Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Zod

Clausen Poll .....

102 posts in this topic

It looks like A but I hope it's B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what you are saying but there really is more to looking at one QB play and comparing him to another.

However this belief in him refusing to throw deep needs to be put into better light, Bradford has thrown just 1.7% more of his passes over 10 yards, whilst throwing 1.5% less over 20 yards.

Clausen

20+ yards - 8.8%

10-19 yards - 17.7%

Bradford (+1.7%)

20+ yards - 7.3%

10-19 yards - 20.9%

Matt Stafford 2009 (+6.7%)

20+ yards - 12.3%

10-19 yards - 20.9%

Colt McCoy (+9.8%)

20+ yards - 14.3%

10-19 yards - 21.8%

Mark Sanchez 2009 (+13%)

20+ yards - 13.1%

10-19 yards - 26.4%

Josh Freeman 2009 (+16.3%)

20+ yards - 13.3%

10-19 yards - 29.5%

Looking at it makes interesting reading. Jimmy does throw shorter more often but not to the degree would have you believe. It seems the entire 2009 class as a whole were give more aggressive play calling, or at least played more aggressive. Remember that Sanchez was on one of the most veteran laden teams since the Pats.

Now look at the pressure each faced for their total drop backs

Freeman 2009 - 36.6%

Bradford - 33.9%

Clausen - 33.5%

Stafford 2009 - 29.6%

McCoy - 28.9%

Sanchez 2009 - 24.2%

Other than Freeman who seems to be an anomaly throughout this, it seems pretty evident that the guys who threw longer more often faced the least pressure. With the level of pressure Jimmy faces would you rather he took more sacks (already 9.3% of drops backs), threw a risky pass under pressure, or check down allowing one of our skills players to try to make a play?

Stats about short versus long passes miss a few critical issues. If you threw a 15 yard pass but needed 18 for a first down it will pad your stats and make you look good but in the end didn't get the job done. Likewise a 5 yard pass when you need 3 represents a good job although it was a short pass.

Look at his first down percentages. In the redzone he completes 36% of his passes and his first down percentage is 18%. From the opposition 50 to the 20 he completes only 51% of his passes and his fist down percentage is 24%. Where is he the worse? In our redzone where he completes 45% of his passes but has thrown 2 Ints has been sacked 5 times and is completing first downs at a rousing 15% of the time.

Compare that to Bradford who actually has a lower deep ball percentage but in the redzone is completing 49% of his passes and 23% are going for first downs. In the oppposition's 20-50 yard line he is completing 57% of his passes and 32% are going for first downs. Overall about 32% of his attempts are going for first downs. Compare that to Clausen's 24%. The botomline is that all the pressure stats, yards per attempt and other stats are trumped by a few important ones. Such as are you moving the ball (first down %) and are you scoring (TDs).I didn't include those since it would be plain embarrasing comparing Bradford's 17 TDs to Clausen's 2. Even extropolating for Clausen's fewer starts would raise his numbers from 2 to 3. Not even close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he isn't developing fast enough that we can afford to pass up on luck.

Assuming we actually get a shot at Luck, then maybe so. Actually, I am all for having two potential starters on the roster. One of them will more than likely work out.

Just be aware that starting the year with yet another rookie at QB could mean another bad year. Maybe Luck will come in and play great, but the odds are he will struggle his first year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a) Clausen is terrible because he is ...well.... terrible.

B) Clausen is terrible because he is playing behind a suspect OL, has 1 veteran WR with a hurt hand, and has Jeff Davidson calling plays.

What say you?

Should the Panthers indeed own the #1 overall pick in the 2011 NFL Draft, this question will be rendered meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

btw, the greatest QB to ever play in the NFL was 0 for 4 as a rookie with 2 ints...

That QB didn't start a game. Comparing the two is pretty useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of his sacks come from poor recognition of where the pressure is coming from and any audiblizations at the line to alter plays or see the hot reads.

"Most"?

Some of his sacks come from poor recognition of where the pressure is coming from and any audiblizations at the line to alter plays or see the hot reads.

Fixed.

Most of his sacks come from piss poor O-line play that has made him skittish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of his sacks come from piss poor quarterback play which makes the O-line and receivers look much worse than they are particularly Steve Smith. The lack of a vertical passing attack means defenses can blitz Clausen at will and not worry about him burning them. Hence why he gets blitzed more than other quarterbacks.

Fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a) cant be determined because of B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fixed.

Then you wouldnt mind backing that up with proof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you wouldnt mind backing that up with proof

Proof that he is getting blitzed more? Already established in the thread.

Proof that he sucks? That is clear to all but the Clausen Homers.

Proof that he can't throw downfield? Lowest YPA in the league.

Will anything I say change your mind? Didn't think so. No need to beat a dead horse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites