The 2010 NFL Thread

[Mysterio2000X]

Again, no front office worth it's worth will have Colt McCoy as the #3 QB in this upcoming draft, guaranteed. You do realize ESPN and CBSSports (especially CBS) tend to list prospects based on their name value/the value of the schools they went to, yes? The first ESPN link looks to me to be McShay's rankings, and McShay is a total fucking dumbass. Kiper's better, but his rankings aren't perfect, either - there is no way Trent Williams and Anthony Davis are top 3 tackles (even in this weak class), or that Sergio Kindle is better than either Jerry Hughes or Sean Weatherspoon, for instance. And CBSSports, in particular, is extremely unreliable. Hell, they don't even have Earl Thomas listed in their safety rankings, and he has the talent to be a Top 20 lock this year.

There is simply no way you can justify Colt McCoy being the third best quarterback in this draft class (despite it being an extremely weak QB class). His arm strength is nonexistant, his accuracy is frivolous at best, he comes from a one-read spread offense, he doesn't take snaps under center, he doesn't have to drop back in the pocket. His absolute highest ceiling is Kyle Orton or Trent Edwards, only without the guarantee that he won't throw multiple interceptions a game at this point, and it'll take him 2-4 years to even get to that level.

Charlie Whitehurst was a third-string quarterback who, in his three years, has never thrown a single pass during the official NFL season (as in, when it actually matters). I understand Norv Turner is a QB guru, but that hardly justifies giving up a fringe 1st rounder and $5 million a year for a player that couldn't even beat out Billy Volek, especially for a team that is as riddled with holes as the Seahawks are.

McCoy, maybe not. But Bradford and Clausen will, guaranteed, and they've yet to throw an NFL pass. And Christ, Bradford is coming off shoulder surgery. I really don't see anything wrong with giving a guy who has been in the league and studied NFL teams for a few years a bigger contract than a rookie. And, I may be mistaken, but isn't it only a two-year deal? It's not like they signed Whitehurst to a five or seven year deal like Bradford and Clausen will get.

You do realize there is a huge difference between drafting one of the highest rated college players in a given year, and signing a third string quarterback, yes? I'll eat some crow if I'm wrong, but Charlie Whitehurst doesn't have the potential to be what Bradford and Clausen could potentially be.

The biggest issue I have here is that they could could have gotten a quarterback with a similar skillset to Charlie Whitehurst (or, hell, Charlie Whitehurst himself) for a far lesser price, but the FO's showing to be pretty incompetent so far (Darryl Tapp for Chris Clemons and a mid-round pick, Carroll? Really?)

Edited March 19, 2010 by Mysterio2000X

[DMN in the House]

I'll tell you right now that Whitehurst has better potential to be a decent starting QB than Jimmy Clausen. Clausen is the epitome of empty numbers, had two first round talents at WR, and never beat anyone with a pulse at Notre Dame.

Bradford is a major risk too, due to the injuries, and if he goes over Suh, the Rams are complete and utter idiots. Then again, they are the Rams, and I remember when that used to mean nothing.

[livid]

Actually, they really couldn't have gotten Whitehurst for any less. He was tendered at a 3rd round level but the Seahawks don't have a 3rd round pick this year. So they matched the value of what a 3rd round pick this year would've been by switching 2nd round picks and giving them a 3rd next year (which would be around the equivalent of a 4th this year). And I already stated the value of the contract is similar to what was given to Rosenfels last year. And I would argue I would rather pay Whitehurst that money who has the potential to be better than what was given to Rosenfels for being an average QB in the NFL.

And your comparison between Hughes, Kindle and Weatherspoon is a bit weak, considering only 2 of them play the same position. Kindle/Hughes will play either 4-3 end or 3-4 rush linebacker, whereas Weatherspoon is just a straight up LB in a 4-3 scheme. Not to mention that Kindle is a better all around player than Hughes because Hughes' run defense is pretty weak and he's smaller than what teams like to see from a 3-4 OLB/4-3 DE that they would use a 1st round pick on.

[Mysterio2000X]

I'll tell you right now that Whitehurst has better potential to be a decent starting QB than Jimmy Clausen. Clausen is the epitome of empty numbers, had two first round talents at WR, and never beat anyone with a pulse at Notre Dame.

