PDA

View Full Version : Newton Game Tape...from Westlake HS


FUNBUNCHER
01-27-2011, 11:18 AM
Who cares what Cam Newton did in HIGH SCHOOL???
You do.

After starring in Malzahn's funky spread run option at Auburn, the negatives about Cam the player are typical for a QB from that system.
Namely, that Cam is a a product of that 'system'; didn't have to make reads, didn't have to make NFL throws, can't play from inside the pocket and needs to learn to take snaps from under center, threw dumpoffs on shallow routes and his first option was to run first, isn't a talented passer.

Essentially, the argument against Cam is that he's a 10 brain cell, super athlete, idiot-savant playing QB.

Fine. Totally wrong IMO, but I won't deny another man's right to think a prospect sucks.

Cam supporters like myself will point out the more you watch him play, the more it becomes obvious that Newton has legit, next-level QB skills. Mainly, that his passing ability is severely underrated.

But again, where's the proof that Cam is more than a one-read, run first spread QB who will have to be rebuilt from the ground up by some team into an NFL starter??

That evidence IMO is Cam's HS game tape.
Don't know if this tape is from Cam's junior or senior year, however what you do notice is that Newton wasn't a 'run first' QB in HS; he was a shotgun/dropback QB. He threw for roughly 2500 yards and ran for about 500. Depending on how long his HS season was, that's less than 50 yards rushing a game.

What you notice from this prep tape is Cam was required to do more in the passing game than he ever was at Auburn.

Look at the play Newton makes at the 1:12 mark on a right rollout, he's got three passing options in the redzone- the RB coming out in the flat, or one of the two bunch WRs on the nearside.
Remember Cam is the biggest and fastest athlete on the field, 12 yards from a TD. Why not just run it?? Because instinctively as a passing QB, he's looking to may a play WITH HIS ARM.
So where does he go with the ball?? The easy throw to the RB breaking into the flat?? Nope. Cam goes to the WR coming open late in the back of the endzone. Touchdown.

Another thing you notice is most the runs by Cam are by design. He rarely takes the snap, looks downfield and takes off.
Yes, this is a tape from HS, but the more you watch his willingness to stay in the pocket, starting from the :43 second mark, it's hard not to come away believing that Auburn did not fully exploit Newton's passing abilities.

Any team that passes on Newton in the 2011 draft does so at the peril of their franchise's future.

IMO there's no QB prospect close to him in this draft.
But that's just my opinion!lol


aKZkPv9B1v4

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 11:25 AM
Playing against 17 year old teenagers. Irrelevant when scouting an NFL prospect.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 11:52 AM
You're not going to find many here who know the first thing about evaluating a QB. Many are quick to talk about the "system" and point out they didn't have to make pro reads. These people are way out in left field and are using an argument that isn't valid. These people remember hearing about past players like Colt Brennan when using the system argument.

Hopefully I can help some of you out who like to use scouting words like "system" and "pro reads." First of all, back to Colt Brennan. The "system" he was in was spoken of to simply discredit the inflated numbers/stats he had because of the pass happy "system" he was in.

So for you people, tell me what college QB out there made "pro reads." I'll answer that for you...none. College defenses are so completely vanilla in comparison to the NFL that no QB prospect has an advantage over another based on the "reads" he made or didn't have to make.

When evaluating a NFL prospect at the quarterback position you have to look at the raw ability. Once they hit the NFL they are broken down like a cadet in a military boot camp. All their previous "knowledge" is thrown out the door and from that point on they are taught/coached the pro way.

To find a good QB prospect you look for someone who looks the part (has the prefered size), has an adequate arm to make NFL throws, has an accurate arm (because you either have it or don't, fundamentals only can help improve that to a degree), someone who can make good decisions (not to be confused with "reads"), someone who is cool under pressure, someone who can lead, and most importantly someone who is dedicated 100% to the game of football and their team.

Once you've found a prospect who meets that criteria then you have a pro prospect. To separate one from the next you look at the degree of arm strengh, how accurate they are, did they play in big games, were they a winner, and all the other intangibles like athletic ability and so on to separate one from the next.

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 12:01 PM
You're not going to find many here who know the first thing about evaluating a QB. Many are quick to talk about the "system" and point out they didn't have to make pro reads. These people are way out in left field and are using an argument that isn't valid. These people remember hearing about past players like Colt Brennan when using the system argument.

Hopefully I can help some of you out who like to use scouting words like "system" and "pro reads." First of all, back to Colt Brennan. The "system" he was in was spoken of to simply discredit the inflated numbers/stats he had because of the pass happy "system" he was in.

So for you people, tell me what college QB out there made "pro reads." I'll answer that for you...none. College defenses are so completely vanilla in comparison to the NFL that no QB prospect has an advantage over another based on the "reads" he made or didn't have to make.

When evaluating a NFL prospect at the quarterback position you have to look at the raw ability. Once they hit the NFL they are broken down like a cadet in a military boot camp. All their previous "knowledge" is thrown out the door and from that point on they are taught/coached the pro way.

To find a good QB prospect you look for someone who looks the part (has the prefered size), has an adequate arm to make NFL throws, has an accurate arm (because you either have it or don't, fundamentals only can help improve that to a degree), someone who can make good decisions (not to be confused with "reads"), someone who is cool under pressure, someone who can lead, and most importantly someone who is dedicated 100% to the game of football and their team.

Once you've found a prospect who meets that criteria then you have a pro prospect. To separate one from the next you look at the degree of arm strengh, how accurate they are, did they play in big games, were they a winner, and all the other intangibles like athletic ability and so on to separate one from the next.

Thank you, I've been saying this for three years now. Like, verbatim.

I like this guy.

senormysterioso
01-27-2011, 12:03 PM
Thank you, I've been saying this for three years now. I like this guy.

There. Is. No. Such. Thing. As. A. Pro. Style. Offense. In. College.

Stanford's offense this year was more complicated than a few teams in the NFL.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 12:33 PM
Stanford's offense this year was more complicated than a few teams in the NFL.

Might be able to measure a QB's intelligence based off that, but other than that no benefit could be found IMO unless Andrew Luck or another Stanford QB winds up with the 49ers.

Again, if you're talking about reads...that has nothing to do with the offense, that's based off the opposing defense (which is no comparision to an NFL defense).

That said, no it wasn't more complicated. Time wouldn't allow.

brat316
01-27-2011, 12:33 PM
Jake Locker raawwwr

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 12:34 PM
Stanford's offense this year was more complicated than a few teams in the NFL.

This just isn't true. My roommate played for Harbuagh during his freshman year at USD (the Josh Johnson era). I actually think I still have a copy of his playbook at my mom and dad's house.

I also watched two or three Stanford games this year. It's not an incredibly complicated or intricate passing system, even if the terminology is similar to an NFL style offense. For an NFL player, football is a full time job. College teams are allowed 20 hours max of practice per week. There's no way a college team can absorb that much information.

Not only that, but the main point is that college defenses are so bad and so basic (again, because of time restraints), that the "reads" you make in college aren't transferable to the pros. The only thing that really transfers is running game footwork and drops - both of which can be improved upon incredibly quickly with NFL coaching.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 12:36 PM
Jake Locker raawwwr

I'm really starting to think Locker's draft stock is similar to Jimmy Clausen's. He won't get the "nucklehead" lable, but is accuracy is a real issue. As I stated above, accuracy isn't all that correctable. It's able to be improved through coaching and improved mechanics, but it's one of those things you either wake up in the morning with or you don't. Locker has about the same chance to complete 65% of his passes as Kellen Moore has to be 6-4.

A Perfect Score
01-27-2011, 12:42 PM
I don't care what you say about system as a reference to a prospect, but to say Newton operated in anything other then a read/option offense this year where he was asked to make one read then bolt is idiotic. I don't really care about the system in regards to him as a prospect (I have much bigger concerns over his mid range accuracy and sloppy footwork), but it absolutely, 100% inflated his numbers. People will consistently cite Newton's completion percentage as proof of his accuracy and then come right back around and say system doesn't matter when evaluating a prospect. Its beyond idiotic. He isn't an accurate passer out of the pocket and yes, he's going to go in the first round, but once again I absolutely despise the fact that he's made out to be some sort of polished pocket passer. He isn't. Far from it. He's got serious accuracy issues on his short and mid range passes and he's got no touch on anything in that area either.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 12:55 PM
I don't care what you say about system as a reference to a prospect, but to say Newton operated in anything other then a read/option offense this year where he was asked to make one read then bolt is idiotic. I don't really care about the system in regards to him as a prospect (I have much bigger concerns over his mid range accuracy and sloppy footwork), but it absolutely, 100% inflated his numbers. People will consistently cite Newton's completion percentage as proof of his accuracy and then come right back around and say system doesn't matter when evaluating a prospect. Its beyond idiotic. He isn't an accurate passer out of the pocket and yes, he's going to go in the first round, but once again I absolutely despise the fact that he's made out to be some sort of polished pocket passer. He isn't. Far from it. He's got serious accuracy issues on his short and mid range passes and he's got no touch on anything in that area either.

I haven't heard anyone call him a polished pocket passer. Here's what I personally know to be true about Cam Newton.

1. He looks the part.

2. His arm is plently strong enough to make all the throws.

3. His arm is accurate for the most part.

4. He's a proven winner at every level so far.

5. He loves and is dedicated to football and becoming better.

6. His mechanics are plenty far enough along at this point.

7. Though his decision making isn't flawless, he's not careless with the ball.

8. He's mobile, able to escape pressure, and can make plays with his legs. (All just a bonus)

Newton operated in anything other then a read/option offense this year where he was asked to make one read

Yeah you're right, but so what...Go read or re-read my post above. It briefly explains why this doesn't matter. What are you trying to say, is there a QB out there who can tell his new O.C. in the NFL he doen't need a playbook because he's got it covered...just give me the ball.

