So who should've Houston taken over Watt? I think the pick has worked out great for them.


Reaching for a QB just for sake of needing a QB is exactly how you end up drafting Blaine Gabbert over a J.J. Watt.

Where did he say it was a bad pick? He is saying qb >>> any other position and using JJ watts two ridiculously amazing years as proof of this.


It all revolves around the qb. You obviously need to have good players all over the roster but it doesn't help as much without a good qb.

---

So who should've Houston taken over Watt?  I think the pick has worked out great for them.

 

Reaching for a QB just for sake of needing a QB is exactly how you end up drafting Blaine Gabbert over a J.J. Watt.

 

And I don't think Bridgewater and Clowney are close in talent or close NFL prospects..  I do however feel Bridewater is close to other QBs in this draft, some of which can be picked up after the first round.  You aren't going to get a prospect with Clowney's abilities in other rounds.  Just because you need a QB, doesn't mean you have to take one #1 ovrl.. especially in this draft.  In this draft you can have your cake (good QB prospect) and eat it too (Clowney).  You don't need to force the issue in this draft.

If Blaine Gabbert had been as good as some people touted him to be, nobody would be saying "Would you take Blaine Gabbert over JJ Watt"

 

In fact, if Blaine Gabbert had been as great some seemed to think, and JJ Watt was chosen first, people would probably be asking "What if they had taken Gabbert over Watt?"


I don't think anybody is suggesting that the Texans made the wrong choice in taking Watt.  But if say the choice was between JJ Watt and... Matthew Stafford, it'd be different.  


I personally believe the gap between Bridgewater and whoever will be available in the second is pretty big.  I also think finding the right person in the 2nd round is more difficult than you think.  Between Mariota and Clowney, I'd say you take Clowney.  But between Bridgewater and Clowney, I'd say take Bridgewater.  Quarterback is the hardest position to predict.  Cleveland took Brandon Weedon when Russell Wilson was still available.  Nick Foles was also available.  


 

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

If Blaine Gabbert had been as good as some people touted him to be, nobody would be saying "Would you take Blaine Gabbert over JJ Watt"

 

In fact, if Blaine Gabbert had been as great some seemed to think, and JJ Watt was chosen first, people would probably be asking "What if they had taken Gabbert over Watt?"


I don't think anybody is suggesting that the Texans made the wrong choice in taking Watt.  But if say the choice was between JJ Watt and... Matthew Stafford, it'd be different.  


I personally believe the gap between Bridgewater and whoever will be available in the second is pretty big.  I also think finding the right person in the 2nd round is more difficult than you think.  Between Mariota and Clowney, I'd say you take Clowney.  But between Bridgewater and Clowney, I'd say take Bridgewater.  Quarterback is the hardest position to predict.  Cleveland took Brandon Weedon when Russell Wilson was still available.  Nick Foles was also available.  

 

Cleveland has been making stupid picks ever since they returned to Cleveland.. I wouldn't be using that team as a argument point.  They took Richardson in the top 5.. at least the new regime was able to get a 1st round pick back for him. 

 

As far as Blaine Gabbert, I always knew he was going to stink.  The problems he's having now are some of the same problems he had in college when I watched him in the big 12, which was a conference of crap defenses.  He's the classic example of scouts just looking at size and arm strength.  Blaine Gabbert physically passed the prototypical QB eye test, but no way in hell should he of been a top 10 pick..  If he came out in this draft he wouldn't have gone higher than the 3rd round.

 

As far as the gap between Bridgewater and whoever is taken in the second round being big.. I don't think it is.  People here are going to think this is crazy, because they're already dead set on Teddy, but I'd take A.J. McCarron over him and think this guy is highly overlooked.

 

I'm not comparing McCarron to Tom Brady here.. just their situations and how they were overlooked coming out of college.  All Brady did at Michigan was win and play great in big games.. for whatever reason scouts didn't take notice and he went in the 6th round.  While McCarron won't fall that far, I don't understand why he doesn't get more pub or isn't held in a higher regard.  He has played great during his college career, in the toughest conference in the country (he's already facing the guys he'll face on Sunday) coming up big in big games, and has won 2 national championships.  His numbers have been great, but he's not putting up the eye popping #s other QBs do, because of the system he plays in (ball control) under Saben.

 

This draft is deep at the QB position, but there is no slam dunk #1 ovrl or even top 5 QB.  There's a bunch of promising QBs that stretch deep into the second round and possibly beyond and I don't see a great difference between a lot of them. If you need a QB in this draft.. you don't have to force the issue, just let the draft come to you.  I'd take Clowney 1st and grab one of the other QBs in the 2nd.  I'm just not as high on Bridgewater as other people on this board are.  Like I said, he's smart and will probably have a decent career (which is what I can say about a handful of other QBs in this draft), but he doesn't wow me and he certainly isn't close to being the prospect that Stafford was.

---

So who should've Houston taken over Watt?  I think the pick has worked out great for them.

 

Reaching for a QB just for sake of needing a QB is exactly how you end up drafting Blaine Gabbert over a J.J. Watt.

 

And I don't think Bridgewater and Clowney are close in talent or close NFL prospects..  I do however feel Bridewater is close to other QBs in this draft, some of which can be picked up after the first round.  You aren't going to get a prospect with Clowney's abilities in other rounds.  Just because you need a QB, doesn't mean you have to take one #1 ovrl.. especially in this draft.  In this draft you can have your cake (good QB prospect) and eat it too (Clowney).  You don't need to force the issue in this draft.

You must have some QB evaluation talents that no other draftnik in the world has...because every draftnik I know loves Teddy. Most equal or more than Clowney, and none way below Clowney. 

---

You must have some QB evaluation talents that no other draftnik in the world has...because every draftnik I know loves Teddy. Most equal or more than Clowney, and none way below Clowney. 

 

No, I just don't read what "draftnik's" think or care what they think.  I watch the games and form my own opinions, but I'm sure if I did some research I could find some that do not agree with what you typed above.  Clowney is considered the best DE prospect in years, not even Watt was considered that type of prospect when he came out. (not saying Clowney is going to be better as Watt has already exceeded his draft status and has proven himself at a NFL level) Neither was Aldon Smith, and Von Miller also didn't get that type of hype.. So I seriously doubt every draftnik grades Teddy (who is NOT considered the best QB prospect to come out in quite some time) and Clowney as equal NFL prospects.

 

Now they might have him mocked to go higher in the draft, but that's due to where they expect teams to draft and what teams needs are.. as well as importance of position.  However that has nothing to do with prospect grades.

---

No, I just don't read what "draftnik's" think or care what they think.  I watch the games and form my own opinions, but I'm sure if I did some research I could find some that do not agree with what you typed above.  Clowney is considered the best DE prospect in years, not even Watt was considered that type of prospect when he came out. (not saying Clowney is going to be better as Watt has already exceeded his draft status and has proven himself at a NFL level) Neither was Aldon Smith, and Von Miller also didn't get that type of hype.. So I seriously doubt every draftnik grades Teddy (who is NOT considered the best QB prospect to come out in quite some time) and Clowney as equal NFL prospects.

 

Now they might have him mocked to go higher in the draft, but that's due to where they expect teams to draft and what teams needs are.. as well as importance of position.  However that has nothing to do with prospect grades.

Yep, most say Clowney is the best defensive prospect since Woodson. And most people say Teddy is the 2nd best QB prospect of the last decade too, just behind Luck (and ahead of RG3, Bradford, Stafford, Alex Smith, etc). Take the QB.

---

Murray, McCarron, and Mettenberger are all possibilities at 33

 

BARF.

---

Yep, most say Clowney is the best defensive prospect since Woodson. And most people say Teddy is the 2nd best QB prospect of the last decade too, just behind Luck (and ahead of RG3, Bradford, Stafford, Alex Smith, etc). Take the QB.

 

No they don't..

 

How about you start providing links for all of what "most people say".

 

No way in hades are most people saying he's the 2nd best prospect of the last decade.

 

Just off the top of my head..  Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers, and Cam Newton were all regarded higher prospects.. as was Matt Stafford and RG3.  If RG3 was coming out in this draft he'd go ahead of Bridgewater.

---

No they don't..

 

How about you start providing links for all of what "most people say".

 

No way in hades are most people saying he's the 2nd best prospect of the last decade.

 

Just off the top of my head..  Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers, and Cam Newton were all regarded higher prospects.. as was Matt Stafford and RG3.  If RG3 was coming out in this draft he'd go ahead of Bridgewater.

