Could colts trade for Clowney?

[Peterk2011]

36 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

Technically this is Ballard's 3rd draft/year. 

 

Regardless, last year's draft and performance put us ahead of plan IMO. And,,,, a good planner/manager always adjusts based on the current situation. I have no clue what they defined as success criteria, but one has to think we're farther along than they expected. If for instance we've satisfied success criteria a year earlier than planned, the current year's plan changes.

 

ESPN's future power rating agrees as well. If we're number one in their eyes, we can't be more than a couple players away. IMO, we filled our deepest hole this off season, and the remaining holes aren't deep.

 

I agree with you regarding the overall picture. I think that's pretty much what Ballard does and will do, he'll adjust. But my current take on Ballard is, that in his mind, this roster is not yet there, where an acquisition like Clowney would make sense for him. What I mean is, if you sign a guy like Clowney and you already have Houston and Sheard on your roster, than you pretty much decide about the fate of Turay, Muhamad, Banogu, etc., because you can't give them enough snaps to develop. Kenny Moore would've never (or at least a lot slower) become the player he is, if he wasn't given a tons of snaps. I think, Ballard is still in the "build" phase in his mind,  e.g. he is thinking long term, and willing to give our young guys as much snaps as possible, rather than sign a top free agent like Clowney, even if he is a better player right now.

[EastStreet]

6 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

I agree with you regarding the overall picture. I think that's pretty much what Ballard does and will do, he'll adjust. But my current take on Ballard is, that in his mind, this roster is not yet there, where an acquisition like Clowney would make sense for him. What I mean is, if you sign a guy like Clowney and you already have Houston and Sheard on your roster, than you pretty much decide about the fate of Turay, Muhamad, Banogu, etc., because you can't give them enough snaps to develop. Kenny Moore would've never (or at least a lot slower) become the player he is, if he wasn't given a tons of snaps. I think, Ballard is still in the "build" phase in his mind,  e.g. he is thinking long term, and willing to give our young guys as much snaps as possible, rather than sign a top free agent like Clowney, even if he is a better player right now.

I agree with most of this, however there's several reasons why I think Ballard would consider.

 

1) Sheard is 30 and his contract is up in 2020

2) Houston is only under contract for two years, and he's 30

3) I don't have high hopes for Muhammad.

4) Turay and Banogu are really young and raw. Turay needs time (more time) to become an every down guy, and I don't see him taking a huge step this year. Banogu is just plain raw and needs time too (strength and technique, but mostly technique). Both could still get plenty of time with Clowney and Houston. Learning from those two would be worth the delayed experience. Also, I just don't see Turay emerging as anything close to Clowney at any point in his career.

5) The addition of a another stud bookend would give a huge boost to iDL play.

6) It would help immensely with the upgraded QBs we'll see this year.

7) It would definitely be a big step towards contender status, if not immediately put us in the conversation.

[Peterk2011]

12 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

I agree with most of this, however there's several reasons why I think Ballard would consider.

 

1) Sheard is 30 and his contract is up in 2020

2) Houston is only under contract for two years, and he's 30

3) I don't have high hopes for Muhammad.

4) Turay and Banogu are really young and raw. Turay needs time (more time) to become an every down guy, and I don't see him taking a huge step this year. Banogu is just plain raw and needs time too (strength and technique, but mostly technique). Both could still get plenty of time with Clowney and Houston. Learning from those two would be worth the delayed experience. Also, I just don't see Turay emerging as anything close to Clowney at any point in his career.

5) The addition of a another stud bookend would give a huge boost to iDL play.

6) It would help immensely with the upgraded QBs we'll see this year.

7) It would definitely be a big step towards contender status, if not immediately put us in the conversation.

 

Your points are valid. I'm not saying I agree with all of them (I don't), but I see the logic.

 

However, my answer for your question has not changed: No.  I don't think Ballard would pull a trigger on a trade like that, right now.

