At what point would you Trade Up to get Jimmy Clausen?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Landry44

Why would we invest our who draft in the OL when we have other needs?

2 out of 5 isn't our whole draft, and we would invest our top picks, because right now we don't have an NFL caliber LT or RT on our roster. So we could conceivably use our 1st two picks to fill our two most obvious needs.

With that said, I hope and expect that somehow we will get a 3rd round pick, and possibly another 4th. And that if that happens, we would use our 2nd round pick on one of the qb's, preferably Colt McCoy.

[GusFrerotte]

Not worth it. Clausen will fall in our laps, and if not there are other good QBs out there that can be starter caliber for us. I think this Bradford/Clausen obsession is rather shortsighted. Very few of the top billed college QBs have panned out in over a decade or have been lackluster thus far. There are at least a dozen solid QB prospects, with most mocks seeing them go in the latter rounds. A great QB behind a terrible line will suck, but a good Qb behind a great line can do wonders. Do you really think Flacco is all the great of an actual QB? He is more of a game manager than a true gunslinger, but his poise and not making mistakes is going to make him a winner behind a solid line and some nice new weapons for next season. Top 2 picks should be O line then either a QB, RB, LB, or even A CB or S.

[The Goat]

Options are:

-I would not be willing to use the 37th overall pick on Jimmy Clausen
-I would be willing to spend the 37th overall pick on Clausen, but not trade up for him
-I would be willing to trade our fourth round pick to move up 2-6 spots and ensure that we get him, even if it looks like we can get him at 37.
-I would be willing to trade up about 10 picks into the back end of the first round (ahead of, say, Arizona), at the cost of the 2011 2nd rounder.
-If Jimmy Clausen is available after the 16th pick in the first round, we should trade our 2011 first rounder to ensure we get him.

Note: in all situations, you would be using the second round pick in part of the trade/selection process.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I would not be willing to spend the 37th overall to get Clausen. Like others I think he's a bust. Charlie did a good job w/ his QBs. Just like Quinn was perceived as a solid prospect but in fact doesn't have enough talent to excel in the pros I think Clausen's talent (or lack thereof) is less than it's perceived.

Also, I would not assume Bradford is at the top of our board. I just wouldn't assume it. Shanny has been rather particular about his QBs. He likes guys with rocket arm and quicker than average release. Elway, Cutler, hell even Griese fits that bill. Bradford does NOT. I understand it's easy to get into the hype we hear all day long about the new young stud, but there's no reason to believe Mike is on that bandwagon. He's been through plenty of these rodeos already...

[poopoobigelow]

if we had a third and if clausen fell there, then, i'd take him... that's the only scenario i would endorse...

but, we don't have a third, so...

if he falls to the second and we pick him, i'll be pissed...

[TrustinGibbs]

As a Notre Dame fan who watched every single down Clausen played I must say some of you are under rating him.

Also blaming Clausen for Notre Dame's struggles these past few seasons is ludicrous since Clausen didn't play a single down on defense and that defense under Charlie Wies was pathetic. Defense was absolutely the reason why the Irish's record has been mediocre. Clausen can make all of the NFL throws and due to playing behind a rather pathetic offensive line at ND and getting hammered for three years is one tough kid who is very durable(unlike Bradford who seems to be made of glass). Blaming Clausen for ND's losses is in all honesty quite comical and absolutely ridiculous.


Now for the draft....I wouldn't take Clausen at #4 not because he isn't worth that pick but because the Skins OFFENSIVE LINEMEN above all else. If he dropped to us in the 2nd round I'd take him before they announced whom was on the clock but I wouldn't trade away any other picks to get up to get anyone because this team needs all of the picks it has because Curato/Snyder have spent over a decade giving draft picks away.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by TrustinGibbs

As a Notre Dame fan who watched every single down Clausen played I must say some of you are under rating him.

Also blaming Clausen for Notre Dame's struggles these past few season is ludicrous since Clausen didn't play a single down on defense and that defense under Charlie Wies was pathetic and absolutely the reason why the Irish sucked. Clausen can make all of the NFL throws and due to playing behind a pathetic offensive line at ND and getting hammered for three years is one tough kid who is very durable(unlike Bradford who seems to be made of glass)

Now for the draft....I wouldn't take Clausen at #4 not because he isn't worth that pick but because the Skins OFFENSIVE LINEMEN above all else. If he dropped to us in the 2nd round I'd take him before they announced whom was on the clock but I wouldn't trade away any other picks to get up to get anyone because Curato/Snyder killed this franchise by trading away picks for the past decade plus.

It is funny how the anti-Clause group blame Clausen for the losses and the pro-Clausen group completely absolves him. Somewhere in the middle I think is fair. He does have some responsibility.
The great QB's like Peyton Manning on some under-man-ed Colts teams or Ben Roethlisburger when at Miami of Ohio, won and even upsetting stronger teams so your argument is kind of weak.
Notre Dame is not a weak sister that has no top recruits show up at their door. So when ND loses to Navy, Connecticut or a bad Michigan team in one season, I think that stink has to be partly associated to Clausen. I don't blame Clausen when playing a true powerhouse team like USC, but losing to to other weak teams is not something you can not completely absolve Clausen.