Golden Tate is hardly a first round talent, and Michael Floyd was hurt for the majority of the year. Jimmy Clausen is the best quarterback prospect in this year's class, in my opinion, and one of the best quarterback prospects coming out of college in quite some time. He doesn't have a cannon, but can make any throw (though he does need some work on completing those out-routes). He is intelligent, by all accounts a leader and hard worker, has experience in a pro style offense, has a good and quick enough release to evade pressure when it comes, can read defenses, is mentally tough, and just completed one of the best season, statistically, by a junior quarterback ever despite a poor offensive line, running game and a non-existant defense. Never beat anyone with a pulse? He's the only reason Notre Dame was still in it for most of their games in the 4th quarter, and had his TE not slipped there is a very good chance they would've beat a then highly ranked USC team, as well.

Bradford is a major risk too, due to the injuries, and if he goes over Suh, the Rams are complete and utter idiots. Then again, they are the Rams, and I remember when that used to mean nothing.

Yes, taking a potential franchise quarterback over a potential great defensive tackle is the worst move a rebuilding team could ever do. Because, y'know, defensive tackles can single handedly be the difference in games, unlike quarterbacks. Bradford has elite accuracy, a stupid-quick release, and can make any throw. There are questions about his toughness/being able to play without ***** star recruits at all of the positions/being able to take snaps under center (and all that that entails), but at this point he has the potential to be the next Kurt Warner. If the Rams think so, as well, then they have to pull the trigger.

Edited March 19, 2010 by Mysterio2000X

[Mysterio2000X]

Actually, they really couldn't have gotten Whitehurst for any less. He was tendered at a 3rd round level but the Seahawks don't have a 3rd round pick this year. So they matched the value of what a 3rd round pick this year would've been by switching 2nd round picks and giving them a 3rd next year (which would be around the equivalent of a 4th this year). And I already stated the value of the contract is similar to what was given to Rosenfels last year. And I would argue I would rather pay Whitehurst that money who has the potential to be better than what was given to Rosenfels for being an average QB in the NFL.

Yes, and at that point the cost for Whitehurst, in my opinion, exceeds his worth. That early 2nd round pick could've been turned into a Damian Williams, or Jahvid Best, or Everson Griffen, or.. any number of fringe 1st round players who could contribute more and for a longer time than Whitehurst. Since, for the purposes of your argument, we're trusting Norv Turner to be a genius when it comes to quarterbacks, would you really give up that much for somebody who isn't even better than Billy Volek? Hell, there's no proof that he'll even be as average as Sage Rosenfels at this point.

And your comparison between Hughes, Kindle and Weatherspoon is a bit weak, considering only 2 of them play the same position. Kindle/Hughes will play either 4-3 end or 3-4 rush linebacker, whereas Weatherspoon is just a straight up LB in a 4-3 scheme. Not to mention that Kindle is a better all around player than Hughes because Hughes' run defense is pretty weak and he's smaller than what teams like to see from a 3-4 OLB/4-3 DE that they would use a 1st round pick on.

In terms of player prospects and the impact they will have on their future NFL teams, Weatherspoon and Hughes are clearly ahead of Kindle. I watched a handful of Texas games this year, Kindle was non-existant for the most part, up until the bowl game. He is very overrated as a prospect. Hughes, on the other hand, is the most polished pass rusher in this draft (especially after Greg Hardy took his draft stock out back and shot it in the face. Twice.) in terms of technique and burst. He isn't a walking tank, but he isn't Derrick Brooks, either (and by the way, two of the best rush linebackers in the league are 5'11"). Weatherspoon is best fit to be a weakside linebacker at the next level, but he has the coverage and tackling skills (as well as the intangibles and personality) to be great on the inside of a 3-4, similar to Karlos Dansby. He's a top 15 talent, but will drop because of the lack of positional need for a weakside LB. They're both superior to Sergio Kindle, even though Kindle actually has experience playing and rushing from a standing position.

Edited March 19, 2010 by Mysterio2000X

[Powerhart]

Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen, and Colt McCoy have yet to throw an NFL pass and they\'ll all get bigger contracts than that.

Oh shit, totally the same situation!

And no, Colt McCoy will not. He won't be drafted before the 5th round, if at all. He's terrible.

