Is it Clemen(s)time yet? (1 Viewer)

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Now is the time for Clemens. He's a gamer and every game they wait he's missing valuable in game experience.

Ridiculous.

How is that Ridiculous

It's ridiculous to think that Clemens' development is being hampered by sitting on the bench.

not at all. Nothing better than learning with live bullets. I completely disagree.

Akili Smith, Cade McNown, Tim Couch, Joey Harrington, David Carr, Kyle Boller, Ryan Leaf, Tommy Maddox, Rick Mirer, Heath Shuler, Danny Wuerffel, Danny Kanell, Chad Hutchinson, Chris Weinke, Patrick Ramsey, Shawn King, Quincy Carter.

thanks for providing a list of quarterbacks that never lived up to expectations without making a point. I am sure there are good QB's that started in their 1st or 2nd year as well why don't you make a list of them too?

Is there a list of recent young QBs who benefited from "learning with live bullets"? Aikman, Manning, ummmmm.....anyone else? Roethlisberger? List seems pretty short to me.

Footballoutsiders did something like this a while ago. They broke it down in 3 categories.1) QBs who started (almost) right away.2) QBs who started halfway through the season.3) QBs who started after sitting (at least) a year.I think category #3 QBs came out the best, but it's been at least 2 years since I read it. I definitely can think of more successful QBs off the top of my head who sat a year than those who started right away.

 

[loose circuits]

...if you're playing good, you get pulled? Thats just ridiculous.

He has a great completion percentage but his 9:7 TD:INT ratio is meh and needed the woeful Cinci secondary to improve that from 6:6.And his 6.7 YPA is also meh.

Question: Who thinks Chad Pennington is the quarterback of the future for the Jets? If you do, how many more years could he lead this team?

Replace "Pennington" with "Favre" and get back to me.

Perhaps I will get back to you in the "Is it Rodger(s) time yet?" thread. Otherwise quit ducking the questions.In the limited time I have paid attention to your post's [scooter] (i.e. this thread) I have come to the conclusion that you bring very little to the table.

Sorry if you don't like facts and objectivity being brought to the table. But feel free to be among the Jets homers that let their emotions get the better of them (young Skywalker....)- Someone said Pennington should be benched because of his low YPG; I brought facts showing that YPG alone is not a reason to bench a QB.

- Someone said "live bullets" were the best way for a young QB to learn the game; I brought facts in the form of 17 players who did not benefit from the "live bullet method".

(But hey, feel free to provide a list of 18 recent QBs who did benefit from this method.)

- Someone said Pennington should be benched because he's not the future of the franchise; I brought objectivity.

The irony of this situation is that the Jets fans made the exact same arguments in 2000 and 2001, when Pennington himself was riding the pine. Thank goodness Herm Edwards had the patience to keep Pennington on the bench where he belonged, otherwise his career might have flamed out like the other 17 QBs that I listed.

you didn't bring any facts and objectivity. You brought a list of busts at QB. We don't know if they would have stuck around the league or if they just flat out didn't have the mental make-up to be NFL QB's. What are the odds that a QB becomes successful in the NFL and makes it as a franchise QB? The ratio is ridiculously low so in order to be proportionate I'll just name 6- Big Ben, Palmer, Manning, Brees McNabb, and Brady all were starting by the end of their 2nd year.As for your list of QB's that were worse than Pennington last year. Those guys didn't have good years either. I am sure that Carolina would be looking for Delhomme's replacement if it was convenient for them. They had other needs to address in this years draft and thought that Carr could possibly help them. Manning is still developing and getting better I might add. Bringing up Rivers is kind of ridiculous because the nobody else has LT. Not to mention Cutler who was brought in to get experience with a conservative playbook. Seattle was a team that squeaked in the playoffs cause their division sucked. Carolina wasn't a good team because of OL injuries and Chargers/Broncos both used good D and running games to make the playoffs.

When your QB is limited in the things he can do it limits how effective players like Brad Smith and Jerricho Cotchery can be. It also hurts the running game.

The bottomline is that Kellen Clemens has earned an opportunity to see the field with solid preseason performances and playing decent when called upon this year. The Jets would be better off seeing what they have in him to figure out whether they need to address that position in the future. Clemens may be the guy they are looking for and he may not, but they aren't going to get anything worth while for Chad Pennington on the trade market that they wouldn't if they inserted Clemens. Either a team likes what they seen from Chad or they don't...

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Theres lots of exceptions:I belive Brady, Hassleback, Brees, Bulger, Garcia all were not top picks nor last rd UFA and have been solid starters in the league. Even if you are correct - is that a reason not to give the kid a chance? Plus a mid 2nd rd pick is not a mid rder in my eyes - he was something like the 4th QB off the board after Young, Leinart, Cutler..

Off the top of my head, all the QBs you listed except Brees were last rounders/UDFAs by today's draft.Let me rephrase my point so it's clear.Good NFL QBs generally are either1) High first rounder2) last round of the draft or UDFA (by today's 6 rounds of drafting standards).Even late 1st rounders don't fare as well as their early first rounder brethren (Losman, Grossman, Pennington, Patrick Ramsey off the top of my head).The exceptions I can think of are Brees and Favre. Someone mentioned Schaub and it's a wee bit early to make that call.

 

[loose circuits]

Theres lots of exceptions:I belive Brady, Hassleback, Brees, Bulger, Garcia all were not top picks nor last rd UFA and have been solid starters in the league. Even if you are correct - is that a reason not to give the kid a chance? Plus a mid 2nd rd pick is not a mid rder in my eyes - he was something like the 4th QB off the board after Young, Leinart, Cutler..

Off the top of my head, all the QBs you listed except Brees were last rounders/UDFAs by today's draft.Let me rephrase my point so it's clear.Good NFL QBs generally are either1) High first rounder2) last round of the draft or UDFA (by today's 6 rounds of drafting standards).Even late 1st rounders don't fare as well as their early first rounder brethren (Losman, Grossman, Pennington, Patrick Ramsey off the top of my head).The exceptions I can think of are Brees and Favre. Someone mentioned Schaub and it's a wee bit early to make that call.

I don't think you can say that as theory. I personally don't think draft position is that relevant at all in whether a QB is good or not. They either have what it takes or they don't and come in all different shapes, sizes, and draft positions...the sample size of QB's that make it is too small to say with any certainity that QB's need to either be drafted in the early 1st or end of the draft.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Theres lots of exceptions:

I belive Brady, Hassleback, Brees, Bulger, Garcia all were not top picks nor last rd UFA and have been solid starters in the league.

Even if you are correct - is that a reason not to give the kid a chance? Plus a mid 2nd rd pick is not a mid rder in my eyes - he was something like the 4th QB off the board after Young, Leinart, Cutler..

Off the top of my head, all the QBs you listed except Brees were last rounders/UDFAs by today's draft.Let me rephrase my point so it's clear.

Good NFL QBs generally are either

1) High first rounder

2) last round of the draft or UDFA (by today's 6 rounds of drafting standards).

Even late 1st rounders don't fare as well as their early first rounder brethren (Losman, Grossman, Pennington, Patrick Ramsey off the top of my head).

The exceptions I can think of are Brees and Favre. Someone mentioned Schaub and it's a wee bit early to make that call.

I don't think you can say that as theory. I personally don't think draft position is that relevant at all in whether a QB is good or not. They either have what it takes or they don't and come in all different shapes, sizes, and draft positions...the sample size of QB's that make it is too small to say with any certainity that QB's need to either be drafted in the early 1st or end of the draft.

I'll let all the teams know they can fire their scouting departments then.

 

[mistersmith]

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football...gton_lik-1.html

It might Clemens' time soon according to this article:

Instead of declaring, "Chad is the starting quarterback," as he has done so many times, Mangini resorted to the time-tested, kiss-of-death: "I'll have to watch the tape."

 

[loose circuits]

Theres lots of exceptions:

I belive Brady, Hassleback, Brees, Bulger, Garcia all were not top picks nor last rd UFA and have been solid starters in the league.

Even if you are correct - is that a reason not to give the kid a chance? Plus a mid 2nd rd pick is not a mid rder in my eyes - he was something like the 4th QB off the board after Young, Leinart, Cutler..

Off the top of my head, all the QBs you listed except Brees were last rounders/UDFAs by today's draft.Let me rephrase my point so it's clear.

Good NFL QBs generally are either

1) High first rounder

2) last round of the draft or UDFA (by today's 6 rounds of drafting standards).

Even late 1st rounders don't fare as well as their early first rounder brethren (Losman, Grossman, Pennington, Patrick Ramsey off the top of my head).