FYI, one of the biggest issues with a college QB's system as it translates to the NFL is the formations and weather or not they took snaps under center. In both cases Cam Newton was in a "system" with pro aspects.

brasho
01-27-2011, 12:56 PM
Stanford's offense this year was more complicated than a few teams in the NFL.

Yeah, but defenses in college aren't nearly as complex either with the DBs not being able to make nearly as good of breaks on the ball.

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 12:58 PM
I don't care what you say about system as a reference to a prospect, but to say Newton operated in anything other then a read/option offense this year where he was asked to make one read then bolt is idiotic. I don't really care about the system in regards to him as a prospect (I have much bigger concerns over his mid range accuracy and sloppy footwork), but it absolutely, 100% inflated his numbers. People will consistently cite Newton's completion percentage as proof of his accuracy and then come right back around and say system doesn't matter when evaluating a prospect. Its beyond idiotic. He isn't an accurate passer out of the pocket and yes, he's going to go in the first round, but once again I absolutely despise the fact that he's made out to be some sort of polished pocket passer. He isn't. Far from it. He's got serious accuracy issues on his short and mid range passes and he's got no touch on anything in that area either.

I haven't seen nearly enough of him to have an opinion either way. Numbers should be completely discounted when you're scouting a quarterback. They shouldn't be used as an argument for or against him. You honestly have to judge each play as an individual event. Understand what the prospect is seeing in the defense (both pre-snap and post-snap), watching his footwork, judging ball placement (can he hit stick throws/can he throw a receiver open/does the receiver catch his balls in stride consistently/and can he hit the Cover Two "honey holes").

Another important thing to look for is how often they try to protect him from the wide side of the field. The hashmarks are much wider in college than in the pros. With the NFL hashmarks being closer together, throws to both the short and wide side of the field are much more difficult than in college. Is he only comfortable throwing outs to the short side of the field? Do they have to roll him out to throw outside the numbers to the wide side? What is the velocity on those outside throws? Is it on a rope, or is there arc and hangtime? That's how you judge armstrength. It's not by how often he throws deep.

And, lastly, the most important aspect to look for is how he does in confined spaces when the pocket breaks down. I'd venture to say NFL quarterbacks throw out of a completely clean pocket on maybe 10-20% of their attempts. This is why Luck is rated as such a high prospect, despite nobody really being able to put their finger on what makes him so great. His presence in the pocket and ability to feel pressure is outstanding. It's also why I was so adamant that Leinart would fail (other than his girlie arm), despite having all the foolish "NFL ready/pro style offense/intangibles" tags placed on him.

Again, I'm not trying to disparage your feelings on Newton or lecture you, because a) I haven't really seen him play, and b) I can tell you know what to look for better than most. This is really for other people who are more curious on what makes a good NFL prospect.

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 12:59 PM
I haven't heard anyone call him a polished pocket passer. Here's what I personally know to be true about Cam Newton.

1. He looks the part.

2. His arm is plently strong enough to make all the throws.

3. His arm is accurate for the most part.

4. He's a proven winner at every level so far.

5. He loves and is dedicated to football and becoming better.

6. His mechanics are plenty far enough along at this point.

7. Though his decision making isn't flawless, he's not careless with the ball.

8. He's mobile, able to escape pressure, and can make plays with his legs. (All just a bonus)



Yeah you're right, but so what...Go read or re-read my post above. It briefly explains why this doesn't matter. What are you trying to say, is there a QB out there who can tell his new O.C. in the NFL he doen't need a playbook because he's got it covered...just give me the ball.

FYI, one of the biggest issues with a college QB's system as it translates to the NFL is the formations and weather or not they took snaps under center. In both cases Cam Newton was in a "system" with pro aspects.

Stop stealing my thunder!

brasho
01-27-2011, 01:02 PM
1. He looks the part.

2. His arm is plently strong enough to make all the throws.

3. His arm is accurate for the most part.

4. He's a proven winner at every level so far.

5. He loves and is dedicated to football and becoming better.

6. His mechanics are plenty far enough along at this point.

7. Though his decision making isn't flawless, he's not careless with the ball.

8. He's mobile, able to escape pressure, and can make plays with his legs. (All just a bonus)

.

This is just me playing devil's advocate, but the same could be said about JaMarcus Russell (except for #5), Vince Young, Rick Mirer, Jim Druckenmiller, Andre Ware, Ryan Leaf, David Klingler, Heath Shuler, Akili Smith, David Carr, Kyle Boller, JP Losman, and Brady Quinn.

Point is, it takes more than what you mentioned to be a great QB prospect. I'm not saying Newton won't be... just that for every prospects that has "it" there are 2 prospects that don't.

senormysterioso
01-27-2011, 01:02 PM
This just isn't true. My roommate played for Harbuagh during his freshman year at USD (the Josh Johnson era). I actually think I still have a copy of his playbook at my mom and dad's house.

I also watched two or three Stanford games this year. It's not an incredibly complicated or intricate passing system, even if the terminology is similar to an NFL style offense. For an NFL player, football is a full time job. College teams are allowed 20 hours max of practice per week. There's no way a college team can absorb that much information.

Not only that, but the main point is that college defenses are so bad and so basic (again, because of time restraints), that what the "reads" you make in college aren't transferable to the pros. The only thing that really transfers is running game footwork and drops - both of which can be improved upon incredibly quickly with NFL coaching.

That is true, the vanilla college defense point especially. In the Stanford games that I've watched the thing that stood out is the double moves, and how Luck routinely has 3 routes to look at on a given pass play, and uses the whole field. Most of the reason that Stanford had, I think I heard something like 400 offensive plays this season, compared to the 100 that Virginia Tech had...don't quote me on those numbers, I can't find the article that I saw them in. I also saw a bunch of back shoulder throws by Luck which implies that Luck and the receivers both have pre snap reads. Compare Stanford's offense last year with say, Carolina or Arizona last year.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 01:05 PM
Stop stealing my thunder!

You expanded in more detail the jist of what I was saying. Maybe our two posts should be merged and a required read for all new members here from this point on, lol.

ThePudge
01-27-2011, 01:05 PM
You're not going to find many here who know the first thing about evaluating a QB.

I don't mean to be rude in calling you out, but didn't you have Tony Pike as your #1 Quarterback in last year's draft? I remember disagreeing with you very strongly about that. I thought Bradford was perhaps the best QB prospect I've ever graded (since 07' - only Matt Ryan was close in my mind) and you thought he was just a guy. Just found it ironic that you chose to imply that you can evaluate QB talent better than most people here.

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 01:06 PM
You expanded in more detail the jist of what I was saying. Maybe our two posts should be merged and a required read for all new members here from this point on, lol.

I agree. We need a scouting 101 thread stickied on here for people who want to learn more about scouting, and I think those posts are a good place to start.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 01:13 PM
This is just me playing devil's advocate, but the same could be said about JaMarcus Russell (except for #5), Vince Young, Rick Mirer, Jim Druckenmiller, Andre Ware, Ryan Leaf, David Klingler, Heath Shuler, Akili Smith, David Carr, Kyle Boller, JP Losman, and Brady Quinn.

Point is, it takes more than what you mentioned to be a great QB prospect. I'm not saying Newton won't be... just that for every prospects that has "it" there are 2 prospects that don't.

I disagree. First let me say that #5 is the single most important on that list. It also wasn't a complete list of things to look for, just things I know to be true about Newton. Vince Young didn't have #2, 5, 6, or 7. Rick Mirer didn't have #1, 2 or 8. Andre Ware is a good example of where the "system" can be used as a valid argument because he got drafted high based off his over-inflated stats, same with Clingler. Heath Shuler has left my memory a long time ago. Akili Smith didn't have #3, 4, 5, 6, or 7. Brady Quinn was notoriously inaccurate (similar to Locker).

Rashaan Salaam
01-27-2011, 01:14 PM
Lotta Knowledge being dropped in this thread!! This is what a Forum Discussion is supposed to look like!!

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 01:15 PM
I don't mean to be rude in calling you out, but didn't you have Tony Pike as your #1 Quarterback in last year's draft? I remember disagreeing with you very strongly about that. I thought Bradford was perhaps the best QB prospect I've ever graded (since 07' - only Matt Ryan was close in my mind) and you thought he was just a guy. Just found it ironic that you chose to imply that you can evaluate QB talent better than most people here.

Yeah I did. It's also never a science. Do you already know for a fact that Tony Pike won't be a good NFL QB? Give him more than a year to develope. I still stand by my evaluation of him, and still fully expect him to be successful in the NFL.

Also, it's still too early to proclaim Sam Bradford the top QB of this class. Remember, Tom Brady is the top QB of his class even though it didn't start out that way.

Rashaan Salaam
01-27-2011, 01:16 PM
I agree. We need a scouting 101 thread stickied on here for people who want to learn more about scouting, and I think those posts are a good place to start.

All people have to do is watch the tape...flip side of that is that many don't know what they're looking at..

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 01:26 PM
Also, the only thing that can really be observed by watching that HS video is ball placement. And even then - it's not in a vacuum. It's a collection of his best plays. And in all of them, he's throwing from a completely clean pocket with his feet completely set to a receiver that's wide open. Not a whole lot to be gained from that.

49erNation85
01-27-2011, 01:27 PM
He should become a WR already and for get about QB .

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 01:28 PM
He should become a WR already and for get about QB .

I still can't tell if you're a troll or if you're just incredibly stupid.

ThePudge
01-27-2011, 01:31 PM
Yeah I did. It's also never a science. Do you already know for a fact that Tony Pike won't be a good NFL QB? Give him more than a year to develope. I still stand by my evaluation of him, and still fully expect him to be successful in the NFL.

Also, it's still too early to proclaim Sam Bradford the top QB of this class. Remember, Tom Brady is the top QB of his class even though it didn't start out that way.

Nothing is in stone yet, but I don't think Pike is in the NFL for more than... say... 5 years. I don't know for certain Bradford is the best 3-5 years from now, but I take pride in my evaluation and he did a lot on the field this season to prove me right. One season is by no means a career, but I think the kid is a future star. Once he gets a little help (at WR notably) and the Rams fill out their defense, I think St. Louis will be perennial contenders in the NFC. Carolina, on the other hand, might still be looking for a QB despite drafting two last year (one being Pike.)

