Revisiting The Evaluation Of Cam

by Derek Leazer on Jan 6, 2012 12:44 AM EST

Accuracy, arm strength, poise in the pocket, manipulation of the pocket, intelligence, work ethic, and leadership are all points of emphasis that scouts, general managers, and coaches use to evaluate the quarterbacks that they are looking to possibly draft. This is nothing new to me or you, but I was thinking about something recently concerning today's NFL quarterbacks that I thought I would share with my CSR friends. All of the quarterbacks listed below in group 1 have one thing in common as does group 2. Can you guess what that is? Before you join me after the jump, think about it for a moment, and then see if you got it right.

Group 1	Group 2
Cam Newton	Blaine Gabbert
Peyton Manning	Sam Bradford
Eli Manning	Colt McCoy
Matt Flynn	Vince Young
Matthew Stafford	Josh Freeman
Jay Cutler	Graham Harrell

If you guessed that Group 1 was only comprised of quarterbacks from the SEC, you would be right. Likewise, if you guessed that group 2 was only comprised of quarterbacks from the Big 12, you would be right again.

You may have an idea of where I'm going with this, but let me explain.

You probably quickly noticed that the SEC contains quarterbacks that have all enjoyed varying degrees of success at the NFL level, while the quarterbacks from the Big 12 have mostly struggled at the NFL level. Both Groups contain quarterbacks who still have something to prove, however, the group that overwhelmingly has more to prove is group 2(Big 12). Group 2 has some time to improve their current standing, but I'm not quite sure that they will ever overtake the superior status of Group 1(SEC).

The simple overriding fact of the matter is this: Quarterbacks from the SEC have a much better chance of experiencing success in the NFL than their counterparts in the Big 12. Why is this? The answer is quite simple. Facing an SEC defense is the closest that a quarterback will come to facing an NFL defense. The quarterbacks from the Big 12 usually find that the task of converting from a college quarterback to a professional one is quite a monumental task because of the weak defenses they face in the Big 12. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule from both sides of this equation, and the variables that decide which are successful and which are not, are many. Perhaps, work ethic is the great equalizer in all of this. For example, Jemarcus Russell will go down as one of the all-time busts because he didn't have the fire in his belly. He was quite satisfied with an above-average college career and the millions he acquired from his rookie contract.

Hurney was probably well ahead of the curve on this(and maybe many or you were as well), and it certainly must have made the decision to draft Cam a little bit easier. So, the next time you see a quarterback rip through the Big 12 and another through the SEC, keep their respective conference's defenses in mind. As fortune would have it, we probably won't have to worry about such evaluations for the Panthers over the next decade or so, and we owe our owner, gm, and coach all the credit in the world for taking a chance on Cam. Ultimately, Cam gets the most credit of all for setting out to prove every damning critic wrong and breaking multiple NFL records in the process. We can only hope that Cam continues to chop as much wood as he can during the summer so he has enough to feed the fire that burns within him all winter long.

The content of these posts are those of the user/fan making the post only

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I think the overall correlation between QBs from SEC or Big 12

or PAC12 and their success in the NFL is going to be very very low, such that it makes it practically negligible. If you think teams in the SEC are better, then logically they should be better on offense and defense in general. Scouts will take that into account so considering their division shouldn’t really be relevant. For example, you could say Andrew Luck plays against inferior defenses (compared to SEC) and his o-line is ridiculously good; therefore, he’s never faced real pressure. But scouts also recognize everything else he does and that far outweighs that negative.

I also question your definition of success because you put Matt Flynn in successful and Sam Bradford in not successful. I’d say Bradford is far more of a success than Flynn who has shown flashes of brilliance but has actually not proven anything with such a small sample size. Bradford, who has spectacularly declined this year, still was OROY so he gets some benefit of the doubt as his team is unbelievably bad as a whole.

by vitzeng on Jan 6, 2012 2:08 AM EST reply actions

First of all, thank you for reading my blog.

Refer to Shankdiddy below on your Luck comment and the pressure QBs face in their respective conferences. There isn’t any doubt that SEC defenses, as a whole, get more pressure on opposing quarterbacks than any other conference. It’s very interesting that you speak of Andrew Luck as if he’s already proven himself in the NFL. I believe he’s in for a rude awakening in the NFL. He’s going to have much less time to throw the ball because he won’t have the protection he had at Stanford. I will say this: the combination of intelligence and work ethic, along with poise under pressure is a quarterback’s best friend. Guys like Brady, Rodgers, Fitzpatrick, Matt Ryan, and Matt Hasselback have all attained different levels of success in large part because of their intelligence. Luck could be very good if he learns to avoid pressure with his feet, which he can. This may be his saving grace, especially early on in his career.

by Derek Leazer on Jan 6, 2012 11:19 AM EST up reply actions

I would definitely say Luck isn't guaranteed to succeed

but at this point (and for any point in the last 10 years frankly) he appears most ready for the NFL

by vitzeng on Jan 6, 2012 6:33 PM EST up reply actions

but at this point (and for any point in the last 10 years frankly) he appears most ready for the NFL

oh i think he will be a goood quarterback. It is only that this trend to make mistake vs pressure. And that he hasn’t had much pressure at all. It is alarming considering all of the hype.

Honestly it really feels more like collusion and media propaganda in the sense that if you repeat something over and over till some people think it is fact. My take on it is he is worthy of the number one pick but not anywhere near this “future hall of famer” that espn and such try to project.. i just don’t see it.

by Shankdiddy on Jan 6, 2012 11:11 PM EST up reply actions

there is a bigger theme going on besides what conference they play in....it is really about how much pressure they faced in college

The quarterbacks in group 2 looked decent standing behind their line with no pressure on them in college (note Colt McCoy vs Nebraska and how that played out) But when these quarterbacks faced teams that could pressure them they struggled. Again NFL teams ignore this trait big time. All of the quarterbacks in Group 2 are totally different players while under pressure. Where as the quarterbacks in group 1 can play through pressure and still make plays calmly doing what you said “poise in the pocket, manipulation of the pocket” I firmly believe this is the defining reason why quarterbacks pass or fail… regardless of all the common pre draft questions of >> what type of offence they ran >> do they call their own plays >> measurements.

For example, you could say Andrew Luck plays against inferior defenses (compared to SEC) and his o-line is ridiculously good; therefore, he’s never faced real pressure. But scouts also recognize everything else he does and that far outweighs that negative.

This is something that does bother me when i look at Luck. He doesn’t get pressured at all and when he does have pressure he is mistake prone…and that is verse some very poor defences. Beyond looking at what conference a player plays in i look at how much pressure did that quarterback face. This is the common theme that is hidden in this. Quarterbacks that can handle pressure better do better in the NFL. I have talked about this so many times till CSR readers will turn blue in the face. But hear me out here. The reason why quarterbacks from the SEC are doing so much better is because they are facing real pressure. They are facing game situations where there is a defender closing as they release the football. This too me defines why group 1 is better than group 2.

Andrew Luck was sacked 23 times in his CAREER!!!. Compared to Cam Newton who was sacked 23 times in 2010 alone. Newton simply dealt with more pressure yet still only threw 7 int under that pressure. Better comparison is RG3, Griffin has been sacked playing behind Baylor Bear’s offensive line 79 times in his career. So even though he isn’t playing in the SEC he is dealing with pressure by the fact that Baylor doesn’t have the athletes to protect RG3…. yet he still has 5 career less int on 128 more career attempts than Luck… In a nut shell Baylor’s offence needs RG3 to put them on his back too win in a pass oriented spread..Luck in a run oriented offensive system turns it over more even though he throws it less under less pressure…..sigh

Common theme is pressure… it just so happens you get more pressure in the SEC.

Moral of this story is the same drum i have been beating on (Panther fans don’t have to worry about anymore). The number one skill set of any quarterback is dealing with pressure. Refer to “mark sanchez” he was great in college. Look at him over the course of his career and the type of issues he has with pressure. Not reading defences..not throwing a accurate pass. It is doing that verse pressure….. something that only increases at the NFL level. My main reason why i fell in love with Newton as a prospect pre draft.

by Shankdiddy on Jan 6, 2012 11:02 AM EST reply actions 1 recs

You speak the truth very well my friend.

by Derek Leazer on Jan 6, 2012 11:20 AM EST up reply actions

Well, you could also point out

the list of SEC QBs is basically the ENTIRE list of SEC QBs who have been very successful in the NFL.

The SEC also gave us Heath Shuler, Tim Couch, Tommy Hodson, and JaMarucus Russell, along with some decent QBs such as Jason Campbel and Shane Matthews.

Looking at the Big 12, obviously, they don’t have many good QBs coming out of there(though to be fair, I don’t think you can judge a player solely based on their rookie season), but I don’t think the SEC has really produced all that many NFL quality QBs either.

by Philipkcks on Jan 6, 2012 12:00 PM EST reply actions

I didn't explain my point well enough.

There is no question that quarterbacks from the SEC have an easier jump to the NFL than their counterparts in the Big 12 because of the respective defenses that they face. I never said that all SEC quarterbacks made good/great NFL quarterbacks. Nor did I say that all Big 12 quarterbacks were busts. If you want to go back a bit farther, Joe Namath, Ken Stabler, and Archie Manning were all former SEC quarterbacks that had nice careers in the NFL. You’d be hard pressed to find any Big 12 quarterback that ever had great career in the NFL. As I stated in my blog, the jury is still out for multiple QBs on both of my lists.

by Derek Leazer on Jan 6, 2012 12:42 PM EST up reply actions

My thought is that there is more than just one factor

Yes, I agree that facing tough defenses would make a QB better, however, there was certainly a time when the defense in the Big 12 was really good as well.
I think part of it is that the Big 12 isn’t as prestigious of a conference, and so there are better QB recruits for SEC.

You could also look at the coaching from the SEC as opposed to the Big 12.
You can look at the offensive schemes in the different conferences.

I think there are just too many variables to point at one thing as the primary reason, though it would certainly be a factor.

by Philipkcks on Jan 6, 2012 1:35 PM EST up reply actions

Your point is a valid one.

by Derek Leazer on Jan 6, 2012 1:48 PM EST up reply actions

I should also say

I’m not trying to say “No, you’re wrong, there’s no way!”
I think what you said about them facing harder defenses in college making the transition to the NFL is certainly a valid point as well.
I’m just not sure it’s the only factor at play.

by Philipkcks on Jan 6, 2012 2:30 PM EST up reply actions

I agree.

by Derek Leazer on Jan 6, 2012 3:56 PM EST up reply actions

The SEC also gave us Heath Shuler, Tim Couch, Tommy Hodson, and JaMarucus Russell, along with some decent QBs such as Jason Campbel and Shane Matthews.

beating this dead horse till i get arrested by the ASPCA. I don’t know about Tommy Hodson but the rest of these quarterbacks look like scared little bitches in the pocket …excuse my french lol. Russell didn’t look as panic’d in the pocket but pressure caused him to turn into a bleaming idiot (no pressure turned him into a idiot…wait waking up turned him into a idiot)… BUT that is besides the point.

Jason Campbell wasn’t going to win any league MVP awards but he was underrated big time. He wasn’t scared in the pocket or mistake prone. He dealth with pressure just fine…. it is just he isn’t a very dynamic quarterback but he was always a decent one.

Tim Couch was just plain funny. He did some straight up retarded things if he even thought he heard someone coming.

by Shankdiddy on Jan 6, 2012 1:03 PM EST reply actions

Correlation does not necessarily prove causation.

Anyhow, I wonder how this bodes for RGIII, a guy who will likely be chosen in the top 5.

Cam Newton, when a reporter asks him who will win the Heisman Trophy on Saturday: "I'll tell you Sunday."

by Son of a Newton on Jan 6, 2012 4:47 PM EST reply actions

His ability to escape pressure with his speed...

will always be a calling card for him. Time will tell how he fares.

by Derek Leazer on Jan 6, 2012 6:29 PM EST up reply actions

I think RG3's skills in the pocket will seperate him.... he has had to deal with TONS more pressure and still put up better numbers!!!

Anyhow, I wonder how this bodes for RGIII, a guy who will likely be chosen in the top 5.

I think very strongly that not only is RG3 better than Luck but is acturally more advanced than Luck. All because RG3 has had very poor blocking at times. Verse the Texas , Texas A&M, OK, OSU, TCU etc he was under alot of pressure yet still produced in the passing game with very little TO’s. That can’t be stressed enough just how poor of a football team Baylor is without RG3. They don’t have the top recruits down there they get whats left in recruitment.

Andrew Luck was sacked 23 times in his CAREER!!!. Compared to Cam Newton who was sacked 23 times in 2010 alone. Newton simply dealt with more pressure yet still only threw 7 int under that pressure. Better comparison is RG3, Griffin has been sacked playing behind Baylor Bear’s offensive line 79 times in his career. So even though he isn’t playing in the SEC he is dealing with pressure by the fact that Baylor doesn’t have the athletes to protect RG3…. yet he still has 5 career less int on 128 more career attempts than Luck… In a nut shell Baylor’s offence needs RG3 to put them on his back too win in a pass oriented spread..Luck in a run oriented offensive system turns it over more even though he throws it less under less pressure…..sigh

What i think your going to see is this. Luck is going to go to the Colts and Manning is going to be gone. Colts are over the 2012 cap by 8 million according too Irland. (never can spell names right ) Colts likely won’t keep their top3 recievers. Coupled with the fact that they don’t have a identity in the running game and a defence that is questionable (likely going to lose Freeny and Mathis as well.) ….enter Luck…no one to throw it too…no run game…defence giving up 10 play 6 minute drives for TD’s.

