Quinn v. Clausen

So apparently Brady Quinn is worth a sixth rounder and some change, and yet Clausen is regarded as a high first rounder

Somebody please explain.

If you look at their careers in the same offense, and I'm not going to go through an in depth statistical analysis or anything I would say that Quinn was a better player than Clausen coming out.

Sure Quinn has struggled some and his value has thus decreased, but I think he provides a good comparison with Clausen.

This just adds fuel to my fire why we or anyone would consider drafting Clausen in the first, especially if we could have got Quinn for this price, this just doesn't add up to me.

Well when Quinn came out he was expected to go as high as #4 (I think, maybe it was #3) to Cleveland and no lower than #9 (again, I think) to Miami. So Clausen's stock is not that much higher than Quinn's was coming out. The fact that Quinn has flopped and is now worth just a mid-rounder is irrelevant.

Well, there's three reasons IMO.

1) We don't want Quinn.

2) We think Clausen is better than Quinn.

3) We want Bradford.

They are also two different people, you dont know how clausen will handle running an nfl offense. He might be better then Quin at handling pressure and reading coverage.

It doesnt really matter, I seriously doubt we are considering Clausen with the #1 pick.

You forgot that Quinn is already the captain of the failboat.
http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums.../failboat2.jpg

I will make it simple.

Quinn is very, very inaccurate.

Quinn has a very, very weak arm.

Clausen is very, very accurate.

Clausen has a decent arm.

Just because Nebraska DT Carriker isn't exactly lighting up the league doesn't mean Nebraska DT Suh will be a bust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by npow81

So apparently Brady Quinn is worth a sixth rounder and some change, and yet Clausen is regarded as a high first rounder

Somebody please explain.

---

Brady Quinn is worth a sixth rounder and some change because he's done next to nothing in three years in the league.

But when he was coming out, he was regarded by many as a potential Top Ten pick. There was talk of him possibly going to Cleveland, and many were surprised when the Dolphins passed on him @ the ninth pick.

Clausen's stock is probably pretty close to what Quinn's was when he was coming out in 2007. In fact, Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks said this of Clausen the other day on Twitter...

Quote:

---

I keep reading that Clausen is going to go in the top 10 but I've yet to hear any scout/coach/exec tell me they have him rated that high
about 11 hours ago via TweetDeck

---

Clausen and Quinn aren't the same player. While I do think there are some similar attributes, it's not as if they're clones of each other, and there isn't much reason to doubt one prospect because a previous guy from the same school didn't work out. Clausen is his own man, will go to a different team with a different situation.

Some people look at Clausen as a possibility for Washington if they miss out on Bradford. I'm not sure I see him going that high. Like Quinn, there are a couple of teams that could target him in the Top Ten (Seattle, Cleveland, Buffalo), but it wouldn't be shocking at all if he slipped into the teens IMO.

Yes, Brady failed in Cleveland that is a fact.

I am not defending him, but was that entirely his fault, no probably not.

I am not a ND hater, nor a Quinn fan

I'm not saying because Quinn failed that Clausen will fail, they are different players, they have different strengths and weaknesses.

What I am questioning, mainly to establish a point of comparison, is whether there is that big of a difference between Quinn and Clausen or Quinn and hell let's blow this whole thing apart and say Bradford, that one is worth a six rounder and some change and the other two are high first rounders?

Personally I don't think either Bradford or Clausen are significantly better prospects whether comparing (a) Quinn of right now v. Clausen and Bradford as rookies or (b) comparing all three at the time they came out of college.

In my mind Quinn if worse that these two prospects, as a continuing prospect himself, is only slightly worse that Clausen and Bradford (yes I realize I am in the minority on this)

To me, comparing these players in this might highlight the following


How weak this qb class is

How overinflated people's views of Bradford and Clausen are

How desperate we are for a qb and a 'savior'

In the end, in terms of value, I don't see the talent difference between Quinn and Bradford and Clausen to make up five rounds of value.

I think in the end this is a story of two things (1) People think draftees are going to be saviors before they have done anything (2) People are quick to turn on the 'savior' when he doesn't produce victories.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by npow81

Personally I don't think either Bradford or Clausen are significantly better prospects whether comparing (a) Quinn of right now v. Clausen and Bradford as rookies or (b) comparing all three at the time they came out of college.

In my mind Quinn if worse that these two prospects, as a continuing prospect himself, is only slightly worse that Clausen and Bradford (yes I realize I am in the minority on this)

To me, comparing these players in this might highlight the following


How weak this qb class is

How overinflated people's views of Bradford and Clausen are

How desperate we are for a qb and a 'savior'

In the end, in terms of value, I don't see the talent difference between Quinn and Bradford and Clausen to make up five rounds of value.