You just said you don't read any draftniks, so plz stop saying you know stuff like who was regarded as higher prospects when you admitted you don't know and don't care what they say. 

 

Just admit that you have a vastly different opinion of Teddy than virtually anyone on the planet who is paid to evaluate QBs. Maybe you are smarter than every single one of them combined...but I'm pretty positive you aren't.

---

No they don't..

 

How about you start providing links for all of what "most people say".

 

No way in hades are most people saying he's the 2nd best prospect of the last decade.

 

Just off the top of my head..  Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers, and Cam Newton were all regarded higher prospects.. as was Matt Stafford and RG3.  If RG3 was coming out in this draft he'd go ahead of Bridgewater.

 

I can back up KYJaggy on that claim. I know Matt Miller has stated that and I've seen that claim from at least one other writer too, though I can't recall which one(s).

 

Here's the link to Miller's statement: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/18137...-nfl-draft

 

Edit: Here's a link to Bucky Brooks saying he's closer to Luck than Alex Smith, Bradford or Stafford. There's a link to the podcast in that article where he may go as far as saying he's only behind Luck in his evaluation, though I'm not entirely sure since I listened to it over a month ago. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000...ey-at-no-1

---

Here's a couple of varying opinions on Teddy Bridgewater:

 

Jeremiah: Bridgewater behind RGIII & Stafford

 

http://blogs.nbc10.com/headlines/cfb/273...--stafford

 

NFL.com's Daniel Jeremiah believes Louisville junior QB Teddy Bridgewater checks in behind Robert Griffin III and Matthews Stafford grade-wise.

"I'd have him in that Ryan Tannehill group, probably I'd have him behind RGIII," Jeremiah said. "I'd have him over (Mark) Sanchez when he came out. I liked Alex Smith when he came out, so grade-wise I'd have him right there with Alex Smith." It did not happen here, but Bridgewater will be criticized for the level of competition he has faced in the last few years. We don't think this is exactly fair, since Bridgewater's skills can be spotlighted. In fact, he faced defenses like Florida, UConn, and Rutgers filled with NFL talent last season.
 
 
 
Louisville's Teddy Bridgewater compared to Andrew Luck
 
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000...ndrew-luck
 

Louisville (6-1) plays at South Florida (2-4) in an AAC game, and Bulls coach Willie Taggart was appreciative of Bridgewater's skills earlier this week.

"He's the real deal," Taggart said during his weekly teleconference. "Teddy is a special kid. He reminds me a lot of the way Andrew Luck was as a college player. He's very smart. He runs the entire offense. He can get his guys in and out of good and bad plays. He throws the deep ball very well."

---

You just said you don't read any draftniks, so plz stop saying you know stuff like who was regarded as higher prospects when you admitted you don't know and don't care what they say. 

 

Just admit that you have a vastly different opinion of Teddy than virtually anyone on the planet who is paid to evaluate QBs. Maybe you are smarter than every single one of them combined...but I'm pretty positive you aren't.

 

First of all.. I said I don't read or care what they say.. I never said I don't know what they say.  I do watch TV and follow the draft process through the ESPN and NFL Network.  Just by watching other shows I'm able to pick up on how prospects are perceived compared to other drafts and..

 

Umm.. no,  It has nothing to do with a vastly difference of opinion than virtually "anyone on the planet"..  It has to do with me calling you out on the carpet to start posting links to all of these straw man arguments you keep making or how most people on the planet think he's the second best QB prospect of the last decade.

 

Or how everyone has Bridgewater and Clowney being equal NFL prospects..

 

I just did a web search of "Bridewater #2 QB prospect of the last decade.. this is the only thing I could find.. 

 

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/vi...&start=120

 

 

You're 7 times more likely to hit on a QB with the first pick than in the second round. There have been 2 decent 2nd round QBs taken in the last decade, and one has capped out at barely above average.



Teddy is pretty much the #2 QB prospect of the last decade behind Luck. If he's not that guy, you're not finding that guy for a long time.

 

 

Just some random guy named "IPwn on another message board".  LOL..  I guess you and him make up the entire planet huh?

 

I don't have to scour every draft report on the internet to know that Bridgewater is NOT the second best NFL QB prospect of the last decade..  I just need a little common sense and be a little knowledgable about football.

---

I can back up KYJaggy on that claim. I know Matt Miller has stated that and I've seen that claim from at least one other writer too, though I can't recall which one(s).

 

Here's the link to Miller's statement: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/18137...-nfl-draft

 

Edit: Here's a link to Bucky Brooks saying he's closer to Luck than Alex Smith, Bradford or Stafford. There's a link to the podcast in that article where he may go as far as saying he's only behind Luck in his evaluation, though I'm not entirely sure since I listened to it over a month ago. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000...ey-at-no-1

 

 

That's fine, but there's a difference in some people having a opinion.. (while some people also have a different opinion) and then criticizing my opinion by saying "The entire planet thinks that way.. except for you".  That's just ridiculous hyperbole and screams of a extreme bias, which makes me not to be able to take your opinion seriously any more.

---

Lol TH...you've completely moved the goalposts of the debate from Teddy isn't in the same discussion as Clowney to 'Teddy isn't the #2 this decade behind Luck'. Finding people that judge him to only be as good as RG3 or Stafford or whichever other elite QB prospect still easily puts Teddy in the same class as Clowney. Let's try it this way...

 

http://walterfootball.com/draftdata.php (I hate Walter and his site but the draft database and prospect lists are useful)

 

I count 74 mocks have been updated in the last 2 months. 5 of them have Clowney #1...and only 2 of those are since mid October. There are a couple Mariota and Manziel sprinkled in. Now obviously I don't know most of them and wouldn't vouch for their evaluating talent...but the fact that like 90% of the draft sites in the world have Teddy as #1 strongly supports my point 

 

And yes, before you try to say those are mocks and not big boards...I'm sure that some of those people have Clowney as a purely better prospect than Teddy, but not so far out of the discussion that Teddy's talent and positional values don't easily overtake Clowney. In fact roughly half of them think that Mariota or Manziel are close enough to Clowney that their talent + position value = more than Clowney. That was the original point and I think that is the resounding consensus among those who claim to be experts.

---

That's fine, but there's a difference in some people having a opinion.. (while some people also have a different opinion) and then criticizing my opinion by saying "The entire planet thinks that way.. except for you".  That's just ridiculous hyperbole and screams of a extreme bias, which makes me not to be able to take your opinion seriously any more.

I also definitely didn't say the entire planet thinks Teddy is the #2 QB prospect of the last decade...you need to read better. I clearly said your opinion (that Teddy is not close to Clowney as a prospect) is not shared by anyone else on the planet that evaluates football players as a job. I also emphatically backed up that opinion above.

---

Lol TH...you've completely moved the goalposts of the debate from Teddy isn't in the same discussion as Clowney to 'Teddy isn't the #2 this decade behind Luck'. Finding people that judge him to only be as good as RG3 or Stafford or whichever other elite QB prospect still easily puts Teddy in the same class as Clowney. Let's try it this way...

 

http://walterfootball.com/draftdata.php (I hate Walter and his site but the draft database and prospect lists are useful)

 

I count 74 mocks have been updated in the last 2 months. 5 of them have Clowney #1...and only 2 of those are since mid October. There are a couple Mariota and Manziel sprinkled in. Now obviously I don't know most of them and wouldn't vouch for their evaluating talent...but the fact that like 90% of the draft sites in the world have Teddy as #1 strongly supports my point 

 

And yes, before you try to say those are mocks and not big boards...I'm sure that some of those people have Clowney as a purely better prospect than Teddy, but not so far out of the discussion that Teddy's talent and positional values don't easily overtake Clowney. In fact roughly half of them think that Mariota or Manziel are close enough to Clowney that their talent + position value = more than Clowney. That was the original point and I think that is the resounding consensus among those who claim to be experts.

 

Lord Jesus Christ.. where have I "moved goal posts"..  The only one who is doing that is you..  You've stuck words in my mouth and said I said things I never said.. said vastly the entire planet shares your opinion, when they don't, and are now trying to Lawyer things up.

 

BTW I haven't changed the discussion... YOU HAVE.  I STILL DON'T BELIEVE Bridgewater comes close to the total prospect that Clowney is. The only reason why I'm discussing whether or not he's "' the #2 this decade behind Luck" is because you brought it up and I think it's complete asinine to think he's the #2 prospect this decade.  I have doubt if he's even the best prospect in his own draft.

