The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[ILikeBilly]

1 hour ago, HigSkin said:

 

Back in September, I posted on him in the draft thread - "Trent Dilfer on The Herd is slobbering over Senior QB Jake Haener from Fresno State and says he's a Derek Carr type guy."

 

Dilfer loves this guy....

Can we get him in the 4th to go along with our first round qb?  

[HigSkin]

11 minutes ago, ILikeBilly said:

Can we get him in the 4th to go along with our first round qb?  

 

He won't make it to the 4th round.   

[Thinking Skins]

So it's a bit skewed and it's not the guy I thought it'd be, but the whole you need to have the top QB in the draft theory is over again bring proven wrong. Not saying Lawrence or Burrow and Tua can't still be good but it's looking like they're not the top guys in their classes. What's that make it like 7 oh the last 8 drafts where the top QB taken wasn't the best? 

 

I've always said we could wait on a QB and thought Jones would last till the second like Mond did. I still wasn't a fan because I wanted more mobility but he looks like the best guy in the draft and they had the same record as us last year. Normally I hope up an UDFA or sixth round guy who looks good but for the sake of argument if we do win 6 to 8 games this year, it definitely doesn't take us out of the running for a QB. Especially with this year which like last year doesn't have a real front runner (last year it was Lawrence but after that nobody had solidified number 2) so mocks will have all kinds of permutations. So if we stay put we'll probably have a chance at somebody. Or we can move up and be aggressive. But I think the whole Tank for whoever is a flawed system, especially this year 

[philibusters]

8 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

So it's a bit skewed and it's not the guy I thought it'd be, but the whole you need to have the top QB in the draft theory is over again bring proven wrong. Not saying Lawrence or Burrow and Tua can't still be good but it's looking like they're not the top guys in their classes. What's that make it like 7 oh the last 8 drafts where the top QB taken wasn't the best? 

 

I've always said we could wait on a QB and thought Jones would last till the second like Mond did. I still wasn't a fan because I wanted more mobility but he looks like the best guy in the draft and they had the same record as us last year. Normally I hope up an UDFA or sixth round guy who looks good but for the sake of argument if we do win 6 to 8 games this year, it definitely doesn't take us out of the running for a QB. Especially with this year which like last year doesn't have a real front runner (last year it was Lawrence but after that nobody had solidified number 2) so mocks will have all kinds of permutations. So if we stay put we'll probably have a chance at somebody. Or we can move up and be aggressive. But I think the whole Tank for whoever is a flawed system, especially this year 

 

I think Lawrence does have a realistic shot at being better than Mac Jones, its still too early, and Jones went to a situation in New England more conducive to him excelling right away.   That said Jones was the 5th QB taken, so it hink your point still stands.  Burrow looks like he'll be good, but not as good as Herbert.   Baker Mayfield is okay, but not as good as Josh Allen or Lamar Jackson, Trubisky isn't anywhere near as good as Mahomes or Deshaun Watson.  Goff is probably not quite as good as Wentz and definitely isn't as good as Dak Prescott so I do tend to agree with you.  

[KDawg]

9 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

I think Lawrence does have a realistic shot at being better than Mac Jones, its still too early, and Jones went to a situation in New England more conducive to him excelling right away.   That said Jones was the 5th QB taken, so it hink your point still stands.  Burrow looks like he'll be good, but not as good as Herbert.   Baker Mayfield is okay, but not as good as Josh Allen or Lamar Jackson, Trubisky isn't anywhere near as good as Mahomes or Deshaun Watson.  Goff is probably not quite as good as Wentz and definitely isn't as good as Dak Prescott so I do tend to agree with you.  

 

It's always interesting to see how people perceive things.

 

Saying Herbert is better than Burrow seems to be in large part due to the hype surrounding Herbert around here and in the media. Not to say he's not playing excellent... But Burrow is arguably having the better season:

 

 

Both teams are 5-4. Cincy is a much bigger surprise.

[Thinking Skins]

4 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

I think Lawrence does have a realistic shot at being better than Mac Jones, its still too early, and Jones went to a situation in New England more conducive to him excelling right away.   That said Jones was the 5th QB taken, so it hink your point still stands.  Burrow looks like he'll be good, but not as good as Herbert.   Baker Mayfield is okay, but not as good as Josh Allen or Lamar Jackson, Trubisky isn't anywhere near as good as Mahomes or Deshaun Watson.  Goff is probably not quite as good as Wentz and definitely isn't as good as Dak Prescott so I do tend to agree with you.  

Yeah, this comes from an argument / discussion that @Skinsinparadise and I have a lot about QBs. Normally I'm all about looking for the Dak Prescotts of the draft instead of investing everything into a Tank for Tua or Wentz or whoever. I am honestly reconsidering that philosophy because while there have been some QBs drafted late who have looked good lately (Mike White, Cooper Rush, PJ Walker, Taylor Heinicke, etc) those guys are all either having mediocre seasons or still do not have enough evidence to show that they are actually good. And in previous seasons guys like CJ Beathard have come down to earth as they got more playing time. I still think some guys like Gardner Minshew should get more time but I'm not willing to invest in him as the savior. 

 

But I still think that bottom of the first QBs or still QBs that are drafted outside the top 5 are still a good spot. I know we got Haskins there and its a sour smell in our mouths, but look at Mac Jones - 15, Herbert - 6, Allen - 7, Jackson - 32, Mahomes - 10, Bridgewater - 32. Its still not a home run thing but it lends some thought to the idea that its more about going to a good coach / stable franchise than just being the best. All these guys went to decent teams and only Herbert had a coach who was under fire (fired after his rookie season) but even they were a consistent playoff team (9-7 and 12-4 seasons before going 5-11 to get Herbert). 

[KDawg]

Top 3-5 pick is necessary to get the best QB CEILING talent.

 

Top 15ish is necessary to get the best QB prospects, generally guys with high floor and lower ceilings than the top QBs in each class. Some years this extends to the entire first. Some years its only top 10. I'm just splitting the difference here and saying somewhere in the middle. 

 

Sleepers who have it all and flew under the radar can be had anywhere. But they are tougher to uncover because there is a lot of risk at times in drafting these guys. And by the time your pick comes around someone else had the same idea and took the flier. You can trade up but then you have to justify moving up to draft a QB from John Carroll University.

[Skinsinparadise]

31 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

I think Lawrence does have a realistic shot at being better than Mac Jones, its still too early, and Jones went to a situation in New England more conducive to him excelling right away.   That said Jones was the 5th QB taken, so it hink your point still stands.  Burrow looks like he'll be good, but not as good as Herbert.   Baker Mayfield is okay, but not as good as Josh Allen or Lamar Jackson, Trubisky isn't anywhere near as good as Mahomes or Deshaun Watson.  Goff is probably not quite as good as Wentz and definitely isn't as good as Dak Prescott so I do tend to agree with you.  

 

As @Thinking Skins pointed out, I have rallied against going deeper in the draft in general as the solution.  Yet, I was one of the highest guys here about Mac Jones.   Mid first though isn't that deep in the draft if its a highly regarded prospect.   Conversely, in 2019, I rallied against Haskins and Daniel Jones.  I didn't want either dude.  I didn't want Trask and Mills in this last draft.  Generally, i am not big on the flier types.  I don't mind though rolling the dice on one if we are already have a dude ala 2012.  My favorite later round QB in this draft so far is Haener.  But no way I am just drafting him and calling it a day.  

 

To me every draft is different.   I didn't see Mac as the 5th best QB in sort of a vacuum type of drill.  To me he was a good Qb who just happened to be the 5th QB drafted. 

 

This draft to me feels funkier than the typical one at QB.  My initial read is the top 4 QBs are all pretty close talent wise, some would even say the top 5.  Some say even the top one isn't as good as Mac Jones.  As a dude who really liked Mac, I am not sure though that's true.  I think I like Corral more than I liked Jones but he might have a lower floor than him.   

 

Mac I think is headed to be really good.  Even better than I thought he would be.  He's playing arguably without even a legit #2 receiver let alone a #1.  And his running game has been just average,

 

 

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As @Thinking Skins pointed out, I have rallied against going deeper in the draft in general as the solution.  Yet, I was one of the highest guys here about Mac Jones.   Mid first though isn't that deep in the draft if its a highly regarded prospect.   Conversely, in 2019, I rallied against Haskins and Daniel Jones.  I didn't want either dude.  I didn't want Trask and Mills in this last draft.  Generalluy, i am not big on the flier types.  I don't mind though rolling the dice on one if we are already have a dude ala 2012.  My favorite later round QB in this draft so far is Haener.  But no way I am just drafting him and calling it a day.  

