In reply to: Clausen/Quinn: BK would have ruined them both posted by irishrock
Quinn and Clausen's opponents were far superior to what Book faced. I just don't put much credence into Book's 30-5 record as the wins were against weaker teams. I've posted before, Quinn and Clausen faced outstanding USC teams...Kelly has been fortunate that SC has had a down decade and Book benefitted from that as well.
edited to add: I think Weis system was made for very good and talented QB's. I don't think Kelly's system would have been great for Quinn or Clausen but I'm really confident that Book wouldn't have been recruited by Weis, much less a three year starter for him. I just don't think the Weis system was built for a 3* type of QB...he wouldn't have much success with a less talented QB.
My position is that Quinn and Clausen were better than Book (a position evidently shared by NFL scouts). I don’t know about Clausen but I think Quinn would have done even better than Book in Kelly’s system the last few years. He would have feasted on weak competition, had superior ability to sell play-action, and he had a greater ability to stretch the field. He was also athletic enough to make plays with his legs.
Kelly deserves credit for getting a lot out of Book (as he does for Rees) and I think you’re correct that Weis would not have been able to do as well.
no doubt Quinn is better, was better, hell might still be better today than Book. I see your point on Quinn.
completely agree on that matter. Hell man, I'm in purgatory with Kelly (so maybe I'm not thinking straight). He just runs a program...he recruits big guys for TE and OL...ND has always done that (except Willingham) but he doesn't coach. He doesn't gameplan worth a crap. His offense has always been junk and was junk last night (again)
What I've not seen a lot of talk about is how ND receivers are just okay under Kelly and then do pretty well in the NFL...Claypool is the latest exhibit.