05-24-2016, 09:46 AM
I've been reading a lot about Nick Vigil. He was hyped a lot when we first drafted him and he's now being mentioned in Bengals articles and being complimented by Vontaze Burfict here:
http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/OTAs-a-GO/fbc61349-df13-4c2f-8d47-c9fca3b8d42c
And before I start, yes, the title is a little...intentionally eye catching?
I dunno. the point of the title is to compare the pre-draft ratings and the fanbase's perceptions of a player based on where they are drafted.
We have, on one hand, a guy who, according to the draft pundits, was a first round pick, guaranteed to be gone by the 2nd round. He is big, strong, fast, stout at defensive tackle. Almost the perfect nose tackle, but is a few inches too short and is a little too young and raw. Atkins proved that height doesn't have to hold a DT back and being young is rarely a bad thing, so it stands to reason that Billings could be equally successful in his role.
On the other hand, we have a player who was considered a fringe prospect by most draft pundits. While he has good instincts (something that can't be measured at a combine or pro day), he is considered to be too small, not athletic enough and generally, a mediocre LB prospect in Nick Vigil.
When Billings was drafted, the entire fan base celebrated (I truly believe every single person who calls themselves a Bengals fan loved that pick). We got a 1st or 2nd round pick in the 4th! Steal of the draft. Call it in guys, cuz we won this one! The pundits are completely right and this guy is going to be a star. The 31 teams that passed on him don't know what they're doing. Haha!
When Vigil was drafted, initially, there was a bit of confusion (mainly because Billings was still on the board at this point and people didn't get it.). Some negativity here and there, but many people were optimistic. When a report came out that Green Bay was planning on taking him with their pick coming up in the third round, people still questioned the pick here and there.
As the days went on, there were some outlets that called Vigil our best pick and others that called him a bad reach. Generally speaking, and with the assistance of players and coaches like Burfict comparing him to Luke K, the overall opinion of him in the fanbase became one unified voice. We got ANOTHER steal. The pundits don't know what they were talking about. Green Bay was going to draft him and they know what they're doing! This guy is going to be an amazing linebacker for us and all the draft pundits don't know what they're talking about!
My question is...which is it? Do you trust the draft pundits or don't you? If you do, you'd logically love the Billings pick and hate the Vigil pick. If you don't, you'd likely question why Billings dropped and you'd probably form your own opinion on Vigil, which may be a positive one (as it seems to be in the fanbase currently.)
Or, as we are all biased, is it just...we're gonna love every pick because the Bengals made them? We'll cherry pick the good and ignore the bad with just about everything the team does because we all, at our core, are hopeless optimists who want to believe we got the steal that no one else saw.
In my experience, the pundits are generally correct more often than the Bengals. Meaning, our late round picks that the pundits had rated high (such as Marvin Jones, George Iloka, AJ McCarron, Mohamed Sanu, Clint Boling, Vontaze Burfict etc) that slipped for no reason, generally, turn out better than the head scratching 'perceived reaches' that the Bengals quickly celebrate as steals (Margus Hunt, Will Clarke, Dontay Moch, Jerome Simpson, Kenny Irons etc).
If this trend continues, that means Billings will end up being a great player and Vigil will fizzle. That's not to say this formula is guaranteed. There have been 'perceived reaches' that worked out. I can't think of any, but I'm sure there are some. Likewise, there are highly rated players who dropped that haven't worked out as well (Devon Still, Orsen Charles, Brandon Ghee) but those are much more rare than the successes.
I like Vigil and I hope he plays well. We have taken productive college players that, theoretically, didn't project to the NFL well before and they have worked out. Geno Atkins fits that description pretty well, as does Andy Dalton and AJ McCarron.
But I'm getting a little confused with the amount of double speak going on in the fan base. If you trust the pundits on Billings (he'll be good), don't trust them on Vigil (he'll also be good) and love both picks, that just seems like homer-ism to me.
http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/OTAs-a-GO/fbc61349-df13-4c2f-8d47-c9fca3b8d42c
And before I start, yes, the title is a little...intentionally eye catching?
I dunno. the point of the title is to compare the pre-draft ratings and the fanbase's perceptions of a player based on where they are drafted.
We have, on one hand, a guy who, according to the draft pundits, was a first round pick, guaranteed to be gone by the 2nd round. He is big, strong, fast, stout at defensive tackle. Almost the perfect nose tackle, but is a few inches too short and is a little too young and raw. Atkins proved that height doesn't have to hold a DT back and being young is rarely a bad thing, so it stands to reason that Billings could be equally successful in his role.
On the other hand, we have a player who was considered a fringe prospect by most draft pundits. While he has good instincts (something that can't be measured at a combine or pro day), he is considered to be too small, not athletic enough and generally, a mediocre LB prospect in Nick Vigil.
When Billings was drafted, the entire fan base celebrated (I truly believe every single person who calls themselves a Bengals fan loved that pick). We got a 1st or 2nd round pick in the 4th! Steal of the draft. Call it in guys, cuz we won this one! The pundits are completely right and this guy is going to be a star. The 31 teams that passed on him don't know what they're doing. Haha!
When Vigil was drafted, initially, there was a bit of confusion (mainly because Billings was still on the board at this point and people didn't get it.). Some negativity here and there, but many people were optimistic. When a report came out that Green Bay was planning on taking him with their pick coming up in the third round, people still questioned the pick here and there.
As the days went on, there were some outlets that called Vigil our best pick and others that called him a bad reach. Generally speaking, and with the assistance of players and coaches like Burfict comparing him to Luke K, the overall opinion of him in the fanbase became one unified voice. We got ANOTHER steal. The pundits don't know what they were talking about. Green Bay was going to draft him and they know what they're doing! This guy is going to be an amazing linebacker for us and all the draft pundits don't know what they're talking about!
My question is...which is it? Do you trust the draft pundits or don't you? If you do, you'd logically love the Billings pick and hate the Vigil pick. If you don't, you'd likely question why Billings dropped and you'd probably form your own opinion on Vigil, which may be a positive one (as it seems to be in the fanbase currently.)
Or, as we are all biased, is it just...we're gonna love every pick because the Bengals made them? We'll cherry pick the good and ignore the bad with just about everything the team does because we all, at our core, are hopeless optimists who want to believe we got the steal that no one else saw.
In my experience, the pundits are generally correct more often than the Bengals. Meaning, our late round picks that the pundits had rated high (such as Marvin Jones, George Iloka, AJ McCarron, Mohamed Sanu, Clint Boling, Vontaze Burfict etc) that slipped for no reason, generally, turn out better than the head scratching 'perceived reaches' that the Bengals quickly celebrate as steals (Margus Hunt, Will Clarke, Dontay Moch, Jerome Simpson, Kenny Irons etc).
If this trend continues, that means Billings will end up being a great player and Vigil will fizzle. That's not to say this formula is guaranteed. There have been 'perceived reaches' that worked out. I can't think of any, but I'm sure there are some. Likewise, there are highly rated players who dropped that haven't worked out as well (Devon Still, Orsen Charles, Brandon Ghee) but those are much more rare than the successes.
I like Vigil and I hope he plays well. We have taken productive college players that, theoretically, didn't project to the NFL well before and they have worked out. Geno Atkins fits that description pretty well, as does Andy Dalton and AJ McCarron.
But I'm getting a little confused with the amount of double speak going on in the fan base. If you trust the pundits on Billings (he'll be good), don't trust them on Vigil (he'll also be good) and love both picks, that just seems like homer-ism to me.
![[Image: oN5QAdY.png]](https://i.imgur.com/oN5QAdY.png)
