PDA

View Full Version : Is Mathews a reach at 15?


mussop
03-11-2009, 07:29 PM
I say no! The way he shooting up the boards and his impressive combine, I beleive by the time the draft gets here he will have a top 15 grade. And dont forget he still has his pro day to impress even more.

76Texan
03-11-2009, 07:33 PM
Who voted yes besides me I wanna know! :devilpig:

Ryan
03-11-2009, 07:38 PM
No way.

Honoring Earl 34
03-11-2009, 07:41 PM
On body of work maybe .

On measureables and pedigree no way .

phantom17
03-11-2009, 07:41 PM
I wouldn't mind if we get Clay! I'm not sure about Manboobs Cushion or Peria Jerrythough!

Goldensilence
03-11-2009, 07:42 PM
I think he is a reach at 15. Admittedly though I have not seen him play.

TheRealJoker
03-11-2009, 07:42 PM
He would come in and contribute from day one. He's got elite explosiveness and the family genes. A truly self made player who had to work for everything he's gotten despite coming from such great bloodlines. He went from a 166 pound safety in high school who's dad wouldn't even start him to a 6'3'' 240 pound badass who is gonna go in the 1st round this year.

Whether or not its with the Texans remains to be seen. I'm sure his uncle is stumpin for him though...

mussop
03-11-2009, 07:44 PM
He would come in and contribute from day one. He's got elite explosiveness and the family genes. A truly self made player who had to work for everything he's gotten despite coming from such great bloodlines. He went from a 166 pound safety in high school who's dad wouldn't even start him to a 6'3'' 240 pound badass who is gonna go in the 1st round this year.

Whether or not its with the Texans remains to be seen. I'm sure his uncle is stumpin for him though...

Wow are you really 21 or is that just for the chicks? Oh by the way :goodpost:

Goldensilence
03-11-2009, 07:47 PM
On body of work maybe .

On measureables and pedigree no way .

See there is my problem of sorts i guess. I almost typed in great bloodline no doubt but is that the reason people are so high on him or is the short time he's been on field?

If we're looking LB for #15 Lauarenitis is the safetest pick IMO.

TEXANRED
03-11-2009, 07:47 PM
I don't believe any player that is going to help you win games is a reach.

I would take Matthews any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

DiehardChris
03-11-2009, 07:47 PM
I think there's a decent chance he'll go before 15. Really don't think he's a reach at all - and let's not forget he hasn't had his pro day yet.

Honoring Earl 34
03-11-2009, 07:50 PM
See there is my problem of sorts i guess. I almost typed in great bloodline no doubt but is that the reason people are so high on him or is the short time he's been on field?

If we're looking LB for #15 Lauarenitis is the safetest pick IMO.

I think Lauarenitis has peaked where Matthews is just hitting his stride . Think of the Matthews the same way you think of the Barbers . They have several generations that played pro football ... they get it ... they understand the process .

Besides he has the best hair since YKW .

http://photos.al.com/photos/alphotos/cd09555ebe4afb5e99ff26e2d44350c8.jpg

Buffi2
03-11-2009, 08:00 PM
I try not to get emotionally vested in someone we may or may not draft - but I like this kid. I agree that he is just beginning to hit his stride and will be able to contribute from day 1 on will and desire alone if nothing else. I did watch a video or two of his play and that kid can seriously hit and he is fast off the line. I want him to be a Texan.

J-Russ
03-11-2009, 08:50 PM
http://photos.al.com/photos/alphotos/cd09555ebe4afb5e99ff26e2d44350c8.jpg

How can drafting a Greek god ever be considered a reach? He probably even has a constellation already named after him.

But seriously, I probably wouldn't draft him. Being a college walk-on and a starter only in your last year doesn't make him an attractive prospect IMO, atleast not for the 15th pick.

Ole Miss Texan
03-11-2009, 09:12 PM
But seriously, I probably wouldn't draft him. Being a college walk-on and a starter only in your last year doesn't make him an attractive prospect IMO, atleast not for the 15th pick.
I really just don't get this line of thinking.

Would you draft a guy in the top 10 when he couldn't even make the defense for Texas Tech? What about a guy that had to go play at University of New Mexico and couldn't even get much of playing time his freshman or sophomore year? Finally got to play his Jr. and Sr. years? 2 years of starting experience at University of Freakin New Mexico. Top 10 pick.

Does 2 years of "starting" experience trump 1 year of "starting experience" at USC and playing in 50 games while at USC????

Rep to the first person who knows who I'm talking about.

Honoring Earl 34
03-11-2009, 09:17 PM
I really just don't get this line of thinking.

Would you draft a guy in the top 10 when he couldn't even make the defense for Texas Tech? What about a guy that had to go play at University of New Mexico and couldn't even get much of playing time his freshman or sophomore year? Finally got to play his Jr. and Sr. years? 2 years of starting experience at University of Freakin New Mexico. Top 10 pick.

Does 2 years of "starting" experience trump 1 year of "starting experience" at USC and playing in 50 games while at USC????

Rep to the first person who knows who I'm talking about.

Matthews is a great special teams player and has played there for four years ..

Ole Miss Texan
03-11-2009, 09:19 PM
Matthews is a great special teams player and has played there for four years ..

Correct. He played in 50 games while at USC. It's not like he doesn't have any experience.

Jackie Chiles
03-11-2009, 09:20 PM
I really just don't get this line of thinking.

Would you draft a guy in the top 10 when he couldn't even make the defense for Texas Tech? What about a guy that had to go play at University of New Mexico and couldn't even get much of playing time his freshman or sophomore year? Finally got to play his Jr. and Sr. years? 2 years of starting experience at University of Freakin New Mexico. Top 10 pick.

Does 2 years of "starting" experience trump 1 year of "starting experience" at USC and playing in 50 games while at USC????

Rep to the first person who knows who I'm talking about.

Urlacher

Ole Miss Texan
03-11-2009, 09:26 PM
Urlacher

Ding Ding Ding! Only two D-1 schools gave him a scholarship. New Mexico State and University of New Mexico. I'm not saying Matthews is going to be an Urlacher. I'm just correlating that one of the best LBs in the league wasn't even a full time starter throughout college. People develop at different times in their life and Urlacher is a perfect example. He was a hybrid safety/linebacker and the coach found a way to get him on the field. Kind of like Carroll finding a way to get Matthews on the field as a DE/LB kind of hybrid player. Urlacher was drafted in the 1st round, #9 overall.

El Tejano
03-11-2009, 09:42 PM
Anybody think the Browns will take him?

Honoring Earl 34
03-11-2009, 09:44 PM
Anybody think the Browns will take him?

Maybe by trading back .

The1ApplePie
03-11-2009, 09:55 PM
I like Clay but he is pretty much a 3rd down guy only

Nothing wrong with that but 15 is way to high for a part-time player

Though I would take 1 Clay over 12 Michael Johnsons

YoungTexanFan
03-11-2009, 09:56 PM
yes.

Big Poundcake
03-11-2009, 10:38 PM
I like Clay a lot, but it might be possible to trade down and still get him.

J-Russ
03-11-2009, 10:41 PM
I really just don't get this line of thinking.


What's not to get? The guy is basically a one year wonder, overachieving LB. He was overshadowed by three LBers during his years at USC, two of them are in the same draft as Matthews. I have yet to see a mock that has Matthews going in the first half of the draft, while I have seen plenty with his other two teammates in it.

To answer the question of the thread, it would be considered a reach based on how the consensus amongst draftniks is that he is mid-twenties ranked prospect, and also have him going there in their mock. His value isn't worth a 15th pick.

threetoedpete
03-12-2009, 02:59 AM
Is he going to be there in all reality with the forty six ?

Do you really like him ?

Can he cover both OLBs in case of a crisis in September ?

If Dilles and Adbi are back at 100% out of camp....can he still come in a make a contribution ?

No Virgina, He isn't a reach with the fifteen. He starts out as our second fastest linebacker. He makes the back seven faster and adds a pass rush.

McClain hinted in his last blog that they might be tempted with a DT.

Be glad I'm not the GM . I'd move up into the top five and take Orakpo. Switch Mario to the other side and put a ring on everyones fingers.

threetoedpete
03-12-2009, 03:06 AM
I like Clay but he is pretty much a 3rd down guy only

Nothing wrong with that but 15 is way to high for a part-time player

Though I would take 1 Clay over 12 Michael Johnsons

he's been moving up the boards for two months. Don't Believe McClain...tune into Mayock. And there is absolutey nothing which sugest that both the outside guys will be locked and loaded by September. And going with one of the cap guy back ups is a sure fire way to start out the year stumbling.

the other way would be to take someone less tallented...later. So who on the second day do you want to see out there starting for us September ?

If they aren't going to move Mario....I don't see how they can go any other way and improve the pass rush...which will improve the DBs production...

If you know of something else, do tell.

They could take Ayers....but alas he's a one year wonder too. Although, he's currently being rated three slots over our pick in terms of value. But then they'd have to move Mario.

Maybe we could just start over again....trade Mario and go back to the 3-4.

bah007
03-12-2009, 11:19 AM
If you are in the Texans draft room and Matthews is your favorite guy, you take him at #15.

Don't worry about "value". That "value" has been placed on him by somebody else.

If you know you can trade back and still get him then you do it. But don't let his suggested value stop you from taking him there.

What if you trade back to the #20 or somewhere around there and he goes #16-19?

If he is #1 on your board when you're pick comes up then you take him. You don't worry about where Kiper & Mayock say he should go.

We did the same exact thing last year with Duane Brown. He was our guy. We knew we could trade back and get him. We got our #1 guy plus a pick and Kiper complains that we "reached". BS.

Every team ranks players differently.

Ole Miss Texan
03-12-2009, 11:53 AM
If you are in the Texans draft room and Matthews is your favorite guy, you take him at #15.

Don't worry about "value". That "value" has been placed on him by somebody else.

If you know you can trade back and still get him then you do it. But don't let his suggested value stop you from taking him there.

What if you trade back to the #20 or somewhere around there and he goes #16-19?

If he is #1 on your board when you're pick comes up then you take him. You don't worry about where Kiper & Mayock say he should go.

We did the same exact thing last year with Duane Brown. He was our guy. We knew we could trade back and get him. We got our #1 guy plus a pick and Kiper complains that we "reached". BS.

Every team ranks players differently.

I agree! This is much more about the theory than the actual player. Everything is team exclusive.

For example if the Texans had OL problems so they just draft the highest rated OL player available, that would potentially be a reach. If they had several prospects rated higher, it'd be a reach. Maybe Kiper even has this Linemen as the highest rated player on the board, it would be a reach if the Texans just grabbed that guy and he didn't fit the scheme. Think of a big body guy that would be a great power blocking scheme guy... a team running that system could take him at 15 and it'd be a great pick. If he doesn't fit the team though then it's a reach/bad pick.

Duane Brown was more valuable to our team than most other teams because of our team. Same goes for most positions. What do we want to use that player for and is he more valuable to us than another player available. If the answer is yes, then it's a great pick. If the answer is no, it's most likely a reach.

The Pencil Neck
03-12-2009, 12:01 PM
To me, a "reach" should be a guy that you take even though you could wait a round and still get him. A "reach" is a guy you trade up to get even though he'd still drop to you even if you don't make that trade.

If you take a guy and he would have been taken 5-10 picks later, to me, that's not as much of a reach. That's just a difference in value on different people's boards.

To me, if the Texans think that Matthews fills a need and he's high on their board, they should take him. They can try to trade down and they'll probably still be able to get him but it's hard to trade down sometimes. You've got to find someone who wants to trade up into your spot and offers you something good in return.

I wouldn't mind the Texans taking Matthews at 15. I don't think it's a huge reach because I don't think he lasts another 10 picks after ours and he definitely won't last to our pick in the 2nd round.

badboy
03-12-2009, 12:03 PM
I voted yes. I am hoping that Raji, Jenkins or Orakpo falls to 15. The guys who will probably be there will all be a reach imo. I think Vontae Davis would be the closest value & I don't see CB as a priority need.

Blake
03-12-2009, 12:05 PM
I dont think he is worth #15. But then again I dont get to interview the players to set an order because #12-32 is about the same "value" player.

The Pencil Neck
03-12-2009, 12:06 PM
I voted yes. I am hoping that Raji, Jenkins or Orakpo falls to 15. The guys who will probably be there will all be a reach imo. I think Vontae Davis would be the closest value & I don't see CB as a priority need.

This is what I'm talking about. You've got to take SOMEONE at 15. They can't all be reaches.

J-Russ
03-12-2009, 12:22 PM
We did the same exact thing last year with Duane Brown. He was our guy. We knew we could trade back and get him. We got our #1 guy plus a pick and Kiper complains that we "reached". BS.

Every team ranks players differently.

Yea, well it wasn't just Kiper. Pretty much everyone outside of the Texan's fanbase thought it was a reach. There was probably half of the fanbase, or more, against the pick as well. There's no BS to it, the majority felt that it was a reach. I like the pick at the moment, and didn't care if we did "reach". Everytime I talk about the Duane pick I always put apostrophe because he was a hot prospect going into the draft, and there were teams reportedly willing to take him with their late first or early second. We got him right before San Diego, acouple picks before SF, and before the Seahawks as well. Brown wasn't a pick IMO because he was a commodity late in the first.

The Matthews pick would probably get the majority of NFL fans/draftniks/etc. ragging on us for taking him at 15 when we could very much get him if we trade down in the mid-20s.

Some people are saying 5-10 picks difference isn't that big of a deal. Wanna refer to the draft picks value chart? It's the 1st round, not the 4th round we're talking about. There's alot of difference in terms of value, and we could get more if we trade back. I would be outraged if we took reached for him at 15, unless there are "rumors" floating around that he's on the rise and if we want him and felt that we could lose at on him if we trade back, then that'll be ok to take him at 15.

I'm pretty certain he has reached his draft ceiling already. He lit it up in the combines and the senior bowl has already pass. I'm not hearing much of his name around the league so I'm sure he's not going to rated any higher.

The Pencil Neck
03-12-2009, 12:44 PM
Some people are saying 5-10 picks difference isn't that big of a deal. Wanna refer to the draft picks value chart? It's the 1st round, not the 4th round we're talking about. There's alot of difference in terms of value, and we could get more if we trade back. I would be outraged if we took reached for him at 15, unless there are "rumors" floating around that he's on the rise and if we want him and felt that we could lose at on him if we trade back, then that'll be ok to take him at 15.


If you're sitting at 15 and you like player A and there are no other players you have ranked higher than player A and no one wants to trade with you, you take the player you want where you are. And it doesn't matter if everyone in the world thinks that guy shouldn't be drafted before 25.

Everyone talks about trading back like it's easy. It's not easy. And since you've got to take someone, you take the player you think is going to best help the team. You don't take player B just because everyone else on the planet thinks he's got more value than player A.

If our guy was Duane Brown and no one was going to trade with us, what should we have done at 18? Take Joe Flacco? Take some other tackle that didn't fit our system just because Kiper had him rated higher?

bah007
03-12-2009, 12:51 PM
Yea, well it wasn't just Kiper. Pretty much everyone outside of the Texan's fanbase thought it was a reach. There was probably half of the fanbase, or more, against the pick as well. There's no BS to it, the majority felt that it was a reach. I like the pick at the moment, and didn't care if we did "reach". Everytime I talk about the Duane pick I always put apostrophe because he was a hot prospect going into the draft, and there were teams reportedly willing to take him with their late first or early second. We got him right before San Diego, acouple picks before SF, and before the Seahawks as well. Brown wasn't a pick IMO because he was a commodity late in the first.

The Matthews pick would probably get the majority of NFL fans/draftniks/etc. ragging on us for taking him at 15 when we could very much get him if we trade down in the mid-20s.

Some people are saying 5-10 picks difference isn't that big of a deal. Wanna refer to the draft picks value chart? It's the 1st round, not the 4th round we're talking about. There's alot of difference in terms of value, and we could get more if we trade back. I would be outraged if we took reached for him at 15, unless there are "rumors" floating around that he's on the rise and if we want him and felt that we could lose at on him if we trade back, then that'll be ok to take him at 15.

I'm pretty certain he has reached his draft ceiling already. He lit it up in the combines and the senior bowl has already pass. I'm not hearing much of his name around the league so I'm sure he's not going to rated any higher.

Alright. Don't think about what his value or his draft stock is.

Give me your answer to this scenario. Don't worry about names because this is hypothetical. Pretend we aren't even talking about this year's draft.

Let's say you have the #12 pick.

You have John Doe as the #12 player on your board, but Kiper, McShay, Mayock, and all those "gurus" have him as a #22 "value".

Your pick rolls along and Doe is the highest rated player still on the board. What do you do?

Do you take him because you feel like he is the best player available?

Or do you trade back because other people feel like he isn't worth that value?

bah007
03-12-2009, 12:56 PM
If you're sitting at 15 and you like player A and there are no other players you have ranked higher than player A and no one wants to trade with you, you take the player you want where you are. And it doesn't matter if everyone in the world thinks that guy shouldn't be drafted before 25.

Everyone talks about trading back like it's easy. It's not easy. And since you've got to take someone, you take the player you think is going to best help the team. You don't take player B just because everyone else on the planet thinks he's got more value than player A.

If our guy was Duane Brown and no one was going to trade with us, what should we have done at 18? Take Joe Flacco? Take some other tackle that didn't fit our system just because Kiper had him rated higher?

Exactly.

If that were the case then we would be sitting here right now with Reggie Bush instead of Mario Williams.

The whole world had Bush rated higher.

Where we supposed to take Bush because his supposed "value" was higher?

No. We take Mario because we have him rated higher.

Ole Miss Texan
03-12-2009, 12:58 PM
Alright. Don't think about what his value or his draft stock is.

Give me your answer to this scenario. Don't worry about names because this is hypothetical. Pretend we aren't even talking about this year's draft.

Let's say you have the #12 pick.

You have John Doe as the #12 player on your board, but Kiper, McShay, Mayock, and all those "gurus" have him as a #22 "value".

Your pick rolls along and Doe is the highest rated player still on the board. What do you do?

Do you take him because you feel like he is the best player available?

Or do you trade back because other people feel like he isn't worth that value?

I take a look at the other teams selecting behind us and see how they value this particular player. I'd prefer to trade down some if I know he wouldn't get selected or the chance of another team moving back in front of us to take him is low(see Dallas selecting Jenkins last year). If I can find a trade partner and feel comfortable with this then I make the trade.

It's likely that this trade may not occur. If that's the case I take John at #12 and don't look back.

The Pencil Neck
03-12-2009, 01:07 PM
Look at it this way...

"Reaching" is a tag that people who are outside the process assign to the picks. If you're a GM, whether the outside world thinks you reached on a player is irrelevant to you. Your job is to pick up the best group of guys you can that you think can help your team. Worrying about whether you're reaching for a player or whether you're milking every ounce of value out of the draft chart that you can is a sure way to miss on a lot of the guys you want.

And people who complain about not taking the best player available are really coming at it from a backwards viewpoint. Every person out there has a totally different board. Defining who is the best player available is crazy. Every time you watch the draft, you see guys on Mayocks and Kipers big boards dropping, dropping, dropping, that's because none of the actual team boards had those guys ranked that way.

And your board changes on your needs and who you've picked.

bah007
03-12-2009, 01:07 PM
I take a look at the other teams selecting behind us and see how they value this particular player. I'd prefer to trade down some if I know he wouldn't get selected or the chance of another team moving back in front of us to take him is low(see Dallas selecting Jenkins last year). If I can find a trade partner and feel comfortable with this then I make the trade.

It's likely that this trade may not occur. If that's the case I take John at #12 and don't look back.

I think we pretty much have the exact same thoughts about this situation.

If you know that you can trade down a few and still get Doe, then you do it.

If you don't think he will fall to the spot you can trade into then you nix the trade and take Doe there.

bah007
03-12-2009, 01:10 PM
Look at it this way...

"Reaching" is a tag that people who are outside the process assign to the picks. If you're a GM, whether the outside world thinks you reached on a player is irrelevant to you. Your job is to pick up the best group of guys you can that you think can help your team. Worrying about whether you're reaching for a player or whether you're milking every ounce of value out of the draft chart that you can is a sure way to miss on a lot of the guys you want.

And people who complain about not taking the best player available are really coming at it from a backwards viewpoint. Every person out there has a totally different board. Defining who is the best player available is crazy. Every time you watch the draft, you see guys on Mayocks and Kipers big boards dropping, dropping, dropping, that's because none of the actual team boards had those guys ranked that way.

And your board changes on your needs and who you've picked.

Exactly. Another great point.

We are all Texans fans here. We follow the same team. We debate the prospects together.

But I bet if ten of us posted our top 32 prospects none of us would have the same list.

Now just think how different they would be if we followed different teams and valued prospects differently.

Specnatz
03-12-2009, 01:17 PM
I guess I think differently than a lot of draft pundits. If it is with-in 10 spots it is not a reach. Because if you do not take that player you will not get that player.

threetoedpete
03-15-2009, 02:29 AM
I voted yes. I am hoping that Raji, Jenkins or Orakpo falls to 15. The guys who will probably be there will all be a reach imo. I think Vontae Davis would be the closest value & I don't see CB as a priority need.

I'm being nice but getting frustrated....

By all of their quotes.....they are not going to move Mario Williams....and there is no way at 263 Orakpo is going to hold up against the league's right tackles. So even if he fell to them @ the fifteen, they aren't going to take Orakpo.....he doesn't fit what they're are going to do. Raji is being projected as a top seven pick now....so you're going to pass up Mathews for a tweener CB/Safety ? OK. Throw another one on the pile.

TimeKiller
03-15-2009, 03:33 PM
I think it's a reach but I also think it's the right move. He's big, fast, smart, hard working and for anyone who has ever said they want this team to have an identity I think he and Bruce probably bring a little of that to Houston. Personally I hope this is who we get.

gtexan02
03-15-2009, 03:39 PM
It always worries me when you have a whole group of guys working together in college come out the same year. You don't know how much any of those 3 LBs relied on the great play of the others. Who is the star out of the 3? Its the same way Mario made some of his other DL teammates look great at NC, but they haven't done much in the pros

Ole Miss Texan
03-15-2009, 03:39 PM
I'm being nice but getting frusdtrated....

By all of their quotes.....they are not going to move Mario Williams....and there is no way at 263 Orakpo is going to hold up against the leagues right tackles. So even if he fell to them @ the fifteen, they aren't going to take Orakpo.....he doesn't fit what thery are going to do. Raji is beng projected as a top seven pick now....so you're going to pass up Mathews for a tweener CB/Safety ? OK. Throw another one on the pile.

If what you're saying is true and they strictly want to keep Mario at RDE, then I don't think picking a LDE at 15 would be the best course of action. If we do, Robert Ayers may be the man to look for. Of course by the time the draft comes around, he could be off the board as early as #11 to Buffalo.

Goatcheese
03-15-2009, 11:48 PM
Anybody think the Browns will take him?

Maybe. 3-4 OLB in the early second is probably where his value is at.

threetoedpete
03-16-2009, 02:32 AM
If what you're saying is true and they strictly want to keep Mario at RDE, then I don't think picking a LDE at 15 would be the best course of action. If we do, Robert Ayers may be the man to look for. Of course by the time the draft comes around, he could be off the board as early as #11 to Buffalo.

Which is exactly what happened to me with Clady and Brandon Alberts last year. The world is in it's imperfect orbit. The moon is drifting further away. Texas is sinking into the Gulf....and no one knows who'll we 'll take.

beerlover
03-16-2009, 10:06 AM
The world is in it's imperfect orbit. The moon is drifting further away. Texas is sinking into the Gulf....and no one knows who'll we 'll take.

And they say I'm CRAZY http://screenrant.com/images/joker-wizard.jpg

HOU-TEX
03-16-2009, 10:10 AM
Personally, I think there will be several 1st round "reaches". The 1st round talent just isn't there to justify 1st round picks. I'm sure there will still be several fans with knee-jerk reactions to our first pick, but not I. *unless it's a long snapper

I'm actually just as, if not more, interested in our second to mid-round picks than our first. I don't think there's much drop off in talent in this years 1-3 rounds. With the exception of a few, of course. :)

Vinny
03-16-2009, 10:12 AM
Personally, I think there will be several 1st round "reaches". The 1st round talent just isn't there to justify 1st round picks. I'm sure there will still be several fans with knee-jerk reactions to our first pick, but not I. *unless it's a long snapper

I'm actually just as, if not more, interested in our second to mid-round picks than our first. I don't think there's much drop off in talent in this years 1-3 rounds. With the exception of a few, of course. :) not so much reaches but the talent at 12 looks alot like the talent at 20 this draft.

HOU-TEX
03-16-2009, 10:18 AM
not so much reaches but the talent at 12 looks alot like the talent at 20 this draft.

Yeppers. That's why I put "reaches" in quotes. It's just the word "draft guru's" and fans use to describe their animosity towards a pick.

Many think D. Brown was a "reach", but I highly doubt NFL teams did.

badboy
03-16-2009, 11:46 AM
This is what I'm talking about. You've got to take SOMEONE at 15. They can't all be reaches.Allow me to disagree. If for example, I have Vontae Davis ranked later in first, I may still select him, but he is a reach on my board. I do not care where others slotted him. If I think he is a player for me and I can not work a trade down, I'd pick him. I think Davis is a prime example. I don't want another CB in first unless it is Jenkins whose ability to move to FS may be worth selecting him @#15.

Here is where I differ from many on this board. Unless the player available is a "franchise type" player, usually I will pass on (Davis) and select another player who meets a need. I and others have debated this on other threads over the years.
PN, if the thread had asked who I would pick at #15 with no trades, that would be a different thread.

Corrosion
03-16-2009, 11:51 AM
Poll results thus far

32 yes
32 no


talk about a polarizing pick .....

danger6
03-16-2009, 01:02 PM
"Is Matthews a reach at #20" would be a nice poll. That is where I'd like to get him.

badboy
03-16-2009, 01:24 PM
I'm being nice but getting frustrated....

By all of their quotes.....they are not going to move Mario Williams....and there is no way at 263 Orakpo is going to hold up against the league's right tackles. So even if he fell to them @ the fifteen, they aren't going to take Orakpo.....he doesn't fit what they're are going to do. Raji is being projected as a top seven pick now....so you're going to pass up Mathews for a tweener CB/Safety ? OK. Throw another one on the pile.Now I am trying to be nice.. no wonder you are frustrated. Your post on this thread @#26 says "Be glad I am not the GM. I'd move up into top 5 and take Orakpo". Then here you say he will not hold up. For someone who "will not hold up" you want to spend extra picks to trade up and get Orakpo?

Most of us will agree that both Orakpo and Raji will be gone @ #15, but MAYBE not. That is why it is fun to talk about. Same for Jenkins or a QB that might encourage a trade down. I have said that I am ok with the 3 starting LB Adibi, Diles and Demeco and would draft a LB day two for back up or to beat out one of the starters. You can have a different opinion. threetoedpete, I am not the guy to attack other posters but I am telling you that you are starting to be rude to people who do not agree with you. We all are Texans fans and may disagree. IMO you are allowing the sarcasm fly just a bit too much. Let's be cool. Steve

bah007
03-16-2009, 01:38 PM
Now I am trying to be nice.. no wonder you are frustrated. Your post on this thread @#26 says "Be glad I am not the GM. I'd move up into top 5 and take Orakpo". Then here you say he will not hold up. For someone who "will not hold up" you want to spend extra picks to trade up and get Orakpo?

Most of us will agree that both Orakpo and Raji will be gone @ #15, but MAYBE not. That is why it is fun to talk about. Same for Jenkins or a QB that might encourage a trade down. I have said that I am ok with the 3 starting LB Adibi, Diles and Demeco and would draft a LB day two for back up or to beat out one of the starters. You can have a different opinion. threetoedpete, I am not the guy to attack other posters but I am telling you that you are starting to be rude to people who do not agree with you. We all are Texans fans and may disagree. IMO you are allowing the sarcasm fly just a bit too much. Let's be cool. Steve

He means that the Texans are not going to move Mario to LDE so if we took Orakpo he would play LDE, and wouldn't hold up.

If he was GM, he would take Orakpo and put him at RDE and Mario at LDE.

badboy
03-16-2009, 01:40 PM
He means that the Texans are not going to move Mario to LDE so if we took Orakpo he would play LDE, and wouldn't hold up.

If he was GM, he would take Orakpo and put him at RDE and Mario at LDE.Thanks for clarifying.

Polo
03-16-2009, 02:29 PM
The way I look at reaches is on a team by team basis.

If you could have gotten said player with your 'next' pick then you reached.

Also, a reach only becomes a reach when they don't live up to the position they were drafted at...

A reach is like a few levels above bust...

Slaton is a good example of what I mean...If a team would have drafted him in the second round, how many people would have considered that a reach today? It'd have looked like they had good foresight...Unless they could have gotten him with their next pick...

jdog
03-16-2009, 06:57 PM
Well, if I really want a kicker and put my favorite kicker at the top of my board, then I'm reaching according to everyone else regardless of what I want. Market value is determined by everyone else, and they would consider me taking a kicker in the first round a reach even if I was afraid that he wouldn't be there in the second round. The value I place on that kicker is what is important to me, but if I don't check that personal value against the market value, I could end up paying more for the kicker or outside linebacker or nostalgic lunch pail on ebay than it's worth. Oh, and I might just be crazed and out of my mind which is another reason to pay attention to what other people think when pulling out your checkbook. Then again, he has that bloodline AND that Cinderella story...

mussop
03-18-2009, 06:52 AM
Some questions that need to be asked. What other player that should be available at 15 would start for us? Who would that player be replacing? Factor in those and who gives us the greatest value?

beerlover
03-23-2009, 09:35 AM
Its really facinating to me as time rolls closer to the draft how some players rise up draft boards without any production in an actual game. Does he have upside, yes. great family/bloodlines, yes. Played in a great program always around NFL talent, yes. Does he play a position of need & flash the abiltiy to come in & start, yes.

Add it all up along with the Texans history of drafting ascending players thought to be reaches at the time & even though I have him still rated as a late 1st early 2nd prospect if he blows up USC pro-day more likely than not, all bets are off :texflag:

HOU-TEX
03-23-2009, 09:45 AM
Its really facinating to me as time rolls closer to the draft how some players rise up draft boards without any production in an actual game. Does he have upside, yes. great family/bloodlines, yes. Played in a great program always around NFL talent, yes. Does he play a position of need & flash the abiltiy to come in & start, yes.

Add it all up along with the Texans history of drafting ascending players thought to be reaches at the time & even though I have him still rated as a late 1st early 2nd prospect if he blows up USC pro-day more likely than not, all bets are off :texflag:

When is USC's pro day? They've got a few decent prospects I'd like to check up on.

Goatcheese
03-23-2009, 09:47 AM
Its really facinating to me as time rolls closer to the draft how some players rise up draft boards without any production in an actual game. Does he have upside, yes. great family/bloodlines, yes. Played in a great program always around NFL talent, yes. Does he play a position of need & flash the abiltiy to come in & start, yes.

Add it all up along with the Texans history of drafting ascending players thought to be reaches at the time & even though I have him still rated as a late 1st early 2nd prospect if he blows up USC pro-day more likely than not, all bets are off :texflag:

I think his stock has inflated about as far as it can go.

There's only so far a 1 year starter with average athleticism, and bellow average production can rise.

I'd like to get a guy who averaged more than 4.3 tackles per game for a first rounder.

Polo
03-23-2009, 09:58 AM
The more I think about it, the less I want this guy.

I really don't see how this guy would be an upgrade over the other possible starters we have at OLB.

I'd rather take a guy who we pretty much know will have a good chance to play. Even if we take Clay I'm not sure he comes in a wins a starting job.

76Texan
03-23-2009, 10:22 AM
If we want a SAM, I think it's better to wait until next year with Herzlich (BC) and possibly Lewis (Okl) coming out. Those two can actually play across the line.

But then again, there will be some good safeties as well like Berry, Mays, and possibly Morgan Burnett (Ga Tech).

Maybe we ought to trade for a first rounder next yr??????
Y'all think Kubiak can be so confident as to wait 'til then? :cool:

beerlover
03-23-2009, 10:41 AM
When is USC's pro day? They've got a few decent prospects I'd like to check up on.

April 1st

beerlover
03-23-2009, 10:55 AM
If we want a SAM, I think it's better to wait until next year with Herzlich (BC) and possibly Lewis (Okl) coming out. Those two can actually play across the line.

But then again, there will be some good safeties as well like Berry, Mays, and possibly Morgan Burnett (Ga Tech).

Maybe we ought to trade for a first rounder next yr??????
Y'all think Kubiak can be so confident as to wait 'til then? :cool:


the 15th selection will be focused on addressing the system's priority need- pass rush, unless a much higher graded prospect falls into their laps like Jenkins. I would expect USC Pro-Day to be highly attended (Texans). In Clay's case its probably going to require a scheduled invidiual workout to test specific skill sets/ability that WLB/SLB linebacker face in game situations (coverage, back peddle, change of direction,laterial movement & recovery speed to name a few). Bush/Kollar may come away feeling he can play RDE in their 4-3 & kick Smith inside in blitz packages? one thing the Texans are not shy about is taking players they view as having the most upside even if it requires some development time.

HoustonFrog
03-23-2009, 11:00 AM
Ding Ding Ding! Only two D-1 schools gave him a scholarship. New Mexico State and University of New Mexico. I'm not saying Matthews is going to be an Urlacher. I'm just correlating that one of the best LBs in the league wasn't even a full time starter throughout college. People develop at different times in their life and Urlacher is a perfect example. He was a hybrid safety/linebacker and the coach found a way to get him on the field. Kind of like Carroll finding a way to get Matthews on the field as a DE/LB kind of hybrid player. Urlacher was drafted in the 1st round, #9 overall.

Or he could be like Carpenter of the Cowboys...long hair in college, etc with a father with pedigree...a guy who was a stud in college though and made up the best linebacking core out there...he has made 6 tackles in 2 years at LB, I believe, and plays alot of special teams.

mussop
04-02-2009, 12:05 AM
I say no! The way he shooting up the boards and his impressive combine, I beleive by the time the draft gets here he will have a top 15 grade. And dont forget he still has his pro day to impress even more.


I believe an I told you so is in order....... I told you so!:kingkong:

threetoedpete
04-02-2009, 09:47 AM
Its really facinating to me as time rolls closer to the draft how some players rise up draft boards without any production in an actual game. Does he have upside, yes. great family/bloodlines, yes. Played in a great program always around NFL talent, yes. Does he play a position of need & flash the abiltiy to come in & start, yes.

Add it all up along with the Texans history of drafting ascending players thought to be reaches at the time & even though I have him still rated as a late 1st early 2nd prospect if he blows up USC pro-day more likely than not, all bets are off :texflag:

He did. My book says he did so well.....he's worked himself into the top fifteen. The odds are he won't be there. No DC is going to pass on the guy and his up side.....none of them.

What this reminds me of is the year when Ray Childeress and Bruce Smith came out. Buffalo got Smith and went to four super bowls. Houston got Childeress and went....to Buffalo. Funny old game.
We'll get the safe guy and somebody else will go to four super bowls.

Texecutioner
04-02-2009, 10:04 AM
Or he could be like Carpenter of the Cowboys...long hair in college, etc with a father with pedigree...a guy who was a stud in college though and made up the best linebacking core out there...he has made 6 tackles in 2 years at LB, I believe, and plays alot of special teams.

Man I was so impessed with that trio of LB's from OSU with Hawk, Capenter,and Schleagal. That was one of the best LB trios in college I had ever seen. I also thought Carpenter might end up better than Hawk. Boy was I wrong, Carpenter hasn't done jack in the NFL.

I don't think Carpernter is a fair comparison to Mathews though, because Carpenter was a starter and beast in college and one of the best in all of the NCAA. Mathews hasn't done near what Carpenter did actually.

THe only real comparison with both of them is the long blonde hair. But in the end Mathews should be better than Carpenter for sure, because Carpenter hasn't done anything.

BigBull17
04-02-2009, 10:11 AM
Who voted yes besides me I wanna know! :devilpig:

I did. He was a 2nd round grade after all their games have been played, and without a single game and a 40 yard dash, he is top 15? Nah. People put too much into 40 times and bench press. Just my :twocents:

TheRealJoker
04-02-2009, 10:23 AM
I did. He was a 2nd round grade after all their games have been played, and without a single game and a 40 yard dash, he is top 15? Nah. People put too much into 40 times and bench press. Just my :twocents:

There are much larger rises every year and people dont question them as much. You could argue Mario was borderline top 10 before his offseason workouts and he turned out to be a great pick.

There is a major difference between guys who flash instincts on film but aren't quite elite players yet that have extreme athletic ability.

AND

The players with extreme athletic ability who dont have any football IQ whatsoever.

I'm guessing Clay Matthews is in the 1st category.

TexansSeminole
04-02-2009, 10:33 AM
There are much larger rises every year and people dont question them as much. You could argue Mario was borderline top 10 before his offseason workouts and he turned out to be a great pick.

There is a major difference between guys who flash instincts on film but aren't quite elite players yet that have extreme athletic ability.

AND

The players with extreme athletic ability who dont have any football IQ whatsoever.

I'm guessing Clay Matthews is in the 1st category.

Mario's game tape was fantastic. He was a top 3 pick, or top 5 before his workouts. Teams didn't try to run to Mario's side in college; he would completely dominate the other team's run game to his side.

I would argue anyone saying that Mario was not a top 3, or top 5 pick before his workouts simply did not see him play in college.

Mr teX
04-02-2009, 10:46 AM
Mario's game tape was fantastic. He was a top 3 pick, or top 5 before his workouts. Teams didn't try to run to Mario's side in college; he would completely dominate the other team's run game to his side.

I would argue anyone saying that Mario was not a top 3, or top 5 pick before his workouts simply did not see him play in college.

I'm not gonna lie, i had no clue who he was. Really didn't start to find out about him until the chatter heated up about him being our pick. The little tape i did see of him showed him coming off the edge - unblocked which didn't impress me not 1 bit b/c i knew it wouldn't be that easy in the NFL.

Fortunately for me, After i got over the initial blasphemy the texans had just committed by taking him over my guy, i calmed down & put my faith in Smithiak that this guy was gonna be a difference maker. 3 years later, I've got a picture of him in my avatar........:cool:

Polo
04-02-2009, 10:50 AM
Mario was mentioned as being a top pick before he ever worked out.

TheRealJoker
04-02-2009, 10:53 AM
Mario was mentioned as being a top pick before he ever worked out.

If that were true ESPiN and company wouldn't have had the feeding frenzy they did when the top pick was announced and he would've been accompanying Bush/Young/Leinart on the cover of every draft mag in the nation before the draft.

Polo
04-02-2009, 10:55 AM
I did. He was a 2nd round grade after all their games have been played, and without a single game and a 40 yard dash, he is top 15? Nah. People put too much into 40 times and bench press. Just my :twocents:

I'm with you on this.

I'm scared of taking a guy that was a stand up DE and asking him to play in space off the line of scrimmage.

If folks weren't overly wowed with his actual football performance then I don't see what this fuss is about now.

Yes there are folks who rise every year due to work-outs, and there are a lot of those same guys that we hear about as being busts.

beerlover
04-02-2009, 10:57 AM
If that were true ESPiN and company wouldn't have had the feeding frenzy they did when the top pick was announced and he would've been accompanying Bush/Young/Leinart on the cover of every draft mag in the nation before the draft.

Bush may have had all the hype but around draft boards they where rated close to even. in fact ourlads had them rated 1a. bush 9.65 1b. mario 9.64 :)

TheRealJoker
04-02-2009, 10:57 AM
I'm with you on this.

I'm scared of taking a guy that was a stand up DE and asking him to play in space off the line of scrimmage.

If folks weren't overly wowed with his actual football performance then I don't see what this fuss is about now.

Yes there are folks who rise every year due to work-outs, and there are a lot of those same guys that we hear about as being busts.


That goes for EVERYONE that is drafted. Not just the late bloomers.

Polo
04-02-2009, 10:58 AM
If that were true ESPiN and company wouldn't have had the feeding frenzy they did when the top pick was announced and he would've been accompanying Bush/Young/Leinart on the cover of every draft mag in the nation before the draft.


ESPN was shocked even after the fact that Mario posted monster workout numbers and was largely rumored to have been going 2nd, AKA the next pick.

I don't see how ESPN going nuts has any relevance.

TheRealJoker
04-02-2009, 11:00 AM
Bush may have had all the hype but around draft boards they where rated close to even. in fact ourlads had them rated 1a. bush 9.65 1b. mario 9.64 :)

Wasthat before the combine/pro day workouts?

Polo
04-02-2009, 11:01 AM
That goes for EVERYONE that is drafted. Not just the late bloomers.

I don't think you hear what I'm saying or want to.

What do you hear about more...

Guys that were good in college, but didn't have great workouts/measurements slipping and becoming major steals?

Or

Guys rising up draftboards due to crazy workout numbers/measurements and becoming bust?

:um:

TheRealJoker
04-02-2009, 11:01 AM
ESPN was shocked even after the fact that Mario posted monster workout numbers and was largely rumored to have been going 2nd, AKA the next pick.

I don't see how ESPN going nuts has any relevance.

Wasn't just ESPiN.

Polo
04-02-2009, 11:04 AM
Wasn't just ESPiN.

Doesn't amtter who it was...


Mario was always viewed as one of the top prospects in the draft even before he declared.

TexansSeminole
04-02-2009, 11:07 AM
If that were true ESPiN and company wouldn't have had the feeding frenzy they did when the top pick was announced and he would've been accompanying Bush/Young/Leinart on the cover of every draft mag in the nation before the draft.

What does ESPN have to do with it?

The only reason they flipped out was that they LOVED Reggie Bush. It had nothing to do with the other players in the draft. They just loved themselves some Reggie Bush and felt that he was the best player hands down.

It has been reported many times that Mario was at the top of many draft boards for a good while during the off season.

infantrycak
04-02-2009, 11:21 AM
I don't think you hear what I'm saying or want to.

What do you hear about more...

Guys that were good in college, but didn't have great workouts/measurements slipping and becoming major steals?

Or

Guys rising up draftboards due to crazy workout numbers/measurements and becoming bust?

:um:

We have two stars on our D--one slipped, one rose--neither busted--Mario and DeMeco.

BigBull17
04-02-2009, 11:25 AM
Doesn't amtter who it was...


Mario was always viewed as one of the top prospects in the draft even before he declared.

Mario also played a few more than 10 games too.

I'm not trying to put Matthews in a Mamula mold, but he has too little game film and too has risen too much without a game being played for my taste. He was a mid 2nd round grade at the end of the year, its amazing how far he has risen since. Kinda scary. You also can't ignore that he played the Elephant End. We need OLB's to drop in coverage a little.

Polo
04-02-2009, 11:27 AM
We have two stars on our D--one slipped, one rose--neither busted--Mario and DeMeco.

Would you classify taking Slaton in the third as him slipping?

But besides that Mario and Demeco are a small sample size...What about Jason Babin he rose, and busted...

Polo
04-02-2009, 11:27 AM
Mario also played a few more than 10 games too.

I'm not trying to put Matthews in a Mamula mold, but he has too little game film and too has risen too much without a game being played for my taste. He was a mid 2nd round grade at the end of the year, its amazing how far he has risen since. Kinda scary. You also can't ignore that he played the Elephant End. We need OLB's to drop in coverage a little.

You are barking up the wrong tree.

beerlover
04-02-2009, 11:31 AM
I beleive Matthews walked on to USC & made the team @ Safety so I would imagine he does have some coverage skills :)

Polo
04-02-2009, 11:33 AM
I beleive Matthews walked on to USC & made the team @ Safety so I would imagine he does have some coverage skills :)

Roy Williams was called superman while actually playing safety for Oklahoma...

Just sayin...

infantrycak
04-02-2009, 11:36 AM
Would you classify taking Slaton in the third as him slipping?

Seems I saw reports having him go higher, but I think the issue with him was size an inside running game rather than poor workout.

But besides that Mario and Demeco are a small sample size...What about Jason Babin he rose, and busted...

Babin wasn't a pro-day riser--he was a Capers/Casserly system reach.

76Texan
04-02-2009, 11:43 AM
Was Demeco a McNair's pick, or Kubiak's, or Richard's or Casserly's, that is an interesting question!

Ole Miss Texan
04-02-2009, 11:44 AM
Mario also played a few more than 10 games too.
Matthews played in 50 games while at USC, there' plenty of film on him if you can get your hands on it. I'm not trying to put Matthews in a Mamula mold, but he has too little game film and too has risen too much without a game being played for my taste.

He was a mid 2nd round grade at the end of the year, its amazing how far he has risen since. Kinda scary. You also can't ignore that he played the Elephant End. We need OLB's to drop in coverage a little.
Depends who you listen to and we all know people can be off base. Its just their perceptions at the time. Matthews was considered a late 1st round pick in December by some. Others thought that was ridiculous but Boylhart was ahead of the game on this one. He also said Matthews will probably have the longest and most successful NFL career over Cushing and Maualuga... people laughed. He put himself out there and others are starting to latch on.

I was very impressed with Matthews coverage... this from his pro day though, not film He's got the athletecism and play recognition to turn and get backfield and make the catch/deflection. That's what separates him from the other DE/LBs for me. The others probably can't (Orakpo, Brown, Maybin, etc.).

BigBull17
04-02-2009, 11:45 AM
You are barking up the wrong tree.

? Did I phrase it wrong? I was trying to agree with you. I am at work and spread sheeted out, so its possible I can't read any more.

Ole Miss Texan
04-02-2009, 11:45 AM
Was Demeco a McNair's pick, or Kubiak's, or Richard's or Casserly's, that is an interesting question!

I heard Johnny Holland really liked Demeco and made a fuss about we'd regret it if we didn't take him. That's heresay though, I have no quote. For what it's worth I heard Casserly actually really like Owen Daniels.

HOU-TEX
04-02-2009, 11:47 AM
Whoever the player is we choose at 15 is going to be considered a reach.....by most fans. Especially this year's 1st round.

Mr teX
04-02-2009, 11:50 AM
Mathews shouldn't be penalized for production b/c his body developed later than some others essentially prohibiting him from getting on the field as a starter earlier. & the major reason he was valued as an early 2nd rounder was b/c of his lack of production.

I think some in here are valuing 1 aspect of these guys' college careers more (size, speed, production) over another & are dismissing them if they don't fit in their box. The reality of it is, none of us know how these guys will fit in the pros b/c too many things matter...what scheme you get into, how you're used & stability of the franchise.

Also the comparisons to Bobby Carpenter aren't valid imo. Sure, they both were apart of some outstanding Lb cores & have the pedigrees, but that's about where it stops.

Polo
04-02-2009, 11:50 AM
Seems I saw reports having him go higher, but I think the issue with him was size an inside running game rather than poor workout..

This is what I wrote:

Guys that were good in college, but didn't have great workouts/measurements slipping and becoming major steals?

The point is that he was an excellent college player that slipped due to reasons not directly related to his actual on field play.



Babin wasn't a pro-day riser--he was a Capers/Casserly system reach

Deceptively strong and puts up good numbers in the weight room. One of the fastest defensive ends at the Combine and turned in a great workout.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2004/draft/players/48367.html

Babin was atleast in the top 5 in his group in all of the running type drills. Couldn't find his bench. Babin went to Western Michigan. He was a good player there, but you don't come out of wester Michigan and have an NFL team move up to draft you if you don't put up good combine #'s and have good measurements.

TexansSeminole
04-02-2009, 11:51 AM
I was very impressed with Matthews coverage... this from his pro day though, not film He's got the athletecism and play recognition to turn and get backfield and make the catch/deflection. That's what separates him from the other DE/LBs for me. The others probably can't (Orakpo, Brown, Maybin, etc.).

I'd be more impressed had he done more in coverage on the field. No interceptions for the guy in his USC career. It's one thing to catch the ball in a drill where you and the QB are the only guys out there. It's another thing to put yourself in the right position, fight off receivers, and make a catch in a football game.

I guess I am just a big "on the field" type of guy. Workouts don't really impress me.

I know tons of people who can catch a ball while we warm up, but when we start playing the guy can't catch. I'm not saying that's how Matthews is, I am just pointing out that catching the ball in a drill and catching the ball in a game are two completely different things.

Ole Miss Texan
04-02-2009, 11:51 AM
Whoever the player is we choose at 15 is going to be considered a reach.....by most fans. Especially this year's 1st round.
Totally agree, I think fans are going to flip out whoever it is. Any defensive guy will probably be considered a reach. And if it's an offensive player like a RB or WR, people will criticize it because we NEEDED defense.

There will probably be 20% on here that will be happy with the pick, probably 30% that are thinking 'meh, what else could we have done' and 50% that will threaten to sell their season tickets, "again".

Polo
04-02-2009, 11:54 AM
? Did I phrase it wrong? I was trying to agree with you. I am at work and spread sheeted out, so its possible I can't read any more.

Oh my bad.. I probably just read it wrong...

Ole Miss Texan
04-02-2009, 11:55 AM
I'd be more impressed had he done more in coverage on the field. No interceptions for the guy in his USC career. It's one thing to catch the ball in a drill where you and the QB are the only guys out there. It's another thing to put yourself in the right position, fight off receivers, and make a catch in a football game.

I guess I am just a big "on the field" type of guy. Workouts don't really impress me.

I know tons of people who can catch a ball while we warm up, but when we start playing the guy can't catch. I'm not saying that's how Matthews is, I am just pointing out that catching the ball in a drill and catching the ball in a game are two completely different things.
Totally agree with you on game film and "on the field". As I wrote in another thread regarding interceptions:
Not trying to make excuses but Matthews was exceptional at rushing the passer and that's what Carrol had him doing most of the time. Hard to get interception when you're in the backfield the majority of the time.

Pro day video- Matthews is on the 2nd one.
http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/showscontent?page=/nflnetwork/programs/pathtothedraft&subjectType=pathtothedraft

Polo
04-02-2009, 11:57 AM
Mathews shouldn't be penalized for production b/c his body developed later than some others essentially prohibiting him from getting on the field as a starter earlier. & the major reason he was valued as an early 2nd rounder was b/c of his lack of production.

I think some in here are valuing 1 aspect of these guys' college careers more (size, speed, production) over another & are dismissing them if they don't fit in their box. The reality of it is, none of us know how these guys will fit in the pros b/c too many things matter...what scheme you get into, how you're used & stability of the franchise.

Personally I could care less about his career.

All I know is that this past season he wasn't anything spectacular.

HOU-TEX
04-02-2009, 12:05 PM
Totally agree, I think fans are going to flip out whoever it is. Any defensive guy will probably be considered a reach. And if it's an offensive player like a RB or WR, people will criticize it because we NEEDED defense.

There will probably be 20% on here that will be happy with the pick, probably 30% that are thinking 'meh, what else could we have done' and 50% that will threaten to sell their season tickets, "again".

I'd most likely be in this group.

Most know my stance on the 1st round pick, but I'd have a hard time getting upset if we were to pick a RB or an Olineman in this years 1st round. The talent simply isn't there this year. I'm actually looking forward to rounds 2-5 more so than round 1.

Then again, I don't recall ever getting upset on the day of the draft. Yes, that includes 06 as well.

Goatcheese
04-02-2009, 12:07 PM
Totally agree with you on game film and "on the field". As I wrote in another thread regarding interceptions:


Pro day video- Matthews is on the 2nd one.
http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/showscontent?page=/nflnetwork/programs/pathtothedraft&subjectType=pathtothedraft

If he is such an amazing pass rusher why did he only have 3 solo sacks, and 3 assists? That's terrible for a guy playing DE.

76Texan
04-02-2009, 12:42 PM
I'm not dogging Matthews, but he's one of those guys who can make great plays and also give up big plays.

He still needs to learn the game.
Let's take an example of a late game against UCLA (last regular season game).

3rd and 11 at the Trojans 21.
The Bruins in single backfield, TE strong right.
3 wides to their left.

USC rushed 4.
3 CBs on the right to cover the 3 receivers (actually one WR was in motion so the DB had to follow him to the other side.)
The SS play behind them.
Mauluaga stays in the middle to spy on either the QB or the RB (if he comes this way.)
The FS play back to check either the TE or RB if they release out of the backfield.
Same with Matthews.
He has to know that when the TE releases first, the FS has to pick up that guy.
That would leave him with the RB.