McCoy, maybe not. But Bradford and Clausen will, guaranteed, and they've yet to throw an NFL pass. And Christ, Bradford is coming off shoulder surgery. I really don't see anything wrong with giving a guy who has been in the league and studied NFL teams for a few years a bigger contract than a rookie. And, I may be mistaken, but isn't it only a two-year deal? It's not like they signed Whitehurst to a five or seven year deal like Bradford and Clausen will get.

Not to mention that he's been learning behind one of the better QBs in the league in Phillip Rivers and under one of the better offensive minds in the game in Norv Turner (not saying he's a great head coach) so it's not like he won't bring nothing to the table. And yeah, the contract really isn't that big. It's about on par to what the Vikings gave Rosenfels last offseason and he was the 3rd stringer on that team. Granted, he had thrown an NFL pass before but it's not like they were that good.

Maybe Mysterio's just upset that Whitehurst chose Seattle over Arizona and now he's stuck with Derek Anderson instead.

Are you kidding me? Have you see any of his games against the Titans (in 06 and 07) when Schaub was injured, anything from his run on Miami? The guy has had great games when coming from behind. You are not gonna tell me Whitehurst, who hasn't thrown a single pass in a reg. season game, is worth more or the same than someone who has proved that he could at least be a starter for sometime until the team finds the right QB. Whitehurst isn't worth that kind of money. But why are we arguing about this? It's already a done deal, let's move on.

On another news... the Cards reached an agreement with LB Joey Porter to a 3-year deal.

Any news on Brandon Marshall? The guy was supposedly going to be on high-demand but after his visit to Seattle nothing.

[Mysterio2000X]

On another news... the Cards reached an agreement with LB Joey Porter to a 3-year deal.

Any news on Brandon Marshall? The guy was supposedly going to be on high-demand but after his visit to Seattle nothing.

Any word on how much Porter's deal is worth? AZ's had an offer out to him since Sunday/Monday, but he thought the money was too low so he went ahead and set up a visit with the Redskins, as well. I'm guessing the Redskins weren't willing to break the bank for him, either. I love the move, between he, Haggans, Brown and Will Davis, we are virtually set at OLB, and Rod Graves/Whisenunt has also set the team up so that they can take whoever the best player available is when we're on the clock. He still has some pass rushing skillz, and will be fine as a one or two year stop gap while Brown and Davis further develop. At the very least, he's an improvement over what we had opposite of Clark Haggans last year.

And I'm guessing Brandon Marshall's stock has been killed by McDaniels and the Boldin trade. He is a known head case, and McDaniels wants him out ASAP, so why would a team bend over for him when he might either just get straight up cut or taken for a cheaper value later? And also, after Boldin got only a 3rd round pick, it doesn't make much sense giving up a high 1st for Marshall, due once again to his personality issues. The market simply isn't there.

[Mysterio2000X]

In other news, Mike Bellotti quit as Oregon's AD today to join ESPN. wat?.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5009981

EDIT - because triple posting is just lame, here are the 5 best and worst 10-yard splits from the combine, organized by position. Jesus christ Greg Hardy, could your fall from "elite pass rusher" to "injury prone slob" be any more sad?

Edited March 19, 2010 by Mysterio2000X

[livid]

Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen, and Colt McCoy have yet to throw an NFL pass and they\'ll all get bigger contracts than that.

Oh shit, totally the same situation!

And no, Colt McCoy will not. He won't be drafted before the 5th round, if at all. He's terrible.

McCoy, maybe not. But Bradford and Clausen will, guaranteed, and they've yet to throw an NFL pass. And Christ, Bradford is coming off shoulder surgery. I really don't see anything wrong with giving a guy who has been in the league and studied NFL teams for a few years a bigger contract than a rookie. And, I may be mistaken, but isn't it only a two-year deal? It's not like they signed Whitehurst to a five or seven year deal like Bradford and Clausen will get.

Not to mention that he's been learning behind one of the better QBs in the league in Phillip Rivers and under one of the better offensive minds in the game in Norv Turner (not saying he's a great head coach) so it's not like he won't bring nothing to the table. And yeah, the contract really isn't that big. It's about on par to what the Vikings gave Rosenfels last offseason and he was the 3rd stringer on that team. Granted, he had thrown an NFL pass before but it's not like they were that good.

Maybe Mysterio's just upset that Whitehurst chose Seattle over Arizona and now he's stuck with Derek Anderson instead.

