(05-02-2017, 01:53 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I hope we keep 7 WR's in 2017 and do it simply by eliminating a QB from the 53 man roster.

As far as Core, I think as a WR he has advantage if he can develop into Green's backup and I think he can. He has the size, he has the speed. If I look at our WR's he is the only one as of now until Malone develops to be a minny AJG (obviously not near the talent, but no back up has elite starter's talent).

WR1 - Green - Core
WR2 -Lafell - Boyd - Ross, Core, Malone
 Slot - Boyd, Ross, Erickson

Is this sneario strictky from a WR, Erickson may be most expendable

ST  - Erickson great returner
Core - is very good gunner

Just an opinion

1 assisted tackle in the year makes Core a very good gunner?

(05-02-2017, 03:57 PM)Whatever Wrote: Starting with an official 40 time of 4.44, Erickson showed that he has the speed to make a difference at the next level.


You want to compare total yardage for the year?  How about preseason receiving stats?  How about college stats?  Of course, Erickson was 1st team All Big 10 and Core was #2 to the biggest WR draft bust in the 1st round last yrar.  But hey, Core bumped those stats up with that meaningless Ravens game that Baltimore had packed it in beforehand 

Cool you found the bold font. Now here is something for you, his official NFL COMBINE TIME was a 4.52, which is the only number I care about don't give me his pro day time to make him sound faster. I don't care about pre season stats they are agaisnt guys who are bagging groceries now. When NFL games counted they went to James Wright and Cody Core, not Erickson. Pre season all stars come through here every season and then do nothing during the season, that is what Alex Erickson brings as a WR (12th on the team in receiving).

Side note, Core still had more yards and catches without the Baltimore game than your boy. Also, where was your boy in that meaningless game? Not even a catch in a meaningless regular season game with a depleted WR group?

(05-02-2017, 04:26 PM)Au165 Wrote: Cool you found the bold font. Now here is something for you, his official NFL COMBINE TIME was a 4.52, which is the only number I care about don't give me his pro day time to make him sound faster. I don't care about pre season stats they are agaisnt guys who are bagging groceries now, when NFL games counted they went to James Wright and Cody Core, not Erickson. Pre season all stars come through here every season and then do nothing during the season, that is what Alex Erickson brings as a WR (12th on the team in receiving).

Side note, Core still had more yards and catches without the Baltimore game than your boy. Also, where was your boy in that meaningless game? Not even a catch in a meaningless regular season game with a depleted WR group?

It would be kind of hard for Erickson to post a combine 40 time, since he wasn't invited to the combine.

"Erickson, who was oddly not invited to any postseason all-star games or to the combine after posting an All-Big Ten First Team season as a senior, took advantage of his opportunity. Starting with an official 40 time of 4.44, Erickson showed that he has the speed to make a difference at the next level. 

So, are you just making up facts to defend your guy, or so you just not have a clue what you're talking about?

(05-02-2017, 04:50 PM)Whatever Wrote: It would be kind of hard for Erickson to post a combine 40 time, since he wasn't invited to the combine.

"Erickson, who was oddly not invited to any postseason all-star games or to the combine after posting an All-Big Ten First Team season as a senior, took advantage of his opportunity. Starting with an official 40 time of 4.44, Erickson showed that he has the speed to make a difference at the next level. 

So, are you just making up facts to defend your guy, or so you just not have a clue what you're talking about?

I apologize, the NFL.com draft profile page was showing a 4.52 40 which is normally their combine, but that is what they are listing from his pro day. So apparently the NFL.com scout had him at a 4.52 not a 4.44.

So back to the question, why was his production so much worse than Core and Wright? Why was it they were used in those meaningless games, yet Erickson wasn't?

(05-02-2017, 04:04 PM)Whatever Wrote: 1 assisted tackle in the year makes Core a very good gunner?

Simmons mentioned it an interview last year. But as I have said numerous times, I hope we keep all 7 and feel they all bring different skills sets.

(05-02-2017, 05:22 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Simmons mentioned it an interview last year. But as I have said numerous times, I hope we keep all 7 and feel they all bring different skills sets.

Hey buddy good draft for ya? What did you think of it?

