Where to spend the 2014 1st round pick?

[steelbtexan]

I'm not against taking a QB - don't get me wrong .... I just don't see any real franchise QB's in this draft. Every one of them is a huge gamble tho some greater than others.


I do want to see Keenum finish the season before we make the decision we have to draft a QB .... he's played pretty damn well so far despite unfavorable conditions - no running game and a sh!t OL.

Also filling those holes at LG & RT via FA .... will cost premium $$$$.


Lets at least get to the end of the season before we finalize our evaluations of the QB spot - its a near complete unknown , those other spots (LG , RT , ILB , NT) aren't.



Tough question .... one I wouldn't want to make just yet.

I would put off drafting a QB until 2015, fill as many holes as the new regime can and find out if Keenum can be the QB of the future by giving him the rest of this season and all of 2014. If Keenum isn't the man for the job, then trade up and pick Hogan in the 2015 draft. I'm biased, my 2 favorite QB's are McCarron and Hogan.

 

[WolverineFan]

If we get the #3 pick, I think I'd take clowney and stick him at olb.

What would you do with Mercilus? If you don't mind my asking.

 

[Corrosion]

I agree you dont just play the odds. All the QB's you mention were selected because teams evaluated them and judged their value in the top 10 of their draft class. Gabbert, Carr and Harrington werent the only QBs left on the board. They were judged to be top signal callers and worthy of a top 10 pick.

Obviously if you dont feel that the QB prospect is a top signal caller and have another position player rated higher you can go with that. But with a top 5 pick (and Bridgewater, Mariota, Hundley potentially coming out) we would virtually be a lock for a highly rated signal caller. And it wouldnt be out of the question to move up a couple of spots to land your guy.

We obviously evaluate this group of QB's differently .... at this point in time.


Of those you listed , Bridgewater is the only one I take with a first round pick (this year).
Mariota looks to me to be a system QB and probably the best athlete on the field in any given game - that doesn't make him a good QB.

Hundley is probably two years away from being close to NFL ready. He's a project.

I'd rather go with Murray in the second or McCarron in the 3rd than either Mariota or Hundley , might even take Boyd and Manziel over them as well.

 

[Rey]

What would you do with Mercilus? If you don't mind my asking.

Ever since the Mercilus pick was announced i was down on it. I did not see the actual ability that his one year of great production. He plays stiff to me and I don't see a real football player when I look at how he moves.

I'm not a fan of his or reeds.

So really I don't care what they do with him.

But practically speaking I'd have an open competition for his spot.

If you're asking if Mercilus could play opposite clowney, my answer is yes. But again, I'd open the competition and if he didn't win the spot I'd bench him.

 

[WolverineFan]

Ever since the Mercilus pick was announced i was down on it. I did not see the actual ability that his one year of great production. He plays stiff to me and I don't see a real football player when I look at how he moves.

I'm not a fan of his or reeds.

So really I don't care what they do with him.

But practically speaking I'd have an open competition for his spot.

If you're asking if Mercilus could play opposite clowney, my answer is yes. But again, I'd open the competition and if he didn't win the spot I'd bench him.

Mercilus was definitely an "all potential" pick. He was pretty raw and only had the one year of production like you said. I think it's obvious he always relied too much on his athletic ability and hasn't really developed. It is pretty frustrating that the defense is basically built for him to succeed and he only has 4.5 sacks.

As for my original question, I only ask because I see Clowney as Ninja's replacement at DE. The problem is I question his ability with double teams so my 2nd position for him would be WLB. Mercilus doesn't really have another position in the defense though so he'd be a wasted pick if you move Clowney there. He did play well in spot duty last year at the 7' technique, but it was mostly on passing downs. I question his ability to two-gap and cover TE/RB's.

 

[Rey]

Mercilus was definitely an "all potential" pick. He was pretty raw and only had the one year of production like you said. I think it's obvious he always relied too much on his athletic ability and hasn't really developed. It is pretty frustrating that the defense is basically built for him to succeed and he only has 4.5 sacks.

