(03-08-2016, 01:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Here is what a lot of people miss.  There were just not a lot of great DEs on the street to replace Hunt.   He didn't look very good, but that does not mean there is an unemployed DE out there somewhere who is that much better.

Who is missing that? People don't want to replace garbage with different garbage. 

That just sounds like a really bad excuse as to why he's here. 

(03-08-2016, 10:21 AM)fredtoast Wrote: 1.  I looked up Brooks and everything I found said he played OLB

2.  The original comment was about coaching up players to rush the passer, so the fact that Smith had just as many sacks per year with the Bengals as he did with the Niners proves nothing.

3.. How many examples do I need?  More than 4 in 20 years.  In fact you mentioned Alfred Williams when in fact Williams had more 9+ sack season in four years with the Bengals than he did in five years with other teams. So don't know how you can consider that a strike against the Bengals.

And if just one 10 sack season by Foley is considered "thriving" to you. Then what about the fact that Dunlap had 13.5 in one season for the Bengals, and Michael Johnson had 11.5, and Geathers had 10.5, Justin Smith had his career high in sacks (8.5) with the Bengals,  Alfred Williams had seasons of 10 and 9.5, John Copeland had 9, Reinard Wilson had 9, Danny Stubbs had 9.  

1.) His job as rush end was to rush the passer, something he couldn't do in Cincinnati

2.) Justin Smith may have had the same number of sacks (unlike Brooks, Williams, and Foley, so good for you singling out that one stat), but he was CLEARLY a much better player in SF than Cincinnati.  If that is lost on you, then you are blinded by your own desire to somehow continue to discredit that several players did significantly better after they left Cincinnati.

3.) Alfred Williams was a better pass rusher after he left Cincinnati.

4.) Foley was here several years and did very little and thrived when he got a chance in SD.  Getting shot affected him after that.

Several means more than two and less than five.  Sorry, but that was the idea.  

(03-09-2016, 09:17 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: 1.) His job as rush end was to rush the passer, something he couldn't do in Cincinnati

2.) Justin Smith may have had the same number of sacks (unlike Brooks, Williams, and Foley, so good for you singling out that one stat), but he was CLEARLY a much better player in SF than Cincinnati.  If that is lost on you, then you are blinded by your own desire to somehow continue to discredit that several players did significantly better after they left Cincinnati.

3.) Alfred Williams was a better pass rusher after he left Cincinnati.

4.) Foley was here several years and did very little and thrived when he got a chance in SD.  Getting shot affected him after that.

Several means more than two and less than five.  Sorry, but that was the idea.  

Alfred Williams hated Mike Brown with a passion. He couldn't wait to leave.

Margus Hunt, on the other hand, isn't in any of these guy's league. Hunt has done nothing in here and it's not likely that he ever will because I really don't think he can do it.

(03-09-2016, 11:20 AM)BengalChris Wrote: Alfred Williams hated Mike Brown with a passion. He couldn't wait to leave.

Margus Hunt, on the other hand, isn't in any of these guy's league. Hunt has done nothing in here and it's not likely that he ever will because I really don't think he can do it.

I don't know and therefore can't comment on Alfred Williams' opinion of Mr. Brown, but you have no idea what might happen to Margus if he goes to another team.  I would be very interested to see what someone like Rex Ryan could do with the guy.  But, overall, a huge disappointment.  

(03-15-2016, 08:23 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I don't know and therefore can't comment on Alfred Williams' opinion of Mr. Brown, but you have no idea what might happen to Margus if he goes to another team.  I would be very interested to see what someone like Rex Ryan could do with the guy.  But, overall, a huge disappointment.  

Keeping Hunt because he might play well for someone else just isn't a good enough reason to keep a guy around who has done nothing for us. Smith did a lot more for us, so did Alfred Williams.

(03-15-2016, 08:23 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I don't know and therefore can't comment on Alfred Williams' opinion of Mr. Brown, but you have no idea what might happen to Margus if he goes to another team.  I would be very interested to see what someone like Rex Ryan could do with the guy.  But, overall, a huge disappointment.  

He won't do anything, just like he doesn't do anything here. 
It isn't a matter of a "bad" fit like it was with a lot of the guys mentioned here. 
He's just bad at football.

Rex Ryan isn't some kind of DL whisperer. He can't make bad players good. 
If you fit his system he can make you a star, but he can't make guys fit his system.
Look at Mario Williams. 

It's all a moot point, Hunt is here this coming year, and Paulie says it is his make or break season. We'll know after that....

You have to take the bad with the good in life. Hunt and Tate are our foot fungus.

(03-15-2016, 01:25 PM)Sled21 Wrote: It's all a moot point, Hunt is here this coming year, and Paulie says it is his make or break season. We'll know after that....

Where did you come up with this?  From everything I have read Guenther said THE EXACT OPPOSITE.  .  .  

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2016/3/1/11136174/paul-guenther-talks-vontaze-burfict-make-or-break-time

Hunt, drafted in the second round of 2013, and Clarke, drafted in the third round in 2014, have both struggled to see the field during their careers, let alone show they can make a positive impact. Guenther seems to be indicating he's looking for guys to replace them if aren't ready to step up in 2016.

