PDA

View Full Version : Bob McNair open to trading No. 1 pick


Hookem Horns
01-03-2014, 04:03 PM
New article on ESPN.com. Didn't see this posted yet, not that this is really news. Of course McNair would be open if the right deal came around.

HOUSTON -- Texans owner Bob McNair is open to trading out of the No. 1 overall selection in this year's NFL draft.

"Maybe we'll trade down and still get a quarterback that can do the job and get an outstanding defensive player," McNair said Friday. "It's an exciting time. Everything's a moving target. Lot of different pieces."

More From ESPN.com
GanguliAfter this season's mess at quarterback, the Texans are smart to keep all options open with the No. 1 pick in the draft, writes Tania Ganguli. Blog

The Texans secured the top pick with a league-worst 2-14 record this season. They fired coach Gary Kubiak on Dec. 6 and officially announced the hiring of Bill O'Brien on Friday to be the franchise's third head coach.

Houston needs a quarterback with the likely departure of veteran Matt Schaub and the struggles of young quarterback Case Keenum, who started eight games and didn't win any of them.

"I don't think you take a particular position just because you need a particular position at any point in the draft, especially the first pick," Texans general manager Rick Smith said. "So we'll rank it, we'll value it, and we'll make good choices if the opportunity presents itself to move back because it is a very valuable pick, and we'll entertain those as well."

This is the third time the Texans have had the No. 1 overall pick, and each time it has coincided with a new head coach. With their first No. 1 overall pick, the expansion Texans selected quarterback David Carr in 2002. With their second in 2006, the Texans took pass-rusher Mario Williams.

Unfortunately, both suffered losing seasons in those years, combining to go 10-22.

"The defensive player worked out better than the offensive player," McNair said with a chuckle. "That won't lock us into anything."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10238006/houston-texans-owner-bob-mcnair-open-trading-no-1-pick

Marshall
01-03-2014, 04:05 PM
New article on ESPN.com. Didn't see this posted yet, not that this is really news. Of course McNair would be open if the right deal came around.



http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10238006/houston-texans-owner-bob-mcnair-open-trading-no-1-pick

This is music to my ears.
************************************************** ************

Errant Hothy
01-03-2014, 04:06 PM
This is a non-story of the highest order.

b0ng
01-03-2014, 04:12 PM
This is a non-story of the highest order.

Agreed. Nobody is deadset on keeping their pick in January unless it's an Andrew Luck type draft.

bOODRO87
01-03-2014, 04:17 PM
"Maybe we'll trade down and still get a quarterback that can do the job and get an outstanding defensive player,"

Sooo, what it sounds like to me is the first plan is to draft a QB at No. 1.

Teddy, Teddy, Teddy...

Marshall
01-03-2014, 04:21 PM
This is a non-story of the highest order.

Au Contraire; this is big. Let it be known that Texans should receive any offers that might have gone to the Rams at number two if everyone thinks we are locked in to one player or one position, Make it known that we have the prime trade position, not the Rams.

Trade with the Rams and take a chance that your trade will not bring the player you covet. I'd take a deal for Minnesota's 1st and second in 2014 and 2015 so they can leapfrog other QB hungry teams. At 8, we could still get a prime player, but closer to where they should be drafted rather than overpriced. But Minnesota would have to have made a different analysis than us.

Even better would be trades with St Louis or Cleveland if the price is right and we think our guy will fall to us later.

My dream would be to trade down one slot at a time while picking up draft choices until we reach the point our guy is next up.

Errant Hothy
01-03-2014, 04:24 PM
Au Contraire; this is big. Let it be known that Texans should receive any offers that might have gone to the Rams at number two if everyone thinks we are locked in to one player or one position, Make it known that we have the prime trade position, not the Rams.

Trade with the Rams and take a chance that your trade will not bring the player you covet. I'd take a deal for Minnesota's 1st and second in 2014 and 2015 so they can leapfrog other QB hungry teams. At 8, we could still get a prime player, but closer to where they should be drafted rather than overpriced. But Minnesota would have to have made a different analysis than us.

Even better would be trades with St Louis or Cleveland if the price is right and we think our guy will fall to us later.

My dream would be to trade down one slot at a time while picking up draft choices until we reach the point our guy is next up.

If it takes the owner saying this in public for trade offers to be made than the front office here, and a bunch of other places, are in serious disarray.

NFL GMs are fully capable of doing their due diligence without McNair advertising the pick is available.

badboy
01-03-2014, 04:26 PM
Au Contraire; this is big. Let it be known that Texans should receive any offers that might have gone to the Rams at number two if everyone thinks we are locked in to one player or one position, Make it known that we have the prime trade position, not the Rams.

Trade with the Rams and take a chance that your trade will not bring the player you covet. I'd take a deal for Minnesota's 1st and second in 2014 and 2015 so they can leapfrog other QB hungry teams. At 8, we could still get a prime player, but closer to where they should be drafted rather than overpriced. But Minnesota would have to have made a different analysis than us.

Even better would be trades with St Louis or Cleveland if the price is right and we think our guy will fall to us later.

My dream would be to trade down one slot at a time while picking up draft choices until we reach the point our guy is next up.Bolded could possibly happen. Trade with Browns then maybe to Minnie or Oakland or both. I think the key is not to get greedy and expect RG3 type deal.

infantrycak
01-03-2014, 04:27 PM
If it takes the owner saying this in public for trade offers to be made than the front office here, and a bunch of other places, are in serious disarray.

NFL GMs are fully capable of doing their due diligence without McNair advertising the pick is available.

Plus the fact that the top picks are shopped every single year so this is the ultimate non-news.

badboy
01-03-2014, 04:27 PM
If it takes the owner saying this in public for trade offers to be made than the front office here, and a bunch of other places, are in serious disarray.

NFL GMs are fully capable of doing their due diligence without McNair advertising the pick is available.

Then why did St Louis do it so quickly?

Errant Hothy
01-03-2014, 04:29 PM
Then why did St Louis do it so quickly?

Honestly? Pandering in my opinion. Snyder did not need to be told that the Rams were open to trading.

drs23
01-03-2014, 05:03 PM
Au Contraire; this is big. Let it be known that Texans should receive any offers that might have gone to the Rams at number two if everyone thinks we are locked in to one player or one position, Make it known that we have the prime trade position, not the Rams.

Trade with the Rams and take a chance that your trade will not bring the player you covet. I'd take a deal for Minnesota's 1st and second in 2014 and 2015 so they can leapfrog other QB hungry teams. At 8, we could still get a prime player, but closer to where they should be drafted rather than overpriced. But Minnesota would have to have made a different analysis than us.

Even better would be trades with St Louis or Cleveland if the price is right and we think our guy will fall to us later.

My dream would be to trade down one slot at a time while picking up draft choices until we reach the point our guy is next up.

Yeah, that'd be really cool. The coup of all times, but alas, a dream. Has that ever happened before?

Marcus
01-03-2014, 05:40 PM
NFL GMs are fully capable of doing their due diligence without McNair advertising the pick is available.

Don't be so cynically melodramatic. The same thing is said every year.

That said, if they trade down multiple times, all the way out of the first round, I'd be one happy camper. The team is very overrated in the overall talent department.

Marshall
01-03-2014, 05:42 PM
If it takes the owner saying this in public for trade offers to be made than the front office here, and a bunch of other places, are in serious disarray.

NFL GMs are fully capable of doing their due diligence without McNair advertising the pick is available.

There are never enough sales pitches. Where did you learn marketing?

Errant Hothy
01-03-2014, 05:48 PM
Don't be so cynically melodramatic. The same thing is said every year.

That said, if they trade down multiple times, all the way out of the first round, I'd be one happy camper. The team is very overrated in the overall talent department.

I know. Which is why my first post called this whole announcement a non-story.

EllisUnit
01-03-2014, 05:51 PM
OMG THIS NEWS IS LIKE.....a preacher saying he might go to church sunday.

Man i hate the off season, this one specifically is going to suck more so than previous ones IMO.

NastyNate
01-03-2014, 06:13 PM
Au Contraire; this is big. Let it be known that Texans should receive any offers that might have gone to the Rams at number two if everyone thinks we are locked in to one player or one position, Make it known that we have the prime trade position, not the Rams.

Trade with the Rams and take a chance that your trade will not bring the player you covet. I'd take a deal for Minnesota's 1st and second in 2014 and 2015 so they can leapfrog other QB hungry teams. At 8, we could still get a prime player, but closer to where they should be drafted rather than overpriced. But Minnesota would have to have made a different analysis than us.

Even better would be trades with St Louis or Cleveland if the price is right and we think our guy will fall to us later.

My dream would be to trade down one slot at a time while picking up draft choices until we reach the point our guy is next up.

I take it this is your first offseason watching professional football. This is not news. In other news, I might eat carrots this week, I might not.

JCTexan
01-03-2014, 06:15 PM
I'm starting to feel like this is one off-season I'm going to want to skip. I can't wait until the draft gets here.

Marshall
01-03-2014, 06:44 PM
I take it this is your first offseason watching professional football. This is not news. In other news, I might eat carrots this week, I might not.

~I've only had 50 years watching the off season and I guess I need a little more seasoning.~

By the way, it's said every year for a reason. Talking heads like to take away options and GMs and Owners like to keep them. It's like marketing any other product. There can't be too much as long as it doesn't cost any more.

Playoffs
01-03-2014, 06:57 PM
A man asks a woman if she would be willing to sleep with him if he pays her an exorbitant sum. She replies affirmatively.

He then names a paltry amount and asks if she would still be willing to sleep with him for the revised fee. The woman is greatly offended and replies as follows:

She: What kind of woman do you think I am?

He: We’ve already established that. Now we’re just haggling over the price.



