And what if they grade out Manziel the highest?
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
Clowney, then what?
- Thread starter thunderkyss
- Start date
And what if they grade out Manziel the highest?
bah007
Hall of Fame
Saw Trent Murphy brought up a couple of pages ago. I think he is very similar to Brooks Reed when he came out of Arizona. His best fit is probably as a SDE in a 43. I don't like him that much in a 34. He's not versatile enough. Solid player though. Just not my type.
As far as Clowney goes, let's cut to the chase. If you can't acknowledge that Clowney is a freak of nature and clearly the best physical specimen (athletically) in this draft then I can't help you. Does that mean he is the best football player? NO. But the reason people have been head over heels in love with him for years now is because he is without doubt one of the most physically impressive college players to come out in a long while.
Conversely, if you can't acknowledge that Clowney clearly has several serious potential issues that would make you stop and think before drafting him then I can't help you either. All the criticisms that have been brought up about Clowney are fair. Is it possible that he overcomes all that and becomes a fantastic pro? YES.
You have to objectively look at the pros (his freakish ability) and cons (motor, injury) and measure it out before making your choice. As for me, I acknowledge that he is a once in a generation athletic talent. But I'm willing to pass on him because his issues are severe enough that it depreciates his value in my eyes. If he becomes an All Pro for another team more power to him. I'd rather not take the risk.
As far as Clowney goes, let's cut to the chase. If you can't acknowledge that Clowney is a freak of nature and clearly the best physical specimen (athletically) in this draft then I can't help you. Does that mean he is the best football player? NO. But the reason people have been head over heels in love with him for years now is because he is without doubt one of the most physically impressive college players to come out in a long while.
Conversely, if you can't acknowledge that Clowney clearly has several serious potential issues that would make you stop and think before drafting him then I can't help you either. All the criticisms that have been brought up about Clowney are fair. Is it possible that he overcomes all that and becomes a fantastic pro? YES.
You have to objectively look at the pros (his freakish ability) and cons (motor, injury) and measure it out before making your choice. As for me, I acknowledge that he is a once in a generation athletic talent. But I'm willing to pass on him because his issues are severe enough that it depreciates his value in my eyes. If he becomes an All Pro for another team more power to him. I'd rather not take the risk.
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
Perhaps "I believe you're mistaken." might be a little more politic. This is a political board I've discovered.
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
All I'm reading is "I don't watch the tape, I just read media headlines."
EDIT: The Mario comparisons alone are straight-up horsehockey; Mario had no move besides the bullrush. By this year Clowney has already mastered the bull rush AND the swim move. Directly comparing the two as anything other than freakish athletes - especially if you want to talk about effort - is just being lazy.
EDIT: Even in another thread, still waiting for you to respond to matt290's detailing of Kollmann's breakdown, you big baby.
I'm sorry. Three sacks does not sound like mastery to me. It sounds like unfamiliarity.
Uncle Rico
Ur apology should be as loud as Ur disrespect was
You pose a valid opinion. Even though I would disagree I wont accuse you of being on drugs or try to impose a cyber superiority complex like some! LOL
I happen to think that Murphy was out of position at the Senior Bowl when they asked him to play with his hand in the dirt. I actually like him more standing up as an OLB myself in a 3-4. He doesnt have the weight to attack head on, he'll need to use his athleticism and drive to get to the QB. Im not saying he should be a first round pick, but I also wouldnt be surprised if he goes in the 20's. I dont have the numbers in front of me, but I would guess that Reed never had a season like Murphy just had while in college, but I could be wrong.
bah007
Hall of Fame
It's entirely possible I'm selling Murphy short. I'm just not in love with him. I think he's a good player but I wouldn't want to draft him (not sure if that makes sense or not, it does in my head).
Reed had 8 sacks as a SO. Missed a lot of time his JR year and wasn't very effective when he was on the field. Had 6.5 sacks his SR year. He was mostly used as a SDE who had responsibilities in the run game.
If Murphy is developed correctly I think his ceiling is a Connor Barwin-type player. Nothing wrong with that.
Texecutioner
Hall of Fame
It really is that simple. The problem is that ESPN made so many people fall in love with him as a freakish talent, that they could care less about history with first round busts and they feel that any freakish talented guy is automatic just because of that. But I don't agree that he is so much freakishly better than any other top flight tall DE that has come out in the last 10 years. There have been a lot of really high explosive pass rushers that were freakish from year to year. I think it's fine and dandy if people want to think that Clowney is the best one they've ever seen. But to suggest that no one else is even remotely right when they feel like he isn't that much better of a prospect than guys like Gholston, Gaines, or Mario was well I feel like they are being disingenuous. They don't have to agree, but to discount a lot of other top prospects that were similar isn't being honest in my eyes.
