Jump to content

Hou Is Not Going To Take Clowney, And Neither Are #2 Thru #5


Guest terryowens81
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest terryowens81

This is the way I see it happening on draft day.

HOU - will take a QB. There are too many teams who need to draft a QB to risk passing on the top selection. On the flipside they're a 3-4 defense. They would be insane to draft a DE that plays 20 lbs lighter than the position requires for their defense. Clowney is not a player that will convert to OLB either because he plays with his hand on the ground and uses his body length to gain advantage on the line. They're set at OT. I'd probably take Mack if I were them.

STL - With the Kenny Britt signing late today, Watkins is likely out of the mix as the second straight 1st round WR pick for the Rams. Given their OL injuries they could definitely use some long term insurance at tackle. I sense that even if the Rams were not already stacked at the DE position that Fisher may see Clowney as a poor substitute for a real standout talent like Jevon Kearse used to be.

JAX - They've already spent a chunk acquiring the Seahawks' DE castoffs and seem focused on stopping the run up front. Why would they need Clowney? Seems like the Jags do something completely unexpected every year in the first round so taking Clowney after rebuilding the line through free agency might just be their plan. Imo, they need Watkins the most because they may be stuck with Henne, and with 2014 suspension looming for their top WR they desperately need a playmaker on offense.

CLE - Brian Hoyer lit the world on fire for two games and then blew up like a satellite with an injury. Is there any magic left in the bottle? I sense that CLE is the best place for Manziel. Mack would make a lot of sense for them too. Browns' 3-4 defense not a good match for Clowney though.

OAK - Like the Jags, OAK has also welcomed two new starting DE free agents to the Black Hole, so again why would they invest in Clowney at this stage? They could definitely use a franchise tackle to help protect poor Matt Schaub though. This is what I'm afraid of -- top 2 offensive tackles off the board and Clowney falling out of the Top 5.

So 2 QBs, 2 OTs, and a WR is how I see it. If I'm wrong on one that probably means Mack is gone @#6. But Clowney should still be there when the Falcons' clock starts. Hopefully then some team will wheel and deal so the Falcons pick up extra draft picks if they can't get Mack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest terryowens81

Woodley and Tuck just got paid $12M/season in Oakland to watch Clowney? I don't think so.

Long broke the bank in STL and Quinn is on fire. I don't see room for Clowney in STL at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest terryowens81

Look at it this way, two teams with top 5 draft picks paid 4 free agent DEs starter money in anticipation of "drafting" the highly touted Clowney. Two more of those teams don't run the 4-3 scheme that fits Clowney's skill set. And the last of the group has arguably the top DE in the game right now in Quinn already lining up for them.

All I think this proves is that if the Falcons trade up for Clowney that would be the stupidest thing they could do. If they trade up for anybody it should be Mack or even the OT.

Edited by terryowens81
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were Hou, Jax, and Cle... I would be taking a QB. However, for some reason Jacksonville never feels the need to address it. They'll probably draft Clowney/Mack and continue into obscurity.

Either way, we're gonna get one of Clowney/Mack/Robinson/Matthews which I'm fine with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were Hou, Jax, and Cle... I would be taking a QB. However, for some reason Jacksonville never feels the need to address it. They'll probably draft Clowney/Mack and continue into obscurity.

Either way, we're gonna get one of Clowney/Mack/Robinson/Matthews which I'm fine with.

Clowney and Mack are better at their respective positions than most, if not all, of the QBs in this draft. Why should Jax or Oakland take a QB in the first when they can probably still get their guy (or close to it) in the 2nd? Doesn't make sense to me. Outside of the top 10, there aren't too many teams, if any, with a pressing need for a QB. It just doesn't make sense, in my opinion, to overvalue a guy because he plays a certain position. We've been doing that for several years now and we are lacking in talent at quite a few positions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clowney will go to Jax or Oak, it's a no brainer for either team.

Maybe Oakland, but Jax just gave Babin an extension and and signed Chris Clemons. I just don't see Jacksonville taking Clowney. Jacksonville did give Henne a modest 2 year deal, so I see them going QB, probably Manziel, because they need to sell tickets, or Bortles if he is still there.

Oakland needs Sammy Watkins, but could take Clowney. Oaklands D is not bad, but their offense is not good, so I look for them to get Schaub a speedy WR.

1. Bortles

2. Robinson

3. Manziel

4. Mack

5. Watkins

6. Clowney

Edited by 4dabirds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL...I wouldn't care anymore. The draft isn't as deep as some are screaming...lol. Just has shiney players at the top, then splash!!!

I know you're very big on pass rusher in the first. Just didn't know if the draft shook out like that, if you'd go with Matthews as BPA, or take a Barr type.

The draft is hardly ever as deep as people go on about. It'll usually be deep with roster talent at a couple of positions...but hardly ever with consistent predictable starters into the 5th at any position (other than FB, punter...5th round type positions).

I haven't studied this draft as much as some. It seems like it has good talent at WR, RB in the midrounds (legitimate contributors from the get go) which I'd like to take, but we may be painted into a corner with the top 4 needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you're very big on pass rusher in the first. Just didn't know if the draft shook out like that, if you'd go with Matthews as BPA, or take a Barr type.

The draft is hardly ever as deep as people go on about. It'll usually be deep with roster talent at a couple of positions...but hardly ever with consistent predictable starters into the 5th at any position (other than FB, punter...5th round type positions).

I haven't studied this draft as much as some. It seems like it has good talent at WR, RB in the midrounds (legitimate contributors from the get go) which I'd like to take, but we may be painted into a corner with the top 4 needs.

I would probably still get a defensive player. Go with Clinton-Dix, maybe even Barr at that point. The two OT's that high are suspect for what we need. I may would even ytrade down at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...