Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

    The main debate for the upcoming draft is if the Rams will take Suh or a QB, with Clausen currently having the edge over Bradford. Although Suh would improve the defense, you can't win in this league without a solid or elite QB. Here are the top teams from 2009 and their QB's.

    1) Indianapolis - Peyton Manning
    2) New Orleans - Drew Brees
    3) San Diego - Phillip Rivers
    4) Minnesota - Brett Favre
    5) Dallas - Tony Romo
    6) Green Bay - Aaron Rodgers
    7) Philadelphia - Donovan McNabb
    8) Arizona - Kurt Warner
    9) Cincinnati - Carson Palmer
    10) New England - Tom Brady

    As you can see, the top 10 teams have arguably the top 10 Quarterback's in the league. As it has been posted before, our defense can compete in this league. However, our offense can't. If we take Suh, we will be looking at another top 5 pick again next year. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the Rams have a player like Suh. But if we grab him, we would lose a shot at a franchise QB like Clausen. Having Clausen would take a lot of pressure off of Jackson as teams wouldn't be able to consistantly stack the box against him. Not only that, but Clausen spent three years in a pro-style offense under Charlie Weiss, who has been a successful OC in the NFL.

    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. He did all of that with a terrible offensive line (he's already starting to fit in!) and virtually no running game (which he will have with the Rams).

    The two biggest flaws that people seem to pick out in him are his attitude and his carrer record (13-18). when you look at the win loss record, it is no fault of his own. During his time in Notre Dame, he was playing with no defense. With the points he put up and the level he played at, the losses were not his fault. His character is the other issue. Although he is cocky and abrassive, can't the same be said in Phillip Rivers?

    IMO, Spags and Devaney need to take Clausen to move this team forward. In the NFL you can't win without a QB, and I guarantee you that the front office is aware of it (they did spend a year with Bulger, Boller and Null* starting at QB).

    *This isn't a shot at Null, I realize that he was a rookie, and I have high hopes for him as the future backup of the Rams.

  • #2
    Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

    I love Suh but I am a fan of going quarterback.

    Mainly because of the time it takes to develop.

    Even if we draft Clausen or Bradford the odds are they will need a year under someone to develop so they can be ready to start in 2011.

    If we wait and draft Locker or Mallet next year I think they will need a year under someone to develop so they wouldn't be ready to start until 2012.

    If we go middle round quarterback this year I think the odds are they wouldn't develop until 2012 or beyond. Yes there have been exceptions but in this day and age I don't think Spags and Devany can bank on exceptions.

    IMHO

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

      The main debate for the upcoming draft is if the Rams will take Suh or a QB, with Clausen currently having the edge over Bradford. Although Suh would improve the defense, you can't win in this league without a solid or elite QB. Here are the top teams from 2009 and their QB's.

      1) Indianapolis - Peyton Manning
      2) New Orleans - Drew Brees
      3) San Diego - Phillip Rivers
      4) Minnesota - Brett Favre
      5) Dallas - Tony Romo
      6) Green Bay - Aaron Rodgers
      7) Philadelphia - Donovan McNabb
      8) Arizona - Kurt Warner
      9) Cincinnati - Carson Palmer
      10) New England - Tom Brady
      I'd draft Suh, because I don't see Bradford/Clausen as turning out better than any of those mentioned QBs.
      The more things change, the more they stay the same.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

        so you would rather take clausen or bradford and blood them in for a season on the bench rather than letting them asap and see how they fair ala ryan,sanchez,stafford. Or better yet pick a DT coming into the draft and have a defence in place for the future. We took O.Pace high as an o-line and im damn sure people would of made same fuss not a line man ra ra ra. But if Suh turns out to be a pro-bowl dt for years and years to come I for one feel we would have made a mistake. Solid D and RUN game is good for young qbs

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

          I agree you need a good QB but how do you know clausen or bradford will be a good QB I would take suh without a doubt and if a QB doesn't fall to us then go with bulger and look next year for a QB

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

            Of the 10 QBs you've listed, only 5 were selected in the first round, so who's to say that the Rams wouldn't be better off with Suh and a QB who will fall past the first 32 picks (i.e. Colt McCoy, Tony Pike, Dan LeFevour, Levi Brown or Sean Canfield).

