Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Manziel

Status
Not open for further replies.
The general Rule of Thumb and Conventional Wisdom for many many years is the first pick in the draft is worth (3) first round draft picks. The new CBA only makes that more attractive. That said, there are years the draft is void of top talent the #1 pick is not worth trading for.
 
Honoring Earl 34 said:
He reminds Bob of Ed Reed .:)
Click to expand...
Dude, that's just mean.

Scooter said:
in the second round or later i'd be willing to take the risk. i wouldnt spend a first on manziel though. to me, he's vince young with an extra IQ point and fewer natural talents ... and similar maturity issues.
Click to expand...
Right - VY's passing stats were just off-the charts in College.
:vincepalm:

Corrosion said:
I want 4 , 26 , 68 & next years #1 , or something similar.
That's less than the Skins gave to move up for RG3 , the difference being they gave up a 2nd instead of a 3rd (68).

Considering they only moved to #2 and this is the #1 giving the Browns their pick of the top signal callers rather than the leftovers .... and the fact that rookie salaries are now slotted instead of holy %$*# Batman ..... I think its worth at lest that.
Click to expand...
I'd agree, but I doubt we'll get it. The fact that there's several QBs in the same "grouping" will likely work agaisnt us unless someone sets themselves apart at the combine.
 
Last edited:
Texian said:
The general Rule of Thumb and Conventional Wisdom for many many years is the first pick in the draft is worth (3) first round draft picks. The new CBA only makes that more attractive. That said, there are years the draft is void of top talent the #1 pick is not worth trading for.
Click to expand...

You capitalize them like they are chapters in the NFL GM and Owners handbook or something, when in reality there is really no rule of thumb for trading the first overall pick because in the modern era is has effectively only happened twice.

The Eli Manning trade where essentially the Chargers traded their first overall pick in 2004 for the Giants 5th overall and 65th overall in 2004, and also their 1st and 5th rounders in 2005. Keep in mind Eli was a consensus first overall pick, more of a sure thing than any of the guys in this draft, plus the Manning's made it known that Eli would not being playing in San Diego. This trade was made after the picks were already made so it's not exactly the situation we are in there...

The second instance is from 2001 where the Chargers traded their first overall for the Falcons 1st and 5th rounders in 2001.

So no, there is no rule of thumb for trading the first overall pick and expecting "3 first rounders" or the "4 , 26 , 68 & next years #1" is crazy.
 
disaacks3 said:
Right VY's passing stats were just off-the charts in College.
:vincepalm:
Click to expand...

size, strength, the ability to stand in the pocket with even pro's hanging off of him, mid range accuracy, arm strength, and speed. vince young had far more natural physical talent than manziel. he was dumb as a stump and is a prime example of exceptional talent being enough to win at the college level.

if you're going by college stats, keenum is the current elite, and the kids from texas tech and hawaii have won the last 3 superbowls. david carr is on his way to the hall of fame (ugh i feel dirty writing that).
 
Dutchrudder said:
Do you think Gil Brandt is putting JFF #1 in his mock because he has inside info on the Texans, or because he wants to be provocative and get lots of webhits?
Click to expand...

It's a click generator, no doubt, but in this QB group I won't call out someone's opinion that Manziel has the better potential as invalid on its face. He's done some remarkable things on the field.
 
Scooter said:
size, strength, the ability to stand in the pocket with even pro's hanging off of him, mid range accuracy, arm strength, and speed. vince young had far more natural physical talent than manziel. he was dumb as a stump and is a prime example of exceptional talent being enough to win at the college level.

if you're going by college stats, keenum is the current elite, and the kids from texas tech and hawaii have won the last 3 superbowls. david carr is on his way to the hall of fame (ugh i feel dirty writing that).
Click to expand...
You're bypassing the level-of-competition metric in making Keenum, et al. elite.

VY had better prototypical size, yes. He was a great "athlete".

Your attribution of Arm Strength and accuracy advantage can't be so easily supported.
 
matts290 said:
You capitalize them like they are chapters in the NFL GM and Owners handbook or something, when in reality there is really no rule of thumb for trading the first overall pick because in the modern era is has effectively only happened twice.

