Extra Points
News and commentary from around the Web

Sources Believe Watson Wants Out of Houston

We usually wait until a move actually happens to stick up an XP, but we might as well have a discussion about the biggest news in the NFL outside of the playoffs. A number of reports state that Deshaun Watson wants to force his way out of Houston, upset about the front office and the process in hiring GM Nick Cesario and a new head coach. Sources have told ESPN that the Texans have had discussions about possible trade partners. Watson has a no-trade clause so he has some control over where he is traded.

View Full Article


78 comments, Last at 25 Jan 2021, 8:13am

3 If the Texans can get a top…

If the Texans can get a top 10 pick in this draft that has possibly 5 good QBs in it as part of a trade package that has multiple high picks, they should really consider taking it.  It's hard to feel good about a guy being your franchise QB if he's whining on Twitter for not getting to hire the front office himself.  And how much worse can the Texans be without Watson when theyre losing 12 games this season with him haha!

5 And

for not taking his HC/GM suggestions despite being told they were going to. 

And he hasn't really been whining on twitter fwiw lol. Nothing but rumors right now.

10 Eh.

If that's what gets you going, I'd suggest (not) checking what Yannick Ngakoue did last year because that's the tamest one can be imo 

14 Um...he largely kept it in…

Um...he largely kept it in house throughout the 2020 season.  If you recall, the owner gave BOB all the personnel power, let him run the draft and free agency, let him trade Hopkins and take on Johnson's contract, let him then turn around and trade a valuable pick for Cooks to fill the void left by Hopkins's departure, and then fired him 4 games into year after a slow start against a very tough schedule even though there wasn't much of a training camp and there were zero preseason games.  The owner then handed personnel power over to a former team chaplin who has zero experience in player personnel.  Given the shambolic GM and coach hiring process so far, things have only gotten worse since the end of the year.

The fact that things didn't hit the fan in like week 8 is a minor miracle actually.

28 I’d agree with this. Such…

I’d agree with this. Such was the mismanagement, I’m impressed that Watson is only now is leaking his discontent. His performance this season in such wretched circumstances speaks well of his professionalism.

54 Twitter?

The article says "Sources say..."

Presumably if there were a Tweet, we'd have a link to it.  Right?

I guess I'll "disagree" with your false characterization of the situation.  I'm not seeing a tweet attacking the Texans.




13 Sure, I hope the Texans…

Sure, I hope the Texans trade Watson to the Jets for their number 2 pick... and only the number 2 pick.  Because those possibly 5 good quarterbacks probably translates to 2 to 3.  Maybe.  2018 had 5 guys, who were hyped more than anyone in this draft other than Lawrence... and we ended up with 3 guys being solid.  Even then, there are comments on the playoff threads about not paying Lamar Jackson.  As far as the 5 guys, I'm not sure about any of them, even Lawrence.  Zac Wilson's toughest game this year was Coastal Carolina, Mac Jones looks great throwing for Alabama, but so did Greg McElroy, Justin Fields has started a total of 22 games, 1 more than Mark Sanchez did.  Kyle Trask stunk it up in his bowl game without his playmakers, who will get drafted before him.  Would have been nice if Bowles/MacCagnan had just drafted Watson instead of some All-Pro safety who really whines on twitter....

16 RE: games started

If that's a guys biggest flaw...but that old start 3 years adage is pretty out of date. Rodgers started like a max of 25, think it was actually like 21 outside of community college. Kyler Murray, less. Brady like 23. Seniority still plays apart in coaches decisions, like Kirby thinking Fields was just going to wait for his shot on the bench before Fromm declared. 

19 You are new around here. …

In reply to by ImNewAroundThe…

You are new around here.  Read one of the Qbase articles, they usually cover why games started is important.  To sum up, it gives scouts a chance to find flaws so guys don't get overdrafted.  Cardale Jones and Matt Barkley are examples of quarterback prospects who were thought to be amazing until their last year in college, and then the flaws showed up.  By the way, using Brady as an example is just absurd.  He's an anomaly; you almost never get a decent quarterback from the late rounds, much less the GOAT.

