Peter King with a quote that I 100 percent agree with.

I completely agree with this post. Newton is supremely talented but I think Tannehill is the safer bet long term.

 

Is a touchdown a bread and butter play?

Because Newton scores like 28 of those per year while Tannehill has scored about 22 per year thus far.

Is a turnover a bread and butter play or is it a 'wow' play?

Because Ryan Tannehill averages 18 of those per year while Newton averages 16 of them.

 

Or is the argument more or less that Ryan Tannehill helps his offense score more touchdowns on their own, whereas Newton may score those touchdowns himself but that doesn't mean he's helping his offense score?

Because if that's the case then I think you have to try and dance between the rain drops to explain why Newton's offenses have averaged a #15 ranking over his four years there while Tannehill's offenses have averaged a #21 ranking in his three years.

 

Newton has the potential, I don't know if it's in him, or it's coaching. For now, Tannehill is clearly the better passer and unless Newton shows us something, will remain the better passer. Watching games last year, Newton looked like he wasn't trying. Throwing bullets on short and intermediate routes not even trying to apply any touch to his passes. Not sure what's going on, as I saw some improvement through his first 3 years.

The dual threat'ness can't be dismissed. If he becomes a competent passer he'll be a tough cookie to contain. Let's not forget he dealt with a rash of injuries last year.

 

Well, CK, the way I see it, is that quarterbacks that rely on their legs don't last as long. As they get older, they lose the speed, or the agility. Not to mention, generally, they're taking different sorts of hits, which can expose them to more injuries.

 

Disclaimer: I don't watch Newton as often as Tannehill. Having said that, I see Newton missing a lot of "easy" throws. He also has made more throws/plays where I came away thinking (for lack of a better term) "wow" than Tannehill.

The key difference is what you can plan around. I don't think you can expect Newton to succeed in the kind of offense Tannehill is playing in (with precise route running, timing-based etc..) or other types of offense where you need high-percentage plays to be successfully completed. And the ability to plan around a guy is very important IMO because that brings the coordinators'/coaches' abilities squarely into play.

With Newton, I think the best strategy is to just find some talented WR's that don't necessarily fit "together" or in a "system", but have great physical attributes (for WR's) and let them play a less structured game. Like I said though, I as a coach would not prefer to have such a player over one you can better plan around.

 

He will be a tough cookie to contain?

Cam Newton is already a tough quarterback to play against. He's been tougher to play against than Ryan Tannehill.

 

That's fair. But it hasn't happened yet, I don't think. The Panthers offense clearly had some woes last year but look what they were working with on the OL and WR units, not to mention the continuous injuries at RB. Newton basically manufactured the #18 offense in the NFL on his own.

 

Yes, so imagine when his passing becomes solid and consistent, he'll be nigh unstoppable. Ever heard of British understatement? Yeah I ain't British but the sentiment remains

Cam Newton was top 5 in fantasy his first 3 years. He dropped last year but adding Ginn and maybe Funchess will help. Fantasy doesn't measure anything but individual statistics but that's the point. He was already top 5 without polished passing skills and his passing was already decent. I think last year with ankle surgery, then the ribs, then stripping him of Smith and Ginn, hurt him. He took a step back passing. But I saw improvement over the first 3. Sure, it wasn't a 17 point jump but that just meant he didn't suck as bad as Tanny did to start with. Let's not forget him winning two games to get into the playoffs after fracturing his spine in two places in a car accident that look like it killed someone. I represented someone with a compression fracture in their spine after getting hit by a car riding a bicycle, and he couldn't ride a bike for 3 months and still isn't back to his pre-accident level 2 years later (competitive bicyclist).

 

So the argument is revolving around Cam Newton's accuracy.

Over his career Cam Newton has thrown catchable balls on 71.2% (1133 of 1591) of all aimed passes up to 19 yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Ryan Tannehill has thrown catchable balls on 77.3% (1064 of 1376) of those passes. So there is a disparity there.

On the other hand Newton has thrown catchable balls on 39.3% (106 of 270) of his throws 20+ yards beyond the line of scrimmage, versus Tannehill's 37.5% (63 of 168).

