Our Chances for Getting Claussen
by CBATL32 on Mar 13, 2010 6:31 PM EST
Email
PrintI think they just increased ever so slightly with Delhomme going to Cleveland. I think this makes it less likely they take a QB in the 1st round now. I don't think it would make much sense for them to bring in Delhomme and Wallace if they planned on using their first for a QB. I can definitely see them taking a QB in the second or third.
Now, if Derek Anderson will cooperate and sign with Seattle, that would help our chances even more. That would likely mean they wouldn't be drafting a QB with their first pick either.
That would leave only Washington as a possible team to take Claussen if Bradford goes to St Louis. I don't think Claussen will be their pick.
I know many of you don't want us to take Claussen, but I really believe we are much better off with something like Claussen/Saffold than we are with Trent Williams/Tebow. I really think the drop off in talent from Claussen to the next batch of QBs is way bigger than going from Trent Williams to Roger Saffold (assuming we can get him with our second rounder).
Just another great fan opinion shared on the pages of BuffaloRumblings.com.
52 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I agree
With everything you said, our chances have just improved considerably with regards to getting Clausen.
That is IF we (Chix) actually want him?
Whitehurst
Rumor has it that Seattle is actually considering an offer sheet for Whitehurst too. It just seems to look like Seattle is trying to get a possible long term QB answer before the draft starts. Which is good for those of us that want Claussen.
Offer Sheets
I believe Whitehurst actually has an offer sheet from Seattle – AND one from Arizona – so I’m hoping hard that he signs the Seattle one as well !
"Fan ?" You want to talk about being a fan of the Bills ? Try getting up at 3 AM every Monday to watch their games knowing they'll likely lose. Do this for 18 years and then call yourself a "fan"
Not to mention
that with all the interest in these veterans it seems we have decided to stand pat with what we have. Remember last year how hard K.C. went after Cassel, how hard the bears went after Cutler. If our next “francise” QB is out there we will go after him. If he is not out there then there is nothing to go after. That includes the draft.
This is like dumping a new puzzle from it's box. Now let's start putting the peices together. I guess this is what we all asked for.
Even With Signings
I feel we’ll be lucky if Clausen is still on the board. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Clev. or Seattle take a QB with their 1st rd. picks. They’d be able to develop their QB while someone else starts. I’d love it if Clausen did fall to us though!!
Not sure what happened there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOKDNUM0NIA
i will not drinketh thy coolaid...
Yea, that play has Charlie Weis written all over it.
Not a big deal but Clausen has only 1 “s” in the middle of his name but it’s all good, I like your thinking. The extra “s” is just a pet peeve of mine. Good post.
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 14, 2010 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
This has nothing to do with the subject at hand...
But at least it’s positive news!
http://twitter.com/AaronMaybin58
It’s good news that Maybin has a twitter account?
Never confuse movement with action.
~Ernest Hemingway
by NolaBillsFan on Mar 13, 2010 7:58 PM EST up reply actions
Clausen Fans
How well does he throw while lying on his back? Not always on target, got a lot of help from his receivers (Bills kindof short on good receivers) Arm strengh is short of elite status Our GM is looking for a strongarmed QB
disagree
i dont think they brought in delhomme to be the guy. maybe thats just my opinion, but i see the delhomme signing as a way for them to have delhomme teach whoever they might draft, someone like clausen. if anything it might make it more likely they draft clausen now….
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
Could be, but....
I don’t think Claussen fits Holmgren’s offensive scheme as a great match. Could be wrong though.
i agree
Delhomme has just turned inot Daunte Caulpepper
It is Brohm’s Bills jersey that is the least stained with doo-doo... GO BILLS
by killascript on Mar 14, 2010 12:55 AM EST up reply actions
lets see
ex pro-bowl. led his team to a super bowl. seen as a stand up guy off the football field. holds team records for the carolina panthers in passes attempted, completed and for passing yards…..yea id say he could be a really good leader to any young b like clausen…
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
by silverstreak3k on Mar 15, 2010 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
JMHO
The Bills spending the 9 pick on Claussen would be plain wrong. Why do you guys think this guy is anything but another project QB? He’s coming out early, which makes me question his maturity to handle the role of an NFL QB for at least two or three years.
Don’t forget, a year ago everybody was excited about Byran Brohm, now he’s a POS in minds of many, many on this site, or let’s go back a few years to another “great” ND QB. Remember the hype about Brady Quinn?
IMHO if we don’t improve the OL by finding a future LT and the DL by getting a quality 3-4 NT prospect not Calussen, or any other QB, is going to make this team any better!
Don’t forget, a year ago everybody was excited about Byran Brohm, now he’s a POS in minds of many, many on this site, or let’s go back a few years to another "great" ND QB. Remember the hype about Brady Quinn?