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Your points are valid. I'm not saying I agree with all of them (I don't), but I see the logic.

 

However, my answer for your question has not changed: No.  I don't think Ballard would pull a trigger on a trade like that, right now.

How about this. Send Sheard (who's up in 2020) plus a second rounder :-)

[shasta519]

3 hours ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

I don't really get what's the point talking about a trade that would never happen, but whatever. Imo Ballard - at this point -, would not give up a good pick PLUS give a blockbuster contract to him. I don't think Ballard sees this current roster as a "we just need one more guy" kind of roster. He and Irsay put down a 3+ years plan, and he is in year 2 now.

 

According to this article...he called in to check about the availability. So I think he would definitely entertain giving up a pick and signing Clowney. 

[Peterk2011]

29 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

How about this. Send Sheard (who's up in 2020) plus a second rounder :-)

 

Convince Ballard, not me.

 

(If I was the GM, I would still say no, though.  But for different reason. My reason would be, that I don't think Clowney would be that much of an upgrade for the Colts. Not because the scheme - 3-4 vs 4-3 would not matter -, but because while Clowney is an elite edge setter, he is not that productive as a pure rusher. A bit like Sheard. Actually, Sheard had more total pressures both in 2017 and 2018 than Clowney. So I prefer to draft/develop/sign a better rusher, rather, than an upgraded and younger version of Sheard.)

[shasta519]

6 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Convince Ballard, not me.

 

(If I was the GM, I would still say no, though.  But by different reasons. My reason is that I don't think Clowney would be a great fit for the Colts. Not because the scheme - 3-4 vs 4-3 would not matter -, but because while Clowney is an elite edge setter, he is not that productive as a pure rusher. A bit like Sheard. Actually, Sheard had more total pressures both in 2017 and 2018 than Clowney. So I prefer to draft/develop/sign a better rusher, rather, than an upgraded and younger version of Sheard.)

 

A younger, upgraded version of Sheard is a perfect fit though. And while Clowney isn't leading the league in sacks...he has 18.5 the past two years...so he's pretty productive from that standpoint. The upside is there for a double digit sack player. 

 

I don't really see a player like him on the roster either...other than Sheard...who is much older and in the final year of his contract. Houston and Turay are edge rushers...and Banogu as well. Autry plays better inside at the 3 tech. Lewis is likely a DT. A Pro Bowl cailber starting LDE like Clowney is pretty much the main thing missing from this defense at this point. And you get one locked in for the next few years during this competitive window.

 

It's probably not going to happen...but I think it would be great.

[EastStreet]

26 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Convince Ballard, not me.

 

(If I was the GM, I would still say no, though.  But for different reason. My reason would be, that I don't think Clowney would be that much of an upgrade for the Colts. Not because the scheme - 3-4 vs 4-3 would not matter -, but because while Clowney is an elite edge setter, he is not that productive as a pure rusher. A bit like Sheard. Actually, Sheard had more total pressures both in 2017 and 2018 than Clowney. So I prefer to draft/develop/sign a better rusher, rather, than an upgraded and younger version of Sheard.)

Clowney

2018 - 9 Sacks, 16 TFLs, 21 QB hits

2017 - 9.5 Sacks, 21 TFLs, 21 QB hits

Sheard

2018 - 5.5 sacks, 13 TFLs, 11 QB hits

2017 5.5 Sacks, 9 TFLs, 14 QB hits

 

I'm gonna say Clowney is also at a bit of a disadvantage competing with JJ Watt for stats. Sheard on the other hand was competing with Hunt most of the year, and Lewis late year.

 

You may not deem him elite, but he had a substantial stat lead in sacks and QB hits compared to Sheard.

