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

Clowney, then what?

bhsman said:
That article only counts pass-rushing downs, not total.
Click to expand...

He is rated as a freak on his pass rushing ability. You can keep throwing this out there and it still makes no difference in that regard.

Not to mention that 25% put him at nearly double the rate of every other prospect evaluated in that piece, including Anthony Barr.

But sure, I guess a vague term like 'all the time' isn't the same as 'twice as much', Clowney's a fraud. :kitten:
Click to expand...

What the hell middle school did you go to? Yeah 25 is just right next to 34.

Dan B. said:
Watkins had a pretty subpar sophomore year in 2012 (700 yards and 3 TD's). Certainly not the stats of a #1 overall receiver. Was he dogging plays that year or trying all out and failing? So just like Clowney, he's had two stellar college seasons and one that was fairly mediocre.
Click to expand...

So now any one off season counts the same? Nice try but the last season counts more.

mussop said:
There is no bigger fact checker or stickler for details on this board than infantrycak. He's anal about it. So when he used stats that were accumulated from insufficient data there is only one conclusion. He be trollin! :smiliedance:
Click to expand...

He posted the article.
 
IDEXAN said:
Gimme a break Thunderkyss, he gave up a 6th round pick for him. So yea he thinks he's something, but apparently not much.
Click to expand...

& the Raiders think they're going to the play-offs this season. Part of that reasoning is because they've got Matt Schaub who they got for a 6th round pick.

He could have gotten Connor Shaw with that 6th round pick, but he decided to take Gabbert.
 
thunderkyss said:
Now if there was a can't miss franchise guy, a Peyton Manning, or Phillip Rivers... even someone like Cam Newton, I'd want to take that guy in the first.

If Manziel had Newton's size, no doubt about it, I'd be all over wanting to take him in the first.

If Bridgewater had that production & poise at Pittsburgh, or UNC, or any school in a major conference, I'd be pounding the table for him with the #1 overall.

If Aj McCarron had a gun for an arm, I'd want him with the first overall.

If Mettenberger had numbers like Bridgewater, he'd be my pick.

But with the mix that these guys have, I'd rather take an elite talent with the 1-1.
Click to expand...

Really good post man. Hard to disagree with much, except for the bold. It just seems to me that making size that big of an issue in today's NFL is yesteryear's mentality. The league has changed, and nearly all of us have complained on this very message board about those changes and what they have done to the NFL. In many ways, it sucks, but you can't deny it's a different league than it once was. The days of grinding out games, pounding the rock, having a game manager that looks the part as the QB, and winning with your defense is almost done.

I know, I know that someone will immediately throw out Seattle as their example. But face the facts, Seattle is the exception, not the rule. There probably won't be another defense built like Seattle this generation. Only two first round picks on that starting D, a bunch of guys left on the scrap heaps by other teams, and late round picks. What Seattle has done with that defense is legendary, but it's the exception not the rule.

All that is to say this is a different NFL. Does prototypical size still matter in today's NFL? Somewhat, but don't make size the primary reason for eliminating a guy from contention when he performed like a superstar against the top talent in the entire college football world. Look at the game tape, and Johnny Manziel is a #1 pick. I'll eat crow if I'm wrong, but some team is going to reap the rewards of adapting to the future of the NFL with Johnny Manziel. I really hope that team is the Texans.
 
Say Watt said:
Really good post man. Hard to disagree with much, except for the bold. It just seems to me that making size that big of an issue in today's NFL is yesteryear's mentality. The league has changed, and nearly all of us have complained on this very message board about those changes and what they have done to the NFL. In many ways, it sucks, but you can't deny it's a different league than it once was. The days of grinding out games, pounding the rock, having a game manager that looks the part as the QB, and winning with your defense is almost done.

I know, I know that someone will immediately throw out Seattle as their example. But face the facts, Seattle is the exception, not the rule. There probably won't be another defense built like Seattle this generation. Only two first round picks on that starting D, a bunch of guys left on the scrap heaps by other teams, and late round picks. What Seattle has done with that defense is legendary, but it's the exception not the rule.

All that is to say this is a different NFL. Does prototypical size still matter in today's NFL? Somewhat, but don't make size the primary reason for eliminating a guy from contention when he performed like a superstar against the top talent in the entire college football world. Look at the game tape, and Johnny Manziel is a #1 pick. I'll eat crow if I'm wrong, but some team is going to reap the rewards of adapting to the future of the NFL with Johnny Manziel. I really hope that team is the Texans.
Click to expand...

I'm unabashedly old-school, stubborn, & slow to change my ways.

But if Manziel had Vick's speed & arm, I'd still want him at #1.

I like Johnny. If the Texans are going to use our first on a QB, I'd rather it be him. But if we're asking would TK draft Manziel with the #1 overall....


no.


So size is one thing, but there are ways, even in my antiquated way of thinking, to compensate. Right now, Manziel's only compensation is something we can't measure. Had he done it for a three years... maybe. Four years, definitely. But as it stands.... not me, I won't do it. I can't.
 
Say Watt said:
All that is to say this is a different NFL. Does prototypical size still matter in today's NFL? Somewhat, but don't make size the primary reason for eliminating a guy from contention when he performed like a superstar against the top talent in the entire college football world. Look at the game tape, and Johnny Manziel is a #1 pick. I'll eat crow if I'm wrong, but some team is going to reap the rewards of adapting to the future of the NFL with Johnny Manziel. I really hope that team is the Texans.
Click to expand...

On the whole? Absolutely. For each individual player? No.

People can say what they want but size and measureables will always be huge determining factors to evaluators. That's just how it is. I agree with you though that being undersized shouldn't be anywhere close to being the determining factor in forecasting a player's success.

Being undersized doesn't mean you will fail. However, you must also be aware that most undersized players do fail and work that much harder to succeed. The guys with the will to always get better are the ones who pan out.
 
Draft Clowney, do the surgery and he will be good to go for 4-5 yrs.

That's good enough for me to take the most talented guy in the draft. CND said if Clowney has the surgery then he would have no problem with Clowney at 1-1. That's good enough for me.

Carry on with the babble.
 
Last edited:
infantrycak said:
He is rated as a freak on his pass rushing ability. You can keep throwing this out there and it still makes no difference in that regard.
Click to expand...

If your entire goal was to prove that some nonexistent poster here claimed that Clowney was double/triple-teamed or chipped on, literally and explicitly, 'every single play', then you would be right. Congrats, I guess. You totally showed that nonexistant person who was totally seriously and not using hyperbole; would you like a gold star?

But in your hilarious (and perhaps a bit pitiful) attempt to paint anything related to Clowney as negative, you're leaving out the fact that he was drawing more attention from opposing offense than any of his competitors. Add in the strength of schedule for SCAR last year, and that should raise a few eyebrows when you consider that he'd be on a defensive line with JJ Watt; they can't get away with only focusing on one of them and not pay for it.

And all of that is STILL ignoring the fact that the writer explicitly left out rushing plays (and even then if the team was running at or away from Clowney), only using 3-step drops, etc. Your posting on this is becoming intransigent at best or intellectually dishonest at worst.
 
JB said:
What does this have to do with any player we might draft?
Click to expand...

infantrycak said:
Not sure what point you are attempting to make. Foster went UDFA because of an off final season and Cushing didn't have an off year and didn't fall in the draft.
Click to expand...

The point was that both of them were signed based on their career's production, not their last season. If you only consider their last seasons before declaring Cushing would not have been a first round choice and Foster never would have gotten a shot at all. I thought I remembered Cushing had a better junior year, so I admit there wasn't a real dropoff with his stats, but his stats were not overwhelming the year before he was drafted. He had more tackles than Clowney, but he played LB. They both had the same number of sacks and TFL. Statistically Cushing's collegiate career was not exceptional. Cushing excelled with his versatility, at the combine, and in interviews. From NFL.com:


Overview

While teammate Rey Maualuga generated most of the headlines over their respective careers, it could be the versatile Cushing who enjoys the last laugh come draft day. While he has struggled with durability at times, Cushing held up in 2008, starting all 13 games for the Trojans and earning second-team AP All-American accolades despite rather pedestrian statistics (73 tackles, 10.5 tackles for loss, 3.0 sacks).

NFL scouts don't admire Cushing for his statistics, but for his versatility. Athletic and instinctive enough to star at linebacker and yet big and strong enough to compete at defensive end -- as he did in starting 13 games at the position in 2006 when injuries forced the Trojans to be creative -- Cushing is arguably the draft's most versatile defender.

