ESPN Say's Newton To Enter Draft

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 30gut

I think I'll let Mayock himself clear up the next portion of your post:



Talent is exactly why Cam has 1st round ability.
Cam Newton looking purely at a talent perspective like you suggest is easily a top pick.
If you can honestly look at Newton and not see or understand his raw talent you might not understand what you're looking at.

After all the bluster of your post my point remains:

Your point doesn't remain. If that's the case, Olympic athletes have 1st round talent to be a WR/OL/DL. Why aren't they drafted? Maybe because of ..I dunno...OTHER FACTORS?? Mayock even said that he himself would NOT take him in the first round (the same with JaMarcus R.) based off the other factors. He's a first round talent in terms of of being a incredible athlete and potential, but he's not a 1st round talent in terms of a polished QB. Does that mean nobody is going to take him? Sure there will be, just like the Raiders took JaMarcus Russell with the first pick. Idiots will always be lured by that "shiny diamond" that always ends up being a polished turd.

There is nothing he's done so far that can translate well to the NFL. Shotgun formations? One read and go offense? Running more than he passes? One year in college football? If you are trying to convince me of his "upside" and "potential" to be a great QB, then you are wasting your time. I know he has all the "potential" and "upside" there is in a QB. I've also gone on record saying that the first round isn't the place you take "projects" either, and that the person being drafted in the 1st round are generally projected day 1 starters. Do you see Cam Newton as a day 1 starter? I sure as hell don't. More like a project who'll need 1-3 years at best.


Also, Bruce Campbell was a slated 1st round "talent" to be a dominate LT in the NFL, yet he didn't go till the 4th round. Why is that? It's because teams don't want to waste a 1st round pick on a project who isn't going to help the team immediately.

[cdskins26]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Your point doesn't remain. If that's the case, Olympic athletes have 1st round talent to be a WR/OL/DL. Why aren't they drafted? Maybe because of ..I dunno...OTHER FACTORS?? Mayock even said that he himself would NOT take him in the first round (the same with JaMarcus R.) based off the other factors. He's a first round talent in terms of of being a incredible athlete and potential, but he's not a 1st round talent in terms of a polished QB. Does that mean nobody is going to take him? Sure there will be, just like the Raiders took JaMarcus Russell with the first pick. Idiots will always be lured by that "shiny diamond" that always ends up being a polished turd.

There is nothing he's done so far that can translate well to the NFL. Shotgun formations? One read and go offense? Running more than he passes? One year in college football? If you are trying to convince me of his "upside" and "potential" to be a great QB, then you are wasting your time. I know he has all the "potential" and "upside" there is in a QB. I've also gone on record saying that the first round isn't the place you take "projects" either, and that the person being drafted in the 1st round are generally projected day 1 starters. Do you see Cam Newton as a day 1 starter? I sure as hell don't. More like a project who'll need 1-3 years at best.


Also, Bruce Campbell was a slated 1st round "talent" to be a dominate LT in the NFL, yet he didn't go till the 4th round. Why is that? It's because teams don't want to waste a 1st round pick on a project who isn't going to help the team immediately.

While this is true, he also had a horrible pro day or combine. He had rumored problems with his reflexes and such. The real difference though, is by position. Quarterback is one of the few positions where a best-case scenario means that he isn't playing in his rookie season. When a team is drafting their future LT in the first 20 or so selections, they most likely need him to be able to step into the fire right away.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Your point doesn't remain.

Its almost universally accepted that Cam Newton possesses 1st round talent.
(The almost being you)

Mayock even said that he himself would NOT take him in the first round

B.S.
Find a quote where Mayock has said that.

He's a first round talent in terms of of being a incredible athlete and potential, but he's not a 1st round talent in terms of a polished QB.

You realize now that you have just changed your position?
From 'not a 1st round talent' to '1st round talent in terms of a polished QB'

If you are trying to convince me of his "upside" and "potential" to be a great QB, then you are wasting your time.

I'm not trying to convince you anything.
You decided to challenge the following fairly obvious statement:

Originally Posted by 30gut

I think if people are honest with themselves its kinda obvious that Cam Newton is a first round talent.
But, at the same time being talented does not guarantee success for Newton or for anybody else.

Do you see Cam Newton as a day 1 starter? I sure as hell don't. More like a project who'll need 1-3 years at best.

I think it would be best for Cam to sit at least til midway through the season.

But, could he be a day 1 starter? Depends on where he goes, their OC, the talent on offense and their opening game schedule.

I think its also important to note that Gil Brandt thinks Cam Newton should be the top pick in the draft.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 30gut

You realize now that you have just changed your position?
From 'not a 1st round talent' to '1st round talent in terms of a polished QB'

I haven't changed anything. When I said "he's a first round grade based of being a great athlete and potential", I wasn't saying I thought he was. That's why the other draft pundits have him listed. It's also why they had Bruce Campbell listed so high as even going in the top 10. Why? All because of the "potential" and "upside".

