Clowney, then what?

[infantrycak]

Do people consider getting chipped by the RB a "double-team?"

No generally but particularly not in college where the RBs as a general matter suck at pass protection.

Preface: I only read the last 3 pages.

Clowney is the best player in this draft. That shouldn't be a question. You can question his effort or conditioning, but you are lying to yourself if you question his talent.

Everyone keeps looking only at the motivation issue but there is a very significant health issue. The guy has multiple bone spurs which require surgery. That is not minor and is not spontaneous on its own. It is a result of another underlying cause such as plantar fasciitis. PF and turf tow can rob a player of initial burst in a heartbeat, they are take a year off to rehab kind of injuries and they are frequently degenerative. Topping that off with someone who may not be all that motivated doesn't help the prognosis.

For an example people should recall, Gary Walker had 29 sacks in 4 years as 4-3 DT and then 3-4 DE. Then he got turf toe. 3 seasons and 1.5 sacks later his NFL career was over.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

No generally but particularly not in college where the RBs as a general matter suck at pass protection.



Everyone keeps looking only at the motivation issue but there is a very significant health issue. The guy has multiple bone spurs which require surgery. That is not minor and is not spontaneous on its own. It is a result of another underlying cause such as plantar fasciitis. PF and turf tow can rob a player of initial burst in a heartbeat, they are take a year off to rehab kind of injuries and they are frequently degenerative. Topping that off with someone who may not be all that motivated doesn't help the prognosis.

For an example people should recall, Gary Walker had 29 sacks in 4 years as 4-3 DT and then 3-4 DE. Then he got turf toe. 3 seasons and 1.5 sacks later his NFL career was over.

I think the motivation issue is a symptom of being just ok about playing football . To be really good in anything it's something you can't put down . It could be injury or motivation but Clowney has warts .

 

[infantrycak]

I think the motivation issue is a symptom of being just ok about playing football . To be really good in anything it's something you can't put down . It could be injury or motivation but Clowney has warts .

I wasn't saying that as the injury is the cause of his apparent lack of motivation. My point is he may be the most motivated guy in the world and most talented and there is still a very serious injury concern.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

I wasn't saying that as the injury is the cause of his apparent lack of motivation. My point is he may be the most motivated guy in the world and most talented and there is still a very serious injury concern.

I've read where he missed the Kentucky game because he had bruised ribs . Nobody knew he wasn't playing until he walked out of the tunnel in street clothes .

I find all this funny because some of the same folks who bashed Mario are pro Clowney . The funnier thing to me is we expect football players to workout 24/7 while we tap on a keyboard all day .

 

[Dutchrudder]

I do, it is usually part of the game plan to help disrupt a player. Without a RB/FB helping out the damage could be much worse.

Well, I don't. Double-teams are designed to pick up a player once the ball is snapped. With Clowney, you usually see it with the OT being helped by the TE or Guard. The RB is more of a second line of defense, in case a protection breaks down. He's often on the side where the defense has the most potential rushers in order to mitigate the pressure on the QB. Clowney getting to the RB level is a positive of course, because he's the first to get there, but I wouldn't consider it a "double-team" unless the RB specifically goes to him at the snap.

I distinguishee between the to in my post; the puropose in the game (or at least the UNC game, but I've seen it occur in others) is not to take Clowney of out a play entirely but to just slow him down. If he were to play for us, he wouldn't be playing opposite Kelcy Quarles and Will Sutton (who have certainly taken advantage of all the attention Clowney receives and gotten sacks with all the single blocking they get) but JJ Watt and Whitney Mercilus.

Yeah, I appreciate your work on that and making the distinctions, I'm just asking out of curiosity. People often say things like "Clowney is constantly double-teamed" or something to that effect, and I don't really think it's true, or even close to being true, but that's how the hype builds. I see the same sort of exaggeration about Watt around here too, so it's not really anything new, I just think it's people using a bit of hyperbole due to excitement. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

I think that UNC game was a good example of this. In the first half you saw a lot of Clowney getting by the OT 1v1 and making some QB pressures, so you get a lot of RB chips or cut blocks. You also see some double-teams by the guard or TE. Then in the second half, UNC adjusted their scheme and decided to just run to the opposite side of the field, or have the QB roll that direction away from Clowney's pressure, or do quick throws on a 3step drop. That was their way of taking him out of many plays, but he was still able to make some plays. By doing so, they avoid wasting a second player blocking Clowney. So while he wasn't getting double-teamed much in the 2nd half, you could see how his performance in the 1st half dictated the adjustments of UNC. That's one hell of a disruptive player for sure.

