(01-22-2025, 03:05 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Yes, Donovan Jackson has screamed up the Draft board after switching to LT and being dominant against the best in the CFP.

All for him at 17 now, start him at LG as a rookie and he can move to LT once Orlando's contract is up. Sounds like a solid plan to me.

I agree. This is win/win for player and team. Player loses no potential income as paid as a 1st round pick for 4 or 5 years and team gets a very good starting OG in year 1 with the versatility to backup OT.

(01-22-2025, 03:09 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Joe Thuney is a huge part of KC's super bowl wins. He is LG who has been playing LT again (I say again as he plays there when the LT was injured or not playing well in the past).

This past year Smith the RG for KC was also all pro and they have an all-pro center in Creed Humphreys. 

Interior OL are huge and anyone watching our team the past year and seeing Cappa and Volson get beat quickly should see the problem. How good could our offense be with very good to great OG play?

KC was winning SB's before Thuney ever got there.  And he's playing T now because they've botched their T situation so badly.

Having your IOL made up of All Pro"s is completely different than drafting a guy in the first, hoping he becomes an All Pro, and expecting him to have similar impact.

G's have terrible WAR.  Yes, our G's are putrid and need upgraded on, but that doesn't mean that you will see some massive difference between a 1st round G and a guy like Risner, Brown, whoever who's a solid starter you get in FA.

(01-22-2025, 02:50 PM)Whatever Wrote: G is a very different position when talking about this philosophy.

If you're spending a 1st on a G, they need to be a cornerstone of your OL for 10+ years just due to the position having very little impact compared to other positions.  Name a G that's transformed a team into a playoff contender.  I can't think of one.  The reason you would go for one is to have long term stability.  Just drafting one to "fill a hole" isn't logical, especially when you consider OL have a steep learning curve coming into the NFL.  It may take a year or two for the guy to start playing at above replacement level starter capacity.

The Bengals don't have a single OL who has been with the team 10+ years.
Boling only made it 8 years, which is just 1 more year than a 1st round pick + 2 tags would be.

Whitworth is about the only Bengals OL worth a damn to have played with the franchise 10+ years in the past 20 years.
Andre Smith was technically with the Bengals 10 seasons, but his last few seasons were basically as a backup/filler.

And knowing the current regime's apprehension to sign players who are/will be 30+ years old, 7-8 years might be the sweet spot for what they look for in terms of longevity for anyone but QB.

I would damn near guarantee the Bengals aren't making a decision on their 1st round draft picks based on who they think they could end up signing to a veteran contract down the road. They are very, very likely thinking in terms of who can become a good contributor for the team over the next 5-7 years.

EDIT - Also, a G SHOULD have good impact on the team, but maybe the Bengals FO is still outdated in their thinking. A good G can help stifle good interior pass rush and open holes in the run game, something the Bengals have struggled against for years. So the value of a good G is known, at least to us fans.

(01-22-2025, 03:34 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The Bengals don't have a single OL who has been with the team 10+ years.
Boling only made it 8 years, which is just 1 more year than a 1st round pick + 2 tags would be.

Whitworth is about the only Bengals OL worth a damn to have played with the franchise 10+ years in the past 20 years.
Andre Smith was technically with the Bengals 10 seasons, but his last few seasons were basically as a backup/filler.

And knowing the current regime's apprehension to sign players who are/will be 30+ years old, 7-8 years might be the sweet spot for what they look for in terms of longevity for anyone but QB.

I would damn near guarantee the Bengals aren't making a decision on their 1st round draft picks based on who they think they could end up signing to a veteran contract down the road. They are very, very likely thinking in terms of who can become a good contributor for the team over the next 5-7 years.

EDIT - Also, a G SHOULD have good impact on the team, but maybe the Bengals FO is still outdated in their thinking. A good G can help stifle good interior pass rush and open holes in the run game, something the Bengals have struggled against for years. So the value of a good G is known, at least to us fans.

Quenton Nelson was drafted in the 1st and is signed through his 9th year.

David DeCastro played his entire 9 year career for the Steelers.  

Zeitler is still playing at a high level after 13 years in the league and was commonly looked at as a mistake to not re-up.  But he's the type of guy you would look at spending a 1st on and serving as an anchor on the OL for a decade plus.

10+ years may be overstating, but there is definitely an expectation that you will have them through their 2nd contract at least.

Bolling was a 4th round pick and not really anything more than a solid starter.  I don't see how he really applies.

It you don't think the Bengals are thinking about second contracts when they draft guys, then why are you arguing for Jackson?  After all, the team almost never spends a 1st on G's.  In fact, it's a rarity for anyone to.

(01-22-2025, 04:03 PM)Whatever Wrote: Quenton Nelson was drafted in the 1st and is signed through his 9th year.

David DeCastro played his entire 9 year career for the Steelers.  

Zeitler is still playing at a high level after 13 years in the league and was commonly looked at as a mistake to not re-up.  But he's the type of guy you would look at spending a 1st on and serving as an anchor on the OL for a decade plus.

10+ years may be overstating, but there is definitely an expectation that you will have them through their 2nd contract at least.

