Clowney, then what?

[Texian]

If Bortles was the GREAT QB you make him out to be he wouldn't have needed to come from behind in any game, throw any INTs, or ever get sacked. If you're telling me that the juggernaut conference that is the American Athletic Conference can contain Bortles, imagine what an NFL team with time nothing but time and resources will do to him.

See how stupid you sound?

Contraire, apparently the AAC didn't contain Bortles and the reason Bortles and UCF had to come from behind is directly attributed to the number of points allowed by the UCF Defense. When called upon Bortles, cool calm and collected could deliver. Unlike so many QBs in this draft who were never able to display this ability. And finally, this is a Clowney thread, stay on message or take it to the Bortles thread.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Koch and Kalu this morning were discussing parts of the Spurrier interview which were not widely reported on. Spurrier said that he would often have to hold Clowney back in practice because he was worried that he was going to kill his running backs.

 

[JB]

I've come to think I'm hoping that if they don't take watkins, they can trade down and take Nix. NT is hardest to fill hole on the team imo. And biggest drop off of talent to what you can get in round 2.

 

[Hervoyel]

This pro day just made it possible for Houston to trade down. We just benefited either way.

Very true. It's a win-win for us. He separated himself from the QB's at the top and reignited the hype around him in the process. There's Clowney and everybody else now so we either get the guy at the top or we get to shoplift somebody's draft so they can get the guy at the top.

These are great days we're living in bro's.

 

[Texian]

As a South Carolina fan who watched every game last year, it wasn't just the double teams that caused Clowney to only have 3 sacks. Many people don't realize how much the opposing teams offense game planned to take Clowney out of the game. Many teams changed their whole Offensive philosophy and switched to short passes and screens for a majority of their passing plays. No one, Not even Bruce Smith or Watt can get to the QB in 2 seconds which was basically what clowney had to deal with every game.

So if college teams can effectively neutralize the likes of Bruce Smith and JJ Watt why aren't NFL teams doing the same?

 

[Mr teX]

If Bortles was the GREAT QB you make him out to be he wouldn't have needed to come from behind in any game, throw any INTs, or ever get sacked. If you're telling me that the juggernaut conference that is the American Athletic Conference can contain Bortles, imagine what an NFL team with time nothing but time and resources will do to him.

See how stupid you sound?

You're wasting your breath my man....the competition faced argument only works against Bridgewater...not against THE BORTLE

...even though they played the same damn teams in the same damn conference....

 

[Hervoyel]

Noone who was a fan of the texans from the beginning wants a second helping of the Carr turd pie. Even if he was coming in with Andrew Luck type hype, i still don't think folks here could completely get onboard with that pick. Hell, I don't even think he'd want to come here having had a front row seat to watch his brother's demise in this town.

Pallilo said it correctly yesterday, fans would just be waiting for him to fail like his brother did. You can't have a fan base thinking like that.

Oh, & then there's that "laughing stock of the NFL" thing that you could take in any number of ways. Peppers & David Carr = :kubepalm:....... Derek Carr = :wadepalm::vincepalm: They'd be like "do you guys learn nothing from the first go round?"

We'd officially be the Portland Trailblazers of the NFL.

If he was as certain a prospect as Andrew Luck I'd be fine with him coming here. Hell I'd be fine with him coming here and bringing his brother to back him up. They could both wear #8 for all I cared.

Of course if Derek Carr was as sure a thing as Andrew Luck he wouldn't be there at #33 so that about sums that up.

With our luck it would be more like drafting Derek Zoolander. Oh wait, we already did that in 2002!

 

[Texian]

You're wasting your breath my man....the competition faced argument only works against Bridgewater...not against THE BORTLE

...even though they played the same damn teams in the same damn conference....

with the exception of Penn St and South Carolina and Clowney.

 

[Mr teX]

If he was as certain a prospect as Andrew Luck I'd be fine with him coming here. Hell I'd be fine with him coming here and bringing his brother to back him up. They could both wear #8 for all I cared.

Of course if Derek Carr was as sure a thing as Andrew Luck he wouldn't be there at #33 so that about sums that up.

With our luck it would be more like drafting Derek Zoolander. Oh wait, we already did that in 2002!

I hear ya, but i still think that even if he was considered to be as sure of a prospect as Andrew Luck was, many people would still have this in the back of thier minds...

 

[michaelm]

These are great days we're living in bro's.

We are jolly green giants, walking the Earth with guns. These people we wasted here today are the finest human beings we will ever know.

[IMGwidthsize=400]http://beingsakin.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/full-metal-jacket.jpg[/IMG]

 

[The1ApplePie]

I guess you go Clowney if you expect either Manziel or Bridgewater to slip.

Really don't want to watch this team with bums like Fitz or Keenum under center. Neither would I want to watch the team go 6-10 with third-tier rookies like McCarron or Mettenburger.

Wouldn't mind Derrick Carr at 33, but I know the fan base would crap themselves with furious anger if that happened.

 

[Mr teX]

with the exception of Penn St and South Carolina and Clowney.

I see your underachieving South Carolina & over achieving Penn State teams from 2013..... & I'll raise you a stout 2012 11-1 Florida team with NFLers all over it and a talented Miami team from 2013...........& 2 victories..

 

[Hervoyel]

I guess you go Clowney if you expect either Manziel or Bridgewater to slip.

Really don't want to watch this team with bums like Fitz or Keenum under center. Neither would I want to watch the team go 6-10 with third-tier rookies like McCarron or Mettenburger.

Wouldn't mind Derrick Carr at 33, but I know the fan base would crap themselves with furious anger if that happened.

The Bears built a defense that Rex Grossman managed to ride to a Super Bowl appearance. Now I don't think we're going to get very far with either Fitz or Keenum at this point but Rex-friggin-Grossman got to a Super Bowl so.....

I want to see Watt, Clowney, and Cushing on the field at the same time. I want to see what Brooks Reed can do at ILB next to Cushing and I want to see what Mercilus can do while everyone is trying to work out how they can stop Watt & Clowney.

I think the offense isn't going to have to average a lot of points to keep us in games with that kind of defense on the field (in theory at least).

Great days I tell ya. Great days.

 

[TexansFTW]

Are you going for zero chance of happening scenarios?

Maybe Teddy Bridgewater will drop to 2.01 and then we trade 3.01 for Ndamukong Suh.

Yeah, I have to say they seem to be entertaining Clowney more than others. Having dinner with him before his pro-day, personally working him during and now I hear they are bringing him to Houston later in the month. Their interest is either very high on him or they are luring someone into a trade. I lean that this may be our pick which I'm cool with as long as RAC utilize him correctly. Good coaches adjust their gameplans to the personnel. Not the other way around. So if he's good at what he does then he'll find a place for Clowney to best utilize his skillset.

I always thought that good coaches never tried to force a square into a circle hole. A scheme is a lot more difficult to replace than a player. I could be wrong though.

If Bortles was the GREAT QB you make him out to be he wouldn't have needed to come from behind in any game, throw any INTs, or ever get sacked. If you're telling me that the juggernaut conference that is the American Athletic Conference can contain Bortles, imagine what an NFL team with time nothing but time and resources will do to him.

See how stupid you sound?

There are ways to go about making your point without calling others stupid. I believe it's very safe to say Texian knows more football than you will forget. I only defend this guy because in another message board people like you used to talk this way to him, then when the draft was over and he was right on a subject and they were wrong, no one ever apologized or admitted fault.

I have a different view of Bortles but Texian was raving about him as a #1 pick when most didn't know his name. The people paid to do this were calling him a 3rd round pick, now a simple google search will show Texian may not be that far off. Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck also got sacked, threw INTs, and lost games FWIW.

With that said, I do not want Bortles, nor do I find the need to call others stupid for wanting as much.

 

[infantrycak]

I hear ya, but i still think that even if he was considered to be as sure of a prospect as Andrew Luck was, many people would still have this in the back of thier minds...

