Editor’s Note: This will be a new column running every week that will address sports topics outside Tennessee

In the aftermath of Super Bowl 50, as Peyton Manning celebrated the walk-off home run to a nearly perfect career, thoughts about Cam Newton loomed large in many people’s minds.

Some tweets, articles, interviews and think pieces referred to Newton as classless, a showboat and a crybaby while others called him a mortal savant on the field who did everything right but still came out the loser.

As is the case in almost all circumstances, the truth lies somewhere in between the two extremes; that Newton is unapologetically who he is as well as a great quarterback with the opportunity to transcend upbringing, race, stereotypes and football itself.

Newton did himself no favors post-game, saying “I’m done, man,” while answering questions from the reporters following the loss. He then proceeded to leave the media area without answering more questions.

After losing the biggest game of his life, with a member of the winning Broncos team sitting next to him, Newton did not want to talk to the media. Newton did not insult or slander any person, opponent or media, and elected to remove himself from the environment after answering a series of mildly thought-provoking questions. Newton acted professionally in the situation.

Many people have cited this incident as an example that Newton is not a humble, classy athlete. When in fact, the noted competitor and reigning MVP simply did not feel like addressing questions about losing, moments after being defeated in the largest spotlight of his career.

Opposite of Cam Newton that night was the courteous, modest Peyton Manning, who said in his live post-game interview that he planned on drinking a lot of Budweiser that night.

It is true, Manning’s wing of the Hall of Fame will be the most expansive collection of accolades in the history of the NFL, but to pretend one of the two quarterbacks is more morally wrong than the other for their post-game actions is wrong in itself.

One was elated that he had the opportunity to close his career with a fairy-tale ending and the other was grieving his defeat in the most televised American sporting event. Nothing more, nothing less.

As happy as Manning and his many fans are for the win, to shower him in admiration for his Super Bowl performance is something else entirely. Manning was the worse of the two starting quarterbacks, but had the help of the best defense in my football-viewing lifetime to carry the burden. Denver allowed only 10 points to Newton and company, and carried an offense that was unspectacular outside of the first drive.

Newton can only tell part of the same tale. His defense limited his opponent to 17 total points, which Newton outscored all but one week during the regular season. Newton also was the victim of his supporting cast to a higher degree than Manning, experiencing drops from receivers whose flaws he had covered up since August.

Ultimately, the truth about Newton and the Super Bowl falls somewhere in the middle. Could Newton have carried himself better in the interview? Probably, but it is foolish to fault him for not wanting to talk at that current moment. Is he responsible for the loss? To some degree, but he plays the most important position on the field and received little help from his supporting cast.

In the end, Manning received the perfect farewell tour, Newton will most likely be back in the Super Bowl before the decade is up and Budweiser got the best sponsorship they never paid for.

Lucas Hunter is a sophomore in journalism and electronic media and can be reached at [email protected].