 

To me every draft is different.   I didn't see Mac as the 5th best QB in sort of a vacuum type of drill.  To me he was a good Qb who just happened to be the 5th QB drafted. 

 

This draft to me feels funkier than the typical one at QB.  My initial read is the top 4 QBs are all pretty close talent wise, some would even say the top 5.  Some say even the top one isn't as good as Mac Jones.  As a dude who really liked Mac, I am not sure though that's true.  I think I like Corral more than I liked Jones but he might have a lower floor than him.   

 

Mac I think is headed to be really good.  Even better than I thought he would be.  He's playing arguably without even a legit #2 receiver let alone a #1.  And his running game has been just average,

 

 

 

 

Yup. You were Mac's biggest advocate. I wasn't in love but if I recall my take was: I like him, there's no reason he can't be successful, he may not ever be the best skilled QB in the league but his floor is high.

 

I was a "if we get Mac, I'd be good with it". 

 

So I won't take credit for beating that drum.

[Thinking Skins]

10 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Saying Herbert is better than Burrow seems to be in large part due to the hype surrounding Herbert around here and in the media. Not to say he's not playing excellent... But Burrow is arguably having the better season:

 

I disagree completely. First, look at the QBR for those QBs and you see a big difference. 

QBR: 

Herbert: 69.5

Burrow: 49.4

 

That said, the question becomes what is Herbert doing that Burrow isn't. We se that Burrow has only 44 rushing yards compared to Herbert's 117 including 2 rushing touchdowns and 13 first downs (Burrow has 5 rushing first downs). Add to that the fact that Burrow has been sacked 25 times compared to Herbert's 16. 

 

I'd buy into the narrative that Herbert is playing better. 

 

But even if you want to call it a wash. The point is that going into the draft it was Burrow was the clear and obvious number 1 pick. The whole college season was Tank for Tua. Herbert was either an afterthought or a distant third choice. The fact that a team can pick the "third best" QB in the draft and have him as clearly better than one QB picked ahead of him (Tua) and tied with another (Burrow) shows that we know so little about drafting QBs. 

[Skinsinparadise]

13 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

 

But I still think that bottom of the first QBs or still QBs that are drafted outside the top 5 are still a good spot. I know we got Haskins there and its a sour smell in our mouths, but look at Mac Jones - 15, Herbert - 6, Allen - 7, Jackson - 32, Mahomes - 10, Bridgewater - 32. Its still not a home run thing but it lends some thought to the idea that its more about going to a good coach / stable franchise than just being the best. All these guys went to decent teams and only Herbert had a coach who was under fire (fired after his rookie season) but even they were a consistent playoff team (9-7 and 12-4 seasons before going 5-11 to get Herbert). 

 

The thing that those QBs have in common are freak talents with live arms and great mobility (Jackson, Allen, Mahomes, Herbert) or freak intangiblles which all of them have.

[KDawg]

Just now, Thinking Skins said:

I disagree completely. First, look at the QBR for those QBs and you see a big difference. 

QBR: 

Herbert: 69.5

Burrow: 49.4

 

That said, the question becomes what is Herbert doing that Burrow isn't. We se that Burrow has only 44 rushing yards compared to Herbert's 117 including 2 rushing touchdowns and 13 first downs (Burrow has 5 rushing first downs). Add to that the fact that Burrow has been sacked 25 times compared to Herbert's 16. 

 

I'd buy into the narrative that Herbert is playing better. 

 

But even if you want to call it a wash. The point is that going into the draft it was Burrow was the clear and obvious number 1 pick. The whole college season was Tank for Tua. Herbert was either an afterthought or a distant third choice. The fact that a team can pick the "third best" QB in the draft and have him as clearly better than one QB picked ahead of him (Tua) and tied with another (Burrow) shows that we know so little about drafting QBs. 

 

You are discounting supporting casts. Cincy was a ****show last year. LAC has underperformed this year. They drafted linemen. They have fantastic weapons. 

 

Burrow's line is weak. He has one real receiving threat.