If he was Luck he'd be fine so long as he performed as well as Luck has. But yes there would be some skepticism and grumbling.

I would hope the Texans would never entertain that degree of fan concern. But for Derek it is a legitimate problem.

 

[Mr teX]

The Bears built a defense that Rex Grossman managed to ride to a Super Bowl appearance. Now I don't think we're going to get very far with either Fitz or Keenum at this point but Rex-friggin-Grossman got to a Super Bowl so.....

I want to see Watt, Clowney, and Cushing on the field at the same time. I want to see what Brooks Reed can do at ILB next to Cushing and I want to see what Mercilus can do while everyone is trying to work out how they can stop Watt & Clowney.

I think the offense isn't going to have to average a lot of points to keep us in games with that kind of defense on the field (in theory at least).

Great days I tell ya. Great days.

I'm not nearly as down on mercilus as some here. I think he's done well all things considered, he just hasn't had a breakout year yet. I think adding Clowney would help in bringing him to that final step he needs to make.

 

[IDEXAN]

I guess you go Clowney if you expect either Manziel or Bridgewater to slip.

Really don't want to watch this team with bums like Fitz or Keenum under center. Neither would I want to watch the team go 6-10 with third-tier rookies like McCarron or Mettenburger.

Wouldn't mind Derrick Carr at 33, but I know the fan base would crap themselves with furious anger if that happened.

Don't you think it's entirely possible that O'Brien likes McCarron or Mettenburger or Garrapolo or Aron Murray or Tom Savage or some other QB atleast as much as any of the socalled "big three" QBs ? I'm not saying that's the case, I'm just raising the possibility.
O'brien seems to talk more in positive terms about the large number/depth of this Draft in terms of QB prospects than using profuse or extravagant language in describing any one or two particular QBs.

 

[michaelm]

Clowney, then what?

Jimmy Garoppolo. That's where I'm at.

 

[_King_]

4. I think Clowney would be a strong fit if this was the actual system. What makes you say you don't?

Maybe I worded that poorly, but I do think that Clowney would be a good if the defense shapes up how OB has mentioned.

 

[kingtexan]

Bob McNair had dinner with the night before his pro-day and later had come to Houston for another visit...Reggie Bush.

Aaah, all the fond memories of him as a Texan.

Don't remember RB going to the owners alma mater ...

 

[_King_]

Don't remember RB going to the owners alma mater ...

What does that have to do with the flow of that conversation?

Focus man.

 

[beerlover]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap20...adeveon-clowney-play-mcginest-role-for-texans

you be the judge

 

[Playoffs]

Drew Dougherty ‏@DoughertyDrew

"Destroy quarterbacks and give offensive coordinators nightmares."- #Texans S D.J. Swearinger on what Clowney can do in NFL.

Interesting who we didn't hear anything from yesterday on Twitter...

The "General" wasn't at his post(ing) re: Clowney's pro day. No articles, nuthin'. On 3/27 his Twitter timeline was burning up. I guess other prospects aren't McClain worthy. #relationshipswithprospects

Koch and Kalu this morning were discussing parts of the Spurrier interview which were not widely reported on. Spurrier said that he would often have to hold Clowney back in practice because he was worried that he was going to kill his running backs.

Said at times they couldn't run their offense and get the game plan in unless he harnessed JdC.

This pro day just made it possible for Houston to trade down. We just benefited either way.

That's the idea, imo.

 

[kingtexan]

What does that have to do with the flow of that conversation?

Focus man.

Simple math ... man.

 

[thunderkyss]

I've come to think I'm hoping that if they don't take watkins, they can trade down and take Nix. NT is hardest to fill hole on the team imo. And biggest drop off of talent to what you can get in round 2.

Not even close, I don't think. It's one of the easiest.

IT's maybe the hardest to fill with a star, I'll give you that. Athletically gifted men at that size is a rarity, even rarer than the once in a lifetime Clowney.

