(02-13-2018, 10:57 AM)Gohards Wrote: omg a 6 game suspension?! yeah, good thing we didn't draft him, it really would of been a shame if our first round pick missed that many games.

.....oh wait

Are you really making that parallel?  Did you see the charges?  I would be willing to bet that Ross has an amazing season this year while Foster won't play a down.  

Amazing how much people either want to be right about how the Bengals should NOT have selected Ross or simply want to see the kid fail.  Pathetic. 

(02-13-2018, 11:32 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pAtUHp_SFU

Not exactly verifiable, but yea. It's out there.

Thanks for trying to help, and at least this might give the dogs a bone, but I can't reveal my source.  

If you look back at the draft boards last year, I knew the Ross pick before it happened.  It wasn't a guess.  

(02-13-2018, 06:41 PM)samhain Wrote: Foster was a terrific player.  A lot of people wanted him, including on this board.  I wouldn't fault Marvin for feeling the same way, unless he was ignoring blatant personality flaws that he knew about and other may not have.  They should know better than that by now.

Exactly.  This is what I was trying to say.  Marvin AGAIN overlooked the character issues for the player.  Weren't we already sticking our heads out with the selection of Mixon?

And there is no way he wouldn't have known about the character issues pre-draft.  He had plenty.  That, as a first round pick, is unacceptable. 

(02-14-2018, 09:22 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Exactly.  This is what I was trying to say.  Marvin AGAIN overlooked the character issues for the player.  Weren't we already sticking our heads out with the selection of Mixon?

And there is no way he wouldn't have known about the character issues pre-draft.  He had plenty.  That, as a first round pick, is unacceptable. 

Marvin drafted Mixon.  You complained about that but Mixon has hod no problems.

Marvin did NOT draft Foster, yet you complain about Foster having more problems.

You are just making stuff up to bash Marvin.  Lots of coaches probably wanted Foster, but you can't complain about the ones who did not draft him.

(02-14-2018, 09:11 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Amazing how much people either want to be right about how the Bengals should NOT have selected Ross or simply want to see the kid fail.  Pathetic. 

There is no difference between the people who want Ross to fail and the people like you who want Marvin to fail.

You are all pathetic.

And the official word for today is ... pathetic. i.e. We're all pathetic Bengal fans.

(02-13-2018, 03:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And where is all the cheering and applause for Marvin finally holding a player accountable.  Isn't that what so meany people have been squealing about around here?

Yep, sure has.....too bad it was a rookie and not the likes of Maualuga, Pacman, Ced O, Nugent (soon enough), Bodine, Burfict at times, etc, etc.

The ONLY thing that I take from this, is that if it's true, we are going to be taking Smith or Edmunds at #12 if they are there.

(02-14-2018, 12:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Marvin drafted Mixon.  You complained about that but Mixon has hod no problems.

Marvin did NOT draft Foster, yet you complain about Foster having more problems.

You are just making stuff up to bash Marvin.  Lots of coaches probably wanted Foster, but you can't complain about the ones who did not draft him.

No, Marvin did not draft Mixon.  The Bengals did.  He was not in disagreement with that selection as he was with the Ross selection.  I am not making anything up to bash Marvin.  The fact that he hasn't learned his lesson about character guys is his problem, not mine.  

And Foster was thought of as a top 5 pick by many leading up to the draft.  He couldn't even stay out of trouble in that brief period, so he slid.  The 49ers took a risk and got burned.  The Bengals got Burfict as an UDFA.  They didn't spend a first round pick on him.  

And FWIW, I really didn't want Mixon.  He has proven to be a solid guy thus far, but I wouldn't have taken the risk, nor the public criticism when there were lots of other really talented backs available without the baggage.  

If the Bengals STILL didn't get crap for the 2006 team of idiots, I wouldn't mind so much, but I think the Bengals will never get a fair shake so long as that is their reputation.  

(02-14-2018, 12:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is no difference between the people who want Ross to fail and the people like you who want Marvin to fail.

You are all pathetic.

An insult coming from a guy like you reads like a complement, so thanks.  I don't want Marvin to fail, so that was a poor assumption by you.  I want the Bengals to win a Super Bowl and I don't think Marvin can accomplish that because he is far too conservative a coach.  I would much rather be wrong with a Lombardi than correct and another sub .500 season.

(02-14-2018, 01:56 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: The ONLY thing that I take from this, is that if it's true, we are going to be taking Smith or Edmunds at #12 if they are there.

Excellent point, and I believe if there isn't a LT there at #12, it will absolutely be a LB.

(02-14-2018, 03:31 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Excellent point, and I believe if there isn't a LT there at #12, it will absolutely be a LB.

I would be absolutely shocked if we draft a LT in the first round.

Nothing right now seems to suggest we will.  Usually you can read between the lines with Hobson or even Lap - who doesn't mince words about where he thinks the Bengals will go.

(02-14-2018, 03:27 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: No, Marvin did not draft Mixon.  The Bengals did.  He was not in disagreement with that selection as he was with the Ross selection.  I am not making anything up to bash Marvin.  The fact that he hasn't learned his lesson about character guys is his problem, not mine.  

And FWIW, I really didn't want Mixon. 

