, we lost. Simple freaking recipe if you ask me.

We have lost one game when we were efficient. Saints. It also happened to be a game where the coach gave away 3 points which had nothing to do with how our football team played that day. Saints couldn't have won without that. So when we play efficient not even the Saints can beat us without something like the coach making a boneheaded call interfering with the playing. We can beat anybody with this team IF they play good for a full 60 minutes.

It's like if you have a car that's chugging oil, has a leaky gas tank, two flat tires and you go and try to put in a new front seat without fixing that other poo first expecting it to fix your problems.

nobody reads this poo and/or gives a fug.

[Showtime]

Packers and Pats defenses are much better than ours because they get turnovers. That's why they allow less points. If our defense got more turnovers they would allow less points as well. Can't blame our offense because our defense can't get the ball.

We get takeaways. The average team gets 1.5. We got 1.4 per game all season long. We've had games where we got this offense 3. Now we dropped to 1.2 but that means on average we get one per game just like any other team. Few teams ever get 2 every game. They are not even dependent on a defense. There is no fuging correlation between a defense and takeaways. This is a fact. Takeaways are random. They depend mostly on bad opposing QB's. Buffalo led the league with 2+ per game in the first 4 games, and now it's GB. Pittsburg got 0.4 most season!!! They are now up to 1.1. Less than us.

This has everything to do with their schedule. There is no pattern, no indication, no way of guaranteeing that you can do something to end up with a lot of takeaways at the end of the season or after a game. The other offense has most to say about this part. Mostly the QB.

Philadelphia gets as many yards as we do. They get points. Their QB's rush. They are experienced. Their defense gets takeaways. They have a good defense(according even to you!). It does not fuging help them win! Not their defense. Not Vick. Not the rushing. Not the yards. Not the points. Loaded with talent. They are 5-8. The key is: you not turnover over the ball. That's what you actually have control over. Not your defense getting you takeaways. That depends on the other team fuging up.

Why? They are fug-ups and have an inefficient offense! Point blank. fug-ups. Running around like a chicken with your head cut off. That's what they are. That's what we are. Put the damn head back on the chicken or you just cannot win.

[Showtime]

nobody reads this poo and/or gives a fug.

Which is why you keep repeating the same flawed poo week in and week out that has nothing to do with why we lose and never matches up with when we win.

While what I say, does. You are closed minded. You don't take the time to look into things and look for facts or evidence.

You're far too concerned with cliches, hearsay, repeating poo that's just "talk".

Defense wins championships

You can't win without defense

Offense is regular season, defense is for the playoffs.

Losing your ass off with a rookie means we're developing him and will make him an elite QB.

It's how things are done.

Any team that scores 26 points should win.

We lead the league in yards, that must mean our defense sucks.

All of these things are the type of poo people talk about that's actually a bunch of bullpoo. They're not actually true. You don't question. You don't care to find out what's really going on. It's like that old man in the rocking chair that just keeps mumbling the same old mentality that just doesn't apply anymore. I see this type of talk day in and day out and it never changes. It doesn't get any more true either.

[Killa Cam 69]

No offense but you got a Shi**y job, you're not quite as tall as me, nobody really respects you. Me on the other hand, I got the glory, I get the fame, the money, the jewels, the cash, the Denali, getting drunk on the reg, fuc*in good times on the reg, yachts on the reg, sex on the reg, basically all the shi* that most men fantasize about.

[chef17]

We get takeaways. The average team gets 1.5. We got 1.4 per game all season long. We've had games where we got this offense 3. Now we dropped to 1.2 but that means on average we get one per game just like any other team. Few teams ever get 2 every game. They are not even dependent on a defense. There is no fuging correlation between a defense and takeaways. This is a fact. Takeaways are random. They depend mostly on bad opposing QB's. Buffalo led the league with 2+ per game in the first 4 games, and now it's GB. Pittsburg got 0.4 most season!!! They are now up to 1.1. Less than us.

This has everything to do with their schedule. There is no pattern, no indication, no way of guaranteeing that you can do something to end up with a lot of takeaways at the end of the season or after a game. The other offense has most to say about this part. Mostly the QB.