21 I understand why

But starting 3 years as Walsh(?) said isn't really a thing anymore. Of course you'd want them to start (and finish) 45 games but that's not realistic.

Using Brady is absurd? I was just pointing out a QB that had a low amount of starts. I guess my point is starts should essentially be a non issue with the way QBs are developed and given everything at an early age nowadays. No one should think Fromm was a better prospect than Fields. Or Kyle Allen over Kyler Murrary. Etc. Gotta work with what you're given. It'd be like doubling down on Darnold now because he has started enough, even though one should be able to tell if he'll be it or not. 

Dropbacks are probably better than starts though if you want some type of total statistic. 

22 Oh, starts shouldn't be…

In reply to by ImNewAroundThe…

Oh, starts shouldn't be everything.  If somebody has 45 starts but stinks it shouldn't matter.  But not starting for more than two years adds a lot of doubt or risk to the pick.  I'm not saying Fields will definitely bust, or even probably, but he's nowhere close to a sure thing.  There's also some decision making issues, if you check out his game against Indiana (the Northwestern tape isn't as bad as the stats are, though).  I might add Lawrence and Wilson started 40 and 30 games respectively.

Watson now is a lot more certain than any of these guys, which is why Houston should want more than just the Jets pick in a trade.

23 Did Lawrence and Fields stock change?

I dont think so as they were the consesus top guys and remain so, so I don't think it'd matter so much if they had even opted out (it's not mattering for Jamarr Chase, Micah Parsons, Penei Sewell, etc). 

Wilson went from day 3 to top 3 based solely on this year's 12 games. His other 18 starts are completely forgotten as if they didn't even exist. Similar to Burrow. First 13 starts were day 3 worthy. Last 15 in his 5th year in college (so 28 total in 5 years) were all that really mattered in the NFL eyes. We see the same thing happening with Josh Allen right now. Comically bad his first 27 in the NFL. Last 18 and he's a franchise QB apparently. 

More certainty is nice but it seems like opinions are staked pretty early/quickly (based mostly on tools).

I.E.Cardale had 269 pass attempts and 153 rushes. Fields has 423 completions and 260 rush attempts. Cardale was never really seen as a good prospect. I also don't think Barkley (whos unbelievably still in the league) was seen as anything special after his junior year iirc, either.

24 Lawrence is probably 1, and…

Lawrence is probably 1, and Fields 2 as far as most teams go right now.  If Lawrence had opted out, he'd probably still be the first pick.  Not so sure about Fields.

The thing about Burrow is his last 15 starts were the best anyone ever had.  Just absurd.  I had my doubts about him in the draft, to be honest.  Judging by his rookie year (until the injury) I was massively wrong.

More certainty is nice but it seems like opinions are staked pretty early/quickly (based mostly on tools).

I think the opposite is true; there's a lot of recency bias.  Guys like Gabbert get drafted early because they lit up their bowl game, and that's a mistake.  It's nice to see an arc of improvement (with Burrows and Wilson), but the old tape can tell you where they improved.  It's also important to watch how Wilson did against Washington, since he didn't play Power 5 teams this past year, and he didn't do all that great against them (kind of like Fields against Northwestern).

One last thing; I'm not a believer in Josh Allen.  He's been great this year, but now he has great weapons.  If he loses them, we'll see how he does.  I've seen enough Jets quarterbacks who lit the league on fire (1985 Ken O'Brien, 1998 Testaverde, 2002 Pennington) only to watch them come down to earth again.

25 I have a good feeling Fields would've remained

in the 1st at least. With only Wilson surpassing (and he's slowly doing that despite what Fields did to Clemson). Doubt people would drop him...how many spots? Maaaaaybe a couple but even then, who's overtaking him? Even the consensus QB3 entering the season, Trey Lance is still a top 4 QB and remains a 1st rounder. And that's after starting 1 game this past season (looking meh) and only 16 the season before, totaling 17. And dudes played in only a total of 19 games. At that was at the FCS level. And he's still likely going top 19 too! With only 318 pass attempts and 192 rush attempts that has to be almost purely on tools and that's probably fine when you're QB is Nick Folesish. 

