Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Mike Holmgren is latest to say Jimmy Clausen isn't worth the No. 4 pick

Conventional thinking goes like this: As the draft nears, quarterbacks slowly climb up the draft board. While that might ultimately prove true, there's at least one bluntly honest assessment of Notre Dame Jimmy Clausen that is worth considering.

Cleveland Browns president Mike Holmgren was asked about Clausen on Sunday and he responded: "I wish I liked him more," according to the Cleveland Plain-Dealer.

Holmgren says the Browns will select a quarterback in next month's draft but probably not in the first couple of rounds. The Browns hold the draft's No. 7 overall pick, and there's no way Oklahoma's Sam Bradford will fall that far. It's possible that Clausen slips to No. 7, but Holmgren apparently doesn't think Clausen is a good value that high in the draft.

"You know how you have a type of player that you like? It's not scientific. People like him a lot. He'll go high," Holmgren said. "But it would be hard for me [to take him]."

Sure, the pre-draft talk is littered with misdirection, subterfuge and outright lies, but it sure doesn't seem Clausen will be Cleveland-bound. Holmgren's assessment should be of particular interest to Redskins' fans. Some mock drafts -- including that of ESPN's Mel Kiper Jr. -- have the Redskins selecting Clausen with the No. 4 pick in the first round.

But many talent evaluators -- and add Holmgren's name to the list -- continue to say that Clausen isn't worth that high a pick.

By Cindy Boren  |  March 22, 2010; 7:00 AM ET
Categories:  NFL Draft  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Redskins get a look at Tim Tebow
Next: DeAngelo Hall: Mike Shanahan wins over Redskins' players with 'presence'

Comments

Hello!

Posted by: stwasm | March 22, 2010 7:17 AM | Report abuse

First to say I will lmao if Holmgren is blowing smoke and Cleveland ends up drafting Clausen anyway.

Posted by: Predator48 | March 22, 2010 7:20 AM | Report abuse

No chance the Skins take Clausen 4th overall. I don't know what brand of whacky tobacky Kiper has been huffing, but I'll be damned if the Skins bet the farm on that d-bag.

The only way they take a QB there is if his name is Sam Bradford.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 7:23 AM | Report abuse

If you believe Holmgren then your an idiot, he is saying all the right stuff to try and get Clausen to fall to them so he doesn't have to trade up to get him.

Holmgren is smart he would never reveal his true thoughts before the draft.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 22, 2010 7:25 AM | Report abuse

First to say I will lmao if Holmgren is blowing smoke and Cleveland ends up drafting Clausen anyway.

Posted by: Predator48 | March 22, 2010 7:20 AM


I hope that happens...because that means the Skins didn't take him.

I still don't see how they don't take Okung at #4...but I did see a mock draft this weekend from some guy on Yahoo who thinks we'll take Trent Williams 4th overall, says he's more athletic and fits the zone blocking scheme better. This is easily one of the most unpredictable drafts I've seen in years.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 7:28 AM | Report abuse

brown,

Most people have Okung going 2 I think if he is there at 4 they will take him, but thats starting to look like it wont happen.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 22, 2010 7:38 AM | Report abuse

"Mike Holmgren is latest to say Jimmy Clausen isn't worth the No. 4 pick.."


The better question is, is Sam Bradford worth trading up to the first pick to be had?

Another question is, what would the rams want to give up the chance to draft a guy they need?

I can tell you one thing, the quarterback prospects in this draft would've been much better had M Sanchez and M Stafford stayed behind another year in college, or J Locker decided to leave.

'Cuz had any of that had happened we wouldn't be talking about Claussan or Bradford.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 22, 2010 7:51 AM | Report abuse

Yeah Flound, I meant if he was still on the board at #4 I think they take him. They'll obviously have to go in another direction if the Lions take him 2nd.

I just don't get the love with Claussen...dude put up decent numbers at ND but came up small in a lot of big games. Seems to me if he ain't clutch in college, he sure as hell won't roll out of bed a clutch QB in the pros.

Plus he just seems like he'd get real full of himself like Big Ben did in Pittsburgh. I'll take a pass on a guy with all the attitude of Ben and none of the clutch play.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 7:53 AM | Report abuse

Even if Holmgren is blowing smoke, I would be happy if the Redskins fell for it. Clausen, IMAO, will never be a franchise quarterback. He's not a leader and he can't win games. He is also short for an NFL quarterback. I'm still sticking with Tony Pike as the sleeper at QB in this draft.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 22, 2010 8:01 AM | Report abuse

brown,

Most people have Okung going 2 I think if he is there at 4 they will take him, but thats starting to look like it wont happen.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 22, 2010 7:38 AM
------------------------------------------
I think the Lions are pulling the wool over everyone's eyes with talk of Okung. They want Suh. Their coach is a former defensive coach who knows a blue chip prospect on that side of the football when he sees one.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 22, 2010 8:04 AM | Report abuse

Eh, let's get suh and lefevour!!

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:05 AM | Report abuse

Gee thanks for remembering me, Moe!

How about Brando quotes applied to Redskins

Jim Zorn:
You don't understand! I could've had class. I could've been a contender.

Dan Snyder on free agency:
I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse.

Vinny the Rat on the press:
You think you're too good for me? Nobody's too good for me. Anybody thinks they're too good for me, I make sure I knock 'em over sometime.

Bruce Allen on last season:
The horror. The horror.

Posted by: noonefromtampa | March 21, 2010 11:53 PM

There's one other from Apocoltpse Now that comes to immediate mind and that is that we are a bunch of "nattering nabobs."

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 22, 2010 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Eh, let's get suh and lefevour!!

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:05 AM |

Yes, let's ignore the worst part of our team from the last 2 years. Great idea!

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 22, 2010 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Shan has obviously had success but has he ever had success at drafting and developing a quarterback? I think last three attempts did not work out.

Posted by: hz9604 | March 22, 2010 7:31 AM

I'd like to know how you measure success. I thought his work with Cutler was off the scales. Cutler went to the Pro Bowl after a year and a half as a starter and Denver traded him for half of Chicago's draft plus a starting QB. If Shanahan can do that in DC we'd all be celebrating.

Posted by: League-Source | March 22, 2010 8:10 AM | Report abuse

I think the Lions are pulling the wool over everyone's eyes with talk of Okung. They want Suh. Their coach is a former defensive coach who knows a blue chip prospect on that side of the football when he sees one.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 22, 2010 8:04 AM


I don't think so...I've heard that there's a real debate over who to take 2nd. The coach wants Suh, but the GM (former Skin Martin Mayhew) wants Okung. It'll be interesting to see what direction they go in.

That's why I'm so anxious to see this draft. There's no cinch #1 overall pick this year and the first 2 picks will send a ripple effect down the rest of the draft board, at least in the top 10. The Skins can't really target anyone at #4 with any real confidence that they'll still be on the board at that spot. I'll certainly be up past my bedtime April 22nd...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 8:11 AM | Report abuse

I'm still sticking with Tony Pike as the sleeper at QB in this draft.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 22, 2010 8:01 AM

League-Source would be happy with a sleeper QB. Sleeper TE is working out great, once the brain dead HC woke up and put him on the field.

Posted by: League-Source | March 22, 2010 8:14 AM | Report abuse

Eh, let's get suh and lefevour!!

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:05 AM |

Yes, let's ignore the worst part of our team from the last 2 years. Great idea!

===================

sorry, that was a failed attempt at sarcasm

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:15 AM | Report abuse

sorry, that was a failed attempt at sarcasm

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:15 AM

Three times a day on RI someone has to explain that his sarcasm was misunderstood. This is the polite way of doing it. Usually it's someone like glawrence007 up here saying "You're a maroon because I was being sarcastic and you didn't understand."

League_Source has decided that sarcasm is always the best way to communicate on RI!!!

Posted by: League-Source | March 22, 2010 8:27 AM | Report abuse

I don't think so...I've heard that there's a real debate over who to take 2nd. The coach wants Suh, but the GM (former Skin Martin Mayhew) wants Okung. It'll be interesting to see what direction they go in.

That's why I'm so anxious to see this draft. There's no cinch #1 overall pick this year and the first 2 picks will send a ripple effect down the rest of the draft board, at least in the top 10. The Skins can't really target anyone at #4 with any real confidence that they'll still be on the board at that spot. I'll certainly be up past my bedtime April 22nd...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 8:11 AM
------------------------------------------
I know the Skins will have to be flexible and even if they believe they have all of the teams' wants identified ahead of them, there is always that looming possibility that someone will offer them a trade they can't refuse. Still, in my heart of hearts I believe the Rams will take Bradford and the Lions will take Suh. I am not so sure about the Bucs because I think they could go a number of ways.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 22, 2010 8:29 AM | Report abuse

Eh, let's get suh and lefevour!!

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:05 AM |

Yes, let's ignore the worst part of our team from the last 2 years. Great idea!

===================

sorry, that was a failed attempt at sarcasm
Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Gotcha. There are many here that would be okay with ignoring the oline and doing exactly what you sarcastically suggested so I took you as serious. My bad.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 22, 2010 8:37 AM | Report abuse

I know football talk is primarily spoken here, but let me just step out of context for a minute to congratulate my home town Syracuse Orange for advancing to the sweet sixteen. They looked unstoppable and now their center is ready to return to the lineup: look out! Also, on a lesser note, let me also congratulate the team just down the road, Cornell, who continues to over achieve. Here in central New York we are loving it.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 22, 2010 8:39 AM | Report abuse

Eh, let's get suh and lefevour!!

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:05 AM |

Yes, let's ignore the worst part of our team from the last 2 years. Great idea!

===================

sorry, that was a failed attempt at sarcasm
Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Gotcha. There are many here that would be okay with ignoring the oline and doing exactly what you sarcastically suggested so I took you as serious. My bad.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 22, 2010 8:42 AM | Report abuse

I am not so sure about the Bucs because I think they could go a number of ways.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 22, 2010 8:29 AM


That's actually the only team in the top 5 that we can predict with some degree of certainty...McCoy is a perfect fit for DT in the Tampa 2, so he's pretty much a lock to go 3rd. But I agree that if I were to guess at it, Bradford and Suh with go 1-2 respectively and Okung will be there for us at #4.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 8:42 AM | Report abuse

Apocalapse Now Quote applied to Zorn-"I asked for a head coaching job for my sins, and when it was over i would never want another"

Posted by: drewkinnear | March 22, 2010 8:45 AM | Report abuse

Gotcha. There are many here that would be okay with ignoring the oline and doing exactly what you sarcastically suggested so I took you as serious. My bad.

==================

that's exactly what scares me so much about our fans, and also dan snyder, because they both think alike

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:45 AM | Report abuse

that's exactly what scares me so much about our fans, and also dan snyder, because they both think alike

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:45 AM


If you stop and think about it, any fans under the age of about 25 have only seen the awful Snyder regime (or the crappy Norv era before it), so they really haven't seen a well run organization. Hopefully, their education starts now.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 8:49 AM | Report abuse

Pretty sure 75% of Redskins fans are aware of the craptastic offensive line and would like to see a offensive linemen drafted with the first pick.

I think it's simple.

If Bradford is available and Okung is gone then draft Bradford. If Bradford is gone then draft Okung. If both are gone, then they have a decision: Do they trade down if they're able or do they draft best available?

I'm 50-50 on both.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 22, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

Shan has obviously had success but has he ever had success at drafting and developing a quarterback? I think last three attempts did not work out.

Posted by: hz9604 | March 22, 2010 7:31 AM
==========================
Cutler picked up in 06, (thanks to the Skin's 05 pick trade), went to the pro-bowl in 08.. Chicago was a struggle last year for him but, it was a new team and new system.
I see a greater upside with Shanny jr. and what he did with Schaub in Houston.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | March 22, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Lets say the draft goes Bradford, Okung, then McCoy. Which the way it seems to be taking shape and we then can draft Suh. Do any one think that Tenn would want Hayneswoth back, yea they would be on the hook for 2 years and give us a 3 round pick for him.

Posted by: dsquare | March 22, 2010 8:55 AM | Report abuse

If you stop and think about it, any fans under the age of about 25 have only seen the awful Snyder regime (or the crappy Norv era before it), so they really haven't seen a well run organization. Hopefully, their education starts now.

Count me in on that group, I have high hope for our new staff!

Posted by: ddrcoaster | March 22, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Do any one think that Tenn would want Hayneswoth back, yea they would be on the hook for 2 years and give us a 3 round pick for him.

Posted by: dsquare | March 22, 2010 8:55 AM


I doubt that seriously. The only reason we have him is because they didn't keep him. If they wanted to pay him the money we gave him, he'd still be a Titan now.

If anyone gives us anything for Haynesworth, I'd take it. He doesn't fit into the new system (or at least he's not interested in trying) and this uncapped year gives us a window to get rid of him without blowing up our cap for the next 3 years. Gotta figure at least one 4-3 team would take a chance on him for a mid-round pick, right?

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Which the way it seems to be taking shape and we then can draft Suh. Do any one think that Tenn would want Hayneswoth back, yea they would be on the hook for 2 years and give us a 3 round pick for him.


Can't make this stuff up....instead of a 3rd rounder, we should ask for a unicorn.

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 22, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

He doesn't fit into the new system (or at least he's not interested in trying)

And you know this how brownie?

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 22, 2010 9:03 AM | Report abuse

CALL KIPER, CALL BANKS, CALL MCSHAY!

WE NEED THIS INFO TO BE REFLECTED ON DRAFT BOARD 53.0!

CALL A NEWS CONFERENCE WITH KIPER! GET HIS MUG ON ESPN! CHARGE THE READERS A FRESH ROUND OF CASH TO SEE THE LATEST BOARD AND ANALYSIS ON "INSIDER"!

Posted by: p1funk | March 22, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

I'm more interested in knowing what Holmgren's thought process is about his 'stache.

I think we'd get a more honest reflection on that question at this point of the year than we will on any draft projections.

Posted by: p1funk | March 22, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

ref Pike as a sleeper.. Accurate or not, Reports say he had a poor Combine.
I think Jevan Snead is the stealth pick.... He has moved up into the top 5 QBs of the Draft. His Sr year at Ole Miss included a serious bout with swine flu in the middle of the season which can surely f with your stats...so he may be great value at a mid round.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | March 22, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

LOL Haynesworth for a mid-round pic.

This has to be joke right?

