(03-19-2021, 03:11 PM)shanebo Wrote: I agree -- I think Hilton would be a very good fit.  Rely on Higgins and Boyd to carry the load, let Hilton stretch the field and run intermediate routes ... Throw in Pitts (?) and you've got yourself the makings of an offensive machine!  At least on paper.

Not aimed at you specifically, but at all the Pitts suggestions. WHY? We really don't rely on TE too much. Plus, when we grabbed Sample in the 2nd round, most complained. 

(03-19-2021, 02:56 PM)Synric Wrote: It's a pick swap Bengals 7th for Texas 6th move up 30 spots.

Sure beats getting nothing.

And I like commending the front office for doing a good job a helluva a lot more than complaining.

(03-19-2021, 03:15 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Not aimed at you specifically, but at all the Pitts suggestions. WHY? We really don't rely on TE too much. Plus, when we grabbed Sample in the 2nd round, most complained. 

Pitts can still line up in 3 or 4 WR sets because he would be one of the best three or four pass catchers on the team.

Kinda like how the Saints used Jimmy Graham at his best.

(03-19-2021, 03:15 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Not aimed at you specifically, but at all the Pitts suggestions. WHY? We really don't rely on TE too much. Plus, when we grabbed Sample in the 2nd round, most complained. 

Yeah we are really underestimating how much work needs done to the lines and how little separation there is from Pitts to some of the others.  

I like Pitts but you still take Sewell or a trade down a few slots to land one of the tackles or WR plus land a 2nd.  I don't see enough separation in Pitts or those guys to warrant not boosting the defensive front 7 with another quality pick.  

(03-19-2021, 03:15 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Not aimed at you specifically, but at all the Pitts suggestions. WHY? We really don't rely on TE too much. Plus, when we grabbed Sample in the 2nd round, most complained.

Joe was just a 53 percent passer in the red zone.  Pitts would help in that regard. 

(03-19-2021, 03:15 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Not aimed at you specifically, but at all the Pitts suggestions. WHY? We really don't rely on TE too much. Plus, when we grabbed Sample in the 2nd round, most complained. 

Burrow uses the TE plenty. At LSU and CJ was having a big game vs Cleveland when he got hurt.

I think Sewell, Chase, and Pitts can all be elite level players at their positions. I'd be delighted with any of the 3 and trading back for more picks and getting Slater, Smith/Waddle, or Parsons to boot is dandy as well.

(03-19-2021, 03:21 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Pitts can still line up in 3 or 4 WR sets because he would be one of the best three or four pass catchers on the team.

Kinda like how the Saints used Jimmy Graham at his best.

I see a couple other TEs that could also be put into a spread sets.. and as stated since TE is not as big in our offensive plus Pitts lack of blocking experience, I prefer to stay with Oline in first over TE. draft a TE 3 round range

(03-19-2021, 03:24 PM)Goalpost Wrote: Joe was just a 53 percent passer in the red zone.  Pitts would help in that regard. 

Possibly, but at what cost? TE over OL? If we are sure we need a decent TE this year, rounds 1 - 3 are not acceptable in my opinion when there are too many holes to fill. Plus, we should focus on our ability to help our QB stay upright before we worry about who he's throwing too. Everyone else doesn't matter when he's laying on his back.

(03-19-2021, 03:24 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I see a couple other TEs that could also be put into a spread sets.. and as stated since TE is not as big in our offensive plus Pitts lack of blocking experience, I prefer to stay with Oline in first over TE. draft a TE 3 round range

And I agree. I was just giving my opinion on why some consider Pitts a possibility. Especially if drafting strictly BPA without consideration for needs depending upon who is drafted before the Bengals pick.

(03-19-2021, 03:15 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Not aimed at you specifically, but at all the Pitts suggestions. WHY? We really don't rely on TE too much. Plus, when we grabbed Sample in the 2nd round, most complained. 

Tes are popular on some of the better teams now. Pitts is a good one.

I'd be fine with taking him if our ol wasn't crap and we didn't still need to upgrade a rusher.

(03-19-2021, 03:33 PM)Benton Wrote: Tes are popular on some of the better teams now. Pitts is a good one.

I'd be fine with taking him if our ol wasn't crap and we didn't still need to upgrade a rusher.

And that's the downside. Too many urgent needs other than a TE. 

(03-19-2021, 03:36 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: And that's the downside. Too many urgent needs other than a TE. 

Kyle Pitts isn't just a TE he can line up at any WR, TE, or Fullback position.

(03-19-2021, 03:31 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Possibly, but at what cost? TE over OL? If we are sure we need a decent TE this year, rounds 1 - 3 are not acceptable in my opinion when there are too many holes to fill. Plus, we should focus on our ability to help our QB stay upright before we worry about who he's throwing too. Everyone else doesn't matter when he's laying on his back.

I would have considered Pitts at #5 if they were able to better address the offensive line during free agency.

But, as it is now I’m still all in on Oline during the draft. I’m talking balls deep all in.

(03-19-2021, 03:24 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I see a couple other TEs that could also be put into a spread sets.. and as stated since TE is not as big in our offensive plus Pitts lack of blocking experience, I prefer to stay with Oline in first over TE. draft a TE 3 round range

I agree and would take Sewell over Pitts if he's there -- but it's looking more and more like he won't be.  I'd probably also take Chase over Pitts in a vacuum, but signing someone like Hilton would give us the ability to take Pitts if we like him better.  And Pitts is far and away better regarded than the next best TEs in this class, who are generally considered to be fringe-2nd or 3rd round guys with question marks (Freiermuth, Jordan, Long, Tremble, etc.)   

What I don't want is to be forced to overdraft a position of need if no one wants to trade, e.g., Slater or Darrisaw at 5 if Sewell is gone because we need an OT.  We've avoided that scenario by signing Reiff.  Now I hope we can pick up a FA WR so we don't have to reach for Waddle if Chase and Smith are gone. 

(03-19-2021, 02:56 PM)Fulcher_33 Wrote: Shiiiiiiiiiiet at 18per I don't blame them....


I said this in another thread, I would be happy with a Bateman or Marshall @38 if we don't sign a FA WR esp for the amount of Golladay wants

I'm down with you 100% on either of those picks in the 2nd round....Unless they take Chase at #5. 

But how cool would it be if they took Chase at #5 and then Marshall in the 2nd, reuniting the National Title squad for a run at the NFL title now????! Lmao! 

(03-19-2021, 03:38 PM)Synric Wrote: Kyle Pitts isn't just a TE he can line up at any WR, TE, or Fullback position.

so my prediction of a FB in the 1st could be right

Per Field Yates on twitter.

"The Bengals deal with Riley Reiff is for one year and is worth $7.5M, with $5.5M guaranteed, per source. "

I still think OL is the way to go in the first.

(03-19-2021, 04:03 PM)Schmitbuck Wrote: Per Field Yates on twitter.

"The Bengals deal with Riley Reiff is for one year and is worth $7.5M, with  $5.5M guaranteed, per source. "

I still think OL is the way to go in the first.

Thats a good number.

(03-19-2021, 04:03 PM)Schmitbuck Wrote: Per Field Yates on twitter.

"The Bengals deal with Riley Reiff is for one year and is worth $7.5M, with  $5.5M guaranteed, per source. "

I still think OL is the way to go in the first.

Just 1yr? Yeah OT is still on table full fledged.

(03-19-2021, 04:25 PM)Fulcher_33 Wrote: Just 1yr? Yeah OT is still on table full fledged.

Yep. That's what I popped in this thread to say.