As I mentioned, I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just replying to a fairly condescending statement about the posters here. People, at the highest level, value different traits in Quarterback prospects and will like/dislike players accordingly.

TACKLE
01-27-2011, 01:40 PM
Just a few thoughts and things I agree with as I was reading through.

This just isn't true. My roommate played for Harbuagh during his freshman year at USD (the Josh Johnson era). I actually think I still have a copy of his playbook at my mom and dad's house.

Yeah the offense itself isn't very complicated at all but most of the "complexities" of the offense are in the wide array of personnel packages. The plays and concepts themselves are pretty much status-quo when it comes to pro-style offenses at the college level.

Another important thing to look for is how often they try to protect him from the wide side of the field. The hashmarks are much wider in college than in the pros. With the NFL hashmarks being closer together, throws to both the short and wide side of the field are much more difficult than in college. Is he only comfortable throwing outs to the short side of the field? Do they have to roll him out to throw outside the numbers to the wide side? What is the velocity on those outside throws? Is it on a rope, or is there arc and hangtime? That's how you judge armstrength. It's not by how often he throws deep.

This right here really needs to be emphasized more. Scouts but huge stock in a quarterback's ability to throw with velocity to the 1 and the 5 zones. (1,5 = outside the numbers 2,4 = hashmarks/seams, 3 = middle of the field) We always talk about judging arm strength but being able to make those throws outside the hashes, especially from one hash to another, is very important in evaluating quarterback prospects. Scouts love guys who can throw from the right hash to the #1 zone and vice versa. Although I personally don't hold this opinion, its why NFL people view Gabbert as a top 10 pick and Locker as a late first/second round pick. Arm to arm, there isn't much difference between the two. But from the pocket, Gabbert has shown he can make the throws to the 1 and 5 zones with velocity where as Locker has struggled in this area despite his arm strength. Locker does a great job at throwing the seams but less value is put on be able to make those throws.

I absolutely despise the fact that he's made out to be some sort of polished pocket passer.

I am one of the bigger Cam Newton advocates on this board yet have no idea whatsoever where you're getting this impression from. I have read through basically all of the Cam Newton Thread/Jake Locker vs. Cam Newton/etc. and I have yet to see a post that suggests that currently a polished pocket passer. I don't think even Cam himself has that perception. People have said he's improved in the pocket, he's improved as a passer, he has a fairly natural throwing motion and is mechanically further along than some running QB's in the past. I don't how you're pulling the perception that he is a polished pocket passer at this point, out of those statements.

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 01:42 PM
Newton would be a terrible WR. He's less terrible as a QB, so he's better off this way.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 01:48 PM
He should become a WR already and for get about QB .

Ironic statement based on your user name and sig.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 01:54 PM
Nothing is in stone yet, but I don't think Pike is in the NFL for more than... say... 5 years. I don't know for certain Bradford is the best 3-5 years from now, but I take pride in my evaluation and he did a lot on the field this season to prove me right. One season is by no means a career, but I think the kid is a future star. Once he gets a little help (at WR notably) and the Rams fill out their defense, I think St. Louis will be perennial contenders in the NFC. Carolina, on the other hand, might still be looking for a QB despite drafting two last year (one being Pike.)

As I mentioned, I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just replying to a fairly condescending statement about the posters here. People, at the highest level, value different traits in Quarterback prospects and will like/dislike players accordingly.

Are you trying to say my statement was incorrect that the majority of members here don't have a clue what to look for? I didn't say every member and certainly didn't name names. I don't think it was a condescending statement, I think it's fact.

I also didn't place any priority on what to value, I briefly pointed out things to look for. What I said about how people use the "system" argument was a factual statement. It's just not a valid argument and always get's misused.

SchizophrenicBatman
01-27-2011, 02:19 PM
I'm really starting to think Locker's draft stock is similar to Jimmy Clausen's. He won't get the "nucklehead" lable, but is accuracy is a real issue. As I stated above, accuracy isn't all that correctable. It's able to be improved through coaching and improved mechanics, but it's one of those things you either wake up in the morning with or you don't. Locker has about the same chance to complete 65% of his passes as Kellen Moore has to be 6-4.

The main difference between Locker and Clausen is that Locker has the physical upside to be a top level QB. Clausen basically has to be perfect in every other fashion because he's not mobile, he's not big, and he doesn't have Jamarcus Russell's arm. I imagine that's why he continued to fall even once he hit the late first round when teams will start to take a risk on QBs that fell (Rodgers, Quinn, etc).

Now, you can argue over whether or not the physical factor is overrated because it leads to guys like Leaf and Russell going in the top 5 but that's how it seems the NFL views things

jsa230
01-27-2011, 02:28 PM
Ironic statement based on your user name and sig.

Yeah, Tebow should be moved to fullback and lead block for moreno.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 02:28 PM
The main difference between Locker and Clausen is that Locker has the physical upside to be a top level QB. Clausen basically has to be perfect in every other fashion because he's not mobile, he's not big, and he doesn't have Jamarcus Russell's arm. I imagine that's why he continued to fall even once he hit the late first round when teams will start to take a risk on QBs that fell (Rodgers, Quinn, etc).

Now, you can argue over whether or not the physical factor is overrated because it leads to guys like Leaf and Russell going in the top 5 but that's how it seems the NFL views things

I think Jimmy Clausen's biggest issue is found between his ears. He's just a clown and I think that's the biggest factor to him falling like he did. He has an enormous ego even though it's not warranted, he's not a leader, and I doubt he puts in the time required to be great. I think physically he has enough to be an NFL QB.

Physically Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russell, and a ton of former busts had the physical attributes but lacked the most important ingreedients which can't be measured by any on field test or film study.

Being mobile as a QB is just gravy, it's not a requirment to be successful in the NFL.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
01-27-2011, 02:29 PM
The only concern I'd have with that is that the guy went to UF, then to junior college, then to Auburn. I have no idea what type of offense he ran in JC, but we know both UF and Auburn preach run based play from their QB. Is it possible that they changed his mentality? I would think that turning a QB into a one read and run type of guy at 18 would be a lot easier than turning him from a run-first type to a pass first type at 22. And that's where his intelligence comes in, and teams are gonna have to make a judgment on that. What that judgment is could vary from team to team.

Also I want to say I didn't see any Auburn games this year(I work for like 9 hours every Saturday) other than the NC game, so I could very well be wrong on this.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 02:29 PM
Yeah, Tebow should be moved to fullback and lead block for moreno.

I disagree, just thought it was ironic that a Tebow fan would suggest a QB position change.

TACKLE
01-27-2011, 02:30 PM
The main difference between Locker and Clausen is that Locker has the physical upside to be a top level QB. Clausen basically has to be perfect in every other fashion because he's not mobile, he's not big, and he doesn't have Jamarcus Russell's arm. I imagine that's why he continued to fall even once he hit the late first round when teams will start to take a risk on QBs that fell (Rodgers, Quinn, etc).

You can't take a QB in the first two rounds unless you feel he has the ability to lead a franchise. Simple as that. Even if the QB has talent, you can't take him if he can't lead your team. That's why Clausen fell as far as he did. He wasn't a winner, wasn't a leader and had average physical tools. How can you spend a first round pick on someone to lead your franchise, who fits that description? You can't.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
01-27-2011, 02:31 PM
Yeah, Tebow should be moved to fullback and lead block for moreno.

Tebow is probably faster than Moreno on the field, it should be switched.

Rashaan Salaam
01-27-2011, 02:31 PM
The only concern I'd have with that is that the guy went to UF, then to junior college, then to Auburn. I have no idea what type of offense he ran in JC, but we know both UF and Auburn preach run based play from their QB. Is it possible that they changed his mentality? I would think that turning a QB into a one read and run type of guy at 18 would be a lot easier than turning him from a run-first type to a pass first type at 22. And that's where his intelligence comes in, and teams are gonna have to make a judgment on that. What that judgment is could vary from team to team.

Also I want to say I didn't see any Auburn games this year(I work for like 9 hours every Saturday) other than the NC game, so I could very well be wrong on this.

You just said that you didn't see ANY Auburn games...yet you make a comment on Newton?

I'm confused
*Kanye Shrug*

Rashaan Salaam
01-27-2011, 02:32 PM
You can't take a QB in the first two rounds unless you feel he has the ability to lead a franchise. Simple as that. Even if the QB has talent, you can't take him if he can't lead your team. That's why Clausen fell as far as he did. He wasn't a winner, wasn't a leader and had average physical tools. How can you spend a first round pick on someone to lead your franchise, who fits that description? You can't.

Well said!

SchizophrenicBatman
01-27-2011, 02:38 PM
people way overrated clausen's physical talents because they focused so much on the character issues with him and whether they mattered or not. even if the guy had tim tebow's attitude he would still have problems

he has enough to "get by" in the nfl but really nothing that separates him from an average nfl qb

also mobility is NOT overrated in today's nfl. i'm not talking about running for 100 yards like a vick/young but pocket mobility and being able to make plays happen with pressure on you. statue's are the way of the past

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 02:40 PM
The only concern I'd have with that is that the guy went to UF, then to junior college, then to Auburn. I have no idea what type of offense he ran in JC, but we know both UF and Auburn preach run based play from their QB. Is it possible that they changed his mentality? I would think that turning a QB into a one read and run type of guy at 18 would be a lot easier than turning him from a run-first type to a pass first type at 22. And that's where his intelligence comes in, and teams are gonna have to make a judgment on that. What that judgment is could vary from team to team.

Also I want to say I didn't see any Auburn games this year(I work for like 9 hours every Saturday) other than the NC game, so I could very well be wrong on this.

This is the most valid statement I've read in regards to a quarterbacks system. It's the very thing Mike Vick struggled with early on. If this is a case of something being ingrained in his head, I think the quality of coaching he gets at the next level will be the deciding factor between success and failure.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
01-27-2011, 02:56 PM
You just said that you didn't see ANY Auburn games...yet you make a comment on Newton?

