A Closer Look at 2011 QB Prospects:Cam Newton

[RocketCitySkins]

Good interview with Todd McShay. Talks simply about working to be a part of this all his life and continuing to work to get better. No ego talk. Also, Cam spent the first 3 1/2 hours walking around the sidelines talking to different players. No entourage and although I'm sure he was there, I didn't see his dad. Maybe he hired an image coach.

I was hoping he would be drafted by a team needing a starter. He's an exciting player to watch. But now, I think that would be a mistake. Cam needs at least a year to work on his footwork and transision to the NFL.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_Np6PaqFUg

[aarobinson]

we can stop talking about drafting Newton unless we trade up. We have a better chance of winning the super bowl next season than this guy dropping to 10.

[Going Commando]

Good description, I like reading your take on things. In the debates I've read between the two, they devolve into arguing tools vs. tools + production - character and they end up in semantics. I just favor Cam's many tools over Gabbert's one, which I honestly have doubts about as it hasn't served him well so far. I'd still take either, I just greatly prefer Cam. And with neither being ready to go out of the box, I don't see the allure in choosing Gabbert over Cam.

What many tools does Newton have over Gabbert, and what is his singular tool? Gabbert is one of the most complete QB prospects you're ever going to find.

[aarobinson]

What many tools does Newton have over Gabbert, and what is his singular tool? Gabbert is one of the most complete QB prospects you're ever going to find.

I'm not going to speak as to Gabbert's "tools" because it's pretty clear to me that he has them all, and so does Newton. But I simply cannot get behind a guy who is so supremely talented but cannot get it done in a Fisher-Price My First Offense. It's a bigger red flag than anything on Newton or Mallett or Locker or whoever. It's a red flag on on-field performance. The NFL is just so much harder than that. If the guy can't handle the Mizzou spread--and let's face it, he could not make that offense go--why are we to believe that he's going to turn it on overnight in a much more complex scheme? At least with Newton we know the guy can master a simple offense quickly. Newton made Malzahn's offense run smoothly from game 1, whereas Gabbert struggled in the Mizzou spread in year 3. There's a massive achievement gap between the two.

[number twenty-eight]

What many tools does Newton have over Gabbert, and what is his singular tool? Gabbert is one of the most complete QB prospects you're ever going to find.

Gabbert's best tool is his short and medium accuracy. He can make the stick throws and the little curls to the sidelines all game long. Also the slants depending on coverage. I know he lost his deep threat this year, but overall I can't credit him with having above-average deep accuracy, and worse is his pocket presence. He looks like he gets in too much of a hurry on the move, and its rare that he manufactures any extra yardage scrambling downfield, instead stepping out of bounds ahead of defenders.

Gabbert's a better pro prospect than his college performances would indicate and especially this draft year, but I suspect the casual BigXII fans are probably surprised that he's a first rounder. He was the master of the 8 yard pass on 3rd and 9. He gets so flustered with pressure that it really makes him ineffective. Overall, he just wasn't unusually good, despite having a pro arm and size and it makes me apprehensive. I can see him succeeding as a pro with some maturity onfield, but I can see Cam making it just as easily.

I think Newton has a quiver full of weapons, comparatively. Starting with his size and elusiveness, he'll be an intimidating guy to blitz in the pros, as he's tough to get to and then bring down in the pocket. He's got phenomenal depth judgment throwing long and good rhythm and anticipation between the numbers. He doesn't have the same timing and ball placement as Gabbert throwing short, but its something you can reasonably expect to improve through repetitions.

Cam has something extra that's hard to describe. Its another gear as far as winning and losing, and on the field it looks like a murderous streak of competitiveness. On that LSU run, Peterson was within arm's length at the 15 and advantaged by momentum but Cam got ahead of him to the 7 and dragged him the rest of the way. Cam isn't faster than Peterson, and neither does he have more acceleration, but he wanted to score more than Peterson wanted to stop him. Cam's an absolute killer on gamedays in that way.

Its not a straight comparison because of their different strengths and each will force different defenses opposite them.

[MartinC]

There's a massive achievement gap between the two.

There ceratinly is and thats a great point. What with Gabbert throwing for 3,186 yards on 475 attempts this year and 933 attempts for 6,822 yards over his 3 year starting career as a Div 1 QB versus Newtons single year as a starter at Div 1 level throwing only 280 passes for 2,854 yards. When you consider that difference is achievement it really does make you think.