Altogether Newton's balls are catchable 66.6% of the time versus Tannehill's 73.0%.

That really is not that big of a disparity and to me the disparity altogether disappears when you account for what Newton has been doing on the ground and how much easier that makes it for the pedestrian cast around him to operate.

 

And its why Seattle might let Wilson walk. Have to wonder why a player the media and a number of fans deem to be elite is still playing out his rookie contract. Is it that the Seattle front office and coaches don't value him that way and believe he is the beneficiary of a system that they can plug in a more affordable QB and get the same results? Most interesting story of the next year imo

 

I don't know that I would characterize Newton's weapons over his career as "pedestrian." Might just be me. Deangelo Williams was good for them. Stewart had some really nice years. Steve Smith was sick. Greg Olsen was a stud. He had some nice weapons at his disposal.

 

And people can talk about the 2014 playoff appearance being a joke for the Panthers and I think that's fair.

However, I will say this. Faced with a situation where despite all the injuries and poor performance in the first 12 games of the season, they were still somehow in the playoff hunt over the final month of the season, they finished the year with four straight victories that pushed them into the playoffs and then got a playoff win on top of it.

And they had already done the same in 2013 as well. The Panthers were 9-4 at one point, having just lost to the 10-3 New Orleans Saints in the first of their two battles for the division crown (and a bye week). They won three consecutive games, beating the Saints and taking the division title and a bye week.

Two seasons in a row Miami was firmly in the playoff hunt with three games to go. In 2013 they beat the Patriots to go 8-6 and all they needed was one more victory to assure them a playoff spot, and all they had to do was beat the lowly Bills or Jets. We lost 0-19 and 7-20. Those weren't defensive meltdowns.

And by the time Miami played the Week 16 Vikings game in 2014, it was already too late. Miami got mathematically eliminated that day despite a win against Minnesota and I remember it was considered inevitable at that point as some incredibly unlikely series of circumstances would have needed to unfold for Miami to make it. For all intents and purposes the Dolphins played for and lost their playoff berth in the previous two weeks, and they lost 13-28 to the Ravens and 13-41 to the Patriots. Poor defensive showings, to be sure. But also poor offensive showings at the most critical stage of the season.

 

I tend to agree with ck on Newton although he's going to trash my Wilson post lol. He's underappreciated. His biggest problem imo is consistency. He can go entire halves ice cold but when he's on he's dangerous as hell. He's improved his reads tremendously and I like that he hesitates to run and will instead buy time for his receivers to get open.

 

Well, those stats help, but they're not really getting to the core of what I was saying. I think many (good) throws Newton makes are due to him moving out of the pocket in a way that wasn't necessarily designed and then throwing to a receiver that might have had time to get more open. Tannehill rarely does that. Tannehill is a far better pocket passer than Newton (the one area I'd say Tannehill > Newton).

So the question is: IF coaches plan a play that should be relatively high percentage, how accurate is Tannehill vs. Newton? The stats you posted don't really get at that, though it's true that some influence of what I'm describing should be seen in those stats, and it looks like some influence is possibly seen.

Also, regarding Newton's ability on the ground, I think if you take that into consideration you're looking at comparable QB's in terms of overall ability right now, but like I said: 1) I prefer a QB where you can get the OC more heavily involved, and 2) Newton seems to have peaked long time ago; Tannehill's ceiling seems to be higher.

 

Greg Olsen was a mediocre tight end when he met Cam Newton, relatively disappointing for a former 1st round pick in Chicago. Newton made him better than he is.

Steve Smith is awesome, I'll grant you that. But Newton never had any other receivers to throw to up there. He had Legedu Naanee and Brandon LaFell.

As for DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart, yeah they were good...in 2011. They haven't been healthy and good on the field since, except in spots. Newton had the luxury of good runners for basically his rookie year, and half of his fourth year.

 

That's true, CK, but especially last year, the oline was a complete wreck by that late in the year, and there were clearly tensions running high, judging from the Wallace soap opera that came a week or so later. So, I'm not sure I really want to lay the blame for the lackluster offense on Tannehill. Not a great game against Baltimore, but not a terrible game. Against the Patriots, threw for a ton of yards, but had one td and 2 ints. I recall at least one dropped td in that game, and I seem to recall some other garbage that happened, but don't remember it all. Yes, though, definite subpar performances from the offense.

