Why Not?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-10-2022, 02:58 PM)casear2727 Wrote: I have no issue upgrading CB over FS.  But CB is a huge cost vs a rookie replacement at WR3 and we still need a replacement at FS so you are adding 2 players. And both the CB & FS must be solid or we are screwed. WR3 is low risk.

You need to add a CB in either scenario.  The Bengals need to add a CB right now with both Boyd and Bates on the roster.

Quote:You're projecting replacing Boyd with someone else because you believe Bates is a higher priority.  Well, do a different projection because you already admitted CB is a higher priority than FS. You're completely inconsistent in your logic.

Again, I hate calling you names but it is so frustrating when you refuse to even try to comprehend the message.  CB is higher priority than FS but as I said 50 f-ing times Im going by our current roster.  We need to pay big for a CB that isnt here yet. We would need to replace Bates with a player that isnt here yet.  Both of these guys must be solid.  I can replace WR3 with a rookie at low cost and if he isnt great that isnt a huge loss if our oline is much improved.

And the Bengals need to add a CB that isn't here with Bates and Boyd on the roster, RIGHT NOW.

This offensive scheme is based upon 3 WRs which is why the Rams signed OBJ mid season.  Despite the Rams having a better Oline it didn't change the reliance on a WR3 to operate their style of offense.  Their WR3 is a 2nd round pick from 2020. The only WR from last years draft that fit your criteria that you think you can add to replace Boyd were 1st or 2nd round picks.  

Quote:These questions mean nothing - Im not getting rid of WR3 simply adding a less expensive, younger, faster player.
1. Why isn't the opposing defense in nickel vs 3 WRs?

2. Do only WR3s run hitches or slants? If that's true maybe the offense shouldn't be so predictable.







Last draft there were nine WRs that meet just your speed requirement of 4.3s.  Only one matched or exceeded Boyd's production as a WR3 

Again, for the 500th time, I dont care about Boyds production in an offense running half the playbook forced into dink and dunk situations due to a terrible oline in which the WR3 is a good option due to coverage by a LB.

Let me type this slowly, maybe it will help... IN MY OPINION with a much improved oline we become a better rushing offense which keeps LBs at home and provides more time for deeper route concepts geared for Chase & Higgins. We still have a WR3 and TE but without as much reliance.  This is an explosive and sustainable offense, again IN MY OPINION.

Again, I've showed data which applies to this style of offense with a better offensive line and what you claimed will happen didn't.  The reliance on the WR3 was unchanged.

Show me the data upon which your opinion is based.  Because I have provided the info to support mine. I have an open mind and am willing to change my opinion, but you haven't given me ANY information to reassess.