I'm confused
*Kanye Shrug*

It wasn't so much a comment on Newton himself as much as it was a comment on QBs in general who play in that type of offense as a collegiate.

Rashaan Salaam
01-27-2011, 03:11 PM
It wasn't so much a comment on Newton himself as much as it was a comment on QBs in general who play in that type of offense as a collegiate.

Ahhhhhh! My bad homie!

*runs back to the sideline*

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
01-27-2011, 03:32 PM
Ahhhhhh! My bad homie!

*runs back to the sideline*

**** happens.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wAQQHVAYZVg/TRmDw26KA3I/AAAAAAAAACY/0Tc35s_v_S8/s1600/Kanye-Shrug.jpg

FUNBUNCHER
01-27-2011, 03:42 PM
Also, the only thing that can really be observed by watching that HS video is ball placement. And even then - it's not in a vacuum. It's a collection of his best plays. And in all of them, he's throwing from a completely clean pocket with his feet completely set to a receiver that's wide open. Not a whole lot to be gained from that.

Agree that it's a highlight tape which is cheating from the jump when evaluating a prospect, but not all those throws were to wide open WRs.

Basically I wanted to show that Cam is being stereotyped as this typical running QB from since forever, but if you look at enough film on Cam going back to HS, that's not the player he was as a prep.
If you want to see a guy who's had to unlearn bad habits developed in HS, take a look at VY when he played at Madison. 90% of his highlights are 50+ yard runs.

As a college coach in the SEC, I imagine it's hard to bring in a guy you've recruited with all-world athletic ability who also happens to play QB, and decide best how to use him.
Just an attempt on my part to demonstrate that Cam likely has a better feel for the passing game in his background than he's given credit for.

SchizophrenicBatman
01-27-2011, 03:58 PM
josh nesbitt played in a spread passing attack in high school

the guy still sucks at passing

brasho
01-27-2011, 04:06 PM
I disagree. First let me say that #5 is the single most important on that list. It also wasn't a complete list of things to look for, just things I know to be true about Newton. Vince Young didn't have #2, 5, 6, or 7. Rick Mirer didn't have #1, 2 or 8. Andre Ware is a good example of where the "system" can be used as a valid argument because he got drafted high based off his over-inflated stats, same with Clingler. Heath Shuler has left my memory a long time ago. Akili Smith didn't have #3, 4, 5, 6, or 7. Brady Quinn was notoriously inaccurate (similar to Locker).

He said "accurrate for the most part"... I figure all the guys I named were "accurrate for the most part".

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 04:08 PM
I also think that something that has to be mentioned here is the unfair double standard most draftniks hold for quarterbacks. And I understand this mentality, because I used to be the same way.

Because of the negative repercussions of drafting a bust quarterback in the first round, a lot draftniks will only like a guy that is a completely finished, polished product. Just because a guy isn't able to start right away doesn't mean he's not deserving of a high first round pick.

What you find out, though, is that passing on a franchise quarterback can be just as devastating as having one bust for you.

brasho
01-27-2011, 04:08 PM
This is the most valid statement I've read in regards to a quarterbacks system. It's the very thing Mike Vick struggled with early on. If this is a case of something being ingrained in his head, I think the quality of coaching he gets at the next level will be the deciding factor between success and failure.

I don't think Michael Vick ever ran for over 500 yards in a college season... of course he only had two... but still, he wasn't REALLY a run-first guy necessarily... even though he was. I thought he ran more than he did but I recall his rushing stats not being extraordinary.

brasho
01-27-2011, 04:11 PM
people way overrated clausen's physical talents because they focused so much on the character issues with him and whether they mattered or not. even if the guy had tim tebow's attitude he would still have problems

he has enough to "get by" in the nfl but really nothing that separates him from an average nfl qb

also mobility is NOT overrated in today's nfl. i'm not talking about running for 100 yards like a vick/young but pocket mobility and being able to make plays happen with pressure on you. statue's are the way of the past

We've been hearing that "Statues" part for a while now but Peyton and Tom keep chugging slowly along... but I do agree, though there are always exceptions to the rule (Warner as well). But I know teams WANT guys that can move a little. I think Roethlisberger's mobility (even though his stats sucked) were the key to the Steelers beating the Jets right after they took down Manning and Brady in consecutive weeks. That extra second or two makes it harder to keep covering receivers.

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 04:16 PM
I also think that something that has to be mentioned here is the unfair double standard most draftniks hold for quarterbacks. And I understand this mentality, because I used to be the same way.

Because of the negative repercussions of drafting a bust quarterback in the first round, a lot draftniks will only like a guy that is a completely finished, polished product. Just because a guy isn't able to start right away doesn't mean he's not deserving of a high first round pick.

What you find out, though, is that passing on a franchise quarterback can be just as devastating as having one bust for you.

God damn page traps.

brasho
01-27-2011, 04:19 PM
I also think that something that has to be mentioned here is the unfair double standard most draftniks hold for quarterbacks. And I understand this mentality, because I used to be the same way.

Because of the negative repercussions of drafting a bust quarterback in the first round, a lot draftniks will only like a guy that is a completely finished, polished product. Just because a guy isn't able to start right away doesn't mean he's not deserving of a high first round pick.

What you find out, though, is that passing on a franchise quarterback can be just as devastating as having one bust for you.

Gotta agree and also say that part of a lot of QBs busting or becoming the guys has to do with the teams around them and their support system (coaching, system).

I think Ryan Leaf was so extremely immature he would have busted no matter what. I think the Seahawks ruined Rick Mirer. I think in the right system TIm Couch would've been pretty good. I think Donovan McNabb would've really sucked as a Bengal. I think whomever it was that played with Carter and Moss in Minnesota would've looked like a stud instead of Daunte Culpepper. I think Aaron Rodgers would have been a failure in San Francisco. Can anyone imagine what would have happened to Elway if he stayed a Colt? I guess he would've been a baseball player. Would Steve Young had beenin the HoF if he hadn't been traded to the 49ers (no).

papageorgio
01-27-2011, 04:21 PM
Newton will be the best quarterback in this draft and will become a top 5 quarterback in the NFL in the next few years.

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 04:33 PM
Newton will be the best quarterback in this draft and will become a top 5 quarterback in the NFL in the next few years.
That's what the folks here said about JaMarcus, right?

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 04:37 PM
That's what the folks here said about JaMarcus, right?

What similarities do Russell and Netwon share that make this relevant to the discussion?

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 04:41 PM
What similarities do Russell and Netwon share that make this relevant to the discussion?
Size and character?

yourfavestoner
01-27-2011, 04:47 PM
Big and black?

Fixed it to what you want to say, but can't.

Comparisons between the two are superficial at best. Netwon's body type is completely different than Russell and he's a much better, more fluid athlete. That much is fairly obvious.

As far as "character" goes, I've made numerous posts on how stupid it is to label every single misgiving in the universe as a "character" concern. NFL teams aren't going to care that he took money.

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 04:50 PM
I did mean character, not race.

Russell was a fat lazy bastard and Newton is a dumb prick.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
01-27-2011, 04:50 PM
YFS beat me to that punch. Russell and Newton aren't any more comparable than Manning and Tebow.

papageorgio
01-27-2011, 04:56 PM
I did mean character, not race.

Russell was a fat lazy bastard and Newton is a dumb prick.

Umm the only Prick quarterback I know is the one of the Patriots. A choker and a cry baby Brady.

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 04:58 PM
Umm the only Prick quarterback I know is the one of the Patriots. A choker and a cry baby Brady.
3-time Super Bowl winner and the one that's probably going to be recognized as the best of all-time after his career prick choker cry baby. More respect towards Brady please.

Rashaan Salaam
01-27-2011, 05:02 PM
3-time Super Bowl winner and the one that's probably going to be recognized as the best of all-time after his career prick choker cry baby. More respect towards Brady please.

Brady isn't better than Manning and you noticed that since "SpyGate" they haven't been back to the Big Game.. It's funny how nobody wants to talk about that.

Its tough to win when you don't know the opponents defensive signals....

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 05:03 PM
I thought Brady was 25-7 in the two post-Spygate seasons, so yeah, he can win. But let's not go offtopic.

Rashaan Salaam
01-27-2011, 05:07 PM
I thought Brady was 25-7 in the two post-Spygate seasons, so yeah, he can win. But let's not go offtopic.

Talking super bowl victories...

*back on topic*

senormysterioso
01-27-2011, 05:09 PM
I did mean character, not race.

Russell was a fat lazy bastard and Newton is a dumb prick.

It shocks me how quick people are to slander and denegrate athletes on a personal level when they have never met or have any contact with them.

papageorgio
01-27-2011, 05:10 PM
I thought Brady was 25-7 in the two post-Spygate seasons, so yeah, he can win. But let's not go offtopic.

Bill Belichik is the only reason why that franchise won anything. Brady is nothing without his defence and Vinatieri.

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 05:12 PM
Bill Belichik is the only reason why that franchise won anything. Brady is nothing without his defence and Vinatieri.
I thought we had a 16-0 regular season and almost won a SB without Vinatieri, Bruschi, Vrabel, Law and Harrison.

papageorgio
01-27-2011, 05:25 PM
I thought we had a 16-0 regular season and almost won a SB without Vinatieri, Bruschi, Vrabel, Law and Harrison.

guess what you lost. That franchise is a joke. All they do is cheat. Mcdaniels goes to Denver gets caught cheating.

It wont really matter once the franchise stops winning you'll see what that fanbase is all about. They wont sell out any games and revert back to one of the worst fan bases in the NFL just like they were in the 80s and 90s.

A Perfect Score
01-27-2011, 05:40 PM
guess what you lost. That franchise is a joke. All they do is cheat. Mcdaniels goes to Denver gets caught cheating.

