Connor Barwin: better than mario? Yes!

[steelbtexan]

Originally Posted by texanfan2002114

That money will come down no matter what next year, especially if the Texans tag him with the franchise tag. I saw somewhere this morning on NFLN that the tag # for DE's will go from $13 million down to $10.6 million when the new CBA takes effect. All position tags will go down, so my money is that Mario will be here next year.


http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d...-board-in-2012

"Quarterback: $14.4 million (down from $16.1 million in 2011, $16.4 million in 2010); Drew Brees

Running back: $7.7 million (down from $9.6 million in 2011, $8.2 million in 2010); Matt Forte, Ray Rice

Wide receiver: $9.4 million (down from 11.4 million in 2011, $9.5 million in 2010); DeSean Jackson, Vincent Jackson*, Steve Johnson, Wes Welker

Tight end: $5.4 million (down from $7.3 million in 2011, $5.9 million in 2010); Fred Davis, Jermichael Finley

Offensive line: $9.4 million (down from $10.1 million in 2011, $10.7 million in 2010); Ben Grubbs, Carl Nicks

Defensive end: $10.6 million (down from $13 million in 2011, $12.4 million in 2010); Jason Jones, Mario Williams*

Defensive tackle: $7.9 million (down from $12.5 million in 2011; it was $7 million in 2010); Paul Soliai*

Linebacker: $8.8 million (down from $10.1 million in 2011, $9.7 million in 2010); Stephen Tulloch

Cornerback: $10.6 million (down from $13.5 million in 2011; tag was $9.6 million in 2010); Cortland Finnegan, Brent Grimes

Safety: $6.2 million (down from $8.8 million in 2011, $6.5 million in 2010); "

Shouldn't MW be getting the 8.8 mil LB $$$$ ?

Didn't MW say he didn't want to play DE in a 3-4 this offseason?

Looking at these numbers finding a WR2 with speed and a vet NT shouldn't be a problem with MW's $$$$.

BTW, Cody has looked much better lately. Dont know if it's the quality of the opposition or he's improving?

[texanfan2002114]

Nevermind

[Lucky]

Originally Posted by texanfan2002114

In the past, a franchise tag was derived from averaging the top five salaries at a particular position from the previous season. The new formula is much more complicated and is formed by determining the franchise tags at that position over the last five years as a percentage of the overall cap figure in each of those five years."

His number is coming down if he gets franchised from the way that reads.

No, the franchise tag is the above formula or the player's previous year's salary + 20%. Whichever is higher. Williams' 2010 salary of $14 mill or so, with the added 20%, will trump the formula.

Haven't we been over this ad nauseam?

[texanfan2002114]

Originally Posted by Lucky

No, the franchise tag is the above formula or the player's previous year's salary + 20%. Whichever is higher. Williams' 2010 salary of $14 mill or so, with the added 20%, will trump the formula.

Haven't we been over this ad nauseam?

It was my bad. I forgot and was deleting my post while you quoted me!! My Bad!! Sorry!!

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Number19

This is the first year in Wade's defense. We don't know how good Mario can be.

And we don't know how good Barwin can be.

I'm going to love seeing this defense with Mario, Reed, & Barwin next year. No doubt about it, Reed & Barwin add a versatility that Mario does not. But, since Wade is so good at making the most of that versatility, we'll probably have the defense of the next 5 to 10 years.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

But, I'll be glad when the year is over and we have the $14 million in cap money to spend elsewhere!

Part of that $14 million will be used to secure Mario for the next 4 years.

He'll probably count for 6-9 million of our cap space, because that's what GMs do.

[Kaiser Toro]

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Mario and Connor approaches - Barwin's Law

[dalemurphy]

Originally Posted by Scooter

also the meat of our schedule while mario was in and he still had the numbers. i find the reed/barwin comparisons funny because how often does mario go completely unblocked? did mario get to rack up sacks against the david "fetal" carr type failure that is blaine gabbart (twice)? did he get to destroy tennessee or "i hope i dont get sacked 3 times in a row" tampa bay?

i've blasted mario plenty, and assumed that he'd fail spectacularly as a linebacker, but he proved me and everybody wrong against our toughest opponents. health is a concern to a very small degree (in the "what have you done for me lately" category), but if healthy he has 12+ sacks at this point and we're a more overwhelming defense.