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

              Originally posted by ramstiles View Post
              I agree you need a good QB but how do you know clausen or bradford will be a good QB
              [/QUOTE] I have my doubts about Bradford, and I would take Suh over him. The thing is, how do we know Suh will be a good DT? Sure, he dominated in college, but there are no guarantees in the NFL. But lets say that both Clausen and Suh turn into pro bowl players – wouldn’t you rather have a pro bowl QB over a pro bowl DT?

              Also, I believe that Clausen will be ready to step in and start in his first year. There’s a great article here that exemplifies this:
              http://walterfootball.com/mattblog091229.php

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

                But lets say that both Clausen and Suh turn into pro bowl players
                That's a pretty big assumption to walk on though.
                The more things change, the more they stay the same.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

                  Originally posted by HUbison View Post
                  That's a pretty big assumption to walk on though.
                  True, but both players have a good chance of playing at that level, otherwise we wouldn't be talking about them as potential fist overall picks.

                  If we pass on a franchise quarterback this year, we will once again be picking in the top 5, because our offense will be putting up the same points per game as this year, and you can't win with scores that low.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

                    Originally posted by sakl18 View Post
                    True, but both players have a good chance of playing at that level, otherwise we wouldn't be talking about them as potential fist overall picks.

                    If we pass on a franchise quarterback this year, we will once again be picking in the top 5, because our offense will be putting up the same points per game as this year, and you can't win with scores that low.
                    Every QB that rates as the best in his draft class is not necessarily a "franchise" QB. Given his record of performance over his college career, and the finishing record of his team during that time, I would be hestitant to label Claussen as a "franchise" type QB. He may be one, and if drafted high may end of being "the franchises QB", but Suh's performance and projections ......... more solid and sure, IMO.

                    I think you original post list is misleading. How many of those teams have pretty good defenses? Can the case be made that the defense was more responsible to their records than the QB? Case in point, NYJ's are on to the next round of the playoffs, and certainly not on the strength of their QB, but on the strength of their defense and running game. The QB isn't the only reason these teams are good.

                    That said, I want the base of this team solid before bringing in the "franchise" QB, whoever he'll be. The NYJ's are good even without Sanchez mastering his position. Seems pretty smart to me.
                    Semper Fi!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

                      Brees had 29 tds to 31 ints in his first three years. I don't think he had his breakout until his 4th season.

                      Romo didn't start a game until his 4th season.

                      Warner had 2 years in the AFL, a stint in NFL Europe and a year as backup for the Rams before he got his start in 1999.

                      Favre and Brady remain the exceptions but both still had a year on the bench before they started.

                      After several posts I want to clear up that I am not opposed to going with Suh and drafting developmental quarterback... but I am a patient fan. A first round qb could probably make a difference in 2011 but I think it would be 2012 before anyone like Pike, LeFevour, etc would pay dividends.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

                        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, because our offense will be putting up the same points per game as this year, and you can't win with scores that low.
                        I want a quarterback this year but seriously doubt they will contribute until 2011. Our offense needs a lot more help to get on the board in 2010.

                        Originally posted by Richbert88 View Post
                        Can the case be made that the defense was more responsible to their records than the QB? Case in point, NYJ's are on to the next round of the playoffs, and certainly not on the strength of their QB, but on the strength of their defense and running game. The QB isn't the only reason these teams are good.
                        I Posted this in another thread.

                        "Defense wind Championships" is a little outdated. It should be "Defense helps to win Championships."

                        Yes it is awesome to see Minnesota hold a really good Dallas team to 3 points but throughout the season five of the Viking's victories came against teams that put up 20 or more points. If their offense wasn't able to put the numbers on the scoreboard they could have been 7 and 9.

