Jump to content

Is Cam Newton on a HOF pace?


TecmoSuperJoe

Recommended Posts

I hate using counting stats as the hard line stance, I prefer to see where he ranked among his peers.

2011 - Record 6-10

Passing Yards - 10th
Passing TDs - T 11th
INTs - 6th most
QB Rating - 15th
Total Yards - 6th
Total TDs - 5th

2012 - Record 7-9

Passing Yards - 13th
Passing TDs - 21st
INTs - T 17th most
QB Rating - 15th
Total Yards - 7th
Total TDs - T 10th

2013 - Record 12-4 (0-1 in playoffs)

Passing Yards - 15th
Passing TDs - T12th
INTs - 12th most
QB Rating - T15th
Total Yards - 13th
Total TDs - T7th

2014 - Record 5-8-1 (14 G) (1-1 in playoffs)

Passing Yards - 21st
Passing TDs - T 19th
INTs - T 13th most
QB Rating - 26th
Total Yards - 16th
Total TDs - T 16th

2015 - Record 15-1 (2-1 in playoffs)

Passing Yards - 16th
Passing TDs - T2
INTs - T 19th most
QB Rating - T7th
Total Yards - 9th
Total TDs - 1st

2016 - Record 6-8

Passing Yards - 21st
Passing TDs - T20th
INTs - T9th most
QB Rating - 28th
Total Yards - 20th
Total TDs - 17th

2017 - Record 11-5 (0-1 in playoffs)

Passing Yards - 18th
Passing TDs - T12th
INTs - 2nd most
QB Rating - 24th
Total Yards - 10th
Total TDs - T9th

Overall, against his peers, he's a below average passer that had one major outlier year in 2015 where his passing and total touchdowns made a drastic jump but other than that it appears that his team wins/loses without him doing anything major to increase his performance. I don't see where ANY of that makes him a HOF QB, in fact, I think exactly the opposite. Without some sort of major playoff impact or some MUCH higher rankings going forward I don't see how he sniffs the HOF.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎9‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 2:28 PM, Toomers said:

 Keep adding. All-Pro, MVP, playoff wins vs O for ever, being your teams leading rusher, not having AJ Green, having the worst OC in the NFL. 

   Again, I’m not saying he’s some lock, or even likely at this point. But not because of any of the reasons given so far. 

All of this color should add to a case for the HOF....not make the case. He's just not there my man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, iknowcool said:

No, you’re just backtracking now.  You didn’t say in response “I’m only talking about passing stats” when you were called out, you simply said rushing TDs and passing TDs aren’t the same.  

I’m not calling you a liar, but saying Cam hasn’t scored 40 TDs in a season is a Iie.  Is it not a lie?  Did Cam not scored 45 regular season TDs?

And again you are trying to take away from Cam by saying he needs to run and pass.  Why does it matter?  A rushing TD = a passing TD in value.  Why does it matter if he needs to run and pass to get 40 TDs? 

Again it’s like if I said Faulk never had 2000 yards in a season.  It’s a misleading statement.  And quite frankly it makes no sense at all to eliminate half of a players production.  Literally none.  

I find it very difficult to believe you had a hard time realizing in a post where every stat I made was discussing passing stats that you didn’t realize I was talking about passing. In fact, I don’t believe it, I’ll leave it at that. This is just becoming a pissing contest over something that isn’t remotely controversial 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Hockey5djh said:

All of this color should add to a case for the HOF....not make the case. He's just not there my man.

  And if you would read the post I just made, you would see I’ve never said he was. I don’t think anyone has. But you quote a specific player to player comparison. Not anyone saying either is close. Then you post more numbers that have already been discussed. No context.... even though you hated to post it. Sure Ok

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, lancerman said:

I find it very difficult to believe you had a hard time realizing in a post where every stat I made was discussing passing stats that you didn’t realize I was talking about passing. In fact, I don’t believe it, I’ll leave it at that. This is just becoming a pissing contest over something that isn’t remotely controversial 

It was our mistake for not realizing you wanted to have a conversation about only things that supported your agenda. That’s my bad on that. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, lancerman said:

I find it very difficult to believe you had a hard time realizing in a post where every stat I made was discussing passing stats that you didn’t realize I was talking about passing. In fact, I don’t believe it, I’ll leave it at that. This is just becoming a pissing contest over something that isn’t remotely controversial 

My bad.  I didn’t realize Pro Bowls is a passing stat.

 In real life, you don't just take something out of the equation "just because".  Your response to being called out was "Newton is a QB, not a RB", implying that you didn't see his rushing touchdowns as worth mentioning which doesn't make any sense.  Saying Newton hasn't eclipsed 40 TDs in a season is akin to me saying Faulk hasn't eclipsed 2,000 yards in a season.  It is only true if you twist it in a way that doesn't need to be twisted - Faulk's receiving skills should be considered just like Cam's rushing skills.  And in your post, you didn't say passing touchdowns.  You just said touchdowns.  When you were corrected, you dismissed it because Newton isn't a RB.  Then you started backtracking.

 

Edited by iknowcool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Toomers said:

  And if you would read the post I just made, you would see I’ve never said he was. I don’t think anyone has. But you quote a specific player to player comparison. Not anyone saying either is close. Then you post more numbers that have already been discussed. No context.... even though you hated to post it. Sure Ok

Man....someone cranky. While I don't think anyone in the thread has said "he's on the path to being a HOF" there are still some in here defending that side. Yes, I quoted you defending Newton against Dalton because you were trying to provide context. The point of me quoting that is that context behind the numbers should add to the case, not make the case. Also, the numbers I posted for Cam year over year against his peers have not been posted a single other time in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iknowcool said:

My bad.  I didn’t realize Pro Bowls is a passing stat.

 In real life, you don't just take something out of the equation "just because".  Your response to being called out was "Newton is a QB, not a RB", implying that you didn't see his rushing touchdowns as worth mentioning which doesn't make any sense.  Saying Newton hasn't eclipsed 40 TDs in a season is akin to me saying Faulk hasn't eclipsed 2,000 yards in a season.  It is only true if you twist it in a way that doesn't need to be twisted - Faulk's receiving skills should be considered just like Cam's rushing skills.  And in your post, you didn't say passing touchdowns.  You just said touchdowns.  When you were corrected, you dismissed it because Newton isn't a RB.  Then you started backtracking.

 

You keep using Faulk as an example but if we were debating who was a better RB between Faulk, Brown or Sanders and someone brought up their rushing yards, rushing TD’s, YPC and all of a sudden you said “well Faulk really has this many yards because of receptions” it would be equally as preposterous.

Again the context was that Marino was a far superior QB, do you want to argue against that or do you want argue semantics over whether the stats were exclusively passing (and I said stats, pro Bowls are not a stat)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, lancerman said:

You keep using Faulk as an example but if we were debating who was a better RB between Faulk, Brown or Sanders and someone brought up their rushing yards, rushing TD’s, YPC and all of a sudden you said “well Faulk really has this many yards because of receptions” it would be equally as preposterous.

Again the context was that Marino was a far superior QB, do you want to argue against that or do you want argue semantics over whether the stats were exclusively passing (and I said stats, pro Bowls are not a stat)

The context was you said Cam's never broken 40 TDs.  Someone responded saying that he had.  You in response did not say "I'm only talking about passing stats".  Instead, you told the guy to go away because Cam is a QB, not a RB.  You clearly were implying that his rushing statistics don't hold the same value.  As a matter of fact, you literally said "no its not the same" rather than saying "true, but I'm only talking about passing stats".  And then you proceeded to shame everyone for pointing out this fact.  

Instead of telling someone to go away for pointing out a fact (Cam has indeed cracked 40 TDs) and making it seem like rushing TDs don't equal 6 points like passing TDs do, you should have just said you were talking about passing TDs (even if that doesn't make sense in a discussion involving a rushing threat like Cam). 

And how would bringing up Faulk's receiving numbers in a discussion about who the better RB is be preposterous?  What?  Any argument about who the better RB is involving Faulk that limits it to rushing yards, rushing TDs, etc. isn't really much of an argument so I wouldn't take it seriously.  You can't ignore a facet of someones game.  

Edited by iknowcool
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hockey5djh said:

Man....someone cranky. While I don't think anyone in the thread has said "he's on the path to being a HOF" there are still some in here defending that side. Yes, I quoted you defending Newton against Dalton because you were trying to provide context. The point of me quoting that is that context behind the numbers should add to the case, not make the case. Also, the numbers I posted for Cam year over year against his peers have not been posted a single other time in this thread.

  Who? Show me? You jumped in telling people they were wrong about something they didn’t even think. Defending stats with context was all either “side” has done. Read the thread before you post one time.  

  Let’s post the first 7 years of all 23 HOF QBs and see if Cam stacks up? Aren’t those the standard? 

 

 

Edited by Toomers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Toomers said:

  Who? Show me? You jumped in telling people they were wrong about something they didn’t even think. Defending stats with context was all either “side” has done. Read the thread before you post one time.  

  Let’s post the first 7 years of all 23 HOF QBs and see if Cam stacks up? Aren’t those the standard? 

 

 

Not really.  

Guys are usually judged against their peers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, DLF54927 said:

Not really.  

Guys are usually judged against their peers.

 

Then how/who do you define as on pace? Who are Cams peers? The guys now, or the QBs the next ten years? Let’s go back 5 years. How many QBs drafted after 2006 are ahead of Cam when considering HOF pace?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Toomers said:

Then how/who do you define as on pace? Who are Cams peers? The guys now, or the QBs the next ten years? Let’s go back 5 years. How many QBs drafted after 2006 are ahead of Cam when considering HOF pace?

Seems pretty simple to me; guys that play the same position as he does while at the same time he's playing.  

I'm guessing the conversation goes like this, "Wow, Newton dominated in 2015, but why did he finish 14 points lower than league average as a passer in the next two seasons? Guys people imagined were much worse like Stafford and Cousins finished almost 20 points higher than he did while playing at the same time, in the same conference".

At no point will anyone care which season each is entering. He isn't going to get around that type of knock without more hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...