Bolling was a 4th round pick and not really anything more than a solid starter.  I don't see how he really applies.

It you don't think the Bengals are thinking about second contracts when they draft guys, then why are you arguing for Jackson?  After all, the team almost never spends a 1st on G's.  In fact, it's a rarity for anyone to.

It is different if it is a Guard that can also play Left Tackle though. That makes the pick much more valuable.

(01-22-2025, 03:27 PM)Whatever Wrote: KC was winning SB's before Thuney ever got there.  And he's playing T now because they've botched their T situation so badly.

Having your IOL made up of All Pro"s is completely different than drafting a guy in the first, hoping he becomes an All Pro, and expecting him to have similar impact.

G's have terrible WAR.  Yes, our G's are putrid and need upgraded on, but that doesn't mean that you will see some massive difference between a 1st round G and a guy like Risner, Brown, whoever who's a solid starter you get in FA.

Chiefs won 1 Super Bowl in 2020 before Thuney arrived. Then won in 2022 and 2023. Thuney was signed as a free agent in 2021. The lone year they did not win or go to the SB, Bengals beat them in AFC championship game. Trey Smith (all pro RG 2024) also joined the Chiefs as a rookie 6th round pick in 2021 and was inserted as a starter immediately.

Chiefs signed a great vet and drafted a rookie (he had history of blood clots and likely why he fell in the draft) in 2021. Since then, they have won 2 Super Bowls, lost in an AFC championship game and 4th year of Thuney and Smith they are still alive for another AFC championship and then possibly Super Bowl.

I will say it again, time we quit undervaluing guards. Why didn't we go after Joe Thuney in 2021?

What will we do in 2024 as we are in the same position the Chiefs were in 2021; we need 2 guards who can help us run the football and protect the franchise.

(01-22-2025, 04:08 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Chiefs won 1 Super Bowl in 2020 before Thuney arrived. Then won in 2022 and 2023. Thuney was signed as a free agent in 2021. The lone year they did not win or go to the SB, Bengals beat them in AFC championship game. Trey Smith (all pro RG 2024) also joined the Chiefs as a rookie 6th round pick in 2021 and was inserted as a starter immediately.

Chiefs signed a great vet and drafted a rookie (he had history of blood clots and likely why he fell in the draft) in 2021. Since then, they have won 2 Super Bowls, lost in an AFC championship game and 4th year of Thuney and Smith they are still alive for another AFC championship and then possibly Super Bowl.

I will say it again, time we quit undervaluing guards. Why didn't we go after Joe Thuney in 2021?

What will we do in 2024 as we are in the same position the Chiefs were in 2021; we need 2 guards who can help us run the football and protect the franchise.

Trey Smith is a Pro Bowler, not an All Pro, or at least an AP All Pro.  You may be referring to PFF or some other All Pro list.

KC also lost in the SB the year before Thuney went there, so two SB appearances with 1 win in the two years previous to 2 titles in two appearances in the three years since.  They were already a well established perennial SB contender before their IOL makeover.

Quenton Nelson has been widely regarded as the best G in the game for years.  How is the Colts success as a team?  What about Lindstrom and the Falcons?  I think you're running into some false causality here.

(01-22-2025, 04:06 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: It is different if it is a Guard that can also play Left Tackle though. That makes the pick much more valuable.

It depends on how confident you are that Jackson can slide out to T in a couple of years.

If he can, then the pick is a lot more justifiable, though I still think there will be better prospects available.  

If he's G only, like Synric suggests, that's the discussion at hand.  

(01-22-2025, 05:04 PM)Whatever Wrote: It depends on how confident you are that Jackson can slide out to T in a couple of years.

If he can, then the pick is a lot more justifiable, though I still think there will be better prospects available.  

If he's G only, like Synric suggests, that's the discussion at hand.  

Well, I think Donovan Jackson shown he is not only a Guard prospect in the College Football Playoffs against the best.

I would of understood this if he struggled at LT but aside from the Penn State game Synric alluded to, he was dominant at LT.

(01-22-2025, 05:49 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Well, I think Donovan Jackson shown he is not only a Guard prospect in the College Football Playoffs against the best.

I would of understood this if he struggled at LT but aside from the Penn State game Synric alluded to, he was dominant at LT.

There really weren't any edges he faced in the CFP this year that are draftable in this class except Pearce, though.  Ironically, a ton of talent at DT that would have been good to see him against, though.  

Trying to think of the last college G that successfully kicked out to T as a pro...Brandon Albert, maybe? 

(01-22-2025, 06:27 PM)Whatever Wrote: There really weren't any edges he faced in the CFP this year that are draftable in this class except Pearce, though.  Ironically, a ton of talent at DT that would have been good to see him against, though.  

Trying to think of the last college G that successfully kicked out to T as a pro...Brandon Albert, maybe? 

Pearce is a damn good one though. Surprised teams in the Playoff wouldn't have elite Edges. Usually, you have to have a good pass rush to be 
one of the top teams in college.

(01-22-2025, 03:34 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The Bengals don't have a single OL who has been with the team 10+ years.
Boling only made it 8 years, which is just 1 more year than a 1st round pick + 2 tags would be.