 

[The1ApplePie]

The Bears built a defense that Rex Grossman managed to ride to a Super Bowl appearance. Now I don't think we're going to get very far with either Fitz or Keenum at this point but Rex-friggin-Grossman got to a Super Bowl so.....

I want to see Watt, Clowney, and Cushing on the field at the same time. I want to see what Brooks Reed can do at ILB next to Cushing and I want to see what Mercilus can do while everyone is trying to work out how they can stop Watt & Clowney.

I think the offense isn't going to have to average a lot of points to keep us in games with that kind of defense on the field (in theory at least).

Great days I tell ya. Great days.

The Bears also had Hester, who pretty much won them a few games by himself that year. I'm pretty sure Sexy Rexy was a better QB than Fitz (certainly better than Keenum).

I think the Seahawks are making people look way too much at the outlier. In general, the NFL is totally geared to the offense. You can win with a terrible defense and a good offense. You won't be winning anything with a garbage QB and a stud defense any more. Russell Wilson isn't a superstar, but he's not a bag of crap either.

The only three logical picks at No. 1 are Clowney, Bridgewater, or Manziel. I'd probably go Clowney out of that group, but I would be hoping that one of the great QB prospects would fall in range for a trade up

 

[JB]

Not even close, I don't think. It's one of the easiest.

IT's maybe the hardest to fill with a star, I'll give you that. Athletically gifted men at that size is a rarity, even rarer than the once in a lifetime Clowney.

That was my point, not just filling with a body but with someone that could be a star. I don't know if Nix is that guy, but it is a for sure need.

 

[steelbtexan]

I've posted this a few times but either people don't believe me or didn't read it, but When OB was talking about watt he said he'll be lined up as a 4tech (not traditional 5tech) and be one gaping most of the time. He said he's going to let watt do what he does best. GEt up field and get after it. Then he also made the 70% nickel comment. (Maybe a slight exaggeration, maybe based on us specifically vs teams we play, I don't know)

But assuming OB is being honest, I don't believe Clowney would be playing a traditional 34 role nearly as much as people think. I think the team would do for him like they claim to be doing for watt. Using guys at what they do best. They've also made multiple mentions of having a versatile scheme. Changing it based on the opponent. Obrien said he plans on moving watt around quite a bit.

So personally, I don't have this view of this fixed traditional 34.

I don't think we're going to take clowney anyways...I think we'll trade back with someone who wants him...

But regardless, OB himself said watt will play a lot of 4 tech and be one tapping and we'll be in nickel 70% of the time. That doesn't sound like a defense that would use clowney in a way that didn't best suit his skills.

Sounds more like a more flexible version of wades defense, tbh.

Great post

People need to go back and look at some old Pats film of McGinest if they want to see how Clowney might be used.

 

[Hervoyel]

The Bears also had Hester, who pretty much won them a few games by himself that year. I'm pretty sure Sexy Rexy was a better QB than Fitz (certainly better than Keenum).

I think the Seahawks are making people look way too much at the outlier. In general, the NFL is totally geared to the offense. You can win with a terrible defense and a good offense. You won't be winning anything with a garbage QB and a stud defense any more. Russell Wilson isn't a superstar, but he's not a bag of crap either.

The only three logical picks at No. 1 are Clowney, Bridgewater, or Manziel. I'd probably go Clowney out of that group, but I would be hoping that one of the great QB prospects would fall in range for a trade up

I'd go Clowney too because I don't see a "great" QB prospect out there. Just a bunch of guys who I think are fairly interchangeable and who really belong in that range from the second half of the first round to the top of the third. The top guys are Clowney, Robinson, and Watkins to my mind. I'm told (repeatedly) that we don't take a RT at 1-1 and that we already have Brown at LT so Robinson would be a no-go. Watkins is interesting but we have AJ and Hopkins. How many 1's does a team need at WR? <Sit down Matt Millen, nobody cares what you think!> So that leaves Clowney and conversely I think his addition to the defense would do a lot more for that side of the ball than adding another WR, an elite RT, or a "good" rookie QB who might turn out or might not do ****. I wouldn't draft Bridgewater or Manziel first overall. No way in hell. The only three logical picks at No. 1 are Clowney, Robinson, and Watkins.

The only guy who appears on both of our lists is Clowney.

Get the QB at #33 if one falls that we like. If not roll with who we got and try again next year. Only thing that makes sense to me.

 

[steelbtexan]

Take a king's ransom for Clowney or take Clowney.

Win-Win.

EDIT: BoB said we're going to be in Nickel/Dime about 70% of the time so technically Clowney will be playing as a DE for us. Perfect. 29.9% of the time he'll be standing up while rushing the passer and .1% of the time, he'll be dropping back in coverage.

^^^^
This

 

[powda]

Great post

People need to go back and look at some old Pats film of McGinest if they want to see how Clowney might be used.

So for the 3rd time in this thread...

How well does clowney compare to willie mcginist? He WONT be a 3-4 de for crennel.

As soon as we knew RAC was the D cord this became a relevant question.

 

[PapaL]

Clowney, then what?

Jimmy Garoppolo. That's where I'm at.

This is where I've been for months as my ideal situation.

We cannot generate a pass rush to save our lives; Clowney instantly makes our D better. We also did not have consistent play at QB. Will a rookie QB from the AAC stabilize the position? (Feel free to pick between "the tall guy" or "the skinny guy") If QB at 2-1 is the play, the pressure on him is immensely less than at 1-1. He could sit most of the year behind Fitz and Keenum and learn...pressure free. 1-1 QB doesn't get that luxury.

 

[steelbtexan]

With Carr being there? Yeah I know it wont happen ... but one can dream.

I guess a nightmare is a dream.

 

[_King_]

Bortles is probably the only prospect that doesn't excite me.

I would be excited about everyone else that's been mention.

My ideal scenario would be get a kings ransom for Clowney...move back a bit, grab Teddy...have other picks to where we could jump into the bottom of the first for another top prospect like Nix...

 

[BullNation4Life]

I am liking this scenarios as time goes on. Rebuilding the Texans using the Seahawks model is a successful strategy. Build a suffocating defense to help out the average to above average offense and let the chips fall...

Clowney and Watt could be a devastating scenario and Clowney's work ethic is something I wouldn't question, especially with Watt there.


McCarron, Murray, Savage in the later rounds, let them sit behind FitzMagic, learn the system and proceed and planned...


Defiantly gonna be an interesting year...

 

[steelbtexan]

OH, do you mean, Dumb It Down?

Matt Miller &#8207;@nfldraftscout


Personally, I would rather have Bortles at 1.1 and Attaochu at 2.1 for two reason: A. The most important position on any football team is the QB and the Texans DO NOT have a true starting QB. B. IMHO Attaochu will have more successful NFL career than Clowney. IMHO I think Clowney's career will be closer to Aundray Bruce (played 10 years but no Pro Bowls) and Attaochu will be closer to Orakpo.

I get where you're coming from, but disagree with you.

If Clowney is 1-1 and say Bortles fell to 7, would you do an Atlanta type (Julio Jones trade to move up and pick Bortles?

If so this would solidify the 3 most important positions on the team. QB/Pass rusher/LT. After studying Bortles I would have to consider trading up.

 

[The1ApplePie]

I'd go Clowney too because I don't see a "great" QB prospect out there. Just a bunch of guys who I think are fairly interchangeable and who really belong in that range from the second half of the first round to the top of the third. The top guys are Clowney, Robinson, and Watkins to my mind. I'm told (repeatedly) that we don't take a RT at 1-1 and that we already have Brown at LT so Robinson would be a no-go. Watkins is interesting but we have AJ and Hopkins. How many 1's does a team need at WR? <Sit down Matt Millen, nobody cares what you think!> So that leaves Clowney and conversely I think his addition to the defense would do a lot more for that side of the ball than adding another WR, an elite RT, or a "good" rookie QB who might turn out or might not do ****. I wouldn't draft Bridgewater or Manziel first overall. No way in hell. The only three logical picks at No. 1 are Clowney, Robinson, and Watkins.

