Clowney, then what?

[Lord Bills]

I just don't see the logic in hiring a well respected defensive coordinator and then not installing his defense. There's comments that he'll find ways to utilize the talent by installing a hybrid defense. But why not just hire a different, well respected coach known for his 43, or whatever. If you hire a coach known for his 2-gap 34, you'd expect to move the team to a 2-gap 34 defense. Clowney, as good as he may be, is not a good fit for "our" defense.

i never understood the whole you draft players to fit your system argument.

WRONG.

You draft players because they are the best available talent. A good coach, scratch that, a great coach can make any player fit his system.

That's the sign of a truly great coach. If mario williams can play outside linebacker in a 3-4, then so can clowney who has fast twitch muscle fibers unlike mario.

If you are gonna pass up on manziel or any of the quarterbacks, you draft clowney and make him fit your system. That's what great coaches do. I mean if clowney is the real deal, he can fit any system.

Beware ... that dudes trolling .

that word is thrown around too much and its done to discredit people you dont like or cant beat in an argument.

Bet you said the same thing when we passed on Reggie Bush and Vince Young.

What has this franchise accomplished other than two meaningless division titles during peyton's end in indy and the colts going through a quick rebuild and two first round wins vs marvin lewis and andy dalton's bengals?




That's where we are right now.

That's why we are picking first.

Right back where we started.

But i digress, all that i say is irrelevant because im a troll right?

 

[The Pencil Neck]

i never understood the whole you draft players to fit your system argument.

Then you should try harder.

 

[infantrycak]

KC has two 1st rounds picks on the OL along with a 2nd and a 3rd , I haven't checked their center . The 49ers have three 1st round picks on their OL . You overspend to rid a headache if you believe you'll be cured .

Just because some teams do it, by your own admission overspend, doesn't mean it is the only or best approach. Clearly the rest of the league does not believe in overspending on bookend 1st round OTs.

But all that ignores the point you quoted which is the Texans' situation is nothing like KC's when they chose to get another 1st round OT which is what TK asserted.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

i never understood the whole you draft players to fit your system argument.

WRONG.

You draft players because they are the best available talent. A good coach, scratch that, a great coach can make any player fit his system.

That's the sign of a truly great coach. If mario williams can play outside linebacker in a 3-4, then so can clowney who has fast twitch muscle fibers unlike mario.

If you are gonna pass up on manziel or any of the quarterbacks, you draft clowney and make him fit your system. That's what great coaches do. I mean if clowney is the real deal, he can fit any system.



that word is thrown around too much and its done to discredit people you dont like or cant beat in an argument.



What has this franchise accomplished other than two meaningless division titles during peyton's end in indy and the colts going through a quick rebuild and two first round wins vs marvin lewis and andy dalton's bengals?




That's where we are right now.

That's why we are picking first.

Right back where we started.

But i digress, all that i say is irrelevant because im a troll right?

No ... it means this guy isn't worth arguing with .

 

[TexansFTW]

I have not even touched this prospect but maybe it's time? Max Bullough would be an excellent fit inside LB in Crennel defense, he is 6027 265. Good in coverage, instinctual, quick to diagnose & possess natural leadership, leave Mack outside in space as edge rusher.

I really like Max Bullough. I don't project him as a day 1 starter, and maybe not ever a starter, but I think he can develop into very solid depth very late in the draft and he has a nose for the football.

In the later rounds I'm often looking for OLine or Special Teams players. I like what he brings in special teams as he (hopefully) develops into an NFL level player.

I'll go out on a limb and say all boards have him top ten; and many, if not most, updated boards have him top 5. A few now have him top 3. He really helped himself at the Senior Bowl, and then followed that with a fine combine. He's jumped ahead of Barr and is now rated the #1 OLB prospect.

Did you read the name wrong?

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

Just because some teams do it, by your own admission overspend, doesn't mean it is the only or best approach. Clearly the rest of the league does not believe in overspending on bookend 1st round OTs.

But all that ignores the point you quoted which is the Texans' situation is nothing like KC's when they chose to get another 1st round OT which is what TK asserted.

I think you're trying to catch lightning in a bottle somewhere . If it means that you think a QB is the answer , fine . I don't get that this year with the QBs and the same with Clowney . So what's left ?

The ultra safe approach is Matthews at #1 . Why ... he doesn't have the highest ceiling but he will play somewhere on the OL .

Trade ... if there was someone worth trading for we should pick him .

So I think you copy the 49ers with bookend OTs and a cheaper QB . I think the Browns screwed the pooch big time when they picked Trent Richardson and Weeden , instead , what if they pick Matt Kalil, OT and David DeCastro, OG ?

 

[thunderkyss]

Duane Brown is not a semi-bust LT playing on a franchise tag who the team is going to allow to walk as a FA instead of re-signing. Not much of a similarity there.

See, I didn't point to Duane Brown as one of many similarities. Stay on topic. Ryan said he is not a fan of taking an OT with 1-1 to play RT. I replied to that.

This is your opinion and I respect that, but we should not try to pass off opinion as fact.

In your opinion, tell me who I've heard mentioning any of these guys will be a franchise QB & lead us to a Super Bowl...

 

[thunderkyss]

And I'm sure if people thought that way about Big Ben, Rodgers, Flacco & Ryan they wouldn't have lasted so long in their respective drafts either.

1 out of that bunch was drafted with the #1 overall.

 

[JCTexan]

1 out of that bunch was drafted with the #1 overall.

No, I left Eli off.. He's probably the worst QB you listed.The highest any of the guys I listed was Matt Ryan at #3. Big Ben went #11, Rodgers #24 & Flacco #18. They all would have been drafted higher if they were considered franchise caliber back then..

 

[infantrycak]

I think you're trying to catch lightning in a bottle somewhere . If it means that you think a QB is the answer , fine . I don't get that this year with the QBs and the same with Clowney . So what's left ?

Catch lightning what? I'd say you are fixated on OL only. I have said repeatedly if they don't like the top 3 QBs then don't take them. My point is overspending assets is not the only way to fix the OL.

The ultra safe approach is Matthews at #1 . Why ... he doesn't have the highest ceiling but he will play somewhere on the OL .

I think Mack, Mosley and Watkins are all just as safe as Matthews, possibly more so than someone with no set place on the OL. Mosley looks like the safest pick in the draft to me.

So I think you copy the 49ers with bookend OTs and a cheaper QB . I think the Browns screwed the pooch big time when they picked Trent Richardson and Weeden , instead , what if they pick Matt Kalil, OT and David DeCastro, OG ?

You're revising Niner history. They had an expensive QB when they made all three of those OL picks. Also two of their 1st OL guys are on rookie contracts as is their current starting QB. That will not last.

Browns - and there is that fascination with OL again. What about Luke Kuechly and Russell Wilson?

See, I didn't point to Duane Brown as one of many similarities. Stay on topic. Ryan said he is not a fan of taking an OT with 1-1 to play RT. I replied to that.

You called the Texans' situation if they had two 1st OT's and KC's similar and they are not. That was the topic. And KC had zero intention of him playing RT for more than a season.

 

[thunderkyss]

You called the Texans' situation if they had two 1st OT's and KC's similar and they are not. That was the topic. And KC had zero intention of him playing RT for more than a season.

No I didn't.

 

[mussop]

I really like Max Bullough. I don't project him as a day 1 starter, and maybe not ever a starter, but I think he can develop into very solid depth very late in the draft and he has a nose for the football.

In the later rounds I'm often looking for OLine or Special Teams players. I like what he brings in special teams as he (hopefully) develops into an NFL level player.



Did you read the name wrong?

Beat me to it on both responses.

I think number 19 was talking about Donald. Had to be.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

Catch lightning what? I'd say you are fixated on OL only. I have said repeatedly if they don't like the top 3 QBs then don't take them. My point is overspending assets is not the only way to fix the OL.



I think Mack, Mosley and Watkins are all just as safe as Matthews, possibly more so than someone with no set place on the OL. Mosley looks like the safest pick in the draft to me.



You're revising Niner history. They had an expensive QB when they made all three of those OL picks. Also two of their 1st OL guys are on rookie contracts as is their current starting QB. That will not last.

Browns - and there is that fascination with OL again. What about Luke Kuechly and Russell Wilson?



You called the Texans' situation if they had two 1st OT's and KC's similar and they are not. That was the topic. And KC had zero intention of him playing RT for more than a season.

I'm saying I'm not thrilled with any of the big need players so I'd revert to solid . I like Robinson , Watkins , and Donald the most . I don't know what we'd do with Donald and we picked Nuk last year in the 1st so do we pick another WR in the 1st ?

 

[TexansFTW]

In your opinion, tell me who I've heard mentioning any of these guys will be a franchise QB & lead us to a Super Bowl...

Your question is worded a little unusual so I'm not totally sure I understand it, but I know you are very active on this message board in every thread. So therefore, If you take a look at the Manziel thread and scan through 130+ pages you will see many people saying this as far as franchise QB which would in turn imply Super Bowl.

If you look through the 100+ Teddy B thread pages you will see the same.

If you look through the 35+ Bortles thread pages, etc.

I'm not referring to posters either, but posters that post what these 'scouts' and draft people are saying.

No scout will ever put their name on the line saying "if they draft this guy they will win a Super Bowl" thus the implication that franchise QB generally means playoff possibilities and Super Bowl is the last stop in the playoffs.

 

[beerlover]

Just because consensus says Clowney is BPA. Fine we ALL UNDERSTAND THAT DON'T WE? That doesn't mean jack **** once he starts strapping on those NFL pads Sunday he is just another rookie making his money, hopefully earning it.

My approach is a little different, w/experience. My focus is still BPA but more weighted towards tomorrow, longevity. That's why Matthews & Robinson will be graded on some boards higher than Clowney. Not sure about O'Brian or how they stack their big board. Clowney doesn't seem like a fit here but who knows? This is how Blake Bortles sneaks into the conversation. I'm a broken record but it's a longer term developmental perspective. I personally don't feel he will ever be all world like Greg Robinson will however Houston has a QB problem that needs to be quickly resolved.

 

[ObsiWan]

Just because consensus says Clowney is BPA. Fine we ALL UNDERSTAND THAT DON'T WE? That doesn't mean jack **** once he starts strapping on those NFL pads Sunday he is just another rookie making his money, hopefully earning it.

My approach is a little different, w/experience. My focus is still BPA but more weighted towards tomorrow, longevity. That's why Matthews & Robinson will be graded on some boards higher than Clowney. Not sure about O'Brian or how they stack their big board. Clowney doesn't seem like a fit here but who knows? This is how Blake Bortles sneaks into the conversation. I'm a broken record but it's a longer term developmental perspective. I personally don't feel he will ever be all world like Greg Robinson will however Houston has a QB problem that needs to be quickly resolved.

This is how I see it.
We have the 1-1 pick. With that we should at least grab a top 3 guy talentwise. To do otherwise would be "reaching" as I understand the term.

However, one of the guys sitting there - Robinson - is rated in the top five overall on every big board you want to consult and he's the answer to a current need and very possibly a future need (if we groom him to step into the LT position) so why would you pass on him?? Especially when you can still upgrade at QB with Garappolo in rd 2-3 or Bret Smith in round 3 or 4.

That's all I'm asking.

 

[beerlover]

This is how I see it.
We have the 1-1 pick. With that we should at least grab a top 3 guy talentwise. To do otherwise would be "reaching" as I understand the term.

However, one of the guys sitting there - Robinson - is rated in the top five overall on every big board you want to consult and he's the answer to a current need and very possibly a future need (if we groom him to step into the LT position) so why would you pass on him?? Especially when you can still upgrade at QB with Garappolo in rd 2-3 or Bret Smith in round 3 or 4.

That's all I'm asking.

Becoming a complete stud in the NFL takes more than just god given talent. You need your mind, body & soul in the game. It takes work, dedication, coachable, intelligence then just maybe a prospect can realize his potential. But yeah being 6-5 332 lbs running a 4.9 is sick, he shows rapid improvement & understanding of LT position, is a mauler & road grader. Once he develops his craft/handwork he will be a mountain to scale in the truest sense of the word. BPA

 

[mussop]

This is how I see it.
We have the 1-1 pick. With that we should at least grab a top 3 guy talentwise. To do otherwise would be "reaching" as I understand the term.

However, one of the guys sitting there - Robinson - is rated in the top five overall on every big board you want to consult and he's the answer to a current need and very possibly a future need (if we groom him to step into the LT position) so why would you pass on him?? Especially when you can still upgrade at QB with Garappolo in rd 2-3 or Bret Smith in round 3 or 4.

That's all I'm asking.

This !!!

Why reach with the #1 overall pick on a QB when there is a player (Robinson) sitting there that has future pro bowl written all over him? And he plays a premium position. Sure he will man the right side for a couple of years so what. Having two stud OTs will make it just that much easier on whoever the next QB is.

 

[ObsiWan]

i never understood the whole you draft players to fit your system argument.

then you don't understand Belichick because, historically, that's what he's known for. Grabbing guys that fit what he wants to do. But I guess he's not a "great coach".

 

[leebigeztx]

Well, perhaps you're right; let's just see.....

2013 Seattle Seahawks
LT - Russell Okung - 1st rd 2010, 6th overall pick
LG - James Carpenter - 1st rd 2011, 25th overall pick
OC - Max Unger - 2nd rd 2009, 49th overall pick; Pro Bowl 2013
RG - J.R. Sweezy - 7th rd 2012
RT - Michael Bowie - 7th rd 2013
these guys on the right side must be the guys you're talking about that were responsible for Wilson being under pressure. I admit this is pure speculation on my part but I'd bet good money that Crazy Pete C. will set about fixing that issue in this draft or free agency before the 2014 season begins.

2013 Denver Bronco
LT - Ryan Clady - 1st rd 2008, 12th overall pick
LG - Zane Beadles - 2nd rd 2010, 45th overall pick
OC - Manuel Ramirez - 4th rd 2007, 117th pick
RG - Louis Vasquez - 3rd rd 2009, 78th pick; Pro Bowl, 1st team All Pro 2013
RT - Orlando Franklin - 2nd rd 2011l 46th pick

2012 Baltimore Ravens
LT - Michael Oher - 1st rd 2009, 23rd pick
LG - I can't find this guy in pro-football reference; someone help
OC - Matt Birk, 6th rd 1998
RG - Marshal Yanda - 3rd rd 2007, 86th pick; 2012 Pro Bowler
RT - Kelechi Osemele - 2nd rd 2012, 60th pick; started as a rookie

2012 SF 49ers
LT - Joe Staley - 1st rd 2007, 28th pick; 2012 Pro Bowler
LG - Mike Iupati - 1st rd 2010, 17th pick; 2012 Pro bowler and 1st team All-Pro
OC - Jonathan Goodwin - 5th rd 2002
RG - Alex Boone - UDFA 2009. Elevated from practice squad to starter in 2010. Made 2nd team All-NFL by Pro Football Focus
RT - Anthony Davis - 1st rd 2010, 11th pick overall

No pro bowlers or all pro's huh...?
Recent history does not support this at all
Please take note of all the first day picks (I still think of "1st day" as rounds 1-3 before the NFL network decided to use the draft to sell more commercials by stretching it over three damned days... but I digress)

Point is all of these lines are anchored by first, second, and third rounders, experienced guys who know the ropes, or late round/UDFA guys who have stepped up their games.

fix the O-line.

I won't nitpik,but I did say won the superbowl. I'm not against taking oline in 1st 3rds,I'm against it as the top pick. I mean at 2.1 ,there will be a slew of good oline prospects. If you think about when the texans had their best oline, it was brown,smith,meyers,winston,and the dude in oakland. Brown was a 1st,winston a 3rd,briesel udfa,meyers a 5th or 6th,and I can't remember where wade smith was drafted. SF is one of the few teams I've seen in recent memory to use multiple 1st rd picks on ol. It not a bad idea.

 

[kiwitexansfan]

Especially when you can still upgrade at QB with Garappolo in rd 2-3 or Bret Smith in round 3 or 4.

That's all I'm asking.

Define upgrade. Neither of the two guys you name here are commonly talked about as NFL ready. Long term they might be an upgrade, Garappolo has some good buzz from the postseason circuit but is really small time and the reviews on Smith are very mixed some praising the guy and some thinking he is worse than awful. Do you think these guys come in and upgrade the position THIS year?

 

[ObsiWan]

I won't nitpik,but I did say won the superbowl. I'm not against taking oline in 1st 3rds,I'm against it as the top pick. I mean at 2.1, there will be a slew of good oline prospects. If you think about when the texans had their best oline, it was brown,smith,meyers,winston,and the dude in oakland. Brown was a 1st,winston a 3rd,briesel udfa,meyers a 5th or 6th,and I can't remember where wade smith was drafted. SF is one of the few teams I've seen in recent memory to use multiple 1st rd picks on ol. It not a bad idea.

Three of those teams did win it.
But my argument is we need a solid O-line. As the lists show, solid players can be found in any round and some were even undrafted. But to say teams have won Super Bowls with an "average O-line" is simply not supported by the facts. And outside of Duane Brown and Chris Myers, our O-line is, at best, average; maybe not even that good.

So now we have a shot to get a stud tackle - rated #2 thru #4 on most draftniks big boards; a guy who may be able to step in for D.B. if necessary should he get re-injured or he could take DB's spot if that foot thing of his hasn't completely healed or gets worse - you do remember Duane was "battling" some kind of toe/bone bruise thing and was out from August thru the first part of October, right?? yeah, he played the rest of the season, but was he ever really right? I want some insurance. And I don't see Quess or Williams as that insurance.

We can still get a solid QB prospect - Garappolo maybe - in the next round. Maybe Bret Smith in the 3rd or 4th.

 

[JCTexan]

Three of those teams did win it.
But my argument is we need a solid O-line. As the lists show, solid players can be found in any round and some were even undrafted. But to say teams have won Super Bowls with an "average O-line" is simply not supported by the facts. And outside of Duane Brown and Chris Myers, our O-line is, at best, average; maybe not even that good.

So now we have a shot to get a stud tackle - rated #2 thru #4 on most draftniks big boards; a guy who may be able to step in for D.B. if necessary should he get re-injured or he could take DB's spot if that foot thing of his hasn't completely healed or gets worse - you do remember Duane was "battling" some kind of toe/bone bruise thing and was out from August thru the first part of October, right?? yeah, he played the rest of the season, but was he ever really right? I want some insurance. And I don't see Quess or Williams as that insurance.

We can still get a solid QB prospect - Garappolo maybe - in the next round. Maybe Bret Smith in the 3rd or 4th.

Not knocking your idea, but why not take the best QB prospect and then take an OT at 2.1? Morgan Moses or Antonio Richardson would both help solidify the O-line.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Not knocking your idea, but why not take the best QB prospect and then take an OT at 2.1? Morgan Moses or Antonio Richardson would both help solidify the O-line.

It's a personal sort of thing.

If you think the best QB prospect has very little chance of actually developing into a QB capable of winning a Super Bowl, then why would you waste a pick taking a QB just to take a QB? If you've got the option between taking a guy who's going to become Blaine Gabbert or a guy who's going to become the next Jonathon Ogden, who should you take?

