-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
The Everything NFL Thread: 2011-2012 Season (plus free agency I guess)
- Thread starter WaterBomb
- Start date
- Status
Well you said you don't watch Panther games so I would trust him over you.
Obviously Newton does get hit. The point is that he does not get hit more than any other QB. Look at all of the QBs that have had severe injuries or concussions over the years. The biggest problem is usually getting hit from the blindside when they are standing in the pocket. Every QB in the NFL gets sacked. Who was sacked the most last year? The one and only, super mobile, Alex Smith. People who say a running QB won't last long because of the hits are just silly. Newton may have taken 2-3 hits (on the level of a sack hit) the entire season running the ball. The rest of his runs ended with him going out of bounds, scoring a TD, sliding and getting touched or him angling his body to wear the hit was negligible.
Can you name those 2-3 hits?
Curious. ;D
OMG NEW NIKE STUFF TOMRROW :DDD
Amazingly, Cam is sacked more often than Tim Tebow and Matt Ryan 0.o and Matt Ryan is a statue behind that horrid offensive line of the Falcons. So that means in terms of running QBs, Vick is better than Tebow who is better than Cam :D
Curious. ;D
OMG NEW NIKE STUFF TOMRROW :DDD
Amazingly, Cam is sacked more often than Tim Tebow and Matt Ryan 0.o and Matt Ryan is a statue behind that horrid offensive line of the Falcons. So that means in terms of running QBs, Vick is better than Tebow who is better than Cam :D
Why are we judging how well Mobile QBs perform by how many sacks they take? If they're running and get tackled past the line it's not considered a sack. Cam Newton could've been tackled 50 times and also had however many sacks he had, and even still those numbers would be meaningless since Tackles and Sacks don't record if he was hit with any damaging force which is what we were discussing here.
The point of my post was saying that stats in this discussion are terribly misleading, and bringing up any at all is rather foolish. People can be "tackled" many times according to stat books, but that doesn't mean they were hit. People can also be "sacked" many times but that doesn't mean they were hit hard or with any damaging force. Bringing up either of those stats makes you look like an idiot.
The problem with this discussion is that the only evidence anyone can bring to bear is anecdotal, so you look like a raving fanatic who exaggerates (probably because you are), and you make everyone else have to deal with your stupidity of bringing in sacks to the argument for the same error you're accusing others of making.
The problem with this discussion is that the only evidence anyone can bring to bear is anecdotal, so you look like a raving fanatic who exaggerates (probably because you are), and you make everyone else have to deal with your stupidity of bringing in sacks to the argument for the same error you're accusing others of making.
Look at all of the serious injuries that have happened to the QBs over the ages. Steve Young and Troy Aikman had their careers ended due to multiple concussions from hits standing in the pocket. Why do you think the league has made all of these absurd rules about hitting QBs now?
You are whining about stats being inaccurate, and then you continue to whine about my "anecdotal" evidence which consists of watching every single Panthers game. Really? How many Panthers games have you guys watched? You just want to keep on saying that Newton won't last because he can run with the football? That sure does make sense. I'm not a raving fanatic. I can name several flaws in many Panthers players games. Steve Smith takes retarded penalties due to his girly temper tantrums. Captain Munnerlyn is a midget and cannot defend any WR in the NFL. Cam Newton holds on to the ball way too long and refuses to throw the ball away. He forces the ball into tight coverage when there are other open options available. He is obsessed with the "big play." Thomas Davis needs to retire because the Panthers keep expecting him to start even though he gets injured every single year.
But whatever, I'm just a biased raving fanatic. You guys that haven't even seen a player at all clearly know exactly what is going on.
You are whining about stats being inaccurate, and then you continue to whine about my "anecdotal" evidence which consists of watching every single Panthers game. Really? How many Panthers games have you guys watched? You just want to keep on saying that Newton won't last because he can run with the football? That sure does make sense. I'm not a raving fanatic. I can name several flaws in many Panthers players games. Steve Smith takes retarded penalties due to his girly temper tantrums. Captain Munnerlyn is a midget and cannot defend any WR in the NFL. Cam Newton holds on to the ball way too long and refuses to throw the ball away. He forces the ball into tight coverage when there are other open options available. He is obsessed with the "big play." Thomas Davis needs to retire because the Panthers keep expecting him to start even though he gets injured every single year.