Tough crowd.

ArlingtonTexan
01-03-2014, 07:08 PM
I had a sales manager, gazillion years ago who reminded us daily, "Don't be afraid to address the obvious." in my mind that's all McNair and Smith did when "announcing" that the number one pick could be had in a trade. I did like the idea of McNair going some version of its up for trade and smith coming back sort of saying but we are not giving it away.

Fans and media both talk about top picks being traded way more than it actually functionally happens. the last time the 1st pick was traded was when whined Eli whined his way out San Diego to New York so that was not even a normal trade.

The RGIII was the last true blockbuster in my mind near the top of the draft although there have been a handful of lesser trades in the top 5 in the last ten or so years if my memory is working.

There is around a 10% percent chance that some team bites in my mind, but I see nothing wrong with McSmith stating what everybody already should have known just so there is no confusion.

Hervoyel
01-03-2014, 07:13 PM
I'd like the Texans to trade down so the mention from McNair that they would consider a trade down sounds good to me.

Admittedly it has no significance at this time. It's just a comment.

dalemurphy
01-03-2014, 08:26 PM
I'd like the Texans to trade down so the mention from McNair that they would consider a trade down sounds good to me.

Admittedly it has no significance at this time. It's just a comment.

Agreed.

While it isn't earth-shattering news and does not actually indicate a likelihood of a trade, he rejected the alternative option of saying, "we like where we are at. we are only a couple players away and think the value is there for us to go get a QB... "

While that may seem an unwise thing to say, owners and GMs have been known to do it. I remember when the Redskins actually traded into late round one a couple weeks before the draft and announced, at that point, they intended to take Jason Campbell with the pick.

Beyond Dan Snyder and Vinnie Cerratta buffoonery, though, the manner/tone by which McNair answered the question indicated clear willingness to move down and not simply lip service... It seems to me that they've already had discussions about it, which is a good thing.

NastyNate
01-03-2014, 09:15 PM
A man asks a woman if she would be willing to sleep with him if he pays her an exorbitant sum. She replies affirmatively.

He then names a paltry amount and asks if she would still be willing to sleep with him for the revised fee. The woman is greatly offended and replies as follows:

She: What kind of woman do you think I am?

He: Weve already established that. Now were just haggling over the price.



Tough crowd.

Jillian Boardman "What do you think I am?"

Ben Caxton "We settled that, we're dickering over the price. A hundred and fifty?"


Wonder if anyone will get the reference. I don't think they will. Stranger in a strange land.

thunderkyss
01-03-2014, 09:48 PM
Marshall is correct. We should make sure everyone knows our pick is available & the price is reasonable. We're not itching to get rid of it, we're not expecting more than fair value.

Now we need the draft machine to settle on who the best player in the draft is. If one player emerges & he happens to be someone the Rams wants & we handle our business in Free Agency, we'll get more & more trade partners, & may have to weed through several trade offers.

The Pencil Neck
01-04-2014, 12:26 AM
Jillian Boardman "What do you think I am?"

Ben Caxton "We settled that, we're dickering over the price. A hundred and fifty?"


Wonder if anyone will get the reference. I don't think they will. Stranger in a strange land.

When I was a kid, I wanted to grow up to be Jubal Harshaw.

Lambert
01-04-2014, 01:25 AM
A man asks a woman if she would be willing to sleep with him if he pays her an exorbitant sum. She replies affirmatively.

He then names a paltry amount and asks if she would still be willing to sleep with him for the revised fee. The woman is greatly offended and replies as follows:

She: What kind of woman do you think I am?

He: Weve already established that. Now were just haggling over the price.



Tough crowd.

That's almost a George Bernard Shaw quote. He was in a carriage in London with a high-society lady. As they passed Soho and saw prostitutes soliciting customers, the woman was digusted and asked George how could these women debase themselves to this level? George asked the woman, "Suppose you had no money and your child was ill with an illness that only an expensive operation could cure. Would you do it?" The woman said, "Well perhaps under those circumstances." George then said, " Well, we already have established what you are, and now are just dickering about the price."

BullNation4Life
01-04-2014, 12:32 PM
Texans trade for Ryan Mallet, already knows O'Brien's system, trade down from the #1 pick for more picks and stock pile to fill greater holes....

steelbtexan
01-04-2014, 12:46 PM
I'm starting to feel like this is one off-season I'm going to want to skip. I can't wait until the draft gets here.

Why?

TheIronDuke
01-04-2014, 12:50 PM
Texans trade for Ryan Mallet, already knows O'Brien's system, trade down from the #1 pick for more picks and stock pile to fill greater holes....

But then you'd cry about us being "Patriots 2.0.". I really wonder why anyone really wants Mallett at starter, he's dumb as hell and if he was such a hot commodity, someone would've traded for him by now.

BullNation4Life
01-04-2014, 12:54 PM
But then you'd cry about us being "Patriots 2.0.". I really wonder why anyone really wants Mallett at starter, he's dumb as hell and if he was such a hot commodity, someone would've traded for him by now.

Well hell if you are gonna go, go all in! You think he is dumb or that teams saw what happened when Matt Cassell left the Patriots system and was an ultimate fail, so why even bother?

If Mallet is running the same system under O'Brien, shouldn't he flourish, in theory?

steelbtexan
01-04-2014, 12:57 PM
Texans trade for Ryan Mallet, already knows O'Brien's system, trade down from the #1 pick for more picks and stock pile to fill greater holes....

^^^^
This

cstyle42
01-04-2014, 01:46 PM
^^^^
This

This... is the loser mindset that we must get away from. Ryan is a back up quarterback for a team that has a franchise qb. We are not trying to be the junior varsity version of the New England Patriots... we are building a team to beat them and everyone else to win the superbowl.

JCTexan
01-04-2014, 01:58 PM
Why?

The suspense and uncertainty of it all. We have barely gotten into the debate of Bridgewater vs. Clowney at #1 and I'm already getting tired of it. I'm ready for them to make a decision and it's not going to come for another five months. Thank God there is playoff football, the Winter Olympics, March Madness & baseball to get me through until the NFL draft gets here...

Errant Hothy
01-04-2014, 05:36 PM
Texans trade for Ryan Mallet, already knows O'Brien's system, trade down from the #1 pick for more picks and stock pile to fill greater holes....

I hope Smith and O'Brien stay as far as humanly possible from this mindset. Names like the following should be all the reason anybody needs as evidence against this. Kolb, Cassell, Flynn and to aaa lesser extent Schaub. A team needs star level talent to win in the NFL and Mallett ain't that.

thunderkyss
01-04-2014, 06:23 PM
I hope Smith and O'Brien stay as far as humanly possible from this mindset. Names like the following should be all the reason anybody needs as evidence against this. Kolb, Cassell, Flynn and to aaa lesser extent Schaub. A team needs star level talent to win in the NFL and Mallett ain't that.

Getting a player like Mallet (depending on what you have to give up) only allows us more flexibility in the draft. It allows us the ability to trade out of the first spot, picking up more picks (early picks) & acquiring more talented players.

It also gives us the ability to take the best non-QB available, then get a talented "star" level QB later in the draft..... Bortles, Manziel, Hundley, Mettenberger, even if we have to trade back into the first to do it.

Then of course if we draft a QB with the #1 overall, we don't have to just give him the job. Let him earn it

dalemurphy
01-04-2014, 06:24 PM
I hope Smith and O'Brien stay as far as humanly possible from this mindset. Names like the following should be all the reason anybody needs as evidence against this. Kolb, Cassell, Flynn and to aaa lesser extent Schaub. A team needs star level talent to win in the NFL and Mallett ain't that.

Drew Brees
Tom Brady
Kaepernick
Russell Wilson
Nick Foles
Alex Smith
Andy Dalton

All are starting QBs in these playoffs: None of those guys were drafted or signed as free agents with a widely held belief that they would be "star talent".

If O'brien believes in Mallett and can get him at a good price, then I am for it. To your point, though: I don't want our organization to look for a serviceable QB that could work well-enough.

LikeMike
01-04-2014, 06:35 PM
Getting a player like Mallet (depending on what you have to give up) only allows us more flexibility in the draft. It allows us the ability to trade out of the first spot, picking up more picks (early picks) & acquiring more talented players.

It also gives us the ability to take the best non-QB available, then get a talented "star" level QB later in the draft..... Bortles, Manziel, Hundley, Mettenberger, even if we have to trade back into the first to do it.

Then of course if we draft a QB with the #1 overall, we don't have to just give him the job. Let him earn it

What has Mallet shown so far? I don`t think he can be the long term solution for us - and he would come at a price. So basically we would give up picks to get QB that probably won`t be the long term solution.

Id say sign a veteran FA QB and draft a QB with one of our first two picks...

Errant Hothy
01-04-2014, 06:40 PM
Drew Brees
Tom Brady
Kaepernick
Russell Wilson
Nick Foles
Alex Smith
Andy Dalton

All are starting QBs in these playoffs: None of those guys were drafted or signed as free agents with a widely held belief that they would be "star talent".

If O'brien believes in Mallett and can get him at a good price, then I am for it. To your point, though: I don't want our organization to look for a serviceable QB that could work well-enough.

Smith and Dalton are both 1st round picks and Bress was a star coming off an injury. And none of the rest were traded for I have no problems drafting a QB outside of pick 1.1, but trading for one hardly ever works out. Especially when trading for the likes of Mallet.

ziggy29
01-04-2014, 06:42 PM
Smith and Dalton are both 1st round picks and Bress was a star coming off an injury. And none of the rest were traded for I have no problems drafting a QB outside of pick 1.1, but trading for one hardly ever works out. Especially when trading for the likes of Mallet.

