We take fisher over tyler lockett in the 2nd rd! Lockett has absolutely ripped it up in the preseason, fisher, not so much.  (lockett has done alot of damage vs. the "ones) Lockett would have rid us of the agony of watching tate return kicks and would at least be the number 3 wr and a game changer. The fisher pick was typical bengals b.s. preparing for the financial future instead of win now. And dont tell me about alford, he couldnt even beat out tater tot.

(09-05-2015, 08:33 AM)jjvolt Wrote: We take fisher over tyler lockett in the 2nd rd! Lockett has absolutely ripped it up in the preseason, fisher, not so much.  (lockett has done alot of damage vs. the "ones) Lockett would have rid us of the agony of watching tate return kicks and would at least be the number 3 wr and a game changer. The fisher pick was typical bengals b.s. preparing for the financial future instead of win now. And dont tell me about alford, he couldnt even beat out tater tot.

You can't really make assumptions about this year's draft based on a few preseason games.  

(09-05-2015, 08:33 AM)jjvolt Wrote: We take fisher over tyler lockett in the 2nd rd! Lockett has absolutely ripped it up in the preseason, fisher, not so much.  (lockett has done alot of damage vs. the "ones) Lockett would have rid us of the agony of watching tate return kicks and would at least be the number 3 wr and a game changer. The fisher pick was typical bengals b.s. preparing for the financial future instead of win now. And dont tell me about alford, he couldnt even beat out tater tot.

This is the epitome of short-sightedness.

(09-05-2015, 08:33 AM)jjvolt Wrote: We take fisher over tyler lockett in the 2nd rd! Lockett has absolutely ripped it up in the preseason, fisher, not so much.  (lockett has done alot of damage vs. the "ones) Lockett would have rid us of the agony of watching tate return kicks and would at least be the number 3 wr and a game changer. The fisher pick was typical bengals b.s. preparing for the financial future instead of win now. And dont tell me about alford, he couldnt even beat out tater tot.

Besides, if they take Lockett, how is that any less just preparing for the financial future? The top 3 WRs are all free agents after this year. If they were just drafting for financial future reasons, they WOULD have taken Lockett.

I liked Lockett a lot too, but will never complain about taking O-line high in the draft.

Plus, how do you know from one year to the next what position is going to be a need?

And I still don't understand your issues with Tate returning kicks.

(09-05-2015, 08:33 AM)jjvolt Wrote: We take fisher over tyler lockett in the 2nd rd! Lockett has absolutely ripped it up in the preseason, fisher, not so much.  (lockett has done alot of damage vs. the "ones) Lockett would have rid us of the agony of watching tate return kicks and would at least be the number 3 wr and a game changer. The fisher pick was typical bengals b.s. preparing for the financial future instead of win now. And dont tell me about alford, he couldnt even beat out tater tot.

- Locker has looked really good this preseason and, as long as he can stay healthy, might be a stud. But, you can't find a lot of smaller fast WRs in today's NFL that last entire seasons while playing a featured role in an offense. Only a few teams/players have managed to pull that off consistently.

- I like Fischer as a prospect and feel like the Bengals made the perfect moves this past draft and offseason. That's not me being a homer, I just like the Bengals weapons on offense a lot and I actually am impressed with and give a lot of credit for the team's front office for staying away from the fast, shiny new skill guys and instead seeing that there is absolute garbage for depth behind the starting line. Depth on the line is HUGELY important with two aging tackles in the last years of their deals.

- Brandon Tate is not a flashy player and I get why a lot of Bengals fans are down or indifferent towards him (I fall into the latter). But he has been consistent and is the 4th option in the outside receiver spots - a position where the Bengals need depth.

- Alford is a similar player to Locket, just not as polished. I see a similar player in the long run based on (and this is key) WHAT THE BENGALS DO WITH SMALLER SLOT GUYS.

- Look at who the Bengals have to slide into those slot routes: Sanu, Bernard, Alford (developing), and Burkhead. Not to mention the fact that the Bengals slip their TEs out there in those spaces quite often. I actually think Burkhead is a sleeping dragon as a slot receiver and if those guys are already on the roster, why take another (?) given my final point below.....

- In the return game, look, I agree that the Bengals need a home run threat. But they already have that in Pacman if the need arrises. Marvin just doesn't seem to value that position enough to put a strong starter out there to chance injury - hence why Alford makes sense as a low draft pick who will be brought along to develop into that role. Honestly, remembering Jason Sehorn blowing his knee out returning a kick makes me gun shy on Jones being back there anyway.

I wanted Lockett too, and I wasn't too big on the Fisher pick. We do have a big need for OL though, so I'm not too mad. Just think about who's behind the starters right now at OL. Our OL is lacking the most depth out of any position on the team right now IMO.

(09-05-2015, 08:33 AM)jjvolt Wrote: We take fisher over tyler lockett in the 2nd rd! Lockett has absolutely ripped it up in the preseason, fisher, not so much.  (lockett has done alot of damage vs. the "ones) Lockett would have rid us of the agony of watching tate return kicks and would at least be the number 3 wr and a game changer. The fisher pick was typical bengals b.s. preparing for the financial future instead of win now. And dont tell me about alford, he couldnt even beat out tater tot.

