How will Clausen be remembered?

[jason_h537]

Great fucking QB. Plain and Simple.

 

[IrishAlum1997]

That guy with the shiner that stuck up for Charlie til the end.

 

[Riddickulous]

Never mind what I said earlier.

Best quarterback in Notre Dame history. Undebatable.

 

[IrishAlum1997]

Never mind what I said earlier.

Best quarterback in Notre Dame history. Undebatable.

Kevin McDougal? Tony Rice? Even Quinn won most of these games against the teams we were supposed to beat.

Most accurate passer in ND history? I'm with you. Quarterback? Plenty of debate.

 

[Riddickulous]

Kevin McDougal? Tony Rice? Even Quinn won most of these games against the teams we were supposed to beat.

Most accurate passer in ND history? I'm with you. Quarterback? Plenty of debate.

In my opinion, the order of the above mentioned goes thus:

1. Jimmy Clausen
2. Kevin McDougal
3. Brady Quinn
4. Tony Rice

 

[IrishAlum1997]

In my opinion, the order of the above mentioned goes thus:

1. Jimmy Clausen
2. Kevin McDougal
3. Brady Quinn
4. Tony Rice

Agree to disagree. May feel different if he's back next year.

 

[LOVEMYIRISH]

Agree to disagree. May feel different if he's back next year.

No way he comes back. He simply can't leave tens of millions on the table like that. He knows it too.

The NFL screwed us... [rookie salary cap in 2011!!!]

 

[GoIrish41]

He'll be remembered as a 4-year starter when he returns next year.

 

[phork]

Kevin McDougal? Tony Rice? Even Quinn won most of these games against the teams we were supposed to beat.

Most accurate passer in ND history? I'm with you. Quarterback? Plenty of debate.

Last I checked Clausen wasn't listed on the Dline, nor Linebackers or even secondary depth charts. Those games weren't his fault. The game that cemented it for me was Purdue. Guy can barely walk, comes in and marches down the field for a 4th quarter, 4th down, no time on the clock TD.

 

[Junkhead]

Arguably the best QB in ND history, who had a losing record, thanks to poor defense and poor coaching.

 

[OlympiaIrishFan]

340 yards passing and 5 TD's how should he be remembered?? We would have never been in the game without him.

Ucon game 329 and 2 TDs
michigan game 336 3 TDS
USC game 285 2 TDs
BC game 246 2 TDs
Navy 452 2 TD s
Pitt 283 1TD

He lead us back in the UW, Purdue, Mich. State for the wins
And lead us back against Michigan, Conn, USC. Pitt, and BC but the D let us down.
And lead us the whole way with 5 TDs against Stanford and we lost again. If we didn't have him what would we have won? Washington State and Nevada? 2-10?

Jimmy put us in a position to win every single stinking game. How will he be remembered?? Getting killed behind a crappy line as a freshman, still had a bad line last year, but made plenty of mistakes, and now this year year should be the Heisman winner if we had any assemblance of a Defense. We were lucky to have him. And for the Jimmy haters out there--or should I say Notre Dame fans that hare Jimmy haters--wait until next year and we take a huge step back with Dayne then you will miss him.

Good luck Jimmy, I am one fan who appreciates what you have done for us. I sure wish you would stay, selfishly I have to admit. I want you back slinging it for the Golden Domers. But the millions are hard to turn down.

 

[jason_h537]

Jimmy was right. Weis will not be fired because of him

 

[NDMontana]

In-game statistics....b/c nobody wants to talk about his end-game statistics. And, honestly, I think he had numerous opportunities to win games this year and he didn't. Yes, he led the team to 30 points every game but with game on the line and the ball in his hands he didn't get it done. No, it should not have come down to the final minute with all the weight on his shoulders every week....but it did and he went 4-6 in those situations.

So he can throw for 300 yards and four touchdowns and talk shit to opposing head coaches and players in-game but, at the end of the day, he was humbled.

It wasn't his fault but he certainly didn't get the job done every time he had the chance; he certainly a microcosm of the entire team. All this team needed in all six losses was one person to step up--and not with ten minutes but with five minutes left--and make a play....and that only happened 40% of the time.

 

[jason_h537]

You cant seriously expect a QB to gob 10-0 in those situations. Even Joe Montana failed sometimes. Some of those games required the defense to step up. Jimmy had to score every time he had the ball. If ND had a defense that would only give Jimmy more opportunites to make plays. Then he wouldnt have to make comeback drives in 10 games. We might just be talking about the 1 or 2 he did because he only had to 1 or 2 times.

 

[NDMontana]

You cant seriously expect a QB to gob 10-0 in those situations. Even Joe Montana failed sometimes. Some of those games required the defense to step up. Jimmy had to score every time he had the ball. If ND had a defense that would only give Jimmy more opportunites to make plays. Then he wouldnt have to make comeback drives in 10 games. We might just be talking about the 1 or 2 he did because he only had to 1 or 2 times.

I said it wasn't all his fault; that's obvious. But how many times did we need two or three first downs to run out the clock? The Pitt game....yeah, he got blind sided but he held onto the ball too long. USC....four shots and nada. Navy....six trips to the redzone and two scores. That's a 9-3 record right there. Stanford....just needed a few first downs on the second-to-last possession.

Here's the deal: we hold him in the highest esteem, talk about him as one of the best in college right now and talk about his NFL draft potential (well some do....I really don't give a hoot what he does in the NFL). But would Tim Tebow or Colt McCoy have won those games or not? I think they would have. The problem is that everybody wants to talk about Jimmy playing on Sundays, he's like Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, et.al. That's fine, but the fact is that I'm worried about Saturdays. I'm looking at the here and now and the here and now says Jimmy Clausen was a sub-.500 QB. He never won games that the team shouldn't have won or that could've gone either way. He LED the team to wins over teams they should beat (and lost to some of those teams too) and lost to teams that were on the same level or slightly better.

And that's not a winner to me.

 

[jason_h537]

If Jimmy had the time to throw against Stanford, Navy and Pitt then maybe he would have won those games. Its hard to make a pass from your back. Kamara tripped against USC. If you have to come back EVERY game, the law of averages will eventually catch upto you. If the defense wcould stop someone. Maybe the only comeback he would have to make is agianst Purdue and we are talking about a Heisman moment as opposed to his struggles.

 

[NDMontana]

If Jimmy had the time to throw against Stanford, Navy and Pitt then maybe he would have won those games. Its hard to make a pass from your back. Kamara tripped against USC. If you have to come back EVERY game, the law of averages will eventually catch upto you. If the defense wcould stop someone. Maybe the only comeback he would have to make is agianst Purdue and we are talking about a Heisman moment as opposed to his struggles.

Heisman moment against Purdue? Six trips to the redzone against Navy? Kamara did slip but how about the first three plays?

Did he ever lead the team to a victory against a team that was of equal talent or that was slightly better?

He put up great statistics. But only one statistic really matters....and you know it.

 

[jason_h537]

Heisman moment against Purdue? Six trips to the redzone against Navy? Kamara did slip but how about the first three plays?

Did he ever lead the team to a victory against a team that was of equal talent or that was slightly better?

He put up great statistics. But only one statistic really matters....and you know it.

Dude, no one will make a comeback every week and that is what i am saying. The factthat he put us in a situation to be there every week is a credit to him. a good QB will be lucky to be batting .300 in the same situation. What he was able to do in his situation is nothing short of spectacular. I think you are being a bit too harsh in your judgement of the guy. 10 ttimes he needed to come from behind, 3 of which he was sacked before he knew what hit him on the final drive. Seriously you think Joe Montana would have done better?

He never led a team to a victory against equal or bettertalent is because his defense couldnt stop anyone of equal or better talent. Its a team sport remember, thats alot to ask of one man

 

[BillyIrish]

I said it wasn't all his fault; that's obvious. But how many times did we need two or three first downs to run out the clock? The Pitt game....yeah, he got blind sided but he held onto the ball too long. USC....four shots and nada. Navy....six trips to the redzone and two scores. That's a 9-3 record right there. Stanford....just needed a few first downs on the second-to-last possession.

Here's the deal: we hold him in the highest esteem, talk about him as one of the best in college right now and talk about his NFL draft potential (well some do....I really don't give a hoot what he does in the NFL). But would Tim Tebow or Colt McCoy have won those games or not? I think they would have. The problem is that everybody wants to talk about Jimmy playing on Sundays, he's like Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, et.al. That's fine, but the fact is that I'm worried about Saturdays. I'm looking at the here and now and the here and now says Jimmy Clausen was a sub-.500 QB. He never won games that the team shouldn't have won or that could've gone either way. He LED the team to wins over teams they should beat (and lost to some of those teams too) and lost to teams that were on the same level or slightly better.

And that's not a winner to me.