As for my original question, I only ask because I see Clowney as Ninja's replacement at DE. The problem is I question his ability with double teams so my 2nd position for him would be WLB. Mercilus doesn't really have another position in the defense though so he'd be a wasted pick if you move Clowney there. He did play well in spot duty last year at the 7' technique, but it was mostly on passing downs. I question his ability to two-gap and cover TE/RB's.

I'd play clowney exactly how we played Mario.

Right now I'm assuming that the coaching staff will be back. Who knows. We could go to a 43.

Personally, I wouldn't put him at 34 DE though. I think he would be a beast on the edge where he could better use his athleticism.

I know most disagree, but I'd move Cushing outside to be the solb opposite clowney.

I can almost guaranteed we'd get more pressure on qb's from the edges.

 

[WolverineFan]

I'd play clowney exactly how we played Mario.

Right now I'm assuming that the coaching staff will be back. Who knows. We could go to a 43.

Personally, I wouldn't put him at 34 DE though. I think he would be a beast on the edge where he could better use his athleticism.

I know most disagree, but I'd move Cushing outside to be the solb opposite clowney.

I can almost guaranteed we'd get more pressure on qb's from the edges.

It's certainly not a bad idea. Right now Mercilus basically plays a wide 9 and his only responsibilities are leverage to his side and rushing the passer. I don't think it's a stretch to say that Clowney would be more successful, if not much more successful. Also, Clowney tends to get lazy in the run game so it's not a bad idea to put him in a position to focus mainly on rushing the passer.

I haven't made it a secret on this board but I have a certain disdain for the way Clowney has played this year. His pursuit effort has been pitiful this year and he seems to only care about two things 1) sacks and 2) not getting hurt. I acknowledge his ridiculous talent, but I question his work ethic and seeing a guy with that kind of talent not give 100% effort really pisses me off.

 

[76Texan]

The fact that people in this thread alone disagree on which QB is rated the highest should mean that there's no sure-fire franchise QB in this class.

Sounds to me like rolling the dice if one wants to go all-in for a QB.

 

[Blake]

The fact that people in this thread alone disagree on which QB is rated the highest should mean that there's no sure-fire franchise QB in this class.

Sounds to me like rolling the dice if one wants to go all-in for a QB.

Manning and Leaf were widely debated on who should be rated the highest. Doesnt mean there wasnt a sure-fire franchise QB there.

 

[Corrosion]

The fact that people in this thread alone disagree on which QB is rated the highest should mean that there's no sure-fire franchise QB in this class.

Sounds to me like rolling the dice if one wants to go all-in for a QB .

Because of that , doesn't it make sense to take the highest risk / reward guy if you are in fact going to take the gamble ?

 

[Blake]

I'm not sure what you see in what is basically an inferior version of Johnny Manziel.

To each his own. I see a guy who is a dual threat QB with blazing speed, and height to see over the o-line. I see a guy who is taking care of the football and making good decisions. Resembles Kaepernick to an extent.

 

[Texian]

Most college QBs if they don't have 30 college starts under their belt will return to school. The general rule of thumb is the NFL will downgrade their their perspective draft position because of a lack of experience. NFL Conventional Wisdom is those college QBs with 30 or more college starts tend to be the rookie QBs who have better and earlier success in the NFL.

 

[76Texan]

Because of that , doesn't it make sense to take the highest risk / reward guy if you are in fact going to take the gamble ?

That guy would be Clowney.

 

[Corrosion]

That guy would be Clowney.

Or Manziel (strictly speaking on the QB position).


I think they are both boom or bust ...

 

[htownfan32]

To each his own. I see a guy who is a dual threat QB with blazing speed, and height to see over the o-line. I see a guy who is taking care of the football and making good decisions. Resembles Kaepernick to an extent.

I can see where many would be enamored with Mariota. I'm not really one of them. He is in my mind like Manziel, too difficult to project at a pro level in a pro offense.

I think he'd kill it if Philly picked him up, though.

 

[TexansSeminole]

I can see where many would be enamored with Mariota. I'm not really one of them. He is in my mind like Manziel, too difficult to project at a pro level in a pro offense.

I think he'd kill it if Philly picked him up, though.

I don't see how he is anything like Manziel. They both can run and are in odd spread schemes, that's about it.

