Sorenson: Claussen will almost certainly open season as starter

[4Corners]

Hey numbnutz, it Clausen starts week one, it's because our coaching staff thinks he should, not b/c the CO writer proclaimed it in July. Cant wait for this lockout to be done so you ladies can get back to shopping for awesome sideline hats and fake replica jerseys.

lol he mad

[chef17]

Why wouldn't someone trade for him?

Last year was only his rookie season, had the previous regime not been replaced he would still be the starting QB entering year 2.

Afterall if you're gonna judge a QB from there rookie year then Sanchez and Freeman should suck too they're rookie season were just as bad as Clausen's.

They have no reason to believe he will be good. Teams don't normally trade for a 2nd year QB who had a bad rookie season. Why would someone trade for him?

[edromeo]

They have no reason to believe he will be good. Teams don't normally trade for a 2nd year QB who had a bad rookie season. Why would someone trade for him?

By that same token they have no reason to believe he won't be good.

You kinda glossed right over the fact that many rookie QBs struggle.

And the fact that Clausen's rookie year wasn't much different then Sanchez or Freeman.

By your reason the Jets and the Buccs should have moved on because based on their rookie seasons there was no reason to believe they would be good.

Point being is that you cannot predict what Clausen will become after his rookie season alone.

Considering that the common knowledge is that it takes at least 2 season worth of starts to know anything meaningful about a QB, odds are there is a team somewhere that will see Clausen as the same talented kid he was when he was drafted.

[YoungPanthers89]

You kinda glossed right over the fact that many rookie QBs struggle.

And the fact that Clausen's rookie year wasn't much different then Sanchez or Freeman.

Point being is that you cannot predict what Clausen will become after his rookie season alone.

Considering that the common knowledge is that it takes at least 2 season worth of starts to know anything meaningful about a QB, odds are there is a team somewhere that will see Clausen as the same talented kid he was when he was drafted.

[chef17]

By that same token they have no reason to believe he won't be good.

You kinda glossed right over the fact that many rookie QBs struggle.

And the fact that Clausen's rookie year wasn't much different then Sanchez or Freeman.

By your reason the Jets and the Buccs should have moved on because based on their rookie seasons there was no reason to believe they would be good.

Point being is that you cannot predict what Clausen will become after his rookie season alone.

Considering that the common knowledge is that it takes at least 2 season worth of starts to know anything meaningful about a QB, odds are there is a team somewhere that will see Clausen as the same talented kid he was when he was drafted.

1. There is a difference between the Jets and Bucs sticking with their first round QB after his rookie season, and a team trading for Clausen after his rookie season.

2. I wasn't trying to predict what Clausen will become. But after a QB has a terrible rookie season, I don't see a reason why a team would trade for him.

2. Teams passed over him once, some twice. I doubt they see him as so talented or they would have drafted him.

[SuperMan]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/07/09/2442869/expect-a-leaner-clausen-to-come.html

If true, then I'm not looking forward to watching the first month of the season until doofey plays his way out of the job.

We don't care your obviously a bandwagon cam newton fan not a panther fan.

[edromeo]

.

Josh Freeman 54.8% 6.4 YPA 10 TDs 18 INTs QBR: 59.8

Mark Sanchez 53.8% 6.7 YPA 12 TDs 20 INTs QBR: 63.0

Matt Stafford 53.3% 6.0 YPA 13 TDs 20 INTs QBR: 61.0

Jimmy Clausen 52.5% 5.2 YPA 3 TDs 9 INTs QBR: 58.4

My point stands.

Clausen's rookie wasn't much different then Sanchez or Freeman.

He was a rookie; and rookie QB's often struggle.

[edromeo]

1. There is a difference between the Jets and Bucs sticking with their first round QB after his rookie season, and a team trading for Clausen after his rookie season.

2. I wasn't trying to predict what Clausen will become. But after a QB has a terrible rookie season, I don't see a reason why a team would trade for him.

2. Teams passed over him once, some twice. I doubt they see him as so talented or they would have drafted him.

1. The Panther's have a new coaching staff.

More often then not new coaching staff's like to get their own QB.

You believe the Panthers drafted Cam Newton because they don't think Clausen will develop.

I think Clausen had nothing to do with their decision at all.

A new franchise was lucky enough to have the chance to draft the kind of prospect that doesn't come around every draft; it was a no brainer.

