A lot of You Don't Get it you DONT Want to Draft Clausen or Mccoy and Here is Why

[RAIDERMIKE47]

Although it's not 20 years, Joe Montana was also a 3rd round pick.

Yes, Joe Montana is in the HOF, but that you have to go back 30 years to find that example. Let that number sink in...30....years.

There is only one (Matt Schaub) 3rd round quarterback in the last 20 years that you would label as "good."

My point is that you can't make the arguement that the reason our third round quarterbacks haven't worked out is because there is something inferior with our ability to coach quarterbacks. Third round quarterbacks just don't work out.

If you want to take that a step further, Schaub is the only good quarterback drafted after #37 overall to the end of the 3rd round in the past 20 years. Do you believe that?

The Raiders are rumored to have interest in Mike Kafka too. Most likely, he would be our 5th round pick (since we don't have a 6th). Mark Brunell is the only good quarterback drafted in the history of the 5th round!

There has never been a good quarterback selected in the 7th round!

[Muse]

Kinda sick of seeing topics about how we can't develop quarterbacks, we signed Hue Jackson for a reason guys.

[goofismaximus]

I personally think clausen is way over rated i mean the guy couldnt beat syracuse or navy(not what you would call monsters of the gridiron)we need to go O-line i belive if we can put together a decent line we can use the run effectively and will help our QB's (except jbust nothing can help him)

[Xx_HandofGod_xX]

I think we should just draft Dan Lefevour in the 3rd

[Raiderwerewolf]

I personally think clausen is way over rated i mean the guy couldnt beat syracuse or navy(not what you would call monsters of the gridiron)we need to go O-line i belive if we can put together a decent line we can use the run effectively and will help our QB's (except jbust nothing can help him)

LMAo, so its all claussens fault they lost? Despite the fact their defense was atrocious? they put up a lot of points and he was very poised with the comebacks. ND was bad because of a bad D.

Not saying I want him, but some of the reasons people bash him are ludicrous.

[speedkills]

Watch the friggin Chiefs grab Clausen (if C. Weiss has any say).

people who think he will be there at 39 are kidding anyhow. Someone is going to trade up to grab him or the vikes just will do it or KC

however, i agree we need a line who knows about carr or couch or guys who could have worked behind half decent lines

clausen wil be useless if he is always on his back.

[Okie]

I keep seeing Clausen this and that or Mccoy

We don't want to draft a QB and here is why. Raiders can't develop quarterbacks.

When the last good qb you drafted was when the Beatles were the biggest band in the world (EG Stabler) you know you have problems. But, anyon we drafted since Wilson, Marinovich, Walter, Russell, Hobert, Tui, have been total bums. Some of thi had to do with Davis reaching, but mostly because of the unstable coaching situation we can not develop a QB. Our successes during that time Plunkett, VInce Evans (as a backup), Hos, George for at least 1997, Gannon, Even Kerry COllins had statistically two good years in 2004-2005 and Grad last year were ALL Veteran free agents. 40 years of this is a TREND!!

I think Clausen is going to be a good NFL QB, but NOT for us. We have no patience to develop a QB. We are better off going OT and DT rounds 2 and 3 and then trading for Campbell or goign with Gradkowski. Don't think that this time is different when drafting a QB we won't be able to develop one of these guys. Go for the trenches and hope that Campbell or Grad pan out at QB.

Great post. But, i think just because we have failed at it before, doesnt mean we abandon it completely. We just need to stop reaching for potential, and pick for "proven" winners.

so you want us to take chances with career back ups and terrible offensive coaches

You said it yourself, how do you expect to develop a QB with terrible coaches. I think ours are decent right now, but the problem is if this were vegas, im betting the dont come line because odds are they arent even going to be here next year.

agreed its 2010 and you need a franchise qb to get to the playoffs or have an insanely good d like the steelers jets ravens have which we obviously dont russell hasnt worked out but so what hes not clausen this is a business you take risk if clausen doesnt work we can start over again and plus we dont have a 1st round pick next year the good qbs will probably be gone

Sure, i have no problem taking a franchise QB, but what makes you think Clausen is that guy. He has Leaf, Todd and even Russell written all over him. Lets look at similarities at draft time:
Russell Pros:
Great arm
Accurate passer
Determined leader
Proven Winner
Great playmaking ability
Great downfield vision
Good size
Good mobility
Improved every year

Russell Cons:
Questionable experience
Questionable fundamentals
Questionable pocket awareness
Questionable weight implications

Clausen Pros:
Great arm
Accurate passer
Great playmaking ability
Good size
Good throwing mechanics
Good pedigree


Clausen Cons:
Questionable attitude
Questionable leadership skills
Questionable personal accountability
Questionable and lazy footwork
Questionable pocket awareness
Questionable downfield decision making


Russsell, why there were a few questions, there werent near as many red flags as there are with Clausen. Lets just look at the facts right now. Russell is hated here by most of us because he doesnt work hard enough, he doesnt care, he cant lead this team and according to most he doesnt hold himself accountable for any of our failures. That sum it up?