Those are two of the worst words you want to hear about a draft prospect in the first round. The words you want to mostly hear are "immediate impact". So in conclusion, if you are ranking a 1st round grade on a kid based on "potential" and "upside" instead of polished products, then chances are you are going to blow your pick and set your team back 3-5 years.

Notice teams like the Patriots don't take "projects" like those of Cam Newton in their drafts? You see the Oakland Raiders doing it constantly (beyward-hey, russell, gallery) and how has it worked out for them?

Goes back to my point that you don't draft projects (that huge) in the first round, and somebody with as many flags as he is has to be considered a "project".

At this point, we will agree to disagree, but I'll leave it with this. If any team drafts him in the first round expecting him to make a immediate impact, then they will be set back years. This kid is going to fall flat on his face. The reg flags are there, and stupid teams will ignore them.

1) Character issues
2) Questionable intelligence (cheating verifies this)
3) No experience in reading defenses
4) No experience in pro-style offense or taking snaps from center
5) Accuracy issues
6) Footwork issues
7) Dedication to football questioned (he's a entertainer per his words)


1) big arm
2) great athelete


Yup, I'd say the bad outweighs the good by a huge margin.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I haven't changed anything. When I said "he's a first round grade based of being a great athlete and potential", I wasn't saying I thought he was. That's why the other draft pundits have him listed. It's also why they had Bruce Campbell listed so high as even going in the top 10. Why? All because of the "potential" and "upside".

Those are two of the worst words you want to hear about a draft prospect in the first round. The words you want to mostly hear are "immediate impact". So in conclusion, if you are ranking a 1st round grade on a kid based on "potential" and "upside" instead of polished products, then chances are you are going to blow your pick and set your team back 3-5 years.

Notice teams like the Patriots don't take "projects" like those of Cam Newton in their drafts? You see the Oakland Raiders doing it constantly (beyward-hey, russell, gallery) and how has it worked out for them?

Goes back to my point that you don't draft projects (that huge) in the first round, and somebody with as many flags as he is has to be considered a "project".

At this point, we will agree to disagree, but I'll leave it with this. If any team drafts him in the first round expecting him to make a immediate impact, then they will be set back years. This kid is going to fall flat on his face. The reg flags are there, and stupid teams will ignore them.

1) Character issues
2) Questionable intelligence (cheating verifies this)
3) No experience in reading defenses
4) No experience in pro-style offense or taking snaps from center
5) Accuracy issues
6) Footwork issues
7) Dedication to football questioned (he's a entertainer per his words)


1) big arm
2) great athelete


Yup, I'd say the bad outweighs the good by a huge margin.

Well we know who you dont want to draft

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Vinny said he wouldn't draft Cam, so that means we should definitely draft him.

The problem with Vinny is he took to many "high risk" selections in the second round two years ago. Kelly and Thomas were both "high risk" selections with one being a project the other being injury prone. They both slid to the 2nd round after draft pundits had them slated for 1st round. Taking 1 risk should have been enough, but taking two high risks with the 3 picks was foolish. Most of the picks have been decent in regards to actual talent. I do disagree with him 100% about Jimmy Clausen though. I think he lets the Notre Dame ties influence his judgment.

Devin Thomas is another one of those "projects" that mock drafters had going in the first round with all that "potential" and "upside" at WR. We see how that's worked out.

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Well we know who you dont want to draft

Don't get me wrong, I'm not high on any of the QBs this year. I think Locker would be our best fit for the type of player he is, but I don't think he's worth a #10 selection. That said, he's proved more than Cam Newton ever has (on and off the field).

[30gut]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I haven't changed anything. When I said "he's a first round grade based of being a great athlete and potential", I wasn't saying I thought he was. That's why the other draft pundits have him listed. It's also why they had Bruce Campbell listed so high as even going in the top 10. Why? All because of the "potential" and "upside".

Blah, Blah, Blah
Stop. You're arguing with yourself.
None of your back pedalling and switching arguments changes the facts.

Cam Newton has 1st round talent; if you can't see that or understand that there's no way I can explain it to you.

The rest of your post just takes a long winded route of saying the exact same thing I said in my original post that in your haste to disagree with the first statement apparently didn't bother to read:

Originally Posted by 30gut

I think if people are honest with themselves its kinda obvious that Cam Newton is a first round talent.
But, at the same time being talented does not guarantee success for Newton or for anybody else.

Originally Posted by You

....................This kid is going to fall flat on his face.

Thanks, that's nice to know.
Predicting that any NFL prospect will fail is always the safe side. Afterall we're talking about the NFL the failure rate will always be high regardless of draft position.
You're not exactly going out on a limb when you predict a prospect will fail.

HTTR!