That was what you meant right?

[aarobinson]

There ceratinly is and thats a great point. What with Gabbert throwing for 3,186 yards on 475 attempts this year and 933 attempts for 6,822 yards over his 3 year starting career as a Div 1 QB versus Newtons single year as a starter at Div 1 level throwing only 280 passes for 2,854 yards. When you consider that difference is achievement it really does make you think.

That was what you meant right?

By that logic, Kerry Collins has achieved more in the NFL than Ben Roethlisberger. I don't follow what you're saying at all -- there is no credible argument that number of attempts and yards is a proxy for achievement.

[MartinC]

By that logic, Kerry Collins has achieved more in the NFL than Ben Roethlisberger. I don't follow what you're saying at all -- there is no credible argument that number of attempts and yards is a proxy for achievement.

One it was an attempt at humor. Two there is a very credible argument about the lack of experience and passing attempts Newton has had versus Gabbert which make grading him and projecting how he will transition into the pros more difficult and increase the risk.

There is no question Newton had a spectacular year but the offense was as much about his legs as his arm. His achievement is unquestioned but its one year - can he repeat it and does he have the experience to make the jump to the NFL. These questions have been discussed ad naseum in this thread and others and we have no answers - just best guesses. That the questions exist though is clear. My flippant response was pointing out that Gabberts production in an offense based on his throwing over 3 years as a starter helps us to get a better handle on his strengths and weaknesses and gives him great experience to help the transition to the pros.

[aarobinson]

One it was an attempt at humor. Two there is a very credible argument about the lack of experience and passing attempts Newton has had versus Gabbert which make grading him and projecting how he will transition into the pros more difficult and increase the risk.

There is no question Newton had a spectacular year but the offense was as much about his legs as his arm. His achievement is unquestioned but its one year - can he repeat it and does he have the experience to make the jump to the NFL. These questions have been discussed ad naseum in this thread and others and we have no answers - just best guesses. That the questions exist though is clear. My flippant response was pointing out that Gabberts production in an offense based on his throwing over 3 years as a starter helps us to get a better handle on his strengths and weaknesses and gives him great experience to help the transition to the pros.

I totally agree with that. I don't think it's inconsistent with my point about Gabbert at all though. If he's proven anything over his many attempts, it's that he's a very talented underachiever with below average composure in the pocket.

With Newton, you have a question mark with lots of upside and he could go either way. I think it would be silly to claim that Newton doesnt have lots of question marks. It would also be silly to believe that he couldn't possibly be a top flight NFL starter. And equally silly to believe he couldnt be a bust. However, Gabbert is more of a clear picture. I think it would be a stunning display of arrogance to take Gabbert at #10 with the belief that he could be coached into a composed NFL starter.

[MartinC]

I totally agree with that. I don't think it's inconsistent with my point about Gabbert at all though. If he's proven anything over his many attempts, it's that he's a very talented underachiever with below average composure in the pocket.

I agree to an extent about Gabberts pocket presence, I have seen him bail early and see pressure thats not really there. But I have also seen him show paitence and hang in to make tough throws as well. I think with experience and good coaching thats going to be sorted - he played through broken or badly bruised ribbs this year so I dont question is toughness or courage.

I think to call him an underachiever is a bit unfair - he won a lot of games with a Mizzou team that did not have a lot else apart from him on the offensive side of the ball. If you are comparing his production to Chase Daniel he was running a more balanced offense with much fewer and less talented receivers than Daniels had. There are questions about Gabbert for sure but his tools plus experience and demonstrated ability to make NFL throws make him the safest QB pick in this draft in my opinion and the only one I wojuld personally make in the top 10.

[number twenty-eight]

I agree to an extent about Gabberts pocket presence, I have seen him bail early and see pressure thats not really there. But I have also seen him show paitence and hang in to make tough throws as well. I think with experience and good coaching thats going to be sorted - he played through broken or badly bruised ribbs this year so I dont question is toughness or courage.

I think to call him an underachiever is a bit unfair - he won a lot of games with a Mizzou team that did not have a lot else apart from him on the offensive side of the ball. If you are comparing his production to Chase Daniel he was running a more balanced offense with much fewer and less talented receivers than Daniels had. There are questions about Gabbert for sure but his tools plus experience and demonstrated ability to make NFL throws make him the safest QB pick in this draft in my opinion and the only one I wojuld personally make in the top 10.

