A good read on Clausen

[BillsWin]

Didn't know if this was posted or not, but I was sent this article from walterfootball.com today and figured I would share it with you.

It pretty much tears into any anti-Clausenites out there. So it is about as bias an article as possible, but the original poster seems to have done their homework stat wise.

Not saying, I want Clausen. As I have said in other threads, I feel like I am coming around to Clausen at nine, not because I would like the pick, but because I feel that may be the pick at nine and rationalizing it now will help with the craziness later.

http://walterfootball.com/jimmyclausenhate.php

Here are some parts I really liked:

Let's discuss Clausen's running game, or lack thereof. Consider the following facts:

Clausen never shared a backfield with a 1,000-yard rusher.

No running back eclipsed 700 rushing yards while Clausen was at Notre Dame.

No running back had a run longer than 27 yards during Clausen's final two years at Notre Dame.

No running back topped five rushing touchdowns during Clausen's career.

The team as a whole never scored more than 13 rushing touchdowns.

Non-quarterbacks never accounted for more than 11 touchdowns in a season.

Clausen's running game (excluding quarterbacks) averaged 3.56, 3.57, and 4.8 YPC during his career.

Clausen improved every season he played in college, to an extremely underrated degree, negating the argument that he's a so-called "one-year wonder," which, incidentally, did not stop Aaron Rodgers or Mark Sanchez from being drafted in the first round.

Clausen has potential. His attitude scared me at first, but after talking to some people it looks like the majority of attitude concerns came from the way he approached signing day some time ago.

Apparently he is a good teammate and won a lot of respect in his time at Notre Dame.

Still not saying I want him, but this article gives me more points with which to rationalize a Clausen pick at nine.

I still think LT is the way to go, and if there is no top LT left, I would rather trade down than do anything else.

[bigbry]

I hope you guys take Clausen.

[T-Long]

Clausen needs to be the pick if he is available.

[homeslice5484]

I would be OK if it was Clausen, I just want this team to pick someone who can make in impact NOW for a change and have some direction.

[The Spaz]

If he is the pick I trust Nix/Modrak. I am not sure about him but I will support him if he is a Bill.

[kernowboy]

I don't think people hate Clausen.

The article is also arguing that Clausen is a 1st round selection which of course he is, but is not the top guy some are saying he is.

Its just that people question whether he really is a franchise QB.

And you can criticise Sam Young as a pro-prospect but he was a legitimate college LT.

Using stats you could say that Tim Tebow is a franchise QB and should be the No1 overall pick but few will agree there.

[FlyingDutchman]

i understand our QB situation is crap, but I dont get why people are so hell bent on getting a QB in one of the weakest classes for QBs in a long time. Just bc there are QBs available doesnt mean they are good and are going to be the answer. Its like if youve ever been camping in the adirondacks with your buddies for a while, when you go into town and see a girl you think shes hot just bc theres nothing else to choose from and its been a while since youve seen anything, it doesnt mean you should knock her up and try to marry her

[DraftBoy]

I laughed the whole way through that article Ill be honest. Im not surprised Walter ran it, its a deep piece, but the guy is a complete Notre Dame homer. He addresses superficial issues and makes no attempt to even look at things from an unbias perspective. A few issues with what he said;

-Relating to the lack of the run game, that's the system ND plays, they run the ball very little. Personally I think if they actually stuck with the run a little more they could of picked up another victory or two, but they are the quickest team in the world to leave the run in order to pass.

-The entire thing is full of excuses, and I think my favorite was when he praised Clausen for putting up numbers as a true freshman and sophmore but then was critical of other players who put up big numbers like Floyd and Randolph calling them inexperienced.

-Lastly for a ND homer he should know the reason Clausen didn't get a RS is because ND doesn't do red shirts. We don't red shirt anybody so it would of been impossible for Clausen to be a RS-Fr ever so to praise him for that is unwarranted.

-If he ever addresses Clausen's actual game tape and breaks down his decision making, mechanics, throwing motion, defensive reading, and how he makes plays under pressure, with a pocket, outside of the pocket. Call me, because all this is is a superficial fluff piece where he repeats himself multiple times to make it longer and takes Clausen's side no matter what, specifically relating to character concerns.

[PISSCHUNK]

DraftBoy,

If you had your choices with Clausen, Trent Williams and CJ Spiller @ #9; who would you take?

Late

[BillsWin]

I think DB would take Spiller, then Williams, then Clausen in that order at nine. Gun to his head, had to pick one of those three.

But let's see what he says.

[DraftBoy]

DraftBoy,

If you had your choices with Clausen, Trent Williams and CJ Spiller @ #9; who would you take?

Late

Billwin is correct.

It would take .01 seconds to get my pick for CJ Spiller.