So no, there is no rule of thumb for trading the first overall pick and expecting "3 first rounders" or the "4 , 26 , 68 & next years #1" is crazy.
Click to expand...

I am only going to disagree with your conclusion not your rhetoric comments. There has long been a rule of thumb that future draft picks are valued one round lower for each year they are brought forward. Under that, three 1sts if in consecutive years are valued at a 1st, 2nd and 3rd this year. Doesn't mean it happens but the value isn't off much. 4, 26, 68 and next year's 1st would be 4, 26, 68 and a 2nd this year. That also is not crazy although a 2nd next year (valued as a 3rd this year) would be closer.
 
Vince Young could have been a very good QB, he just didn't want to be. People forget he had a good rookie season, won ROY and got a Pro Bowl election. Then at the end of his first season he had that whole statement about not liking the NFL and saying it was not as fun as it used to be. That right there tells you all you need to know about Young, he was gifted and coasted by on it during his entire amateur career, but when he got to the pros and needed to put in tons of work and dedication he couldn't cut it.

Johnny may be a great athlete, but he does no have near the natural gifts that Young did and he has had to work hard for everything he has gotten going all the way back to his freshman year in high school.
 
infantrycak said:
I am only going to disagree with your conclusion not your rhetoric comments. There has long been a rule of thumb that future draft picks are valued one round lower for each year they are brought forward. Under that, three 1sts if in consecutive years are valued at a 1st, 2nd and 3rd this year. Doesn't mean it happens but the value isn't off much. 4, 26, 68 and next year's 1st would be 4, 26, 68 and a 2nd this year. That also is not crazy although a 2nd next year (valued as a 3rd this year) would be closer.
Click to expand...

There is no rhetoric involved, I posted the facts of the two instances of the first overall pick being traded in the last 30 years, and neither of the two trades were on the level of what some people expect to get for ours. I understand there is a school of thought for what a pick is worth, but the first overall is different and the fact is it just doesn't get traded, which is evidenced by it only happening twice in the last 3 decades.

My personal opinion is the RG3 trade is a cautionary tale for many GMs in the future as to why you don't give up huge haul for just one guy.
 
matts290 said:
There is no rhetoric involved..."
Click to expand...

The rhetoric comments, not rhetoric, were about Texian's use of capitalization, which by the way I agree with.

I understand there is a school of thought for what a pick is worth, but the first overall is different and the fact is it just doesn't get traded, which is evidenced by it only happening twice in the last 3 decades.
Click to expand...

I think these huge trades draftniks drool over are just shy of a figment of their imagination - somewhere a white elephant exists, don't expect to see them any time soon. Trades in general aren't that common and 90% of them fall into the small maneuvers category like dropping back for Duane Brown or moving up for Flacco.
 
infantrycak said:
The rhetoric comments, not rhetoric, were about Texian's use of capitalization, which by the way I agree with.



I think these huge trades draftniks drool over are just shy of a figment of their imagination - somewhere a white elephant exists, don't expect to see them any time soon. Trades in general aren't that common and 90% of them fall into the small maneuvers category like dropping back for Duane Brown or moving up for Flacco.
Click to expand...

Oh gotcha, read that wrong.

And yeah I agree, major trades just don't happen a ton in the NFL which is another reason why I don't see us getting a legendary offer for our #1 pick. St Louis is in a better position to trade down, because they have other picks to deal with, while we don't really have the luxury of giving up additional picks...plus one would assume the #1 overall comes at a notable higher price than the #2, and that price is probably not justifiable given the players in this draft.

In my opinion, Manziel and Teddy are the only top 10 worthy QBs in this draft, and I think come draft time their stock will be similar and we will have people who are in both their camps, therefore, theoretically Cleveland could trade up to STL for a cheaper price and still get one of them.
 
matts290 said:
You capitalize them like they are chapters in the NFL GM and Owners handbook or something, when in reality there is really no rule of thumb for trading the first overall pick because in the modern era is has effectively only happened twice.

The Eli Manning trade where essentially the Chargers traded their first overall pick in 2004 for the Giants 5th overall and 65th overall in 2004, and also their 1st and 5th rounders in 2005. Keep in mind Eli was a consensus first overall pick, more of a sure thing than any of the guys in this draft, plus the Manning's made it known that Eli would not being playing in San Diego. This trade was made after the picks were already made so it's not exactly the situation we are in there...