The only guy who appears on both of our lists is Clowney.

Get the QB at #33 if one falls that we like. If not roll with who we got and try again next year. Only thing that makes sense to me.

I am of the belief that a "good" QB does more for the team than two or three great defensive players, which is where we differ.

As far as WRs go, there is going to be a beast sitting at 33. Either Marquis Lee or Mike Evans may be dropping there. Whether you go QB or Clowney in the first, that would be damn hard to pass up.

Wouldn't waste a pick on AJ McCarron, let alone No. 33. Would this team take Derrick Carr if he were there?

 

[steelbtexan]

I guess you go Clowney if you expect either Manziel or Bridgewater to slip.

Really don't want to watch this team with bums like Fitz or Keenum under center. Neither would I want to watch the team go 6-10 with third-tier rookies like McCarron or Mettenburger.

Wouldn't mind Derrick Carr at 33, but I know the fan base would crap themselves with furious anger if that happened.

This just in

The Texans are probably going to go 6-10/7-9 regardless of who's drafted at QB next season. This is the price that is being paid for not firing Kubiak after the 2010 season. The winning seasons were built on a straw house.

 

[powda]

I'd go Clowney too because I don't see a "great" QB prospect out there. Just a bunch of guys who I think are fairly interchangeable and who really belong in that range from the second half of the first round to the top of the third. The top guys are Clowney, Robinson, and Watkins to my mind. I'm told (repeatedly) that we don't take a RT at 1-1 and that we already have Brown at LT so Robinson would be a no-go. Watkins is interesting but we have AJ and Hopkins. How many 1's does a team need at WR? <Sit down Matt Millen, nobody cares what you think!> So that leaves Clowney and conversely I think his addition to the defense would do a lot more for that side of the ball than adding another WR, an elite RT, or a "good" rookie QB who might turn out or might not do ****. I wouldn't draft Bridgewater or Manziel first overall. No way in hell. The only three logical picks at No. 1 are Clowney, Robinson, and Watkins.

The only guy who appears on both of our lists is Clowney.

Get the QB at #33 if one falls that we like. If not roll with who we got and try again next year. Only thing that makes sense to me.

Are you willing to go Clowney 1.1 and then:

trade #33 and 3rd round pick for Bortles/Manziel at roughly #20 overall?

 

[Playoffs]

So for the 3rd time in this thread...

As soon as we knew RAC was the D cord this became a relevant question.

Download ESPN Radio App and go in later today to find ON Demand "The Herd" with Colin Cowherd and select the hour with Tedy Bruschi as a guest. He explains it there, played for Crennel in it at NE. Bruschi was at the pro day.

Unless you can find another way to access "The Herd" in a podcast somewhere else...? Not "Thundering Herd", that's different.

 

[steelbtexan]

Clowney, then what?

Jimmy Garoppolo. That's where I'm at.

Me too

Aaron Murray or Brett Smith would be fine with me also.

 

[mussop]

OH, do you mean, Dumb It Down?

Matt Miller &#8207;@nfldraftscout


Personally, I would rather have Bortles at 1.1 and Attaochu at 2.1 for two reason: A. The most important position on any football team is the QB and the Texans DO NOT have a true starting QB. B. IMHO Attaochu will have more successful NFL career than Clowney. IMHO I think Clowney's career will be closer to Aundray Bruce (played 10 years but no Pro Bowls) and Attaochu will be closer to Orakpo.

Reason A is no reason to reach. I'm so tired of hearing "QB is the most important position" as a reason we HAVE to take a QB number one overall. It's just so narrow minded. If there isn't a franchise QB available then you don't draft a JAG with 1.1. Either use the pick on the highest rated player or trade down for a boatload of picks.


Reason B, I can understand. If you feel that way it's perfectly rational. But if you feel you can find a Better pass rusher later in the draft that doesn't mean you HAVE to draft a QB first. Take the next highest rated player. Robinson??? Whoever, just don't reach for a QB.

