The argument for drafting QB at the #4 pick

[modazfuk]

I just don't think from what I've seen he's that good. What has he done in the pros to make you think he's gonna be great one day?

I mentioned it yesterday and PCS today echoed a similar sentiment that Brennan did move the ball into the red zone, and if I'm not mistaken, against the Pats 1st team, but unfortunately for him, was a tad late on the throw which resulted in an INT.

All part of the learning process for young QBs, right?

As for thinking Brennan is going to be great one day or a failure, no one knows, but his window of opportunity is much, much smaller than young high-profile QBs solely because of team investment.

[BlackBush]

I think it is pretty tough to call 28 tds to 4 picks, with 68% accuracy and 8.8 YPA mediocre.

For comparison with the junior years of other highly drafted QBs:

Source: http://walterfootball.com/mattblog091229.php

Additionally, football outsiders say the two best indicators of QB success are number of college games started and completion percentage.

As a 3 year starter, and having 68% completion his junior year, Football outsiders would probably predict a solid career for Clausen. Not to mention he did all of this behind a terrible line his whole career. Additionally, he played in a pro style offense, under center, made reads, and was successful.

I think you would be hard pressed to find a more NFL ready QB in any draft. I think some of you are too risk averse to draft a QB and would pass on pretty much anyone in any year.

Can anyone that keeps saying Clausen won't be a good pro provide any analysis of why?

I didn't like Clausen for some reason but I think these guys really open my eyes as to why McShay is so down on him (I think he ranks him around 23rd best player)

http://seahawksdraft.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-jimmy-clausen-top-ten-pick.html

Here are the issues I have with Clausen:

When he throws off his back foot, which is quite often, he loses all velocity in his passes. Let's look at two examples from the Pittsburgh game. Firstly, Clausen takes a snap under center on his own 23-yard line. He drops back, eyes up his best receiver Michael Floyd and without making any other read floats a deep pass down field. It's under-thrown off his back foot and simply hangs in the air. Floyd is double covered, so it's not a great read anyway - but the fact it's thrown so gently makes it a jump ball up for grabs. The defensive back catches the ball and it's a turn over.

On the second example, Notre Dame are 4th and 1 in the third quarter. Clausen uses play action before dropping back. The Pittsburgh defense completely bites on the PA, allowing Floyd to run a deep route straight down the middle of the field. He's completely open and a well thrown pass leads to an easy touchdown. Instead, Clausen under-throws off his back foot, again floating the ball high into the air. The air time on the pass is excruciating, forcing Floyd to physically stand still and wait for the ball to drop. Of course, by the time it lands three defensive backs have reacted and instead of a touchdown it's merely a completion. However, that was such an easy throw to make and it simply must be a touchdown.

It should bring his arm strength into question. However, when I watch Clausen drive the ball off his front foot there is some velocity. But this only happens on short slants (Clausen throws an outside slant more than any other pass). I'm not sure he can make big throws down field with the same kind of drive. This is a big concern because whenever he throws deep, it tends to be under thrown or too floated with little or no velocity.

My next complaint is about his mechanics and most of all, his side-arm throwing motion. In all honesty he gets the ball out nice and quickly. However, the fact the ball is coming out at shoulder height (and he isn't a huge guy - 6'2" at best) leads to all kinds of problems. In this game alone I saw two tipped passes and a throw that hit one of his offensive lineman smack on the back of the helmet. There were also four occasions where Clausen just simply threw the ball too low. His action is such that the ball generally projects downwards and this led to some drops because the receiver is having to dive to the ground to get the ball. NFL scouts and GM's want to see guys throwing the ball as high as possible - that's why Mark Sanchez made a concerted effort to correct his mechanics before the USC pro-day.

Now, it's easy to see why Clausen has put up nice numbers this year (21/4 TD/INT ratio). He doesn't make a lot of bad decisions in the short game that lead to interceptions. A lot of his passes are high percentage outside slants and we have to remember that he's throwing to two of the better receivers in college football - Michael Floyd and Golden Tate (although admittedly Floyd has missed time this year). But I saw no evidence of a guy who can come into the NFL and put up big numbers quickly. He can't keep throwing the same outside slant every week to the same guys, occasionally floating passes downfield hoping something comes off. He'll be an interception machine throwing downfield like that.

