Mr teX
Hall of Fame
you have no case & point...only agenda...a bad 1 at that..
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
Blake Bortles
- Thread starter Texian
- Start date
you have no case & point...only agenda...a bad 1 at that..
kiwitexansfan
Hall of Fame
Hearing Bortles made a lot of adjustments at the LOS and impressed on the whiteboard moved him up in my appreciation. For me he is a close #2 to TB.
Playoffs
Hall of Fame
The thing is, don't hate on Bortles just because you don't like the way Texian is "shoving him down your throat"...
That would be a shame. [IMGwidthsize=45]http://smileys.emoticonsonly.com/emoticons/f/football-3861.gif[/IMG]
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Agreed. I, like many others here, find Texian's shtick annoying, but that has no impact on my evaluation of Bortles. Of course, I'm also pretty sure I was a fan of Bortles long before his name ever crossed ole Tex's twitter page.
jradMIT
Veteran
I don't dislike Bortles just him as a high first round pick. There's just is too much projection your betting on for him to be worth it, IMHO. I like his ability to climb and poise in the pocket. He has good accuracy especially over the middle of the field and above average arm strength. He needs to cut down on the TO's especially the fumbles.
Texian
Hall of Fame
That's a BIG NEGATIVE....not forcing Bortles down anyone's throat....just pointing out THE GREAT HYPOCRISY of so many TEDDY FANS.
THOU SHALT NOT SPEAK POSITIVELY ABOUT ANY QB BUT TEDDY OR WE WILL SMITE THEE...and that's the way it is.
dalemurphy
Hall of Fame
There is no easy answer with the 1st pick this year... However, it is not the Texans fault that there is not a standout #1 overall pick. It just happens to be the case this year. That being said, there is no reason not to think the Texans won't make a very good selection with it. I think there is reason to like Bortles, but at some point, it is a matter of trusting the organization and the process they go through... Unfortunately, it is hard to trust an organization that is in the midst of a 14 game losing streak.
My biggest worry if the Texans take a QB at 1.1 is that they will be missing out on a lot of value at QB in the middle rounds. It appears there are 10 guys unlikely to go in round one that have the potential to be quality NFL starters (I realize most of them will not). Guys like McCarron, Murray, Mettenburg, Foles, etc... are good value gambles later in the draft. What I would love to see would be a Texans trade down from 1.1 into the middle of the round... eventually taking two targeted guys at QB and having a competition along with Keenum or another veteran for the starting job in 2014. It is my belief and hope that O'brien can find two quality arms beyond round one in this draft who can both be developed into very good QBs. The depth of the QB position in this draft is very strong, so a draft plan that takes advantage of that depth makes sense to me...
Still, if O'Brien and company love one of the guys likely to be taken early, then it is almost impossible to justify doing anything else.
You say it a lot better than I do.
In addition to those guys (who I wouldn't really say are gambles) are guys like Garropolo, Smith, & Shaw..... these guys would be good gambles, McCarron, Murray, Mettenberger, & Foles are good values outside of the first round.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
THOU SHALT NOT SPEAK NEGATIVELY ABOUT ANY QB BUT TEDDY OR WE WILL SMITE THEE...
& that is the way it is with you....
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
I said in the post he quoted that Bortles is my 3rd option for the texans if they have to take someone of the top 5 prospects....I see the positives with him...I just see far too many negatives with him right now & i'm not sure he'll be able to live up to the pie in the sky projections Texian seems to be projecting as a given. In addition to all this, the hypocrisy in how he's choosing to evaluate these guys....
Playoffs
Hall of Fame
I know Im late to the discussion but I wanted to actually study each QB without reading other people's opinions so they dont influence mine.
Blake Bortles is not a good QB.... Yet.
The scouts say he has upside and since they do this for a living I wont argue with that. What I will say is the only way I think BB succeeds is if he is put in a good situation.
1.Going number one could be a mistake as it would put too much outside pressure on his development. In a world where twitter and tv can sometimes force a teams decisions, it would be best if he didnt have that added pressure.
