Breaking Down the Texans’ Top Options for the No. 1 Draft Pick

Houston looks certain to end up with the NFL’s worst record. Who will the team move forward with? Plus, forecasting whether Derek Carr and Mac Jones will return to their teams and more.

It’s Christmas week, meaning a lot of the mailbag questions I’m getting now are about next year, not this year. Let’s dive in …

From A (@randomdogname): Are Texans better taking Bryce Young, or taking Will Anderson/Jalen Carter and rolling dice on a QB elsewhere?

A, it’s way too early to make a definitive call on that. That said, we can talk about it philosophically.

I do think the safer call here is to go with Alabama's Anderson Jr. or Georgia's Carter. Both are physically superior players at important positions that you can plug in and hope for a decade’s worth of Pro Bowls. If I had to guess which player Texans GM Nick Caserio would be more comfortable, I’d go with Anderson, because he is cleaner from a makeup perspective and comes from a program Caserio has a ton of background with. But Carter has more upside.

Here are the comps I got from one AFC exec, who started by saying that physically, Anderson is built like Von Miller, while he plays a little like a smaller version of another star edge guy.

“Will Anderson is a less athletic Myles Garrett—not as long or quick, but just as powerful,” he said. “Heavy-handed, more consistent motor than Myles coming out. … And Jalen is a unicorn. Probably the closest thing to [Ndamukong] Suh since Suh, just a total, freakish blend of size, power and athletic ability.”

One other comp that I got for Carter that I kind of liked was Fletcher Cox. And Kayvon Thibodeaux and Melvin Ingram are two other comps that came in for Anderson.

Alabama linebacker Will Anderson Jr. is regarded as a safe bet to succeed in the NFL after playing in Nick Saban’s well-oiled player development program :: Gary Cosby Jr./USA TODAY Sports

Now, if you want a real-life example of how the actual decision-making here could play out, if you’re not wild about the quarterbacks, look at the first three picks from 2019.

The Cardinals got Kyler Murray and that’s, well, complicated. He’s not a bust, but there’s a lot to dig through with him. Meanwhile, the 49ers and Jets are pulling Brinks trucks out of the driveway for Nick Bosa and Quinnen Williams, both of whom have become game-wreckers at important positions, but not as important as quarterback. And both teams took quarterbacks two years after that, and are contending now (the Cardinals are not).

So there’s a lot to a decision such as this one, for sure. So it’s a good thing Caserio’s got four months to mull it over.

---

From Muskrat (@GambleBug): Will the falcons go for a top 5 QB this years draft? Do they like what they have with Ridder?

Muskrat, I think they like what they have with Desmond Ridder, but probably not quite enough to dismiss the idea of taking one. Also, their situation is similar, but different, from the Texans. Right now, the Falcons are sitting at No. 7 (obviously that could fluctuate with 11 teams within a game of them—at four, five or six wins—in the standings), and that means even if they wind up really liking Alabama’s Young or Ohio State’s CJ Stroud or Kentucky’s Will Levis or Florida’s Anthony Richardson, there’s no guarantee they get the one they want.

I also think, given the way GM Terry Fontenot and coach Arthur Smith have operated through almost two years, it’d be silly to expect them to force something or to not look at multiple avenues to fill out the position. They could go get a vet, and there’ll be a lot of those available this year (we’ll get to that in a minute). They could sell out for a rookie. Regardless, I’d expect the guys in charge to use their newfound flexibility—with a clean cap and picks—in the offseason.

---

From Home Boy C’artel (@homeboycartel): Who’s LV’s opening day ‘23 QB?

Here’s the key date to pay attention to: Feb. 15. That's the third day of the waiver period (and third day after the Super Bowl), and there’s a $40 million injury guarantee on Derek Carr’s contract that vests as fully guaranteed. So, essentially, less than two months from now, we’ll know whether the Raiders intend for Carr to be their starting quarterback in 2023.

My sense would be that even the Raiders don’t know the way that decision will go yet.

