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

Teddy Bridgewater

WolverineFan said:
He also led the league in turnovers and finished 31st in completion percentage. But yea, he threw for a lot of yards and TD's while throwing 600+ passes.
Click to expand...
You're right. Don't get me wrong, I think he's highly overrated and the Texans always make Blake Bortles look bad twice a year. If I judge him simply based on his performances against the Texans I would still think he was a bad quarterback.

But stats wise, he threw for a ton of Touchdown passes and yardage (35 and 4,428). It was highly impressive. I feel he deserves his due as one of the more intriguing young QB's in the game. Especially with Bridgewater, Carr and Winston all pro bowl bound. Bortles was worthy of some praise judging his raw stats.

Yeah, he threw 18 INTs, only completed 58 % of his passes but a lot of his passes were deep bombs bro. He flat out slung it 25, 30, 40 yards down the field making some big plays. Also threw a ton like you said, because the Jaguars defense is so bad he played in many high-scoring games.

But if nothing else I often wonder what if the Texans had drafted Blake Bortles? Put him with our defense, Watt and Mercilus is a strong duo - second best pass-rushing tandem this past season in terms of sacks. So not having Clowney but a franchise quarterback instead may have been better for us. But hindsight is 20-20. Who knew Clowney would be this injury-riddled through two seasons?

I'd have been okay not drafting Bridgewater or Carr if we had taken Bortles. I think Bortles shows just as much, if not more potential as a young quarterback, under the circumstances of the team around him (awful defense). But if the Texans had drafted either of the three - Bortles, Bridgewater or Carr - we'd probably be in a better position. Just because Clowney has been that disappointing this far.
 
The way I see it, there are plenty "good" QBs in the league who will never win the Super Bowl. That's pretty much what I mean when I say "good Schaub"

Philip Rivers, Matt Stafford, Matt Ryan, Andrew Luck... I could be wrong, but imo, those guys won't win a Super Bowl unless there's some drastic change in their circumstance.

Regardless how good they play, I don't think Bortles or Carr will win a Super Bowl. Even had we drafted them. Sure, we'd be "better off" than mucking around with Hoyer.

Wentz, Goff, Lynch, Cook... Hogan, Coker, I could fall in love with one of these guys & I'm glad we're in the position we're in now. One of those guys may be a Texan pretty soon. Had we drafted Bortles I'd be thinking we screwed up & should have waited.

So 8 don't think it was a mistake to pass on Bortles or Carr anymore than I think it was a mistake to pass on JFF.
 
thunderkyss said:
Wentz, Goff, Lynch, Cook... Hogan, Coker, I could fall in love with one of these guys & I'm glad we're in the position we're in now. One of those guys may be a Texan pretty soon. Had we drafted Bortles I'd be thinking we screwed up & should have waited.

So 8 don't think it was a mistake to pass on Bortles or Carr anymore than I think it was a mistake to pass on JFF.
Click to expand...

So you'd be happy with one of these guys when there could maybe be someone even better coming around the bend next year?
 
infantrycak said:
Waiting, waiting, waiting... for the greener grass.
Click to expand...

Ya, I don't get giving this club credit for not taking a swing just because the result may be that they ultimately pick from a better crop ... as though they knew all along what the future crop would yield.
 
Mollywhopper said:
So you'd be happy with one of these guys when there could maybe be someone even better coming around the bend next year?
Click to expand...

What are we waiting for? A guy to get us to the play offs, or a guy to win a Super Bowl?

I said back in 2014 those QBs should be late first round picks. I'm saying the same thing about Wentz. We just happen to be picking late in the 1st, where we weren't in 2014. AAMOF, I've said plenty of times I don't understand why the Texans didn't trade back into the first to get Bridgewater.

So this isn't a wait until next year argument.

I've got a prototype for what I want at the top of the first. Goff & Lynch fit. Cook & Hogan moreso, but the scouts/media are saying Goff & Lynch right now. I'm not looking for someone better, I'm looking for someone that fits my standard.

Your standards are obviously lower. Nothing wrong with that.
 
Mollywhopper said:
Ya, I don't get giving this club credit for not taking a swing just because the result may be that they ultimately pick from a better crop ... as though they knew all along what the future crop would yield.
Click to expand...

It's more about how you grade them. The 2014 class graded out as mid to late first rounders. Bortles was drafted as if he were an elite prospect & he's not. Never was.
 
Bulls on Parade said:
Blake Bortles had a monster 2015 season. Stats wise, he was a pro bowler this past season. I didn't hear his name or did he bow out of the pro bowl? Looking back, did we make a mistake selecting Jadeveon Clowney #1 overall? There were three franchise quarterbacks in that draft. Also Khalil Mack, thus far, has been the best defensive player from that draft a couple of years ago.
Click to expand...
Is every player who is injured a bust? Does that prove you made the wrong pick? If so, then you have to believe that some GMs have found an oracle who is successful at predicting injury. Or maybe some people FORGET picks of favorites who don't work out and only REMEMBER the ones who do.

Which scenario seems most likely?
 
Last edited:
Mollywhopper said:
My standards aren't to perpetually wait till next year.
Click to expand...
There is the rub. Perpetually waiting verses perpetually swinging at QBs who are marginal.

The key is to swing at the pitches over the plate and not at those pesky balls off the plate. And the art is figuring out which is which while you still have time to make a swing.

Do you want to pay a marginal prospect like an elite one? Or conserve your resources until the right one appears?

You still take a chance of swinging and missing, even if the ball is over the plate. But you have to work your way into the most favorable situation possible.
 
Marshall said:
There is the rub. Perpetually waiting verses perpetually swinging at QBs who are marginal.
Click to expand...
The problem with the Texans is they pick the wrong years to completely sh** the bed when it comes to can't-miss prospects.

Hell, we were snakebit from year one. Try to find a truly "good" QB from the 2002 draft...I dare you.
 
Marshall said:
There is the rub. Perpetually waiting verses perpetually swinging at QBs who are marginal.

The key is to swing at the pitches over the plate and not at those pesky balls off the plate. And the art is figuring out which is which while you still have time to make a swing.

Do you want to pay a marginal prospect like an elite one? Or conserve your resources until the right one appears?

You still take a chance of swinging and missing, even if the ball is over the plate. But you have to work your way into the most favorable situation possible.
Click to expand...

Shaka, when the walls fell. Kadir beneath Mo Moteh.

Kailash when it rises ...

Kira at bashi ... The river Temarc in winter!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB
disaacks3 said:
The problem with the Texans is they pick the wrong years to completely sh** the bed when it comes to can't-miss prospects.

Hell, we were snakebit from year one. Try to find a truly "good" QB from the 2002 draft...I dare you.
Click to expand...

Or... we don't do a good job of stock piling picks. Acquiring the collateral needed to work the draft. I'll admit there was a time when it looked like we had the assets to move around & work the draft, but... we went after players that barely make it to the field for one reason or another; Brandon Harris, Louis Nix, Jalen Strong.

Then it wouldn't matter.

Still, if this is the draft... if there is a franchise QB, we do have collateral to trade, it's just going to hurt more. But, if the guy is a franchise QB isn't he worth it?
 
thunderkyss said:
Still, if this is the draft... if there is a franchise QB, we do have collateral to trade, it's just going to hurt more. But, if the guy is a franchise QB isn't he worth it?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is. Think about how little most teams actually get from any given draft. One or two players is about the most. That's one of the reasons the 2006 draft was such a success for the Texans - they hit on so many players. But it doesn't happen often. So I'd rather have them go after that one guy that they feel is going to be the big time player and sacrifice the draft to get there. You don't do that very often, of course, and you don't do it for a veteran player, and you basically only do it for a generational talent at a key skill position (QB), but if you see the chance, you take a shot. The Texans have really only had one, maybe two opportunities at a guy like that, I think, and they didn't have the ammo/cojones to pull the trigger.
 
Let's revist the RG3 Trade:


CO9DDTgWwAEhUjE.jpg


Rams obviously had more opportunities to fix many more issues, but did they?
Granted now RG3 is on his way out of Washington but who really won that trade?
 
PapaL said:
Let's revist the RG3 Trade:

Rams obviously had more opportunities to fix many more issues, but did they?
Granted now RG3 is on his way out of Washington but who really won that trade?
Click to expand...

The Rams did. Just because they squandered their winnings doesn't change that they cleaned up on the trade itself. They could have had Luke Kuechly, Bobby Wagner, DeAndre Hopkins, and Aaron Donald. It's cherry picking, but the opportunity was there all the same.

If I squander a 500M dollar lottery winning I didn't all of the sudden lose the lottery.
 
Mollywhopper said:
The Rams did. Just because they squandered their winnings doesn't change that they cleaned up on the trade itself. They could have had Luke Kuechly, Bobby Wagner, DeAndre Hopkins, and Aaron Donald. It's cherry picking, but the opportunity was there all the same.

If I squander a 500M dollar lottery winning I didn't all of the sudden lose the lottery.
Click to expand...

Seeing how the last mega-trade for an unproven QB, would you be willing to pull such a trade today if you were us?
Keep in mind, that was to move up 4 spots.

As for squandering picks; as TK and eriadoc were talking would be do any better with those picks?
 
PapaL said:
Seeing how the last mega-trade for an unproven QB, would you be willing to pull such a trade today if you were us?
Keep in mind, that was to move up 4 spots.

As for squandering picks; as TK and eriadoc were talking would be do any better with those picks?
Click to expand...

- Are you asking if I'd pull the Washington end of that trade if it were the Texans this year? Sorry, just your wording there kinda hung me up reading it.

- I don't know if we'd do any better/worse with those picks, we seemed to have done well last year. And I don't think you ever go into a draft with a mindset of "well, since we're going to eff these picks up anyway ...". That's just kind of a non-starter for what if's.
 
Mollywhopper said:
The Rams did. Just because they squandered their winnings doesn't change that they cleaned up on the trade itself. They could have had Luke Kuechly, Bobby Wagner, DeAndre Hopkins, and Aaron Donald. It's cherry picking, but the opportunity was there all the same.

If I squander a 500M dollar lottery winning I didn't all of the sudden lose the lottery.
Click to expand...


I hear what you're saying, but it's hard to say they won because of who they could have had...We traded down the year we took Travis Johnson. We didn't win that Trade down because we could have had Aaron Rodgers instead.

I think the anology you used would be better if you said, If I had one lottery ticket with very good odds but I traded it for a bunch of tickets with smaller odds.

There's no guarantee you win in the draft or in the lottery.

I'd say the Rams won because they got multiple players that helped their team and the Skins are about to cut ties with the target of their trade up. But I think the quality of your haul has to come into play.
 
xtruroyaltyx said:
I hear what you're saying, but it's hard to say they won because of who they could have had...We traded down the year we took Travis Johnson. We didn't win that Trade down because we could have had Aaron Rodgers instead.

I think the anology you used would be better if you said, If I had one lottery ticket with very good odds but I traded it for a bunch of tickets with smaller odds.

There's no guarantee you win in the draft or in the lottery.

I'd say the Rams won because they got multiple players that helped their team and the Skins are about to cut ties with the target of their trade up. But I think the quality of your haul has to come into play.
Click to expand...

My argument wasn't really who they could have had, I was just using that to counter the idea that who they picked didn't justify the trade. I admitted as much that I was cherry picking those guys. That's also why the analogy was more about the fact that them squandering the picks in lieu of who they could have had didn't make the trade itself a loss.

I agree though, they won simply because they gave their team far more opportunity to better itself than what was available to them solely with the number 2 pick. But, from where we haplessly sit I can hardly fault Washington for wanting to pull the trigger so aggressively, I wish our team would take a swing like that every once in a while *coughthisyearcough*.

Bottom line, the Rams couldn't stand to lose that trade almost no matter who they picked. Washington though could have been just as big a winner, only had Griffin turned out to be their franchise guy.
 
Jags get laughed at for missing on QBs, but here are they are again with another 'franchise' QB and in a more favorable position than Houston with a passer. You can bounce back from mistakes, but you will never know if you are too scared to take a chance. Paralysis by analysis, and on the RG3 front, if not for the injuries he'd still be leading that team. He was ELECTRIC for a few years and I'm sure during that time WAS fan had no issue with the trade. Even after the 'failed' experiment I'd say its not like STL did much damage with all those picks, surely not a DAllas/Minnesota situation by any means, so competent front office guys are a must.
 
I find it hard to believe our fans would be satisfied with two losing seasons & no playoffs after drafting Blake Bortles.

Half the board would be talking about giving him time, how the defense needs to be top two in all categories, & patience, while the other half would be all, "I told you so." Talking about the clutch gene or lack thereof. Oh, & how inept Rick was for reaching on this small school, spread offense project.

I mean we don't have a QB, finished 9-7 two years in a row, won the division by default & I want the HC fired, there's damn near a consensus on canning the GM.

Nah... we wouldn't feel like we were ahead of the Jags if the tables were turned.
 
Tables turned on teams =\= tables turned on QBs.

The question is if we would have won/lost more games with Bortles and whether they would have won/lost more with Fitz/Hoyer?

Keep in mind they have a defensive HC while we have an offensive HC (pun not intended but somewhat amusing).

But yes, there is rarely consensus on this and most any NFL MB...and all have their optimists and pessimists.
 
thunderkyss said:
I find it hard to believe our fans would be satisfied with two losing seasons & no playoffs after drafting Blake Bortles.

Half the board would be talking about giving him time, how the defense needs to be top two in all categories, & patience, while the other half would be all, "I told you so." Talking about the clutch gene or lack thereof. Oh, & how inept Rick was for reaching on this small school, spread offense project.

I mean we don't have a QB, finished 9-7 two years in a row, won the division by default & I want the HC fired, there's damn near a consensus on canning the GM.

Nah... we wouldn't feel like we were ahead of the Jags if the tables were turned.
Click to expand...

pretty much. Go on the jags message board and check out what their fans are saying. It pretty much looks just like our board except they're bitching about their defense losing them games and were bitching about our Qb losing games. By no means do they feel Bortles' play elevated them anywhere except in the "fun to watch" department, which as we know from watching the Rockets under Kevin Mchale, counts for nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top