I think in the end this is a story of two things (1) People think draftees are going to be saviors before they have done anything (2) People are quick to turn on the 'savior' when he doesn't produce victories.

---

Let's put it this way. First, 2007 was an extremely, extremely weak QB class IMO. The most successful QB out of that year was Trent Edwards. Trent Edwards...


If Brady Quinn was coming out of college last year in the 2009 draft, I think he'd be behind Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, and Josh Freeman IMO.

Now, if Bradford was came out last year, he'd be the #1 QB. He'd probably be playing in Detroit right now.


If Clausen came out last year, I think he'd be behind Sanchez and above Freeman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RockinRam

Let's put it this way. First, 2007 was an extremely, extremely weak QB class IMO. The most successful QB out of that year was Trent Edwards. Trent Edwards...


If Brady Quinn was coming out of college last year in the 2009 draft, I think he'd be behind Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, and Josh Freeman IMO.

Now, if Bradford was came out last year, he'd be the #1 QB. He'd probably be playing in Detroit right now.


If Clausen came out last year, I think he'd be behind Sanchez and above Freeman.

---

Ok well that is all opinion, I think Quinn had a better career at ND than Clausen, irrespective I think it is impossible to say that there is a stark contrast between them.

Again, to reiterate, I am not saying that Quinn "failed" and b/c he played and ND that therefore Clausen will fail.

My position is merely that even today, even with Quinn's "failure", I personally don't see a STARK contrast in his abilities to that of Clausen, and probably not in Bradford.

I personally wouldn't put Brady in the "bust" category yet, I'm not saying he won't be, but I think its too early to tell and I think an investment of a fifth or so for him would be a better investment that drafting either Bradford or Clausen in the first.

I realize I am in the minority on this

I really think too much is put on wins and losses at the qb position, Brady has looked good and bad, and i'll admit during the Monday night game last year he was awful.

Case in point is Sanchez, who everyone regards as a success, why is that, because his team won games, did he have a whole lot to do with that, NO. I 'm not saying the kid won't be good, but he really didn't have much to do with them making it to the AFC championship

As for Bradford, I've abstained from saying much about him, I just fail to see how you can know for sure with him, I think he can make all the throws, but I don't know if he has the ability to take pressure and some of the other things a qb must do.

As you can see, I am clearly confused about the direction we should take with the qb position, however, I am still not convinced that we should take a qb in the first round, and pass up Suh

To me there's too many question marks with those guys to invest that much--this is why I bring posted this thread, in an attempt to use Quinn as a point of comparsion, I think its difficult to say that as a prospect now or back when he was drafted as compared to these two right now there is that big of difference to justify the giant gap between 1st-5thish round, and to me we are reaching and getting on the Bradford bandwagon because we all want a qb of the future and because we have seen some good ones passed up in the last few years.

I think in the end we have to realize how big an investment the #1 pick is, sure a gamble might pay off, but for me, there are too many question marks with Bradford and Clausen to make that investment, especially when you are looking at the other talent that is available there.

In your comparisons all you really seem to list is physical comparisons.

I think Bradford is much more accurate and has a better arm than Quinn. Bradford is highly intelligent (GPA, Wonderlic score, plays cello), dedicated (went through intense rehab, added 12 pounds of solid muscle mass), and an all around great guy to have on the team.

Quinn seems to be a good guy but doesn't have the attributes that Bradford has nor the accolades. How are they even considered similar?

Clausen comparisons I can see more clearly. I think Clausen has a better arm, is a better quarterback, and has the better accuracy but they played in the same offense andw ent to the same school.

I see your point but i also see how your point fails.

I think the reason people like Bradford so much is because he is a proven winner and has all the attributes you want in a quarterback minus an indestructible shoulder. Its not like he's getting elevated because this is supposedly a weak qb class (that remains to be seen), its that he is a good quarterback and would have been the top guy last year witth one less year experience (and admittedly one less shoulder injury).

You draft guys based on what you've seen of them and their potential. Brady had a great career at Notre Dame and looked like a solid quarterback. Albeit he still was considered to have a weak arm then as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bralidore(RAMMODE)

In your comparisons all you really seem to list is physical comparisons.

I think Bradford is much more accurate and has a better arm than Quinn. Bradford is highly intelligent (GPA, Wonderlic score, plays cello), dedicated (went through intense rehab, added 12 pounds of solid muscle mass), and an all around great guy to have on the team.

Quinn seems to be a good guy but doesn't have the attributes that Bradford has nor the accolades. How are they even considered similar?