Clausen is drooled over and thought by many here that he could come in and change our fortunes. Simply because he was an accurate passer in college (so was Russell) has good size and arm (so did Russell), showed signs of his playmaking ability and upside (so did Russell). See the point?

And thats what i dont understand at all about your guys and Kipers mancrush on Clausen. Sure i like his numbers, but they are slightly above average playing weaker opponents. Almost all of the things we absolutely despise Russell for, Clausen is noted for having the same traits. Lack of leadership skills, lack of desire and most importantly lack of personal accountability.

Under great offensive coaching and an average team, he couldnt lead his teamates to win at least half of their games at the college level against second tier opponents. But for some reason we expect him to come into a below average team, with unproven coaching and expect him to win against the best competition?

I just dont see the logic in that.

In the right system, the right coaching and the right amount of time i can see him being successful. In this system he will be forced to play right away, suffer through a questionable offensive line and schemes and will become Leaf 2.0

Too many similarities to past mistakes for my taste.

Raiders + Clausen = Bust

Raiders + Offensive line = Hope

Ding....ding...ding...we have a winner!

[guydon]

Hackett helped develope Montana and young (among others) and hue Jackson developed Flacco... despite what the past was I say we have the staff to give it a try.

[Okie]

Hackett helped develope Montana and young (among others) and hue Jackson developed Flacco... despite what the past was I say we have the staff to give it a try.

Yeah, but its tough to credit Jackson or anyone with Flaccos develoment yet. Flacco was protected by a great defense and a great running game. Theres a big difference when you limit the plays you ask your QB to make and when you rely on them to go win games. Big difference. Look at Sanchezs rollercoaster this year to validate that as well. Rivers, Ben, if you take a good look at history you dont see very many young QBs have good success without a damn good running game to lean on.

Thats why ive said all year, fix our OL, get our running game going again and our QB production will improve.

[guydon]

Yeah, but its tough to credit Jackson or anyone with Flaccos develoment yet. Flacco was protected by a great defense and a great running game. Theres a big difference when you limit the plays you ask your QB to make and when you rely on them to go win games. Big difference. Look at Sanchezs rollercoaster this year to validate that as well. Rivers, Ben, if you take a good look at history you dont see very many young QBs have good success without a damn good running game to lean on.

Thats why ive said all year, fix our OL, get our running game going again and our QB production will improve.

I see your point, but Flacco also took his team to the playoffs twice in a row from his rook season, and is the only guy to take his team to the playoffs in his first two years if I'm not mistaken. By your resoning he would had to have stepped in to the best situation of all time. Hue is a damn good QB coach.

[Raiderwerewolf]

One argument that screams GRASPING AT STRAWS, is the "Claussen could not win".

That is moronic to say that means much at the collegiate level. How many National champ winning QB's amounted to anything? How did russell who beat ND in the sugar bowl pan out? there are hundreds of examples of this. ND lost, claussen never, ND and that terribllD and oline.

I don't want claussen, but come on, come up with a better argument then that.

[goofismaximus]

no wolfe i wouldnt put all the losses on clausen but navy ans syracuse have had niether offences or defences to speak of and being a fan of syracuse ( ouch ) wathing that game it was clear that clausen was making bad decisions against a team that couldnt cover a reciever if he was standing still.

[Raiderwerewolf]

no wolfe i wouldnt put all the losses on clausen but navy ans syracuse have had niether offences or defences to speak of and being a fan of syracuse ( ouch ) wathing that game it was clear that clausen was making bad decisions against a team that couldnt cover a reciever if he was standing still.

Even if that were true, one bad game in college means squat.

[metalhead2354]

Raiders + Clausen = Bust

Raiders + Offensive line = Hope

Hope for what?? That Russell will have more time to decide which defensive player to throw to? That he'll sit in the pocket for a couple more seconds before fumbling?
edit: just to be clear i don't really like Clausen either, I would go McCoy in the second if quarterback was the pick.

[DarkLordAlDavis]

Clausen was 37-51-452 2TDs 1 INt against Navy. He didnt play Syracuse in 2009......

If that was a "bad" game Ill take it.....