PDA

View Full Version : Braford Close to Being Elite After his Pro Day?


Thunder&Lightning
03-31-2010, 09:07 PM
after sam bradford had his great pro day, could he be considered an elite prospect now? He would have been the #1 pick last year and most likely will be this year... Hard to argue how he isnt...

RealityCheck
03-31-2010, 09:08 PM
Bradford maybe, not sure about Braford though.

sbh15
03-31-2010, 09:09 PM
Bradford maybe, not sure about Braford though.

You had to be that guy? At least add some input if you're going to do that.

EvilNixon
03-31-2010, 09:09 PM
Not close. Just doesn't have the elite upside IMO.

TheSlinger
03-31-2010, 09:11 PM
I would have been the #1 pick last year and most likely will be this year

Didn't expect Bradford to be posting on NFLDC

Thunder&Lightning
03-31-2010, 09:16 PM
hahaha fixed, geeshhh tough crowd

RealityCheck
03-31-2010, 09:16 PM
You had to be that guy? At least add some input if you're going to do that.
Somebody had to.

BuddyCHRIST
03-31-2010, 09:18 PM
He's not as good of a prospect of Stafford, and never was imo. I wouldn't put him elite just because there's too many question marks for me. I doubt Scott puts him as elite either as he seems to like Clausen more.

PoopSandwich
03-31-2010, 09:24 PM
after sam bradford had his great pro day, could he be considered an elite prospect now? He would have been the #1 pick last year and most likely will be this year... Hard to argue how he isnt...

Starting the paragraph off without a capital letter. The name Sam Bradford should be capitalized and where is your comma for isn't?

Jeeze man this is nfl draft board and you come in here with poor grammar, get up on and out of here.

LookItsAlDavis
03-31-2010, 09:26 PM
Bradford=Pre-Rotator Cuff Chad Pennington

Matthew Jones
03-31-2010, 09:28 PM
I wouldn't rank him as elite. If he had stayed healthy this year and had another big season I probably would have though. The injury definitely knocked him down some for me. He's also basically a two-year starter as a result of it. I like him more than I liked Stafford last year but I'm not even sure I'd rank him ahead of Clausen this year.

Caulibflower
03-31-2010, 09:30 PM
His arm strength isn't good enough to call him an "elite" prospect. He could certainly develop into a pro-bowler, but as far as rating draftees, I'd only put the "elite" label on a guy who literally has no peers. Bradford's smart and accurate and all that, but he doesn't really set any bars.

Caulibflower
03-31-2010, 09:32 PM
^^^ Someone mentioned Matthew Stafford. While Sanchez and guys like him were being looked at as franchise QBs, too, Stafford was simply making throws that were on another level.

I_C_DeadPeople
03-31-2010, 09:44 PM
Bradford=Pre-Rotator Cuff Chad Pennington

Bradford has a better arm that Pennington, in fact I think McCoy does to. Pennington always reminded me of a smarter Jon Kitna.

wogitalia
03-31-2010, 10:06 PM
Starting the paragraph off without a capital letter. The name Sam Bradford should be capitalized and where is your comma for isn't?

By comma you mean apostrophe right? Sorry had to do it, grammar Nazi thread for the wins!

As for Bradford, still has a bunch of questions that just can't allow an elite label.

First and foremost is the reason his pro day mattered so much... DURABILITY. The reason he hadn't thrown up until this point is because he was injured and at this point it has become a slight trend. Fragile QBs just aren't a good idea.

Check the top QBs, Manning, Favre, Marino, Elway, Brady, Rivers and Brees. These guys just don't miss games. Something that has killed Alex Smith and Tavaris Jackson has been an inability to stay on the field for sustained stretches(only a small part yes but a part none the less).

Secondly you have the system questions. Still coming out of an Oklahoma system that flat out hasn't produced a pro quarterback. Until he can show otherwise those questions remain.

Third, he flashed a solid arm, acceptable. Not an elite arm. I think that is both a pass and a worry. His arm is good enough but you have to worry about a guy with an adequate arm that has shoulder injury problems, he could be one tackle from no longer having adequate strength, as in he has no room for error there, he can't afford to lose any arm strength.

I have a 4th point that I feel on him. He just doesn't feel right to me. It is just a vibe he gives me that I get on some prospects and I have no tangible reason for it. I have been both wrong and right with regards to the vibe but Bradford's is strong, just something that doesn't sit right with him.

All in all though, the first 3 reasons are certainly enough to not be an elite prospect. I could get over the system but the other two basically mean you can be a very good prospect. In many regards he is similar to Alex Smith as a prospect. Adequate but not elite Arm Strength, Great accuracy, Less than ideal college system, Smart, Great Intangibles. This isn't a knock, Smith was a good solid prospect who so far hasn't worked out and in no way implies that Bradford wont but I think that is the closest match to him I can think of.