 

I don't believe QBR is a great indicator of anything, either. 

[Thinking Skins]

8 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

You are discounting supporting casts. Cincy was a ****show last year. LAC has underperformed this year. They drafted linemen. They have fantastic weapons. 

 

Burrow's line is weak. He has one real receiving threat.

 

I don't believe QBR is a great indicator of anything, either. 

I don't think QBR is the end all be all, but it measures the impact of the player on the win percentage of the game (or maybe its the scoring percentage) so that gives it some value. And what I was showing is that with Herbert's running he's having more of an impact than Burrow. He's more than doubled in yards, has 2 TDs and more first downs. He's keeping drives alive. Not to mention he has less ints and more total TDs. Its not a slam dunk victory over him but if I'm comparing stats I'm saying that Herbert is having the better year. 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Thinking Skins said:

I don't think QBR is the end all be all, but it measures the impact of the player on the win percentage of the game (or maybe its the scoring percentage) so that gives it some value. And what I was showing is that with Herbert's running he's having more of an impact than Burrow. He's more than doubled in yards, has 2 TDs and more first downs. He's keeping drives alive. Not to mention he has less ints and more total TDs. Its not a slam dunk victory over him but if I'm comparing stats I'm saying that Herbert is having the better year. 

Nothing is ever just about stats.

 

And by the way... this is why I said arguably.

 

I've watched both play a lot this year. Both are impressive. Herbert has been getting more hype. Burrow has been better with what he has and overall. In my opinion. I'm not basing anything on stats. I used the stats because I genuinely don't think people realize how good Burrow has been. 

 

You also will argue against anything that shows a higher drafted QB vs. a lower drafted QB. You've done it for years.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

 

Yup. You were Mac's biggest advocate. I wasn't in love but if I recall my take was: I like him, there's no reason he can't be successful, he may not ever be the best skilled QB in the league but his floor is high.

 

I was a "if we get Mac, I'd be good with it". 

 

So I won't take credit for beating that drum.

 

There were two people who at times even quoted some of the superlatives I gave Mac but they loved him more than me.  I told them he's good but calm down.  So I give them props on this, they wanted him bad.  I wanted him at 19 but didn't push for a trade up but defininetly wouldn't have hated it if they did it. 

 

But I was definitely the king of selling Mac.  I spent more time explaining why i think he'd be a good player than I did on any player before that draft.    Also, we had for whatever reason a bunch of Mac Jones versus Trask debates on that thread.  And it forced me to spend a lot of time on both players -- and I really didn't care for Trask the deeper I studied him.

 

I bring back Mac to some of these debates in part as a lesson for myself because as much as I liked him, i should have liked him even more.  So rehashing what I dug about him is helping me (or at least I think it is) study this crop.   

 

And to me there were 5 things that jumped to me about Mac.

 

A.  The dudes accuracy was freakishly good and in a wide range not just a sweet spot.  Some trashed him and said his guys were wide open.  That was true,  But still his ball placement was really good -- hit the WRs in stride.  Also sometimes the windows were tight and he still hit his mark.  Only weaknesses i saw was on the deep ball, sometimes he'd underthrow them. 

 

B.  Really good at selling play action and using body language to misdirect the defense.  Corral to me isn't as good on that front as Mac but is the closest to my eyes on this front.

 

C.  Processes fast -- quick release.   Again to me Corral is the best of this bunch IMO on this front.

 

D.  Can make plays on the move.  Some of his critics IMO got this wrong the most.  They called him a stationary QB.  He's not.  He's not fast but he could roll out in the pocket and can make plays. He wasn't slow.  He had some mobility.   I recall you agreed with me on this.    To me Corral and Howell can be potentially special on this front -- better on this variable than Jones.  

 

E.  Intangibles.  i know some think, all these QBs have Rocky like personalities.  They all live and die with the sport and that's why they are first round picks.  The more I've dug into this issue, i find that's nonsense.  In college, mere talent can carry you through.  it's not a 24-7 sport. It's simpler. The talent disparity is larger.  The NFL is tougher and requires a much bigger committment.  Dudes like Mac who are obsessed with football are rare not a dime a dozen.  Peyton Manning among others talks about it all the time, he says the fact that he loves football and would do it for free is part of what made him a great player. 

 

 

 

[Thinking Skins]

34 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Nothing is ever just about stats.

 

And by the way... this is why I said arguably.

 

I've watched both play a lot this year. Both are impressive. Herbert has been getting more hype. Burrow has been better with what he has and overall. In my opinion. I'm not basing anything on stats. I used the stats because I genuinely don't think people realize how good Burrow has been. 

 

You also will argue against anything that shows a higher drafted QB vs. a lower drafted QB. You've done it for years.

I agree and diverging from the Burrow vs Herbert conversation, I will say that one of the reasons that I don't think of QBR as the end all be all is because I'm not sure how QBR would rank (for example) the last drive of Heinicke vs the last drive of Brady, and what about the last drive of Brady if we hadn't scored or if they had blocked and returned the XP. Brian Burke says that they discounted stats when games are not winnable, but I'm not sure of how it does that. Kirk Cousins was the king of meaningless stats but being unable to get a critical third down. I can't manually calculate his QBR so I have to take it at face value that his QBR being higher than Burrow indicates that these are meaningful stats but I don't know how much I believe that. 

 

For one, how do we determine when a stat is meaningless? I guess that similar to how they have the EVA data table showing how likely it is to score from every point in the field, there is probably a data table showing how likely a win is with a given point difference and time remaining in the game. But I'm weary about this type of a table because thats what a comeback is, unlikely and the QBs that are able to make an initial blowout loss close (not just seem close but actually winnable) should have that noted in their QBR and it should be distinguished from the KCs who score a TD late to make it seem like we were close to a win but in actuality it was nothing. 

 

Sorry I'm rambling here because I'm trying to express my confusion about QBR and it may not be making sense. I know I'm confusing myself. 

[Skinsinparadise]

I usually don't put the same thing on two different threads but on rare occasion I do if different debates are being made and the posters don't all overlap on those threads.  I think this is interesting...

 

QB evaluations according to scouts, etc.

 

https://www.espn.com/blog/new-york/giants/post/_/id/58668/what-matters-when-evaluating-qbs-today-not-height-and-arm-strength

 

"A non-negotiable for me is instincts. It really is," Gettleman said. "There are guys that are big, great arm, great athletes. They can't figure it out. I don't think people talk about it enough. Instincts are critical. You turn around at every position -- people will fall in love with the height, weight, speed, defensive tackle, but you put his hand in the dirt, he can't find the ball, he doesn't understand blocking schemes -- so all this great height, weight, speed, whatever he's got, it doesn't make a difference."

Instincts are something you can't necessarily put your finger on and say, "Aha, that's it!" But neither are some other vital quarterback qualities that evaluators prioritize, which further adds to the subjective nature of the process and complicates matters.

A feel for the game -- which cannot be quantified -- matters.

"A guy has to have a natural instinct on where to go with the ball, and he can place it where he wants to," a quarterbacks coach said. "That is kind of the whole thing."

One NFL executive considered leadership his No. 1 skill for a quarterback. There isn't a be-all, tell-all database for leadership. Wins and losses only tell part of the story. Speaking to coaches and teammates can help, but it's ultimately a projection when you're trying to figure how a 20-something will be able to lead grown men.

 

That executive had decision-making and accuracy second and third on his QB priority list.

An NFL coach listed functional intelligence, natural decision-making and accuracy as his top three needs when evaluating college quarterbacks. Another had a quarterback's ability to control the game, poise in the pocket and vision atop his list.

Arm strength and height weren't necessarily prioritized by the more than a handful of executives, scouts and coaches polled. In fact, one coach was weary of quarterbacks over 6-foot-4. Hand size was viewed by some as simply a compensating factor for height.

It doesn't mean there isn’t a minimum threshold for all, but they're not top priorities.

"Accuracy over arm strength," according to a scout.

 

To some, this isn't necessarily new. It has nothing to do with spread offenses and consistently shorter throws in today's NFL.

"It hasn't changed," a second executive said. "I just think people have been looking at the wrong thing. People are still talking about arm strength in 2019. ... There is no correlation between having a strong arm and being a great quarterback. There is a certain standard you must have, but once you get that, anything after that, it doesn't matter who has the strongest arm in the NFL."

What does seem to matter most is that a quarterback can create, whether it be by using different arm angles, sliding in the pocket or running. The evaluators polled seemed to be in agreement that avoiding pressure and making plays under duress was mandatory.

[Skinsinparadise]

That comment from Dak, he comes off and plays like a baller.  He has that "it" factor.  Corral and Howell to me play like that, tough son of guns.   Ridder has that in him too but his inconsistent accuracy bugs me at times. 

 

 

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

QB talk about Carolina

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/32645245/predicting-nfl-week-11-upset-picks-fantasy-football-sleepers-flops-plus-buzz-notes-league

 

Does Cam Newton have a realistic shot of being the Panthers' opening-day starter in 2022?

Graziano: I think it's unlikely. Carolina will be big-game hunters on the quarterback market this offseason, as it was last offseason, when it tried to trade for Matthew Stafford and Deshaun Watson only to end up with Sam Darnold. This time, with Watson, Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins and others among the potentially available impact names at the position, I expect the Panthers to aim higher than Newton and be motivated enough to land one of the bigger names.

Fowler: I'm with Dan. This feels like a half-year rental. It's such a great story that I don't want to muddle it with concerns about Newton's long-term viability. Both parties know what this is -- a chance to win, and a chance for closure on a memorable run. We could see an unprecedented run of big-name quarterbacks going elsewhere, depending on how everything shakes out. Expect Carolina to be in the mix there. What's wild is that Carolina has Darnold's $18.858 million fifth-year option on the books for 2022. The organization made a two-year commitment to him. What does it do with that, Dan?

Graziano: Well, the Panthers could pay a chunk of it to make him go away, as they did when they traded Teddy Bridgewater to the Broncos just a few months ago. But (A) I can't conceive of what the market would be for Darnold at any significant price at this point, and (B) eventually they're going to run out of cap space. It's certainly possible that having to pay Darnold could affect their pursuit of a higher-end QB option, but I don't get the sense that they're overly worried about that at this point.

Fowler: Right. And I don't get the sense that team owner David Tepper will let a few million dollars thwart his quest for a long-term signal-caller. The Panthers are about as subtle as Jim Carrey's acting with that pursuit. The cap implications are what they are, but teams can work around it. They will try to get in the mix on the heavy hitters available.

[Skinsinparadise]

I am more of a Mariota than Trubisky guy, far from love Mariota though.  Yeah i doubt they'd try to sell either Qb as the solution.  I think it would have to be a QB drafted and one of these guys. 

 

 

 

[Warhead36]

People are a bit too high on Mac Jones. He hasn't been bad but he's mostly just been kinda "meh." Some good moments sure but he's not really lighting it up. Ironically he kinda looks like very early Tom Brady who won by managing the game and letting the D carry.

 

I don't think our record is that much better if at all with Jones than it would be with Heinicke to be honest. Heinicke's mobility won us the Giants and Falcons games and Jones doesn't have that.

[wit33]

Rookie and Heineke for 2022. Heineke will win the job and let him ride it out until the wheels fall off, providing the rookie time to learn. 

[Anselmheifer]

I still think we should trade for Watson. Include Chase and his ACL and failure to show up for voluntary workouts. We need a QB. A 26 year old top 5 QB is available. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 minute ago, Anselmheifer said:

I still think we should trade for Watson. Include Chase and his ACL and failure to show up for voluntary workouts. We need a QB. A 26 year old top 5 QB is available. 

So you think the Texans want Chase and his ACL in a trade for Watson?  And you think the team tangled in sexual harassment issues, should give up assets, to trade for a QB that may not even get to play football due to his own sexual harassment/assault allegations?

 

If and when the Watson legal issues are cleared, there will be a market for the guy.  Until that time, you're playing yourself conjuring up angst for why the team isn't making a move for him. 

[Anselmheifer]

32 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

So you think the Texans want Chase and his ACL in a trade for Watson?  And you think the team tangled in sexual harassment issues, should give up assets, to trade for a QB that may not even get to play football due to his own sexual harassment/assault allegations?

 

If and when the Watson legal issues are cleared, there will be a market for the guy.  Until that time, you're playing yourself conjuring up angst for why the team isn't making a move for him. 

Not Chase for Watson straight up. However many 1sts plus Chase. 
 

And I agree that we need to feel like Watson won’t face criminal charges.