2010 NFL Draft : Jimmy Clausen Will Be a Top Draft Pick: It's the QB Effect

In a few weeks, Jimmy Clausen will be a high NFL draft pick. Ask yourself why.

1. Does Clausen have a strong arm by NFL standards? Nope.

2. Is Clausen mobile or possess superior athletic gifts by NFL standards? Nope.

3. Is Clausen particularly accurate by NFL standards? Nope.

4. Does Clausen have great field vision, technique, fundamentals, footwork, quick release, or knowledge of the game by NFL standards? Nope.

5. Did Clausen elevate his college program? Nope.

6. Does Clausen come from a family of successful NFL QBs? Nope.

7. Did Clausen come up big and perform well in pressure situations, i.e. lead comebacks or play extremely well against superior foes? Nope.

8. Did Clausen have a great winning percentage, win a lot of games, win a title, or a big game? Nope.

So, why is he regarded to be a top NFL prospect?

Of course, I know that not everything at Notre Dame was his fault: He played for flawed teams with flawed coaching. Still, he was surrounded by enough talent to do better than going 1-2 against NAVY, don't you think?

Not that I am just picking on Clausen, though he is an egregious example. After all, Tim Tebow will be a high pick (though not as high as Clausen) because he won a lot of college games.

And Jay Cutler was a high pick despite an 11-34 record because he has exceptional natural gifts (and his college team was much worse than Clausen's).

But Clausen? Why?

The same goes for Sam Bradford, a consensus top-five pick. How many shotgun-spread QBs have actually SUCCEEDED in the NFL?

One...Drew Brees, who took three to four years to pick up the NFL game, and whose game IS NOT the same as Bradford's.

Oh yeah, Bradford also does not have a particularly strong arm; isn't mobile or possess great natural gifts; only played a little more than two college seasons; is coming off a severe shoulder injury; and even before his injury, was pedestrian behind a mediocre offensive line against mighty BYU's defense.

Yes, he put up big numbers and won a lot of games, but so did Jason White, Nate Hybl, Josh Heupel, and Paul Thompson for Oklahoma.

How'd their NFL careers turn out?

Why is Bradford getting so much more consideration than the Washington State, Texas Tech, Missouri, and Kansas system QBs? This isn't to say that Bradford shouldn't be a first round pick, but a TOP FIVE PICK?

I will give you the answer: marketing.

The NFL is marketed around the QB. Not just any QBs, but STAR QBs. In order to maximize the exposure and revenue to the NFL, a quarterback HAS to come into the league as a top 10—and preferably top three—pick every year that the NFL can justify it.

So, it isn't about getting the "franchise QB."

Tom Brady is a franchise QB. He was taken in the fifth round.

Kurt Warner was a franchise QB. He was undrafted.

It is making money off promoting these guys, making them the face of the franchise, solely because of where they went in the draft. And if you can kinda sorta justify it by saying "this kid put up big numbers and won two conference titles at Oklahoma" and "that kid was the top high school player and started three years at Notre Dame," even better.

And yes, if Tim Tebow's delivery was just a little better, he'd be right up there too. Note that he has been invited to attend the NFL draft, meaning that he will almost certainly go in the second round at minimum.

Who is really driving this? The media.

The media wishes for the game to be about the QB, and not only that but CERTAIN QBs, the dropback passers who played for the "name brand" programs.

So a guy like Zac Robinson, who with his arm strength, scrambling ability, and good numbers for an above-average team is probably the most intriguing QB prospect in the draft? Sorry Zac, you play for Oklahoma State, not Oklahoma.

And he isn't in the draft, but consider Chase Keenum. What does he have that Clausen doesn't?

Other than Notre Dame on the back of his helmet, nothing. (Please, don't tell me that Houston wasn't a better team than Notre Dame the past two years, or that the reason for it was because Keenum had better players around him AT HOUSTON than did Clausen at Notre Dame, or because Keenum received better coaching at a Conference USA school than Clausen did from a guy who won three Super Bowl rings as the Patriots' offensive coordinator.)

Now granted, star QBs do drive ratings. Look at the Drew Brees-Peyton Manning Super Bowl. (And remember the winning QB in that matchup was a second round pick from unglamorous Purdue that the Saints picked up in free agency, not the No. 1 overall pick that is being hyped as "the best ever.")

But that isn't the main reason. The main reason is that keeping the focus on star QBs makes the media's job easier.

It allows them to cover the game without knowing—or caring—much about it.

Consider it from their angle: "Why spend 20 hours a week or more actually studying the games, watching the game, or watching film? I don't even LIKE football. I don't even like SPORTS! I am only covering sports because it's the only job that I could get coming out of journalism school. I'd trade being a political reporter for being a top sportscaster like Keith Olbermann and Bryant Gumbel did in a New York minute!"

If any of you have ever wondered why ESPN spends more time talking about civil rights and gender equity than the game itself, turning anything and everything into "Outside the Lines" practically any chance they get, now you know. Mike Wilbon? Tony Kornheiser? I'm talking about you and all your buddies.

And of course, the media drives a lot of what the NFL teams do. The reason: the guys who run NFL teams are mostly in it for the media attention in the first place.

Practically every NFL coach, general manager, or owner could be making twice as much money working half as hard doing something else. (Well, maybe not Mike Brown of the Bengals or Bill Bidwill of the Cardinals, who benefit VERY MUCH from revenue sharing, but otherwise you get my drift.)

These ego-driven guys are in it for the glory, and the main reason why they want to win is because that's where the glory comes from. Jerry Jones admitted it himself when he forced out Jimmy Johnson and replaced him with lightly regarded Barry Switzer: He wanted more credit for the Cowboys' success.

Winning two or three more Super Bowls while getting less media attention than Johnson and the players wouldn't have done a thing for Jones.

Now the owners are the most influenced by the media, but you had better believe that the coaches and GMs are too. Being the coach who won a Super Bowl or the GM who built a Super Bowl winning team is good. But going down in history as the coach who won a Super Bowl with the Hall of Fame QB, or the GM who drafted or traded for the Hall of Fame QB that led the team to the Super Bowl is better.

That's why no one is even trying to win a Super Bowl with a primarily running-and-defense oriented team anymore. It isn't that it can't be done.

Baltimore and Tampa Bay did it.

Also, New England and Pittsburgh won the first of their recent Super Bowls without their QBs doing much. It isn't that they can't, it's that they would rather not, because they'd rather win the way that gets them the headlines.

Which, again, is why they got involved in the NFL and stayed with the NFL to begin with.

So whatever team winds up with Bradford or Clausen in the draft instead of that shutdown corner or franchise tackle, know the fact that your local sports page reporters would much rather write about one of those guys than Morgan Burnett, Sergio Kindle, or Everson Griffen, and that your coach, owner, and GM knew that by taking Clausen or Bradford he'll get in the paper more than he would by drafting those other guys.

And taking Tim Tebow in the second round instead of Eric Norwood?

Who's Norwood you ask and why should any national sportswriter care when or if he is drafted?

That's precisely the point, and you'd better believe there are coaches, GMs, and especially owners asking the same question.

By the way, this Norwood is nothing special. He's just some 250 lb. guy who runs a 4.7 40 and had 29 career sacks, 175 tackles, and 43 tackles for loss playing both DE and OLB.

He's not anybody that could help your team or anything like that.