Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 20 of 20
  1. #16
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,542
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

    Quote Originally Posted by sakl18 View Post
    If we pass on a franchise quarterback this year, we will once again be picking in the top 5,
    Assuming this draft class has a "franchise" QB at the #1 spot, we'd probably still be picking in the top 5 next year. However, I don't see where there's a good chance of Bradford or Clausen being a franchise QB worth passing over Suh.

    I'm going to apply some numbers; nothing scientific just ball-parking.

    Why would we pass over a DT who has a 65% chance of being truly dominant for a QB who has a 20% of being truly dominant?

    Not exact numbers of course, but you get the idea.........Suh appears to have a much better chance of being dominant in the NFL than does either Bradford or Clausen.

    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  2. #17
    Bralidore(RAMMODE)'s Avatar
    Bralidore(RAMMODE) is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,149
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

    I think we can easily get by with a steven jackson/someone else duo carrying the load of the offense. We cant sacrifice young talent like Suh just so we can MAYBE win a few more games next year. I honestly don't think we're as far from being a dominant defense as people think. What do you guys think it takes for a dominant defense to be dominant? You need play-makers and talent and good coaching. We already have Jlau, long, atogwe, dahl/butler, bartell, and emerging young talent in fletcher and clifton ryan. Add Suh and a possible first round OLB or DE in the second round with Spags defensive coaching and what more do you need?

    Ive said this before but the combination of Suh's talent, attitude in the form of work ethic and tenacity at the position he plays (which is a lot less hard in terms of the mental learning curve) makes Suhs chances of being a bust significantly lower than a QB period, let alone claussen or bradford.
    Last edited by Bralidore(RAMMODE); -01-21-2010 at 05:52 PM.

  3. #18
    Warner4prez's Avatar
    Warner4prez is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    North Dakota
    Age
    28
    Posts
    468
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

    I say we take Suh, unless the rare opportuniyty to trade down rears it's head. It's reasonable to say that a rookie DT will have a bigger impact than a rookie QB based solely on the difficutly transitioning to each respectable position in the pros.

    However, if someone is going to offer us more picks to have Suh, we may as well let them have him, because we can gain from that in the form of fresh talent. I'm not opposed to seeing a QB taken, more just opposed to paying the kind of money a #1 overall QB would expect.

  4. #19
    jerseyramsfan's Avatar
    jerseyramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    416
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

    [QUOTE]If you look at the numbers that Clausen put up, they are spectacular. He finished the year with a 68% completion percentage, 3722 yards, 28 touchdowns and 4 interceptions.

    If you want to look at numbers they don't look all that spectacular next to: 67.9 completion percentage, 4720 yards, and 50 TOUCHDOWNS of course there were eight interceptions and these are 2008 stats. But Bradford has the edge big time...

  5. #20
    The Rammer's Avatar
    The Rammer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    213
    Rep Power
    5

    Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

    Clausen sucks. LeFevour is better. If LeFevour played at Notre Dame (meaning scouts would misguidingly think he's better than everyone else), he'd be the first overall pick in the draft no doubt.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •