Mike,
Simplified is not the same as modern. Even the more pro style college offenses do not match up the the complication of the NFL offense. You talk about an offense that is all of 40 or 50 plays. In the NFL you are talking offenses that are all of 400 or 500 plays. While the NFL style play calling may seem overly complex, the reality is that the NFL simply have too many plays to memorize. So what seems like gibberish to the casual fan is actually a full description of the play so the players know what's going to be run.
Based on what I have just said, I have to disagree with your assertion that running Auburn's simple but effective (at the college level) offense has prepared Cam for what he will face in the NFL. At the NFL level being the QB is incredibly difficult. First of all the QB not only has to know his role in the 400-500 plays he has to understand what the other 10 players around him are doing. He has to understand the offensive line scheme called. Based on that offensive line scheme he has to understand what potential blitzer his RB will pick up and which one the line will pick up. He has to understand that his WRs are going to run different routes based on the what the defense does. An NFL QB is going to have to recognize blitzes and understand what his hot routes are. The more advanced QBs will have to look over the defense (which the defense is going to disguise) and he not only needs to understand how the offense will run based on that defense, he may be given 1 or more (Peyton has nearly the entire play book at his disposal) of plays to check off to, if he doesn't like the defense that was called for the offense. That sort of complex offense is light years ahead what Cam saw at Auburn. As Ed said this lack of experience dealing with the complexity of the NFL offense has not been lost on the NFL scouts. I have noticed that it has been lost on many of the so called draft experts though.
Well, while simplified does not necessarily mean modern, in the application of the term we are discussing, its the most modern approach to offense. Its essentially evolved in the past 3 seasons, with Nevada and Oregon leading the way, but its history is the last 10-15 years of spread offenses growing at colleges. So in that since, its as modern as modern can be, since it is still being created today and tomorrow too. All the talk at spring practices this year are teams running quick sets like the Ducks and Tigers did in the BCS title game last year. This is the very definition of modern.
Anyway, I never suggested that any college offense can be as complex as an nfl offense. In fact, that is exactly my point. No college offense can be as complex as an nfl offense. Since that is obviously true, no college player can ever jump into an nfl offense an run it. But by the very success of others before him, it means that college players can indeed learn to run it. The fact that a given college does not employ the same style of coaching and the terms of a particular offense dopes not mean that it can not be done.
I think its about the player himself, and not the offense run at colelge, that dictates success. It took P. Manning a season to catch up from the pitch and catch offense the Volunteers have run for the past century, yet it was his skills, despite being from a pretty basic offense, that has proven through.
Also Rich, I never suggested that running Auburn's simple but effective offense has prepared Cam for what he will face in the NFL. what I am suggesting is that it makes no difference at all where a player plays in college. Certainly you need to see him produce against decent defense before wasting a draft pick on a total unknown, so in that respect certainly it matters. But assumign you go to a school where your skill set can be displayed and evaluated, whether or not you can adjust to the nfl offense has nothing to do with the school and the offense that they run.
Everything you have said about the QB (not only knowing his role, but the other 10 player roles; understanding the offensive line scheme; blitz coverage; WR routes and his own checks on those routes), all have nothing to do with where the QB went to school. A QB from Oregon or a QB from Auburn is just as likely as a QB from Vanderbilt or Florida, to be able to do this once coached at the nfl level. Its all about the individual. If Gruden's point is that Cam Newton is either not intelligent enough to do this or not skilled enough to do this, than his highlighting his lack of use of the terms at Auburn has nothing to do with his point. I think Gruden was looking for a sound-bite rather than make an actual point. I'm not saying Newton is smart enough to run an NFL offense or even that he has the ability to do so. I think he will make a far better RB with an arm for the occasional wildcat than a QB, but thats just me.
My only point is that Gruden's referenced quote mean nothing. That an offense the Panthers, Giants, 49ers or anyone at the nfl runs may be ahead of the offense at Auburn is meaningless since it is equally light years ahead of the offenses that Peyton ran at Tennesee, Brees ran at Purdue (which was maybe the simplest offense in college in 2001) and the spread offense that Rodgers ran at Cal, which was a predecessor of the speed offense we are talking about at Auburn. It is Brees, Peyton and Rodgers that made those players able to adapt to the changes at the nfl level, not where they went to school.
I really don;t know anything about Cam Newton, but I reject any concept that evaluates a player based on the offense he ran in college. If Gruden is saying Newton is dumb, he should just say it. Aaron Rodgers, probably had a similar understanding of nfl offensive football terminology having come from Jeff Tedford's Oregon/Cal system (which is and was very simple). All I am saying is that it is all about the guy, and not what terms he used at college for what they did. Gruden thinks Newton is stupid, okay. Then say he won;t make it because he lacks the brainpan, not because he could not play your word game. Aaron Rodgers would not have been able to do it either, but Rodgers was an academic all american (or at least all pac-10). I expect a team to evaluate whether he can learn the complexity of the NFL offense, but if he shows the capacity to learn it, this lack of experience dealing with the NFL offense means nothing.