2. But, you described Clausen rookie season as terrible, but he's a rookie.

You asked me why a team trade for Clausen and one of the reason is because they realize that a QBs rookie year isn't a barometer for what type QB they'll become.

3. Poor example.

Teams pass over prospects they like all the time.

Mike Holmgren went into the draft with the intent of taking Colt McCoy but still passed over him 3 times.

This clearly going in circles.

We can simple agree to disagree.

If the Panther's make Clausen available via trade there will be teams willing to trade for him.

I'm fairly certain the Redskins would have interest, they were interested last year.

[TheRealDeal]

I don't have any alts :(

[YoungPanthers89]

Josh Freeman 54.8% 6.4 YPA 10 TDs 18 INTs QBR: 59.8

Mark Sanchez 53.8% 6.7 YPA 12 TDs 20 INTs QBR: 63.0

Matt Stafford 53.3% 6.0 YPA 13 TDs 20 INTs QBR: 61.0

Jimmy Clausen 52.5% 5.2 YPA 3 TDs 9 INTs QBR: 58.4

My point stands.

Clausen's rookie wasn't much different then Sanchez or Freeman.

He was a rookie; and rookie QB's often struggle.

yeah pretty much the same

[edromeo]

yeah pretty much the same

Yeah, they're all 'terrible'

BTW-who's the girl in the sig?

[chef17]

1. The Panther's have a new coaching staff.

More often then not new coaching staff's like to get their own QB.

You believe the Panthers drafted Cam Newton because they don't think Clausen will develop.

I think Clausen had nothing to do with their decision at all.

A new franchise was lucky enough to have the chance to draft the kind of prospect that doesn't come around every draft; it was a no brainer.

2. But, you described Clausen rookie season as terrible, but he's a rookie.

You asked me why a team trade for Clausen and one of the reason is because they realize that a QBs rookie year isn't a barometer for what type QB they'll become.

3. Poor example.

Teams pass over prospects they like all the time.

Mike Holmgren went into the draft with the intent of taking Colt McCoy but still passed over him 3 times.

This clearly going in circles.

We can simple agree to disagree.

If the Panther's make Clausen available via trade there will be teams willing to trade for him.

I'm fairly certain the Redskins would have interest, they were interested last year.

1. How is that relevant? How does our new coaching staff determine what other teams think of Clausen?

2. I never said rookie seasons are a barometer for success. But teams don't trade for second year QBs after they have a terrible rookie season. It wouldn't make sense.

3. I will give you that one.

Were the Redskins interested before or after the season?

[chef17]

Josh Freeman 54.8% 6.4 YPA 10 TDs 18 INTs QBR: 59.8

Mark Sanchez 53.8% 6.7 YPA 12 TDs 20 INTs QBR: 63.0

Matt Stafford 53.3% 6.0 YPA 13 TDs 20 INTs QBR: 61.0

Jimmy Clausen 52.5% 5.2 YPA 3 TDs 9 INTs QBR: 58.4

My point stands.

Clausen's rookie wasn't much different then Sanchez or Freeman.

He was a rookie; and rookie QB's often struggle.

Freeman 1.8 INTs for every TD

Sanchez 1.67 INTs for every TD

Stafford 1.5 INTs for every TD

Clausen 3 INTs for every TD

When the point of the game is to score without turning the ball over, Jimmy's rookie season was much worse than those you mentioned.

[edromeo]

1. How is that relevant? How does our new coaching staff determine what other teams think of Clausen?

Its relevant b/c its a response to your previous post about Buccs/Jets not giving up on their QBs after their rookie seasons.

You seem to imply that you think Panther's have given up on Clausen and therefore other teams will think they're right.

That is the implication I got from this:

1. There is a difference between the Jets and Bucs sticking with their first round QB after his rookie season, and a team trading for Clausen after his rookie season

Otherwise I don't understand your point.^^

2. I never said rookie seasons are a barometer for success. But teams don't trade for second year QBs after they have a terrible rookie season. It wouldn't make sense.

But, you keep mentioning his bad rookie season but if your not using a rookie season as a barometer for future success then it doesn't matter if they play poorly, they're rookies.

Were the Redskins interested before or after the season?

Yeah, they brought him in for a visit, they worked him out.

There was buzz about drafting Clausen and McCoy.