Now he makes some nice throws and his issues could be partially due to the turf toe, but I just don't think he is that good. I wouldn't take him before the second round. IMO

[addicted]

I mentioned it yesterday and PCS today echoed a similar sentiment that Brennan did move the ball into the red zone, and if I'm not mistaken, against the Pats 1st team, but unfortunately for him, was a tad late on the throw which resulted in an INT.

All part of the learning process for young QBs, right?

As for thinking Brennan is going to be great one day or a failure, no one knows, but his window of opportunity is much, much smaller than young high-profile QBs solely because of team investment.

That's true. The expectations for getting it right on the field decrease with the amount of money you pay the man. If your a 6th round pick patience won't be there compared to a 1st round pick. That's just the business side of things.

[DieHard86]

McCoy, Clausen, Bradford--their highlight reels are pathetic. They have 10 seconds to throw. Their receivers are open by 20 yards. It a joke and a waste of a pick.

[darklight1216]

Did you not read this or are you just unaware of who the teams in the playoffs are?

The top 5 rushing teams had two playoff teams in it, the NY Jets and the Baltimore Ravens. Both of these teams made the playoffs in the last week of the year and not likely to do much of anything in the playoffs.

Balimore and Philly both made the playoffs in the last week in 2008. They did all right for themselves.

The top 5 passing teams had 4 teams make the playoffs. The only team that missed it could have made it the last week of the year. The elite teams who got first round byes are on this list.

So it's okay for the Texans to miss the playoffs by one week, but it's not okay for the Ravens and Jets to make in the last week?

This reminds me of a fun fact: this is the 50th straight year that a championship has not been won by the team with a quarterback that is first in passing yards. In fact the last time a quarterback led the league in passing yards and won a championship was 1959 (Johnny U).

[Jeff in D.C.]

Which 8 are busts?

Let's look at your list:

Aaron Rodgers - Not a Bust [correct]

Alex Smith - Not a Bust [the jury is still VERY much out on him]

Ben Roethlisberger - Not a Bust [correct]

Byron Leftwich - Not a Bust [had two decent years in Jax and that's it]

Carson Palmer - Not a Bust [pretty much correct although he can't stay healthy]

Chad Pennington - Not a Bust [wasn't worthy of a 1st round pick]

Daunte Culpepper - Not a Bust [a few good years in Minny and then his career went down the toilet]

Donovan McNabb - Not a Bust [correct]

Eli Manning - Not a Bust [won a SB, but it was because of a great defense. wasn't worthy of where he was drafted but I'll agree he certainly hasn't been a bust]

Jason Campbell - Not a Bust :doh:

Jay Cutler - Not a Bust :doh::doh:

Joe Flacco - Not a Bust [correct so far]

Matt Leinart - Not a Bust [huh????]

Matt Ryan - Not a Bust [correct]

Michael Vick - Not a Bust [Vick had some good years in Atl but he wasn't worthy of the #1 pick]

Philip Rivers - Not a Bust [correct]

Rex Grossman - Not a Bust [you lose all credibility with this one]

Vince Young - Not a Bust [VY is looking alot better and he's 25-14 as a starter, BUT the jury is still out]

Only 8 of those 18 aren't busts, and the other 10 were either busts or the jury is still very much out.

You must not realize or know, my guess if you don't know this, that Rex Grossman took his team to the Superbowl this decade. Again not a bust. Who else?

So did Trent Dilfer & Jake Delhomme, and if you want to go back a few decades so did Mark Rypien, David Woodley, & Neil O'Donnell.

Grossman threw 20 INT's that season and the only reasons the Bears went to the Super Bowl was their 5th ranked defense and superior running game.

