The Bengals have made it an art to do just enough, and not even a smidgen more, to sell the idea that they a shit about interior O line.

It's really a fascinating thing to see. On one end, I can't complain because they did get a guard. The problem is they're getting later round talents as opposed to premium picks and hoping they pan out.

(Yesterday, 10:18 AM)NotBigzo Wrote: The Bengals have made it an art to do just enough, and not even a smidgen more, to sell the idea that they a shit about interior O line.

It's really a fascinating thing to see. On one end, I can't complain because they did get a guard. The problem is they're getting later round talents as opposed to premium picks and hoping they pan out.

you know ..I watch the Chiefs and Bills quite frequently..and I see Mahommes and Allen run for their lives on almost every play. Aside from maybe the top 12-15. players in the draft...and irregardless what the "gurus" may say..there ain't a lot of difference in the rest of the players drafted...lol@ later round talent..the team drafts a guard  and you are still complaining because its not a name you like

(Yesterday, 10:35 AM)ERIC1 Wrote: you know ..I watch the Chiefs and Bills quite frequently..and I see Mahommes and Allen run for their lives on almost every play. Aside from maybe the top 12-15. players in the draft...and irregardless what the "gurus" may say..there ain't a lot of difference in the rest of the players drafted...lol@ later round talent..the team drafts a guard  and you are still complaining because its not a name you like

The majority of NFL Starters are Day 2 draft picks. Good Teams win Day 2.

(Yesterday, 09:00 AM)Synric Wrote: Not last year. He was out of shape, slow, and a liability in coverage.

Agree 100%. Both Safeties were piss poor last year. As bad as Volson & Cappa were at guard, in my book. 

Two years ago they were both good,,so maybe banking on a return to form? Or just prioritizing DL, OL, and LB more. 

Look, we had/have needs all over the place. OG (1 or two), pass rush at DE and DT, and  S (1 or 2) were the big ones for me. But transforming the LB corps, CB1/depth, a two way TE, OT depth, WR depth, RB depth, and even PK were/are needs too.

Knight is fine as a player. Top 5 LB on most/all boards. I do not care a ton about the age. And I get Golden needed his Vyper. But hexres hed for him.He had a 3rd/4th round grade from most/all boards. And therexwere more pressing needs at #49 and good LB value later (Stutsman ,Paul, Mondon, and Carter are all still on the board 2 rounds later). 

The player is a B/C. The pick is a D. Campbell is a MUCH better Vyper. Campbell at #17 and DE help at #49 would have made a ton more sense to me.

Stewart is questionable as an impact DE due to his lack of production, poor football instincts, and lack of finishing. Knight is an OK off ball linebacker who I think is miscast as a Vyper/disruptor guy who lines up on the edge. I do not see it. Though I respect Nate a ton. And Fairchild is the 3rd best IOL on his own team.

I am not excited about any of these guys. I think all were probably 10 to 40 picks early. One starter, and only that assumes we jettison the guy starting now, with no guarantee Knight is really any better. Marginal immediate improvement. 

I give our draft a D. Risky. Reachy. Poor value. Not a good reading of the positional strength of the draft. 

Doesn't mean I am not rooting to be wrong. If Stewart suddenly understands how to play football, he could be a monster. With polish, Fairchild could be a good guard. And Knight should be able to contribute roght away, but he ain't no Micah Parsons/Campbell type at at LB. I think Al is delusional there. 

(Yesterday, 01:17 AM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Well, two more poor/dumb picks. If this is Al, I want Lou back.

Knight is (at least) a round early and there were probably gonna be similar guys available even later. Furthermore, G, S, and DT had to be more pressing needs. And for my money, CB as well (and TE).  So you reached for a guy at, at best, our 5th most needy position?

With Ratledge, Watts, Winston (still there at #81), Mukuba, Alexander, Morrison, Amos, Thonas, and Porter still on the board. The only way LB is a higher priority is if Pratt is gone. If so , we have managed the neat teick of getting no draft capital for him, nor cutting him and using that $$ on a FA. Though both things could change.

But if Knight is a Pratt replacement, what did we get Burks for? And it really is just plugging a Pratt hole and not improving the team (much). We used a premium pick to tread water and leave spots inore dire need of attention unaddressed.

I give it a D.

And not to mention yesterday's dumb pick again, but Green, Scourton, Burch, Gillotte, and Jackson were all on the board at #49. 

As for Fairchild, I am glad we got a guard, finally. But he was the 3rd best IOL in his college team. Not sure he is a plug & play starter. Not sure he allows us to cut Volson & use that $$. Watts & Winston were still there. As was Grant eith OT/G versatility (though more of a project). 