Are you kidding me? Have you see any of his games against the Titans (in 06 and 07) when Schaub was injured, anything from his run on Miami? The guy has had great games when coming from behind. You are not gonna tell me Whitehurst, who hasn't thrown a single pass in a reg. season game, is worth more or the same than someone who has proved that he could at least be a starter for sometime until the team finds the right QB. Whitehurst isn't worth that kind of money. But why are we arguing about this? It's already a done deal, let's move on.

Yes, I have seen those games and I have also seen the other games he played in as a Texan and all that he proved was that he's Trent Dilfer. Now, there's nothing wrong with that because everybody could use a serviceable backup that can come in and be a decent stop gap until your #1 gets healthy or you're future #1 to sit and learn but he's nothing more than that. And for the record, the Bills game was his only good game as a Dolphin, otherwise he sucked pretty bad.

So yeah, I would much rather pay $10M to a guy who, more than one team has viewed as having the potential to be a starter in the NFL, than a journeyman who's had a marginal amount of success when he's come off the bench for an injured starter. If nothing else, Whitehurst will become what Rosenfels is now and be a solid backup, in which case, he would be worth the money but he has the potential to be worth more than that, which is why the Seahawks made the deal and paid him the money.

EDIT: And with Mysterio posting that Oregon story, it reminded me of an equally strange situation regarding the 49ers' GM situation. Apparently he's on an extended leave of absence and may step down/be let go but no reason other than "personal reasons" has been given. And all of this coming about a month away from the draft.

Edited March 19, 2010 by Livid

[Mysterio2000X]

Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen, and Colt McCoy have yet to throw an NFL pass and they\'ll all get bigger contracts than that.

Oh shit, totally the same situation!

And no, Colt McCoy will not. He won't be drafted before the 5th round, if at all. He's terrible.

McCoy, maybe not. But Bradford and Clausen will, guaranteed, and they've yet to throw an NFL pass. And Christ, Bradford is coming off shoulder surgery. I really don't see anything wrong with giving a guy who has been in the league and studied NFL teams for a few years a bigger contract than a rookie. And, I may be mistaken, but isn't it only a two-year deal? It's not like they signed Whitehurst to a five or seven year deal like Bradford and Clausen will get.

Not to mention that he's been learning behind one of the better QBs in the league in Phillip Rivers and under one of the better offensive minds in the game in Norv Turner (not saying he's a great head coach) so it's not like he won't bring nothing to the table. And yeah, the contract really isn't that big. It's about on par to what the Vikings gave Rosenfels last offseason and he was the 3rd stringer on that team. Granted, he had thrown an NFL pass before but it's not like they were that good.

Maybe Mysterio's just upset that Whitehurst chose Seattle over Arizona and now he's stuck with Derek Anderson instead.

Are you kidding me? Have you see any of his games against the Titans (in 06 and 07) when Schaub was injured, anything from his run on Miami? The guy has had great games when coming from behind. You are not gonna tell me Whitehurst, who hasn't thrown a single pass in a reg. season game, is worth more or the same than someone who has proved that he could at least be a starter for sometime until the team finds the right QB. Whitehurst isn't worth that kind of money. But why are we arguing about this? It's already a done deal, let's move on.

Yes, I have seen those games and I have also seen the other games he played in as a Texan and all that he proved was that he's Trent Dilfer. Now, there's nothing wrong with that because everybody could use a serviceable backup that can come in and be a decent stop gap until your #1 gets healthy or you're future #1 to sit and learn but he's nothing more than that. And for the record, the Bills game was his only good game as a Dolphin, otherwise he sucked pretty bad.

So yeah, I would much rather pay $10M to a guy who, more than one team has viewed as having the potential to be a starter in the NFL, than a journeyman who's had a marginal amount of success when he's come off the bench for an injured starter. If nothing else, Whitehurst will become what Rosenfels is now and be a solid backup, in which case, he would be worth the money but he has the potential to be worth more than that, which is why the Seahawks made the deal and paid him the money.

That's pay $10 million and give up a fringe 1st round draft pick for a quarterback who the Cardinals (who literally had Leinart, and then nobody) wanted to bring in to serve as his backup/competition if he faltered. Arizona, though, would only of given up one of their two 3rd round picks, and I doubt they would've given him $5 mil/year.

Also, the Seahawks don't have the supporting cast that the Vikings have.

