Are they in the playoffs? Also Matt Stafford is pretty decent Josh Gordon is a once in a 5 year freak talent He could do what he wants
Example of why erase everything you know of qbs and listen to me... Stafford. 1. Top 3 arm 2. Accurate when consistent 3. Untamed He has never been properly coached. He has some amazing throws but other times he has mind boggling throws/decision Now I would trade our 1st overall for Stafford
Stafford is Favre esque, if he can be harnessed and drilled on consistency he has incredible potential
Clowney and JJ WATT will not win you a championship without a QB.. Thats our biggest need QB.. You pick the damn QB if you hit your good for 10-12 years if you dont - well theres not much you can do... You need a QB in order to win, The Jets are an example they had a nasty defense, but couldnt win it because there QB was sub par
I agree with this, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that the Texans go entirely without a QB so you're really creating a false dichotomy.
yes but again you are banking on a second RD QB, which your percent goes down.. Yes there has been cases that teams find a QB in the 2nd RD, but more often you dont tend to find those in RD 2 or later. I much rather take a chance on Teddy or Manziel..
The difference is that I'm not trying to find the next amazing QB, I'm trying to find a "good enough" QB like Flacco, Wilson, or Kaepernick. Drafting Sam Bradford hasn't exactly worked out for the Rams, I think the same would happen if the Texans draft Bridgewater.
I posted about this a couple of weeks ago, since 1980, only two SB winning QBs have been drafted outside the first three rounds, and most of the winners aren't just first round picks but number one picks overall.
What if thats not the case, and Teddy is the next Taller russel Wilson or Aaron rodgers..? Im not saying that he will be, but there's a chance he will and a chance he wont.. you dont get many NO # 1 Picks or even TOP 5 Picks, so taking a QB you have in the top of your board will not be a mistake..
the problem i have with clowney is best case scenario he dominates and walks in 4 years. were not going to have 2 of the top 3 highest paid DEs on the the same team.. then you better find a franchise qb in that 4 year window because we know the matt schaubs of this league do not work.. even the "bad" qbs in this league that won with great D's made plays when they needed to, you need more than a game manager.. clowney is a luxury pick at this point,
Well if he's a slightly taller Russell Wilson then you'd have found a decent game manager but wouldn't have the defense to have a worth a damn team. If by some miracle he magically turns into the next Aaron Rodgers then you won the lottery, congratulations. I don't think playing the lottery is a good strategy to provide for your future, most of the time it leads to nothing.
I don't know why I keep hearing this ridiculous argument since it has no basis in reality. First of all, he'd still be on his rookie deal in 4 years. Secondly, we have no clue what the team would look like in 6 years, so planning for that is laughable. Finally, saying you don't want to draft a player for fear they they'll be too awesome and won't be affordable in half a decade is not the way anyone should look at any draft.
Building a team around a 2nd or 3rd round QB is much more akin to playing the lottery than taking one #1 overall. History clearly shows that.
a clowney contract would be only 3 years after the inevitable jj watt contract. honestly im not passing on clowney because he might be too awesome and walk. that was simply a best case scenario. i think he'll be very underwhelming and never live up to the once in a generation hype, not only that there will probably be a couple better front 7 guys drafted after him.. again this is a luxury pick on a team with a ton of holes, and a glaring one at QB.. niether of those teams current qbs were plan 1..
