Considering Clausen for the Rams next QB
by Ryan Van Bibber on Nov 24, 2009 3:58 PM CST
in 2010 NFL Draft
Email
PrintOk, with Bulger's tibia fracture barely days old and the (likely) end of his career with the St. Louis Rams, it's time to start talking QB of the future. Not that we haven't been talking about that since the last draft, but such chatter earned a new lease on life with Bulger's injury.
Carneros got it started yesterday with this post, and I'm going to feed the fire some more today. First, a quick review of the Rams QB options moving forward. Boil it down to the essence, and the Rams have three options at QB for 2010: 1) sign a free agent (personally, I like Jason Campbell if they go this route), 2) draft a QB or 3) keep one of the in-house options, Bulger (if he can return) or Boller. Note that 2 and 3 are not mutually exclusive.
And now, I submit for your consideration Notre Dame QB Jimmy Clausen.
With Sam Bradford on the mend, Clausen is racing to the top of draft boards, at least among QBs. I think he'll be the first QB taken in the draft. I guess we'll have to see how much fan damage he incurred on a punch to the face this weekend. Will the Rams take him? Should the Rams take him?
Why Clausen?
Let's start with the stats, more specifically, the stats that can tell us something about success at the next level. According to the Lewin Career Forecast, the two most important things to look at when trying to gauge NFL success are a QBs career starts and completion percentage.
Clausen's a junior this year. He took over starting duties early in his freshman year, true freshman year, and ended up starting in nine games, and started every game in two seasons since then. For his college career, he has a 62.2 percent completion rate, a stunning 67.3 percent this season.
His TD to INT ratio of 23-4 speaks to his accuracy as a QB.
One thing I like about him is his ability to find receivers and create plays where others cannot. That's something the Rams have really been missing. Yes, St. Louis lacks the established talent at WR, but after watching this season of west coast offense move forward in fits and starts, it would be wise to have a QB that could find receivers or even go through the reads.
I'm not qualified to judge much about college players, especially the "intangibles". Talk of Clausen's acumen for the game, ability to read defenses and assuredness resonate for a long suffering fan of this team. Here are a couple of scouting reports from FFToolbox and Walter Football.
As a junior, there's still no gaurantee that Clausen will declare for the draft this year. I'd be pretty shocked if he didn't given the fact that his stock is skyrocketing. In fact, with Bradford unlikely to be ready for the Combine, I wonder if Clausen does separate himself from the rest of the QB class enough to make teams seriously consider a trade up to into the top five. Those kind of moves are getting rarer lately, but anything can happen once the hype machine kicks into high gear.
Oh, and he plays in a West Coast style offense at Notre Dame. He fits the bill for the Rams in that sense and seems to pass Spagnuolo's four pillars test.
Is this an official endorsement? No, I'm not ready to commit to that just yet. I still think Clausen is a guy to keep your eye on if the Rams do opt for a QB with their top pick in the draft.
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
As I've stated before
Campbell wouldn’t be a good option for us. Washington runs a similar system to ours and the reason he has struggled is because he is not capable of quickly making multiple reads and making the right throw in time. He needs to play in a vertical passing game with a strong o line.
I may be completely wrong so someone correct me if I am but doesnt clausen operate out of a vertical passing game at ND? Not saying he can’t make the switch to a different system but it is something to keep in mind.
by jb22 on Nov 24, 2009 4:36 PM CST via mobile reply actions
good article
I agree that Claussen would be a decent option at QB but I have been a Bradford supporter from the get go. Not to get technical, but by the 2nd and 3rd options not being mutually exclusive, you’re saying that they can exist at the same time? Or am I just reading this wrong?
Shouldn't they exist at the same time?
We’re not exactly going to be NFC favorites in 2010, so I see no reason to start a rookie QB in week 1.
You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.
by 3k on Nov 24, 2009 5:10 PM CST up reply actions
My only concern with Clausen is arm strength
I would grade it as average; if he had a stronger arm, he would be at the top of my board with Bradford.
You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.
Locker will be a bust in the NFL. His TD/INT is rate 17/10. No thanks.
Case Keenum anyone?
Tony Pike if we take Campbell in FA?
It's a little premature for bust tags
You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.
by 3k on Nov 24, 2009 7:48 PM CST up reply actions
Statistics are pretty poor ways of measuring the likelihood of a QB transitioning from the college to the pros.