And that's what this boils down to.

Everyone has their own assessment on the ceiling for the QBs. It's up to the Texans to make the right assessments on all these players and choose the ones who are going to have the most positive impact on our team. If Bridgewater, Bortles, or Manziel will develop into a great QB, then of course you take them but if you have strong doubts about that, then you stay away.

If you think Garoppolo has as good a chance (or almost as good of a chance) and you think he's going to be available at 2-1 or 3-1, then you wait and take him while drafting players you have more confidence in.

But just because a player is a QB doesn't mean he can't bust. Just look at the Seahawks taking Aaron Curry or the Jets taking Vernon Gholston. Any of these guys can bust.

For me at 1-1, I take the player I think is going to become the best player out of this draft class. And for me, that's Watkins. If I allow myself to be swayed by best player that fits team needs, I take Robinson. I don't take a QB I don't think is going to become a great QB at 1-1 just because I have my pick of the litter.

 

[thunderkyss]

I won't nitpik,but I did say won the superbowl. I'm not against taking oline in 1st 3rds,I'm against it as the top pick. I mean at 2.1 ,there will be a slew of good oline prospects. If you think about when the texans had their best oline, it was brown,smith,meyers,winston,and the dude in oakland. Brown was a 1st,winston a 3rd,briesel udfa,meyers a 5th or 6th,and I can't remember where wade smith was drafted. SF is one of the few teams I've seen in recent memory to use multiple 1st rd picks on ol. It not a bad idea.

I still think we'll be heavily a zone running team. It will be a means to an end, not the end to the means, ala Kubiak/Dennison/Gibbs.

We're going to find out what the other team's weaknesses are & we're going to exploit them. As opposed to doing what we do, the best we can (the Kubiak way). If that means we'll blow them up in the middle, we're going to manhandle them in the middle. If it means we can get the edge, we're going to get the edge. If that means we need to stretch them, we're going to stretch them.

Then whether Schaub is here or not, he's clearly not the guy who played behind the OL you speak of. I don't trust him to get the ball out on time & I don't trust him to ad-lib if he fails to get the ball out on time. Then he's going to have to learn a whole new set of terminology & way of looking at things. Had he not gone all loopy on us maybe I'd have faith in him picking up a new offense quickly & hiding the defects along the OL.

Now, not so much.

 

[leebigeztx]

Three of those teams did win it.
But my argument is we need a solid O-line. As the lists show, solid players can be found in any round and some were even undrafted. But to say teams have won Super Bowls with an "average O-line" is simply not supported by the facts. And outside of Duane Brown and Chris Myers, our O-line is, at best, average; maybe not even that good.

So now we have a shot to get a stud tackle - rated #2 thru #4 on most draftniks big boards; a guy who may be able to step in for D.B. if necessary should he get re-injured or he could take DB's spot if that foot thing of his hasn't completely healed or gets worse - you do remember Duane was "battling" some kind of toe/bone bruise thing and was out from August thru the first part of October, right?? yeah, he played the rest of the season, but was he ever really right? I want some insurance. And I don't see Quess or Williams as that insurance.

We can still get a solid QB prospect - Garappolo maybe - in the next round. Maybe Bret Smith in the 3rd or 4th.

All you did was list where they were drafted,not by how they played. The last giants team to win was last in rushing and the packers were next to last when they won. The broncos this year scored more points than anyone in the history of football,are you saying they had anything better than avg offensive line? They did their damage because of manning, just like he did in indy.All the good qbs make their oline look better by making quick decisions with the ball and getting the team in the right play. When those avg lines play top flight d-lines,they've been exposed. The best oline I've seen play the last few yrs where big ben 1st sb and probably brees when they won the sb.

 

[leebigeztx]

Not knocking your idea, but why not take the best QB prospect and then take an OT at 2.1? Morgan Moses or Antonio Richardson would both help solidify the O-line.

I don't know why people don't see that. You can get the best qb availible at 1, richardson or moses at 2,marcus smith at 3,mcgill at 4(maybe). The draft isn't over after the 1st pick. As I've said before,people had the texans as a top 5 oline 3 yrs ago and they had 1 late 1st rd pick,2-3rd,udfa,and a 6th. O line coaches in particular like a certain type of athlete on the line. We can say take robinson at 1,but who's to say obrien and the line coach wants that kind of guy at tackle? A couple of yrs back when okung and williams were coming out, the redskins had their choice. Most draft people had okung rated higher,but for what they do,williams was a better fit. Hell many people laughed when the texans took the ex-dl with te in his background and 1 yr starting experience in the 1st rd. Few yrs later,probowl and all pro type,brown is still a high end player when healthy.

 

[ObsiWan]

Define upgrade. Neither of the two guys you name here are commonly talked about as NFL ready. Long term they might be an upgrade, Garappolo has some good buzz from the postseason circuit but is really small time and the reviews on Smith are very mixed some praising the guy and some thinking he is worse than awful. Do you think these guys come in and upgrade the position THIS year?