(05-02-2017, 05:30 PM)packerbacker Wrote: Hey buddy good draft for ya? What did you think of it?

I am cautiously optimistic. I love we have added speed on offense and defense. I never thought we were in rebuild mode, but did feel we were getting too old and slow. How about your draft?

(05-02-2017, 04:58 PM)Au165 Wrote: I apologize, the NFL.com draft profile page was showing a 4.52 40 which is normally their combine, but that is what they are listing from his pro day. So apparently the NFL.com scout had him at a 4.52 not a 4.44.

So back to the question, why was his production so much worse than Core and Wright? Why was it they were used in those meaningless games, yet Erickson wasn't?

saved him PR and KR duties....   they were really pushing wright and he was pretty bad I'm glad that crush is over. but your main reason is probly... Boyd was healthy and Erickson figures to backup slot if anything

From the posts I've seen so far, it looks like everyone thinks Russell is going to make it over Benwikere. Do you guys just think he was brought in as a camp body or are you guys impressed with whatever Russell showed against Baltimore last year? I know Benwikere isn't someone you want to rely on as a starter, but thought he added good depth. Was he picked up as a ST guy? I understand Russell is only in his 2nd year, so he probably has a lot of potential, so he likely makes it over Benwikere if it comes down to the two of them. I wonder if the Bengals are trying to see how the CB group does (Jones, Dre, Shaw, Dennard, WJ, Russell, Benwikere), before deciding if they can cut Jones and have everyone else kind of move up the chain.

(05-02-2017, 04:58 PM)Au165 Wrote: I apologize, the NFL.com draft profile page was showing a 4.52 40 which is normally their combine, but that is what they are listing from his pro day. So apparently the NFL.com scout had him at a 4.52 not a 4.44.

So back to the question, why was his production so much worse than Core and Wright? Why was it they were used in those meaningless games, yet Erickson wasn't?

No problem.

There could be a number of reasons why Core outperformed him against Baltimore.  Core could have just had a really good game or matched up well against whoever he was lined up with.  Part of the game plan could have been to try to Core the ball to see what they had for next year.  As the primary returner in his rookie year, it's likely that Erickson isn't getting reps with the first team offense.  You also have to consider that given his body type and skill set compared to the rest of our WR's last year, Erickson probably saw a lot of scout team duty simulating guys like Steve Smith, Antonio Brown, etc.  Or, Core may just be a better WR.

However, what I'm looking at is that Erickson was an excellent returner last year and had 57 returns, or "touches", as a returner, not counting fair catches, touchbacks, or receptions.  By comparison, Tyler Boyd had 58 on offense.  LaFell had 64.  As the #4-5 WR's, Core and Wright combined for 32, with 15 for Wright and 17 for Core.  I don't want to downgrade a position that gets 57 touches a year to improve a spot that may get 20 touches, max.  That's being generous, btw, as Core would likely be the 6th WR and get fewer opportunities than last year, especially with Ross added to the top 4.  

I'm not opposed to cutting Erickson if someone that they are willing to risk as the primary returner proves to be better.  However, he had a great year last year, and that will be a tall order.  

From a roster management standpoint, there's not a lot of point to trying to keep Core.  Ross is here for 4 years, plus the 5th year option. Malone will have a 4 year deal.  AJ, Boyd, Erickson, and Core have 3 years left on their deals.  LaFell has 2 years.  AJ is a franchise cornerstone.  Ross would have to be a complete disaster to get cut.  Same with Boyd.  Malone is a lot like Core, but better.  LaFell provides a veteran presence.  I can't see a scenario where Core climbs above #5 on the depth chart before his contract expires.  We'd basically just be developing him for his next team if we kept him, because he will never be in a position to get significant touches.  Depth and competition are great, but I just don't see how you cut a top shelf KR to keep a guy that's never going to progress up the depth chart.  I would understand it more if we had a lot of WR's who are getting old or who's contracts are expiring at the end of the year, but that's not the case for us.

(05-02-2017, 07:22 PM)Whatever Wrote: No problem.