Caulibflower
03-31-2010, 10:34 PM
I have that "eh..." vibe about both Bradford and Clausen, simply because we're talking about taking them so high. Do they measure out, have they had successful careers, are they pretty bright? Yeah. I just don't want to have to take either of them with an early first-rounder. Would I take Bradford with a second-rounder? Or even a late first-rounder? Absolutely. I just can't go all-in with him. I just don't feel it. On the other hand, when I watch Jake Locker film, I think, "I want THAT guy." Same with Tebow, really. You can talk about value and how well his skills will translate to the NFL, but he's a guy I'd want on my team. With guys like Bradford and Clausen....I don't know. They just don't wow me. I just don't really get excited watching them play. And since the post before me mentioned it, I'll go ahead and add my "ditto" for comparing Sam Bradford to Alex Smith. Again.

(EDIT) I'm not saying I'd draft Tebow in the top 5, just to be clear. It's just the fact that he is an exciting player, a gamer. Depending on how many picks I had and what my team needed, I'd gamble on him in the mid-to-late first. And that's half the point; I'd be willing to gamble on Tebow, but I'm not so keen on rolling the dice with those other two, even if their odds for success are supposedly higher.

Brent
03-31-2010, 10:35 PM
Alex Smith had an awesome pro-day, a lot of good that meant.

Flyboy
03-31-2010, 10:39 PM
Ummmmm..... no.

MetSox17
03-31-2010, 10:47 PM
Alex Smith had an awesome pro-day, a lot of good that meant.

Alex Smith never had the production, especially against top notch competition, that Bradford has had.

I like Bradford (wtf, i know), but he catches way too much flack. I think he has a better body of work than Stafford did coming out of Georgia, and everybody drools all over his nuts.

JRTPlaya21
03-31-2010, 10:48 PM
Nope. Okay thread.

FrankGore
03-31-2010, 10:48 PM
He's not an elite prospect to me. Suh, McCoy and Berry are, to me, the elite prospects in this draft who compare well to any recent prospects at their position. Bradford is what he is - the best QB in the class but ultimately he's not one of those QBs that a team dreams of landing at #1 (Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, Peyton Manning, etc.).

JRTPlaya21
03-31-2010, 10:48 PM
Alex Smith never had the production, especially against top notch competition, that Bradford has had.

I like Bradford (wtf, i know), but he catches way too much flack. I think he has a better body of work than Stafford did coming out of Georgia, and everybody drools all over his nuts.

Well I mean everybody and their mother said Stafford would be a future #1 pick his Senior year in high school. Too bad the poor boy had to land in Detroit..no offense to anybody.

Flyboy
03-31-2010, 10:52 PM
Alex Smith never had the production, especially against top notch competition, that Bradford has had.

I like Bradford (wtf, i know), but he catches way too much flack. I think he has a better body of work than Stafford did coming out of Georgia, and everybody drools all over his nuts.

Stafford also played in a pro style offense and didn't show the injury concerns of a china doll. Also, Stafford has a unleash the dragon-esque arm. Even though I liked Mark Sanchez over Stafford it seemed like he just had "it" when you watched film on him. I don't know if that's something you can say in regards to Sam Bradford.

armageddon
03-31-2010, 11:00 PM
Bradford has everything you want in a QB. He's as elite as you can be.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-31-2010, 11:03 PM
Whatever you felt prior to his pro day, your opinion shouldn't have changed. Bradford's workout was only meaningful in a medical sense, but there had never been any indication that his shoulder wouldn't be able to perform for 60-odd throws. It's not like he hadn't proved he could put it on a dime in college nor can it be said that a good completion rate at your pro day means much at all (http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=2798826).

At any rate, with Bradford, I see the appeal I just don't entirely share it. I like him more than Alex Smith (since someone had offered that comparison) and would probably be compelled to draw a comparison to Phillip Rivers (although I personally think Rivers was a marginally stronger prospect). He showed he could read the field north-to-south at Oklahoma, but he was almost never asked to read a play east-to-west. I don't see any reason to assume he couldn't adjust, but asking him to do so against NFL defenses is going to be rough going.

FrankGore
03-31-2010, 11:12 PM
Alex Smith gets mentioned a lot as a negative comparison for Bradford, but if you watched him last year you'd see him finally showing potential to light it up in a spread offense. He had a few poor performances but at times the guy looked like a true #1 pick. Better OL play and more chemistry with his receivers should lead to him being a solid QB this year.

I think Bradford compares favorably with Smith as a prospect (translation: I like him more coming out). Unfortunately I don't know that the Rams are a place where he'll really be able to succeed, though their OL might finally be coming together. But I won't fault them at all for picking him.

Caulibflower
03-31-2010, 11:21 PM
Alex Smith gets mentioned a lot as a negative comparison for Bradford, but if you watched him last year you'd see him finally showing potential to light it up in a spread offense. He had a few poor performances but at times the guy looked like a true #1 pick. Better OL play and more chemistry with his receivers should lead to him being a solid QB this year.

I think Bradford compares favorably with Smith as a prospect (translation: I like him more coming out). Unfortunately I don't know that the Rams are a place where he'll really be able to succeed, though their OL might finally be coming together. But I won't fault them at all for picking him.