[richard pallo]

Today , right now, a trade would probably not happen.  But by the end of preseason and cut down time a lot could change.  For the Colts I don't see the need to rush into this.  Let's see how the players perform in preseason and go from there.  By then Ballard might feel the team is ready and adding a talent like Clowney would make sense.  He did inquire about him so It's a move he has thought about.  I think this idea has to run it's course through the preseason.  Then we shall see. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

According to this article...he called in to check about the availability. So I think he would definitely entertain giving up a pick and signing Clowney. 

The Texans probably said heck no when ballard called and hung up the phone. Lol

[Mr.Debonair]

2 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

Clowney

2018 - 9 Sacks, 16 TFLs, 21 QB hits

2017 - 9.5 Sacks, 21 TFLs, 21 QB hits

Sheard

2018 - 5.5 sacks, 13 TFLs, 11 QB hits

2017 5.5 Sacks, 9 TFLs, 14 QB hits

 

I'm gonna say Clowney is also at a bit of a disadvantage competing with JJ Watt for stats. Sheard on the other hand was competing with Hunt most of the year, and Lewis late year.

 

You may not deem him elite, but he had a substantial stat lead in sacks and QB hits compared to Sheard.

 

This place gets crazy when downplaying non Colts players. 

[EastStreet]

15 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

 

This place gets crazy when downplaying non Colts players. 

nothing crazy about what i said. it's just relevant fact and data in a thread about Ballard's supposed interest in Clowney.....

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

Today , right now, a trade would probably not happen.  But by the end of preseason and cut down time a lot could change.  For the Colts I don't see the need to rush into this.  Let's see how the players perform in preseason and go from there.  By then Ballard might feel the team is ready and adding a talent like Clowney would make sense.  He did inquire about him so It's a move he has thought about.  I think this idea has to run it's course through the preseason.  Then we shall see. 

Waiting till the end of preseason isn't really ideal for many reasons. He'd be changing systems and going back to a 4-3. He might be out of shape if he hasn't participated in camp, etc..

 

Guys we pick up normally towards the end of preseason are typically either 1) additions to fill injury holes, and/or 2) turning over rocks to find good guys who where just cut/waived by teams getting to 53. 

 

Unless we're waiting for Houston to get desperate, I don't see Ballard wanting to wait that long. Like I said earlier, doubt Houston would send him to another AFCS team anyway, but who knows.

 

And as far as us turning over stones, our roster has improved a bunch, so those types of pick ups should be less frequent. 

[Mr.Debonair]

1 hour ago, Irish YJ said:

nothing crazy about what i said. it's just relevant fact and data in a thread about Ballard's supposed interest in Clowney.....

 

Huh? I was agreeing with you that Sheard is not on the same level as Clowney

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I bet Clowny would be excited to not be pancaked  by Nelson anymore.

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

 

Huh? I was agreeing with you that Sheard is not on the same level as Clowney

your post said downplaying non-colts. did you mean downplaying colts? fuzzy on what you were trying to say.

[Mr.Debonair]

6 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

your post said downplaying non-colts. did you mean downplaying colts? fuzzy on what you were trying to say.

 

People tend to downplay non colts players and rate them lower than what they really are. The poster making the comparison of Sheard to Clowney when it comes to rushing the passer is one example. 

[EastStreet]

12 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

 

People tend to downplay non colts players and rate them lower than what they really are. The poster making the comparison of Sheard to Clowney when it comes to rushing the passer is one example. 

Got ya!

[Steamboat_Shaun]

On 7/16/2019 at 12:59 PM, Chloe6124 said:

The Texans are not going to trade Clowney inside the division lol.

 

Who would you trade though. Maybe give up your first round pick next year.

 

https://www.nflchatter.com/2019/07/16/6-teams-show-strong-interest-in-texans-star/

 

"Although it is believed the Colts have made a call to the Texans regarding Clowney, GM Chris Ballard has proved to be a bit of a hoarder with assets, so he won’t be sending off a boatload of picks for Clowney, and Houston would much rather send him outside the conference, much less the division. Still, the Texans literally don’t have a GM right now, and their path forward is unclear.

 

As odd as it may seem to the rest of us to keep Clowney in the division, if all they want is to get something for Clowney, it’s a real possibility."

 

That's an awful lot of fluff just to essentially say "Ballard may have reached out, we really don't know though. Either way, it's technically not impossible."

[richard pallo]

15 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

Waiting till the end of preseason isn't really ideal for many reasons. He'd be changing systems and going back to a 4-3. He might be out of shape if he hasn't participated in camp, etc..

 

Guys we pick up normally towards the end of preseason are typically either 1) additions to fill injury holes, and/or 2) turning over rocks to find good guys who where just cut/waived by teams getting to 53. 

 

Unless we're waiting for Houston to get desperate, I don't see Ballard wanting to wait that long. Like I said earlier, doubt Houston would send him to another AFCS team anyway, but who knows.

 

And as far as us turning over stones, our roster has improved a bunch, so those types of pick ups should be less frequent. 

I agree.  Waiting until the end of preseason isn't ideal.  My thought was Ballard and the staff will want to take a hard look at our current DE's to see where they stand.  Especially the new players.  Injuries could certainly play a role as well.  Since both teams are contenders we might have a player they would like to fill one of their needs and that player could be part of a trade.  I think we are probably done turning over players looking for a hidden gem but a trade or two to position the team for a run at cut down time could present itself.  That said it is hard to imagine Houston dealing him to us. 

[Peterk2011]

19 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

Clowney

2018 - 9 Sacks, 16 TFLs, 21 QB hits

2017 - 9.5 Sacks, 21 TFLs, 21 QB hits

Sheard

2018 - 5.5 sacks, 13 TFLs, 11 QB hits

2017 5.5 Sacks, 9 TFLs, 14 QB hits

 

I'm gonna say Clowney is also at a bit of a disadvantage competing with JJ Watt for stats. Sheard on the other hand was competing with Hunt most of the year, and Lewis late year.

 

You may not deem him elite, but he had a substantial stat lead in sacks and QB hits compared to Sheard.

 

Yep. Compared to Sheard. But not if compared to Houston for example. Even the 2018 Houston. And no, I don't think playing alongside Watt is a disadvantage. Actually, I think it is an advantage, because Wattt gets double teamed most of the time. Bradley Chubb had 14 sacks in his rookie year alongside Von Miller. He was great, but the fact that it was Miller who was double teamed all the time, helped Chubb a lot.

 

Ballard could get Houston for relatively cheap for relatively short term. That was a very good deal. But he would not be able to sign Clowney for cheap and short term, plus he would have to give away a pick on top of that. I don't think that would be a good deal at all. Clowney is a very-very good player. But, I dont want the Colts to pay 20 ish million for a great edge setter, who is a formidable rusher (at best). I want them to pay 20 million for a great rusher. Like Frank Clark, Lawrence, or Ngakogue for example.

 

15 hours ago, Mr.Debonair said:

 

People tend to downplay non colts players and rate them lower than what they really are. The poster making the comparison of Sheard to Clowney when it comes to rushing the passer is one example. 

 

No, it's not. If it was Ngakogue, my answer would be, hell yeah, trade for him! But not for Clowney.

 

[Jason_]

22 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I'm very confused as to why everyone thinks he wouldnt fit in a 4-3 lol

 

I think that, more often than not, people that cite scheme switch as a reason to not pursue a player don't really know what they're talking about, but rather they're simply repeating something they've heard before.

[shasta519]

16 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Yep. Compared to Sheard. But not if compared to Houston for example. Even the 2018 Houston. And no, I don't think playing alongside Watt is a disadvantage. Actually, I think it is an advantage, because Wattt gets double teamed most of the time. Bradley Chubb had 14 sacks in his rookie year alongside Von Miller. He was great, but the fact that it was Miller who was double teamed all the time, helped Chubb a lot.

 

Ballard could get Houston for relatively cheap for relatively short term. That was a very good deal. But he would not be able to sign Clowney for cheap and short term, plus he would have to give away a pick on top of that. I don't think that would be a good deal at all. Clowney is a very-very good player. But, I dont want the Colts to pay 20 ish million for a great edge setter, who is a formidable rusher (at best). I want them to pay 20 million for a great rusher. Like Frank Clark, Lawrence, or Ngakogue for example.

 

 

No, it's not. If it was Ngakogue, my answer would be, hell yeah, trade for him! But not for Clowney.

 

 

Clowney is not that far off those guys as a pass rusher. Look at the stats the last two years:

 

Clark - 22 sacks, 20 TFL

Ngakoue - 21.5 sacks, 23 TFL

Clowney - 18.5 sacks, 37 TFL

 

Those have a few more sacks than Clowney...but Clowney had 14-17 more TFL. He is the more well-rounded player...which is a big part of the reason he has been a Pro Bowler the past three years...he provides a ton of value and impact to this team. And a well-rounded player like that is the exact type the Colts need at LDE. 

 

There is no way I would pay Frank Clark over Clowney...for so many reasons.

[shasta519]

9 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

I think that, more often than not, people that cite scheme switch as a reason to not pursue a player don't really know what they're talking about, but rather they're simply repeating something they've heard before.

 

Yeah...I think people get hung up on OLBs being some prototypical size...and assume they can't play DE (and forget that last year's starting LDE was a 3-4 OLB the year before).

 

Clowney is actually bigger than Turay and Banogu (both DEs in this defense)...and more athletic. He's a perfect fit.

[Peterk2011]

35 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

Clowney is not that far off those guys as a pass rusher. Look at the stats the last two years:

 

Clark - 22 sacks, 20 TFL

Ngakoue - 21.5 sacks, 23 TFL

Clowney - 18.5 sacks, 37 TFL

 

Those have a few more sacks than Clowney...but Clowney had 14-17 more TFL. He is the more well-rounded player...which is a big part of the reason he has been a Pro Bowler the past three years...he provides a ton of value and impact to this team. And a well-rounded player like that is the exact type the Colts need at LDE. 

 

There is no way I would pay Frank Clark over Clowney...for so many reasons.

 

It's not just about sacks, but hits, pressures, etc.. And these stats should be viewed by pass rush snaps to get a comparable pressures/snap value. So I trust my eyes, Clowney is ultra talented, but I have multiple "issues" with him. Compared to the others mentioned (tends to disappear for periods, even games, I'm not a big fan of his motor, his pass rush arsenal, etc. Again, I'm comparing him to the bests. Watch him - him exclusively, and all of his snaps - in a game, and watch Flowers. Or Clark. Imo you will see what I mean.)

 

We will see how the league values him, 'cause I think O'Brien does not want to keep him. So he'll be available, probably sooner than later.

 

My bet: no one will give a 1st + 2nd for Clowney, and he won't get the deal Clark (or Flowers) got in Kansas City (assuming he gets traded and extended this season, 'cause next year's market may skyrocket again, that's unpredictable).

[joeb]

No, we should not give up a first for him. We gave up a first for Trent Richardson. That worked out well.  If we had to give up Turay or Lewis not so bad.  I would rather keep Lewis. I think Turay is injury prone.  Just remember years ago we gave away/up Marshall Faulk in his prime for a 2nd and 5th.  So Clowney might be worth much less than you think.

[Jason_]

2 minutes ago, joeb said:

No, we should not give up a first for him. We gave up a first for Trent Richardson. That worked out well. 

 

What does that have to do with the possibility of trading a first for Clowney?  

[Superman]

I'm not a big fan of Clowney, I wouldn't spend major resources on him, but I'd be open to trading for him while on the tag, then trading him again next year. We have an extra second and a tackle prospect that probably won't make the team (Clark), I might be talked into that if Houston wants help on the OL. 

