this writer actually thinks Ponder is better then Cam long term (1 Viewer)

[biggamer3]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton

Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.

Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.

But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.

Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.

If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.

The debate is who will have the better long-term future.

Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.

Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners.

Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.

Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).

Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.

When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.

Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.

The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.

However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.

The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

 

[CalBear]

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

"Maturation" is the process of an abscess forming pus, which pretty much describes the value of this article.

 

[shnikies]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.The debate is who will have the better long-term future.Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners. Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

You do understand that article is from Bleacher Report? It's a website where anyone can write an article. You don't need to know what you're doing, these aren't paid journalists. /endthread

 

[Reepicheep]

Newton has proven more in the pocket than Ponder. It's certainly possible that Ponder could have the better career but the whole article is garbage.

 

[massraider]

It's not a writer. It's a guy on Bleacher Report. Bleacher Report is a series of fan-zines. And the fans that write for them are no more qualified to be called writers than you or I. They aren't living off of writing that stuff.

Although, this early on in their careers, I don't think it's far-fetched to predict anything. If someone wants to tell me they think Ponder is going be a better QB than Cam, well, OK. It's only been a handful of games.

It's funny, before the season everyone knew the Panthers screwed the pooch. And now we're at the point where people get held up for ridicule if they dare rank another rookie QB over him. Funny how common knowledge changes so fast.

 

[two_dollars]

It certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility.

 

[biggamer3]

It's not a writer. It's a guy on Bleacher Report. Bleacher Report is a series of fan-zines. And the fans that write for them are no more qualified to be called writers than you or I. They aren't living off of writing that stuff.

Although, this early on in their careers, I don't think it's far-fetched to predict anything. If someone wants to tell me they think Ponder is going be a better QB than Cam, well, OK. It's only been a handful of games.

It's funny, before the season everyone knew the Panthers screwed the pooch. And now we're at the point where people get held up for ridicule if they dare rank another rookie QB over him. Funny how common knowledge changes so fast.

Ok thanks your right, I didn't know it was random fans, thought they were legitimate writers. Its absolute drivel

 

[CalBear]

It certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility.

Sure, Ponder could wind up with a better career than Newton, but if he does, it'll be because he's better than Newton, not because he's a pocket passer and Newton can also run. The article includes no analysis.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

I'm guessing the writer of the article was the same guy who was predicting the Packers would lose to the Vikings on the board last week.

 

[shnikies]

I'm guessing the writer of the article was the same guy who was predicting the Packers would lose to the Vikings on the board last week.

I'm guessing he's in seventh grade and is honored to have his article be the topic of this thread.

 

[Touchdown Syndrome]

Stopped reading at "bleacher report".

 

[Johnny Blood]

It's infuriating that Bleacher Report sites show up in Google News searches.

 

[Wadsworth]

Stay in school, stay off drugs.

 

[killrobotkill]

It's not as bad of an article as some of the folks on here are making it out to be. There's some good points made, although he also ignores some of Ponder's weaknesses (i.e. his tendency to stare down receivers).

The thing about articles like this, though, is that it's pretty risk-free to take two rookies and say that one will have a better career than the other. For example, if Ponder has a career-ending injury next year, the author can just say "I would have been right had Ponder not had that injury" and nobody could prove him wrong. Same thing if Ponder gets stuck on bad teams, has below-average receivers to work with for his career, or any number of excuses. And even if they both manage to stay injury-free and have identical situations, and Newton does prove to have a better career, who's going to go back to this article 10-15 years from now and dig up this article and put it back in the author's face? I remember back when people were saying the Patriots shouldn't start Brady ahead of Bledsoe - who calls them out on that now?

 

[BallparkFrank]

I just happened to see a Ponder press conference today for the first time - dude already carries himself like an Aaron Rodgers type with a combo of well spoken, funny, humble, cool under pressure, yet oozing confidence at the same time. I think the only tool he may be missing is the consistent accurate deep ball (6/18 on throws outside the numbers last week per PFF), otherwise he seems to be pretty close to the total package when you account for all around skills, intelligence, and character. He's an intriguing kid to watch for the future.

 

[mr roboto]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton

Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.

Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.

But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.

Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.

If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.

The debate is who will have the better long-term future.

Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.

Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners.

Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.

Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).

Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.

When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.

Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.

The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.

However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.

The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

The first two red lines I highlighted smack of the kind of latent racism that exists when an athletic black QB comes into the league. When have you ever heard 'pocket presence', 'poise', or 'intelligence' used to describe an African American QB? I don't know if it is the case with this writer, but this is the typical stuff said about Vick, McNabb etc.The 3rd line is patently false. Ponder WAS touted as a good runner, athletic, quick, able to get 1st downs with his legs. He does look to tuck and run more than the Brady, Manning type QB.

 

[Disc Shark]

I watched a good portion of the Green Bay/Minn. game last Sunday, and while I think Newton is better, I thought Ponder looked pretty good.

 

[Apple Jack]

I hope this kid's comp professor isn't a football fan.

 

[MIMN]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton

Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.

Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.

But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.

Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.

If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.

The debate is who will have the better long-term future.

Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.

Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners.

Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.

Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).

Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.

When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.

Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.

The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.

However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.

The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

The first two red lines I highlighted smack of the kind of latent racism that exists when an athletic black QB comes into the league. When have you ever heard 'pocket presence', 'poise', or 'intelligence' used to describe an African American QB? I don't know if it is the case with this writer, but this is the typical stuff said about Vick, McNabb etc.The 3rd line is patently false. Ponder WAS touted as a good runner, athletic, quick, able to get 1st downs with his legs. He does look to tuck and run more than the Brady, Manning type QB.

Your comments are as ridiculous as the original "article." When did the writer mention race? Not at all.

 

[sports_fan]

The author underestimates Newton's pocket presence and throwing ability. He looks like a hell of a lot more than just a running QB. I like Ponder's long term outlook a good deal but Newton has a chance to be something special. Ponder isn't quite at that level.

 

[massraider]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton

Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.

Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.

But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.

Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.

If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.

The debate is who will have the better long-term future.

Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.

Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners.

Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.

Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).

Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.

When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.

Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.

The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.

However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.

The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

The first two red lines I highlighted smack of the kind of latent racism that exists when an athletic black QB comes into the league. When have you ever heard 'pocket presence', 'poise', or 'intelligence' used to describe an African American QB? I don't know if it is the case with this writer, but this is the typical stuff said about Vick, McNabb etc.The 3rd line is patently false. Ponder WAS touted as a good runner, athletic, quick, able to get 1st downs with his legs. He does look to tuck and run more than the Brady, Manning type QB.

Your comments are as ridiculous as the original "article." When did the writer mention race? Not at all.

He didn't. Hence the term 'latent'.

 

[Reepicheep]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton

Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.

Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.

But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.

Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.

If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.

The debate is who will have the better long-term future.

Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.

Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners.

Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.

Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).

Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.

When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.

Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.

The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.

However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.

The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

The first two red lines I highlighted smack of the kind of latent racism that exists when an athletic black QB comes into the league. When have you ever heard 'pocket presence', 'poise', or 'intelligence' used to describe an African American QB? I don't know if it is the case with this writer, but this is the typical stuff said about Vick, McNabb etc.The 3rd line is patently false. Ponder WAS touted as a good runner, athletic, quick, able to get 1st downs with his legs. He does look to tuck and run more than the Brady, Manning type QB.

Your comments are as ridiculous as the original "article." When did the writer mention race? Not at all.

He didn't. Hence the term 'latent'.

I don't like to assume racist intentions. But, I was put off by how the author went out of his way to make sure you know that he views Ponder as more intelligent than Newton, without providing any basis for this other than he was drafted as a pocket passer. It certainly makes you wonder: Why does he think Ponder is more intelligent?

 

[Bri]

It's infuriating that Bleacher Report sites show up in Google News searches.

CBS owns them, or did.They pay some very good writers then attract the fans to write. In time, ditching the writers that "drew" a crowd and got it all built up. It's a pretty common practice for building a site.