If they weren’t, Matt Ryan would have been undrafted and Colt Brennan would have been drafted #1 overall.
by Fearless Frog on Nov 24, 2009 8:25 PM CST up reply actions
Locker is a huge prospect
almost as much as Tebow. He’s very raw, and I don’t expect a team like the Rams who need a 2010 pick to start in 2011 to pick someone like Locker.
You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.
by 3k on Nov 24, 2009 7:48 PM CST up reply actions
locker seems like he'd stay another year
he is a junior right?
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Nov 24, 2009 7:50 PM CST up reply actions
Correct
Although I wouldn’t be surprised if he comes out…of the closet! Oh snippety snap!
You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.
by 3k on Nov 24, 2009 8:42 PM CST up reply actions
I'd still be surprised if he doesn't come out.
His draft stock won’t be much higher next year and the whole rookie pay scale thing is too much to ignore.
Locker
would be better fit to stay another year with coach Sark to iron out all those QB defiencies. He (not Washington) was able to be successful early on because of his athleticism. Sark will help refine him and he will come out better for it.
But what can Sark do
that most NFL head coaches, mentors and QB coaches can’t
You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.
by 3k on Nov 24, 2009 8:43 PM CST up reply actions
It is not so much Sark
as the environment for him to implement what is being worked on. For instance going up against Stanfords Defense when you have been working out kinks as compared to San Francisco’s Defense is slightly different. Not to mention the extra year of confidence by being the big man on campus and leader of the offense. It will help shape his character and hopefully maturity for the better
I'll give you this
nobody knows Locker better than he. Still, I doubt Sark can fix all the issues Locker has in a single season.
You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.
by 3k on Nov 24, 2009 8:58 PM CST up reply actions
No doubt
But in only a Spring semester and one summer of training, he has refined a lot of his QB attributes. Look at his delivery compared to his first year, and it just looks so much cleaner. Look at his patience and reads….much more mature than his “damn I got nothing -time to run…..” mentality. Sark is not just a good coach, but his strength his ability to communicate to the young players. A tool not always understood by coaches. The communication piece is key for players development considering every player responds differently.
Yeahhhh
give him another year. His pocket presence needs work and he hasn’t had a good offensive line since high school.
The hype started when the Huskies beat USC and then they were brought down to earth. For that matter, so was Locker.
Seattle Seahawks: The only team in the NFL to trail 17-17 according to Dick Stockton.
Take a QB
I would take the best qb on the board.Clausen could be a good fit with the rams. I wouldn’t take Campbell, hes old and done.
You guys need to understand how to evaluate a QB! Here is how:
Lets look at Bradford: STrengths: Accurate, Quick decision maker. Weakness: Injuries, not mobile.
Clausen: STrengths: Nice Deep ball. Weaknesses: Bad pocket awareness, needs lots of time to find a reciever.
Locker: Strengths: Arm Strength, Great Feet (good speed also, but I am talking about ability to move his feet and always be in a good stance to throw), Great pocket awareness, always has his eyes downfield before running. Weakness: Very raw, TD/INT ratio is not as great as other. Completion percentage is under 60%.
The other guys should all be considered decent but not Franchise QBs.
Now looknig at the top 3 QBs strengths and weaknesses, and making sure the Rams pick a QB that fits the team, the QB of the future hsould be anyone except for Clausen. Clausen would be an awfull fit for the follownig reasons: The Ram run a wescoast offense, Clausen is not a west coast QB. Everyone remembers Walsh right? The coach behind Montana and Young of the 49ers dynasty and the inventor of the west coast offense. He said the only attributes he looked ofr were the best feet and accuracy. Everything else will follow. Clausen has awfull feet. Clausen is another Matt Lienhart. A decent arm with a nice deep ball, but that is about it.
The pick should be either Bradford or Locker. Bradford has decent feet but is super accurate, and Locker has great feet but is less accurate with a strong arm. Either would work. I say take a chance on Locker, have a vet like Jeff Garcia start and teach him, then throw Locker in half way or next season. Considering Locker has no talent around him and is still posting decent numbers and is carrying the team to vistories and being competative all by himself, he is the right pick. Not to mention he is tougher than either of the QBs mentioned. With a great running game, a QB like Locker would have a chance for success right away. Pretty much anyone but Clausen would work. Clausen may fit for another team, but not for the Rams.
X2
I don’t think Garcia will come back at all though…
Could we get Clausen in the third? I say first two picks go defense and third pick offense, of course I carry no weight around here to make it happen.
Why Campbell?
