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!

     

Dan Morgan on Jadeveon Clowney: “we’re still working through the roster”


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

I’m usually more risk adverse but, I’m wondering if it doesn’t make sense to rip the band aid off, trade or cut Clowney and start Scourton.  Unless he just seems lost in camp, let’s throw him in the fire and get him real three down starter experience.

We are still in the rebuilding phase, not the ‘win now’ phase.

Edited by bythenbrs
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd consider cutting DJ Johnson before Clowney. He hasn't shown anything in the 2 seasons he's been here. In 27 games he's appeared in he has a half a sack. He will also be turning 27 in October.

Clowney at least fills a role of having a veteran with some success in the NFL with high draft pedigree. If I had to choose between the 2 I'd choose Clowney. I don't see Johnson developing into a solid starter.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bythenbrs said:

I’m usually more risk adverse but, I’m wondering if it doesn’t make sense to rip the band aid off, cut Clowney and start Scourton.  Unless he just seems lost in camp, let’s throw him in the fire and get him real three down starter experience.

All 3 of the rookies will not start until they can execute their assignments. Nalo has to learn the playbook which is now a year thicker and he's a year behind. The new edge guys have a system to learn and prove they will not be a liability on an already historically bed defense. That would theoretically be impossible to do but we are a team of firsts and not in a good way. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mr Mojo Risin said:

I'd consider cutting DJ Johnson before Clowney. He hasn't shown anything in the 2 seasons he's been here. In 27 games he's appeared in he has a half a sack. He will also be turning 27 in October.

Clowney at least fills a role of having a veteran with some success in the NFL with high draft pedigree. If I had to choose between the 2 I'd choose Clowney. I don't see Johnson developing into a solid starter.

No disagreement with cutting DJ Johnson.  That was a terrible ‘need’ pick and should be the poster child for why you should draft BPA, not need.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Waldo said:

You hang onto Clowney as insurance and part time work. With as much dead weight as they have in that room there are easier cuts.

They look to be feeling overconfident IMO.

True, but that insurance has a cost that can be avoided (in part).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bythenbrs said:

True, but that insurance has a cost that can be avoided (in part).

Maybe, maybe not. You cannot assume these rookies will be able to start right out of the gate. The run defense could actually get worse for a while before these rookies get up to speed. But given how bad it's been I can see the benefit in just ripping the bandaid off and letting them earn their strips under live bullets all season.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bythenbrs said:

True, but that insurance has a cost that can be avoided (in part).

Sometimes it just makes you feel better to pay, at least until you don't have to. Peace of mind in lean times until you're rich. Sure it's a mindset, but you gotta actually have to prove to yourself that you're rich first.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mr Mojo Risin said:

I'd consider cutting DJ Johnson before Clowney. He hasn't shown anything in the 2 seasons he's been here. In 27 games he's appeared in he has a half a sack. He will also be turning 27 in October.

Clowney at least fills a role of having a veteran with some success in the NFL with high draft pedigree. If I had to choose between the 2 I'd choose Clowney. I don't see Johnson developing into a solid starter.

He might be, and likely will be cut during preseason.  

But if we are talking about cap space, cutting him saves very little.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, bythenbrs said:

True, but that insurance has a cost that can be avoided (in part).

Insurance policies exist for a reason. People have liked drafts in the past that have imploded.

He isn't a starter but your paying for known pressure. Again, there are easy cuts sitting there that the team is much better off without.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Hoenheim said:

 

All I will say is Wonnum was solid when he was healthy. Otherwise, that is a room full of JAGs not counting our two drafted guys. One of them could push to start immediately if theyre good enough. 

We had such a poo defense they should let the best man win in training camp for the starting OLB positions. 

I think Clowney would only be a 20-25 snap guy if here--not sure he is even worth the $7m we could save by cutting him.  Wonnum is 27 and is probably entering his prime and he is good on the strong side.  Pat Jones II is a 26-year old, 265 lb run stuffer, even though he had a career-high 7 sacks in 2024. Wonnum is 6'5" 258 and he has had 2 8-sack seasons and was on an 8-sack pace last year (4 sacks in 8 games).

Scourton should start across from Wonnum, with Jones and Princely rotating in situationally. I just don't see how Clowney, at 32, does much more than blocks the developmental opportunities of the younger players if he stays.

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've got enough to sign the draft class and have around $10m left over, I think the mentorship and impact of Clowney/Wonnum being able to rotate well rested is worth more than saving some money we're not desperate for. Can't have these rookies learning from Patrick Jones and Barno or whoever. Have to keep at least one of Clowney/Wonnum

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

    • okay I found this and it sounds like my hopes for the first surgery being not such a great job seems like it could be actual reality.  I only hoped because that would give a better chance for recovery and ia a possible scenario so I just thought it could be possible. Had no real evidence of it. But I’ll be damned.    This is a detailed report of Brooks’ surgery and the condition of his knee after the failed repair.     https://x.com/jmthrivept/status/2055743129408704806?s= Sparked by some very good questions by @CoachspeakIndex, here’s some info on Jonathon Brooks: 1. Speculation that the first graft/ACLR by Dr. Cooper didn’t “take” or at least was too lax, leading to failure and re-tear. Brooks dealt with issues cutting, progressing in his rehab into the early stages of 2024 and then re-tore it late 2024, requiring a second ACLR in January 2025 (essentially revision). Notably, CAR prolonged Brooks’ rehab process through Sept-Oct due to issues progressing into the next stages of rehab. 2. Second surgery performed by Dr. Neal ElAttrache, who has extensive experience with revisions. He did a double bundle technique, harvesting graft from Brooks’ left patellar tendon and a strip of his right IT Band (his right patellar tendon had been utilized for the prior graft in 2023. The double bundle technique significantly increases rotational stability of the knee, leading to a stronger and more secure graft/reconstruction. Also to note, Brooks’ surgery wasn’t significantly delayed, meaning that the tunnels from his prior ACLR were in good shape and they didn’t need to perform bone grafts to fill in (would have delayed 2nd surgery by 5-6 months). Essentially, reading the tea leaves tells me that everything else except for the graft itself was still in good quality within his knee. Good sign for future.  3. Typically, you see a performance increase anywhere from 16-20 months post-revision. Brooks will be ~21 months out from his second surgery by the time Week 1 hits. His knee should be more stable and stronger this time around, with adequate time for healing and return to all movement patterns. I’m not viewing this situation as a typical “Player __ had TWO ACL tears, he’s cooked” situation. Rather, I’m viewing it as the first procedure failed, but the second procedure is significantly stronger and should allow him to return to form this time around. I don’t know why it posted as a link but there it is.  
    • Jackie, any more reps tomorrow, or is that it for this session?  thanks for the work
    • How can you say they aren’t trying to win now with all the moves made in free agency? Or is trading first round picks the only way to be win now? I’d be fine never trading another first round pick again, win now be damned.
×
×
  • Create New...