Cautious teams will certainly look into Cushing's previous struggles with durability, but his upside might be too much to allow him to get out of the top 20 come draft day.
Click to expand...
 
infantrycak said:
You won't get a do not draft opinion from him and I am not saying he has said anything like that. He would take the risk IF Clowney promises to have the surgery immediately. He's also doesn't say surgery = wham bam light a cigarette. I don't differ from what he has said on the medical issues but we differ on the decision to be made based on that.
Click to expand...
I don't feel like looking for the exact post right now, but I think CND's position is for Clowney to have that foot surgery right after the draft as a condition of employment. I'd bet a paycheck he said, if Clowney refused to get that spur fixed he'd stay away from him.

...but I've been wrong before.
 
bhsman said:
So Rotoworld did a piece on pass-rushing productivity, and basically said that the argument that Clowney got more attention than any other defensive lineman (and only grading pure pass-rush plays, no less) is true.
Click to expand...
Hmmm... that piece seems to point to K.Martin as the more versatile pass rusher. He's got a better success rate than Clowney and seems to be able to rush from the left, right, or inside with more or less equal effectiveness.
Wonder what round he's projected to go in...?
 
The Pencil Neck said:
So you take a chance on someone with huge questions and a much greater likelihood of busting and being out of the league in 4 years? I wouldn't. Drafting shouldn't be so much about what you need but rather what's available.

AJ isn't going to last forever and as much as I like Hopkins, I don't see him as AJ's replacement. Watkins could be. A WR crew of AJ, Watkins, and Hopkins would be hard to stop and could make even a mediocre QB look pretty damned good.

Although we have our franchise LT, we have a gaping hole at RT. With the change in the Rookie Salary structure, I don't have a problem nabbing a guy who really is more suited for RT right now and putting him there while he learns how to play the position and improve his pass protection. This gives us a superior line -- possibly one of the best lines in the league -- and that makes everyone else better. And if something happens to DB, we've got a guy we can put over there who's at least talented enough to play the position.

With Clowney, he's a risk. He's got health questions, motor questions, and motivation questions. He could be the best player out of this draft or he could get a paycheck and be done.

Like I said, I expect us to go Clowney. I'll get behind him and I'll root for him to be the greatest OLB he can be and get lots of sacks for us. But that's just not the strategy I'd take.
Click to expand...

MSR, But my sentiments also. I'd love either Mack or Watkins. Mack is my preference.

DO IT RICK!
 
Double Barrel said:
The Boselli angle is either disingenuous agenda-driven or it is based on ignorance of early Texans history.

Boselli was a Casserly deal with the Jags to get Walker and Payne in the expansion draft. At this point, it's not even speculation, but verified history by many of the people involved. The Jags need cap relief and the Texans needed players. Make a deal to take Boselli off their hands and they leave another player the Texans wanted on the board.

I do not hold Boselli against the Texans or think it's even worthy of mention in a story like the Clowney situation. It's like comparing apples to tennis balls.
Click to expand...

The tennis balls have the stems. Right?? :kitten:

Great rebuttal. Exactly the way it went down if my grey matter is still connecting. Those signals are going astray at times though, I must admit.
 
IDEXAN said:
We've already got our franchise LT who is under contract for several more years, and WR is a non-premium position which is already our strongest position on offense, maybe the whole roster. What we are really hurting for is an edge pass rusher to pressure the QB.
Click to expand...

What we are hurting for is a QB ....


I'm all over the place on this draft , one day its Clowney , the next its Manziel , the next its one of Watkins or Robinson .... the next , I want to trade out of the pick.

But what we are really hurting for is a damn quarterback.
 
Say Watt said:
The days of grinding out games, pounding the rock, having a game manager that looks the part as the QB, and winning with your defense is almost done.

I know, I know that someone will immediately throw out Seattle as their example. But face the facts, Seattle is the exception, not the rule. There probably won't be another defense built like Seattle this generation. Only two first round picks on that starting D, a bunch of guys left on the scrap heaps by other teams, and late round picks. What Seattle has done with that defense is legendary, but it's the exception not the rule.

All that is to say this is a different NFL. Does prototypical size still matter in today's NFL? Somewhat, but don't make size the primary reason for eliminating a guy from contention when he performed like a superstar against the top talent in the entire college football world. Look at the game tape, and Johnny Manziel is a #1 pick. I'll eat crow if I'm wrong, but some team is going to reap the rewards of adapting to the future of the NFL with Johnny Manziel. I really hope that team is the Texans.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're right. Tell Pete Carroll that. Seattle DID IT JUST LIKE THAT.

CASE CLOSED...*(is your nose raw yet from swingin' on that j-stap?)*
 
Texian said:
I watched 4 Pittsburgh games this year and 5 South Carolina games. I can say without a doubt and without any hesitation that Aaron Donald was a much better player and much more productive than Jadevon Clowney. Donald was double teamed as much if not more than Clowney. The same is true for 2012 and 2011.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/gamelog/_/id/502393/year/2013/aaron-donald

vs

http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/gamelog/_/id/515821/jadeveon-clowney
Click to expand...

The Pitt guy is really talented, and a relentless player, a JJ Watt type. In fact too much of a JJ type because he's an inside guy who will probably end up as a 3-tech. He's basically what we were hoping for in Amobi back before Wade came along when were still running a 4-3.
 
Dan B. said:
Watkins had a pretty subpar sophomore year in 2012 (700 yards and 3 TD's). Certainly not the stats of a #1 overall receiver. Was he dogging plays that year or trying all out and failing? So just like Clowney, he's had two stellar college seasons and one that was fairly mediocre.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. He was suspended, then injured. He also only played partial games due to the fact that they didn't need an injured WR playing in blowouts.

We had this discussion a year ago when we determined that actually watching players was important.
 
ObsiWan said:
Hmmm... that piece seems to point to K.Martin as the more versatile pass rusher. He's got a better success rate than Clowney and seems to be able to rush from the left, right, or inside with more or less equal effectiveness.
Wonder what round he's projected to go in...?
Click to expand...

K.Martin is very good but doesn't have the burst, regardless of what the numbers say.

Besides, 1 K.Martin on the Texans is enough for me.

Just like drafting Carr. We've been down this road before and if he becomes all pro great. But let's hope it's with another team. NO to Roger CARR!!!!!!!!
 
Corrosion said:
What we are hurting for is a QB ....


I'm all over the place on this draft , one day its Clowney , the next its Manziel , the next its one of Watkins or Robinson .... the next , I want to trade out of the pick.

But what we are really hurting for is a damn quarterback.
Click to expand...

This is what the Commander Cody/Bucky Richarson era felt like.
 
I think all of this talk of taking a season off in college is overblown. You guys act as if it means he will do the same in the pro's, but college is but a stepping stone into the highest level of football. Why would you risk injury when by all appearances Clowney had locked up the #1 overall pick the previous year?

Why does that make him selfish? He is supposed to blow out a knee, or something for his college teammates most of whom will not even make it to the next level just to make you feel at ease about his commitment to football?

Coaches protect players all the time, including just before the playoffs when they rest their star players, does this mean those players are selfish and only thinking of themselves? Should they go balls to the wall all 16 games even when the playoff berth has been secured just to prove to you they have a good work ethic, or are a team player?

It's very common to protect an asset so why is it so hard for some of you to accept that he took it easy in his final year so as not to be injured so that he didn't blow his chance to make the final level of the game of football?

Is it really that much to ask to see some positive thinking around here instead of all this character assassination over perceived flaws? All this talk means 0 because until they have suited up, and played in some actual games, no amount of hand wringing, or Nostradamus impersonations is going to change anything regarding who has more success in the NFL.

I think if I were Clowney I would have done the same thing, and anyone judging me for it could suck it.
 
TexansSeminole said:
Uh, no. He was suspended, then injured. He also only played partial games due to the fact that they didn't need an injured WR playing in blowouts.

We had this discussion a year ago when we determined that actually watching players was important.
Click to expand...
Well, I think a year where Watkins was suspended/injured in 2012 equates to a "down year" as much as Clowney's 2013. So Dan's point is still valid.
 