Smith was not just a 1st rounder, but the #1 pick overall. The #24 pick overall was a serviceable QB named Aaron Rodgers.

thunderkyss
01-04-2014, 06:56 PM
What has Mallet shown so far? I don`t think...

This is predicated on what Bill O'Brien thinks, not me. He knows Mallet better than these guys in the draft. He might be fine with Matt Cassell.

thunderkyss
01-04-2014, 06:58 PM
Smith and Dalton are both 1st round picks

Dalton was not a 1st round pick.

Errant Hothy
01-04-2014, 07:10 PM
Dalton was not a 1st round pick.

You are right. Doesn't change the fact that only one of the 12 starting playoff QBS was traded for, and the one that was traded for had playoff experience. Something Mallet does not.

Also 25% of the starting playoff QBs were 1st overall picks Cam, Luck, Manning and Smith.

dalemurphy
01-04-2014, 07:18 PM
Smith and Dalton are both 1st round picks and Bress was a star coming off an injury. And none of the rest were traded for I have no problems drafting a QB outside of pick 1.1, but trading for one hardly ever works out. Especially when trading for the likes of Mallet.

Smith was not drafted by KC though... How did they acquire him?

Errant Hothy
01-04-2014, 08:24 PM
Smith was not drafted by KC though... How did they acquire him?

You didn't read all of my posts I'm guessing.

Smith had one thing when the Chiefs traded for him that Mallet does not and likely will never have. Playoff experience.

Texecutioner
01-04-2014, 08:27 PM
You didn't read all of my posts I'm guessing.

Smith had one thing when the Chiefs traded for him that Mallet does not and likely will never have. Playoff experience.

He had two games. Wow.

infantrycak
01-04-2014, 08:41 PM
Smith had one thing when the Chiefs traded for him that Mallet does not and likely will never have. Playoff experience.

He had two games. Wow.

Way underplaying your hand EA. How about - started an NFL game? Smith 75 starts plus 2 in playoffs v. 0 for Mallett.

Mallett does have one up on Smith. 50% of his NFL completions have been to the Texans.

Texecutioner
01-04-2014, 09:02 PM
Way underplaying your hand EA. How about - started an NFL game? Smith 75 starts plus 2 in playoffs v. 0 for Mallett.

Mallett does have one up on Smith. 50% of his NFL completions have been to the Texans.

I'm not saying that Mallet is better, nor was I even part of that argument Cak. The fact is that Mallet is this big "unknown" that had a lot of potential when he was drafted. A lot of people assume that he is this great QB in waiting because he plays on the Patriots, but really none of us has a clue what Mallet can do.

I was just commenting on the idea that Smith's playoff experience prior to this season was some big deal. It really wasn't. He went to the playoffs one year where he played in two games. FOr the record he played pretty well though.

thunderkyss
01-04-2014, 09:14 PM
You are right. Doesn't change the fact that only one of the 12 starting playoff QBS was traded for, and the one that was traded for had playoff experience. Something Mallet does not.

Also 25% of the starting playoff QBs were 1st overall picks Cam, Luck, Manning and Smith.

Trading for Mallet doesn't mean we don't take a first round QB.

Exascor
01-04-2014, 09:18 PM
Trading for Mallet doesn't mean we don't take a first round QB.

So we use 2 picks on qbs? I'd rather draft 2 than to use a pick on an unproven back up.

Errant Hothy
01-04-2014, 09:19 PM
Trading for Mallet doesn't mean we don't take a first round QB.

So you want us to give up some of the most valuable assets we have to get a QB and then spend another of those same assets on another QB? Why not just sign a vet FA and use only 1 draft pick on a QB?

bash
01-04-2014, 09:24 PM
Im open to jadevon clowney if we get mallet

thunderkyss
01-04-2014, 09:27 PM
So you want us to give up some of the most valuable assets we have to get a QB and then spend another of those same assets on another QB? Why not just sign a vet FA and use only 1 draft pick on a QB?

I'm open to possibilities. Mallet is just one of them. How about we swap #1s with Cleveland, they give us Hoyer & a 3rd.

drs23
01-04-2014, 09:41 PM
I'm open to possibilities. Mallet is just one of them. How about we swap #1s with Cleveland, they give us Hoyer & a 3rd.

How about we draft a pro ready QB that's been dissecting defenses, calling protections, changing plays at the line and then executing at a high caliber in a pro style offense?

Naaaa, that'd never work. Better to get rid of precious draft picks that we need more of for some never has been/never will be scrub. Yeah, that makes sense.

Damn, I'm good at this GM stuff. :whip:

thunderkyss
01-04-2014, 10:07 PM
How about we draft a pro ready QB that's been dissecting defenses, calling protections, changing plays at the line and then executing at a high caliber in a pro style offense?


If they feel that guy is in this draft, I'd have no problem with it. I don't think that guy is in this draft, so I'm looking at options.

drs23
01-04-2014, 10:52 PM
If they feel that guy is in this draft, I'd have no problem with it. I don't think that guy is in this draft, so I'm looking at options.

Fair enough. I guess I'll just sit back and watch since no matter how much I peck on these keys the Texans are gonna do what they're going to do obviously. So far I've been excited about what we know for sure and the rumors being floated are not upsetting at all. So far, so good.

PHILLYTEXANFAN
01-04-2014, 10:52 PM
Trade with STL. Take Clowney at 2, Bortles at 13

beerlover
01-04-2014, 11:04 PM
Trade with STL. Take Clowney at 2, Bortles at 13

Sorry Philly lost tonight! But why would St Louis need to trade up? If anything they are the ones who will be trading down. Texans I'm afraid are stuck. They just need to make the best player evaluation & move forward.

PHILLYTEXANFAN
01-04-2014, 11:08 PM
Sorry Philly lost tonight! d.

I hope thats sarcasm. Lol! I will NEVER EVER be affiliated with that sh*t team. Im a Texans fan through and through. I just live in the city. Haha

Texecutioner
01-04-2014, 11:25 PM
How about we draft a pro ready QB that's been dissecting defenses, calling protections, changing plays at the line and then executing at a high caliber in a pro style offense?

Naaaa, that'd never work. Better to get rid of precious draft picks that we need more of for some never has been/never will be scrub. Yeah, that makes sense.

Damn, I'm good at this GM stuff. :whip:

What do you mean? Did you not see those two games from Hoyer? He was on the way to some major success and was going to easily be a pro bowler. We should definitely target Hoyer and forget about the potential of these rookies.

Texecutioner
01-04-2014, 11:27 PM
Sorry Philly lost tonight! But why would St Louis need to trade up? If anything they are the ones who will be trading down. Texans I'm afraid are stuck. They just need to make the best player evaluation & move forward.

Yeah, I think that you are going to be right. However, with the amount of money that early picks "don't" make anymore, then people might be more inclined to trade up since they do't have to pay so much money for an unproven player. All it takes is one team to be in love with some guy like Bridgewater or Clowney. I could easily see a team like the Raiders or the Bills being dumb enough to trade up for a guy like Clowney.

thunderkyss
01-04-2014, 11:36 PM
Fair enough. I guess I'll just sit back and watch since no matter how much I peck on these keys the Texans are gonna do what they're going to do obviously. So far I've been excited about what we know for sure and the rumors being floated are not upsetting at all. So far, so good.

There is a possibility the Texans will not draft who we want them to. It's best if we don't fall in love with a player, or the idea that we have to take a particular position at a particular spot.

The goal is to win, in both the short & long term. There are more examples of the best QB in a draft not winning a Super Bowl, than there are of #1 QBs winning them. We need to be smart about this & acknowledge every QB in this draft have pros & cons; reasons they will succeed & reasons they may fail.

I'm not one of those who believe everything the Texans do or will do is correct. But I know they have information & will gather information I don't & won't.

Texecutioner
01-04-2014, 11:46 PM
There is a possibility the Texans will not draft who we want them to. It's best if we don't fall in love with a player, or the idea that we have to take a particular position at a particular spot.

Best advice anyone could take. Well said.

The goal is to win, in both the short & long term. There are more examples of the best QB in a draft not winning a Super Bowl, than there are of #1 QBs winning them. We need to be smart about this & acknowledge every QB in this draft have pros & cons; reasons they will succeed & reasons they may fail.


That's why I hope that O'Brien takes his time if he has to in order to find this QB. Not a lot of time, but extra if he feels that these guys aren't worth the investment from this draft. It will be very interesting to see how he takes this currently constructed team and transforms it into his own well oiled machine.

drs23
01-05-2014, 12:23 AM
What do you mean? Did you not see those two games from Hoyer? He was on the way to some major success and was going to easily be a pro bowler. We should definitely target Hoyer and forget about the potential of these rookies.

Yes Tex, I watched those starts by Brian Hoyer. He looked good, no doubt, and hasn't been a total bum since coming into the league as a UDFA in '09. IIRC after he got to Arizona Airens said he'd start the season with his as they were working on the deal for Palmer. I wasn't necessarily pointing at him when I made my tongue-in-cheek "scrub" remark upthread.

But "We should definitely target Hoyer and forget about the potential of these rookies." Fact is he's been serviceable in his backup role for the Pats and Browns but "major success" and "easily a pro bowler."? That's pure ambitious supposition.

My position hasn't changed though. My stance is we need to be harvesting picks, not coming off of em. Hoyer still has a year left on his contract in Cleveland. Unless Lombardi or whoever makes the calls up there wants to package him with a few primo picks to move up to 1-1 then personally, I'm not interested. I don't see that happening.

Regarding your position of "We should definitely target Hoyer and forget about the potential of these rookies", well that just floors me. All I can say is I'm very thankful your not in the position to make that call. I (almost) can't believe you typed that. Definitely spend picks on a UDFA backup with 3 starts since '09 and forget about a high potential face of the franchise QB. That surprises me coming from you.