 

No offense, but is any of this based on anything more than just your imagination? Are you watching film and seeing this, or are you imagining it in your head and then describing what you're imagining?

I just don't understand calling them "comparable" when one guy averages 28 touchdowns to 16 turnovers a year and the other averages 22 touchdowns to 18 turnovers...when one guy's offense averages a #15 ranking and the other guy's offense averages a #22 ranking...when one guy has not only been to the playoffs twice but actually helped lead those playoff pushes during the critical stages of the season, and the other guy fell short during that critical portion of the season two years in a row.

That's not comparable. I can't predict the future and it is my hope, and perhaps even my belief, that Ryan Tannehill will ascend beyond Cam Newton's level. I think it's a particularly salient point that Newton will get older and get beat up and if his legs aren't doing the damage for him anymore then Tannehill will pole vault him. I can get with that. But saying these two have been "comparable" is just...well, it's wrong. I don't think that's an opinion, I think that's just the way it is.

 

Personally, I would take Tannehill over Cam. A big reason for me is that I value passing above running ability in a QB and I see Tannehill as the better passer. And more narrowly, accuracy and decision-making are my top two QB criteria and I believe Tannehill is better in those areas. I also think that Tannehill will continue to improve his running ability. I don't ever want him to be a runner like CKap or Cam. But I'd like him to get closer to a Wilson or Rodgers, opportunistic runners who I consider primarily passers. Much like with Wilson, I see Tannehill as having a a large experience deficit relative to Cam. I see experience as a big factor in incorporating the run with the pass game (not including the other extreme, inexperienced guys who primarily run). But I also see experience as a temporary factor. Tannehill will never be able to run like Cam. He's simply not the same level of athlete, but I do think he can get closer to running like Rodgers.

Another big reason is trust. I simply trust Tannehill more to avoid injury, to not embarrass the organization, to be good for a longer stretch. I do not fault Carolina for the contract. I see Cam as clear franchise QB. But I simply prefer Tannehill as the face of my franchise.

I can understand the reasoning of those who prefer Cam. I think the preference for many is as much stylistic as anything else. Personally, my ideal QB is Rodgers and I see Tannehill as more likely to become a Rodgers' style QB.

 

Williams put up 836 yards in 2011, 737 in 2012, 843 in 2013, and 219 in 6 games in 2014. Stewart put up 761 yards in 2011, 336 in 2012, 180 in 2013 (injured), and 809 in 2014. They combined for 23 tds in those years. So, basically, every season, the Panthers have had over 1000 yards on the ground.

 

It's just based on the few games I've seen with Cam. That was the disclaimer I put up in post #46.

 

The OL up in Carolina has been no less of a wreck my man. It's been bad up there. A lot of failures on the personnel end, mediocre and disappointing play.

 

Every team gets over 1000 yards on the ground every year. That's not a good measure. DeAngelo Williams hasn't been an efficient runner since 2011 and he's not been a particularly healthy runner either. Jonathan Williams has not been healthy at all and only finally got going again from both a health AND performance standpoint in 2H2014.

If you really investigate it, that is exactly what you will find.

 

I said "comparable ability". I value Tannehill's pocket passing ability more than Cam's, and of course Cam can make things happen with his athleticism that Tannehill can't. I just don't think Cam would have made the Dolphins into perennial playoff contenders or that Tannehill would have led the Panthers to far worse records on average.

 

I think the big thing is I believe Ryan Tannehill hasn't hit his ceiling yet while I think Cam Newton has. I think as Tannehill continues to grow as a passer, while also continuing to get a better grasp of when and how best to use his athleticism as a runner, he will only get better.

Objectively right now these 2 are pretty damn close. I would definitely take Tannehill but I'm also willing to admit a large part of that is due to my homerism as a Dolphins and Ryan Tannehill fan.

 

I don't think they are.

 

My post wasn't meant to imply anything to do with Carolina. Simply speaking about the Dolphins poor play at the end of the year.

