Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

Thanks. Though this part kind of ticked me off.

"If Flacco is as good as scouts believe he is, why didn't Wannstedt see that he was better than Palko? Wannstedt may not be the best coach in college football, but it is hard to believe he was that wrong."

This empty circular logic is being used by journalist way to much. It assumes that a guy like Dave Wannstedt couldn't possibly make a mistake. All we seem to hear these days is "for a reason" "happened for a reason" especially when journalist become desperate for a scoop. We don't even look at possibilities like politics or human error. This isn't an exact science. Mistakes happen.

Nevertheless good article, shady journalism.

Yeah, it's not good logic. Wannedstedt in particular has never been a great judge of talent.

Still, it's hard even in hindsight to view the Ravens choice of Flacco as either a positive or a negative. In honesty, he seems like the perfect idea of what a team should expect when they take a quarterback in the bottom half of the first round. Without delving into the loaded term "franchise quarterback", Flacco is a very sound prospect who can distribute the ball to a bunch of different receivers, but has to do a lot of improving to ever be a valuable quarterback at the next level.

I've always wondered what the logic is with taking guys like Flacco/Campbell/Freeman/Ramsey is at the back end of round one. If you don't "have" a quarterback, these guys are all really good quarterbacks to have on your team. They're all average to above average players (or in Ramsey's case, potential, pending patience), and all would be very good if they had the same tools that a guy like Aaron Rodgers has around him. But a lot of these teams never planned on putting the tools to succeed around them. It simply wasn't part of the team building plan.

To me, if you're not going to bother building around a quarterback, it's not hard to find general competency at the position for the run first offense. It's in fact, quite easy and cheap to find a competent quarterback. There's two or three free agents every year...in fact, every two or three years a future hall of famer (like Warner or Favre) will hit the open market.

The Lions are clearly making every attempt to build around Stafford. The Jets had a pretty good situation to begin with and decided Braylon Edwards might be able to help them with Sanchez. The Bengals built quickly around Palmer after drafting him, although they've now become far less reliant on the quarterback these days. The Texans certainly tried to put an offense around Carr at the expense of the defense, although, ultimately, there wasn't enough there to work with. Even the Raiders have built hard around JaMarcus Russell, though they tend to suck at it it.

There's something about teams that take quarterbacks later on in the first round (Browns, Bucs, Redskins, Ravens) where they treat the position on a year to year basis that just makes you wonder what they were thinking when they made the draft choice. And consequently, I think players drafted in that 12-14 pick span are collectively underachieving their draft projections, in part because teams are acting oddly post-draft pick.

[Son Of Man]

Two words...........Colt McCoy (2nd Round).

[diehardskin2982]

What type of QB is Bradford? who do you feel his game compares most to?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by diehardskin2982

What type of QB is Bradford? who do you feel his game compares most to?

Anecdotally, I think he some mix of Eli Manning or Steve McNair on the high end, or Jon Kitna/JP Losman on the low end. All of those guys were primarily pocket passers with quick releases and relative athleticism, but the guys who made it were good decision makers under pressure. The guys who ended up being backups or out of the league were poor decision makers under pressure.

I think we (I?) know a lot more about Clausen's mediocre ability to adjust to adverse conditions, compared to Bradford, who is an unknown from that one aspect.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I think we (I?) know a lot more about Clausen's mediocre ability to adjust to adverse conditions, compared to Bradford, who is an unknown from that one aspect.

Please explain Clausen's mediocre ability to adjust to adverse conditions? I know you're up in MI, but I watch ND quite a bit too, and I don't see what you're talking about.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Please explain Clausen's mediocre ability to adjust to adverse conditions? I know you're up in MI, but I watch ND quite a bit too, and I don't see what you're talking about.

adverse conditions = when his team is not the decisive advantage. So, you'd throw out the Washington State game, throw out the Purdue game, the Nevada game, the 200(9) Hawaii Bowl. Specifically, I'm looking at those Boston College games and Navy games when Clausen struggles to adjust to teams that take away the deep ball and make him throw underneath. His inability to sustain drives.

Not to say that can't be adapted over time, as Peyton Manning came into the NFL with the same problem.

Freely admitting that this is something he got better with over time, Clausen has a tendency to have second half struggles against teams who can adjust to whatever Weis wanted to attack them with in the first half. I think it was a big part of ND's end-of-year swoon, personally. Not as big as the defensive woes, obviously, but Clausens efficiency certainly declined in the second half of the season.