And that’s not that they’re upset with the job Carr has done. To me, this would be more about their options, which creates competition for that spot. Jimmy Garoppolo is in a contract year with the 49ers and has a no-tag provision in his deal. Tom Brady is in a contract year with the Buccaneers and has a no-tag provision in his deal. Both, obviously, have background with Josh McDaniels, Dave Ziegler and the Vegas staff. Which creates a rare opportunity for a still-new coach and GM to get a starting-caliber quarterback they have experience with.

When those guys extended Carr in April, the idea was for him to be for McDaniels and Ziegler what Alex Smith was for Andy Reid and John Dorsey in Kansas City in 2013—specifically, a quarterback they could contend with and build around that would give them enough runway to find the right young quarterback, to a point where they never have to force it.

The question, to me, then, is twofold. One, are you close enough roster-wise to roll the dice on Brady (because he wouldn’t give you that runway) in what would probably be a one-off shot to compete for a championship? Or, two, do you view Garoppolo, 31, as better for that long-term, high-end placeholder role than Carr, 31, is?

With all that in mind, I’d say it’s 50-50 right now that Carr is back next year. And because I think he’ll play well against the Steelers, 49ers and Chiefs (and he’ll have to, because that’s no lay-up line of a finishing stretch), and because it’d be hard to bank on getting one of the others a full month before free agency, I’ll guess Carr is back in 2023. But I had to swallow hard to give you that guess. We’ll see what happens.

Watch NFL games live with fuboTV: Start a free trial today.

---

From Matt Ramas (@matt_ramas): Do you think the League will ever seed playoff teams by total record rather than Division winners?

Matt, I don’t. Remember, NFL schedules are far more unbalanced than in other professional sports. Just consider the facts: 

Here’s a breakdown of how each team’s opponents are set from NFL operations:

• Six games against divisional opponents—two games per team, one at home and one on the road.
• Four games against teams from a division within its conference—two games at home and two on the road.
• Four games against teams from a division in the other conference—two games at home and two on the road.
• Two games against teams from the two remaining divisions in its own conference—one game at home and one on the road. Matchups are based on division ranking from the previous season.
• The new 17th game is an additional game against a nonconference opponent from a division that the team is not scheduled to play. Matchups are based on division ranking from the previous season.

Because of that setup, I understand why the league would want to reward teams for winning their divisions—it does make sense. Now, you could argue that whoever wins the South divisions (plural) will get the benefit of simply making the playoffs when they otherwise might not have. That’s fair. But there’s also the matter of rewarding a team that has to endure a gauntlet over, say, one with two bad teams at the bottom of its division.

I also think all of this is sort of what the league bargained for in going to eight divisions with the addition of the Texans in 2002. Before that, there were five divisions with five teams, and one with six (it was six five-team divisions before the Browns reentered the NFL in 1999), which made it far less likely a .500-or-worse team would win its division. And to be fair, going to eight divisions, of course, was great for scheduling, and for balance, with this one (I think manageable) drawback.

So, anyway, yeah, I don’t think they change it.

---

From BJL1906 (@Big_John_1906): After a wild QB off-season last year (which largely hasn't worked out) what do you anticipate in the upcoming off-season in the QB market?

Let’s start with a list of quarterbacks with significant starting experience in contract years. Here goes (in alphabetical order) …

• Brady
• Jacoby Brissett
• Sam Darnold
• Taylor Heinicke
• Garoppolo
• Lamar Jackson
• Baker Mayfield
• Geno Smith

Then, you have Ryan Tannehill going into a contract year in 2023. You have Carr at an early contractual crossroads in his deal. You have Carson Wentz beyond the guaranteed money in his deal, and carrying a big number next year. What do the Jets do with Zach Wilson? How about the Packers with Jordan Love?

Some of this stuff will be stagnant, for sure. Jackson is a good bet to get franchised. The Seahawks want to keep Smith, and I believe that Smith wants to stay there. But a lot of these guys are going to make it to the market. And that’s not even taking into account the fallout if, say, the Titans or Saints go big-game hunting, or the potential for someone getting fed up and demanding a trade.

All things considered, we may not have the amount of high-profile names we did a year ago, but there should be plenty of movement.