To each their own.

beerlover
01-05-2014, 12:41 AM
Yeah, I think that you are going to be right. However, with the amount of money that early picks "don't" make anymore, then people might be more inclined to trade up since they do't have to pay so much money for an unproven player. All it takes is one team to be in love with some guy like Bridgewater or Clowney. I could easily see a team like the Raiders or the Bills being dumb enough to trade up for a guy like Clowney.

I can't hear you :tiphat:

All money aside, people are in fear for their jobs, unless you haven't heard. Smart play is to let Joe Blow in this case Texans, make first move then begins process in lock step. Have no idea why history repeats itself over & over it just does. Pretty obvious both St. Louis & Cleveland are smug in there recent moves to add 1st rd. draft picks & hell or high water will not deter their course. Last thing Texans need to do is get cute & miss out addressing a need that has haunted them since inception. :stooges:

drs23
01-05-2014, 12:52 AM
I can't hear you :tiphat:

All money aside, people are in fear for their jobs, unless you haven't heard. Smart play is to let Joe Blow in this case Texans, make first move then begins process in lock step. Have no idea why history repeats itself over & over it just does. Pretty obvious both St. Louis & Cleveland are smug in there recent moves to add 1st rd. draft picks & hell or high water will not deter their course. Last thing Texans need to do is get cute & miss out addressing a need that has haunted them since inception. :stooges:

That's my position as well. I know people say there are no "sure" players "worthy" of the 1-1 pick. This is the lot the team has drawn. I'll defer and support whatever decision the brass makes but if we can't find any suitors then we have to pull the trigger on one player or another. Right now I'm leaning toward being in TB's corner but many things can and will change between now and then. I think it's a very exciting time to be a Texan fan. I haven't looked forward to checking the MB each day ever I think. I know things will slow down but it's a whirlwind now and I'm enjoying it. I hope we're finally "on the right track"!

houstonhurricane
01-05-2014, 08:26 AM
There is a possibility the Texans will not draft who we want them to. It's best if we don't fall in love with a player, or the idea that we have to take a particular position at a particular spot.

The goal is to win, in both the short & long term. There are more examples of the best QB in a draft not winning a Super Bowl, than there are of #1 QBs winning them. We need to be smart about this & acknowledge every QB in this draft have pros & cons; reasons they will succeed & reasons they may fail.

I'm not one of those who believe everything the Texans do or will do is correct. But I know they have information & will gather information I don't & won't.

Excellent post. My thoughts exactly.

speedfreek
01-05-2014, 08:41 AM
I'm cool with trading the first pick if either Clowney or Matthews
are still available at our pick in round 1.

Many of the "touted" QB's will still be there at the end of
round 1 and beginning of round 2.

This year has proven to me that, without a doubt, we have a
ton of holes everywhere.

And that doesn't include the question marks posed by the injuries
to Cushing and Foster

Texecutioner
01-05-2014, 10:30 AM
Yes Tex, I watched those starts by Brian Hoyer. He looked good, no doubt, and hasn't been a total bum since coming into the league as a UDFA in '09. IIRC after he got to Arizona Airens said he'd start the season with his as they were working on the deal for Palmer. I wasn't necessarily pointing at him when I made my tongue-in-cheek "scrub" remark upthread.

But "We should definitely target Hoyer and forget about the potential of these rookies." Fact is he's been serviceable in his backup role for the Pats and Browns but "major success" and "easily a pro bowler."? That's pure ambitious supposition.

My position hasn't changed though. My stance is we need to be harvesting picks, not coming off of em. Hoyer still has a year left on his contract in Cleveland. Unless Lombardi or whoever makes the calls up there wants to package him with a few primo picks to move up to 1-1 then personally, I'm not interested. I don't see that happening.

Regarding your position of "We should definitely target Hoyer and forget about the potential of these rookies", well that just floors me. All I can say is I'm very thankful your not in the position to make that call. I (almost) can't believe you typed that. Definitely spend picks on a UDFA backup with 3 starts since '09 and forget about a high potential face of the franchise QB. That surprises me coming from you.

To each their own.

I was totally joking and being sarcastic about Hoyer. Lol!

I am not at all sold on some backup that had two nice games.

kingtexan
01-05-2014, 10:34 AM
Non-story. Everything in life is for sale ... everything. With the possible exception of children.

JCTexan
01-05-2014, 11:32 AM
I'm cool with trading the first pick if either Clowney or Matthews
are still available at our pick in round 1.

Many of the "touted" QB's will still be there at the end of
round 1 and beginning of round 2.

This year has proven to me that, without a doubt, we have a
ton of holes everywhere.

And that doesn't include the question marks posed by the injuries
to Cushing and Foster

Every single player in the draft will be available at 1.1...

drs23
01-05-2014, 02:29 PM
I was totally joking and being sarcastic about Hoyer. Lol!

I am not at all sold on some backup that had two nice games.

LOL. You got me. I know that didn't sound like you. Sarcasm smiley already, eh?

mussop
01-05-2014, 11:54 PM
"Maybe we'll trade down and still get a quarterback that can do the job and get an outstanding defensive player," McNair said Friday. "It's an exciting time. Everything's a moving target. Lot of different pieces."

Hmmm sounds like the first pick (if we stay at #1) is defiantly going to be a QB.

HOU-TEX
01-06-2014, 09:59 AM
I think it'll be tough to trade out of this pick this year. I don't think teams will trade multiple picks for a player not worthy of the #1 overall. IMO, the top 5 or so isn't very strong. Which is quite fitting considering our luck

Errant Hothy
01-06-2014, 10:02 AM
I think it'll be tough to trade out of this pick this year. I don't think teams will trade multiple picks for a player not worthy of the #1 overall. IMO, the top 5 or so isn't very strong. Which is quite fitting considering our luck

Even worse is that StL will probably take less to move out of the second spot, and unless somebody is desperately in love with 1 player they can get him then and for less.

Thorn
01-06-2014, 11:38 AM
I'm cool with trading the first pick if either Clowney or Matthews
are still available at our pick in round 1.

Many of the "touted" QB's will still be there at the end of
round 1 and beginning of round 2.

This year has proven to me that, without a doubt, we have a
ton of holes everywhere.

And that doesn't include the question marks posed by the injuries
to Cushing and Foster

There's not a position on this team that doesn't need help. Except for maybe the punter.

thunderkyss
01-06-2014, 11:51 AM
There's not a position on this team that doesn't need help. Except for maybe the punter.

Which is why we shouldn't be looking for a "RT". If the situation presents itself for us to draft a LT, or even sign an inepensive FA (a bit of an oxymoron for the position) we should do it. No reason to set the bar at "Duane Brown." The bar should be raised across the board.

If we draft a second rounder better than Kareem Jackson, so be it. We've got other wholes KJ can fill.

beerlover
01-06-2014, 11:57 AM
There's not a position on this team that doesn't need help. Except for maybe the punter.

oh snap, couldn't help but notice about every player cut off Texans special teams, expect for maybe Demps, have done ok everywhere else (Holliday, Jacoby, Donnie Jones, Shayne Graham) tells me more about Marciano & culture than player(s) specifically.

http://fantasynews.cbssports.com/fantasyfootball/players/playerpage/289074/shayne-graham

HuttoKarl
01-10-2014, 11:46 AM
Sooo, what it sounds like to me is the first plan is to draft a QB at No. 1.

Teddy, Teddy, Teddy...

I hope so.

This "open to trade" thing makes me think McNair's trying to pick up Manziel and set us up for disappointment.

DX-TEX
01-10-2014, 12:01 PM
I hope so.

This "open to trade" thing makes me think McNair's trying to pick up Manziel and set us up for disappointment.

Manziel is the exact opposite of what McNair wants as a player. Teddy is like his wet dream.

speedfreek
01-10-2014, 12:13 PM
McNair and I see eye to eye on this.. Trade down, get an outstanding
defensive player and get a QB that can do the job..

Clowney + Watt would be scary -- and might help offset starting
a back-to-back knee-surgery Cushing in the middle..
(while also helping out a slowed JJo and KJ at the same time)

The more I see the #'s, I just don't think there is any QB out there
truly franchise changing..

"Maybe we'll trade down and still get a quarterback that can do the job and get an outstanding defensive player," McNair said Friday. "It's an exciting time. Everything's a moving target. Lot of different pieces."

Hmmm sounds like the first pick (if we stay at #1) is defiantly going to be a QB.

paycheck71
01-10-2014, 12:38 PM
wait till the combine and interviews before labeling this group of QBs not worthy of #1 draft pick or franchise changers.

nobody really knows until they play.

Draft a qb already and stop messing about.

Can't disagree with this.

Also, as much as I love defense, this seems to be a league where you MUST have a good QB. A GREAT QB masks all kinds of problems in other areas. So, if you're in a position to get the QB you want, do it.

speedfreek
01-10-2014, 12:58 PM
So many of these QB look "good" but not "great". I doubt any of
the big names even throw at the combine (most don't)

I think we can still get one of the top 5 listed QB's later in the
1st round. (while getting another pick for DL or OL)

To me there is so little difference in any of the QB's. There really isn't
a Manning or Luck type out there.

I posted a rotoworld thread earlier (but it was either moved
or deleted) which showed that none of the top-4 QB's were
statistically that much different than the average draftable
QB

-with the exception that Carr was substantially worse than the
other 3


wait till the combine and interviews before labeling this group of QBs not worthy of #1 draft pick or franchise changers.

nobody really knows until they play.

Draft a qb already and stop messing about.

thunderkyss
01-10-2014, 01:44 PM
McNair and I see eye to eye on this.. Trade down, get an outstanding
defensive player and get a QB that can do the job..