 

I wish Tannehill played more like Cam, or at least adopted his tendencies a little. Newton threatens the defense in more ways than Tannehill does; the way Newton runs, extends plays, hits ropes to the perimeter, and attacks deep...he's stressing the defense at every level. Tannehill doesn't do that.

This is where I disagree with people talking about 'upside'. Does Tannehill have more because he's never shown consistent ability in taking advantage of these areas of the game? Or does Newton have more because he's shown that he's capable of threatening a defense in more multiple ways?

It's similar to the improvement question: Why should Tannehill get bonus points for 'improvement' when the main reason he improved is the fact that he wasn't good in his first year? If he had Cam's rookie season he wouldn't have improved.

 

Newton's deficiencies I think are all "mental" in nature, as in decision making (certainly hard to argue they're physical limitations). Problem is, I don't see evidence his decision making has steadily improved over the years. Tannehill needs to improve his decision making too, but we've seen improvement in that. So for me that's the reason I think Tannehill will continue to improve while Newton will not.

 

Every team puts 1,000 yards on the ground. The minimum each year is around 1,200. Without Cam's contribution they'd range from the middle to the bottom of the league in rushing, assuming he'd get 200-300 like Ryan does.

I'm not 100% sure Cam has hit his ceiling yet. He suffered that ankle injury last year and really relied on his arm strength which threw his mechanics off. He's healthy this year, has new weapons. Ted Ginn ain't that special but he brings speed and they developed a little chemistry two years ago. He's a nice filler piece. Benjamin, Funchess, Olson and Ginn is better than what they had last year.

 

I think Stephen Hill could play a bigger role than Ted Ginn. Just a hunch.

EDIT: Take this talk for what it's worth but I guess he's been creating a little bit of a buzz in camp. He caught a bunch of long balls from Newton a couple weeks ago. He's 6'4" & 215 lbs, runs as fast as Ted Ginn, and has a year under his belt in the system as a practice squad player. Again, just a hunch.

 

Catch me up, are we talking past production or forecasting future performance?

I agree w your main argument, Newton's production has been great and his potential is off the charts. Imo the Newton > Tannehill arguement is considerably stronger than the Wilson > Tannehill arguement. Put Cam Newton in Seattle and I wonder how anyone would ever beat them.

 

Forgot about Hill. Definitely better than last year though.

 

Coaching.

I believe in his talent and ability , he needs to have a better coaching staff and game plan imo .

Have zero issues with him as a player , think he is a QB you certainly can with with , like 17 he can't do it alone or overcome major defecienies .

 

I don't know if it will be better or not but they seem like they know what they want. They have these huge pillars all over the damn place between Kelvin Benjamin (6'5" & 240 lbs), Devin Funchess (6'4" & 232 lbs), Stephen Hill (6'4" & 215 lbs), Marcus Lucas (6'4" & 220 lbs), Jarrett Boykin (6'2" & 218 lbs), Brenton Bersin (6'3" & 210 lbs). They've got a couple of tight ends that can play off the formation in Greg Olsen (6'5" & 254 lbs) and Ed Dickson (6'4" & 255 lbs). And of course Cam Newton himself is 6'5" & 245 lbs.

Then you have a couple guys that are polar opposites from them size-wise in Ted Ginn and Damiere Byrd, but both of them are among the fastest humans on the planet.

 

A bunch of guys who can reach or run underneath errant throws lol.

Seriously, let Cam do what he does best. It'd be a huge mistake to sit him in he pocket and run a traditional offense. I'm guessing there are people in the organization who want to do just that, to protect their 100 million dollar investment but Cam will never be as good as he can be playing as a run it how the coaches draw it up style QB.

 

The Panthers do a good job running the offense through him. He's had no shortage of opportunities to hurt teams with his legs. Like I said basically 4 times a game they run him on designed runs. Another 2 or 3 times a game, he scrambles for yardage off the pass.

By doing that he ends up gaining 640 yards & 8 TDs a year on the ground. That's pretty damn significant.

 

Wilson>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Newton>Tannehill

 

We agree on a lot but this is pretty ridiculous.