For example PFFs big board before the season was:

  1. Lawrence (correction from earlier, 36 starts, 40 GP)
  2. Fields
  3. Sewell
  4. Chase
  5. Parsons

Now (and at midseason) it's:

  1. Lawrence (10 games this season)
  2. Wilson (12)
  3. Fields (8)
  4. Sewell (0)
  5. Chase (0)
  6. Parsons (0)

This is after Mac Jones, Trask, Devonta Smith, Najee Harris, etc had their seasons. Dont really think Fields (despite the criticisms this year) would have changed too much on the consensus big board though had he opted out. 

Gabbert may have been the beneficiary of something else (along with significantly improving his comp% every year) as well but it feels like it's almost a bad idea be too good, too fast. Want that arc as you say. And slowly improve yourself, instead of losing out due to seniority, then playing really well and then, still play well but not as well. Then again Lawrence never really progressed. 

39 We are arguing about two…

We are arguing about two different things.  I don't care where they go in the draft (ok, maybe a little, I wouldn't mind if Jacksonville passes on Lawrence since I'm a Jets fan), but how they do in the NFL.  Looking back at the 2018 draft, it's a crapshoot.  You can make an educated guess at who will succeed (Mayfield, according to Qbase) and fail (Josh Allen, according to almost everyone) and still be partially wrong, or massively wrong in the case of Allen.  The two quarterbacks most hyped in that class a year earlier, much like Fields and Lawrence, were Darnold and Rosen.  Man, did that not work out!

41 Are we?

I was talking about "starts" of which Rosen (taking over for 3 year starter Brett Hundley, who is nothing in the NFL) started like 30 games. Darnold started 24. Not sure what the cut off is. Josh Allen 20 (26 if we're counting community). Lamar 34. Baker 44. Cam 14. Eh, seems random. 

Scouting is about traits though so just show me enough (and 22 starts is plenty enough for Fields who just declared). Show me that efficiency over beating out a guy with less eligibility left (because the coaches seem to like to rock with those that "know the system" more, banking on that backup being content on the bench). If starts are the biggest knock on Fields...that's a pretty great prospect (and he is). 

38 Eh, semantics

He was below average at everything but INT%. Overall, nothing indicated he'd turn around like this, this quickly. 

42 Below average is not the…

In reply to by ImNewAroundThe…

Below average is not the same as "comically bad."  The latter would be something like Nathan Peterman's performances or Jared Goff in 2016.


Also, his 2019 play was a considerable improvement over his 2018 performance.  His TD to Int ratio went from 10-12 to 20-9, he had 500 more DYAR in 2019 than 2018, his QB rating improved by 20 points, his completion percentage improved by 6 points, and his int percentage was nearly halved.  He also nearly doubled his AV on PFR and led 5 game winning drives to lead Buffalo into the playoffs.  He had some bad plays in the second half of the playoff game, but he managed to shake them off and send the game to overtime when given one last chance at the end of regulation, and almost drove his team to a game winning FG in overtime before a dubious penalty on the rookie right tackle killed the drive.  

43 Again, semantics.

+500 DYAR...but still negative.

IDC, his overall career looked bad a year ago. Debate how you wanna define comically bad but IDC anymore. I'll let you have it. 

73 Even then, I wouldn't say…

Even then, I wouldn't say Jared Goff was "comically bad."  For that to be true, there'd have to be something funny about it, no?  I can't recall myself laughing at Goff in 2016, just sneering. 

Peterman, I'm unfamiliar with.  Was he comically bad, or just horrifically bad?  Sadly, there are no stats that quantify the humorousness of a player's performance, only the badness. 

Now Mark Sanchez, there was a guy who was comically bad.  Butt fumble, anyone? 