"First year you're on scholarship. Second year, you better show me something. Third year, if you don't do anything, I'm looking to replace you. Period. That's with any guy," Guenther said. 

(03-15-2016, 01:28 PM)Okeana Wrote: You have to take the bad with the good in life.  Hunt and Tate are our foot fungus.

Putting those two in the same sentence is just wrong.

At least Tate contributes in some ways. Hunt on the other hand....

(03-15-2016, 02:24 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Putting those two in the same sentence is just wrong.

At least Tate contributes in some ways. Hunt on the other hand....

......or foot, as the case may be.....

(03-15-2016, 01:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Where did you come up with this?  From everything I have read Guenther said THE EXACT OPPOSITE.  .  .  

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2016/3/1/11136174/paul-guenther-talks-vontaze-burfict-make-or-break-time

Hunt, drafted in the second round of 2013, and Clarke, drafted in the third round in 2014, have both struggled to see the field during their careers, let alone show they can make a positive impact. Guenther seems to be indicating he's looking for guys to replace them if aren't ready to step up in 2016.

"First year you're on scholarship. Second year, you better show me something. Third year, if you don't do anything, I'm looking to replace you. Period. That's with any guy," Guenther said. 

From the article you posted.....

Quote:
He indicated it’s a make-or-break season for a pair of high picks at defensive end, Margus Hunt as he heads into his fourth year and Will Clarke, as he heads into his third year. He also said this draft has the most defensive players he’s ever seen, so he’s going to continue to look for "rushers and cover guys."

Not a "Make or Break training camp" or first couple of games..... "make or break season"...season being 16 games...

(03-16-2016, 08:54 AM)Sled21 Wrote: From the article you posted.....


Not a "Make or Break training camp" or first couple of games..... "make or break season"...season being 16 games...

Guenther clearly said that if a fuy does not produce by year three then he is likely to get replaced.  Hunt has already been here 3 years.

Telling Hunt this could be a "break season" is the opposite of telling him he has a guaranteed spot for the full season.

That's you interpretation, we read it differently. Doesn't matter, whatever happens happens. I predict he finishes the season here...

My only concern when we drafted this guy is that his heart wasn't fully in it. I think that's the case. You have a track athlete thrown into a sport he isn't fully invested in. Shame.

(03-01-2016, 09:43 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: His entire stat line last year was 1 solo tackle, 1 tackle assist. He's so bad they simply stopped activating him every week so he was only active for 7 weeks this year. Trust me, you haven't forgotten any of his contributions.

Hes not as bad as you make him out to be... He didnt play much but Dunlap Gilberry and MJ where healthy most the year and we had injuries elsewhere that needed an extra body active.

He was a raw project that needed a few years training when drafted. and looks better every year.


But the draft will show what we think.. also will clark is still around. so if we draft a DE early we will know whats up

Still think Hunt would make a better DT just do to size power and how high he can get those hands up (distrupting passing lane and getting in QBs way)

he will be here for camp. if some one knocks him out then we know.

(03-16-2016, 05:56 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Hes not as bad as you make him out to be...   He didnt play much but Dunlap Gilberry and MJ where healthy most the year and we had injuries elsewhere that needed an extra body active.

He was a raw project that needed a few years training when drafted. and looks better every year.


But the draft will show what we think.. also will clark is still around.  so if we draft a DE early we will know whats up

Still think Hunt would make a better DT just do to size power and how high he can get those hands up (distrupting passing lane and getting in QBs way)  

he will be here for camp.  if some one knocks him out then we know.

Yes he is. 

He would be a terrible DT. He doesn't play low enough. One run play will fix him of any DT dreams. 

(03-16-2016, 05:56 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Hes not as bad as you make him out to be...   He didnt play much but Dunlap Gilberry and MJ where healthy most the year and we had injuries elsewhere that needed an extra body active.

He was a raw project that needed a few years training when drafted. and looks better every year.


But the draft will show what we think.. also will clark is still around.  so if we draft a DE early we will know whats up

Still think Hunt would make a better DT just do to size power and how high he can get those hands up (distrupting passing lane and getting in QBs way)  

he will be here for camp.  if some one knocks him out then we know.

I think the Bengals will draft a DE, and a different mold DE than Hunt and Clarke, who are kind of the same guy...ditto Gilberry, although he at least demonstrated some pass rush when he would rotate inside.  I think they want a speed guy at RDE.  That doesn't necessarily mean Hunt OR Clarke are gone, since Gilberry would already likely not be re-signed.  

(03-16-2016, 06:07 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Yes he is. 

He would be a terrible DT. He doesn't play low enough. One run play will fix him of any DT dreams. 

As a rotational DT, that would come in on passing downs for Peko, he could help press the pocket and try to knock down passes.  He wouldn't likely be able to hold up as an every down DT with his length, but I always wanted to see a QB try to throw a ball over the arms of the likes of Dunlap, MJ, and Hunt while Geno comes in down low.  

He'll be around because I just don't think the Bengals think that Gilberry's production is worth it to re-sign him..I love the kids ability but you gotta translate that into some production on the field. I'm pulling for him.