Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
I'm sure none of y'all noticed, but Clowney was the best player on the field for either team yesterday. Russell Wilson included.
Dude was a monster. And he's been damn good all year. His pass rush win rate was among the tops in the league BEFORE yesterday's game.
Everybody wanting to carp about his sack total needs to watch him, and then watch the sack that Clark got. Clark was largely an afterthought on his sack Sunday - Jones did all the work. Well Clowney's been doing that sort of heavy lifting a lot for the Seahawks this season. He's been winning his matchups regularly and just not quite getting there.
As opposed to Clark, who loses his matchups and then we get excuses for him.
Clowney's game yesterday was the bill of goods we were sold on Frank Clark. None of this "well he set the edge" or "he almost made a tackle on that screen pass" bullshit. We were supposed to get a guy who can win games.
And he's just worthless. He actively hurt the team Sunday by being on it instead of Mike Pennel. We win that game if Clark simply doesn't play and Pennel does. When considering cost, he's very likely the single worst transaction in franchise history.
|
Yep, and by contrast, the Seattle trade for Clowney was by far the best get by any team all off season, especially when one considers what the chump change they got him for. Of course it took the Texans to be real stupid, but that's beside the point. He is VERY disruptive, as you said, just like he was in Houston. Everyone puts so much emphasis on sacks because that's were the BIG $$$ is, and Clowney has never had a 10-sack season, but his play made others around him get to the QB more. Yep, Seattle got one hell of a deal, and even if it's just a one-year rental, they'll get a comp pick - maybe even as high as a 3rd, which is what they gave up for him. My bet is he signs a long term deal with them though, but if not, someone will pay him. It's a win for Seattle and Clowney either way.