48 It's not absurd to point out…

In reply to by ImNewAroundThe…

It's not absurd to point out that Brady had a low amount of starts. It is absurd to suggest that a guy who was drafted in the 6th round (not just because of his low amount of starts!) and was successful somehow proves that another guy with a low amount of starts should be drafted high in the 1st round. The point is that guys with few starts are harder to scout, and therefore riskier as high picks.

65 I get that

But do you really need to see more from Fields to know more? Or would yall just complain that he's older next season and/or downgrade him if he got seriously hurt this past year? If he's good, he's good and he's good.

IDK what the arbitrary cutoff is, but 22 starts is plenty for Fields and shouldn't be used against when...scouting. Total dropbacks is probably far better anyway. Mark Sanchez had a combined 487 pass attempts + 70 rush attempts = 557 dropbacks. Fields has had 618 pass attempts alone + 260 rushes = 878 dropbacks. And he gained more per each attempt, even when passing is adjusted for INT/TD. That's plenty nowadays. I'm not passing on a guy like him for lack of starts. If you can't tell, I'd suggest looking at his non starts. He's got the traits.

9 So hypothetically (assuming…

So hypothetically (assuming a non-exclusive franchise tag), prescott could be had for 2 1s and enough money (assume 40 million per).  Watson is gonna cost that much money, but a trade would come with 20 million paid by houston.

So I guess the "normal" value would be 2 1s and a 2.  Big guess, but that's my spot.  Any deal for more than that is a good haul, and less a bad haul.  Obviously if he waits longer, it will get lower offers.

For this broncos fan, I thought the first thing our new gm should have done was call houston and make an offer for him, and I still would love him too end up a bronco, and I could see plenty of reasons why he might be happy in Denver (the offense sucked hard, but the o line is all signed for two years and mostly was pretty great, and the offensive skill position players are all young and promising). 

There definitely will be less opportunity to move for him because of the ridiculously tight cap situations many teams will be in for 2021.  The broncos, Patriots, colts, and football team could ask fit him somewhat easily, (or the jaguars or jets, though I guess I assume they will want to spend draft picks on rookie qbs).

49 If I was Caserio, I would…

If I was Caserio, I would not even answer the phone to an offer of four likely late first rounders. Every Colts pick in the first four rounds for the next six years, and maybe it starts to be worth considering.

12 1994 Houston Oilers had one…

1994 Houston Oilers had one of the most turbulent seasons in nfl history. Does the 2020 Texans match or exceed that one? Coach fired, QB unhappy and expected to be gone, key defensive player unhappy and may be gone, owner and GM both terrible, etc.

30 I think you're thinking of…

I think you're thinking of the 1993 Oilers. That was the year of baby-gate, Jeff Alm's suicide, the 1-4 start and 11-0 finish before  a playoff implosion, Warren Moon getting benched, Buddy Ryan vs Kevin Gilbride, Gary Brown coming from nowhere to put up over 1000 yards on less than 200 carries (the first player to ever do that) and a constant backdrop of "win the super bowl or I'll blow up the team" from their dipshit owner, it was a crazy season.

33 1993 was also the last year…

1993 was also the last year of no salary cap, and IIRC correctly, the Oilers had the most expensive roster in the league, and were projected to be way over the cap in ‘94.  A tear down was coming, no matter what.  

However, the owner making threats like that in public and putting unneeded pressure on an already volatile situation was not great.  But that’s just how Bud Adams rolled.

15 If I am the Texans, I am not…

If I am the Texans, I am not trading Watson. You sift for years on draft picks hoping one turns into someone as good as him. 

I would just say no. He's not going to hold out, that's losing 30 million dollars. And even after the 4 years are up, you can franchise him at least one more year. That's 5 years down the road. I would just try to patch things up because unless a team is offering a decade worth of first rounders, I would never make this trade. 

17 Situation like the jags

At what point does it become a situation like the jags a few years back when the nflpa tells free agents to not sign there?

The nflpa should really tell players to honor their contracts (and how to sign smarter contracts) but they in turn end up as a lobbying agency for stars that garner press.

