Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   2015 NFL Draft Forum (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=47)
-   -   Who Do Texans Take @ #1? (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57885)

gpngc 12-06-2013 12:17 AM

Who Do Texans Take @ #1?
 
It's a fascinating debate. Very complex.

gpngc 12-06-2013 12:19 AM

DAMNIT! I forgot to check the poll box....

Wanted to put:

W BW, S BW
W JC, S JC
W BW, S JC
W JC, S BW
etc.

Sportsfan486 12-06-2013 12:21 AM

If I were the Texans GM, I trade the pick for a boatload of picks and take a QB with my new first pick, then start addressing needs.

But I think the Texans take a QB. The one thing Clowney isn't the best fit for is a 3-4. Where do you play him in that defense? You really draft Clowney to be a 3-4 OLB? Or a 3-4 DE? When you have two really good 3-4 DEs and two really good 3-4 OLBs? I don't see it.

They obviously don't see Keenum as the answer, so draft a QB. By far their most glaring need.

mightytitan9 12-06-2013 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sportsfan486 (Post 3511865)
If I were the Texans GM, I trade the pick for a boatload of picks and take a QB with my new first pick, then start addressing needs.

But I think the Texans take a QB. The one thing Clowney isn't the best fit for is a 3-4. Where do you play him in that defense? You really draft Clowney to be a 3-4 OLB? Or a 3-4 DE? When you have two really good 3-4 DEs and two really good 3-4 OLBs? I don't see it.

They obviously don't see Keenum as the answer, so draft a QB. By far their most glaring need.

Scheme versatility is key in the NFL, Clowney is athletic enough to play 4-3 DE and 3-4 OLB. Brooks Reed is an average starting OLB thus far in his career.

It's tough to pass up a game changer on the defensive side of the ball. It'd be tough for me to pass on Clowney because I am not the fan of Bridgewater that most are.

The opportunity to put Clowney and JJ Watt on the same defense would be too much for me to resist.

gpngc 12-06-2013 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sportsfan486 (Post 3511865)
If I were the Texans GM, I trade the pick for a boatload of picks and take a QB with my new first pick, then start addressing needs.

But I think the Texans take a QB. The one thing Clowney isn't the best fit for is a 3-4. Where do you play him in that defense? You really draft Clowney to be a 3-4 OLB? Or a 3-4 DE? When you have two really good 3-4 DEs and two really good 3-4 OLBs? I don't see it.

They obviously don't see Keenum as the answer, so draft a QB. By far their most glaring need.

I understand that he's played in a 4-3 and has the prototype size and skill for a 4-3, but he is so gifted he can play any position. Think about LT - they created a new position for him.

Is Phillips even definitely staying? Kubiak's gone so I wonder what will happen there.

Watt and Clowney are both so gifted they can play anywhere.

Jcn92 12-06-2013 12:49 AM

I know you can never pass on a franchise QB, but the possibility of having Clowney and Watt on the same defense would be so hard for me to pass on. Brooks Reed would be entering the final year of his deal. Having Watt up front with Mercilus and Clowney behind him would be amazing.

Although, if you're going to pass on a QB you could argue that RT is this team's biggest need and Jake Matthews would be a quality first overall pick.

fatso 12-06-2013 12:58 AM

:gtfo:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jcn92 (Post 3511880)
I know you can never pass on a franchise QB, but the possibility of having Clowney and Watt on the same defense would be so hard for me to pass on. Brooks Reed would be entering the final year of his deal. Having Watt up front with Mercilus and Clowney behind him would be amazing.

Although, if you're going to pass on a QB you could argue that RT is this team's biggest need and Jake Matthews would be a quality first overall pick.

I like Jake Mathews but would weep for Texan fans if they passed on Teddy, Johnny, or Clowney for a tackle.