It wont really matter once the franchise stops winning you'll see what that fanbase is all about. They wont sell out any games and revert back to one of the worst fan bases in the NFL just like they were in the 80s and 90s.

Stuff like this is what makes this board unenjoyable. Go talk about this in the right thread, at the right time, and not here. Its annoying, not productive, and frankly unwarranted.

stephenson86
01-27-2011, 06:15 PM
The guy has brilliant athleticism, perfect body, good release (not too slow) and he has great arm strength. Give him 3 years holding a clipboard he could probably be very good, a team could pull a VY and throw him straight in the fire.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 06:42 PM
I did mean character, not race.

Russell was a fat lazy bastard and Newton is a dumb prick.

What info or proof do you have that Newton is dumb? To me he sounds rather well spoken. Are you just assuming that because he's black? Also, why is he believed to have bad character? Is it because of the alleged money situation? If so, I have news for you. The NFL is flooded with players who received improper benefits while in college...they just didn't get caught. Or is it the laptop thing? I don't know you, but I bet you haven't lived your entire life without making any mistakes. Infact, if I offered you a new laptop for $100 I bet you would buy it. I also highly doubt you would turn down $180K either. I think everyone needs to view things realistically before they start labeling someone.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 06:45 PM
YFS beat me to that punch. Russell and Newton aren't any more comparable than Manning and Tebow.

Agreed. He may as well compare him to Michael Vick, Steve McNair, Dennis Dixon, Warren Moon, Kordell Stewart, Andre Ware, David Garrard...get the point.

Now that's a Reality Check...

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 06:47 PM
Brady isn't better than Manning and you noticed that since "SpyGate" they haven't been back to the Big Game.. It's funny how nobody wants to talk about that.

Its tough to win when you don't know the opponents defensive signals....

SpyGate...now that's bad character.

Day One Pick
01-27-2011, 06:48 PM
Bill Belichik is the only reason why that franchise won anything. Brady is nothing without his defence and Vinatieri.

Matt Cassel agrees.

Brent
01-27-2011, 08:37 PM
I am hoping he throws at the combine but that seems to happen less and less.

TACKLE
01-27-2011, 08:42 PM
I am hoping he throws at the combine but that seems to happen less and less.

There's really no point though. How a QB throws at the combine really isn't going to effect their stock much at all. It's all about the pro-days/personal work outs.

Brent
01-27-2011, 08:43 PM
There's really no point though. How a QB throws at the combine really isn't going to effect their stock much at all. It's all about the pro-days/personal work outs.
I just want to see it televised. All I can ever see of him throwing is from game highlights.

FWIW: Dan LeFevour not throwing was a rather stupid thing last year. Yes, I am aware it's different when you are a top-whatever prospect.

TACKLE
01-27-2011, 08:48 PM
I just want to see it televised. All I can ever see of him throwing is from game highlights.

Oh don't get me wrong, I'd like to see it too. Unfortunately for us as fans, we won't get to see it.

If you ever have some time to sit down and watch some games, you can watch full SEC games on this site (without comercials!)

http://www.secdigitalnetwork.com/SECVIDEO/TabId/468/VideoId/10639/Top-5-Plays.aspx

DBNYDP
01-27-2011, 08:55 PM
High School...Really?

nikkayeah
01-28-2011, 01:19 AM
High School...Really?

did you even read the thread? stop side busting

nepg
01-28-2011, 08:35 AM
I haven't seen anything from Cam to indicate that he can't become a good NFL QB. He sees the field well, has a quick release, and is pretty accurate. An NFL team will get his footwork fixed (if it even needs fixing...the nature of the Gus Malzahn offense required him to drop back prepared to scramble), and that will only make everything else better.

I'd take him after Locker, but before Mallett and Gabbert.

senormysterioso
01-28-2011, 08:40 AM
it's incredible that in the span of about three posts, this thread went from interesting and worth reading to whatever you'd call most of the last 30ish posts.

why is anyone talking about brady or manning in a cam newton thread?

It just seems to be the trajectory of any quarterback related conversation;
1. Someone forwards that QB A is Good.
2. Someone else forwards that Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are good.
3. Then, QB A is not as good as Peyton Manning and Tom Brady, therefor, QB A is not good.

AntoinCD
01-28-2011, 08:56 AM
It just seems to be the trajectory of any quarterback related conversation;
1. Someone forwards that QB A is Good.
2. Someone else forwards that Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are good.
3. Then, QB A is not as good as Peyton Manning and Tom Brady, therefor, QB A is not good.

Allow me to continue

4. Forget QB A, despite it's a thread about him, because Peyton Manning is better than Tom Brady
5. But Tom Brady has rings and Peyton Manning doesnt
6. Tom Brady suckzzzz it's all Belichick and Adam Vinatieri
7. Peyton Manning is a choker in big games
8. Tom Brady has been a choker since Spygate!!!!
9. Peyton Manning has the worst record for one and dones in playoff history
10. SPYGATE!!CHEATERZZZZZZ!!!PATS SUCK
11. Peyton Manning is ugly
12. QB A is better than Peyton Manning

And so on. I do enjoy these threads about college QBs and how they directly concern Manning and Brady

yourfavestoner
01-28-2011, 11:22 AM
Dunno if he'll throw at the combine, but Newton has scheduled a throwing workout for the media on February 10.

http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=6066772

Also, he weighs 250 right now with 6% body fat. Not exactly a Jamarcus Russell body type there.

the natural
01-28-2011, 11:47 AM
Umm the only Prick quarterback I know is the one of the Patriots. A choker and a cry baby Brady.

papageorgio I think you should just go back to Greece, or Italy, or wherever, and stick with futbol. You're obviously out of your depth here.

the natural
01-28-2011, 11:50 AM
Dunno if he'll throw at the combine, but Newton has scheduled a throwing workout for the media on February 10.

http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=6066772

Also, he weighs 250 right now with 6% body fat. Not exactly a Jamarcus Russell body type there.

So, who's throwing? Cam, Cecil, or Cecil Jr.? Hard to keep track sometimes. Which of their agents should we contact to attend? Will Brett Favre be there? Is the footage for a movie or straight to television documentary?

JHL6719
01-28-2011, 12:14 PM
So, who's throwing? Cam, Cecil, or Cecil Jr.? Hard to keep track sometimes. Which of their agents should we contact to attend? Will Brett Favre be there? Is the footage for a movie or straight to television documentary?


lol. why does Cam need an agent? i thought Cecil did all Cam's contract negotiations.

Day One Pick
01-28-2011, 12:58 PM
it's incredible that in the span of about three posts, this thread went from interesting and worth reading to whatever you'd call most of the last 30ish posts.

why is anyone talking about brady or manning in a cam newton thread?

It all happened when a Pats fan blindly compared Cam Newton to Jamarcus Russell (because he's black) and said he's stupid (because he's black) and said he has low character (because he's black). One thing led to another.

nepg
01-28-2011, 01:00 PM
It all happened when a Pats fan blindly compared Cam Newton to Jamarcus Russell (because he's black) and said he's stupid (because he's black) and said he has low character (because he's black). One thing led to another.
Hey. Don't say Pats fan. Say who it was. He's not accepted here.

SRogers92
01-28-2011, 02:09 PM
You can say his system doesn't matter all you want ... but -- that's bologna ... scouts take into account a players system all the time ... certain guys will fall big time because of that and it's a legit concern ... particularly run-first QBs in a read/option system which Newton was last year.


Showing High School film to help your "argument" is a joke ... just sayin'.

nepg
01-28-2011, 02:50 PM
You can say his system doesn't matter all you want ... but -- that's bologna ... scouts take into account a players system all the time ... certain guys will fall big time because of that and it's a legit concern ... particularly run-first QBs in a read/option system which Newton was last year.


Showing High School film to help your "argument" is a joke ... just sayin'.
Not it's not. The main thing with Newton as far as that system goes is that his footwork was completely unorthodox. High school film shows that his footwork at Auburn was a product of the system.

Day One Pick
01-28-2011, 03:02 PM
You can say his system doesn't matter all you want ... but -- that's bologna ... scouts take into account a players system all the time ... certain guys will fall big time because of that and it's a legit concern ... particularly run-first QBs in a read/option system which Newton was last year.


Showing High School film to help your "argument" is a joke ... just sayin'.

I only see two legitimate reasons to discredit a quarterback prospect on the grounds of the system he comes from.

One being to discredit inflated stats. Inflated stats on their own aren't necessarily grounds to discredit a prospect. I'm speaking in regards to a prospect like Colt Brennan. Many simply could not understand how he wasn't a highly rated prospect by saying, "look what he did in college."

The second is simply if a QB didn't take snaps under center. Again, this alone isn't grounds to completely write a prospect off.

There was one point brought up in this thread I never put much thought into but I can see how it could carry some weight. It basically spoke of the mentality to take off and run, which falls into the pocket awareness ability. But you don't find too many QB prospects who don't need work in that area coming out of college.

People want to keep refering to "reads" in reference to a prospects system. To me that's just a blind statement. There's not a prospect in this class, any future class, or any past class who enters the NFL knowing how to make NFL reads. Reads aren't based off a system, they are based off an opposing defense. There's not a defense in the NCAA that comes even close to being as complex as an NFL defense. Anything any QB is taught about reads in college goes out the window once they hit the NFL. NFL Offensive coordinators wipe all of that out of a young QB's head from day one and teach them the NFL way.

In regards to Cam Newton, discrediting him because of his system is just the wrong way to evaluate him. If your gut tells you he will be a bust that's fine and a far more legitimate reason for not liking his chances in the NFL. If you don't feel he has the arm, that's a legitimate reason too (although I would have to wonder what you were watching). If you think he lacks the mental ability to succeed, that's fine too but I would have to ask how do you know that.

When I look at him I don't take into consideration his stats, the Heisman Trophy, or any of his other accolades. I first look at his size and say check mark. Then I look at his arm strength and say check mark. I look at his accuracy and say check mark. I look at his history as being a winner and say check mark. I look at him as a leader (based on everything I've heard coaches and teamates say and he gets a check mark there. He just has everything you look for in a quarterback prospect. I'm really beginning to realize many of you don't like him because he doesn't meet your first criteria, that is being a white QB.

