04-02-2017, 01:30 PM
(04-02-2017, 01:17 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Here's why I think the "sell" makes sense. He's more athletic than Tyler Eifert, he's a better blocker out of the gate than Eifert was, he would provide insurance if/when Eifert goes down to injury, and provides a backup plan for if Eifert were to leave in FA. Plus, it would allow the Bengals to use two-TE sets, which would make a lot of sense given the likely quick throws Dalton will have to do behind a mediocre-at-best OL.
We heard this past offseason that the Bengals refuse to pay top dollar for OGs even though the NFL is going in that direction. What makes people think the Bengals will pay top dollar for a TE when they've never shown such an investment in that position previously? If anything, people should start considering the possibility of Howard simply to allow the team to stay competitive if Eifert were to go elsewhere in FA next year or the year after if tagged.
Hmm, he may be a better blocker, but i'm not down for picking a TE at 9 because he can block. The insurance part is solid if Eifert goes down, but again, picking for insurance at 9 overall? Not for me. This team has never shown it can effectively use a 2 TE set. I especially don't expect Zampese to do that.
You're right the Bengals rarely invest money in TE's, so then WHY IN THE WORLD pick a TE at number 9 overall if they're also going to let him walk in 5 years? Furthermore for a team that doesn't invest in TE's picking 3 in the first round in 7 years!? That would prove the Bengals are incompetent (though I wouldn't put it past them). When you're picking at 9 overall you should be picking a guy who you think can be a franchise player for 10 years, not 5 and dump.
There is something seriously wrong if a team picks 3 TE's in 7 years in the first, it's such a low position on the totem poll of impact comparatively.