I've said this a few times; comparing Bradford to Smith isn't really an insult. They're just really similar. Until this year, Alex had been in a new offense every year as well, in addition to having injury problems. His projections over a full 2009 would have been something like 3600 yards, 27 TDs, 18 picks, 81.2 rating (if I remember correctly). Not too bad. If some team is getting that out of Bradford, we certainly won't be calling him a bust.

PoopSandwich
03-31-2010, 11:30 PM
By comma you mean apostrophe right? Sorry had to do it, grammar Nazi thread for the wins!

#1 rule of being a grammar nazi is you have to **** up some where in your sentence to make yourself look stupid even if you aren't trying to.

GhostDeini
03-31-2010, 11:35 PM
Did Alex Smith really improve or did Vernon Davis start catching TD's ?

Anyway, I'm going to laugh at the Rams when they make Bradford the 1st pick. Their last few drafts have gone like this: Alex Barron, Tye Hill, Adam Carriker, Chris Long, and Jason Smith...Ouch !

Bucs4242
03-31-2010, 11:44 PM
Stafford also played in a pro style offense and didn't show the injury concerns of a china doll. Also, Stafford has a unleash the dragon-esque arm. Even though I liked Mark Sanchez over Stafford it seemed like he just had "it" when you watched film on him. I don't know if that's something you can say in regards to Sam Bradford.



I didnt see "it" when I watched Stafford. I saw a guy who had as many INTs as TDs, and wasnt all that impressive.

Trent Dilfer had a dragon-esque arm too, whatever the he!! that means.

I didnt love Stafford and dont love Bradford, but if the guy was a #1 pick a year ago and did nothing to hurt his value and checks out medically, then hes still that good now

TACKLE
03-31-2010, 11:54 PM
In my eyes, Bradford was an elite prospect prior to his Pro-Day. His pro-day only confirmed it.

wogitalia
04-01-2010, 12:23 AM
The Smith comparison is not an insult if anyone takes it that way. Comparing prospect to prospect there are a lot of similarities. Rivers may be better but I wasn't around for that draft so I can't say for sure.

Basically Smith is a comparable prospect and Smith has showed some good things in the NFL, the spread thing is a fair concern though it is probably the most notable thing, along with injuries, that have slowed Smith, the Spread just compounds the new offense thing and makes it a major problem.

I think Bradford has a very good chance of being successful but I still don't feel good about him. I would take him anywhere from pick 15 onward and feel fine about him which basically means I see him as a very good prospect, just not quite elite. Circumstances rule the draft though and the fact that he is the top prospect at QB in this draft will drive him upwards. For what it is worth I felt similarly about Smith, in that he was a 15 onward pick but that he would be reached on. I think Clausen is in the same bracket but at the moment if he were to fall would be a "better" pick.

Hurricane Ditka
04-01-2010, 12:41 AM
Doesn't him working with Terry Shea scare anyone? Or do only Bears fan remember how clueless he was about offense.

Geason Noceur
04-01-2010, 02:01 AM
Alex Smith never had the production, especially against top notch competition, that Bradford has had.

I like Bradford (wtf, i know), but he catches way too much flack. I think he has a better body of work than Stafford did coming out of Georgia, and everybody drools all over his nuts.

Big 12 defenses aren't exactly considered top notch.

As for Stafford, he might not have put up astronomical stats while at Georgia, but he did go 11-4 against ranked teams, which is a better record than Bradford's, Tebow's, and McCoy's. Two of those losses were against the eventual national champion, the other two to a #8 ranked Alabama and a ranked Georgia Tech team, a game in which he threw for over 400 yards and 5 TDs. While at UGA, he beat ranked teams such as Florida, LSU, Alabama, Georgia Tech, and Auburn among others. He led UGA to a #2 national ranking behind champion LSU, three straight bowl games victories and was MVP of two of them. That's a pretty good body of work IYAM. He also had complete autonomy of a pro-style offense, played against SEC defenses, audibled at the LOS (didn't have to look to the sideline), played behind college football's youngest offensive line two straight years and made it through college injury free and oh yes... he has elite arm strength.

MenOfTroy
04-01-2010, 02:04 AM
Not close. Just doesn't have the elite upside IMO.

Eh...

Did Montana or Brady have "elite upside"? What about JaMarcus Russell?

I'll take a strong arm if I can get it, but it all begins with the QB's mind and accuracy.

MetSox17
04-01-2010, 02:28 AM
Big 12 defenses aren't exactly considered top notch.