2. Bortles will need a very good O-line; this can be said for all QB's. Still, given the Big Ben comparison, he would be better off if given time and kept clean.
3. Bortles does not have a huge arm. People see his frame and weight and automatically think rocket; not true for Bortles. His deep ball is not as pretty as Big ben or even fellow prospect Mettenberger.
4. He will need a patient owner. I say this because he will need time to develop and it will be better if he had the same coaching staff to help with that development. In other words, dont blow it all up if you have a few bad seasons with him at the helm.
5. Doesn't seem like the type of QB to elevate his receivers so he will need a great supporting cast in my opinion.
I honestly think that best case scenario for the TEXANS (meaning this is what we could expect from him as it relates to the TEXANS), Blake Bortles will be a more mobile Matt Schaub. This is not meant as a negative comparison because I think schaub played very, very well before this recent meltdown. I think that matt schuab's only problems were that he couldn't move when he needed to and he wasn't particularly clutch. He did have some thrilling come from behind games (The one against baltimore a few years ago for instance), but he wasn't clutch. As Texian continues to point out, Bortles has that clutch sense about him so he will be better than schaub in that regard.
All in all, I wouldn't mind bortles on our team... Just not a #1.
Blake Bortles is not a good QB.... Yet.
The scouts say he has upside and since they do this for a living I wont argue with that. What I will say is the only way I think BB succeeds is if he is put in a good situation.
1.Going number one could be a mistake as it would put too much outside pressure on his development. In a world where twitter and tv can sometimes force a teams decisions, it would be best if he didnt have that added pressure.
2. Bortles will need a very good O-line; this can be said for all QB's. Still, given the Big Ben comparison, he would be better off if given time and kept clean.
3. Bortles does not have a huge arm. People see his frame and weight and automatically think rocket; not true for Bortles. His deep ball is not as pretty as Big ben or even fellow prospect Mettenberger.
4. He will need a patient owner. I say this because he will need time to develop and it will be better if he had the same coaching staff to help with that development. In other words, dont blow it all up if you have a few bad seasons with him at the helm.
5. Doesn't seem like the type of QB to elevate his receivers so he will need a great supporting cast in my opinion.
I honestly think that best case scenario for the TEXANS (meaning this is what we could expect from him as it relates to the TEXANS), Blake Bortles will be a more mobile Matt Schaub. This is not meant as a negative comparison because I think schaub played very, very well before this recent meltdown. I think that matt schuab's only problems were that he couldn't move when he needed to and he wasn't particularly clutch. He did have some thrilling come from behind games (The one against baltimore a few years ago for instance), but he wasn't clutch. As Texian continues to point out, Bortles has that clutch sense about him so he will be better than schaub in that regard.
All in all, I wouldn't mind bortles on our team... Just not a #1.
TexansFTW
Veteran
Just a few things here.
1. I respect what you're saying and it is your right to believe this.
2. There are a lot of people here that believe these QBs you named will be viable NFL starters (it's Fales BTW, Foles plays on the Eagles and just had a beast year). I can't argue enough that this is just not the reality. Just to put this in perspective, all of these guys graded out substantially worse than Andy Dalton did when he came out (by most of the stuff I follow), and he went early in the 2nd. That says (to me) these guys are mostly 3rd round+ quality QBs. Not value picks.
3. With this strategy, here is the thing... You can't have 4 QBs on the roster in the NFL. Most teams now run with 2 (3 max) because of the value of the roster spot. There is ALMOST ALWAYS a proven vet somewhere in there. You never saw Cousins and RG3 w/out Grossman at least on the roster. If you draft 2 QBs one will almost certainly be cut from the team, therefore a wasted pick (they don't generally work well on Special Teams). This team after the 53 cut will likely have (1 QB drafted in this draft, 1 Case Keenum or TJ Yates, and 1 journeyman QB). You won't be getting 2 rookies competing with Case in all likelihood.
4. That's cool that you believe that, it is your right and I respect that, but to say it as fact is false because I disagree completely.
