It is about production and results. Rivers' game translated better to the pros, yes. That only matters to scouts and NFL teams. Strictly looking at what they did on the football field in college, there is no way you can argue Rivers was a better college QB than Newton. A better college career, sure. Newton had to sit behind Tebow for a year and then transferred so he could get playing time. So not as many years as Rivers had.
But Cam at the top of his game in college and Rivers at the top of his game in college, Newton was 10x better. It really isn't close. Newton had arguably the most dominant season by any college player in the last 15 years, period. He was that Auburn team, which was pretty void of talent outside of Fairley and a freshman Dyer.
Rivers in his best season had 37 touchdowns to 7 INTs, which is amazing. Rivers was excellent in college, not denying that.
Cam Newton? 51 touchdowns to 7 INTs in the SEC, at the time (and still is) a much more difficult conference than the ACC, completing 66% of his throws at 10.2 Y/A, nearly a full yard more than Rivers. Sorry but it isn't close. You're 100% right, Rivers is a better passer and a better NFL QB. Cam doesn't touch that. But in college? There is no debate. Newton dominated the college game. Dude was a man with boys on the football field.
Newton went into Tuscaloosa against the defending champs and led a 24 point comeback victory. Rivers could only dream of doing that in college.