 

[Texian]

I can see where many would be enamored with Mariota. I'm not really one of them. He is in my mind like Manziel, too difficult to project at a pro level in a pro offense.

I think he'd kill it if Philly picked him up, though.

I don't see how he is anything like Manziel. They both can run and are in odd spread schemes, that's about it.

The difference in Manziel and Mariota is Manziel is Must See TV. Manziel sees the field better than any other college QB today and Manziel is better at improvisation.

 

[Naija Texan]

The fact that people in this thread alone disagree on which QB is rated the highest should mean that there's no sure-fire franchise QB in this class.

Sounds to me like rolling the dice if one wants to go all-in for a QB.

Pretty much, just like last draft a lot of great college QBs that may not have what it takes in the NFL.

Personally, I think the safe and smart bet would be to trade the Texans first round pick for another team's that might be lower plus more 1st or 2nd round picks. As nice as this QB class is looking, we all know big name guys in College football right now will fall a round or two based off slip ups in the combine and just the normal GMs trying to outsmart themselves.

Personally, I'd grab someone that can take the place of one of the departing starters like Wade Smith or maybe Antonio Smith (who I hope we retain) and then pick up one of the fallen QBs later in the round or in the second.

The fact is the best QBs right now are all undersized, might as well get legit needs handled first so that if we can have our new QB surrounded with talent that can help him succeed sooner rather then later.

 

[aussie_texan]

If we get the #3 pick, I think I'd take clowney and stick him at olb.

if your going to stay with 3-4 surely you go Barr over clowney. both a incredible playmakers and barr is having the better season this year

 

[aussie_texan]

Foster wouldn't net us a 6th right now I don't think .... big contract & injuries.


BUT pending we end up with a top 5 pick , there is the possibility of getting both a tackle (doubtful its Erving) and Mosley .... depending upon what compensation you get by trading back ~5-7 picks.
If you get a 2nd as compensation , you could easily package that along with your own #2 to get back up in the middle of the first round giving you two selections from ~10-12 and ~12-15.
You might even be able to keep one of those second rounder's and give up a 2nd & 3rd instead , picking somewhere around ~18.


Maybe you end up with Mosley & Antonio Richardson of Tennessee who is very comparable to Erving.

yeah i like that idea. Mosley is just to much of a playmaker for me to pass on. in terms of defence its him barr and clowney has your elite talents in the draft imo. Also if you could keep that 2nd round pick. taking ebron would be icing on the cake…but i think I'm asking for a bit to much

you really think thats all we would get for foster?
I agree that his health is a concern but his contract is favourable considering when healthy is an elite RB in the league. when i see richardson going for a 1st surely foster is worth at minimum the same amount

 

[Wolf6151]

yeah i like that idea. Mosley is just to much of a playmaker for me to pass on. in terms of defence its him barr and clowney has your elite talents in the draft imo. Also if you could keep that 2nd round pick. taking ebron would be icing on the cake…but i think I'm asking for a bit to much

you really think thats all we would get for foster?
I agree that his health is a concern but his contract is favourable considering when healthy is an elite RB in the league. when i see richardson going for a 1st surely foster is worth at minimum the same amount

The reason Richardson is worth more than Foster is that he's younger, healthier, and alot less mileage. Plus the Colts over paid. I think the best you'd get for Foster would be a 4th and that's not even likely. Foster is having spinal surgery, has lots of mileage with diminishing returns, and is already old for a RB.

 

[aussie_texan]

The reason Richardson is worth more than Foster is that he's younger, healthier, and alot less mileage. Plus the Colts over paid. I think the best you'd get for Foster would be a 4th and that's not even likely. Foster is having spinal surgery, has lots of mileage with diminishing returns, and is already old for a RB.

but his terrible!!!!!!

can't believe i used to think he was good :vincepalm:

 

[Corrosion]

The reason Richardson is worth more than Foster is that he's younger, healthier, and alot less mileage. Plus the Colts over paid. I think the best you'd get for Foster would be a 4th and that's not even likely. Foster is having spinal surgery, has lots of mileage with diminishing returns, and is already old for a RB.