That's my issue. I don't see ANY of the QBs in this year's draft coming in and upgrading the QB position THIS year. Even Bridgewater, who is the guy I'd pick if I had to go QB at 1-1, won't be the upgrade at QB, THIS year, that Robinson (or Matthews) will be at OT this year.

If I miss on Robinson and he can't transition to LT as I'm projecting, I've still got a solid RT that's likely at least as good as Winston was.

If I miss on Bridgewater/Bortles/Manziel, and he's no better than Keenum then I'm right back here in a couple of years looking for a QB.

No matter who they pick, I'm not going to have a conniption. I've seen that happen on this board on draft day. Some people go all
or :vincepalm: if their guy isn't taken by the Texans.

Who really knows what O'Brien will do.

 

[ObsiWan]

Not knocking your idea, but why not take the best QB prospect and then take an OT at 2.1? Morgan Moses or Antonio Richardson would both help solidify the O-line.

Because I'm hoping for Van Noy at 2-1.

We need LBs who can both tackle AND cover. We need to give RAC some weapons in this draft too, and I'd rather not wait for rounds 4-7 to do it.
So now I'm looking for a RT in round 3 or 4.
Ugh....

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

That's my issue. I don't see ANY of the QBs in this year's draft coming in and upgrading the QB position THIS year. Even Bridgewater, who is the guy I'd pick if I had to go QB at 1-1, won't be the upgrade at QB, THIS year, that Robinson (or Matthews) will be at OT this year.

If I miss on Robinson and he can't transition to LT as I'm projecting, I've still got a solid RT that's likely at least as good as Winston was.

If I miss on Bridgewater/Bortles/Manziel, and he's no better than Keenum then I'm right back here in a couple of years looking for a QB.

No matter who they pick, I'm not going to have a conniption. I've seen that happen on this board on draft day. Some people go all
or :vincepalm: if their guy isn't taken by the Texans.

Who really knows what O'Brien will do.

NFL Team NFL Draft Pick
1 CAR Cam Newton, QB, Auburn
2 DEN Von Miller, LB, Texas A&M
3 BUF Marcell Dareus, DT, Alabama
4 CIN A.J. Green, WR, Georgia
5 ARI Patrick Peterson, CB, LSU
6 ATL Julio Jones, WR, Alabama
7 SF Aldon Smith, DE, Missouri
8 TEN Jake Locker, QB, Washington
9 DAL Tyron Smith, OT, USC
10 JAX Blaine Gabbert, QB, Missouri
11 HOU J.J. Watt, DE, Wisconsin

Reaching and hoping will make you pick right behind the Texans . Oh heck ... wait that didn't come out right .

 

[LikeMike]

NFL Team NFL Draft Pick
1 CAR Cam Newton, QB, Auburn
2 DEN Von Miller, LB, Texas A&M
3 BUF Marcell Dareus, DT, Alabama
4 CIN A.J. Green, WR, Georgia
5 ARI Patrick Peterson, CB, LSU
6 ATL Julio Jones, WR, Alabama
7 SF Aldon Smith, DE, Missouri
8 TEN Jake Locker, QB, Washington
9 DAL Tyron Smith, OT, USC
10 JAX Blaine Gabbert, QB, Missouri
11 HOU J.J. Watt, DE, Wisconsin

Reaching and hoping will make you pick right behind the Texans . Oh heck ... wait that didn't come out right .

Lockers concerns were accuracy and decision making - both these things prevent him from being a great QB today. But scouts and coaches thought, they could fix this and fell in love with his strong arm and overall athletic ability.

Gabbert was a system QB that didn`t have too think too much on the field, not great accuracy and didn`t react well too pressure. But scouts and coaches fell in love with his prototypical size and felt like they could teach him the rest and that he will learn to live with pressure.

What I am trying to say - the red flags were there, coaches and scouts just like to believe, that they can fix things, if the physique is there.

In this years draft there is a lot to teach Bortles (accuracy, NFL reads, mechaniques) and a lot to teach Manziel (NFL system, pocket passing). You don`t have to teach Bridgewater a lot, since he already did most things in College. Of course there is the question of how he will adjust to NFL competition, but that goes for every prospect.

What I am saying is: the usual reasons why drafted QBs fail are things, coaches believe they can fix. With Bridgewater those things don`t need to be fixed because they are his strengths.

 

[infantrycak]

NFL Team NFL Draft Pick
1 CAR Cam Newton, QB, Auburn
2 DEN Von Miller, LB, Texas A&M
3 BUF Marcell Dareus, DT, Alabama
4 CIN A.J. Green, WR, Georgia
5 ARI Patrick Peterson, CB, LSU
6 ATL Julio Jones, WR, Alabama
7 SF Aldon Smith, DE, Missouri
8 TEN Jake Locker, QB, Washington
9 DAL Tyron Smith, OT, USC
10 JAX Blaine Gabbert, QB, Missouri
11 HOU J.J. Watt, DE, Wisconsin

Reaching and hoping will make you pick right behind the Texans . Oh heck ... wait that didn't come out right .

