(01-15-2017, 12:09 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Not a very productive response. 

Also holds absolutely no bearing to the conversation.

I see you posting a lot about the draft so I was hoping maybe you'd actually be interested in defending your opinion about a RB at number 9.

Especially considering the recent devaluation of RBs in the draft (that was very briefly offset by Zeke).

But, oh well.

I didn't expect to be convinced anyway. There is so little reason to actually do it.

Looking at the position groups though, which needs more of an upgrade? There's no doubt that RB is a big crapshoot, but if you can get speed with good size/durability (and get it young and cheap) it's hard to pass that up. Cook has a LT/Shady body type. The potential there is greater, i think, for the offense. 

I think there was a devaluation of RBs recently, simply because there was a shortage of really good ones, compared to WRs and TEs. 

(01-15-2017, 12:31 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Looking at the position groups though, which needs more of an upgrade? There's no doubt that RB is a big crapshoot, but if you can get speed with good size/durability (and get it young and cheap) it's hard to pass that up. Cook has a LT/Shady body type. The potential there is greater, i think, for the offense. 

I think there was a devaluation of RBs recently, simply because there was a shortage of really good ones, compared to WRs and TEs. 

If either of the top rb are available when we pick at 9 then we better run to the podium.both are considered to be blue chip players.When you have a chance at someone who can actually make a large impact you do it..Not to mention that hill is a scrub and  gios knee is shredded and rex is gonna get paid .It just makes sense .Cook or Fournette  ...Jamaal Charles or Adrian Peterson

(01-15-2017, 12:31 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Looking at the position groups though, which needs more of an upgrade? There's no doubt that RB is a big crapshoot, but if you can get speed with good size/durability (and get it young and cheap) it's hard to pass that up. Cook has a LT/Shady body type. The potential there is greater, i think, for the offense. 

I think there was a devaluation of RBs recently, simply because there was a shortage of really good ones, compared to WRs and TEs.

Agreed. Fun fact: '13 and '14 (when Gio and Hill were selected) were the only years since the merger that no RBs were taken in the first round. In the 2 years since, things have gone back to normal with Elliott, Gurley and Melvin Gordon all being taken in the top 15 picks.

(01-14-2017, 11:03 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I am not a huge fan of taking a RB at 9. I don't know what it is. It just makes me worry. We will only get a top 10 pick once every 5 to 10 years (ideally), so taking a RB in that year really feels like a waste.

An elite RB will last maybe 5 years. 7 or 8 if you're really really lucky.

An elite DE or WR, on the other hand, will last 10 years easy, and up to 15 years.

You can get an exceptional RB outside of the first round pretty easily. The other positions, it's a lot harder to come by outside of the top few rounds.

I know it's not logical and there are RBs worth a top 10 pick. But it's just scary. Especially since RBs are SO dependent on their Oline. A great RB will be rendered useless is running behind a bad line. However, a great Oline can make a bad RB look very good.

I get this.  I really do.  But I also know that the best Bengal teams over the past 10-15 years were when they had a really good back to pair with good receiving threats.  Your point about a great RB being rendered useless behind a bad line isn't entirely accurate, either, if you look at the likes of Barry Sanders.  

The real challenge is to determine which is the bigger issue right now:  the offensive line or the RB?  It is easy to say the offensive line as Dalton got bludgeoned this year, but with Ced benched for Fisher, the line played fairly well.  The season was already pretty much wasted by the time Burkhead got his opportunity, but it wasn't for the Bills, steelers, and Texans when the Bengals played them.  Here is a breakdown of the final 6 games of the season comparing Burkhead and Hill:

                                        SEXY              HILL
Week 12 @ Baltimore:           5/29              12/21
Week 13 EAGLES:                 8/38              23/33
Week 14 @ Cleveland:           9/45              25/111
Week 15 steelers:                 7/32              20/43
Week 16 @ Houston:            12/42              7/8
Week 17 Ravens:                 27/119             OUT

Now, I will grant that Hill was probably experiencing a lot of injury problems in the Houston game, which led to him missing the entire Baltimore game, but you can see the difference between the two during that period.  I don't even remember which game had Ced benched...I think it was Philly.  Rex averaged more YPC than Hill in every game, even the Cleveland game.  Rex is also a much better route runner and receiver out of the backfield as well as a factor in special teams.  This isn't meant to be a Rex commercial as much as it is an indictment on Hill and defense of the offensive line, once Ced was out.  Their scheme is still too predictable.  They still can't seem to get one yard when needed.  But even with Hill's strong rookie season, I think a lot more of that should have been attributed to the offensive line.  