The second instance is from 2001 where the Chargers traded their first overall for the Falcons 1st and 5th rounders in 2001.

So no, there is no rule of thumb for trading the first overall pick and expecting "3 first rounders" or the "4 , 26 , 68 & next years #1" is crazy.
Click to expand...

The trade you discuss is close to 3 1s in value. Go back and review past #1 being traded and you will find more often than not that 3 1st Rd or equal value were included. The Falcons Chargers trade was for a 1, a 2, a 3 and a player. The Chargers were not interested in Vick and wanted out so they took their best offer.
 
Last edited:
JB said:
How was it wrong if he hasn't put out a mock yet? Big difference between will be and was
Click to expand...

Yeh I was wrong.
One of the most well-respected draft analysts in the country, Gil Brandt, has yet to release his first mock draft of the season, but he is preparing to do so and has already determined who the top pick will be.

For Brandt, it is none other than Texas A&M star quarterback Johnny Manziel that he will have the Houston Texans selecting.
 
matts290 said:
Vince Young could have been a very good QB, he just didn't want to be.
Click to expand...

no, he couldnt have. what he showed for the titans was his peak. the coaching staff was able to dumb it down enough for his ability to carry him (along with a good run game and defense) to a few wins. once vince had to be an actual quarterback, he cracked. i've talked to several people who have played with and against vince through the years and they all say the same thing. he is the absolute dumbest player they've ever been around. phenomenal talent, but quite literally too stupid to play in the NFL.

manziel isnt a moron like vince, but the maturity level that he's shown makes me believe that he'll have the same ceiling - capped by his own mental issues. unfortunately for manziel, he isnt blessed with the pure physical abilities that would float him a few years before the NFL becomes real.
 
Cecil Lammey ‏@cecillammey
Scout on Johnny Manziel "I'll throw to an a$$hole, I'll hand off to an a$$hole, I'd never snap to an a$$hole." #NFLdraft personality perceptions thick

Another long-time scout (future GM?) of team w/premium pick says "we don't want him" both personality and on field issues for them

As expected, I'm hearing all sorts of opinions on Johnny Manziel #NFLDraft from scouts. 1 team w/top 10 pick says they've found 0 problems
Click to expand...
 
http://www.draftjohnnymanziel.com/

Texans Fans for Johnny Manziel!

This site is dedicated to supporting Johnny Manziel as the #1 draft pick of the Houston Texans in 2014. To win in the NFL a team must have a quarterback with strong leadership skills, a winning attitude, and lots of talent. Johnny Manziel is a winner and he is a unique talent--college football has never seen anything like him. Johnny Manziel has proven time and again that he has those skills needed to get the Texans back on track. If the Texans use their number one pick on Johnny, we will once again have hopes of Super Bowl glory. If you're a Texans fan, and you want to see Johnny Manziel in a Texans uniform, show your support by liking our Facebook page. Let's show Bob McNair just how much we want and NEED Johnny Football. Don't blow it Bob--Draft Johnny!
Click to expand...

:vincepalm:
 
Texian said:
The trade you discuss is close to 3 1s in value. Go back and review past #1 being traded and you will find more often than not that 3 1st Rd or equal value were included. The Falcons Chargers trade was for a 1, a 2, a 3 and a player. The Chargers were not interested in Vick and wanted out so they took their best offer.
Click to expand...

I just did, those are the only two instances of the first overall pick being traded in the modern era of the NFL, and even then the Chargers-Giants trade had some extenuating circumstances that make it very different than our situation at hand. The point is, it just doesn't happen often, so regardless of what we should expect in return, history suggests that is very unlikely we trade out of the first spot.


Scooter said:
no, he couldnt have. what he showed for the titans was his peak. the coaching staff was able to dumb it down enough for his ability to carry him (along with a good run game and defense) to a few wins. once vince had to be an actual quarterback, he cracked. i've talked to several people who have played with and against vince through the years and they all say the same thing. he is the absolute dumbest player they've ever been around. phenomenal talent, but quite literally too stupid to play in the NFL.

manziel isnt a moron like vince, but the maturity level that he's shown makes me believe that he'll have the same ceiling - capped by his own mental issues. unfortunately for manziel, he isnt blessed with the pure physical abilities that would float him a few years before the NFL becomes real.
Click to expand...

