Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Deshaun Watson trade now as unlikely as ever...


SizzleBuzz
 Share

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

Name him the starter.  

 

Too bad...shouldn't have signed a legally binding contract obligating him to play for Houston.  

Think it is just that easy?  

We'll see how accurate you are.  

T. Taylor is set to start game one. 

Either way, it's no skin off my butt.  I wanted him before his issues but there is no way in hell I would give up 3-1st and multiple 2nds for a player that has all these legal issues. 

I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Think it is just that easy?  

Sure do.

 

7 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

We'll see how accurate you are.  

I'm in no way predicting the team will take this path but do wish they would. 

 

There's only one thing that's for certain in this deal -- every one of the "he'll be traded by" prognostications (expert and armchair alike) has been flat out wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

Sure do.

 

I'm in no way predicting the team will take this path but do wish they would. 

 

There's only one thing that's for certain in this deal -- every one of the "he'll be traded by" prognostications (expert and armchair alike) has been flat out wrong.

If the issues never came up, he most definitely would have been traded!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

Sure do.

 

I'm in no way predicting the team will take this path but do wish they would. 

 

There's only one thing that's for certain in this deal -- every one of the "he'll be traded by" prognostications (expert and armchair alike) has been flat out wrong.

You don’t even think he is starting? Why are you asking everyone who the starter is? It just bothers you that even a player in legal trouble with little leverage has some pull on say on how he plays vs what the owners want.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Because the Texans have no plans to play him.

He's on the 53-man roster and available.  In the NFL "plans" change daily if not hourly!

 

12 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

If they announced him to start week one he'd probably be on the commissioner's exempt list 15 minutes later.

If true the Texans should immediately name him the starter so they can then fill that 53rd roster spot with another player who is eligible and available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

He's on the 53-man roster and available.  In the NFL "plans" change daily if not hourly!

 

If true the Texans should immediately name him the starter so they can then fill that 53rd roster spot with another player who is eligible and available.

He’s not playing this year, give it up dude!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

Starting QBs who want no part of the organization while also upsetting a large portion of the fanbase. What could possibly go wrong?! Glad this guy isn’t running any organizations…

Texans fans are squarely behind Mr. Whip It Out because their only concern is winning!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • He can’t even learn to run routes. No chance in hell he can do both that and pick up blocking schemes 
    • Well he had essentially a 70% completion rate for almost three thousand yards.  Biggest issues were awkward and inconsistent release.  I wouldn't call arm strength bad, but not great.    
    • I see him being better and most of that is a few downfield passes that were seemingly non existent.    But it is what is around him that has dictated the trajectory more than the quarterbacking. He is game manager level and unable to dictate to defenses.  And even if I am wrong and he is the reason we ‘upwarded’, we are bumping our heads on the ceiling and only making meager gains. If it is an incline it is awfully shallow degree wise. Like a finance graph that tracks your progress and hovers around the rate of inflation. Barely breaking even.  Is that where you want your money?  We make up these deadlines expectations and generally he does the minimum of what he needs to do to hang around.    It does not encourage me to believe that when we get into a game against a good run d that we cannot break down with our run game, to believe that we can pivot to the air and successfully counter their strategy.  But they run it back again. Of course I am gunshy of a repeat of the same thing we have watched for three years.    oh, and yes his durability is his most impressive positive for my money. I fear the other shoe dropping on that and the contractual consequences that will follow.   Last  of all, too late to edit my mistake here but would like to acknowledge it: the last three years has done very little to convince me that I was not wrong in not wanting him. One too many “not”s. 
×
×
  • Create New...