Deshaun Watson “might” want out of Houston

[danlhart87 8,678]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

Watsons line is not nearly as terrible as it once was.   Remember, they traded for Leremy Tunsil, who is a very good LT and they spent a previous #1 on a Right tackle, I think his last name is Howard.   Watson’s OL is much improved.  

Much improved and got sacked 2nd most times 

[Jared Cisneros 3,851]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Watsons line is not nearly as terrible as it once was.   Remember, they traded for Leremy Tunsil, who is a very good LT and they spent a previous #1 on a Right tackle, I think his last name is Howard.   Watson’s OL is much improved.  

Watson was sacked 49 times this year and McCarron once. That equals 50 sacks the Houston O-Line allowed. Yes it's better than last year, but that was a historically bad O-Line. 50 sacks is still pretty terrible. The Colts allowed 21 sacks this year on the contrary. It's not even close.

[Shafty138 1,432]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Watson was sacked 49 times this year and McCarron once. That equals 50 sacks the Houston O-Line allowed. Yes it's better than last year, but that was a historically bad O-Line. 50 sacks is still pretty terrible. The Colts allowed 21 sacks this year on the contrary. It's not even close.

Amazingly short self imposed exile 

[coltsva 1,776]

12 hours ago, adubb84 said:

Here is the link 

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2925845-deshaun-watson-rumors-texans-qb-has-told-teammates-he-could-request-trade

 

What would give up to get him over here?

Red meat

[NewColtsFan 9,268]

27 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Watson was sacked 49 times this year and McCarron once. That equals 50 sacks the Houston O-Line allowed. Yes it's better than last year, but that was a historically bad O-Line. 50 sacks is still pretty terrible. The Colts allowed 21 sacks this year on the contrary. It's not even close.

I didn’t compare the Colts OL with the Texans.

 

As for the Houston OL, I’d say this.   I suspect it’s about approach or philosophy.   Does Houston try to get rid of the ball as soon as he can, as the Colts do?   Not that I’m aware of.

 

Rember the first five years of Luck we had a raging debate over who was to blame for so many sacks, Luck or the OL?    I’m just saying it’s not black and white on this.   I’m just repeating what I’ve read — that their line is improved.   Not saying they’re great, or even good.    Just improved. 

[rock8591 553]

Sack numbers themselves are misleading.

 

Michael Vick was once one of the most oftentimes sacked QBs in the league; does that mean he's one of the fattest and slowest?

 

A sack does not necessarily mean a blindside hit followed by a QB on the ground in a fetal position.

A sack is a QB tackled behind the line of scrimmage.

 

If a QB scrambles 20 years east and west on offense while attempting to find a receiver but ends up getting tackled for a 1 inch loss, that is considered a "sack." Watson's "sack" numbers are not surprising, especially given how much of a runner he is.

[richard pallo 2,813]

I do think Watson will request a trade now.  And I also think the only way he comes here is if we are his only choice and he makes life miserable for them.  Even if we are in his top three we would really have to pay up for the Texans to do it.  That's why it's more likely to be Stafford or Darnold if we move on from Rivers. 

[crazycolt1 7,556]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

I do think Watson will request a trade now.  And I also think the only way he comes here is if we are his only choice and he makes life miserable for them.  Even if we are in his top three we would really have to pay up for the Texans to do it.  That's why it's more likely to be Stafford or Darnold if we move on from Rivers. 

Watson can want a trade but he is under contract and is under control by the Texans regardless of what he wants.

If, and that is a big IF the Texans trade him, it will not be in division. 

You have to keep in mind the report is from BleacherReport and they are not known to be the best at what they claim they know. 

[ReMeDy 434]

25 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Watson can want a trade but he is under contract and is under control by the Texans regardless of what he wants.

If, and that is a big IF the Texans trade him, it will not be in division.

 

Yea, but imagine you're the Texans and a team is offering three 1st round picks and you know you're going to be in rebuilding mode anyways with a new GM. The new GM is going to be licking his chops for three 1st rounders. Also, he's a former New England scout, so if he's good as legends say, then he could make magic work with those.

 

Although I do say if given the choice between three 1st rounders with the Colts and three 1st rounders somewhere else, then yea, they wont pick the Colts.

[crazycolt1 7,556]

15 minutes ago, ReMeDy said:

 

Yea, but imagine you're the Texans and a team is offering three 1st round picks and you know you're going to be in rebuilding mode anyways with a new GM. The new GM is going to be licking his chops for three 1st rounders. Also, he's a former New England scout, so if he's good as legends say, then he could make magic work with those.

 

Although I do say if given the choice between three 1st rounders with the Colts and three 1st rounders somewhere else, then yea, they wont pick the Colts.

