Jimmy Clausen or Sam Bradford?

[HighOnHendrix]

Again, this is not a:

Anti-JC thread

QB vs LT thread

Free Agent thread

Colt Brennan thread

Nice try, but every thread is and Anti-JC thread.

[Wyndorf25]

I drew a line right down the middle of my cat's freshly changed litter box. One side represents Clausen, the other represents Bradford. Wherever my cat's latest turd drops--then that is the QB. Personally, I'm hoping she craps outside the box and the Skins address the O-line.

[mhenry41h]

Just say "NO" to Bradford Shanny and Bruce! I think if you threw the votes of the biased Irish haters out of the polling, that those with objective views would have Clausen leading the poll 70%-30%. Clausen will be playing in playoff games when Bradfords career is over.

[RichmondRedskin88]

I would lean toward Bradford. I was kind of hesitant at first because of the arm but seeing Drew Brees win the Super bowl after him having a similar injury shows that a QB can get past such a injury.

[ArmchairRedskin]

I found this on another board.

What this is: During the year, Football Scientist K.C. Joyner has evaluated top NFL draft prospects. This week he looks at former Notre Dame Fighting Irish QB Jimmy Clausen.

When grading a quarterback’s arm strength, I often think back to a line from former San Francisco 49ers coach Bill Walsh in Dr. Z’s classic book, “The New Thinking Man’s Guide To Pro Football.” Some in the media had called Super Bowl XVI a battle between Walsh’s brains and Cincinnati coach Forrest Gregg’s discipline. That viewpoint led Walsh to ask this question: What constituted discipline? Was it being physically tough on someone? Or could it also be executing a highly choreographed set of moves under the pressure of competition? The answer is that it could be either, and it really depended on what one meant by the word discipline.

The same thing goes for measuring the velocity of a passing arm. The gold standard in this area is the deep out pass, but that throw requires a much different kind of delivery and less touch than many other important vertical passes, such as the go, corner, post and fade routes.

Now, let’s look at Jimmy Clausen. It is pretty much a given that Clausen will be a first-round draft pick, but his arm strength is enough of a question mark to cause his predicted draft slot status to vary significantly. For example, Mel Kiper’s initial mock draft has Clausen going to the Buffalo Bills at the No. 9 spot because he possesses “an NFL arm.” Scouts Inc.‘s Todd McShay, on the other hand, has Clausen going in the No. 23 spot (to the Seattle Seahawks) in part because "he doesn’t have ideal arm strength."

So which analyst is right?

The odd thing is that they both are on the money. After breaking down six of Clausen’s 2009 game tapes (at Michigan, at Michigan State, vs. USC, vs. Boston College, vs. Connecticut and at Stanford), I found metrics and scouting notes to back both sides of that argument.

For example, Clausen did a fine job on the 13 deep out passes he threw. Eleven of them were on target (on target being defined as landing within the catching frame of the receiver) and seven ended up being completed. He was also 2-for-2 on the comeback route — which is a close cousin of the deep out — so he was on the money on 13 out of 15 of the vertical outside routes.

Clausen also displayed superb accuracy on the long passes that require more arc than the deep out. He was one for two on the corner route and would have been two for two if not for a dropped pass. Clausen also completed the only deep post route he threw.

Throwing into high traffic areas also was an area of strength for Clausen, something that is evidenced by his seven completions in eight attempts on deep in passes.

For all of his vertical plusses from a metric perspective, the scouting eye indicated Clausen had some issues on certain types of throws. This was especially evident in the Michigan contest. In that game, Clausen had multiple occasions when he threw a low hard pass when a higher, arced passed would have been more appropriate. It almost looked as though he was trying to show just how hard he could throw the ball and was putting more mustard on passes than was necessary. That trend didn’t show up later in the season, so it might have been an early season psychological issue he has since overcome.

Clausen also had issues when facing a pass rush. The scouting notes indicated numerous instances where Clausen threw passes off of his back foot when the defense did a heavy blitz. The first negative on this front is that he would do at times even when the blitz was picked up, so that leads to concerns about whether he will get what Phil Simms calls “pocket cabin fever” whenever a defense comes after him.

The second negative is that those aerials ended up well short of the mark. That clearly shows Clausen cannot effectively gun a pass downfield unless he has the ability to step into the pass.

If the game tape reviews showed both an upside and a downside in terms of Clausen’s arm, they were perfectly clear about his ability to read a defense. He made only four bad decisions in 224 passes (a bad decision being defined as when the quarterback makes a mistake with the ball that leads to either a turnover or a near turnover). That equates to a 1.7 percent bad-decision rate, which is a mark that would usually rank among the top 10-15 quarterbacks if it were accomplished at the NFL level, so Clausen gets high marks here.