We needed tackles more than we needed small WRs.  

(09-05-2015, 08:33 AM)jjvolt Wrote: We take fisher over tyler lockett in the 2nd rd! Lockett has absolutely ripped it up in the preseason, fisher, not so much.  (lockett has done alot of damage vs. the "ones) Lockett would have rid us of the agony of watching tate return kicks and would at least be the number 3 wr and a game changer. The fisher pick was typical bengals b.s. preparing for the financial future instead of win now. And dont tell me about alford, he couldnt even beat out tater tot.

Meh, If you ask me, 2nd round would have been better spent taking a NT, than a small WR.  For that matter, many of us on here were hoping to see Jamison Crowder on this team, he's also looked pretty good this preseason.

In the first round Philly took Agholor right before us then in the second Miami traded up to take Phillips who was also rumoured to be a target. Sometimes the draft doesn't fall for you and you take what your board says. You can't argue with two high graded OT though - if they pay off we'll be sorted for a decade at a particularly important position.

(09-05-2015, 08:47 AM)BonnieBengal Wrote: You can't really make assumptions about this year's draft based on a few preseason games.  

I can. Based on locketts credentials, production, and bloodline, yes i can. So teams dont evaluate players or make assumptions about them in the preseason?
I wanted lockett from jump, taking fisher, especially after taking ced in the 1st is not gonna move this team deeper into the post season.

(09-05-2015, 08:50 AM)Joe Pong Wrote: This is the epitome of short-sightedness.

That is the epitome of why we are the bungles. Taking lockett wouldve helped a lot right now. Noooo, we wouldnt want that.....dont deter the path of the oxcart...

(09-05-2015, 08:33 AM)jjvolt Wrote: We take fisher over tyler lockett in the 2nd rd! Lockett has absolutely ripped it up in the preseason, fisher, not so much.  (lockett has done alot of damage vs. the "ones) Lockett would have rid us of the agony of watching tate return kicks and would at least be the number 3 wr and a game changer. The fisher pick was typical bengals b.s. preparing for the financial future instead of win now. And dont tell me about alford, he couldnt even beat out tater tot.

A lot of people might not be inclined to spend a second round pick on a 4th or 5th receiver.  He may end up legendary but he might be another small speed guy who can't get through a season without injury like plenty like him in the past.

(09-05-2015, 11:09 AM)jjvolt Wrote: That is the epitome of why we are the bungles. Taking lockett wouldve helped a lot right now. Noooo, we wouldnt want that.....dont deter the path of the oxcart...

You would have gotten negative rep from me if we had it.  Fans don't use the "B" word.

(09-05-2015, 11:12 AM)BonnieBengal Wrote: You would have gotten negative rep from me if we had it.  Fans don't use the "B" word.

+1

(09-05-2015, 11:12 AM)BonnieBengal Wrote: You would have gotten negative rep from me if we had it.  Fans don't use the "B" word.

I dont care about rep points. My use of "bungals" was to illustrate what other fans and writers think of us and will continue to do so until we go deep into the post season.

(09-05-2015, 11:19 AM)jjvolt Wrote: I dont care about rep points. My use of "bungals" was to illustrate what other fans and writers think of us and will continue to do so until we go deep into the post season.

Most experts and many "other fans" picked us to beat the Colts on the road in the playoffs last year.

"Bungles' is a term used by people who need to be negative about their own team.

Don't need Lockett because they have a similar guy in Rex. Yes I know Lockett had alot faster 40 but all the other measureables are quite similar. Rex does have one thing over Lockett... Size.

(09-05-2015, 11:24 AM)Synric Wrote: Don't need Lockett because they have a similar guy in Rex.  Yes I know Lockett had alot faster 40 but all the other measureables are quite similar.  Rex does have one thing over Lockett... Size.

Can't just forget about return ability, and one being slightly, just slightly, better at going deep.

Lockett would've been a good pick, had Fisher been off the board I think he actually would've been the pick. We had a good amount of interest and fit what we were targeting in a WR this offseason.

(09-05-2015, 11:32 AM)Stormborn Wrote: Can't just forget about return ability, and one being slightly, just slightly, better at going deep.

Lockett would've been a good pick, had Fisher been off the board I think he actually would've been the pick. We had a good amount of interest and fit what we were targeting in a WR this offseason.

Rex can play RB if needed too makes him more versatile. The return thing would be nice because they are lacking a dynamic return guy. No idea why Alford and Gio didnt get more chances Thursday night.

(09-05-2015, 11:38 AM)Synric Wrote: Rex can play RB if needed too makes him more versatile.  The return thing would be nice because they are lacking a dynamic return guy. No idea why Alford and Gio didnt get more chances Thursday night.

Well, I'd hope he could, because he is a RB. I'm excited to see him get lots of slot snaps, but Lockett would've had a great role here regardless.

You have a guy who you know what he can do and he still took those snaps away from them, no idea either.