As for Stafford, he might not have put up astronomical stats while at Georgia, but he did go 11-4 against ranked teams, which is a better record than Bradford's, Tebow's, and McCoy's. Two of those losses were against the eventual national champion, the other two to a #8 ranked Alabama and a ranked Georgia Tech team, a game in which he threw for over 400 yards and 5 TDs. While at UGA, he beat ranked teams such as Florida, LSU, Alabama, Georgia Tech, and Auburn among others. He led UGA to a #2 national ranking behind champion LSU, three straight bowl games victories and was MVP of two of them. That's a pretty good body of work IYAM. He also had complete autonomy of a pro-style offense, played against SEC defenses, audibled at the LOS (didn't have to look to the sideline), played behind college football's youngest offensive line two straight years and made it through college injury free and oh yes... he has elite arm strength.

Are you Matt Stafford's dad?

Caulibflower
04-01-2010, 03:02 AM
Comparing the competition faced Sam Bradford's Heisman year to Alex Smith's last year:

Alex Smith's record: undefeated against teams that were 61-86, many of those being 4-7 type teams from a weak conference. The MWC was a lot weaker in 2004. Utah feasted on those weak teams. The best team they faced was an 8-4 Pittsburgh team in the Fiesta Bowl.

Sam Bradford's record: undefeated against teams which combined for an 83-72 record in generally tougher conferences, lost to a Texas team that finished 12-1 and the eventual national champion 13-1 Florida.

Of course, as well as playing against superior competition Bradford was also surrounded by superior talent. I think it's fairly obvious that Bradford did, in fact, play against "top-notch competition" in 2008. Even if the Big 12 isn't as good as it's been in years (or decades) past, its still a BCS conference at it still attracts premier players. As opposed to, say, the MWC. Also worth noting: there are more games in Bradford's "opponents' records" partly because many of those teams played in bowls and/or conference championships.

Geason Noceur
04-01-2010, 03:30 AM
Are you Matt Stafford's dad?

Nope, but I did watch every single game he played at Georgia. I was just providing some facts to the misinformed out there that think he had a subpar body of work in college.

Michigan
04-01-2010, 03:33 AM
Are you Matt Stafford's dad?

...what did the guy say that wasn't true? ***hole =\

LizardState
04-01-2010, 05:14 AM
First and foremost is the reason his pro day mattered so much... DURABILITY. The reason he hadn't thrown up until this point is because he was injured and at this point it has become a slight trend. Fragile QBs just aren't a good idea.

2 injuries on the same shoulder both costing him playing time at Oklahoma eliminate him from any elite category. Those are 2 big red flags for any scout who's even remotely paying attention.

He is also by default a better QB than anyone else this yr. with its substandard QB draft class. I could almost say the same for Clausen, who IMO has a far worse arm than Bradford but played in a more NFL-ready system & that alone may drive some team to draft him ahead of Bradford.

Tebow is an QB in an H-back's body, & I'm higher on Pike & Lefevour than these top 3. I think Carolina has the greatest need for a franchise QB & the fact that they're drafting thier 1st pick in the 2nd rd. might prove a blessing in disguise if they take the BQBA approach & go with Pike or Lefevour since the top 2 will likely be gone.

Short supply & the always desperate demand for franchise QBs will determine Bradford & Clausen going in the 1st rd, but I think any team that drafts either of them as the future of their franchise will regret it. About 50% of potential franchise QBs bust, it's just that viciously competitive a league, for every Drew Brees there are 2-3 Ryan Leafs or Tim Couches. These 2 have big factors that will tip that balance toward failure vs. success in the NFL -- the injury history for Bradford, & that arrogant swagger of Clausen's that was almost unanimously reported by Combine scouts in his interviews that can be a career-killer for a rookie in an NFL locker room should tell the QB-hungry teams to let the buyer beware.

killxswitch
04-01-2010, 07:24 AM
Not elite IMO. Clausen will have a better NFL career.

HawkeyeFan
04-01-2010, 07:53 AM
These Pro Days are written like movies, you shouldn't be surprised by his buzz.

wicket
04-01-2010, 07:57 AM
Bradford has everything you want in a QB. He's as elite as you can be.

I can think of a few quetionmarks, quite a lot actually

but then again iyam jimmy is clearly the superior prospect

wogitalia
04-01-2010, 08:06 AM
& that arrogant swagger of Clausen's that was almost unanimously reported by Combine scouts in his interviews

I don't totally buy this. Both Manning's reek of this, Rivers stinks of it, Cutler stinks of it, Brady has certainly developed it, Sanchez certainly has a bit of it and Favre is saturated in it. I mean at what point do arrogance and confidence merge, I'm not saying by any means that it is a unanimously good thing or anything, JaMarcus stinks of it also, but nearly all the top QBs in the league have that same arrogant swagger.

The big thing though is none of us a privy to the interviews, we just hear stuff like that, I want a QB with arrogance because the best ones nearly all have it. I don't want a shrinking violet at QB who will get walked over by his teammates. Still don't buy arrogance as a downside on Clausen, I very much see it as a positive and one of his best traits. Arm Strength, Ball placement and slight durability I buy and perhaps even character concerns but it isn't the arrogance that is a red flag, again, the only guy who might be more arrogant than Peyton Manning is Eli Manning and both have been pretty damn good in the NFL.

BuddyCHRIST
04-01-2010, 08:12 AM
I'm coming around to the notion that Clausen's cockyness is a good thing too. Being brash like that isn't a bad thing as long as your willing to put the work in to back it up (which Jamarcus wasn't, the elite QB's mentioned were) and I think Clausen will definitely put the work in.

killxswitch
04-01-2010, 08:15 AM
The arrogance thing with Clausen is such BS. As wog said you want a QB to be so good he even impresses himself a little. The two biggest douchebag QBs that flamed out in the NFL I can think of are Jeff George and Ryan Leaf. Compare that to all the douchebag QBs on back to Elway, or Fouts, or Unitas, guys who backed it up with their play on the field. There's a fine line between confidence and arrogance and if a superstar crosses it occasionally but still excels, who cares?

HawkeyeFan
04-01-2010, 08:22 AM
I like it when people call out Clausen like he's arrogant, it certainly shows that he's mentally tough and can handle some BS criticism like this. I'd much rather have a QB who shows a hint of cockiness and arrogance, than one that just plasy the game and is done. Clausen has a fiery attitude, something Bradford really doesn't have.

I was talking to Clifton Ryan the other day, and I asked him what he'd prefer, a QB with attitude and fire who will get into your face and demand the best, or a QB with less emotion who plays the game ( similar to Marc Bulger ), and he said if your a QB, you need fire and emotion and a "cocky" attitude to make it, and to have your team behind you.

Babylon
04-01-2010, 11:11 AM
Pro days dont make people elite, he was or he wasnt going into his friendly workout.

Saints-Tigers
04-01-2010, 11:23 AM
Colt McCoy didn't have a ball touch the ground either, the Lions HAVE to take him at 2, Stafford hasn't proven he's Peyton Manning yet. If a QB looks like he can be better than mediocre,, you have to take him.

/Halsey

yourfavestoner
04-01-2010, 01:10 PM
Stafford also played in a pro style offense and didn't show the injury concerns of a china doll. Also, Stafford has a unleash the dragon-esque arm. Even though I liked Mark Sanchez over Stafford it seemed like he just had "it" when you watched film on him. I don't know if that's something you can say in regards to Sam Bradford.

I dunno...I never saw "it" out of Stafford except for one game against an incredibly overrated Hawaii team. Dude can throw the ball off of his back foot through a brick wall, but I never came away overly impressed with him.

Complex
04-01-2010, 01:30 PM
I don't get why you guys like Jimmy so much he had one good season and beat no 1 decent. I know the GREAT Charlie Weis was his coach but still he is not that impressive.

JRTPlaya21
04-01-2010, 01:41 PM
I think it has to do with Clausen being the most pro ready and him putting up better stats then Stafford, Ryan and some other notable high quarterback draft picks. Bradford has grown bigger but he may be a tough hit on his shoulder away from being mediocre. I'm not truly sold on any of these 2 quarterbacks but I like what Clausen has to offer more then Bradford. There is no guarantee that a team can land Locker or Mallett next year unless they tank.

killxswitch
04-01-2010, 01:46 PM
I don't get why you guys like Jimmy so much he had one good season and beat no 1 decent. I know the GREAT Charlie Weis was his coach but still he is not that impressive.

Two good seasons. In 08 he threw for more than 3000 yards, 25 TDs, 17 INTs. In 09, he threw for closer to 4000 yards, 28 TDs, and 4 INTs. His completion percentage went from 56% to 61% to 68% each year he played. He played in a pro-style offense and learned from an NFL coach. He can make all NFL throws, he's very competitive, he makes good decisions on the field, and if ND's defense hadn't sucked so bad he would've had a lot more wins.

SenorGato
04-01-2010, 01:50 PM
Two good seasons. In 08 he threw for more than 3000 yards, 25 TDs, 17 INTs. In 09, he threw for closer to 4000 yards, 28 TDs, and 4 INTs. His completion percentage went from 56% to 61% to 68% each year he played. He played in a pro-style offense and learned from an NFL coach. He can make all NFL throws, he's very competitive, he makes good decisions on the field, and if ND's defense hadn't sucked so bad he would've had a lot more wins.

If he was more of a leader and a franchise QB then he would have willed them to more wins. It's entirely possible.

wicket
04-01-2010, 01:50 PM
I don't get why you guys like Jimmy so much he had one good season and beat no 1 decent. I know the GREAT Charlie Weis was his coach but still he is not that impressive.

you can not really blame JC for literally having the worst D in the whole of CFB playing with him.
JC had a gamewinning drive on almost every game the irish won and had game winning drives 3 times negated by the D as well and needed a slip and a drop to not have a gametieing(sp?) drive against SC not happening. JC showed up for every game this season and got better when the game was on the line.
Im getting so tired about people blaming JC for NDs w/l record.

Ow yeah and people that want to talk about the weapons he had should also realise that the OLine was pretty bad as well so that kinda negates the weapons.

