(03-29-2021, 02:43 PM)AQIndianHill Wrote: It's one guys rankings,  The majority, like 95% of them, have sewell top 5 

(03-29-2021, 09:26 PM)Beaker Wrote: Just goes to show there's not a consensus on if he is really that good.

(03-29-2021, 09:26 PM)Beaker Wrote: Just goes to show there's not a consensus on if he is really that good.

(03-29-2021, 09:33 PM)AQIndianHill Wrote: OH yeah, the consensus.  That is huge

Ill stick w the experts

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2021/insider/story/_/id/30867941/rankings-nfl-draft-2021-top-25-prospects-best-position-mel-kiper-new-big-board

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2021/insider/story/_/id/30918379/nfl-draft-2021-rankings-todd-mcshay-updated-top-32-prospects-class-including-pass-rush-risers

But hey, they better panic and take a WR because you found a guy (1 in like 50) who says so 

(03-29-2021, 08:19 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Like who? I haven’t seen anyone say it’d be a bad pick. I know there’s guy’s like Racer who is pushing hard for Chase or impactplaya for Pitts, but again, I think them being “pissed” is a stretch. Anyone should be able to get behind taking Sewell.

(03-29-2021, 10:34 PM)Whatever Wrote: Sewell, Chase, and Pitts would all be great picks for the Bengals.  They're all great prospects and they can all help the Bengals in different ways.  The things that drive me nuts are people unfairly tearing down any of the three to push their guy, the people that are locked into a position group and think any pick outside of that position group is a waste, or the people that make completely illogical arguments with nothing to back them up that behave like something is fact just because it's their opinion.

Reality is, I've seen more people drama queening on here about not taking OL in the first than not taking Chase or Pitts in the first.  Those people then assume that just because they are OL or bust, other people are WR/TE or bust when they aren't.

(03-29-2021, 09:31 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: You could argue that Darrisaw, Slater, Eichenberg, Cosmi are just as good Tackles right off the bat and less raw...

(03-29-2021, 10:34 PM)Whatever Wrote: Sewell, Chase, and Pitts would all be great picks for the Bengals.  They're all great prospects and they can all help the Bengals in different ways.  The things that drive me nuts are people unfairly tearing down any of the three to push their guy, the people that are locked into a position group and think any pick outside of that position group is a waste, or the people that make completely illogical arguments with nothing to back them up that behave like something is fact just because it's their opinion.

Reality is, I've seen more people drama queening on here about not taking OL in the first than not taking Chase or Pitts in the first.  Those people then assume that just because they are OL or bust, other people are WR/TE or bust when they aren't.

(03-29-2021, 10:41 PM)jason Wrote: What about your boy from USC? I'm coming around...  I don't know that I want any of those guys at 5 though. I'm also lyin' if the Oregon thing doesn't make me pause a lil with Sewell.

(03-29-2021, 09:26 PM)Beaker Wrote: Just goes to show there's not a consensus on if he is really that good.

(03-29-2021, 10:30 AM)AQIndianHill Wrote: 1 Sewell
2 best WR on board

Then defense/Og/te

(03-29-2021, 10:52 PM)Whatever Wrote: I've said before that Sewell has Jonathan Ogden type potential.  He has technique issues that need cleaned up, which combined with work ethic concerns may keep him from realizing that potential.  I think there's a slim chance he outright busts, but there's a decent chance he's an Andre Smith type that's a solid starter, but not the Munoz/Willie/Whit people are hoping for.

Slater is a much more finished product and has great technique, which causes some to have him higher.  But Slater has size/length issues and is nearly topped out already, while Sewell has ridiculous upside. Some people will rate the more polished guy higher because that's their preference, while others will prioritize upside more.  I know one of the scouting services I look at that has Slater higher also has Smith over Chase because he's more polished as a route runner, but we're comparing Smith as a senior to Chase as a sophomore.

(03-29-2021, 01:12 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: And Chase isn't the only WR.

At least if they were passing on the best OL in the draft for Pitts they'd be getting a unique talent. 

This is a bad look if the best OL is on the board and they pass. Especially when they go DE in round 2.

(03-29-2021, 10:53 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I'd prefer OG/TE/D

(03-29-2021, 10:46 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: A few people are spazzing out over the thought of not taking Sewell at 5.

Taking players like Chase/Pitts does not mean they can't get quality T/G/C in the 2nd and even 3rd round.

There's some decent WRs in those drafts rounds as well but not really complete impact players.  

Either way we should be fine as long as the team doesn't do some Drew Sample type stuff.

(03-29-2021, 11:06 PM)Whatever Wrote: I love Sewell's upside and would most likely take him at 5, but honestly, the Day 2 and 3 WR group does not impress me that much and a lot of the guys that could step in and produce immediately project more to the slot when we need an outside WR.  I mean, I see Dyami Brown get thrown around a lot, but the guy has 12 drops the last two years.  Marshall is really the only guy I'm seeing WR1 potential in out of that group.  I'm a lot more confident that we can get a good OL prospect in 2 than a WR.  Unless you get Sewell/Marshall, you probably make out better going Chase/OL.  This OL class is so stacked that a lot of the Rd 2 guys would slide into the 1st in a typical year.

(03-29-2021, 02:31 PM)Beaker Wrote: https://www.nfl.com/news/daniel-jeremiah-s-top-50-2021-nfl-draft-prospect-rankings-3-0

(03-29-2021, 10:55 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: If people are expecting Sewell to just come in here and be a Munoz they will be mistaken that is for sure.

(03-29-2021, 04:10 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: Why does everyone keep saying that?

His line last season wasn't very good. I mentioned in another thread, his awesome O-line in Dallas, had 4 1st rounders on it. Is he an upgrade over Turner, absolutely. But, he isn't some magical O-line whisperer that makes bad players good.

Stud O-lineman in the 2nd? After the top three Sewell, Slater and possibly Darrisaw there are good O-lineman, but not near the talent and ability of the top 3.

The name I hear a lot around here is Leatherwood:

Negatives: Must improve his overall strength at the point. Rarely finishes blocks. Does not always play with a nasty attitude.

Senior Bowl Performance

Alex Leatherwood was one of the higher-rated players at the 2021 Reese’s Senior Bowl. However, he wasn’t as consistent as his high billing demanded. Leatherwood had some good reps, courtesy of his overwhelming length and functional power. That said, he struggled to deal with quick rushers around the edge at times, and his one-on-one losses might have exposed a lack of elite raw power. Leatherwood’s power is more a product of his length, which serves as an effective conduit. That said, he can still get stronger.

Leatherwood is still a solid prospect with a relatively high range, but the Senior Bowl helped quantify his limitations, and strengthened the calls to move him to guard.

That is a huge drop-off from the top 3, I'm so tired of having to settle for guys on the line with "limitations" when you have the chance to take a guy that has such a high ceiling in Sewell or the versatile and finished product of Slater.