A Burgundy and Gold Obsession
Game 12 - Philly. No biggie. Just a season in the balance ...

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Disagree Disagree:  0
Post of the Year Post of the Year:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24
  1. #1
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    07-16-09
    Posts
    283
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Top 5 reasons the redskins won't pass on Clausen

    LOTS OF DRAFT STUFF HERE-CLICK LINKS
    http://walterfootball.com/mattblog.php

    The Top Five Reasons the Redskins Won't Pass on Jimmy Clausen

    Most of the time in my 2010 NFL Mock Draft, I've had Jimmy Clausen as my No. 1 overall pick. I'm still not extremely confident Clausen will go the Rams at No. 1 because Sam Bradford and Ndamukong Suh are certainly in that pick range. However, Clausen is falling out of the top four in too many 2010 NFL Mock Drafts. Here is why the Washington Redskins will not pass up Jimmy Clausen if he is on the board:

    5. New Regimes Mean New Quarterbacks. It just holds up. Daniel Snyder didn't hire general manager Bruce Allen and head coach Mike Shanahan to do the same things that Jim Zorn did. This staff has no ties or loyalty to Jason Campbell who seems to have worn out his welcome in Washington. He improved last year, but I really think this organization wants a fresh start and the face of the franchise. The Redskins will take either Jimmy Clausen or Sam Bradford if either are on the board.

    4. Daniel Snyder Loves Big Names and Superstars. Snyder has a big ego. He has traded draft picks in the past for big-name players. He doesn't mind paying tons of money to free agents who aren't worth it because he has more money than God and he operates his organization like a fan. Snyder wants someone who can handle being the face of the franchise and nobody in this draft can do that better than Jimmy Clausen.


    CLICK THIS LINK FOR THIS ARTICLE
    http://walterfootball.com/mattblog100222.php
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  2. #2

    Join Date
    02-22-10
    Posts
    90
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I'm not buying it. The contract for a QB that high is too much for a rookie. Especially on a team that is looking to change direction.

    I just don't see how they pass on a OL when its such a huge need.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  3. #3
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    The Shadows of the Unknown
    Posts
    952
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    15
    Navy Salisbury

    Default

    I'm just not a fan of Claussen.
    He stinks of overhype to me going back to his early days of Notre Dame. While I'm on the "draft a O-lineman" bandwagon, if we did take a QB at 4, I really hope it would be Bradford.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  4. #4
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)

    Default

    The one thing I like about Clausen is that he improved EVERY year at Notre Dame. He plays through injuries, he's confident and he's probably the most NFL-ready QB in the draft right now.

    Still, that doesn't necessarily translate to success and, like Wheat said, it's a lot of money to tie up for a guy who probably won't play much in 2010, unless Campbell is traded. Yes, the draft is a crap shoot but do Shanahan and Allen want to gamble on blowing their very first pick together?
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  5. #5

    Join Date
    02-22-10
    Posts
    90
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    The one thing I like about Clausen is that he improved EVERY year at Notre Dame. He plays through injuries, he's confident and he's probably the most NFL-ready QB in the draft right now.

    Still, that doesn't necessarily translate to success and, like Wheat said, it's a lot of money to tie up for a guy who probably won't play much in 2010, unless Campbell is traded. Yes, the draft is a crap shoot but do Shanahan and Allen want to gamble on blowing their very first pick together?
    If you take a QB this year, you can't play him before the end of the season at the earlier. Behind an OL that needs this much work, you can't ruin a young player like that.

    If you're (the Skins) clear about that, then fine. But even in an uncapped year, you're paying a lot of money to a rookie QB who has never taken a NFL snap.

    A OL taken 4th overall would most likely be starting by opening day.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  6. #6

    Join Date
    04-11-09
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Posts
    17,528
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    93
    Marine Corps Virginia

    Default

    You hint at what I've been saying though Wheat - you don't have to build a line via the draft, THEN draft a franchise QB. Given the crap shoot selecting an NFL QB is, if you are going to go QB anytime soon, you have to look very hard at who's there this year - because you likely won't be in this kind of draft position for a long time. If you think Claussen or Bradford is THE guy, you get him - and you start rebuilding the line, knowing you aren't going to put a franchise QB out there as a rook until that line is steadier (which in our case would probably be the 2011 season).

