Cam Newton Thinks He’ll be Drafted by Dallas Cowboys

I would absolutely, totally, and completely hate this move. We have far more pressing needs than a QB to sit behind Romo for a few years.
 
pupulehaole;3858362 said:
yea my bad i totally forgot i could read minds rofl you're hilarious.
Are you drunk? You said you'd be pissed if we took him. So I said you won't be pissed. A damned 1st grader could figure that out. So don't blame me for mind reading and other crap.
 
Hostile;3858364 said:
Are you drunk? You said you'd be pissed if we took him. So I said you won't be pissed. A damned 1st grader could figure that out. So don't blame me for mind reading and other crap.

Bro "you're not going to be pissed" could have so many different explanations but whatever this is petty lol so ill just stop. Oh and no i'm not drunk....
 
pupulehaole;3858365 said:
Bro "you're not going to be pissed" could have so many different explanations but whatever this is petty lol so ill just stop. Oh and no i'm not drunk....
Good, because if you are this surly when someone is trying to be friendly and you aren't drunk I'd hate to be friendly when you are.
 
Hostile;3858373 said:
Good, because if you are this surly when someone is trying to be friendly and you aren't drunk I'd hate to be friendly when you are.
:laugh2:
 
carphalen5150;3858290 said:
If you view him as a franchise QB you never pass on them to fill a need.

False. That's not the rule.

You never pass on a franchise QB if you do not already have one.

If you do, you pass on them.

Hence the Cowboys will and should pass on "franchise" qbs and take players who might actually play at some point in the next 5 years.
 
I wonder how much money Jerry paid Cam's dad for him to start spreading that rumor?
 
There's no way in hell Garrett's hitching his coaching career on Cam Newton.
 
Dash28;3858451 said:
Nothing needed explanation.

Actually, I read it the way pup... did. Sounded like Hos was guaranteeing that Cam will be a huge success and he wouldn't have a reason to be pissed.

So make that 2 people that needed explanations.
 
If we draft Cam my fandom will take a step back...I can't root for this guy :(
 
proline;3858528 said:
Actually, I read it the way pup... did. Sounded like Hos was guaranteeing that Cam will be a huge success and he wouldn't have a reason to be pissed. So make that 2 people that needed explanations.


Really ? :huh:
 
dbair1967;3858524 said:
There's no way in hell Garrett's hitching his coaching career on Cam Newton.


Probably the smartest thing written about us drafting cam, yet.
 
proline;3858528 said:
Actually, I read it the way pup... did. Sounded like Hos was guaranteeing that Cam will be a huge success and he wouldn't have a reason to be pissed.

So make that 2 people that needed explanations.
Seriously?

He said he would be pissed if we selected Cam, Hos said that he wouldn't be pissed. To make it simple, Newton will not be our selection so he won't be pissed.
 
Dash28;3858570 said:
Seriously?

He said he would be pissed if we selected Cam, Hos said that he wouldn't be pissed. To make it simple, Newton will not be our selection so he won't be pissed.

Look, I get it. But it's a stretch to say that it was obvious. Since pupulehaole said that he would be pissed IF Newton was picked, and Hos's reply didn't address the conditional, then it is readily implied from Hos's response that he is arguing about the same conditional, i.e. not throwing another issue into the argument.

Let's try this:

pupulehaole: If it rains, my car in the driveway is going to get wet.

Hostile: No, your car won't get wet.


According to several of you, we are supposed to imply from Hos's reply that it isn't going to rain. If that's how you communicate, all I can say is :banghead:
 
I don't see a quote from Cam that says he thinks the Cowboys will take him... The title of this article came from "Jerry knows how to reach me"??
 
proline;3858745 said:
Look, I get it. But it's a stretch to say that it was obvious. Since pupulehaole said that he would be pissed IF Newton was picked, and Hos's reply didn't address the conditional, then it is readily implied from Hos's response that he is arguing about the same conditional, i.e. not throwing another issue into the argument.

Let's try this:

pupulehaole: If it rains, my car in the driveway is going to get wet.

Hostile: No, your car won't get wet.


According to several of you, we are supposed to imply from Hos's reply that it isn't going to rain. If that's how you communicate, all I can say is :banghead:

Rofl youre a ****** man.
 

Staff online

Cowboys Pick'em

DAL @ GB
Oct 18, 2026 at 7:20 PM
Make your pick
83 member(s) have picked so far. Picks are revealed at kickoff.
+ 1 more games to pick this week
Season leaders
🥇 Skafko Skafko 65
🥈 TheSport78 TheSport78 55
🥉 SlammedZero SlammedZero 50
🥉 Homer Homer 50
🥉 12+88=7 12+88=7 50

Survivor Pool

49 of 64 still standing
Week 6 · last kickoff Oct 19, 2026 at 7:15 PM
Join the pool
Most picked (locked games)
LAR ARI 23%
IND TEN 14%
CAR @PHI 11%

Forum statistics

Threads
476,591
Messages
14,703,025
Members
24,234
Latest member
Justdatruth
Back
Top