Please tell me you're joking brownwood, Haynesworth wouldn't be traded for anything less than a 1st.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | March 22, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

ref Pike as a sleeper.. Accurate or not, Reports say he had a poor Combine.
I think Jevan Snead is the stealth pick.... He has moved up into the top 5 QBs of the Draft. His Sr year at Ole Miss included a serious bout with swine flu in the middle of the season which can surely f with your stats...so he may be great value at a mid round.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | March 22, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

This from a guy who signed Delhomme and Seneca Wallace??? That to me hardly makes Holmgren the expert on which QB's will be great one day??? Also Holmgren clearly doesn't think much of Campbell either because he made no attempt to sign him either. I see two things here.. One Jason Reid has a "man crush" on Jason Campbell so he is doing everything he can to get rid of competition for him. Second Holmgren is smart enough to say Clausen isn't that good so Clausen will drop to where Cleveland picks...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 9:17 AM | Report abuse

AH does make us a better team, my issue is the doing his own thing during the offseason. "Football is the ultimate TEAM sport." Just come into training camp in shape and earn every cent. Last year he was out of shape and still was a force imagine if he was in shape.

Posted by: sthai75 | March 22, 2010 9:19 AM | Report abuse

I agree Okung and Bradford will likely be gone when the Skins pick. I think it is wishful thinking they will find someone willing to trade up at that point though. You just can't count on that.

Which begs the question: How much of a drop-off is Balauga (sp?) from Okung? Are they even in the same galaxy?

Is Balauga more of a reach than Clausen?

Posted by: McMetal | March 22, 2010 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Second Holmgren is smart enough to say Clausen isn't that good so Clausen will drop to where Cleveland picks...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 9:17 AM | Report abuse


I think this is Holmgren's way of baiting a team to trade with him.

He knows that Clausen and Bradford are the only to top-tier QB prospects in the draft, and there alot of teams with QB needs. He knows that Bradford won't get to him at #7, but Clausen may.

Much like the Skins, he faces a big-time rebuilding project and he's ready to roll the dice in year one with Wallace, Delhomme and ??, while he rebuilds other facets of the team.

I think he'd like to send a signal to teams needing a QB that he's ready to trade out of the #7 for more picks if the right offer comes.

Posted by: p1funk | March 22, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

I just don't get the love with Claussen...dude put up decent numbers at ND but came up small in a lot of big games. Seems to me if he ain't clutch in college, he sure as hell won't roll out of bed a clutch QB in the pros.
Plus he just seems like he'd get real full of himself like Big Ben did in Pittsburgh. I'll take a pass on a guy with all the attitude of Ben and none of the clutch play.
Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 7:53 AM

I thought the same thing about Sanchez coming out of USC….the dude did nothing but underachieve on essentially the number one college program in the country. I just didn’t get why the scouts were so enamored with him. Turns out, he’s a pretty good pro. Not great, but he looks pretty mature already and throws a nice deep ball. Maybe Clausen would end up the same type of player. Who knows?

Posted by: dlhaze1 | March 22, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

I agree Okung and Bradford will likely be gone when the Skins pick. I think it is wishful thinking they will find someone willing to trade up at that point though. You just can't count on that.

Which begs the question: How much of a drop-off is Balauga (sp?) from Okung? Are they even in the same galaxy?

Is Balauga more of a reach than Clausen?

Posted by: McMetal | March 22, 2010 9:19 AM |


Ideally no okung or bradford @ 4 then trade down, but I would absolutely go OL over Clausen.

Posted by: sthai75 | March 22, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

brown,

Most people have Okung going 2 I think if he is there at 4 they will take him, but thats starting to look like it wont happen.

Posted by: Flounder21

So now, what? If Bradford & Okung are gone then, what do the 'skins do?

What value is there at #4 that helps the team and doesn't get overpicked or overpaid? All I can see would be McCoy or Suh, and a 3-4 team doesn't take one.

Lord forbid the 'skins had Suh and Haynesworth next to each other inside.

Posted by: TheCork | March 22, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

I just don't get the love with Claussen...dude put up decent numbers at ND but came up small in a lot of big games. Seems to me if he ain't clutch in college, he sure as hell won't roll out of bed a clutch QB in the pros.
Posted by: brownwood26
____
Hello.. Campbell??? Talk about a guy who puts up ok numbers but can't win the big games... And he's IN THE PROS!!! Will Clausen be clutch in the pros? I don't know.. but we do know Campbell is NOT!!! Look there's always a risk in a draft.. but most say there are only 2 blue chip QB's.. Bradford and Clausen.. Bradford will probably be gone.. so Clausen is our best chance to get a franchise QB. He's worth the risk..

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

First of all the title of this thread is suggestive. How do you get "I wished I liked him more" and "it would be hard for me [to take him]" as Jimmy Clausen isn't worth the No. 4 pick.

Washington Post = Drama Promoters = Beef Cookers

Posted by: RedDMV | March 22, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Beep Beep

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 22, 2010 9:27 AM | Report abuse

I was hoping the browns would move up and trade for the skins forth pick....maybe the bills...I dont see why everybody is so pressed on a qb any way. I rather see a new running back than a new qb.

Posted by: unknownsouljah | March 22, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

I was hoping the browns would move up and trade for the skins forth pick....maybe the bills...I dont see why everybody is so pressed on a qb any way. I rather see a new running back than a new qb.

Posted by: unknownsouljah | March 22, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Greg, consider this from your favorite website, PFT:

"Any displeasure between the two sides about Haynesworth's role has been aired, according to Reid.

'There are no secrets between Haynesworth and the Redskins regarding Haynesworth's feelings about the new defense and his role in it,' Reid wrote last week."

Seems to me at a minimum, grievances were aired. Just because they weren't contentious doesn't mean Haynesworth is a fan of the 3-4 switch or that he's anxious to play in it.

I think he'll do what he normal does when he's not in a contract year: underachieve. And if you can unload that guy right away without a cap consequence, I'd do it.

Not saying it's gonna happen, but I'm just saying I would love for it to happen.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

First of all the title of this thread is suggestive. How do you get "I wished I liked him more" and "it would be hard for me [to take him]" as Jimmy Clausen isn't worth the No. 4 pick.

Washington Post = Drama Promoters = Beef Cookers

Posted by: RedDMV | March 22, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse


Agreed.

I think HOlmes chose his words carefully. He did not say "Clausen isn't worth a high pick". All he said was that he (himself) wished he liked him more.

I think this is a subtely overt way of sending a signal to other teams that may want to draft Clausen at #7, that the Browns are ready to trade the pick if the right offer comes - probably for more draft picks given the rebuilding project needed in Cleveland.

Posted by: p1funk | March 22, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

This from a guy who signed Delhomme and Seneca Wallace??? That to me hardly makes Holmgren the expert on which QB's will be great one day??? Also Holmgren clearly doesn't think much of Campbell either because he made no attempt to sign him either. I see two things here.. One Jason Reid has a "man crush" on Jason Campbell so he is doing everything he can to get rid of competition for him. Second Holmgren is smart enough to say Clausen isn't that good so Clausen will drop to where Cleveland picks...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Maybe it's that Clausen just really isn't that good. Go watch his highlight tape. He floats his deep passes a little and they look like wounded ducks. He struggles with the out routes and his tape looks more like an endorsement for Golden Tate than Jimmy Clausen. Seriously though, watch his highlights and then go watch Bradford's. Bradford throws a much better ball and is a lot more accurate. Bradford also has the elite size to go along with the elite arm. I wouldn't take Bradford that high because if his injury but I still think he's much better than Clausen.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | March 22, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Lord forbid the 'skins had Suh and Haynesworth next to each other inside.

Posted by: TheCork | March 22, 2010 9:24 AM

In a 3-4 picking suh essentially is uprading P daniels position. mmmm...don't think it's worth it @#4. neither AH or Suh would be used properly as a nose. Nose is just an excessively large body, I mean huge which are hard to find that doesn't mind being overshadowed by others on the defense.

Posted by: sthai75 | March 22, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

He doesn't fit into the new system (or at least he's not interested in trying)

And you know this how brownie?

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 22, 2010 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Good coaches make adjustments in the systems they want to run to fit the abilities of their best players, and Shanny and Haslett appear to want to do this with Haynesworth. Trading someone who is BY FAR your most disruptive player on defense for a mid-round draft pick and the hope that (1) Suh or McCoy will be there at 4, and (2) they'll be as good in the pros as advertised, makes ZERO sense.

Posted by: rbpalmer | March 22, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Hello.. Campbell??? Talk about a guy who puts up ok numbers but can't win the big games... And he's IN THE PROS!!! Will Clausen be clutch in the pros? I don't know.. but we do know Campbell is NOT!!! Look there's always a risk in a draft.. but most say there are only 2 blue chip QB's.. Bradford and Clausen.. Bradford will probably be gone.. so Clausen is our best chance to get a franchise QB. He's worth the risk..

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 9:26 AM


So let me get this straight...you say Clausen is like Campbell (who you clearly hate) and you'd take him because he's the "best chance to get a franchise QB"? Really? So you don't like the guy we drafted to be "franchise QB" at #25 but taking a guy with a similar story at #4 overall will make it better?

Pass.

Franchise QB does NOT equal drafting a guy in the top 5. If that were true, the Bengals would be adding Akili Smith to their ring of fame by now.

All indications are that the '11 draft will have a better crop of QBs. I'll take my QB then if LeFevour is gone in the 4th round.

You need to get off the Campbell hate and come join the rest of us in reality, dude.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 22, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

He knows that Clausen and Bradford are the only to top-tier QB prospects in the draft, and there alot of teams with QB needs. He knows that Bradford won't get to him at #7, but Clausen may. I think he'd like to send a signal to teams needing a QB that he's ready to trade out of the #7 for more picks if the right offer comes.
Posted by: p1funk
____
I concur... Doesn't make much sense to talk down a college QB unless you are trying to lessen the guy's value for yourself.. Or maybe Holmgren just doesn't like Notre Dame QB's.. he got rid of Brady Quinn fast enough. Look Clausen is considered by most as the second best QB in the draft.. (some say first). Skins need a franchise QB.. if he's the best when the Skins pick they need to grab him. Yes there are other needs but the Skins have other draft picks and can sign FA's. You build a franchise around a QB.. for that you have to get franchise QB.