Caulibflower 12-06-2013 01:11 AM

Aside from the idealistic "trade down a few spots for more picks" pipe dream, they should just take Bridgewater. They should be thrilled to already have Keenum locked in as a nice backup for a few years, but he's no reason to pass on a real starter. It has to be Bridgewater if they have the first pick. Anything else is delusional, unless they're going to take Clowney and then pull a Dan Snyder to somehow get back into the first for Manziel. I do think they're a deep enough (and young enough) team that they could afford to try and swing some big moves to get the players they really want. The team doesn't exactly need a total overhaul, it's just obvious that Matt Schaub held them back this year. Gotta get that QB. Clowney's just barely enough of a freak to pass on a quarterback the first time around, but they've got to get someone they believe in. Otherwise they're just torturing their fans.

Matty B 12-06-2013 01:33 AM

Clowney would be a better 3-4 OLB than a 4-3 DE. Calling it now.

RaiderNation 12-06-2013 01:34 AM

This is a QB driven league and this team is a year removed from being a top AFC team. Bridgewater has to be the pick, has the weapons on offense to succeed with Foster coming back next season and a very solid defense. The whole fantasy of Watt and Clowney is nice and all but Keenum/Schaub aren't going to get the job done against Andrew Luck twice a season.

twiz 12-06-2013 01:38 AM

Bridgewater. Don't think it's much of a contest really.

gpngc 12-06-2013 01:39 AM

I think it's way more fantasy to believe that a rookie QB is going to step into that offensive situation and out duel Andrew Luck with a defense that's been below average without the injury-riddled Cushing.

Clowney's way more of a *gulp* sure thing. He's going to step in from day one and be a monster. With hall of fame potential.

niel89 12-06-2013 01:44 AM

Bridgewater is the pick for sure. They need a QB and Bridgewater looks like he checks out.

Norcal3518 12-06-2013 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc (Post 3511906)
I think it's way more fantasy to believe that a rookie QB is going to step into that offensive situation and out duel Andrew Luck with a defense that's been below average without the injury-riddled Cushing.

Houston's defense has been pretty solid this year. They are #3 in total yards and #2 against the pass. Their biggest problem has been in the TO ratio which they are -14 which is 31st in the league.
IMO, adding Clowney wouldnt make them a playoff team. IDk if Bridgewater does make them a playoff team either. But QB play is essential in the NFL and they dont have that right now so I dont see them passing on a Bridgewater. The only way they dont go Teddy or whoever is the #1 QB with the first pick is if there is another QB they like that they can land with their 2nd pick.

Halsey 12-06-2013 03:29 AM

Fans are so clueless....

Take a break from your Clowney jock sniffing and look at the Texans. They've already spent a #1 overall pick on a D-lineman. How'd that work out? They currently have the best D-lineman in football, and they just got swept by the ******* Jags. THE JAGS! They should either take a QB or try desperately to trade down if they don't like any of the QBs available. You can't win in the NFL if you can't score. It's an offensive league.

Crickett 12-06-2013 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey (Post 3511926)
Fans are so clueless....

Take a break from your Clowney jock sniffing and look at the Texans. They've already spent a #1 overall pick on a D-lineman. How'd that work out?

Much better than if they had taken either of the top two rated quarterbacks.

Ness 12-06-2013 03:51 AM

I'm guessing Bridgewater will be the pick. Should get the fans excited.

AntoinCD 12-06-2013 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey (Post 3511926)
Fans are so clueless....

Take a break from your Clowney jock sniffing and look at the Texans. They've already spent a #1 overall pick on a D-lineman. How'd that work out? They currently have the best D-lineman in football, and they just got swept by the ******* Jags. THE JAGS! They should either take a QB or try desperately to trade down if they don't like any of the QBs available. You can't win in the NFL if you can't score. It's an offensive league.

Yes and last year they had the best D lineman in football and made the playoffs. The year before they had the best D lineman in football and were maybe the best team up until the playoffs.

See, and I know this is a weird thing to say, but one player does not make a team. And let's not make it out like they only have one pick.