That is kinda what I was getting at, his mentality and work ethic is what held him back. Sure he might not have been the brightest guy ever, but if he would have put in the work to try and grasp the concepts he needed to, maybe his career would have been different. Maybe he was just too stupid to play in the NFL like you say. Either way, this is not Manziel, he is a bright kid who has the work ethic and drive to get better and learn in the NFL.
 
Scooter said:
no, he couldnt have. what he showed for the titans was his peak. the coaching staff was able to dumb it down enough for his ability to carry him (along with a good run game and defense) to a few wins. once vince had to be an actual quarterback, he cracked. i've talked to several people who have played with and against vince through the years and they all say the same thing. he is the absolute dumbest player they've ever been around. phenomenal talent, but quite literally too stupid to play in the NFL.

manziel isnt a moron like vince, but the maturity level that he's shown makes me believe that he'll have the same ceiling - capped by his own mental issues. unfortunately for manziel, he isnt blessed with the pure physical abilities that would float him a few years before the NFL becomes real.
Click to expand...

Work ethic, maturity and personality issues can be changed or corrected and is a glass door.

Intelligence is a brick wall.
 
matts290 said:
So no, there is no rule of thumb for trading the first overall pick and expecting "3 first rounders" or the "4 , 26 , 68 & next years #1" is crazy.
Click to expand...

Look , you are entitled to your opinion .... fact is , a trade of that magnitude is not without precedent.


Those examples you give are not relevant to this discussion as they were made before the rookie salary scale was put in place which makes those premium picks even more valuable as they give the team making the selection control over that player for a longer period of time at a significant discount as compared to those not on the rookie scale.
 
mussop said:
I'm on record that I would LOVE for us to draft Manziel. However I believe it's more likely McNair is floating this out there because of the recent reports that Cleveland is infatuated with JM and they are sitting on two first round picks. Just as I predicted would happen awhile back. Like I said, the chess game has begun.

I would be surprised if every rumor of another high picking team falling in love with a player wasn't followed by a rumor that we were leaning that way ourselves.
Click to expand...

I fully endorse this idea of making our interest in various high round draft choices public. We have the only guaranteed selection available and there is no reason we shouldn't be the one receiving all the request for trading up. Hopefully we get one we can't refuse.

First was the article about Clowney being seen live because of McNair's association with SC. Then the story about Manziel. I love seeing FO that maximizes value rather than giving a reporter an inside scoop which straightjackets us.

A certain former GM with the Astros was the worlds worst at doing just that.
 
JB said:
That curse only affects those that win the Heisman following those that win it after their senior season, not those that win it after their freshman season :kitten:
Click to expand...

I think he was referencing this Heisman curse....

There is only one Heisman winning QB with a playoff win in the last 25 years.....Tim Tebow.

Here's the list:

Robert Griffin III
Cam Newton
Sam Bradford
Tim Tebow (1 playoff win)
Troy Smith
Matt Leinart
Jason White
Carson Palmer
Eric Crouch
Chris Weinke
Danny Wuerffel
Charlie Ward
Gino Torretta
Ty Detmer
Andre Ware
 
mussop said:
I think you are overthinking this a little.
Click to expand...

There are 31 other teams who would want this pick. Some more than others. We only need two to get in a bidding war to get the price up. They not only have to meet our threshold, but outbid all other teams as well.

If we telegraph any particular player as our pick, then the Rams at two are sitting in the rocking chair with the courtiers.

I'd love to trade down one pick at a time picking up extra picks with every move. But that is contingent on teams deciding their player is enough better than the alternative to make it worth the cost. You can make each pick conditional so that you direct the draft to the point your player of choice cannot fall further.
 
Corrosion said:
Those examples you give are not relevant to this discussion as they were made before the rookie salary scale was put in place which makes those premium picks even more valuable as they give the team making the selection control over that player for a longer period of time at a significant discount as compared to those not on the rookie scale.
Click to expand...