But whatever, I'm just a biased raving fanatic. You guys that haven't even seen a player at all clearly know exactly what is going on.
Look at Michael Vick, a guy who is a running QB who hasn't started a full season in his entire career (maybe with one exception, can't remember) because of injuries taken while running. Look at Brett Favre a QB who I'm pretty sure holds the record for most times sacked in a career and only missed a couple of games in his final season as an NFL player.
This is why anecdotal evidence is terrible. It means nothing. Anyone can say whatever they like because they have one instance where it's different than your opinion.
To clarify, I don't actually think Running QB's are unsustainable or that Sacks can't be damaging hits. I'm just pointing out how stupid it is to say that something is true because of one instance.
This is fun, because the only thing I've said to you is that anecdotal evidence doesn't prove your point and the stats you bring up are misleading. I'm neither for nor against you, but keep coming at me like I am bro. All I'm doing is pointing out the fallacious nature of your arguments.
In reality, I'm a gigantic Cam Newton fan, and I think he's going to be great, and I've seen that he avoids hits well. I guess you could say I'm just playing the Devil's Advocate.
Well there are 2 ways to judge sports players. Statistics and anecdotal (video) evidence. You want to dismiss both of these methods. Maybe you should be a judge and just dismiss all evidence and make an arbitrary decision.
Yo Valkryies welcome to the party!
also
"The biggest problem is usually getting hit from the blindside when they are standing in the pocket. Every QB in the NFL gets sacked. Who was sacked the most last year? The one and only, super mobile, Alex Smith. People who say a running QB won't last long because of the hits are just silly."
-Justin8649
Cam was sacked ~35 times last season. And he's a "super mobile" QB. The above sentiment means nothing. 6_6
also
"The biggest problem is usually getting hit from the blindside when they are standing in the pocket. Every QB in the NFL gets sacked. Who was sacked the most last year? The one and only, super mobile, Alex Smith. People who say a running QB won't last long because of the hits are just silly."
-Justin8649
Cam was sacked ~35 times last season. And he's a "super mobile" QB. The above sentiment means nothing. 6_6
Actually, it means that every QB in the NFL gets sacked. By nature, this means that every QB gets hit!!!!!!
For the billionth time in this thread:
If Cam Newton has a severe injury, it is going to happen from him staying in the pocket too long. His biggest hits are received when he is in the pocket and gets hit from the blindside. As somebody that watched all 16 Panthers games last year, I only witnessed Cam taking a "hard hit" 2-3 times last year when running the ball. At least half of his sacks were as hard or harder than the 2-3 "hard hits" he took running with the ball.
We have all witnessed Mike Vick get injured running the ball, but Cam Newton has a completely different running style than Vick. He is also built like a LBer. Vick is a lot slimmer in stature than Newton as well. Newton is good at angling himself away from the big hit, sliding, getting out of bounds, etc.
For the billionth time in this thread:
If Cam Newton has a severe injury, it is going to happen from him staying in the pocket too long. His biggest hits are received when he is in the pocket and gets hit from the blindside. As somebody that watched all 16 Panthers games last year, I only witnessed Cam taking a "hard hit" 2-3 times last year when running the ball. At least half of his sacks were as hard or harder than the 2-3 "hard hits" he took running with the ball.
We have all witnessed Mike Vick get injured running the ball, but Cam Newton has a completely different running style than Vick. He is also built like a LBer. Vick is a lot slimmer in stature than Newton as well. Newton is good at angling himself away from the big hit, sliding, getting out of bounds, etc.
but you don't see qbs getting hurt in the pocket as frequently as running the ball. that's why there are rules to protect the qb when he is running! even the nfl realizes that running qbs, while exciting, are gonna get blasted out there.
cam isn't the only running qb!
but it's cool. i already have my post ready for when cam newton fails so hard that sophomore slump can not even defend him.
cam isn't the only running qb!
but it's cool. i already have my post ready for when cam newton fails so hard that sophomore slump can not even defend him.
actually, I'm inclined to think that because of all the rules and the fact that every QB is practically obligated by their contract to slide, they're taking bigger hits in the pocket when they don't see it coming. When you're a runner in the open field you really only have to watch what's in front of you because you won't take a huge hit from behind. This enables QBs to slide before getting hit or change direction to make the blow less severe. Any QB that's careless enough to take a bone-jarring hit when he's running deserves to be injured =/
The problem is that you seem to be assuming that you clearly know everything about Cam Newton's season from watching all 16 games.