That being said, he's only worth taking 1.1 if he fits the scheme. If our Defense moves to a 4-3, I'd have no problem making him the RE across from Watt, that to me is a slam-dunk pair of DEs for the future. If we move to a traditional 3-4, then I'm a bit concerned about how he would do at OLB. Putting him on Watt's side means that teams will just need to scheme the opposite direction. Putting him at WOLB means we would need to shift someone else into coverage on their TE if he's on that side. Making him a 3-4 RDE might work, but I don't know if he would fair well in that position. He'd probably do well, but man that's a lot of resources to have in both DEs of a 3-4.

 

[YoungTexanFan]

So what is your take on Clowney's effort over the last season? Also, what QB's do you have in mind for trade?

My take is that he had a big head coming off his Sophomore year and he didn't dedicate himself to offseason conditioning. He worked his way into enough shape to make an impact. Offenses changed how they approached and ran against him and added timing routes. His play is fine. I trust an NFL coaching staff, our veteran players, and a paycheck to fix that "big head" issue. The talent is there. As shown in this thread and I'm sure others, it's not like he takes plays off often. He's gassed. That's a conditioning issue. That is fixable. Easily. That has nothing to do with how he can impact the game, and that is my take on his "effort" over the last season.

As for QBs, I'd consider Mallet who is in an offensive system/culture O'Brien helped create or the Oakland QB who torched us and was at Penn State with him before the NFL. Give up a 3rd this year and a conditional pick next year for Mallet.

 

[WolverineFan]

Mallett is as unproven as any of the QB's this year that nobody here wants to draft.

 

[Texian]

Well, I don't. Double-teams are designed to pick up a player once the ball is snapped. With Clowney, you usually see it with the OT being helped by the TE or Guard. The RB is more of a second line of defense, in case a protection breaks down. He's often on the side where the defense has the most potential rushers in order to mitigate the pressure on the QB. Clowney getting to the RB level is a positive of course, because he's the first to get there, but I wouldn't consider it a "double-team" unless the RB specifically goes to him at the snap.

Duane Brown's first 2 years in league he was giving up double digit sacks. In his 3rd year the Texans game planned to have a TE, FB, RB help out w/ Brown's blocking assignment in passing situations usually w/ a chip block. As a result the number of sacks allowed by Brown dropped dramatically.

 

[WolverineFan]

Duane Brown's first 2 years in league he was giving up double digit sacks. In his 3rd year the Texans game planned to have a TE, FB, RB help out w/ Brown's blocking assignment in passing situations usually w/ a chip block. As a result the number of sacks allowed by Brown dropped dramatically.

Which is exactly why it is utilized. It still doesn't make it a double-team.

 

[Texian]

Which is exactly why it is utilized. It still doesn't make it a double-team.

Two people, that's TWO (2) people making contact to block another player is a double team. ONE player, ONE (1) player making contact to block another player is not a double team. The key here is TWO PEOPLE, That's a double team, that's a conspiracy. It's not even math, it's called simple arithmetic.

 

[Dutchrudder]

Two people, that's TWO (2) people making contact to block another player is a double team. ONE player, ONE (1) player making contact to block another player is not a double team. The key here is TWO PEOPLE, That's a double team, that's a conspiracy. It's not even math, it's called simple arithmetic.

By that logic, beating the OT, the TE chip block, then going through a RB to get to the QB would be a triple team.

And to take it a step further, on some of those Johnny Football plays, defenders will make contact with 4+ blockers while chasing JFF around. Calling that blocking chaos a quadruple-team would be silly. The difference is the designed engaging blocks, versus the reaction blocks that occur based on how the play goes.

 

[WolverineFan]

Two people, that's TWO (2) people making contact to block another player is a double team. ONE player, ONE (1) player making contact to block another player is not a double team. The key here is TWO PEOPLE, That's a double team, that's a conspiracy. It's not even math, it's called simple arithmetic.

