Sgt Schultz

Well, I wasn't going to say it, but my drink to this was my second. But that takes some of the celebratory spirit out of it. As does the fact that I will drink to almost anything.

It's almost 5:00 here, and I'll drink to this news.

That thought has entered my mind. Then I remember neither Hurney nor The Process is involved in this decision, and my mind is put at ease.

Slightly in the Stroud camp, myself, but what the Texans do after we pick means nothing to me. If anything, the Texans passing on which of these two we do not draft has a better chance of being an indicator that they will be wildly successful in the NFL. Trying to get any great insight on the meaning of life based on what the Houston Texans do seems roughly the same as deciding what to do with one's money by listening to my ex-wife. Any debate over whether we made the right or wrong pick may be decided by the results on the field. I say may be because both Stroud and Young could be crazy good......or both wash out in a couple of years. I think the former has a better chance than the latter, but you never know. We may look back in a few years and say we couldn't lose with this pick.....or couldn't win.

Exactly. I've said I favor Stroud, mostly because I am concerned about Young's general physical stature taking NFL-level beatings over the course of a season. Now granted, I am a little biased because of the way our OL's have allowed our QBs to be beaten in the past (and I hope that is past tense....finally). But, I see 19:2 and 21:2 TDs to Ints in that stat line and it makes me smile. It tells me that neither QB was exactly doing stupid things when they were under pressure.

Next up.....a bunch of us took the test at the bar last night, during happy hour.

Everybody is looking for some way to predict whether a QB (or any position) will work out if they are drafted. The problem I see, just from what I have read, is the proponents say the S2 correctly identified several prospects as hits and they were. Who else did it identify as hits that were not? Who did it not identify as a hit that were? Numbers can be dangerous things. I'm not saying the S2 is NOT a good identifier, I just can't conclude that based on identifying 5 or 6 guys that turned out great without knowing the false alarms or misses.

Well, then the Panthers and I have something in common.

Probably right after Juan posts another thread, this time with Matt Rhule or Moe Howard giving their insight on who we will draft. Moe will have either Young or Stroud, while Rhule will say his inside sources tell him it is Max Duggan.

Put a moratorium on Juan starting threads for 60 days prior to the start of the draft.

That should be titled "Latest BS, Speculation, and Conjecture"

There are two separate issues at play that should help most of our defense. Some will benefit from the switch to a 3-4, and I would perhaps put Burns at the top of that, but as the discussion has pointed out, there are several candidates. Then there is a coaching staff who will hopefully assess the talent's strengths and weaknesses and put them in the best position to succeed whether it is a 3-4, 4-3, 5-2, 7-0. Honestly, I could care less about the 3-4 switch. The second change has me a lot more pumped up.

I'm in agreement with this, except my preference is Stroud over Young. The problem is that I read both Stroud and Young will be gone by the time we select at #1.

What we have here, like what we have at the heart of most of these threads, is a writer doing this:

One would think that the capability to produce the proper colors for the 32 teams would have been part of the contract with Nike. It's not like those colors were not known when the bids for the contract were being requested. If Nike could not do that with the material they were proposing to use, then bid another material that can. If they can't or do not want to do that, then thank you very much, better luck next time, next in line please. It's a specification.....they can either produce something that meets it or they can't.

Whether it is good or not is subjective, and is almost irrelevant because of the perspective that needs to be added "according to whom?" In general, I agree with the statement that sunlight is the best disinfectant. Whether people see that as good or not is up to them. I also don't think what we are seeing right now is what will be happening in 10 years.

There is always a transition period between a corrupt organization and its replacement (or leadership turnover), where the new organization/leadership is both idealistic and aware that all eyes are on them after the stench of what got driven out. So, there would be a few years where the replacement organization would be focused on its mission rather than its own feeding and expansion. Then the destructive cycle starts all over again, usually with hiring management consultants. It exists in organizations not profit driven, too. I've worked in and around a government agency for nearly 34 years, and they constantly drift away from their mission into "more glamorous" things (usually in the name of power and "the integrity" of the organization). It's not like they do that in addition to the mission, it is at the expense of the mission. Then something bad happens, the leadership is purged, they refocus on the mission, and about 5-7 years later start to drift off into Never Never Land again.

And they might be able to snap that line tightly to the NIL changes had they signed a consent decree and avoided the litigation, but they didn't. This is what class action lawsuits were made of. Otherwise, the NCAA may wind up in endless litigation and could well wind up bankrupt. Honestly, I don't feel sorry for them one bit. They milked the "preserving the integrity of amateur athletics" angle for years, decades really. The NCAA gets what it gets at this point, and they have spent a long time setting themselves up for that fall. Some governing body is needed, but they proved they aren't it.

And let's face it, they are not the same size. I got the point of the question, but that is essentially asking if we remove the biggest concern/liability on one prospect, which one is better? If you are comparing two houses, and you like one a lot and love the other but have real concerns about whether it is too small, you can't base the decision on which one you would pick if they were the same size. They aren't.

I pretty much agree, with an qualifier on the shoulder numbers. Almost every team has them, but if they have to be wedged in to fit, leave them out. I don't think the Bengals have them, so they are not required by the league.

There are some rather frightening uniform concepts out on these interwebz for every team. It is a form of pollution, really. I guess the good news is that the trend for teams has been to go to a more classic look, with the exception of the Falcons. I'm not sure what the Falcons were trying to do. When you see people with some great new idea for the Packers, Steelers, Bears, Raiders, Colts, or Niners, you know they have too much time on their hands. I think you could add the current rendition of the Chargers, Browns, and Bills to that list, as well, since they all reverted back to their classic uniforms. I'm hoping that whatever we do, we don't try to outNike anybody.

He may be. In fairness, he was drafted by an organization that may get less attention by the talking heads than any other in the NFL, including us. If that was not bad enough, then he got drafted by that organization when they had a head coach that made The Process' look like Bill Parcells at the NFL level. Despite all that, his team got to the playoffs in his second year and led them to a huge second half comeback after stinking the place up in the opening half. Doesn't sound like lack of commitment or focus to me.

That's my concern. Banking on a young QB that is 5' 10-1/2 and probably legitimately 195 is a big gamble. I know, the NFL protects QBs but that is about like finding out the local police department closes 97% of homocide cases. Great, and it probably cuts down on murder, but it doesn't mean much for those attending the funeral, nor fans seeing the penalty flag next to the guy stretched out on the field. Young is going to get hit, and his general build raises concerns about his ability to withstand it. I won't be upset if they draft him, but I will hold my breath every time he gets wallopped, penalty flag or no.

If I remember right, the league average is around 2.75 seconds. Darnold's time to throw last year was north of 3 seconds, so our line was providing that time. But, if opposing defenses conclude that the QB NEEDS that time to function, they are going to dial up the pressure. As far as our rather impressive protection (time to throw) number, that was probably a function of not only our OL, but our tendency to be a run-first offense. That semi-constant run threat gives pass rushers an initial pause which can be the difference between 2.75 seconds and 3 or better.