Texans FA Tracker

[bikerack]

Per multiple sources on twitter...

Texans re-sign Lechler and Novak.



Also, Texans interested in Ravens RT Rick Wagner but he may be too expensive.

[HPF Bob]

So does that mean they'll be cutting Fig Newton?

[bikerack]

So does that mean they'll be cutting Fig Newton?

Can't answer the Newton question but sounds like they have been priced out of Wagner.

[popanot]

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account
@RapSheet

The #Lions and OT Ricky Wagner have agreed in principle on a contract, source said. It will eclipse $9M per year, setting a new market.Wagner (supposedly) off the market

[bikerack]

I'm sure everyone has seen/heard it but Romo will be released tomorrow.

[bikerack]

Demps is gone. Signing with Chicago.

[bikerack]

https://twitter.com/mortreport/status/839915288799903744

Cowboys now expected to trade Romo to either DEN or HOU.

[bikerack]

John Simon to Indy

[nunusguy]

John Simon to Indy

I saw 17M with 5.5M guaranteed. Those numbers seem reasonable for Simon but guess Rac & Vrabel didn't think he was worth it.
I would have restructured or cut Cushing to retain Simon but maybe they don't want to keep either of them.

[barrett]

I saw 17M with 5.5M guaranteed. Those numbers seem reasonable for Simon but guess Rac & Vrabel didn't think he was worth it.
I would have restructured or cut Cushing to retain Simon but maybe they don't want to keep either of them.

I love Simon, but you can't pay him that money to be your 4th edge rusher, and I don't think you can pay him that money with the plan that JJ/Mercilous/Clowney are getting hurt again.

Stinks that he went to Indy though.

[HPF Bob]

It's good, really. Now we can exploit Simon's inability to cover backs out of the backfield just like Indy would do to us.

[chuck]

I never really thought Simon was anything more than just a guy.

Bouye we'll miss; Simon, I doubt it.

[barrett]

It's good, really. Now we can exploit Simon's inability to cover backs out of the backfield just like Indy would do to us.

34 OLBs cannot cover backs out of the backfield. Nor should they be asked to for longer than 1-2 seconds. That has nothing to with Simon.

Also, the Colts did little in the passing game against us in general last year, and even less with their RBs. What little they did get to their RBs had nothing to do with Simon. So I have no idea where this comment comes from.

[Nconroe]

I think we will miss all three guys lost from Defense so far, all three had positive contributions.

Wonder when we will start spending our 30 mil free cap space?

And, I am not one hoping for Romo. Though QB for sure our biggest need.

Further, pretty surprized they had a reasonable end to Osweiler story. Seemed like a nice guy so wish him well.

[barrett]

I hope for Romo even expecting him to play less than 6 games next year. I think this defense is so good that if we get above average playoff QB play, we could win a super bowl. You have to take a shot at the only way you get that QB play.

But don't let Romo stop you from drafting a QB on the first 2 days.

[Keith]

I will miss Bouye, Simon, and Demps, but this was the #1 defense because of several other guys. Those guys leaving opens a door for players like Robert Nelson, Brennan Scarlett, and Eddie Pleasant. Not impressed? How impressed were you when the Texans first added Bouye, Simon, and Pleasant to the roster? I'll wait as you scroll back your memory banks to when they were signed.

And, oh yeah, they're going to get to add J.J. Watt back to a front-7 that features J.D. Clowney just now hitting his peak. Shed no tears for the Texans defense. They're fine.

If you want to wring your hands over something (besides QB, duh), then think about what's happening (or not happening) at right tackle. And TE, too. For the second straight year the team has not signed Martellus Bennett in FA, instead losing him to the Patriots and Packers, a couple teams that know a thing or two about offense.

As for TE, it has been a huge need ever since Owen Daniels left. I am optimistic about Stephen Alexander's development in the passing game, but the Texans have used him so little they seem less than enthused.

[barrett]

I will miss Bouye, Simon, and Demps, but this was the #1 defense because of several other guys. Those guys leaving opens a door for players like Robert Nelson, Brennan Scarlett, and Eddie Pleasant. Not impressed? How impressed were you when the Texans first added Bouye, Simon, and Pleasant to the roster? I'll wait as you scroll back your memory banks to when they were signed.

And, oh yeah, they're going to get to add J.J. Watt back to a front-7 that features J.D. Clowney just now hitting his peak. Shed no tears for the Texans defense. They're fine.

If you want to wring your hands over something (besides QB, duh), then think about what's happening (or not happening) at right tackle. And TE, too. For the second straight year the team has not signed Martellus Bennett in FA, instead losing him to the Patriots and Packers, a couple teams that know a thing or two about offense.

As for TE, it has been a huge need ever since Owen Daniels left. I am optimistic about Stephen Alexander's development in the passing game, but the Texans have used him so little they seem less than enthused.

If we sign Romo that completely prevents a Bennett signing. Bennett has spoken out loudly about his unhappiness with the Romo/Witten crowd in Dallas and how he was frozen out.

If we don't sign Romo, Bennett is not a guy I'd like to have on a team with a bad QB. Put him with a great QB and he'll be eccentric and fun. Put him with a bad QB and he'll be a constant headache.

[barrett]

But if I was in the mood to cherry pick Patriots front office moves, I love the Cooks trade. NE has been so bad drafting WRs, but they turned #32 and the limited impact it would have in 2017 into a really good young deep threat and YAC guy without it costing them much money in 2017. That's a smart move when your QB is 40 and you're trying to win as much as possible while he lasts.

[HPF Bob]

Also, the Colts did little in the passing game against us in general last year, and even less with their RBs. What little they did get to their RBs had nothing to do with Simon. So I have no idea where this comment comes from.

Just a quick scan of the play-by-play log for the first game against the Colts last year include these entries.

1 10 HTX 26 Andrew Luck pass complete short right to Robert Turbin for 9 yards (tackle by Benardrick McKinney)

2 7 CLT 43 Andrew Luck pass complete short left to Frank Gore for 13 yards (tackle by Kevin Johnson).

2 10 HTX 34 Andrew Luck pass complete short left to Robert Turbin for -1 yards (tackle by Kevin Johnson)

2 14 CLT 17 Andrew Luck pass complete short left to Frank Gore for 2 yards (tackle by Kevin Johnson)

3 12 CLT 19 Andrew Luck pass complete short left to Robert Turbin for 2 yards (tackle by A.J. Bouye)

3 4 CLT 30 Andrew Luck pass complete short right to Robert Turbin for 12 yards (tackle by John Simon)

This on a night when Gore rushed 22 times for 106 yards.

My point being that the Colts do throw to their backs on a regular basis as part of their game plan. Neither Simon nor McKinney were all that effective in pass coverage.

[nunusguy]

I hope for Romo even expecting him to play less than 6 games next year. I think this defense is so good that if we get above average playoff QB play, we could win a super bowl. You have to take a shot at the only way you get that QB play.

But don't let Romo stop you from drafting a QB on the first 2 days.

Assuming he's willing to come to Houston and play ball what's the price tag on Romo gonna be ? 2-year deal at 15M a year front-end loaded where all of the guaranteed money hits the cap in 2017 ? That may all be moot as Romo might just up and retire now.
Even if we sign him I expect them to draft a QB this year and in the first round it they like their Board. In other words no more procrastination on drafting a young QB.
I'm starting to really like this MaHomes kid out of Texas Tech but he may be too wild and wooly for O'Brien but he's got a tremendous arm.

[barrett]

Just a quick scan of the play-by-play log for the first game against the Colts last year include these entries.

