The sack total itself is one of the most extremely overrated stats in the game.
Give me a forced bad pass on a critical down over a sack in garbage time any day.
Clowney creates disruption. He is a pressure player.
So WAS Smith. We have no idea what he may be at this point.
I wanted Clowney here from the start, but if the team was inclined to go that way, they already would have.
He is underrated by fans because of the sack stat and his draft status.
yes sacks are just one stupid stat, those other things including disruption, and pressure are what count during the season.
if you dont have someone good on him or dont double him, he is coming in!
I saw one game with him last year and he looked good to me.
Where do you play Clowney?
Great postReleasing Crawford would free up $8 million in cap space.
That freed up money should allow for enough cap space to sign Clowney to a 1 year prove it deal at $16 million (it is being reported he turned down a $15 million one year deal with the Browns) since he remains a free agent late into the offseason.
In my view, this move has a few benefits:
1) Clowney is a better player than Crawford and has a much higher ceiling.
Clowney has 32 sacks in his 6 years in the NFL and that is including his rookie year where it was cut short to only 4 games because of injury. Since then, Clowney has missed a total of 9 games in 5 seasons.
Crawford, on the other hand, has had 23 sacks in 8 seasons. That does include the 2013 season where he was IRd for an ACL injury he suffered in training camp. He remained healthy after that, but he only played 4 games last season after having another injury that brought his season to an end.
2) Clowney has better position flexibility than Crawford does. Clowney can playe DE or move inside if needed. Crawford is a better 3T than a DE, which is where he is expected to play a majority of the time.
3) Signing Clowney to a 1 year deal will make him want to play at a high level at all times and tough out injuries.
4) Clowney is only 27 and Crawford is 30. Clowney is more apt to have a big year, which would improve his market dramatically next year. We wouldn't be able to sign him, but he would yield us a 3rd round comp pick in 2022.
Bring in Clowney and say goodbye to Crawford.
Get rid of Hill and CrawfordRelease Trysten Hill instead!
or accept 24 years of not competing for championships.
Weird fan base indeed.
Releasing Crawford would free up $8 million in cap space.
That freed up money should allow for enough cap space to sign Clowney to a 1 year prove it deal at $16 million (it is being reported he turned down a $15 million one year deal with the Browns) since he remains a free agent late into the offseason.
In my view, this move has a few benefits:
1) Clowney is a better player than Crawford and has a much higher ceiling.
Clowney has 32 sacks in his 6 years in the NFL and that is including his rookie year where it was cut short to only 4 games because of injury. Since then, Clowney has missed a total of 9 games in 5 seasons.
Crawford, on the other hand, has had 23 sacks in 8 seasons. That does include the 2013 season where he was IRd for an ACL injury he suffered in training camp. He remained healthy after that, but he only played 4 games last season after having another injury that brought his season to an end.
2) Clowney has better position flexibility than Crawford does. Clowney can playe DE or move inside if needed. Crawford is a better 3T than a DE, which is where he is expected to play a majority of the time.
3) Signing Clowney to a 1 year deal will make him want to play at a high level at all times and tough out injuries.
4) Clowney is only 27 and Crawford is 30. Clowney is more apt to have a big year, which would improve his market dramatically next year. We wouldn't be able to sign him, but he would yield us a 3rd round comp pick in 2022.
Bring in Clowney and say goodbye to Crawford.
I completely disagree with this premise. I will take the guy with twice the production at twice the cost every time.
Ask OC's how they game plan for:
A) Clowney
B) Crawford
Answers below
A) QB's identify where Clowney is and O Line calls protection based on Clowney's alignment.
B) Who?
Ask left tackles what they do to counter:
A) Clowney
B) Crawford
Answers below
A) Be technically sound and don't commit to a predetermined position, keep him at distance so he can't get in on you and use his unique combination power and athleticism to beat you inside or out.
B) Take away the inside move and just let him loop outside where he'll run right past the pocket. "Who?" is also an acceptable answer.
People saying he's not disruptive or that he's a better LDE haven't really watched him in Seattle or Houston. J.J. Watt likes to rush from the left or "strong "side. He was a problem for Seattle opponents last year. He lined up in all techniques and even stood up over the A gaps like a linebacker, faking pressure and dropping into coverage. Yes, injuries have derailed him. Had he been healthy all this time, he wouldn't even be possibility for the Cowboys or anyone else at this point. He impacts the way the OC and QB have to call plays. He makes your Secondary better. He makes the other defensive linemen better with his actual presence versus the RaRa garbage you guys like to pretend Tyrone Crawford allegedly brings to the defense.
Also for the Crawford apologists, Clowney has missed 7 games in the last 4 seasons. Crawford has missed 15 games over that same time.
You won't be getting twice the production. Crawford will likely take a pay cut or get cut. Dallas won't be paying him $8 million this year. It isn't Clowney at $16 million versus Crawford at $8 million. It is Crawford at around $4 million. The cost for Clowney will be 4 times as much and the production will be a little better, tut not as much as is needed for a $16 million contract.
Anyone notice how bad the Dline sucked after Crawford went down? He was better on the edge against the run than "pass rush every down" Quinn. He never played the run.
If you can get Clowney for $16/ do it. But I'd be more in to signing Griffin
I'll take a pressure that gets the team off the field on 3rd and 10 over a sack when the game has already been decided.
LOL ! ... Ok, ya'll keep on tryin' to convince yourself about that, ..![]()
There is absolutely no comparison's to a Sack vs Pressure. who is gonna dish out big money contract to an " Almost Anthony " player ?
A man that is always two- three inches away from the QB.. but can never finish the task of getting the QB on the ground.
" Hurries and pressures " are no guarantees to kill big plays and downs,. But a sack is a guarantee that plays are instantly killed.
How often have we've seen countless upon countless games on both NFL and college levels
of QBs scrambling and breaking away away from " hurries" and " pressures " to extend plays to
throw downfield en route to back-breaking big plays ..and many times over game-winning plays
If you get a hurry-pressure, that does not guarantee that back- breaking, scrambling plays will be over
However ,if you get a sack, and puts the QB on the ground- that potential scrambling, extending big play ... becomes instantly dead on the spot.. Play blown dead,
A Hurry or pressure will NEVER compare to a Sack.
Here's the problem with part of your thinking. We've heard nothing from Jerry or Stephan about Crawford going to be forced to take a pay cut of half or get released. This is nothing but speculation by you which isn't any different than all the speculation the sportswriters do all off season that is extremely seldom if ever their peculation comes true.
.
A significant amount of posts on this board are speculation. What else is new? If they don't cut Crawford, then trying to sign Clowney is moot. And I will say again, even if they do cut Crawford as I speculate they might possibly do, I don't think Clowney is worth the speculative figure of $16+ million.
I'll take a pressure that gets the team off the field on 3rd and 10 over a sack when the game has already been decided.
That's what I meant. Not a play where a pressure is recorded but the QB gets away and converts the third down.
I felt like that was fairly understood, at least to where you didnt need six paragraphs and an insult to point out that I didnt fully nail the semantics on this one.
But I hope it felt good.