There could be a number of reasons why Core outperformed him against Baltimore.  Core could have just had a really good game or matched up well against whoever he was lined up with.  Part of the game plan could have been to try to Core the ball to see what they had for next year.  As the primary returner in his rookie year, it's likely that Erickson isn't getting reps with the first team offense.  You also have to consider that given his body type and skill set compared to the rest of our WR's last year, Erickson probably saw a lot of scout team duty simulating guys like Steve Smith, Antonio Brown, etc.  Or, Core may just be a better WR.

However, what I'm looking at is that Erickson was an excellent returner last year and had 57 returns, or "touches", as a returner, not counting fair catches, touchbacks, or receptions.  By comparison, Tyler Boyd had 58 on offense.  LaFell had 64.  As the #4-5 WR's, Core and Wright combined for 32, with 15 for Wright and 17 for Core.  I don't want to downgrade a position that gets 57 touches a year to improve a spot that may get 20 touches, max.  That's being generous, btw, as Core would likely be the 6th WR and get fewer opportunities than last year, especially with Ross added to the top 4.  

I'm not opposed to cutting Erickson if someone that they are willing to risk as the primary returner proves to be better.  However, he had a great year last year, and that will be a tall order.  

From a roster management standpoint, there's not a lot of point to trying to keep Core.  Ross is here for 4 years, plus the 5th year option. Malone will have a 4 year deal.  AJ, Boyd, Erickson, and Core have 3 years left on their deals.  LaFell has 2 years.  AJ is a franchise cornerstone.  Ross would have to be a complete disaster to get cut.  Same with Boyd.  Malone is a lot like Core, but better.  LaFell provides a veteran presence.  I can't see a scenario where Core climbs above #5 on the depth chart before his contract expires.  We'd basically just be developing him for his next team if we kept him, because he will never be in a position to get significant touches.  Depth and competition are great, but I just don't see how you cut a top shelf KR to keep a guy that's never going to progress up the depth chart.  I would understand it more if we had a lot of WR's who are getting old or who's contracts are expiring at the end of the year, but that's not the case for us.

I appreciate the thought put into this post, especially the roster management part.  However, I'm not sure you can reach conclusions on Core's roster ascendance at this point.  You're probably correct in your projection, but since Core's contract doesn't expire for 3 years, whereas LaFell's expires in two, there's already a scenario where keeping 6 WRs on the roster 3 years from now could include Core.  But the other thing that adds a lot of uncertainty at this point is that we don't really know what we have in Malone and one of Hobson's articles mentions this year as basically a developmental year without really getting play time for him.  Going by college stats it's probably (I really don't know, but I'm making an assumption here), fair to say that Malone has produced better at that level.  However, given Core's development late last year, there's a possibility he could ascend up the depth chart to maybe #4 (in a scenario without Lafell).  I think I agree with your projections, but there's still some uncertainty that we must wait to see play out.  One of these uncertain things is injuries, which could definitely alter who we keep.  I guess this is my long winded way of saying that I could see a case for keeping 7 WRs if we feel all 7 increase the overall quality of the team even if we may be a little thin at some other spot.  That is, we push the decision of cutting good players out for another 2 years (assuming LaFell lasts that long and Erickson is not beat out by someone else at returner).  If Erickson gets beat out as a returner, maybe we can trade him for another player who could bolster the team in a spot with weaker depth.  

QB: Dalton, McCaron

HB: Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Peerman

TE: Eifert, Hewitt, Uzomah

WR: Green, Lafell, Boyd, Ross, Core, Malone, Erickson


OT: Ogbuehi, Fisher, Winston

OG: Boling, Smith, Westerman, Johnson

C: Bodine, Dielman

DE: Dunlap, Johnson, Willis, Clarke, Lawson

DT: Atkins, Billings, Williams, Glasgow

LB: Burfict, Minter, Rey, Vigil, Dawson, Evans

CB: Jones, Kirkpatrick, Jackson, Dennard, Shaw, Russell

S: Iloka, Williams, Smith, Fejedelem

P: Huber

K: Elliot

LS: Harris

(05-02-2017, 08:05 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: QB: Dalton, McCaron

HB: Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Peerman

TE: Eifert, Hewitt, Uzomah

WR: Green, Lafell, Boyd, Ross, Core, Malone, Erickson


OT: Ogbuehi, Fisher, Winston

OG: Boling, Smith, Westerman, Johnson

C: Bodine, Dielman

DE: Dunlap, Johnson, Willis, Clarke, Lawson

DT: Atkins, Billings, Williams, Glasgow

LB: Burfict, Minter, Rey, Vigil, Dawson, Evans

CB: Jones, Kirkpatrick, Jackson, Dennard, Shaw, Russell

S: Iloka, Williams, Smith, Fejedelem

P: Huber

K: Elliot

LS: Harris

Wilson will make the squad.  I just cannot see the Bengals keeping 7 WR.  Every time someone list the offensive line depth, it scares the crap out of me.  