So, if Dalvin Cook is a "once every 5 year talent", should the Bengals take him?  I am starting to think that they should.   

(01-15-2017, 12:35 AM)Buckeyes420 Wrote: Theres not alot i need to say to back up my argument,the stats do that for me.As for convincing you i could care less.If you were making personnel decisions it would be different.

Good point. My opinion matters just as much as yours though (in that it doesn't matter at all), so it's interesting that you would take the condescending "you're not worth my time" approach when you're the one that started the thread in the first place. My impression was that you started the thread because you were interested in discussing the merits of your idea, and to convince people that it is the best plan for the team.

Now that I know you just wanted to show the message board how smart you are and that you "watch tape", I will take that into account going forward. 

(01-15-2017, 02:28 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: I get this.  I really do.  But I also know that the best Bengal teams over the past 10-15 years were when they had a really good back to pair with good receiving threats.  Your point about a great RB being rendered useless behind a bad line isn't entirely accurate, either, if you look at the likes of Barry Sanders.  

The real challenge is to determine which is the bigger issue right now:  the offensive line or the RB?  It is easy to say the offensive line as Dalton got bludgeoned this year, but with Ced benched for Fisher, the line played fairly well.  The season was already pretty much wasted by the time Burkhead got his opportunity, but it wasn't for the Bills, steelers, and Texans when the Bengals played them.  Here is a breakdown of the final 6 games of the season comparing Burkhead and Hill:

                                        SEXY              HILL
Week 12 @ Baltimore:           5/29              12/21
Week 13 EAGLES:                 8/38              23/33
Week 14 @ Cleveland:           9/45              25/111
Week 15 steelers:                 7/32              20/43
Week 16 @ Houston:            12/42              7/8
Week 17 Ravens:                 27/119             OUT

Now, I will grant that Hill was probably experiencing a lot of injury problems in the Houston game, which led to him missing the entire Baltimore game, but you can see the difference between the two during that period.  I don't even remember which game had Ced benched...I think it was Philly.  Rex averaged more YPC than Hill in every game, even the Cleveland game.  Rex is also a much better route runner and receiver out of the backfield as well as a factor in special teams.  This isn't meant to be a Rex commercial as much as it is an indictment on Hill and defense of the offensive line, once Ced was out.  Their scheme is still too predictable.  They still can't seem to get one yard when needed.  But even with Hill's strong rookie season, I think a lot more of that should have been attributed to the offensive line.  

So, if Dalvin Cook is a "once every 5 year talent", should the Bengals take him?  I am starting to think that they should.   

I'll openly say that I am not the best at talent evaluation. I'm not a future scout like some people on this message board (not the OP, but people like Bfine and Wolf). 

It's so hard to determine when a good stat line in college is due to transcendent talent of the player, the talent level of the players around them (a big problem when evaluating Alabama players) or talent level of the players they are playing against.

I recently went back and watched a video of Jeremy Hill's best plays in college and he had a lot of punishing runs and break away runs that look very similar to Fournette's highlights today. Even looking at the stats, Jeremy Hill averaged 6.9 ypc in his sophomore year and Fournette has a 6.2 ypc career average (6.5 in his best year).

Now, I say highlights because this early on, I don't generally look at the play by plays for every game of most prospects, so I am only doing a top down look at these guys. So maybe, aside from the highlights, Fournette has more quality non-highlight snaps that make him a superior prospect to Jeremy, but they don't look all that different from a high level.

Dalvin Cook, I agree, is the better prospect between the two, but I don't know if he qualifies as a once every 5 year talent. That kind of evaluation I leave to the professionals. If he is truly a unique talent that will transform our offense, I would be fine with the pick. 

And your point about Rex is a good one. He came in and suddenly our running game is much better. That speaks very poorly of Jeremy. And I think he needs to be replaced anyway.

But Rex isn't a top 10 pick. If we can get a guy in the 3rd or 4th round that could replicate his kind of production in his limited play time, I think that would fix our running game as well, don't you think?

(01-14-2017, 11:03 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I am not a huge fan of taking a RB at 9. I don't know what it is. It just makes me worry. We will only get a top 10 pick once every 5 to 10 years (ideally), so taking a RB in that year really feels like a waste.

An elite RB will last maybe 5 years. 7 or 8 if you're really really lucky.