If the Texans hold onto Watson's rights I think the fanbase will turn on the team (although that may happen when they cut Watt to get under the cap). As much as teams should function in a certain way, it's an entertainment industry and fans don't want to follow bad teams (although there will be diehards that do).

I get where you're coming from but I also don't think it would go down as smoothly at all. The last year has been turbulent and still wouldn't hold a candle to the drama that would unfold if they held onto watson (if rumors are true)

20 The NFLPA should make…

The NFLPA should make players honor their contracts even though those contracts aren't guaranteed and owners - many of whom inherited their positions for no reason other than birth - have traditionally not shown much loyalty to players?  Interesting viewpoint... 

Also the NFLPA is a labor union.  Why wouldn't you expect it to advance the interests of its membership?

29 The NFLPA should encourage…

The NFLPA should encourage their players to show up and work to the best of their abilities, and wait until appropriate moments (i.e. after the season) to voice any discontent. Pretty much exactly as Watson has done. 

75 Why would a labor union…

Why would a labor union encourage its members to wait until a time more suitable to an owner (i.e., after the season) to voice their discontent? That would be an insane stance, asking workers to kneecap their own wage negotiations like that.

Then again, this is the NFLPA we're talking about, the most toothless union in all of sports. And it's exactly this kind of owner bootlicking attitude among fans that gives management the space it needs to ensure that it remains toothless.

76 I believe that labor…

I believe that labor negotiations are best done, at least initially, in good faith. Amongst other reasons, immediately going for the nuclear option is a sure fire way of losing support amongst team-mates and fans. (There are of course scenarios where it might be appropriate to immediately go nuclear, but I don't think they broadly apply to NFL players, and probably not Watson, who knew the team management context long before the start of the season; indeed when he signed his new contract. Now that the season is done, and he has performed well and behaved professionally, he is in a stronger position to negotiate IMO)

18 As we saw with Trent…

As we saw with Trent Williams in Washington, the player can sit out all offseason activities, miss the beginning of the year, and just show up long enough during the regular season to accrue service time against his pension.  Watson would still make $10M+ in that scenario.  While he sits, the team has to deal with the fallout of its best player - a QB nonetheless - being unavailable.  It won't help the on field product, it won't help curry favor with the fans, and it certainly won't be good for ticket sales.  From Houston's perspective, I don't know how anyone aside from the owner survives that mess, including the new GM.

The best thing to do is trade him before the draft.  Luckily, there are number of teams drafting in the top 10 this year who need a QB and, more importantly, play in markets that Watson would go to.

27 You are probably correct,…

You are probably correct, but I’m quite sure the Texans leadership can convince themselves how brilliantly they will be able to spend their newly acquired bevvy of draft picks. Some fans may even be convinced; it seems to be the way these days that many are focussed more on the upcoming draft than caring about what is actually happening on the field. 

50 Every player has a price,…

Every player has a price, but I would be looking for something truly outrageous to even consider it. The kinds of "two firsts and a mediocre player" offers being mooted are frankly insulting. Watson is by my reckoning the second most valuable asset in the league. Most drafts do not contain a comparably valuable player, and you are unlikely to select said player even if they do.

53 The mooted offers are low…

The mooted offers are low because the opportunity cost isn't Deshaun Watson, it's Deshaun Watson Making the Minimum Effort to Accrue a League Year.

The Texans are fucked and teams know that.

62 Not sure I understand you…

Not sure I understand you. Even if you assume that the Texans have absolutely no choice but to trade him, unless Watson will only accept a trade to one team, there will be multiple teams bidding against each other. (And if Watson is as unhappy as it appears, it seems like the list of teams he WOULDN'T agree to be traded to would be much smaller than the list he'd accept).

64 He has a no trade clause and…

He has a no trade clause and the ability to withhold his labor for a large chunk of the season.  Both factors make this less of a bidding war since all Watson has to do is tell a team that they aren't on his list.  Also presumably, the Texans will want to be able to fill their open QB1 position with their trade assets.  The Texans also need better players at multiple positions, so the draft picks will be helpful.  That puts teams with high draft picks (Atlanta, Denver), reasonable QB replacements that could be had in trade (LAR since McVay just put Goff on the market), or both (Miami, NYJ, Philly, Detroit, Dallas, Carolina) in play.