The exceptions I can think of are Brees and Favre. Someone mentioned Schaub and it's a wee bit early to make that call.

I don't think you can say that as theory. I personally don't think draft position is that relevant at all in whether a QB is good or not. They either have what it takes or they don't and come in all different shapes, sizes, and draft positions...the sample size of QB's that make it is too small to say with any certainity that QB's need to either be drafted in the early 1st or end of the draft.

I'll let all the teams know they can fire their scouting departments then.

the idea behind scouting is too get the guy the most talented guy that best fits your position. It's not an exact science which has been demonstrated time and time again although a good scouting department does put a team in a good situation but you can't always tell how the piece is going to fit into the puzzle until the guy gets in camp and the season starts.Regardless, I am pretty sure that scouting departments don't say well we can't draft this QB in the 2nd round because we need our franchise guy in the early 1st or last round of the draft because Kiddnets said so without providing any actual statistical data too back up his theory.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Theres lots of exceptions:

I belive Brady, Hassleback, Brees, Bulger, Garcia all were not top picks nor last rd UFA and have been solid starters in the league.

Even if you are correct - is that a reason not to give the kid a chance? Plus a mid 2nd rd pick is not a mid rder in my eyes - he was something like the 4th QB off the board after Young, Leinart, Cutler..

Off the top of my head, all the QBs you listed except Brees were last rounders/UDFAs by today's draft.Let me rephrase my point so it's clear.

Good NFL QBs generally are either

1) High first rounder

2) last round of the draft or UDFA (by today's 6 rounds of drafting standards).

Even late 1st rounders don't fare as well as their early first rounder brethren (Losman, Grossman, Pennington, Patrick Ramsey off the top of my head).

The exceptions I can think of are Brees and Favre. Someone mentioned Schaub and it's a wee bit early to make that call.

I don't think you can say that as theory. I personally don't think draft position is that relevant at all in whether a QB is good or not. They either have what it takes or they don't and come in all different shapes, sizes, and draft positions...the sample size of QB's that make it is too small to say with any certainity that QB's need to either be drafted in the early 1st or end of the draft.

I'll let all the teams know they can fire their scouting departments then.

the idea behind scouting is too get the guy the most talented guy that best fits your position. It's not an exact science which has been demonstrated time and time again although a good scouting department does put a team in a good situation but you can't always tell how the piece is going to fit into the puzzle until the guy gets in camp and the season starts.Regardless, I am pretty sure that scouting departments don't say well we can't draft this QB in the 2nd round because we need our franchise guy in the early 1st or last round of the draft because Kiddnets said so without providing any actual statistical data too back up his theory.

Pretty sure that's not what I'm saying they're saying.

 

[loose circuits]

Theres lots of exceptions:

I belive Brady, Hassleback, Brees, Bulger, Garcia all were not top picks nor last rd UFA and have been solid starters in the league.

Even if you are correct - is that a reason not to give the kid a chance? Plus a mid 2nd rd pick is not a mid rder in my eyes - he was something like the 4th QB off the board after Young, Leinart, Cutler..

Off the top of my head, all the QBs you listed except Brees were last rounders/UDFAs by today's draft.Let me rephrase my point so it's clear.

Good NFL QBs generally are either

1) High first rounder

2) last round of the draft or UDFA (by today's 6 rounds of drafting standards).

Even late 1st rounders don't fare as well as their early first rounder brethren (Losman, Grossman, Pennington, Patrick Ramsey off the top of my head).

The exceptions I can think of are Brees and Favre. Someone mentioned Schaub and it's a wee bit early to make that call.

I don't think you can say that as theory. I personally don't think draft position is that relevant at all in whether a QB is good or not. They either have what it takes or they don't and come in all different shapes, sizes, and draft positions...the sample size of QB's that make it is too small to say with any certainity that QB's need to either be drafted in the early 1st or end of the draft.

I'll let all the teams know they can fire their scouting departments then.

the idea behind scouting is too get the guy the most talented guy that best fits your position. It's not an exact science which has been demonstrated time and time again although a good scouting department does put a team in a good situation but you can't always tell how the piece is going to fit into the puzzle until the guy gets in camp and the season starts.Regardless, I am pretty sure that scouting departments don't say well we can't draft this QB in the 2nd round because we need our franchise guy in the early 1st or last round of the draft because Kiddnets said so without providing any actual statistical data too back up his theory.