You are the one who has not learned a lesson if you wanted us to pass on Mixon.

Neither Marvin nor the Bengals drafted Foster.  So you can't rip Marvin for taking Foster.

(02-14-2018, 03:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are the one who has not learned a lesson if you wanted us to pass on Mixon.

Neither Marvin nor the Bengals drafted Foster.  So you can't rip Marvin for taking Foster.

This makes zero sense.  I needed to learn a lesson about building up our team without bad character guys, and working on our team's image by not wanting Mixon when there were a lot of other RBs in the draft that had similar talents?  And Marvin wanted to draft Foster, and did not want Ross....you can ask for a source and not get it.  Believe what you want.  I really don't give a shit.  And I CAN rip Marv for wanting to take Foster and for treating Ross like dogshit.  Don't tell me what I can and can't do.  

Hell a lot of us still wanted Foster even after the combine incident. I'ts easy to sit here now and 2nd guess it. Sure the warning signs were there but it's not like Ross didn't have any. For other reasons of course. It's the same crap as the Mike Brown wanted Colin Kap when Andy looked inferior. I'm convinced that no matter who we picked the result would have been the same. First rounder the can't get on the field. Also at least LB was a position of need unlike a WR.

(02-13-2018, 10:31 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I hope Mods will leave this in JN, because I want Bengal fan's responses to this discussion:

Marvin wanted Reuben Foster.  Even after he got thrown out of the combine, and had the "diluted sample", Marv saw his athletic ability and wanted him.  

I wanted Ross, but I don't mean this thread to be about Ross and his Marv Issues.

Foster has been arrested for pot and no domestic violence with possession of an illegal assault rifle in the same month.  He is likely facing a six game suspension.  

Had the Bengals drafted him, they would be right back where they started reputation-wise.  And they would be without another high draft pick.  So Marv acts like a douche and doesn't play Ross because he wanted Foster.  Thank God the Bengals didn't listen to him.

Ross didn't see playing time because he couldn't play, fumbled when given a chance, stopped on a route when given another chance, hid injury. He couldn't get it done in practice either, which is why Marvin wouldn't play him. Had nothing to do with the front office picking a guy the coaches didn't want.

A guy drafted in the top 10 should have an impact and help the team win. Ross, a WR, had zero catches, one touch and one fumble.

(02-14-2018, 12:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is no difference between the people who want Ross to fail and the people like you who want Marvin to fail.

You are all pathetic.

I don't know anyone who wanted Ross to fail. To the contrary I believe most wanted him to live up to his draft position, even if they wanted the team to draft someone else. Of course, Ross didn't, in fact, he didn't live up to a 7th round pick's production. Drafting a one year wonder in the top 10 was a big risk for the Bengals front office and it didn't pay off. Maybe it will pay off someday, but the team sure could have used an actual football player out there at WR.

As for Marvin Lewis, people are done with him and want him gone. Mike Brown made a mistake in bringing him back again after two dismal seasons. If the Bengals had a normal person as an owner Marvin Lewis would have been let go.

It isn't the fans who have failed Marvin Lewis, it's Marvin Lewis who has failed the fans. The same is true for Mike Brown. No one needs to want them to fail. They've already failed.

(02-15-2018, 03:56 AM)TKUHL Wrote: Hell a lot of us still wanted Foster even after the combine incident. I'ts easy to sit here now and 2nd guess it. Sure the warning signs were there but it's not like Ross didn't have any. For other reasons of course. It's the same crap as the Mike Brown wanted Colin Kap when Andy looked inferior. I'm convinced that no matter who we picked the result would have been the same. First rounder the can't get on the field. Also at least LB was a position of need unlike a WR.

I disagree that WR wasn't a position of need.  If you watched the Super Bowl teams, those QBs have 4-5 legitimate receiving threats.  Outside of AJ Green, the Bengals didn't have any WRs that threatened people vertically or could capitalize on single coverage.  Core showed some promise, but he didn't get much of an opportunity with Brandon Lafell taking the majority of snaps at X.  

The warning signs of character are far different from that of injury history.  Especially when considering in the first round.  

(02-15-2018, 09:06 AM)BengalChris Wrote: Ross didn't see playing time because he couldn't play, fumbled when given a chance, stopped on a route when given another chance, hid injury. He couldn't get it done in practice either, which is why Marvin wouldn't play him. Had nothing to do with the front office picking a guy the coaches didn't want.

A guy drafted in the top 10 should have an impact and help the team win. Ross, a WR, had zero catches, one touch and one fumble.

https://bengalswire.usatoday.com/2017/12/15/john-ross-practice-videos-making-big-plays-injury/

And I will remind you that Kareem Hunt had a fumble his first play of the season as well.  He went on to set an NFL Rookie total yards record against the Patriots and helped the Chiefs win the game.  

(02-15-2018, 09:52 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: https://bengalswire.usatoday.com/2017/12/15/john-ross-practice-videos-making-big-plays-injury/

And I will remind you that Kareem Hunt had a fumble his first play of the season as well.  He went on to set an NFL Rookie total yards record against the Patriots and helped the Chiefs win the game.  

A few select catches doesn't prove he was doing it in practice. It makes no sense that Marvin would keep him inactive because he was overruled by Mike Brown on the draft pick.