IDEXAN said:
The Pitt guy is really talented, and a relentless player, a JJ Watt type. In fact too much of a JJ type because he's an inside guy who will probably end up as a 3-tech. He's basically what we were hoping for in Amobi back before Wade came along when were still running a 4-3.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he's a Geno Atkins type DT. Good player. Not a great fit for this defense.
 
Corrosion said:
But what we are really hurting for is a damn quarterback.
Click to expand...
Until this franchise gets s legit QB, they're spinning their wheels. I don't care if it's Johnny Football, some no-name who transferred 17 times, or a kid out of a Upper Mideastern State U. Just pick a guy that can play. There's at least one QB that can play in this draft (from basic statistics). The Texans have no excuses in not finding him.
 
Former Georgia quarterback Aaron Murray spent half a decade in the SEC, which in many ways is the closest thing to an NFL minor league. Asked during a Tuesday appearance on NBCSN’s Pro Football Talk to identify the best player he has faced in the conference, Murray didn’t hesitate.

“Clowney, no doubt about it,” Murray said. “He’s a special player, a player you really have to game plan against. . . . He’ll really make you change things up, to be able to get two guys on him at all times, and being able to run away from him.”
Click to expand...
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/04/08/aaron-murray-raves-about-jadeveon-clowney/
*****
BTW, Murray had his PD yesterday, dunno if the Texans had anybody there or not ?
 
thunderkyss said:
I'm unabashedly old-school, stubborn, & slow to change my ways.
Click to expand...

I love the honesty. It's why I have always enjoyed conversing with you on this board. Cheers.

But if Manziel had Vick's speed & arm, I'd still want him at #1.
Click to expand...

Ok, but Vick had no accuracy, something that Manziel has proven time and time again against the best competition that he has. Accuracy >>>> Arm Strength any day of the week. It's why Peyton Manning had the greatest season of his career all the while having a noodle for an arm, because of the neck injury. As for the speed issue, it's rare a guy runs a straight 40 yard sprint and when he does, it's more important he has lateral quickness, something that Johnny Manziel is extremely comparable to Michael Vick in.

I like Johnny. If the Texans are going to use our first on a QB, I'd rather it be him. But if we're asking would TK draft Manziel with the #1 overall....

no.

So size is one thing, but there are ways, even in my antiquated way of thinking, to compensate. Right now, Manziel's only compensation is something we can't measure. Had he done it for a three years... maybe. Four years, definitely. But as it stands.... not me, I won't do it. I can't.
Click to expand...

Totally fair. Obviously, I disagree, but you have at least made some good points in your arguments against Manziel. I too would love it if Manziel were a few inches taller and about 20 lbs heavier. He'd no doubt be the #1 pick if he was. But that leads me into my response below.


WolverineFan said:
On the whole? Absolutely. For each individual player? No.

People can say what they want but size and measureables will always be huge determining factors to evaluators. That's just how it is. I agree with you though that being undersized shouldn't be anywhere close to being the determining factor in forecasting a player's success.

Being undersized doesn't mean you will fail. However, you must also be aware that most undersized players do fail and work that much harder to succeed. The guys with the will to always get better are the ones who pan out.
Click to expand...

Very good post. Rep to you. The bold is the key with Manziel. I have watched every single game the guy has ever played in a Texas A&M uniform and there is NOBODY that wants to win and prove the doubters wrong more than Johnny Football. Yes, he likes to party but when it comes to game time, there is not a player on the field that wants it as bad as Manziel. Every single player that has played with him as well as against him seems to respect Johnny as much if not more than anyone they have ever played with or against. I can't tell you how many times I watched as defenders would nail Johnny Manziel only to reach down, pick him up, and give him a pat. Opposing players after every game would run over to congratulate Manziel. He is the ultimate competitor, and you simply can't teach that. Size should be thrown out the window at that point.
 
Lucky said:
Well, I think a year where Watkins was suspended/injured in 2012 equates to a "down year" as much as Clowney's 2013. So Dan's point is still valid.
Click to expand...

Off the field and therefore not producing =/= on the field and not producing.

It's a cause for concern and investigation but it does not equate.
 
A lot of mockers seem to have Teddy B or Johnny Football sliding way down. If that is a real possibility, I have no problems with the Texans taking Clowney. All it takes is a team to live Derrick Carr over them.