I think that Houston will get to pick the QB they want from a team on Watson's list (rookie or veteran) and a bunch of draft picks.  The overall return will be higher but not significantly more than what Denver got for Cutler.

66 While I agree with a lot of…

While I agree with a lot of your post, I will point out that if the cap goes to 175 million it is very hard for some of those teams to afford Watson.  Atlanta, Rams, Philly would be very tough to fit him, and would include making a lot of long-term roster sacrifices.  Carolina and Detroit are both doable, but would require big sacrifices.

I am a broncos fan so I know their roster quite well, and even they would need to make some sacrifices (They could afford to sign him, resign simmons and then keep 1 out of Miller, KJack, Bouye, Casey without making major long-term sacrifices - not the end of the world and all 4 players are older but those are still all talented players.  Other teams I am mostly just looking at cap space and how much money they can save from cutting obvious dead weight so I could be wrong, but somewhat the market will be constrained by his contract which is a top of the market one (and worth it, but still getting the money to make sense will functionally eliminate a lot of teams).  This is something that I think would keep his market lower if he decided to force his way out of town and why teams wouldn't need to send insane amounts of picks.

70 All of what you said is true…

All of what you said is true, but if there are 2 teams that he would accept a trade to that meet Houston's criteria, I don't see why the return would be significantly lower than if there are 4-5 teams bidding. As long as there is at least one competing offer to beat, no team can really low-ball.

I know we're basically in a different era of the NFL at this point, but it seems crazy to think that Houston wouldn't get significantly more for Watson than Denver got for Cutler. Although maybe my opinion of Cutler is colored by what he turned out to be rather than how he was viewed at the time of the trade.

It would be really interesting to see a team with a pretty good QB, who isn't at the very end of his career, pull off a trade that is closer to player-for-player. Just because you see that so rarely in the NFL.

72 I think that there are a lot…

I think that there are a lot similarities with the Cutler.  Cutler was due for a new big money contract and didn't want to play for McDaniels under any circumstance.  That hurt Denver's leverage since the opportunity cost was Cutler refusing to suit up during the year.  Watson already has his big money contract and, based on current indications, seems like he won't be suiting up for Houston.  As a new coach who got total roster control, McDaniels had every incentive to be competitive immediately, so he needed a new QB that he felt he could win with in addition to draft capital.  The new HC and GM in Houston have the same incentives.  That makes them more motivated to do a deal now versus waiting until week 4 of the regular season when Watson stays away from the team.  All waiting does is reduce their leverage. 

Honestly, given the state of the Houston roster and draft situation, I think a deal makes sense since they'll be able to get an above avg QB plus picks in return.

57 Also, isn't anyone worried…

Also, isn't anyone worried that a player whose slow processing means his legs are a vital asset takes so many hits? I I love Watson, but he seems a relatively high-risk for a high-impact injury. RGIII and Daunte Culpepper are cautionary tales here.

68 I would say no. Rodgers is a…

I would say no. Rodgers is a hunter. He's playing cat and mouse, always looking for the big play but in control. That's why he doesn't get sacked much, he knows exactly what he's doing. Watson, on the other hand, doesn't seem to be in control of the play and he gets sacked a lot. It seems to me that a guy who gets sacked is a guy who doesn't have a plan. Watson goes fishing in troubled waters and sometimes it's a big play and sometimes it's a sack.

Bottom line, Rodgers is superb at a time in his career when his legs are not what they used to be. I doubt Watson will be effective at that age... or rather, when his legs give, whenever that is.

71 Comparing Watson's passing…

Comparing Watson's passing ability to Vick's is incredibly insulting. Watson has a 104 career QB rating and just led the league in passing yards and YPA. Vick was never even close to Watson's league as a passer (except perhaps that one year with the Eagles), and Watson is certainly not as good of a runner as Vick was. There is really no reason to compare the two players.  