For people on the bradford ship after the pro day, JC pitched a similar quality performance against hawaii and nevada, both with an actual D playing he still had two games where the only incompletions where drops.

killxswitch
04-01-2010, 01:58 PM
If he was more of a leader and a franchise QB then he would have willed them to more wins. It's entirely possible.

I hope this is a joke because it made me laugh.

Geason Noceur
04-01-2010, 02:07 PM
Two good seasons. In 08 he threw for more than 3000 yards, 25 TDs, 17 INTs. In 09, he threw for closer to 4000 yards, 28 TDs, and 4 INTs. His completion percentage went from 56% to 61% to 68% each year he played. He played in a pro-style offense and learned from an NFL coach. He can make all NFL throws, he's very competitive, he makes good decisions on the field, and if ND's defense hadn't sucked so bad he would've had a lot more wins.

Most of teams he faced where not what anyone would describe as top notch. He didn't win a single game against a ranked opponent. Putting up good stats against poor to mediocre teams is not exactly good endorsement.

MetSox17
04-01-2010, 02:14 PM
Nope, but I did watch every single game he played at Georgia. I was just providing some facts to the misinformed out there that think he had a subpar body of work in college.

And Bradford has a Heisman, that alone doesn't make him a great prospect.

Like YFS said, there was never anything that really popped out of Stafford outside his arm strength to me.

killxswitch
04-01-2010, 02:24 PM
Most of teams he faced where not what anyone would describe as top notch. He didn't win a single game against a ranked opponent. Putting up good stats against poor to mediocre teams is not exactly good endorsement.

Your argument would be worth something if Clausen played both offense and defense.

Complex
04-01-2010, 02:47 PM
Two good seasons. In 08 he threw for more than 3000 yards, 25 TDs, 17 INTs. In 09, he threw for closer to 4000 yards, 28 TDs, and 4 INTs. His completion percentage went from 56% to 61% to 68% each year he played. He played in a pro-style offense and learned from an NFL coach. He can make all NFL throws, he's very competitive, he makes good decisions on the field, and if ND's defense hadn't sucked so bad he would've had a lot more wins.

I don't call 25 TD to 17 ints a good season but w/e. He was playing inferior competition all season besides USC and Pitt so he should have good stats. He never faced a great D or even decent Defense(maybe USC)the whole season. So that O-line excuse is pretty lame because i'm pretty sure that O-line is better than 80% of the D-lines they faced.Even the O-line was not the the greatest,he had Floyd(1st rounder),(1st or 2nd rounder)Tate and (1st or 2nd rounder)Rudolph. His wideouts were better than any defensive secondary in the country.

Halsey
04-01-2010, 03:00 PM
It's funny when some people try to make being productive vs 'lesser competition' a bad thing. I suppose those people prefer prospects who are unproductive vs bad competition? I always thought putting up big numbers against inferior competition is what superior players are supposed to do.

Babylon
04-01-2010, 03:03 PM
It's funny when some people try to make being productive vs 'lesser competition' a bad thing. I suppose those people prefer prospects who are unproductive vs bad competition? I always thought putting up big numbers against inferior competition is what superior players are supposed to do.

Agree, another thing is where exactly are the good defenses? I guess the SEC would be at the top but guys like Tim Tebow and whoever Alabama throws out there year to year seem to carve that league up.

If you're going to argue Clausen vs Bradford the level of defensive back play they are facing is mediocre.

Paranoidmoonduck
04-01-2010, 03:04 PM
I don't think anyone is maintaining that production is a bad thing, just that you can't reasonably compare two players with "similar" production if those two players have faced hugely different qualities of competition.

Babylon
04-01-2010, 03:06 PM
I don't think anyone is maintaining that production is a bad thing, just that you can't reasonably compare two players with "similar" production if those two players have faced hugely different qualities of competition.

Just curious who would have faced the tougher competition between Bradford and Clausen?

Halsey
04-01-2010, 03:15 PM
It's not like Notre Dame faces a schedule full of div. III teams. In fact, Notre Dame played exactly 0 non-Div I teams during Clausen's 3 years there. Those games included USC, Penn State, Pitt, Georgia Tech, etc. The idea that Clausen faced weak competition is a case of perception not equaling reality. I'm not saying he faced nothing but elite Div 1 powerhouses every week, but he did have to face Div 1 talent week in and week out, with no exceptions.

Paranoidmoonduck
04-01-2010, 03:16 PM
Just curious who would have faced the tougher competition between Bradford and Clausen?

I think that Oklahoma's 2008 schedule was harder than either of Notre Dame's last two years, so I guess that would mean Bradford.

Babylon
04-01-2010, 03:32 PM
I think that Oklahoma's 2008 schedule was harder than either of Notre Dame's last two years, so I guess that would mean Bradford.

Is that by strength of schedule because i dont see it being tougher. And you could argue the good teams Bradford faced like Texas, Florida and BYU he lost too.

I really dont want to have to choose between the two because as a Seahawks fan i really dont want either.

Brent
04-01-2010, 04:29 PM
Alex Smith never had the production, especially against top notch competition, that Bradford has had.