---

Mac Jones may be under more pressure to win now than most quarterbacks his age due to Bill Belichick’s age :: David Butler II/USA TODAY Sports

From Stephen Sheehan (@StephenPSheehan): Is Mac Jones the starting quarterback for the #Patriots in 2023?

Stephen, the short answer is yes. And I understand, too, why this is a question, where for a lot of teams and fan bases it wouldn’t be. Bill Belichick turns 71 in April. The Patriots also have a good number of older players playing big roles on their roster. So if there’s a sense of urgency to win now, I definitely get it—even before we get to the fact that a couple of former Patriots quarterbacks could be available this offseason.

That said, generally, first-round quarterbacks get three years to prove themselves, leading into that fourth offseason when decisions need to be made on picking up fifth-year options and negotiating extensions. Almost every bona fide franchise quarterback drafted over the last 10 draft cycles (Jackson and Dak Prescott are the exceptions) got their long-term deal between Years 3 and 4. So, yes, a crossroads is looming for Jones, but history tells us he’ll reach it in 2024, not ’23. And I do think Jones has done plenty to get a third year starting.

I also think ownership likes Jones, which isn’t a small detail, and buoys my belief that the Krafts, when they meet with Belichick after the year, will be focused on trying to make things better around Jones, rather than trying to replace him.

So give me Jones in 2023 in Foxboro, and let’s see where it goes.

---

From Jay Euler (@jay_euler): If the Cowboys go one and done, will Big Mike be done?

I don’t think so, Jay, although I know a playoff exit like last year’s would invite the Sean Payton speculation. But, realistically, I’m not sure how you could ask for more than what you’ve gotten from Mike McCarthy in 2023. He navigated more than a month without Prescott, and had Cooper Rush playing winning football. He got the team past the loss of Tyron Smith and had first-round pick Tyler Smith ready to go at left tackle after he’d played guard through the entire spring and summer. His hire of Dan Quinn set up the defense.

Now, we’ll see what happens going forward. I’ll allow that another game-management meltdown in the playoffs might change the dynamic, especially with an older owner desperate to get his hands on another Lombardi Trophy. But I don’t think that’s coming. As long as they play well in the wild-card round—when they’ll probably be on the road at Tampa Bay—win or lose, McCarthy should be back for a fourth year in the Metroplex.

---

From John May (@juandemayo): Will Jags make the playoffs?

John, I think there’s a very real chance of it. The Jaguars play the Jets and Texans the next two weeks. The Titans play the Texans and Cowboys. So long as the Jags stay even with Tennessee over the next two weeks—so long as both teams beat the Texans, it’ll come down to either the Jags beating the Jets Thursday or the Titans losing to the Cowboys next Thursday—then their game on Jan. 8 will be for the AFC South title.

I think we get there, with that game being for the South’s ticket to the dance. And the Jags beat the Titans soundly 10 days ago. So I’ll say, yes, Jacksonville does it.

---

From Mike (@MrMike410): Trade for Devante Adams…. Josh will take Mac, Bourne and picks. Possible?

Who’s playing quarterback for the Patriots then?

---

From Pablo Toro (@pablotoro623): Are the Commanders going to keep Wentz and Heinicke or do you see them exploring another trade this offseason to get their QB?

Pablo, I think the Commanders will go into the 2023 offseason same as they went into the ’22 and even ’21 offseasons, which is with their radar up for a quarterback. Two years ago, they offered first- and third-round picks for Matthew Stafford, but Stafford didn’t want to go there. They looked into Russell Wilson in ’22, and got the same answer back (Deshaun Watson was a non-starter for them because of the issues the Washington organization has had).

So I think knowing that Taylor Heinicke is a nice player who’s not the long-term answer, and Wentz isn’t that guy, either, puts them back in the mix again, for the third consecutive year. What’s different this time around? I think the team is better. The line’s improved. The quarterback will have Terry McLaurin, Jahan Dotson and Brian Robinson Jr. around him. And they’re still in D.C. All of which, I think, makes it more likely a star QB finds them appealing.