1 10 HTX 26 Andrew Luck pass complete short right to Robert Turbin for 9 yards (tackle by Benardrick McKinney)

2 7 CLT 43 Andrew Luck pass complete short left to Frank Gore for 13 yards (tackle by Kevin Johnson).

2 10 HTX 34 Andrew Luck pass complete short left to Robert Turbin for -1 yards (tackle by Kevin Johnson)

2 14 CLT 17 Andrew Luck pass complete short left to Frank Gore for 2 yards (tackle by Kevin Johnson)

3 12 CLT 19 Andrew Luck pass complete short left to Robert Turbin for 2 yards (tackle by A.J. Bouye)

3 4 CLT 30 Andrew Luck pass complete short right to Robert Turbin for 12 yards (tackle by John Simon)

This on a night when Gore rushed 22 times for 106 yards.

My point being that the Colts do throw to their backs on a regular basis as part of their game plan. Neither Simon nor McKinney were all that effective in pass coverage.

I'm not sure what play by play you perused. The night where Gore ran for 106 he had 1 catch for 2 yards.

For the season Gore had 277 yards receiving and Turbin had 179. This makes them 23 and 42 in the NFL among RBs. And that on a team with the 5th most passing yards. They have 3 WRs and 3 TEs who had more receiving yards. The RBs are not a big part of the gameplan for the Colts.

And like I said, Simon is a 34 OLB and is not expected to cover much. McKinney is a MLB who was on the field a lot on 3rd down. It was expected to be part of his game. McKinney and Cushing are guys who need to cover RBs or they have limited value. Simon and Clowney/Mercilous are not.

[HPF Bob]

After I posted, I looked up the second Colts game and RBs Gore and Turpin were targeted on 9 pass attempts of which Indy completed 6 for 66 yards and a touchdown.

You're welcome to pretend this is insignificant but, for years, the Texans do not defend well against screens and flat passes to the backs. Indy, in particular, knows this and makes it a regular part of their gameplan. Sure, they'd rather pass it to Hilton instead and last year they rediscovered their tight ends as receivers (Allen and Doyle) but dinks and dunks to the backs is also a significant part of their plan.

As for the OLB responsibilities, we have pressure guys (Mercilus, Clowney) and we have cover guys who fill the zone (Cushing, McKinney, Simon). Cushing used to be fantastic before his knees blew out. McKinney is slow but he's learning angles and is improving. Simon was "just a guy" out there for the most part. I certainly wouldn't have paid what the Colts paid for him.

[barrett]

After I posted, I looked up the second Colts game and RBs Gore and Turpin were targeted on 9 pass attempts of which Indy completed 6 for 66 yards and a touchdown.

You're welcome to pretend this is insignificant but, for years, the Texans do not defend well against screens and flat passes to the backs. Indy, in particular, knows this and makes it a regular part of their gameplan. Sure, they'd rather pass it to Hilton instead and last year they rediscovered their tight ends as receivers (Allen and Doyle) but dinks and dunks to the backs is also a significant part of their plan.

As for the OLB responsibilities, we have pressure guys (Mercilus, Clowney) and we have cover guys who fill the zone (Cushing, McKinney, Simon). Cushing used to be fantastic before his knees blew out. McKinney is slow but he's learning angles and is improving. Simon was "just a guy" out there for the most part. I certainly wouldn't have paid what the Colts paid for him.

So to recap your points, in the past the Colts used the RBs more in the passing game, none of that had anything to do with John Simon, and now we can take advantage of the Colts by passing to our RBs because they signed Simon. Great analysis Bob.

[Keith]

Texans re-signed TE Ryan Griffin to a 3-year deal. So that solves the problem there. :rolleyes:

My Marty B lust is more about my personal cry for help to upgrade the talent at the position more than anything. The point about his relationship with Romo is a good one. I probably could have just said any capable TE's name to make my point.

[Blitzwood]

Assuming he's willing to come to Houston and play ball what's the price tag on Romo gonna be ? 2-year deal at 15M a year front-end loaded where all of the guaranteed money hits the cap in 2017 ? That may all be moot as Romo might just up and retire now.
Even if we sign him I expect them to draft a QB this year and in the first round it they like their Board. In other words no more procrastination on drafting a young QB.
I'm starting to really like this MaHomes kid out of Texas Tech but he may be too wild and wooly for O'Brien but he's got a tremendous arm.

Don't know how long it's been since Romo played a full season.

I totally agree with you on the Mahomes kid, I really like him.

[barrett]

Texans re-signed TE Ryan Griffin to a 3-year deal. So that solves the problem there. :rolleyes:

My Marty B lust is more about my personal cry for help to upgrade the talent at the position more than anything. The point about his relationship with Romo is a good one. I probably could have just said any capable TE's name to make my point.

I love him. I coached against him his senior year in HS. I was a low level defensive assistant and we were sure we had a great game plan for how to handle him down near the goal line.

We lost in OT when he caught a goal line TD. So much for that. The TD was more like a rebound than a fade route.

I think he was fantastic for the Patriots last year and he is the rare receiving threat at TE who still blocks. I would have loved him on the Texans in the Kubiak years when we used the TE.

[HPF Bob]

So to recap your points, in the past the Colts used the RBs more in the passing game, none of that had anything to do with John Simon, and now we can take advantage of the Colts by passing to our RBs because they signed Simon. Great analysis Bob.

So, to recap your points, John Simon stands around with his thumb up his ass whenever a running back makes a catch on a screen or out in the flat because it's not his job to run down the ballcarrier and, besides, teams never throw the ball to the backs against the Texans anyway. Great analysis Barrett.

[barrett]

So, to recap your points, John Simon stands around with his thumb up his ass whenever a running back makes a catch on a screen or out in the flat because it's not his job to run down the ballcarrier and, besides, teams never throw the ball to the backs against the Texans anyway. Great analysis Barrett.

Nice straw man Bob. The only difference is you actually tried to make the idiotic points I recapped. Now if your original analysis was half as smart as your sarcasm, then you probably would have had something to add to the discussion of Texans FAs.

[HPF Bob]

Bottom line. John Simon is a waste at LB who can't cover backs and I will enjoy like crazy watching Miller or Hunt zoom past him for first downs against the Colts. May he have the same success in Indy that Andre Johnson had.

[chuck]

I'll just add that the Texans' OLBs are in fact dropped into coverage more often than never. I've never really understood this very well, why that would be part of a package, but it does happen. Perhaps the coaching changes will result in a change of strategy here, or maybe the team will get serious about the safety position for once in its existence.

On an unrelated note I knew that BO sucked at football, what I didn't know is that he's a whiny little pussy.

I also like how Cleveland - Cleveland! - had to lead Rick Smith by the hand out of the darkness and into the light. I wonder what sort of master plan that genius had in his back pocket had the Browns not done his thinking for him.

[popanot]

Yahoo Sports' Eric Edholm reports the Texans are interested in Patriots restricted free agent Malcolm Butler, and would be willing to trade a second-round pick.

The Texans traded their 2018 second-rounder in the Brock Osweiler asset dump, but still have their 2017 second-rounder. Edholm concedes the second-rounder in and of itself probably wouldn't be enough to get a deal done. Butler is visiting the Saints on Thursday, and has begun negotiations with the team. There's a real chance he signs an offer sheet elsewhere with the understanding a trade will be worked out.

Obviously a rumor at this point, but if true, wouldn't it have been better to just keep Bouye? They'd have to pay Butler roughly the same amount and would still have a pick.

[barrett]

Obviously a rumor at this point, but if true, wouldn't it have been better to just keep Bouye? They'd have to pay Butler roughly the same amount and would still have a pick.

I think Butler is at least a 2nd round pick better than Bouye.

I can't imagine this gets done without one of our guys being dealt. Preferrably Jackson or Joseph, but since Bellichek likes guys on rookie contracts, maybe Kevin Johnson and the 2nd for Butler and a low round pick.

[popanot]

I'd rather have Bouye and the pick. The D was good enough with Bouye (let alone also losing Johnson in your scenario in acquiring Butler), and that 2nd RD pick could be another good player (QB, OL).

But like you said, it's not going to happen. I think Butler ends up with the Saints.

[barrett]

I'd rather have Bouye and the pick. The D was good enough with Bouye (let alone also losing Johnson in your scenario in acquiring Butler), and that 2nd RD pick could be another good player (QB, OL).

But like you said, it's not going to happen. I think Butler ends up with the Saints.

I totally agree that on our team I'd rather have Bouye and the 2nd. We have good CB depth and I just don't think we ask our CBs to do enough to justify that deal.

But I do think Butler is significantly better than Bouye.

[nunusguy]

I totally agree that on our team I'd rather have Bouye and the 2nd. We have good CB depth and I just don't think we ask our CBs to do enough to justify that deal.

But I do think Butler is significantly better than Bouye.

Man I agree with that !
Our second round pick in next months Draft is extremely important to us. So right now we've got our first, second, third, and two fourth round picks remaining and we have pressing needs for those few precious pics especially @ QB, offensive tackle, and TE.

[bikerack]

FYI - Romo and the Texans met last night.

[HPF Bob]

I don't trust whatever QB falls to us at #25 as being starter-ready. I don't even see any of them besides Deshaun Watson as first-round material. Which all means we probably have to overpay to get Romo with backup options being Cutler or Kaepernick.

I don't think Jerry Jones wants to risk Romo leading the cross-state rival Texans to a title and would rather he go to Denver but the Broncos are resolute not to give Dallas anything and wait for Romo to be cut.

Therefore, the only way I see Houston getting Romo is if they offer Dallas a draft pick and take Romo's large contract with the agreement that Romo is willing to renegotiate it to something more cap-friendly.

I think a 5th-rounder is enough to save face with Dallas and get it done so long as Dallas can be convinced that's the best offer they are going to see. Denver can be more patient. They have two potential starters already in the fold while the best we have right now is Savage.

If the Texans can't secure Romo, they are almost forced to draft a QB in the first round and I think that will be a huge flop for 2017.

[barrett]

I don't trust whatever QB falls to us at #25 as being starter-ready. I don't even see any of them besides Deshaun Watson as first-round material. Which all means we probably have to overpay to get Romo with backup options being Cutler or Kaepernick.

I don't think Jerry Jones wants to risk Romo leading the cross-state rival Texans to a title and would rather he go to Denver but the Broncos are resolute not to give Dallas anything and wait for Romo to be cut.

Therefore, the only way I see Houston getting Romo is if they offer Dallas a draft pick and take Romo's large contract with the agreement that Romo is willing to renegotiate it to something more cap-friendly.

I think a 5th-rounder is enough to save face with Dallas and get it done so long as Dallas can be convinced that's the best offer they are going to see. Denver can be more patient. They have two potential starters already in the fold while the best we have right now is Savage.

If the Texans can't secure Romo, they are almost forced to draft a QB in the first round and I think that will be a huge flop for 2017.

Why would Romo go anywhere other than the place he most wants to go? He can 100% control his destiny in this one, and if he wants Denver, he just doesn't agree to renegotiate with Houston. And the same is true vice versa.

The guy is gearing up for his last go round, and it will happen on his terms in a location of his choosing. If he doesn't choose Houston we can't change that by pointlessly giving up a 5th round pick.

Either way (trade or FA) Romo will pick where he goes.

[HPF Bob]

Romo is under contract with the Dallas Cowboys. Until he gets cut, this is true. That's why Houston would obtain Romo's rights with a trade, just as Cleveland obtained Osweiler's rights with a trade. Osweiler didn't decide to be a Brown. In fact, he wasn't told until after it happened. To obtain Romo's rights prior to his being cut, Houston would have to give Dallas something of value, hence the draft pick. If that were to happen, Romo would be a Texan.

Would Dallas prefer to get something of value for trading Romo or nothing of value by cutting him? I'm sure the Texans would rather wait out the Cowboys but if they do it and either Romo is never cut or Romo is cut but doesn't sign with Houston, there's a black hole the size of NRG Stadium left at QB and very few viable options available to fix it.

[chuck]

If the Texans want Romo and Romo wants to be a Texan a trade would be the smartest way to accomplish that obviously so long as Romo is willing to renegotiate the contract. If he becomes a free agent who knows who might offer him who knows what and the marketplace could get very confused. Again, IF the Texans are sold on Romo the best way to control the situation is to assuage Jerry's ego with a pick.

I'm not sold on any of these quarterbacks. Hell, that Kelly kid might have the most talent. Of course you'd have to hope he wouldn't try to beat up everyone on your roster. But on the other hand, it would be very entertaining to have a quarterback who's more volatile than the head coach.

Watson couldn't throw the ball through wrapping paper, Mahomes' mechanics are terrifying, everyone else basically sucks as far as I've been able to tell. You know it's grim when you're starting to daydream about Jay Cutler. Don't anyone mention to Rick that he used to play for the Broncos or he'd immediately try to sign him.

[barrett]

I'm not saying a trade won't happen. I'm saying a trade won't happen unless it's to the place Romo wants to go, because no team will employ him with that contract. So no trade happens without his say so and ensuing renegotiation.

So he will pick his team either via trade or FA.

By the way I'm fine with sending a late conditional pick if he wants to come here.

[chuck]

Of course. His contract is not tradable. Anyone trading for him would have to rework it, and I'm sure he'd want to rework it, too, because if I recall correctly virtually none of it is guaranteed.

If the Texans want him and he wants to be a Texan the easiest and surest way to do it is capitulate to Mr Glitter and send that asshat a pick.

[Arky]

I think the Texans are gonna wait, here. I don't think they want anything to do with giving Jerrah a pick or dealing with Romo's present contract. I think they're interested but any deals will be on their terms.....

I like Mahomes but he's very raw and (IMO) will need much NFL schooling. He just flat out looks young, like he's still 18 or 19. Good arm, though...

McClain thinks if they get Romo, they'll still draft a QB. I think it will be one or the other.... Next year's QB class is supposed to be better....

[barrett]

I think the Texans are gonna wait, here. I don't think they want anything to do with giving Jerrah a pick or dealing with Romo's present contract. I think they're interested but any deals will be on their terms.....

I like Mahomes but he's very raw and (IMO) will need much NFL schooling. He just flat out looks young, like he's still 18 or 19. Good arm, though...

McClain thinks if they get Romo, they'll still draft a QB. I think it will be one or the other.... Next year's QB class is supposed to be better....

That's what they said a year ago. A year ago Watson was the crown jewel. The longer these college QBs are in the spotlight, the longer we get to find things wrong with them. And the longer you wait to draft a QB, the longer you are good but going nowhere like most of our last decade.

The last QB we drafted in the first 2 rounds was David Carr. In the last 10 drafts we have used a 4th, 5th, and 7th on 3 QBs. During that same time the Patriots have had GOAT Tom Brady and still used a 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, and 7th on 5 QBs.

And right now we are hoping to be lucky enough to sign a guy who played 4 of the last 32 games and lost his job to a 5th round rookie (who we could have drafted). The Patriots still have Brady and have a cheap young guy that a dozen teams would probably prefer to their starter.

If we don't draft a QB we ought to forfeit the franchise.

[chuck]

In the last 10 drafts we have used a 4th, 5th, and 7th on 3 QBs. During that same time the Patriots have had GOAT Tom Brady and still used a 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, and 7th on 5 QBs.


I'd just like to highlight this post for its excellence and to underscore the difference between an organization run by people who want to win and an organization run by people who are content to milk money out of ignorant necks.

Buford's all-time favorite Texans quarterback was drafted in the third round, you know. Good old Dave Ragone. Second round pick that year? Anyone? That's right, Bennie Joppru, tight end. I believe he has as many catches for the Texans as I do. Other third rounders that year? The team had three for some reason. Seth Wand, who is, by far, the best Texan ever from Northwest Missouri State, and Antwan Peek, who is nowhere near the best Texan pass rusher from Cincinnati.

To be fair, Rasputin somehow picked Andre Johnson that draft. Of course word was he wanted Willis McGahee instead. Drafting a running back third overall seems like a very Rasputin thing to do. But in that draft he also selected Domanick Whateverhisnameis, who had a couple of pretty good years for the team, which is about right for a running back, which is why it is generally insane to draft one at number three overall.

Look at me. I'm slowly turning into Buford, lecturing all seven of us about shit everybody knows that happened years and years ago. Kids born the year AJ was drafted would be terrifyingly close to being able to drive a motor vehicle on public roadways by now. Hey, get off Buford's lawn! Oh, I forgot, Buford doesn't have a lawn. Step away from Buford's LeSabre! Put his cassettes back where you found them, you punks!

[Keith]

I think all seven of us think this too is an excellent post.

Like a generation of children who had never known a white president until two months ago, there is a generation of children who have never seen the Texans draft a first or second round quarterback.

#DoItForTheKids

[chuck]

#DoItForTheKids

#FinallyAWhitePresidentWhatTookSoLong

#PutThatLeoSayerGreatestHitTapeBackWhereYouGotIt

[HPF Bob]

smh

Truth be told, the Texans (either Casserly or Smith) have been rancid with their second and third round picks since the beginning in 2002. Technically, their best one was Demeco Ryans but since he was the first pick of the second round, my brain made him an honorary first-rounder.

We gave up a pair of seconds to get Schaub which was either genius or retarded depending how you felt about the Schaub years and about the value of second-rounders.

Watson could use some polish but he has been the main cog in two runs at the National Championship so we know he plays/produces in big games. The other QBs we're discussing have never even sniffed a big game, much less stepped up in one. If he were an inch or two taller, Watson would be up there with Cam Newton.

This whole situation is so bad, I'm starting to warm to the idea of signing Jay Cutler, insulin pump and all.

[popanot]

I'd go so far as to draft 2 QBs this draft. One high (perhaps Mahomes) and one later (perhaps Webb or Kayaa) and may the best one win an opportunity. We piss away late picks on players that never amount to anything so why not gamble on QBs? Shoot, we might just get lucky where one is the franchise answer and the other brings some future trade value or is at least a serviceable backup.

It's mindboggling to see how many QBs this franchise has passed on over the last 5yrs. They drafted one a few years ago (Savage) and then never gave him a real shot at playing other than when they finally realized they had the worst QB in the league. If Savage has been that bad or questionable over the years, then why is he on the roster? If you didn't think Savage had a shot, why would you not take a draft flyer on a QB from a major program and who's had fairly good college success like a Cousins, Dak or McCarron? Romo fits the mindset of this franchise so perfectly you know it's happening (and will likely be an immense failure).

[Joshua]

Kudos to Barrett for compiling the draft picks used by the Texans and Patriots on QBs during the Tom Brady era. I actually was wondering this very thing the other day but never got around to looking it up.

At this point, I'm completely perplexed by the Texans. They've botched the QB position at a Cleveland Brown-level for virtually their entire existence. And there is no doubt that they have squandered 2nd and 3rd round picks by the bushel. But I'll be damned if it's not a pretty good roster aside for the QB position (which I admit is kinda like saying "other than that, how was the play, Ms. Lincoln?").

For instance, one of the discussions I've had with some friends lately is what team would you trade rosters with, if you leave out the QB position. We were all having a hard time finding one. Maybe Denver? Pittsburgh? This is all to say I don't know what to make of the Texans. While I can find plenty to fault them for, if they somehow stumbled into an above-average QB, I think they're one of the best teams in the league.

[HPF Bob]

What was so bad about Weeden? All he did was win when we gave him a chance. I don't think we are finding our QBTF this year. We're just looking for someone to give us a fair shot in the postseason.

[chuck]

What was so bad about Weeden? All he did was win when we gave him a chance. I don't think we are finding our QBTF this year. We're just looking for someone to give us a fair shot in the postseason.

The Texans would have won the Super Bowl last year with average quarterback play. Who is average? Savage? Weeden? Cutler? I don't know, but the team sure as hell needs to find one, quick.

If they somehow found a quarterback that could win games for you? Well, I have no idea what that would be like.

[barrett]

What was so bad about Weeden? All he did was win when we gave him a chance. I don't think we are finding our QBTF this year. We're just looking for someone to give us a fair shot in the postseason.

That is how bad franchises operate. "Why bother with a QB when we might get a guy off the scrap heap to be average?"

That is how you end up bad at QB for a decade instead of a season.

[Arky]

They were making the point yesterday on the radio yesterday that we Texan fans seem to look at the drafts in a vacuum - and we do. Compare the Texans recent drafts to any other team.....nobody has perfect drafts.

True, not too many QB's drafted in the last 10 years but you have Senor Schaub taking up about 7 of those years. He wasn't losing his starters job especially with Kubes in command. Following that era, you got OB trying to convince us that Fitz/Hoyer/Mallett, et al were good QB's. So, post-Schaub, they've tried to fill the position - they're just not very good at it.... All this culminated with the Oz mistake - heavily paying for a guy who was unable to dink & dunk.

So, while we're all honing our critiques, how would YOU fix the QB position?

Draft? A young guy will most likely will need a year or two to develop.... Romo? Kinda broken...
Savage?

[barrett]

They were making the point yesterday on the radio yesterday that we Texan fans seem to look at the drafts in a vacuum - and we do. Compare the Texans recent drafts to any other team.....nobody has perfect drafts.

True, not too many QB's drafted in the last 10 years but you have Senor Schaub taking up about 7 of those years. He wasn't losing his starters job especially with Kubes in command. Following that era, you got OB trying to convince us that Fitz/Hoyer/Mallett, et al were good QB's. So, post-Schaub, they've tried to fill the position - they're just not very good at it.... All this culminated with the Oz mistake - heavily paying for a guy who was unable to dink & dunk.

So, while we're all honing our critiques, how would YOU fix the QB position?

Draft? A young guy will most likely will need a year or two to develop.... Romo? Kinda broken...
Savage?

Yes we had Schaub. And the patriots had TOM BRADY and kept drafting QBs. That was my point. It's almost like a GM ought to consider more than just the current year. You don't not draft a rookie because he will take a year to develop. You draft a rookie now BECAUSE he will take a year or two to develop.

It's embarrassing we're this bad at QB. It's more embarrassing how little we've done to try fixing that.

So what would I do? I'd draft a QB on the first 2 days of the draft every year until I had one that could win a super bowl for me. Then after I had that one, I'd still draft one every other year or 3, because decent backup QBs cost tons of money on the market but are cheap to draft. I guess I'd consider copying the team that beats the rest of the league every year.

[Arky]

Yes we had Schaub. And the patriots had TOM BRADY and kept drafting QBs. That was my point. It's almost like a GM ought to consider more than just the current year. You don't not draft a rookie because he will take a year to develop. You draft a rookie now BECAUSE he will take a year or two to develop.

Ya, all those drafted Patriot QB's and how much game time did they see? Cassel got some time one year during a Brady injury, that's about it. "2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, and 7th on 5 QBs". At least they had good seats to watch the GOAT. I'm guessing during the Schaub era, the Texans figured other areas of the team needed attention....

Besides Garapollo, not too many people are coveting back-up Patriot QB's. Well, except for the Texans... Cassel/Hoyer/Mallett, meh..



It's embarrassing we're this bad at QB. It's more embarrassing how little we've done to try fixing that.

I'm not embarrassed. That's their ****-up, not mine.


So what would I do? I'd draft a QB on the first 2 days of the draft every year until I had one that could win a super bowl for me. Then after I had that one, I'd still draft one every other year or 3, because decent backup QBs cost tons of money on the market but are cheap to draft.

That may or may not work. Worst case, you turn into Cleveland. Best case, you find one - possibly a gem like Dak Prescott (who I will be very interested to watch in his sophomore season).... They really should draft one this year. Just hope whoever he is can see some action before the defense goes into a down-cycle...


I guess I'd consider copying the team that beats the rest of the league every year.

Well, we are New England South afterall. All we lack is the GOAT coach and the GOAT QB....

[barrett]

Ya, all those drafted Patriot QB's and how much game time did they see? Cassel got some time one year during a Brady injury, that's about it. "2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, and 7th on 5 QBs". At least they had good seats to watch the GOAT. I'm guessing during the Schaub era, the Texans figured other areas of the team needed attention.

In 2015 New England probably had the best team but they stumbled late, blew home field, and couldn't go on the road and win at Denver in the playoffs.

This year they played 4 games without Brady and two of those drafted QBs won games in a 3-1 start (Brissett crushed us). If they go 0-4 with a veteran castoff at QB they don't get home field and their odds of winning the superbowl plummet.

But forget those wins. The main point is that you hope you never need your backup QB, but as a GM you think moves ahead. You don't just look at this year's roster. You don't just look at your starting QB. You have backup plans for your backup plans. You don't plan for your GOAT QB to play at this level until he's 40, but you're happy when your plan to replace him at 38 turns out to be unneeded.

The bottom line is a competent team never gets caught out at QB. They never don't know who's supposed to take snaps next year and the year after. They don't try to fill gaps at QB like you do at CB with guys off the street.

There are maybe 20 guys in the world who can play NFL QB, and you treat the position like that. You don't try to hide a guy there like you might hide your 4th CB.

It's a QB league. If you have one you have a chance, if you don't, you're wasting time. I wish we'd stop wasting time.

[Arky]

In 2015 New England probably had the best team but they stumbled late, blew home field, and couldn't go on the road and win at Denver in the playoffs.

This year they played 4 games without Brady and two of those drafted QBs won games in a 3-1 start (Brissett crushed us). If they go 0-4 with a veteran castoff at QB they don't get home field and their odds of winning the superbowl plummet.

But forget those wins. The main point is that you hope you never need your backup QB, but as a GM you think moves ahead. You don't just look at this year's roster. You don't just look at your starting QB. You have backup plans for your backup plans. You don't plan for your GOAT QB to play at this level until he's 40, but you're happy when your plan to replace him at 38 turns out to be unneeded.

The bottom line is a competent team never gets caught out at QB. They never don't know who's supposed to take snaps next year and the year after. They don't try to fill gaps at QB like you do at CB with guys off the street.

There are maybe 20 guys in the world who can play NFL QB, and you treat the position like that. You don't try to hide a guy there like you might hide your 4th CB.

It's a QB league. If you have one you have a chance, if you don't, you're wasting time. I wish we'd stop wasting time.

I got your point a long time ago. Yep, the Texans have neglected the QB position via the draft.

You want Brissett? I don't.

I can defend them during the Schaub era. We had TJ Yates for most of that time. TJ was serviceable when Schaub had health problems.

But then Schaub and Kubes were both gone. Enter OB. We get Fitz and maybe OB is a little reluctant to take Garoppolo @ 2.1 that year. First gig, first draft, maybe he doesn't want to get himself tied to Jimmy Garoppolo (who was a total unknown at that point - small school guys sometimes don't get the NFL). The following year, a lot of us had high hopes for Mallett while Hoyer was OB's choice (the Hard Knocks year). And then we got Brock last year.

So, I understand why they did what they did. In each instance, the QB "problem" was thought to be solved. But there really is no excuse for not drafting a high round QB over the last 3 years.... A lot of us liked Prescott last year but they had just signed Brock. Hindsight now says they shoulda pulled the trigger....

[barrett]

I got your point a long time ago. Yep, the Texans have neglected the QB position via the draft.

You want Brissett? I don't.

I can defend them during the Schaub era. We had TJ Yates for most of that time. TJ was serviceable when Schaub had health problems.

But then Schaub and Kubes were both gone. Enter OB. We get Fitz and maybe OB is a little reluctant to take Garoppolo @ 2.1 that year. First gig, first draft, maybe he doesn't want to get himself tied to Jimmy Garoppolo (who was a total unknown at that point - small school guys sometimes don't get the NFL). The following year, a lot of us had high hopes for Mallett while Hoyer was OB's choice (the Hard Knocks year). And then we got Brock last year.

So, I understand why they did what they did. In each instance, the QB "problem" was thought to be solved. But there really is no excuse for not drafting a high round QB over the last 3 years.... A lot of us liked Prescott last year but they had just signed Brock. Hindsight now says they shoulda pulled the trigger....

I said nothing about liking Brissett.

Again, how would Schaub's or Yates' presence mean you weren't looking for the QB of the future? Why would Mallett or any of the castoffs paraded through here affect what we do at QB? Why would you believe a guy in the league that nobody wanted would suddenly fill the need like we're talking about stealing reps at dime back with a street FA? Why would $72 million to Brock affect drafting a QB like Prescott with our 5th rounder? There is almost no way to pay a QB less than to draft a guy in the 5th round. We ought to have a day 3 QB as our 3rd stringer every year on the chance we like one and have a super cheap backup.

I seriously don't understand how you can look at what we've done and say "I get it."

[HPF Bob]

I keep reading this and thinking "Boy weren't we stupid not to have Tom Brady and Bill Belichick?" The Patriots didn't have a QB controversy because they got lucky on Tom Brady before the Texans were even in the league (!!!). Without Brady, they could recycle all the QBs they wanted and look just as bad as we do. And we've seen up close what the Patriot assistants bring to the table without Belichick to lead them - not exactly MENSA members.

I think everyone is in agreement that Osweiler was a mistake and that getting veteran QBs wasn't as smart as perhaps using a top pick to grab one of their own (IMO, Teddy Bridgewater was the most logical choice out of the past three years).

The problem is that we're at the worst drafting position (25th) and in a bad QB class to be thinking about drafting a franchise QB. A good one would be long gone and a crappy one likely just be a ticket for more crap.

Someone asked "what would you do?" As of March 18th, my straategy is this:

1) Sign Jay Cutler to a 2-year deal that is manageable within the cap. Don't expect a lot but know you have a guy who can run an offense and make the big play on occasion.

2) With the 25th pick in the draft, get the best LT candidate out there regardless who else is on the board. In order, that would be Ramczyk, Robinson and Bolles. From the mocks, I don't think they'll all be gone by #25.

3) With the second-round pick, get the best QB candidate on the board which I am hoping and praying will be Davis Webb. I might even get itchy and trade up for Webb with my extra fourth if he gets close enough.

If by some crazy coincidence, DeShaun Watson lasts until #25, I'll take Watson and get my OT in the second (Roderick Johnson a possibility).

Nothing else matters besides securing a current and future QB and finding a LT. Everything else can wait until that is settled.

[chuck]

I think barrett's point made many times years ago was and is valid - that BOB didn't want to commit himself to a rookie quarterback early in BOB's tenure with the team so he deliberately brought in second (at best) rate guys in order to get his sea legs. I do get the thinking behind that.

Although it's idiotic, of course, and any competently run organization would have a GM who would overrule that sort of foolishness and draft a freakng QB anyway.

[chuck]

Why would you rather have Cutler than Romo?

[Arky]

I said nothing about liking Brissett.

It was a flip question. Roll with it.


Again, how would Schaub's or Yates' presence mean you weren't looking for the QB of the future? Why would Mallett or any of the castoffs paraded through here affect what we do at QB? Why would you believe a guy in the league that nobody wanted would suddenly fill the need like we're talking about stealing reps at dime back with a street FA? Why would $72 million to Brock affect drafting a QB like Prescott with our 5th rounder? There is almost no way to pay a QB less than to draft a guy in the 5th round. We ought to have a day 3 QB as our 3rd stringer every year on the chance we like one and have a super cheap backup.

I seriously don't understand how you can look at what we've done and say "I get it."

Because I was OK with what they were trying at the time. I'm not going to use the marvelous benefit of hindsight to condemn them when I was OK with what they were trying at the time. Fitz struck out. Hoyer struck out. Mallett struck out. Osweiler struck out. Savage can't stay healthy. If any of those guys would have hit over the last 3 years, then the QB position has an answer for the #1 and it wouldn't have mattered who they drafted to sit on the bench.

I'm not going to play 20 questions with ya, barrett but they did draft Savage during this time to develop and to be, at minimum, the #2.... One of (big) problems is, they haven't found their "win now" (#1) guy, yet. Once they find a good #1, whether that's a FA or through the draft, then they can start throwing draft picks at replacements every year. It's like, some people (not necessarily you) think every draft is full of Dak Prescotts and the Texans think every draft is full of Jared Goffs, i.e., non-plus types.... There is no resolve between those two schools of thought...

[barrett]

I keep reading this and thinking "Boy weren't we stupid not to have Tom Brady and Bill Belichick?" The Patriots didn't have a QB controversy because they got lucky on Tom Brady before the Texans were even in the league (!!!). Without Brady, they could recycle all the QBs they wanted and look just as bad as we do. And we've seen up close what the Patriot assistants bring to the table without Belichick to lead them - not exactly MENSA members.

I think everyone is in agreement that Osweiler was a mistake and that getting veteran QBs wasn't as smart as perhaps using a top pick to grab one of their own (IMO, Teddy Bridgewater was the most logical choice out of the past three years).

The problem is that we're at the worst drafting position (25th) and in a bad QB class to be thinking about drafting a franchise QB. A good one would be long gone and a crappy one likely just be a ticket for more crap.

Someone asked "what would you do?" As of March 18th, my straategy is this:

1) Sign Jay Cutler to a 2-year deal that is manageable within the cap. Don't expect a lot but know you have a guy who can run an offense and make the big play on occasion.

2) With the 25th pick in the draft, get the best LT candidate out there regardless who else is on the board. In order, that would be Ramczyk, Robinson and Bolles. From the mocks, I don't think they'll all be gone by #25.

3) With the second-round pick, get the best QB candidate on the board which I am hoping and praying will be Davis Webb. I might even get itchy and trade up for Webb with my extra fourth if he gets close enough.

If by some crazy coincidence, DeShaun Watson lasts until #25, I'll take Watson and get my OT in the second (Roderick Johnson a possibility).

Nothing else matters besides securing a current and future QB and finding a LT. Everything else can wait until that is settled.

When did you start agreeing with this Bob?

And as for the best option in the last 3 years I'll pass on Bridgewater. If we weren't afraid of our fans and bad PR we could have come away with the best young QB in the NFL and Jadaveon Clowney in the same draft. But we preferred a fat guard who can't play. It's so hard to find competent interior line play after all.

[barrett]

I think barrett's point made many times years ago was and is valid - that BOB didn't want to commit himself to a rookie quarterback early in BOB's tenure with the team so he deliberately brought in second (at best) rate guys in order to get his sea legs. I do get the thinking behind that.

Although it's idiotic, of course, and any competently run organization would have a GM who would overrule that sort of foolishness and draft a freakng QB anyway.

Especially an organization with a GM who has authority to sign QBs the coach never met.

[barrett]

It's like, some people (not necessarily you) think every draft is full of Dak Prescotts and the Texans think every draft is full of Jared Goffs, i.e., non-plus types.... There is no resolve between those two schools of thought...

I have said the exact opposite but you're not listening. The reason you keep drafting guys is because it's so hard to find one. So you throw resources at it and fake other positions. You don't try to get away with faking QBs. You can't get lucky on a QB if you never try. And you can increase your odds of getting lucky if you try often. And obviously the rewards and consequences are so obvious that you try often if you have a brain in your head.

And as for hindsight, I think I've been very clear for years now that we should have been drafting QBs all along. Even among the choir of Brock applause last summer.

[Arky]

I have said the exact opposite but you're not listening. The reason you keep drafting guys is because it's so hard to find one. So you throw resources at it and fake other positions. You don't try to get away with faking QBs. You can't get lucky on a QB if you never try. And you can increase your odds of getting lucky if you try often. And obviously the rewards and consequences are so obvious that you try often if you have a brain in your head.

And as for hindsight, I think I've been very clear for years now that we should have been drafting QBs all along. Even among the choir of Brock applause last summer.

And the Texans have thrown mucho bodies at the QB position over the last 3 years. Not via the draft as is your preferred method but FA "maybe" guys. Unfortunately, every stinkin' one of them turned out to be below average..... Once again, if they had hit on one of those guys, then we're not having this conversation..

So, yep, one more time I will agree, the Texans long term QB plan sucks. But it's not like they haven't tried or your words "faked it". 72 mil is some serious faking....

Unlike the Pats, the Texans don't have the stability of a #1 (you listening?). At this point in time, they don't have the luxury to set up a draft/groom/you're-gonna-be-a-star, kid program but they can start right now with this draft. I doubt whoever is drafted though will be the opening day starter - it's probably going to be a FA or Tom Savage, IMO....

[HPF Bob]

Why would you rather have Cutler than Romo?

Cost. Cutler is not under contract so it's just a straight money deal. I think he would come cheaper than Romo and is marginally more likely to make it through an entire season than Balsa Wood Romo.

[HPF Bob]

When did you start agreeing with this Bob?

I disagreed with the way it was done from the beginning. I chose, however, to accept what was done instead of reaching for a thesaurus to find every negative word I could find to describe our quarterback play. I tried to be an optimist and remind people that there were positives (including a playoff win) with Osweiler at the helm.

And as for the best option in the last 3 years I'll pass on Bridgewater. If we weren't afraid of our fans and bad PR we could have come away with the best young QB in the NFL and Jadaveon Clowney in the same draft. But we preferred a fat guard who can't play. It's so hard to find competent interior line play after all.

Environment being what it is, I seriously doubt Derek Carr would be the Pro Bowl caliber QB in Houston that he's been in Oakland, particularly when you factor in our stinking to holy hell offensive line which they never bother to improve. It's alot easier to look like a great QB behind three pro bowlers on the offensive line.

[barrett]

I disagreed with the way it was done from the beginning. I chose, however, to accept what was done instead of reaching for a thesaurus to find every negative word I could find to describe our quarterback play. I tried to be an optimist and remind people that there were positives (including a playoff win) with Osweiler at the helm.



Environment being what it is, I seriously doubt Derek Carr would be the Pro Bowl caliber QB in Houston that he's been in Oakland, particularly when you factor in our stinking to holy hell offensive line which they never bother to improve. It's alot easier to look like a great QB behind three pro bowlers on the offensive line.

He plays for Jack Del Rio. On the Oakland Raiders. That alone shows he can overcome any obstacle. Del Rio is like poison to offense.

[barrett]

And the Texans have thrown mucho bodies at the QB position over the last 3 years. Not via the draft as is your preferred method but FA "maybe" guys. Unfortunately, every stinkin' one of them turned out to be below average..... Once again, if they had hit on one of those guys, then we're not having this conversation..

So, yep, one more time I will agree, the Texans long term QB plan sucks. But it's not like they haven't tried or your words "faked it". 72 mil is some serious faking....

Unlike the Pats, the Texans don't have the stability of a #1 (you listening?). At this point in time, they don't have the luxury to set up a draft/groom/you're-gonna-be-a-star, kid program but they can start right now with this draft. I doubt whoever is drafted though will be the opening day starter - it's probably going to be a FA or Tom Savage, IMO....

I think there should not be just one plan. Make a plan for an opening day starter and then make a plan for the next decade's opening day starter at the same time. The low financial cost of young QBs means there is no conflict of interest.

And yes, trying to sign existing unproven players is faking it at QB. You can get a castoff or a street FA, or a project at the other positions, but decent QBs don't hit the market unless health forces them to. So no, signing countless journeymen does not equal a plan. I will give to you that Brock was a sincere attempt even if it was idiotic and against the entire financial structure of the NFL. Somehow the approach got copied this year with Mike Glennon, so there are dumber front offices than us.

[Arky]

I think there should not be just one plan. Make a plan for an opening day starter and then make a plan for the next decade's opening day starter at the same time. The low financial cost of young QBs means there is no conflict of interest.

And yes, trying to sign existing unproven players is faking it at QB. You can get a castoff or a street FA, or a project at the other positions, but decent QBs don't hit the market unless health forces them to. So no, signing countless journeymen does not equal a plan. I will give to you that Brock was a sincere attempt even if it was idiotic and against the entire financial structure of the NFL. Somehow the approach got copied this year with Mike Glennon, so there are dumber front offices than us.

Well, I suppose Fitz and probably Hoyer (now) fall into the "journeyman" category. But Mallett and Osweiler were both youngish, had limited work when they became Texans and were still unknown as full time starters. Some of us had hope for those two so I'm not quite sweeping along with that generalization....

In 2014, they picked up Savage in the draft while Fitz was mostly the starter that year. 2015, no QB in the draft but they spent (wasted?) the year finding out what they had in Hoyer and Mallett. 2016 was spent finding out what Brock was all about. IMO, Savage was kinda the "groom" guy during this 3 year period. Weeden hops on board towards the end of 2015, sticks around for 2016 and one could make the case that he was a safer bet to keep on the roster than drafting some 3rd round rookie QB.

Yet, during this parade of horrors, the Texans somehow go 9-7 all three years. Man, they could be really good with just an average QB....

So, what were we talking about again? Oh yeah, how the Texans suck at drafting QB's..... Include Schaub's "magical" 2013 and it's been a really painful four years of watching Texan QBs. I'm not sure I'll know how to react to competent QB play if I ever see it again...

[popanot]

Savage's groom year should have been in 2015. Instead, they IR'd him the full season for what amounted to a hangnail on the severity scale. Maybe Savage sucks. Maybe he's good. I have a feeling we'll never really know. When your franchise has sucked at QB for as long as the Texans have, you draft a QB at some point in the draft every year. Why not take a gamble that you might hit on a QB rather than a TE, K, S, etc? I thought they were idiots for not drafting McCarron as late as he went. They were idiots for not drafting Conner Cook, who, by the way, went to a team with a young star at QB. Maybe these guys suck. Maybe they're good. At least have them on your roster and see for yourself.

[popanot]

Side note to this drafting a QB discussion... If the Texans plan on drafting a QB with their #1 pick and really like a guy who happens to be falling, say Trubisky or Watson, they should trade up a few picks to get him. IMO, pick #25 is a prime area where someone (Browns, Chiefs or Steelers, maybe?) will jump over us to grab him. There are 3 or 4 teams in front of us that I could see trading their pick and moving back a few slots. I'd even try to jump the Giants at #23 with Eli getting up in age. Maybe try to work a deal with Miami at #22 or Detroit at #21. #19 to #22 seems to be a sweet spot for the right deal. #16 and #17 look workable too but will likely be too costly.

[Arky]

Side note to this drafting a QB discussion... If the Texans plan on drafting a QB with their #1 pick and really like a guy who happens to be falling, say Trubisky or Watson, they should trade up a few picks to get him. IMO, pick #25 is a prime area where someone (Browns, Chiefs or Steelers, maybe?) will jump over us to grab him. There are 3 or 4 teams in front of us that I could see trading their pick and moving back a few slots. I'd even try to jump the Giants at #23 with Eli getting up in age. Maybe try to work a deal with Miami at #22 or Detroit at #21. #19 to #22 seems to be a sweet spot for the right deal. #16 and #17 look workable too but will likely be too costly.

This year's 1st round should be quite interesting. I'm expecting high drama....

Been awful quiet on Kirby, lately...

[Keith]

Side note to this drafting a QB discussion... If the Texans plan on drafting a QB with their #1 pick and really like a guy who happens to be falling, say Trubisky or Watson, they should trade up a few picks to get him. IMO, pick #25 is a prime area where someone (Browns, Chiefs or Steelers, maybe?) will jump over us to grab him. There are 3 or 4 teams in front of us that I could see trading their pick and moving back a few slots. I'd even try to jump the Giants at #23 with Eli getting up in age. Maybe try to work a deal with Miami at #22 or Detroit at #21. #19 to #22 seems to be a sweet spot for the right deal. #16 and #17 look workable too but will likely be too costly.
Problem is every team knows the Texans need a QB, so any other QB-needy team is going to jockey around them to get one they want. Happened with the Pats getting Garrapolo.

So yeah, if there is a QB the Texans have their eye on, they probably will have to at least consider some maneuvers to get him. Will it be a "value" pick then? Probably not, but the team can only blame themselves for getting into this mess.

[HPF Bob]

And there's your catch 22 as the most plausible way to move up in the first round is to give up your second rounder and we also need to get an offensive lineman before the third round.

If Watson is falling, it makes sense to go get him. Otherwise, I'd prefer to draft a LT then wait for round two and trade up if needed for Webb or Mahomes.

[HPF Bob]

Jeff Darlington tweet per CBS Sports now reporting that, according to Romo, it's Houston or retirement.

Texans seem resolute to wait out the Cowboys and probably wait for a June 1st release then sign Romo. Dallas still hoping they can trick Houston into giving up draft picks.

The Broncos, it is said, have not closed the door on Romo but are not actively pursuing him either.

Of course, Dallas may decide that they can keep Romo since Dak Prescott is still under a rookie contract but releasing him and getting the cap savings makes more long-term sense. But then Romo can retire and get the Fox gig he's been promised if he takes the offer rather than be a backup.

Frankly, for $21 mil or whatever it is, I would be happy being a backup - but that's just me.

[painekiller]

Frankly, for $21 mil or whatever it is, I would be happy being a backup - but that's just me.

I think I could be persuaded to keep that gig also.

[HPF Bob]

Apparently, CBS is now also wooing Romo for an analyst job, not just Fox.

I think the Texans are still going to commit a high draft pick to a QB, Romo or no Romo but it they *know* they can sign Romo (or if they tire of waiting and sign Cutler or Kaepernick) then QB doesn't have to be their #1 need.