Isn't Richardson still on a rookie scale contract ?! Contracts have a huge impact on player trade value , especially bonus money that is accelerated.

Foster's deal 5 years 43.5m total , 12.5 signing bonus 20.75 guaranteed.

Richardson 4 years 20.489m total 13.341m signing bonus 20.489m guaranteed.


The difference here is that the Browns ate any funds from that 13.341m signing bonus that hadn't been paid and the Dolts get him for 1.32m this season , 2.52m in 2014 and 3.18m in 2015.

Foster's cap hit is between 8.25m and 9.5m for this season and three more after it.


Richardson's value is inflated by the fact that Cleveland was able to eat the cap hit passing that value on to Indy and being compensated a #1 pick for it.

If the Texans were to eat Foster's bonus money the team he goes to is still on the hook for ~6.25m - 7m per year.

Compare that to what Indy is paying Richardson now .... roughly 25-45% over the life of the deal.

 

[Texian]

Isn't Richardson still on a rookie scale contract ?! Contracts have a huge impact on player trade value , especially bonus money that is accelerated.

Foster's deal 5 years 43.5m total , 12.5 signing bonus 20.75 guaranteed.

Richardson 4 years 20.489m total 13.341m signing bonus 20.489m guaranteed.


The difference here is that the Browns ate any funds from that 13.341m signing bonus that hadn't been paid and the Dolts get him for 1.32m this season , 2.52m in 2014 and 3.18m in 2015.

Foster's cap hit is between 8.25m and 9.5m for this season and three more after it.


Richardson's value is inflated by the fact that Cleveland was able to eat the cap hit passing that value on to Indy and being compensated a #1 pick for it.

^^^^^ Refreshing to see that someone truly understands the working of the salary cap.

 

[76Texan]

The Colts thought they were getting good value with Richardson's "affordable" remaining portion on his rookie contract, but it looks like now that they are just wasting their first round pick in 2014.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/sto...re-andrew-luck-sacks-hits-one-dimensional-afc

Also, I don't think you can compare a guy on his rookie contract, who has yet to prove anything in the NFL with Foster.

$2M might be less than $6M, but if you don't get the return of that spending, the $2M is just money down the drain.

 

[infantrycak]

If the Texans were to eat Foster's bonus money the team he goes to is still on the hook for ~6.25m - 7m per year.

Compare that to what Indy is paying Richardson now .... roughly 25-45% over the life of the deal.

All true. But, the trade value is not affected by the ability of the trading team to absorb the cap hit. That just makes the trade possible.

The below is also true.

$2M might be less than $6M, but if you don't get the return of that spending, the $2M is just money down the drain.

2.8 ypc for a starting RB is a player you are thinking to replace regardless of his salary.

 

[Mr teX]

top 5 pick....get your qb

top 10 pick...get jake matthews

 

[Corrosion]

All true. But, the trade value is not affected by the ability of the trading team to absorb the cap hit. That just makes the trade possible.

Ah but it is ... as the team getting said player is getting him at a discounted salary cap hit for the duration of the deal - Pending the player was worth the initial value.

Basically they are paying less for the same production. In this case , the Dolts are getting a ~4.6m player for 1.3m this season. They save 3.335m in both actual cash and cap space.

What's more valuable to you , Trent Richardson at 4.6m or Trent Richardson at 1.3m ?? This is comparing apples to apples .... for once.

top 5 pick....get your qb

top 10 pick...get jake matthews

OT has become one of the premier positions in the game , I cant see Matthews being on the board beyond the 4th-5th picks.

Bridgewater , Clowney & Mariota .... who else do you see going in front of Matthews ?

 

[infantrycak]

Ah but it is ... as the team getting said player is getting him at a discounted salary cap hit for the duration of the deal - Pending the player was worth the initial value.

Basically they are paying less for the same production. In this case , the Dolts are getting a ~4.6m player for 1.3m this season. They save 3.335m in both actual cash and cap space.

What's more valuable to you , Trent Richardson at 4.6m or Trent Richardson at 1.3m ?? This is comparing apples to apples .... for once.