 

[steelbtexan]

Are you willing to go Clowney 1.1 and then:

trade #33 and 3rd round pick for Bortles/Manziel at roughly #20 overall?

In a heartbeat

 

[Playoffs]

You're not wrong....I didn't include this reference specifically when I mentioned his high school bone spur issues........but it did include surgery. This information is buried in a single old ESPN article..........and, no, it would not change my impressions.

Okay, cool, wanted to make sure of that. Thanks, Doc!

 

[The Pencil Neck]

My biggest concerns with Clowney have always been:

1) His work ethic
2) His lack of production this past year (see #1)
3) His role in a traditional 3-4
4) His bone spurs

So, let's go through these one-by-one.

When I watched him in games, I saw a lot of times when he didn't seem to be working very hard. Especially when the play went away from him. I saw times where he didn't chase things down that I think he could have. I saw times where he didn't really do anything more than run into the OT and play patty-cake with him. And this bothered me.

But a couple of different people pointed out some things that put this into perspective for me. First off, he was playing almost every single defensive snap. But more importantly, even with those slack plays, he still found a handful of plays every game to just blow stuff up. So I'm not going to hold those slack plays against him anymore.

Another thing with his work ethic was that I didn't feel he put enough time working on his craft. I feel like he should be showing more and different moves. BUT. He also displays a great ability for diagnosing the play. One of the things that really frustrated me with Mario (and now with Mercilus) was that he'd get into the backfield very, very fast and then hesitate because he wasn't sure whether to go after the QB or the RB. Clowney doesn't have that hesitation. So I'm going to cut him slack on this and just hope that Kollar and Watt can get his craft up-to-speed.

His lack of production bothered me. Until I went back and looked at a lot of the premier pass-rusher's final year in college. Many of them experienced a distinct drop in production their final year. So I'm not going to hold that against him, anymore, either.

When it comes to his role in a traditional 3-4, he just doesn't fit. The guy looks like more of a 4-3 DE. BUT. Given what OB and Bruschi have said and RAC's own history, I'm not too worried about this anymore. RAC ran a 4-3 when he first started with the Patriots and then shifted to a 3-4. I think RAC is flexible enough in his scheme to change things to whatever they need to be to get the most out of both Watt and Clowney.

So. For me. The only reservation I still have with taking Clowney at 1-1 is his bone spurs. And. Frankly. I'm not THAT worried about those.

So, for me, I would not mind taking Clowney at 1-1, and then a tackle at 2-1, and then a QB like Garoppolo, Mettenberger, or Murray at 3-1. Or even someone like Tajh Boyd or Stephen Morris later in the draft.

 

[TexansFTW]

So that leaves Clowney and conversely I think his addition to the defense would do a lot more for that side of the ball than adding another WR, an elite RT, or a "good" rookie QB who might turn out or might not do ****. I wouldn't draft Bridgewater or Manziel first overall. No way in hell. The only three logical picks at No. 1 are Clowney, Robinson, and Watkins.

Get the QB at #33 if one falls that we like. If not roll with who we got and try again next year. Only thing that makes sense to me.

Your logic is on point. If there are only "good" QBs who are likely to turn into shoot you take Clowney.

However, you speak as if this is a fact, that they are all just good. What if I told you that I don't agree with your opinion that you are pushing as fact?

This thread has gone on for over 100 pages and this same post you just wrote has been written on every single one of those 100 pages.

I just want to break it to you and the next guy that posts this same exact thing on page 104. Your opinion is not fact.

If everybody in this draft sucks and Clowney is the only good person in the draft, I will draft Clowney with my #1 pick. Boom! Game changing analysis for you.

 

[TexansFTW]

This is where I've been for months as my ideal situation.