Philadelphia gets as many yards as we do. They get points. Their QB's rush. They are experienced. Their defense gets takeaways. They have a good defense(according even to you!). It does not fuging help them win! Not their defense. Not Vick. Not the rushing. Not the yards. Not the points. Loaded with talent. They are 5-8. The key is: you not turnover over the ball. That's what you actually have control over. Not your defense getting you takeaways. That depends on the other team fuging up.

Why? They are fug-ups and have an inefficient offense! Point blank. fug-ups. Running around like a chicken with your head cut off. That's what they are. That's what we are. Put the damn head back on the chicken or you just cannot win.

A defenses ability to break on and catch the ball, as well as forcing fumbles has a lot to do with turnovers. You don't think Clay, Tramon, Woodson, ect. have anything to do with them getting turnovers? Yeah schedule helps but the players have a lot to do with it as well.

Where did I say the Eagles had a good defense?

[ed bell]

And this is why your sound logic isn't sound.

All I said was that the offense is averaging more yards per attempt than any other year in Panther's history and the defense is allowing more yards per attempt than any year in Panthers history.....yet you begin talking about sound logic? Nothing wrong with having a franchise record yards per attempt average on offense. It's not good at all to be allowing the most yards per attempt in franchise history on defense...These are stats that reflect the performance of each unit averaged over the season. Not indicative of any one game or dependent on the contributions of others....simply a cumulative stat spanning every second of play to this point.

[ed bell]

It may not make a whole lot of sense to to you and appear counter intuitive, but when an offense gets a lot of yards and doesn't score...it makes you a pooty losing offense AND hurts your defense.

Not scoring hurts the team, it happens to all teams.....not scoring and not moving the ball hurts your team more than not scoring after you do move the ball....that's ball control and flipping the field.....you know all this, yet you're trying to obscure it, why?

[ed bell]

They go hand in hand, ok? It may not make a whole lot of sense to to you and appear counter intuitive, but when an offense gets a lot of yards and doesn't score...it makes you a pooty losing offense AND hurts your defense. It's only good for football talk and bragging right but it actually means you are WORSE than one that doesn't get a lot of yards but operates efficiently. This offense is not currently better than a conservative and efficient John Fox offense. It simply is not and has not been all year.

So you are making the case for ball control and TOP coupled with flipping field position? But wait, those things don't lead to scoring, they rely on defense to create easier scoring chances. A luxury we certainly don't have and our offense has actually done well with TOP and moving the chains....what's missing?

What exactly does an efficient offensive unit do to score if they aren't gaining yards? How would John Fox transform this "inefficiency" into an "efficient" offensive unit if we can already move the ball and are successful in avoiding 3 and outs and have the most 80+ yard drives for TD's in the league?

Of course limiting turnovers and penalties would help....coupled with improvements in Red-Zone scoring and field goals....along with coaching decisions and limiting the IR list of impact players....wait I'm listing too many factors, I forgot that we are trying to pin this on one thing...

[ed bell]

-Bengals are doing what I am against, but they have an efficient offense and are primarily teaching Dalton how to manage a football game. Dalton's ahead of Cam when it comes to being NFL ready. He's proven to be much more ready for the job. They are the 9th most efficient offense in the NFL even after their most recent loss. That's incredible! And that is not something I am against.

-Yates. This is a great example of why benching works. It's about the coaching and team as a whole. It's about learning on the bench until you are ready and it really doesn't affect development. This is the type of team I prefer. Not one centered around one star player. They are smart. Believe it or not, GB and the Patriots are actually built exactly this way. The system makes the entire team.

-The 14 games Cam's played this season didn't actually accelerate anything. He made the same exact mistake in week 14 that he did in week 1. It's gave him game time experience. Game time experience is no substitute for a solid foundation. Without that you will fail. He has not progressed in that aspect. You believe in a myth!

-Yes starting Peyton was a bad decision. It cost them a season. It actually helped create this myth. There's never a need to throw away a season to develop a rookie. There are much better QB's who have achieved more and faster than Peyton has in his career in what matters: Rodgers, Ben, Brees and the big daddy of them all: Tom Brady. A 7th rounder, who took over after riding the bench and has done as much in his career to rival the greatest achievers like Montana, not just Peyton manning.