Actually no. The structure of the prior deal is irrelevant except for the portion the new team is taking on. The are getting Trent Richardson for $1.3 mil regardless of whether he had been paid a $3 mil signing bonus or a $30 mil signing bonus. Heck the Browns could have been in position to pay his signing bonus as a roster bonus last year and so he would have been $1.3 mil for either team this year. Makes no difference to the value Indy is getting - it is all $1.3 mil.

If you are buying a chicken you don't care whether the seller got it for free or paid $100k thinking it laid golden eggs. Richardson remains a $1.3 mil chicken.

 

[Texian]

Actually no. The structure of the prior deal is irrelevant except for the portion the new team is taking on. The are getting Trent Richardson for $1.3 mil regardless of whether he had been paid a $3 mil signing bonus or a $30 mil signing bonus. Heck the Browns could have been in position to pay his signing bonus as a roster bonus last year and so he would have been $1.3 mil for either team this year. Makes no difference to the value Indy is getting - it is all $1.3 mil.

If you are buying a chicken you don't care whether the seller got it for free or paid $100k thinking it laid golden eggs. Richardson remains a $1.3 mil chicken.

I have watched you often go to left field in a desperate ploy and effort to find something that will make sense to your point of view. A $1.3 mil chicken may be your best or worst depending on how you look at it.

 

[76Texan]

Ah but it is ... as the team getting said player is getting him at a discounted salary cap hit for the duration of the deal - Pending the player was worth the initial value.

Basically they are paying less for the same production. In this case , the Dolts are getting a ~4.6m player for 1.3m this season. They save 3.335m in both actual cash and cap space.

What's more valuable to you , Trent Richardson at 4.6m or Trent Richardson at 1.3m ?? This is comparing apples to apples .... for once.




OT has become one of the premier positions in the game , I cant see Matthews being on the board beyond the 4th-5th picks.

Bridgewater , Clowney & Mariota .... who else do you see going in front of Matthews ?

Been watching Matthews. I'm starting to think he might be the safest pick in the draft. It might be a premium pick at RT at no. 5 through 10, but like you said, I don't see too many guys ahead of him as BPA.

Is Evans of more value than Matthews? Possibly.

 

[Blake]

No, Mariota. And you are headed in the right direction, but the coach you should be thinking about coaches in Waco Texas.

Well hell. Briles signs 10 year deal to stay with Baylor. Smart move by Baylor.

 

[mussop]

Well hell. Briles signs 10 year deal to stay with Baylor. Smart move by Baylor.

I seen that. It sucks, I really was hoping at the very least we could get him as OC.

 

[Texian]

I seen that. It sucks, I really was hoping at the very least we could get him as OC.

The only head coaches that I know of that would leave a head coaching position to become an OC is a high school head coach leaving high school to become a college OC.

 

[kiwitexansfan]

More and more convinced we need to spend the first round pick on one of the lines.

I believe we have weapons to win on offense if we get the blocking required.

I think that we need someone to take advantage of the attention Watt gets to transform the defense.

 

[infantrycak]

The only head coaches that I know of that would leave a head coaching position to become an OC is a high school head coach leaving high school to become a college OC.

Correct.

Current OCs who came from college HC:

Mike Sherman - fired
Jim Caldwell - fired
Bill Callahan - fired
Dirk Koelter - fired
Mike Shua - fired

 

[Mr teX]

if i had to guess a few names i'd say:

Hundley- if he comes out and has a good workout, some team will fall in love with his size & potential & jump up & take him way before he's supposed to go..

Don't know too much about Barr, but lots of mocks project him going in the top 5...a great workout could force a team like ATL who's so thirsty for a pass rusher that they signed an over the hill Umenyiora this past year.. to take him if they wind up inside the top 5.

Can't rule out Sammy Watkins who's just outside the top 5..he's sure to blow teams away with his athleticism at his pro day....& Pittsburgh needs someone opposite brown b/c sanders isn't getting it done.

& that other OT Lewan could be in the mix to go before him if he blows away scouts or performs better or as good at the combine / pro day than matthews.