We cannot generate a pass rush to save our lives; Clowney instantly makes our D better. We also did not have consistent play at QB. Will a rookie QB from the AAC stabilize the position? (Feel free to pick between "the tall guy" or "the skinny guy") If QB at 2-1 is the play, the pressure on him is immensely less than at 1-1. He could sit most of the year behind Fitz and Keenum and learn...pressure free. 1-1 QB doesn't get that luxury.

Pressure or not, if you are not good, you are not good. If you are drafted at 2.01 and you are terrible, you are still a wasted pick.

I personally see no separation with the QBs at 2.01 and back with Ryan Fitzpatrick. If Clowney is the play, I am behind it, but I am not behind wasting a pick on Jimmy G. I would rather roll a year w/ Fitzpatrick, Keenum, and Yates than waste 2.01 on a guy like that who (IMO) will never amount to anything more than Ryan Fitzpatrick in the NFL.

 

[leebigeztx]

If Clowney is the GREAT player that so many are making him out to be, he would have more than 3 sacks this year.

If you're going to tell me he was limited to 3 sacks because of all the times he was double blocked this year, then I have to ask, if college teams can limit Clowney to 3 sacks with double blocks, how many sacks are you expecting when NFL teams are double blocking Clowney?

See,this is me. I don't have to create excuses for jf,bb,or tb even with a bad game here or there. For some reason,we have Neo of college football,yet his teammates trumped him in every defensive category. Now before the defenders of supafreak starts lying about the doubles and line shift, von miler had moore and porter and neither trumped his production. Mario played with manny lawson and tank tyler and neither trumped his production. Peppers had guys on the line with him,again none trumped his production. Kelcy Quarles had more tackles,tfls and trippled his sack production,but it was because of clowney?

See,this is my big issue. I'm 43, and I've never seen a supposed top pick have to be defended like clowney.Imagine if luck would've thrown for 50% and 2k yds with a upside td/int ratio. We have never had a so called top prospect have such a dog of a year and people are acting like it didn't happen. We're not talking about ansah who was came from another country and didn't even play football until track wasn't a option. We're talking about a guy whom we've known about since he was 13. If people were being honest and watched his 2012 games like I did,you will see the same guy.The diference was teams realize what he can't do which is what nfl teams will. We've seen mark anderson get 12 sacks as a rookie upfield rusher then be basically avg after that. We've seen kearse go from the freak to just a guy because of no counter move. The trend on clowney is going the wrong direction.

On a side note, no team will double clowney until he proves he can beat single blocks. If you've watched enough games of clowney, you will know he has trouble doing it even at the college level. Go watch his 4.5 sack performance vs clemson in 2012.

 

[steelbtexan]

Your logic is on point. If there are only "good" QBs who are likely to turn into shoot you take Clowney.

However, you speak as if this is a fact, that they are all just good. What if I told you that I don't agree with your opinion that you are pushing as fact?

This thread has gone on for over 100 pages and this same post you just wrote has been written on every single one of those 100 pages.

I just want to break it to you and the next guy that posts this same exact thing on page 104. Your opinion is not fact.

If everybody in this draft sucks and Clowney is the only good person in the draft, I will draft Clowney with my #1 pick. Boom! Game changing analysis for you.

Not following your line of thinking. There are plenty of good great players in this draft. Robinson/Watkins/Clowney/Matthews etc... help me figure out what you're saying?

You seem to be describing Teddy fans more than Clowney fans. IMHO

 

[steelbtexan]

Pressure or not, if you are not good, you are not good. If you are drafted at 2.01 and you are terrible, you are still a wasted pick.

I personally see no separation with the QBs at 2.01 and back with Ryan Fitzpatrick. If Clowney is the play, I am behind it, but I am not behind wasting a pick on Jimmy G. I would rather roll a year w/ Fitzpatrick, Keenum, and Yates than waste 2.01 on a guy like that who (IMO) will never amount to anything more than Ryan Fitzpatrick in the NFL.

I'm a Garappolo/Murray/Smith guy. But could get on board with waiting for a QB in 2015. Along with drafting a developmental QB somewhere in this draft.

I still think Manziel/Bortles will be 1-1. I hope I'm wrong.