Mayock hits all the Huddle sore spots; Luck vs. Newton, AJ, and Coples

[panthers55]

This notion that if you are athletically gifted you are lazy and dont work hard and if you're a twirp you're automatically a hard worker and cerebral is crap. Those things are not mutually exclusive. And its almost always a philosophy held by those who are resentful and envious of people with great athletic gifts. This is why we need more african american analysts and scouts. I just dont trust these other guys anymore. Theres a bias there theyre just too proud or too engrained with to give up. If people dont want to be considered bigotted, maybe they shouldnt lean so heavily on eugenics and racist ideology. Stop being lazy.

I think you are going way over the top here. It is pretty accepted that in college there are players black, white, asian, etc who do get by on their athletic talent. When a team like Alabama plays Kent ST in football, their guys are so far above the opponet in ability it really requires little work to beat them. Some dominant players may only face a real quality opponent 2 or 3 times a year. So there is a tendency to rely on your superior strength or quickness rather than develop the foot and hand technique you will need at the NFL level where everyone is quick and strong. Players will tell you that.

I also think that your belief that having more African American analysts and scouts would be superior to who we have now is racial prejudice in the extreme. Race wouldn't make them better at evaluating talent; knowledge of what it takes to play in the NFL and an understanding of how athleticism in college translates to the NFL would and that is not race specific. If you argued that we need more professional players in these roles you might have a point, but basing it solely on race is ridiculous at best.

You argue that white analysts are biased and proud and then assert that black analysts wouldn't be biased and aren't proud with no basis other than the color of their skin which is painting everyone with wide stereotypical brushes.

The problem is you do the very thing you rail against. You paint people with streotypical brushes using race as your criteria which by the very definition is racial prejudice while railing against racism at the same time.

Perhaps ironic of all is that you will argue ongoingly that this isn't the case when it is apparent to everyone but you that it is.

[MadHatter]

I think you are going way over the top here. It is pretty accepted that in college there are players black, white, asian, etc who do get by on their athletic talent. When a team like Alabama plays Kent ST in football, their guys are so far above the opponet in ability it really requires little work to beat them. Some dominant players may only face a real quality opponent 2 or 3 times a year. So there is a tendency to rely on your superior strength or quickness rather than develop the foot and hand technique you will need at the NFL level where everyone is quick and strong. Players will tell you that.

I also think that your belief that having more African American analysts and scouts would be superior to who we have now is racial prejudice in the extreme. Race wouldn't make them better at evaluating talent; knowledge of what it takes to play in the NFL and an understanding of how athleticism in college translates to the NFL would and that is not race specific. If you argued that we need more professional players in these roles you might have a point, but basing it solely on race is ridiculous at best.

You argue that white analysts are biased and proud and then assert that black analysts wouldn't be biased and aren't proud with no basis other than the color of their skin which is painting everyone with wide stereotypical brushes.

The problem is you do the very thing you rail against. You paint people with streotypical brushes using race as your criteria which by the very definition is racial prejudice while railing against racism at the same time.

Perhaps ironic of all is that you will argue ongoingly that this isn't the case when it is apparent to everyone but you that it is.

You just proved what we all knew.....KT is a racist.

[panthers55]

You just proved what we all knew.....KT is a racist.

As are many people on this forum and in general. The problem for me is railing against it while doing the same thing.

[OneBadassCat]

Maycock is an idiot. To say he would take Luck, despite Cam's season this year is so damn arrogant.

[footballisasport]

ugh.....no, not that one thing alone. It is a big picture thing.

The fact Cam Newton is so MIND BOGGLING talented and can dominate single handedly..........is the biggest reason for the questions to at least be asked. B/c Cam Newton is so good that he COULD (doesn't mean he did) embarass opponents without putting in great work during the week.

What is sad, is you think b/c I think questions could be asked.....means I am now a Cam hater.

I, CRA, was on the Cam Newton bandwagon from the very beginning. Before many on this board. I heard the questions. Didn't mean I believed what they implied was true.

again, people are too senstive w/ Cam.

I am simply responding to your post in regards to folks defending Cam. I am not attacking you.

From what I've read, many are scratching their heads over Mayock's comment. So, I really don't believe it's just folks being defensive of Cam.

And, I will say it again, all the reason for arguing against Cam seems very shallow and baseless. Every player should be scrutinzed if we are going to place in such high esteem as being more greater than or HOF bound. Especially, if they haven't done a darn thing to warrant such praises. This my only pet peeve towards Luck.

