Who's your quarterback - 2015 v2.0

[thunderkyss]

If I were the Texans I wouldn't take Grayson, because I think they are already prepared to invest in Mallett for the time being. But there are other teams that need QBs and if I were that team I would give Grayson consideration at some point in the first round.

After four years with Mallett I would hope the Texans "know" they can win a Super Bowl with him, just like we knew after three years we wouldn't win one with Schaub (if you were one of those guys, even if you weren't, you "knew" he was going to require a lot of help from Foster, Aj, & the defense).

If they don't, if they think he "might" be the guy & they think that Savage "might" be the guy, I'd have no problem taking another guy they think "might" be the guy. Doesn't matter to me what round, depends on how the draft plays out to me & there usually isn't a lot of difference between a late first & early 4th round pick.

Mallett's had three years, now four of training. Savage is going on year two. If we can find & develop the next Aaron Rodgers & that guy happens to be Dak Prescott (for all I care), that would be great.

To me, that's addressing the QB position. To me, that's investing in the QB position. & that's not like these other teams that continue to throw QBs out there, each one looking less prepared & less capable than the previous.

But if they're "sure" Mallett is the guy & they do everything they need to, to help him succeed, & they're "sure" Savage can be the guy if something unfortunate happens to Mallett, then it shouldn't matter what they think of a QB in this draft unless they see a "can't miss" guy (for their system) that happens to fall to us, or within our reach.

 

[Runner]

The impact of a miss isn't as magnified at other positions as it is with a high round QB miss.

Even if this is true, in the vast majority of cases the payoff for getting a hit isn't nearly as large either.

 

[Mollywhopper]

Even if this is true, in the vast majority of cases the payoff for getting a hit isn't nearly as large either.

I don't think the argument is whether getting it right at QB is any more or less difficult than any other one position. It's comparing focusing all one's attention on QB versus the options all all other positions.

 

[Lucky]

The impact of a miss isn't as magnified at other positions as it is with a high round QB miss.

Why is that?

 

[thunderkyss]

Why is that?

Because no one waits for an outside pass rusher, for example, to learn how to play the game.

We drafted Mario Williams in 2006, number 1 overall. We drafted Connor Barwin in the second round 2009, Brooks Reed in 2011, Whitney Mercilus in 2012.

Then again, I'm sure Texans fans would have preffered we drafted QB twice in the first round & twice in the second round inside of seven seasons.

Where it is expected to substitute at every other position during every game, it is hoped that you do not change the QB mid-season.

 

[Lucky]

Because no one waits for an outside pass rusher, for example, to learn how to play the game.

Most rookies have to learn the ropes of the NFL. That's a cop out. Can't draft a QB because you have to coach them? That's not a reason. Can this guy help you win? That's the question that's valid.

 

[thunderkyss]

Most rookies have to learn the ropes of the NFL. That's a cop out. Can't draft a QB because you have to coach them? That's not a reason. Can this guy help you win? That's the question that's valid.

Who said you can't draft a QB because you have to coach them?

You asked why a miss on a high round QB hurts moreso than other positions. That's the question I answered.

 

[Marshall]

Most rookies have to learn the ropes of the NFL. That's a cop out. Can't draft a QB because you have to coach them? That's not a reason. Can this guy help you win? That's the question that's valid.

In almost all cases the answer will be no with a rookie QB. You hope to find someone who will grow into the role in a couple of years.

 

[ObsiWan]

Why is that?

You can "hide" deficiencies at other positions easier than QB. You can move the guy you drafted to be your stud LT to RT or OG if he flops at LT. The guy you drafted as a stud RB but can't catch or doesn't pick up blitzes can be taken out on 3rd downs.

It's harder to hide a QB who doesn't recognize blitz pkgs coming at him or who stares down his receivers. And it takes them longer to obtain proficiency at the NFL level.

I'm not saying don't draft a QB if there's one O'Brien believes in. I just think that guy is already on the team in Mallett.

 

[Lucky]

You asked why a miss on a high round QB hurts moreso than otddher positions. That's the question I answered.

You didn't answer a thing. A miss is a miss. If you miss on a dt , you still have to find another dt. Same with QB. Only with QB, it is more imperative.

The missing on a QB is worse argument doesn't hold water. Other than you still don't have a QB. That's what is worse.