That's semantics. If that's true, then the RG3 trade is also not relevant to this discussion because there is no outstanding talent available that would dictate such a trade like there was in 2012.

I've said it over and over, talent dictates value. The value is not as high this year as it was with RG3. You can't just point to the 2012 trade and say that is the value of the 2014 #1 pick. The talent pool dictates the value.

I agree with you that those pre-New CBA trades are not in line with the current value attributed to draft picks but, as I said, using the RG3 trade as the standard is not accurate either.
 
Scooter said:
manziel isnt a moron like vince, but the maturity level that he's shown makes me believe that he'll have the same ceiling - capped by his own mental issues. unfortunately for manziel, he isnt blessed with the pure physical abilities that would float him a few years before the NFL becomes real.
Click to expand...
No matter how often you repeat it, it still doesn't make it true.
 
WolverineFan said:
I agree with you that those pre-New CBA trades are not in line with the current value attributed to draft picks but, as I said, using the RG3 trade as the standard is not accurate either.
Click to expand...

I think this is being over-stated. Only in the last few years prior to the new CBA was there talk of the top picks being devalued because of the price tag. Vick's deal was considered huge at the time and is dwarfed by those which came later. He had a $3 mil signing bonus and just $15 mil guaranteed. Bradford got a $20 mil signing bonus and $50 mil guaranteed. I'd say the aberration is the about 5 years prior to the new CBA.
 
Corrosion said:
Look , you are entitled to your opinion .... fact is , a trade of that magnitude is not without precedent.


Those examples you give are not relevant to this discussion as they were made before the rookie salary scale was put in place which makes those premium picks even more valuable as they give the team making the selection control over that player for a longer period of time at a significant discount as compared to those not on the rookie scale.
Click to expand...

Yes of course, all this is just my opinion, as is what you are suggesting as well. None of us are NFL GMs, and everything we are discussing here is pretty much just pure speculation.

The examples I gave are relevant, just like the RG3 example is relevant. Sure the new CBA makes high draft picks more valuable, but in this proposed Cleveland trade you are posting, it works both ways. Yes they would be getting the single most valuable draft pick in our 2014 1.1, but they are also giving up two more first rounders in addition to their #65. Those two first rounders have potential to be very valuable picks as well since like you said the rookie pay scale dictates.

Also keep in mind that the Browns have Hoyer returning next year, who although unproven, showed lots of promise in his limited starts in 2013. If the Browns were to give up so many valuable picks it would be because they have little belief in him ever being a starting caliber QB.

As it stands, there is no precedent for a first overall pick being traded under the new CBA. RG3 trade is the closest thing we have, but again I am of the opinion that that was a terrible trade and should be a cautionary tale to GMs of why not to trade tons of early picks just to get one guy. If you look at all the picks the Rams acquire as a result of that trade, there are a ton of great players the Reskins missed out on. Of course this is just my opinion and hindsight is 20/20. The only other two examples of the first pick being traded are the two I posted, and although they were in a different era of the CBA, it is still relevant because that is all we have to go on.
 
mussop said:
The tweeter was wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm never wrong

Signed,
charlie+tweeder.jpg


Oh, you said tweeter, not Tweeder
 
matts290 said:
As it stands, there is no precedent for a first overall pick being traded under the new CBA. RG3 trade is the closest thing we have, but again I am of the opinion that that was a terrible trade and should be a cautionary tale to GMs of why not to trade tons of early picks just to get one guy. If you look at all the picks the Rams acquire as a result of that trade, there are a ton of great players the Reskins missed out on. Of course this is just my opinion and hindsight is 20/20. The only other two examples of the first pick being traded are the two I posted, and although they were in a different era of the CBA, it is still relevant because that is all we have to go on.
Click to expand...

Great points and I agree that the RG3 trade was terrible and will serve as a reminder to GM's how such a trade can backfire on your franchise. Not only that, but if the trade for RG3 (who was seen as a can't-miss prospect) was a complete failure....then why would you offer a similar trade for players (Bridgewater, Manziel, Clowney, Mathews) who are not seen as anywhere near that type of prospect?

