Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts

Can say i wasn't happy with the last couple years in ND, but heres my .02 for Clausen since i watched every minute of every game. Somewhat mobile, can throw the deep out, has played through great adversity. Granted he had GREAT receivers but it helped he didn't have too many ints. He might not have won them all, but countless times brought team back in games when they fell behind early.

Even then i don't want a qb first round. After unless Brennan isn't coming back i see no need to draft qb in later rounds.

Can say i wasn't happy with the last couple years in ND, but heres my .02 for Clausen since i watched every minute of every game. Somewhat mobile, can throw the deep out, has played through great adversity. Granted he had GREAT receivers but it helped he didn't have too many ints. He might not have won them all, but countless times brought team back in games when they fell behind early.

Even then i don't want a qb first round. After unless Brennan isn't coming back i see no need to draft qb in later rounds.

People keep saying that Clausen had great receivers, in actuality I think that Clausen was the one who made them great. In all the highlight films I've seen on him, especially the TD passes, he showed top notch ball placement and anticipation. The only person who had a chance to catch those passes were his receivers.

On TD passes most college QB's that are highly regarded seem to throw to guys that are wide open half the time. With Clausen I'm seeing him make those same throws except in his case the receivers are covered. In the end thats the thing that makes me excited about Clausen. Not only is he able to thread the needle into coverage but he also didn't throw many INT's while doing it. I think he's good for 25 TD passes a year in the NFL. Especially if Shannahan gets a hold of him.

I mean look at this. Compare last years #1 pick Stafford to Clausen. Just look at how open Staffords receivers are compared to Clausen, especially on TD passes. (Also notice how many of Staffords TD passes are against poor SEC coverage).

B_K23nR5Rsk

RGHzJo8Bc5k

In the meantime I want to see if Bradford had to make the same throws against tight coverage. I mean it just impresses me how many difficult completions Clausen is able to complete. Especially passes on the outs and by the sidelines.

Are you saying the wr's weren't good, with all due respect Golden Tate is All American. Countless times he had to fight for ball and came up with it. Clausen threw great passes, but he had great receivers too. Though he was hurt most year which really killed us, Floyd was thought to be better then Tate.

Are you saying the wr's weren't good, with all due respect Golden Tate is All American. Countless times he had to fight for ball and came up with it. Clausen threw great passes, but he had great receivers too. Though he was hurt most year which really killed us, Floyd was thought to be better then Tate.

No not at all. But Clausen didn't have Golden Tate all year and was still able to put up numbers. Tate made very good catches but they were very well placed by Clausen. A lot of times Tate was covered very well and there was usually only a small window for Clausen to thread the needle, which many times he did. Credit goes to Tate for making those catches but very rarely were Clausen's receivers wide open deep, like you see in Staffords video. Tate did though have some amazing YAC catches though, I will give him that.

I mean how many times have we've seen it in the NFL. Great Receiver goes to a team with mediocre QB play and suddenly he can barely break 900 yards while getting something like 30% of his teams throws. By nature receivers are much more dependent on their QB for production then QB's are on their receivers. So just as a rule of thumb I'm more willing to give credit to the QB long before I give credit to the receiver.

In the meantime I want to see if Bradford had to make the same throws against tight coverage. I mean it just impresses me how many difficult completions Clausen is able to complete. Especially passes on the outs and by the sidelines.

thats what ive noticed too. ive been watching alot of highlight reels of the top qbs and with bradford it seemed every pass he was in shotgun, had tons of time and was throwing to wide open receivers. now im not saying every throw he made was to a wide open guy or that without a doubt clausen is better but it was something i took note of. also, this is just my own impression from watching youtube clips and reading draft experts opinions.

with clausen it seemed he made more tough throws in tighter coverage which is the reality in the nfl.

just watching that spread shotgun offense makes it hard for me to see how bradfords game will translate to the nfl compared to clausen.

OL, bradford, clausen suh berry, trade back . . . whatever allen and shanny think is best is better than any outside opinion i could have.