I like Bradford (wtf, i know), but he catches way too much flack. I think he has a better body of work than Stafford did coming out of Georgia, and everybody drools all over his nuts.
I like Bradford, but I think blowing a nut over a ******* pro day is very foolish.

Clarkw267
04-01-2010, 04:57 PM
I'm a lions fan and i still think everyone was/is too high on stafford. His accuracy just isn't very good, and that's not going by completion %. He doesn't put the ball where it needs to be in the target zone to give his receivers a chance to make plays after the catch. That's what guys like Manning, Brady, and Brees do so well. He also doesn't have a good feel for touch on his throws yet. That's something that can develop over time, but it's not a given. That being said I'm not upset that we took him, I just don't think he was an elite prospect.

As for Bradford .. He actually has a naturally strong arm. Better than average for the NFL. Also his accuracy is elite, and that's the most important trait you can have IMO. I would say he's just as good a prospect as stafford was, maybe a notch below "elite" status , but pretty darn close

49erNation85
04-01-2010, 05:18 PM
Tebow > both bradford and clausen enough said .

killxswitch
04-01-2010, 05:37 PM
Hey look, a troll with 127 posts.

stephenson86
04-01-2010, 05:41 PM
I think he is the best prospect at QB to come along in a while

Clarkw267
04-01-2010, 05:51 PM
Tebow > both bradford and clausen enough said .

Tebow = stooge ... Enough said

stephenson86
04-01-2010, 05:57 PM
Tebow = stool ... Enough said

fixed that one

umphrey
04-01-2010, 06:11 PM
I think this is an interesting quote that puts things into perspective


Asked about the different workouts McCoy and Bradford were put through, McCarthy said he got a better evaluation out of McCoy’s.
“I thought Colt was challenged more in his workout as far as the types of throws," McCarthy said. "Sam was very accurate, but Sam's workout was very controlled. He didn't do as much movement."

Geason Noceur
04-01-2010, 06:17 PM
Your argument would be worth something if Clausen played both offense and defense.

Even with a mediocre defense (who played against mediocre offenses), Clausen didn't exactly excel. He was decent. Nothing to write home about. Putting up good stats against the likes of Nevada, Washington and Navy is not exactly a ringing endorsement.

JHL6719
04-01-2010, 06:25 PM
Even with a mediocre defense (who played against mediocre offenses), Clausen didn't exactly excel. He was decent. Nothing to write home about. Putting up good stats against the likes of Nevada, Washington and Navy is not exactly a ringing endorsement.


Well ask Blaine Gabbert and Missouri's offense or Terrell Pryor and OSU's offense how easy it was to put up good stats against a team like Navy....

If putting up stats had ANYTHING to do with playing QB in the NFL, guys like Graham Harrell, Timmy Chang, Tim Couch, Danny Weurfell, Jason White, etc. would be headed to the Hall of Fame.

I think if you watch Clausen play and really project his skills to the next level.....it's all there.

Sniper
04-01-2010, 06:26 PM
Im getting so tired about people blaming JC for NDs w/l record.

Gi9fQPTSeJo&feature=related

GREATNESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

Prime example of what wicket is talking about. Notice the 34 for ND there. Alas, Jimmy Clausen was no match for Tate Forcier's healthy shoulder.

Sniper
04-01-2010, 06:27 PM
Even with a mediocre defense (who played against mediocre offenses), Clausen didn't exactly excel. He was decent. Nothing to write home about. Putting up good stats against the likes of Nevada, Washington and Navy is not exactly a ringing endorsement.

A 7:1 TD:INT ratio actually IS excelling.

Geason Noceur
04-01-2010, 06:55 PM
A 7:1 TD:INT ratio actually IS excelling.

I guess we all have different definitions of excelling. I think a 7:1 TD:INT ratio against the likes of UF, USC, Alabama, etc. is excelling. Against Washington, Nevada, Navy not so much.

Halsey
04-01-2010, 06:57 PM
Arguing against the teams a QB faced is for people who don't know how to evaluate QBs. Look around the NFL. Is every QB from the SEC or Big 12? Did every QB play only top 10 teams game in and game out? I bet if you looked up the schedules of guys like Tom Brady, Drew Brees and Philip Rivers, the teams Clausen faced would compare quite favorably. If you looked up the schedules that guys like Kurt Warner and Tony Romo faced, the level of competition Clausen faced would be significantly tougher. If you think facing tougher competition automatically makes a QB a stud, go watch JaMarcus Russel and Jason Campbell play. Arguing that a QB faced weak competition just shows you're not paying attention to the QBs in the NFL.

Geason Noceur
04-01-2010, 06:57 PM
Well ask Blaine Gabbert and Missouri's offense or Terrell Pryor and OSU's offense how easy it was to put up good stats against a team like Navy....

If putting up stats had ANYTHING to do with playing QB in the NFL, guys like Graham Harrell, Timmy Chang, Tim Couch, Danny Weurfell, Jason White, etc. would be headed to the Hall of Fame.