I think an injury or Gio starting the year gives us some early season flexibility.

(05-02-2017, 05:51 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I am cautiously optimistic. I love we have added speed on offense and defense. I never thought we were in rebuild mode, but did feel we were getting too old and slow. How about your draft?

I liked it. We beefed up our defense which we needed to do in the worst way. Our secondary is awful. I was happy with our draft too.

(05-02-2017, 08:05 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: QB: Dalton, McCaron

HB: Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Peerman

TE: Eifert, Hewitt, Uzomah

WR: Green, Lafell, Boyd, Ross, Core, Malone, Erickson


OT: Ogbuehi, Fisher, Winston

OG: Boling, Smith, Westerman, Johnson

C: Bodine, Dielman

DE: Dunlap, Johnson, Willis, Clarke, Lawson

DT: Atkins, Billings, Williams, Glasgow

LB: Burfict, Minter, Rey, Vigil, Dawson, Evans

CB: Jones, Kirkpatrick, Jackson, Dennard, Shaw, Russell

S: Iloka, Williams, Smith, Fejedelem

P: Huber

K: Elliot

LS: Harris

It could shake out this way.  I think it's a lot more likely that they keep Kroft as the 4th TE given Eifert's injury history instead of 7 WR's, though.  With them initially listing Lawson as a LB, I think he knocks Dawson off the roster and opens a DL spot for Gilberry or Hardison.

(05-02-2017, 08:05 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: QB: Dalton, McCaron

HB: Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Peerman Wilson

TE: Eifert, Hewitt, Uzomah, Kroft

WR: Green, Lafell, Boyd, Ross, Core, Malone, Erickson


OT: Ogbuehi, Fisher, Winston

OG: Boling, Smith, Westerman, Johnson

C: Bodine, Dielman

DE: Dunlap, Johnson, Willis, Clarke, Lawson (Move Lawson to LB group)

DT: Atkins, Billings, Williams, Glasgow, Sims or Hardison

LB: Burfict, Minter, Rey, Vigil, Dawson, Evans (Lawwson from DL group)

CB: Jones, Kirkpatrick, Jackson, Dennard, Shaw, Russell

S: Iloka, Williams, Smith, Fejedelem

P: Huber

K: Elliot

LS: Harris

Here is my input on how I think it shakes out (no injuries taken into consideration)

My 53 man roster predictions:

Offense

QB: Andy Dalton, A.J. McCarron

RB: Jeremy Hill, Giovani Bernard, Joe Mixon

WR1: A.J. Green, John Ross III

WR2: Brandon Lafell, Cody Core, Josh Malone

Slot WR: Tyler Boyd, Alex Erickson (+KR, PR)

TE: Tyler Eifert, C.J. Uzomah, Tyler Kroft

LT: Cedric Ogbuehi, Eric Winston (+RT)

LG: Clint Boling, Christian Westerman (+RG)

C: Russell Bodine, T.J. Johnson (+LG, RG), J.J. Dielmann

RG: Andre Smith (+RT)

RT: Jake Fisher


Defense

NT: Andrew Billings, Ryan Glasgow

3T: Geno Atkins, Marcus Hardison

LE: Carlos Dunlap, Jordan Willis

RE: Michael Johnson, Will Clarke

EDGE/Specialist: Wallace Gillberry, Carl Lawson (+SAM)

WLB: Vontaze Burfict, Vincent Rey, Jordan Evans

MLB: Kevin Minter, Hardy Nickerson Jr.