What’s your point? Everybody thought Robert Gallery was a better prospect than people thought Quinn was. Should we not draft Bulaga or a LT? If you go back over the last 5-10 years of first round DTs vs. QBs, it’s actually a comparable bust rate. Should we not draft a NT? Players bust, I’m not sure what Brady Quinn and especially Brian Brohm have to do with Clausen. People talk up Brohm like he was some top 5 prospect, but if that was the case, he wouldn’t have been taken towards the end of the 2nd round.
IMHO if we don’t improve the OL by finding a future LT and the DL by getting a quality 3-4 NT prospect not Calussen, or any other QB, is going to make this team any better!
Circular argument. If we don’t find a QB, than a LT and NT don’t improve this team all that much. Rookie QBs havn’t had much success behind bad OLs, but it’s a long list of QBs who have had lots of sucess, many of them first year starters, behind some of the worst OLs in the league. A QB improves this team in the long run so, so much more than any other position can.
Why do you guys think this guy is anything but another project QB?
He’s a project in the sense that all college QBs are projects. But you could make the case that Clausen is one of the most NFL ready prospect since Peyton Manning. Obviously, he won’t prove to be more NFL ready than guys like Matt Ryan or Ben Roethlisberger, but nobody knew those guys were anywhere near as ready as they proved to be. Clausen started working with a well known QB guru in 8th grade and then spent the last three years with Charlie Weis. Jimmy Clausen is an immediate starter for any team that doesn’t have a Bills-esque OL. And for the Bills he’d be a guy you could put in at the bye or some time around week 10 and then could enter year 2 as the unquestioned starter. What exactly makes him a project?
He’s coming out early, which makes me question his maturity to handle the role of an NFL QB for at least two or three years.
If you listen to the scouting repots (which I do), maturity could be an issue. The fact that he’s coming out early isn’t. Both Sanchez and Stafford appeared ready to lead a team as JRs last year. Clausen is actually only one month younger than Tebow and is somehow older than Matt Stafford. He’s also a three year starter which is about as much college experience as you can ask for in a prospect.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
by kaisertown on Mar 13, 2010 11:51 PM EST up reply actions 6 recs
I wish I owned a truffle pig.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: U2 - Breathe
by TheAfghanTwilight on Mar 14, 2010 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
yes rec'd,
I popped my rec’d cherry
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 14, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Also his age, his dad held him back early in his youth. True as can be, which is why he's older than Stafford.
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 14, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Give some examples Kaiser.
Rookie QBs havn’t had much success behind bad OLs, but it’s a long list of QBs who have had lots of sucess, many of them first year starters, behind some of the worst OLs in the league. A QB improves this team in the long run so, so much more than any other position can.
Peyton Manning is one who comes to mind, but keep in mind, the Colts drafted their fixture for LT the year before in the first round to protect his blindside in Tarik Glenn, he played RG his first year, but was Peyton’s LT from the start and through his developmental years.
There's not a wide receiver who is fast enough, that J.P. Losman can't overthrow him on a fly pattern.
by The Buffalo Kid on Mar 15, 2010 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions
And also
It took 2 years for Tarik Glenn to grow into his LT spot and start to look comfortable there.
There's not a wide receiver who is fast enough, that J.P. Losman can't overthrow him on a fly pattern.
by The Buffalo Kid on Mar 16, 2010 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Matt Schaub played behind the same line that supposedly never gave David Carr a chance to succeed.
Aaron Rodgers.
The Falcons line turned out to be pretty decent, but everybody thought it was going to be terrible when Matt Ryan was a rookie.
Jay Cutler’s line in the few games as a rookie was pretty bad. They changed the starter at all 5 positions (that includes a preseason injury) and only one starter from the year before still started (Erik Pears moved from LT to RT). And the line wasn’t any better for Cutler’s first season as a starter as they changed all 5 starters again, drafting Clady, moving Kuper from LG to RG, Ben Hamilton came back from injury, Ryan Harris was promoted from a backup role and Casey Weigman was signed as an FA. Everybody assumes that since it’s Denver, they must have a good OL, but it was a mess for Cutler’s first couple seasons.
Eli Manning had a mediocre line as a rookie, although the Giants sure did fix things in a hurry after his rookie season.
It took Drew Brees a few years to take off, but he had terrible lines early in his career and then still didn’t have all that good of a line when he started playing well.
I know they are established vets, but Carson Palmer and Kurt Warner just had fine seasons behind bad OLs.
Daunte Culpepper’s 2nd year in the league was behind a really bad OL.
You mentioned Peyton. It was Glenn’s first year at LT and the three interior guys were no names.