IMO, considering how much hype is surrounding Andrew Luck and he's no where even as good as RGIII, then one can only imagine how much praises he would have gotten if he had Cam's natural talent. I'm sure all the so called "concerns" that is being used against Cam would be a non issue with Luck.

[teeray]

Not necessarily. In college it is completely possible to physically outperform people.

Of course, to the level Cam did it, it takes much more than that.

Not in the SEC IMO. I have given the SEC poo this year because it wasn't the best conference this past season but still I don't think that at that level you can just get by on sheer talent at the QB position.

ACC, Big East, non-BCS conference, yeah maybe. But to dominate the SEC you need more than a high level baseline talent IMO

Edit: Of course your second sentence does allude to that.

[g5jamz]

Let's say for poop and giggles that the Carolina Panthers had the first pick again this year.

Do you feel they'd strongly consider taking Andrew Luck?

[teeray]

This notion that if you are athletically gifted you are lazy and dont work hard and if you're a twirp you're automatically a hard worker and cerebral is crap. Those things are not mutually exclusive. And its almost always a philosophy held by those who are resentful and envious of people with great athletic gifts. This is why we need more african american analysts and scouts. I just dont trust these other guys anymore. Theres a bias there theyre just too proud or too engrained with to give up. If people dont want to be considered bigotted, maybe they shouldnt lean so heavily on eugenics and racist ideology. Stop being lazy.

My opinion is that skin color isn't the problem with these analysts and the media. It is laziness.

When you get lazy with these types of analysis it is easy to fall victim to racial stereotypes and/or just follow the easy narrative created even if there isn't any evidence.

The problem is that they don't put he work in and try to put everyone in a box instead of evaluating each QB by their individual skill set.

Like: Cam Newton played QB, was a run pass threat, in the SEC, won a NC, and won a Heisman. The Golden Calf of Bristol played QB, was a run pass threat, in the SEC, won a NC, and won a Heisman. Therefore Cam Newton is The Golden Calf of Bristol. They are the same. Easy peasy. Lazy.

Or: Cam Newton was 6'6, 250 pounds, wore #2, is African American, had a big arm, played in the SEC. Jamarcus Russell was 6'6, 250 pounds, wore #2, is African American, had a big arm, played in the SEC. Therefore Cam Newton and Jamarcus Russell are the same.

Again it is laziness and not willing to explore each QB by their own unique qualities. It is about finding the guy he reminds you most of and cut and pasting their analysis to one another.

My honest opinion is that if Russell, The Golden Calf of Bristol, or Young had set the world on fire in the NFL Cam Newton would have been the consensus number one pick in the draft last year. Instead he had to answer the questions left by Russell, The Golden Calf of Bristol, and Young.

Now instead it is RG3 who is reaping those benefits because of what Cam Newton did.

[Marguide]

Let's say for poop and giggles that the Carolina Panthers had the first pick again this year.

Do you feel they'd strongly consider taking Andrew Luck?

Not a chance. They would trade the pick.

[panthers55]

Not a chance. They would trade the pick.

Then again if we had gotten the first pick we would have had to suck and Newton would have stunk it up, so may be we would have. But if Cam played as well as he did and we still only won 1 or 2 games then we would trade the pick for more picks to fix the lousy team we would have.

[CRA]

It seems as if you're the one doing your best to find all kinds of rational to defend the baises and baseless 'concerns" about Cam put out by folks like Mayock.

No, Mayack is an over the top TV persona now.....he might not be to the degree of some but he is still a TV persona. I get that. He dug in. He still is dug in. He took what was a legit question......and ran with it. Got no beef w/ the actual question being rasied.

I am simply saying if no one in the media had said jack squat......the Carolina Panthers would have asked themselves the very same basic questions some are still bitching about. They would have still looked into them.

I don't agree at all with what the media did. There job isn't just to evaluate talent. There job is to evaluate talent to a degree.........and then do there "thing". I get that. I can still pick out the core of what the questions were at the time........and those had a right to be asked. Saying that doesn't endorse what the media did overall.

Cam Newton WAS RIGHT to a degree......fault does rest with other talented athletes before him that had success prior to the draft w/o having a work ethic. They also aided in those questions for Newton. Hindsight doesn't mean questioning those things was wrong.......we just know the real answer now.

[Jangler]

this threads has a lot of f*cking words I didn't read.

[csx]

this threads has a lot of f*cking words I didn't read.

I think the same things have been said about 100x over.

[rayzor]

this threads has a lot of f*cking words I didn't read.

probably been a few hundred posts since anything new was said in the thread and a lot of pissing/going around in circles ever since. i didn't read either.