Matt Moore gets Hurt and Jimmy has to play out the season.... What Happens?

[Sandy Claws]

Actually TDs make sense since if you were trying to defend a team would you care as much whether they threw a bunch of passes short or where they threw deep or which receivers had the ability to burn you deep after the catch. You really think that it was just a fluke that Brees threw 3 times as many touchdowns to the right as he did to the left?? If you were deciding to skew your defense to play Brees, wouldn't you line up your free safety to defend the right side of the field all things considered.

Whether a TD is scored is not entirely pertinent. It make little sense to base an argument on roughly 5% of the pass attempts. There are a lot more things to consider than just the result of a single attempt.

You also have to look at the number of times we rolled Moore out to the right during the game. Obviously rolling him out takes away the left side of the field and by design he will only have the right side of the field to throw to. if you take away his designed plays to the right, I suspect the percentages are more even.

Chicken and egg. We rolled him right because he can't throw left. Get him out there where he has a chance.

And if you try to skew your coverage to the right against Moore, I will line up Smith on the left side and have a field day burning your weakest corner all day long.

Now there's a brilliant game plan. Let's put one of our best weapons over where our QB can't get him the ball. This isn't about Smitty's ability, it's about Moore's.

[panthers55]

Whether a TD is scored is not entirely pertinent. It make little sense to base an argument on roughly 5% of the pass attempts. There are a lot more things to consider than just the result of a single attempt.

Chicken and egg. We rolled him right because he can't throw left. Get him out there where he has a chance.

Now there's a brilliant game plan. Let's put one of our best weapons over where our QB can't get him the ball. This isn't about Smitty's ability, it's about Moore's.

I wish you were the opponent's defensive coordinator. I would burn you a brand new one. TDs are the only thing that counts. You really think that every pass is equal and Tds don't account for more than anything else?? How ignorant is that??

And no we didn't roll him right because he can't throw left. Another ignorant statement. You roll quarterbacks for pass protection purposes and to overload one side of the field not because they can't throw but to one side or the other.

And seriously you really believe that he can't throw to his left. Gee in your scenario lets just line up trips to the right and toss it up every pass play.

I understand your wanting to win an argument but honestly I have always thought you knew quite a bit about football. Your post puts that seriously in doubt.

[Sandy Claws]

I wish you were the opponent's defensive coordinator. I would burn you a brand new one. TDs are the only thing that counts. You really think that every pass is equal and Tds don't account for more than anything else?? How ignorant is that??

And no we didn't roll him right because he can't throw left. Another ignorant statement. You roll quarterbacks for pass protection purposes and to overload one side of the field not because they can't throw but to one side or the other.

And seriously you really believe that he can't throw to his left. Gee in your scenario lets just line up trips to the right and toss it up every pass play.

I understand your wanting to win an argument but honestly I have always thought you knew quite a bit about football. Your post puts that seriously in doubt.

I'm not trying to "win" any argument. I'm just trying to make you understand my point. You seemed focused on "winning" some mythical prize or else you would discuss without falling back on being insulting.

[panthers55]

I'm not trying to "win" any argument. I'm just trying to make you understand my point. You seemed focused on "winning" some mythical prize or else you would discuss without falling back on being insulting.

I didn't see a point if there was one in there. Unless it is that you don't like Moore which appears readily apparent.

There is no prize to be won, I just feel compelled to post when I see comments made which are patently incorrect or ignorant. This time it just happened to land on you.

[frash.exe]

what i have trouble grasping, is what is this rule people have about the "student" QB needing to sit on the bench for a specified amount of time they are psychologically comfortable with like they're talking about an unripe tomato

personally, for Clausen, his best bet at ever developing into a good pro is to get out there at least a little bit this season, because, for plenty of top starting QBs, they tend to play a significant amount of time their rookie season. There is no dominant pattern of great QBs sitting and "learning" their first 1 or 2 or 3 years to justify this accepted belief that it is the best way to transition a college QB to the pro level.

if Clausen has what it takes to perform, better to get the bugs out of his playing game now than 2 years down the road.