If they don't like Bridgewater then don't pick him simply because he is the top QB. The Texans likely aren't going to win the Superbowl next year. Their mission now is to build the best team they can. If that means Clowney then so be it.

And yes, they have the best D lineman in football, but if Clowney is as advertised and they pick him they may well have the best front 7 in my memory and that's without having great LBs outside of Cushing.

Wouldn't be out of this world to imagine it, but what if they took Clowney at #1 and then Ryan Shazier at #33. That is just ridiculous what they could do and would maybe mask some issues in the secondary

Caulibflower 12-06-2013 04:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crickett (Post 3511927)
Much better than if they had taken either of the top two rated quarterbacks.

Bridgewater is waaaay better than either Vince Young or Matt Leinart was. Vince Young was this wildcard-sort of pick who nobody really knew how to quantify and while Leinart had his fans (Arizona apparently among them), there was a large faction that really didn't buy into him. There really tough to find people who don't like Teddy Bridgewater. He's got good size, good technique, good athleticism, good pocket presence and decision-making, a good arm, and good accuracy. He's just good. He's got no glaring weaknesses and high athleticism, and he comes off as a hard worker and tough player. Neither Vince Young nor Matt Leinart could check off all the boxes like that. At this point, the only real negative statements about Bridgewater are warnings not to let the recent success of some rookies create unreasonable expectations for him. It's just people saying, "Well, he's not as good a prospect as Andrew Luck!" and it's kind of meaningless. He grades incredibly well, and the Texans need a quarterback.

AntoinCD 12-06-2013 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caulibflower (Post 3511936)
Bridgewater is waaaay better than either Vince Young or Matt Leinart was. Vince Young was this wildcard-sort of pick who nobody really knew how to quantify and while Leinart had his fans (Arizona apparently among them), there was a large faction that really didn't buy into him. There really tough to find people who don't like Teddy Bridgewater. He's got good size, good technique, good athleticism, good pocket presence and decision-making, a good arm, and good accuracy. He's just good. He's got no glaring weaknesses and high athleticism, and he comes off as a hard worker and tough player. Neither Vince Young nor Matt Leinart could check off all the boxes like that. At this point, the only real negative statements about Bridgewater are warnings not to let the recent success of some rookies create unreasonable expectations for him. It's just people saying, "Well, he's not as good a prospect as Andrew Luck!" and it's kind of meaningless. He grades incredibly well, and the Texans need a quarterback.

The problem I have seen with Bridgewater, and it's not exactly a problem, but you kind of touched on it. He is very good at pretty much everything. But is he elite as a prospect? What about his game says he will be better than that bunch of QBs in the NFL who are too good to have their team suck but not quite good enough to win it all.

This is obviously the gamble nearly every year with a QB but this year it is very similar to the Sam Bradford/Ndamukong Suh year. Suh was billed as a once in a generation prospect at DT whereas Bradford was seen as a very good, not great QB prospect. Now I do think Bridgewater is a better prospect than Bradford, but the same thing applies here. If the Texans think Bridgewater can be a top QB in the NFL then he will be the pick, however if they think he can be above average but Clowney can be great then it becomes harder.

The narrative of always take a franchise QB when one becomes available if you need one is tough to defend when you look at the amount of average to mediocre QBs picked recently in the first round. Nobody wants to draft a bust obviously, but if you draft a QB high then you better be in love with him because he is your job security.

jayceheathman 12-06-2013 04:57 AM

Bridgewater will be the pick. I have questions with Clowney and Watt. Could Clowney play a 5 technique or an OLB? Could Watt be a DE in a 4-3 even though he fits perfectly in a 3-4? Would they make Clowney a hybrid like Wade did with Mario? He had him standing up but at the line of scrimmage. Watt and Barr would fit better in their scheme than Clowney, IMO.

