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

Report: Texans G.M. prefers Khalil Mack to Jadeveon Clowney

bhsman said:
Clowney had his best season ever the year after Melvin Ingram left, so perhaps you don't have any idea what you're talking about? Go watch some tape.

Actually his best season ever was Devin Taylor's senior year. I think that just illustrates my point even more.

I don't downgrade a guy for playing in the MAC, but watching Mack play against Mewhort or a team like Baylor and not show up as a pass rusher when facing decent talent wasn't encouraging, and why I like him better as the ILB next to Cush if we draft him rather than OLB.

Both good points and I see the versatility for him to fit anywhere in our starting lb core. If he has to play 40 minutes a game like in Buffalo because their offense can't stay on the field, I can see how he'd wear down on the outside just like against Mewhort. I'm pretty sure the pick-6 came against a heads up play to beat the Mewhort cut-block. He fared much better against the RT though in that game.

Realistically I project him more as a SOLB in RAC's defense.

"I could actually address the points that are inconvenient to my argument but those involve actually watching tape and putting my own points to the test."

I'm at work right now, don't have a ton of time to respond to every point about a taller heavier player arm length to strength translation. I'm 6'4" 275, it doesn't matter. You want to get stronger? Lift more or increase reps.

Ryan Shazier beat Mack in the vertical, bench press, 40 time (comparing pro days) AND the 20-yard shuffle, so by your logic he's a lock for first overall, right?

Yes, that's all great, but I didn't say a lick about Shazier. We were comparing two players to determine "talent". I used two different metrics; stats, and measured athleticism. Mack had the edge in both except for the '40. If we were comparing all players to find a combine king for a #1 overall pick I'd use your logic.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the debate and am just talking footall. No ill will intended.
 
WolverineFan said:
You're dead wrong here. Mack made Mewhort look like an UDFA in the game against Ohio State. He recorded 2.5 sacks, 9 tackles, and returned an INT for a TD. He would have had 3.5 sacks if Mewhort hadn't traded a sack for a holding penalty.

Against Baylor, he only had 4 tackles. But that's mainly because Baylor's quick passing attack neutralizes most pass rushers. They only gave up 1 more sack this year than A&M's vaunted O-Line. You can also bet, as he was the only weapon in the Buffalo front seven, that he saw most of Baylor's attention in pass pro. Especially considering that game was 1 week after he shredded the Ohio State O-Line. I'm sure he had their attention that week as much as Clowney has had any opponent's attention.

Also, Baylor jumped out to a huge lead early in the game and Petty only threw 16 passes. Hard to blame Mack for not filling up the stat sheet.
Click to expand...

I thought both his sacks came off the RT in that game... The pick-6 came lined up over LT. Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly.
 
NastyNate said:
I thought both his sacks came off the RT in that game... The pick-6 came lined up over LT. Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly.
Click to expand...

His sacks did come against Decker. However, he had another sack dead to rights against Mewhort but Mewhort held him and got called. He also had another sack lined up against Mewhort and Mewhort got away with the hold that time. He also beat Mewhort clean for another one but couldn't wrap Miller up for the sack. Later he had Norwell beat but got held and got the flag. Then he beat Marcus Hall for an almost safety but Miller was able to flush out the other side. The guy was 2 flags and about a hair away from having 5 sacks in the game, 2 of which were against Mewhort.

And yes, his pick-six came when lined up over Mewhort, who totally whiffed his cut block. He also out-ran Dontre Wilson on the return, who has been lazer timed at sub-4.4 in the forty. OSU is lucky he started to gas toward the end of the game.
 
WolverineFan said:
You're dead wrong here. Mack made Mewhort look like an UDFA in the game against Ohio State. He recorded 2.5 sacks, 9 tackles, and returned an INT for a TD. He would have had 3.5 sacks if Mewhort hadn't traded a sack for a holding penalty.
Click to expand...

Watch the game tape and then re-read your own post here. Mack's sacks came against the freshman right tackle; the interception was a great play by Mack but Mewhort screwed up a cut block and took himself out of the play. Otherwise, whenever Mewhort got his hands on Mack, Mack stayed put.