Would take that much ammo to move up from No. 32 to the bottom of the first.
 
drs23 said:
Yeah, you're right. Tell Pete Carroll that. Seattle DID IT JUST LIKE THAT.

CASE CLOSED...*(is your nose raw yet from swingin' on that j-stap?)*
Click to expand...

I've never understood the mentality of some people. You're 57 years old and look at how childish you are. You and I aren't even engaging in conversation, yet you feel the need to come in and take pot shots at me? Grow the **** up.
 
Nitrofish said:
I think all of this talk of taking a season off in college is overblown. You guys act as if it means he will do the same in the pro's, but college is but a stepping stone into the highest level of football. Why would you risk injury when by all appearances Clowney had locked up the #1 overall pick the previous year?

Why does that make him selfish? He is supposed to blow out a knee, or something for his college teammates most of whom will not even make it to the next level just to make you feel at ease about his commitment to football?

Coaches protect players all the time, including just before the playoffs when they rest their star players, does this mean those players are selfish and only thinking of themselves? Should they go balls to the wall all 16 games even when the playoff berth has been secured just to prove to you they have a good work ethic, or are a team player?

It's very common to protect an asset so why is it so hard for some of you to accept that he took it easy in his final year so as not to be injured so that he didn't blow his chance to make the final level of the game of football?

Is it really that much to ask to see some positive thinking around here instead of all this character assassination over perceived flaws? All this talk means 0 because until they have suited up, and played in some actual games, no amount of hand wringing, or Nostradamus impersonations is going to change anything regarding who has more success in the NFL.

I think if I were Clowney I would have done the same thing, and anyone judging me for it could suck it.
Click to expand...

So it's not fair to think that his behavior will stay the same and he will continue to look out for #1 but it is fair to assume that he is just going to up and change that behavior when he gets drafted? What about his contract? The second contract is bigger than the rookie contract. He's going to have to protect himself if he doesn't want to blow that knee and get lowballed on that big contract.

The reason coaches protect players is because the players will not protect themselves. They will go 100% for their teammates when they are on the field. The only way to protect them is to get them off of the field. If a guy is only worried about his pro future then that is a huge red flag to me. That says he is a me first guy and will always put himself above his team.

As a player, there is nothing worse than looking at the guy next to you and not knowing if you can count on him or not, regardless of how much physical talent he has.

Players get injured all the time in every way imaginable. Half assing it out there isn't going to protect you from something you can't see coming.

You can tell the people judging to suck it if you wish. But with millions of dollars on the line, the people making the decisions are judging everything. If they don't care about this then it's obviously no big deal. If they do care, then Clowney only has himself to blame.
 
If Twitter & football forums were face-to-face there would be dead people in NFL cities...

20 DAYS

08 HOURS

42 MIN

14 SEC

#can'twaitforthedrafttogethere
 
I don't think that Clowney will be able to ever match Aldon Smith's production on the field. My gut feeling tells me that Clowney will be much more similar to Smith in their off the field news.
 
Texian said:
I don't think that Clowney will be able to ever match Aldon Smith's production on the field. My gut feeling tells me that Clowney will be much more similar to Smith in their off the field news.
Click to expand...

Ok. I think he could exceed Aldon Smith's production on the field, and my gut feeling tells me that Clowney will not have any of the off-field issues like Aldon.

Personal opinion is great, but it doesnt mean anything.
 
Blake said:
Ok. I think he could exceed Aldon Smith's production on the field, and my gut feeling tells me that Clowney will not have any of the off-field issues like Aldon.

Personal opinion is great, but it doesnt mean anything.
Click to expand...

Except that some personal opinions are more right than others. Like when Zierlein insinuated I was crazy when I said Kyle Long would go to more Pro Bowls than any of the OL drafted ahead of Long last year. See what I mean Vern?
 
infantrycak said:
Off the field and therefore not producing =/= on the field and not producing.

It's a cause for concern and investigation but it does not equate.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't understand drafting a player with a history of injury and off the field issues because you are worried about another player's character and potential for injury.
 
infantrycak said:
Off the field and therefore not producing =/= on the field and not producing.

It's a cause for concern and investigation but it does not equate.
Click to expand...
If you put it that way, I guess Watkin's 2012 would be more of a concern than Clowney's 2013.
 