I would like to say that I've seen enough from Mallett or Savage to know the QB position is secure. That we would be a lie. I don't know how O'Brien can feel any differently. I don't see how he can stop looking. And that means the draft, free agency, experimental cloning. Whatever it takes.

 

[thunderkyss]

You didn't answer a thing. A miss is a miss. If you miss on a dt , you still have to find another dt. Same with QB. Only with QB, it is more imperative.

The missing on a QB is worse argument doesn't hold water. Other than you still don't have a QB. That's what is worse.

I answered your question.

I never said anything about not drafting a QB for any reason, in relation to your question.

I agree with you that the Texans should add another QB to the mix. I could care less what round they take him, as long as they take a guy they believe in. Three shots, imo, is better than one. It is the primary position that defines your franchise & your franchise is on hold until you find the guy. Then you'll give that guy every opportunity to prove you wrong. & I've seen that process take as long as three years.

New York Jets for instance, how long have they wasted on Geno Smith? They knew what they had in Geno Smith. They knew what they had in Michael Vick. They passed on Bridgewater, they passed on Garoppolo, they passed on Mettenberger...

But they wanted to give Geno a second season to prove what they already knew.

 

[WolverineFan]

New York Jets for instance, how long have they wasted on Geno Smith? They knew what they had in Geno Smith. They knew what they had in Michael Vick. They passed on Bridgewater, they passed on Garoppolo, they passed on Mettenberger...

But they wanted to give Geno a second season to prove what they already knew.

Not they. Him. As in John Idzik. As a GM his reign is tied to the QB he drafts. He drafted Geno Smith. If Geno isn't the answer then Idzik probably gets the axe along with him. It was in his best interest to keep Geno as the starting QB because as long as they are "seeing what they have" he has a chance to keep his job.

That's the problem with the NFL these days. The lifespan of these HC and GM jobs is so short that guys will detriment their own teams if it means holding onto their job for another year. We all knew Geno wasn't the answer. But admitting it is admitting that you screwed up and giving your boss a reason to fire you.

 

[thunderkyss]

Not they. Him. As in John Idzik. As a GM his reign is tied to the QB he drafts. He drafted Geno Smith. If Geno isn't the answer then Idzik probably gets the axe along with him. It was in his best interest to keep Geno as the starting QB because as long as they are "seeing what they have" he has a chance to keep his job.
.

But it doesn't matter that he also drafted Sheldon Richardson in the first round of 2013 after drafting Quinton Coples in the first round of 2012, Muhammed Wilkonson in the first round of 2011...

I know Idzik didn't draft all of them, but drafting & missing on first round DLmen doesn't count against the Jets as much as missing on Sanchez & Smith.

 

[Lucky]

New York Jets for instance, how long have they wasted on Geno Smith?

Smith had to play as a rookie because Mark Sanchez was injured in the preseason. How many years was Sanchez given?

Here's the question I have: Is the risk taking a QB early, or is the real problem not having anyone in the organization capable of identifying a franchise QB? If I'm a Jets or Browns fan, I don't want them drafting a QB early. Because they've proven to be clueless in regards to the position. Do we feel the same about O'Brien? No. Not yet, anyway.

 

[thunderkyss]

Smith had to play as a rookie because Mark Sanchez was injured in the preseason. How many years was Sanchez given?

Again, goes back to the point that missing on an early round QB will stifle a team more than a miss at any other position.

Here's the question I have: Is the risk taking a QB early, or is the real problem not having anyone in the organization capable of identifying a franchise QB? If I'm a Jets or Browns fan, I don't want them drafting a QB early. Because they've proven to be clueless in regards to the position. Do we feel the same about O'Brien? No. Not yet, anyway.

I don't have a problem with the Texans taking a QB in the first round. But yes, too many teams don't know how to identify a franchise QB, they don't have the foundation needed to develop a franchise QB, & they don't know how to develop that franchise QB.

It appears too many teams think they can draft a "franchise QB" & let him start winning.

But I also don't believe there is a franchise QB in every draft, or even every other draft. I didn't see one last year & after what I saw O'Brien do with Fitzpatrick, I believe he can make Tom Savage just as successful as Blake Bortles in this division.