This is why you have to watch tape and not just read statlines all day.

Against Baylor, he only had 4 tackles. But that's mainly because Baylor's quick passing attack neutralizes most pass rushers. They only gave up 1 more sack this year than A&M's vaunted O-Line. You can also bet, as he was the only weapon in the Buffalo front seven, that he saw most of Baylor's attention in pass pro. Especially considering that game was 1 week after he shredded the Ohio State O-Line. I'm sure he had their attention that week as much as Clowney has had any opponent's attention.
Click to expand...

1) Watch the game tape and then re-read your own post. Again, Mack was about as effective against either of Baylor's tackles as he was against Mewhort.

2) You can be sure of a lot of things, but you simply don't have the the benefit of the facts here:

Clowney defenders will be the first to say that teams threw extra double teams his way when asked about his decrease in production. In this case, the numbers bear that out. He was double teamed on 8.9% of his pass rush attempts, but was chipped by a RB or TE on a whopping 16.7% of his plays. In total, he faced extra offensive blocking on 25% of plays – more than double some others in this group.
Click to expand...

Khalil Mack is naturally going to have a low strength of sack playing at Buffalo and indeed comes in lowest of the group with a SOS of 23.09. However, more important is that 37.5% of his sacks were unblocked – the highest in the group. Suddenly that could cast some doubts on his quick sack time – was he beating blockers soundly or just on the receiving end of some good luck?
Click to expand...

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/cfb/46928/349/peshek-edge-rushers-10

The link also points out that Mack was only given extra attention on 13.89% of his pass-rushing snaps, only a little more than half of the attention Clowney got. To say Mack received just as much attention is to be dead wrong.

While Khalil Mack split his time relatively evenly amongst the left and right sides, he was significantly less effective when rushing against teams’ left tackle. When playing right defensive end he only managed to pressure the QB once every seventeen snaps – a much poorer showing than his time against right tackles.
Click to expand...

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/cfb/46981/349/peshek-edge-rushers-20

Also, Baylor jumped out to a huge lead early in the game and Petty only threw 16 passes. Hard to blame Mack for not filling up the stat sheet.
Click to expand...

That's fair when it comes to accruing stats, but Mack still didn't look all-that-impressive. And even then, how is that any different from pointing out that UNC and Tennessee used an excessive amount of quick-passing to negate Clowney, as well as rarely running any plays towards his side of the field?

People are awfully quick to defend Mack for a poor game against Baylor but are already prejudiced against Clowney. Beats me, but here we are.
 
NastyNate said:
I appreciate the debate and am just talking footall. No ill will intended.
Click to expand...

Fair enough on being at work; that's totally fine. Your comment came off as not wanting to put in the effort, but my mistake for misinterpreting it.

That said:

-You are really high on Devin Taylor for some reason. Dude had less sacks in 2012 than Quarles did, and has had even less in the NFL as a 4th-round pick. If you think he was the reason for Clowney's success, all I can say is that you're being a little ridiculous.

-I'm not talking about late in the game when Mack and the rest of Buffalo were worn out against Baylor, I'm talking about in the first quarter on two big runs where he has no ability to get in the backfield when facing their Tackles.

-If you're that big and heavy, all the more power to you. But if you're going to use combine tests as a purely dispositive point against Clowney, why can't I use that against Mack with Shazier? It makes no sense. Also, the longer arms thing w/r/t bench reps is true, I don't see why that makes Mack's all of two more reps impressive considering it's less stress on his arms.
 
bhsman said:
Watch the game tape and then re-read your own post here. Mack's sacks came against the freshman right tackle; the interception was a great play by Mack but Mewhort screwed up a cut block and took himself out of the play. Otherwise, whenever Mewhort got his hands on Mack, Mack stayed put.

This is why you have to watch tape and not just read statlines all day.
Click to expand...

