About a month ago all the talk for the first pick was about Gerald McCoy or Ndamukong Suh. I did not do any comparison or debate between which of them was better for one simple reason, I didn’t think either of them had a shot at the #1 pick unless the Rams were really stupid and passed on a franchise quarterback for a franchise defensive tackle. A month has passed and, sure enough, all the talk is about the Rams taking a quarterback #1. Even Todd McShay, notorious NFL Draft bandwagoner, has a quarterback going #1 overall. The issue I’m talking about here is which quarterback they should take. Every one and their dog has Sam Bradford going #1, but I have taken a controversial approach to the Bradford/Clausen debate, by talking Jimmy Clausen. I know numbers aren’t everything, but here are some numbers to support it. I will compare Sam Bradford’s best season as a Sooner (2008) to Jimmy Clausen’s best season as a member of the Fighting Irish (2009).

Completion Percentage

Bradford: 67.9%

Clausen: 68.0%

YPA

Bradford: 9.77

Clausen: 8.76

TD/INT

Bradford: 50/8

Clausen: 28/4

Now, you’ve probably noticed that those numbers are very similar. However, take these things into account. Bradford’s season was 2008, Clausen’s was 2009. Since Bradford’s amazing season, he has had 2 shoulder separations and 1 shoulder surgery. Clausen played his 2009 season with a foot injury. Clausen played 2009 in a Pro Style offense, throwing Pro Style routes from under center, something he’ll have to do in the NFL. Bradford did not. Bradford played in a scheme that not only doesn’t convert to the NFL, but is notorious for producing bad NFL quarterbacks. There isn’t a lot of guess work with Clausen. He had all of his success in a Pro Style offense, which means he’s a lot more likely to pan out than Bradford. Clausen played his 2009 season with about half the talent around him that Bradford had, Bradford being supported by the league’s best offensive line and one of the league’s best running game (2779 yards 45 touchdowns). Speaking of offensive lines, take a look at how many sacks each quarterbacks took during their best season.

Sacks

Bradford: 11

Clausen: 24

Clausen did all of that with at least twice the pressure than Bradford had in his face. In the NFL, both of these quarterbacks are going to go to teams that are bad and hence, teams that have bad offensive lines. Why wouldn’t you want the guy used to producing in harsh conditions, in a Pro Style offense, with little talent around him, over the guy who is used to producing in relatively easy conditions, in a shotgun gimmick offense, with tons of talent around him.

Record

Bradford: 11-2

Clausen: 6-6

Record in games decided by less than 7

Bradford: 0-0

Clausen: 4-6

The only area Bradford has Clausen beat is team record. However, that wasn’t all his fault. The defense supporting him wasn’t great and, considering Clausen led the offense, with no running game, to 30.1 points per game, it’s hard to blame Clausen, though as the quarterback, he does deserve some blame. Clausen lost all 6 games by 7 points or less, which shows he didn’t step up in the clutch enough, but he also did win 4 games in the clutch. Bradford? Well, he was so sheltered at Oklahoma in 2008 that he never played a game decided by less than 7 points. We don’t know how Bradford performs in the clutch. He has never been tested.

I know what you’re thinking. Bradford had two great seasons and Clausen only had one. While one of my major knocks on Clausen is the fact that he’s a bit of a one year wonder, Bradford still did come out of a scheme where everyone had a good year as a quarterback. Look at Landry Jones, Bradford’s replacement when he went down with injury this year.

Jones had a 58% completion percentage with 26 touchdowns to 14 picks and a 7.1 YPA, not great, but also pretty good for a freshman. Let’s take a look at Oklahoma’s last ten quarterbacks in the Bob Stoops era.

2009: Landry Jones 58% 26 touchdowns 14 picks 7.1 YPA

2008: Sam Bradford 68% 50 touchdowns 8 picks 9.8 YPA

2007: Sam Bradford 69% 36 touchdowns 8 picks 9.2 YPA

2006: Paul Thompson 61% 22 touchdowns 11 picks 7.9 YPA

2005: Rhett Bomar 54% 10 touchdowns 10 picks 6.6 YPA

2004: Jason White 65% 35 touchdowns 9 picks 8.2 YPA

2003: Jason White 62% 40 touchdowns 10 picks 8.5 YPA

2002: Nate Hybl 58% 24 touchdowns 8 picks 7.0 YPA

2001: N/A (could not find)

2000: Josh Heupel 65% 20 touchdowns 15 picks 7.6

Guess how many combined NFL starts that group has? 0

Yes, Bradford is the best of this group, but by how much. Oklahoma’s scheme is known for making quarterbacks look better than they actually are.

The final point is strength of schedule. Clausen did not play Bradford’s 2008 schedule in 2009, but he wasn’t far off.

Bradford’s 6 toughest games

Florida

Texas

Kansas

Texas Tech

Oklahoma State

Missouri

Stats 168-245 (69%) 2169 yards (8.9 YPA) 20 TD 4 INT

Clausen’s 6 toughest games

USC

Washington

Connecticut

Stanford

Nevada

Boston College

Stats 141-206 (68%) 1912 yards (9.3 YPA) 17 TD 1 INT

Not exactly the same strength of schedule, but Clausen was better in tougher games than in normal games whereas Bradford was not. Also, when you consider the difference between the good teams Clausen played and the great teams Bradford played is offensively and not defensively, the difference in the strength of schedule is not so profound.

In conclusion, Clausen is proven in a Pro Style offense in tougher conditions through injury, whereas Bradford is proven in a College Style offense in much easier than normal conditions. Clausen struggled somewhat in close games, but at least he played close games, whereas Bradford did not. Bradford comes from a scheme that inflates quarterbacks stats and does not produce good quarterbacks, whereas Jimmy Clausen comes from a traditional West Coast Offense system, which he may have to run in the NFL, considering how popular it is becoming (St. Louis who has the first pick runs it). Clausen stepped up bigger in bigger games, whereas Bradford was about the same in tougher games than in normal games.

This isn’t saying I don’t like Bradford. I think of Bradford as an Eli Manning type player, a player who is smart and can magnify the talent around him, making he will only be just a little better than the players around him. When Eli Manning was first drafted to a struggling team, he made them just a little bit better. Once they added more talent around him, he took them to the Super Bowl, but when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg, he struggled again going 8-9 since that incident. I see Clausen more as a traditional gunslinger, a Tony Romo, or if you want an example of one who runs a West Coast offense, Aaron Rodgers. He lacks both of their mobility, but other than that, they are very similar quarterbacks and Clausen should have similar success. I tend to go with the Romo comparison a little bit more because people don’t like him (and people don’t like Clausen) and because Romo is not quite a proven winner yet (though this year was definitely a step in the right direction).