I also find it interesting that Sanchez and Stafford had comparable statistical season playing behind OLs on the complete opposite end of the spectrum.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
Matt Schaub played behind the same line that supposedly never gave David Carr a chance to succeed.
Chester Pitts never cut it at LT, though he played that when Carr was still there. Also Fred Weary was a rookie when Carr was drafted, took some time to develop. Carr never had the luxury of a stable decent OL, Schaub was the recipient of an OL that was developed during Carr’s tenure at QB.
Aaron Rodgers.
Can extend plays with his feet and throw accurately on the run, this is why I wanted Locker this year.
The Falcons line turned out to be pretty decent,
You made my argument, OL take time to develop just like QBs, It’s rare you get an instant starter you can plug in the OL, that will play at a high level, right from when drafted.
Eli Manning had a mediocre line as a rookie, although the Giants sure did fix things in a hurry after his rookie season.
And that is when he showed some promise.
Jay Cutler’s line in the few games as a rookie was pretty bad.
See Aaron Rodgers, ability to make plays on the run, also why I wanted Locker again with our current OL.
There's not a wide receiver who is fast enough, that J.P. Losman can't overthrow him on a fly pattern.
by The Buffalo Kid on Mar 16, 2010 1:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Both A-Rodge and Locker have good mobility
with Locker being the faster of the 2 IMO but his accuracy isn’t what Rodgers has, he sat for years and I think is the way to bring along a QB.
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 16, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
You mentioned Peyton. It was Glenn’s first year at LT and the three interior guys were no names
LT is the most important position on the line, If the QB can’t trust the LT to have his back, you will see results like Trent had last year,
There's not a wide receiver who is fast enough, that J.P. Losman can't overthrow him on a fly pattern.
by The Buffalo Kid on Mar 16, 2010 4:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Jake Delhomme is a 35 year old QB who just signed a two year deal after being cut by a team that payed him 19 mil last year and still owes him 12 mil because he was one of the couple worst QBs in the league. I don’t think his signing will impact Cleveland’s draft plans in any way. QB is by far the most important position and you don’t fill it with a declining and potentially shot question mark while you prioritize other positions over it. Seneca Wallace is a backup. It would be like Buffalo not drafting a QB because they’ve got Fitz on the roster.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
thats what happened last year....
It would be like Buffalo not drafting a QB because they’ve got Fitz on the roste
It is Brohm’s Bills jersey that is the least stained with doo-doo... GO BILLS
by killascript on Mar 14, 2010 12:56 AM EST up reply actions
First there was only really one qb in last
years draft (Sanchez). Second i think most people including obd thought TE was gonna be the man. Fitzy was purely backup. Third sanchez was gone by pick 11 anyway.
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
by silverstreak3k on Mar 14, 2010 4:40 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
still happened
and they were still wrong, no matter what they thought
It is Brohm’s Bills jersey that is the least stained with doo-doo... GO BILLS
The Browns aren’t paying Delhomme 7M a year to sit the bench IMO.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Mar 15, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Why not? The Panthers just paid him 12 mil to never play for their team again. I also think it’s possible that Cleveland would draft a QB in teh first round with the intention of him learning from the sidelines as a rookie.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
Clausen
I am suspecting more and more that Chix is waiting until 2011 to draft our franchise QB.
The Missing Link in the Chan Gang
You have some inside info on the vaunted "inner circle"
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 14, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I bet
the Browns target Tebow if they want to role with this vet scenario, and pass on a QB in the 1st.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: U2 - Breathe
by TheAfghanTwilight on Mar 14, 2010 11:12 AM EDT reply actions
I've been back & forth on the subject
But I think I’d prefer taking Claussen if he’s there at #9.
As I have said in numerous posts already, I think the best way to rebuild is to play the rookies you draft and give them experience even if it means losing a few extra games. It also ensures that you’ll be drafting at a better position the next year. Based on this concept, getting Claussen/Saffold this year could position us to get our next franchise LT next year. QB’s normally struggle their first year, it’s normal and a natural maturation process. Ryans & Flaccoes are flukes, exceptions to the rules. If we draft Claussen this year and let him compete with Brohm & Edwards, chances are that he will back them up the first year anyway – Learning while our line gets better is not a bad thing. The other option is to let him start in 2010 (if he beats the two other out) and let him learn the hard way (Like Peyton & Eli, they both turned out pretty good)
If Claussen is available and we draft a LT instead, then our incumbents will have a better year (behind presumably a better line) and we won’t have as good of a draft position in 2011. I like the Claussen / Saffold approach for that reason.
Nothing left to say... the clock is ticking...