The NFL is a QB league, if we can get a franchise QB, we've got to get him. If we look at the Conference championships, who are the QBs; Manning, Brees, Favre, Sanchez (#1 D, #1 Rushing O). Look at the division round; Warner, Rivers, Flacco (excellent D, excellent run game), Romo (Cowpuke, he just sucks and is the exception). So unless a team can build a dominant defense and develop a dominant running game, a franchise-type QB is needed to win in the playoffs.

The only franchise QB in this draft IMO is Clausen. If STL grabs him, then we definitely go OL or trade down and get even more OL and help elsewhere.

I agree, but is someone like Clausen or Bradford a true franchise type? I think that's up for debate, neither seem like slam dunks. So if that's the case I'd rather build the line and look for a later round gem to develop. I hear what you're saying about winning games in the playoffs but let's not get ahead of ourselves here, a quality OL is an important piece of the puzzle too.

I agree, but is someone like Clausen or Bradford a true franchise type? I think that's up for debate, neither seem like slam dunks. So if that's the case I'd rather build the line and look for a later round gem to develop.Deciding that is why Shanny and Allen are getting paid seven figures per year. Get it right and we're looking at playoffs in 2011/12. Get it wrong and we're stuck in 8-8 mode or worse for a while.

I hear what you're saying about winning games in the playoffs but let's not get ahead of ourselves here, a quality OL is an important piece of the puzzle too.Agreed 100%. Even if we get Clausen, we need to spend our 2nd & 4th on OL. Hopefully we can work some type of trade along the way to pick up a 3rd too. But if Clausen's gone, then build the OL now.

But let's say he's there and we pass on Clausen to build the OL, when do we get the franchise QB? If our OL is better, we aren't picking in the top 5-10 in 2011 and Locker & Luck won't last that long next year.

No not at all. But Clausen didn't have Golden Tate all year and was still able to put up numbers.

Actually it was Michael Floyd who missed a few games (who's equally awesome by the way).

By nature receivers are much more dependent on their QB for production thenQB's are on their receivers.

Exactly, place Austin Collie and Pierre Garcon on the Redksins with JC and see how well they do!

Deciding that is why Shanny and Allen are getting paid seven figures per year. Get it right and we're looking at playoffs in 2011/12. Get it wrong and we're stuck in 8-8 mode or worse for a while.

Agreed 100%. Even if we get Clausen, we need to spend our 2nd & 4th on OL. Hopefully we can work some type of trade along the way to pick up a 3rd too. But if Clausen's gone, then build the OL now.

But let's say he's there and we pass on Clausen to build the OL, when do we get the franchise QB? If our OL is better, we aren't picking in the top 5-10 in 2011 and Locker & Luck won't last that long next year.

That's what we're hoping Sammy. ;) With a strong o-line we may find we can do just fine with the QB we have and groom someone from the 4th round, who could turn out to be very good.

You're looking at overall career 62% completion %, but if you look at his Junior season he completed 68% of his passes. So based on that, you agree that he's franchise QB material, correct? Right, but a players best college season tends to be his least predictive year. It's the reason that college one-year wonders hardly ever make it in the NFL. JaMarcus Russell had a 69% completion percentage as a junior at LSU. Of course, three receivers and a runner from that LSU team (not to mention a lineman) are in the NFL and contributing (well, except for Buster Davis).

Russell is an extreme example, it doesn't take much digging to see exactly where Clausen's a much more solid prospect. You look at Clausen in the most adverse conditions, that 2007 season, and you can see that though he wasn't that polished as a player, he held up his end of the bargin that year. His statistics show that. It's the Jason Campbell argument, "yeah the team sucks, but as an individual, the performance was there." And clearly, he can play through injury.

I would have liked to see Clausen come back for his senior season and work on getting rid of the ball quicker because he does have a very high college sack rate (6.7%), and for guys who play big-time competition, that number tends to remain pretty static from college to the pros. Then again, I think he's ready enough, if he lands in the right spot.

As an ND fan, for his sake, I hope he doesn't end up here. He won't be successful, even with Shanahan. He'd be the ideal pick for Denver or Arizona or Minnesota. Those are places he could go and win as early as this year. St. Louis could at least build around him. Here, and in Buffalo, there just isn't much in the offensive cupboard to work with for any quarterback.