Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Newton Game Tape...from Westlake HS

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Newton Game Tape...from Westlake HS

    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



  • #2
    Playing against 17 year old teenagers. Irrelevant when scouting an NFL prospect.

    Comment


    • #3
      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.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Day One Pick View Post
        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.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by yourfavestoner View Post
          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.

          sig by BoneKrusher

          PACKERS BADGERS BREWERS BUCKS

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by senormysterioso View Post
            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.

            Comment


            • #7
              Jake Locker raawwwr

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by senormysterioso View Post
                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.
                Last edited by yourfavestoner; 01-27-2011, 01:20 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bhaarat316 View Post
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    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.
                    Originally posted by Mr. Goosemahn
                    The APS is strong in this one.
                    Originally posted by killxswitch
                    Tears for Fears is better than whatever it is you happen to be thinking about right now.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by A Perfect Score View Post
                      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.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by senormysterioso View Post
                        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.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by A Perfect Score View Post
                          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.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Day One Pick View Post
                            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!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Day One Pick View Post
                              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.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information