05-04-2020, 02:21 PM
(05-03-2020, 01:44 PM)masonbengals fan Wrote: This... I was all for drafting o-line at 33 but it's hard to argue with the results the last time they picked a QB/WR combo. LB corps was pitiful so they double dipped. So it's wait & see for now.
Logan Woodside and Auden Tate?
(05-03-2020, 06:14 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Junk article.
1) The MEDIA had Jones as a first round talent, and some had Cleveland there as well. But the fact is, NFL teams did not. He went in round 3. Cleveland in Round 2. The guy wants to cover his own butt because teams did not agree with his evaluations.
2) Anyone who thinks a team is set at WR because the have John Ross is an idiot. Plus, he fails to mention that AJ has not been healthy for 2 years either.
3) Two rookie tackles is not exactly a recipe for great pass protection. No matter who they are.
4) The guy writes an article on the O-line but fails to mention the scheme change. Shows his depth of suvject matter knowledge is shallow.
I still hope we sign some reinforcements (Peters, Jackson, etc) if we have cap room after Mixon's new deal is done. Even absent that, if Jordan & Johnson improve, and Price is healthy, I think we could be OK.
Isn't that what we're basically going to have with Jonah Williams and Fred Johnson's one start between them (assuming Johnson beats out Hart, which is what everyone wants).
(05-03-2020, 07:18 PM)samhain Wrote: This article is jumping the gun a bit. I'd like to see more talent on the line, but there are 2 things at play here:
1: This team, in case you didn't notice, really effing sucked last year at several position groups. They sucked practically everywhere on the defensive side, save maybe the line at the end of the season. They needed a lot of upgrades. There wasn't enough money or draft picks to address them all. Beating up on the worst team in football for not fixing every position on the roster is a cheap narrative to start off with.
2. The team says they like the guys they have, and they've stuck with that assertion all year. With all of the other things they've done to address personnel, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt here. if they truly believed that the o-line was going to get Burrow killed, I think they'd have attempted to do more.
I don't love Turner. I think he's a clown. Still, it's worth seeing if continuity in his system and a year of development/chemistry for younger guys can make the difference. If not, then attack the o-line like you did linebacker and the secondary this year.
It's easy to say that an o-line is essential to developing a young franchise quarterback, but it's not the ONLY essential thing. I imagine any quarterback would appreciate a defense that plays well enough to take some of the pressure of of them. To me it was just a matter of not being able to do everything at once.
I don't think the article was necessarily disagreeing with the idea that several positions needed revamping, but was rather arguing that O-line should have been prioritized more when you have a rookie QB.
I think QBs would take the O-line over a defense if they couldn't all be fixed at once.