Why is it always Daniel? Yeah Daniel had better receivers but Reesing was better than Gabbert. Was KU's offense more talented than his? How about Taylor Potts sharply outproducing him this year (the same Potts who Tuberville was dissatisfied enough with to bench the second half of A&M and first half of Missouri). These other guys made it work.

[aarobinson]

I agree to an extent about Gabberts pocket presence, I have seen him bail early and see pressure thats not really there. But I have also seen him show paitence and hang in to make tough throws as well. I think with experience and good coaching thats going to be sorted - he played through broken or badly bruised ribbs this year so I dont question is toughness or courage.

I think to call him an underachiever is a bit unfair - he won a lot of games with a Mizzou team that did not have a lot else apart from him on the offensive side of the ball. If you are comparing his production to Chase Daniel he was running a more balanced offense with much fewer and less talented receivers than Daniels had. There are questions about Gabbert for sure but his tools plus experience and demonstrated ability to make NFL throws make him the safest QB pick in this draft in my opinion and the only one I wojuld personally make in the top 10.

I will not dispute that Daniel had a much better supporting cast. Gabbert, as a five-star recruit, was supposed to be much better though, and he wasn't. He didn't show up against decent competition. As a sophomore, against four top-35 defenses (Nebraska, Texas, Oklahoma State and Navy) Gabbert completed just 46.3 percent of his attempts for an average of 208.5 yards. The Tigers lost all those games. As a junior, against two top-35 defenses (Miami OH and Nebraska), he completed 52.3 percent for an average of 193 yards. The Tigers won one of those games. Remember Jimmy Clausen's inability to throw well or win against good teams? Gabbert is very similar in that regard. Pro scouts take notice of these sorts of things, while the draftniks don't. I wouldnt be surprised to see Gabbert slide way down from his projected slot.

[MartinC]

I will not dispute that Daniel had a much better supporting cast. Gabbert, as a five-star recruit, was supposed to be much better though, and he wasn't. He didn't show up against decent competition. As a sophomore, against four top-35 defenses (Nebraska, Texas, Oklahoma State and Navy) Gabbert completed just 46.3 percent of his attempts for an average of 208.5 yards. The Tigers lost all those games. As a junior, against two top-35 defenses (Miami OH and Nebraska), he completed 52.3 percent for an average of 193 yards. The Tigers won one of those games. Remember Jimmy Clausen's inability to throw well or win against good teams? Gabbert is very similar in that regard. Pro scouts take notice of these sorts of things, while the draftniks don't. I wouldnt be surprised to see Gabbert slide way down from his projected slot.

Thats the beauty of all the draft talk - its all just speculation and opinion and the only folks whoes opinions really matter are saying nothing! At least nothing which you can believe .....

[mistertim]

I agree to an extent about Gabberts pocket presence, I have seen him bail early and see pressure thats not really there. But I have also seen him show paitence and hang in to make tough throws as well. I think with experience and good coaching thats going to be sorted - he played through broken or badly bruised ribbs this year so I dont question is toughness or courage.

Something I saw and read makes me curious as to how much Gabbert's coaches had to do with him leaving the pocket early many times:

http://kbiasportsextra.wordpress.com/2010/09/07/video-gary-pinkel-on-blaine-gabbert/

Coach Gary Pinkel addressed Gabbert’s tendency to leave the pocket, noting that he and coach Dave Yost may “over-coach” that aspect of Gabbert’s game to avoid sacks

[RocketCitySkins]

Thanks for compiling those stats, I've seen them before and find them to be very telling. But for some reason Gabbert is the golden boy on this website, I don't dislike the guy (as many here feel about Newton), I just don't see the reason he's considered a top 10 pick. I've said it over and over again, don't be surprised if Gabbert is there at 10 and the skins pass up on him.

Unfortunately, the only response you're going to hear about Gabbert will blame his supporting cast. Forget the fact that Chase Daniel, and UDFA completely outplayed him, Gabbert just didn't have a good team around him.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcsouth/post/_/id/19015/by-the-numbers-newton-vs-gabbert

By the numbers: Newton vs. Gabbert

Pat Yasinskas March 9

On throws of 15 yards or more in their respective conference games last season, Newton completed 49 percent of his passes with seven touchdowns and three interceptions. Gabbert completed 37.5 percent of his passes with four touchdowns and two interceptions.