SAM: Nick Vigil,

CB1: Dre Kirkpatrick, William Jackson III

CB2: Adam Jones, Darqueze Dennard (+Slot CB), Bene Benwikere

Slot CB: Josh Shaw

S: George Iloka, Shawn Williams, Darron Smith, Brandon Wilson


Special Teams:

K: Jake Elliott

P: Kevin Huber

LS: Clark Harris  


Notable Cuts

1. Ryan Hewitt
Simply put, he can’t do his job when the offensive line is ineffective. With the selection of Joe Mixon and the increased emphasis on WRs, there simply won’t be many opportunities for Hewitt to get on the field. We will run most of our plays out of the shotgun to mask our weak O-line, and this very talented player will probably be allowed to walk. If we go 6 WRs his spot might be saved.

2. Cedric Peerman
Excellent captain and special teams leader, but with the amount of talent we are trying to absorb from this year’s draft there will likely emerge someone younger and faster who can match Peerman's ST production while also counting as depth at a position thinner than RB (see. Brandon Wilson).

3. Pat Sims
He has been reliable over the years but the youth movement is here and I think it's the end of the line for Pat. However, if one of our young DTs goes down before final cuts, Sims will likely be the first guy off the bubble and back into the fold.

4. Brandon Thompson
Hasn’t developed into the player we all would've hoped. Injuries have kept him off the field, and when he has been on the field he hasn’t shown many flashes. Glasgow is going to absorb his roster spot with relative ease.

5. Randy Bullock
Randy didn’t knock anyone's socks off in his limited sample size last year, and his heir apparent is the first rookie kicker to impress Simmons in years.

6. Clayton Fejedelem
Solid contributor as a rookie, but Wilson likely has a higher ceiling. Coaches like him though and will do what they can to stash him on the practice squad.

7. Marquis Flowers
Injuries have rattled Flowers left and right. If he makes it through camp healthy he has a chance, but I think this ends up being his last shot with the team.

8. Paul Dawson
Coaches don’t seem impressed with this guy. He seems to have all of Tez’s attitude but little of his impact. As with Flowers he’s not completely out of it, but I think someone younger with more hunger takes his spot.

9. KeiVarae Russell
Disappointing to let a young guy with talent (and an INT in limited snaps!) go, but he’s up against the stiffest of competition. Adam Jones getting released was about his only prayer going into this season. He might hold off Benwikere, but the coaches historically prefer experience over potential. Bene has several career starts, Russell has 0. (for the record, I prefer Russell)

10. Mason Schreck
Kroft has been surpassed by Uzomah on the depth chart, but I still think he should be able to beat out Schreck. Coaches would probably like to stash Mason on the practice squad and let him develop this year.

(05-02-2017, 07:14 PM)masterpanthera_t Wrote: From the posts I've seen so far, it looks like everyone thinks Russell is going to make it over Benwikere.  Do you guys just think he was brought in as a camp body or are you guys impressed with whatever Russell showed against Baltimore last  year?  I know Benwikere isn't someone you want to rely on as a starter, but thought he added good depth.  Was he picked up as a ST guy? I understand Russell is only in his 2nd year, so he probably has a lot of potential, so he likely makes it over Benwikere if it comes down to the two of them.  I wonder if the Bengals are trying to see how the CB group does (Jones, Dre, Shaw, Dennard, WJ, Russell, Benwikere), before deciding if they can cut Jones and have everyone else kind of move up the chain.

The Bengals claimed Russell off waivers last year for a reason. He's more than just a camp body. I liked him as a mid-round pick coming out of college last year. Given the Bengals have so much invested in first rounders, I think Russell fit well as a developmental CB that would be an ideal 3rd CB.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/keivarae-russell?id=2555547

Quote:Smart, experienced cornerback has strapped it on against some of the best receivers in the nation during his time with the Irish. Russell has the athleticism and cover talent to play press coverage and make a living there, but he may never produce as many pass break­ups or interceptions as a team would like. Played outside and from the slot and offers that versatility to an NFL team as a future starter or third corner.

(05-05-2017, 05:07 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The Bengals claimed Russell off waivers last year for a reason. He's more than just a camp body. I liked him as a mid-round pick coming out of college last year. Given the Bengals have so much invested in first rounders, I think Russell fit well as a developmental CB that would be an ideal 3rd CB.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/keivarae-russell?id=2555547

Let me clarify, I meant was Benwikere brought in as a camp body.