Also, Sage Rosenfels was at least good enough to be the the back up for somebody, and actually showed enough skill that, as long as he didn't somehow fuck up handing the ball to AP, the Vikes would've still won the first seed in the NFC North.

Also, what are Whitehurst's skills that make him worth that combination of draft picks and money to a team that needs to rebuild everywhere but at the LB positions?

Also, Chris Miller is a pretty damn good QB coach, too. Should someone shell out a high 2nd round pick and $5 mil/year for Brian St. Pierre, AZ's 3rd string QB from last year? Or what about John Beck, Baltimore's 3rd string QB? Etc.

It's just not a good business or football decision from Pete Carroll.

[DMN in the House]

Suh is a potential HoF DT, and it's MUCH harder to find that than to find a 'franchise' QB. Suh is, almost without argument, the best DT in the draft since, oh, Warren Sapp. Sam Bradford isn't even the consensus 'best' QB in this draft, and even if he was, that'd make him what, the best QB in the draft since Mark Sanchez?

Suh is the best player in the draft AND the safest pick. Next year's QB class should, at the very least, be as good as this years (Jake Locker, anyone?), and even if it wasn't, you could always grab Dan LeFevour or Tony Pike in a later round.

You're over-hyping Clausen, as well. He's never won anything, despite usually having much better talent on his side (outside of the USC games). Don't give me shit about a bad defense, line, or running game when you're playing Army and Navy.

Clausen might be a hard worker, tough enough to take a hit, and have a decent arm. He's far too immature to be a 'franchise' QB, ans he's not even as clearly NFL ready as, say, Brady Quinn (from all accounts, it's a fair comparison, talent-wise), and we saw how that turned out. I wouldn't take Clausen unless I could sit him for a few years, and, given the choice, I'd take the guy who's already done that (Whitehurst) over him.

You can continue to overvalue QBs, though. It's understandable.

[Maxx]

And they money paid to Whitehurst is irrelevant, it's an uncapped year.

[Mysterio2000X]

Suh is a potential HoF DT, and it's MUCH harder to find that than to find a 'franchise' QB. Suh is, almost without argument, the best DT in the draft since, oh, Warren Sapp. Sam Bradford isn't even the consensus 'best' QB in this draft, and even if he was, that'd make him what, the best QB in the draft since Mark Sanchez?

Even if Suh had 90+ tackles, 4 forced fumbles and 14 sacks in a season, that won't mean shit if the team isn't winning. Potential Hall of Fame players, period, are hard to find. That doesn't make defensive tackle any more vital of a position than quarterback in terms of long-term success, especially in today's pass-friendly NFL world. No, Sam Bradford is not the consensus best QB in this draft. He isn't even my top QB (Clausen is, obviously), and I'm not arguing that the Rams should draft Bradford. I'm saying that, if the Rams think there is any quarterback in this draft capable of becoming a franchise quarterback, they need to pull the trigger. And the best DT since Warren Sapp? That's funny; Suh isn't even the DT most like Warren Sapp in this draft. Suh is a physical specimen and a man amongst boys, but he relies on his pure, brute strength too much. Something tells me that won't play when everybody that double teams him is 6'4"+ and 300+ lbs. Gerald McCoy is the far better pass rusher in terms of his technique and burst. Oh, and btw, those stats I listed up there? Those are Cortez Kennedy's stats from 1992. The Seahawks went 2-14 that year. And, once again, that was before the NFL became such a pass-friendly league, and the need for true franchise QBs became so great in order to sustain long-term success.

Suh is the best player in the draft AND the safest pick.

That's funny, I remember when Aaron Curry and Glenn Dorsey were "the best players in the draft" and "the safest picks". Where would Atlanta and Detroit be now if they had gone that route over Matt Ryan and Matt Stafford, respectively? Oh, and just like Dorsey, Suh's also had multiple knee surgeries. That doesn't guarantee he'll have a similar rookie season or career path, but still.

Next year's QB class should, at the very least, be as good as this years (Jake Locker, anyone?), and even if it wasn't, you could always grab Dan LeFevour or Tony Pike in a later round.