Clowney + Watt would be scary -- and might help offset starting
a back-to-back knee-surgery Cushing in the middle..
(while also helping out a slowed JJo and KJ at the same time)

The more I see the #'s, I just don't think there is any QB out there
truly franchise changing..

Trading down to get Clowney & a QB later in the draft would be one of the more difficult things to do in this draft. Clowney will more than likely go in the first 5 picks & while any of those teams can sure use a QB.... Clowney & Chris Long wouldn't look bad either. Any of the teams we trade behind could very well use Clowney.

So when we're (at least I) are talking about Clowney plus a QB, we're talking about taking him at 1-1 & getting one latter in the draft, either trading back into the 1st (but chances are someone will draft Bridgewater, Manziel, & Bortles before the late 1st) or using 2-1.

thunderkyss
01-10-2014, 01:47 PM
wait till the combine and interviews before labeling this group of QBs not worthy of #1 draft pick or franchise changers.

nobody really knows until they play.

Draft a qb already and stop messing about.

1st, you're saying not to make up my mind about these QBs yet.

2nd, you tell me you've already made up yours??


:ok:

badboy
01-10-2014, 02:04 PM
That's almost a George Bernard Shaw quote. He was in a carriage in London with a high-society lady. As they passed Soho and saw prostitutes soliciting customers, the woman was digusted and asked George how could these women debase themselves to this level? George asked the woman, "Suppose you had no money and your child was ill with an illness that only an expensive operation could cure. Would you do it?" The woman said, "Well perhaps under those circumstances." George then said, " Well, we already have established what you are, and now are just dickering about the price."Almost but not quite:


Quote Investigator: The role of the character initiating the proposal in this anecdote has been assigned to George Bernard Shaw, Winston Churchill, Groucho Marx, Mark Twain, W.C. Fields, Bertrand Russell, H.G. Wells, Woodrow Wilson and others. However, the earliest example of this basic story found by QI did not spotlight any of the persons just listed. In addition, the punch line was phrased differently.

In January 1937 the syndicated newspaper columnist O. O. McIntyre printed a version of the anecdote that he says was sent to him as a newspaper clipping. This tale featured a powerful Canadian-British media magnate and politician named Max Aitken who was also referred to as Lord Beaverbrook [MJLB]:

http://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/03/07/haggling/

Here are many funny quotes by comedienne W C Fields for those interested.
http://www.mindspring.com/~hsstern/maewest/fields.htm

The Pencil Neck
01-10-2014, 02:08 PM
Trading down to get Clowney & a QB later in the draft would be one of the more difficult things to do in this draft. Clowney will more than likely go in the first 5 picks & while any of those teams can sure use a QB.... Clowney & Chris Long wouldn't look bad either. Any of the teams we trade behind could very well use Clowney.

So when we're (at least I) are talking about Clowney plus a QB, we're talking about taking him at 1-1 & getting one latter in the draft, either trading back into the 1st (but chances are someone will draft Bridgewater, Manziel, & Bortles before the late 1st) or using 2-1.

Trading down usually doesn't involve a big drop. I doubt if we trade back that we'll trade out of the top 5. We just need a couple of the other top-5 teams to fall in love with a particular QB and for one of them to want to trade up to get him.

Of course, if the team in between where we were and where we trade to drafts Clowney, then that plan is blown and we end up with whoever the trade gods force on us.

So it's probably wiser to just pick the guy you want unless you wouldn't mind having any of them.

TheMatrix31
01-10-2014, 02:14 PM
I don't think there's any real chance we take Clowney. He's not a Houston Texans-type player as evidenced by his idiocy off the field. Plus, with people questioning his motor on the field and us seeing how a relentless motor matters (Watt, Cushing, etc)....I just don't see it.

eriadoc
01-10-2014, 02:25 PM
Also, as much as I love defense, this seems to be a league where you MUST have a good QB. A GREAT QB masks all kinds of problems in other areas. So, if you're in a position to get the QB you want, do it.

What if they aren't in a position to get a great QB? What if they're in position to get an Alex Smith or Matt Schaub caliber QB at #1? What if TB, Bortles, Manziel, and whoever else end up being the next wave of Locker, Tannehill, Ponder, Gabbert, Freeman, Geno Smith, and Dalton?

Titans took Jake Locker at #8 in 2011, for example. They probably felt like he could be the QB of the future. Think they would redraft that way now? They could have taken the defensive guy at #11 that year. In 2010, the Rams took Sam Bradford #1 overall. This might be our best history lesson, actually. Bradford has been good enough that you can't really call him a bust, but was he worth the #1 pick overall? I'm sure there's someone who was taken shortly thereafter that would have helped more.

I understand the sentiment to grab the next franchise QB. I want that too. But if he isn't there, don't force it. Ending up with a bust wouldn't be the worst result. The worst result would be ending up with the guy that you're always wondering about. Is he good enough? Is it the OL? Is it the coaching? Scheme? Maybe if we get him more weapons? Blah.

BullNation4Life
01-10-2014, 02:57 PM
I still see O'Brien making a run to trade for Mallett and possibly bringing in a vet, Cassel, to run his offense and trading back, even out of the top 10, to get more picks....

BullNation4Life
01-10-2014, 02:58 PM
What if they aren't in a position to get a great QB? What if they're in position to get an Alex Smith or Matt Schaub caliber QB at #1? What if TB, Bortles, Manziel, and whoever else end up being the next wave of Locker, Tannehill, Ponder, Gabbert, Freeman, Geno Smith, and Dalton?

Titans took Jake Locker at #8 in 2011, for example. They probably felt like he could be the QB of the future. Think they would redraft that way now? They could have taken the defensive guy at #11 that year. In 2010, the Rams took Sam Bradford #1 overall. This might be our best history lesson, actually. Bradford has been good enough that you can't really call him a bust, but was he worth the #1 pick overall? I'm sure there's someone who was taken shortly thereafter that would have helped more.

I understand the sentiment to grab the next franchise QB. I want that too. But if he isn't there, don't force it. Ending up with a bust wouldn't be the worst result. The worst result would be ending up with the guy that you're always wondering about. Is he good enough? Is it the OL? Is it the coaching? Scheme? Maybe if we get him more weapons? Blah.

Didn't we already go through that with Matty Pick 6? Can't say it won't happen again though...

thunderkyss
01-10-2014, 03:53 PM
I still see O'Brien making a run to trade for Mallett and possibly bringing in a vet, Cassel, to run his offense and trading back, even out of the top 10, to get more picks....

I found a few youtube clips of him & checked out some scouting reports. I wouldn't be mad at l if we traded two twos to get him. Likd we did for Schaub. He might not be a franchise guy, but I think he can be an effective starter. I like him as much as any QB in this draft. We're not winning a Super Bowl with Bidgewater, Manziel, or Bortles. & I wouldn't feel comfortable starting any of them on day 1. Not with what I've seen so far.

infantrycak
01-10-2014, 03:57 PM
We're not winning a Super Bowl with Bidgewater, Manziel, or Bortles. & I wouldn't feel comfortable starting any of them on day 1. Not with what I've seen so far.

There is absolutely zero ability to look at any of those guys and say we're not winning a Super Bowl with one. It's a silly assertion in connection with almost any QB.

JB
01-10-2014, 03:58 PM
How about if we trade a 6th for Brad Smith, do without a QB and run the wildcat all the time? :kitten: :evil: :bubbles:

DBCooper
01-10-2014, 04:00 PM
There is absolutely zero ability to look at any of those guys and say we're not winning a Super Bowl with one. It's a silly assertion in connection with almost any QB.

No way cak, it's an exact science.

That's why Brady was a 6th rounder.

paycheck71
01-10-2014, 04:27 PM
What if they aren't in a position to get a great QB? What if they're in position to get an Alex Smith or Matt Schaub caliber QB at #1? What if TB, Bortles, Manziel, and whoever else end up being the next wave of Locker, Tannehill, Ponder, Gabbert, Freeman, Geno Smith, and Dalton?

Titans took Jake Locker at #8 in 2011, for example. They probably felt like he could be the QB of the future. Think they would redraft that way now? They could have taken the defensive guy at #11 that year. In 2010, the Rams took Sam Bradford #1 overall. This might be our best history lesson, actually. Bradford has been good enough that you can't really call him a bust, but was he worth the #1 pick overall? I'm sure there's someone who was taken shortly thereafter that would have helped more.

I understand the sentiment to grab the next franchise QB. I want that too. But if he isn't there, don't force it. Ending up with a bust wouldn't be the worst result. The worst result would be ending up with the guy that you're always wondering about. Is he good enough? Is it the OL? Is it the coaching? Scheme? Maybe if we get him more weapons? Blah.

Hindsight is always 20/20. You don't know how any of the players you take are going to work out, even at 1.1. So, you do the best you can then, you prepare the very best way possible and make the decision that you can be happy with at that time. And that means that if you feel the QB you want is there, you take him. Unless you feel he'll still be there later in the draft, then you do something else. And if you don't feel strongly about any of the QB's, or other players for that matter, you do something else, too.

It doesn't matter what we think about these players; it only matters what they do. And a lot of this won't be decided until after the combine. Nobody was taking Tannehill in the top 10 two years ago until the combine.

thunderkyss
01-10-2014, 05:19 PM
There is absolutely zero ability to look at any of those guys and say we're not winning a Super Bowl with one. It's a silly assertion in connection with almost any QB.

Too far? Fair enough.

LikeMike
01-10-2014, 06:34 PM
So many of these QB look "good" but not "great". I doubt any of
the big names even throw at the combine (most don't)

I think we can still get one of the top 5 listed QB's later in the
1st round. (while getting another pick for DL or OL)

To me there is so little difference in any of the QB's. There really isn't
a Manning or Luck type out there.

