?there?s no guarantee that he or any other prospect will make it the NFL. QB is the most difficult position in the league. For the naysayers on the board, Clemens was well on his way to becoming Oregon?s all time passing leader before breaking his ankle. He never missed a game to injury until he broke his ankle. He?s not an injury risk like many have claimed. That doesn?t mean he won?t get hurt because the NFL is a brutal game. Clemens was sacked 40 times his junior year. The offensive line wasn?t very good, his best receiver was hurt and the running game was mediocre. Despite this, he put up impressive numbers. This was in a pro style offense. He put up impressive numbers his sophomore and senior years as well. He?s the most accurate passer in school history. Did he put up Leinart like numbers? No? USC rushed for 3,000 yards last year, which is truly incredible. Leinart is a good prospect but no doubt he?s benefited from some incredible talent on both sides of the ball. Put Clemens on USC and he?ll rack up similar stats. Put Leinart on Oregon when Clemens was sacked 40 times as a junior and I?m not sure if Leinart is as effective or if he makes it through the season. Clemens is much more mobile than Leinart and can throw on the run better plus he has a stronger arm. Is Clemens a better prospect than Leinart? Probably not but he?s not far behind. Leinart did inherit a much better situation than Clemens. No disrespect to Jets fans but throwing the ball to Boldin and Fitzgerald and handing it off to James sounds pretty good to me.
Hmm... you make a good case here but one thing came to mind. The jets don't have great RB's either. We really don't have the best targets at WR or TE. The line is a brand new one and could still be a bad one. So how is he gunna step it up even further now that it will be even harder? I'm a Clemens fan and all, I'm just looking at it from a pessimistic view at the moment.
I think a lot of you guys might be missing something here. Clemens is an incredible QB and I have no doubt he would have went mid first if not for his injury. A lot of analysts are calling him a steal, and talking about how well he will develop. He looked absolutely amazing in training camp. I think he will make the adjustment to the NFL easier than Leinart or Young. He's also very intellegent. As far as our situation this year, I don't think Gini will throw him into the mix. The thing with Clemens is, he still needs time to come back 100% from his injury. I dont care what everyone's saying, he's not 100% yet. With the rookie line, and target recievers that we have, it's not smart to work him in early this year. He's simply there to fill a roster space for now. I'll explain what i mean. With veterans like Ramsey and Pennington, Gini will work them hard through the season. Clemens will play the back up role, while gaining knowledge of the NFL, system, and game. In about 2-3 seasons, when Pennington is done (maybe even 2007), and our line has had a chance to develop, and maybe Gini and the clubhouse make some moves to pick up a solid reciever, THEN Clemens comes in. He's a solid option for a franchise QB. He's young, and we have time to develop him the way we want him. Keep him on the roster and DONT RUSH him. In 2-3 seasons, he will be exactlly where we want him and he'll have the oppertunity to emerge as one of the top QBs in the league throughout his career. (IMO)
Well I agree completely with your opinion except for one thing. I think at some point in THIS year or early next year, he will have stolen the job from Chad. I love Chad and I know he's gunna return and be a great QB...however I feel KC might be a little better...time will tell.
In 2005 he was featured in a run and shoot offense which allows QB's to be compilers of great stats. In 2004 the top two QB's in terms of passing yards both came from a run and shoot offense. Run and shoot is no longer run in the NFL after defenses learned how to shut it down. Prior run and shoot QB's amassed enormous stats with Andre Ware and Danny Weurfel winning Heisman Trophy's. They don't tranlate to the NFL any better than the wishbone QB's of the 1970's. You claim he was compromised by his OL and WR's in 2004 but had a great year in 2003. Here's the NCAA's passing statistics for 2004 and 2003. Maybe worse than 2004, near the bottom of all NCAA QB's in virtually every category of passing statistics. Care to explain why in 2003 and 2004 when he wasn't the featured QB in a run and shoot offense, his passing records ranged from mediocre to below average to awful? 2004 official NCAA passing statistics: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/sortables?stat=pass&sort=rat&season=3&year=2004&group=80 2003 NCAA official passing statistics: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/sortables?stat=pass&sort=rat&season=3&year=2003&group=80
I think alot of his problem was offensive line and offensive coordinator. He was constantly running for his life and our coordinator was so predictable that fans in the stadium were calling the plays before they would be run. It was bad. Andy Ludwig took an offensive coordinators spot on a lesser team to get out of eugene before he was fired. Clemens had 3 or 4 offensive coordinators in his 5 years at oregon. Each one tried to change things about him and it showed as he got frusterated. His senior year he was allowed to play his game and he put up great #s until his injury. I wouldnt exactly say his numbers were ever aweful. in 2003 he passed for 2400 yards, 60% completions and 18 TDs, 9 INTs. Certainly not stellar but not aweful. He was only a sophomore. 2004 #s are pretty similar 2548 Yards, 60% completions, 22 TDs, 10 Ints. He was also sacked 40 times. 27 the year before. 2005 we switched to a different offensive coordinator. Upgraded our Oline and allowed Kellen to play a more wide open style emphasizing his mobility and ability to throw on the move. He flourished. We dont run a true run and shoot offense. Not like Houston did in years past. You have every right to doubt him but I think he will prove alot of naysayers wrong. I have highlight videos of most of the games from last year but I dont have anywhere to host them and they are 13-20 Megs so they are to big for me to send through Email. If someone has an FTP server I can upload them to Id be happy to do it. -Howry
I'm really glad we didn't crack and take Leinart on the 4. Clemens is probably 90% of the prospect that Leinart is and would have been 95%+ if he didn't get hurt.