So in a Cover 2, when the CB passes off the WR to the Safety, if the ball is thrown on a fade 1-on-1 then it was thrown into double coverage because the CB shadowed his route to start the play?

 

[infantrycak]

From a coach:

"Running backs will also help the offensive lineman on the speed rusher by doing something we call chipping," Conner said. "Chipping is when a running back brushes a defensive lineman before he goes into his route. He's not responsible for blocking this guy, but he wants to chip him just enough to slow him down for the offensive lineman to block him."

Link

 

[2012Champs]

Yes, Speeding, REALLLY!

I drove over 100mph once in my life. But the difference is that I was not about to be negotiating a million dollar contract depending on my draft status.

And save me the argument that taking a QB 1-1 means it is forcing it when we all value these guys differently. Every player thrives and fails for different reasons.

Ive driven over 100 mph more times than I care to remember but it did stop around my early to mid 20s. Even if I was about to sign for millions Im not sure if that would change anything. Im thankful I grew out of that habit and didnt hurt anyone before I put that one to rest

 

[Texian]

So in a Cover 2, when the CB passes off the WR to the Safety, if the ball is thrown on a fade 1-on-1 then it was thrown into double coverage because the CB shadowed his route to start the play?

When Julius Peppers is fully blocked by the OT and the TE also hits him with his shoulder and knocks him off stride, how many players would Julius Pepper say blocked him? Hint: This is not a trick question.

 

[Texian]

From a coach:



Link

Sounds like a TWO PLAYER effort.

 

[Texian]

Ive driven over 100 mph more times than I care to remember but it did stop around my early to mid 20s. Even if I was about to sign for millions Im not sure if that would change anything. Im thankful I grew out of that habit and didnt hurt anyone before I put that one to rest

The male mind does not fully develop and mature until they reach the age of 27 to 30.

 

[infantrycak]

Sounds like a TWO PLAYER effort.

Where only ONE is responsible for blocking the defender.

The primary responsibility of a RB or TE who chips is the route, not the block. A double team is TWO whose responsibility is blocking.

 

[Texian]

So in a Cover 2, when the CB passes off the WR to the Safety, if the ball is thrown on a fade 1-on-1 then it was thrown into double coverage because the CB shadowed his route to start the play?

Where only ONE is responsible for blocking the defender.

The primary responsibility of a RB or TE who chips is the route, not the block. A double team is TWO whose responsibility is blocking.

So if two people are arguing just for the sake of arguing, how many people are arguing?

 

[bhsman]

I shouldn't have typed that response in such a hurry; so many spelling errors.

Anyways, I think Clowney could make do as a 3-4 OLB as long as he isn't asked to cover a whole lot due to his stiffness. On one snap against UNC he stood up and had great speed but the LT went at his legs and had some success slowing him down. In any case, I've grown fond of the 3-4 during Wade's tenure here but if switching to a 4-3 would be a better use of Watt and Clowney I'm all for it.

As far as injuries go I'm not too concerned with Clowney; the bone spurs will need removing but he should be fine after that. We should probably ask Doc about it for a better understanding of how it might affect him, in any case. The fact that Clowney wants to go to the Combine before getting surgery seems to speak to his willingness to prove himself.

 

[Dutchrudder]

So if two people are arguing just for the sake of arguing, how many people are arguing?

And this is why I don't like you at all. I thought you mellowed out a little since you got here, but you're still acting like a child and can't have a discussion about anything without making it devolve into pointless slapfights. It's not arguing for the sake of arguing, it's trying to understand the language you are using, and presenting the opposing definitions. Simply disagreeing is not being argumentative, but you seem to have some sort of victim mentality where anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a contrarian simply because it's against you.

When you make a statement like "he's double-teamed on every passing play" that means something. If you consider contact with any two offensive players a "double-team" then I need to know that, or else you give a mischaracterization in your analysis. I read that earlier in one of your posts, and never saw that when I watched the game, so I thought you were crazy.

I think you're wrong in your definition, and I think that's important if you're going to continue to post here. But feel free to just think this is some silly waste of time discussion and we're all out to get you.