Pretty sure that's not what I'm saying they're saying.

i can't figure out what you are saying? I think somewhere you tried to make a point that QB's can't be successful if drafted in the middle rounds, but I guess your point is lost now since youi somehow took it to a scouting department discussion...

 

[TommyGilmore]

The bottomline is that Kellen Clemens has earned an opportunity to see the field with solid preseason performances and playing decent when called upon this year.

Just curious: how can you say that Clemens has "earned" something, when he has not performed better than Pennington? Couldn't you use the same argument to state that Pennington has "earned" an opportunity to retain the starting job?

 

[loose circuits]

The bottomline is that Kellen Clemens has earned an opportunity to see the field with solid preseason performances and playing decent when called upon this year.

Just curious: how can you say that Clemens has "earned" something, when he has not performed better than Pennington? Couldn't you use the same argument to state that Pennington has "earned" an opportunity to retain the starting job?

what exactly are you talking about? Clemens performed better than expected against a tough Ravens D. He would have tied the game had McCaerins not dropped 2 easy balls. Not to mention that was Clemens 1st start so I don't think we could have expected more than him putting the Jets in a position to win the game...

 

[Koya]

FWIW, timing is critical here for 2 QB leagues. For those with byes behind them and Chad as a third, it is a sigh of relief he made it this far... if you have a week 8-10 QB bye to deal with, really makes this interesting fantasy wise.

 

[TommyGilmore]

The bottomline is that Kellen Clemens has earned an opportunity to see the field with solid preseason performances and playing decent when called upon this year.

Just curious: how can you say that Clemens has "earned" something, when he has not performed better than Pennington? Couldn't you use the same argument to state that Pennington has "earned" an opportunity to retain the starting job?

what exactly are you talking about? Clemens performed better than expected against a tough Ravens D.

Just trying to be an impartial observer here, but....The Ravens D allows 55% completions and a 1-1.25 TD-INT ratio, and a 71.8 QB rating.Clemens completed 51% of his passes with a 1-2 TD-INT ratio, for a 60.6 rating.So the question is, does this constitute "better than expected"? I wouldn't think so, unless the expectations were very, very low. And if the expectations were low, then I don't think you can say that Clemens "earned an opportunity" with this performance.

 

[MCguidance]

Does Clemens have ANY value this year?

 

[loose circuits]

The bottomline is that Kellen Clemens has earned an opportunity to see the field with solid preseason performances and playing decent when called upon this year.

Just curious: how can you say that Clemens has "earned" something, when he has not performed better than Pennington? Couldn't you use the same argument to state that Pennington has "earned" an opportunity to retain the starting job?

what exactly are you talking about? Clemens performed better than expected against a tough Ravens D.

Just trying to be an impartial observer here, but....The Ravens D allows 55% completions and a 1-1.25 TD-INT ratio, and a 71.8 QB rating.Clemens completed 51% of his passes with a 1-2 TD-INT ratio, for a 60.6 rating.So the question is, does this constitute "better than expected"? I wouldn't think so, unless the expectations were very, very low. And if the expectations were low, then I don't think you can say that Clemens "earned an opportunity" with this performance.

what would his QB rating be if McCaerins catches those balls? Also, weren't one of those picks tipped balls?besides that. This was his 1st start of his career against one of the top defenses in the league you can't really expect him to come out and light up the Ravens. Had McCaerins not dropped a couple passes they could have beat a good football team.The Jets are a 1-6 football team who's one win is against the winless Miami Dolphins by 3 points. They don't have anything to lose by throwing Clemens out there to the wolves. Clemens could be that franchise type guy and a 1-6 season is the right time to find out what he's made of...He can't be any worse than most of the guys they have played in the last 5 years...

 

[TommyGilmore]

besides that. This was his 1st start of his career against one of the top defenses in the league you can't really expect him to come out and light up the Ravens.

I don't disagree with that. But the question remains: should a below-average start against the Ravens mean that Clemens has "earned an opportunity" to start more games?

 

[Chaka]

...if you're playing good, you get pulled? Thats just ridiculous.

He has a great completion percentage but his 9:7 TD:INT ratio is meh and needed the woeful Cinci secondary to improve that from 6:6.And his 6.7 YPA is also meh.