This is the environment that i believe will expose a flaw in Lucks game that is a big one. Pressure during known passing situations….

RG3’s skill set is more suited to carry a team with less talent around him. Its not so much that he is just running around as much as it is that he keeps the play alive and keeps his eyes down field. He deals with pressure so much better. He dealt with more pressure and yet put up better numbers while the team expected him to put the team on his back through the passing game….Luck playing in a run oriented offence didn’t have the team on his back. Many will say he has bad recievers. Yet he didn’t make Doug Baldwin nor Ryan Wallen stand out (even too Baldwin is the Seahawks leading reciever now after going undrafted). There are trends that the main steam sports media just aren’t paying attention too…..how do you get sacked 56 less times than RG3 and still throw more int (17 int for RG3 to 22 int for Luck) in a offence that is more run oriented and not asking him to put the team on his back.? In this last Bowl game Luck had outstanding stats. Yet i didn’t really see any “wow throws” Just short ding and dunk plays. Even on the long TD the reciever was wide open and he had no pressure like he was at practice.

I think Luck will be pretty good. But there are things that i am seeing that apparently i am alone in seeing. Patterns that could turn out bad verse a veteran NFL defence…. or if he is asked to respond to scores. I don’t understand the hype

What i think is happening is people are starting to realize this. That is why there is more talk about RG3 vs Luck. But we all know Luck is going to be selected first. But i really do believe that some teams are seeing what i am seeing…. asking him to put the team on his back in the passing game plus pressure on him = a totally different player…. RG3 has been having to deal with this. ALOT!!!

by Shankdiddy on Jan 6, 2012 6:48 PM EST up reply actions

I agree and well stated.

by Derek Leazer on Jan 6, 2012 7:09 PM EST up reply actions

Disagree

If the colts part ways with manning, they would have a GIANT cap surplus at that point. I dont think they would have any problem keeping wr and bringing in defensive talent

by Whitt2k1 on Jan 6, 2012 10:21 PM EST up reply actions

Disagree
If the colts part ways with manning, they would have a GIANT cap surplus at that point. I dont think they would have any problem keeping wr and bringing in defensive talent

The point i am trying to make is Luck if he is the starter in Indy will be in a offense with a needed emphsis on the pass. This isn’t what we have seen from him. Infact the offence he is in now almost seems like the type of system you have in place to protect a young quarterback. Add too it what i suspect will be a major weakness is him in known passing situations.

Oddly if anyone objectively looks at him you see he has no pressure and when he does strangly he takes off and runs instead of allowing rushers to get washed up field. It is being in the twillight zone and no body can see this lol.

Even if they resign everyone they have now it will be a offence that will need him to carry them with almost no running game. I would imagine they would need some really key free agent signings and a super draft. That defence could be alot better if they did resign the guys they have a get helpup front…. but that is the same story for half the NFL.

by Shankdiddy on Jan 6, 2012 11:19 PM EST up reply actions

I agree with your analysis

It’s like what Phil Simms was saying about him. The throws he makes are not a very high degree of difficulty and his offense isn’t even based around him, which takes pressure off him. Couple that with the fact that he’s got two top ten picks on his line protecting him, he really is in a perfect situation to make him look good.

by JDeLong42 on Jan 6, 2012 11:08 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed on all accounts.

Cam Newton, when a reporter asks him who will win the Heisman Trophy on Saturday: "I'll tell you Sunday."

by Son of a Newton on Jan 7, 2012 12:30 AM EST up reply actions

incomplete stats

If you wanna say that SEC QBs are simply better prepared for the NFL than Big 12 QBs, than look at the real stats. Quantitatively define success, and then compare all SEC QBs to all Big 12 QBs over the same period. I’m thinking about Chris Simms, Erik Ainge and Tee Martin. I’m not saying that you’re wrong in your analysis (especially when an SEC team has won the last six BCS championships), I just think the analysis should be more thorough before saying SEC QBs are simply better. In fact, I think there were about 10 teams in 2010 that probably would’ve gone undefeated and won it all with CAM, regardless of their conference because he’s that damn good.

I also don’t think it makes sense to act like we’ve discovered something here that NFL scouts have not. Look at Blaine Gabbert, Locker, Ponder, and Mallett, and you see teams that probably would’ve drafted CAM is they could. Of course they would rather have drafted Luck, but couldn’t. And next year, some Big 12 QB will get drafted by a team that really wanted Matt Barkley.

by usana_gaines on Jan 8, 2012 2:48 AM EST reply actions