I watched the tape. Read my post above. He beat Mewhort on 3 separate occasions for pressures. On one he got held and got a flag, on the next he got held and no call, on the last he beat him clean and then missed the tackle on the QB. He also beat each OG for a pressure in the game and dominated the other OT. He beat 4 different O-Linemen in that game for pressures, including Mewhort. That hold that Mewhort was flagged for is almost the same thing as a sack.

bhsman said:
1) Watch the game tape and then re-read your own post. Again, Mack was about as effective against either of Baylor's tackles as he was against Mewhort.
Click to expand...

Mack was less effective against Baylor and, IMO, it had a lot to do with Baylor's scheme. Look at how quickly Petty is getting the ball out on every pass. The 90-yard TD pass was an 8-yard slant throw where Mack was a step away from a sack. Buffalo manned up across the board and their DB's got slaughtered.

Mack didn't apply the same amount of pressure as he did against OSU, but Baylor was also exploiting matchups outside and getting the ball out much quicker. They also spent half the day running away from him and on the few plays where they ran at him, he set the edge and the runner cut back into open field. Mack didn't play great, but I wouldn't say he played bad. The rest of that defense totally no-showed.

bhsman said:
2) You can be sure of a lot of things, but you simply don't have the the benefit of the facts here:



http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/cfb/46928/349/peshek-edge-rushers-10



The link also points out that Mack was only given extra attention on 13.89% of his pass-rushing snaps, only a little more than half of the attention Clowney got. To say Mack received just as much attention is to be dead wrong.

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/cfb/46981/349/peshek-edge-rushers-20
Click to expand...

I never argued that he received as much attention as Clowney. I said that Baylor likely game planned for him that week just like teams were game planning for Clowney every week. Their plan was to make other players beat them. It worked.

And yes, those metrics do not support Mack's case. However, let's also realize that half the time Mack is rushing the passer he is coming from off the line of scrimmage. Clowney exclusively rushes from the DE spot with his hand down. It's a lot easier to double a guy on the LOS than it is to double a guy who's 4-5 yards off of it. Also, Mack dropped into coverage quite a bit. Is a team going to try to send a double team his way every play when he's not even rushing half the time? We know Clowney is coming, so we send the double. But Mack? If we try to double a guy who's not there then we're playing at a disadvantage against the rest of the front.

bhsman said:
That's fair when it comes to accruing stats, but Mack still didn't look all-that-impressive. And even then, how is that any different from pointing out that UNC and Tennessee used an excessive amount of quick-passing to negate Clowney, as well as rarely running any plays towards his side of the field?

People are awfully quick to defend Mack for a poor game against Baylor but are already prejudiced against Clowney. Beats me, but here we are.
Click to expand...

It's not any different and I've never argued that. Do you have me confused with someone else? Teams went out of their way to disrupt Clowney. The only argument that I've made is that, if he's this generational talent that everyone says he is, then why was it so successful?

And yes, I agree that Mack wasn't all that impressive against Baylor. But it was one game. You're annoyed that people criticize Clowney for a poor game and yet here you are criticizing Mack for one poor game. A bit ironic no?
 
Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet
If #Texans pass on Jadeveon Clowney, it sets up incredible drama at No. 2. Do #Rams take the star pass-rusher? Or auction their pick off?

I believe I read a version of this thought process in @theMMQB 2 weeks ago (http://mmqb.si.com/2014/04/21/2014-nfl-draft-rumors-monday-morning-quarterback/ …). Khalil Mack a name to watch this week.

After discussing the topic with people familiar with Rick Smith, it doesn’t appear #Texans are 100% sold on Clowney. Thus, willing to trade

In talking to people who know #Texans GM Rick Smith well, I no longer believe it’s a certainty that Jadeveon Clowney would be their 1st pick
Click to expand...
 
If we are one or two players away from the kind of team that can take us deep into the POs (like what we thought we had the last couple years), then go with that player that most compliments your existing defense or offense and puts you over the top. But if we are drafting for sheer talent which is what you do anyway with the 1.1 and are in atleast a semi-rebuild of the roster, lets take the most talented player and figure out how to use him and best apply his talent(s).
 