AntoinCD 12-06-2013 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayceheathman (Post 3511939)
Bridgewater will be the pick. I have questions with Clowney and Watt. Could Clowney play a 5 technique or an OLB? Could Watt be a DE in a 4-3 even though he fits perfectly in a 3-4? Would they make Clowney a hybrid like Wade did with Mario? He had him standing up but at the line of scrimmage. Watt and Barr would fit better in their scheme than Clowney, IMO.

I think scheme fit at times is overrated, especially for defensive linemen. Can Clowney rush the passer? Yes! That is what he will be asked to do. No teams play their base defense more than about 50% of the time with the exception of SF and that is based on the abilities of their LBs.

When you have teams who regularly switch between 34, 43, 33, 42, 41 etc and combine that with defensive linemen who are able to switch positions you can scheme to get them the best matchup.

Picture a 3 man defensive front on 3rd down of Clowney lined up over the LT, Watt lined up at 3 technique over the RG and Smith lined up over the RT. You can double Clowney and Watt with 4 linemen but that leaves Smith singled against the RT. That is already a win for the defense as you get a favourable matchup up front and can drop 8 in coverage. Then, if you want to blitz a LB you can still drop 7 and get 3 one on one matchups and if Clowney or Watt get singled then you fancy your chances.

Or conversely, imagine a 4 man line consisting of Clowney, Watt, Smith and Mercilus with Cushing at LB. You can then play 6 DBs which allows you to have more athleticism on the field for passing situations.

Clowney allows the Texans to do more than Barr even though Barr may be better suited to a true 34 OLB role. Barr would probably struggle more with a transition to down end more than Clowney would in his move to OLB because neither should be asked to drop too much, because as I said you don't draft a guy 1st overall based on his ability as a coverage LB

Caulibflower 12-06-2013 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntoinCD (Post 3511938)
The problem I have seen with Bridgewater, and it's not exactly a problem, but you kind of touched on it. He is very good at pretty much everything. But is he elite as a prospect? What about his game says he will be better than that bunch of QBs in the NFL who are too good to have their team suck but not quite good enough to win it all.

This is obviously the gamble nearly every year with a QB but this year it is very similar to the Sam Bradford/Ndamukong Suh year. Suh was billed as a once in a generation prospect at DT whereas Bradford was seen as a very good, not great QB prospect. Now I do think Bridgewater is a better prospect than Bradford, but the same thing applies here. If the Texans think Bridgewater can be a top QB in the NFL then he will be the pick, however if they think he can be above average but Clowney can be great then it becomes harder.

The narrative of always take a franchise QB when one becomes available if you need one is tough to defend when you look at the amount of average to mediocre QBs picked recently in the first round. Nobody wants to draft a bust obviously, but if you draft a QB high then you better be in love with him because he is your job security.

I do agree with you, and it was pointedly that I avoided hyperbole and said he was "good" at everything. I think I also made my case for why I do think he's as good a pick as any for them at no. 1 - unlike Bradford, he's got a very high athleticism rating, too, and we've seen a lot more ability to create and respond to pressure without making crucial mistakes. Everybody improves, so what I see with Bridgewater is someone who plays well, from a technical as well as improvisational standpoint (great mechanics but doesn't need a clean pocket) and also has shown in college that he can be "the guy" on his team and really take charge of a game. It's his game. I think what you want to see in a college quarterback is that sort of Kobe Bryant-like ability to make the game his. Yes, it's always a team team when it comes down to it, but you want one of those guys who was clearly in charge, clearly the best player, and excelled while bearing a ton of responsibility. So with Bridgewater, I just look at him and see everything I need to see, so I don't want to over-think it just because he doesn't have a huuuuuge arm or something. I think Andrew Luck got a ton more exposure playing at Stanford and against PAC-10 teams, but of course, he was on better teams, too. Sure doesn't hurt to be playing with a bunch of other NFL players.

But anyways - I do absolutely agree that teams shouldn't reach for QBs in the first round. I saw a mock draft recently that had five going in the first round this year, and I think that's insane. It's not going to happen. I do like this draft as a good year for QB-needy teams to pick the BPA in the first round and then take a shot on a boom-or-bust sort of player in the second or third. I just think Bridgewater's the real deal. If Andrew Luck graded as, say, a 95 overall as a prospect, you don't pass on Bridgewater just because he's more like an 89. He's still a great prospect and if you need a quarterback, like the Texans do, you can't pass on him just because he doesn't look as good as Andrew Luck. I mean, he's twice as good as EJ Manuel. I like him a lot more than Bradford, too. Honestly, I think the 2012 class just blew peoples' minds and now a lot of us are comparing prospects to some of the best college QBs we've ever seen play in RGIII, Luck and Russell Wilson. Those guys were dominant college players. Bridgewater isn't quite as breathtaking on the field as those guys, but we have to keep in mind that the speed with which they acclimated to the NFL was truly unprecedented. Same with Cam Newton. Bridgewater's not quite in that class. But where Luck, Griffin and Newton were arguably the most talented players in their respective classes, regardless of position, the fact that Clowney might be a better defensive end than Bridgewater is a quarterback doesn't mean you pass on Bridgewater. I mean, if Clowney is a guy you expect to make the All-Pro team like 5 times, but the hole your team really needs to fill in order to win a Super Bowl is at quarterback, you don't pass on a guy who might "only" be an All-Pro a couple of times.

Quarterback is just too important to pass on a guy who is almost assuredly going to be very good, and potentially great. I like a lot of the talent in this quarterback class, but a lot of it doesn't look very "safe" to me. I think Bridgewater is one of the safest-combined-with-high-upside picks I've seen in a long time. I don't think he's quite as physically gifted as Luck, but I honestly think they're a category of two (as far as the last 5 or so years go) in terms of belonging to an exclusive high floor/high upside category. Newton had the highest ceiling of all (it doesn't really exist), but there were some legitimate concerns. I just don't see legitimate concerns with Bridgewater. When you need a QB as the last piece of your team, you just don't pass on a player who has high marks in everything, physical as well as intangible, that you look for. That's classic over-analysis. That's thinking, "Wouldn't it be cool to have the best defensive ends in the league?" and then suffering through another year of frustration at your quarterbacks' inability to put games away despite having a great defense and a talented young star wideout while your division rival picks Bridgewater and improves their win total by 6 games.

AntoinCD 12-06-2013 05:55 AM

Yeah agree with the above points, and really I am playing a bit of devil's advocate here. I rate Bridgewater somewhere between the Andrew Luck level and the Sam Bradford level. Sometimes it is hard to quantify what a QB should have because regardless of arm strength, accuracy etc if he doesn't have it between the ears then he won't succeed. People don't like to hear these things when looking at prospects because they want a definitive trait to pin down and say this guy will succeed because of x.

Us on the outside will not know this about Bridgewater. Teams will get more from their interview process with him than any offseason workouts or further film study. By watching him, he has good accuracy, more than enough arm strength and as you said can work in a muddied pocket. If he checks out through their personal evaluations I think he will be the pick. But I don't think he should be the pick because he is the best QB. He should be the pick because he is the top player who can help their team the most.

It is why I tend to have issues with the so-called golden rule of drafting, ie - get a QB if one is available.

This is why the Blaine Gabbert's and Christian Ponder's of the NFL happen. Teams look at the turnaround of the Colts and the success of the Seahawks and assume that all rookie QBs should have that success. Unless you really believe in a guy you shouldn't draft him that high regardless of position.

Caulibflower 12-06-2013 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntoinCD (Post 3511944)
He should be the pick because he is the top player who can help their team the most.

It is why I tend to have issues with the so-called golden rule of drafting, ie - get a QB if one is available.

This is why the Blaine Gabbert's and Christian Ponder's of the NFL happen. Teams look at the turnaround of the Colts and the success of the Seahawks and assume that all rookie QBs should have that success. Unless you really believe in a guy you shouldn't draft him that high regardless of position.

Totally agree.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.