 

[Mr teX]

I shouldn't have typed that response in such a hurry; so many spelling errors.

Anyways, I think Clowney could make do as a 3-4 OLB as long as he isn't asked to cover a whole lot due to his stiffness. On one snap against UNC he stood up and had great speed but the LT went at his legs and had some success slowing him down. In any case, I've grown fond of the 3-4 during Wade's tenure here but if switching to a 4-3 would be a better use of Watt and Clowney I'm all for it.

As far as injuries go I'm not too concerned with Clowney; the bone spurs will need removing but he should be fine after that. We should probably ask Doc about it for a better understanding of how it might affect him, in any case. The fact that Clowney wants to go to the Combine before getting surgery seems to speak to his willingness to prove himself.

And as soon as a good coach sees the bolded, he's done...he wasn't asked to do much of it in college, i'd hate to have him do it alot in the NFL b/c i don't think he'd be good at. The way offenses are spreading defenses out these days, it would be nearly impossible to not have him coverage a ton. We'd see repeats of the 2012 Patriots/Texans debacles. & for a guy with injury concerns around his feet already, i'm not sure you'd want him out there covering the Graham's...or Gronkowski's.....or in 1 on 1 situations with a guy like Bush or Sproles.

Bottom line is, if we were to stay in a 3-4, i don't think he could play OLB...too big & stiff imo. Taking him would mean we'd have to switch to a 4-3 & put his ass on the line where he's comfy & we could use his athleticism in spurts and as a strength.

 

[disaacks3]

i'm not sure you'd want him out there covering the Graham's...or Gronkowski's.....or in 1 on 1 situations with a guy like Bush or Sproles.

Bottom line is, if we were to stay in a 3-4, i don't think he could play OLB...too big & stiff imo. Taking him would mean we'd have to switch to a 4-3 & put his ass on the line where he's comfy & we could use his athleticism in spurts and as a strength.

I think hell froze over, I'm in full agreement with you.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

So if two people are arguing just for the sake of arguing, how many people are arguing?

A chip block is a chip block. A double-team is a double-team. For most people, they're not the same thing.

With a chip block, the person performing the chip just brushes the player and doesn't engage in a true block. In a double-team, two players actively engage a single player.

Let's see if we can find any definitions...
Double-team: Two linemen ganging up on one defensive player. It’s more common on pass plays when the center and a guard work together to stop the penetration of a talented inside pass-rusher. However, the double-team also works well on running plays, especially at the point of attack or at the place where the play is designed to go. The double-team blockers attack one defender, clearing out the one player who might stop the play from working.

A chip block isn't a double-team because the one of the two offensive players does not "gang up", he just brushes by.

 

[Texian]

And this is why I don't like you at all. I thought you mellowed out a little since you got here, but you're still acting like a child and can't have a discussion about anything without making it devolve into pointless slapfights. It's not arguing for the sake of arguing, it's trying to understand the language you are using, and presenting the opposing definitions. Simply disagreeing is not being argumentative, but you seem to have some sort of victim mentality where anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a contrarian simply because it's against you.

When you make a statement like "he's double-teamed on every passing play" that means something. If you consider contact with any two offensive players a "double-team" then I need to know that, or else you give a mischaracterization in your analysis. I read that earlier in one of your posts, and never saw that when I watched the game, so I thought you were crazy.

I think you're wrong in your definition, and I think that's important if you're going to continue to post here. But feel free to just think this is some silly waste of time discussion and we're all out to get you.

Lighten up francis....there comes a point when people are arguing just argue because that is their nature. Once I have said two people blocking is a double team and you say it is not I see no reason of a lengthy back and forth just because you want to be right, I see it more as we disagree. I guess you and others will want to argue this too.

 

[WolverineFan]

And this is why I don't like you at all. I thought you mellowed out a little since you got here, but you're still acting like a child and can't have a discussion about anything without making it devolve into pointless slapfights. It's not arguing for the sake of arguing, it's trying to understand the language you are using, and presenting the opposing definitions. Simply disagreeing is not being argumentative, but you seem to have some sort of victim mentality where anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a contrarian simply because it's against you.