All of above is just my opinion, feel free to disagree.
badboy
Hall of Fame
The risk for me is not only in selecting the correct player but if you wait until later rounds, your guy could be gone. This happened to us last draft with the ILB we allegedly wanted and IIRC Baltimore traded up and snagged him just before us. I agree if you have to "groom" a guy (and IMO all the big three need that) why not groom a 2-3 round guy? Admittedly all these QB have negatives. What would be hilarious is if Keenum beats out whomever we draft. A least we would be deep.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
The problem is that there's a greater possibility that your grooming of a 1st round guy will pan out than the grooming of a later round guy. By waiting, you're probably taking on a guy with more flaws who has less chance of developing.
badboy
Hall of Fame
Agreed but we have evaluations all over the place as with Bortles from 1-1 to late first round. If Mettenberger had BB's mobility I'd probably go for him.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
There are always going to be evaluations that are all over the place. This isn't a science. You can't look into someone's heart and you can't peek into the future. There's a risk with each of these guys and there's every possibility that none of them will be worth a 5th round pick. You asked "why don't we just get a guy in the 2nd or 3rd round", well... why not get a guy in the 6th or 7th round? Let's grab Mettenberger in the 4th or Murray in the 5th or Logan Thomas in the 6th. Why not?
I'm all for drafting a QB in the 7th round and having him turn into Peyton Manning. That sounds like an awesome idea. Count me in. Definitely.
The problem is those guys pan out less frequently. Sure, sometimes they do pan out. Sometimes the guy that no one thinks is worth a pick turns out to be Kurt Warner or Tom Brady. But more often than not, those guys are still available because they're not salvageable.
Between 2000-2010, there were 143 QBs taken overall.
1st round: 28 taken, 16080 yards average.
2nd round: 12 taken, 7597 yards average (boosted because of Brees)
3rd round: 14 taken, 4179 yards average (boosted because of Schaub)
4th round: 13 taken, 3637 yards average
5th round: 23 taken, 836 yards average
6th round: 28 taken, 3340 yards average (boosted because of Brady and Bulger)
7th round: 23 taken, 1980 yards average (boosted because of Cassel and Fitzpatrick)
Granted, first rounders are given more opportunities to fail but most of the best QBs come from that first round. You have a few later round guys here and there that surprise people but for the most part, if you've got a chance to become a real QB, you're going to gravitate into the first round or the very tip-top of the second.
& Last year there was only one QB taken in the first round. in 2012, two out of 4 QBs had back to back winning seasons. The other two teams should be picking in the top 5 again.
From 2011 one of the 4 QBs taken in the 1st is a viable starter, one still has questions, the other two are generally considered busts.
From 2010 only one of the two taken in the 1st round is still in the league.
From 2009 only one of three 1st round QBs is a viable starter.
2008, 2 for 2.... one of them won the Super Bowl, the other at least made it to a Conference Championship game.
2007, 0-2... one is out of the league, the other..... well let's say I'll get crucified if I suggested we pick him up this offseason.
2006, 1 of the 3 first round QBs is still in the league.
It's like a shot in the dark. If you think one of these guys will be special, it's worth the risk. If not, you'll probably get just as good a result by shoring up your OL with the best OT in the draft.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
Which has always been my point. Don't waste that pick on a QB unless you're sure of him. If you see a guy who you think is the guy, then you go get him. If you don't, take a flyer in later round with the expectation that the guy is going to wash out.
But don't put your hopes and dreams on a guy in the 3rd round developing into a franchise QB. Because that's a rare, rare thing. (Only one QB taken in the 3rd round from 2000-2010 has thrown for over more than 8900 yards and that's Matt Schaub.)
leebigeztx
Keep it Movin!
Yep,couldn't agree more. Over the last 10 yrs, check and see the sb wining qbs and where they were drafted. By contrast,check the leading pass rushers on those teams.
Back to Bortles, I like him in terms of looking the part,but I dislike the pop of the ball off his hand and his flat foot setup in the pocket. He doesn't have slow feet like barkley or schaub,but he plays flat foot in the pocket. I also expected more velocity on his ball considering his size.
PapaL
Loose Screw
Sadly that's how I feel. If we draft him I'll support him but because of one idiotic poster I hope we don't.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
lol
Not sure this is going in the direction you want but... of the last 10 SBs...