[BillsWin]

Billwin is correct.

It would take .01 seconds to get my pick for CJ Spiller.

I figured as much. I like Spiller, but I would trade Lynch for a pick before drafting him.

Sure its nice having three 1,000 yard capable backs on roster, but finding them carries could get difficult. Plus, Lynch could fetch us a third or possible second.

Get rid of Lynch if you are going to draft Spiller is all I ask. It frees up addressing other needs, such as OT, WR, LB, NT, QB. etc. etc.

[psubills62]

Billwin is correct.

It would take .01 seconds to get my pick for CJ Spiller.

Hm I guess I didn't realize how much you like Spiller. Would you rather take Spiller or Bulaga at #9?

[DraftBoy]

I figured as much. I like Spiller, but I would trade Lynch for a pick before drafting him.

Sure its nice having three 1,000 yard capable backs on roster, but finding them carries could get difficult. Plus, Lynch could fetch us a third or possible second.

Get rid of Lynch if you are going to draft Spiller is all I ask. It frees up addressing other needs, such as OT, WR, LB, NT, QB. etc. etc.

Why get rid of Lynch? Do you recall how dynamic the Giants offense was with three backs? How about New Orleans this year?

Spiller is far more than just a 1000 yd back as well.

[DraftBoy]

Hm I guess I didn't realize how much you like Spiller. Would you rather take Spiller or Bulaga at #9?

Tough call, but probably Bulaga.

His technique makes him too valuable a LT to me.

[BillsWin]

Why get rid of Lynch? Do you recall how dynamic the Giants offense was with three backs? How about New Orleans this year?

Spiller is far more than just a 1000 yd back as well.

I am just looking at it from the standpoint that we could get solid value for Lynch. He is a suspension liability, we have Jackson and (hypothetically) Spiller, we have a bunch of needs to fill, and supposedly this is a deep draft. Not to mention how solid third backs can be found deeper in the draft.

I understand the argument for keeping three good backs on roster, but doesn't it make a little sense to get the extra pick and use it on a right tackle, a linebacker, a nose tackle or BPA?

Just saying, I think there are arguments for both sides. If some team is willing to dish out a 2nd for Lynch, and we intend to draft Spiller, I would understand taking the deal.

[BillsWin]

This is supposedly a great, deep draft too. So I guess getting more picks just makes sense to me.

[SirMcGee]

I would be OK if it was Clausen, I just want this team to pick someone who can make in impact NOW for a change and have some direction.

If you want somebody that would make an impact NOW, then QB shouldnt be the way to go. I dont think any QB should be put into the line of fire in their first year...unless of course they already have an established line and running game and defense.

[DraftBoy]

I am just looking at it from the standpoint that we could get solid value for Lynch. He is a suspension liability, we have Jackson and (hypothetically) Spiller, we have a bunch of needs to fill, and supposedly this is a deep draft. Not to mention how solid third backs can be found deeper in the draft.

I understand the argument for keeping three good backs on roster, but doesn't it make a little sense to get the extra pick and use it on a right tackle, a linebacker, a nose tackle or BPA?

Just saying, I think there are arguments for both sides. If some team is willing to dish out a 2nd for Lynch, and we intend to draft Spiller, I would understand taking the deal.

So would I for a 2nd but I put Lynch's value at about a 5th right. A two strike player who had a bad attitude last year about being benched.

[Mr. Pink]

I laughed the whole way through that article Ill be honest. Im not surprised Walter ran it, its a deep piece, but the guy is a complete Notre Dame homer. He addresses superficial issues and makes no attempt to even look at things from an unbias perspective. A few issues with what he said;

-Relating to the lack of the run game, that's the system ND plays, they run the ball very little. Personally I think if they actually stuck with the run a little more they could of picked up another victory or two, but they are the quickest team in the world to leave the run in order to pass.

-The entire thing is full of excuses, and I think my favorite was when he praised Clausen for putting up numbers as a true freshman and sophmore but then was critical of other players who put up big numbers like Floyd and Randolph calling them inexperienced.

-Lastly for a ND homer he should know the reason Clausen didn't get a RS is because ND doesn't do red shirts. We don't red shirt anybody so it would of been impossible for Clausen to be a RS-Fr ever so to praise him for that is unwarranted.

-If he ever addresses Clausen's actual game tape and breaks down his decision making, mechanics, throwing motion, defensive reading, and how he makes plays under pressure, with a pocket, outside of the pocket. Call me, because all this is is a superficial fluff piece where he repeats himself multiple times to make it longer and takes Clausen's side no matter what, specifically relating to character concerns.

I read this the same way as I read Brady Quinn fluff pieces a few years ago.

In fact, I thought it was the same article just replaced Quinn with Clausen.