I can't believe we're actually having this discussion. :doh:

[VaBeachRedskin]

The 2011 QB class is so much better than the 2010 class. If we want to truly get a "franchise" QB we should look to pick up one in the 2011 draft.

[addicted]

So did Trent Dilfer & Jake Delhomme, and if you want to go back a few decades so did Mark Rypien, David Woodley, & Neil O'Donnell.

Grossman threw 20 INT's that season and the only reasons the Bears went to the Super Bowl was their 5th ranked defense and superior running game.

I can't believe we're actually having this discussion. :doh:

I cant believe your getting all worked up about that list, let alone calling a Superbowl QB a bust. The only way were going to come to an agreement is to define a QB bust. What's yours?

[mnb123]

The 2011 QB class is so much better than the 2010 class. If we want to truly get a "franchise" QB we should look to pick up one in the 2011 draft.

Who is in that class besides Locker?

....Terrelle Pryor?

[Rufus T Firefly]

This reminds me of a fun fact: this is the 50th straight year that a championship has not been won by the team with a quarterback that is first in passing yards. In fact the last time a quarterback led the league in passing yards and won a championship was 1959 (Johnny U).

Fun, if meaningless. Manning was 2nd when he won, Brady mearly went 16-0 when he led the league. And rushers who lead the league have even less team success in recent years.

[addicted]

The 2011 QB class is so much better than the 2010 class. If we want to truly get a "franchise" QB we should look to pick up one in the 2011 draft.

Do you think we will be so bad next year that we can pick 4th again? I don't. And if those QB's you claim are so much better if were not picking high in the draft again which I can't see happening, why would the teams holding the picks to draft them not do it themselves? The idea to wait is completely flawed

[Rufus T Firefly]

Who is in that class besides Locker?

....Terrelle Pryor?

Ryan Mallet if he doesn't come out this year (I haven't heard anything on that. Don't know if I missed it, though) Christian Ponder. Andrew Luck could declare next year, McShay recently said he's the number 1 pick whenever he decides to come out (he's a 3rd year soph next year, so he coud come out in 2011, 12 or 13).

But I would be interested in hearing someone who follows college more closely tell us who else could be in that draft.

[darklight1216]

#3) Draft a QB and playing him right from the start. Baptize him by fire like Flacco, Ryan, and Sanchez. Those men are the next coming of Trent Dilfer, not a stud like Payton Manning or Phillip Rivers. These men are an exception not a rule.

You do realize that Peyton Manning started in his rookie season, right? He threw more picks than touchdowns and his team finished with three wins. Mark Sanchez has thrown at least 20 ints and he is one of only five rookie qbs who have done that. Peyton Manning was one of the others.

I believe that Manning also finished his sophomore year with a qb rating that was just slightly higher than Joe Flacco's in his second season.

It may also be worth mentioning that Baltimore is one of very few, if not the only team, to ever make it to the playoffs in both of the first two years of their quarterback and head coaches careers. But I guess, according you, these accomplishments cannot possibly mean that a young quarterback will improve and attain the coveted "elite" status.

It took several years for some qbs to even get on the field, but it's taken you just one or two to say that the young qbs will never be prolific... how is that fair?

Myth number two - Other teams played rookie QB's and do fine; why can't we?:

People point to last years Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, and this years Mark Sanchez as examples of QB's who played as rookies and didn't sit a year and had success. They say that a franchise QB doesn't have to sit a year because those men didn't. They point to the offensive line and say things like "we fix that, we can throw out a rookie"

My question against that is what kind of QB do you want? Look at the stats these men put out last year and this year. Ryan looked lost his second year, Flacco and Sanchez aren't the primary options for scoring points for there teams. They are ranked Flacco (15), Ryan (21), and Sanchez (23) over all other QB's in the league. This is the measuring stick you want to be judged against? Sorry but that's not what I want.

You would say "No" to the combined 4 playoff appearances that Flacco, Ryan, and Sanchez have?

You act as though these young qbs are frozen in time; like they can never possibly get any better than they were in their first 16-32 games.

Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather have the back-to-back playoff appearances that the Ravens have had recently, than have the best passing team in the league and be on the outside looking in.

We have to realize that guys like Farve, Rivers, Brady, Brees, Romo sits to pee, and the elite QB's in the league sat for a year or longer and learned the game of football before playing. If you want the next Trent Dilfer then we could draft offensive linemen and then next year draft QB in round one and throw him out there immediately and maybe wish for great results but we'd be fooling ourselves doing that. The men who generally don't sit a year don't do as well as the men who do sit a year or longer.

I like how you have neglected to mention Ben Roethlisberger in the elite quarterback class. Oh wait, he started as a rookie, had pedestrian numbers and was considered to be of the order of Trent Diler, and then turned out to be pretty decent, to say the least.

I guess talking about him would have ruined your arguement since he has more rings than Favre, Rivers, Brees, and Romo sits to pee combined.

[generals01]

I didn't like Clausen for some reason but I think these guys really open my eyes as to why McShay is so down on him (I think he ranks him around 23rd best player)

http://seahawksdraft.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-jimmy-clausen-top-ten-pick.html

Now he makes some nice throws and his issues could be partially due to the turf toe, but I just don't think he is that good. I wouldn't take him before the second round. IMO

Not a bad analysis you posted.

But I think it is awfully nit picky.

It is just too easy to analyze an interception and say he made a mistake. No crap he made a mistake. You can do this with any QB coming out of college. Fact is, Clausen only through 4 picks which is really impressive. Matt Ryan had 19 his senior year as a comparison. If Matt Ryan with 19 picks his senior season can come into the nfl and not be a pick machine, I think it is tough to project Clausen as a pick machine with 4 ints.

The author also seems pretty nit picky about some incompletions in the Pitt game as well. You could do a similar analysis for Peyton Manning in college. College qbs make mistakes. A 68% accuracy percentage makes me believe that throughout the season, overall, Clausen made pretty solid decisions and accurate throws.

Also, I am no QB coach or doctor, but it seems to me that losing velocity because he throws off his back foot too often 1) probably has a lot to due with the turf toe had (prevented him from really driving on that food) or 2) if not due to turf toe, is a fundamental issue that can be corrected.

As for the reliance on slants, I think the author is overgeneralizing based on the Pitt game. It would be tough to put up a high, 8.8 YPC if every throw was a slant. I watched a number of ND games this year and saw plenty of intermediate and downfield throws.

The side arm delivery complaint has some merit. This is something the coaches would need to examine to see how it could be improved. I do like his quick release a lot though.

Also, in contrast to McShays low opinion of Clausen, Kiper has him at 4 I believe.

[Jeff in D.C.]

As for the question of which position to draft with the 4th pick, my first choice would be to trade out of the 4th spot and stockpile picks. In the event that Bruce & Shanny don't have a willing partner for a trade, here are my thoughts on the 4th pick.

This is where a great scouting department (which has been sorely lacking in this organization for a long time imo) really comes into play. Any GM, coach, player personnel director, etc. is only as good as his scouts in making player choices.

If Bruce & Shanny put together a great scouting department, and based on the information that those scouts bring back it's determined that the better pick would be Okung or another LT over Bradford & Clausen, then Okung/that other LT should be the pick. The last thing that needs to happen is for us to reach for a QB at #4 who doesn't deserve to be drafted in that spot. Or if they determine that there's another position who should be drafted at #4, then they should take that guy. You don't reach for a guy who you're going to give the type of contract to that a #4 pick gets.

And for those of you who don't value the impact that a top-5 LT can have, I'll give you the names Jonathan Ogden & Orlando Pace. Both the Rams & Ravens won Super Bowls in the next few years after picking those guys and had among the top running games in the league. Food for thought.

[Jeff in D.C.]

Originally Posted by VaBeachRedskin

The 2011 QB class is so much better than the 2010 class. If we want to truly get a "franchise" QB we should look to pick up one in the 2011 draft.