An elite DE or WR, on the other hand, will last 10 years easy, and up to 15 years.

You can get an exceptional RB outside of the first round pretty easily. The other positions, it's a lot harder to come by outside of the top few rounds.

I know it's not logical and there are RBs worth a top 10 pick. But it's just scary. Especially since RBs are SO dependent on their Oline. A great RB will be rendered useless is running behind a bad line. However, a great Oline can make a bad RB look very good.

Good post CJD, i understand what you are saying.

Dalvin Cook to me is the exception, he ran behind a bad O-line at Florida State and still was great.

Him and John Toth would fix our biggest weakness, the running game.

(01-15-2017, 02:47 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I'll openly say that I am not the best at talent evaluation. I'm not a future scout like some people on this message board (not the OP, but people like Bfine and Wolf). 

It's so hard to determine when a good stat line in college is due to transcendent talent of the player, the talent level of the players around them (a big problem when evaluating Alabama players) or talent level of the players they are playing against.

I recently went back and watched a video of Jeremy Hill's best plays in college and he had a lot of punishing runs and break away runs that look very similar to Fournette's highlights today. Even looking at the stats, Jeremy Hill averaged 6.9 ypc in his sophomore year and Fournette has a 6.2 ypc career average (6.5 in his best year).

Now, I say highlights because this early on, I don't generally look at the play by plays for every game of most prospects, so I am only doing a top down look at these guys. So maybe, aside from the highlights, Fournette has more quality non-highlight snaps that make him a superior prospect to Jeremy, but they don't look all that different from a high level.

Dalvin Cook, I agree, is the better prospect between the two, but I don't know if he qualifies as a once every 5 year talent. That kind of evaluation I leave to the professionals. If he is truly a unique talent that will transform our offense, I would be fine with the pick. 

And your point about Rex is a good one. He came in and suddenly our running game is much better. That speaks very poorly of Jeremy. And I think he needs to be replaced anyway.

But Rex isn't a top 10 pick. If we can get a guy in the 3rd or 4th round that could replicate his kind of production in his limited play time, I think that would fix our running game as well, don't you think?

I was in Vegas for an annual meeting all last week.  I was looking for something for my 13 year old son (He was 11 in my Avatar, and now looks me in the eye).  It isn't as easy as it used to be....some simple lego, toy, shirt...just a little guilt gift for me being gone.  He is a swimmer and baseball player (like his dad...once Herbstreit hit puberty, it was over for me in football) and I will find a baseball shirt or something, but the gifts in the Vegas shops all bordered on too childish or too inappropriate.  

To the latter, there was a shirt with a chicken and an egg, in bed, smoking a cigarette...the chicken has turned to the egg and says:  "I think it was you".  I didn't buy it, but got a good chuckle.  

My point of this long-winded story?  Which came first, the chicken of the egg, or in this case, the RB or the offensive line.  You are dead on that another version of Rex is probably available in the later (3rd?) rounds vs. taking a RB with a top 10 pick.  There are so many positions where the player looks unstoppable against their college competition, but then against NFL talent, they bust.  RB seems to me to be a position where a rookie can not only make an immediate impact but if you are running through tackles, running away from NFL-speed players, and catching balls on NFL-style routes that you have a pretty good chance of success in the NFL.

I keep going back and forth on how much I like the DE class and how the Bengals can have an impact RDE for the first time in a while.   I have long said it is the missing piece of the puzzle on the front four.  A speed merchant that can get around a LT and force the QB in to the arms of a closing Dunalp and Geno.  And as badly as I want that for the defense, I keep coming back to the thought that this team needs to be able to score more points, in a number of different ways.  Atlanta put up 36 on a strong Seattle defense.  Atlanta's defense isn't that strong, but you can't score if you don't have the ball.  The Patriots had their issues with ball security early, but in the end, they put up 34 points on the Texans.

The reference I made about RDE being the missing piece on the front four is how I also feel about a stud RB on the offense.  They have the WRs, TEs, but not that special Pro Bowl talent at RB.  Dalvin Cook absolutely tore through a tough Michigan line....and ran away from some NFL talent, despite not having the offensive line of some of the better teams in college football.  

Fournette may be a very good NFL player as well, but I worry about mileage and it also falls back in to the old "this guy is in so it is a run, this guy is in so it is a pass" habit.  I want Cook, Gio, and Sexy to be a three-headed rotational monster that you can't predict plays by formation or personnel.  Throw to the RB on first down, run with another on second down...no predictability.  

