Thanks for the talk on Clifford. Clifford has intrigued me because of his smarts. As you know, he was a finalist for a prestigious academic award aside from being a proven winner as four year starter at Penn State. There were other analysts who did due diligence and liked what they seen in Clifford’s game.
Watching his highlights his poise in the pocket is evident. You can see he can do the back shoulder, he can drop it in with touch and fire it in tight windows. Also, the kid can scramble.
I don’t believe the criticism from some so called experts who are painting him as just another average guy. he has shown he can play a tough college schedule and win a Rose Bowl. He also beat out Will Levis twice causing Levis to transfer. Now the analysts like Levis?

The kid is a good smart QB from an excellent program and should be given a fair chance at starting QB for the Packers. He should not be pegged as strictly a back up. Love should have to earn the starting position and not be anointed as the starter. Competition is the best way to decide who is the better choice just ask WILL LEVIS.

I think a smart QB who has played in big games is an ideal backup.

One angle to remember is that a backup QB this year is very different than the last 15 years; previously, the ideal situation was one experienced QB who could finish a game or win a couple if Aaron went down, plus one young developmental QB. Right now, Love is our developmental guy.

Also, I think it’s possible that LaFleur, like any good coach/teacher, sees Clifford as having a “few things that are fixable.” Maybe he just needs to work on his footwork. etc. Then maybe you get a Matt Flynn type. On tape, his arm looks like a pro arm— it’s not like Rodgers, but most aren’t.