He threw the least amount of TDs (13) among QBs who started all 16 games, and Daniel Snyder was rightfully blasted for reaching on him in the first round because he was a decent guy on a stacked Auburn team filled with elite talent.
Jason Campbell isn’t struggling because of the LOLSKINS offense, the LOLSKINS offense is struggling because of Jason Campbell and his eternal suck.
I think it's a combination of both
Campbell is below average and the rest of the offense is aging/futile.
Portis is 155 years old and on the downside of his career. Offensive line is banged up, old, and ineffective. The receiving corp has two midgets and inexperienced guys in Thomas and Kelly. Campbell can’t necessarily work with that can he?
Jim Zorn. Need we go on for this part?
Seattle Seahawks: The only team in the NFL to trail 17-17 according to Dick Stockton.
I'm not talking about just this season, I mean his entire career thus far.
He’s had a productive Clinton Portis for every season except this one. Washington’s offensive line isn’t nearly as bad as people make it out to be. This season is probably the worst it’s been in the past several seasons, and it’s still reasonably good. I would easily take it over Seattle’s, or perhaps any line in the NFC West.
I’ll grant you that Antwaan Randle-El is a bum, but the reality is that Jason Campbell is spoiled with receiving targets. Chris Cooley is a premier tight end, Santana Moss is what Deion Branch is supposed to be, Fred Davis is emerging as another solid TE, and he has young two second round pick WRs who were both considered first round caliber. In my opinion, very few QBs would struggle with those receiving targets, and Jason Campbell is one of them.
I understand why people think he’d make a good signing; he’s low risk, won’t cost much, and no draft picks required. But his struggles are mostly his own. Campbell has poor pocket presence, cannot hit an open receiver in stride, checks down far too much (even in designed vertical pass plays), and appears to not go through all of his progressions.
Jim Zorn may be a bad coach in his own right but it’s unfair to judge him yet because he’s had to inherit Jason Campbell.
by Fearless Frog on Nov 24, 2009 8:20 PM CST up reply actions
Okay I understand your point now and agree with it
I do think some of it is just being under a bad system but I really don’t think it’s worth anyone’s time to sign him unless he shows some improvement towards season’s end.
We can judge Zorn on his game management and playcalling. Stretch run on 4th and 3 inches is something Holmgren would call. Campbell or not he absolutely blows. It’s like this is the very first time he’s doing this and it’s on a weekly basis.
Seattle Seahawks: The only team in the NFL to trail 17-17 according to Dick Stockton.
I'm not going to argue about Zorn.
Loved him, but he probably isn’t a head coach.
I don’t buy the system excuse, though. Granted, switching offensive systems every season isn’t easy. But when Zorn came to town, the popular news was that Campbell was finally going to back to the system he succeeded in during his college days, and now it’s his second consecutive year and he’s as ineffective as ever.
by Fearless Frog on Nov 24, 2009 9:53 PM CST up reply actions
Well said Frog!!!
You covered some points that I was thinking, but I have to disagree with spoiled with targets comments. Davis is too raw and needs work on the route running…although he is a hell of an athlete and will only get better with the proper coaching. I was really expecting more from Devin Thomas, he hasn’t shown why he was the top WR on many peoples board during the draft. He either does not know how to get his receivers on the same page or they just need to work on their craft that much moe. I somehow beleive this needs to be more so on Campbell.
Perhaps you are right,
but in either case, it’s not like Campbell is crying for offensive talent around him.
To me, 2008 was a pretty clear cut example of why Campbell isn’t very good. Clinton Portis looks like a frontrunner MVP candidate for the first half of the season, the Redskins offense clicks and they win some games. Portis wears down and becomes less effective, Campbell doesn’t compensate, they go in a tailspin in the latter half.
by Fearless Frog on Nov 24, 2009 9:48 PM CST up reply actions
I know that doesn't matter but...
how can i trust a guy how can’t lead his team past Connecticut?
i’ll be seeing him this weekend at stanford, so we’ll see
Sorry man
I put that on the Defense. UConn even had two game winning TDs called back. That Def didn’t do their job.
yeah, notre dame has
been struggling as whole for the last few years, Weis being the main target of criticism. I’m just excited to see him this weekend.
by loyal2therams on Nov 24, 2009 9:14 PM CST up reply actions
Two Words
Colt McCoy………
I Want The Rams Back In LA....The More They Lose The More Of A Chance That It Will Happen....Sorry St Louis You Cant Keep A Team(Twice)...Rams Come Home....We'll Be Here For You When You Do
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Turf Show Times
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