But that is assuming Ballard would come off that amount of picks. 

IMO he wouldn't. 

[Architects08 234]

I'd just give the Texans a "blank check" and ask what they want. Four 1st rounders? Ok. With Watson this team not only is a SB contender they would be the favorites for years to come.

[crazycolt1 7,556]

9 minutes ago, Architects08 said:

 With Watson this team not only is a SB contender they would be the favorites for years to come.

That is exactly why the Texans will not trade Watson to the Colts. The new GM is not Bill O'Brian. 

[csmopar 7,514]

31 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

That is exactly why the Texans will not trade Watson to the Colts. The new GM is not Bill O'Brian. 

I agree but this is the only name tied to the Colts that I would remotely give thought too if I were Ballard. 
 

most likely we will end up with either Rivers, Eason or Wentz as our QB next year with an outside chance of Brissett or a draftee to be determined. 

[richard pallo 2,813]

8 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Watson can want a trade but he is under contract and is under control by the Texans regardless of what he wants.

If, and that is a big IF the Texans trade him, it will not be in division. 

You have to keep in mind the report is from BleacherReport and they are not known to be the best at what they claim they know. 

Of course he is under contract we all know that.  We also know we are the last place they will want to trade him to.  BR is suggesting possible trade scenarios not claiming that they know anything at all.  They suggested NINE scenarios.  The price they suggested for us is very high.  That's why I said it's more likely Stafford or Darnold come here IF we move on from Rivers.   Hopefully this helps you understand my comment.  

[Stephen 1,875]

12 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Of course he is under contract we all know that.  We also know we are the last place they will want to trade him to.  BR is suggesting possible trade scenarios not claiming that they know anything at all.  They suggested NINE scenarios.  The price they suggested for us is very high.  That's why I said it's more likely Stafford or Darnold come here IF we move on from Rivers.   Hopefully this helps you understand my comment.  

Watson pulls andrew luck and retires

[coltsva 1,776]

If the Texans trade Watson, it's not going to be for Round 1 picks that are in the 20's. 

[danlhart87 8,678]

48 minutes ago, coltsva said:

If the Texans trade Watson, it's not going to be for Round 1 picks that are in the 20's. 

Future picks would be involved 

 

I believe in trades like these quantity plays a big part 

 

If Colts offer more 1s Watson will come here

Its not gonna happen but you get the idea 

[Four2itus 5,037]

No player is worth 4 first rounders to me. None. One bad tackle in year 1 on your investment, and you could have a team with a severely limited way to rebuild itself. It would take another 4 years after you start picking in the 1st round again to rebuild the high end talent. 

 

Nope. 

[danlhart87 8,678]

32 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

No player is worth 4 first rounders to me. None. One bad tackle in year 1 on your investment, and you could have a team with a severely limited way to rebuild itself. It would take another 4 years after you start picking in the 1st round again to rebuild the high end talent. 

 

Nope. 

I really think the rewards outweigh the risks. If it's someone like Mahomes or Watson i do the trade in a heartbeat. 

[crazycolt1 7,556]

32 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I really think the rewards outweigh the risks. If it's someone like Mahomes or Watson i do the trade in a heartbeat. 

Just curious? 

Do you think Ballard would gamble the future and put the Colts in the same position as the Texans are in right now? 

 

[danlhart87 8,678]

24 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Just curious? 

Do you think Ballard would gamble the future and put the Colts in the same position as the Texans are in right now? 

 

I don't think so

Ballard values quantity over quality 

 

The difference is Colts have a very good team even without Watson.

 

Watson would push the Colts into elite 

[Dingus McGirt 1,640]

He just wants to be team president and qb at the same time.  

[danlhart87 8,678]

4 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

He just wants to be team president and qb at the same time.  

He's got my vote

[aaron11 1,680]

8 hours ago, Four2itus said:

No player is worth 4 first rounders to me. None. One bad tackle in year 1 on your investment, and you could have a team with a severely limited way to rebuild itself. It would take another 4 years after you start picking in the 1st round again to rebuild the high end talent. 

I agree, three is pushing it. I would not do 4 for anybody.  its too many eggs in one basket, and you might have a down year in there losing a valuable pick when you need it

[danlhart87 8,678]

7 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

I agree, three is pushing it. I would not do 4 for anybody.  its too many eggs in one basket, and you might have a down year in there losing a valuable pick when you need it

if you have the chance to get a top 5 franchise QB its worth the risk 

[jvan1973 5,484]

18 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

if you have the chance to get a top 5 franchise QB its worth the risk 

No one is giving up 4 firsts.    