Those ARE facts. Screwing your fan base out of a season because it "helps develop a rookie QB" is a myth. "Defense wins championships". Myth.

Not facts, those are opinions being passed off as facts to support your narrative that Cam isn't worthy of starting for the Carolina Panthers and by doing so he is not progressing as a player and tat the quality of our defense is irrelevant since it is dependent on the ratio of yards gained by the QB led offensive unit/ total points scored.

-Andy Dalton is going through the same procedure Cam is: starting NFL games as a rookie...yet your spin is that Dalton is being "taught" and is much more ready....it's spin because it fails to hold the Bengals to the standard you are holding Carolina. Hindsight.....

-Yeats didn't "learn on the bench until he was ready"...he was forced into the job after Schaub went on IR and perennial failure and bust Matt Leinart went on IR after less than one game of action....

-Cam's not missing any opportunities to learn the game or get a solid foundation by playing on Sundays.....This isn't Clausen 2.1...he has been able to operate this system and we have been in contention in every game except for the one that followed a MRI and the first appearance for Cam on the injury report....maybe unrelated, but it makes you wonder.

-You still haven't looked at the Colts' QB situation in 1998 or in the years prior...Hiring another stop-gap measure wasn't the answer....

[mav1234]

it's funny that PFFL's premise is basically starting a rookie is sacrificing a season, then he goes on to name the Bengals as a team that is winning, later on says that Big Ben accomplished more than Manning...

I'm just curious, is it only sacrificing a season to start a rookie when the team is losing? Or did the Steelers sacrifice 2004, too? Did the Falcons sacrifice 2008? Did the Jets sacrifice 2009?

[teeray]

Yeah it would help but you still don't understand it's not primarily the interceptions and fumbles. Those aren't the turnovers that are killing us. Is he bad here? Yes. We could use cleaning up as always, but as a team, as a whole, they were not insurmountable in most of our losses. Just 2. For a rookie throwing as much as he does, he's actually not that bad in picks, imo. This is not what's keeping us from winning. The part some people keep saying that we can't win without him being perfect? We can't win unless he doesn't turn over the ball?

The reason for that is because of all the OTHER turnovers we have. 3 and outs and turnovers on downs. Failing to score. Penalties. Bad decisions. Incompletions. No rhythm. Inconsistency. That's actually the primary cause of our inefficiency. When you have this stuff down, you can overcome turnovers with a high powered offense. You can overcome a defense giving up a score or a big play. This team can and should be putting up 30 points a game even with a turnover. The reason we don't is because of all the other damn turnovers outside of interceptions. That's what makes us inefficient. For most teams it's interceptions. For us it's overall turnovers and other mistakes.

See Philadelphia. We're one and the same. Two very potent offenses that play with a poo ton of mistakes. And nobody here would say Philly has a bad defense. They are stacked with talent. They were the "dream team". It doesn't help when you make mistakes and don't execute. They are right there with us in inefficiency despite their yards and points. Defense can't help you. It doesn't help them. We can overcome an interception without Cam Newton having to play perfect or a new defense. I assure you. We just don't because we are so inefficient outside of interceptions.

I would agree with this if these things were actually happening. But for the most part they aren't. We aren't having a lot of three and outs. We are scoring at a very high rate. We are among the best in the league in those two things. We have been consistent. Outside of the Tennessee game we haven't been held to less than 16 points. We have scored 20+ points in 10 of our 13 games!

Maybe we haven't been as consistent within the game. But that is the natural ebb and flow of the NFL. You won't be great on offense on every drive, or half, or game. Green Bay even has games where they struggle for periods of time. In the first half against Detroit a few weeks ago Green Bay's offense was pretty bad. If it wasn't for a Detroit turnover on their own 13 Green Bay likely would not have even scored in the first half.

But when GB was struggling that first half their defense rose up to the challenge and shut out Detroit and made a play by getting that turnover.

Against Atlanta week 5 in the first half GB only scored 6 points and had a turnover.

I am not going to go on but that is life in the NFL.