---

Dude, in posts 753, 754, 760, and 763 you broke down how average Teddy was. In 760 you said "I don't think Bridgewater and Clowney are close in talent or close NFL prospects." Those are where you jumped into the debate. 

 

In 764 (after all 4 of those posts by you) I made the comment that I many times have seen Teddy ranked as the #2 prospect of this decade behind only Luck...which is true. You then decided to change the entire crux of your argument from "I don't think Bridgewater and Clowney are close in talent or close NFL prospects" to Teddy not being #2 of this decade...which is a clear changing of the goalposts by you.

 

The second part is me saying 'you have a vastly different opinion of Teddy than virtually anyone on the planet who is paid to evaluate QBs'. I proved that 100% of the 74 draft sites (updated in the last 2 months) on Walter's database have Teddy as a prospect on the level of Clowney. That would indeed show that your opinion ("I don't think Bridgewater and Clowney are close in talent or close NFL prospects") is not shared by anyone else on the planet who is paid to evaluate QBs.

---

I also definitely didn't say the entire planet thinks Teddy is the #2 QB prospect of the last decade...you need to read better. I clearly said your opinion (that Teddy is not close to Clowney as a prospect) is not shared by anyone else on the planet that evaluates football players as a job. I also emphatically backed up that opinion above.

 

LOL.. so so sad.

 

Here's the post you were replying to.. which didn't have jack crap to do with Clowney

No they don't..

 

How about you start providing links for all of what "most people say".

 

No way in hades are most people saying he's the 2nd best prospect of the last decade.

 

Just off the top of my head..  Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers, and Cam Newton were all regarded higher prospects.. as was Matt Stafford and RG3.  If RG3 was coming out in this draft he'd go ahead of Bridgewater.

 

 

You just said you don't read any draftniks, so plz stop saying you know stuff like who was regarded as higher prospects when you admitted you don't know and don't care what they say. 

Just admit that you have a vastly different opinion of Teddy than virtually anyone on the planet who is paid to evaluate QBs. Maybe you are smarter than every single one of them combined...but I'm pretty positive you aren't.

 

Nice edit there buddy, so who's moving goal posts now.  I remember the original post and if you remove the bolded which wasn't there.. it makes a lot more sense.

 

 

You just said you don't read any draftniks, so plz stop saying you know stuff when you admitted you don't know and don't care what they say. 

Just admit that you have a vastly different opinion of Teddy than virtually anyone on the planet who is paid to evaluate QBs. Maybe you are smarter than every single one of them combined...but I'm pretty positive you aren't.

 

THAT is the post I was replying to.  But I'm moving goal posts over here huh? LOL

 

 

I'm obviously dealing with someone who can't discuss this topic objectively (the choo choo train should've tipped me off).. so I'll leave it at this.  These posts and my opinions are on record as are yours.. we'll see how it turns out (unless the board updates and dumps it all again)

---

LOL.. so so sad.

 

Here's the post you were replying to.. which didn't have jack crap to do with Clowney

 

 

 

Nice edit there buddy, so who's moving goal posts now.  I remember the original post and if you remove the bolded which wasn't there.. it makes a lot more sense.

 

 

 

THAT is the post I was replying to.  But I'm moving goal posts over here huh? LOL

You can look up at that post that I made at 2:17 and clearly see I didn't edit anything...cool of you to take out the bolded text and try to act like I edited it when I didn't. Why am I arguing with someone who is so blatantly trying to cheat their way to some hypothetical debate win?

---

You can look up at that post that I made at 2:17 and clearly see I didn't edit anything...cool of you to take out the bolded text and try to act like I edited it when I didn't. Why am I arguing with someone who is so blatantly trying to cheat their way to some hypothetical debate win?

 

Nobody is winning crap right now, because this isn't going to be decided until both of these players see the field.  You're on record thinking that Bridgewater is the best QB outside of Luck in the past decade (which he's not).. I'm on record saying he isn't even the best QB in his class and think McCarron will be as good or better and believe if you wanted to you could get a impact player like Clowney (if he's there when you pick) and still pick up a good QB later, we'll see how it turns out.

 

But hey what do I know.. I'm not some "internet draftnick/expert"

---