 

[Bri]

I do appreciate someone going out on a limb as many seemed to have Cam in the HOF after week two.

I don't disagree with this summary: However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.

However, it's harder to predict greatness for a pocket guy that still has so much learning to do versus a supreme athlete that has already lit it up.

 

[GManiac]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.The debate is who will have the better long-term future.Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners. Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

You do understand that article is from Bleacher Report? It's a website where anyone can write an article. You don't need to know what you're doing, these aren't paid journalists. /endthread

The difference between modern day journalist when it comes to sports, especially fantasy, is about a hairs width greater than that of anyone on here. Fantasy analysts and editorial writers are generally hardly more knowledgeable than your run of the mill dynasty league owner. Especially since the majority of the content in fantasy writing is subjective opinion. These are not really "professionals" or "experts" when it comes to fantasy sports. Just because some guy gets payed to write fantasy football content, does not mean he knows any more about fantasy sports than anyone else. It's really disturbing to see people look up to fantasy sports guru's. These guys just made it their jobs. There is little difference otherwise. Ugh.

 

[Reepicheep]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.The debate is who will have the better long-term future.Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners. Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

You do understand that article is from Bleacher Report? It's a website where anyone can write an article. You don't need to know what you're doing, these aren't paid journalists. /endthread

The difference between modern day journalist when it comes to sports, especially fantasy, is about a hairs width greater than that of anyone on here. Fantasy analysts and editorial writers are generally hardly more knowledgeable than your run of the mill dynasty league owner. Especially since the majority of the content in fantasy writing is subjective opinion. These are not really "professionals" or "experts" when it comes to fantasy sports. Just because some guy gets payed to write fantasy football content, does not mean he knows any more about fantasy sports than anyone else. It's really disturbing to see people look up to fantasy sports guru's. These guys just made it their jobs. There is little difference otherwise. Ugh.

Thats all well and good, but the article is still poorly written drivel.

 

[BassNBrew]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton

Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.

Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.

But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.

Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.

If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.

The debate is who will have the better long-term future.

Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.

Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners.

Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.

Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).

Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.

When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.

Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.

The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.

However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.

The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

The first two red lines I highlighted smack of the kind of latent racism that exists when an athletic black QB comes into the league. When have you ever heard 'pocket presence', 'poise', or 'intelligence' used to describe an African American QB? I don't know if it is the case with this writer, but this is the typical stuff said about Vick, McNabb etc.The 3rd line is patently false. Ponder WAS touted as a good runner, athletic, quick, able to get 1st downs with his legs. He does look to tuck and run more than the Brady, Manning type QB.

Your comments are as ridiculous as the original "article." When did the writer mention race? Not at all.

He didn't. Hence the term 'latent'.

I don't like to assume racist intentions. But, I was put off by how the author went out of his way to make sure you know that he views Ponder as more intelligent than Newton, without providing any basis for this other than he was drafted as a pocket passer. It certainly makes you wonder: Why does he think Ponder is more intelligent?

Wonderlic scoresMcElroy 43, Gabbert 42, Ponder 35, Stanzi 30, Dalton 29, Mallett 26, Newton 21, Locker 20.

Also, Ponder beat Newton in the 3 cone drill and 20 yard shuttle run. Pretty close to him in the 40 yard dash.

Also

Name School Pass/Fail Wonderlic Starts Completion Percentage

Christian Ponder FSU Pass 35 35 61.8%

Greg McElroy Alabama Pass 43 27 66.3%

Andy Dalton TCU Pass 29 50 61.7%

Blaine Gabbert Missouri Pass 42 29 60.9%

Jake Locker Washington Fail 20 39 53.9%

Colin Kaepernick Nevada Fail - 49 58.2%

Ricky Stanzi Iowa Fail 30 32 59.8%

Cam Newton Auburn Fail 21 14 66.1%

Ryan Mallett Arkansas Fail 26 29 57.8%

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2011/3/17/2056095/quarterback-wonderlic-scores-released-updating-the-26-27-60-formula

 

[lazyike]

I wouldn't like to compare Ponder to Newton but it is refreshing to see the Minnesota braintrust see the value of a somewhat athletic QB who is mobile, accurate and smart with the emphasis on smart. I'd rather compare him to a young Fran Tarkenton. I like what I've seen of him so far.