7 were won by QBs drafted in the 1st round, 1 by a QB from the 2nd round, 1 by a QB from the 3rd round, and 1 by a QB from the 6th round.
The Running Backs are a little more problematic. 2 of the teams had 2 running backs that had similar numbers. But of the running backs, 2 were drafted in the 1st round, 3 were drafted in the 2nd, 2 were drafted in the 4th, 1 was drafted in the 7th, and 4 were UDFAs.
So. Basically. If you see a quality QB and you need a quality QB, bet on the fact that he's going to go in the first round and go up and get him.
I'd like to see the velocity numbers from the Combine. With Bortles, it looks like he's having to work really hard to put zip on the ball when he's trying to zip it in.
For me, it's either Bortles or Bridgewater if we're going QB in the first. I'm not sold on either of them but I think they've got the best shot at being franchise QBs of any guys in this draft.
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
He said pass rushers.
I think he is anticipating results like RBs though - you don't have to spend a 1st round pick.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
smh
Getting too old to read properly.
Duh.
For leading passrushers, there was one team that had two pass rushers with very similar numbers so we have 11 instead of 10. Of those 11:
4 were 1st rounders (Pierre-Paul, Clay Matthews, Will Smith, and Willie McGinest), 2 were 2nd rounders (Paul Kruger, Usi Umenyiora), 2 were 3rd rounders (Avril, Porter), 1 was a 5th rounder (Mathis), and 2 were UDFAs (Bennett, Harrison).
Texian
Hall of Fame
Just out of curiosity, why is it that because I am All-In and committed to Blake Bortles I am accused of "shoving him down your throat"... Yet when the herd of Teddy Bridgewater supporters who are just as committed to Teddy and even far more vocal in their admiration this is NOT considered as, shoving Teddy down anyone's collective throats?
Is this because I am a lone wolf or because this is just some more Teddy Bridgewater's fans IRONY/HYPOCRISY at it's finest?
Most of my defense of Bortles has come as a result of Bridgewater fans attacking my positive comments about Bortles.
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
You are posing a false question.
You far and away standout over anyone else for any other draft prospect at drum banging.
FTW called it - you may end up being correct and Bortles turns out best in this draft, you are hardly the only one saying it. But you are annoying as crap about how you wage your campaign.
Now rather than soaking that in, call me a homer for someone and don't learn anything.
Texian
Hall of Fame
The question is valid, but once again, like so many other times before, you find fault with it simply because you don't agree with it.
As far as being annoying as crap, I guess that puts me in good company. In the category of Annoying as Crap, I would only rank 2nd when compared to you. The same would apply in the category of the Biggest Jack Wagon and the BIGGEST BULLY.
Last edited:
Texian has 145 posts in this thread. The next highest does not even have 50.
TKyss has 152 posts in the Bridgewater thread, with Texian coming in second with 142 and mussop in third with 108. Neither of you guys are really pro-Bridgewater.
While I realize that this is not a great analysis, it does bring into question Texian's assertion that the Bridgewater guys are the most vocal and pushy in this forum.
TKyss has 152 posts in the Bridgewater thread, with Texian coming in second with 142 and mussop in third with 108. Neither of you guys are really pro-Bridgewater.
While I realize that this is not a great analysis, it does bring into question Texian's assertion that the Bridgewater guys are the most vocal and pushy in this forum.
Texian
Hall of Fame
How many of my posts have been in response to Bridgewater fans negative attacks on Bortles? Similar to this post, although not an attack on Bortles but a post that still solicits a response.
There has been a tremendous amount of HYPOCRISY that has needed to be addressed. (see my sig)
While it is clear I am clearly in the Bortles camp I think you will also find that I have made positive comments about Bridgewater, Manziel, McCarron and Mettenberger. Something that doesn't really happen with many of the Bridgewater fans.
Wasn't Freeny on that team?
Dishman
Miss Ya Blue
More than 145 solicited responses? Your posts in this thread alone equate to about 1/4 of my entire post count on the board. Either you're not very effective at getting you point across or would just plain argue with a fence post till you're blue in the face.