Clausen comparisons I can see more clearly. I think Clausen has a better arm, is a better quarterback, and has the better accuracy but they played in the same offense andw ent to the same school.

I see your point but i also see how your point fails.

I think the reason people like Bradford so much is because he is a proven winner and has all the attributes you want in a quarterback minus an indestructible shoulder. Its not like he's getting elevated because this is supposedly a weak qb class (that remains to be seen), its that he is a good quarterback and would have been the top guy last year witth one less year experience (and admittedly one less shoulder injury).

You draft guys based on what you've seen of them and their potential. Brady had a great career at Notre Dame and looked like a solid quarterback. Albeit he still was considered to have a weak arm then as well.

---

(1) Actually I've made almost 0 physical comparisons, I think all I've said is that Bradford can make all the throws, generally I agree that Bradford is a better prospect, but I don't believe by that wide of a disparity

(2) Bradford does have a better arm, however Brady was a pretty accurate college qb as well, I believe the difference is pressure in the NFL, and it might be for Bradford too.

(3) Bradford may be highly intelligent, but if I remember correctly Brady did very well academically at ND, and ND happens to be just a teeny bit better academic school than OU, not to mention that Brady's offense in college, the real smarts that are important here, is more of a pro style than Bradfords

(4) I don't care if Bradford can conduct a symphony---playing the cello...really?

(5) What mythical attributes are you speaking of, sure Bradford won a Heisman, but history has shown that means squat--Brady was a great leader in college--i think this is a form of the 'savior' syndrome I think some of us are suffering from.

(6) I am saying they are somewhat similar because I don't see a great gap in the talent level of the two coming out of college or now.

(7) My problem with Bradford isn't that I don't think he has the tools, I just really really don't think someone can judge him as a whole and say he is a #1 pick based on the times when he played.

The main problem I see is that Bradford was not touched when he played and the majority of his throws are dink and dunk throws, the ability to handle pressure is huge in the NFL, many QBs, including Quinn, can be successful, if they are not touched and not pressured, the ones that can handle it are the ones that truly separate themselves.

I'm not saying Bradford can't do this, I'm just saying no one, not you, not anyone can tell me that they KNOW this, because he simply was not pressured, in fact, when he was pressured in the BYU game, he did not perform too well

I really really wish Bradford would have played this year, I think it would have given us a more accurate reflection of his abilities as a pro.

(8) This is important---I DO NOT CARE HOW BRADFORD WAS RATED LAST YEAR THIS YEAR OR ANY OTHER YEAR, part of the reason he would have been rated #1 last year was his heisman campaign, which inevitably will boost up a rating, sometimes deservedly, sometimes not so much.

I am simply judging Bradford as a whole, and its not that I don't see a glimpse of special, I just don't think anyone can know FOR SURE, and I think if your going to pay a guy $80 mil, you better be sure, we can not to afford to miss on this one.

(9) I see potential in Bradford, just as I see still see potential in Quinn, and as I saw potential in Quinn coming out, sure I see more in Bradford but my point is I don't see the vast differences in potential to make up that big of a gap in draft value

(10) Therefore, I would have been happier had we pulled the trigger on this trade and lost a 5th round pick, and taken Suh or one of the bevy of highly talented players at the top of the draft.

In the end this is moot, however, I still just don't get it.

I remember Quinn being knocked for inaccuracy & getting happy feet under pressure. Not something I've read or seen in Clausen.

Quinn was thought of as the #1 QB prospect for a while, no? Never been the case for Clausen.Can't even say I'd have taken Russell over him. Certainly wouldn't want Russell instead of him now.

If Clausen's toe is cleared & he refutes the claim that he doesn't have good arm strength at his Pro Day, I think he'll go much higher than Quinn. If not, maybe about the same.

Not even sure I'd label Quinn a bust at this point; I think The Browns have been making a hash of developing young QBs for a while now. I think he might have a minor renaissance elsewhere. Depends on whether he can shed the BMOC attitude & buckle down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by npow81

What I am questioning, mainly to establish a point of comparison, is whether there is that big of a difference between Quinn and Clausen or Quinn and hell let's blow this whole thing apart and say Bradford, that one is worth a six rounder and some change and the other two are high first rounders?

---

But Quinn is only worth a sixth rounder because he's been in the league and hasn't developed. When he was a prospect coming out, like Bradford and Clausen are now, he was viewed as a first round guy, just like they are.

It sounds as if you're taking Brady Quinn's value now and trying to compare it to two rookies coming out. But you really can't do that, because Quinn's current value is affected by the three years he's spent in the NFL. It's an apples to oranges comparison, IMO.