Discussion in 'College Football & the NFL Draft' started by Wolf, Jun 22, 2006.
I don't know about any change, but I wouldn't spend more than a third on him. I think we've got some good LBs already on the team and we have some solid depth there.
Still hate him.
That has to be at least 5 laps, but because it's late, I'll knock it down to 3 if you recant now.
I am curious on how that measures up with some prospects for 2007 draft..too bad I don't have a crystal ball
The guy wants to play football, he needs help though, is he going to do this after he gets paid, is he still going to stay away from the junk after he is a millionaire??????????
the good sign is in the article says he has passed 5 drug tests in 10 weeks.. that is a start for him to turn himself around
He's a worthless dirtbag just like every other player to come from the Al Groh farm.
Loads of players used to have drug issues, and still come out as good players. Chris Carter comes to mind.
And loads of players have used drugs and ruined their potential--Thomas Hollywood Henderson and Ricky Williams come to mind, with Charles Rogers as an example on the brink.
Those are just the 'name' guys. Over the years there have been thousands and thousands of guys walking around with 'NFL talent', but it is wasted one way or another.
I'd stay away from Brooks. If I were a Bengals fan I'd be really disappointed with my Management team. I can appreciate the Texans staying clear of these kinds of Men if they can help it...and in this case...they can.
Darrell Russell was the other name that immediately came to mind. Two Pro Bowls and 28.5 sacks in five years with the Raiders. Bounced out of the league on drug suspensions and addiction.
Happens all the time, much less to players who never make it into the NFL.
Still would not go after him hard. I think our LB core right now is quite competent and with Brooks' baggage I personally wouldn't spend much on him and I doubt the Texans do either. I don't remember seeing him play a whole lot, but if he was a pretty good player and judging from his workout numbers I'd offer up a 4th since it sounds like he's a decent player, but it also sounds like someone will offer something better for him. His current weight looks a little more like a DE than a LB, and they mentioned that he dropped some weight before the workout, although he'll need to get stronger to play DE effectively, or else lose a decent amount of weight for LB, so I'd probably look at him more as a DE, which I think we're also quite solid at with Mario, Peek, Babin, Kalu, and Weaver.
If you are thinking starters at LB, ok.. but depth wise(if he didn't beat our starters out) wouldn't he be an asset? ..
He has good tools and we could use him, but I wouldn't spend more than a 5th on him...I doubt the Texans even make an offer...
I think depth-wise we're pretty solid as well, I think we have 6-7 fairly solid LBs, and if we're just looking to add depth then I wouldn't spend anything more than a 5th round pick on him, I'm not fond of spending high picks on guys that you don't plan on starting, and either way look what guys like A.J. Nicholson have done since the draft, I don't want to risk a pick of any kind on a guy that might end up getting into more trouble and causing locker room problems for our team.
I said a forth. So I'm with you. I can understand the gamble with the guys potential. If you're going to gamble on one of the two I'd rather gamble on Dixon. Inspite of what Ron White says, I'll take a little stupid over a little additicted any day. If the titans can get Bullock on line, Dixon shouldn't have too much trouble. JMHO.
Separate names with a comma.