I just feel like your expectations for what this offense should have to do in order for us to get more wins is unreasonable and unrealistic. Especially with a rookie QB, as dynamic as he is.

What I don't think is unreasonable or unrealistic is having a defense that can sometimes carry us during the stretches when our offense struggles. And right now they can't. And it is the biggest reason we are 4-9 right now in my opinion.

[Showtime]

it's funny that PFFL's premise is basically starting a rookie is sacrificing a season, then he goes on to name the Bengals as a team that is winning, later on says that Big Ben accomplished more than Manning...

I'm just curious, is it only sacrificing a season to start a rookie when the team is losing? Or did the Steelers sacrifice 2004, too? Did the Falcons sacrifice 2008? Did the Jets sacrifice 2009?

Actually my main premise is it doesn't really matter who you start as long as you are efficient offense. The key being, having a guy that can run an efficient offense.

Some guys can do it, others can't. Ben was one that could as a rookie. Made it to the NFC. Andy's getting it done. Peyton couldn't. Neither can Cam. Cam, like Peyton as a rookie, believe throwing the ball 50 million times a game at the expense of turnovers or stalling, sacks, and picks is what a quarterback is supposed to do.

Peyton learned but still never really did it as good as Brady or as Rodgers is doing it. I hope Cam does too. We sure as hell aren't teaching him that this year. Anybody here that watched the game where Peyton actually made it to the Super Bowl can tell you he had A LOT of help from the NFL refs. A LOT.

If it wasn't for that, I still don't think he would have a Super Bowl ring on his hand. Peyton's not been all that in the playoffs. Brady's owned him repeatedly for like a decade straight and Peyton was a major choke artist for awhile before that Super Bowl. If it wasn't for the refs he'd be Dan Marino #2. Actually that might give him too much credit. More like somewhere between Rivers and Marino. I can't talk poo about Marino since I didn't watch him play. Plus he doesn't look like the type to be missing a spine or get rattled easily.

If you ask me, Eli may not be as talented as Peyton but as far as accomplishment, taking down the Perfect Patriots in the Super Bowl....well that carries weight. And it didn't take him nearly as long as Peyton to get there, nor did Eli have the same type of talent or fine oiled offense like Peyton did in Indy.

I'm personally not crazy about Peyton. I always have to give it to Brady. He has the rings. He beat us, for one thing at our best. He's won a Super Bowl under a number of circumstances. Snow, after throwing everything we had at him, had a perfect season. He beat up on Peyton for years, and Peyton's no slouch. He's accomplishments are much bigger in the grand scheme than Peyton's. 50 years from now, when they are both old and gone, Brady will be talked about a lot more. If he does it once more, he'll be seen as greater than Montana down the road.

So I don't even know why so many hope Cam turns out like Peyton when I'd much rather he turn out like Brady or even Delhomme. That's what I liked about him to start off with. He said he wanted to be like Brady, not Peyton. That tells me he cares about what matters. He gets it.

[footballisasport]

Actually my main premise is it doesn't really matter who you start as long as you are efficient offense. The key being, having a guy that can run an efficient offense.

Some guys can do it, others can't. Ben was one that could as a rookie. Made it to the NFC. Andy's getting it done. Peyton couldn't. Neither can Cam. Cam, like Peyton as a rookie, believe throwing the ball 50 million times a game at the expense of turnovers or stalling, sacks, and picks is what a quarterback is supposed to do.

Peyton learned but still never really did it as good as Brady or as Rodgers is doing it. I hope Cam does too. We sure as hell aren't teaching him that this year.

Andy, not only has a supporting team around him to help him win even when he's having a bad day, he also has a reliable receiver in A.J. Green. In all honesty, A.J. makes the receivers on this Panther team look lazy has heck.

Unlike the highlights of those Panthers' receivers being afraid to fight for everyone of Cam's balls, all I see of A.J. is a kid who always seems to be in the right place at the right time and make those catches for his boss, NO MATTER HOW HE THROWS THEM. That sure nuff goes a long way in minimizing Andy's Ints and other so called mental mistakes.

I'm sure if you was honest to yourself, you would admit that Andy would be playing much worst than Cam if he was a QB on this team.