I really can't understand how some of you can hate on Cam Newton and then turn around and drool over Jake Locker or Ryan Mallett. It would be fine to like one better than the other, but to feel certain about one's success in the NFL and then completely write off Cam Newton's chances is absurd.

At the end of the day, I see a lot of similarities in Cam Newton and Ben Roethlisberger. I actually think Newton has a stronger arm and is certainly a better runner. I know a lot of you don't see Roethlisberger for who and what he is and likely never will...even when he's enshrined in the Hall of Fame. As a Steelers fan I can sincerely say I wouldn't trade him for a single other QB on the planet.

SRogers92
01-28-2011, 04:42 PM
Did anyone say discredit? Anywhere?

It has to throw up some red flags and concerns ... and it does ... that's why Scouts(who know more than us) take that into consideration immensely ...

Don't show me footage of him balling on 16, 17, and some 18 year olds in high school as vindication that he can be a pocket QB. It means nothing.

FUNBUNCHER
01-28-2011, 04:51 PM
lol. why does Cam need an agent? i thought Cecil did all Cam's contract negotiations.


Keep it in the family. Mob deep.

DBNYDP
01-29-2011, 01:04 PM
did you even read the thread? stop side busting
I did read it but as far as I'm concerned the thread would have functioned without the high school highlight film. It really doesn't have much of a point just because of the level of competition.

Personally I don't like Newton because I have no idea how he is going to do his reads, he floats the ball way to much (despite his arm), some character concerns, and I don't think he is going to be very poised in the pocket against "NFL" competition.
At the end of the day my gut tells me he is going to bust.

Iamcanadian
01-29-2011, 01:57 PM
I don't think pro scouts and GM's care a whole lot about which system a QB plays in. All you heard last year was Bradford is just a system QB and will have great difficulty adjusting to the pro game.
What they care about is a QB's arm, his intelligence, his accuracy, whether he will work hard to learn his trade, his pocket presence, ability to read defenses and his mental toughness under stress. There are other issues as well but if he can show the above traits, they don't care what system he came from, it wouldn't effect his draft status one bit.
Sure, Newton will have to demonstrate at his pro day and during team workouts and interviews that he has enough of those traits to become a solid NFL QB, because right now all they can see on film is he throws to his primary receiver or takes off running. The scouts and GM will have to decide if he can adjust and if the answer is a positive yes, he will move up big time, if it is no, he will drop. End of story.

PrimetimeTheDon
01-31-2011, 12:22 AM
I would not draft a quarterback with his character concerns in the first round. He will bust.

nepg
01-31-2011, 12:34 AM
He doesn't really have any character concerns. By all accounts, he's a great person and a very good leader.

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 04:42 AM
I would not draft a quarterback with his character concerns in the first round. He will bust.

Can you explain to me what these character issues are on Cam Newton. Thanks in advance.

EvilNixon
01-31-2011, 07:59 AM
Why not just say black instead of character concerns? It makes the arguments much less cluttered.

EvilNixon
01-31-2011, 10:24 AM
How is allegedly taking money a character concern?

yourfavestoner
01-31-2011, 10:35 AM
If I was an NFL GM, I'd be more concerned with what happened at Florida than what happened at Auburn.

RealityCheck
01-31-2011, 10:59 AM
Why not just say black instead of character concerns? It makes the arguments much less cluttered.
No because Josh Freeman, Michael Vick and Donovan McNabb are all black and they are all great QBs (were on McNabb's case) with great characters.

Vick had the dog fights and all, but he's changed.

SolidGold
01-31-2011, 11:04 AM
Why not just say black instead of character concerns? It makes the arguments much less cluttered.

I wasn't aware Ryan Mallet was black...one of his weaknesses are his character concerns too

Babylon
01-31-2011, 11:23 AM
Newton is supposedly going to put on some kind of media workout before the combine (no scouts allowed per rules). Some might see this as a publicity stunt, like me.

SolidGold
01-31-2011, 11:28 AM
I saw that too Babylon. Sounds like its a Cecil Newton idea. Also is this really Cam Newton's twitter: http://twitter.com/cameronnewton

Babylon
01-31-2011, 11:33 AM
I saw that too Babylon. Sounds like its a Cecil Newton idea. Also is this really Cam Newton's twitter: http://twitter.com/cameronnewton

If those are his tweeters (whatever they call them) then you have to wonder about this guy. Granted you dont have to be a choir boy or the brightest guy in the world to play QB but you'd like to see the face of your franchise have some class.

As for a lot of this stuff being blamed on his dad i'd say the kid needs to take some ownership.

RealityCheck
01-31-2011, 11:41 AM
That's not Cam Newton. His tweets would be like:

@TimTebow lol u mad brah u not cam newton dood?lolz

Just like Marvin Austin's were last year.

A Perfect Score
01-31-2011, 11:41 AM
Why not just say black instead of character concerns? It makes the arguments much less cluttered.

This is beyond stupid: It wouldn't matter if Newton was black, white, red or yellow, the concerns over his past would be justified in every single case. It's **** like this that gets threads locked and the complete inability to carry on a coherent argument without resorting to playing the race card is honestly quite sad. In fact, I'd venture to say it makes the person drawing attention to it far more susceptible to being called a "racist" then the person who said he had character concerns. Anyone attempting to deny that Newton's past is checkered or NFL GMs won't be asking all sorts of questions about his wrongdoings is sorely mistaken: it's going to be a hot topic in his interviews...teams don't want another Reggie Bush situation where in 3 years it turns out his Dad had all the money buried in the basement of his church and Newton is stripped of his Heisman and NC. You can bet your ass he's got character concerns at this point.

Babylon
01-31-2011, 11:53 AM
This is beyond stupid: It wouldn't matter if Newton was black, white, red or yellow, the concerns over his past would be justified in every single case. It's **** like this that gets threads locked and the complete inability to carry on a coherent argument without resorting to playing the race card is honestly quite sad. In fact, I'd venture to say it makes the person drawing attention to it far more susceptible to being called a "racist" then the person who said he had character concerns. Anyone attempting to deny that Newton's past is checkered or NFL GMs won't be asking all sorts of questions about his wrongdoings is sorely mistaken: it's going to be a hot topic in his interviews...teams don't want another Reggie Bush situation where in 3 years it turns out his Dad had all the money buried in the basement of his church and Newton is stripped of his Heisman and NC. You can bet your ass he's got character concerns at this point.

FWIW Ryan Mallett is dealing with character issues too.

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 12:06 PM
i'm pretty sure they've been discussed ad nauseum in every other cam newton thread. the fact that you clearly don't see them as concerns doesn't mean they aren't concerns to others.



and it's a lie. 'let's see... i'm too ******* stupid to make a coherent counter argument regarding those character concerns, but if i call the person a racist, i win by default!'

******* pathetic.

So you are saying the laptop and the alleged $100-180K are the things people are refering to when they say Cam Newton has character concerns?

If that's the case, let me ask you a couple questions.

1. If you were offered a new laptop for $100 would you buy it?

2. Would you turn down $100K cash money + a full scholarship to attend a particular school?

3. If you answered yes to those two questions, would it be fair to say you had poor character?

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 12:11 PM
This is beyond stupid: It wouldn't matter if Newton was black, white, red or yellow, the concerns over his past would be justified in every single case. It's **** like this that gets threads locked and the complete inability to carry on a coherent argument without resorting to playing the race card is honestly quite sad. In fact, I'd venture to say it makes the person drawing attention to it far more susceptible to being called a "racist" then the person who said he had character concerns. Anyone attempting to deny that Newton's past is checkered or NFL GMs won't be asking all sorts of questions about his wrongdoings is sorely mistaken: it's going to be a hot topic in his interviews...teams don't want another Reggie Bush situation where in 3 years it turns out his Dad had all the money buried in the basement of his church and Newton is stripped of his Heisman and NC. You can bet your ass he's got character concerns at this point.

Is Reggie Bush a man of poor character?

FUNBUNCHER
01-31-2011, 12:27 PM
Taking money (allegedly or in fact) is NOT a character concern for NFL GMs.
Cheating on tests in college, yes to a slightly greater degree.

Receiving money to play football as an undergrad, or, acting like a 'pro' while still in college, is meaningless to an NFL team and always has been IMO.

Don't you think every NFL team knew the inside story on the Reggie Bush fiasco at So Cal??
How much digging around does it take for an NFL private investigator to find out Bush's parents were living in a house that neither they nor Reggie paid for??
Still was the 2nd overall pick.

Typically GMs care about how a player conducts himself off the football field; is this someone who has multiple run-ins with law enforcement, is a heavy drinker, recreational drug user, etc., is he the type of player who routinely 'butts heads' with his coaches and teammates?

But I do agree this private media workout is a Poppa Newton brain-storm and may be one of many examples that Cam's father is going to be the biggest drag on Newton's career on and off the field.

When your dad thinks he's an agent/coach/PR exec AND a preacher, God help the son.

EDIT: BTW, if I was still a college freshman and a 'friend' of mine offered to sell me a new Dell laptop for $100, I'm making that deal tomorrow.

ElectricEye
01-31-2011, 12:40 PM
I'm not sure that laptop is worth the risk as a college student, let alone an NFL prospect. I wouldn't want to expose myself to the risks associated with buying a stolen laptop.

Babylon
01-31-2011, 01:42 PM
so, if you were a top prospect with a solid chance of going to the nfl, you would risk all of that on a laptop? are you serious?

i don't even know what to say. that's just stupid.

Your implying that top recruits/college stars/QBs need to hold themselves to a differant standard is spot on.

I dont think anyone here is saying Newton is a bad guy but when you add up all the questionable moves and who he surrounds himself with then you're creating an environment that teams are going to have to look at.

yourfavestoner
01-31-2011, 02:33 PM
I think it should be noted that the racism argument stems purely from RealityCheck comparing him to Jamarcus Russell, when the two don't really share any similar qualities besides their size and color.