IDEXAN said:
If we are one or two players away from the kind of team that can take us deep into the POs (like what we thought we had the last couple years), then go with that player that most compliments your existing defense or offense and puts you over the top. But if we are drafting for sheer talent which is what you do anyway with the 1.1 and are in at least a semi-rebuild of the roster, lets take the most talented player and figure out how to use him and best apply his talent(s).
Click to expand...
Since we have a 95% new coaching staff, I'd say that doesn't apply (I know, that's your point).

I'd rephrase your second option this way:
Take the player that will have the greatest, immediate impact toward team success.
A lot of you say that guy has to be a QB. I disagree because if you're going to spend the better part of a year (or two) getting him indoctrinated into the NFL. That doesn't present "immediate impact" to me.
Better to go with a guy that can step in right away and have an immediate positive impact. Now we can talk for days (and we have) about who will make the greatest immediate impact.
 
ObsiWan said:
Since we have a 95% new coaching staff, I'd say that doesn't apply (I know, that's your point).

I'd rephrase your second option this way:
Take the player that will have the greatest, immediate impact toward team success.
A lot of you say that guy has to be a QB. I disagree because if you're going to spend the better part of a year (or two) getting him indoctrinated into the NFL. That doesn't present "immediate impact" to me.
Better to go with a guy that can step in right away and have an immediate positive impact. Now we can talk for days (and we have) about who will make the greatest immediate impact.
Click to expand...

Seems like a no brainer IMO. Mack already plays a 3-4 OLB. No need to get him to learn much just tweak. Where as Clowney is a complete build upt o learn the position.
 
DX-TEX said:
Seems like a no brainer IMO. Mack already plays a 3-4 OLB. No need to get him to learn much just tweak. Where as Clowney is a complete build upt o learn the position.
Click to expand...

been thinking about this & came to another possibility - Texans are letting another team know (Buffalo) if they really want to draft Mack they'll have to deal with Rick Smith aka Texans in blockbuster draft day trade. Texans would then use the 9th overall pick on a QB, best available left on their board.

draft trade value table gives us a glimpse @ what Texans should or could receive in return-

1st overall - 3000

9th - 1350
41st - 500
73rd - 225
= 2075 +
next years #1 or next years #2 & #3
 
Give me

1. Clowney
2. Savage
2. James after trading up

That would be a very successful first 2 days of the draft. IMHO

I also think sitting at 3-1 and taking a CB might be the way to go. What would you guys think if Savage went 33rd and Verrett was there at 35 would you be willing to give up 3-1 and 4-1 to take Verrett?

That would give you
1. Best pass rusher in draft
2. QB of the future
3. Best CB in the draft.

You could do a lot worse.
 
steelbtexan said:
Give me

1. Clowney
2. Savage
2. James after trading up

That would be a very successful first 2 days of the draft. IMHO

I also think sitting at 3-1 and taking a CB might be the way to go. What would you guys think if Savage went 33rd and Verrett was there at 35 would you be willing to give up 3-1 and 4-1 to take Verrett?

That would give you
1. Best pass rusher in draft
2. QB of the future
3. Best CB in the draft.

You could do a lot worse.
Click to expand...

I'll be pissed if we take Savage at 33. I've been very open about not being a believer in Savage. Does the guy have physical tools? Yes. But he also has flaws and from what I have seen people are highlighting his physical skills/measureables while making excuses for his flaws.

You should always be wary of a guy who rises like this after all the games have been played.
 
beerlover said:
draft trade value table gives us a glimpse @ what Texans should or could receive in return-

1st overall - 3000

9th - 1350
41st - 500
73rd - 225
= 2075 +
next years #1 or next years #2 & #3
Click to expand...
I'd have a hard time justifying that King's ransom for Mack. With the depth of this draft, that's potentially 4 or 5 starters.
 
steelbtexan said:
Give me

1. Clowney
2. Savage
2. James after trading up

That would be a very successful first 2 days of the draft. IMHO

I also think sitting at 3-1 and taking a CB might be the way to go. What would you guys think if Savage went 33rd and Verrett was there at 35 would you be willing to give up 3-1 and 4-1 to take Verrett?