The x-factor is Manziel imo...considering the teams who project to be at the top of the draft board....Minny, TB, Jax, us....someone's gonna reach for him. Us and Minny are prime candidates b/c it is thought we already have enough weapons to surround him with...

Apart from that you know how the draft goes man..there's always someone who's not on the radar that has a beast workout at the combine & that shoots them up draft boards.

 

[aussie_texan]

today reaffirmed my position on drafting a TE early. not with a top 5 pick but possibly in the 2nd and no later then the 3rd.

 

[infantrycak]

today reaffirmed my position on drafting a TE early. not with a top 5 pick but possibly in the 2nd and no later then the 3rd.

A 7 rec. 136 yd 1 TD (which almost had another 40 yd comp.) day reaffirmed to you that TE should take precedence over RT, ILB, OG, S, CB and QB? Not getting that.

 

[Rey]

I'm still leaning towards clowney if we stay 34.

I think this defense is missing an edge presence like nobody's business.

Maybe when I get around to looking at other players I'll like another edge player more, but for now I still like clowney.

 

[aussie_texan]

A 7 rec. 136 yd 1 TD (which almost had another 40 yd comp.) day reaffirmed to you that TE should take precedence over RT, ILB, OG, S, CB and QB? Not getting that.

certainly not over RT and ILB. but over S, QB, OG, and maybe CB depending the value of the players involved when drafting.

also i don't think the stats are indicative of the TE play. was the play calling and QB play the forged those stats not GG making a play. GG is a serviceable TE but with OD probably gone we are left with 2 TEs that a JAGs. bring a big time weapon to help keenum out. Who i still see as the QB for next year

 

[aussie_texan]

I'm still leaning towards clowney if we stay 34.

I think this defense is missing an edge presence like nobody's business.

Maybe when I get around to looking at other players I'll like another edge player more, but for now I still like clowney.

if we are staying in the 3-4 i think i would prefer barr over clowney. more natural fit. but really either way you go your getting a beast player

 

[Texian]

today reaffirmed my position on drafting a TE early. not with a top 5 pick but possibly in the 2nd and no later then the 3rd.

I understand the need to add TEs w/ Daniels coming off 2nd major injury on backside of his career and Graham becoming a FA. However an a 2nd or 3nd RD may be a bit of an over reaction. Both Daniels and Graham were 4th RD picks and that's where I've Arthur Lynch, TE, Georgia in my mock

 

[Corrosion]

I understand the need to add TEs w/ Daniels coming off 2nd major injury on backside of his career and Graham becoming a FA. However an a 2nd or 3nd RD may be a bit of an over reaction. Both Daniels and Graham were 4th RD picks and that's where I've Arthur Lynch, TE, Georgia in my mock

5) Georgia TE Arthur Lynch - OD costs too much. Lynch is a strong blocker and reliable pass catcher.

Ive got Lynch in my mock as well .... but in the 5th round.

A 7 rec. 136 yd 1 TD (which almost had another 40 yd comp.) day reaffirmed to you that TE should take precedence over RT, ILB, OG, S, CB and QB? Not getting that.

Well he is a FA .... no guarantee he returns.


After today's performance (or lack of) by the OL , I'm sticking with taking an OT with that top 5 pick - Unless they end up with #1 and then you have to really consider Bridgewater but I'm not at all sold on him being all that in the NFL.
I'd probably trade out of the #1 spot to #3-8 taking one of Matthews , Lewan or Irving at OT.
Then you have the option of taking a QB in round 2 or trading back into the first round to get one.

 

[mussop]

I can't believe anyone thinks we shouldn't go QB first pick. I think it's a combination of how good Luck and RG3 were as prospects (rare) and Wilson and Kapreneck (sp?) being late picks and having success. Now all the sudden no prospect is franchise worthy unless they are as good a prospect as luck or rg3 and it's easy to get a great QB late in the draft. Smh!!!!!!!


It's the Trent Dilfer effect all over again. A great defensive team wins a Super Bowl with a game management type QB and all the sudden everyone is on the "you don't have to have a great QB to win the big one" band wagon.

Between manzel, bridgewater and Marcus Mariota you have three possible franchise QB's. All have shown on field capable. If they interview well and workout well there is no reason to doubt they could be franchise QB's.