Texian
Hall of Fame
That is less than 20% of the posts in this thread, which I started by the way. This is a message board that is for and encourages debate and discussion. From your response and low post count are you suggesting a football message board would be better with less discussion and less post? Your post solicited a response, so are we having a discussion/debate or are you a fence post?
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
He was but he didn't have a lot of sacks that year. I looked at the leader in sacks for that season. Which is also why Kruger ended up on top for the Ravens instead of Suggs.
PapaL
Loose Screw
I'd bet that his posts in the Clowney thread are right up there too. Everyone sucks except Shlake Shortles!
TexansFTW
Veteran
Brees was also the #32 pick. If he was drafted today, the #32 pick is 1st round.
On to other subjects...
I think maybe we should try to better word some of the things we say. I love debating, but it is getting to a point of internet bullying. Some of it may be self inflicted to an extent, but definitely not all is deserved. Maybe we can try a little to debate more and attack less? That should apply to you as well Tex.
My thing is I have a group of friends that are football fans, we can talk football to an extent, but not to the level of this message board. I'll admit it, I'm borderline addicted to football. I can't talk this level of draft stuff with anyone I know which is why I come here. To be made a social pariah in a forum where we can get out this borderline addiction is not fun. I may disagree with many things certain posters say, but them bringing those opinions and validating them (in their minds) educates me a little more, which is what I like.
LSS: Why can't we all be friends?
Lord Bills
Destruction
The same would apply in the category of the Biggest Jack Wagon and the BIGGEST BULLY.
bully is the perfect description.
ive never seen a moderator harass and stalk and bully other posters on this site because he doesnt like their opinion as much as infantry. and ive been a member of a lot of messge boards. in fact, you dont really hear from them unless rules are being broken.
That's not what moderators are suppose to do. Moderators are suppose to be above that kind of behavior.
The only time a moderator should come in is if the poster is breaking any rules.
Infantry likes to flex his muscles and go on power trips. I just hope he's not a cop in real life.
Im probably gonna get more harrassing neg reps from him and get banned but the truth had to be said.
Texian
Hall of Fame
Look on the bright side LB, you and me, we don't wake up in a very BAD MOOD everyday.
leebigeztx
Keep it Movin!
That's what I was trying to say regarding the qbs in the 1st rd. if you want to win the sb, your chances are best with a 1st rd qb. The chances of drafting wilson,brady,or brees(I consider him a 1st rd pick), is rare. They weren't expectating wilson to be their starting qb. The patriots weren't either. They asked norv in 01 and he didn't want to remold vick and he told butler he really liked Brees. When you draft a qb in the 3rd rd ,you're not expecting them to be your starting qb. You're hoping the guy can develop into a starter type.
In terms of Bortles, I like his in the moment gameplay,but his ball security in the pocket and his arm. For a guy of his stature, I expect more pop off a compact or different platform of throwing. He has an nfl arm,but from a short step throwing and driving the ball, he has issues.
Dishman
Miss Ya Blue
That is less than 20% of the posts in this thread, which I started by the way. This is a message board that is for and encourages debate and discussion. From your response and low post count are you suggesting a football message board would be better with less discussion and less post? Your post solicited a response, so are we having a discussion/debate or are you a fence post?
That's cute. I appreciate the lesson on the purpose of a message board. I'm not sure you like to debate as much as you may like hearing/reading your own words. Have fun with that fence post. Say hello to your family every once in awhile to let them know you're still alive and kicking.
I agree 100%
However, drafting a QB in the 1st round doesn't mean you're going to win the Super Bowl. May never get close, may never make the play-offs. May never have a winning season.
If they decide to take a QB in the first round, I hope they do their best & get him the best OT they can find in the second round, or trade back up into the first. Then an OG in the third... I know Ben Jones was a forth rounder, but the experts here say he's worse than chopped liver.
In the 4th we need a TE to replace Garrett Graham.... or we can resign Garrett Graham & take a RB.
We need to do everything possible to help this kid be successful.