Newton also held the edge last season when facing the blitz. We’re talking only conference games again, but here’s what happened when opponents sent five or more pass-rushers. Newton completed 73.5 percent of his passes with five touchdowns and no interceptions. Gabbert completed 44.8 percent of his passes with four touchdowns and no interceptions.

Newton’s got a reputation for being mobile that’s backed up by his success throwing outside the pocket. In conference games, he completed 20 of 30 throws outside the pocket with two touchdowns and averaged 9.7 yards per attempt. In similar situations, Gabbert completed six of 20 passes with one touchdown and averaged 4.5 yards per attempt.

Newton’s mobility has some people thinking he’s not a pocket passer, but the numbers tell a different story. In conference games, Newton completed 67.7 percent of his passes with 14 touchdowns and three interceptions. Gabbert completed 61.1 percent with nine touchdowns and four interceptions.

One final note on Gabbert: He threw all 267 of his passes against Big 12 opponents after lining up in the shotgun.

[Mahons21]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcsouth/post/_/id/19015/by-the-numbers-newton-vs-gabbert

By the numbers: Newton vs. Gabbert

Pat Yasinskas March 9

On throws of 15 yards or more in their respective conference games last season, Newton completed 49 percent of his passes with seven touchdowns and three interceptions. Gabbert completed 37.5 percent of his passes with four touchdowns and two interceptions.

Newton also held the edge last season when facing the blitz. We’re talking only conference games again, but here’s what happened when opponents sent five or more pass-rushers. Newton completed 73.5 percent of his passes with five touchdowns and no interceptions. Gabbert completed 44.8 percent of his passes with four touchdowns and no interceptions.

Newton’s got a reputation for being mobile that’s backed up by his success throwing outside the pocket. In conference games, he completed 20 of 30 throws outside the pocket with two touchdowns and averaged 9.7 yards per attempt. In similar situations, Gabbert completed six of 20 passes with one touchdown and averaged 4.5 yards per attempt.

Newton’s mobility has some people thinking he’s not a pocket passer, but the numbers tell a different story. In conference games, Newton completed 67.7 percent of his passes with 14 touchdowns and three interceptions. Gabbert completed 61.1 percent with nine touchdowns and four interceptions.

One final note on Gabbert: He threw all 267 of his passes against Big 12 opponents after lining up in the shotgun.

It's a descent article, though I'm weary the stats have been cherry-picked. I highlighted in bold up above what I thought was relevant to the Redskins system specifically.

[MartinC]

Why is it always Daniel? Yeah Daniel had better receivers but Reesing was better than Gabbert. Was KU's offense more talented than his? How about Taylor Potts sharply outproducing him this year (the same Potts who Tuberville was dissatisfied enough with to bench the second half of A&M and first half of Missouri). These other guys made it work.

The comparison with Daniels is just because he was Gabberts immediate predecessor at Mizzou.

On a wider point production is important but only to a point when grading QB on his NFL potential. There have been lots of very productive College QBs who have never sniffed an NFL roster and plenty more who have been bottom feeders or complete busts. It's the total package of College performance (as opposed to pure production which is too team dependent), physical ability and intangibles that equals a grade. It's as much of an art as a science and very hard for the Pros to do let alone a bunch of us shooting bull on a message board.

[Mahons21]

On a wider point production is important but only to a point when grading QB on his NFL potential. There have been lots of very productive College QBs who have never sniffed an NFL roster and plenty more who have been bottom feeders or complete busts.

And how many QB's that had lack-luster stats in a spread system have gone on to succeed in the NFL?

It's not that production at the college level means you will succeed in the NFL, but if you can't produce in college, in a system that's designed to put up stats, how on Earth are you going to produce in the NFL?

[number twenty-eight]

The comparison with Daniels is just because he was Gabberts immediate predecessor at Mizzou.

On a wider point production is important but only to a point when grading QB on his NFL potential. There have been lots of very productive College QBs who have never sniffed an NFL roster and plenty more who have been bottom feeders or complete busts. It's the total package of College performance (as opposed to pure production which is too team dependent), physical ability and intangibles that equals a grade. It's as much of an art as a science and very hard for the Pros to do let alone a bunch of us shooting bull on a message board.

I certainly agree, and I think you've been one of the most fair in this thread. College performance isn't the end-all. I bring it up because the prevailing thinking is that Gabbert is more polished and pro-ready, based on more attempts. Contrarily, the efficiency of his many attempts wasn't as good as the UDFA and late-round peers in his conference, so it gets hard to give the benefit of the doubt in that department.

