Bob McNair: We’re working on getting a quarterback

Well that's certainly a hot take, even looking past the awful analysis of Clowney's play this season, the idea that it is worth it to trade up to #1 to select a QB that has no business going that high is pretty ridiculous.

It would be just wasteful and on top of that, it makes a division rival a lot better.

 

Good point. We're much better off with Hoyer and co.

I'm not saying you absolutely trade up. If there's a better way to get the QB of the now and future go for that. And if the organization thinks one of the other QBs that will almost certainly be there or require much less of a move up then sure.

I've been on the Goff bandwagon for a year. I still think he's the standout QB of this draft. But i don't know much. Haha. That's my view though.

If the option is no QB in the draft or obvious long term offseason solution there better be some clear and blunt language from coach, GM, and owner about what the plan is.

 

That's what we call a strawman argument.

No one is suggesting that we stick with Hoyer....but that doesn't mean you trade up to the first pick in the draft to get a QB that isn't good enough to justify being drafted that early.

Like I've said earlier in this thread, given the QB class, there's no point trading up that high when you can trade up to a pick later in the first for MUCH cheaper and get the same quality QB.

Personally I'd try to lure RG3 for a vet reclamation project and I'd draft a RB in the first and a QB in the second.

 

Another thing to consider is we have several areas of need. Trading up doesn't usually work according to the analytics guys. But sometimes does

 

I'd rather stand pat and take Hackenberg.


Trading Clowney at this point in his career, and especially for a non-generational QB talent (who could be good, but isn't even the consensus number one overall player at his position) is just nonsense. Especially when you start to throw in other future picks. Just dumb. And it goes against franchise building 101.

You ever see Seattle do that? Pittsburgh? New England? Indy? Green Bay? Yeah, I get it. Some of these teams literally Lucked into their franchise quarterback. That's all fine. But I guarantee you none of them would ever mortgage their future like some of you are suggesting, setting themselves back by years, just for a shot at a gamble at a quarterback. That is utter nonsense. And I can't believe some are even suggesting it.

If I'm the Texans, I go after RG3 hard. I sign him to a two year deal on the premise that if he can become a starter, he'll have a much more lucrative deal waiting for him on the other side (from me or another team). I then draft, at 22, whoever is available out of my top QBs (not necessarily my sig, I'm talking their board). You go into training camp with the mindset that either RG3, rookie, or Savage will take over and distance themselves as the starter. Yeah, these may not be sexy names, but you still have three quarterbacks on the team that have tons of potential. One of them hopefully pans out. It may not be the best philosophy, but it's the best philosophy for where the Texans franchise is currently sitting.

And then, you go into training camp, and sit back and laugh while the whole fan base, right on cue mind you, starts to complain about how we didn't trade up for the number one pick just for the brand name, or how we didn't trade for Brees, or Stafford, or whoever wasn't available.

 

All fine ... But my point isn't whether you trade up or not. Amongst us that's just some random people on the internet's opinion.

The point is there needs to be a clear plan with an ultimate solution and if that plan is trade up to get Goff because they believe he's a star QB potential then you do that.

I don't think anyone finds your scouting reports on QBs to be worth anything - no offense.

I've noted mine shouldn't be viewed as amazing or anything either. The one guy I liked was Bridgewater. And he's ok.

I'd much rather trade up for Goff than go RB, Hackenbergb (or whomever). That's just my take.

I just want the Texans to just have a legitimate take. I think hoping on RG3 is ludicrous. But that's just me.

 

Like the year Clowney went 1st and like the year Fisher went first, this isn't really a good year to have the first pick. Not coincidentally, the Texans, Chiefs, and now the Titans are reportedly shopping the pick. It's hard to trade because there is no guaranteed franchise QB. Lucky for the Titans, they already have their QB.

 

We play in a conference where, through the entire history of the franchise, only 4 QB's have gotten teams to the Super Bowl. There is literally nothing I would not give up to grab a guy who I legitimately think could be a franchise level QB. This entire league comes down to who has a QB and who doesn't. Turn over every stone..spare no expense..until you find that guy.

 

That's my point regarding race when Matt Schaub was getting plays in the same form that you just mentioned Bridgewater is... hardly any Texans fan said nothing about it and he was mentioned as a franchise qb. Then as of right now the play of Bridgewater still is waaaay better than what Hoyer would do under the pressure of a playoff game. My argument with the Texans way of business is not primarily focused on race it's a lot of things that are too good ol boy with this organization. They wouldn't even take a chance on Drew Brees or Peyton Manning... they also cut players that are actually the heart and soul players of the team but keep players that are injury prone and hyped. You don't have to agree with what I'm saying but these results that the texans are getting will stay the same and/or get worse if they don't change their philosophy on the qb and how they play favorites with certain players. Every decision needs to be a business decision that makes the team better as a whole primarily while getting more bang for your buck salary cap wise. Screw overpaying players before they actually prove anything then holding back on the players that have done nothing but produce consistently.

 

Sounds good but how will rg3 react once hackenberg takes the starting job from him.

 

If only the Texans management would hang this quote up on a big picture inside their office and stand by it. This franchise would be in the super bowl for years to come. This is the whole point right here. All the argument about why, what or who isn't changing until the Texans do this. There's no excuses.

 

Just wondering... what makes us think we are getting RG3??? For the world of me I don't understand this and heavily doubt it. This organization actually going out and signing this guy to a contract to play qb.

 

Lmfao are you serious? Show me one playoff game Schaub played in that would prove this? He was trash under pressure just like Hoyer KC would have ate this guy up. Instead of 5 turnovers prime Schaub would have had at least 3 before he got hurt.

 

I agree with this.

 

Don't know how reliable:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Draft nugget: was just told if Carson Wentz does well at Senior Bowl he's gone before Dallas gets a shot at him at 4 overall.</p>&mdash; Jeff Risdon (@JeffRisdon) <a href="https://twitter.com/JeffRisdon/status/689269533777985537">January 19, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

No offense taken, I know that people complain about my QB valuations.....often even after they prove to be accurate. It is what it is.

 

I'm absolutely serious. Schaub never got a chance to play in the playoffs in his prime because of injury and Frank Bush.

Obviously he had his flaws as a QB, but he was absolutely a good enough QB to win with if the defense isn't garbage. Unfortunately he was never really the same after the Lisfranc injury.

The one year Schaub was relatively healthy and the defense was good was 2012, which was the year that the team lost Cushing for the season and the defense just wasn't the same afterwards. The Pats scored about 1000 points on them, can't blame that on the QB, especially when he throws for nearly 350 yards and puts 28 points on the board.

 

I understand your thinking on this. To me Schaub was never a big game quarterback even in his prime. We never got a chance to see it. Blaming Frank Bush may be a little over the top I think that's still on Kubiak for hiring a young guy like that in a big position. Texans have a habit of over promoting. Head coaches should be coordinaters, coordinators should be position coaches, starting qbs should be backup qbs and gms should be scouts lol... it's crazy.

 

Oh for sure, I don't blame Frank Bush for being just horrible at his job and leading to the Texans having just a tragic defense the years he was here, I blame those who took some bad acid and made the decision to let him be DC. Now I don't know if that was a Kubiak decision or a Rick Smith decision, either way it was terrible. Had they been able to bring in Wade Smith earlier, who knows what might have been.

In general, I have no problem with promoting from within. When you have good people, it's even smart to do so.....when you don't have good people, like with the Frank Bush promotion, it's an awful idea.

I just don't think one can overstate how bad he was at his job. Frank Bush was the Brian Hoyer of Defensive Coordinators. Every other Defensive Coordinator in the NFL was better and there were several assistants who were better than him too.