Clowney, then what?

[bah007]

...For good or bad, drafting Johnny Manziel most definitely makes a statement for this franchise. It shows we are willing to swing for the fences, that we are ready for an exciting brand of football, and that we are ready to take advantage of the rule changes in this league and develop a high-powered offense that can put points on anyone. Drafting Clowney probably does much the same thing Mario Williams did for us: a few 8-8 seasons, a playoff appearance, and then he bolts for a stupid contract with a crap franchise.

Totally disagree with just about all of this. These are terrible reasons to make a selection and you come off as if you are just reaching for anything that justifies taking Manziel.

Who cares about making a statement? We should care about winning. We can debate about who or what will help this team win, but making a statement isn't it.

Swinging for the fences? Sounds good but you better do your homework because you're just as likely to strike out.

Exciting brand of football? Are we trying to win games or drive up ratings?

I do somewhat agree with your point about a high-powered offense, but the #1 defense in the league just won the Super Bowl. And they flat out embarrassed the greatest offense of all time to do it. Plus, if you look at the top ten teams in points scored, I don't think that Manziel has a skill set similar to the majority of their QBs.

1. Denver - Peyton
2. Chicago - Cutler/McCown
3. New England - Brady
4. Philadelphia - Foles
5. Dallas - Romo
6. Cincinnati - Dalton
7. Kansas City - Smith
8. Green Bay - Rodgers
9. Seattle - Wilson
10. New Orleans - Brees

Outside of Wilson, those guys are all pretty close to the prototype. That doesn't mean that you necessarily have to search for the prototype, but it shows me that the rule changes favor the guys who sit in the pocket and pick you apart.

I'm not saying that Manziel isn't capable of that, but that's not his game. And that's why I don't like how his skills translate to the NFL. The only way you get that kind of player is if you tame him, and if you tame him I worry that you're taking away some of the things that make him special. If you let him play his way, I fear you're looking at a guy who isn't going to last very long.

There are no guarantees in the NFL. But this is a QB driven league. If you are counting on getting the next guarantee at QB, you are going to be waiting a LONG time, because those guys only come along about every 15 years. If you are counting on striking it lucky with a middle to late round pick at QB, you also might be waiting a long time. At some point, you have to take a chance. I firmly believe Manziel is worth gambling on.

I don't believe the same as you do on the bolded. But for the rest of the statement, I couldn't agree more. I just don't think Manziel is that guy.

 

[steelbtexan]

I heard Bob Polian talking about Pro Days yesterday on Sirius XM.

He said, for scouts and GMs, Pro Days mean almost nothing. They've already seen most of these guys in person and already have solid opinions formed.

But for coaches, the Pro Day is a chance to see the person up close for the first time. And for coaches, this can help them make up their minds about guys.

Now, for the Media and for fans... yeah. The pro days can mean something for their opinion of the players. But. Their opinion means nothing.

I personally feel better about Clowney after his pro-day and although I thought Bridgewater was the #1 QB after the season, seeing him perform that poorly on his pro-day has raised doubts for me.

OTOH, Manziel's pro-day didn't really move me either way. I wasn't comfortable with him before his pro-day and I'm not comfy with him after it. I don't expect him to be a consistently good QB. I expect him to be a highlight reel guy who costs his team more games than he wins for them. I don't expect his game to translate to the NFL. I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just saying that's what I expect and why, if it was up to me, I wouldn't draft him in the first round.

I'm pretty much like this.

Clowney/Robinson's pro days solidified what I thought of them. (They shined)

Bridgewater scares me because when he was put under pressure at his pro day he wilted. (Confirming my suspicions.)

Manziel did what I thought he would do (Shine) But Manziel wrenching his knee against Auburn, combined with size and whether his game translates to the NFL is a no go for me.

Bortles pro day was impressive to me. But I don't think his decision making process is quick enough for the NFL right now. This can be learned though.

In Short, I like Robinson/Clowney like I did before the combine/pro days.

Bortles impressed me but he will be a reach at 1-1. Bridgewater was never in the running for 1-1. Manziel is the wildcard, I think he's the pick that the McNairs make. (Rick is just the McNair's yes man.)

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Manziel did what I thought he would do (Shine) But Manziel wrenching his knee against Auburn, combined with size and whether his game translates to the NFL is a no go for me.

I believe the knee injury was against Mizzou, then a second knee injury against Ole Miss. He waited until Auburn to enjoy his shoulder injury.

But don't worry, he's still got several joints and limbs left for the Big Boys to re-arrange.

 

[Say Watt]

Totally disagree with just about all of this. These are terrible reasons to make a selection and you come off as if you are just reaching for anything that justifies taking Manziel.

I have already detailed my reasons for thinking Manziel is the guy ad nauseum. Those weren't reaches. They were related to MY sense of frustration with the bland state of the Texans organization. We've never gone after speed, we've never gone after flashy, but instead we have always attempted to play it "safe". Yes, there are exceptions to the rule but if you are being honest with yourself, more often than not the Texans are going with the vanilla pick.

As for the reasons I think we should draft Manziel, I'll give you a few of them.

1. Intensity: the guy wants to win more than anyone else on the field
2. Leadership: directly related to point 1; his intensity is what causes his teammates to respect him and want to win for him
3. Accuracy: threw for just under 70% last year and that was while throwing more intermediate and deep balls than any of the other 1st round QBs
4. Arm strength: can deliver the ball to every part of the field and has the arm strength to get it into tight spaces
5. Athleticism: he can run but even more important, he is one of the most agile players you will ever see; yes, injuries are a concern, but his elusiveness keeps him from taking a lot of the biggest hits
6. Improvisation: the best of the best know how to make things happen when the play breaks down; Manziel does this better than anyone most analysts and scouts have ever seen since a guy named Brett Favre played the game

Who cares about making a statement? We should care about winning. We can debate about who or what will help this team win, but making a statement isn't it.

Yes, and Manziel can quite likely help this team win while the organization makes a statement.

Swinging for the fences? Sounds good but you better do your homework because you're just as likely to strike out.

Correct. As I said in my post, it can either work out incredibly, or we can fall flat on our faces. But I'm tired of 12 seasons with two playoff appearances. It's time for this organization to take a chance.

Exciting brand of football? Are we trying to win games or drive up ratings?

Is Peyton Manning exciting? Is Drew Brees exciting? Heck, people seem to forget Michael Vick was taking the Falcons to the NFC Championship seemingly every year before he went to prison. The Texans have never even sniffed an AFC Championship game. Keep doing the same things, and we can expect the same results. I'm tired of the same old.

I do somewhat agree with your point about a high-powered offense, but the #1 defense in the league just won the Super Bowl. And if you look at the top ten teams in points scored, I don't think that Manziel has a skill set similar to the majority of their QBs.

1. Denver - Peyton
2. Chicago - Cutler/McCown
3. New England - Brady
4. Philadelphia - Foles
5. Dallas - Romo
6. Cincinnati - Dalton
7. Kansas City - Smith
8. Green Bay - Rodgers
9. Seattle - Wilson
10. New Orleans - Brees

Outside of Wilson, those guys are all pretty close to the prototype. That doesn't mean that you necessarily have to search for the prototype, but it shows me that the rules favor the guys who sit in the pocket and pick you apart.

Manziel is as unique a player as has ever come out for the NFL. Like it or not, Mike Vick did cause a huge impact early in his career, and that was with the guy being incapable of hitting the broadside of the barn. As you have already agreed with me, that isn't a problem with Manziel. Combine athleticism similar to Vick, similar to RG3, with a good arm and great accuracy and you have a POTENTIALLY game changing QB.

I don't believe the same as you do on the bolded. But for the rest of the statement, I couldn't agree more. I just don't think Manziel is that guy.

And that's really what it boils down to. You don't believe Manziel is that guy, and I do. I have watched every game the guy has ever played. I'm not just some Aggie homer. You can go through my posts, and there has never been an Aggie I have been this intent on the Texans drafting. I do understand why posters see this similarly to the 2006 draft but where I differ greatly is there is no Reggie Bush in this draft nor is there a Mario Williams. Hell, there isn't even a Matt Leinart, a guy that nearly everyone thought was going to be a guarantee at the QB position.

While Clowney finished his career with a whopping three sacks and 41 tackles, Mario had 14 sacks and 57 tackles. Yes, the hit on the Michigan RB was bad ass. Yes, he makes some highlight plays. No, stats don't tell the whole story. But no one will ever convince me (that is unless Clowney comes in and dominates in the NFL) that a guy with three sacks his final college season is the next coming of Bruce Smith. I'm just not buying what you and many others are selling based on a guy's athletic ability and a few highlight plays.

 

[steelbtexan]

I believe the knee injury was against Mizzou, then a second knee injury against Ole Miss. He waited until Auburn to enjoy his shoulder injury.

But don't worry, he's still got several joints and limbs left for the Big Boys to re-arrange.

It was Ole Miss, I got my Manziel injury list mixed up. When a guy has that many injuries at 21-22 yrs old an old man like me can lose track of them.

Many/Many joints are probably in Manziel's future. (Hydroponic)

 

[Say Watt]

I believe the knee injury was against Mizzou, then a second knee injury against Ole Miss. He waited until Auburn to enjoy his shoulder injury.

But don't worry, he's still got several joints and limbs left for the Big Boys to re-arrange.

He "hurt" his knee against Mizzou the year prior. He finished that game with 372 yards passing, 3 TDs, 67 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs. That knee really hurt him there. And in the injury against Ole Miss, he still finished with 124 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs. Most importantly, the Aggies won both of those games.

In the Auburn game, he did hurt his shoulder. It bothered him the rest of the season but what really hurt him was the injury to his thumb on his throwing hand before the LSU game. This kept him from being able to properly grip the ball and especially caused him problems in the crap weather during the LSU game.

But hey, remind me how many games he missed in his college career...

 

[thunderkyss]

Totally disagree with just about all of this. These are terrible reasons to make a selection and you come off as if you are just reaching for anything that justifies taking Manziel.

Who cares about making a statement? We should care about winning. We can debate about who or what will help this team win, but making a statement isn't it.

Agree.... 100%

I do somewhat agree with your point about a high-powered offense, but the #1 defense in the league just won the Super Bowl. And they flat out embarrassed the greatest offense of all time to do it. Plus, if you look at the top ten teams in points scored, I don't think that Manziel has a skill set similar to the majority of their QBs.

1. Denver - Peyton
2. Chicago - Cutler/McCown
3. New England - Brady
4. Philadelphia - Foles
5. Dallas - Romo
6. Cincinnati - Dalton
7. Kansas City - Smith
8. Green Bay - Rodgers
9. Seattle - Wilson
10. New Orleans - Brees

Outside of Wilson, those guys are all pretty close to the prototype. That doesn't mean that you necessarily have to search for the prototype, but it shows me that the rule changes favor the guys who sit in the pocket and pick you apart.

Don't know that I can agree with you here. When I project "good" Johnny into the future, I'm looking at some amalgamation of the bolded QBs.

Edit: Sorry, you said majority

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

He "hurt" his knee against Mizzou the year prior. He finished that game with 372 yards passing, 3 TDs, 67 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs. That knee really hurt him there. And in the injury against Ole Miss, he still finished with 124 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs. Most importantly, the Aggies won both of those games.

In the Auburn game, he did hurt his shoulder. It bothered him the rest of the season but what really hurt him was the injury to his thumb on his throwing hand before the LSU game. This kept him from being able to properly grip the ball and especially caused him problems in the crap weather during the LSU game.

But hey, remind me how many games he missed in his college career...

I'm quite aware of all of that. Just because you can play through injuries, even well, doesn't mean they don't do damage with each and every incident. Injuries no matter how minor (especially like the thumb ligament damage he sustained which can be a career-long weakness increasing risk for chronic re-injury) have a way to leading to additive damage that ultimately catches up with you. I'd wait until a full season or two with the Big Boys before I'd show the sarcasm. Players with a history of numerous lesser injuries in college not uncommonly go onto bigger and better things when they get to the next level.

 

[TexansFTW]

I'm pretty much like this.

Bridgewater scares me because when he was put under pressure at his pro day he wilted. (Confirming my suspicions.)

Under pressure he wilts? Just not on the football field where it matters though I guess...

Best QB Pro days of the last 10 years... JaMarcus Russell, Vince Young, Blaine Gabbert.... Johnny Manziel?

Football players are made on the Football field.

I won't sit here and say TBs pro day wasn't disappointing or that Clowney's wasn't impressive, because they both were just that. I won't lie to myself. Regardless, these should be thought about, but have little bearing and ABSOLUTELY not be a be all end all.

I've always looked at pro days and combines for guys in rounds 5+ (might go 6+ this year, this draft is Stacked!) because I believe 95% of the time those guys are gonna fail in the NFL so I'd rather have a beast athlete that has a chance to learn what it takes, who in the meantime will either pop someone hard on special teams or fly down the field untouched on special teams.

First 4 rounds I've always only cared about what happens on the football field, and until something drastic happens that shakes this, I will give very little credence to these dog and pony shows.

When you get obsessed with Pro Days and Combines you end up drafting Stephen Hills and leaving Alshon Jeffery's on the board, some food for thought.

 

[thunderkyss]

Under pressure he wilts? Just not on the football field where it matters though I guess...

Best QB Pro days of the last 10 years... JaMarcus Russell, Vince Young, Blaine Gabbert.... Johnny Manziel?

There's a difference between "not impressive" & "bad" Teddy's was "bad"

Football players are made on the Football field.

Regardless, these should be thought about, but have little bearing and ABSOLUTE not be a be all end all.

I've always looked at pro days and combines for guys in rounds 5+ (might go 6+ this year, this draft is Stacked!) because I believe 95% of the time those guys are gonna fail in the NFL so I'd rather have a beast athlete that has a chance to learn what it takes, who in the meantime will either pop someone hard on special teams or fly down the field untouched on special teams.

I don't necessarily put a lot of weight in pro days, however when we're talking about a QB, & we're talking about a guy from a small conference, & that guy skipped out on the combine work outs, & it was a particularly bad showing, I think it adds up.

All of these guys had questions coming out of college. All of them have been working on those questions since. Some of them came out & answered some of those questions, or at least displayed the ability to improve, or at least respond to additional coaching.

Some raised more questions.

 

[Vinny]

I'm not saying that Manziel isn't capable of that, but that's not his game. And that's why I don't like how his skills translate to the NFL. The only way you get that kind of player is if you tame him, and if you tame him I worry that you're taking away some of the things that make him special. If you let him play his way, I fear you're looking at a guy who isn't going to last very long.

I think it helps to be built like Steve McNair if you are going to be a qb who can stand in the pocket and then apply your running skills when needed. I'm like you in the fact that I'd be fonder of Manziel if he had a physical build that could take some punishment going fwd.

 

[HOU-TEX]

I think it helps to be built like Steve McNair if you are going to be a qb who can stand in the pocket and then apply your running skills when needed. I'm like you in the fact that I'd be fonder of Manziel if he had a physical build that could take some punishment going fwd.

Yes, but even Steve was beat to crap. Which caught up to him towards the end of his career.

 

[Vinny]

I think it helps to be built like Steve McNair if you are going to be a qb who can stand in the pocket and then apply your running skills when needed. I'm like you in the fact that I'd be fonder of Manziel if he had a physical build that could take some punishment going fwd.

Yes, but even Steve was beat to crap. Which caught up to him towards the end of his career.

Got a solid decade out of a guy who played with a lot of pain. McNair was 240lbs. and built like a linebacker. I don't see Manziel holding up as well.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

Got a solid decade out of a guy who played with a lot of pain. McNair was 240lbs. and built like a linebacker. I don't see Manziel holding up as well.

That's why I think JF best comparison is Vick . JF only played two years in college and he was starting to get nicked .

 

[IDEXAN]

That's why I think JF best comparison is Vick . JF only played two years in college and he was starting to get nicked .

Only in terms of size and concerns about durability, because while JF is somewhat athletic he's light years away from a great athlete like Vick, and furthermore he doesn't have near the arm that Vick does.

 

[Vinny]

Since I don't post as much I think I'll just state here for the record that I've come full circle and am currently leaning back to taking Clowney and thinking that Crennel will use him like HOF'er Willie McGinest. With Watt and a big NT to clog the middle we can have heat from both sides of the ball for a change. I think this roster will take some time so I'm ok if we don't find our ideal QB for now as long as we have a build similar to Seattle's build.

 

[thunderkyss]

Only in terms of size and concerns about durability, because while JF is somewhat athletic he's light years away from a great athlete like Vick, and furthermore he doesn't have near the arm that Vick does.

But Manziel sees the field better than Vick ever did & is a lot more accurate throwing the football... kind of a wash if you ask me.

 

[kingtexan]

Since I don't post as much I think I'll just state here for the record that I've come full circle and am currently leaning back to taking Clowney and thinking that Crennel will use him like HOF'er Willie McGinest. With Watt and a big NT to clog the middle we can have heat from both sides of the ball for a change. I think this roster will take some time so I'm ok if we don't find our ideal QB for now as long as we have a build similar to Seattle's build.

I concur.

We will take a QB, but I wouldn't be disappointed if it was a 4th, or 5th round pick knowing that this class is hit or miss from the top down. That might give us a chance to shore up some slots like ILB, NT, DB, and OL.

OB stated that they draft based on value, not need in an interview last week, so we will see.

 

[Say Watt]

I think it helps to be built like Steve McNair if you are going to be a qb who can stand in the pocket and then apply your running skills when needed. I'm like you in the fact that I'd be fonder of Manziel if he had a physical build that could take some punishment going fwd.

Without question. He needs to put on some weight. No way he ever gets to 240, but 220 certainly isn't out of the question. How would you say Manziel's accuracy compares with McNair? From what I remember, he wasn't a slouch, but I'd say Manziel is more accurate. Out of my QB, I'll take the accuracy over some additional size.

As Gruden said perfectly, Manziel has got to master the check down to be a success in the NFL. He is going to have to learn to take what defenses give him and not always try to make the big play. What people don't realize is a lot of Johnny's risk taking was due to just how pitiful A&M's defense was. They were atrocious and got scored on nearly every drive. That puts a lot of pressure on a QB to make things happen. Put Manziel on a team with a good to great defense, and I find it very unlikely he doesn't have major success.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[_King_]

I've still got Bridgewater as my #1 prospect in this draft.

I expect him to be a franchise QB and franchise QB's are always more valuable than any other position.

So what I'm hoping is we trade down a little bit and still get Teddy.

Haven't heard much talk about us drafting him. Have heard lots of chatter about the other prospects, and that's a good thing. Don't let other teams think we're interested so when we trade the Clowney pick for a kings ransom, no one jumps ahead of us to grab out guy. And if they do jump ahead of us it's to grab Manziel since they think that's who we want.

Draft TB, get your franchise guy and have a boatload of picks to grab other impact players.

 

[bOODRO87]

Oh awesome, Manziel talk in the JD thread..

 

[HOU-TEX]

Oh awesome, Manziel talk in the JD thread..

Let's get the Manziel thread hyped up on Clowney. That'll get all the Manzies riled up

 

[Number19]

As analyzed at Battle Red Blog, Whitney Mercilus' pass rush is one dimensional, which is the primary reason he was so unproductive last year. http://www.battleredblog.com/2014/2...texans-season-review-whitney-mercilus-part-ii

If we were to draft Clowney to play the weak side opposite JJ, and Mercilus was moved to the strong side, what do you you think about this move?

The BRB analysis only focused on the pass rush and did not analyze play against the run or dropping back into coverage. So if Mercilus moved to the strong side, how do you think his play would compare to Reed's at this position?

 

[_King_]

As analyzed at Battle Red Blog, Whitney Mercilus' pass rush is one dimensional, which is the primary reason he was so unproductive last year. http://www.battleredblog.com/2014/2...texans-season-review-whitney-mercilus-part-ii

If we were to draft Clowney to play the weak side opposite JJ, and Mercilus was moved to the strong side, what do you you think about this move?

The BRB analysis only focused on the pass rush and did not analyze play against the run or dropping back into coverage. So if Mercilus moved to the strong side, how do you think his play would compare to Reed's at this position?

Didn't want Mercilus when we drafted him. Hated that pick.

Maybe this new staff can get something out of him. I wouldn't bank on it though.

I'd rather just get him off the field period. Every mock I've done I have us taking two OLB's. Mercilus nor Reed should be penciled in as starters anywhere on defense. They both need to come to camp ready to earn their spots.

 

[DX-TEX]

John Middlekauff ‏@JohnMiddlekauff · 30m
More NFL people I talk with the more I think Bridgewater falls to the 2nd round

Cliowney then Bridgewater. I would be happy

 

[Trap_Star]

John Middlekauff ‏@JohnMiddlekauff · 30m
More NFL people I talk with the more I think Bridgewater falls to the 2nd round

Cliowney then Bridgewater. I would be happy

Sign me up.

 

[Texian]

If Bridgewater falls to the 2nd round there are reasons for his fall. (much of it has already been discussed) The fall sends a BUYER BEWARE message, not as advertised.

 

[PapaL]

If Bridgewater falls to the 2nd round there are reasons for his fall. (much of it has already been discussed) The fall sends a BUYER BEWARE message, not as advertised.

Just like Aaron Rogers fall when Alex Smith went #1? That exact science of drafting!

 

[PapaL]

John Middlekauff ‏@JohnMiddlekauff · 30m
More NFL people I talk with the more I think Bridgewater falls to the 2nd round

Cliowney then Bridgewater. I would be happy

I'm good w that. Brees fell out of the first and has played w a chip on his shoulder ever since.

 

[thunderkyss]

As analyzed at Battle Red Blog, Whitney Mercilus' pass rush is one dimensional, which is the primary reason he was so unproductive last year. http://www.battleredblog.com/2014/2...texans-season-review-whitney-mercilus-part-ii

If we were to draft Clowney to play the weak side opposite JJ, and Mercilus was moved to the strong side, what do you you think about this move?

The BRB analysis only focused on the pass rush and did not analyze play against the run or dropping back into coverage. So if Mercilus moved to the strong side, how do you think his play would compare to Reed's at this position?

Wow.... that was a long and good read.

The only thing I don't like a Brooks Reed, is because he adds no value to the pass rush. It's a smaller part of his job on the strong side, but it's an important part of it. I don't expect him to get double digit sacks, but he should be the kind of guy TEs don't want to see a lot of... & he's not.

I think he's fine in coverage, I think he's good down hill, I think he's a pretty good tackler, so I would like to see more of him inside.... backing more into zone coverages than playing TEs one on one... or attacking the LOS from inside.

I honestly don't know what Merci would look like covering TEs one on one.

 

[TexansFTW]

There's a difference between "not impressive" & "bad" Teddy's was "bad"




I don't necessarily put a lot of weight in pro days, however when we're talking about a QB, & we're talking about a guy from a small conference, & that guy skipped out on the combine work outs, & it was a particularly bad showing, I think it adds up.

All of these guys had questions coming out of college. All of them have been working on those questions since. Some of them came out & answered some of those questions, or at least displayed the ability to improve, or at least respond to additional coaching.

Some raised more questions.

Was that on or off the football field when it mattered most?

You can't say pro days don't matter if you follow that up and say questions are now raised because of it. Because he had zero questions on the football field other than his weight and not playing the SEC every single week, Most of the best QBs that came out of college didn't though.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

John Middlekauff ‏@JohnMiddlekauff · 30m
More NFL people I talk with the more I think Bridgewater falls to the 2nd round

Cliowney then Bridgewater. I would be happy

Subscribe.

 

[thunderkyss]

Was that on or off the football field when it mattered most?

You can't say pro days don't matter if you follow that up and say questions are now raised because of it. Because he had zero questions on the football field other than his weight and not playing the SEC every single week, Most of the best QBs that came out of college didn't though.

The ones that didn't come out of a major conference at least had the measurables. 6-5, 235 lbs, rocket arm... Bridgewater has none of that. As far as what he did on the football field, I liken it to what Case Keenum did in the preseason (or what he did in college, on the football field, take your pick). It's nice to talk about, but foolish to draft him with the #1 overall pick (coincidentally, those guys who weren't from a major conference, but did have the measurables were mid first rounders).

A QBs pro day should not matter. Everything is set up for him to be successful. He practiced & trained without his glove. He felt good enough about what he did during training to start the day without the glove... So when you have a bad QB pro day... it raises questions. If it goes as planned, like Bortles, or McCarron, it doesn't matter.

 

[_King_]

John Middlekauff ‏@JohnMiddlekauff · 30m
More NFL people I talk with the more I think Bridgewater falls to the 2nd round

Cliowney then Bridgewater. I would be happy

Would easily be the best draft we've ever had just based in those two picks.

 

[_King_]

I don't think TB falls to the second round though.

 

[thunderkyss]

John Middlekauff ‏@JohnMiddlekauff · 30m
More NFL people I talk with the more I think Bridgewater falls to the 2nd round

Cliowney then Bridgewater. I would be happy

I can absolutely see the value there.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

I don't think TB falls to the second round though.

No one expected Geno Smith to fall out of the first, either.

 

[NCTexan]

I'm good w that. Brees fell out of the first and has played w a chip on his shoulder ever since.

But was it a Dorito?

 

[_King_]

No one expected Geno Smith to fall out of the first, either.

I don't know about that..

Maybe not early in the process, but I didn't see Geno Smith nor The FSU QB as 1st round guys..

 

[Double Barrel]

I'll probably always root for this franchise. But to be quite honest, I'm tired of the boring, same old **** from this organization. We are vanilla. Frankly, I'm getting tired of the flavour vanilla. You are more than welcome to keep on lapping up whatever this franchise serves you, but I quit purchasing season tickets, didn't go to a single game last year because I saw the collapse coming after the first or second game, and am tired of watching this organization make changes at a snails pace.

For good or bad, drafting Johnny Manziel most definitely makes a statement for this franchise. It shows we are willing to swing for the fences, that we are ready for an exciting brand of football, and that we are ready to take advantage of the rule changes in this league and develop a high-powered offense that can put points on anyone. Drafting Clowney probably does much the same thing Mario Williams did for us: a few 8-8 seasons, a playoff appearance, and then he bolts for a stupid contract with a crap franchise.

There are no guarantees in the NFL. But this is a QB driven league. If you are counting on getting the next guarantee at QB, you are going to be waiting a LONG time, because those guys only come along about every 15 years. If you are counting on striking it lucky with a middle to late round pick at QB, you also might be waiting a long time. At some point, you have to take a chance. I firmly believe Manziel is worth gambling on.

Lots of folks say it's a "QB driven league". In reality, it is a win-driven league.

Who is the better QB: Peyton Manning or Russell Wilson? Obvious answer is HoF Manning. Dude had one of the greatest statistical seasons in NFL history last year. However, what did those stats ultimately mean in the Super Bowl, the one game that everyone in the league plays for? Absolutely nothing. He faced a monster defense and looked like any other generic QB out there. There is certainly a strong case to be made for building dominant defenses, which is where picking Clowney would come into play.

As far as the vanilla thing; I don't feel that 2011 and 2012 seasons were a waste of my time as a fan. I get what you're saying, but past regimes are not necessarily indicative of future performance under a new head coach and staff.

My loyalty to the franchise is not negotiable or dependent on arbitrary decisions. My loyalty is hardcore and unwavering. I might not always like the product on the field and certain feel I have the right to critically analyze anything / everything, but in the end, I will always be a Houston Texans fan. Nothing will change that, even vanilla (which is one of my favorite flavors, so not sure why it gets a bad rap).

Since I don't post as much I think I'll just state here for the record that I've come full circle and am currently leaning back to taking Clowney and thinking that Crennel will use him like HOF'er Willie McGinest. With Watt and a big NT to clog the middle we can have heat from both sides of the ball for a change. I think this roster will take some time so I'm ok if we don't find our ideal QB for now as long as we have a build similar to Seattle's build.

I agree completely. The gamble of a first round QB pick is all chips on the table. The entire regime ultimately lives or dies based on the pick. And the pressure to start a 1.1 pick QB is immense.

But building a dominant defense can give the regime a chance to sift through the available QBs. Picking up a guy in later rounds or even a journeyman QB does not carry the inherent risks of a first round QB. You can go through multiple QBs until you find one that fits what you need. This luxury is not there with a first round pick.

I'm a fan of defense. Always have been. So any pick that ultimately builds a D that can dominate and control games is going to be something I'm all on board. Give me a top ranked defense and a minimal mistake "game managing" offense and I believe it's a formula for championship success. Seattle just proved it once again.

 

[Dan B.]

nvm

 

[The Pencil Neck]

I don't know about that..

Maybe not early in the process, but I didn't see Geno Smith nor The FSU QB as 1st round guys..

OK. Yeah. There are always on-the-street guys who can say that they expected what happened to happen.

But most media mocks that I recall seeing still had Geno Smith as a top-10 draft pick. During the draft when he didn't get selected in the top-10, the buzz was about how far he was going to fall and could he drop out of the first. Everyone expected him to be the first QB taken and most people expected it to be rarely early.

And he wasn't and it wasn't.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

Lots of folks say it's a "QB driven league". In reality, it is a win-driven league.

Who is the better QB: Peyton Manning or Russell Wilson? Obvious answer is HoF Manning. Dude had one of the greatest statistical seasons in NFL history last year. However, what did those stats ultimately mean in the Super Bowl, the one game that everyone in the league plays for? Absolutely nothing. He faced a monster defense and looked like any other generic QB out there. There is certainly a strong case to be made for building dominant defenses, which is where picking Clowney would come into play.

As far as the vanilla thing; I don't feel that 2011 and 2012 seasons were a waste of my time as a fan. I get what you're saying, but past regimes are not necessarily indicative of future performance under a new head coach and staff.

My loyalty to the franchise is not negotiable or dependent on arbitrary decisions. My loyalty is hardcore and unwavering. I might not always like the product on the field and certain feel I have the right to critically analyze anything / everything, but in the end, I will always be a Houston Texans fan. Nothing will change that, even vanilla (which is one of my favorite flavors, so not sure why it gets a bad rap).



I agree completely. The gamble of a first round QB pick is all chips on the table. The entire regime ultimately lives or dies based on the pick. And the pressure to start a 1.1 pick QB is immense.

But building a dominant defense can give the regime a chance to sift through the available QBs. Picking up a guy in later rounds or even a journeyman QB does not carry the inherent risks of a first round QB. You can go through multiple QBs until you find one that fits what you need. This luxury is not there with a first round pick.

I'm a fan of defense. Always have been. So any pick that ultimately builds a D that can dominate and control games is going to be something I'm all on board. Give me a top ranked defense and a minimal mistake "game managing" offense and I believe it's a formula for championship success. Seattle just proved it once again.

There's always more ways to skin a cat that's for sure . I'd gamble with Clowney and the a 2nd or 3rd round QB because I think a good one will fall and there's no great one .

McClain wrote today that if the Texans don't pick a QB first this year they would be picking high next year . A rookie QB doesn't bring that to the table usually unless the team is already pretty good .

Johnny Football waits for the draft and from this picture , he's to short .

 

[_King_]

Lots of folks say it's a "QB driven league". In reality, it is a win-driven league.

Who is the better QB: Peyton Manning or Russell Wilson?

I don't think people say the best QB always wins, but both of those guys are good QB's for their team.

When people say it's a QB driven league, they mean that having good QB play exponentially increases your odds of winning.

Look at it this way...As good as Seattle's team was around Wilson, they still needed a good young QB that made a bunch of plays.

Then Look at Denver's team...No Von Miller...Not a good defense. Some good WR's, but without Manning that team is not even sniffing a superbowl.

Very rarely is a team going to make it to the superbowl without a QB making plays. Teams getting good/great QB play are usually always in the hunt.

Whereas you can have the best defensive player in football (JJ Watt) and go 2-14 with bad QB play.


I'm just responding to the QB driven league part. I'm not saying you can't draft Clowney and find a good QB elsewhere. But make no mistake about it, in all likelihood this team will need good/great QB play to get where they want to go. Regardless of drafting Clowney or not.

 

[Double Barrel]

I don't think people say the best QB always wins, but both of those guys are good QB's for their team.

When people say it's a QB driven league, they mean that having good QB play exponentially increases your odds of winning.

Look at it this way...As good as Seattle's team was around Wilson, they still needed a good young QB that made a bunch of plays.

Then Look at Denver's team...No Von Miller...Not a good defense. Some good WR's, but without Manning that team is not even sniffing a superbowl.

Very rarely is a team going to make it to the superbowl without a QB making plays. Teams getting good/great QB play are usually always in the hunt.

Whereas you can have the best defensive player in football (JJ Watt) and go 2-14 with bad QB play.

I'm just responding to the QB driven league part. I'm not saying you can't draft Clowney and find a good QB elsewhere. But make no mistake about it, in all likelihood this team will need good/great QB play to get where they want to go. Regardless of drafting Clowney or not.

I understand why it's called a QB-driven league. And I'm not going to dispute the importance of the position.

That said, most SB winning QBs had great defenses. So in that regard, I do not have a problem with using the top pick to help our own defense.

My example of the Manning and Russell comparison was just to exemplify the importance of defense, not to diminish either QB. Give Manning that Seahawks D and he's sporting his second championship ring, IMO.

 

[Texian]

My example of the Manning and Russell comparison was just to exemplify the importance of defense, not to diminish either QB. Give Manning that Seahawks D and he's sporting his second championship ring, IMO.

The common denominator here is that Manning and Russell both, are good QBs. Give Seatlle and Denver poor QBs and neither go to the SB. Head Coaches with bad QBs aren't head coaches for very long.

 

[leebigeztx]

I understand why it's called a QB-driven league. And I'm not going to dispute the importance of the position.

That said, most SB winning QBs had great defenses. So in that regard, I do not have a problem with using the top pick to help our own defense.

My example of the Manning and Russell comparison was just to exemplify the importance of defense, not to diminish either QB. Give Manning that Seahawks D and he's sporting his second championship ring, IMO.

The same who say build the defense and get the qb ,look at seattle types won't recognize that seattle is so far from the norm that its impossible to replicate what they did. Think about how many late rd picks are playing way beyond their draft position. That same defense everyone wants to build has 2 top 14 picks on it,that's it. All of the other guys are mid to late guys are from somene else team like avril and bennett.I give them their due, and most thought denver was kinda glass champs anyway with their injuries. How many teams can make it to the superbowl with one of the 5 best de's and lt in the game. Not to mention missing vickers,their starting safety,bailey playing 1 game and so forth. I guarantee if the defense would've been intact and played like they did last year #4 ppg and #2 in yards, different story.

It is a qb driven league and you have to get it right. Luck has been so-so ,but if you put a so-so luck on any of the other 3 teams,they're winning the division. He's the difference among those teams in the division,that's it. If you select the right qb ,the texans have enough talent to close that gap big time. The texans have a better line on both sides,better wrs,and better backs. The difference is luck and his moxy late games vs his consistent play.

 

[_King_]

OK. Yeah. There are always on-the-street guys who can say that they expected what happened to happen.

But most media mocks...

Most mocks doesn't have anything to do with me.

I was giving my opinion and my opinion isn't based off of other people's mocks.

I'm on record now so this isn't some "after the fact claim". I don't think TB is going to fall to the second round. Could be wrong. I've been wrong before.....once or twice...I think....

 

[Double Barrel]

The common denominator here is that Manning and Russell both, are good QBs. Give Seatlle and Denver poor QBs and neither go to the SB.

I'd say one is a great QB and the other is a good QB, but that's just splitting hairs.

But yeah, it's pretty obvious that teams with bad QBs don't go to the SB. Just like it is very rare that a team with a bad defense makes it that far.

It's a team game. One position gets more credit and more blame than they should, but such is the nature of the sport. But, in the end, they all win and lose as a team.

Head Coaches with bad QBs aren't head coaches for very long.

Marvin Lewis seems to be doing okay.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Most mocks doesn't have anything to do with me.

When someone says "most guys feel a certain way" and you don't feel that way, that means you're not one of the guys included in "most guys".