When you make a statement like "he's double-teamed on every passing play" that means something. If you consider contact with any two offensive players a "double-team" then I need to know that, or else you give a mischaracterization in your analysis. I read that earlier in one of your posts, and never saw that when I watched the game, so I thought you were crazy.

I think you're wrong in your definition, and I think that's important if you're going to continue to post here. But feel free to just think this is some silly waste of time discussion and we're all out to get you.

 

[Marshall]

I shouldn't have typed that response in such a hurry; so many spelling errors.

Anyways, I think Clowney could make do as a 3-4 OLB as long as he isn't asked to cover a whole lot due to his stiffness. On one snap against UNC he stood up and had great speed but the LT went at his legs and had some success slowing him down. In any case, I've grown fond of the 3-4 during Wade's tenure here but if switching to a 4-3 would be a better use of Watt and Clowney I'm all for it.

As far as injuries go I'm not too concerned with Clowney; the bone spurs will need removing but he should be fine after that. We should probably ask Doc about it for a better understanding of how it might affect him, in any case. The fact that Clowney wants to go to the Combine before getting surgery seems to speak to his willingness to prove himself.

I'd set up an early special combine so I could get the surgery in time for recovery by the OTAs and Training Camp.

 

[bhsman]

And as soon as a good coach sees the bolded, he's done...he wasn't asked to do much of it in college, i'd hate to have him do it alot in the NFL b/c i don't think he'd be good at. The way offenses are spreading defenses out these days, it would be nearly impossible to not have him coverage a ton. We'd see repeats of the 2012 Patriots/Texans debacles. & for a guy with injury concerns around his feet already, i'm not sure you'd want him out there covering the Graham's...or Gronkowski's.....or in 1 on 1 situations with a guy like Bush or Sproles.

Bottom line is, if we were to stay in a 3-4, i don't think he could play OLB...too big & stiff imo. Taking him would mean we'd have to switch to a 4-3 & put his ass on the line where he's comfy & we could use his athleticism in spurts and as a strength.

Well, not being able to cover is not necessarily a weakness if you never need him to do it; Watt is never (or, at least, only rarely) asked to cover anyone and just rushes the passer/RB. O'Brien also made a good point that whether we stay in the 3-4 or switch to the 4-3, that ~60% of the time a defense is in a nickel or dime 4-man front anyways due to how profound the passing game has become as of late, just like you mention.

Drafting Clowney and staying in the 3-4 wouldn't preclude him from putting his hands on the ground. Any defensive coach worth his salt would find a way to use JD to the limits of his talent.

 

[Marshall]

And this is why I don't like you at all. I thought you mellowed out a little since you got here, but you're still acting like a child and can't have a discussion about anything without making it devolve into pointless slapfights. It's not arguing for the sake of arguing, it's trying to understand the language you are using, and presenting the opposing definitions. Simply disagreeing is not being argumentative, but you seem to have some sort of victim mentality where anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a contrarian simply because it's against you.

When you make a statement like "he's double-teamed on every passing play" that means something. If you consider contact with any two offensive players a "double-team" then I need to know that, or else you give a mischaracterization in your analysis. I read that earlier in one of your posts, and never saw that when I watched the game, so I thought you were crazy.

I think you're wrong in your definition, and I think that's important if you're going to continue to post here. But feel free to just think this is some silly waste of time discussion and we're all out to get you.

Perhaps there should be a half block like there are half sacks.

 

[Mr teX]

Well, not being able to cover is not necessarily a weakness if you never need him to do it; Watt is never (or, at least, only rarely) asked to cover anyone and just rushes the passer/RB. O'Brien also made a good point that whether we stay in the 3-4 or switch to the 4-3, that ~60% of the time a defense is in a nickel or dime 4-man front anyways due to how profound the passing game has become as of late, just like you mention.

Drafting Clowney and staying in the 3-4 wouldn't preclude him from putting his hands on the ground. Any defensive coach worth his salt would find a way to use JD to the limits of his talent.

Watt was never considered to be a candidate to be converted to an OLB though either. If Clowney is brought in and they have any ideas about possibly converting him, he will be in coverage much more than he ever was in college...even if it is only 40% of the time as O'brien says; Either that or he'll be coming in off the bench on situational pass rushing downs much like Aldon Smith is used in SF.