As far as character concerns go, I would agree that when there's this much smoke, there's fire somewhere. My opinion is that most character concerns are completely overblown to begin with.

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 02:59 PM
if i was a top recruit who was hoping for an nfl payday? not a chance. only an idiot would chance his college career on something like that.



see above.



it would indicate to me that, at best, you're braindead.

do you think he's an exemplary citizen for breaking rules that every college athlete is expected to abide by, and which could very easily have resulted in his inability to play in college and thus, the nfl?



strawman. poor character is not the same as having character concerns.

Forget the part about being a top recruit. You being the person you are, would you buy a brand new laptop for $100 if offered?

FUNBUNCHER
01-31-2011, 03:35 PM
so, if you were a top prospect with a solid chance of going to the nfl, you would risk all of that on a laptop? are you serious?

i don't even know what to say. that's just stupid.

That's right. It is. And it happened when Cam Newton was a college freshman at Florida.

I don't think it's fair to continue to rake the guy over the coals for something he did as an 18-19 year old.
As a freshman, I also filled a squeeze bottle half full of grain alcohol and half full with OJ and proceeded to attempt to drink the whole damn thing in 3 hours before passing out in the common area of a friend's dorm and having EMT called to revive me.

IMO Cam Newton is NOT the same person he was as a frosh at UF, and to hold him accountable for every infraction he committed in one year at Florida is beyond unreasonable.
Cam's biggest problem going forward I still believe is Newton Sr.

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 03:59 PM
what does that have to do with anything? i'm not in the same position as a top quarterback, therefore, whether or not i personally have character concerns is irrelevant. further, i run no risk of being thrown out of the ncaa forever if i try to cheat the system.

a comparison between an apple and an orange isn't really relevant.

So you're saying it's ok for you and average joe to display poor character, but it's not ok for a college athlete? I'm sure you either have a job or one day hope to have a job. If you were to get caught receiving stolen property it could damage you in whatever career you are in or intend to be in. That's the point.

I also find it hard to believe that under any circumstance outside of facing possible jail time you would be able to turn down $100K.

senormysterioso
01-31-2011, 04:17 PM
I'm so sick of that BS catchall, "character concerns". I would guess (conservatively) that about 70% of all pro athletes are complete assholes with few, if any, redeemable qualities. Ray Lewis is always talked about as "the consummate professional" and the best leader on the defensive side of the ball and "a coaches dream", and we all know what kind of a guy he is. Who Cares! Especially with Newton. All of his alleged improprieties revolve around money...guess what, he's not going to be needing pay offs from boosters or black market laptops when he's making $6.5 million a year. As long as the guy can play football within the framework of a team, that's good enough for me.

You guys can have Ghandi and Mother Theresa on your team, I'll take Ray Lewis and Lawrence Taylor.

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 04:32 PM
I'm so sick of that BS catchall, "character concerns". I would guess (conservatively) that about 70% of all pro athletes are complete assholes with few, if any, redeemable qualities. Ray Lewis is always talked about as "the consummate professional" and the best leader on the defensive side of the ball and "a coaches dream", and we all know what kind of a guy he is. Who Cares! Especially with Newton. All of his alleged improprieties revolve around money...guess what, he's not going to be needing pay offs from boosters or black market laptops when he's making $6.5 million a year. As long as the guy can play football within the framework of a team, that's good enough for me.

You guys can have Ghandi and Mother Theresa on your team, I'll take Ray Lewis and Lawrence Taylor.

I like how you worded that by saying catchall, because that's exactly how I see it as well. People hear these fancy words related to the draft and blindly throw them all over the place.

I can honestly say I could care less about a player taking money or improper benefits while in school. They all do it, just not many get caught. More get caught now because of all the modern day technology, but I'm certain it's still a very small percentage.

The only "character issue" I care about are the guys who can't stay out of trouble with the law.

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 04:43 PM
except that it couldn't have in college. and again, let's stop with the poor character strawman. it's ridiculous.

if someone offered me a $100 laptop now, that wasn't an OLPC, i'd assume it was stolen property and i *wouldn't* touch it. otoh, i'm not a moron.



i don't really care what you believe. i wouldn't have risked what, at the time, was looking like hundreds of times more guaranteed money a few years later for the potential to be kicked out of division 1 football entirely. it seems silly, at best, to suggest that every football player would do something that stupid.

Sorry, I don't know you but I call b.s...

So you've never done anything in your life that was wrong and you were glad you didn't get caught?

Either way, Cam Newton isn't a menace to society. He's not somebody who has been in trouble time and time again. For anyone to say he has character issues is just blindly labeling him. I realize that's what the media does for the sake of getting a story, but most should be subjective enough not to buy into that. NFL teams won't come away feeling he someone of low character and at the end of the day that's the only thing that pertains to a conversation in this forum.

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 04:57 PM
again, this has nothing to do with anything. i'm not a potential top player in the ncaa with a legitimate shot at playing in the nfl. i was a one year, 1aa player, majoring in comp sci. you're comparing apples and polar bears.



ooh, can i play?

cam newton is clearly an idiot. he makes bad decision after bad decision. anyone who says he doesn't have character issues is clearly a blind apologist who probably wouldn't care if he spent 24 hours a day beating children.

ad homming the **** out of a discussion is lame.



i'm glad that's your opinion. someone remind me, was jimmy clausen a menace to society? what about marcus thomas?

I don't understand much of what you say.

Jimmy Clausen is/was an immature kid who can't be a leader, that's his issue.

Marcus Thomas falls under the category of those who can't stay out of trouble.

Day One Pick
01-31-2011, 05:07 PM
which part should i explain? all of it should be fairly clear.



and cam newton (allegedly) makes poor off-field decisions. i fail to see why you think that should be dismissed out of hand, or why you think it's ridiculous that anyone would call that a character concern.

Here's one

ad homming the **** out of a discussion is lame.

Call it poor off the field decisions, 2 that we know of at most. Both had to do with money which won't be a problem for him ever again. The laptop thing was when he was 19. Teams will care about his on the field decision making. Remember this conversation all started in regards to his draft stock.

brat316
01-31-2011, 08:16 PM
I think he wants to by hyped up like Tebow. Tebow changed is mechanics and we all saw video on him. So Cam is trying to do the same.

wogitalia
01-31-2011, 08:49 PM
I actually like Cam's physical tools. It's the mental stuff that makes me not want him.

There just aren't a lot of guys that have his track record that end up being great pros and at the most important position that is kind of a big deal. Cam is basically a 1st round prospect physically and UDFA mentally. I have no doubt that there is a team out there that will grade him purely on the physical side of things and I also have no doubt there will be several teams that will grade purely on the mental.

In many ways he is a very similar prospect to Jimmy Clausen last year. A couple of questions physically but nothing to stop him being a 1st rounder and a hell of a lot of mental questions.

TACKLE
01-31-2011, 08:58 PM
In many ways he is a very similar prospect to Jimmy Clausen last year. A couple of questions physically but nothing to stop him being a 1st rounder and a hell of a lot of mental questions.

I don't see this whatsoever. In many ways, they are the exact opposite.

PrimetimeTheDon
02-01-2011, 08:09 AM
Was my post deleted? My thoughts are I would not take a QB with this kind of tangible character history in the first round. He will get the money, then he will bust.

Hell of a talent. But so was JaMarcus. The QB position isn't about measurables at the NFL level.

Day One Pick
02-01-2011, 08:38 AM
Was my post deleted? My thoughts are I would not take a QB with this kind of tangible character history in the first round. He will get the money, then he will bust.

Hell of a talent. But so was JaMarcus. The QB position isn't about measurables at the NFL level.


Jamarcus Russell was a bust because he had/has a terrible work ethic. There is zero evidence that Cam Newton has work ethic issues. In fact, everything I know about him says the opposite.

Jamarcus Russell was/is not a leader. Have you ever heard Newton's current and past coaches and teamates talk about the type of leader he is? I have, and all indications are that he's a great leader.

Yet another Jamarcus Russell comparison...

Matthew Jones
02-01-2011, 08:52 AM
The main concern I have with Newton isn't "will he steal someone else's laptop once I draft this guy?", it's "will he care about putting in the work necessary to become an NFL quarterback once I pay this guy millions of dollars?" Money changes people. It's not all about talent or capability, it's about getting a return on an extremely high-risk investment. Is drafting Newton at the top of the draft a smart idea? That's for NFL teams to decide based on their interviews, evaluations, etc., but I'd certainly be wary of handing this guy a $40 million contract.

Day One Pick
02-01-2011, 09:15 AM
The main concern I have with Newton isn't "will he steal someone else's laptop once I draft this guy?", it's "will he care about putting in the work necessary to become an NFL quarterback once I pay this guy millions of dollars?" Money changes people. It's not all about talent or capability, it's about getting a return on an extremely high-risk investment. Is drafting Newton at the top of the draft a smart idea? That's for NFL teams to decide based on their interviews, evaluations, etc., but I'd certainly be wary of handing this guy a $40 million contract.

How someone handles having money is an issue for all 256 players who get drafted this year. That's always a concern and IMO the single biggest thing that separates a star from a bust. Why is that a bigger concern for Cam Newton than it is for a guy like Jake Locker? Remember...most feel Newton's had some money in his pocket for some time and he just won a National Championship.

AntoinCD
02-01-2011, 09:34 AM
How someone handles having money is an issue for all 256 players who get drafted this year. That's always a concern and IMO the single biggest thing that separates a star from a bust. Why is that a bigger concern for Cam Newton than it is for a guy like Jake Locker? Remember...most feel Newton's had some money in his pocket for some time and he just won a National Championship.

I think when it comes to evaluating a prospect and how you believe he will act when given a huge contract it's not about whether they have had money or money issues before etc. It's a maturity question. Jake Locker has shown nothing to anyone that would suggest he doesnt have the maturity to handle a multimillion dollar contract. Newton has had maturity issues in the past which, directly linked to money or not should be brought up in his evaluation. Some teams may not be 100% comfortable in giving the guy a major contract in the same way they would a guy who has shown no prior behaviour to indicate a lack of maturity.