74 Of course Watson is the far…

Of course Watson is the far better player, but that year with the Eagles was exactly what I was referring to, as Vick learned to be a pocket passer. I was saying Watson might have a similar progression, maybe, with time.

46 Keeping it in the AFC East,…

Keeping it in the AFC East, I'd love to know what Caserio's opinion of Jarrett Stidham is.  Could the Patriots offer a package around Stidham and two #1s?  Would noted draft pick-enthusiast Bill Belichick want to do that? 

My dream offseason for the Pats is to trade for Watson, bring in A. Robinson and M. Jones, and have a professional-grade passing game again.  Then they need to draft a guard to replace Thuney, but a good one should be available with their first pick.

47 Yeah, I forgot about the…

Yeah, I forgot about the Patriots.  But a lot depends upon Watson; if he doesn't want to go to the Jets, Patriots, or Dolphins, he doesn't have to go there.  The Jets are the hard sell, but Watson is mad the Texans hired a guy from the Patriots, so I'm not sure he wants to go there either.  Unfortunately for Jets and Patriots fans, he has said some nice things about Brian Flores, and they have the number 3 pick in the draft, so the Texans would prefer the Dolphins offer to the Patriots.

52 Variant on my earlier scenario

Does Belichick like Tua?  How about a three way trade in which the Fins get the Patriots’ 1st for Tua and package it plus their 2 current firsts, and something else since the majority opinion on this board is Watson > 3 firsts, for Deshaun?

35 I'd love there to be a legit…

I'd love there to be a legit, several team, fairly-transparent, bidding war.  We almost never get to see that.  Certainly didn't with Hopkins.  

45 Prescott for Watkins? Though…

Prescott for Watkins?

Though, if anything I might think the WFT would make more sense. I can’t imagine that the Texans would trade him in the conference, but it is the Texans I guess...

51 It looks like the team's…

It looks like the team's next move is to hire Bienemy (seemingly Watson's preferred choice of coach) to placate him. The fact that Bienemy was interviewed and Watson apparently took part in the interview suggests that Caserio is not siding with Easterby in the internal power struggle as many had assumed he would.

59 From the perspective of…

From the perspective of other QB-needy teams, Watson is almost as desirable as a player could be. 25 years old and coming off a season where he was 5th in DYAR and DVOA despite playing for an absolute dumpster fire of a team. QBs like him basically never become available. I'm not sure that any QB prospect, even one considered as much a sure thing as Trevor Lawrence, is a better choice than Watson at this point (and if so, a big part of that has to be the cheap years on the rookie contract).

I don't see how you can think Watson is being unreasonable here. His organization has been as dysfunctional as can be over the past couple of seasons, they've mortgaged enough future draft picks and cap space that it would be almost impossible for even the wisest leadership to make them a contender in the next 2 years, and the continued presence of Jack Easterby is proof that McNair is the exact opposite of that. He seems to have remained professional and worked hard during the season (his production is certainly evidence of that), and it's not like he has come out and publicly torched the organization in the last couple of weeks. He'd be an idiot not to be unhappy to be playing his prime years and risking his long-term health for an organization that seems hellbent on squandering his talent.

No-trade clause aside, if Houston trades him, Miami is clearly best positioned to offer the most attractive package. Teams that have a top pick this year have a huge leg up because any halfway decent team that adds Watson is probably picking in the 20s next year and going forward; Miami can offer not only the 3rd overall pick, but also the 18th and a young prospect in Tagovailoa that would leave Houston with a reasonably good QB situation.

As a Bears fan, I don't think the team has the capital to obtain Watson nor do I think it's a sure thing he'd accept the trade, given how Ryan Pace ignored him in 2017. But I would be ecstatic if they gave up their next 3 first and second round picks as well as basically any three players on their roster to get him.

77 Now wants out

no matter the hire. 

This is what happens when you interview Josh McCown.

Also his list has expanded to the Jets along with the Dolphins. Probably waiting to officially request until he sees the coaching hire(s).