Valkryies is 100% correct here. There are no statistics filed under "Big Hits" or such. There are none that show how many times the quarterback slid and didn't get hit at all. Bringing up "statistical evidence" that Newton got hit a lot is pointless without context.
On the flipside, even if you have watched and rewatched every game this season, you are not an unbiased or perfect account of Newton's running plays. Can you honestly say that you distinctly remember the times Newton got hit hard while running? Unless you have a photographic memory, the answer is probably no. I watched every single Falcons game this season, some multiple times, and if you asked the same question about Matt Ryan sitting in the pocket I'd probably say something along the lines of "Uh, I dunno?" I do not pretend to know something that would be rather difficult to remember!
Valkryies was completely civil in his response and you instantly jumped down his throat like he was another troll. I disagree with him and others fairly often, but we almost never stoop to such low levels of bigoted slander. Throwing insults around like that certainly makes you seem like a raving fanatic.
This comment got kinda lost, and while I don't necessarily disagree with you there are some counterpoints to this:
Deep accuracy - both are exceptional at this, so it doesn't particularly mean too much. I don't keep up with draft prospects much, but is this (presumably expert) opinion heavily reliant on game tape or team workouts? Baylor's spread offense would drastically aid his deep passing on game tape, but that may not truly indicate his ability in a "standard" environment.
"Muddy" pockets - 100% agreed. Guys like Roethlisberger, Rodgers, and to some extent Brees are fantastic at avoiding the rush and throwing on the run. Guys like the Manning bros, Brady, and Ryan are notorious statues in the pocket in most occasions and can't easily avoid the rush. RGIII and Luck are pretty much textbook group 1/2 respectively.
Baylor Offense - This is the whole "Spread offense vs Standard offense" argument coming into the NFL. How many spread quarterbacks have truly succeeded after the transition? Anyone can see how Bradford is struggling mightily in his transition, while say Stafford has transitioned tremendously because UGA's offense was pro-style. Of course, then you get guys like Stinky Sanchez (pro-style) or Newton (run-option) who have lately gone against this trend. RGIII appears to have the wits to transfer, but timing could take a while.
Directly in line with the Baylor offense, I'd be willing to bet that a LOT of RGIII's throws were much easier to make because of the spread. Decision making is far more important than accuracy or execution in this style of offense, because usually *someone* will be wide open by a good distance if the play was executed properly. In pro-style offenses, this is rarely the case; will he be able to quickly transfer to an offense where guys will only be open for a short period of time, or in a small window of space? That's difficult to say. Luck has the experience in this area, and he's as close to a proven commodity as you can get.
Talent - Again, don't follow it too much, so it's hard for me to say. I still don't think you can directly compare the two in this regard because of the style of offenses that they use. Luck would have done worse if he were surrounded by less talent due to the nature of the run-first, short-yardage offense. A better offensive line or tight ends would not severely have helped Baylor's offense, as spread offenses usually do well in spite of worse offensive lines, rather than do well because of a great offensive line.
I'm not bashing on him or anything, but I think there's a reason that the Colts haven't appeared to look at him being on the same level as Luck. At the same time, the Redskins saw enough to gamble the future, so who's to say? It would be a fantastic story a few years from now if they were both big successes!