The Football Scientist Lab Result: Drew Brees and Philip Rivers have proven that the ability to read a defense is much more important than possessing a cannon for an arm. Clausen has displayed superb ability in that area, and when that is added to his more than adequate skill in placing accurate throws downfield, it equals a TFS seal of approval.

[MGutta]

I found this on another board.

What this is: During the year, Football Scientist K.C. Joyner has evaluated top NFL draft prospects. This week he looks at former Notre Dame Fighting Irish QB Jimmy Clausen...

Wow! Great read. It's just a matter of crossing fingers now. With this combined with the other scouting reports and highlights around the web, I just do not get how so many people around here still hate Clausen. It baffles me.

[c4man5282]

Where is the neither or draft an OL?

[mhenry41h]

I found this on another board.

What this is: During the year, Football Scientist K.C. Joyner has evaluated top NFL draft prospects. This week he looks at former Notre Dame Fighting Irish QB Jimmy Clausen.

When grading a quarterback’s arm strength, I often think back to a line from former San Francisco 49ers coach Bill Walsh in Dr. Z’s classic book, “The New Thinking Man’s Guide To Pro Football.” Some in the media had called Super Bowl XVI a battle between Walsh’s brains and Cincinnati coach Forrest Gregg’s discipline. That viewpoint led Walsh to ask this question: What constituted discipline? Was it being physically tough on someone? Or could it also be executing a highly choreographed set of moves under the pressure of competition? The answer is that it could be either, and it really depended on what one meant by the word discipline.

The same thing goes for measuring the velocity of a passing arm. The gold standard in this area is the deep out pass, but that throw requires a much different kind of delivery and less touch than many other important vertical passes, such as the go, corner, post and fade routes.

Now, let’s look at Jimmy Clausen. It is pretty much a given that Clausen will be a first-round draft pick, but his arm strength is enough of a question mark to cause his predicted draft slot status to vary significantly. For example, Mel Kiper’s initial mock draft has Clausen going to the Buffalo Bills at the No. 9 spot because he possesses “an NFL arm.” Scouts Inc.‘s Todd McShay, on the other hand, has Clausen going in the No. 23 spot (to the Seattle Seahawks) in part because "he doesn’t have ideal arm strength."

So which analyst is right?

The odd thing is that they both are on the money. After breaking down six of Clausen’s 2009 game tapes (at Michigan, at Michigan State, vs. USC, vs. Boston College, vs. Connecticut and at Stanford), I found metrics and scouting notes to back both sides of that argument.

For example, Clausen did a fine job on the 13 deep out passes he threw. Eleven of them were on target (on target being defined as landing within the catching frame of the receiver) and seven ended up being completed. He was also 2-for-2 on the comeback route — which is a close cousin of the deep out — so he was on the money on 13 out of 15 of the vertical outside routes.

Clausen also displayed superb accuracy on the long passes that require more arc than the deep out. He was one for two on the corner route and would have been two for two if not for a dropped pass. Clausen also completed the only deep post route he threw.

Throwing into high traffic areas also was an area of strength for Clausen, something that is evidenced by his seven completions in eight attempts on deep in passes.

For all of his vertical plusses from a metric perspective, the scouting eye indicated Clausen had some issues on certain types of throws. This was especially evident in the Michigan contest. In that game, Clausen had multiple occasions when he threw a low hard pass when a higher, arced passed would have been more appropriate. It almost looked as though he was trying to show just how hard he could throw the ball and was putting more mustard on passes than was necessary. That trend didn’t show up later in the season, so it might have been an early season psychological issue he has since overcome.

Clausen also had issues when facing a pass rush. The scouting notes indicated numerous instances where Clausen threw passes off of his back foot when the defense did a heavy blitz. The first negative on this front is that he would do at times even when the blitz was picked up, so that leads to concerns about whether he will get what Phil Simms calls “pocket cabin fever” whenever a defense comes after him.

The second negative is that those aerials ended up well short of the mark. That clearly shows Clausen cannot effectively gun a pass downfield unless he has the ability to step into the pass.

If the game tape reviews showed both an upside and a downside in terms of Clausen’s arm, they were perfectly clear about his ability to read a defense. He made only four bad decisions in 224 passes (a bad decision being defined as when the quarterback makes a mistake with the ball that leads to either a turnover or a near turnover). That equates to a 1.7 percent bad-decision rate, which is a mark that would usually rank among the top 10-15 quarterbacks if it were accomplished at the NFL level, so Clausen gets high marks here.

The Football Scientist Lab Result: Drew Brees and Philip Rivers have proven that the ability to read a defense is much more important than possessing a cannon for an arm. Clausen has displayed superb ability in that area, and when that is added to his more than adequate skill in placing accurate throws downfield, it equals a TFS seal of approval.