OK, but the Texans aren't in the 8-10 range looking at drafting AJ McCarron or Mettenberger in the top 1st when they are graded in the 2nd or 3rd. The Texans are in Carolina's spot at 1.1 getting to pick any QB they want AND there is more than 1 graded in the top half of the 1st round.

I understand what you and TPN are getting at. Last year would have been the perfect illustration to me where there simply wasn't a QB it was reasonable to take near the top of the draft. That isn't the case this season even if none of them are Luck.




This Robinson is going to be Ogden thing seems very flavor of the moment also. The guy wasn't even considered the best LT prospect when playing football stopped and now he is all but a Hall of Fame nominee. I challenged early on that Matthews (when he was the consensus #1 LT prospect) was no Pace or Boselli. Nobody came back with maybe not but Robinson is that good.

 

[bah007]

i never understood the whole you draft players to fit your system argument.

WRONG.

You draft players because they are the best available talent. A good coach, scratch that, a great coach can make any player fit his system.

That's the sign of a truly great coach. If mario williams can play outside linebacker in a 3-4, then so can clowney who has fast twitch muscle fibers unlike mario.

If you are gonna pass up on manziel or any of the quarterbacks, you draft clowney and make him fit your system. That's what great coaches do. I mean if clowney is the real deal, he can fit any system....

Wrong? Seattle just won the Super Bowl using that approach. They run a very defined system and they only want players that fit into it, regardless of where other teams rate their talent. As long as they are talented enough to do their job in the scheme it doesn't matter.

You cannot change what a player is. That's the arrogant type of thinking that gets coaches fired. You cannot "make" a player fit a scheme that they don't fit.

You have two options:

-Take the best talent, even if he doesn't fit your system. Then change your system to accommodate that player. This is possible but I don't prefer it. I prefer my coaches to coach within their comfort zone. That doesn't mean I don't want them to adapt, but I want them to be working within the system that they are most confident in.

-Pass on that player and take the next best player that fits your system. He may not be as naturally talented, but he is a better piece for your team because he has a designed role within the scheme.

 

[Lucky]

If I miss on Bridgewater/Bortles/Manziel, and he's no better than Keenum then I'm right back here in a couple of years looking for a QB.

Here's the deal. If you don't take a swing, you'll never get a hit. Mr. Perfect QB comes around once every 10 years. You likely will never get a shot at him. So you have to take a shot at a guy who is not perfect, and try to improve him. Otherwise, you have a team full of Joe Thomas-types. Really good players that need a QB to lead them.

 

[HJam72]

Here's the deal. If you don't take a swing, you'll never get a hit. Mr. Perfect QB comes around once every 10 years. You likely will never get a shot at him. So you have to take a shot at a guy who is not perfect, and try to improve him. Otherwise, you have a team full of Joe Thomas-types. Really good players that need a QB to lead them.

If it's me, I'm taking Bridgewater. The guy has a type of guaranteed value. He's not guaranteed to be a star by any means, but he will be worth something even if he doesn't turn into what we hope. Combine that with our serious need for a QB....and I'm in for Bridgewater.

 

[thunderkyss]

Here's the deal. If you don't take a swing, you'll never get a hit. Mr. Perfect QB comes around once every 10 years. You likely will never get a shot at him. So you have to take a shot at a guy who is not perfect, and try to improve him. Otherwise, you have a team full of Joe Thomas-types. Really good players that need a QB to lead them.

If we had a GM who valued future draft picks, or at least knew how to acquire them, we could get that opportunity more often.

& I know it's dead horsish, but Ben, Cutler, Flacco, Rodgers, we could have had any one of them.

 

[TexansSeminole]

If we had a GM who valued future draft picks, or at least knew how to acquire them, we could get that opportunity more often.

& I know it's dead horsish, but Ben, Cutler, Flacco, Rodgers, we could have had any one of them.

What team regularly acquires future top 10-15 first rounders?

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

OK, but the Texans aren't in the 8-10 range looking at drafting AJ McCarron or Mettenberger in the top 1st when they are graded in the 2nd or 3rd. The Texans are in Carolina's spot at 1.1 getting to pick any QB they want AND there is more than 1 graded in the top half of the 1st round.

I understand what you and TPN are getting at. Last year would have been the perfect illustration to me where there simply wasn't a QB it was reasonable to take near the top of the draft. That isn't the case this season even if none of them are Luck.




This Robinson is going to be Ogden thing seems very flavor of the moment also. The guy wasn't even considered the best LT prospect when playing football stopped and now he is all but a Hall of Fame nominee. I challenged early on that Matthews (when he was the consensus #1 LT prospect) was no Pace or Boselli. Nobody came back with maybe not but Robinson is that good.