It just makes no sense and I think guys are just grasping at straws with these trade down scenarios because they don't like the top prospects available. They want to fleece a team like St. Louis did because that would be the absolute best case scenario for the Texans in their minds.
 
Scooter said:
no, he couldnt have. what he showed for the titans was his peak. the coaching staff was able to dumb it down enough for his ability to carry him (along with a good run game and defense) to a few wins. once vince had to be an actual quarterback, he cracked. i've talked to several people who have played with and against vince through the years and they all say the same thing. he is the absolute dumbest player they've ever been around. phenomenal talent, but quite literally too stupid to play in the NFL.

manziel isnt a moron like vince, but the maturity level that he's shown makes me believe that he'll have the same ceiling - capped by his own mental issues. unfortunately for manziel, he isnt blessed with the pure physical abilities that would float him a few years before the NFL becomes real.
Click to expand...

It's stupid to try and say Manziel won make it in the nfl because young didn't. Especially when the reason he didn't make it was because he was dumber than a box of rocks. Manziel isn't. Case closed.

And this bs abou Manziel being immature is just that, BS. Tell me jus one thing he did this season that shows immaturity. If anything he has proven that he did realize he needed to change his ways and he did it. That is a sign of maturity.
 
WolverineFan said:
Great points and I agree that the RG3 trade was terrible and will serve as a reminder to GM's how such a trade can backfire on your franchise. Not only that, but if the trade for RG3 (who was seen as a can't-miss prospect) was a complete failure....then why would you offer a similar trade for players (Bridgewater, Manziel, Clowney, Mathews) who are not seen as anywhere near that type of prospect?

It just makes no sense and I think guys are just grasping at straws with these trade down scenarios because they don't like the top prospects available. They want to fleece a team like St. Louis did because that would be the absolute best case scenario for the Texans in their minds.
Click to expand...

IMO I think y'all are reading the RGIII all wrong. The Skins and RGIII were in playoffs last year, a from worst to first division performance. So clearly not a terrible trade. If there is a lesson and reminder it is that of meddling coddling owner and coach's misuse of an injured player. The book on the RGIII trade is far from being closed.
 
Texian said:
IMO I think y'all are reading the RGIII all wrong. The Skins and RGIII were in playoffs last year, a from worst to first division performance. So clearly not a terrible trade. If there is a lesson and reminder it is that of meddling coddling owner and coach's misuse of an injured player. The book on the RGIII trade is far from being closed.
Click to expand...

I gotcha, and I think the perception on RG3 and the trade will vary from person to person. I personally think his rookie season was the best we will see from him. The read-option took the NFL by storm in 2012, but the book is out on it now and it kinda seems like a flash in a pan. Also consider that the Skins made the playoffs in the NFC East, which was a fairly weak division.

Either way, the Skins did do a worst to first deal, but then turned around and did the opposite this year in a first to worst (Texans style). Now they have tons of holes on both sides of the ball, and no first round picks for the next couple years, plus a new coach, and now they are in rebuilding mode without the recourses to do so.

But I am kinda getting off topic here...
 
matts290 said:
I gotcha, and I think the perception on RG3 and the trade will vary from person to person. I personally think his rookie season was the best we will see from him. The read-option took the NFL by storm in 2012, but the book is out on it now and it kinda seems like a flash in a pan. Also consider that the Skins made the playoffs in the NFC East, which was a fairly weak division.

Either way, the Skins did do a worst to first deal, but then turned around and did the opposite this year in a first to worst (Texans style). Now they have tons of holes on both sides of the ball, and no first round picks for the next couple years, plus a new coach, and now they are in rebuilding mode without the recourses to do so.

But I am kinda getting off topic here...
Click to expand...

The read option had little to do with rg3s success last year.
 
mussop said:
The read option had little to do with rg3s success last year.
Click to expand...

Ummm, what? You can't be serious, RG3s ability to run the zone read so well is what made that offense tick. It set up play action in which the Redskins were the most effective in the league at in 2012, and in the Shanahan's own words their success in the zone read opened up so many more play calling opportunities for him. The read option had tons to do with RG3s success in his first year.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...rdinator-readoption-no-longer-shocking-people

http://mmqb.si.com/2013/09/05/kyle-shanahan-rg3-read-option/
 
matts290 said:
Oh gotcha, read that wrong.