I posted a rotoworld thread earlier (but it was either moved
or deleted) which showed that none of the top-4 QB's were
statistically that much different than the average draftable
QB

-with the exception that Carr was substantially worse than the
other 3

There is one thing that makes Bridgewater special in my opinion - and that`s his football IQ. It was called savant-like before, and it sounds a lot like Manning. Bridgewater is elite at reading defenses presnap, rarely makes mistakes with the ball and usually hits the right guy. He is constantly in the film room or studying gameplans.

I feel like a lot of QBs fail despite having all the physical tools because either the game is too fast for them (with too many things going on) or they lack motivation to put in all the work needed. Both of these things should be no problem with Bridgewater.

Scooter
01-20-2014, 10:50 AM
i would match whatever the rams offer or even less if the browns wanted to move up. there is nothing greater in the NFL offseason than acquiring more draft picks. one team follows through with that philosophy, and they have more superbowl rings/appearances than anyone since the 90's. #1's bust as often as anyone else, and the only way to stack the odds in your favor is to make more picks.

Section516
01-20-2014, 10:56 AM
In my opinion, if you have the three quarterbacks ranked nearly the same..Trade down to four, pick between remaining, if none remaining, Clowney or another tradeback.

If you're having trouble waiting for the draft, offering free time machine rides..
:barman:

IDEXAN
01-20-2014, 11:07 AM
i would match whatever the rams offer or even less if the browns wanted to move up. there is nothing greater in the NFL offseason than acquiring more draft picks. one team follows through with that philosophy, and they have more superbowl rings/appearances than anyone since the 90's. #1's bust as often as anyone else, and the only way to stack the odds in your favor is to make more picks.
Bingo !
Would exchange our 1 for their 4 & 26 in a heart-beat even though the DVC indicates we'd be 400 points short on that deal. I might even consider more boot to the Browns ? It is all about Draft picks, that's where a team is built, not in FA. Of course you've got to draft wisely.

infantrycak
01-20-2014, 11:10 AM
Bingo !
Would exchange our 1 for their 4 & 26 in a heart-beat even though the DVC indicates we'd be 400 points short on that deal. I might even consider more boot to the Browns ? It is all about Draft picks, that's where a team is built, not in FA. Of course you've got to draft wisely.

The bold negates the trade at all costs mentality. It isn't drafting wisely to trade back and get the 4th best QB when you think only 2 are good.

Scooter
01-20-2014, 11:26 AM
The bold negates the trade at all costs mentality. It isn't drafting wisely to trade back and get the 4th best QB when you think only 2 are good.

russell wilson has hardly looked better than case keenum the last 2 months, yet the seahawks are going to the superbowl. if i trade back and the best player isnt a quarterback, so be it. the AFC is being carried by 2 hall of fame QB's who wont be far from 1 and 2 on the greatest of all time list. the NFC however is being won the other way, by exceptional talent around the field (a lot of suck going into years of early draft picks). only 1 of this weekend's qb's was even a first rounder.

i'm of the mind that the quarterback, while THE key player, is still just a draft pick like any other (peyton, carr, vick, russell, stafford, luck, cam ... the full gambit of boom and bust) - until he proves otherwise. if i can get an OT and an OG in the first round that would give enough time for even texanbill to make throws, we can be successful. same setting on defense. i'd take the risk that one of those 2 quarterbacks is still available, and if he isnt - a starter at another position will be. probably 2 starters with the additional early pick.

IDEXAN
01-20-2014, 11:42 AM
The bold negates the trade at all costs mentality. It isn't drafting wisely to trade back and get the 4th best QB when you think only 2 are good.
JMO of course, but this years QB class is starting to feel to me like last years class which means not that talented at that top. Perhaps BOB sees someone he likes farther down the Board or a veteran backup like the guy in NE as the best QB option for his team right now.
So obviously if there's a stud prospect there like a Luck or a Manning the fortunate team with the top pick just sits on their hands and ignores all offers, but nobody sees any such Draft Board in 2014 which
requires improvization if the opportunity presents itself.

Playoffs
01-20-2014, 11:53 AM
As much as I'd love to see a trade, I'd rather have OB wowed enough by one particular QB -- or other player -- that the price he puts on first overall is too high for even a fool to pay.

Without a standout player, our first is closer in value to the following picks.

Our best trade bet might be two teams that fall in love with Jadeveon Clowney competing to trade up for him.

IDEXAN
01-20-2014, 11:58 AM
russell wilson has hardly looked better than case keenum the last 2 months, yet the seahawks are going to the superbowl. if i trade back and the best player isnt a quarterback, so be it. the AFC is being carried by 2 hall of fame QB's who wont be far from 1 and 2 on the greatest of all time list. the NFC however is being won the other way, by exceptional talent around the field (a lot of suck going into years of early draft picks). only 1 of this weekend's qb's was even a first rounder.

i'm of the mind that the quarterback, while THE key player, is still just a draft pick like any other (peyton, carr, vick, russell, stafford, luck, cam ... the full gambit of boom and bust) - until he proves otherwise. if i can get an OT and an OG in the first round that would give enough time for even texanbill to make throws, we can be successful. same setting on defense. i'd take the risk that one of those 2 quarterbacks is still available, and if he isnt - a starter at another position will be. probably 2 starters with the additional early pick.
Very well stated.
But now Manning also has an outstanding supporting cast with a strong receiving corp, xcellent back, and very good OLine. Did the Pats even touch Manning yesterday ?

Scooter
01-20-2014, 12:03 PM
i have no problem with being so enamored with a player that he warrants a #1, but you have to be certain. i have trouble seeing that player. i'd rather have keenum than manziel. bridgewater and bortles both have big question marks. and clowney has more bust potential than anyone else in the early first.

if i could drop to 4 and grab the quarterback that falls, or matthews or barr - i'd take it every time. you're either getting that quarterback, or you're getting more of a sure bet that still has a high ceiling that can help anchor the team for years ... along with another first round pick (and probably more).

Scooter
01-20-2014, 12:11 PM
Very well stated.
But now Manning also has an outstanding supporting cast with a strong receiving corp, xcellent back, and very good OLine. Did the Pats even touch Manning yesterday?

nope, but they beat the snot out of andrew luck. manning went to a team that made the playoffs with tim tebow, and that's what i want to see. we're a team that's a year away from 12 wins with a gimp schaub. i'd continue to build on that and add talent to the roster at every opportunity. if "THE MAN" at quarterback is available (and OB might feel he is at #1 which is just fine) then you grab him. if the "HE HAS A CHANCE TO BE THE MAN MAYBE" is available, he's more likely to cripple the franchise than help. that's where i'm currently at, and why i'm preaching trade down and build talent + depth.

edit: i sure do get repetitive when i drink.

Victor B
01-20-2014, 03:22 PM
nope, but they beat the snot out of andrew luck. manning went to a team that made the playoffs with tim tebow, and that's what i want to see. we're a team that's a year away from 12 wins with a gimp schaub. i'd continue to build on that and add talent to the roster at every opportunity. if "THE MAN" at quarterback is available (and OB might feel he is at #1 which is just fine) then you grab him. if the "HE HAS A CHANCE TO BE THE MAN MAYBE" is available, he's more likely to cripple the franchise than help. that's where i'm currently at, and why i'm preaching trade down and build talent + depth.

Agreed. Don't reach with a QB with the hopes that he might be the future. If they feel that one of those "Top Rated" QB prospects are the future, then make the pick. If not, take Clowney.

Honestly, I would feel better about the direction of the franchise if they took Clowney with the #1. You are statistically less prone to set your franchise back if you don't take a QB #1. If they take a QB #1 then he will play despite the fact that he is ready or not. That will not only hurt us, but it will hurt that player's development as well.

How much time are we going to give a rookie QB to straighten things out before we declare him a bust? Everyone wants to win now and if the kid doesn't come out and lead us to the playoffs we will be calling to draft another QB in 2015. We gave an UDF QB with virtually no real practice time 8 games before we decided he wasn't serviceable. The verdict isn't in on him, and it also won't be on another rookie QB after year 1. Have patience.

People should take a step back from the "we need to win now!" emotions and look at what is more beneficial for our team in the long run. Build a strong foundation because we don't have one. Don't bring in a kid and set him up for failure from day 1.

infantrycak
01-20-2014, 03:35 PM
You are statistically less prone to set your franchise back if you don't take a QB #1.

Love to see that assertion supported.

Victor B
01-20-2014, 03:52 PM
Love to see that assertion supported.

I'm on the phone with Daryl Morey now...

How integral is the QB position on a team? Taking a QB high in the draft is essentially guaranteeing him a starting spot is it not? If you fail on your QB pick you're setting the team back. If you fail on your DE pick or WR pick or RB pick it is not going to have the same ill effect as missing on a QB pick.

I'm having flashbacks of 2002. Carr over Peppers. Maybe we should have gone with Young over Williams in 2006 too.

infantrycak
01-20-2014, 04:20 PM
I'm on the phone with Daryl Morey now...

How integral is the QB position on a team? Taking a QB high in the draft is essentially guaranteeing him a starting spot is it not? If you fail on your QB pick you're setting the team back. If you fail on your DE pick or WR pick or RB pick it is not going to have the same ill effect as missing on a QB pick.

I'm having flashbacks of 2002. Carr over Peppers. Maybe we should have gone with Young over Williams in 2006 too.

Your construct is fallacious.

Taking anyone high in the draft essentially guarantees them a starting spot.

If you fail on any pick high WR, DE, RB or QB you're setting the team back and just as much - the same wasted pick. The opportunity to have improved the team and not having done so.