At least two of Mario's sacks came against Dallas Clark in a one on one matchup. I specifically recall one of Connor Barwin's sacks coming against Jake Long. Meanwhile, I can not recall Mario beating one of the better tackles in football for a sack... ever! I'm sure he did back in 2007 and 2008. But, that's too far back to recall for me.

You are correct that IF (that's a big "if") Mario stayed healthy, he would likely have as many, if not more, sacks that Barwin. However, that is because he is so limited. He can not play the position like Barwin can. He can not successfully drop in coverage. So, Wade was forced to put him in constant pass rush positions. How you can suggest that the defense would be better with him starting the past month, I'm not sure? From a depth stand point, certainly we are better with him than without him. However, barring further injuries, his loss has not hurt the defense at all, and I'd argue that it has helped the defense's growth and development.

[EllisUnit]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

At least two of Mario's sacks came against Dallas Clark in a one on one matchup. I specifically recall one of Connor Barwin's sacks coming against Jake Long. Meanwhile, I can not recall Mario beating one of the better tackles in football for a sack... ever! I'm sure he did back in 2007 and 2008. But, that's too far back to recall for me.

You are correct that IF (that's a big "if") Mario stayed healthy, he would likely have as many, if not more, sacks that Barwin. However, that is because he is so limited. He can not play the position like Barwin can. He can not successfully drop in coverage. So, Wade was forced to put him in constant pass rush positions. How you can suggest that the defense would be better with him starting the past month, I'm not sure? From a depth stand point, certainly we are better with him than without him. However, barring further injuries, his loss has not hurt the defense at all, and I'd argue that it has helped the defense's growth and development.

I disagree i think that wade put him to consistently rush the QB because thats what he's best at.

[dalemurphy]

Originally Posted by Scooter

also the meat of our schedule while mario was in and he still had the numbers. i find the reed/barwin comparisons funny because how often does mario go completely unblocked? did mario get to rack up sacks against the david "fetal" carr type failure that is blaine gabbart (twice)? did he get to destroy tennessee or "i hope i dont get sacked 3 times in a row" tampa bay?

i've blasted mario plenty, and assumed that he'd fail spectacularly as a linebacker, but he proved me and everybody wrong against our toughest opponents. health is a concern to a very small degree (in the "what have you done for me lately" category), but if healthy he has 12+ sacks at this point and we're a more overwhelming defense.

meat of the schedule?:

Indy is pathetic and Mario's 2 sacks were against Dallas Clark.
New Orleans- Mario was horrible against the Saints, including allowing Robert Meachem to seal him for a big run.
Miami- Mario was okay. Connor Barwin outplayed him.
Pittsburgh- Mario played well against a QB that gets sacked a lot and a beat up OLine.
Baltimore- Mario was hurt early in the game.

Mario was not particularly good against good players over that stretch. His opportunities were limited. He was bad against solid but unspectacular tackles in New Orleans. He was okay against Miami but played on the opposite side from Jake Long much of the time. That's about it as far as playing tough competition.

[dalemurphy]

Originally Posted by EllisUnit

I disagree i think that wade put him to consistently rush the QB because thats what he's best at.

Yes... he's not good at anything else. He can not drop in coverage. That's why they do that. Even Wade commented after the Texans lost Mario that they will compensate for his loss by having more opportunity for disguise and freedom to use Reed in different ways.

[dalemurphy]

Originally Posted by thunderkyss

Part of that $14 million will be used to secure Mario for the next 4 years.

He'll probably count for 6-9 million of our cap space, because that's what GMs do.

Unless the market is as aware of Mario's limitations as I am, he is going to command way more than Rick Smith and company will be willing to pay him. He'll be gone after the season unless Kubiak and Smith don't have the guts to make that call. I think they do.

