Who HOUshould take — each prospect's model grade, weighted up where the roster is thin, so highly graded players at positions HOU needs rise to the top.
| Rank↑ | Player | Fit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Trevor Goosbyrank#3$12M OTBlue Chip· Texas· model #3· critical need | 0.92 |
| 2 | Jordan Seatonrank#5$10M OTBlue Chip· LSU· model #5· critical need | 0.91 |
| 3 | Colin Simmonsrank#4$11M EDGEBlue Chip· Texas· model #4· critical need | 0.85 |
| 4 | Jeremiah Smithrank#1$14M WRBlue Chip· Ohio State· model #1 | 0.81 |
| 5 | Cayden Greenrank#13$7M OT1st Round· Missouri· model #13· critical need | 0.81 |
| 6 | William Echolesrank#9$8M DL1st Round· Ole Miss· model #9· critical need | 0.80 |
| 7 | OT1st Round· Iowa· model #16· critical need | 0.78 |
| 8 | Cam Colemanrank#6$9M WRBlue Chip· Texas· model #6 | 0.78 |
| 9 | Kyngstonn Viliamu-Asarank#12$7M LB1st Round· Notre Dame· model #12· critical need | 0.78 |
| 10 | G1st Round· Ohio State· model #20· critical need | 0.77 |
| 11 | Dante Moorerank#7 QB1st Round· Oregon· model #7 | 0.76 |
| 12 | Leonard Moorerank#2$13M CBBlue Chip· Notre Dame· model #2 | 0.76 |
| 13 | Ryan Williamsrank#10$8M WR1st Round· Alabama· model #10 | 0.74 |
| 14 | KJ Boldenrank#8$8M S1st Round· Georgia· model #8 | 0.73 |
| 15 | Arch Manningrank#11 QB1st Round· Texas· model #11 | 0.72 |
| 16 | DL1st Round· Iowa· model #18· critical need | 0.71 |
| 17 | David Stonerank#19$5M DL1st Round· Oklahoma· model #19· critical need | 0.71 |
| 18 | Dylan Stewartrank#24$4M EDGE1st Round· South Carolina· model #24· critical need | 0.71 |
| 19 | A'Mauri Washingtonrank#27$4M DL1st Round· Oregon· model #27· critical need | 0.69 |
| 20 | Adam Trickrank#30$4M LB1st Round· Texas Tech· model #30· critical need | 0.67 |
| 21 | Kewan Lacyrank#17$5M RB1st Round· Ole Miss· model #17 | 0.66 |
| 22 | Quincy Rhodes Jr.rank#31$4M DL1st Round· Arkansas· model #31· critical need | 0.66 |
| 23 | Julian Sayinrank#14 QB1st Round· Ohio State· model #14 | 0.66 |
| 24 | Sammy Brownrank#34$4M LBDay 2· Clemson· model #34· critical need | 0.65 |
| 25 | Rasheem Bilesrank#15$6M ATH1st Round· Texas· model #15 | 0.65 |
| 26 | GDay 2· Ohio State· model #56· critical need | 0.65 |
| 27 | Jamari Johnsonrank#21$5M ATH1st Round· Oregon· model #21 | 0.64 |
| 28 | Jadan Baughrank#23$4M ATH1st Round· Florida· model #23 | 0.63 |
| 29 | GDay 2· Oregon· model #64· critical need | 0.63 |
| 30 | Ethan Wesloskirank#40$3M LBDay 2· Oklahoma State· model #40· critical need | 0.63 |
| 31 | OTDay 2· Miami· model #67· critical need | 0.63 |
| 32 | OTDay 2· SMU· model #70· critical need | 0.62 |
| 33 | GDay 2· South Carolina· model #72· critical need | 0.62 |
| 34 | LBDay 2· Penn State· model #42· critical need | 0.62 |
| 35 | Ryan Wingorank#28$4M WR1st Round· Texas· model #28 | 0.62 |
| 36 | OTDay 2· Texas· model #83· critical need | 0.62 |
| 37 | S1st Round· Oregon· model #22 | 0.61 |
| 38 | LBDay 2· Georgia· model #48· critical need | 0.60 |
| 39 | LaNorris Sellersrank#29 QB1st Round· South Carolina· model #29 | 0.60 |
| 40 | Boubacar Traorerank#50$2M DLDay 2· Notre Dame· model #50· critical need | 0.60 |
| 41 | Nate Frazierrank#33$4M RBDay 2· Georgia· model #33 | 0.60 |
| 42 | LBDay 2· Ole Miss· model #51· critical need | 0.60 |
| 43 | Damon Wilson IIrank#53$2M EDGEDay 2· Miami· model #53· critical need | 0.59 |
| 44 | Maverick Baranowskirank#55$2M LBDay 2· Minnesota· model #55· critical need | 0.59 |
| 45 | WRDay 2· Arizona State· model #35 | 0.59 |
| 46 | CB1st Round· Miami· model #25 | 0.59 |
| 47 | Nick Marshrank#36$4M WRDay 2· Indiana· model #36 | 0.59 |
| 48 | CB1st Round· Illinois· model #26 | 0.59 |
| 49 | Will Heldtrank#58$2M EDGEDay 2· Clemson· model #58· critical need | 0.58 |
| 50 | DLDay 2· Michigan State· model #61· critical need | 0.58 |
The house mock sends Houston Damon Wilson at 21 and a quarterback at 53 — not a single blocker. That's a strange script for a team with offensive line as a top need, especially with Trevor Lauck sitting 16th on the model, 60th in the room, a 44-spot gap. Kade Pieper's split is almost as wide, the room even colder on him than on Lauck. If Houston's board actually mirrors this model, the Wilson pick reads less like a plan than a placeholder.
Written by our models from the live board; every name and number checked