You said "fix our running game", and I took that as "not make it suck"    I know you were probably thinking of a loftier goal, but I want a running game like Atlanta to pair with our other weapons.  I think Cook could have the same impact here that Freeman has had in Atlanta...and I now think the Falcons will represent the NFC in the Super Bowl.  

(01-15-2017, 03:36 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: I was in Vegas for an annual meeting all last week.  I was looking for something for my 13 year old son (He was 11 in my Avatar, and now looks me in the eye).  It isn't as easy as it used to be....some simple lego, toy, shirt...just a little guilt gift for me being gone.  He is a swimmer and baseball player (like his dad...once Herbstreit hit puberty, it was over for me in football) and I will find a baseball shirt or something, but the gifts in the Vegas shops all bordered on too childish or too inappropriate.  

To the latter, there was a shirt with a chicken and an egg, in bed, smoking a cigarette...the chicken has turned to the egg and says:  "I think it was you".  I didn't buy it, but got a good chuckle.  

My point of this long-winded story?  Which came first, the chicken of the egg, or in this case, the RB or the offensive line.  You are dead on that another version of Rex is probably available in the later (3rd?) rounds vs. taking a RB with a top 10 pick.  There are so many positions where the player looks unstoppable against their college competition, but then against NFL talent, they bust.  RB seems to me to be a position where a rookie can not only make an immediate impact but if you are running through tackles, running away from NFL-speed players, and catching balls on NFL-style routes that you have a pretty good chance of success in the NFL.

I keep going back and forth on how much I like the DE class and how the Bengals can have an impact RDE for the first time in a while.   I have long said it is the missing piece of the puzzle on the front four.  A speed merchant that can get around a LT and force the QB in to the arms of a closing Dunalp and Geno.  And as badly as I want that for the defense, I keep coming back to the thought that this team needs to be able to score more points, in a number of different ways.  Atlanta put up 36 on a strong Seattle defense.  Atlanta's defense isn't that strong, but you can't score if you don't have the ball.  The Patriots had their issues with ball security early, but in the end, they put up 34 points on the Texans.

The reference I made about RDE being the missing piece on the front four is how I also feel about a stud RB on the offense.  They have the WRs, TEs, but not that special Pro Bowl talent at RB.  Dalvin Cook absolutely tore through a tough Michigan line....and ran away from some NFL talent, despite not having the offensive line of some of the better teams in college football.  

Fournette may be a very good NFL player as well, but I worry about mileage and it also falls back in to the old "this guy is in so it is a run, this guy is in so it is a pass" habit.  I want Cook, Gio, and Sexy to be a three-headed rotational monster that you can't predict plays by formation or personnel.  Throw to the RB on first down, run with another on second down...no predictability.  

You said "fix our running game", and I took that as "not make it suck"    I know you were probably thinking of a loftier goal, but I want a running game like Atlanta to pair with our other weapons.  I think Cook could have the same impact here that Freeman has had in Atlanta...and I now think the Falcons will represent the NFC in the Super Bowl.  

I'm not going to lie. Dalvin Cook is enticing. But I, like you, think an athletic RDE is the missing piece to our defense, especially if we keep DreK for a few more years. The idea of Billings, Atkins and Dunlap being combined with the likes of Barnett is very exciting.

At this point in the process I'll just say that I'd like if we went in either direction haha.

(01-15-2017, 02:31 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Good point. My opinion matters just as much as yours though (in that it doesn't matter at all), so it's interesting that you would take the condescending "you're not worth my time" approach when you're the one that started the thread in the first place. My impression was that you started the thread because you were interested in discussing the merits of your idea, and to convince people that it is the best plan for the team.

Now that I know you just wanted to show the message board how smart you are and that you "watch tape", I will take that into account going forward. 

I never said you arent worth my time ,i said i dont care what u think.im cool with talking football but you would rather try to turn stuff against me .i dont have anything to prove to anyone especially on a message board,Apparently you have alot to prove to people on here.Hows that working out for ya??going forward i will make sure i dont reference your avatar.Sorry to get you so butthurt..enjoy todays games!

(01-15-2017, 05:44 PM)Buckeyes420 Wrote: I never said you arent worth my time ,i said i dont care what u think.im cool with talking football but you would rather try to turn stuff against me .i dont have anything to prove to anyone especially on a message board,Apparently you have alot to prove to people on here.Hows that working out for ya??going forward i will make sure i dont reference your avatar.Sorry to get you so butthurt..enjoy todays games!

I don't have anything to prove on here. I just respect the people on this message board and enjoy conversing with them, especially when it comes to those with differing opinions than mine.

I'm sorry you took my comments as if I was trying to turn stuff against you haha. When in reality your response was just you being an asshat and me pointing that out.

But hey, not everyone can handle conversation, so I understand it may have been stressful for me to ask you "Why do you think that?"

Keep working hard, buddy.

You'll learn how to discuss things some day :).

Not sure. Would it be that great to have Bernard, Hill plus a third young running back looking for carries?

(01-15-2017, 06:37 PM)bengalsnj Wrote: Not sure. Would it be that great to have Bernard, Hill plus a third young running back looking for carries?

Look at it like this, Bernard is going to be coming back from ACL.  Hill hasn't done much of anything special since his rookie year, and he's already getting banged up regularly.  Team really should be looking to draft a RB.

(01-15-2017, 04:56 AM)Buckeyes420 Wrote: There is 2 all pro caliber rb in this draft..We need one of them period.oline will be fine,we were just one dimensional and predictable.a home run hitter rb can open up the pass game with just a few runs or vice versa

How do you come up with that conclusion? It won't happen unless some serious additions are made to the O line.

(01-15-2017, 05:28 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I'm not going to lie. Dalvin Cook is enticing. But I, like you, think an athletic RDE is the missing piece to our defense, especially if we keep DreK for a few more years. The idea of Billings, Atkins and Dunlap being combined with the likes of Barnett is very exciting.

At this point in the process I'll just say that I'd like if we went in either direction haha.

That's what is cool about this draft...I think the Bengals will get a huge upgrade at either position and with a potential AJM trade, go in to the draft with as many as 12 picks.  

(01-15-2017, 03:54 AM)Jpoore Wrote: A good rb can make his line look great(see bulkhead). Not a fan as stated before of taking rb in first but the only rb I can see that would be worthy would be cook. Other than that I would draft center and take a great running back in 4th or 5th.

(01-15-2017, 04:56 AM)Buckeyes420 Wrote: There is 2 all pro caliber rb in this draft..We need one of them period.oline will be fine,we were just one dimensional and predictable.a home run hitter rb can open up the pass game with just a few runs or vice versa

One game doesn't tell you anything really. Hill has had better games that Burkhead's best, so has Gio.

The OL isn't going to be fine as it is. Whit is a FA, so is Zeitler and the replacement for Whit only proved that he can't do the job. Then there's Bodine, who did improve as the year went on, but he's by no means a guy who's going to make the pro bowl some day.

My solution:

1. Fire Ken Zampese

2. Hire Dallas Offensive Live coach Frank Pollack as our new OC

3. Actually spend money and draft picks making our line good


That will fix the running game. Oh and maybe tell Hill to run where people aren't as opposed to acting like the defense will be confused if you run right into their waiting arms.

(01-15-2017, 08:49 PM)Derrick Wrote: How do you come up with that conclusion? It won't happen unless some serious additions are made to the O line.

How do you suggest we fix the oline?? Use a first and 2nd? I dont trust Paul Alexanders talent evaluation and im sure it will be a large factor if we draft a ol again.I dont wanna trade down from 9 and i dont like Cam Rob at 9 so i figured if we go rb 1 and ol in the 2nd we would be good,Also i dont think theres a lineman in this draft who could come in and just fix it.Maybe it would benefit this team to take some players who would have an impact now.If we trade down or take ol in 1 that we are wasting a huge opportunity

(01-15-2017, 06:48 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Look at it like this, Bernard is going to be coming back from ACL.  Hill hasn't done much of anything special since his rookie year, and he's already getting banged up regularly.  Team really should be looking to draft a RB.

Agreed. Either way, if we go RB at #9, Gio and especially Hill will become afterthoughts. Ok, maybe "afterthought" is strong for Gio, but it'd be far from an even split. You only draft a RB that high if he's going to be the starter and a huge part of the offense.  300+ touches.

(01-16-2017, 01:09 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Agreed. If we go RB at #9, Gio and especially Hill will become afterthoughts. Ok, maybe "afterthought" is strong for Gio, but it'd be far from an even split. You only draft a RB that high if he's going to be the starter and a huge part of the offense.  300+ touches.

Anything to get rid of Hill.After watching the playoff games this weekend i think we go rb at 9 and it makes us so much better and takes away the predictability of this offense.