So basically, the biggest negative was the fact that Clausen has a tendency to throw off his back foot in the face of a rush which lead to throws coming up short. I have two crucial elements of this "flaw" to consider. In spite of short throwing in the face of the rush, his turnovers or bad decisions were minimal. This is key. Also, throwing off his back foot in the face of pressure is a quirk than can be trained out of him by a good coaching staff. So basically, Clausen gets high marks in spite of his few shortcomings...of which ar coachable. We need to draft this kid asap.

[anar-k21]

at least Clausen played more than 2 years in college

[anar-k21]

can someone help me !!!! ho do i get "the cheerleader" under my name changed??? wtf

[Hail Gibbs]

at least Clausen played more than 2 years in college

So did Ryan Leaf and a lot of other QBs who busted, what difference does that make? In those 2 seasons Bradford played well against more quality defenses than Clausen faced in his years at ND. Even USC, the one team on ND schedule who is normally great every year had a very suspect D this season.

[Zzj]

i second the notion that bradford has superior upside. also, clausen is kind of a dick, but that doesn't matter so much when you're winning games.

i'd go with bradford, if that's what it comes down to. but i'd rather have o-line help. we need TWO tackles!

[Brunell_2_Moss=TD]

when the combine begins everyone will see that clausen is by far the better qb i am a notre dame fan and every saturday watched the games the guy for one is not afraid to throw the ball down field something our team has been unable to do since brunell went to moss for 2 tds against dallas on monday night....with santana at wr who is similar to golden tate he will produce more down field throws... clausen style of play shows that he is ready for the nfl charlie weis ran an nfl style offense which really means is what you saw at notre dame from clausen is what your gunna get he has a quick release he puts the ball where only his receivers can get it watch highlights the balls he throw are perfect bradford on the other hand had top recruits around him and still played shaky he now had 2 shoulder surgeries the guy will be the next ryan leaf clausen reminds me of drew brees

[skinsfan190]

when the combine begins everyone will see that clausen is by far the better qb i am a notre dame fan and every saturday watched the games the guy for one is not afraid to throw the ball down field something our team has been unable to do since brunell went to moss for 2 tds against dallas on monday night....with santana at wr who is similar to golden tate he will produce more down field throws... clausen style of play shows that he is ready for the nfl charlie weis ran an nfl style offense which really means is what you saw at notre dame from clausen is what your gunna get he has a quick release he puts the ball where only his receivers can get it watch highlights the balls he throw are perfect bradford on the other hand had top recruits around him and still played shaky he now had 2 shoulder surgeries the guy will be the next ryan leaf clausen reminds me of drew brees

I see what ur saying and I agree Clausen is underrated by alot of people on this board and so called scouts like Todd McShay.

Unfortunately he won't be ready for the Combine tho. Remember he had that toe surgrey. He won't be able to work out until his Pro Day in April

[BruinSkin]

when the combine begins everyone will see that clausen is by far the better qb i am a notre dame fan and every saturday watched the games the guy for one is not afraid to throw the ball down field something our team has been unable to do since brunell went to moss for 2 tds against dallas on monday night....with santana at wr who is similar to golden tate he will produce more down field throws... clausen style of play shows that he is ready for the nfl charlie weis ran an nfl style offense which really means is what you saw at notre dame from clausen is what your gunna get he has a quick release he puts the ball where only his receivers can get it watch highlights the balls he throw are perfect bradford on the other hand had top recruits around him and still played shaky he now had 2 shoulder surgeries the guy will be the next ryan leaf clausen reminds me of drew brees

Holy run-on sentence, Batman. Is this what our public schools have come to?

Kidding aside, Clausen had top recruits too. Don't kid yourself. Golden Tate, Michael Floyd, and Kyle Rudolph will all be playing on Sundays and most likely taken within the first two rounds.

[skinsfan190]

Holy run-on sentence, Batman. Is this what our public schools have come to?

Kidding aside, Clausen had top recruits too. Don't kid yourself. Golden Tate, Michael Floyd, and Kyle Rudolph will all be playing on Sundays and most likely taken within the first two rounds.

Yes, Clausen played with 2 First Round pick recievers. Michael Floyd might even be a top 5 or 10 pick next year

But, his offensive line was horrible and nothing came easy for him at Notre Dame. After his first year, he was crushed game after game. I think he showed alot of toughness by improving each season and making alot of plays under very adverse situations.

I love his toughness and I don't think his personality is any different from Phillip Rivers. Both come off ****y and adbrasive, but they both are great leaders and very talented.