I think if you watch Clausen play and really project his skills to the next level.....it's all there.

I completely agree. I think Clausen has everything to be an NFL QB, I just don't think putting up good stats against mediocre teams is all that impressive.

Geason Noceur
04-01-2010, 07:08 PM
Arguing against the teams a QB faced is for people who don't know how to evaluate QBs. Look around the NFL. Is every QB from the SEC or Big 12? Did every QB play only top 10 teams game in and game out? I bet if you looked up the schedules of guys like Tom Brady, Drew Brees and Philip Rivers, the teams Clausen faced would compare quite favorably. If you looked up the schedules that guys like Kurt Warner and Tony Romo faced, the level of competition Clausen faced would be significantly tougher. If you think facing tougher competition automatically makes a QB a stud, go watch JaMarcus Russel and Jason Campbell play. Arguing that a QB faced weak competition just shows you're not paying attention to the QBs in the NFL.

Not disagreeing with you at all. I think you're right. A lot of small-school QBs have excelled at the pro-level. Someone else posted Clausen stats to validate him as a pro prospect. I disagreed. If you're going to use stats as a method of validation, at least make sure they were against good teams don't you think?

jth1331
04-02-2010, 08:47 AM
A 7:1 TD:INT ratio actually IS excelling.

Oh, so you must be talking about Bradford's 50 TD, 8 interception season which is nearly 7:1. Right?

LizardState
04-02-2010, 09:08 AM
As for Stafford, he might not have put up astronomical stats while at Georgia, but he did go 11-4 against ranked teams, which is a better record than Bradford's, Tebow's, and McCoy's. Two of those losses were against the eventual national champion, the other two to a #8 ranked Alabama and a ranked Georgia Tech team, a game in which he threw for over 400 yards and 5 TDs. While at UGA, he beat ranked teams such as Florida, LSU, Alabama, Georgia Tech, and Auburn among others. He led UGA to a #2 national ranking behind champion LSU, three straight bowl games victories and was MVP of two of them. That's a pretty good body of work IYAM. He also had complete autonomy of a pro-style offense, played against SEC defenses, audibled at the LOS (didn't have to look to the sideline), played behind college football's youngest offensive line two straight years and made it through college injury free and oh yes... he has elite arm strength.

I beg to differ, you didnt go far enough in your SEC research.

I don't think Stafford ever beat Alabama in his career, or Florida or LSU either. In his SEC losses he was encumbered by a young o-line with their best OL injured & got pummeled by SEC pass rushes or he threw INTs b/c he was hurried.

Sniper
04-02-2010, 09:28 AM
Oh, so you must be talking about Bradford's 50 TD, 8 interception season which is nearly 7:1. Right?

I don't recall questioning Bradford's season, but thanks anyway. Also, 6.25:1 isn't "nearly 7".

I beg to differ, you didnt go far enough in your SEC research.

I don't think Stafford ever beat Alabama in his career, or Florida or LSU either. In his SEC losses he was encumbered by a young o-line with their best OL injured & got pummeled by SEC pass rushes or he threw INTs b/c he was hurried.

Stafford was 1-1 against both Alabama and Florida and was 1-0 against LSU.

wogitalia
04-02-2010, 09:29 AM
Interesting umphrey, but part of that is certainly that McCoy has better wheels and it is one of his strengths that he probably wanted to show off, Bradford it's not something that is expected of him.

EvilNixon
04-02-2010, 09:31 AM
Staff beat Florida I'm sure.

Sniper
04-02-2010, 09:32 AM
Staff beat Florida I'm sure.

The infamous "celebration" game.

Geason Noceur
04-02-2010, 06:12 PM
I beg to differ, you didnt go far enough in your SEC research.

I don't think Stafford ever beat Alabama in his career, or Florida or LSU either. In his SEC losses he was encumbered by a young o-line with their best OL injured & got pummeled by SEC pass rushes or he threw INTs b/c he was hurried.

I watched every single game that Stafforde played at UGA. Some of his wins against Alabama, Florida, LSU, Auburn and Georgia Tech are some of the most memorable games in recent UGA history. The win over #5 Auburn, the endzone celebration win over Florida, the overtime win over Alabama, the blackout game vs Auburn, the win over LSU in Baton Rouge, all his games against GT. I don't have to do research to remember them, but I'll oblige you.

Win over Alabama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC8X_hI3ypw&feature=related

Win over UF
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9VxyCC2vSI

Win over LSU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqce-CbG6VQ

I don't disagree with you about the injured, young o-line, getting pummeled by SEC pass rushes or him throwing INTs because he was hurried.

MetSox17
04-02-2010, 11:16 PM
I like Bradford, but I think blowing a nut over a ******* pro day is very foolish.

I agree, which is why i'm not nutting yet. I've seen enough of the guy to be confident in his abilities as an NFL qb, his pro day was more of a workout to show that his throwing shoulder is healed enough to make deep NFL throws.