That would give you
1. Best pass rusher in draft
2. QB of the future
3. Best CB in the draft.

You could do a lot worse.
Click to expand...


Who is James?
 
steelbtexan said:
Give me

1. Clowney
2. Savage
2. James after trading up

That would be a very successful first 2 days of the draft. IMHO

I also think sitting at 3-1 and taking a CB might be the way to go. What would you guys think if Savage went 33rd and Verrett was there at 35 would you be willing to give up 3-1 and 4-1 to take Verrett?

That would give you
1. Best pass rusher in draft
2. QB of the future
3. Best CB in the draft.

You could do a lot worse.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't reach for Savage in the second. Only QB I take in the second is if Carr drops. Otherwise BPA ...
 
DX-TEX said:
Seems like a no brainer IMO. Mack already plays a 3-4 OLB. No need to get him to learn much just tweak. Where as Clowney is a complete build upt o learn the position.
Click to expand...
Very few are talking about Mack with the same kind of superlatives and descriptions as a prospect that they are about Clowney who's the consensus if not near unanimous choice as the top talent in this Draft, and as an edge-rusher he's plays at a highly valued, premium position. Now if your argument is that these people are just off of the mark in their ratings of Clowey, OK fine that's your prerogative.
 
IDEXAN said:
Very few are talking about Mack with the same kind of superlatives and descriptions as a prospect that they are about Clowney who's the consensus if not near unanimous choice as the top talent in this Draft, and as an edge-rusher he's plays at a highly valued, premium position. Now if your argument is that these people are just off of the mark in their ratings of Clowey, OK fine that's your prerogative.
Click to expand...

I think Mack is the safer pick. A guy that doesn`t have to learn a new position, a guy that already has pretty good technique and a guy with a neverending motor. Clowney doesn`t have the technique down and a questionable motor. As far as upside is concerned, I don`t think there is a question that Clowney is the guy.

So do you bet on the once in a generation physical talent or do you take the "safe" pick. I´d take the former, but I fully understand anyone who would rather have Mack. My thing is just: if we want Mack, I´d prefer to trade down. Even if we don`t end up with him, I see him in a group of a couple of guys talentwise, and if we get any of them plus extra picks I´m fine.
 
Is there wisdom in a strategy of first taking Clowney with the intention of trading him later in the Draft ?
 
Lance Zierlein ‏@LanceZierlein
I don’t see the Houston Texans and Bill O’Brien/Rick Smith taking a chance at #1 on just traits if a guy has questionable football character

If this information is correct, and I have no reason to believe his team didn’t hear this Clowney info, I think Texans go Mack.

Had conversation w/ friend for team inside top 10 about Clowney late last night. He said his team got rough evals on football character from South Carolina
Click to expand...
 
Draft room debates...
1. Houston Texans
Matt Williamson's recommendation: Jadeveon Clowney
The main reason to take Clowney with this pick is because he is a unique talent with the upside to turn into an all-time great player. With Clowney and J.J. Watt, the Texans could have an elite defense as soon as 2014, with two players that every offense they face must game plan for. Think of it this way: Who would the division-rival Indianapolis Colts rather Houston draft, Clowney or Blake Bortles? Of course the answer to that question is Bortles. The Texans shouldn't overthink this one, and instead just take the best player in this draft.

Aaron Schatz's recommendation: Teddy Bridgewater, Khalil Mack or Jadeveon Clowney
Projecting guys from college to the pros is still one of the most difficult things in football; even for positions where we've developed projections, those formulas are imperfect. Scouting still plays the biggest role here. Where analytics come in is to determine not whom to pick, but rather how to best use picks to get the most value compared to the other 31 teams. Mack and Clowney are the best players available (our projection system actually prefers Mack, but more on that later). Pass rush is a hugely important part of the game, but ask yourself this: How often does a team with a top quarterback go far in the playoffs, and how often does a team with top pass-rushers go far in the playoffs? To give one example, last year's final four teams featured two of the top veteran quarterbacks and two of the top young quarterbacks, but no pass-rusher with 12 or more sacks. If the Texans want to take a quarterback, then you get to the confusing problem of which quarterback to take. I favor Bridgewater (more on that later as well), although others on this panel may believe he'll be available for the Texans to take later.