Do you think we will be so bad next year that we can pick 4th again? I don't. And if those QB's you claim are so much better if were not picking high in the draft again which I can't see happening, why would the teams holding the picks to draft them not do it themselves? The idea to wait is completely flawed

Addicted you're getting your panties in a bunch. Do you know how many really good/great QB's in the last 20 years haven't been drafted in the top-10?:

Favre (1 ring & 2 SB appearances)

Brady (3 rings & 4 SB appearances)

Brees

Warner (1 ring & 3 SB appearances)

Hasselbeck (1 SB appearance)

Big Ben (2 rings)

Brad Johnson (1 ring)

Aaron Rodgers

Delhomme (1 SB appearance)

R. Cunningham

Flacco

Schaub (who was coached by K. Shanahan btw)

Romo sits to pee

Hostetler won a ring

Joey T. won a ring

Mark Rypien won a ring

Doug Williams won a ring

In 83 Dan Marino was 25th I believe. Montana (4 rings) was a 3rd rounder in 79. You don't have to have a top-5 pick to get a potentially great QB.

Edit: That's 16 rings by my count won by guys in the last 28 SB's who weren't top-10 picks. Only nine QB's who were top-10 picks have won the Super Bowl in the last 28 years: Jim Plunkett, Jim McMahon, Phil Simms, Troy Aikman, Steve Young (Supplemental draft), Elway, Trent Dilfer, Peyton Manning, & Eli Manning.

Steve Young was a supplemental pick and as we know neither Jim McMahon nor Trent Dilfer were the reason why their teams won the Super Bowl, both were basically along for the ride. And while Plunkett played well for the Raiders, he was a .500 lifetime QB with 34 more INT's than TD's. So more or less, only FIVE of those nine QB's I listed had a major impact on their teams winning the Super Bowl.

And in the event that we're picking in the 20's next year, it means we had a pretty damn good season and made the playoffs with whoever we had at QB, so we won't be in a panic to get one next year anyway.

[generals01]

And for those of you who don't value the impact that a top-5 LT can have, I'll give you the names Jonathan Ogden & Orlando Pace. Both the Rams & Ravens won Super Bowls in the next few years after picking those guys and had among the top running games in the league. Food for thought.

A few other teams with a top 5 LT this decade:

Browns, Raiders, Bills, Skins, Cardinals (drafted Leonard Davis at 2, now a G)

Also, with with 3 OT taken top 10 in this past draft, it was the one taken in the 20's that had the most success his rookie season.

[VaBeachRedskin]

Who is in that class besides Locker?

....Terrelle Pryor?

Ryan Mallett, Pat Devlin, Blaine Gabbert, Nick Foles (I'm not crazy about him, but he will be highly sought after), and even Andrew Luck will be eligible. Every one of those guys is better than the current group of QBs in the 2010 draft.

Terrelle Pryor needs some serious work and I think he would be a better WR in the NFL.

[addicted]

As for the question of which position to draft with the 4th pick, my first choice would be to trade out of the 4th spot and stockpile picks. In the event that Bruce & Shanny don't have a willing partner for a trade, here are my thoughts on the 4th pick.

I agree with this. However I dont see it happening. The guarenteed money owed to that players too much in this economy I am guessing

This is where a great scouting department (which has been sorely lacking in this organization for a long time imo) really comes into play. Any GM, coach, player personnel director, etc. is only as good as his scouts in making player choices.

Agree to a point. I don't believe that simply taking the best player in the draft at #4 works if you have a team like ours. The way I see the team today is we have talent on Defense. Taking a player like Berry won't turn us into winners like many have suggested here. We have to limit the pick to Offense as that is our biggest weakness.

If Bruce & Shanny put together a great scouting department, and based on the information that those scouts bring back it's determined that the better pick would be Okung or another LT over Bradford & Clausen, then Okung/that other LT should be the pick. The last thing that needs to happen is for us to reach for a QB at #4 who doesn't deserve to be drafted in that spot. Or if they determine that there's another position who should be drafted at #4, then they should take that guy. You don't reach for a guy who you're going to give the type of contract to that a #4 pick gets.