First, i'd like to point out that i'm also a fan of Cameron, unlike YPT. Now that that's out of the way, i was wondering and was curious as to how many of his runs end with slides/oob or with him avoiding meaningless contact compared to how many times he is brought down. The QB i watch most of is Eli(followed by Romo/Dick/BB) and maybe thats why i have absolutely no trust in running qbs who expose themselves to hits. And being so used to Elis playing style is a sharp contrast to Newton, so that doesnt help.. Yes, i understand that "usually" getting hit from your blindside is worse, but running qbs willingly expose themselves to guys much bigger than them(yes even bigger than Cameron..). And because of that the chances of them getting hurt is increased. As chances of the other team touching the runner are increased.
Thats why i was wondering how much Cameron uses his brain when running(with not being touched his highest priority..like Rodgers). Basically, running qbs just have a higher chance of getting hurt because they expose themselves. The chances of something going wrong are increased.
Not so sure his rookie season was the greatest ever, but he certainly was impressive. Happy the Panfers have something to cheer about!
Haha well in terms of yards, and records broken. One of them anyway. Too bad we won't do shit until we get a Dline and a complimentary secondary to Gamble.
I've watched RGIII a lot this year. When I say deep accuracy, I mean that he consistently hits deep targets in stride, giving them room to run, giving them the best chance to make the catch, etc.
Luck isn't BAD at avoiding the rush, but when he gets pressured, despite his athleticism, his quality of play declines. RGIII's play doesn't declined when guys are coming after him.
Baylor Offense - This is the whole "Spread offense vs Standard offense" argument coming into the NFL. How many spread quarterbacks have truly succeeded after the transition? Anyone can see how Bradford is struggling mightily in his transition, while say Stafford has transitioned tremendously because UGA's offense was pro-style. Of course, then you get guys like Stinky Sanchez (pro-style) or Newton (run-option) who have lately gone against this trend. RGIII appears to have the wits to transfer, but timing could take a while. [/QUOTE]
The Spread versus Pro offense is almost 100% irrelevant to prospect evaluation. It's literally 50:50 in terms of successful spread (Rodgers, Brees, Newton, Rivers, Big Ben) to successful pro (Eli, Stafford, Ryan, Peyton) prospects. If anything, more QBs get overdrafted because of them playing a pro system (Sanchez, Clausen, etc).
I've seen a lot of Andrew Luck too - there is ALWAYS someone open in that offense. No college defense can really defend it. Sure, the spread gets guys open too, but top-tier defenses like Oklahoma and Texas can shut it down by playing a lot of heavy man coverage - and RGIII shredded Oklahoma and had a decent game against Texas.
Depends. The spread is designed to negate pressure with quick passes and getting guys open quick, so if RGIII is still getting beaten up, then that says a lot about his pocket presence and ability. Could Luck produce in RGIII's offense? Who knows, but we do know that his play suffers when he's pressured.
Many, many reputable scouts are realizing that Luck was the presumptive #1 pick on hype and the idea of him being a "perfect QB prospect" largely because of his pedigree. RGIII has the better tape, the better talent, the better skillset, and the better production with worse talent around him. The only "tangible" quality that Luck has that RGIII doesn't is having played in a pro offense, and that's a highly overrated factor.
So what DM? I'm important!
These new jerseys are not new at all! Of all the teams they could've completely redone, they choose the SEAHAWKS. THE SEAHAWKS -_-. I wanted all the bird teams to have Oregon Duck type jerseys :( and helmets. If something as swagless as a duck can have such an amazing jersey then a falcon and eagle should be twice as amazing.
nfl offseason completely ruined
These new jerseys are not new at all! Of all the teams they could've completely redone, they choose the SEAHAWKS. THE SEAHAWKS -_-. I wanted all the bird teams to have Oregon Duck type jerseys :( and helmets. If something as swagless as a duck can have such an amazing jersey then a falcon and eagle should be twice as amazing.
nfl offseason completely ruined
Holy text batman! Yeah, I'm going to forgo reading all of that.
YTP, Nike had to get permission from the teams to change any designs and I guess the team that wanted it was the Seahawks. I do like the neon green though......
YTP, Nike had to get permission from the teams to change any designs and I guess the team that wanted it was the Seahawks. I do like the neon green though......