The question then becomes, do we have the luxury of using 1-1 on a guy who's either a project at OLB or just a situational pass rusher? Especially when we have the chance to take the best qb prospect? I say no.

 

[bhsman]

Watt was never considered to be a candidate to be converted to an OLB though either. If Clowney is brought in and they have any ideas about possibly converting him, he will be in coverage much more than he ever was in college...even if it is only 40% of the time as O'brien says; Either that or he'll be coming in off the bench on situational pass rushing downs much like Aldon Smith is used in SF.

The question then becomes, do we have the luxury of using 1-1 on a guy who's either a project at OLB or just a situational pass rusher? Especially when we have the chance to take the best qb prospect? I say no.

Meh, that's why I leave the door open to him becoming a bookend 3-4 DE to Watt once he gains about 15lbs, but like I said he's such a talent that any good defensive coordinator will try and find the best use for him.

As for 1-1, who knows if McNair trades down to the Browns and grabs him at #4 overall. Assuming we aren't picking Manziel.

 

[mussop]

You guys are arguing over symantics. It's not a double team by definition but it's basically the same thing. It's a way of scheming against a player to slow him down by using two players.

Whether it's a double team or a chip the fact remains, he is being schemed against. Some quick plays only require he be slowed down. The slower developing plays require he be held up as long as possible. Either way he's requiring the efforts of more than one player to guard against him. That takes special talent. Opposing coaches wouldn't be implementing specific schemes directed at him if there wasn't a reason.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

I took a look at this video. It's his game against UNC.

I don't see an extraordinary number of double-teams. I don't consider chips to be double-teams and I don't consider someone taking an inside rush so that he ends up being blocked by two guys a double team. To me, a double team is when they draw up the play and say "You two guys block this one guy and stay on him."

He looks very athletic. He's got some nice moves. But he doesn't look like a #1 overall monster to me.

 

[thunderkyss]

That's fine, we disagree. I believe that IR guys and guys like D Brown coming back healthy will improve this OLine more than adequately enough that we DON'T even need to address the line minus late round (4th+) picks.

I think depending on unproven injured players has been a huge problem of this team in the past. We didn't draft a TE because we expected Bennie Joppru, we've held off on LB because of Darryl Sharpton & Cushing, We waited on Dunta to get healthy.

IMO, we don't need to fix the RT position, we need to fix our OL. We can hope Brennan Williams can come back healthy, then hope he is better than Derek Newton, but we don't know that he is. I want to draft a LT, we're in position to get the best one in this draft. If he's a true franchise LT, he should be able to start on the left side from day one. Doesn't mean we have to start him there, but he should be. Either way, our OL gets better. Much, much better. Not marginally better if Williams is healthy, if he's better than Newton..... & any RT we get might not be ready to start in the NFL.

We need to fix our pass rush. Jadaveon Clowney does that, even if he takes plays off. But he won't' take plays off, just like Mario didn't take plays off playing with Cushing & Watt. Even Mario didn't want to be the 3rd best player on our defense. Clowney knew he was the best player on that defense even when he took plays off.

We need to fix our QB. Like Rick said, we didn't have a viable option at the position last year. To me, that screams veteran. We'll draft a QB for our future, but not one QB projected in the first round gives me reason to believe he'll help us win more games than any other QB projected to go in the first round.

There may be two franchise LTs in this draft. Maybe two franchise pass rushers.

There may be 5 franchise QBs in this draft.

 

[leebigeztx]

I took a look at this video. It's his game against UNC.

I don't see an extraordinary number of double-teams. I don't consider chips to be double-teams and I don't consider someone taking an inside rush so that he ends up being blocked by two guys a double team. To me, a double team is when they draw up the play and say "You two guys block this one guy and stay on him."

He looks very athletic. He's got some nice moves. But he doesn't look like a #1 overall monster to me.

That's what I was telling a poster earlier. I told him clowney didn't get doubled like they tried to say. I know what a double looks like. A lot of times, if he beat his man, someone picked him up. That's what you're suppose to do as a ol. The problem I had or have with clowney is the quit in him. I've seen him quit on doubles and chips. Being relentless with his skill can lead to a lot more impact plays. Go look at von miller,aldon smith,jared allen, robert mathis,quinn,long,watt, those guys are relentless. Your initial,secondary,and tertiary effort can yield big results.