Mariota is a talented Mofo, but if he goes to the Jets, he won't be a Franchise QB. Unless, of course, they bring in someone who can develop a franchise QB & build a team that can win without a QB. If he goes to Tampa Bay, he won't be a franchise QB.

A team that can win without a QB would be a team like ours, or Buffalos, or KC, if I were a GM, I wouldn't draft a first round QB unless my club can prove they know how to win.... or unless there is a can't miss guy there. Can't miss guy would be Andrew Luck, Phillip Rivers, Matthew Stafford, Matt Ryan, Sam Bradford type guys.

I never would have let Jed Fisch start Blake Bortles. He couldn't put together a competent offense last season with Gabbert (1st round QB) or Henne (2nd round QB) & he couldn't do it this year with Henne or Bortles (1st round QB). Firing Jed Fisch should have already happened if you ask me. Yeah, Blake is looking better now, than he did at the beginning of the season, but I'd bet that's more Bortles than Fisch.

 

[Lucky]

Again, goes back to the point that missing on an early round QB will stifle a team more than a miss at any other position.

No. No it's not. Ryan loved Sanchez. Gave him an extension. Misjudging talent was the problem.

But I also don't believe there is a franchise QB in every draft, or even every other draft. I didn't see one last year & after what I saw O'Brien do with Fitzpatrick, I believe he can make Tom Savage just as successful as Blake Bortles in this division.

I'm not turning this into a draft thread, but history shows you are wrong. 1-1.5 QBs a year come out of the draft as franchise QBs. And 32 of 32 NFL teams would disagree with your Bortles/Savage comparision.

 

[ObsiWan]

Smith had to play as a rookie because Mark Sanchez was injured in the preseason. How many years was Sanchez given?

Here's the question I have: Is the risk taking a QB early, or is the real problem not having anyone in the organization capable of identifying a franchise QB? If I'm a Jets or Browns fan, I don't want them drafting a QB early. Because they've proven to be clueless in regards to the position. Do we feel the same about O'Brien? No. Not yet, anyway.

The answer to that question is an emphatic "YES". The real problem is not being able to identify a guy that will operate your offense effectively and efficiently. Rex, being a defensive guy, shouldn't have been the one to make the decision on Sanchez.

I have more faith in O'Brien making a good call on "his QB" than I would Rex Ryan.

 

[thunderkyss]

I'm not turning this into a draft thread, but history shows you are wrong. 1-1.5 QBs a year come out of the draft as franchise QBs. And 32 of 32 NFL teams would disagree with your Bortles/Savage comparision.

Depends on how you define the terms. Starting QBs, sure, I can see 1-1.5 a year. Franchise QBs.... not even close.

As far as what 32/32 teams disagree with me on... I'm sitting on my couch for a reason, but I stand by my opinion. We'll see.

 

[Marshall]

No. No it's not. Ryan loved Sanchez. Gave him an extension. Misjudging talent was the problem.

I'm not turning this into a draft thread, but history shows you are wrong. 1-1.5 QBs a year come out of the draft as franchise QBs. And 32 of 32 NFL teams would disagree with your Bortles/Savage comparision.

That is barely a decent number for QB's starting a majority of games in a year. Those numbers hardly constitute Franchise QB's and certainly do not constitute elite Franchise QBs.

There are maybe six right now who have come into the league over the last 15 years so a MEAN AVERAGE of 1 every 2-3 years is closer to the reality.

 

[Lucky]

Depends on how you define the terms. Starting QBs, sure, I can see 1-1.5 a year. Franchise QBs.... not even close.

So only a Peyton, Brady, or Luck is worth drafting, huh? The Texans couldn't use a Big Ben, Ryan, Eli, Wilson, Newton, Dalton, etc? Not worth drafting I guess.

 

[thunderkyss]

So only a Peyton, Brady, or Luck is worth drafting, huh? The Texans couldn't use a Big Ben, Ryan, Eli, Wilson, Newton, Dalton, etc? Not worth drafting I guess.

That's not what I said.

List the 5 franchise QBs from the last five drafts.

 

[Tolar's Ghost]

..I have more faith in O'Brien making a good call on "his QB" than I would Rex Ryan.

Good point...

But he didn't make such a good call on cutting Keenum. Or in waiting as long as he did to bring him back.

If nothing else, Keenum showed in his two games that he can be a competent backup QB in the league -- and maybe, with the right team, more than that.

 

[Marshall]

So only a Peyton, Brady, or Luck is worth drafting, huh? The Texans couldn't use a Big Ben, Ryan, Eli, Wilson, Newton, Dalton, etc? Not worth drafting I guess.

Drafting? yes, but not at 1-1 except perhaps Big Ben. The rest are no better than lower first rounders. Nothing wrong with late first rounders if you aren't reaching for fifth rounders with your first.

 

[Lucky]

I don't have a problem with the Texans taking a QB in the first round. But yes, too many teams don't know how to identify a franchise QB, they don't have the foundation needed to develop a franchise QB, & they don't know how to develop that franchise QB.

It appears too many teams think they can draft a "franchise QB" & let him start winning.

But I also don't believe there is a franchise QB in every draft

That's not what I said.

List the 5 franchise QBs from the last five drafts.

You said that you didn't have a problem taking a QB in the 1st. The, you introduce the term franchise QB. So now you're saying that aren't that many franchise QBs in the league. I can't keep up. A franchise QB means to me, the franchise doesn't have to be concerned with the QB position. Not a system QB, where you're still looking for one. Matthew Stafford is a franchise QB. Alex Smith is not.

Luck, Wilson, Newton, Kaepernick, and Dalton. These franchises aren't concerned with the QB position. Most aren't perfect. But it has been proven that you can win with them. Can't call Bortles, Carr, and Bridgewater franchise QBs yet because it's too soon to know (though they've shown promise). But these teams aren't worried about the position. RGIII who was an obvious franchise QB prior to his injury. Tannehill, hasn't quite made that step. But, he was worth the pick. That's 10 QBs over the past 5 drafts that if available when the Texans draft, would be well worth the pick. That's 2 a year. I'm not guaranteeing there will be one at #16. But the odds are good there will be.

 

[tedr]

In response to the original question- Mallett as starter, Keenum and Savage fight it out for backup.

 

[speedfreek]

9-7 is a good year, but it puts you in a crappy spot to get
a franchise QB.

Not to mention, we will lose cap casualty starters I think..

If we manage to trade into a high slot then great, but if not:

1) Mallett goes into camp as the starter
2) Keenum goes in as the backup
3) Savage competes for the backup gig.

No more StinkyPete(tm). He's too expensive, and he is not an
upgrade over the current #1 or #2.
(compare his numbers vs. Keenum against the same Jags team -- not worth the money)

 

[JB]

In response to the original question- Mallett as starter, Keenum and Savage fight it out for backup.

Fitz is under contract, Keenum is not. I think it'll be Fitz along with Mallett and Savage

 

[speedfreek]

Fitz is under contract, Keenum is not. I think it'll be Fitz along with Mallett and Savage

Fitz is expensive, and is pretty much all he will ever become -- that
story is written

Keenum is cheap, and has less than one year in this system -- open book.

Given our cap situation, only a stubborn fool brings fitz back next year.

 

[JB]

Fitz is expensive, and is pretty much all he will ever become -- that
story is written

Keenum is cheap, and has less than one year in this system -- open book.

Given our cap situation, only a stubborn fool brings fitz back next year.

what cap situation would that be? The cap will be going up. We're not in any cap difficulty at all.

 

[badboy]

9-7 is a good year, but it puts you in a crappy spot to get
a franchise QB.

Not to mention, we will lose cap casualty starters I think..

If we manage to trade into a high slot then great, but if not:

1) Mallett goes into camp as the starter
2) Keenum goes in as the backup
3) Savage competes for the backup gig.

No more StinkyPete(tm). He's too expensive, and he is not an
upgrade over the current #1 or #2.
(compare his numbers vs. Keenum against the same Jags team -- not worth the money)

We can pay whomever we want but should move one or two or not re-sign certain players if we can replace them more cheaply. For example, give Joseph's money to KJ and Newton and maybe have enough for Lewis. Bouye, Jackson, Roll and Morris for corners. Reed gone.

 

[speedfreek]

what cap situation would that be? The cap will be going up. We're not in any cap difficulty at all.

3 mil shouldn't be going to fitz. It should be split between AJ/KJ/Jo, in my
opinion

 

[badboy]

Fitz is expensive, and is pretty much all he will ever become -- that
story is written

Keenum is cheap, and has less than one year in this system -- open book.

Given our cap situation, only a stubborn fool brings fitz back next year.

what is the cap situation you and other refer to? Please show some facts. I like Keenum but Fitz was a better QB this season. I say bring all four to camp and keep the best three. I would even be ok with FItz, Mallett and Savage with Keenum (if still elig) on PS. Fitz at $3.375 m is not expensive.

 

[speedfreek]

Fitz wasn't the best QB against Jacksonville..
And the best win the team had all year was against
the 9-5 Ravens.

And 3.375 mil for a guy who, in no way, will impact your
future is a waste.

We need to use that money to pay other vets -- we lose
too many of those, and it will almost be another rebuild.

I would screw with the defense _as little as possible_, as they
gelled BIGTIME in the last 3 games.

what is the cap situation you and other refer to? Please show some facts. I like Keenum but Fitz was a better QB this season. I say bring all four to camp and keep the best three. I would even be ok with FItz, Mallett and Savage with Keenum (if still elig) on PS. Fitz at $3.375 m is not expensive.

 

[JB]

what is the cap situation you and other refer to? Please show some facts. I like Keenum but Fitz was a better QB this season. I say bring all four to camp and keep the best three. I would even be ok with FItz, Mallett and Savage with Keenum (if still elig) on PS. Fitz at $3.375 m is not expensive.

Exactly. I don't know where all this we're in cap hell fallacy is coming from. Probably just from Rick Smith haters that have gotten so used to the mantra that facts no longer matter.

 

[badboy]

3 mil shouldn't be going to fitz. It should be split between AJ/KJ/Jo, in my
opinion

I am confused on your thinking as AJ and Joseph are on roster and we don't have to put any money towards them, ok with cutting a player to use elsewhere and if Fitz is beat out by all three others..then let him go. No reason to cut any of the 4 until preseason say game three unless one falls apart.

 

[speedfreek]

When there is talk of letting AJ walk, and not bringing back foster,
or kareem, or etc. then it's obvious the cap situation isn't as peachy
as you seem to think it is..

Exactly. I don't know where all this we're in cap hell fallacy is coming from. Probably just from Rick Smith haters that have gotten so used to the mantra that facts no longer matter.

 

[JB]

When there is talk of letting AJ walk, and not bringing back foster,
or kareem, or etc. then it's obvious the cap situation isn't as peachy
as you seem to think it is..

Who is doing the talking? Consider the source.

 

[Lucky]

Exactly. I don't know where all this we're in cap hell fallacy is coming from. Probably just from Rick Smith haters that have gotten so used to the mantra that facts no longer matter.

I don't see a cap issue. But, I don't want Fitz back and I wouldn't sign Keenum for anything guaranteed. I believe there will be better options available.

 

[badboy]

Fitz wasn't the best QB against Jacksonville..
And the best win the team had all year was against
the 9-5 Ravens.

And 3.375 mil for a guy who, in no way, will impact your
future is a waste.

We need to use that money to pay other vets -- we lose
too many of those, and it will almost be another rebuild.

I would screw with the defense _as little as possible_, as they
gelled BIGTIME in the last 3 games.

ok what do you think the roster salary will be in 2015 and what do we have to spend on whomever you want? Again we do not have to cut anyone to pay our guys. I do have us cutting Joseph but we can keep him if we choose.

 

[JB]

I don't see a cap issue. But, I don't want Fitz back and I wouldn't sign Keenum for anything guaranteed. I believe there will be better options available.

Agree with this. Fitz may want to elsewhere. If he wants to stay knowing he has no shot at starting then I don't want him anyway.

 

[badboy]

Agree with this. Fitz may want to elsewhere. If he wants to stay knowing he has no shot at starting then I don't want him anyway.

I am gonna guess that Fitz will want to compete for this roster especially with QBs dropping like me after eating a slab of ribs and tater salad. Also think that being benched was good for him. Now if someone wants to give us a low round draft pick for Fitzy...

 

[JB]

I am gonna guess that Fitz will want to compete for this roster especially with QBs dropping like me after eating a slab of ribs and tater salad. Also think that being benched was good for him. Now if someone wants to give us a low round draft pick for Fitzy...

I guess it all depends on if OB tells him he's competing for starter job or backup job.

 

[PapaL]

I have the feeling that Mallet is our #1 next year with Fitz and Savage at 2 and 3. I think we Mallet at a more than reasonable price so he can prove what he's worth. In theory Savage should challenge for #1 the year after that if Mallet doesn't excel.

That's my theory short of one of the big names falling to us at 16.

 

[infantrycak]

You said that you didn't have a problem taking a QB in the 1st. The, you introduce the term franchise QB. So now you're saying that aren't that many franchise QBs in the league. I can't keep up. A franchise QB means to me, the franchise doesn't have to be concerned with the QB position. Not a system QB, where you're still looking for one. Matthew Stafford is a franchise QB. Alex Smith is not.

Luck, Wilson, Newton, Kaepernick, and Dalton. These franchises aren't concerned with the QB position. Most aren't perfect. But it has been proven that you can win with them. Can't call Bortles, Carr, and Bridgewater franchise QBs yet because it's too soon to know (though they've shown promise). But these teams aren't worried about the position. RGIII who was an obvious franchise QB prior to his injury. Tannehill, hasn't quite made that step. But, he was worth the pick. That's 10 QBs over the past 5 drafts that if available when the Texans draft, would be well worth the pick. That's 2 a year. I'm not guaranteeing there will be one at #16. But the odds are good there will be.

Well said. Most years there is at least one solid QB who as you say their franchises are not concerned about - they aren't looking for replacements. Everyone would love to be the Colts and only be in the market when Manning and Luck are available but that's not realistic or necessary.

 

[badboy]

I guess it all depends on if OB tells him he's competing for starter job or backup job.

lol but we ended up a 6th for what's his name..chuckle; wished Blue was doing more for us.

 

[JB]

lol but we ended up a 6th for what's his name..chuckle; wished Blue was doing more for us.

lol even the Raiders couldn't be that dumb again could they. I wish Blue would do more than he has also, but was really impressed with Grimes today. Love the way he attacks the hole with speed and power

 

[thunderkyss]

You said that you didn't have a problem taking a QB in the 1st. The, you introduce the term franchise QB. So now you're saying that aren't that many franchise QBs in the league. I can't keep up. A franchise QB means to me, the franchise doesn't have to be concerned with the QB position. Not a system QB, where you're still looking for one. Matthew Stafford is a franchise QB. Alex Smith is not.

Luck, Wilson, Newton, Kaepernick, and Dalton. These franchises aren't concerned with the QB position. Most aren't perfect. But it has been proven that you can win with them. Can't call Bortles, Carr, and Bridgewater franchise QBs yet because it's too soon to know (though they've shown promise). But these teams aren't worried about the position. RGIII who was an obvious franchise QB prior to his injury. Tannehill, hasn't quite made that step. But, he was worth the pick. That's 10 QBs over the past 5 drafts that if available when the Texans draft, would be well worth the pick. That's 2 a year. I'm not guaranteeing there will be one at #16. But the odds are good there will be.

None of that proves that I said I wouldn't draft Newton, Roethlisberger, Wilson & the others...

I think a franchise QB is a guy you build your team around because you know you can win a Super Bowl with him.

However, I'll concede the point that there is 1-1.5 of them in the draft.

The only point I wanted to argue is that missing on an early round QB hurts the progress of your team more than missing on any other position taken early in the draft.

 

[JB]

The only point I wanted to argue is that missing on an early round QB hurts the progress of your team more than missing on any other position taken early in the draft.

Only because you only have one of them on the field, multiple of every other position

 

[infantrycak]

The only point I wanted to argue is that missing on an early round QB hurts the progress of your team more than missing on any other position taken early in the draft.

Maybe. Then again where would we be today if Clowney had contributed 10 sacks, 10 TFL etc.?

 

[ziggy29]

I hate to say it but look at the Cowboys. They heavily invested in the O-line in the last several drafts and now they have the best O-line in the NFL. And that to me is why they went from pretenders to legitimate Super Bowl contenders this year.

A great O-line can make a mediocre QB look good, a good QB look like Pro Bowl material and a very good QB look like they are headed for Canton. And it helps that a great line can open up the running game and take a lot of pressure off the QB.