IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The Texans

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 11-28-2017, 02:53 PM
chuck chuck is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett View Post
I think this year's secondary was built with the idea that Clowney, Watt, and Mercilous would wreak havoc on QBs.
This year's secondary was "built" on the idea that they were going to sign a 40 year old, immobile, terminally crippled guy that would play behind THIS OL and lead the team to Never-never Land. (Just let the sheer lunacy of that notion sink in for a second.) They didn't have the money to sign, no, wait, RE-sign one of the top CBs in football (who is leading a defense that appears to be poised to go down as one of the all time great defenses in the history of the sport) (of course their offense is deftly guided by one Blake Bortles) (somehow only just now did it occur to me that his name conveniently rhymes with chortles) because they were operating under the fantasy that they would sign this walking MRI. They could easily have matched or beaten Jacksonville's offer, or they could have fking franchised his ass. Whatever. But to suggest that there was actual planning going on with respect to the secondary is an actionable insult to anyone who has ever made out a grocery list.

I think it is imperative for the team to plan as if Watt will never return. It's impossible to admit that publicly of course, but to "plan" a defense that sees Watt as a centerpiece or even as a functioning member is completely irresponsible.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-28-2017, 04:12 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
This year's secondary was "built" on the idea that they were going to sign a 40 year old, immobile, terminally crippled guy that would play behind THIS OL and lead the team to Never-never Land. (Just let the sheer lunacy of that notion sink in for a second.) They didn't have the money to sign, no, wait, RE-sign one of the top CBs in football (who is leading a defense that appears to be poised to go down as one of the all time great defenses in the history of the sport) (of course their offense is deftly guided by one Blake Bortles) (somehow only just now did it occur to me that his name conveniently rhymes with chortles) because they were operating under the fantasy that they would sign this walking MRI. They could easily have matched or beaten Jacksonville's offer, or they could have fking franchised his ass. Whatever. But to suggest that there was actual planning going on with respect to the secondary is an actionable insult to anyone who has ever made out a grocery list.

I think it is imperative for the team to plan as if Watt will never return. It's impossible to admit that publicly of course, but to "plan" a defense that sees Watt as a centerpiece or even as a functioning member is completely irresponsible.
This is pragmatic, except you cannot operate on the assumption that you get an 80% salary cap. Bellichek isn't good to give away 20% of his cap and put together a complete team. You have to operate like Watt will be here and then cross your fingers he is. The truth is that we are handicapped for the next 3 seasons or so until he is gone. Too bad that will eat up the window where we could put a team around a cheap rookie contract QB. By the time we get Watt off the books we'll have to pay Watson all of that money. So no shortcut through the cheap QB like Seattle got.

But back to your statement, if you try to plan like Watt won't be there while keeping him on because fans love him, then you are doomed from the start with 80% of a roster. At least if you plan on him playing you aren't doomed until September.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-28-2017, 05:43 PM
nunusguy nunusguy is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,210
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett View Post
This is pragmatic, except you cannot operate on the assumption that you get an 80% salary cap. Bellichek isn't good to give away 20% of his cap and put together a complete team. You have to operate like Watt will be here and then cross your fingers he is. The truth is that we are handicapped for the next 3 seasons or so until he is gone. Too bad that will eat up the window where we could put a team around a cheap rookie contract QB. By the time we get Watt off the books we'll have to pay Watson all of that money. So no shortcut through the cheap QB like Seattle got.

But back to your statement, if you try to plan like Watt won't be there while keeping him on because fans love him, then you are doomed from the start with 80% of a roster. At least if you plan on him playing you aren't doomed until September.
Speaking of being handicapped by big contracts:
While I like Clowney and recognize his value to the team which probably now is that with or without Watt he is the new Alpha male on the defense, but as Gruden said last night Clowney is possibly on the verge of realizing a bigger payday than any defender including JJ ever got and I wonder about the wisdom of the Texans doing that deal with Clowney especially considering the likely opportunity cost involved ?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.