Clowney has shown flashes when he wants to play, he also has shown to be below par when he doesn't want to play. What is he gonna do during a tough stretch and he's getting 5m?

 

[bhsman]

If he is moved inside and it takes two guys to block him, it's a double team. We wouldn't put a huge guy inside at NT to garner phantom not-double teams, that's changing the definition to suit your argument.

 

[leebigeztx]

I think depending on unproven injured players has been a huge problem of this team in the past. We didn't draft a TE because we expected Bennie Joppru, we've held off on LB because of Darryl Sharpton & Cushing, We waited on Dunta to get healthy.

IMO, we don't need to fix the RT position, we need to fix our OL. We can hope Brennan Williams can come back healthy, then hope he is better than Derek Newton, but we don't know that he is. I want to draft a LT, we're in position to get the best one in this draft. If he's a true franchise LT, he should be able to start on the left side from day one. Doesn't mean we have to start him there, but he should be. Either way, our OL gets better. Much, much better. Not marginally better if Williams is healthy, if he's better than Newton..... & any RT we get might not be ready to start in the NFL.

We need to fix our pass rush. Jadaveon Clowney does that, even if he takes plays off. But he won't' take plays off, just like Mario didn't take plays off playing with Cushing & Watt. Even Mario didn't want to be the 3rd best player on our defense. Clowney knew he was the best player on that defense even when he took plays off.

We need to fix our QB. Like Rick said, we didn't have a viable option at the position last year. To me, that screams veteran. We'll draft a QB for our future, but not one QB projected in the first round gives me reason to believe he'll help us win more games than any other QB projected to go in the first round.

There may be two franchise LTs in this draft. Maybe two franchise pass rushers.

There may be 5 franchise QBs in this draft.

What team in the playoffs have a franchise lt or pass rusher? I'm willing to bet there is no such thing on any of the teams in the playoffs in the afc. We regard seattle as a top defense,yet all their pass rushers are 2nd,3rd or guys they've signed. I think they have 6 guy with more than 6 sacks. Its about the collective.

There isn't 1 team in the afc playoffs with a franchise lt or rt. Again, its the line as a collection. No one complained about the line when a udfa and a 3rd rd pick was on the right side. What we do know though is 4 of the 6 qbs were drafted top 4.

 

[thunderkyss]

So if two people are arguing just for the sake of arguing, how many people are arguing?

I feel totally useless in this thread.

 

[pirbroke]

I took a look at this video. It's his game against UNC.

I don't see an extraordinary number of double-teams. I don't consider chips to be double-teams and I don't consider someone taking an inside rush so that he ends up being blocked by two guys a double team. To me, a double team is when they draw up the play and say "You two guys block this one guy and stay on him."

He looks very athletic. He's got some nice moves. But he doesn't look like a #1 overall monster to me.

I just watched that video also, I'm not going to get into the whole double team discussion ( both sides of that have good points ). But man he was in the backfield a lot in that game, looked pretty disruptive, stats or no stats. throws his arms and shoulders around players but doesn't look like he uses his hands much to me. nice bull rush to go with his speed. As long as the bone spurs are not going to be a long term problem or cause other problems, I think he is worth top overall. he can definitely get better with technique.

 

[leebigeztx]

If he is moved inside and it takes two guys to block him, it's a double team. We wouldn't put a huge guy inside at NT to garner phantom not-double teams, that's changing the definition to suit your argument.

Imagine a pocket of 5 guys vs 4 guys. If clowney is doubled, its not after he's made his move, its as soon as the ball is hiked. If the ball is hiked,he beats the lt with an inside move,and the lg picks him up,that's not a double. That's more of a slide protection. When teams double with the lt and lg, the de is engaged at the snap.

 

[dalemurphy]

He had very consistent effort until this yr when he knew he would be a top 5 pick if he never played a down. There was too much $$$$ to lose if he got hurt to give it his all this yr. I cant blame him.

Sure, it makes total sense, and I don't blame him... similarly, I can also relate to football players that tend to eat pizza and hamburgers during the off-season and take it easy instead of being militant about their diet and workout routine.