My opinion is Robinson probably is not Ogden but the worst case scenario is he would be a good RT . Robert Gallery was the 2nd player taken overall in 2004 , played 10 years and is considered a bust . Ryan Leaf was the 2nd pick overall by the Chargers in 1998 . The Chargers had the 1st overall pick again in 2001 and 2004 . Of course if the Raiders took a QB in 2004 instead of Gallery , they wouldn't have reached for Jamarcus Russell .

This stuff is an art as much as a science and sometimes it's paralysis by analysis . If you had Aaron Donald's motor in Clowney this would be a no doubter . You can say the same thing if Teddy was 6'4 230 with 10 inch hands and a big arm . I think , 1st overall , you draft a QB , LT , pass rusher , and it should be a shutdown corner because they make the most and if you hit , you have to pay those positions big money anyway .

 

[thunderkyss]

What team regularly acquires future top 10-15 first rounders?

Acquiring extra draft picks gives you the ammo you need to trade up to those picks without sacrificing your ability to pick up new talent.

 

[TexansSeminole]

Acquiring extra draft picks gives you the ammo you need to trade up to those picks without sacrificing your ability to pick up new talent.

Which team has been able to do that regularly, and been able to trade up regularly?

 

[thunderkyss]

Which team has been able to do that regularly, and been able to trade up regularly?

Cleveland?

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

Acquiring extra draft picks gives you the ammo you need to trade up to those picks without sacrificing your ability to pick up new talent.

That's like priming a pump .

Once the pump is up and running you have a lot more options than you do trying to get it going . It's easy to trade back and gain picks when you have the QB set and so on .

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

Cleveland?

Then you can trade the 3rd pick in the 1st for the 22nd pick a year later ... clever .

 

[TexansSeminole]

Cleveland?

I don't think so.

The point was that no GM knows how to regularly acquire top 10-15 first rounders in future years. That's just an unrealistic dream.

 

[TexansSeminole]

Here's the deal. If you don't take a swing, you'll never get a hit. Mr. Perfect QB comes around once every 10 years. You likely will never get a shot at him. So you have to take a shot at a guy who is not perfect, and try to improve him. Otherwise, you have a team full of Joe Thomas-types. Really good players that need a QB to lead them.

I agree with this, but you hope to get a shot at one that you feel a little bit more comfortable with.

 

[thunderkyss]

I don't think so.

The point was that no GM knows how to regularly acquire top 10-15 first rounders in future years. That's just an unrealistic dream.

Just because they don't always trade into the top 10~15, doesn't mean they don't have the ammo to do it. In a deep draft, such as this one (even QB, no elite QBs, but plenty of starters) depending on the make up of your team, if I had a top 25 pick, I would not be looking to move up..... as a matter of fact, if I were in the 10~25 range, I'd be looking to trade down, so I can move up in a thin year.

 

[thunderkyss]

I agree with this, but you hope to get a shot at one that you feel a little bit more comfortable with.

If we didn't already have a QB, we could have drafted Roethlisberger, Rodgers, Flacco, Kaepernick, Dalton... without having to trade up.

 

[Lucky]

I agree with this, but you hope to get a shot at one that you feel a little bit more comfortable with.

But by "you", you mean you, me, and the general draftnik population. Because we don't know how comfortable or not the teams at the top of the draft are with these QBs.

 

[TexansSeminole]

But by "you", you mean you, me, and the general draftnik population. Because we don't know how comfortable or not the teams at the top of the draft are with these QBs.

Yeah, no doubt. I'll be happy with whoever the organization goes with, although slightly less if it's Manziel. I'm only speaking from my opinion.

 

[Number19]

Maybe so, but offenses are changing. Being a QB driven league, does anyone run a true 2 gap any more?

I understand this. It's been pointed out numerous times that defenses spend considerable, maybe majority, of the snaps in nickle and dime packages. But you still usually have your base defense. Crennel's base defense, at least the one he's most comfortable in since he's developed it over the years, is the 2-gap 34.

My question is, concerning Clowney, is he the the most effective three down defensive player in the draft for the schemes Crennel will be implementing? And do you take a player at 1-1 if he's not going to be a three down player?

If Clowney plays the weakside, playing DE or OLB depending on the called play, and is expected to have no coverage responsibilities, then it is imperative that we get an ILB on that side that can cover the short zone over the middle and outside.

Clowney, undoubtedly, is an elite edge rusher, but I do have questions on his effectiveness in run support. He obviously is not someone who has spent much time in the weight room, although this is correctable.

According to the charts, 40% of his sacks are "speed" sacks and 31% are "cover" sacks. 54% were "outside" rushes, 15% inside rushes and he did have 31% "bull" rushes. The charts also show he was "blocked" 100% of the time. And finally, the charts show that he had help from his team mates providing additional pressure 69% of the time.

This decision - taking Clowney at 1-1, will come down to Crennel's evaluation of Mercilus.