[monstercat]

No, but there is a pattern of rookie QB's getting the hell beaten out of them and making plenty of rookie mistakes if they start right away. Tom Brady is a perfect example of how much easier it can be if you sit a rookie QB for a year.

[ChucktownK]

Damn AK, where the hell you been?

You need to get on board the sexy Matt Moore train, yo.

[MadHatter]

No, but there is a pattern of rookie QB's getting the hell beaten out of them and making plenty of rookie mistakes if they start right away. Tom Brady is a perfect example of how much easier it can be if you sit a rookie QB for a year.

That is true....but it is more because most rookie QB's that are thrust into action are on bad teams. Given the OLine, RB's and WR's that the Panthers have, I could see Clausen having some success.....much like Flacco, Ryan, and Sanchez did.

[Sandy Claws]

I didn't see a point if there was one in there. Unless it is that you don't like Moore which appears readily apparent.

There is no prize to be won, I just feel compelled to post when I see comments made which are patently incorrect or ignorant. This time it just happened to land on you.

That's because you think viewing 5 % of data makes a valid point. You give credit to the QB for a 5 yard toss to a WR who then scampers 90 yds , reversing direction 3 times and breaking multiple tackles. Moore obviously has issues throwing left. Weinke did too. It's not about liking an individual. It's about what's best for the team. When Clausen is up to speed in terms o fhis relationship with the receivers, he will be our best chance. Convince me Moore will be the better option for 2010. You won't do it by citing results of 5% of his throws. Or better yet, explain this. You mention 7 TDs (3 left 4 right) as significant. He has 7 inteceptions in his career. Why is it not significant that they are 5 left vs 2 the right?

[frash.exe]

No, but there is a pattern of rookie QB's getting the hell beaten out of them and making plenty of rookie mistakes if they start right away.

which is fine if they're learning from their mistakes early on. if we're eliminated from playoff contention, there's no good reason we shouldn't put Clausen out there to play. he's already got a better grasp of our playbook than most other rookie QBs coming out of college on a team. A lot of them have to start from scratch because the offense they ran in college was completely different than the offense the team that chose them in the draft runs. Clausen is in a good situation for a top prospect as well, he was selected by a much more talented team than what usually picks the best QBs in a draft. We have a running game. We have a top 5 wideout. We have an offensive line that can give the passer time. We have one of the best left tackles in the league right now. We have a good defense. We have the talent to cradle a rookie QB. It would be logical to get him some playing time and we shouldn't avoid starting him at all costs.

Tom Brady is a perfect example of how much easier it can be if you sit a rookie QB for a year.

of course he's a perfect example of a great QB that sat for a year. but his situation was different from Clausen's. For one, Brady wasn't a top QB prospect, he wasn't touted as highly talented, and nobody expected him to do what he did. If Bledsoe hadn't gotten hurt, Brady wouldn't have had his opportunity then, and maybe he wouldn't have had it at all.

Peyton Manning is a perfect example of how beneficial it can be if you play your rookie year out and get a grasp of the game at a young age.

That is true....but it is more because most rookie QB's that are thrust into action are on bad teams. Given the OLine, RB's and WR's that the Panthers have, I could see Clausen having some success.....much like Flacco, Ryan, and Sanchez did.

Given comparison, Clausen's situation is related a little to these guys. And Flacco and Ryan have turned out pretty good. Sanchez played pretty awful on a good team but that's because he never should've been considered a top prospect anyway

[panthers55]

That's because you think viewing 5 % of data makes a valid point. You give credit to the QB for a 5 yard toss to a WR who then scampers 90 yds , reversing direction 3 times and breaking multiple tackles. Moore obviously has issues throwing left. Weinke did too. It's not about liking an individual. It's about what's best for the team. When Clausen is up to speed in terms o fhis relationship with the receivers, he will be our best chance. Convince me Moore will be the better option for 2010. You won't do it by citing results of 5% of his throws. Or better yet, explain this. You mention 7 TDs (3 left 4 right) as significant. He has 7 inteceptions in his career. Why is it not significant that they are 5 left vs 2 the right?

