My problems with this: 1. there are always problems/concerns with players. there are always doubts. anyone can doubt anything. 2. we have one of the very best defensive players the game has ever seen. he's a beast and an absolute force. his team went 2-14 this season. which leads me to.... 3. no position on the field is more important than QB. particularly in today's game. obviously, if you don't think one of these guys on the board fits the bill, then fine....but if you're a decision maker and you think one of these guys has a chance to be a real franchise QB, you pull the trigger on it.
Have to respectfully disagree Max. Defense wins superbowls and while we do have one or two dominant defensive players the overall state of our defense is pretty poor. Denver beat the Pats with defense and Seattle beat the Broncos with defense. We have too many glaring needs to reach on a QB #1 and there are too many great players in this draft to reach for any position.
P-much. I think Clowney is the consensus #1 pick, but if BOB sees something in ANY of the QB crop, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt. I was behind the BOB hire because I felt he gave us the best chance to find a "good" QB. Until he proves otherwise, I'm going to assume his word is gold on that position.
Not saying QB isn't the most important position. It IS the most important position. But drafting a much lesser player with the #1 pick just because he plays QB is plain foolish; especially in one of the deepest drafts in decades. Just my opinion.
Defense won this last Super Bowl. But we've seen a continued stretch of excellence in NE with a pretty scant defense relative to the rest of the league. Saw the same thing from the Saints. A franchise QB is IT in the NFL. Acquiring him is tough, but easier to keep than all the pieces of a great defense over the long term. If BOB thinks there's a franchise QB in this draft, he needs to take him...because this franchise doesn't have one.
Although I want Manziel, this is one reason I want the trade down now. If we can get an offer and still have a pick of Manziel, Bridgewater (would not prefer to take Bortles till much later), Mack or one of Tackles, plus extra picks, that would be ideal. I'm assuming anyone trading for #1 would probably going for Clowney.
I still stand firm that the Texans shouldn't get cute, take the best player in the draft, Clowney. Today reinforced that there is no QB worth reaching on.
Mack really needs to be added to the poll. I'm thinking it's between Clowney (best talent), Mack (most talent best fit), and trade down.
I think we should just do a new poll here in a week or two now that pro day has passed for most players.
How da heck can a guy with 3 sacks be considered the best player...??? Clowney is the best physical specimen but Sammy Watkins is "THE BEST PLAYER." Some scouts even state he had the best pro day by a wide receiver they've ever seen. Adding Clowney to this defense is like putting a pair of expensive 22 inch shiny rims on a old raggedy car ---> useless....
Comparing a player like Clowney to a shinny pair of rims is the most idiotic thing i have heard you say...Do you genuinely believe that Clowney is just a aesthetically pleasing athlete that will have a "zero" impact on winning football games???
There's honestly no point in responding to anything he says, none of it is of any value. Anyone who thinks the Texans best use of the #1 pick in the draft is getting a #3 WR should be ignored and pitied.
^^^^ Using your same analogy...something that actually makes sense...Hiring a top talent driver to drive a broken down POS car is just as pointless. The issue is you have rebuild the car.
I believe drafting a pass rusher with the #1 overall pick who had three freaking sacks is idiotic... But I see many Texans fans think it's a genius idea...lol.. And more than likely he's not even the best player at his position in this draft. Sammy Watkins, different story...
I didn't really "get" Watkins at first. He doesn't have a flashy physical trait like Megatron's length or AJ's bulk. Then I started thinking about the first NFL Draft I ever payed attention to from the start of the offseason - 1988. There are some similarities there - Aundray Bruce, the #1 overall was hyped as the freakiest athlete ever, making the cover on SI, for instance. There were a lot of really nice players at the top of that draft, but if you lined the top 10 up and looked at them, Tim Brown would be among the least impressive. Despite winning the Heisman, he wasn't the sex pick. But if you could give me any of the top ten players of that draft for the Texans right now, I'd choose Brown, in spite of the glut at receivers. I'm getting a Tim Brown vibe from Watkins at this point. I don't think they'll take him and I understand why, but I think in 20 years people might look back at the draft and wonder why Watkins wasn't the first player drafted. Despite his speed and acceleration, the lack of a freaky physical trait means people are kind of sleeping on him.
We have way too many glaring holes and needs to take a WR #1 even if he is the best prospect in the draft. That is probably one of our few strengths right now. If we were to trade down, there are still others I would prefer before a WR, but at least we would be getting addtional picks in a trade down (hopefully).
If I'm Texan's GM and get an ideal draft I take Clowny, Zach Mettenberger in the second and Ra'shede Hageman in the third.
Clowney scares me. The man is on record that he's essentially a paycheck player....before he ever even got his first paycheck. That makes me nervous. 3 sacks for a guy with his raw abilities makes me nervous. I can not imagine there's ever before been a defensive lineman taken with the #1 overall pick who finished his last year at college with a grand total of 3 sacks. He plays when he wants to. When he doesn't, he just doesn't. Yeah, that concerns me.