Also, I was trying to point out earlier that among Newton's peers (three first rounders), his production dwarfed all but Tebow's best year. Its a fairly stark contrast to me. Again, I'm not knocking Gabbert as much as I'm trying to point up Newton's merits.

I totally get why Newton is so controversial. I wish he'd played this way for four years instead of one.

[Going Commando]

There's a massive achievement gap between the two.

Yeah... It's called 700 some odd attempts. Gabbert couldn't run Mizzou's offense? That's news to me. He has good career numbers and he had a 10 win season with a victory over a number one ranked team. This is the first I'm hearing that he couldn't get it done on the field.

[Mahons21]

Yeah... It's called 700 some odd attempts. Gabbert couldn't run Mizzou's offense? That's news to me. He has good career numbers and he had a 10 win season with a victory over a number one ranked team. This is the first I'm hearing that he couldn't get it done on the field.

In 920 att Gabbert scored 40 TD's/1 per every 23 att

In 280 att Newton scored 30 TD's/1 per every 9.3 att

In 1543 att Daniel scored 100 TD's/1 per every 15.4 att

In 864 att Bradford scored 86 TD's/1 per every 10 att

Gabbert doesn't have good career numbers for a QB in a spread offense, it's not really debatable.

[Going Commando]

I agree to an extent about Gabberts pocket presence, I have seen him bail early and see pressure thats not really there. But I have also seen him show paitence and hang in to make tough throws as well.

Yeah this is a fair criticism of Gabbert and I agree with you that it's tunnel-visioned to pan Gabbert on the basis of this alone. If this is the only notable problem you can pick out in Gabbert's game, then he is a damn good (and very clean) prospect. This is, of course, the case.

Gabbert is a tough guy who enjoys the physical aspect of the game. He runs people over when he's charging in the open field. He pops right back up after big hits and he never misses time despite the fact that he's suffered serious injuries to his ribs and a high ankle sprain (not to mention a litany of ones from high school).

[IrepDC]

Does Newton's year at Blinn count for anything? I understand it as against lesser talent, but does that experience get Newton anything? I keep seeing only one year of playing being acknowledged, but with that logic, Flacco had 0 attempts before coming to the NFL. I think he should get SOME credit for starting that year and winning the National Championship on that level of college ball.

[Going Commando]

In 920 att Gabbert scored 40 TD's/1 per every 23 att

In 280 att Newton scored 30 TD's/1 per every 9.3 att

In 1543 att Daniel scored 100 TD's/1 per every 15.4 att

In 864 att Bradford scored 86 TD's/1 per every 10 att

Gabbert doesn't have good career numbers for a QB in a spread offense, it's not really debatable.

Wait so this is based on his touchdown passes? How many is he supposed to have? What is an acceptable season total for a spread offense QB?

40 career TDs is plenty and again, you're nitpicking if you start nickel and diming him because he didn't throw enough touchdowns for you. If he'd only strung together a couple of 10-12 TD seasons together before going pro, then maybe the production would be an issue. Especially if he had a low completion % or not many attempts. But Gabbert demonstrated his ability to make every throw on the field in college and has a very large body of work to assess.

TD passes are finnicky anyway. Would you feel better if he'd thrown 20+ this season? He easily could have but his coach sat him during blowouts. He only played the first half of Missouri's three biggest wins--McNeese St., Colorado, and Miami Ohio. In those contests, he had a total of four TD passes even though his team won by an average of 36 points in those contests. The offense ran like a top while he was on the field in those contests. By contrast, Auburn kept Newton in during its blowouts to pad his numbers: 3 passing TDs in a 56-26 win over Arkansas St.; 3 passing TDs in a 53-3 win over Louisiana Monroe; 4 passing TDs in a 62-24 blowout of Chattanooga. Let's say Gabbert stays in for those performances and keeps throwing and gets six more cheap touchdowns? Is 22 TDs a good enough season for you?

Do you see why a lack of TD passes from Gabbert this season doesn't really concern me?

[aarobinson]

Aaron Rodgers only played one year of college too. He's a bust, obviously.

The only QB I can think of that had as few passing TD's as Gabbert in his final season and still got drafted in the first round is Vick. I don't think there are any others. So really the only precedent to drafting a guy with such mediocre passing production in the first round is a guy who is the greatest athletic specimen in our generation of football players.