[BruinSkin]

But, his offensive line was horrible and nothing came easy for him at Notre Dame. After his first year, he was crushed game after game. I think he showed alot of toughness by improving each season and making alot of plays under very adverse situations.

His freshman year, his line was terrible (35 sacks), yes. His sophomore and junior years they were serviceable but far from terrible. I think this gets way overstated on this board.

I'm not saying his line was elite, but consider that the sack numbers from some college quarterbacks on very good teams:

Colt McCoy: 30

Tebow: 29

Pryor: 22

Canfield: 29

Clausen: 24

Edit to add: I rarely if ever see anyone saying how terrible Florida, Texas, Ohio State or Oregon State's line is.

[Hail Gibbs]

when the combine begins everyone will see that clausen is by far the better qb i am a notre dame fan and every saturday watched the games the guy for one is not afraid to throw the ball down field something our team has been unable to do since brunell went to moss for 2 tds against dallas on monday night....with santana at wr who is similar to golden tate he will produce more down field throws... clausen style of play shows that he is ready for the nfl charlie weis ran an nfl style offense which really means is what you saw at notre dame from clausen is what your gunna get he has a quick release he puts the ball where only his receivers can get it watch highlights the balls he throw are perfect bradford on the other hand had top recruits around him and still played shaky he now had 2 shoulder surgeries the guy will be the next ryan leaf clausen reminds me of drew brees

We are going to be able to tell Jimmy Clausen is a much better football player just by watching the combine? :whoknows:

Also there is no way you can say what you saw at Notre Dame is what you are going to get with Clausen in the NFL. He doesn't get to play against crap defenses he faced in college like Navy, Washington, Washington St., Stanford, UConn, UNC, Nevada, Syracuse, Hawaii, Purdue. These are the teams that Clausen compiled huge numbers against and none of them had the talent on defense to cope with someone like Tate or Floyd.

[BruinSkin]

We are going to be able to tell Jimmy Clausen is a much better football player just by watching the combine? :whoknows:

Also there is no way you can say what you saw at Notre Dame is what you are going to get with Clausen in the NFL. He doesn't get to play against crap defenses he faced in college like Navy, Washington, Washington St., Stanford, UConn, UNC, Nevada, Syracuse, Hawaii, Purdue. These are the teams that Clausen compiled huge numbers against and none of them had the talent on defense to cope with someone like Tate or Floyd.

I'm not going to pretend that Clausen played SEC defenses, but who did Joe Flacco play at Delaware? How many of those teams put guys into the NFL? I don't think level of competition is always the best metric. You need to evaluate the individual and the plays he makes (accuracy, reads, etc.)

[MGutta]

His freshman year, his line was terrible (35 sacks), yes. His sophomore and junior years they were serviceable but far from terrible. I think this gets way overstated on this board.

I'm not saying his line was elite, but consider that the sack numbers from some college quarterbacks on very good teams:

Colt McCoy: 30

Tebow: 29

Pryor: 22

Canfield: 29

Clausen: 24

Edit to add: I rarely if ever see anyone saying how terrible Florida, Texas, Ohio State or Oregon State's line is.

That might also have to do with Clausen's ability to read defenses and get the ball out quickly...

[BruinSkin]

That might also have to do with Clausen's ability to read defenses and get the ball out quickly...

So from 2007 to 2008, Notre Dame gave up 35 then 21 sacks. I think his release may have helped, but was it significantly quicker to make up a 14 sack differential, or do you think the offensive line played better?

Consider this, Notre Dame had 3 new starters (Duncan, Turkovich, Wenger) on the line in 2007 and returned 4 starters in 2008 (Duncan, Turkovich, Wenger, Young). Seems to me, they probably gelled better as a unit, though Clausen's performance probably helped.

Conclusion: His line in 2008 and 2009 is not as terrible as people on this board make it out to be.

[MumboSauce]

Of the two Bradford. I really don't like Clausen throwing motion at all. I like Bradford's accuracy, decision making, height.

[BruinSkin]

I just wanted to note that anyone making a big deal about Jimmy Clausen being punched shouldn't worry. Apparently Clausen's girlfriend was shoved, Clausen shoved the guy back and got punched. That doesn't really shout off-the-field issues to me, he stood up for his old lady. I'd like to think that anyone on this board would do the same.

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2009/11/report-girlfriend-pushed-jimmy-clausen-shoves-puncher-before-altercation.html

[Kilmer]

Bradford is the next Troy Aikman, he is accurate as hell and you cannot teach that.

Bradford all the way.

[bulldog]

Picking Bradford if available will be a ballsy move for Shanahan in his first major move with Washington.

The 'safe' pick is Okung at LT at #4.

If he goes Bradford at #4 you can bet the Redskins have already used free agency and perhaps a trade to secure help for the OL.