Twitter Is Debating Whether or Not Cam Newton Is a Winner and It's Moronic
Howard Eskin took to Twitter Wednesday and claimed Cam Newton wasn't a winner ... then proceeded to list the things Newton had won. It was quite the argument, and it sparked a debate on Twitter that was, at times, mind-numbing.
Cam Newton is not a winner. And when you refer to his past as Heisman winner, MVP, Rookie of year, it’s just that, his past. He’s 30 years old and has had many injuries including a shoulder. Not sure he fits into many offenses. People fall in love w past https://t.co/am3NbY6HeK
— Howard Eskin (@howardeskin) March 25, 2020
So if you don't count the things Newton has won, he's not a winner! And you shouldn't count them because they're in the past. By that logic, Tom Brady isn't a winner because his six Super Bowl rings all came in the past. What have you done lately Tom?!?
Eskin also carefully left out the fact that Newton won national titles at Auburn and in junior college, while also taking the Panthers to the Super Bowl. His career record as a starting quarterback is 68-55-1, which looks like winning to me.
The problem here is Eskin used the term "winner" which didn't mean Newton hasn't actually won things. He meant it in a nebulous way. So, this whole debate is meaningless, because that term can mean different things to different people and can't be quantified.
Here are some of the responses to Eskin's moronic tweet:
"Cam Newton is not a winner. Here are all the things he's won." https://t.co/LVTRFpqP5R
— Doug Farrar (@NFL_DougFarrar) March 28, 2020
Love you Howard but.....
— Steve Wyche (@wyche89) March 28, 2020
Congrats on being a winner in mental gymnastics ?
— Ted Nguyen (@FB_FilmAnalysis) March 28, 2020
“He’s not a winner. But if you bring up all the stuff he won that don’t count”
— Dan Baxter (@baxter4133) March 25, 2020
— Cole Wright (@ColeWright) March 28, 2020
I would love to be that big of a “loser”!
— Andy Nesbitt (@anezbitt) March 28, 2020
It’s a shame Skip, Colin, Nick Wright, and Stephen A keep the world from knowing how bad Howard Elkin has consistently been for decades.
— Bob Sturm (@SportsSturm) March 28, 2020
Based on Howard Eskin's definition, Patrick Mahones isn't a winner because it's in the past
— David Fucillo (@davidfucillo) March 28, 2020
This debate is so lame. Again, there's no way to quantify what being a winner means. I'm all here for people ripping Eskin's tweet though. It was crazy.