 

[THE SNOWMAN]

Ponder > Newton

 

[BassNBrew]

Personally I like Newton's arm more than his athletism. I think his running success is a due alot to his size. That size will help him in the pocket survive those hits you aren't prepared for.

 

[GManiac]

I do worry that teams might expose Ponders longball. He may have a great amount of success but ultimately if he doesn't throw the ball downfield with more velocity he could have Int issues. As his arm probably will not get much stronger, he will have to overcome this by assuring his downfield passes are as accurate as possible. Since he is so accurate in general, especially in the shorter game, I think there is a good chance he learns how to do this more efficiently than he currently is. His arm strength is not bad, he just can not send rockets 80 yards. They have decent velocity but are the type of pass that are more prone for interception. Usually higher up, more air underneath, with a bigger arc. Easier for DBs to get into position for these balls as they have slightly more time to do so. Also allows other DBs to gain ground on the WR.

And I do certainly think Newton has a better arm. He is the better QB currently. But I do not think he is as intelligent as Ponder. And not because he is black. I have heard them both interviewed and have seen them both play. While there are certainly language differences based on culture and background, Ponder certainly seems to me to have a greater grasp on reality and control of his thoughts and language. Newton is certainly no dummy though. On the field, Ponder makes top notch football choices all the time. He is well learned in that regard. Newton takes a lot more chances, and puts himself into a lot more poor football positions. Perhaps this has less to do with intelligence and more to do with him being spoiled with ability and never needing to learn such things to the full extent. But either way it displays to me a higher level of decision making for Ponder. In my opinion Brett Farve had this issue in common with Cam Newton. Brett would often put himself into bad spots or take hopeless chances. While he was a great QB, he has never been accused of being the rocket scientist of QBs. Perhaps though, he too was a victim of a superhuman athletic advantage. Brett possibly spoiled by his arm strength.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

I'm not sure how others view this, but I consider Aaron Rodgers to be pretty athletic. He seems like a pretty good pocket passer to me.

 

[kinghill]

Stopped reading at "bleacher report".

 

[Reepicheep]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/909322-why-christian-ponder-has-the-better-longterm-future-than-cam-newton

Cam Newton and Christian Ponder were two first-round quarterbacks drafted to be the QB of the future for their respective teams, but there is reason to suggest it will be Ponder who will have the better long-term future.

Newton took everyone by storm in the beginning of the season, passing for over 800 yards and three scores, and he continues to play at an elite level despite coming back down to Earth just a bit.

But it isn’t just his arm that makes him so lovable and respected on the field; rather, it's his ability to run.

Ponder, on the other hand, had to wait until just last week to make his NFL debut, and it didn’t go over so well. He was, however, able to move the chains and nearly handed the only undefeated team in the NFL its first loss of the season.

If we stop right there, many will simply say Newton is the far better quarterback over Ponder, and while that is arguably true, it is not the debate here.

The debate is who will have the better long-term future.

Newton has tremendous ability, that much is certain, but he also comes with a rather high-risk factor in that flashy mobility he has. Newton can run like a running back, but highly mobile quarterbacks have a much shorter shelf life than Ponder’s variety, which is built on foundation and intelligence.

Quarterbacks such as Brett Favre and Joe Montana were never known for their ability to run like a RB—in fact, they were terrible runners.

Michael Vick is one of the most electric passers in the league right now and is the epitome of what we think of when we imagine athletic, mobile quarterbacks, but Vick has also never played a full season healthy.

Another mentionable point is the value of a pocket passer and how much of a positive effect it has on a quarterback's long-term future if he masters the art.

Athletic QBs traditionally never maturate into true pocket passers; rather, they rely too heavily on their athleticism instead of good old fashion football intelligence.

The obvious issue here is longevity, but also, these non-pocket passers struggle against certain defenses, such as the base 3-4 (Vick, again, is just one example).