Dan LeFevour is a poor man's Tim Tebow (with all the same issues, minus the elite intangibles), and Tony Pike is a poor man's Shaun Hill. Neither will lead the Rams to the playoffs in their career, or even to .500. And the absolute worst case scenario for the Rams is that you're right; Suh single-handedly allows the Rams to win 6-9 games a year for the remainder of his career. If that's the case, then they are absolutely out of the running of landing any further elite quarterbacks, and are now stuck in mediocrity hell. Say hi to the Bills for me.

You're over-hyping Clausen, as well. He's never won anything, despite usually having much better talent on his side (outside of the USC games). Don't give me shit about a bad defense, line, or running game when you're playing Army and Navy.

Clausen might be a hard worker, tough enough to take a hit, and have a decent arm.

So the fact that Clausen can read a defense, can make any throw, is a true leader, and the hardest working player on his team are all instantly invalidated because he didn't face elite defenses week in and week out? That's stupid. Hell, watch any Michael Floyd/Golden Tate highlight reel (or full-length ND games) - Clausen doesn't loft the ball into the air, and has his better-than-the-defenders-covering-them receivers have to jump up, or down, or sideways, or make any major adjustments the majority of the time. He puts the balls exactly where it needs to go so that his receivers can catch it, uncontested, and in stride.

He's far too immature to be a 'franchise' QB, ans he's not even as clearly NFL ready as, say, Brady Quinn (from all accounts, it's a fair comparison, talent-wise), and we saw how that turned out. I wouldn't take Clausen unless I could sit him for a few years, and, given the choice, I'd take the guy who's already done that (Whitehurst) over him.

You can continue to overvalue QBs, though. It's understandable.

Let me guess, you're referring to the limo incident from when he signed with Notre Dame? That was, what, three years ago? He hasn't had any other maturity-related incidents of that (or any) magnitude since then, and every single person who has worked with him has nothing but positives to say about the man's work ethic or leadership abilities. Ben Roethlisberger and Phillip Rivers are, by all accounts, total fucking egotistical douchebags. Does that suddenly make them bad quarterbacks, too?

You can continue to not understand how the NFL functions nowadays, and short sell the importance of having a great quarterback, though. That's understandable.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Mysterio2000X

[DMN in the House]

You can have your pass happy ideals, but defense still wins championships. You've shown time and time again that you have no clue how football really works, and I'm guessing that Madden is the closest you've ever gotten to playing the game.

You can continue to make excuses, but there are no 'franchise' QBs in this draft. If there were, everyone would know about it. I know, from personal experience as a Raiders fan, how that scenario plays out, and JaMarcus Russell was a MUCH athlete than either of the two top QBs in this draft, and played better competition.

If Clausen is what you say he is, then why was Notre Dame so bad? They never beat a team with a pulse, and despite still having some of the 'best' talent (based on recruiting rankings) in the nation, regularly got embarrassed by lesser teams. Yup, that's a leader right there, can't even figure out how to beat Navy with vastly superior talent. He is immature, is he the same kid that came to ND? No, of course not, but you're the first person I've ever heard try and tout him as a 'true' leader. There IS one true leader at QB in this draft, much as I dislike the dude's hype, and that is Tim Tebow, not Jimmy Clausen.

I guess I shouldn't expect much from an obvious Domer, though.

Suffice to say, there is no QB in this draft that is going to 'save' the Rams, and they are better off taking a slower approach to rebuilding, working on the lines first. If you miss with your 'franchise' QB, then you're fucked for years, and neither of these guys are exactly Peyton Manning. Hell, they aren't even Ryan Leaf. You have a guy who's never won anything, and a guy who's injured his THROWING shoulder twice. Yup, that screams 'franchise' to me.

[Mysterio2000X]

You can have your pass happy ideals, but defense still wins championships. You've shown time and time again that you have no clue how football really works, and I'm guessing that Madden is the closest you've ever gotten to playing the game.

Oh, right. It was Arizona's great defense that brought them more post-season success in the past 2 years than in the past 30. It's because of the vaunted Colts' defense that they've one of the top 3 team of the past decade. It's because of their defense and amazing running games, NOT Ben Roethlisberger and Tom Brady that the Steelers and Patriots split 5 Super Bowls between them this decade (don't get me wrong, they did have great defenses, but they would not have accomplished what they did had it not been for their quarterbacks). This isn't the 60's and 70's anymore, it isn't even the 80's. Ever since the Colts got the NFL to change up their rules regarding the passing game, it's been a passing and quarterbacks league. Name me one team that was genuinely, consistently successful since the Colts got the rules changed without a franchise quarterback. Even the fuckin' Ravens had to change their philosophy, and are now on the verge of being an offensive juggernaut, because the old ways just wasn't cutting it.