Good points. However it was not just the defense that let him down. From the Michigan State game on he was running for his life on many occasions. I think Jimmy has all the ability in the world, but for whatever reason (defense, lack of running game, poor playcalling, offensive line) it just didn't translate into wins. One thing that really surprised me about Jimmy is how fiery the kid is between the lines. The kid is a competitor. I think that is going to be a big part of his legacy. This season Jimmy was everything and more than anyone could have ever asked for in a leader. He played in pain for much of the season and was without weapons throughout the year.

Is he a great QB? I do not think Jimmy fits in as great. He has great ability, great leadership, and great confidence on the field. He just didn't light up the most important stat of all, winning. that is what defines greatness.

 

[Mare426]

Jimmy grew up before our eyes during the last few years. He had to endure a lot during that time and he came through it. If he would stay he will have a great year next year. I am hoping he stays.

 

[dskoo65]

yes, JC left some plays on the field in critical moments. its about scoring points (red zone efficiency) not piling up stats, and the ND offense should have scored more against UM, Pitt, Navy, and Uconn. none of those were great defenses. ND had the guns to put up 40+ against any of those teams, except maybe Pitt, who has an ok defense.

JC became very dependent on perhaps the best tandem of WR's in the country, who over matched their defenders all the time. it will be interesting to see his transition to the nfl next year.

 

[OlympiaIrishFan]

Ok, for all those who want to rip on Claussen will have their chance to see what they want---a Claussenless team next year. And how much better will our offense be?? Sorry, I am not one who thinks we are better without him. Yes, he had 2 awesome receivers. Totally awesome receivers. But, the line wasn't very good and he was under constant pressure having to make all those throws with guys in his face, and with a bad toe to boot--no pun intended.

Sorry, I am one who sure enjoyed watching one of the best passers that ND has ever seen. I am not every going to run him out of town. He put us in position to win every game. I 100% believe that. He isn't perfect, but neither was Montana or Theisman.

 

[Allocco 121975]

You cant seriously expect a QB to gob 10-0 in those situations. Even Joe Montana failed sometimes. Some of those games required the defense to step up. Jimmy had to score every time he had the ball. If ND had a defense that would only give Jimmy more opportunites to make plays. Then he wouldnt have to make comeback drives in 10 games. We might just be talking about the 1 or 2 he did because he only had to 1 or 2 times.

I believe that Joe Montana had a better winning record against ranked teams. Both Montana and Theisman WON against ranked teams. Don't let the stats blind you.

Also many of Montana's comebacks were as a substitute after Rick Slager and Rusty Lisch didn;t get it done as starters.

Bottom line is,he was good, but he doesn't rank up there with the ones who won the big games.

 

[ACamp1900]

here is my honest thought here...

UNLESS he goes on to have a great pro career which I honestly don't see happening I will remember Clausen as a very cocky kid who was super freaking tough and quite exciting to watch. A player with a losing record, and yet another big name High school QB who came to ND and failed to come close to expectations... even the resonable ones.

 

[patman1868]

I think that I'll remember him as a very good QB, one of the very best in the country his Jr. year. I'll remember the chemistry he had with Floyd and Tate and how much of a treat it was to watch those guys in action because you knew at any moment a big play could happen. At the same time he was also a very tough QB who took the hits, but kept on getting up and walking back to the huddle. He may not have a championship or anything like that, but non the less still a very good QB who because of the tools that he possess should become a pretty good NFL player in the future.

 

[Allocco 121975]

So you were waiting for " A big play to happen " ?

When the rest of us were waiting for a win!

 

[patman1868]

I would have loved a win as much as the next guy, but they did not come for whatever reasons. That does not change the fact that at any moment with those 3 (Clausen, Tate, Floyd) on the field a big play could happen at any time, which brought a certain amount of excitement to the game. That is something I will remember about Clasusen.

 

[jason_h537]

I believe that Joe Montana had a better winning record against ranked teams. Both Montana and Theisman WON against ranked teams. Don't let the stats blind you.

Also many of Montana's comebacks were as a substitute after Rick Slager and Rusty Lisch didn;t get it done as starters.

Bottom line is,he was good, but he doesn't rank up there with the ones who won the big games.

Joe Montana did not individually beat anyone. Football is a team sport. Put Joe Montana in his prime on the Bengals right now and he will be a great QB on a shitty team. Clausen is only as good as his defense allowed him to be.

That bum Dan Marino should be ashamed of his mediocrecareer not winning championships

 

[devolg]

Clausen will be remembered as the guy who led the Irish to their 1st NC in 22 years in 2010


It's my dream & I'm allowed to have it

 

[NDMontana]

It's a whole new ballgame at the next level folks. If you want to try to begin understanding Jimmy Clausen, read the book Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell.