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

What's wrong with Watson?

L

LikeMike

Veteran
Hey guys,

I have done a lot of reading about Watson lately and watched some Youtube-videos. Now here quite a few people don't seem to believe, he will be a good NFL QB - and quite a few people would have prefered Mahomes or Trubisky. I would like to know, what the things are that he lacks and that could prevent him from becoming a good QB.

Personally, I am in no way a Talent evaluator. In my perception his accuracy and ball placement isn't the best - or at least it is not reliable. Some balls are beautiful thrown in exactly the right window - others are way behind or ahead of the receiver. But most scouts seem to see his accuracy as a plus.

Then there is the thing about his reads - he wasn't asked to go through many reads, he only had to look at one half of the field. I agree, this is one area he has work to do. But since he already does so many things presnap and seems to really understand coverages and protections, this doesn't seem like a big area of concern.

He wasn't playing in a pro ready offense? Well, neither did the other big prospects - and he was asked to do a lot more than them (like presnap reads and adjustments).

His arm is not as strong as Mahomes? Yeah, but his arm is plenty strong. He won't stand out in either way as far as arm strength is concerned.

So what is it about him that People are cautious about? It can't be his intangibles, it can't be his college career - it's probably not his mechanics, since most scouts are praising him in this area.

After reading scouting Reports and watching Video, he seems to be the "safest bet" at QB. Mahomes could be more special with that arms, but there are so many red flags about his mechanics and lack of having to do presnap stuff - but Watson could have that winner gene, and as Eli has shown, that can play a major role in a career.

What am I missing?
 
Not much you haven't mentioned. People, myself included, get caught up in the predraft process picking a player apart. Watson has all the tools needed to lead this team where we want to go. He's got the ideal supporting cast of all the rookie QBs and is the most pro ready/battle tested of the bunch.

Really comes down to how much he's willing to work to be the best player he can be and how fast he can improve to a level that he's the best option. All signs point to him accepting that challenge and succeeding. I'm excited!!!
 
Last edited:
The difference between Mahomes and Watson is night and day ....

Accuracy and ball placement - Mahomes is Special , he throws guys open and or leaves them an opportunity for yac.

Watson is Average with a better supporting cast.

Int rate the last two seasons -

Watson 1070 att , 30 INT - 1/35.6
Mahomes 1164att , 25 INT - 1/46.5 (Hmmm the gunslinger with a lower INT rate?)

Reading a defense -

Watson often only had single reads or multiple receivers on one side of the field.

Mahomes had multiple reads across the field in a much more complex offense.


The ability to improvise when a play breaks down .... Mahomes can throw on the run , off balance , weird angles because of that big arm , Watson doesn't have that big arm.
 
Texian said:
Wait, isn't this a Watson thread?
Click to expand...
Which means I can't question your sources regarding the comments about Watson?

And actually I'm not questioning your sources as much as your motivation, agenda, and lack of bias, but that's a position that's been around as long as you have.
 
ChampionTexan said:
Which means I can't question your sources regarding the comments about Watson?

And actually I'm not questioning your sources as much as your motivation, agenda, and lack of bias, but that's a position that's been around as long as you have.
Click to expand...
question all you want to but you need to get it right. Here is my actual 2016 Texans draft and it went as follows:

1. Jason Spriggs, LT
2. Bronson Kaufusi, DE
3. Malcolm Mitchell, WR
4. Evan Boehm, C
5. Alex Collins, RB
5. Nile Lawrence-Stample, NT

I do appreciate how you devour and commit to memory each and every one my post. Clearly you're one of my biggest fans. Thanks!

Oh by the way here is my draft post 2016 Combine, as you can see sans Wentz. You would be even better fan if you could get it right a little more often: http://www.texanstalk.com/threads/texians-post-combine-mock.110228/
 
Last edited:
Corrosion said:
The difference between Mahomes and Watson is night and day ....

Accuracy and ball placement - Mahomes is Special , he throws guys open and or leaves them an opportunity for yac.

Watson is Average with a better supporting cast.

Int rate the last two seasons -

Watson 1070 att , 30 INT - 1/35.6
Mahomes 1164att , 25 INT - 1/46.5 (Hmmm the gunslinger with a lower INT rate?)

Reading a defense -

Watson often only had single reads or multiple receivers on one side of the field.

Mahomes had multiple reads across the field in a much more complex offense.


The ability to improvise when a play breaks down .... Mahomes can throw on the run , off balance , weird angles because of that big arm , Watson doesn't have that big arm.
Click to expand...

You are giving Mahomes way too much credit on reading defenses. That offense is set up specifically to overload a portion of the field and allow the QB to make easy reads and get the ball out quick before having to deal with pressure. Are you really suggesting that Watson benefited from single reads and multiple WR sets but Mahomes did not? Tech uses more 4 & 5 WR sets than anyone. Heck they don't even have a TE.

And pumping stats is kind of useless. Watson actually ran virtually the same offense at Clemson under Chad Morris and completed 68% of his passes with 14 TD & 2 INT as a true freshman. Then Morris left for SMU and Clemson moved away from the air raid and toward more of a power spread for his SO and JR seasons. However, as a true freshman in Kingsbury's offense (essentially the same offense as Morris) Mahomes only completed 57% of his passes with 16 TD & 4 INT. In the same offense as freshmen, Watson was more efficient.

Now, here's a clip that completely disproves Mahomes doing a full field read while also having a multi-WR set on each side of the field. On this play Mahomes is reading the high Safety in the middle of the field. That guy crashes at the snap and takes away the underneath drag that was Mahomes first option (clearly ASU saw this on film). However, by doing so, the Safety leaves his slot DB susceptible to the post and it's open but Mahomes doesn't see it because he's focused on his first option (the drag). He double clutches instead and also misses the blindingly wide open circle route to the top of the screen (he never even looks that way which immediately eliminates a full field read on this play). He then panics, scrambles, and manages to draw both DB's up with his scrambling ability and still hit the first option drag. He gets the completion off his improv ability and poor communication by both DB's vacating the WR. That's not how you play QB in the NFL though.

giphy.gif



Here's another one. Tech is lined up in a 5 WR set. Mahomes makes a quick read to the slot fade at the bottom of the screen. The DB gets a solid press and Mahomes immediately starts to panic. No 2nd read despite the backslide drag being open after an initial rub. He never even looks for it before scrambling. Again, clearly no full field read here.

giphy.gif



I don't make this post trying to trumpet Watson over Mahomes. He suffers the same flaws as does pretty much every spread QB these days. These offenses are designed to create mismatches in coverage and exploit them. They are not designed to teach QB's how to read and dissect defenses.

My point though is that Mahomes was not doing full field reads every play. His offense was designed to overload coverages and flood zones with multiple receivers and make defenses pick their poison. The Texas Tech offense is complex for defenses to defend because of all the combination routes they have to cover while also getting a pass rush and containing Mahomes to the pocket. It is not complex for the Tech players. Most of the OL are in two-point stance and blocking with huge splits, the receivers aren't running full route trees and typically are only running combinations, and the QB is usually only making one or two reads on a given play.

Mahomes is a smart kid and he got drafted by a renowned QB coach in Andy Reid. He can learn these things and be a very good NFL QB. But he will have to learn because he was not doing these things in college. Far from it.
 
Corrosion said:
The difference between Mahomes and Watson is night and day ....

Accuracy and ball placement - Mahomes is Special , he throws guys open and or leaves them an opportunity for yac.

Watson is Average with a better supporting cast.

Int rate the last two seasons -

Watson 1070 att , 30 INT - 1/35.6
Mahomes 1164att , 25 INT - 1/46.5 (Hmmm the gunslinger with a lower INT rate?)

Reading a defense -

Watson often only had single reads or multiple receivers on one side of the field.

Mahomes had multiple reads across the field in a much more complex offense.


The ability to improvise when a play breaks down .... Mahomes can throw on the run , off balance , weird angles because of that big arm , Watson doesn't have that big arm.
Click to expand...

He did pretty well (twice) against a Nick Saban coached defense with filthy rosters full of future NFL players. I'll give him a shot
 
Texian said:
For starters there is this: https://twitter.com/Cianaf/status/850806399949045760

Then there is this; http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/individual/740

Passing Efficiency
Peterman = #8
Trubisky = #11
Mahomes = #12
Watson = #19

Yards per Passing Attempt
Peterman = #7
Mahomes = #15
Trubisky = #22
Watson = #33

Yards per Completion
Peterman = #4
Mahomes = #40
Trubisky = #60
Watson = #72

Lastly there is the 30 INTs the last two years.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. What exactly is passing Efficiency? And overall, how important are these stats? I am always careful with college stats, since college offenses often inflates stats - that's where you get your Case Keenums or Johnny Manziells. Are there any numbers for past QBs that succeeded in the NFL?

I thought for Scouts stats don't matter as much as mechanics, arm strength, character, intangibles and measurements.

With a guy like Mahomes you have a high risk high reward Player. A guy, that has (according to some Scouts) basically no mechanics - you have to teach him from the ground up. You have a guy, that doesn't have to do any presnap reads and only limited reads on the field. Yet you have an agile guy with a Monster of an arm. If you can fix his mechanics you got a gem - if not you have a bust.

Of course, INTs are a major concern. The question is always, how did the INT happen? Is that something you can correct? It seems like Watsons INTs were either because of inacurate throws (lack of concentration? Bad mechanics?) or bad decisions (when he tried to throw over a defender).
 
Dakota said:
He did pretty well (twice) against a Nick Saban coached defense with filthy rosters full of future NFL players. I'll give him a shot
Click to expand...


I was just explaining why I preferred Mahomes.

Doesn't mean I wont give him a chance ....
 
For me, it's all about the risk/reward ratio.

I rated Trubisky no. 1 as he looks to be the most solid overall QB.
He goes beyond the second read in his progression, makes good decision, and plays within himself.
For a guy with limited playing time, it shows that he had dedicated plenty of time learning while sitting on the bench.

Mahomes was no. 2 on my list because his arm strength and his knack of making plays off schedule.
I actually has him with the best potential.
But there's a risk with him having chemistry in an NFL system.
If he has an O-line that plays together for an extended period of time, they can get use to his free-lancing.
If it's a revolving door situation, he will need to learn to stay in the pocket more.
The same goes with the receivers.
The salary cap situation in the NFL today sees a lot of movements of players from one team to another.

Watson has some pluses in that he has a quick delivery and can make quick decisions - sometimes too quickly for his own good.
He's not as accurate as the other two.
He has a penchant to take off and run.
He's also often careless with the ball while running and he doesn't know how to protect himself.
We saw bad things with VY and RG III.
Look at how many games Vick missed.
That's why he wasn't even a firm no. 3 on my list.
But, I think learning to play slower is "easier" than learning to play faster, so there's hope for him.

The next guy in the toss-up for me is Kizer.
The fact that his system has more of a semblance to a pro system is one factor. Sometimes, they say he's a bit slow, but that's because he goes through more reads than the other 3.
It's just a nature of the offense.
They have 2TE sets and HB-RB-TE sets
That, and the fact that he has good size.

The last guy for me is CJ Beathard.
He runs a WCO offense with many elements of the pro sets.
His playing with nagging injuries the last two years is a concern though.
If not for that, he would have played better and get the no. 3 spot on my list.

So that's why the toss-up between 3-5 for me (even though Beathard ended up as the 6th QB drafted, behind Webb.)

So, for me, Watson is still a good prospect, as long as he can stay healthy.

What I hated the most is that the 25th draft slot is more than enough to trade down to get both Kizer and Beathard.
And you can still keep next year 1st rounder (with a strong QB class coming up.)

As a team, I would have 3 darts instead of one.
I can also use that third dart on an O-lineman, by the way.
It's all about the risk/ reward ration for me when a guy is not a sure thing.
 
What I don't like about Watson..


He's short. Joe Montana short, not Doug Flutie short.

He played on a very talented team.

He's streaky.

Cleveland passed on him.
 
thunderkyss said:
What I don't like about Watson..


He's short. Joe Montana short, not Doug Flutie short.

He played on a very talented team.

He's streaky.

Cleveland passed on him.
Click to expand...
Good points. I would add that he has a thin frame without much room to add weight.
 
beerlover said:
A QB's objective is not to post up stats but Championships. Pretty hard if your not playing @ Alabama but Watson did and made it to the dance previous year staging a furious late run only to come up short.
Click to expand...
And you think people didn't realize that?
 
Thing that troubles me is that if you go look at any write ups on him, watch people discussing him it all ends up being "He is a winner! Just wins" and "He beat Bama". Hell! Johnny Manziel was that.

I understand the love if intangibles but what is going to actually make him great?
 
Texian said:
For starters there is this: https://twitter.com/Cianaf/status/850806399949045760

Then there is this; http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/individual/740

Passing Efficiency
Peterman = #8
Trubisky = #11
Mahomes = #12
Watson = #19

Yards per Passing Attempt
Peterman = #7
Mahomes = #15
Trubisky = #22
Watson = #33

Yards per Completion
Peterman = #4
Mahomes = #40
Trubisky = #60
Watson = #72

Lastly there is the 30 INTs the last two years.
Click to expand...

On the first link one of the criticisms of Watson referenced him running into or towards pressure...I had Carr flashbacks and threw up...
 
DX-TEX said:
Thing that troubles me is that if you go look at any write ups on him, watch people discussing him it all ends up being "He is a winner! Just wins" and "He beat Bama". Hell! Johnny Manziel was that.

I understand the love if intangibles but what is going to actually make him great?
Click to expand...

People said the same about Tebow, Manziel, and Vince Young...we know how they all worked out...
 
DX-TEX said:
Thing that troubles me is that if you go look at any write ups on him, watch people discussing him it all ends up being "He is a winner! Just wins" and "He beat Bama". Hell! Johnny Manziel was that.

I understand the love if intangibles but what is going to actually make him great?
Click to expand...
A quick strike offense.
He just need to learn to throw the ball away when it's not there, and choose to run only when there's a clear lane (while protecting the ball and himself.)

It's possible if OB can adapt his offense to the player's strength.
 
Who leads his team to the most victories? Give me that guy.

Deshaun is getting **** on for 2 year starters and dudes who need the sideline to make the read for them? Ridiculous. Watson was a high school champion, college champion and a natural leader and the sooner he gets injected into the lineup the better.

People hypothesizing on throwing motions and desire to use his feet to extend or make plays just don't like Watson's style and sadly will never fully support him in the future waiting for the perfect " I told you so moment" where they link to their post as if calling heads or tails is some kind of mutant ability.

Is it August yet?
 
Uncle Rico said:
Who leads his team to the most victories? Give me that guy.

Deshaun is getting **** on for 2 year starters and dudes who need the sideline to make the read for them? Ridiculous. Watson was a high school champion, college champion and a natural leader and the sooner he gets injected into the lineup the better.

People hypothesizing on throwing motions and desire to use his feet to extend or make plays just don't like Watson's style and sadly will never fully support him in the future waiting for the perfect " I told you so moment" where they link to their post as if calling heads or tails is some kind of mutant ability.

Is it August yet?
Click to expand...

VY likes this post

Tebow prays for this post

The question is can you win SB's with the type of style you brought up. So far the answer has been a resounding NO. McNabb got close but threw up on TO's shoes. Maybe Watson has better composure.
 
One of the primary criticisms about Watson is his 30 INTs the last two seasons.

Out of curiosity, I looked up HoF QBs college stats. Dan Marino had 46 INTs in his last two college seasons. Steve Young had 28. Dan Fouts had 30.

I'm not saying Watson is going to be Marino, Young, or Fouts, but rather stats can sometimes be misleading.

What I do like about Watson is that big moments do not overwhelm him. He is very driven, and very serious about his career from everything that I've seen. He's a natural leader. All three of these are intangibles that cannot be taught. A man has those qualities about him or he doesn't.

Obviously, it remains to be seen if it translates to the NFL, but that can be said about every rookie QB. None of them are a sure thing with the exception of maybe Peyton Manning.

I like his potential, and based on that, I'm looking forward to seeing if this blind squirrel team finally stumbled upon a nut.
 
Wasn't my top guy. Or second, third or fourth....

But there are thing I like about him in regards to what he can do on the field. After drafting him I found a few more things to like about him.

Went from hating the pick to being cautiously optimistic.

That's probably where I'll stay until seeing him play NFL football. Cautiously optimistic.
 
Lucky said:
Maybe we should revisit this thread after he plays a few games in the NFL? Just thinking outside the box.
Click to expand...
As a player, I'm good with Watson.
I think of him more highly than Osweiler out of college; that's for sure.
I never entertained the idea of drafting Osweiler.
I do consider Watson as a legitimate prospect.

It's just the cost of acquiring that doesn't sit well with me; especially on the backend of losing a 2nd in 2018 just for dumping Osweiler.

It's just a total lack of vision to me.
Double Barrel said:
One of the primary criticisms about Watson is his 30 INTs the last two seasons.

Out of curiosity, I looked up HoF QBs college stats. Dan Marino had 46 INTs in his last two college seasons. Steve Young had 28. Dan Fouts had 30.

I'm not saying Watson is going to be Marino, Young, or Fouts, but rather stats can sometimes be misleading.

What I do like about Watson is that big moments do not overwhelm him. He is very driven, and very serious about his career from everything that I've seen. He's a natural leader. All three of these are intangibles that cannot be taught. A man has those qualities about him or he doesn't.

Obviously, it remains to be seen if it translates to the NFL, but that can be said about every rookie QB. None of them are a sure thing with the exception of maybe Peyton Manning.

I like his potential, and based on that, I'm looking forward to seeing if this blind squirrel team finally stumbled upon a nut.
Click to expand...
Forget about the " old guys".
How they played football back then is nothing like today.
 
76Texan said:
A quick strike offense.
He just need to learn to throw the ball away when it's not there, and choose to run only when there's a clear lane (while protecting the ball and himself.)

It's possible if OB can adapt his offense to the player's strength.
Click to expand...

This is my biggest concern as well. To me it seems O'Brien is more intent of hammering a square peg into a round hole, he doesn't seem the type that adapts easily to what's given to him.

My biggest concerns for Watson are:
1. Does he fit into O'Briens MIT level offensive system.
2. Can he read an NFL defense.
3. Arm strength, his throws have a lot of air under them and open windows in the NFL are much smaller than college.
 
Last edited:
texan279 said:
People said the same about Tebow, Manziel, and Vince Young...we know how they all worked out...
Click to expand...

Totally different problems. Tebow had real bad mechanics. People were doubting him coming out of college, because he is basically just a runner, that can toss a ball, but not really throw - out of the draft people were suggesting, he should move positions.

Manziel is shorter, doesn't have the mechanics - and most importantly lacks the intangibles. He doesn't have the work ethics or leading character. He could have succeeded, but he doesn't do what is necessary.

Young was just not mature and stable enough. He was good out of the gate, but couldn't handle adversity.

I am not scared of any of that being a problem for Watson. I think if we need to be scared it is because of his turnovers, reading the field and thin frame making him injury prone - not because of his work ethic, maturity, way to handle adversity or mechanics.
 
Uncle Rico said:
Who leads his team to the most victories? Give me that guy.

Deshaun is getting **** on for 2 year starters and dudes who need the sideline to make the read for them? Ridiculous. Watson was a high school champion, college champion and a natural leader and the sooner he gets injected into the lineup the better.

People hypothesizing on throwing motions and desire to use his feet to extend or make plays just don't like Watson's style and sadly will never fully support him in the future waiting for the perfect " I told you so moment" where they link to their post as if calling heads or tails is some kind of mutant ability.

Is it August yet?
Click to expand...

So people aren't allowed to hold critical opinions of the kid ... in a thread asking for critical opinions of the kid?

And beyond reasonable responses to the op question, who's really sh*tt*ng on him?

As for who 'leads his team to the most victories', here ya go ...

Craig Erickson
Gino Torretta
Jay Barker
Danny Wuerffel
Brian Griese
Tee Martin
Chris Weinke
Josh Heupel
Ken Dorsey
Criag Krenzel
Matt Mauck
Matt Leinart
Vince Young
Chris Leak
Tim Tebow
Greg McElroy
Cardale Jones
Jake Coker

... you still want 'that guy'? Great, you can have him..
 
Mollywhopper said:
So people aren't allowed to hold critical opinions of the kid ... in a thread asking for critical opinions of the kid?

And beyond reasonable responses to the op question, who's really sh*tt*ng on him?

As for who 'leads his team to the most victories', here ya go ...

Craig Erickson
Gino Torretta
Jay Barker
Danny Wuerffel
Brian Griese
Tee Martin
Chris Weinke
Josh Heupel
Ken Dorsey
Criag Krenzel
Matt Mauck
Matt Leinart
Vince Young
Chris Leak
Tim Tebow
Greg McElroy
Cardale Jones
Jake Coker

... you still want 'that guy'? Great, you can have him..
Click to expand...

How many of those guys were universally deemed 1st round worthy?

College football is almost a different sport. With all the leagues, systems, etc. ... seems to me the NFL does a pretty good job as a whole. National Champions getting 7th or UDFA and 5-7 Elway going in the 1st.
 
infantrycak said:
How many of those guys were universally deemed 1st round worthy?

College football is almost a different sport. With all the leagues, systems, etc. ... seems to me the NFL does a pretty good job ad a whole. National Champions getting 7th or UDFA and 5-7 Elway going in the 1st.
Click to expand...

He asked for the guy that leads his team to the most victories.
 
Mollywhopper said:
He asked for the guy that leads his team to the most victories.
Click to expand...

I know and I was pointing out it is a ridiculous standard.

College players put up ridiculous and mundane stats and the NFL judges them. They put up championships or are on losing teams and the NFL judges them different. Fact the fans see little difference makes no difference.
 
76Texan said:
It's possible if OB can adapt his offense to the player's strength.
Click to expand...

Does this seem likely? Has OB done this for his other dozen QBs? I worry about this cause I think this is what is necessary and I have my doubts about OB's willingness to design to the QB's talents.
 
TripleTap said:
Does this seem likely? Has OB done this for his other dozen QBs? I worry about this cause I think this is what is necessary and I have my doubts about OB's willingness to design to the QB's talents.
Click to expand...

I hate making this seem like a defense of OB, but an honest question: Fitz, Hoyer, Mallett, Osweiler, Savage. What exactly were their talents/strengths that were good enough to design an offense around? We've had three years of backup QB's pretending to be starters.
 
Double Barrel said:
One of the primary criticisms about Watson is his 30 INTs the last two seasons.

Out of curiosity, I looked up HoF QBs college stats. Dan Marino had 46 INTs in his last two college seasons. Steve Young had 28. Dan Fouts had 30.

I'm not saying Watson is going to be Marino, Young, or Fouts, but rather stats can sometimes be misleading.

What I do like about Watson is that big moments do not overwhelm him. He is very driven, and very serious about his career from everything that I've seen. He's a natural leader. All three of these are intangibles that cannot be taught. A man has those qualities about him or he doesn't.

Obviously, it remains to be seen if it translates to the NFL, but that can be said about every rookie QB. None of them are a sure thing with the exception of maybe Peyton Manning.

I like his potential, and based on that, I'm looking forward to seeing if this blind squirrel team finally stumbled upon a nut.
Click to expand...
My only real criticism of Watson was about the INTs. I've been devouring everything I can find on the kid and I'm pretty impressed with him on and off the field.
 
badboy said:
To me this would only matter if all three guys had been available at our pick. Regardless of what the two teams selecting Trubisky and Mahomes thought about Watson, our guys picked him. For me it's "Go Watson. GO.
Click to expand...

I'm not concerned about the other two guys. From what I've read & heard looks like Watson was their guy all along. They could have sat & waited till 25, but I'm glad they went & got their guy.

Two firsts don't bother me in & of itself. That we didn't have a 2nd makes it seem worse, but that was a totally separate deal. If it were the 12 pick for 25 & our 1st & 2nd next season I'd think it was a bit much, but not so much that I'd be upset.

The most important thing to me is that they got their guy.
 
76Texan said:
It's just the cost of acquiring that doesn't sit well with me; especially on the backend of losing a 2nd in 2018 just for dumping Osweiler.

It's just a total lack of vision to me.
Click to expand...

That's where I'm at.

There's a rumor out there that the two deals are connected. We got #12 & freed up $10M of cap space. Cleveland got #25, our 2018 1st & 2nd, and Osweiler.


I'd rather look at it as two separate transactions. Trading 25 & our 2018 1st is heavily in our favor (points wise). Adding our 2018 2nd tilts the scale heavily in Cleveland's favor. Freeing up $10M in cap space, $16M in cash kind of evens it out a bit...... kinda.
 
DocBar said:
My only real criticism of Watson was about the INTs. I've been devouring everything I can find on the kid and I'm pretty impressed with him on and off the field.
Click to expand...
He's an amazing runner. But that could turn into a negative if Watson leans on it too much. I think he's faster than his combine time. Great acceleration, I think he could have been a pro WR. Like Mariota, Watson needs to harness that ability for maximum effect and minimum risk.

I know that most, if not all, of you watched the last drive of the championship game. Rewatch it when you have a chance, and forget about where and when Watson throws, and just look at his demeanor. Seconds left, and he's not even thinking about a field goal to send the game to OT. Neither are the Clemson coaches. They know he has it. Watson knows he has it. That's what the Texans drafted.
 
I know it's been said that Clemson's offense only required Watson to scan one side of the field.

I don't have an issue with that, if that's the way the offense is designed & not a limitation of Watson's. It's not the same as a one read system. I would imagine we'd start him out reading half the field anyway, until the game slows down for him.
 
sandman said:
I hate making this seem like a defense of OB, but an honest question: Fitz, Hoyer, Mallett, Osweiler, Savage. What exactly were their talents/strengths that were good enough to design an offense around? We've had three years of backup QB's pretending to be starters.
Click to expand...

I'd have liked to have seen a lot more screens & slants last year. Easy stuff to get a rhythm QB in rhythm.

I'd have also liked to have seen more sweeps & tosses to the RBs to get them on the edge or in space.

I'd have liked to have seen more Lamar Miller, & Jonathan Grimes in the passing game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top