And yeah I agree, major trades just don't happen a ton in the NFL which is another reason why I don't see us getting a legendary offer for our #1 pick. St Louis is in a better position to trade down, because they have other picks to deal with, while we don't really have the luxury of giving up additional picks...plus one would assume the #1 overall comes at a notable higher price than the #2, and that price is probably not justifiable given the players in this draft.

In my opinion, Manziel and Teddy are the only top 10 worthy QBs in this draft, and I think come draft time their stock will be similar and we will have people who are in both their camps, therefore, theoretically Cleveland could trade up to STL for a cheaper price and still get one of them.
Click to expand...

Only if you ignore the desire of Oakland and Minnesota or even Cincinnati to do the same thing. Imagine having your heart set on a particular player, only to have it chosen by the team that trades with Houston. Why not just deal with Houston and eliminate the risk? St. Louis is in a good position, Houston is in the catbird seat.
 
Marshall said:
Only if you ignore the desire of Oakland and Minnesota or even Cincinnati to do the same thing. Imagine having your heart set on a particular player, only to have it chosen by the team that trades with Houston. Why not just deal with Houston and eliminate the risk? St. Louis is in a good position, Houston is in the catbird seat.
Click to expand...

Oakland and Minnesota do not have a second 2014 first rounder though and they are picking even later than Cleveland, so it would require a lot more future round picks. Plus us trading down past Cleveland pretty much says we don't want any of the top flight QBs in this draft, which I in no way see happening.

And NFL front offices don't get their heart set on a player, because they know there is always a chance they won't get him. They are business men, not fans like on a message board.
 
mussop said:
It's stupid to try and say Manziel won make it in the nfl because young didn't. Especially when the reason he didn't make it was because he was dumber than a box of rocks. Manziel isn't. Case closed.

And this bs abou Manziel being immature is just that, BS. Tell me jus one thing he did this season that shows immaturity. If anything he has proven that he did realize he needed to change his ways and he did it. That is a sign of maturity.
Click to expand...

UUUUHH, HMMM. Not getting those vampire fangs fixed? :kitten::kitten:
 
mussop said:
It's stupid to try and say Manziel won make it in the nfl because young didn't. Especially when the reason he didn't make it was because he was dumber than a box of rocks. Manziel isn't. Case closed.

And this bs abou Manziel being immature is just that, BS. Tell me jus one thing he did this season that shows immaturity. If anything he has proven that he did realize he needed to change his ways and he did it. That is a sign of maturity.
Click to expand...

Not being professional enough to finish out the Manning passing academy. I'm not saying it's a big red flag, but it did happen. It's not exactly an act of high character.
 
bOODRO87 said:
Not being professional enough to finish out the Manning passing academy. I'm not saying it's a big red flag, but it did happen. It's not exactly an act of high character.
Click to expand...

That was actually before the season started. He caugh a lot of grief for it. Really nothing he has done was a big deal. It was just blown out of porportion because he was so much under the spotlight.

Again he took his lumps/criticism and went into this season and completed it without having any mishaps. If he was such a bad person with bad character he sure pulled a fast one.
 
During the season Manziel is all business. Nary a peep heard about him attending parties and/or getting up to no good during football season.
 
mussop said:
That was actually before the season started. He caugh a lot of grief for it. Really nothing he has done was a big deal. It was just blown out of porportion because he was so much under the spotlight.

Again he took his lumps/criticism and went into this season and completed it without having any mishaps. If he was such a bad person with bad character he sure pulled a fast one.
Click to expand...

I agree with you , nothing he did was all that .... But the media made a big deal outa everything. That along with the A&M defense probably cost him a second Heisman.
 
Texian said:
IMO I think y'all are reading the RGIII all wrong. The Skins and RGIII were in playoffs last year, a from worst to first division performance. So clearly not a terrible trade. If there is a lesson and reminder it is that of meddling coddling owner and coach's misuse of an injured player. The book on the RGIII trade is far from being closed.
Click to expand...

^^^^
This

RG3 still has the ability to be a great QB. He needs to get healthy and will learn plenty under Gruden.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top