Say Luck declared, and we drafted him #1 overall ....

[E CaT PanTHer]

and he ended up winning us only 4 games in 2011, and put up very similar numbers to Clausen, somewhere along the lines of 6 TD's, 16 INT's, a completion % right around 50 and a QB rating of lets say 65.

Would we all of a sudden write him off in 2012 and start looking in another direction?

My point is I think we're being a little unfair to Clausen. I'm not saying he's the answer, but the dude played with a decimated O-line and 2 starting rookie WR's in his rookie year. Kind of hard for any QB to have success, let alone a rookie.

If Luck was in that position, we'd all give him a 2nd chance, so why not give it to Jimmy?

[Catalyst]

Clausen has been a whipping boy for this season, no doubt. People forget that he's a rookie - or was - and that our coaching staff didn't know how to throw the ball. I've felt bad about him all along with all this Luck talk. I think he can be a good QB, but it's going to require more work than first thought.

[Herb]

Clausen was worse than Weinke and he had more talent around him. I hope I'm wrong and that I'll be able to eat all the crow in the world and one day he'll be a franchise QB for us, but...... that is highly unlikely. It's true that we didn't give him the best chance to succeed. We did have a ton of injuries and a young offense. We also had awful playcalling and rarely worked with 3 WR sets so that Clausen could do what he does best. But still.... even when he had time in the pocket (which was quite often) or when we were playing bad defenses he still looked completely lost. Maybe a miracle can happen this offseason for him, but like I said, I doubt it.

I highly doubt Luck would've been anywhere near as bad as Clausen. Remember... Matt Ryan inherited what was supposedly an awful offense his rookie year and he shined. Freeman wasn't great his rookie year, but he was nowhere near as bad as Clausen. You could actually see improvement. I just see nothing in Clausen to give me confidence.

[Catalyst]

Luck would've been much better than Clausen. He will be. But that's water under the bridge. Clausen wouldn't be the first rookie QB to struggle in his first year and develop into a solid QB down the road. In fact, most QB's follow that pattern that end up doing well.

Remember the 4th down throw to Gettis in New Orleans? That's what he's capable of if he gets his poo together. It remains to be seen if he'll do that, however, but we need to give him an actual chance in the form of a solid offensive coaching staff.

And I actually think it'd be better for him if Steve Smith were traded. They obviously just don't get along very well and have no chemistry. That has more of an affect than a lot of people realize on a QB, particularly a young QB.

[JawnyBlaze]

It would depend on how Luck looked doing it. Stats never tell the whole picture. Did every third pass of Luck's get batted down at the LOS? Did he leave a brown stain on the field when a defender got within 2 arms' lengths? Did he regularly throw it at the feet of his intended receiver? If the answers to these questions were "YES" then I'd probably be just as ready to give up on Luck too. I just don't see those as being the case, were we able to draft Luck.