 

But in reality, that's kind of a bargain for a good edge rusher, and the Texans wouldn't trade him to a division rival, especially not without us paying a premium for him. And he still isn't going to show up for training camp, so you're not going to get 100% from him. 

 

I don't think it's a feasible idea. It's smart to inquire, but it's unlikely anything would happen.

[shasta519]

54 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

What does that have to do with the possibility of trading a first for Clowney?  

 

It's probably more relevant than the Faulk trade...LOL.

[gspdx]

22 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

Clowney

2018 - 9 Sacks, 16 TFLs, 21 QB hits

2017 - 9.5 Sacks, 21 TFLs, 21 QB hits

Sheard

2018 - 5.5 sacks, 13 TFLs, 11 QB hits

2017 5.5 Sacks, 9 TFLs, 14 QB hits

 

I'm gonna say Clowney is also at a bit of a disadvantage competing with JJ Watt for stats. Sheard on the other hand was competing with Hunt most of the year, and Lewis late year.

 

You may not deem him elite, but he had a substantial stat lead in sacks and QB hits compared to Sheard.

 

Although I do think Clowney is better than Sheard I am not sure I agree with the bolded.  When offenses have to focus both on JJ Watt and Clowney it makes it more difficult for the oline.  If the oline only had to focus on one elite rusher - say Clowney - it could be tougher for him.

[Blueblazes]

7 sacks per season and 1 QB hit per game, no thanks. If we can't get someone to help out with 6-7 per season for less than the Clown's $, we aren't as good as we think lol.

[Hoosiernsavga]

Not that Clowney is a Beast but the productive player that he is, I couldn't see the Texans willing to trade him to us within the division. 

[jameszeigler834]

On 7/16/2019 at 2:59 PM, Chloe6124 said:

The Texans are not going to trade Clowney inside the division lol.

 

Who would you trade though. Maybe give up your first round pick next year.

 

https://www.nflchatter.com/2019/07/16/6-teams-show-strong-interest-in-texans-star/

They would demand atleast our next two first round picks and probably a good player.

[EastStreet]

12 hours ago, richard pallo said:

I agree.  Waiting until the end of preseason isn't ideal.  My thought was Ballard and the staff will want to take a hard look at our current DE's to see where they stand.  Especially the new players.  Injuries could certainly play a role as well.  Since both teams are contenders we might have a player they would like to fill one of their needs and that player could be part of a trade.  I think we are probably done turning over players looking for a hidden gem but a trade or two to position the team for a run at cut down time could present itself.  That said it is hard to imagine Houston dealing him to us. 

The only late pre-season move I could see, is if Houston says no now, and then gets desperate at the 11th hour. Outside of that, I think Ballard will offer his equated value, and then forgetaboutit. 

[EastStreet]

12 hours ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Yep. Compared to Sheard. But not if compared to Houston for example. Even the 2018 Houston. And no, I don't think playing alongside Watt is a disadvantage. Actually, I think it is an advantage, because Wattt gets double teamed most of the time. Bradley Chubb had 14 sacks in his rookie year alongside Von Miller. He was great, but the fact that it was Miller who was double teamed all the time, helped Chubb a lot.

 

Ballard could get Houston for relatively cheap for relatively short term. That was a very good deal. But he would not be able to sign Clowney for cheap and short term, plus he would have to give away a pick on top of that. I don't think that would be a good deal at all. Clowney is a very-very good player. But, I dont want the Colts to pay 20 ish million for a great edge setter, who is a formidable rusher (at best). I want them to pay 20 million for a great rusher. Like Frank Clark, Lawrence, or Ngakogue for example

 

Clowney is different from Houston. And Clowney is younger.

 

And we're comparing him to the spot he would take, which is Sheard.

[EastStreet]

9 hours ago, gspdx said:

 

Although I do think Clowney is better than Sheard I am not sure I agree with the bolded.  When offenses have to focus both on JJ Watt and Clowney it makes it more difficult for the oline.  If the oline only had to focus on one elite rusher - say Clowney - it could be tougher for him.

They're coming from opposite bookends and play different schemes. A good rushing 3-4 team has 5 guys capable of hammering the OL typically. A 4-3, really only 4 typically (unless you have beasts in the 4, and another at SAM).

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 7/16/2019 at 3:18 PM, Chloe6124 said:

Is he a linebacker or a DE? Would he even fit this system.

 

He would be a DE in the Colts Eberflus system, but he is an OLB in the Texans.

 

On 7/16/2019 at 3:50 PM, csmopar said:

He's listed as an DE/LB and thats been the WHOLE beef he's had as its a way for the Texans to screw him on the pay scale with the Tags.
 

 

 

Franchise tag wise, he is either a DE or OLB.  There is no collectively bargained position of "Edge", that's a media made up position according to Bill Polian. An arbitrator will decide, but I bet Clowney is eventually ruled as an OLB in the 3 - 4 system, much like Jimmy Graham was ruled a TE in the Saints system a few years ago, even though he was in the slot or split wide almost 2/3 of his snaps.

 

But if it is shown Clowney is on the line in a pass rushing stance, and is being blocked by a Tackle or Guard well more than 50% of the defensive snaps, then they can build from there to make a case for him.  But that 3 - 4 base alignment always creeps in...

 

On 7/16/2019 at 7:08 PM, aaron11 said:

hes more of a DE than an OLB imo.  

 

they would never trade him here though, and we are not giving up high picks for him either so yeah

 

 

Dang right. Teams generally want the guy out of the conference, not just the division. Remember Green Bay shipping Favre off to the Jets so they could start Aaron Rodgers? Brett ended up in Minnesota anyway, but the Packers had no part in that. They tried everything to avoid that.

[richard pallo]

53 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

He would be a DE in the Colts Eberflus system, but he is an OLB in the Texans.

 

 

Franchise tag wise, he is either a DE or OLB.  There is no collectively bargained position of "Edge", that's a media made up position according to Bill Polian. An arbitrator will decide, but I bet Clowney is eventually ruled as an OLB in the 3 - 4 system, much like Jimmy Graham was ruled a TE in the Saints system a few years ago, even though he was in the slot or split wide almost 2/3 of his snaps.

 

But if it is shown Clowney is on the line in a pass rushing stance, and is being blocked by a Tackle or Guard well more than 50% of the defensive snaps, then they can build from there to make a case for him.  But that 3 - 4 base alignment always creeps in...

 

 

 

Dang right. Teams generally want the guy out of the conference, not just the division. Remember Green Bay shipping Favre off to the Jets so they could start Aaron Rodgers? Brett ended up in Minnesota anyway, but the Packers had no part in that. They tried everything to avoid that.

True.  But if I remember correctly Bellicheck sent Bledsoe to the Bills and then started Brady.  That was a long time ago of course and I don't remember what they received in return.  I wonder if there are more current examples of a star player being traded within the same division?  

[Steamboat_Shaun]

On 7/16/2019 at 3:02 PM, Chloe6124 said:

I don’t think it is a issue to go from a 3-4 to a 4-3. It’s harder to go the other way.

 

Yes the Texans are really trying to screw him over out of a small amount when you consider a 150 million salary cap. They are a mess.

 

Yeah I don't know why we wouldn't want him. He's been to the Pro Bowl each the last 3 seasons, he's a solid pass rusher, & he's about to hit his prime. Acquiring him wouldn't be cheap, & the likelihood of Houston trading him within the division is probably pretty low, but all that aside I'd be happy to see him in a Colts uniform.

[Maniac]

One of the most overrated players in the league.

 

No. We have young guys and we added Houston and still have Sheard, why trade picks and young players for him? The Texans would flex us too.