[buddyboy]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

At least two of Mario's sacks came against Dallas Clark in a one on one matchup. I specifically recall one of Connor Barwin's sacks coming against Jake Long. Meanwhile, I can not recall Mario beating one of the better tackles in football for a sack... ever! I'm sure he did back in 2007 and 2008. But, that's too far back to recall for me.

You are correct that IF (that's a big "if") Mario stayed healthy, he would likely have as many, if not more, sacks that Barwin. However, that is because he is so limited. He can not play the position like Barwin can. He can not successfully drop in coverage. So, Wade was forced to put him in constant pass rush positions. How you can suggest that the defense would be better with him starting the past month, I'm not sure? From a depth stand point, certainly we are better with him than without him. However, barring further injuries, his loss has not hurt the defense at all, and I'd argue that it has helped the defense's growth and development.

And one of Barwin's sacks was completely unblocked. Are you going to start creating "true" sack numbers? A new stat that factors in matchup of block, coverage down field, quarterback, and blitz scheme?

It's silly to talk down sacks because of the situation. People get sacks when they're not blocked, and sometimes they don't get credit for sacks when they really created the opportunity.

On another note, the constant pushing of your anti-Mario campaign has taken away any credence you have on this subject, regardless of several somewhat accurate points you make.

[dalemurphy]

Originally Posted by buddyboy

And one of Barwin's sacks was completely unblocked. Are you going to start creating "true" sack numbers? A new stat that factors in matchup of block, coverage down field, quarterback, and blitz scheme?

It's silly to talk down sacks because of the situation. People get sacks when they're not blocked, and sometimes they don't get credit for sacks when they really created the opportunity.

On another note, the constant pushing of your anti-Mario campaign has taken away any credence you have on this subject, regardless of several somewhat accurate points you make.

I was responding to another's post about the competition being better during Mario's starts than it has been. I was simply pointing out the inaccuracy of the statement. One of the reasons for the success on defense this season has been the discipline the OLBs have shown. They have consistently been in position and not over-pursued. At least two of Reed's sacks this season and 1 or 2 of Barwin's today are a direct result of that discipline and not an example of their pass rushing technique... I certainly agree with that.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

Unless the market is as aware of Mario's limitations as I am, he is going to command way more than Rick Smith and company will be willing to pay him.

Hubris much? So you are more aware than the 31 GM's, HC's and DC's who make up the market?

[TejasTom]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

Baltimore- Mario was hurt early in the game.

It was Oakland.

[BullNation4Life]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

I was responding to another's post about the competition being better during Mario's starts than it has been. I was simply pointing out the inaccuracy of the statement. One of the reasons for the success on defense this season has been the discipline the OLBs have shown. They have consistently been in position and not over-pursued. At least two of Reed's sacks this season and 1 or 2 of Barwin's today are a direct result of that discipline and not an example of their pass rushing technique... I certainly agree with that.

You were simply pointing out the inaccuracy of a statement? So are you the pot or the kettle because most of your statements are inaccurate....

[Wolf]

goodness Dale

[BullNation4Life]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

meat of the schedule?:

Indy is pathetic and Mario's 2 sacks were against Dallas Clark.
New Orleans- Mario was horrible against the Saints, including allowing Robert Meachem to seal him for a big run.
Miami- Mario was okay. Connor Barwin outplayed him.
Pittsburgh- Mario played well against a QB that gets sacked a lot and a beat up OLine.
Baltimore- Mario was hurt early in the game.

Mario was not particularly good against good players over that stretch. His opportunities were limited. He was bad against solid but unspectacular tackles in New Orleans. He was okay against Miami but played on the opposite side from Jake Long much of the time. That's about it as far as playing tough competition.

again get your facts straight. Mario Williams didn't play against Baltimore, he was hurt early against Oakland.

[BullNation4Life]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Hubris much? So you are more aware than the 31 GM's, HC's and DC's who make up the market?

and of those 31 GMs, HC and DC ALL would take Mario Williams faster than they could write the check....