If you want my in depth thought on Clausen/Bradford/the like, I wrote this article today:

Bradford vs. Clausen, and why McCoy is still tops in this draft class « LiveBall Sports

But basically, my concerns with him are that his 62% completion percentage doesn't really off-set the negatives you have to take when you draft him. I think if he completed 67% of his passes at ND, then yeah, he'd be franchise QB material despite a high sack rate and mediocre win percentage. At 62% and 34 college starts, that's first round quality, but not anything we haven't seen in the past.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

adverse conditions = when his team is not the decisive advantage. So, you'd throw out the Washington State game, throw out the Purdue game, the Nevada game, the 200(9) Hawaii Bowl. Specifically, I'm looking at those Boston College games and Navy games when Clausen struggles to adjust to teams that take away the deep ball and make him throw underneath. His inability to sustain drives.

I didn't get to see the BC and Navy games this year, but his numbers looked pretty good. I know in the Navy game he made a couple of key turnovers (fumble/INT), but I wouldn't discount the season he had for two bad plays in the Navy game. This certainly wasn't his trend this year.

Freely admitting that this is something he got better with over time, Clausen has a tendency to have second half struggles against teams who can adjust to whatever Weis wanted to attack them with in the first half. I think it was a big part of ND's end-of-year swoon, personally. Not as big as the defensive woes, obviously, but Clausens efficiency certainly declined in the second half of the season.

His numbers don't show that. He had 2 INTs in the first half of the season and 2 in the second half. His Comp % was better in the second half of the year. His QB rating was 177.83 in the first half if you include the Nevada game when he threw 18 passes / 4TDs / 0 INTs. It was 152.80, not including that game. In the second half of the year his QB rating was 162.

But basically, my concerns with him are that his 62% completion percentage doesn't really off-set the negatives you have to take when you draft him. I think if he completed 67% of his passes at ND, then yeah, he'd be franchise QB material despite a high sack rate and mediocre win percentage. At 62% and 34 college starts, that's first round quality, but not anything we haven't seen in the past.

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?

Well written article, I don't agree with the assessment of Clausen, but the article was very good.

I posted these in another thread, Matt McGuire hits the nail on the head in his evaluation of Clausen IMO.

WalterFootball.com: The NFL Matt Draft - Matt McGuire's NFL Draft Blog

WalterFootball.com: 2010 NFL Draft Mailbag

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by diehardskin2982

What type of QB is Bradford? who do you feel his game compares most to?

I'm still trying to figure that out. Though I think if Kurt Warner had played at a highly touted program and was projected to be a top 10 pick he would have been Sam Bradford.

I actually have been saying that he could be like Phillip Rivers but I think that was more a reference to the caliber of QB I believed he could become. The fact of the matter is Clausen actually seems pretty similar to Rivers coming out of college. For starters people couldn't really agree where Rivers was going to be selected in the first. SI had him as a mid first round pick going into the draft. Rivers also started his first year.

Both of them also had an odd throwing motion coming out of college, high completion percentages in their final year, and defenses that couldn't support the offense (NC State was 8-5 in Rivers final year).

It'll probably take more time but I'll find a comparison for Bradford, though there might not really be one. Still I have heard people refer to him as a non-fiery version of Peyton Manning.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by diehardskin2982

What type of QB is Bradford? who do you feel his game compares most to?

Rick Mirer.

[SFREDSKIN]

I still say trade down and and get one of the OT and Iupati, then a QB.

[PennSkinsFan]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

I still say trade down and and get one of the OT and Iupati, then a QB.

Mike Iupati has gained some much during Bowl practices. Better yet, he is an OG at Idaho, but most NFL analysts believes he can easily be converted to OT.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by PennSkinsFan

Mike Iupati has gained some much during Bowl practices. Better yet, he is an OG at Idaho, but most NFL analysts believes he can easily be converted to OT.

Iupati is a "Road grader"/"Wheat Combine". He looks like a mauler, reminds me Tre Johnson. I hope we draft him.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by PennSkinsFan

Mike Iupati has gained some much during Bowl practices. Better yet, he is an OG at Idaho, but most NFL analysts believes he can easily be converted to OT.

I've repeatedly read the opposite: that he is much better at guard and should stay there.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I've repeatedly read the opposite: that he is much better at guard and should stay there.

Sort of makes me think of a rich man versions of Chad Rinehart. When Rinehart came out we thought, "oh, this is great, he might even be able to play Center." Turns out he was really only suited to play Guard. And just now on NFLN I heard them suggest that Ipuati could even play Center. In the end he'll probably just end up at Guard.

[tootergray34]

please get off the colt mccoy fling...todd mcshay has him as a 5th or 5th rounder at best