[TrustinGibbs]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

It is funny how the anti-Clause group blame Clausen for the losses and the pro-Clausen group completely absolves him. Somewhere in the middle I think is fair. He does have some responsibility.
The great QB's like Peyton Manning on some under-man-ed Colts teams or Ben Roethlisburger when at Miami of Ohio, won and even upsetting stronger teams so your argument is kind of weak.
Notre Dame is not a weak sister that has no top recruits show up at their door. So when ND loses to Navy, Connecticut or a bad Michigan team in one season, I think that stink has to be partly associated to Clausen.

Notre Dame scored more then enough points to win most or all of the games they have lost in the past two seasons due mostly to Clausen/Tate but they couldn't stop anyone. It is illogical to blame Clausen for most of those losses if not all of them.

The problem at Notre Dame in recent years is they have plenty of talent, even NFL talent on offense and NONE on defense. You cannot win that way(Defensewins right??)

Winning games in college doesn't have a whole lot to do with being successful at the NFL level at the QB position anyway. If it did Matt Lienhart would be headed to the HOF rather then riding the bench and the University of Florida would have numerous All-Pro QB's to it's credit rather then numerous QB's who didn't transition well to the NFL game. How many NCAA Football Championships do Payton Manning, Tom Brady and Bret Farve have anyway?

What matters IMO is:

Can the guy make all of the necessary throws?

Is the guy tough and durable because in the NFL a QB is going to get hit.(this is why I stay far, far away from Bradford especially with a high 1st round pick)

Will said player work hard at his craft and study film to assure his success?

Does said player have the leadership qualities you look for in a QB(this would be the only question mark with Clausen for me, while all of the other available QB's have question marks of their own).

I'd rather draft a QB with a question mark next to leadership then next to durability like Bradford.

With all of that said I do not support drafting Clausen unless he falls to us in the 2nd round.

IMO he will have the best NFL career of any of the available QB's in this draft and he is by far the most NFL ready.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by TrustinGibbs

Notre Dame scored more then enough points to win most or all of the games they have lost in the past two seasons due to Clausen/Tate/Floyd but they couldn't stop anyone. It is illogical to blame Clausen for most of those losses if not all of them.

The problem at Notre Dame in recent years is they have plenty of talent, even NFL talent on offense and NONE on defense. You cannot win that way(Defensewins right??)

Winning games in college doesn't have a whole lot to do with being successful at the NFL level at the QB position anyway. If it did Matt Lienhart would be headed to the HOF rather then riding the bench and the University of Florida would have numerous All-Pro QB's to it's credit rather then numerous QB's who didn't transition well to the NFL game.

What matters IMO is:

Can the guy make all of the necessary throws?

Is the guy tough and durable because in the NFL a QB is going to get hit.

Will said player work hard at his craft and study film to assure his success?

Does said player have the leadership qualities you look for in a QB(this would be the only question mark with Clausen for me, while all of the other available QB's have question marks of their own).

I'd rather draft a QB with a question mark next to leadership then next to durability like Bradford.

With all of that said I do not support drafting Clausen unless he falls to us in the 2nd round.

IMO he will have the best NFL career of any of the available QB's in this draft and he is by far the most NFL ready.

I just don't see Clausen falling past Buffalo. I wouldn't mind us swapping with them or Seattle though and moving up in the second.

[MTK]

There's no need to insult someone if you don't agree with them. Come on let's keep it civil.

[53Fan]

If I'm the Redskins, that point never comes.

[Chico23231]

Give me opinions on top availible QB and which value ranking for the draft. Mine:

1. Bradford...to me the easily the best QB availible...Top ten pick
2. Clausen .... really by a hair over McCoy... 20-30 picks 1st round
3. McCoy .... I ve heard best for Shanny's system, great release 20-30 picks 1st round
4. Tebow .... Intangibles king...late 2nd round pick

[BigHairedAristocrat]

I dont know if i'd trade up for clausen, but if shanahan really liked him, i'd certainly trade DOWN for him. If the ultra-realistic 49ers-redskins tradehappened, id certainly consider this:

13. Notre Dame QB Jimmy Clausen
17. Rutgers OT Anthony Davis
49. Stanford RB Toby Gerhart or best OT on the board.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I dont know if i'd trade up for clausen, but if shanahan really liked him, i'd certainly trade DOWN for him. If the ultra-realistic 49ers-redskins tradehappened, id certainly consider this:

13. Notre Dame QB Jimmy Clausen
17. Rutgers QB Anthony Davis
49. Stanford RB Toby Gerhart or best OT on the board.

#1 I wouldn't draft Clausen that high
#2 I wouldn't draft QB's with our first 2 picks
#3 Davis makes alot better OT than QB

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

#3 Davis makes alot better OT than QB

haha was going to say perhaps we're doing our own jamarcus experiment

[dblanch66]

The bottom line is that no one knows how any of these QBs will fare in the NFL. College performance is just not reliable enough evidence to evaluate how a guy is going to blossom or implode. Ryan Leaf? Tom Brady? That being said: looking at intangibles, I have always liked the work ethic, attitude and passion with which Tim Tebow plays. However I still wouldn't take him unless he fell to round 3 and then there would have to be some trading and such to move up to get him there. First two picks should be of need. O line, LB, CB or O line again.