Question: Who thinks Chad Pennington is the quarterback of the future for the Jets? If you do, how many more years could he lead this team?

Replace "Pennington" with "Favre" and get back to me.

Perhaps I will get back to you in the "Is it Rodger(s) time yet?" thread. Otherwise quit ducking the questions.In the limited time I have paid attention to your post's [scooter] (i.e. this thread) I have come to the conclusion that you bring very little to the table.

Sorry if you don't like facts and objectivity being brought to the table. But feel free to be among the Jets homers that let their emotions get the better of them (young Skywalker....)- Someone said Pennington should be benched because of his low YPG; I brought facts showing that YPG alone is not a reason to bench a QB.

- Someone said "live bullets" were the best way for a young QB to learn the game; I brought facts in the form of 17 players who did not benefit from the "live bullet method".

(But hey, feel free to provide a list of 18 recent QBs who did benefit from this method.)

- Someone said Pennington should be benched because he's not the future of the franchise; I brought objectivity.

The irony of this situation is that the Jets fans made the exact same arguments in 2000 and 2001, when Pennington himself was riding the pine. Thank goodness Herm Edwards had the patience to keep Pennington on the bench where he belonged, otherwise his career might have flamed out like the other 17 QBs that I listed.

Sybil I am sure you have had a nice internal dialogue where you probably made all the logical arguments that you claim to have made in this thread but here is precisely what you have brought to this thread.--Yes.

--Ridiculous.

--It's ridiculous to think that Clemens' development is being hampered by sitting on the bench.

--Pennington averaged more yards per game than Hasselbeck, Rivers, Delhomme, Eli Manning and Cutler.

--Akili Smith, Cade McNown, Tim Couch, Joey Harrington, David Carr, Kyle Boller, Ryan Leaf, Tommy Maddox, Rick Mirer, Heath Shuler, Danny Wuerffel, Danny Kanell, Chad Hutchinson, Chris Weinke, Patrick Ramsey, Shawn King, Quincy Carter.

--Replace "Pennington" with "Favre" and "Jets" with "Packers" and get back to me.

Two non-statements, a post where you cherry picked a list of QBs as if those specific examples had relevance to Chad's performance when another list could be used to demonstrate the opposite and a final listing of almost every QB bust in the past 15 years and a silly statement attempting to draw attention away from the topic at hand, and another irrelevant semi-comparison.

You want 18 QBs that were thrown into the fire and succeeded? Should I start with Peyton Manning? Or are only the successful QBs who spent time on the bench prior to becoming starters allowed? In which case guys like Brady and Palmer are nice examples, so is, y'know, Chad Pennington. I could list 14 more but since I am sure you are right now I think you get the point that it would prove absolutely nothing.

The question is whether Chad has what it takes to lead the Jets. You think so, I think he has the brains but lacks the physical ability to put his thoughts into action.

But don't tell me you have made any contributions to this thread.

 

[loose circuits]

besides that. This was his 1st start of his career against one of the top defenses in the league you can't really expect him to come out and light up the Ravens.

I don't disagree with that. But the question remains: should a below-average start against the Ravens mean that Clemens has "earned an opportunity" to start more games?

when you combine that performance with his solid preseason performances I think so, yes..not many qb's have solid 1st games...

 

[Andy Herron]

Objects in Pennington's mirror are closer than they appear.

I'm guessing it may very well be Sunday.

 

[mlbnfl]

If they do bring Clemens in, how does this effect other players? Look for a Coles drop off? Maybe more catches for Baker? ANy input appreciated.

 

[Andy Herron]

If they do bring Clemens in, how does this effect other players? Look for a Coles drop off? Maybe more catches for Baker? ANy input appreciated.

It expands the horizons for all of them.This reminds me of Romo last year taking over for Bledsoe.He brings the ability for the entire offense to work more effectively.

 

[sdsjr3]

"IF" Clemens sees the field I think All WRs benefit simply because they'll be able to stretch it out more and won't be working the short outs and crosses which are Chad's meat and potatoes.

Personally, I feel like Chad has played well enough to keep the job if the team was playing better, and I'm a pretty avid Jets fan. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that he's done nothing to warrant a benching. However, this isn't a team that's going anywhere this year and my belief is that next year we might still be in a similar situation. I honestly thought this defense was going to be a helluva lot better than it is. Us Jets fans certainly were teased by last year. But I digress, bottom line is that even though I like Chad (as many do) it might be a good thing to see if Clemens can be relied on as a starter.