I also don't understand why people are so quick to dismiss the idea of what a non stop motor is and the difference between a player who has one and who doesn't. A guy who has a lot of injury problems is probably going to be a lot less likely to play all out on every play.
bhsman
Rookie
Go watch the cutups of his Tennessee game from this year, then. He uses it a lot and it's a beauty to see; very Watt-esque. World-famous NFL Scout Brett Kollmann(tm) went over it in his tape breakdown of Clowney, where early in the game they leave Richardson on Clowney to block 1v1. Clowney swims past him so quickly Richardson is actually left staring at the ground for a second while Clowney plants the RB in the backfield. EDIT: Not on that play in particular, but Clowney was in the backfield a ton that game.
After the first quarter, Tennessee changed their game plan and immediately began running away from Clowney and/or giving Richardson extra help.
JCTexan
Hall of Fame
Why is comparing Clowney to a pro-bowl player a bad thing and who else are you going to compare Clowney to? Both are athletic freaks. Mario Williams is one of the best DE's in the game and Clowney has the potential to be one of the best. Both lack motor and take plays off but have the talent to be great. I don't think it's a bad comparison. If Clowney becomes the next Mario Williams I would not consider him to be a bust and would think he turned out to be a very good player.
I can easily admit this. The problem I'm having is; are you willing to pay two DE's the kind of money Watt & Clowney will demand if Clowney becomes awesome for us? That's a lot of $$$$ for one position. And is getting a potential great DE worth passing on a possible franchise QB like Bridgewater?
beerlover
Hall of Fame
technically two different positions. Watt is a 3-4 end. Clowney would be OLB. Just a minor detail. Could save money on secondary, cut J JO & let KJ walk end of his contract & hit on a couple mid-late round db's. They don't have to be that great just good with improved pass rush
You got me on Bridgewater however, I would rue that day if they pass on him.
technically two different positions. Watt is a 3-4 end. Clowney would be OLB. Just a minor detail. Could save money on secondary, cut J JO & let KJ walk end of his contract & hit on a couple mid-late round db's. They don't have to be that great just good with improved pass rush
You got me on Bridgewater however, I would rue that day if they pass on him.
Rick Smith needs to start sitting at the big boy table & learn how to get something in return for these assets.
leebigeztx
Keep it Movin!
What happened on the pass rush situations with richardson? How many times was he stonewalled and stood up? 1st of all as I said,he played the run a lot better than the rush. If u notice, he also played a lot of wide 9 technique. The fact that tennesse chipped maybe 4 times and doubled a couple doesn't constitute changed plan. In fact ,gamecocks started flipping him against james,the rt. Why don't you repost the video again.
bhsman
Rookie
Uhhhhh not sure what you're asking here, I already talked about Richardson doing well in pass pro snaps. Richardson is a talented tackle and it's why Clowney's tape is so impressive that game.
I would point out how incredibly wrong you are on those numbers but we've already discussed your tape-based hallucinations.
deucetx
Rookie
technically two different positions. Watt is a 3-4 end. Clowney would be OLB. Just a minor detail. Could save money on secondary, cut J JO & let KJ walk end of his contract & hit on a couple mid-late round db's. They don't have to be that great just good with improved pass rush
You got me on Bridgewater however, I would rue that day if they pass on him.
I hope they don't go that route. A pass rush is not going to be in the QB's grill every snap, every play. Just not happening. Corner is probably the second most difficult position to play other than the obvious. So you need good corners. Great coverage helps develop pressure so they work hand in hand. Mid to late round corners are too much of a gamble to think they will replace starting caliber defenders.
Now that is not saying I wouldn't want Clowney. I see nothing wrong with choosing him, one of the top QB's or (my favorite plan) trading down to go a different round with more picks. But thinking we can just cut starting corners and replace them with the likes of a Brandon Harris or some other mid-late round guy because we can rush the QB seems a bit much.
leebigeztx
Keep it Movin!
Yet the posters who responded saw what I saw. Hmmmm, kinda strange,yet I'm hallucinting huh?
JCTexan
Hall of Fame
technically two different positions. Watt is a 3-4 end. Clowney would be OLB. Just a minor detail. Could save money on secondary, cut J JO & let KJ walk end of his contract & hit on a couple mid-late round db's. They don't have to be that great just good with improved pass rush
You got me on Bridgewater however, I would rue that day if they pass on him.
I would not draft Clowney first overall to play OLB. With Watt & Clowney the defense would have to be a 4-3.
beerlover
Hall of Fame
Clowney stock will probably go up, way up on some teams boards if he interviews well & answers his motor question, shows willingness to work on weakness with some humbleness. From a workout standpoint he could really show what a special athlete he is.
I see no reason why he should be considered just a 4-3 DE? It is a projection based off physical skills, size, speed & body control/mobility. He could line-up standing up or hand down (they will still use four man fronts). Went back to 09 combine, to pull Clay Mattews (just because he is one of my favorite OLB's). I realize he is smaller, 6031 240 ran a 4.62, 32 1/2 arms, 9 1/2 hands, 23 BP, 4.18 short shuttle (now he 255) 26th overall pick. Four time pro bowler, 2010 NFL defensive player of the year.
Solid numbers right? But if anybody saw how quickly he would transition into one of the best pass rushing OLB in the NFL there is no way he should have slipped out of the top 10 little lone bypassed by Texans. Anyway, enter Wade Phillips (I know he's not here anymore, but then neither is Mario Williams, your proto-typical 4-3 DE). 6070 295 ran a 4.66, 34 1/8 arms, 10 1/4 hands, 35 BP, only measured 1st 10 yard split, 1.61. Those numbers reflect how talent evaluates measure a prospect as top 5 pick. Right or wrong. Anyway Wade moved him to standing up, OLB & he seemed to transition very well before going out with another injury (which was his curse more than anything while being a Texan). Hence I see no reason why Clowney could not stand up & still rush the passer, cause havoc & basically cause mismatches while utilizing all his physical gifts to the maximum.
bhsman
Rookie
Everyone just continued the 'He's not double-teamed' argument and only one other poster has also done an in-depth analysis, whereas you quickly tried to re-define a double team as though Clowney getting attention from multiple players somehow lowers his draft stock. This is besides the point: your argument that prompted it was that Clowney was 'handled' in that game when anyone with working eyeballs saw otherwise.
I think he's going off that thing where you don't want to draft an "OLB" with the #1 overall pick.
If you take a Clowney (or a Jake Matthews or Greg Robinson) with your first overall and he's a disappointment or worse a bust, it won't really set you back that far. Just look at the season KC had last year even though their first overall (an OT) looks to be a mistake.
But draft a QB #1 and you gotta play him, and your whole organization will be set back if he's a fails as your starting QB. It's a position where prudence might be the operative word when it comes to your choice, not boldness.
But draft a QB #1 and you gotta play him, and your whole organization will be set back if he's a fails as your starting QB. It's a position where prudence might be the operative word when it comes to your choice, not boldness.
I get your point, but that is not the right way to approach it. We will never find a star QB if we are always too afraid to take a chance because he might set us back. We won 2 freakin' games last year and had terrible QB play, there really isn't anywhere to go but up and I don't think our QB position scan get much worse.
One thing no one seems to be considering. If we go QB #1, how many games can we really expect to win? Like you said, if we draft one first we have to start him. Where does that likely put is in the win column?
It might be better to go with an experienced QB and use this draft to build the team up more. Then use our high first next year for our QB. Don't ask me where we are going to find this "experienced" QB be use I have no idea.
Agreed. But let's say you have Bridgewater graded a 91 & McCarron an 89.... If you take Bridgewater with that #1, especially the #1 overall, you're going to do everything you can to prove that it's not your QB before you move on.
But if you took McCarron with 2-1, or 3-1 (depending on how the draft falls).... we might take another shot in 2015.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
Historically, rookie QBs have sucked and been monumentally unsuccessful.
Up until the last few years.
I don't know if it's the rules changes or what, but rookie QBs (like Cam Newton, Luck, RGIII, Russell Wilson, Andy Dalton and even Flacco and Roethlisberger and... Sanchez) have been able to find much more success than most rookie QBs have enjoyed.
One of the reasons I'm expecting a 6-10 season is because I expect us to have a rookie QB.
But.
I'd be happy to be wrong about that and for us to have a rookie QB with one of those successful seasons. It would be awesome to have the first rookie QB/rookie HC combo to win the SB.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
I think it would be tough to draft a QB in the 2nd and then come back around and draft another in the 1st the next year. If you draft a 3rd or 4th rounder, maybe, but even then it's going to be hard. Someone would probably lose their job over that.
I'm not worried about the first year, most starting rookie QBs aren't expected to have the kind of season that Luck did, that first year is usually a mulligan for them. My concern is the second and third year if he's a mistake. Look how long the Jags have been forced to screw around with Gabbert who was the 10th overall in his Draft. Just think how long you have to tolerate an unproductive QB if he's the first overall pick in his Draft ?
JCTexan
Hall of Fame
I'm not saying he wouldn't be a successful OLB. I'm saying if that's the position you're drafting him for I'm not taking him #1. I don't want my #1 pick having to learn a new position on the fly in his first year. So if Clowney is the pick I would line him up as a traditional DE and tell him to kill the QB. I could easily see Watt/Clowney being the best DE duo in the NFL. I wouldn't try to screw that up by converting Clowney to an OLB.
There's that and I don't want the first overall pick changing to a position he has never played before.
Nobody has McCarron as an 89. If he was he wouldn't be a 2nd or 3rd round pick. He would be going in the first ahead of Bortles.
Not the point.
Blake
MMQB
You are the king of strange hypotheticals. So why would we draft McCarron in the 2nd or 3rd, give him 1 year to prove himself and then go QB shopping again? Either way you are going to give them time to mature unless you don't believe in the guy. But then why did you draft them in the first place?
How many games we win with a rookie QB depends on a lot. Can we expect to win 11 games like the Colts with a rookie Luck, or 10 wins like the Skins with a rookie RG3? That may be hoping for a little too much, but it is definitely possible. Obviously it all depends on how A. Our rookie QB performs and B. how the rest of the team steps up C. how much of an impact our other draftees can make in year 1
I understand your point of wanting to have a solid all around team before putting the weight on a rookie QBs shoulders, but again you can't just wait around for that perfect time to take a QB. We need a QB now so provided that coaching staff deems one worthy, we should take one now. Whether we take a QB at 1.1, or 2.1 or somewhere else in the first couple rounds via potential traded downs, we still need to take one. Focusing on all the other holes and ignoring the most important one until later just seems like a recipe for failure.
Yeah a first overall selection probably means we are married to that QB for at least 2 seasons, unless an epic bust occurs ala Ryan Leaf. But still, that possibility can't scare us away from taking the best QB in the draft...if of course one is deemed worthy of 1.1 selection.
If someone like McCarron is graded out that close to Bridgewater, who is a candidate for the first overall selection, then no way he makes it out of the first round. Good QB prospects are too sought over to fall.
My personal opinion is that someone separates themselves from the pack and becomes a clear #1 choice by draft date...it happens more often than not. In 2011 around January and February the Panthers were said to be interested in Fairley, Netwon, Von Miller, and Patrick Peterson with their number 1 pick. By the time March rolled around though it becomes pretty clear that Netwon would be their pick. I remember a similar thing in the 2010 draft with the Rams and Bradford and Suh.
Or... Bridgewater is overrated.
Panthers didn't sign Cam before draft date, it was just well known that he would be there pick. Was a strange year because most of the period between college bowl games and the draft was still when the NFL was locked out.
Ha ok.
Which might be even more of a reason to build the team up before drafting your QB. A rookie QB coming in with a dominating defense and a solid running game is going to do much better than a rookie coming into this current team. Look at Wilson and Kapernick, both have great defenses and really good running games.
On top of that next years QB class is considered much better. Why not draft a QB later that has at least enough talent to be our future backup and bring in a older vet to hold down the fort until next year when a rookie from a better pool will have a better chance of success?
I've been in the have to draft a QB now camp but the more I look at this draft the more I see the potential to really build the trenches and Improve this team.
The 2015 QB class is projected to be better by some, but its way too far to predict anything like that, much less make a plan a year in advance to draft a QB next draft. That is just a poor plan, sorry. If you think your guy is in this draft; you take him.
Taking a QB only uses one pick, and we still have 6 other picks, plus a couple comp picks, plus free agency to help build the trenches. And then we can further build the trenches next year too; and the year after that.
QB is our biggest need and we need one now. We have the first overall pick and our choice of any player we want, lets not overthink it here. Taking a QB in the second round is an option too, if a better value is presented there, but I don't see any way we don't take a QB before that.
We have a brand new coach, who is offensive minded...we have no starting QB and O'Brien is going to want his own QB to run his own offense on his new team...no way in hell he just floats along for his first year with some backup level veteran QB.
I think everyone here has just severely over analyzed all the top players in this draft and now nobody thinks anyone is worthy of a first overall pick...when in fact this is one of the most talented draft classes in years.
Good points! I'm just thinking out loud. Man somebody invent a time machine so we can move this offseason along.
Haha I feel you man, doing the same. The combine is only a few weeks away and with it comes tons of new stuff for us to break down a million times over and argue about
bhsman
Rookie
Whoops, meant 2012 with Luck.
Winston, Mariata, Hundley...... chances are one of those guys will not be as highly thought of next season (Lienart, Boyd) & the other two are going to be top 5 picks.
If all goes well, we're going to need a trade much more.... I get it. That's why it's important we get next year's #1.
I think this draft is extremely deep especially at certain positions. QB, for sure. Several QBs who grade as possible franchise guys. IMO, no sure fire guys. I think we've "dreamed" of being in this position for so long (needing a franchise QB) that we're determined to take the "best" of the bunch, draft him at 1 overall, & hope he lives up to it. I believe that's setting us, & our young QB, up for failure.
I've seen some people compare Bridgewater to Rodgers, but looking back on what little I can find from his days at Cal, I'm not seeing it...... then again, I don't think Rodgers looked special in particular, so in that way I hope I'm wrong. I hope we draft TB, & I hope he goes on to be better than Aaron Rodgers.
But Aaron sat behind a legend for years & that might have had more to do with what he is today than where he was drafted. Maybe Ryan Mallet is the next great QB to fit that mold...
leebigeztx
Keep it Movin!
Of that group,winston is the only guy who would have a higher grade than bridgewater. You remember when someone pulled that old thread about qbs back up? Remember the talk of mallet,bray,geno and such. Remember when all the draft people said this year was a much better qb class than the one we just had? Bridgewater,murray,boyd,manziel,were the hot names and teams should wait. All of a sudden,Boyd might be a 3rd rd pick,murray got hurt but people had him in the 3rd rd,and manziel is all over the board. Point is, you can always say wait till next year or let's get the 2nd rd prospect like hof coach parcells did. Problem is that no matter who you pick,you better be right and don't get scared and look to next year all the time.
Its easy to say let's build the team then get the qb,but if you have a top flight qb he can mask defecient areas of your team. Luck isn't a once in a generation qb,but he's good enough to mask that average ol,no running game and so-so defense. Eli and the giants didn't have a great ol,wrs,rb, or defense,but eli played top shelf and the defense got hot. The top qb aren't playing with all pro lineman and probowlers all over the field,they elevate the team around them. So we can say next yr will be better,but if you're not bad enough to get winston,your stuck with who? Petty,hogan?
Great post... really. Not that I'm advocating we wait, but I'm saying if you don't believe in a particular QB, don't grab him just because he is the "best" at that time... There's too much hype surrounding all these players & it gets worse around draft time.
I agree with what you're saying, the top QBs are doing it with less. But Russel Wilson's team was missing a QB. They had a good team bad QB, that was no secret. Wilson probably doesn't look as good with the Buffalo Bills. Same for Kaepernick & the Broncos. Those teams were making noise before last year, just needed a new QB.
I think we were & are in the same boat. It was just a matter of time. Some of us hoped that Schaub could find what he had back in 2009, even 2010 it just never happened. I may have been in the minority, but I thought this team was good enough to get to the Super Bowl with Yates in 2011. Instead of playing to our strengths against Baltimore (running the ball) we had our third stringer airing the ball out because we fell down 7 points in the 1st qtr.
I still think if we sign a LT, or draft a LT, let him compete with Brown & put the 2nd best of the two on the right side, we can go far in 2014 with an above average QB. Whether that's Bridgewater, Boyd, Metteneberger, Mallet, Murray, Keenum, etc...
But there isn't a LT in this draft worth taking, or so "they" say.
HOU-TEX
Ah, Football!
Imo, if we stay at #1, we should draft the best football player in the draft. To me, that is Clowney. I trust that our staff will do their research on him to determine what happened last season. If they're good with it then it's a no-brainer to choose him.
As much as I hate to say it, there is no better option at QB in FA or the draft than what we currently have.
I've been on the Clowney wagon for a while now. It's still very early, but I don't think I'll be convinced that he shouldn't be our #1.
He'd have to take a pay cut. I'm not opposed to keeping Schaub, since I want someone on the roster who has won an NFL game & a rookie.
The only thing I've got against Schaub is his $14M cap number.
If I had my way, I would want
- Mallet, Keenum, Yates
- Freeman/Vick, rookie, Keenum
- Schaub, rookie, Keenum
- Yates, rookie, Keenum
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Schaub's contract needs to be restructured. If he does that then I'm open to keeping him.
Blake
MMQB
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
I don't think he'd have to, nor would he want to after how fans treated him this past year.
Too many teams that he could go & become a quality back up &/or stop gap starter for while they develop some 2nd-3rd draft pick imo......
kingtexan
All Pro
No ... there is no scenario that would make it ok to keep Schaub.