You can continue to make excuses, but there are no 'franchise' QBs in this draft. If there were, everyone would know about it. I know, from personal experience as a Raiders fan, how that scenario plays out, and JaMarcus Russell was a MUCH athlete than either of the two top QBs in this draft, and played better competition.

The top three quarterbacks in the game right now are Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees. They are terrible athletes compred to JaMarcus Russell, and Sam Bradford/Jimmy Clausen are nothing like JaMarcus. How the fuck could you even compare them? Oh, and if there were "franchise" QB's, everybody would know about them? You do realize even Peyton Manning had his detractors, right? You do realize Tom Brady was a fucking 5th round pick, right? Mike Mayock was really the only one high up on Matt Ryan, and Joe Flacco was a late 1st/2nd round prospect by most accounts, right? You remember Aaron Rodgers fell to the 20's of the 1st round, correct? The draft isn't a perfect science.

If Clausen is what you say he is, then why was Notre Dame so bad? They never beat a team with a pulse, and despite still having some of the 'best' talent (based on recruiting rankings) in the nation, regularly got embarrassed by lesser teams. Yup, that's a leader right there, can't even figure out how to beat Navy with vastly superior talent. He is immature, is he the same kid that came to ND? No, of course not, but you're the first person I've ever heard try and tout him as a 'true' leader. There IS one true leader at QB in this draft, much as I dislike the dude's hype, and that is Tim Tebow, not Jimmy Clausen.

"Vastly superior talent"? Jimmy Clausen, Michael Floyd, Golden Tate, Manti Te'o. That's it. Those are the only players on the Notre Dame team last year worth a damn, and Manti Te'o is a freshman. A quarterback, no matter how great, can't do it all by himself, especially when your local high school probably sports a better defense than what Notre Dame had out there last year. Again, it's only because of Clausen that Notre Dame was even in the majority of their games 'til the end. Had he had even a half-decent defense, that team would've been the 10-game winning, bowl-eligible team many people pegged them to be. To say Jimmy Clausen is a bad quarterback because his team was terrible is absolutely, 100% retarded.

I guess I shouldn't expect much from an obvious Domer, though.

You're a moron. I'm the farthest thing from a Notre Dame fan; but that doesn't mean I can't respect the great prospects that they have. I think Michael Floyd is the best wide receiver in next year's draft class, too. Oh shit, I'm definitely a Domer!!

Suffice to say, there is no QB in this draft that is going to 'save' the Rams, and they are better off taking a slower approach to rebuilding, working on the lines first. If you miss with your 'franchise' QB, then you're fucked for years, and neither of these guys are exactly Peyton Manning. Hell, they aren't even Ryan Leaf. You have a guy who's never won anything, and a guy who's injured his THROWING shoulder twice. Yup, that screams 'franchise' to me.

Peyton Manning wasn't Peyton Manning when he came out of college, either. Remember, he had "already reached his full potential". There is no such thing as a perfect quarterback prospect, and there never will be. If the Rams think there is any possibility that either Bradford or Clausen could become "that guy", they need to pull the trigger. They don't have any other options if they hope to become relevant within the next 5 years.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Mysterio2000X

[DMN in the House]

They aren't going to become relevant in the next five years with either of those guys, because nobody except idiots believes that either of them are 'the guy'.

The Pats, Colts, and Steelers are all HORRIBLE examples for your argument. The year the Pats were an offensive juggernaut, they LOST the Super Bowl to a superior defensive team. They years they won? They won with defense. They year the Colts won, Manning played like shit in the playoffs, and the defense stepped up and carried them, and it's similar for the Steelers, because Big Ben hasn't played well in either of their two victories. As for your beloved Cards, they play in a weak division, in a weak conference, got hot at the right time, and still didn't win shit. Oh, and it was a DEFENSIVE play that won that game for Pittsburgh.

Tom Brady and Drew Brees also hurt you QB argument. They, along with Kurt Warner, Tony Romo, and similar guys, show that you don't need to draft a QB high to get a good one.

Care to continue burying your own argument?

[Mysterio2000X]

You've missed the entire point of my argument.