[danlhart87 8,678]

Ya I doubt it but his price will be high if traded

Texans would be smart to trade him and regain tons of draft capital 

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,970]

He wouldn't be coming here for sure.

Probably one of the teams the League likes best like Steelers,  Pat's, Giants, Broncos. 

I'd add packers but Roger's isn't done yet. 

But if he is traded and not to us it's still good news if he's out of our division. 

[danlhart87 8,678]

58 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

He wouldn't be coming here for sure.

Probably one of the teams the League likes best like Steelers,  Pat's, Giants, Broncos. 

I'd add packers but Roger's isn't done yet. 

But if he is traded and not to us it's still good news if he's out of our division. 

No way he goes to Packers unless Rodgers is done and they package Love in the deal

[coltsva 1,776]

Texans have a young, top level player at the most critical position. You don't trade him to build a team, you build a team around him. Heck, Grigson started with a 2-14 group and built around the starting QB, going 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-7, in 4 "healthy" years. And that's with doing a terrible job of drafting (Luck, Hilton, Mewhort, Kelly), in 5 years.

[crazycolt1 7,556]

18 minutes ago, coltsva said:

Texans have a young, top level player at the most critical position. You don't trade him to build a team, you build a team around him. Heck, Grigson started with a 2-14 group and built around the starting QB, going 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-7, in 4 "healthy" years. And that's with doing a terrible job of drafting (Luck, Hilton, Mewhort, Kelly), in 5 years.

Regardless of what happened with O'Brian the Texan's need Watson to step up and be the leader. 

I very well understand Watson being unhappy but he is paid 39 million bucks a year to be the face and the leader of the team. I do believe with the right head coach they will be fine. They have the franchise QB and that is a great start. 

[dw49 725]

And Houston has said they are OK with taking around a 70 million dollar cap hit ?

[King Colt 959]

On 1/7/2021 at 11:47 AM, jvan1973 said:

He was a free agent.    He wasn't traded

Odd post, show me where I wrote he was traded

[jvan1973 5,484]

1 hour ago, King Colt said:

Odd post, show me where I wrote he was traded

You responded to a post about the Texans not trading Watson to the Colts with "Andre Johnson went to the Colts".    So you were either implying he was traded to the Colts,   or your response was not at all related to the post you quoted

[TimetobringDfence! 429]

On 1/8/2021 at 1:18 AM, crazycolt1 said:

Watson can want a trade but he is under contract and is under control by the Texans regardless of what he wants.

If, and that is a big IF the Texans trade him, it will not be in division. 

You have to keep in mind the report is from BleacherReport and they are not known to be the best at what they claim they know. 

It's on espn now too. Hes very upset because McNair told him he would be in the loop after the Hopkins deal and he went back on his word. I dont know if the new GM wants a QB that doesn't want to play for him. From what I understand Miami is the only real possibility because they have low first rounds picks that Houston traded them that Houston can get back along with Tua.

[TimetobringDfence! 429]

On 1/8/2021 at 9:50 AM, csmopar said:

I agree but this is the only name tied to the Colts that I would remotely give thought too if I were Ballard. 
 

most likely we will end up with either Rivers, Eason or Wentz as our QB next year with an outside chance of Brissett or a draftee to be determined. 

I think Stafford is a possibility.

[King Colt 959]

4 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

You responded to a post about the Texans not trading Watson to the Colts with "Andre Johnson went to the Colts".    So you were either implying he was traded to the Colts,   or your response was not at all related to the post you quoted

Is that what I was doing? Thank you so much Dilbert for the enlightenment as to my intentions.

[jvan1973 5,484]

39 minutes ago, King Colt said:

Is that what I was doing? Thank you so much Dilbert for the enlightenment as to my intentions.

You're welcome.    Do better

[luv_pony_express 665]

On 1/8/2021 at 12:59 AM, crazycolt1 said:

But that is assuming Ballard would come off that amount of picks. 

IMO he wouldn't. 

Ballard is one the NFL GMs most bought-in to the Massey-Thaler school of roster strategy.

[Moosejawcolt 1,643]

On 1/7/2021 at 9:49 AM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That is 1 guy I would trade for and give up several picks for as long as we can keep our main core guys as in re-signing Nelson and Leonard. Buckner and Kelly are already signed long term.

It makes absolutley no sense. The Colts r picking at 21 this year. Say the Texans want 3 1st rounders. So we give them this years 1st and 2022 and 2023. The only problem. If the Colts got Deshaun, they would most likely would be picking at the bottom of the 1st round for the next 5 years or so. U think the Texans will take 3 1st rounds at the bottom of the 1st round for Watson? Plus, he aint going no  where happy or not