However, if I am evaluating players to join my team with a $25 million financial commitment, I'm less concerned with their ability to think/behave like Everyday Joe. Instead, I'm looking for someone with an edge, commitment, and intensity that goes beyond logical or relatable.

I do not believe there is any athlete, no matter how remarkable, that can enter the NFL and be a great player without being a harder worker than the majority of the NFL athletes. That wasn't the case 25 years ago. I guarantee you there will be a large number of athletes in this year's combine that will be in the ballpark of Clowney's power/weight/speed/quickness combination... Some of those players may be TEs, LBs, and some DEs... There will be freakishly strong Safeties that weigh 230 lbs and run sub 4.5s and RBs that do the same. I believe football intelligence, commitment, and passion are crucial for anyone to be great in the NFL today. I don't see those intangibles clearly enough to want Clowney...

The Texans will surely do their homework- talking to Clowney and his coaches. They will know much better than you or I will know. So, if they do draft him, I will be cautiously optimistic. I'm only speaking confidently about what I am confident about. Aaron Donald is going to be a great NFL DT... Though it is likely (but not certain) that the Texans could trade back and draft him, at this point, if the Texans drafted defense with pick 1.1, I would want Donald.

p.s. Check went in the mail today.

 

[bah007]

Jesus H...

If you don't understand the difference between a double team and a chip block then just stop bothering with the charade that you know any damn thing about football.

There is clearly a difference between two players working a guy for the duration of a play and one guy working him as another takes a quick shot and moves on.

Yes, if he was chipped it was done as an intentionally schematic move to keep the designated player away from the ball. But it is clearly hyperbole to call it anything other than what it is.

The point is Clowney is good enough that he consistently requires extra attention.

 

[mussop]

Jesus H...

If you don't understand the difference between a double team and a chip block then just stop bothering with the charade that you know any damn thing about football.

There is clearly a difference between two players working a guy for the duration of a play and one guy working him as another takes a quick shot and moves on.

Yes, if he was chipped it was done as an intentionally schematic move to keep the designated player away from the ball. But it is clearly hyperbole to call it anything other than what it is.

The point is Clowney is good enough that he consistently requires extra attention.

If that was directed at me, that is pretty much what I said.

 

[bah007]

If that was directed at me, that is pretty much what I said.

Everybody in this thread knows exactly who that was directed at. The same person who is wrong nearly every time he touches a keyboard and yet consistently gets upset when he is corrected.

If you took it as meant for you then I apologize. It was not.

 

[thunderkyss]

Everybody in this thread knows exactly who that was directed at. The same person who is wrong nearly every time he touches a keyboard and yet consistently gets upset when he is corrected.

If you took it as meant for you then I apologize. It was not.

Well... seeing as how I'm never wrong...

 

[bah007]

Well... seeing as how I'm never wrong...

Only when we disagree

 

[Texian]

Jesus H...

If you don't understand the difference between a double team and a chip block then just stop bothering with the charade that you know any damn thing about football.

There is clearly a difference between two players working a guy for the duration of a play and one guy working him as another takes a quick shot and moves on.

Yes, if he was chipped it was done as an intentionally schematic move to keep the designated player away from the ball. But it is clearly hyperbole to call it anything other than what it is.

The point is Clowney is good enough that he consistently requires extra attention.

If that was directed at me, what mussop said....and you can't correct someone if they're right.

 

[Trap_Star]

Jesus H...

If you don't understand the difference between a double team and a chip block then just stop bothering with the charade that you know any damn thing about football.

There is clearly a difference between two players working a guy for the duration of a play and one guy working him as another takes a quick shot and moves on.

Yes, if he was chipped it was done as an intentionally schematic move to keep the designated player away from the ball. But it is clearly hyperbole to call it anything other than what it is.

The point is Clowney is good enough that he consistently requires extra attention.

yeah, he's just a queer that needs attention and people continue to give it to him.

 

[bhsman]

Yeah, the point is that Clowney is very disruptive and that simply pointing to his sack numbers to the point of stubbornness is approaching intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Uncle Rico]

Clowney = Jevon Kearse.

Not bad, but no LT either. I cringe when I hear generational because its such a grand claim to make when faced with the concerns.