                        In fact the 3 times this year the Vikings couldn't score 20 they lost all 3 games.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

                          Originally posted by sakl18 View Post
                          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. He did all of that with a terrible offensive line (he's already starting to fit in!) and virtually no running game (which he will have with the Rams).
                          Originally posted by sakl18 View Post
                          The thing is, how do we know Suh will be a good DT? Sure, he dominated in college, but there are no guarantees in the NFL.
                          So Clausen can use his college production and performances on his résumé, but Suh can't? If you're going to argue in favor of Clausen by using his college numbers, I don't think you can argue against Suh because of the uncertainty as to whether his college performances will translate.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Sorry, I should have clarified this earlier - I wouldn't expect Clausen to come in and put up huge numbers. History has shown that most rookie QB's don't play very well in their rookie season. A QB like Clausen would be able to start, and he wouldn't be terrible, but also wouldn't b great. However, I think that he will develop faster than other rookie QB's have in the past due to his knowledge of the west coast offence. If we go with a QB in a later round, we are only postponing or return to success for several more years.

                            Originally posted by Richbert88 View Post
                            Every QB that rates as the best in his draft class is not necessarily a "franchise" QB. Given his record of performance over his college career, and the finishing record of his team during that time, I would be hestitant to label Claussen as a "franchise" type QB. He may be one, and if drafted high may end of being "the franchises QB", but Suh's performance and projections ......... more solid and sure, IMO.

                            I think you original post list is misleading. How many of those teams have pretty good defenses? Can the case be made that the defense was more responsible to their records than the QB? Case in point, NYJ's are on to the next round of the playoffs, and certainly not on the strength of their QB, but on the strength of their defense and running game. The QB isn't the only reason these teams are good.

                            That said, I want the base of this team solid before bringing in the "franchise" QB, whoever he'll be. The NYJ's are good even without Sanchez mastering his position. Seems pretty smart to me.
                            No, the QB’s are not the only reasons for their successes. Yes, defence plays an important part in said successes. And yes, the Jets are doing well without a stellar quarterback. However, the majority of the top teams have a better offense than defence. I don’t disagree with the Jets philosophy, but most of the times it is the offense that wins championships.
                            And I would label Jimmy Clausen as a franchise QB. His win-loss record is misleading, as Notre Dame’s defence couldn’t stop anyone. He was the reason that they got as many wins as they did. If the win-loss record of a QB determined his status as a franchise QB, then Jake Locker also wouldn’t be considered one.
                            As for waiting until the Rams are as dominant defensively as the Jets, it will take a long time before we get to that level. Although that would be nice, I just don’t see it as realistic as we should be trying to improve as quickly as possible (without sacrificing the future).

                            Originally posted by Nick View Post
                            So Clausen can use his college production and performances on his résumé, but Suh can't? If you're going to argue in favor of Clausen by using his college numbers, I don't think you can argue against Suh because of the uncertainty as to whether his college performances will translate.
                            I haven't said that Clausen is a sure thing. Like I said, no one is. I'm just saying that he has more upside than peope realize. Yes, Suh has also put up sensational numbers, and I would love to see him in a Rams uniform, but Clausen's numbers have been just as good for his position, and we have a much larger need at QB than DT. And QB's carry teams to Supebowls, not Defensive Tackles.
                            Last edited by Nick; -01-21-2010, 03:08 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Suh or Clausen/Bradford?

                              Originally posted by sakl18
                              I haven't said that Clausen is a sure thing. Like I said, no one is. I'm just saying that he has more upside than peope realize. Yes, Suh has also put up sensational numbers, and I would love to see him in a Rams uniform, but Clausen's numbers have been just as good for his position, and we have a much larger need at QB than DT. And QB's carry teams to Supebowls, not Defensive Tackles.
                              The issue I was responding to wasn't whether or not you said he was a sure thing. The issue was how you could use college stats/production to argue in favor of Clausen, only to then downplay Suh's college stats/production by questioning whether he can be just as dominant at the next level. How collegiate performance will translate to the NFL is an issue with every prospect, not just Suh.

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              • sosa39rams
                                Suh + clausen?
                                by sosa39rams
                                Well, I agree 100% on taking Ndamukong Suh with our first pick. I've been looking around at a lot of mock drafts lately, and it seems like Clausen might slip out of the first round.

                                This would be amazing because we would be able to get Suh, and Clausen (franchise QB).

                                Also, he will not be able to preform at the scouting combine. This may cause him to drop.

                                I would also love for us to get Dexter McCluster. He can play WR/RB/KR/Punt return, and he is a game changer. Where do you guys think he will be drafted?