Whitworth is about the only Bengals OL worth a damn to have played with the franchise 10+ years in the past 20 years.
Andre Smith was technically with the Bengals 10 seasons, but his last few seasons were basically as a backup/filler.

And knowing the current regime's apprehension to sign players who are/will be 30+ years old, 7-8 years might be the sweet spot for what they look for in terms of longevity for anyone but QB.

I would damn near guarantee the Bengals aren't making a decision on their 1st round draft picks based on who they think they could end up signing to a veteran contract down the road. They are very, very likely thinking in terms of who can become a good contributor for the team over the next 5-7 years.

EDIT - Also, a G SHOULD have good impact on the team, but maybe the Bengals FO is still outdated in their thinking. A good G can help stifle good interior pass rush and open holes in the run game, something the Bengals have struggled against for years. So the value of a good G is known, at least to us fans.

If this year didn't show the FO how important having 2 good guards are, then they are blind.

(01-22-2025, 05:01 PM)Whatever Wrote: Trey Smith is a Pro Bowler, not an All Pro, or at least an AP All Pro.  You may be referring to PFF or some other All Pro list.

KC also lost in the SB the year before Thuney went there, so two SB appearances with 1 win in the two years previous to 2 titles in two appearances in the three years since.  They were already a well established perennial SB contender before their IOL makeover.

Quenton Nelson has been widely regarded as the best G in the game for years.  How is the Colts success as a team?  What about Lindstrom and the Falcons?  I think you're running into some false causality here.

If I recall correctly, Mahomes spent the Super Bowl he lost running for his life. His OL was worse than our OL. Then the following year, they sign Thuney and draft Smith. We are in a familiar situation, we too need not 1, but two top quality guards.

In my opinion at a minimum, we need to go after one great guard like Thuney in FA and spend a 1st or 2nd round pick on a second.

Even if the Bengals don't plan on re-signing a guard to a large multiple year contract it doesn't take it off rhe table in thr first round. A first round guard potentially gives the team a 5 to 6 year contract which is possibly the majority of Joe Burrow' career window. Joe will be 34 in 6 years.

Now that we are picking in the low teens, no position of need is off the table IMO.  And OG/development OT is definitely on the list.  Brown Jr.'s broken legs sound like a chronic condition cause by rapid growth, and I expect other injuries to occur with our two 350+ lb. tackles.  My only caveat is that a 1st round pick at a lower value position, and OG is one, needs to be a likely starter on day 1.

(01-22-2025, 05:49 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Well, I think Donovan Jackson shown he is not only a Guard prospect in the College Football Playoffs against the best.

I would of understood this if he struggled at LT but aside from the Penn State game Synric alluded to, he was dominant at LT.

nfldraftbuzz currently has a 3rd round grade on him. taking him at 17 is a reach. Like others said he didn't face any top edges to see how really good he can be at LT. WE know he's a solid OG tho.

(01-25-2025, 06:05 PM)pulses Wrote: nfldraftbuzz currently has a 3rd round grade on him. taking him at 17 is a reach. Like others said he didn't face any top edges to see how really good he can be at LT. WE know he's a solid OG tho.

Okay, that is current I guess and I didn't get to watch the playoff as it was on espn and i don't have that channel.

But all I heard when I was watching Buckeye games before he switched to LT was that Donovan was a top Guard in the class.

That sure seems earlier than the 3rd round especially after showing he can play LT.

(01-25-2025, 11:43 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Okay, that is current I guess and I didn't get to watch the playoff as it was on espn and i don't have that channel.

But all I heard when I was watching Buckeye games before he switched to LT was that Donovan was a top Guard in the class.

That sure seems earlier than the 3rd round especially after showing he can play LT.

Well it's still early on in the process and he still has time to boost that if he tests out well.

(01-26-2025, 01:31 AM)pulses Wrote: Well it's still early on in the process and he still has time to boost that if he tests out well.

1st Team All American this season, his stock will continue to rise.

(01-25-2025, 03:38 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: If I recall correctly, Mahomes spent the Super Bowl he lost running for his life. His OL was worse than our OL. Then the following year, they sign Thuney and draft Smith. We are in a familiar situation, we too need not 1, but two top quality guards.

In my opinion at a minimum, we need to go after one great guard like Thuney in FA and spend a 1st or 2nd round pick on a second.

KC went in decimated at T, not G.  IOL wasn't the issue.

For another, Tampa had KC covered all the way around that year. They had put up 31 by the end of the 3rd quarter and just sleep walked through the rest of the game.  Pressure on Mahomes was just one issue of many.

A huge issue is that KC and Mahomes were not going to enjoy the same sort of calls that they normally get when playing against Tom Brady.  There's a thread in JN breaking down the disparity of penalties between KC and the other playoff teams.  That really makes them hard to point at as an example of how to build a team.  You simply can't count on getting the amount of referee favoritism they do.  And the BS their OL gets away with is legendary.  They get away with murder, for one, and if they give up a negative play, there's a good chance the refs will bail them out with a phantom/ticky tack call on the opposing defense and wipe out their mistake.

But the smoking gun is why did they move their All Pro LG to LT?  Because they know it's way more important than G.