You don't give up do you, even when you don't have a clue.

Let me help you here. I discussed TDs with Brees because the info on his percentages left and right were equal. So the defining info that was relevant was the TDs which were significantly skewed to the right. In most folks estimate, TDs equal success.

Moore doesn't obviously have a problem throwing left. You took one comment from Clayton and are treating it as gospel. The reality is that he threw more times to the right because they rolled him out to that side for blocking purposes given that Gross was injured and the left side was more suspect with Wharton at tackle which is not his usual spot.

Onbiously you are slurping Clausen's nuts and he hasn't even thrown a pass in the NFL. I hate to think what you would do when he actual completes a pass.

What is significant about Moore is that he has thrown only 7 Ints in his career- 2 of them in 2009. Compared to Delhomme that is significant.

We earlier discussed all of Moore's throws so where you get your 5% is completely out in left field.

Here is how a TD comparison could be important. Divide the numbers of TDs to each side as a percentage of total passes and you find he threw more TDs as a percentage of total passes to his left compared to the right. Now compare Brees TDs to each side as a function of total passes and what do you find? He was eminently more successful throwing TDs to his right versus the left. If TDs are a measure of success, then Brees must have a problem throwing the deep ball to his left. Is that true? It makes more sense then looking at total passes which doesn't account for the differences between throwing a 40 yard strike versus a 5 yard dump off. But then again anything that supports Moore as the starter has to be instantly ignored if it doesn't matched with your preconceived notions.

If you want to point out the 7 INTS and believe it is significant then why is that. First of all 5 of those Ints were thrown years ago. He threw 2 last year. Were they to the left or right? And with an "N" of 2 it is significant? Hardly

Or are you once again just pulling numbers out of your butt in an effort to try and salvage some modicum of face here since you are obviously a Clausen homer taking pot shots at Moore.

[Bigdaddy8523]

I just ordered Sunday Ticket to keep from going to a damn bar every week to yell at the tv and get ridiculed by other teams fans. If Moore goes down I need Cantwell to be on the field asap. Cause in my opinion no Notre Dame Qb (besides Montana) should be throwing to a USC receiver ever (Keyshawn, Colbert, and Jarrett im talking about you.)

[Seamonk]

Hi. I Just thought my Sig will do the 'splainin.

[MadHatter]

which is fine if they're learning from their mistakes early on. if we're eliminated from playoff contention, there's no good reason we shouldn't put Clausen out there to play. he's already got a better grasp of our playbook than most other rookie QBs coming out of college on a team. A lot of them have to start from scratch because the offense they ran in college was completely different than the offense the team that chose them in the draft runs. Clausen is in a good situation for a top prospect as well, he was selected by a much more talented team than what usually picks the best QBs in a draft. We have a running game. We have a top 5 wideout. We have an offensive line that can give the passer time. We have one of the best left tackles in the league right now. We have a good defense. We have the talent to cradle a rookie QB. It would be logical to get him some playing time and we shouldn't avoid starting him at all costs.

of course he's a perfect example of a great QB that sat for a year. but his situation was different from Clausen's. For one, Brady wasn't a top QB prospect, he wasn't touted as highly talented, and nobody expected him to do what he did. If Bledsoe hadn't gotten hurt, Brady wouldn't have had his opportunity then, and maybe he wouldn't have had it at all.

Peyton Manning is a perfect example of how beneficial it can be if you play your rookie year out and get a grasp of the game at a young age.

Given comparison, Clausen's situation is related a little to these guys. And Flacco and Ryan have turned out pretty good. Sanchez played pretty awful on a good team but that's because he never should've been considered a top prospect anyway

Agree....

The Tom Brady situation is more like Morre's situation than Clausen's.