Would You Trade....

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

I don't think we've seen the best Schaub has to offer. 2009, he was on the verge to being elite. Then that guy went away.


That big play on our first drive last week, where Andre had to stop then jump over the DB he had already beat would have been a TD with Rogers throwing the ball.

We've already agreed that Rodgers is an upgrade over Schaub. I said that up front.

Are you ready to go with Ninja, Cody, and some whodat for your D-line so you can have Rodgers and an almost-Cushing at OLB.

Now if you'd said Barwin and Reed instead of Watt, I'd be all over it.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by ObsiWan

We've already agreed that Rodgers is an upgrade over Schaub. I said that up front.

Are you ready to go with Ninja, Cody, and some whodat for your D-line so you can have Rodgers and an almost-Cushing at OLB.

Now if you'd said Barwin and Reed instead of Watt, I'd be all over it.

The Rogers comment was in answer to your question about if Rogers makes this conservative offense better. I think he does.

I think Watt's impact on the game will be equivalent to Matthews impact on the game in the future. It looks like an even trade to me. While Jj's stock is high, we could probably get GB to sweeten the deal.


By the way, no one said we have to agree.

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

His ability to extend plays & pick up 6-12 yards moves the chains, & keep us on the field.

The offense doesn't need to change, Rogers will make it more efficient.

& like you said, we're replacing Watt with Matthews, playing on the strong side. We can still get a dynamic rusher on the weak side, if Merci is not that guy. Still we've got Cushing in the middle.

I will admit, you make a solid case....

Let's seee...

Player . . . Gms . TKL . Sck . P/D. F/F . F/R
Matthews . . .10 . 26 . . 11 ... 2 . 1 ... 0
Hawk . . . . .14 . 71 . . 01 ... 0 . 0 ... 0

Watt . . . . .14 . 61 . . 20+.. 15 . 3 ... 2

ummmm.... Naaah. Too much defensive production to let go of for my tastes. And think about what the drop off in D-line pressure would do to the secondary...

Naaah... Not worth it.

you'd have to toss in a 2nd or a 3rd & a 4th [puts his Rick Smith hat on] ...and why should I give you J.J. Watt - who would be super inspired to be back playing in front of his Wisconsin homies - to team up with B.J. Raji for that pretty-boy LB and Mr. Discount-Double-Check?


Edit: Make that a 1st and a 4th.

[Thorn]

Ben Tate and Karem Jackson for 5 third round picks in the next draft is my choice. As good as the Texans have been drafting lately, that would totally rock. But it would also be a must that they pick up a good experienced corner in free agency. We can live without Tate, we've been doing it for a long time now.

[Texecutioner]

I'd trade Watt in a second to obtain RG3 or Luck. I have no doubt that both of these guys are going to be elite level QB's for a long time barring a crazy injury that effects their entire way of playing. QB is the most important position on the field to get the best player. Always has been and it always will be.

QB > DL


You get a QB like that, and you can work the next few years at finding some great pass rushers. You might not find one quite as good as Watt, but you won't need one that has to be as great as Watt. The last 10 SB teams didn't have a DE as good as Watt. But the majority of the last 10 SB's did all have elite QB's playing on their offense. I wouldn't trade Manning or Brady for Watt, because they only have a few seasons left to play at this level, but Luck and RG3 have an entire career ahead of them. This is a no brainer. You put this same type of question on just about any other team forum, they'd all take the QB's over Watt. Love Watt to death, but QB is the more valuable and important position to have an elite player at.

[PapaL]

No way I'd trade Watt. Id take a solid run game and a stout D over a star QB. Ask Tom Brady about that Giants DL. How many SB have the Pats won since they had the cameras and film taken away?

[Say Watt]

There is only one player in the NFL I would trade JJ Watt for: Aaron Rodgers. That's it. If Brady or Peyton were 6-8 years younger, they'd be on my list too.

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by Texecutioner

I'd trade Watt in a second to obtain RG3 or Luck. I have no doubt that both of these guys are going to be elite level QB's for a long time barring a crazy injury that effects their entire way of playing. QB is the most important position on the field to get the best player. Always has been and it always will be.

QB > DL


You get a QB like that, and you can work the next few years at finding some great pass rushers. You might not find one quite as good as Watt, but you won't need one that has to be as great as Watt. The last 10 SB teams didn't have a DE as good as Watt. But the majority of the last 10 SB's did all have elite QB's playing on their offense. I wouldn't trade Manning or Brady for Watt, because they only have a few seasons left to play at this level, but Luck and RG3 have an entire career ahead of them. This is a no brainer. You put this same type of question on just about any other team forum, they'd all take the QB's over Watt. Love Watt to death, but QB is the more valuable and important position to have an elite player at.

You've changed the deal. We've talking trade with the Packers, not the Colts or the 'Skins.

And further more, I don't know how wise it would be to give a division opponent a weapon like Watt to go with Freeney and Mathis.

[steelbtexan]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

Yes. I'd like for Andre to retire a Texan. But the value here is way too good.

No. What's the point?

No. As good as RG3 may seem, I'm not sold. Can't wait to see him next year. Or the year after. But as long as he isn't in the AFC South, we'll be ok.

No... The boys talented, but Jj Watt & Tate is too rich.

Yes.

Yes

Yes

Yes

yes


No

MSR

Great minds think alike.

[steelbtexan]

Who would have given up last yrs entire draft and this yrs 1st rd pick for RG3 ?

[mussop]

Originally Posted by ObsiWan

We've already agreed that Rodgers is an upgrade over Schaub. I said that up front.

Are you ready to go with Ninja, Cody, and some whodat for your D-line so you can have Rodgers and an almost-Cushing at OLB.

Now if you'd said Barwin and Reed instead of Watt, I'd be all over it.

You said it up front but were inaccurate. Rodgers isn't just slightly better than Schaub, he is eons better. With Rodgers running this offense we would score 35 points a game so having this current defense with Cushing back and adding Mathews on the outside would be more than adequate.

Throw in FA aqusitions and future draft picks this team would be immensely better in the future.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by steelbtexan

Who would have given up last yrs entire draft and this yrs 1st rd pick for RG3 ?

ME!

Originally Posted by mussop

Even if Schaub does comeback next year, how much slower will he be? I mean Bajeebus an old retired Dan Marino could beat him in a foot race before the surgery. And how is it going to effect him in the future? He is a FA next year and he's on the wrong side of 30 already with a long history of injuries.

Yates is okay but what if Schaub goes down again? Yates steps up and who backs him up? What if Yates can't handle the pressure? Lots of backups come in and look good at first, then teams get film of them and they are never heard of again. Frank Reich anyone?

This isn't a lets sign Manning post but its funny how some people say Manning couldn't run this offense because of the play action rollout. Well how is Matt Schaub going to run it with a bum foot?

I know this sounds crazy but we should be looking at franchising Mario and trading him along with whatever draft picks it takes to move up and take RG111. Why risk having to rely on an older often injured Schaub or a second year project like Yates when we have all this excellent young talent? Lets get our franchise QB of the future right now. Let him learn behind Schaub for a year. If Schaub goes down oh well throw RG 111 into the fire. If not you have a whole year to see if Schaub can stay healthy and lead this team to the promise land.

link

Originally Posted by mussop

We will see. You want to talk a once in a decade player RG111 is that guy.

link

[Texecutioner]

Originally Posted by PapaL

No way I'd trade Watt. Id take a solid run game and a stout D over a star QB. Ask Tom Brady about that Giants DL. How many SB have the Pats won since they had the cameras and film taken away?

THe Patriots have remained one of the most dominant teams in the league, so I have no idea why you would try to use them as an example. They were seconds away from a perfect season for christ sake, and could be potentially headed for a 3rd SB since then. How did Watt's impact fare against Rogers and Brady's impact against the Texans this season? I rest my case. The Giants are also a bad example as they are a great team all around. They had great WR's last year, a very good running game, a very good SB winning QB, and the deepest D line in the league which means you're making my point for me. They went out and got several great D lineman to go with everything else.

The last few QB's to win SB's

1. Eli - Brady
2. Rogers - Ben
3. Brees - Peyton
4. Big Ben - Warner
5. Peyton - Grossman
6. Ben - Hasselback
7. Brady - Mcnabb
8. Brady - Delhomme
9. Johnson - Gannon
10. Brady - Warner

Forgot Eli's first SB that included Brady in that list as well.

Other then Johnson, you've got nothing but elite QB's winning SB's. Eli and Ben are right behind the elite four (Brady, Rogers, Manning, Brees), but they've both won two a piece and have both been to 5 SB's between both of them. The rest are HOF guys. Even looking at the list of QB's who lost in the SB are all elite guys other then Grossman, Delhomme, and Hasselback. So 7 out of 10 QB's that even lost the SB were top guys at their position of QB. Trying to act like any DE even as great as Watt is can be as dominant of a factor for an entire team is not even close. An elite level DE can still be on a terrible defense. An elite level QB is almost never going to be on a terrible offense no matter what his weapons are. An elite level QB can make average guys look great. Brady has done it for years.