The TE ran a post route, taking the FS with him to the middle.
The RB ran a flag pattern to the outside.
Matthews either forgot or did not know his assignment.
And no speed, nor athleticisim, nor skill would help him there.

A quick lateral pass to the WR who launched a poorly thrown pass to the corner. Underthrown. Still, since Matthews was beaten so badly, he couldn't recover in time. TD.

Mays tried his best and might have had a chance, but Matthews tackling from behind only helped push the RB into the endzone.
(It looks like Mays could have brought down the guy short of the goal line after I rewound the tape a few times.)

Mr teX
04-02-2009, 01:11 PM
I'm not dogging Matthews, but he's one of those guys who can make great plays and also give up big plays.

He still needs to learn the game.
Let's take an example of a late game against UCLA (last regular season game).

3rd and 11 at the Trojans 21.
The Bruins in single backfield, TE strong right.
3 wides to their left.

USC rushed 4.
3 CBs on the right to cover the 3 receivers (actually one WR was in motion so the DB had to follow him to the other side.)
The SS play behind them.
Mauluaga stays in the middle to spy on either the QB or the RB (if he comes this way.)
The FS play back to check either the TE or RB if they release out of the backfield.
Same with Matthews.
He has to know that when the TE releases first, the FS has to pick up that guy.
That would leave him with the RB.

The TE ran a post route, taking the FS with him to the middle.
The RB ran a flag pattern to the outside.
Matthews either forgot or did not know his assignment.
And no speed, nor athleticisim, nor skill would help him there.

A quick lateral pass to the WR who launched a poorly thrown pass to the corner. Underthrown. Still, since Matthews was beaten so badly, he couldn't recover in time. TD.

Mays tried his best and might have had a chance, but Matthews tackling from behind only helped push the RB into the endzone.
(It looks like Mays could have brought down the guy short of the goal line after I rewound the tape a few times.)


y could do this with every player in the draft......many times over at that.

76Texan
04-02-2009, 01:21 PM
y could do this with every player in the draft......many times over at that.

I did mention the Oregon and the Oregon St games, didn't I?

Ole Miss Texan
04-02-2009, 02:08 PM
If he is such an amazing pass rusher why did he only have 3 solo sacks, and 3 assists? That's terrible for a guy playing DE.
That's a pretty good question and should be looked at closely by our scouts when examining his worth to this team.

I will say USC is littered with talent and the stats back that up. Here's what I could find for 2008:

LB: Clay Matthews- 9.0 TFL, 4.5 sacks

By Position:
DTs: 19.5 TFL, 6.0 sacks
DEs: 18.0 TFL, 12.0 sacks
LBs*: 35.5 TFL, 8.5 sacks
DBs: 18.5 TFL, 2.5 sacks
*note that Matthews is listed as a lineback although he lined up as a DE a lot.

Top Players by TFL:
LB Cushing- 10.5
DT Moaloa- 10.0
DE Moore- 9.5
LB Matthews- 9.0
LB Maiava- 7.5
DE Griffen- 6.0

Top Players by Sacks:
DE Moore- 5.0
LB Matthews- 4.5
DE Griffen- 4.5
DT Maola- 4.5
LB Cushing- 3.0

As you can see, the stats are spread out pretty well. Everson Griffen is being talked about as a highly rated DE prospect for next years draft and Clay had better stats. Looking at all the top players on the USC defense, it doesn't seem Matthews did too poorly.

Mr teX
04-02-2009, 02:23 PM
I did mention the Oregon and the Oregon St games, didn't I?

You probably did in some other thread, but it still doesn't mean you couldn't do the same with each & every player every year in the draft; top prospect or not. Qb's are the easiest targets by this logic. Every Int they threw you could say "see...".

BigBull17
04-02-2009, 02:26 PM
Oh my bad.. I probably just read it wrong...

Nah, when you type all day, your eyes dont work all the time. Mario had shown enough to be a high pick coming in to the process. What he did at the Combine, ect... blew it away. With a bad work out he was top 10. Matthews would be a 4th round pick with a hick up in a work out. Those guys scare me.

76Texan
04-02-2009, 04:24 PM
You probably did in some other thread, but it still doesn't mean you couldn't do the same with each & every player every year in the draft; top prospect or not. Qb's are the easiest targets by this logic. Every Int they threw you could say "see...".
OK, I've reviewed the following USC games:

Virginia (1st game starter at QB), Ohio St (without Wells), Oregon St. (first time starter at QB, a Fr RB, I think he's something like 5'6-5'7, 175 lbs from right here at Lamar), Oregon (another first time starter at QB, a Soph), Notre Dame (rebuilding) , UCLA (4-8), Penn St.

The games I didn't watch, 4 of them were against ducklings (Az. St., Stanford, Wash, Wash. St.)
Only Cal. and Az had winning records, and by the look of it, Matthews didn't have such good productions against them.

I don't see how Matthews can be rated #15.
I have a hard time convincing myself he belongs in the first round.

I'm not too high on all the USC LBs, not just Matthews.
Now after the combine and pro-day and stuff, (which is not Mauluga strength), maybe I can see them all in the lower first round.
I don't see any of them to be like Demeco.
In fact, if they are first rounders, Adibi should be a high-to-mid 2nd rounder.

The logic here is at #15, you should very likely start day 1 (effectively, depending on position, and the guys around you.)

At SAM, you ought to be able to take on the TEs and some linemen, either because you're strong enough or you have good technique and leverage.
At WILL, you ough to be able to get by them with your quickness, agility, and so forth.

As OLB, you ought to be able to make the read in coverage, whether your assignment or the developing play calls for checking on the FB, RB, TE, or occasionally a WR.

As a mid first-rounder, I expect that you can perform those tasks well, especially when the competition is not that good.

To say that Matthews is strong at the POA or doesn't get caught in the trash is to say that Adibi had no problem there.
And Matthews does not have the coverage skills of Adibi. He's not as instinctive either, and he's not quicker. (All this is from the games I watch Adibi play at VTech.)

76Texan
04-02-2009, 04:32 PM
You probably did in some other thread, but it still doesn't mean you couldn't do the same with each & every player every year in the draft; top prospect or not. Qb's are the easiest targets by this logic. Every Int they threw you could say "see...".

Also, if you read the Dan Orlovsky thread, I said he's a decent QB.
I mentioned that none of his 8 Ints last year was a bad mistake.

I didn't elaborate, but they would be of these sorts:
3rd and long, last play of the half or the game, hail-mary.
WR slips.
When you're down by a bunch, an Int. deep in ennemy's territority is just as good as a punt, an excellent punt at that.

So you see, I don't make any QB an easy target.
Nor do I make any prospect an easy target! :cool:

Ole Miss Texan
04-02-2009, 04:49 PM
76Texans, thanks for the insight!

Since Matthews played towards the LOS a decent amount, what were your impressions of him fighting the linemen and/or the TEs (ie Matthews being a Sam for us)?

76Texan
04-02-2009, 04:55 PM
76Texans, thanks for the insight!

Since Matthews played towards the LOS a decent amount, what were your impressions of him fighting the linemen and/or the TEs (ie Matthews being a Sam for us)?
Needs lotsa works! Which is understandable. He hasn't been playing LB for long. He can win a fews and showed some strength, but he will have problems at the pro level, at least initially!

TimeKiller
04-02-2009, 05:01 PM
I think strength is the one worry about Matthews I have. He has put on quite a few pounds since his freshman year though and I think with pro-strength trainers/body fully maturing he'll be fine as long as he doesn't lose that burst.

Hypothetical: If he makes it to say, 260-265 lbs. would you consider him a situational speed rusher at DE? That's clearly the role that puts him where he is now.

Ole Miss Texan
04-02-2009, 05:09 PM
I think strength is the one worry about Matthews I have. He has put on quite a few pounds since his freshman year though and I think with pro-strength trainers/body fully maturing he'll be fine as long as he doesn't lose that burst.

Hypothetical: If he makes it to say, 260-265 lbs. would you consider him a situational speed rusher at DE? That's clearly the role that puts him where he is now.
As far as I know, USC has a very good S&C program but I too think once he gets in the pros, he'll add more muscle. More core muscle and squats, etc. should do the trick.

The bolded is what intruiges me and why I have always been high on Matthews and what I'm hoping for. I would love for him to be our SLB. On passing downs, the Sam usually comes off the field so the position is kind of devalued, if you will. I'm hoping with Matthews, he could double as our pass rush specialist. He jumps to the line and we throw a DB in the game. This is one reason why I think Matthews value is up.

I think he can add some more muscle, but how much I don't know- he just looks like he can bulk up more. Cushing looks maxed out to me.

mussop
04-02-2009, 05:58 PM
Personally I could care less about his career.

All I know is that this past season he wasn't anything spectacular.

What is youre definition of special?????

I'm not dogging Matthews, but he's one of those guys who can make great plays and also give up big plays.

He still needs to learn the game.
Let's take an example of a late game against UCLA (last regular season game).