Day One Pick
02-01-2011, 09:43 AM
I think when it comes to evaluating a prospect and how you believe he will act when given a huge contract it's not about whether they have had money or money issues before etc. It's a maturity question. Jake Locker has shown nothing to anyone that would suggest he doesnt have the maturity to handle a multimillion dollar contract. Newton has had maturity issues in the past which, directly linked to money or not should be brought up in his evaluation. Some teams may not be 100% comfortable in giving the guy a major contract in the same way they would a guy who has shown no prior behaviour to indicate a lack of maturity.

I can spin that another direction for the sake of conversation. Jake Locker wasn't ready to give up the college life last year to enter the NFL even though he was projected to be a high draft pick. He took a huge gamble/risk by returning to school, similar to what Matt Leinart did when he would have been the top pick. Matt Leinart's biggest problem once in the NFL was juggling his preparation and his non football life. Some would say Locker made a bad decision by returning to school. I know that's how many of you here felt when he decided to return for his senior year. The masses deemed that a mistake.

If anything, not having money was what made Cam Newton make these mistakes he made.

Are you 100% sure Jake Locker wasn't paid or didn't receive any unproper benefits while at Washington?

AntoinCD
02-01-2011, 09:50 AM
I can spin that another direction for the sake of conversation. Jake Locker wasn't ready to give up the college life last year to enter the NFL even though he was projected to be a high draft pick. He took a huge gamble/risk by returning to school, similar to what Matt Leinart did when he would have been the top pick. Matt Leinart's biggest problem once in the NFL was juggling his preparation and his non football life. Some would say Locker made a bad decision by returning to school. I know that's how many of you here felt when he decided to return for his senior year. The masses deemed that a mistake.

If anything, not having money was what made Cam Newton make these mistakes he made.

Are you 100% sure Jake Locker wasn't paid or didn't receive any unproper benefits while at Washington?

Or you could argue that Jake Locker wasn't happy with the alleged 2nd round draft grade he received and went back for his senior year to improve his stock, obviously this hasn't happened but it doesn't mean it wasn't his thought process.

Day One Pick
02-01-2011, 09:54 AM
Or you could argue that Jake Locker wasn't happy with the alleged 2nd round draft grade he received and went back for his senior year to improve his stock, obviously this hasn't happened but it doesn't mean it wasn't his thought process.

First of all, as you said it was an alleged 2nd round grade. I think his stock was certainly higher last year than it is now.

Of all the reason's he stayed in school, I don't recall hearing his draft stock being one of them.

AntoinCD
02-01-2011, 10:15 AM
First of all, as you said it was an alleged 2nd round grade. I think his stock was certainly higher last year than it is now.

Of all the reason's he stayed in school, I don't recall hearing his draft stock being one of them.

It was almost definitely higher but if he felt he could come back and be almost gauranteed to go #1 overall then he had every reason to go back, especially if the information he was given indicated he wouldn't go high last year. Plus Locker's stock was never truely indicative of the draft process as he didn't declare and come under more scrutiny. Remember last December/early January Jake Locker was certain to go #1 overall and Sam Bradford was going to fall into the 20s on draft sites.

Jimmy Clausen is more evidence to this point. You would struggle to find a mock draft anywhere this time last year that had Clausen falling out of the top ten, let alone to the second round. However with further evaluation etc he started to slip.

And for a guy like Locker who was projected highly based on potential and what progress he made he may not have been comfortable entering the draft without the film to back it up.

Day One Pick
02-01-2011, 10:18 AM
It was almost definitely higher but if he felt he could come back and be almost gauranteed to go #1 overall then he had every reason to go back, especially if the information he was given indicated he wouldn't go high last year. Plus Locker's stock was never truely indicative of the draft process as he didn't declare and come under more scrutiny. Remember last December/early January Jake Locker was certain to go #1 overall and Sam Bradford was going to fall into the 20s on draft sites.

Jimmy Clausen is more evidence to this point. You would struggle to find a mock draft anywhere this time last year that had Clausen falling out of the top ten, let alone to the second round. However with further evaluation etc he started to slip.

And for a guy like Locker who was projected highly based on potential and what progress he made he may not have been comfortable entering the draft without the film to back it up.

We have to believe Locker went back to school for all the reason's he stated, not because of his draft stock.

I never one time ranked Clausen any higher than about 35th overall for the record.

AntoinCD
02-01-2011, 10:39 AM
We have to believe Locker went back to school for all the reason's he stated, not because of his draft stock.

I never one time ranked Clausen any higher than about 35th overall for the record.

And you were in the vast, vast minority at this point last year. And you have to believe that a lot of the reason he fell was his attitude, not something that would have affected Locker.

I don't know why Locker returned to school, but I don't recall anyone having any issues about his maturity, and back to the point ROP was making that will be the issue with Newton when a team decides whether or not to give him so many million guaranteed.

Day One Pick
02-01-2011, 11:00 AM
And you were in the vast, vast minority at this point last year. And you have to believe that a lot of the reason he fell was his attitude, not something that would have affected Locker.

I don't know why Locker returned to school, but I don't recall anyone having any issues about his maturity, and back to the point ROP was making that will be the issue with Newton when a team decides whether or not to give him so many million guaranteed.

I'm not speaking on terms of Locker's maturity, I'm referencing his decision making. I don't think there's any question that in regards to Locker's draft stock and in the end money in his pocket he made a poor decision. He took a big risk by returning and it appears it didn't pay off.

Isn't it two poor decisions and/or risks on Cam Newton's part (2 if you don't buy his story about the money) that have caused people to question his character? I don't feel "character" is even the proper term to use. Character is defined as, "an evaluation of a particular individual's moral qualities." This term is more fitting for someone who can't stay out of trouble (as it pertains to draft talk).

Ryan Mallet is deemed a player who makes poor decisions on the field. Jake Locker made a poor decision going back to school, and Cam Newton made a poor decision buying a stolen laptop. In his own words he calls it a poor decision.

People have come in this thread and compared Newton to Jamarcus Russell, said he's stupid, questioned his work ethic, questioned his leadership, and most of all questioned his character. I just don't understand why. Most of all I don't understand why all the QB prospects aren't being scrutinized the same way.

Babylon
02-01-2011, 11:24 AM
I'm not speaking on terms of Locker's maturity, I'm referencing his decision making. I don't think there's any question that in regards to Locker's draft stock and in the end money in his pocket he made a poor decision. He took a big risk by returning and it appears it didn't pay off.

Isn't it two poor decisions and/or risks on Cam Newton's part (2 if you don't buy his story about the money) that have caused people to question his character? I don't feel "character" is even the proper term to use. Character is defined as, "an evaluation of a particular individual's moral qualities." This term is more fitting for someone who can't stay out of trouble (as it pertains to draft talk).

Ryan Mallet is deemed a player who makes poor decisions on the field. Jake Locker made a poor decision going back to school, and Cam Newton made a poor decision buying a stolen laptop. In his own words he calls it a poor decision.

People have come in this thread and compared Newton to Jamarcus Russell, said he's stupid, questioned his work ethic, questioned his leadership, and most of all questioned his character. I just don't understand why. Most of all I don't understand why all the QB prospects aren't being scrutinized the same way.

Want to add a few comments here.

Locker has never taken any money either leading up to his time with the UW or while he's been there, i have enough friends involved with the program that i would have heard if he had.

Locker also made his decision to stay before he got any result back from the advisory board. We arent sure where he would have gone in the draft last year and we dont know where he will go this year, it may be a fact that he might go higher this year than last.

To include Mallett and Locker in the poor decision converstation with Newton is really comparing apples to oranges and not really fair to the other two guys although we could probably include Mallett in any character conversation (for off the field stuff) and i'm sure we will.

senormysterioso
02-01-2011, 11:36 AM
Want to add a few comments here.

Locker has never taken any money either leading up to his time with the UW or while he's been there, i have enough friends involved with the program that i would have heard if he had.

Locker also made his decision to stay before he got any result back from the advisory board. We arent sure where he would have gone in the draft last year and we dont know where he will go this year, it may be a fact that he might go higher this year than last.

To include Mallett and Locker in the poor decision converstation with Newton is really comparing apples to oranges and not really fair to the other two guys although we could probably include Mallett in any character conversation (for off the field stuff) and i'm sure we will.

Locker signed a minor league contract with the Angels that paid him pretty handsomely early on in his college career, didn't he? Somehow that contract was set up in a way that allowed him to inexplicably retain his amateur status. The rules are so convoluted and backwards I really can't fault these kids for falling into these traps. Why can't AJ Green or Terrell Prior sell things that belong to them? Why can Jake Locker get paid a 1/4 million dollars by the Angles for the right to someday possibly have him in their system, but Enes Kanter can't play for Kentucky because he was paid to actually play in Europe.

The whole amateur status thing is a system of malum prohibitum, with very little if any malum in se.

Babylon
02-01-2011, 11:51 AM
Locker signed a minor league contract with the Angels that paid him pretty handsomely early on in his college career, didn't he? Somehow that contract was set up in a way that allowed him to inexplicably retain his amateur status. The rules are so convoluted and backwards I really can't fault these kids for falling into these traps. Why can't AJ Green or Terrell Prior sell things that belong to them? Why can Jake Locker get paid a 1/4 million dollars by the Angles for the right to someday possibly have him in their system, but Enes Kanter can't play for Kentucky because he was paid to actually play in Europe.

The whole amateur status thing is a system of malum prohibitum, with very little if any malum in se.

I'm not sure i'd disagree with any of your assertions here, by the way Locker was drafted by the Angels in june, (at end of his junior year) and signed in August of that year, not sure if that would be classified as early on in his career. On a sidenote maybe having that 300k may have also factored into his "poor decision" to stay for his senior year.

Whether we like the rules or not they are pretty spelled out for these guys.