Sorry Marvin, but You're Wrong: Why Cam Newton Does Not Have "It"
Sure, Cam Newton is a good player but Lewis' statement is an exaggeration that must be addressed; the reality is, Newton is overrated.
In 2010, Cam Newton was one of college football's most outstanding players, he threw for 2,854 yards, 30 touchdowns and finished the year with 182.05 quarterback rating. What the impeccable statistics don't say is how overrated he is.
Most people use his outstanding 2010 statistics to prove a point by saying that, because he had a really good year, he is NFL material and should be a Top Five pick. The key piece of evidence against that argument is within the argument itself, which is that he has only had a good 2010.
Having Newton would be a huge risk for teams like these, he won't be able to produce. Teams like these are in the rebuilding stage as they look for players to build their franchises around, since they have two of the first five picks in the draft.
There is no doubt that Newton has a great arm and can air the ball out, but if he were to play for one of these teams, the ability to throw 60-yard bombs all the time won't help much, that's not how professional football is played.
Not only does his play on the field raise some serious questions, his off-field actions may end up bringing a team's public relations down.
This year's NFL example would be the Jets' Braylon Edwards being arrested for DUI after beating the Patriots. Prior to his arrest the Jets' reputation was already on the fence since Rex Ryan flipped off Miami Dolphins fans at a wrestling event.
Newton was already in the national spotlight as the NCAA investigated how he and his father decided that Cam would go to play at Auburn (pay-for-play).
Sure, Cam Newton looks like he has "it," because of his strong arm and he's built like a horse, but with the off-field controversy and the high chance that he could be a bust, he's not worth a pick early in the first round.
Quote from here.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?