BTW, I'm seeing several mocks now that have Notre Dame's Deshone Kiser falling to us at 25 if we want him. Some of these mocks are also showing Kiser being passed over for Mahomes.

[barrett]

Jeff Darlington tweet per CBS Sports now reporting that, according to Romo, it's Houston or retirement.

Texans seem resolute to wait out the Cowboys and probably wait for a June 1st release then sign Romo. Dallas still hoping they can trick Houston into giving up draft picks.

The Broncos, it is said, have not closed the door on Romo but are not actively pursuing him either.

Of course, Dallas may decide that they can keep Romo since Dak Prescott is still under a rookie contract but releasing him and getting the cap savings makes more long-term sense. But then Romo can retire and get the Fox gig he's been promised if he takes the offer rather than be a backup.

Frankly, for $21 mil or whatever it is, I would be happy being a backup - but that's just me.

I think up to now Romo has played nice because he is concerned with how he is remembered by Cowboys fans. But if they try to force him into retirement or a backup role because they want a late draft pick, then I think he starts causing trouble. Half the fan base and some small percentage of the locker room probably still prefer him as QB. And in a PR battle, every fan will pick him over Jerry Jones. Romo has accelerated/deferred/renegotiated money multiple times when he didn't have to in order to bail the Cowboys out of cap trouble Jones put them in. If he loses his job because of injury and then is held in a backup role because Jones wants to get a late draft pick, then all media and fans will be on Romo's side. Jones has zero leverage here and will lose in the end. Especially now that the Broncos won't be played as leverage against the Texans.

[nunusguy]

Do people really think that Jerry Jones is that worried about his x-starting QB
appearing in a Texans' uniform, though it would be kinda interesting to see the response from state football fans to those NFL preseason magazines appearing this summer on the newsstands with the likes of Tony Romo & JJ Watt both dressed in Texans gear appearing on the same covers together. And what would also be interesting would be to a Romo led Texans team going up against Dallas in preseason intersquad practices. Yea we could have some fun with some of those scenarios if they were to really happen.

[popanot]

From my understanding, Romo and the Jones family have a really close relationship and it would not surprise me if Romo has been promised a role in the organization upon retirement regardless if he continues playing for a couple years or decides to retire now. As it is today, he's currently under contract and stands to make a ridiculous amount of money for being a backup and is guaranteed a healthy sum even if he's cut June 1, he likely has a future management role with the Cowboys, he has other options outside of football which will likely pay well if he decides to go that route, so why should he get upset with Jones for delaying his release? I personally think Romo is playing along with Jones and would love for Dallas to get something in return in a trade. Yes, please Texans, just hold off and don't do anything stupid. If Romo doesn't come here, big freaking deal.

[popanot]

I'm not going to say Savage is the answer, but I sure would like to find out what we really have in him. Younger Romo is obviously an upgrade to what we've trotted out there the last 5 years, but there's no guaranteed to what you're going to get with him now. If Romo is free and reasonable cost-wise, sign him. If he's costs picks or plays hardball, screw him.

Would love for this article to go into more detail, but I did find it interesting even as limited as it is. I'm okay drafting a rookie (or two) and giving Savage his shot:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-whats-next-for-the-texans-if-not-tony-romo/

I really want nothing to do with Cutler or Keapernick. I'd rather the franchise toss all their eggs into a rookie or Savage than to go the Cutler/Keap route.

Added this:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/27/bill-obrien-real-excited-about-working-with-tom-savage/

[HPF Bob]

Jerry Jones on Romo resolution: 'Before training camp'

The Tony Romo saga could play out for the entire offseason.

Speaking Tuesday at the Annual League Meeting in Phoenix, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones indicated his only timetable for a resolution on Romo's future is "before training camp," according to USA Today's Tom Pelissero.

Jones stressed to local reporters there is no "imminent" deadline that would push a decision.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...-training-camp

[Nconroe]

What do you think about Colin Kappernick? Might be some upside and available. Can still draft a QB as well.

https://www.google.com/amp/profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/29/bill-obrien-weve-discussed-colin-kaepernick-hes-a-good-football-player/amp/

[HPF Bob]

Between Romo, Cutler and Kaepernick, only one of them has ever led a team to a Super Bowl. I just can't imagine McNair and Kaep seeing eye-to-eye the first time there's a political controversy. First time some wiseguy reporter sticks a mic in Kaep's face and baits him about transgendered bathroom bills or something, Kaep won't be able to say "no comment" and walk away.

Otherwise, I think $9 mil is a very reasonable price and better than what we'd get out of Romo.

[bikerack]

Welp. Romo is headed to TV.

[bikerack]

From inside the Texans org...

From my understanding, Romo has some concern about his own back and he was done dealing with Jerry and the Cowboys.

Also from what I was told is his wife was really concerned about Romo's health and caring for their family.

[popanot]

Welp. Romo is headed to TV.Good. The organization can finally move on. Romo hasn't played in 2 years and was not the answer.

[HPF Bob]

We probably dodged a bullet. So, do we sign Cutler, Kaepernick or go all-in on the draft?

[HPF Bob]

Apparently the kicker for Romo was when CBS agreed to let him be part of their golf coverage in year two. Reminds me of when NBC lured Don Meredith away from ABC on the promise he could star in acting roles. It must not have went well because he didn't do a lot of NFL with NBC and he didn't do that much acting either.After a couple of years, he was back on MNF but he was bitter after that and far from the fun-loving cowboy ABC once promoted.

[barrett]

We probably dodged a bullet. So, do we sign Cutler, Kaepernick or go all-in on the draft?

I'd sign one of those guys if there is less than $1 million a year guaranteed. Give Kaepernick 2 years and $20-25 million with $1-2 million guaranteed. Or better yet, no signing bonus and huge roster bonuses. Then he has to earn it all. Then draft a QB early and another one late. Then toss in Savage and let them all compete for the starting job. If Kaep doesn't win the job in the preseason cut him like Denver did Sanchez last year before he ever played a game. Let all of the other QBs compete for the starting job and the backup jobs. Whoever plays best is your starter. 2nd best is your backup. If the 3rd best shows any promise he's your 3rd stringer, and if not go with a practice squad guy.

[chuck]

I would do all of the above but substitute Cutler for Kaep.

Although I would pay good money to watch the necks in the paper's comments section have a chicken fried meltdown if the team signed Kaep. That'd be outstandiner'n hell.

[nunusguy]

Agree or not with his attitude there's no way McNair is gonna hire any player who's does or ever had issues about standing when the national anthem is played.
So last time I checked Cutler is willing to stand for the anthem and he's also got a tremendous arm. But yea he's flaky and not known as a particular good teammate, but still if the money is right why not consider him ?

[Arky]

I guess we won't have Phil Simms to kick around anymore. Bummer.

[barrett]

Agree or not with his attitude there's no way McNair is gonna hire any player who's does or ever had issues about standing when the national anthem is played.
So last time I checked Cutler is willing to stand for the anthem and he's also got a tremendous arm. But yea he's flaky and not known as a particular good teammate, but still if the money is right why not consider him ?

I agree there is no chance this team employs Kaepernick. We pander to the average fan and do whatever possible to make sure our players don't reflect poorly on the franchise. It's why we wouldn't draft Derek Carr.

As for Kaepernick, I don't think he or Cutler can play. But if I was making decisions, I'd sign Kaepernick and in the negotiations I would tell him I expect him to run the ball 150 times if he's healthy. If he isn't your franchise and your future, then you can take the gloves off and call designed runs and encourage scrambling. If your offense isn't going to be traditionally great, steal first downs anyway you can. And at least a mobile QB might help our redzone issues.

But I agree it's probably Smokin' Jay.