[Texecutioner]

Originally Posted by ObsiWan

You've changed the deal. We've talking trade with the Packers, not the Colts or the 'Skins.

And further more, I don't know how wise it would be to give a division opponent a weapon like Watt to go with Freeney and Mathis.

It wouldn't matter, because they wouldn't have a QB again. And if it did, Mathis and Freeney would be gone a few years from now any way. They'd have Watt, but they'd be in a dire search trying to find their QB of the future just like teams like the Jets, the Bills, the Browns, and the Jags and many others. Teams who have all had struggles with their QB's that have held them back for years not matter what types of stars they had on defense. The Ravens and the Bucs SB runs will never be the norm and will always be a rarity to reach a level of defense like those teams had.

Like it or not, the Colts are in a better position for the future then the Texans are as much as I hate to say it.

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by mussop

You said it up front but were inaccurate. Rodgers isn't just slightly better than Schaub, he is eons better. With Rodgers running this offense we would score 35 points a game so having this current defense with Cushing back and adding Mathews on the outside would be more than adequate.

Throw in FA aqusitions and future draft picks this team would be immensely better in the future.

Pure conjecture. That is totally an assumption. As I pointed out before, Rodgers would be leaving behind that squadron of receivers he has up in Green Bay and coming to a RUN FIRST team.

And besides, if Rodgers is all that "efficient, why aren't they ahead of us in pt/game?

Texans - 28.1, ranked 3rd behind only NE and Denver. And we're only behind Denver by 1.1 pts

Packers - 24.6, ranked 13th in the NFL.

Now Rodgers has 10 more TDs than Schaub; 32 vs. 22. Why? Because we have 18 RUSHING TDs and the Packers have FIVE.

Face up to it. Rodgers comes here, he runs THIS offense, not that pass-happy thing they run up in Green Bay. This offense goes thru Foster and Tate (when healthy).

Do you REALLY think Kubiak/Dennison will abandon this offense because Rodgers and not Schaub is under center? I sure don't.

And the fact that Schaub is only a notch behind Rodgers in every stat category, in a run-first offense indicates to me Rodgers is only slightly better. Plus Rodgers also been sacked 45 times to Schaub's 20. Not good for an offense that is built to "stay on schedule".

Nope. Still not sold that the slight upgrade Rodgers will make to the offense is so much better that it would make up for the loss of J.J. Watt.

[Texan_Bill]

It's not really a wonder why I don't post very much anymore.... Some of y'all muff-huggas really, really need to get a life, man..

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by Texan_Bill

It's not really a wonder why I don't post very much anymore.... Some of y'all muff-huggas really, really need to get a life, man..

Not all of us can keep up with the life style you have Bill. ...leave us something.

[Rey]

I don't agree with Tex a lot, but dude is killing it in here. Very strong arguments.

[Texan_Bill]

Originally Posted by ObsiWan

Not all of us can keep up with the life style you have Bill. ...leave us something.

LMFAO!!!!

Repped!!!

[mussop]

Originally Posted by ObsiWan

Pure conjecture. That is totally an assumption. As I pointed out before, Rodgers would be leaving behind that squadron of receivers he has up in Green Bay and coming to a RUN FIRST team.

And besides, if Rodgers is all that "efficient, why aren't they ahead of us in pt/game?

Texans - 28.1, ranked 3rd behind only NE and Denver. And we're only behind Denver by 1.1 pts

Packers - 24.6, ranked 13th in the NFL.

Now Rodgers has 10 more TDs than Schaub; 32 vs. 22. Why? Because we have 18 RUSHING TDs and the Packers have FIVE.

Face up to it. Rodgers comes here, he runs THIS offense, not that pass-happy thing they run up in Green Bay. This offense goes thru Foster and Tate (when healthy).

Do you REALLY think Kubiak/Dennison will abandon this offense because Rodgers and not Schaub is under center? I sure don't.

And the fact that Schaub is only a notch behind Rodgers in every stat category, in a run-first offense indicates to me Rodgers is only slightly better. Plus Rodgers also been sacked 45 times to Schaub's 20. Not good for an offense that is built to "stay on schedule".

Nope. Still not sold that the slight upgrade Rodgers will make to the offense is so much better that it would make up for the loss of J.J. Watt.

Your love of stats has distorted your perception of reality.