Bradford vs. Clausen from ClausenFootball (aka WalterFootball)Interesting article abo

[Head Slap]

ok all I have to say is that most of those "ties" should go to Bradford...

that is great thanks. when you find time can you share why?

[berg8309]

John Gruden ESPN one on one: Advantage Clausen

Really? He had a lot more negatives about Clausen than Bradford. Decision making, communication. Bradford he really only critiqued his ability to slide. Unless you want to talk about their demeanor, but that is open for debate how engaged Bradford was, he looked plenty engaged and pretty enthusiastic when talking about offensive plays, and I thought he accepted the criticism pretty well. He certainly didn't make any bones about it, and all indications are he is pretty coachable. I think the fact he worked his way up from scout team is a good indicator of that.

I think Sam may well have the higher ceiling but Ram fans who are expecting a meteoric start to his career are likely to be disappointed.

this deserves to be repeated

I can't recall anyone who made that claim.

that is great thanks. when you find time can you share why?

Check out my post if you are interested, tell me what you think, but in the mean time, why not?

[Nick]

Unsurprisingly, WalterFootball displays some obvious bias towards Clausen. I think berg's breakdown is much more accurate, although I would differ on just a few of his points...


-Decision Making: Strengths for both guys I believe, but I'd give Clausen the advantage because I think he had more responsibility in this area because of the scheme he was operating in. Plus, I feel like he probably had to improvise more.

-Competitiveness: I agree that you can't say Bradford isn't as competitive because he's surrounded by talent. That makes no sense. But I do wonder if the come-from-behind victories or attempts that Clausen has been a part of gives him an edge here. You don't hear a lot about Bradford having to come from behind to get his team the win, probably because they aren't often behind. It'd be interesting to go back through his close wins or losses and see how he did in those scenarios. Maybe a project for this week.

-Mobility: I still feel like Clausen gets the edge here. I dunno, maybe I'm guilty of underrating Sam's mobility. I certainly don't think he's a statue, and I think he may have a slight edge in terms of moving around inside the pocket. But I feel Clausen has an edge in terms of rollouts and throwing on the run, and I give him in edge in situations where the QB has to pull it down and take off. I just feel like, while neither of them are McNabb or anything, Jimmy is a little more dangerous than Sam in the open field.


Other than that, from skimming berg's breakdown, I believe I'd agree with most of the rest of what he put forth. Certainly, IMO, more accurate and fair than Walter's analysis.

[#39 Fan]

Translation:

Jimmy Clausen played with absolutely no talent around him. They were arguably, a bunch of 8th grade pee wee football players in irish uniforms. Bradford on the other hand, played with college all-stars and future first round NFL picks, who are also better looking than you and can beat you at movie trivia. Therefore, Jimmy Clausen is exponentially better at the quarterback position than Sam Bradford, because I personally like him more.

Sam Bradford operated out of a shotgun spread offense his entire career, and has a huge advantage over Jimmy Clausen at Notre Dame, who I assume hasn't yet heard of the spread, because why would they run any other offense?! This offense also allowed Bradford to put up inflated numbers, because spread offense touchdowns are worth 12 points instead of 6. Advantage Jimmy Clausen!

The only reason Notre Dame had any sort of success at all is entirely based on Jimmy Clausen's individual ability, and the only reason Oklahoma had success is because of the talent surrounding Sam Bradford. I will validate these statements however, by mentioning one time that I think Bradford isn't entirely successful based on this system, even after I clearly wrote multiple paragraphs explaining why this simply isn't true.

Did I mention that Sam Bradford had an offensive line composed entirely of all big 12 lineman, while Notre Dame's line was made up of a tree stump, a sack of footballs, the Notre Dame mascot, a man in a panda bear costume, and a girl scout? Clausen also played most of his career with three toes on one foot. ADVANTAGE CLAUSEN!!

fantastic!

[tomahawk247]

Its amazing how they mention that Bradford had a much better OL than Clausen, but they didnt seem to mention much about Clausen relying heavily on Golden Tate to make plays on his misthrown passes, and to take his short dump offs for TDs

[richtree]

I was trying to take it serious until they said Clausen has more upside....

seems like this was written by a Clausen fan trying to justify things in his favor....

[ManofGod]

It is no secret that Clausen is closer to starting day material than Bradford is at this point, which is why he should be rated ahead of Bradford, if you draft Bradford at #1 you are drafting him primarily based on "upside". "Upside" has led to a lot of first round bust in the past.

[Bralidore(RAMMODE)]

One thing I'm not understanding is Clausen being rated as having more arm strength..eh?

Where is that shown, Bradford flicks the ball with little effort and its a 40 yard stinger. Its close if Clausen can plant his foot without the pain, but I don't know if you can give Clausen the edge here. You don't even see Bradford give ffort when he throws the ball.

[RockinRam]

IMO, Bradford has the better arm strength. Why?

Because looking at film and highlight reels, when Bradford throws it deep, he has a relaxed arm, and it seems like he is doing it effortlessly.


On the other hand, when Clausen throws it deep, he uses his whole body, and to me, it looks like he is tense and is muscling it. It looks like he is trying to force, or push the ball.


For example, there is a set distance on the field. Bradford and Clausen are standing the same distance from the set distance point. For Bradford, throwing a ball to that spot requires little effort, except a relaxed arm and a quick release. Clausen though, has to use his whole body and muscle and push that ball.

To me, I bet if Bradford wanted to, he could throw a hell of a deep ball, if he puts more body into it.

[DistantRam]

I prefer Clausen to Bradford but that article is ridiculously biased. So many of the arguments are based on immeasurable hypotheses and amount to nothing more than personal opinion, yet they're presented as fact. If Matt McGuire (the author) is really a scout, then we can all be one.