Jones was a great back who fell out of favor and never really got a chance to showcase his talent. He had the burst, the ability to run through arm tackles at the line, the vision to run away from the pursuit, and the speed to take it the distance. There's nothing BAD about saying that Julius Jones was the best RB of the decade.
Quinn was a winner. You can argue whether or not that was due to more talent around him or not, but he was a winner. The Quinn/Clausen debate really comes down to personal preference. Both were GREAT college quarterbacks. No one was smarter than Quinn. Maybe as smart, but definitely not smarter. The one thing that Quinn had was the blind faith of his teammates. If you go back and read the comments about Quinn, from his former teammates, one thing was clear: As long as Quinn was under center, they believed that they would win the game. Jimmy has led some great comebacks, too. Clausen's pure skills are probably more polished than Quinn's, but Clausen also had four years of tutelage by one of the best developers of QBs around. So, really, it is just personal preference. I don't think either pick is right, or wrong. One thing that I do think many people took into consideration, was Quinn sticking for all four years, while Clausen bolted after 3. ND has had a long tradition of players staying for all four years. I think many of us "oldenheimers" have come to look upon that as a point of pride.