Ponder is not at all known for his mobility, but he was touted as the most intelligent quarterback coming out of this year’s draft.

When Ponder was drafted, he was more experienced out of the shotgun than any other set but quickly adapted to the pocket passer role—a role all quarterbacks need to learn if they are to succeed in the long term as an NFL quarterback.

Newton is still struggling with his pocket presence consistently.

The bottom line as it stands now is that Newton is more talented while obviously being far more athletic and aggressive, while Ponder appears to be more methodical and mental.

However, when you raise a debate about the long-term future of a quarterback, that future is more reliant on health, intelligence and execution, rather than athleticism, flashiness and pizzazz.

The long-term outlook for Christian Ponder, and his type of quarterback, is simply better than the Cam Newton variety, but hey, it’ll still be fun to watch them both for the next several years.

The first two red lines I highlighted smack of the kind of latent racism that exists when an athletic black QB comes into the league. When have you ever heard 'pocket presence', 'poise', or 'intelligence' used to describe an African American QB? I don't know if it is the case with this writer, but this is the typical stuff said about Vick, McNabb etc.The 3rd line is patently false. Ponder WAS touted as a good runner, athletic, quick, able to get 1st downs with his legs. He does look to tuck and run more than the Brady, Manning type QB.

Your comments are as ridiculous as the original "article." When did the writer mention race? Not at all.

He didn't. Hence the term 'latent'.

I don't like to assume racist intentions. But, I was put off by how the author went out of his way to make sure you know that he views Ponder as more intelligent than Newton, without providing any basis for this other than he was drafted as a pocket passer. It certainly makes you wonder: Why does he think Ponder is more intelligent?

Wonderlic scoresMcElroy 43, Gabbert 42, Ponder 35, Stanzi 30, Dalton 29, Mallett 26, Newton 21, Locker 20.

Also, Ponder beat Newton in the 3 cone drill and 20 yard shuttle run. Pretty close to him in the 40 yard dash.

Also

Name School Pass/Fail Wonderlic Starts Completion Percentage

Christian Ponder FSU Pass 35 35 61.8%

Greg McElroy Alabama Pass 43 27 66.3%

Andy Dalton TCU Pass 29 50 61.7%

Blaine Gabbert Missouri Pass 42 29 60.9%

Jake Locker Washington Fail 20 39 53.9%

Colin Kaepernick Nevada Fail - 49 58.2%

Ricky Stanzi Iowa Fail 30 32 59.8%

Cam Newton Auburn Fail 21 14 66.1%

Ryan Mallett Arkansas Fail 26 29 57.8%

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2011/3/17/2056095/quarterback-wonderlic-scores-released-updating-the-26-27-60-formula

Well at least there is some basis for it then. Now if only Wonderlic scores correlated with QB success he would be onto something!

 

[two_dollars]

Who says they don't? I know its not a direct correlation but Is love to see a cluster graph. The success of Fitzpatrick already had me thinking about it. I'm sure some QBs got drafted only because their intelligence made them what they were in college, and others only because of their athletics.. it's part one and part the other I'm sure and not black and white, so to speak.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Who says they don't? I know its not a direct correlation but Is love to see a cluster graph. The success of Fitzpatrick already had me thinking about it. I'm sure some QBs got drafted only because their intelligence made them what they were in college, and others only because of their athletics.. it's part one and part the other I'm sure and not black and white, so to speak.

When Manning & Leaf came out Leaf owned the physical stats & Manning owned the mental stats.

 

[Reepicheep]

Who says they don't? I know its not a direct correlation but Is love to see a cluster graph. The success of Fitzpatrick already had me thinking about it. I'm sure some QBs got drafted only because their intelligence made them what they were in college, and others only because of their athletics.. it's part one and part the other I'm sure and not black and white, so to speak.

Wikipedia cites this study (among others) when stating:

Similarly, a 2009 study by Brian D. Lyons, Brian J. Hoffman, and John W. Michel found that Wonderlic test scores failed to positively and significantly predict future NFL performance for any position.

The Lyons study also found that the relationship between Wonderlic test scores and future NFL performance was negative for a few positions, indicating the higher a player scores on the Wonderlic test, the worse the player will perform in the NFL.

Also an AJC article discussing the same study with some quotes from Lyons.

 

[JaxBill]

I want to see what Ponder does over the next few weeks now that defensive coordinators have had a chance to view game film on him. Much like teams had some success last year in keeping Vick from running to his left, I want to see if teams try to stop the rollout and how he adjusts to being kept in the pocket.

 

[Hue G]

I want to see what Ponder does over the next few weeks now that defensive coordinators have had a chance to view game film on him. Much like teams had some success last year in keeping Vick from running to his left, I want to see if teams try to stop the rollout and how he adjusts to being kept in the pocket.

The interesting thing is that last week the Vikings had Ponder rolling out to his left and he's right handed while he made a few nice throws rolling out that way he looked understandably awkward and I was kind of puzzled as to why they kept doing it. Ponder looked really good while moving around and scrambling but he did look pretty uncomfortable in the pocket, obviously it was just his first start so hopefully he'll improve but it's something I'll be paying attention to.Should be fun to see Ponder and Newton go at it on Sunday

 

[pantherclub]

Newton is a sick freak at QB and he does things that I have never seen any other qb's do. Such as 50 yard thread the needle pass throwing off his back foot after he has eluded multiple tackles. He does this consistently.

 

[sports_fan]

I want to see what Ponder does over the next few weeks now that defensive coordinators have had a chance to view game film on him. Much like teams had some success last year in keeping Vick from running to his left, I want to see if teams try to stop the rollout and how he adjusts to being kept in the pocket.

The interesting thing is that last week the Vikings had Ponder rolling out to his left and he's right handed while he made a few nice throws rolling out that way he looked understandably awkward and I was kind of puzzled as to why they kept doing it. Ponder looked really good while moving around and scrambling but he did look pretty uncomfortable in the pocket, obviously it was just his first start so hopefully he'll improve but it's something I'll be paying attention to.Should be fun to see Ponder and Newton go at it on Sunday

I've heard a few people say this. I saw the game and it looked to me that on the plays where he did roll to the left it was because the pressure forced him to, and it wasn't necessarily by design. He was under pressure nearly the entire game and was forced to leave the pocket many times. I don't think very highly of the MN coaching staff but they know enough not to send a right handed QB on rollouts to his left.

 

[BassNBrew]

Well at least there is some basis for it then. Now if only Wonderlic scores correlated with QB success he would be onto something!

The link I posted was talking about correlated Wonderlic, college starts, and college completion percentage to success in the NFL.I'm a Cam fan and don't think he fits into the typical categories. Size, speed, arm strength, and maybe accuracy...no one has brought that combination to the NFL before.

 

[Hue G]

Well at least there is some basis for it then. Now if only Wonderlic scores correlated with QB success he would be onto something!

The link I posted was talking about correlated Wonderlic, college starts, and college completion percentage to success in the NFL.I'm a Cam fan and don't think he fits into the typical categories. Size, speed, arm strength, and maybe accuracy...no one has brought that combination to the NFL before.

We've heard the same things before about Dante Culpepper and Donavan McNabb early in their careers, McNabb turned into a decent pocket passer (for a couple years) after his legs abandoned him, after Culpepper's knee got messed up he could never become a consistent pocket passer so his career was cut short after he finished second behind Peyton Manning for league MVP when Manning had the best season of his career and one of the best season for any QB ever.I'm not saying Newton can't or won't develop into a great pocket passer, in fact I've actually been quite impressed that he goes through some progression and doesn't get too impatient before running like Tebow does and it would be very easy to do especially for a rookie but it's hard to say what a QB like that would be like if the threat of running went away or was minimized.

 

[massraider]

Well at least there is some basis for it then. Now if only Wonderlic scores correlated with QB success he would be onto something!

The link I posted was talking about correlated Wonderlic, college starts, and college completion percentage to success in the NFL.I'm a Cam fan and don't think he fits into the typical categories. Size, speed, arm strength, and maybe accuracy...no one has brought that combination to the NFL before.

We've heard the same things before about Dante Culpepper and Donavan McNabb early in their careers, McNabb turned into a decent pocket passer (for a couple years) after his legs abandoned him, after Culpepper's knee got messed up he could never become a consistent pocket passer so his career was cut short after he finished second behind Peyton Manning for league MVP when Manning had the best season of his career and one of the best season for any QB ever.I'm not saying Newton can't or won't develop into a great pocket passer, in fact I've actually been quite impressed that he goes through some progression and doesn't get too impatient before running like Tebow does and it would be very easy to do especially for a rookie but it's hard to say what a QB like that would be like if the threat of running went away or was minimized.

Steve Young.Fran Tarkenton.Randall Cunningham.Steve McNair.

 

[Reepicheep]

Well at least there is some basis for it then. Now if only Wonderlic scores correlated with QB success he would be onto something!

The link I posted was talking about correlated Wonderlic, college starts, and college completion percentage to success in the NFL.I'm a Cam fan and don't think he fits into the typical categories. Size, speed, arm strength, and maybe accuracy...no one has brought that combination to the NFL before.

Sorry, I didn't see anything about real statistical correlation. I read the link, and the link it linked to, and the link the link linked to. All I saw were cherry-picked examples of good players who fit the "rule" and bad players who didn't, and some notable "exceptions." Even if the rule itself had a strong statistical correlation with NFL success, I would still want to see that removing the Wonderlic score from the rule negatively impacted the correlation.

 

[daveR]

If the writer spells "than" T-H-E-N, he's not much of a writer.

 

[NCCommish]

I keep seeing everyone say Cam isn't smart. Well that doesn't jibe with what people who work with him say. Everyone who helped him prep for this season has said how impressed they were with his ability to quickly both understand and execute plays given to him. Chud has said on several occasions how impressive Cam is in the classroom. And you don't have the start he has within a relatively complicated offense if you aren't smart. I think Cam is plenty smart.

 

[pantherclub]

Well at least there is some basis for it then. Now if only Wonderlic scores correlated with QB success he would be onto something!

The link I posted was talking about correlated Wonderlic, college starts, and college completion percentage to success in the NFL.I'm a Cam fan and don't think he fits into the typical categories. Size, speed, arm strength, and maybe accuracy...no one has brought that combination to the NFL before.

We've heard the same things before about Dante Culpepper and Donavan McNabb early in their careers, McNabb turned into a decent pocket passer (for a couple years) after his legs abandoned him, after Culpepper's knee got messed up he could never become a consistent pocket passer so his career was cut short after he finished second behind Peyton Manning for league MVP when Manning had the best season of his career and one of the best season for any QB ever.I'm not saying Newton can't or won't develop into a great pocket passer, in fact I've actually been quite impressed that he goes through some progression and doesn't get too impatient before running like Tebow does and it would be very easy to do especially for a rookie but it's hard to say what a QB like that would be like if the threat of running went away or was minimized.

Steve Young.Fran Tarkenton.Randall Cunningham.Steve McNair.

None of those guys were as big as Cam or had a stronger arm.Cam is a freak.

 

[Ballstein]

cam = early culpepper

 

[BassNBrew]

Well at least there is some basis for it then. Now if only Wonderlic scores correlated with QB success he would be onto something!

The link I posted was talking about correlated Wonderlic, college starts, and college completion percentage to success in the NFL.I'm a Cam fan and don't think he fits into the typical categories. Size, speed, arm strength, and maybe accuracy...no one has brought that combination to the NFL before.

Sorry, I didn't see anything about real statistical correlation. I read the link, and the link it linked to, and the link the link linked to. All I saw were cherry-picked examples of good players who fit the "rule" and bad players who didn't, and some notable "exceptions." Even if the rule itself had a strong statistical correlation with NFL success, I would still want to see that removing the Wonderlic score from the rule negatively impacted the correlation.

You're correct. It's a weak start, but it's something to talk about so I posted it.