The Falcons approach,
Pick up you’re franchise QB in the first ( they did have an earlier pick), than go with a 2nd round OT prospect in Sam Baker. I’m comparing this if Buffalo went Clausen/Saffold to the Falcons going M Ryan/S Baker, I could never say that we’ll have the same success for sure but damn it’s worth a chance.
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 14, 2010 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Has it dawned on anyone.......
that there may be a reason why Teams with perceived needs at QB are going after retreads like Delhomme & Wallace or resigning non-superstar QB’s like Orton & Vick? Could it be that none of these teams think that the QB’s in this draft (well maybe Bradford) are “franchise QB’s” and they are better off keeping what they have for now while someone else (St. Louis, Washington) makes the mistake of overpaying these guys by snatching them up in the first round….. just thinking out loud
"The ball is like a cold to Clifford Franklin..... Clifford Franklin the only one catchin' it....Clifford Franklin the only one comin' down wit it!"....... Clifford Franklin
That has crossed my mind, but the truth is none of them really know who will pan out so I am just hoping that whatever crapshoot CHIX makes works out. Montana (Round 3), Brady (Round 6), and Unitas (Round 9).
Oh wait sorry then there was the ever successful Losman (Round 1).
LeFeavor (Round 3-4), would be great, I wouldn't be upset with that.
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 14, 2010 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Don't you hate tebow?
Why do people like lefeavour over tebow? Tebow has more talent and in my mind wayyy more potential. Honestly lefeavour is a poor mans tebow.
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
by silverstreak3k on Mar 14, 2010 4:42 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think they're two different QB's.
I’ve said it before that if Tebow cleans up his mechanics and stays high and tight with his release he could be great but that is a major IF. I’d be the first one to say that Tebow might just be the greatest college football player in history, why do I hate Tebow, I never said that. Also, I said in the later rounds like 3-6, just like the previous poster Rob B was trying to say and Tebow just won’t be there. That is why to me for a mid-round prospect at QB my personal favorite is Dan LaFeavor, I got to watch him play many times due to CMU playing on those random weeknight games (Tues, Wends) during the season and think he could be a solid NFL QB. That’s just my opinion. Honestly, another opinion I have is that how could you compare the 2 players, they play entirely different ways and also one isn’t considered to be an H-Back, TE, or wildcat if his transition as a QB to the NFL doesn’t workout. I never brought up Tebow, ok he may have more talent and potential than LeFeavor, that doesn’t mean he’ll be better. IMO
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 14, 2010 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
he may have more talent and potential than LeFeavor, that doesn’t mean he’ll be better
to me that one line is what bothers me the most about tebow. how does it make any sense that tebow wont be as good even though he has more talent and potential? both are very raw qbs for the nfl level. both play from the shotgun, both have mechanical issues that need to be worked out prior to taking an nfl snap. they compare very well because both excelled in the spread offense.
now i can understand wanting lefeavour because he will be available later, which i think is true, and im sorry if i called you a tebow hater, if in fact you are not. i just thought i had seen you bash him before. tebows easiest thing will be to change that throwing motion, so i dont see why you would have that as your biggest concern. it should be almost everybodys least concern when it comes to tebow fixing things.
nother opinion I have is that how could you compare the 2 players, they play entirely different ways and also one isn’t considered to be an H-Back, TE, or wildcat if his transition as a QB to the NFL doesn’t workout.
just because lefeavour isnt considered the athlete that tebow is, doesnt mean that you cant compare the two. they both operated only from the shotgun in college, and both ran the spread. both were asked to do the same things on the football field, just one happened to do it against very inferior teams. both were asked to run the ball alot, the only problem is, lefeavour would not have had the same success running in the SEC as he did the MAC.
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
by silverstreak3k on Mar 15, 2010 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Very nice post/rebuttle ( now that's how people debate)
I agree about Tebows ability as an all around athlete, which is why he could be considered for another position. No other QB’s really could have the athleticism in this draft to become another position (other than late round QB/WR/DB’s). Which is something that I tried to make a negative and you very nicely reversed into a argument for Tebow (well done). As to the Tebow hater, I might have spoke negatively about him at times but like I said if he can keep that throwing motion and read NFL D’s he does have the determination to be a great player, nobody could ever say Tebow never was giving it his all and I think he’ll do the same thing in the NFL, I’m just cautiously optimistic about him. If we draft him in the 2nd I’ll have no problem with taking him @ 41, just not in the first 20 picks or @ 9. Nice post, Tebow is stronger and faster then Lefeavour but he is just a guy I like for the Bills if they draft a mid round QB prospect.
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Mar 15, 2010 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions
and like i said
if you want lefeavour based solely on the fact he will be available later in the draft, i totally understand. but i would like tebow at 41, depending on his pro day of course.
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
by silverstreak3k on Mar 16, 2010 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Buffalo Rumblings
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