Louis Riddick's recommendation: Khalil Mack or a trade down
I would recommend that the Texans do whatever they can to trade out of the first overall pick if they can get reasonable value. Given the Falcons' history, need for perimeter rushers and the fact that Clowney played in the SEC, they are a legitimate trade partner. But if the Texans can't trade the pick, I'd suggest they take Mack, which is a departure from what I would have said a few weeks ago. The staff in Houston that would be working closely with Clowney on a daily basis has zero tolerance for anything resembling less than 100 percent commitment to practice and preparation, so when you factor in some of the effort concerns with Clowney, along with the fact that Mack is a better scheme fit, I'd lean toward Mack.

Mark Dominik's pick: Jadeveon Clowney, DE, South Carolina
There are some compelling arguments here, but to me this one comes down to a simple rule: Don't ever pass up the best player on the board. Clowney is such a rare athlete and has so much upside and potential. Being able to pair him with a player like Watt gives them so much latitude on defense to do so many different things schematically, and you can never have too many pass-rushers. If there were a quarterback in this grade range, you'd go with him here. But in this class, Clowney is a level above every player in this draft, quarterbacks and Mack included.
Click to expand...
 
All of this seems to contradict this:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/...n-clowney-texans-gm-smith-in-constant-contact

He has been called spoiled and lazy by anonymous NFL evaluators, but perhaps the only opinion that should matter to pass rusher Jadeveon Clowney is that of Houston Texans general manager Rick Smith.

And according to Clowney, all Smith is calling him is ... often.

Clowney told The State he spoke with Smith two or three times last week, and the volume of contact won't be dialed back this week.
Click to expand...

Think what all this means is that the draft is near and every little story is coming out from every direction. Let the fun begin!
 
All of your draft questions can be answered with my jump to conclusions mat!

jump-to-conclusions-mat.jpg
 
DX-TEX said:
Seems like a no brainer IMO. Mack already plays a 3-4 OLB. No need to get him to learn much just tweak. Where as Clowney is a complete build upt o learn the position.
Click to expand...

I agree with this mentality. The more I see on Mack, the more I think he's ultimately going to prove to be the defensive great in this draft. High motor guy who wants to be Ray Lewis and Clay Matthews in one package. Put him next to Cushing behind Watt, and this could really be the nucleus of a great D.

And like you said, he's already plug-and-play ready for the 3-4 defense.

I know the metrics have Clowney rated higher, but the Texans should pick who they really want instead of going for the favorite.
 
Double Barrel said:
I agree with this mentality. The more I see on Mack, the more I think he's ultimately going to prove to be the defensive great in this draft. High motor guy who wants to be Ray Lewis and Clay Matthews in one package. Put him next to Cushing behind Watt, and this could really be the nucleus of a great D.

And like you said, he's already plug-and-play ready for the 3-4 defense.

I know the metrics have Clowney rated higher, but the Texans should pick who they really want instead of going for the favorite.
Click to expand...

I predict that Barr has a better career than Mack. If Mack can even make it past 4 years.
 
Blake said:
I predict that Barr has a better career than Mack. If Mack can even make it past 4 years.
Click to expand...

I'm cool with Barr, too. I like high motor defenders who can contribute almost immediately. (Which is why I sorta' hope they pass on Clowney.)
 
NastyNate said:
Barr is a prospect where Mack is a proven commodity. The butthurt is strong with you.
Click to expand...
??? That's a pretty strong statement!!! Sounds like the man-crush is strong with you!! LOL:kitten:

Since when did playing at Buffalo State give you "proven commodity" status in the NFL?
 
DocBar said:
??? That's a pretty strong statement!!! Sounds like the man-crush is strong with you!! LOL:kitten:

Since when did playing at Buffalo State give you "proven commodity" status in the NFL?
Click to expand...