Id take my chances with whichever one of them looks the best after the draft process has run its course. You just can't pass up a chance to take a top QB.

 

[Hervoyel]

I can't believe anyone thinks we shouldn't go QB first pick. I think it's a combination of how good Luck and RG3 were as prospects (rare) and Wilson and Kapreneck (sp?) being late picks and having success. Now all the sudden no prospect is franchise worthy unless they are as good a prospect as luck or rg3 and it's easy to get a great QB late in the draft. Smh!!!!!!!


It's the Trent Dilfer effect all over again. A great defensive team wins a Super Bowl with a game management type QB and all the sudden everyone is on the "you don't have to have a great QB to win the big one" band wagon.

Between manzel, bridgewater and Marcus Mariota you have three possible franchise QB's. All have shown on field capable. If they interview well and workout well there is no reason to doubt they could be franchise QB's.

Id take my chances with whichever one of them looks the best after the draft process has run its course. You just can't pass up a chance to take a top QB.

I think it's ridiculous that anyone would think that sticking a rookie "franchise" QB behind our OL is a good idea. Didn't we just go down this road 12 years ago? Every year there are QB's coming out that are going to be great. Most of them aren't and of the three you just listed tell me which one is going to be the Blaine Gabbert or the Byron Leftwich? That will be the one Bob falls in love with most likely.

No, draft OL and do it regularly. This late round "lets get small guys because they fit the zone blocking scheme so well" BS has got to stop. It's time to draft some beasts. It's Munchak/Matthews/Steinkuhler time for the Texans. Go get a real line and then go take a swing at finding the real franchise QB to put behind it.

 

[Mr teX]

I think it's ridiculous that anyone would think that sticking a rookie "franchise" QB behind our OL is a good idea. Didn't we just go down this road 12 years ago? Every year there are QB's coming out that are going to be great. Most of them aren't and of the three you just listed tell me which one is going to be the Blaine Gabbert or the Byron Leftwich? That will be the one Bob falls in love with most likely.

No, draft OL and do it regularly. This late round "lets get small guys because they fit the zone blocking scheme so well" BS has got to stop. It's time to draft some beasts. It's Munchak/Matthews/Steinkuhler time for the Texans. Go get a real line and then go take a swing at finding the real franchise QB to put behind it.

You can go get your franchise guy...its not like u have to start him right away.

 

[bhsman]

It's the Trent Dilfer effect all over again. A great defensive team wins a Super Bowl with a game management type QB and all the sudden everyone is on the "you don't have to have a great QB to win the big one" band wagon.

Not that I disagree with you about going with a QB, but you could also argue that this is how Tom Brady won his rings, on the back of a great defense. Seems weird to say it now, though.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

I think it's ridiculous that anyone would think that sticking a rookie "franchise" QB behind our OL is a good idea. Didn't we just go down this road 12 years ago? Every year there are QB's coming out that are going to be great. Most of them aren't and of the three you just listed tell me which one is going to be the Blaine Gabbert or the Byron Leftwich? That will be the one Bob falls in love with most likely.

No, draft OL and do it regularly. This late round "lets get small guys because they fit the zone blocking scheme so well" BS has got to stop. It's time to draft some beasts. It's Munchak/Matthews/Steinkuhler time for the Texans. Go get a real line and then go take a swing at finding the real franchise QB to put behind it.

If I didn't go OT in the 1st it's because I took Barr . I like Murray in the 3rd with Mathews better than I like a QB in the top 5 . Heck ... I'd take Gabe Jackson G in the 2nd because I'm not really into the ZBS anymore to go with Mathews and Murray .

My favorite QB as far as talent goes is Hundley from UCLA . He may be perfect for the Texans cause he's playing with 3 freshman OL and runs for his life .

 

[Hervoyel]

You can go get your franchise guy...its not like u have to start him right away.

Very few teams ever sit him though. Things run too fast in todays NFL to draft a "savior" and then bench him while someone else takes the reigns. The teams that can do that have a quality entrenched starter (Favre/Rogers for example) and we aren't one of those teams.

We'll pick a talented puppy and throw him to the wolves.