    Of course, if we think there's a hidden QB gem out there, we could trade down and still get our guy. I think that's highly unlikely though. Getting a top QB this year, THEN rebuilding the O-Line, while it might seem counter-intuitive, seems the logical way to go to me.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    Subscribe to our BGO Mailing List

    You ain't bonafide

  7. #7

    Join Date
    02-22-10
    Posts
    90
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Boone View Post
    You hint at what I've been saying though Wheat - you don't have to build a line via the draft, THEN draft a franchise QB. Given the crap shoot selecting an NFL QB is, if you are going to go QB anytime soon, you have to look very hard at who's there this year - because you likely won't be in this kind of draft position for a long time. If you think Claussen or Bradford is THE guy, you get him - and you start rebuilding the line, knowing you aren't going to put a franchise QB out there as a rook until that line is steadier (which in our case would probably be the 2011 season).

    Of course, if we think there's a hidden QB gem out there, we could trade down and still get our guy. I think that's highly unlikely though. Getting a top QB this year, THEN rebuilding the O-Line, while it might seem counter-intuitive, seems the logical way to go to me.
    agreed.

    I'm not saying that its not a crapshoot in other rounds. But I would be MUCH more confortable with OL in the 1st, and QB in the 2nd or 4th with the idea that the very best a rookie QB could do is be the #2. Offer Campbell the one year tender at something like 3.5mil and know with a better OL and D that doesn't fold on the final drive of the game. He will be at least a bridge to something else....or maybe something better after it.

    I wouldn't be upset at all if a rookie in the 2nd or 4th never played because Campbell all the sudden started winning games.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  8. #8
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    227
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    8
    VCU

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Boone View Post
    Of course, if we think there's a hidden QB gem out there, we could trade down and still get our guy.
    *cough* colt mccoy *cough*
    Posted via BGO Mobile Device
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  9. #9
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    07-16-09
    Location
    CTU
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Air Force

    Default

    I guess we're all agreeing that Colt Brennan is out of the picture
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    Formerly known as ...............Sarge

  10. #10

    Join Date
    02-22-10
    Posts
    90
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarge View Post
    I guess we're all agreeing that Colt Brennan is out of the picture
    Who?


    0 0 0 0
     
     

  11. #11
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    07-16-09
    Location
    CTU
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Air Force

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Boone View Post
    You hint at what I've been saying though Wheat - you don't have to build a line via the draft, THEN draft a franchise QB. Given the crap shoot selecting an NFL QB is, if you are going to go QB anytime soon, you have to look very hard at who's there this year - because you likely won't be in this kind of draft position for a long time. If you think Claussen or Bradford is THE guy, you get him - and you start rebuilding the line, knowing you aren't going to put a franchise QB out there as a rook until that line is steadier (which in our case would probably be the 2011 season).

    Of course, if we think there's a hidden QB gem out there, we could trade down and still get our guy. I think that's highly unlikely though. Getting a top QB this year, THEN rebuilding the O-Line, while it might seem counter-intuitive, seems the logical way to go to me.
    So we draft QB to hold a clipboard, put Campbell back out htere for one more year to take a beating, and get a line next year?

    Who replaces Campbell when he gets killed?
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    Formerly known as ...............Sarge

  12. #12

    Join Date
    02-22-10
    Posts
    90
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarge View Post
    So we draft QB to hold a clipboard, put Campbell back out htere for one more year to take a beating, and get a line next year?

    Who replaces Campbell when he gets killed?
    That's a tough one, right?

    I want to say you let that rookie be your #2. But the odds of him getting in if the OL isn't fixed..are HIGH.

    I guess you find a Vet on a one year deal. Does Collins want to stay Mark Bulger maybe?
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  13. #13

    Join Date
    06-30-09
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    3,569
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Indiana

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brandies View Post
    LOTS OF DRAFT STUFF HERE-CLICK LINKS
    http://walterfootball.com/mattblog.php

    4. Daniel Snyder Loves Big Names and Superstars. Snyder has a big ego. He has traded draft picks in the past for big-name players. He doesn't mind paying tons of money to free agents who aren't worth it because he has more money than God and he operates his organization like a fan. Snyder wants someone who can handle being the face of the franchise and nobody in this draft can do that better than Jimmy Clausen.
    I'm going waaay out on a speculative limb on this one-just fer th' helluvit...or maybe not.

    Dan Snyder has disappeared. KIdnapped by gypsies, abducted by aliens, a sudden spasm of acute reclusiveness? Or his usual reticence and hyper-active privacy gland working in concert?

    Or...since his acquisition of Allen and Shanahan-to a certain extent at least-reflected his awareness of the incipient fan revolt of the past season and he's very cognizant of the fact that even the appearance of "meddling" would stoke the fires of this uncomfortable-for him-rebellion and he's staying as out-of-the-picture as possible for that reason.

    Which brings me to item #4 in brandies post. Is it possible-remember, I'm speculating here-that grabbing Claussen, who's name was apparently high on the short "QB wish list" when it was the Dan&Vinny show might give the appearance of a return to the "Snyder's calling the shots like usual" that could re-ignite the flames? Snyder's no dummy when it comes to gauging public reactions-he got rich in marketing after all-and I really do not believe he's as unaware of how he's viewed by fans and the press as I've heard some say. Basically, the question is if Shanahan were to want Claussen, would the liklihood of it's risking fans/media attributing it to Snyder's history of "involvement" in player personnel selection mitigate against such a choice from Snyder's perspective to the extent that he may actually, if anything, discourage such a move based on potential fan/media reaction?

    I know, it's a pretty heavy reach-but the scenario just outlined popped into my head and I haven't been able to dislodge it as a possibility.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    I'm giving it a 2-4 year window. Looking for improvement in all areas. Redskins, you're on the clock.

  14. #14
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    10-20-09
    Location
    Falls Church VA
    Posts
    96
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarge View Post
    So we draft QB to hold a clipboard, put Campbell back out htere for one more year to take a beating, and get a line next year?

    Who replaces Campbell when he gets killed?
    Who says we won't/can't address the OL at the same time?

    To me the message from a lot of people seems "if you don't draft an OL at number 4, your o-line will suck"

    That is pretty false, and evidence of this is the last 10 Superbowl winning o-line had a total of 7 first round starters, while having 12 UDFA starters.

    You can still get quality o-lineman throughout the draft and FA, it takes quantity and quality and you gotta build a unit out of 5 guys.

    The quarterback is one player, and one player who can make an o-line look that much better (see both times Drew Bledsoe was replaced how much better the o-line that was maligned in front of him looked)

    Shanny isn't going to be around forever, you get your QB this year and get him learning. You never know when you'll have the chance at the game changing elite QB again

    The FO isn't that dumb, they'll address both this off season, because both positions need to be addressed
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  15. #15

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    Looks like the Rams might be leaning towards drafting Bradford with the #1 overall pick, according to Daniel Jeremiah of MovetheSticks.com:

    I said last week that the Rams wouldn't be deciding between Suh and McCoy but rather Suh and Bradford...Looks like they're leaning Bradford
    link
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  16. #16
    kirbster
    Honored Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarge View Post
    I guess we're all agreeing that Colt Brennan is out of the picture
    Not according to the (infamous) "sources" that have said Shanny likes Brennan and is impressed with him. So who knows?
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  17. #17
    2016 BGO Survivor Champ

    Join Date
    08-01-09
    Location
    My location
    Posts
    11,282
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Florida State

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Call me Ismail View Post
    Who says we won't/can't address the OL at the same time?

    To me the message from a lot of people seems "if you don't draft an OL at number 4, your o-line will suck"

    That is pretty false, and evidence of this is the last 10 Superbowl winning o-line had a total of 7 first round starters, while having 12 UDFA starters.

    You can still get quality o-lineman throughout the draft and FA, it takes quantity and quality and you gotta build a unit out of 5 guys.

    The quarterback is one player, and one player who can make an o-line look that much better (see both times Drew Bledsoe was replaced how much better the o-line that was maligned in front of him looked)

    Shanny isn't going to be around forever, you get your QB this year and get him learning. You never know when you'll have the chance at the game changing elite QB again

    The FO isn't that dumb, they'll address both this off season, because both positions need to be addressed
    First off, I think you are reading into it what you want to believe people are saying. I have not heard one person say that if we don't select a LT with the fourth pick then our offensive line will suck. Our Offensive Line already sucks!!!