                                Do you guys think Clausen drops, and if so, would you take him in the 2nd?
                                -02-17-2010, 03:43 PM
                              • Bralidore(RAMMODE)
                                Making the Case for Clausen
                                by Bralidore(RAMMODE)
                                Personally, ill probably lose popularity for this, but i wanna grab Clausen over Suh at this point. I want us to trade down a few spots and pick up another 2nd round pick (or first round if humanly possible) and grab him. I love Suh just as much as the next guy but he wont get us a passing offense....and we still don't know what we have in Carriker, Ryan has been solid as well. Long has definitely come along and will hold down the LE spot, and hopefully we can pick up another DE in the second round or through FA.

                                The rams will quite simply continue to fail utterly without a quarterback and this was as plain as day in our most recent failure against the *****. Shut the ***** out of the game for 3 quarters!!! Then let them poor it on in the last quarter because no doubt our defense got gassed, and the ***** were able to pull it out because they have an offense and we don't..

                                Give us a quarterback that can make all the throws (love him or not: Clausen can make all the throws) and we have a chance to win that ball game. I'm not knocking Null because i understand his situation, but you put a Warner (who Clausen reminds me of sort of, with a bigger arm) and you convert those field goals in the points. Broad assumption but i think its at least reasonable to say, despite our horrible o-line woes, Clausen with his quick release could have converted a lot more of those third downs with less arid throws and accidents.

                                Making the Case for ClausenStrengths: Solid size and adequate bulk
                                Very good arm strength; can fit balls into tight windows
                                Extremely quick, snappy release
                                Great accuracy
                                Nice hip torque on throws
                                Gets rid of ball quickly
                                Very decisive with the football
                                Takes what defense gives him; doesn't force ball/will throw away
                                Elite football IQ
                                Great touch
                                Well versed in NFL offense
                                Good sense of timing
                                Will step up/out of pocket
                                Knows how to read coverage
                                Sees the entire field; great vision
                                Very polished for a true junior
                                Shown outstanding development from freshman to junior season
                                Extremely intelligent
                                Ice in his veins; great poise
                                Mentally tough; plays through pain
                                Big leader
                                Confident
                                Film room rat
                                Elite intangibles
                                Good genetics and very well coached
                                Spent 3.5 years in a West Coast offense


                                Weaknesses:
                                Does a poor job of selling play action
                                Footwork used to be a bit shoddy, has improved
                                Not a fluid athlete
                                Personality might come off as abrasive
                                Sometimes gets too much air under fade route
                                Lacks a little pocket awareness


                                We want less rookie down time because we need wins NAO; this guy is the most pro ready quarterback in this years draft EASY.

                                Interesting tid bit on Clausen's stats Ive found.

                                ...
                                -01-04-2010, 08:31 AM
                              • smitheRAM
                                Second quess
                                by smitheRAM
                                So we picked Bradford, but what if we could of picked Suh and now Clausen. Would you have rather done have them?
                                -04-22-2010, 09:00 PM
                              • #39 Fan
                                Another Poll: Suh, McCoy, Bradford, Clausen
                                by #39 Fan
                                Who of the big four are you leaning towards currently?
                                Ndamukong Suh
                                68.06%
                                49
                                Gerald McCoy
                                2.78%
                                2
                                Sam Bradford
                                15.28%
                                11
                                Jimmy Clausen
                                13.89%
                                10
                                -02-17-2010, 02:29 AM
                              • Tampa_Ram
                                After reading all the threads....who wouldnt be happy
                                by Tampa_Ram
                                With drafting either Suh or Bradford.

                                It seems the conseneus around Clan Ram is that most people would be happy with either one, me being one of them. What is your opinion?
                                Either,there both gonna be a great building block for this team!
                                52.17%
                                36
                                SUH! Bradford is injury prone!! Suh is GOD!!!
                                28.99%
                                20
                                Bradford is NOT injury prone,Hes the next P.Manning!!
                                15.94%
                                11
                                Lets trade for Vick, or take McCoy, his numbers are better....
                                2.90%
                                2
                                -03-27-2010, 06:06 PM
                              Working...
                              X