Texian said:
Except that some personal opinions are more right than others. Like when Zierlein insinuated I was crazy when I said Kyle Long would go to more Pro Bowls than any of the OL drafted ahead of Long last year. See what I mean Vern?
Click to expand...
I see what you mean.

Blind-Squirrel-Finds-a-Nut-small.jpg
 
Dan B. said:
I honestly don't understand drafting a player with a history of injury and off the field issues because you are worried about another player's character and potential for injury.
Click to expand...

OK. Then try understanding this...

You're not drafting a player with a history of injury and off the field issues because you're worried about another player's character and potential for injury. You're drafting one player over the other because you think the one player has a greater likelihood of a greater career than the other.

I think Watkins is the best player in this draft. I think he's going to have the best career out of any player in this draft. I think he's a hard worker. Has he had some bad games and a bad season? Yeah. But so did Andre Johnson. AJ never had as many TDs as Watkins had twice and AJ never had as many yards as Watkins had twice.

I think Robinson is the second best player in this draft. Does he have warts? Yeah, he does. At this point, he's more polished as a run blocker than as a pass blocker. But he's got the athletic ability to be able to turn into a straight-up beast.

I think Clowney is probably in at #3 or #4. Why? I don't know if he wants to play. If he does want to play, he's going to be a great player. But I have questions about his game. I have questions about what I see him doing on tape. But that doesn't mean he's not a great player with a bright future. BUT... even if Clowney wants to be a great player and plays up to his potential... I still think Watkins is going to have a better career. Being the 3rd best player in this draft isn't a bad thing, it's just not who I personally would pick with 1-1 if I had the choice.

The fact that you have these guys ranked differently than I do is OK. There's nothing wrong with that. A lot of different people are going to have these guys ranked differently and in the end, no one's going to know who had it right until their careers are over. I mean, Texian has Bortles ranked #1... and that's OK, too.
 
Lucky said:
2011? What was wrong with Clowney's 2011?
Click to expand...

What was great about it?

And yes, a drug suspension causes me more concern that bone spurs. No maybe about it.
Click to expand...

Sure, a drug suspension concerns me more than bone spurs. But that drug suspension concerns me a whole lot less than a guy who doesn't want to play football.

Of these two players, which one was the 4th true freshman in history to be named to the AP All-American team?
 
bhsman said:
What was wrong with Clowney's 2011? Just curious; that's the first time I've heard someone bring it up.
Click to expand...

This is about Watkins vs. Clowney.

In Watkins' freshman year, he was a dominant player. Then he had a not great season. Then he had another dominant year that he capped off with winning the Orange Bowl MVP with 16 receptions for 227 yards.

In Clowney's freshman year, he got 8 sacks and he was ranked 8th in the SEC. He was a good player that year. Not a great one. He was 2nd team all-SEC. His second year, he was dominant. And then his third year, not so much.

So if you're looking at college careers (which Dan brought up), I say it goes to Watkins. He had 2 great years and one good one. Clowney had a great year, a good year, and a so-so year.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
What was great about it?
Click to expand...
8 sacks, 12 TFLs, and 5 FFs is pretty good for a true freshman d-lineman that's still growing. What was your "concern" about that? And yes, Watkins was 1st team All American as a freshman, deservedly so. Clowney made it in his soph season. They're both great and have been since they arrived in college. I don't see Clowney's aversion to football. He's made some of the most violent hits I've ever seen. Made up by people that want him to fall in the draft, me thinks.

I think Watkins problems could be behind him, as well. But if I am going to weigh the concerns between the two, I'm much more concerned about Watkins. Ask Jacksonville about keeping their WR on the field.
 
I don't dislike Sammy Watkins, although to be honest I'd prefer a guy with a bigger frame, especially with letting Daniels walk. And I'll agree that he had a better collegiate career overall. I just think that we have 11 picks right now, WR is very deep this draft, and we need help at pass rush more than at wideout.

I'm also not trying to say Clowney is flawless or that anyone else is awful. I'm trying to point out that the criticisms being levied against Clowney can be used against a lot of other players too.
 
Ive seen some conflicting reports on his technique. If you feel like his technique is sound and this is the kind of production we're gonna get...raise the red flags.

However, if you match superior athleticism with being able to improve his technique/craft youd almost have to take him imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top