Playoffs
Hall of Fame
After grading 12 or 13 quarterbacks in the class, NFL Films' Greg Cosell believes UCF's Blake Bortles is the best of the bunch.
I´d be ok with Bortles - but a bit scared. If you take him you think you can fix several flaws in his games (mechanics, accuracy, reads) and believe in his size, arm and leadership ability. He´s got the things you can`t teach (save for an elite arm), so you like his upside. Problem is, in the past the QBs that failed were usually the ones with the right physical attributes whose flaws couldn`t be fixed. So I see more than some bust potential in him (with the potential to be great as well).
The "There is a lot to work with, with Bortles" - quote is exactly what I mean. Scouts see him and think about what they could turn him into if they can fix his flaws. With some QBs they are right - but most of the time they are wrong and you get the Gabberts and Lockers. I am not entirely comfortable with a QB that has a lot to work with, but is still far off - I would much rather get a QB with less question marks, even if his physical traits don`t show that much upside.
Still, I´d be ok with him. Our scouts will do their work, O`Brien should know what he wants in a QB. What I wouldn`t be ok with is taking him at 1-1. In basically all big boards I´ve seen so far (except the one posted on the last page) he was not the #1 rated QB. Usually he was #3. And if you are not only looking at QBs, Bortles usually doesn`t even end up in the top 10. So if we truly believe in him, I think we can savely trade down to at least the 5th pick and still get the guy.
The "There is a lot to work with, with Bortles" - quote is exactly what I mean. Scouts see him and think about what they could turn him into if they can fix his flaws. With some QBs they are right - but most of the time they are wrong and you get the Gabberts and Lockers. I am not entirely comfortable with a QB that has a lot to work with, but is still far off - I would much rather get a QB with less question marks, even if his physical traits don`t show that much upside.
Still, I´d be ok with him. Our scouts will do their work, O`Brien should know what he wants in a QB. What I wouldn`t be ok with is taking him at 1-1. In basically all big boards I´ve seen so far (except the one posted on the last page) he was not the #1 rated QB. Usually he was #3. And if you are not only looking at QBs, Bortles usually doesn`t even end up in the top 10. So if we truly believe in him, I think we can savely trade down to at least the 5th pick and still get the guy.
What I like most about Bortles is he's a battler. He was having a horrible game vs. South Carolina. Picks, sacks, and a fumble. Still, Bortles never gave up and made the game close at the end. He's raw, for sure. But I think Bortle's got the right stuff. But hey, I like all 3 of the top QBs and everyone else in the internet scouting world thinks they suck.
Right or wrong, when was the last time a QB was taken in the top 10, then allowed to sit for two years?
What I'd like to know, is if sitting for 2 years would help a talented prospect be successfull in the NFL, why doesn't it happen more often? Matt Schaub sat for a couple of years & Kubiak got some good years out of him. If not for injury, we could still be winning 10 games a season.
I suppose Charlie Frye & Kyle Orton had some good years as well. Whitehurst had his opprotunity, but I expected more. Chad Henne has had plenty of opportunity to develop, plenty of playing time, but it's not going to happen.
We're not here just to clean up the mess. First and foremost, we are fans. Fans who like to discuss our team and give our opinions. We all have our own reasons to moderate. For me, I enjoy this board and want to see it maintain the high standard we have come to know. Vinny thought I would do a good job, and I wanted to help him out. But I wouldn't have agreed if moderating no longer allowed me to voice my opinion and just be a janitor for this forum.
No one is going to be 100% right 100% of the time. I make mistakes, and cak would be the first to admit he has as well. But, we are all trying to make and keep this forum a place that everyone can enjoy bringing their opinions. No one has edited you based upon your opinion. And you keep coming around, so this place can't be that bad, right?
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
Not often I would presume. If we take Bortles or whoever at #1, I would expect them to be starting immediately. Whether that's the best course of action, I don't know.
The thing about letting a guy sit for a year or two is that he doesn't get any NFL game experience during that time. You still have to give him a year, maybe two, of experience on the field before you can really expect a whole lot out of him. That's two to four years of waiting and everyone else is getting older.
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
What he said and yes on the bold.