I agree and disagree. You don't reach on a pick for say a guy you know will be there in the second round. However how does that fall with a guy you think gives you the best shot at future wins when you know he's not going to be there in the second? Does anyone think those QB's will be there in the second? No. People think they will go in the top 15 picks of the draft. So is it a reach for us to take a guy at 4 that is expected to be top 15? I don't think so.

And for those of you who don't value the impact that a top-5 LT can have, I'll give you the names Jonathan Ogden & Orlando Pace. Both the Rams & Ravens won Super Bowls in the next few years after picking those guys and had among the top running games in the league. Food for thought.

Sure that's right. I don't take away from the importance of protecting the QB by saying that you could have a great line and if you have average (Jason's average) QB play and still lose. You have to have better then that or a dominant Defense like Baltimore did that one single year they won. If you have top 5 QB play you can compete every year.

[Dick Edds]

The idea to wait is completely flawed

completely agree here ... if Shanny thinks Bradford is the guy we take him at #4 ... all other QB prospects are close to the same as far as potential and development needs, IM uneducated O.

PS - I'd be thrilled with Okung, if Bradford is already gone, or Shanny felt that Bradford wasn't the guy.

[VaBeachRedskin]

Do you think we will be so bad next year that we can pick 4th again? I don't. And if those QB's you claim are so much better if were not picking high in the draft again which I can't see happening, why would the teams holding the picks to draft them not do it themselves? The idea to wait is completely flawed

Unfortunately yes. We have a lot of holes that need to be filled/replaced in the very near future and I just don't think that we will be able to get all the new parts with the way that FA should break down. I fully expect next year to be the 1st in a three year rebuilding plan.

[Jeff in D.C.]

I cant believe your getting all worked up about that list, let alone calling a Superbowl QB a bust. The only way were going to come to an agreement is to define a QB bust. What's yours?

A QB who has a poor TD-INT ratio, doesn't throw for many yards, has a poor completion %, and a horrible record or some combination of several of those categories during his career, is a bust. Even in the Bears SB year, Grossman threw 20 INT's. The Bears went to the SB IN SPITE of him, not BECAUSE of him. A great defense, a great running game, Devin Hester, and a down year in the NFC were responsible for that run.

And if Grossman is so good why did he lose his starting job in Chicago to Kyle Orton??

[jflow78]

If we're going to make the rookie QB sit anyway, why not pick him later in the draft? That way we can get a guy that will step in from day 1 and make an impact, and still have a young QB sitting who can learn and might be ready for year 2, just like the guy you were going to sit at #4?

(and since no one can predict who will be ready as a rookie, that's not an argument. We know he's going to sit, I'm just saying why waste #4 on a squatter)

I have no problem with picking Bradford or Clausen at #4, but if he's picked there, we should know that he's ready to start that day, not a year later. Otherwise pick a guy later in the draft.

[Rutliff381]

I cant believe your getting all worked up about that list, let alone calling a Superbowl QB a bust. The only way were going to come to an agreement is to define a QB bust. What's yours?

How about when the qb is drafted in the 1st round(grossman) and six years later he has been riding the pine the last couple years....sounds like a bust to me!!!

[Horton_Predator48]

I say give Campbell another year and invest in the line. I don't think anyone is going to come in here and do any better the first year. We have a functioning QB that could probably do a lot better if had more than 2 seconds to throw the ball. I don't like his deep ball but I would rather take Okung and nail down that LT spot.

Player Overall Pick

Matt Schaub #90

Peyton Manning #1

Tony Romo sits to pee undrafted

Donovan McNabb #2

Tom Brady #199

Drew Brees #32

Phillip Rivers #3

Ben Roethlisberger#11

Aaron Rodgers #24

Eli Manning #1

Jay Cutler #11

Carson Palmer #1

Matt Ryan #3

Matt Cassell #230

Joe Flacco #18

Brett Favre #33

Kurt Warner undrafted