Is it? Of the five QBs you posted, only Brees had a spread offense truly similar to what RGIII had. Auburn's was more of a run-first option, while the others had fairly standard offenses that featured the pass a little more than the run, as far as I can remember. Perhaps it is because the pro-style passers are overdrafted, but its rare to see someone in a spread passing offense go so early in the draft. The only recent examples I can think of are Drew Brees (not a bust
), Alex Smith (bust), Vince Young (bust), Joe Flacco (in the middle), Josh Freeman (too early), Sam Bradford (too early), and Blaine Gabbert (too early). I've probably missed a couple, but that list doesn't look too stellar. Of course, there's always busts at that position regardless of offensive style (looking at you, Russell/Sanchez/Campbell/etc), but that's always the case with first round picks. I might be a little too nitpicky, perhaps those other guys you mentioned had similar offenses and I've just forgotten... whatever. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that RGIII has to be able to completely rework his game to fit in with the modern NFL, and while he certainly has the physical skills to do so, everything else is a big question mark. I personally believe that it will take time for him to adapt, but whether that takes months or years I think he'll be a top starter for a while :happybrain:
I found this rather funny, but given his position it shouldn't matter much at all.
Does anyone have an opinion on Payton's appeal? I think it's a rather immature move and that there is no chance for a shortening of his ban. He hid the program, lied to the NFL, and then appeared to apologize and take the blame for himself. But then to turn around and whine about his ban being too long? "But Killah, he's not whining, he's complaining." Bullshit. He'll suck up to the NFL when it suits him, but once he has to actually face punishment he's going to give them a sob story about how his ban should be shortened? He's essentially spitting on his own apology, and Goodell won't (or at least shouldn't) see kindly to that at all.
That's not really pertinent - the terminology and the concepts are the same, they just had a different pass - run ratio. I don't imagine the spread offenses Rivers and Big Ben ran were much different either. I also forgot Dalton, who definitely ran the same sort of spread that RGIII and Newton ran. And Vince Young and Alex Smith failed for factors OUTSIDE the spread (Vince Young was never an accurate passer to begin with, and had a pretty average arm in terms of velocity, Alex Smith was an average prospect who got taken high because of his college success)
Why?
I think the thing people need to realize is that running a pro offense in college is nothing to what you see in the NFL. The difference between Luck and RGIII is the difference between the guy who took 8 AP classes in high school and the guy who took only 2 - in theory the guy who took 8 is ahead, but 8 AP classes doesn't even come close to getting a degree.
With that said, there's nothing about what RGIII does that needs to be reworked for the NFL. He's not as good at dropping back as Luck - but he's good enough at it. He's not yet as good at Luck at making "pro-style reads" but Luck is at best 3-6 months ahead at that - that will be erased by the time training camp gets out, I wager. He already has the accuracy, the arm, the playmaking under pressure - the other stuff where Luck beats him is stuff that will be corrected in 1-2 years.
Also Morris Clairborne has a learning disability, so it's not like he's dumb I think, but he's set up to fail on a test like the Wonderlic. Makes me wonder if he's dyslexic or something.
What do you guys think of the Nike NFL jerseys?
I was rather underwhelmed, but I didn't expect teams to radically alter their uniforms, either. I think Seattle's new jersey is a nice change of pace, but no huge alterations elsewhere.
Still, it's nice to have Reebok out of the way and the awesome-looking Nike brand in place.
I was rather underwhelmed, but I didn't expect teams to radically alter their uniforms, either. I think Seattle's new jersey is a nice change of pace, but no huge alterations elsewhere.
Still, it's nice to have Reebok out of the way and the awesome-looking Nike brand in place.
He absolutely deserves a suspension, but it should only be for 8 games. Goodell has no precedent to follow here, so an entire season is unnecessarily harsh. It's not like 8 games wouldn't be a deterrent to future bounty programs, if anyone's stupid enough to do it again.
Goodell decided about halfway through last season that the only way he was going to get players and coaches to take him seriously was to dole out unnecessarily harsh punishments for anything remotely related to player safety. He suddenly went from "oh we're just going to fine you and tell you to be a good boy, but we're THINKING about suspensions really hard!" to "sup you looked at Tom Brady funny? You're suspended for a quarter of the season!"
- Status