08-06-2021, 06:19 PM
(08-06-2021, 03:21 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: While it may seem like fun to rub it in to the portion of the fan community who believed that the Bengals OL was going to make a dramatic turnaround, simply by bringing back Frank Pollack as the OL Coach, that the Bengals should have done much more in regard to rebuilding the OL by adding higher priced, proven quality veterans. On the converse side of things, It's really rather alarming when you look at just how bad the OL is performing in training camp.
So far, Reilly Reiff, the team's only plunge into even the lower end of mid-tier OL FAs, has already pulled a hamstring, having to run down a pick6, the day before they even put the pads on. At his age, that hamstring will likely come back to nag him off and on throughout the season. Our primary backup Tackle, Fred Johnson is out for some length of time, leaving 4th round developmental project Tackle, D'Ante Smith as the only option to practice with.
Enough is enough! Joe Burrow is already looking iffy and shaky for unexplained reasons (though I suspect a perceived lack of confidence in the OL), we haven't seem much of any highlights of Joe Mixon even gashing the defense thus far in camp, which makes me suspect that the team isn't even focusing on running the ball. Someone in the organization needs to make an executive decision to go after whatever tested and experienced OL talent is still out there. Wagner may be set on retiring, but Schwartz and Okung are still on the street.
We should be signing any vet we can right now. I know its early in camp, but goodness how bad can a unit be even early in training camp? Multiple sacks, multiple false starts, a QB who is trying to come back from serious OL induced injury. We need as much depth as we can get.
Another rundown of todays practice:
[/url]@JayMorrisonATH
[url=https://twitter.com/JayMorrisonATH]
Another rough practice for Joe Burrow and the #Bengals offense. Burrow was 4 of 11 in 11s and took a pair of "sacks" on back-to-back plays.
The O-line running with the first group had 4 false starts.
