Quarterback Drafting Strategies and the Texans

[infantrycak]

I don't understand your fascination with Jones. Everytime I see him he's either been knocked down or chasing after the guy he let by that hits the qb

Or looking dumbfounded cuz he didn't know who to block

 

[JB]

 

[Runner]

I still wish we'd traded back into the bottom of the 1st for Bridgewater. I think he has the smarts to play in OB's offence. The Clowney pick was never ideal but I dont think there was a QB worthy of 1.1, and assuming there was no suitable trade he was the obvious, but tragic pick.

Soooo..... it is ok to pick a defensive end who isn't worthy of a 1/1 pick at 1/1, but don't pick a QB at 1/1 who isn't worthy of it. I don't get the logic.

 

[JB]

Soooo..... it is ok to pick a defensive end who isn't worthy of a 1/1 pick at 1/1, but don't pick a QB at 1/1 who isn't worthy of it. I don't get the logic.

Cuz a rookie QB might have to come in and sit for a year while a rookie DE will come in and... oh wait

 

[bah007]

I still wish we'd traded back into the bottom of the 1st for Bridgewater. I think he has the smarts to play in OB's offence. The Clowney pick was never ideal but I dont think there was a QB worthy of 1.1, and assuming there was no suitable trade he was the obvious, but tragic pick.

I loved Bridgewater as well. He was my #2 QB behind Bortles.

I disagree that there wasn't a QB worthy of #1. If the top guy is a project then I agree. But I didn't see Bortles that way. I think he's a guy you sit behind Fitz for one year and then you throw him in there and let him go. I think he's a franchise QB. And a franchise QB is always worthy of #1.

If we ran a 43 I would have been more supportive of the Clowney pick. I didn't hate the pick, but he was my third choice. I would have rather had Bortles or Mack, who I think would have been a fantastic fit in our defense.

 

[markn]

Soooo..... it is ok to pick a defensive end who isn't worthy of a 1/1 pick at 1/1, but don't pick a QB at 1/1 who isn't worthy of it. I don't get the logic.

My drafting philosophy is BPA unless there's someone almost BPA which addresses a specific need.

There was no QB that wasn't a reach at 1.1. Clowney was the consensus best player in the draft, so you take him, even though it's not your primary need.

Clowney was the wrong pick because of fate, not talent.

I understand others think Bortles was a potential 1.1, but I didn't and still don't see that.

 

[markn]

If we ran a 43 I would have been more supportive of the Clowney pick. I didn't hate the pick, but he was my third choice. I would have rather had Bortles or Mack, who I think would have been a fantastic fit in our defense.

With hindsight, Mack would now be my preference.

 

[bah007]

With hindsight, Mack would now be my preference.

He's every bit the athlete that Clowney is, just a different position. People were just wary of him because of where he played. Which I kind of understand, but when you watched his college film you could tell he was going to be a stud.

 

[infantrycak]

He's every bit the athlete that Clowney is, just a different position. People were just wary of him because of where he played. Which I kind of understand, but when you watched his college film you could tell he was going to be a stud.

OK, I was a Watkins/Mack guy and that's not entirely fair.

 

[badboy]

With Texans history of QB leg injuries, I do not want our QBs trying to kick anybody's ass. They'd end up on Injury Reserved more than likely.