C+/B- pick. 

Overall, I think we are a solid D. Marginally better than when the draft started, but not by much. 

I cannot wait for more dumb moves tomorrow. Myoney is on some combo of RB, OT, WR, PK, and QB. 

I am interested..were you a coach ....scout  @ any level..we needed a DL..OL and linebacker...yet because of the names chosen you are not  happy...Aside from maybe the top 12-15 drafted this year..there is not that much of a damn difference in talent level in the rest of the players drafted and one of the main reasons some are "rated higher" ythan others is simply because of school recognition..nothing more..so let me get this straight these coaches/scouts have spent thousands of hours, travelled thousands of miles..met with other coaches ...met with the players and their families..etc etc etc...and they are purposefully making bad picks to hurt the franchise..too funny...I am not a coach but it waould appear to me they have addressed some glaring needs and found some players with smarts and athleticism..Ill give you a grade in 2-3 years

(Yesterday, 10:44 AM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Agree 100%. Both Safeties were piss poor last year. As bad as Volson & Cappa were at guard, in my book. 

Two years ago they were both good,,so maybe banking on a return to form? Or just prioritizing DL, OL, and LB more. 

Look, we had/have needs all over the place. OG (1 or two), pass rush at DE and DT, and  S (1 or 2) were the big ones for me. But transforming the LB corps, CB1/depth, a two way TE, OT depth, WR depth, RB depth, and even PK were/are needs too.

Knight is fine as a player. Top 5 LB on most/all boards. I do not care a ton about the age. And I get Golden needed his Vyper. But hexres hed for him.He had a 3rd/4th round grade from most/all boards. And therexwere more pressing needs at #49 and good LB value later (Stutsman ,Paul, Mondon, and Carter are all still on the board 2 rounds later). 

The player is a B/C. The pick is a D. Campbell is a MUCH better Vyper. Campbell at #17 and DE help at #49 would have made a ton more sense to me.

Stewart is questionable as an impact DE due to his lack of production, poor football instincts, and lack of finishing. Knight is an OK off ball linebacker who I think is miscast as a Vyper/disruptor guy who lines up on the edge. I do not see it. Though I respect Nate a ton. And Fairchild is the 3rd best IOL on his own team.

I am not excited about any of these guys. I think all were probably 10 to 40 picks early. One starter, and only that assumes we jettison the guy starting now, with no guarantee Knight is really any better. Marginal immediate improvement. 

I give our draft a D. Risky. Reachy. Poor value. Not a good reading of the positional strength of the draft. 

Doesn't mean I am not rooting to be wrong. If Stewart suddenly understands how to play football, he could be a monster. With polish, Fairchild could be a good guard. And Knight should be able to contribute roght away, but he ain't no Micah Parsons/Campbell type at at LB. I think Al is delusional there. 

oh really..Stewart is questionable? do you know that if stewart had gotten 5-6 sacks he would have been drafted in the top 5..the guys disrupts almost every play and maybe did not get the sacks but had the opposing quarterback running for his life all the time..Knight is an ok linebacker?  reoprts I have read different from your assessment..Faitrchild is as solid as they come ..you give the draft a D because those chosen were not the players you wanted

(Yesterday, 10:39 AM)Synric Wrote: The majority of NFL Starters are Day 2 draft picks. Good Teams win Day 2.

Look I get that people get disappointed  when their favorite players are not chosen. but you are absolutely correct the smart teams find those solid  players
 in the later rounds..we needed DL, OL and linebackers..we addressed such ..I dont pay a lot of attentionto college players..had not heard of stewart..watch hours of his film..the man is an intense football player..Fairchild is solid.. and that linebacker we chose is also solid..it would appear we did fine  and in a couple of years can grade this years darft

(Yesterday, 10:50 AM)ERIC1 Wrote: oh really..Stewart is questionable? do you know that if stewart had gotten 5-6 sacks he would have been drafted in the top 5..the guys disrupts almost every play and maybe did not get the sacks but had the opposing quarterback running for his life all the time..Knight is an ok linebacker?  reoprts I have read different from your assessment..Faitrchild is as solid as they come ..you give the draft a D because those chosen were not the players you wanted

We have many fans who have never studied tape or watched or studied players who feel they know it all and the FO is stupid. They rely on mock drafts and so called experts like Kiper (who liked our picks) who said Sanders was best QB in tne draft who is undrafted after round 3.

Experts are great, but once you get past the first 15 guys, even experts differ. The further the draft gets away from the top 15, the less consensus on the value (draft position of players) of draftees. Fans also never take into account if they want a guy at 49, it iis very unlikely regardless of ranking it will be there 32 to 40 picks later, so teams that drat a guy mid second round at 49 like we did take the guy because he will have to make it through midway of the 3rd round.

The board GMs are. too enamored in rankings by round. They love to use them when a guy appears to be picked early, but then ignore it when a player like Stewart who was a #1 on every board and in some cases top 10 DE they don't like is picked.

Every fan is entitled to their own opinion, it just seems some fans would not be happy regardless of who we pick as it was not their choice.

(Yesterday, 10:55 AM)ERIC1 Wrote: Look I get that people get disappointed  when their favorite players are not chosen. but you are absolutely correct the smart teams find those solid  players
 in the later rounds..we needed DL, OL and linebackers..we addressed such ..I dont pay a lot of attentionto college players..had not heard of stewart..watch hours of his film..the man is an intense football player..Fairchild is solid.. and that linebacker we chose is also solid..it would appear we did fine  and in a couple of years can grade this years darft

I hope anyone would agree, if we look back 4 years from now, if we get 2 or 3 quality starters from a draft where we drafted 17th and only had 6 starters, it was a very successful draft. If we hit on 3rd round picks and later, an exceptional draft.

I think our 1st three picks will be starters in the NFL barring injury for many years to come. If so, a great draft regardless of our nest 3 picks in rounds 4-7.

(Yesterday, 10:50 AM)ERIC1 Wrote: oh really..Stewart is questionable? do you know that if stewart had gotten 5-6 sacks he would have been drafted in the top 5..the guys disrupts almost every play and maybe did not get the sacks but had the opposing quarterback running for his life all the time..Knight is an ok linebacker?  reoprts I have read different from your assessment..Faitrchild is as solid as they come ..you give the draft a D because those chosen were not the players you wanted

People complaining about the picks is not because they are not theyre personal favorite players. It's because of some major red flags. 
Stewart has some major production failures and it's not just sacks. The lowest TFL production of a drafted DE since 2000. His QB hits put him in the 3rd lowest percentile. He shows poor play awareness and plays chaotically. All this and we had 1 meeting with him at the combine that Stewart himself said he didn't remember meeting with us. This isn't about Golden liking him this pick is 100% saying goodbye to Trey there is no world we keep Trey after spending two 1st rd picks over the last 3 years at that position. 
Knight may end up being a good player and I like him as a player although I didn't pay too much attention to him. The problem is we completely ignored the consesus board. Which to some degree I'm okay with if Golden likes the player but when we are talking a completely rd+ lower grade on a player that is 25 years old that's a bit too much of a red flag. We could've had Ratledge. Heck we most likely could've gone Ratledge, Knight and the Fairchild in the 4th. 

The sad thing is I'm no scout and certainly to draft expert. But I honestly think I could handle this offseason draft better than the Bengals have just by following the board consensus/production athletic metrics.
1:Harmon
2:Ratledge
3:Winston
4:Knight( as I believe with his age he is available here)

As far as the offseason just change contracts slightly to lower contract hits this year so you can resign Trey and done.

(Yesterday, 11:03 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: We have many fans who have never studied tape or watched or studied players who feel they know it all and the FO is stupid. They rely on mock drafts and so called experts like Kiper (who liked our picks) who said Sanders was best QB in tne draft who is undrafted after round 3.

Experts are great, but once you get past the first 15 guys, even experts differ. The further the draft gets away from the top 15, the less consensus on the value (draft position of players) of draftees. Fans also never take into account if they want a guy at 49, it iis very unlikely regardless of ranking it will be there 32 to 40 picks later, so teams that drat a guy mid second round at 49 like we did take the guy because he will have to make it through midway of the 3rd round.

The board GMs are. too enamored in rankings by round. They love to use them when a guy appears to be picked early, but then ignore it when a player like Stewart who was a #1 on every board and in some cases top 10 DE they don't like is picked.

Every fan is entitled to their own opinion, it just seems some fans would not be happy regardless of who we pick as it was not their choice.

It's funny you hear every year, it doesn't matter which spot you get drafted in as long as you get drafted. Apparently that doesn't apply to the Bengals. LOL
Trading up in this draft isn't going to happen with only 6 picks and trading down isn't as easy as most seem to think here. I wasn't big on the Stewart pick but have calmed down about it and I hope the guy reaches his full potential. 

(Yesterday, 11:18 AM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: People complaining about the picks is not because they are not theyre personal favorite players. It's because of some major red flags. 
Stewart has some major production failures and it's not just sacks. The lowest TFL production of a drafted DE since 2000. His QB hits put him in the 3rd lowest percentile. He shows poor play awareness and plays chaotically. All this and we had 1 meeting with him at the combine that Stewart himself said he didn't remember meeting with us. This isn't about Golden liking him this pick is 100% saying goodbye to Trey there is no world we keep Trey after spending two 1st rd picks over the last 3 years at that position. 
Knight may end up being a good player and I like him as a player although I didn't pay too much attention to him. The problem is we completely ignored the consesus board. Which to some degree I'm okay with if Golden likes the player but when we are talking a completely rd+ lower grade on a player that is 25 years old that's a bit too much of a red flag. We could've had Ratledge. Heck we most likely could've gone Ratledge, Knight and the Fairchild in the 4th. 

The sad thing is I'm no scout and certainly to draft expert. But I honestly think I could handle this offseason draft better than the Bengals have just by following the board consensus/production athletic metrics.
1:Harmon
2:Ratledge
3:Winston
4:Knight( as I believe with his age he is available here)

As far as the offseason just change contracts slightly to lower contract hits this year so you can resign Trey and done.

none of the players we drafted has "major red flags" ..none.. opinions as to the players drafted  after  numbers 12-15.. differ remarkably..as a matter of fact there was one guy saying that he thought stewart was the steal of the draft..a major disruptor and had he actually gotten a few sacks would have been picked in the top 5..so you never know..I am happy..and what's eve more impressive was listening to Golden speak..bright guy..positive change for the team

(Yesterday, 11:03 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: We have many fans who have never studied tape or watched or studied players who feel they know it all and the FO is stupid. They rely on mock drafts and so called experts like Kiper (who liked our picks) who said Sanders was best QB in tne draft who is undrafted after round 3.

Experts are great, but once you get past the first 15 guys, even experts differ. The further the draft gets away from the top 15, the less consensus on the value (draft position of players) of draftees. Fans also never take into account if they want a guy at 49, it iis very unlikely regardless of ranking it will be there 32 to 40 picks later, so teams that drat a guy mid second round at 49 like we did take the guy because he will have to make it through midway of the 3rd round.

The board GMs are. too enamored in rankings by round. They love to use them when a guy appears to be picked early, but then ignore it when a player like Stewart who was a #1 on every board and in some cases top 10 DE they don't like is picked.

Every fan is entitled to their own opinion, it just seems some fans would not be happy regardless of who we pick as it was not their choice.

What your describing there is called reaching. See we don't want to "reach" we want to follow the value in the early rounds. I don't claim to be an expert and when I don't consider to be an expert i tend to look to people that are or atleast have metrics that show how they reached theyre conclusion. Production, tape, athletic testing, age and the consesus board. When the Bengals fall so far out of these with they're picks we have to ask our the Bengals smarter than all of these markers or are they ignoring them and making dumb picks. It feels like an obvious answer to me. I know there are team and we don't want to believe it but that's what is happening. 

(Yesterday, 11:20 AM)sandwedge Wrote: It's funny you hear every year, it doesn't matter which spot you get drafted in as long as you get drafted. Apparently that doesn't apply to the Bengals. LOL
Trading up in this draft isn't going to happen with only 6 picks and trading down isn't as easy as most seem to think here. I wasn't big on the Stewart pick but have calmed down about it and I hope the guy reaches his full potential. 

I have always said once a player is drafted they all become equal. I want all Bengals draftees to be successful, but I never get hung up if our 3rd round pick ends up being beter thean our second round pick. Some thinka #1 pick is a bust if they do not start and be very good year 1, I don't agee. I think teams with soid rosters make it tougher for rookies to see the field quickly.

(Yesterday, 11:29 AM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: What your describing there is called reaching. See we don't want to "reach" we want to follow the value in the early rounds. I don't claim to be an expert and when I don't consider to be an expert i tend to look to people that are or atleast have metrics that show how they reached theyre conclusion. Production, tape, athletic testing, age and the consesus board. When the Bengals fall so far out of these with they're picks we have to ask our the Bengals smarter than all of these markers or are they ignoring them and making dumb picks. It feels like an obvious answer to me. I know there are team and we don't want to believe it but that's what is happening. 

we are a good team..barring the plethora of injuries we have had the last two years ..we would have been in super bowl consideration..We did not reach for any player..I watched the tapes on Stewart..the man can play football..he's intense..Fairchild is as solid as you can get..and that linebacker in all areas..as solid as you can get..We have to get out of the mindset that we need a JOew Burrow or Chase in every years draft..

(Yesterday, 11:29 AM)ERIC1 Wrote: none of the players we drafted has "major red flags" ..none.. opinions as to the players drafted  after  numbers 12-15.. differ remarkably..as a matter of fact there was one guy saying that he thought stewart was the steal of the draft..a major disruptor and had he actually gotten a few sacks would have been picked in the top 5..so you never know..I am happy..and what's eve more impressive was listening to Golden speak..bright guy..positive change for the team

I mean "major red flag" as to not only the player but as to the Bengals process to us fans.
As in Stewart's extremely low production statistics and the Bengals having 1 short meeting at the combine with him and being picked 17th.
Or Knight being 25yrs old as well as being picked 40-50 spots ahead of his consesus rankings. 
Major red flags in my opinion.

(Yesterday, 11:29 AM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: What your describing there is called reaching. See we don't want to "reach" we want to follow the value in the early rounds. I don't claim to be an expert and when I don't consider to be an expert i tend to look to people that are or atleast have metrics that show how they reached theyre conclusion. Production, tape, athletic testing, age and the consesus board. When the Bengals fall so far out of these with they're picks we have to ask our the Bengals smarter than all of these markers or are they ignoring them and making dumb picks. It feels like an obvious answer to me. I know there are team and we don't want to believe it but that's what is happening. 

You miss my point, they are reaching based an opinion you formed by looking at rankings provided from different sources.

It was very apparent the Bengals got their top 2 targets, Stewart and Knight were ranked higher and determined a fit by the DC, nit some random ranking system.

If those rankings were so accurate, they would not miss ever on a top 15 pick, yet we know they miss every year because it is hard to be right in the top 15 and gets hard the further we get from the top 15.

The Bengals wanted Knight plain and simple. The Bengals felt Knight would be long gone by pick 81 so a ranking srevice may be correct also, he could be a 3rd round pick on their ranking, but we had 17th pick in round 3, not the first pick. 

As I have mentioned, Knight was ranker higher than Martin and he was taken 75th, so likely Knight would have been gone by our pick. That is not a reach, that is making sure you get your main 2nd round pick since he was available.

(Yesterday, 11:33 AM)ERIC1 Wrote: we are a good team..barring the plethora of injuries we have had the last two years ..we would have been in super bowl consideration..We did not reach for any player..I watched the tapes on Stewart..the man can play football..he's intense..Fairchild is as solid as you can get..and that linebacker in all areas..as solid as you can get..We have to get out of the mindset that we need a JOew Burrow or Chase in every years draft..

We need to get out of the mindset of we need to take a big athletic DE in rd 1 who doesn't rush the passer well. How many sacks does Murphy have? We want to draft that same mold and hope for different results? 
We should 1000% be trying to draft a pro bowl in rd 1 every year regardless of position. Not drafting a guy like Stewart at a position of need that if we are lucky and he hits his ceiling he's a solid B player.

(Yesterday, 11:38 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You miss my point, they are reaching based an opinion you formed by looking at rankings provided from different sources.

It was very apparent the Bengals got their top 2 targets, Stewart and Knight were ranked higher and determined a fit by the DC, nit some random ranking system.

If those rankings were so accurate, they would not miss ever on a top 15 pick, yet we know they miss every year because it is hard to be right in the top 15 and gets hard the further we get from the top 15.

The Bengals wanted Knight plain and simple. The Bengals felt Knight would be long gone by pick 81 so a ranking srevice may be correct also, he could be a 3rd round pick on their ranking, but we had 17th pick in round 3, not the first pick. 

As I have mentioned, Knight was ranker higher than Martin and he was taken 75th, so likely Knight would have been gone by our pick. That is not a reach, that is making sure you get your main 2nd round pick since he was available.

Look we had Trey and Pratt 2 guys that mentioned a trade. We took 2 players that one production said not to take at 17 and the other consesus ranking said not to take at 49. We have bypassed better players to fill our areas of need  and thats not where we want to live. We want to draft best available not need. Now we can say they were our best available but then we are clearly letting need effect our rankings and that is not a good situation.
I heard we had 
Knight 
Ratledge 
Wintson 
As our top 3 in rd 2 and winston makes it to rd 3 but we bypass him for Fairchild. Now I wanted a guard and like Fairchild but why is our need surpassing our board. It's insightful not just there but our picks thru out the whole draft thus far.