3rd and 11 at the Trojans 21.
The Bruins in single backfield, TE strong right.
3 wides to their left.

USC rushed 4.
3 CBs on the right to cover the 3 receivers (actually one WR was in motion so the DB had to follow him to the other side.)
The SS play behind them.
Mauluaga stays in the middle to spy on either the QB or the RB (if he comes this way.)
The FS play back to check either the TE or RB if they release out of the backfield.
Same with Matthews.
He has to know that when the TE releases first, the FS has to pick up that guy.
That would leave him with the RB.

The TE ran a post route, taking the FS with him to the middle.
The RB ran a flag pattern to the outside.
Matthews either forgot or did not know his assignment.
And no speed, nor athleticisim, nor skill would help him there.

A quick lateral pass to the WR who launched a poorly thrown pass to the corner. Underthrown. Still, since Matthews was beaten so badly, he couldn't recover in time. TD.

Mays tried his best and might have had a chance, but Matthews tackling from behind only helped push the RB into the endzone.
(It looks like Mays could have brought down the guy short of the goal line after I rewound the tape a few times.)


No offense but how do you know what defensive play was called and what Mathews responsibilities were on that or any other play for that matter????

Needs lotsa works! Which is understandable. He hasn't been playing LB for long. He can win a fews and showed some strength, but he will have problems at the pro level, at least initially!

Name another player that will be available at 15 that doesnt need work and wont have problems at the pro level, at least initially.

The1ApplePie
04-02-2009, 09:36 PM
I'm the biggest (and probably only) Trojans fan here and I wouldn't want either Matthews or Cush in the first, though I would take Rey Rey

Cush is a warrior but the steroid rumors bother me. His injury history is a little bothersome

I love Clay, just not in the first. In the second I would take him, especially since his combine stats match his motor. I think his last name jacks him up in the eyes of Texans fans

Goatcheese
04-02-2009, 10:21 PM
I'm the biggest (and probably only) Trojans fan here and I wouldn't want either Matthews or Cush in the first, though I would take Rey Rey

Cush is a warrior but the steroid rumors bother me. His injury history is a little bothersome

I love Clay, just not in the first. In the second I would take him, especially since his combine stats match his motor. I think his last name jacks him up in the eyes of Texans fans

You think Texans fans going homo-erotic about Mathews being the long, hard peg that needs to fit in our soft round hole is going a little too far?

Who'da thunk it? :whip:

steelbtexan
04-02-2009, 11:27 PM
Nfl draft bible says Matthews & Cushing failed a steroid test at the Combine

mussop
04-03-2009, 01:30 AM
Nfl draft bible says Matthews & Cushing failed a steroid test at the Combine

Ooh in my face. Locker up! :gun:

Goatcheese
04-03-2009, 01:35 AM
Nfl draft bible says Matthews & Cushing failed a steroid test at the Combine

http://www.nfldraftbible.com/Latest/usc_linebackers_test_positive.html

Wow. Who would be stupid enough to use steroids knowing they're going to be tested?

These guys and Raji are retarded and just cost themselves $millions$. Raji possibly tens of millions.

threetoedpete
04-03-2009, 07:53 AM
I'm the biggest (and probably only) Trojans fan here and I wouldn't want either Matthews or Cush in the first, though I would take Rey Rey

Cush is a warrior but the steroid rumors bother me. His injury history is a little bothersome

I love Clay, just not in the first. In the second I would take him, especially since his combine stats match his motor. I think his last name jacks him up in the eyes of Texans fans

Then you should give it up as far as evaluating tallent goes. If you watched them for three years.....and you're saying now that none of them are going to go in the first round, you either don't have a clue or.....

the linebacker who will drop is Rey.....sorry.

BigBull17
04-03-2009, 08:17 AM
http://www.nfldraftbible.com/Latest/usc_linebackers_test_positive.html

Wow. Who would be stupid enough to use steroids knowing they're going to be tested?

These guys and Raji are retarded and just cost themselves $millions$. Raji possibly tens of millions.

Is that for real? I always doubt everything I see around April 1st.

HOU-TEX
04-03-2009, 09:41 AM
You think Texans fans going homo-erotic about Mathews being the long, hard peg that needs to fit in our soft round hole is going a little too far?

Who'da thunk it? :whip:

Dude, seriously? :spit:

rarazz00
04-05-2009, 06:40 AM
I too feel that Mathews is a reach at 15, despite his climbing up the board. We reached last year. Teams reach every year in drafts. With this being said, the Texans may have him rated so high that in their eyes he would NOT be a reach at 15. Just because Mayock or Kiper or us fans, have him at a certain grade, doesn't mean the Texans have him at the same grade, or other teams for that matter.:fans:

The Pencil Neck
04-05-2009, 12:24 PM
I too feel that Mathews is a reach at 15, despite his climbing up the board. We reached last year. Teams reach every year in drafts. With this being said, the Texans may have him rated so high that in their eyes he would NOT be a reach at 15. Just because Mayock or Kiper or us fans, have him at a certain grade, doesn't mean the Texans have him at the same grade, or other teams for that matter.:fans:

Most mocks have Ayers going mid to late second round and then there are a couple of mocks that have Ayers going top 15 or top 10.

Every team creates their own board with their own rankings. And all the "experts" have their boards. Reaches are defined by the experts because a team's board didn't match with that particular expert's board. But really, a player is only a reach if that team's ranking of the player they pick don't match how every other team ranks that player so that the player would be available at that team's next pick. And there's no way to know that.

So, to me, the whole concept of a reach is intrinsically misguided because it places emphasis on the expert's board instead of the boards of the teams and the boards of the teams are the only boards that matter and they're not known.

The draft is a constant gamble because you've got to match up your board/player rankings with your needs and you've got to take a risk on whether other teams are going to take the guys you want before you want to take them. The one thing I've learned doing multi-player mocks is that there are times when there are players you are sure aren't going to drop to you, but they do and then there are times that you're sure you're going to get your guy, but they get picked up before you expect them to go.

So, if Matthews is the guy that the Texans want and they don't think he's going to be available at 46 (and they can't trade back), then they have to take him at 15 and calling that a reach is silly because they want him more than any of the other guys they could take at that spot.

But that's just me.

Polo
04-05-2009, 01:57 PM
A reach is only a reach if you could have gotten that guy with a later pick.

awtysst
04-05-2009, 02:32 PM
Based on his proday 40 time and combine 10 yard times, I am not sure he still still there at 15. So the idea of reach or not might be mute.

rarazz00
04-07-2009, 07:24 PM
Most mocks have Ayers going mid to late second round and then there are a couple of mocks that have Ayers going top 15 or top 10.

Every team creates their own board with their own rankings. And all the "experts" have their boards. Reaches are defined by the experts because a team's board didn't match with that particular expert's board. But really, a player is only a reach if that team's ranking of the player they pick don't match how every other team ranks that player so that the player would be available at that team's next pick. And there's no way to know that.

So, to me, the whole concept of a reach is intrinsically misguided because it places emphasis on the expert's board instead of the boards of the teams and the boards of the teams are the only boards that matter and they're not known.

The draft is a constant gamble because you've got to match up your board/player rankings with your needs and you've got to take a risk on whether other teams are going to take the guys you want before you want to take them. The one thing I've learned doing multi-player mocks is that there are times when there are players you are sure aren't going to drop to you, but they do and then there are times that you're sure you're going to get your guy, but they get picked up before you expect them to go.

So, if Matthews is the guy that the Texans want and they don't think he's going to be available at 46 (and they can't trade back), then they have to take him at 15 and calling that a reach is silly because they want him more than any of the other guys they could take at that spot.

But that's just me.

PN...I see what your saying...I was basically saying that in short...though you phrased it way better than what I could...lol...either way some(fans) will ***** and some will be elated..I'll just be happy if whomever we pick Kicks Ass!!!(though I do have my preferences)...:texflag:

threetoedpete
04-18-2009, 09:44 AM
http://blogs.chron.com/nfl/2009/04/nfl_combine_positive_drug_test.html

John McClain 04/18/09

On Monday, every NFL team receives the report on which players tested positive for what at the Indianapolis scouting combine. There are uncomfirmed reports that the number could be as high as 26 players.

It's amazing, isn't it, that players can test positive for things like majijuana and steroids at the combine when they know a year ahead of time they're going to be tested. Unbelievable, actually.

Now, when the reports come in, the names will leak out because every team receives it. Nothing will be released because it's supposed to be confidential. I don't know why. To me, if a player is dumb enough to test positive at the combine, it should be officially released.

Next week, every team will know just about everything about a prospect. NFL security digs deep. I know some teams that hire private investigators if they're picking high in the first round because they want to know everything possible before they invest millions and millions on a player.

Maybe if they trade down and get better value but not at 15. I don't think they'll take Cushing, either way. I'm more convinced they're going to trade down for the second year in a row, and I do believe teams will want their pick for a variety of players who might be available.