 

[Andy Herron]

"IF" Clemens sees the field I think All WRs benefit simply because they'll be able to stretch it out more and won't be working the short outs and crosses which are Chad's meat and potatoes.Personally, I feel like Chad has played well enough to keep the job if the team was playing better, and I'm a pretty avid Jets fan. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that he's done nothing to warrant a benching. However, this isn't a team that's going anywhere this year and my belief is that next year we might still be in a similar situation. I honestly thought this defense was going to be a helluva lot better than it is. Us Jets fans certainly were teased by last year. But I digress, bottom line is that even though I like Chad (as many do) it might be a good thing to see if Clemens can be relied on as a starter.

From where I stand, you'll be asking "Chad who?" by next year if they stop fooling around and get Clemens in there.As you probably know, Young, Leinart, and Cutler all went ahead of him in the draft last year. In the end, it wouldn't surprise me to see him finish his career in front of them.

 

[Kiddnets]

"IF" Clemens sees the field I think All WRs benefit simply because they'll be able to stretch it out more and won't be working the short outs and crosses which are Chad's meat and potatoes.Personally, I feel like Chad has played well enough to keep the job if the team was playing better, and I'm a pretty avid Jets fan. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that he's done nothing to warrant a benching. However, this isn't a team that's going anywhere this year and my belief is that next year we might still be in a similar situation. I honestly thought this defense was going to be a helluva lot better than it is. Us Jets fans certainly were teased by last year. But I digress, bottom line is that even though I like Chad (as many do) it might be a good thing to see if Clemens can be relied on as a starter.

From where I stand, you'll be asking "Chad who?" by next year if they stop fooling around and get Clemens in there.As you probably know, Young, Leinart, and Cutler all went ahead of him in the draft last year. In the end, it wouldn't surprise me to see him finish his career in front of them.

I hope so - need something out of this awful yearFWIW - Cotchery had his best game of the year when KC started...

 

[NoFBinLA]

I don't think it's ridiculous to discuss whether Clemens might be a better fit or give the o more options by being able to stretch the field a bit. I like Pennington. I have the Pennington Jersey. I would like to see him suceed.

Bottom line is - I'm not sure anybody gets much of a chance to suceed behind that O-line this season, not right now. It's erratic and plays well one play and badly another. Sometimes they get the run going, sometimes the protect the QB - but they don't seem to do any of it consistently.

I think Clemens COULD (key word, I relally don't KNOW) get the ball downfield, kick start the O and loosen the D up. But I don't know.

Later in the season, I might like to find out.

The big question is whethe rPenny should have the job - he played well last Sunday until - and this is critical - he ONCE again threw a bad pick at a bad time.

If Penny could avoid those game ending INTs, we wouldn't be discussing this. But it seems (and I ain't looking at his stats this moment) like he's making bad decisions at bad times right now.

Some of that might be coaching - but some of it isn't.

 

[gkza]

Now is the time for Clemens. He's a gamer and every game they wait he's missing valuable in game experience.

Ridiculous.

Despite the very long and obvious track record of non 1st round, non late round (or UDFA) QBs having no success whatsoever in the NFL the last 15 years, people come out every year and hype up guys like Clemens, Brodie Croyle, Charlie Frye whatever.I'll take the side that says 99% of the time successful QBs are either early first rounders (everyone saw it coming) or last round/UDFA (everyone had it wrong). The guys that the scouts peg as okay but not great end up in the 2-4th rounds and rarely do anything in the NFL. I can only think of two exceptions the last 15 years. Favre and Brees. I'm sure there are a couple others, but it's pretty obvious that everyone sees these mid rounders coming and all they see is "mediocre backup at best".

I'm sure Clemens is the exception though.

what about Tom Brady? Brees was taken in the 2nd round He was very high profile coming out of Purdue. Dude, what about Joe Montana?

 

[TommyGilmore]

besides that. This was his 1st start of his career against one of the top defenses in the league you can't really expect him to come out and light up the Ravens.

I don't disagree with that. But the question remains: should a below-average start against the Ravens mean that Clemens has "earned an opportunity" to start more games?

when you combine that performance with his solid preseason performances I think so, yes..

And how about when you combine that performance with his "performance" today?