It is the players involved not the positions which determine how poor a choice is made. Brian Urlacher clearly would have been a better choice than Courtney Brown. Doesn't mean start taking LBs higher than DEs.

Dutchrudder
01-20-2014, 04:22 PM
I'm on the phone with Daryl Morey now...

How integral is the QB position on a team? Taking a QB high in the draft is essentially guaranteeing him a starting spot is it not? If you fail on your QB pick you're setting the team back. If you fail on your DE pick or WR pick or RB pick it is not going to have the same ill effect as missing on a QB pick.

I'm having flashbacks of 2002. Carr over Peppers. Maybe we should have gone with Young over Williams in 2006 too.

It's not anything like the Carr debacle because the player contracts are completely different. The Rams were the last team to be in that position, with a #1 QB who had a huge 50 million dollar anchor around the GM's neck. If we take a QB at #1 this year he will be making around 5.5m a year for 4 years, which is not really a big deal. Just for the hell of it:

Name - Length - Total - Per year
Sam Bradford - 6 years, 78m, 13m
Cam Newton - 4 years 22.02m, 5.5m
Andrew Luck - 4 years, 22.10m, 5.5m
Eric Fisher - 4 years, 22.19m, 5.5m

Contracts are clearly cheap now, and the risk of taking a #1 overall QB is significantly less than in the past. Now is the time to take those risks because the bust factor doesn't kill you cap for the next 5+ years.

Playoffs
01-20-2014, 04:27 PM
Your construct is fallacious.

Yeah, we could just avoid the QB position altogether... :kitten:

Or we could hire a guy who we think knows how to evaluate and coach up QBs for a multiple offense in the NFL. :texans:

BullNation4Life
01-20-2014, 04:39 PM
There is one thing that makes Bridgewater special in my opinion - and that`s his football IQ. It was called savant-like before, and it sounds a lot like Manning. Bridgewater is elite at reading defenses presnap, rarely makes mistakes with the ball and usually hits the right guy. He is constantly in the film room or studying gameplans.

I feel like a lot of QBs fail despite having all the physical tools because either the game is too fast for them (with too many things going on) or they lack motivation to put in all the work needed. Both of these things should be no problem with Bridgewater.

OMG, elite at reading college defense? Might want to wipe your upper lip, you have a kool aide mustache....

Bridgewater, Manziel, Bortles, so on is elite at NOTHING until they step onto a NFL field.

there are allot of players coming out of college with "high football IQ" but until they get on the field and prove it, they are nothings....

Corrosion
01-20-2014, 05:06 PM
Very well stated.
But now Manning also has an outstanding supporting cast with a strong receiving corp, xcellent back, and very good OLine. Did the Pats even touch Manning yesterday ?

That Oline is horrible , riddled with injuries from the beginning of the season .... The reason they look good is Manning getting rid of the ball in 1.6 seconds or less on so many occasions - Its near impossible to get to any QB in that short amount of time , unless he falls down or hugs a defender.

DBCooper
01-20-2014, 06:07 PM
That Oline is horrible , riddled with injuries from the beginning of the season .... The reason they look good is Manning getting rid of the ball in 1.6 seconds or less on so many occasions - Its near impossible to get to any QB in that short amount of time , unless he falls down or hugs a defender.

Lol

We've had those!

steelbtexan
01-20-2014, 06:15 PM
How about if we trade a 6th for Brad Smith, do without a QB and run the wildcat all the time? :kitten: :evil: :bubbles:

How about we use a 3rd on Brett Smith and get the best QB in this draft.

After seeing Garappolo for the 1st time this weekend, he and Brett Smith intrigue me more any any other QB's in this class.

kingtexan
01-20-2014, 06:48 PM
The only QB that right now could garner taking a chance with using the #1 pick is JFF. If you don't believe he is your QB, you trade the pick so Cleveland can get him and you pick at #4.

Marshall
01-20-2014, 06:53 PM
nope, but they beat the snot out of andrew luck. manning went to a team that made the playoffs with tim tebow, and that's what i want to see. we're a team that's a year away from 12 wins with a gimp schaub. i'd continue to build on that and add talent to the roster at every opportunity. if "THE MAN" at quarterback is available (and OB might feel he is at #1 which is just fine) then you grab him. if the "HE HAS A CHANCE TO BE THE MAN MAYBE" is available, he's more likely to cripple the franchise than help. that's where i'm currently at, and why i'm preaching trade down and build talent + depth.

edit: i sure do get repetitive when i drink.
I'm repetitive and I don't drink.

pbthunder
01-20-2014, 08:34 PM
McNair and I see eye to eye on this.. Trade down, get an outstanding
defensive player and get a QB that can do the job..

Clowney + Watt would be scary -- and might help offset starting
a back-to-back knee-surgery Cushing in the middle..
(while also helping out a slowed JJo and KJ at the same time)

The more I see the #'s, I just don't think there is any QB out there
truly franchise changing..

I could see taking a QB as low as high 2nd round, meaning we could use everything we get for that #1 pick elsewhere.

Texan_Bill
01-20-2014, 08:49 PM
McNair and I see eye to eye on this.. Trade down, get an outstanding
defensive player and get a QB that can do the job..

Clowney + Watt would be scary -- and might help offset starting
a back-to-back knee-surgery Cushing in the middle..
(while also helping out a slowed JJo and KJ at the same time)

The more I see the #'s, I just don't think there is any QB out there
truly franchise changing..

I'm not actually far off from this. Well, with the exception that Bortles could be "that guy" at the first pick. While I disagree on that, I think AJ McCarron later on in the first round (if they traded down) or maybe on early in the second round and pick up an extra pick or two would be cool!

badboy
01-22-2014, 02:02 PM
Not sure if posted elsewhere but "According to CBS’s Jason La Canfora, the Browns are willing to trade up to select the Texas A&M quarterback.

The Browns have two first-round picks in May’s draft: the No. 4 overall selection and No. 26, which they acquired in a September trade with the Indianapolis Colts for running back Trent Richardson.

The Texans, St. Louis Rams and Jacksonville Jaguars pick ahead of the Browns. In order to move up, Cleveland would likely have to trade both first-round picks or package the No. 4 overall pick with several second and third-day selections.

The Texans could be a willing trade partner for the Browns. Earlier this month, owner Bob McNair said the team might trade the No. 1 overall pick for more draft choices."


http://bleacherreport.com/tb/dcfy8?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=houston-texans

JCTexan
01-22-2014, 03:40 PM
If the Browns rumor is true that could be another reason why no coach wants to go there.

badboy
01-22-2014, 05:44 PM
If the Browns rumor is true that could be another reason why no coach wants to go there.? I would think having the #1 pick and a high 2nd would be enticing.

JCTexan
01-22-2014, 07:29 PM
? I would think having the #1 pick and a high 2nd would be enticing.

Not if the owner has already made up his mind about who the #1 pick would be. As a new HC that #1 pick could be what ultimately decides how successful you are, so why would you want to be forced with Manziel if you don't see him as the #1?

mussop
01-23-2014, 08:36 AM
russell wilson has hardly looked better than case keenum the last 2 months, yet the seahawks are going to the superbowl. if i trade back and the best player isnt a quarterback, so be it. the AFC is being carried by 2 hall of fame QB's who wont be far from 1 and 2 on the greatest of all time list. the NFC however is being won the other way, by exceptional talent around the field (a lot of suck going into years of early draft picks). only 1 of this weekend's qb's was even a first rounder.

i'm of the mind that the quarterback, while THE key player, is still just a draft pick like any other (peyton, carr, vick, russell, stafford, luck, cam ... the full gambit of boom and bust) - until he proves otherwise. if i can get an OT and an OG in the first round that would give enough time for even texanbill to make throws, we can be successful. same setting on defense. i'd take the risk that one of those 2 quarterbacks is still available, and if he isnt - a starter at another position will be. probably 2 starters with the additional early pick.

Don't actually agree that Wilson looks like case but you are making some very good points.

thunderkyss
01-23-2014, 03:51 PM
Not if the owner has already made up his mind about who the #1 pick would be. As a new HC that #1 pick could be what ultimately decides how successful you are, so why would you want to be forced with Manziel if you don't see him as the #1?

If the Browns are saying they are willing to trade up to the #1 position to draft Johnny Manziel, the only thing you can be sure of is that the Browns are not interested in trading up to get Johnny Manziel.

Scooter
01-23-2014, 05:15 PM
Don't actually agree that Wilson looks like case but you are making some very good points.

keenum's 8 games vs wilson's last 8

1760 yards vs 1543 yards
54.2% vs 61.6%
9/6 td/int vs 10/3 td/int

considering the teams and their wildly different situations, the two arent far apart. i only mean to say however that it doesnt take the best quarterback ever to get to the superbowl when you have such a complete roster. that's how i'd personally build a team. quite literally a best player available approach, and allow that talent to make everyone better - which includes making a good qb look great with protection, receiving and a run game.

Scooter
01-23-2014, 07:39 PM
If the Browns are saying they are willing to trade up to the #1 position to draft Johnny Manziel, the only thing you can be sure of is that the Browns are not interested in trading up to get Johnny Manziel.

well, it is the browns ...

TdotTexas2Step
01-24-2014, 12:35 AM
keenum's 8 games vs wilson's last 8

1760 yards vs 1543 yards
54.2% vs 61.6%
9/6 td/int vs 10/3 td/int

considering the teams and their wildly different situations, the two arent far apart. i only mean to say however that it doesnt take the best quarterback ever to get to the superbowl when you have such a complete roster. that's how i'd personally build a team. quite literally a best player available approach, and allow that talent to make everyone better - which includes making a good qb look great with protection, receiving and a run game.