Proven in college, where Barr only has 1 real year of production. 4>1. I seem to remember another guy who came out of a small school (troy university) doing pretty well in the NFL. Demarcus something...
 
NastyNate said:
Proven in college, where Barr only has 1 real year of production. 4>1. I seem to remember another guy who came out of a small school (troy university) doing pretty well in the NFL. Demarcus something...
Click to expand...
Don't forget the best to ever lace 'em up...Jerry Ricecake...Not of that means proven commodity, though. And it also makes me think Barr has the higher ceiling while Mack would have the higher floor. Regardless, it's all a role of the dice.

For every Ware and Rice, there are 10+ Leaf's and Russell's.

Just sayin....

BTW, I like Mack. I'm just not infatuated in him and I'm not sure how well he'll translate in the NFL. Kinda like the D version of Manziel to me.
 
NastyNate said:
Proven in college, where Barr only has 1 real year of production. 4>1. I seem to remember another guy who came out of a small school (troy university) doing pretty well in the NFL. Demarcus something...
Click to expand...

Mack is a great defensive player in college, which has gotten better every year. He has very good stats and had a pretty good combine. But the little tape I watched on him, he didn`t look dominant. He looked hesistant at times, got pushed around a lot, showed little explosion of the snap and didn`t seem to make fast decisions. All of this against not really the best competition.

This might sound very negative - I am not that negative on him. I believe he deserves to be a top 5 or at least a top 10 pick. I am just saying he also has some question marks around him and he definetly lacks the wow factor of a guy like Manziel or Clowney. I´d be ok if we take him, mostly because he fits our defense perfectly and he is actually pretty good in coverage as well. But I´d prefer a player that looks like something really special (Clowney, Robinson - probably even Manziel, though I have way more question marks around him than I do around Mack).
 
LikeMike said:
Mack is a great defensive player in college, which has gotten better every year. He has very good stats and had a pretty good combine. But the little tape I watched on him, he didn`t look dominant. He looked hesistant at times, got pushed around a lot, showed little explosion of the snap and didn`t seem to make fast decisions. All of this against not really the best competition.

This might sound very negative - I am not that negative on him. I believe he deserves to be a top 5 or at least a top 10 pick. I am just saying he also has some question marks around him and he definetly lacks the wow factor of a guy like Manziel or Clowney. I´d be ok if we take him, mostly because he fits our defense perfectly and he is actually pretty good in coverage as well. But I´d prefer a player that looks like something really special (Clowney, Robinson - probably even Manziel, though I have way more question marks around him than I do around Mack).
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more with your assessment of Mack. All the things you noted that is lacking in Mack's game you will find in Attaochu's game and against much better competition.
 
mussop said:
So much for Mack being the better fit.
Click to expand...

I still think he`d be the better fit since he actually is pretty good in coverage. But I´d also still prefer Clowney, because I consider him the way better talent and way more excitiong player.
 
ObsiWan said:
O'Brien said THAT much?
to the press?? :mcnugget:
I don't believe Werder
Click to expand...

Werder had to pad a little.
Actual transcript is probably:

EW: What about Clowney?
BOB: <GLARE>
EW: What about Mack?
BOB: <GLARE>
EW: Would they both be OLBs in a 3-4?
BOB: Grunt. (Walks away).
 
mussop said:
So much for Mack being the better fit.
Click to expand...

How's that? If you rate them as OLBs, Mack is the better of the two.

Playing down 60% of the snaps... I'll have to see how we do it, but if we're going to do it based on offensive personnel, it won't be too hard for offenses to keep Clowney standing up. That 60% may turn into 30% in real time.
 
thunderkyss said:
How's that? If you rate them as OLBs, Mack is the better of the two.

Playing down 60% of the snaps... I'll have to see how we do it, but if we're going to do it based on offensive personnel, it won't be too hard for offenses to keep Clowney standing up. That 60% may turn into 30% in real time.
Click to expand...
According to BOB, it was 30% last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top