I brought up the teams I did, because they are the teams with the most sustained, consistent success year in and year out because of their elite quarterbacks. I don't care how Brady or Manning played in the playoffs, or in the Super Bowl; they would not have been in the positions to even reach the Super Bowl/playoffs all of those years had it not been for them, and that is the point I am making. Getting a franchise quarterback in this year's draft class won't guarantee the Rams (or anybody else) a Super Bowl, but it puts them in the best possible situation to reach one.

Teams need to take franchise quarterbacks however they can get them. Tony Romo, Kurt Warner, Tom Brady, etc. are all, for the most part, blind fucking luck, and we can spend all day listing every elite, Pro Bowl-caliber player at every single position that was chosen after the 3rd round, DTs included. No, choosing a QB in the top 10 picks isn't the only way to get franchise signal callers, but is the best way to go about it. Again, if the Rams think Bradford or Clausen have the potential to be "that guy" for them, they NEED to pull the trigger. What do you not get about this? The chances of them blindly stumbling into a 10-15 year franchise quarterback later in the draft are minuscule at best.

What is your biggest reason for not liking Jimmy Clausen? The fact that his team didn't win, and that he is cocky? Wow. Yeah, because those are the best ways to evaluate individual prospects in a team game, right?

This is the same exact argument Lions fans brought up before, and Atlanta fans before them. It's illogical and short-sighted.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Mysterio2000X

[DMN in the House]

If he had played against superior competition, his losing would have not been an issue. However, that was not the case. Instead, he lost, far too often, while leading superior competition.

That's not a leader. Far from it.

You are missing the point. Neither of these guys are 'the guy', and if the Rams make this mistake, then they'll just prove that they are a shitty franchise.

Picking the wrong guy can doom a franchise. Look at Oakland, they're a laughing stock, and it primarily leads back to the Russell pick (at least, currently).

[Mysterio2000X]

If he had played against superior competition, his losing would have not been an issue. However, that was not the case. Instead, he lost, far too often, while leading superior competition.

That's not a leader. Far from it.

You are missing the point. Neither of these guys are 'the guy', and if the Rams make this mistake, then they'll just prove that they are a shitty franchise.

Picking the wrong guy can doom a franchise. Look at Oakland, they're a laughing stock, and it primarily leads back to the Russell pick (at least, currently).

Again, the only players worth anything on that Notre Dame team were Jimmy Clausen, Michael Floyd, Golden Tate and Manti Te'o. Clausen was hurt all season, yet still played his ass off. Floyd was hurt, as well, and missed a handful of games because of it (during which Clausen stepped up his game, as the article I linked earlier to notes). Tate is overrated, but has a good enough skillset to be a demon in college. And Manti Te'o, the only defender, is a freshman linebacker. There's not many quarterbacks who can win when teams don't respect the running game, and can do as they please to the defense. And again, though Clausen was their starting quarterback, they didn't lose because of him; to place the blame for their poor record squarely on his shoulders, as you are doing, is dumb.

He is a hard worker (in the gym, on the field, and in the tape room) who, when the going got tough, stepped up his game and attempted to motivate the players around him, as well. How is that not a leader? He didn't crumble under pressure; I can't think of a single game in which he completely imploded, even after his defense regularly gave up 30+ points to any half-decent team.

Yes, I agree. If the Rams fuck this up, then they're fucked for the next half decade. Although I think Clausen will be a good NFL quarterback (Bradford is a larger mystery, and I'm not 100% sold on him - I love his accuracy and ultra-quick release, but there are too many questions concerning him for me to argue on why he should be taken 1st overall, or over Clausen), I'm not saying the Rams should take Clausen or Bradford "just cuz". Those executives will get to know these players a lot better than me and you ever will, all I am saying is that if St. Louis thinks either one of them have the potential to turn into "their guy", then they absolutely must pull the trigger, Suh be damned. And at this point, nothing I've seen, read or heard leads me to believe Clausen doesn't have the potential to be "that guy" for a team.

[Powerhart]

Honestly, I'd rather try to manage a trade with the Eagles for one of their QBs than take a chance and fuck up with this year's QB draft class. At least Vick/McNabb have proved themeselves and Kolb seems to be good.

We all should've just been GMs and Presidents and Scouts of teams since we all know so fucking much.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Powerhart