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

I'm still sticking with Tony Pike as the sleeper at QB in this draft.

Posted by: RedSkinHead

He's a project and needs to hit the weights but I like him late also. Kid's got a knack for the big play and wants to prove he can play with the pros. Nobody is talking about him which should give him an underdog attitude going into camp.

Posted by: Holehoggin | March 22, 2010 9:47 AM | Report abuse

So let me get this straight...you say Clausen is like Campbell (who you clearly hate) and you'd take him because he's the "best chance to get a franchise QB"? Really? So you don't like the guy we drafted to be "franchise QB" at #25 but taking a guy with a similar story at #4 overall will make it better?
Pass. Posted by: brownwood26
____
To bad Campbell can't pass be cause if he could it would has saves us this discussion. Look I don't think Clausen is anything like Campbell. No one was saying Campbell was a top 5 pick back when he was drafted but a lot of people are saying that about Clausen. And Campbell was drafted 25 because a lot of teams passed on him.. and who knows how long he would have lasted if Gibbs didn't trade up. I'll tell you right now if Skins pass on Clausen the Seahwaks or Bills won't.

Franchise QB does NOT equal drafting a guy in the top 5. If that were true, the Bengals would be adding Akili Smith to their ring of fame by now. Posted by: brownwood26
_____
What??? Where you are drafted has NO correlation to how successful you will be? Look I'm not saying being picked in the top 5 is a sure thing someone will be successful but the odds are much more in your favor. Cause yeah Akili Smith was a bust.. But the Manning brothers and McNabb, Phillip Rivers weren't. And I'm pretty sure QB's chosen in the top five have a much higher success rate than QB's who were not. If that's not the case then NFL people have no idea what that are doing...

All indications are that the '11 draft will have a better crop of QBs. I'll take my QB then if LeFevour is gone in the 4th round.Posted by: brownwood26

_____
Whos' to say when the Skins draft in 2011.. Skins go 6-10 or 7-9 next year we won't get near those top QB's. We can get the second rated QB NOW, we might not get a chance like this again.. BTW if Lefevour is so good who's to say he will be available in the 4th round??

You need to get off the Campbell hate and come join the rest of us in reality, dude.
Posted by: brownwood26
_____
Yeah and I can say you need to get off the Clausen hate... Listen I was glad Campbell came in for Brunell back in 2006... (I didn't hate Brunell but the team wasn't successful with him so I thought give JC a shot). Well JC got his shot, many times over, and it did not worked out. Funny even guy's who like him think we need a new QB.. just not Clausen. Hey if even you don't think JC can be a franchise QB why are we keeping him???

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

"Clausen sucks" says the man who has chosen Seneca Wallace and Jake Dellome (sp?) to be his QBs.

Posted by: coparker5 | March 22, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

"But you're citing a source that rates Carlos Rogers at 67?

PFF is a site for number crunchers to determine who's best at whatever on a number basis only.

Their staff doesn't watch any game film or aren't scouts.

I wouldn't put too much stock in their data. It maybe accurate, but it doesn't tell the whole story.

Gotta go to the tape...

Posted by: RedDMV"

------

Actually, surprisingly, you have it backwards.

I remember trying to analyze the numbers posted on the website, which clearly show DHall to be a top 5 cover corner, statistically speaking.

Yet in the 'rankings' he was listed at 100+.

I emailed the website moderator to try and get an explanation, pointing out that Hall was better in every single statistical measurement than a CB who was ranked ahead of Hall. Here was the response I received:

"The main reason we grade is because the base stats can tell lies and they can also be miss-interpreted if you omit certain factors as you did below. Two important numbers you left out was the number of missed tackles and passes defensed in which both Carr was significantly ahead of Hall. However, as I said, the other numbers can also deceive you. Consider the following scenarios:

· A team run a WR screen at a CB who is in man coverage. The CB is double-teamed and can do nothing but because of missed tackles by other players the screen goes for 80 yards and a TD. The CB was clearly in coverage and hence the yardage goes against him.

· A CB is beaten badly for a reception but the WR then drops the ball.

· Another CB is beaten badly and gives up a 70 yard TD by peeking in the backfield (a la Chris McAlister for example) but the play is called back on a holding call

In the first of these the CB has done nothing wrong and is penalised by having 80 yards and a TD logged against him. In the latter two the CB has been poor but is rewarded with incomplete passes to his credit. Obviously in our grading the CB would not be penalised in the first but marked down significantly in the others.

Hopefully this gives you some indication. Next year we are looking at publishing a list of our gradings per player as an option (possibly subscription) so people can see the differences for themselves."

So they actually do study film and base their grades more off film, but also provide the documented statistics. However, it's the film that ultimately gives the guy their 'ranking.'

Posted by: psps23 | March 22, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

"""Mel Kiper is the biggest name in draft coverage, and what he thinks affects how others put together their drafts. The elephant in the room is that Kiper is friendly with agent Gary Wichard, who represents Clausen, and ProFootballTalk has repeatedly called out Kiper in the past for allegedly elevating the stock of Wichard's clients. It's hard not to at least wonder if that's the case here. Plus, ask yourself, is Clausen really $25 million better than, say, Colt McCoy, who will be a second round pick? Hell no."""

Posted by: SkinsFreak | March 22, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Anybody got a Skelton in their draft closet?

John Skelton - #19-QB
Fordham
Height: 6-6
Weight: 243

Kid is rising up. Late 3rd (if we can get one by trading down) or 4th?

Posted by: Holehoggin | March 22, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

I don't care who the QB is they select as long as they take Okung with the No.4. After that I will be optimisitic at any position and any pick. Because I know Vinny isn't making the choices.

Posted by: A_o_C57 | March 22, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Okay, regarding Bradford, I've watched 2 different hi-lite vids on him TWICE, and did not see even ONE pass rifled into a tight window, nor one pass completed while he was under any kind of pressure. I would think if he even a few such plays, at least one would end up on a hi-lite vid. He does put great touch on the ball, but I didn't see ANY evidence this guy could be a starter in the NFL.

Posted by: kenboy1 | March 22, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

"Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Maybe it's that Clausen just really isn't that good. Go watch his highlight tape. He floats his deep passes a little and they look like wounded ducks. He struggles with the out routes and his tape looks more like an endorsement for Golden Tate than Jimmy Clausen. Seriously though, watch his highlights and then go watch Bradford's. Bradford throws a much better ball and is a lot more accurate. Bradford also has the elite size to go along with the elite arm. I wouldn't take Bradford that high because if his injury but I still think he's much better than Clausen."

Am I watching the same tape? This is unbelievable. Clausen throws the best deep out in college football. His progressions and reads are widely considered to be vastly superior to any spread QB in this draft. And what are you talking about with Bradford's tape? All I ever see him doing is playing pitch and catch with wide open receivers against over-matched defenses. Of course, that was 2008 when OU had the best offense in the country. We all saw what happened to Bradford's passing game when the playing field was leveled a bit.

Seriously though, your analysis of Clausen is one of the worst I've read from an analytical point of view. Think about it, if the guy is this hated and has no big wins, didn't win the heisman..why is he in the conversation? (Answer: he's the best pure QB in the draft). I would challenge you to go watch the tape again and see why he is projected to go top ten by even those mockers that despise him like McShay.

Posted by: Jpjr | March 22, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

I don't care who the QB is they select as long as they take Okung with the No.4. After that I will be optimisitic at any position and any pick. Because I know Vinny isn't making the choices.

Posted by: A_o_C57

Really? Ok I'll be QB then. God knows I can get sacked as good as anyone and can use the cash. Amen on Vinnie. Okung would be nice but doesn't look like he'll fall. If he doesn't I gotta go Suh or Berry if available or trade out. Pretty sure someone will want those two. Should be able to get a good OT in either Brown-USC or Campbell-Maryland at 37.

Posted by: Holehoggin | March 22, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

You Campbell haters are insane. Campbell was not the problem last year. Injuries and Zorn was the problem. Heck, Campbell was our best offensive player.

Do you actually think that weasel Clausen would be a better fit then Campbell. Campbell is more athletic, stronger arm, and is a tough sob.

And I wouldn't take that toilet paper soft Bradford either. We to build our lines on both sides. I dont care who (Okung, Suh, Baluega, McCoy). Lets get young and nasty in the trenches! We already got a QB and Shanny knows it!

Posted by: digger76 | March 22, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Did Holmgren take Executive Vice President leasons from Vinny? What gives? I believe this is the second or third time I've heard Holmgren say something that seems dead honest in realation to the draft.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | March 22, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

"Well, I got may wish, after looking at more tape, I liked him more." Mike Holmgren, April 23, 2010 comments after drafting Clausen in the first round.

Posted by: nomolehill | March 22, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Umm... Bradford's numbers exceed Clausen's in every category and Bradford leaves college as the NCAA's all-time leader in pass efficiency. That means he's one of the most accurate passers the college game has ever seen.

Who cares if Clausen can throw a deep out pattern. That isn't the only criteria GM's evaluate. The guy is a poor leader and was hated by his teammates and Irish fans alike. The kid looks and acts like a little weasel for a reason... because he is one. And besides, I agree with McShay... in that Clausen is probably maxed out both mentally and physically, already having played for a NFL coach.

In fact, I really don't understand all the love for Clausen. Kiper is the only one singing his praises.

But when I read or listen to the experts as to why Clausen is so highly touted, the response has been that he played in a pro-style offense for Charlie Wiess and is the most "NFL ready" QB in the draft class.

Hmm... really? So how did that work out for Brady Quinn?

Posted by: SkinsFreak | March 22, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

By the way... Clausen and his attitude, bogus bravado and personality and shear arrogance has Ryan Leaf written all over him.

If the Redskins take Jimmy Clausen at #4, I really think we'll look back on it five years from now and laugh at how foolish it was. I'm not convinced Clausen is really rated this high by anyone other than Mel Kiper and Holmgren's comments support that notion. And for the record, he's not the only one to make that assessment.

Posted by: SkinsFreak | March 22, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

By the way... Clausen and his attitude, bogus bravado and personality and shear arrogance has Ryan Leaf written all over him.
_____
Hmmm... attitude, bravado, arrogance.. sounds like another number 7 out of Notre Dame who no one liked.. Joe Theismann!!! And as I remember he did alright as a Redskin...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Hey... at least Theismann could back it up with his play on the field. Just curious, were around back then to witness it? I was, and Joe was pretty impressive.

But the best season record Clausen could ever produce in his 3-year career was 7-6. I recognize other factors in a loss outside of the QB alone, but that isn't very impressive for a QB playing a weak schedule all while being groomed by a "NFL coach."

Posted by: SkinsFreak | March 22, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Let the games begin!

Question?

Why would Mike Holmgren come out and talk like that? what's the point, unless he is playing the game.

Why would Mike/Bruce work out Tebow, when they really are not interested?

This is a power move, as well as a game these guys are playing so nobody will move up to grab this guy.They are playing it cool, but this post exposes their intentions

It's fair to say that none of us know jack about any of these guys.

We do know this, if Mike/Bruce want Clausen, and they get him, it's a great day for skins fans.

Clausen will be the pick, not because I think he should be, but because that's how the game seems to be playing out.

The Tebow/Bradford show is a smoke screen

Posted by: byrdinthesky | March 22, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

It's fair to say that none of us know jack about any of these guys.

We do know this, if Mike/Bruce want Clausen, and they get him, it's a great day for skins fans.

Posted by: byrdinthesky | March 22, 2010 1:56 PM
---------------------------------------------

It's fair to say that none of us know jack about these guys but if the Clausen is the pick it will be a great day for Skins fans?

Sorry. I respect your opinion, but most, including I, highly disagree. Drafting Clausen at #4 would be the worst pick of any 1st round draft prospect. They could take any other player at damn near any other position and it would be a better selection over Clausen.

Posted by: SkinsFreak | March 22, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Hey... at least Theismann could back it up with his play on the field. Just curious, were around back then to witness it? I was, and Joe was pretty impressive.
Posted by: SkinsFreak
_____
I've been a fan since 1966... And Joe did back it up. As far as Clausen I lot of people think he also has backed it up otherwise we wouldn't be talking about him now...

But the best season record Clausen could ever produce in his 3-year career was 7-6. I recognize other factors in a loss outside of the QB alone, but that isn't very impressive for a QB playing a weak schedule all while being groomed by a "NFL coach." Posted by: SkinsFreak
____
Campbell is 6-18 his last 24 games. He played a fourth place schedule and he was coached by what many feel is a quaility QB coach in Zorn.. So why should I want him? Look it's not like everyone is saying this guy is a bum. It fact his strengh is his quaterbacking skill. His biggest weakness seems to be his personality. Well just pointing out on that score Theismann had some issues to...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 22, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

........Okung would be nice but doesn't look like he'll fall. If he doesn't I gotta go Suh or Berry if available or trade out. Pretty sure someone will want those two. Should be able to get a good OT in either Brown-USC or Campbell-Maryland at 37.

Posted by: Holehoggin

I 100% totally agree, I dont think its a bad thing to have our new NT(cant remember name)with Hanyesworth and Suh to play the ends of the 3/4. It will take 5 Offensive lineman to block our 3 Defensive.
But I like Berry also.....

Posted by: dsquare | March 22, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

I also gotta believe the Skins brass is also working on a deal for Andre Carter. Maybe to the Rams or Lions for aleast a 2/3 round pick or a equal player.

Posted by: dsquare | March 22, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

"But the best season record Clausen could ever produce in his 3-year career was 7-6. I recognize other factors in a loss outside of the QB alone, but that isn't very impressive for a QB playing a weak schedule all while being groomed by a "NFL coach." Posted by: SkinsFreak"

I'm always surprised how much weight people put on college won-loss record when judging a QB. Seems to me that much of the time, the most successful college QBs turn out to be undistinguished pros, while some with fewer victories develop into legit stars. Of course there are exceptions, but Tim Tebow is a good example -- here you have a QB with very definite weaknesses who will probably go two rounds higher than he otherwise might, because of Florida's success. Funny, makes me think of a QB named Wuerffel. Or Jason Campbell, who jumped a whole round after Auburn shared the national title.

Probably the safest bet is to judge the QB on his own merits. Not that I think that'll ever happen. It just ain't human nature.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 22, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

"nattering nabobs."

Posted by: scampbell1975

I love the smell of eye black on Sunday morning... it smells like...

Posted by: ElYeah | March 22, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company