Quote:
Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33
Most folks have Clausen going top 10. Matt McGuire at Walter Football makes the argument for Clausen very strong. McShay is wrong on this one.
WalterFootball.com: The NFL Matt Draft - Matt McGuire's NFL Draft Blog
"First, I am going to tell you why you might not like Clausen......Notre Dame is the most hated football program in America, period. They are the Duke of the gridiron. Automatically, you hate Clausen because he went to Notre Dame, just like you hated J.J. Reddick because he went to Duke. If you want to make an analysis as objective and professional as possible, then you need to cut the crap and get over the Notre Dame hate if you have it - and a lot of that is out there.......
Maybe you don't like Clausen because of the blond, spiky hair, or the limo appearance he had when he was a senior in high school to declare for Notre Dame. These aren't "low profile" characteristics and automatically, you might have disliked him. For whatever reasons you're down on Clausen, please put them in the back seat and have an open mind when reading this blog entry." |
Agreed that McShay is wrong on Clausen. It's not preposterous to grade him as a second rounder, at least no more preposterous than grading him as a top five type, but he compares favorably (IMO) to Stafford, Sanchez, and Freeman from a year ago, and Stafford and Sanchez both had top half of the round grades from McShay.
Taking him at four...probably a bit of a stretch. But in the Dirtbag trademarked Bradford-Okung-Suh scenario, Clausen isn't really more of a reach than Bulaga or CJ Spiller as need players. It would be justifiable if Bradford and Okung and Suh were gone, although the BPA principle would likely suggest that the best players are on defense.