Making comparisons for the sake of comparisons using Wilson and Keenum is fair and all, but using passing stats like the ones provided really slant the argument in your favour.

You've also got to consider that Seattle doesn't play in a lot of close games, and thus typically aren't forced to pass the ball to play catch up.

In Wilson's last 8 regular season games, the Seahawks put up the following stats:

W/L Record: 6-2
Total Pts: 212 pts
Pts/GM: 26.5 pts
Total Pt Differential: +107
5 of those wins were 19 pts or more

Wilson also doesn't have the most talented receiving core either. Furthermore, I think Keenum's stats are further inflated due to the fact that our run game was very poor this season too. You can also argue that the lack of a run game made it difficult for Keenum to keep the defense honest, and that would be fair. But if you're making a comparison between Wilson and Keenum, and using passing stats to tell the story, then you also can't ignore that Seattle's effective running game takes away from Wilson's passing opportunities.

rush yards rankings
sea - 7
houston 23

rush attempts rankings
sea - 10
houston - 24

rush yards/attempt rankings
sea - 7
houston - 22

rush yards/gm rankings
sea - 7
houston - 23


Look, Keenum's a great kid and most of us would be totally cool with him getting a fair shot at the starting gig next year. But he's going to be facing an uphill battle once again. Comparing him to Wilson and saying the two are close would IMO be inaccurate.

We saw what Wilson can do when he takes a game into his own hands when they visited Houston earlier in the season. Schaub may have thrown it away, but Wilson made big play after big play to put his team in a position to win.

Scooter
01-24-2014, 01:44 AM
you make great points, but i seem to have steered in the wrong direction. i wasnt trying to directly compare the two quarterbacks, wilson is certainly much further ahead (i probably should've chosen someone other than keenum). my intent was to point out that the seahawks have been winning without wilson carrying the team, or even playing particularly well over the past couple months. heck he beat the powerhouse saints with 103 yards.

i want that. i want a team that can get to the superbowl without needing the quarterback to carry them, because the playoffs are so much more defense and blocking oriented than the regular season. obviously i'd love the next manning or brady, but diving into haystacks looking for him usually just ends with an unpleasant itch.

TdotTexas2Step
01-24-2014, 11:11 AM
you make great points, but i seem to have steered in the wrong direction. i wasnt trying to directly compare the two quarterbacks, wilson is certainly much further ahead (i probably should've chosen someone other than keenum). my intent was to point out that the seahawks have been winning without wilson carrying the team, or even playing particularly well over the past couple months. heck he beat the powerhouse saints with 103 yards.

i want that. i want a team that can get to the superbowl without needing the quarterback to carry them, because the playoffs are so much more defense and blocking oriented than the regular season. obviously i'd love the next manning or brady, but diving into haystacks looking for him usually just ends with an unpleasant itch.


I hear you, and I understand where you're coming from. I just know that when Wilson is required to put the team on his shoulders, he has the ability to do so and actually has done so. I want Keenum to succeed, but so far he's come up empty in that regards. We can blame the team around him, but Wilson too sometimes doesn't have much to work with on the offensive end in regards to a passing game.

At the same time, I don't think there is a Brady or Manning in this draft as well, and if we can move down while acquiring assets, then so be it.

thunderkyss
01-24-2014, 06:59 PM
Making comparisons for the sake of comparisons using Wilson and Keenum is fair and all, but using passing stats like the ones provided really slant the argument in your favour.

You've also got to consider that Seattle doesn't play in a lot of close games, and thus typically aren't forced to pass the ball to play catch up.


I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think your arguments add up to the same thing.... I don't think we spent a lot of time playing catch up either. Most of the time, we had the lead going into the half, but couldn't put points on the board to maintain the lead. We didn't lose many games by more than 7.





Look, Keenum's a great kid and most of us would be totally cool with him getting a fair shot at the starting gig next year. But he's going to be facing an uphill battle once again. Comparing him to Wilson and saying the two are close would IMO be inaccurate.

We saw what Wilson can do when he takes a game into his own hands when they visited Houston earlier in the season. Schaub may have thrown it away, but Wilson made big play after big play to put his team in a position to win.

Like you I think this is the biggest difference... however the lesson I got from this, is that Russell Wilson made plays in clutch situations where Schaub & Keenum didn't.

Case has got the talent, I believe that; but talent is only part of the equation at this level. I'm not saying Case can't get it done at this level & I don't believe he was put in the best situation to succeed. But the deck is no stacked against him even more than before. It is what it is. Time to move forward.

badboy
01-25-2014, 04:23 PM
I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think your arguments add up to the same thing.... I don't think we spent a lot of time playing catch up either. Most of the time, we had the lead going into the half, but couldn't put points on the board to maintain the lead. We didn't lose many games by more than 7.





Like you I think this is the biggest difference... however the lesson I got from this, is that Russell Wilson made plays in clutch situations where Schaub & Keenum didn't.

Case has got the talent, I believe that; but talent is only part of the equation at this level. I'm not saying Case can't get it done at this level & I don't believe he was put in the best situation to succeed. But the deck is no stacked against him even more than before. It is what it is. Time to move forward.
If Case has the talent, why not keep him as the 3rd QB and coach him?

thunderkyss
01-25-2014, 05:58 PM
If Case has the talent, why not keep him as the 3rd QB and coach him?

I didn't say not to. I want a FA veteran, a rookie with first round talent, & either Case or Tj in camp. If OB thinks we need to keep three QBs, I'm fine with that. If he decides two is good enough, I'm fine with that as well.

JB
01-25-2014, 08:49 PM
I didn't say not to. I want a FA veteran, a rookie with first round talent, & either Case or Tj in camp. If OB thinks we need to keep three QBs, I'm fine with that. If he decides two is good enough, I'm fine with that as well.

But you don't want us to draft a qb in the first round, right? Who do you think will be there later that will meet your requirements?

rmartin65
01-25-2014, 09:13 PM
But you don't want us to draft a qb in the first round, right? Who do you think will be there later that will meet your requirements?

Pick a random QB who is 6'5" 240 lbs or bigger, QB skills be damned.






Just having a bit of fun with you, tk

pbthunder
01-26-2014, 01:45 AM
Kind of how the Rockets did with having several PFs, why don't we spend a 2nd and a 4th on QBs, keep Case too, and just wait and see who asserts himself over the next 2 years? Dallas brought Romo along slowly ; Parcells knew Romo was special, though Jones would have run him off if not for Parcells.

thunderkyss
01-26-2014, 04:07 AM
But you don't want us to draft a qb in the first round, right? Who do you think will be there later that will meet your requirements?

I said first round talent. Plenty of QBs in this class would go in the first round under different circumstances. Mettenberger, Murray, McCarron, & Boyd are still on my list. If I can get them in the second or third..... or 4th (Logan Thomas) I'll plan my draft to do so.


At the same time, I like Bridgewater, Manziel, & Bortles..... I just don't think any of them are worth the #1 overall & I wouldn't allow pressure from Jacksonville & Cleveland to force me to select them over superior talent, if this draft has superior talent.

It's still early, I haven't looked at everybody in this draft yet, there may not be any more talented players. But right now, I see two maybe three LTs, I'm not seeing too many Sammy Watkins yet either. Of course, there's Jadaveon Clowney.

JB
01-26-2014, 08:42 AM
I said first round talent. Plenty of QBs in this class would go in the first round under different circumstances. Mettenberger, Murray, McCarron, & Boyd are still on my list. If I can get them in the second or third..... or 4th (Logan Thomas) I'll plan my draft to do so.


At the same time, I like Bridgewater, Manziel, & Bortles..... I just don't think any of them are worth the #1 overall & I wouldn't allow pressure from Jacksonville & Cleveland to force me to select them over superior talent, if this draft has superior talent.

It's still early, I haven't looked at everybody in this draft yet, there may not be any more talented players. But right now, I see two maybe three LTs, I'm not seeing too many Sammy Watkins yet either. Of course, there's Jadaveon Clowney.

You really think those named are 1st round talent under any circumstances? :ok:

kingtexan
01-26-2014, 03:07 PM
What if we traded with Cleveland. Manziel goes #1. Clowney #2 and Matthews #3 ... and we took Watkins? Far fetched but would be interesting ...

The Pencil Neck
01-26-2014, 03:10 PM
What if we traded with Cleveland. Manziel goes #1. Clowney #2 and Matthews #3 ... and we took Watkins? Far fetched but would be interesting ...

I actually brought up a similar scenario in another thread a few days ago.

We draft Watkins and then in the 3rd or 4th pick up Taj Boyd. We end up with a WR corps of AJ, Watkins, and Nuk where Boyd already has chemistry and experience with Watkins and Nuk.

Although with the free-fall that Taj Boyd has been in recently, he's looking like less and less of a possibility.

JRingo
01-27-2014, 04:37 PM
russell wilson has hardly looked better than case keenum the last 2 months, yet the seahawks are going to the superbowl. if i trade back and the best player isnt a quarterback, so be it. the AFC is being carried by 2 hall of fame QB's who wont be far from 1 and 2 on the greatest of all time list. the NFC however is being won the other way, by exceptional talent around the field (a lot of suck going into years of early draft picks). only 1 of this weekend's qb's was even a first rounder.

i'm of the mind that the quarterback, while THE key player, is still just a draft pick like any other (peyton, carr, vick, russell, stafford, luck, cam ... the full gambit of boom and bust) - until he proves otherwise. if i can get an OT and an OG in the first round that would give enough time for even texanbill to make throws, we can be successful. same setting on defense. i'd take the risk that one of those 2 quarterbacks is still available, and if he isnt - a starter at another position will be. probably 2 starters with the additional early pick.

Good post. My thoughts as well.