    What I continually hear is that if we can find a trade partner, we should do our best to gather more picks with the number 4 pick.

    Bradford is a tremendous risk! Clausen is a risk because he may have plateaued talent wise. Neither of these QB's are worthy of the #4 pick. Is Robert Okung worth a number 4 overall pick in the draft, more so than either QB in this draft!

    But like a majority of people with whom I have spoken, a trade down scenario is the greatest option to take advantage of such a high pick, if we can get a trade partner.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  18. #18
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    The Shadows of the Unknown
    Posts
    952
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    15
    Navy Salisbury

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elephant View Post

    But like a majority of people with whom I have spoken, a trade down scenario is the greatest option to take advantage of such a high pick, if we can get a trade partner.
    I don't expect a trade down on #4, either way the Skins should get a franchise guy out of that pick. I do expect the Skins to trade down at #37. There will be a player that another team will have to get and the Skins will let them get it.....for their second round pick and maybe a 3rd and a 6th.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  19. #19
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    08-05-09
    Location
    People's Republic of NJ
    Posts
    54
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Brian Billick says Clausen is his favorite QB prospect out of the draft - which is absolute proof positive the guy will be a complete bust.
    Luckily we have Bruce Allen to find us the next Gaines Adams in the draft....
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  20. #20

    Join Date
    04-11-09
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Posts
    17,528
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    93
    Marine Corps Virginia

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elephant
    First off, I think you are reading into it what you want to believe people are saying. I have not heard one person say that if we don't select a LT with the fourth pick then our offensive line will suck. Our Offensive Line already sucks!!!
    No one says it outright, but there are plenty of Redskins fans (fortunately mostly on other sites ) who will howl bloody murder if we take a QB at #4 because all they heard last year was 'no QB can win with a bad o-line'. That assertion is mostly factual - but it's a red herring, as Call Me aludes to - you can build the o-line AND get your QB. They aren't mutually exclusive

    What I continually hear is that if we can find a trade partner, we should do our best to gather more picks with the number 4 pick.
    'More picks' is always nice, but it doesn't guarantee we make major improvements. It's getting value that matters. And as Call Me stated, if Shanahan feels his QB of the future is there for the taking at #4, he has got to (and will) pull the trigger. It's true teams can and have found franchise QBs in other rounds, but you can't count on that.

    Bradford is a tremendous risk! Clausen is a risk because he may have plateaued talent wise. Neither of these QB's are worthy of the #4 pick. Is Robert Okung worth a number 4 overall pick in the draft, more so than either QB in this draft!
    All QB picks are tremendous risks - because it is nearly impossible to take a college career and translate that into a prediction of NFL success. Even the 'experts' miss as often as they hit on who 'the must-have QB' in each year's draft is going to be. There are so many intangibles and so much hype involved, it is really a muddled mess each year trying to determine who the gems and who the duds are going to be. And so, no offense Elephant, but you have zero idea, and likely zero chance of being right when you dismiss Clausen or any other QB prospect - none of us really know for sure. Tim Tebow could make fools of all of us. I think one of the reasons the NFL 'experts' are so often wrong about who's going to have NFL QB success is that all of the pre-draft focus is on tangibles (speed, release, style of offense played in college, athleticism, arm strength, etc..), but the QB position is as much about intangibles as measurable gifts, more so than any other position.

    But like a majority of people with whom I have spoken, a trade down scenario is the greatest option to take advantage of such a high pick, if we can get a trade partner.
    Maybe. Or you could be dead wrong and one of these QBs is the next big NFL QB we'll have taken a pass on. To an extent, it's a crapshoot. But I think the most critical point in the entire discussion is, the Redskins likely won't have another top 5 pick again (where they may have a chance to pick one of top two prospects in the draft) any time soon. Yeah - they can and may take the safe route and trade down. But at some point, you have to have the courage of your conviction, target that 1 guy who can almost immediately give your prospects a boost, and pull the trigger. I'm betting money there will be no tradedown. We'll either pick up Bradford or some other impact player with the #4 pick.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    Subscribe to our BGO Mailing List

    You ain't bonafide

 

 

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

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