Didn't we just have this thread about 2 days ago? I liked that one better. My name was in the title. No Clemens is not 90% of the prospect Leinart is. Leinart is the most cerebral QB from the draft, has a much more accurate arm than Clemens and has proven that he knows how to win big games consistently.
Facts / Stats "You claim he was compromised by his OL and WR's in 2004 but had a great year in 2003. Here's the NCAA's passing statistics for 2004 and 2003. Maybe worse than 2004, near the bottom of all NCAA QB's in virtually every category of passing statistics." In 2003, Clemens split his playing time with a senior QB. He won the job outright by the end of the season. Had he not split time, obviously his stats would be better. He still set a school record for TD passes for a sophomore surpassing Dan Fouts. His passer rating was 35th out of 117th. In 2004, his passer rating was 38th out of 117th playing most of the year on his backside. I wouldn't call that near the bottom of anything or mediocre by any means. Oregon doesn't have a run / shoot but a spread offense. Similar but different. This was implemented because we had a difficult time protecting the QB and running the ball. No doubt this offense boosted his stats some. You may want re-examine your links. They prove my point not yours.
Clemens & Leinart are very close prospects. Both were highly recruited out of high school. Switch college teams and Clemens would be getting more attention than Leinart.
For some reason benching the rookie QB has become expected path, and many here like you just blanket assume he will not play for a year or two. I think he will be more like the Mannings and Aikman and start THIS year. Time will tell.
Notable Wonderlic scores of NFL prospects from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_Test Donovan McNabb - 12 Terry Bradshaw - 15 Dan Marino - 15 Jim Kelly -15 Randall Cunningham - 15 Vince Young - 16 (make-up after 6 on his initial test) Vinny Testaverde - 17 Michael Vick - 20 Brett Favre - 22 Chris Simms - 22 David Carr - 24 Benn Roethlisberger - 25 John Elway - 29 Troy Aikman - 29 Quincy Carter - 30 Steve Young - 33 Tom Brady - 33 Matt Leinart - 35 Kellen Clemens -35 Akili Smith - 37 Eli Manning - 39 Brian Griese - 39 Alex Smith - 40 (big mistake by the 49ers here...) I defy you to predict accurately how the Wonderlic scores are going to predict which of the QB's drafted this year are going to win a Super Bowls or more. And this cerebral thing is kind of silly unless you mean it in the context of "gets a lot of head..." in which case I might agree that Leinart is more cerebral. BTW, for those needing confirmation of the Wonderlic scores at the combine it is here: http://www.nfldraftalmanac.com/index.php?c=2&a=168 There was a lot of confusion caused by the Wonderlic Blog's attribution of various scores to the QB's despite the fact that they admitted they had little or no info as to what people scored at the combine. This is kind of like saying you know what time it is however you haven't been able to look at a clock recently to confirm it...
Being a cerebral QB has nothing to do with scoring well on the Wonderlic. It's about playing smart football. No prospect in the draft is able to recognize and pick apart defenses like Leinart. He surveys the field, can change the play at the line, draws defensive backs with subtle head and pump fakes...to suggest that Clemens has that kind of game at this point in his career isn't only laughable, it's a sad lie. If you want a QB who can launch it 70 yards and throw 2 picks for every touchdown, go for a "gunslinger." But look at the successful QBs in football like Brady, Manning, Hasselbeck, Roethlisberger and McNabb and you'll see that the common trait is their ability to read defenses and make smart decisions.
Just as an FYI: when he came out of Michigan Brady couldn't read a defense for his life. That's why he kept cycling in and out with Drew Henson. Then Charlie Weiss got his hands on him and turned him into a much better QB. We saw Charlie do that a couple of times (Vinny and Ray Lucas) with the Jets also. What Leinart theoretically can do at USC with Reggie Bush and Lendale White behind him and a bunch of excellent receivers is a lousy predictor of what he's going to do in Arizona. Clemens is easily 90% of the prospect that Leinart is. If he'd been at USC and Leinart had been at Oregon he'd be 110% of the prospect...
Here's the problem with your arguement: basically you are saying that there are no bad QBs because Charlie Weis made Tom Brady really good. That's all fine and dandy but Charlie Weis isn't our QB coach. I'm not saying that Clemens will never be successful, but again you have to see that at this point in their careers Clemens does not read the game as well as Leinart, he doesn't throw as accurately as Leinart, he doesn't perform under pressure as well as Leinart. It's not necessarily his fault (for example the Ducks never got into a position for him to perform under pressure.) The arguement that he would be a better prospect if Leinart played for Oregon and Clemens played for USC is a stupid one as well. Of course he would. I would be a better prospect than Clemens if I played for Oregon and he played for my high school. But I don't. It's moot.
just because he didnt play for a national championship doesn't mean he won't perform well under pressure. Big Ben never played in any "big games" in college and seemed to adjust to the added pressure pretty well.
??????? Bull! Go find me one shred of evidence to back that up! That had NOTHING to do with it. Are we to assume henson COULD read defenses?! He's sure shown that, hasn't he? Brady split time with Henson because Henson had "all the tools" that the Alumni wanted to see.
