Looks like our good friend Duke Tobin was ranked 16. Half the AFCN represents the top 5; Dorsey was ranked 4th, Colbert ranked 3rd, and Decosta is "to new to rank" but had Ozzie at 4 the year before. Tough.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001027372/article/nfl-gm-power-rankings-john-dorsey-kevin-colbert-rank-top-5

Quote:RANK

16

Duke Tobin, Bengals
Tobin's drafts have fallen off a bit in recent years, but the team's director of player personnel deserves extra credit for working within the constraints of a Bengals organization with fewer resources than other teams. It will be interesting to see if new Bengals coach Zac Taylor gives Tobin a new lease on life like Sean McVay did for Les Snead and Matt Nagy did for Ryan Pace.

Here's last years ranking.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000927154/article/gm-power-rankings-howie-roseman-kevin-colbert-among-best

Perfect, right in the middle. Everything Mikey strives for - to be average.

(04-23-2019, 10:48 AM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Looks like our good friend Duke Tobin was ranked 16. Half the AFCN represents the top 5; Dorsey was ranked 4th, Colbert ranked 3rd, and Decosta is "to new to rank" but had Ozzie at 4 the year before. Tough.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001027372/article/nfl-gm-power-rankings-john-dorsey-kevin-colbert-rank-top-5

That's amazing considering Bengals and Mike Brown have NEVER had a GM.  Your good friend Mike Tobin has some kind of player personell job.  He is NOT a GM.  So in ranking GM's in NFL Bengals would be last just because they have never had a GM.  Now if we consider Mike Brown as GM then they are still last for no play-off wins under Mike Brown since 1991 to now. 

BECAUSE BENGALS HAVE NOBODY LISTED AS A GM, BENGALS HAVE TO RANK LAST WHEN RANKING GM'S.

The Brown family has refused giving coaches power to coach, has refused to hire a GM. Some have great hopes that Brown daughter Katie will someday take over, but I still see that as All In The Family. The Brown Family power control really holds this team back. There is no leadership. They won't allow coaches to have the needed leadership. If this was bar rescue or restaurant rescue TV shows, the blame for no play-off wins and poor franchise falls on ownership's refusal to admit they are in need of letting others manage and run the winning football games part of the team. Lack of quality leadership kills the Bengals. I'm for letting the new coach have The Power, but Brown Family are control freaks, even if it means more losing.

(04-23-2019, 12:33 PM)kevin Wrote: That's amazing considering Bengals and Mike Brown have NEVER had a GM.  Your good friend Mike Tobin has some kind of player personell job.  He is NOT a GM.  So in ranking GM's in NFL Bengals would be last just because they have never had a GM.  Now if we consider Mike Brown as GM then they are still last for no play-off wins under Mike Brown since 1991 to now. 

BECAUSE BENGALS HAVE NOBODY LISTED AS A GM, BENGALS HAVE TO RANK LAST WHEN RANKING GM'S.

The Brown family has refused giving coaches power to coach, has refused to hire a GM.  Some have great hopes that Brown daughter Katie will someday take over, but I still see that as All In The Family.  The Brown Family power control really holds this team back.  There is no leadership. They won't allow coaches to have the needed leadership.  If this was bar rescue or restaurant rescue TV shows, the blame for no play-off wins and poor franchise falls on ownership's refusal to admit they are in need of letting others manage and run the winning football games part of the team. Lack of quality leadership kills the Bengals.  I'm for letting the new coach have The Power, but Brown Family are control freaks, even if it means more losing.

So does that mean the pats should be last as well since Belichick is the GM?

(04-23-2019, 12:51 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: So does that mean the pats should be last as well since Belichick is the GM?

If Belichick is head coach and GM then he is a GM.  The Bengals have NEVER had a GM.  Mike Browns rear end puckers up at the very mention of hiring a GM.  We all know Bengals have never had a GM.  This all goes back to Paul Brown and Art Modell.  The Brown Family refuses to give power outside the Family, kind of like a Godfather movie. 

If Belichick is the GM, then he is the best GM in NFL. It also shows that a head coach should have more power. It shows New England and other owners are doing it right and Mike Brown since 1991 doing it wrong.

(04-23-2019, 10:48 AM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Looks like our good friend Duke Tobin was ranked 16. Half the AFCN represents the top 5; Dorsey was ranked 4th, Colbert ranked 3rd, and Decosta is "to new to rank" but had Ozzie at 4 the year before. Tough.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001027372/article/nfl-gm-power-rankings-john-dorsey-kevin-colbert-rank-top-5

Has Dorsey been so great?  He came into a team with shitloads of draft capital, a pretty fair amount of talent already on the team and a crazy amount of cap space and an owner who doomed previous regimes with his own goofy decision making who finally decided to keep his nose out of it.

Dorsey did not build the thing from the ground up.  Granted, he has made bold moves.  But he was handed a situation where bold moves were possible.   Let's see how he sustains it from now on.  But he won't.  He'll move on.

(04-23-2019, 01:22 PM)McC Wrote: Has Dorsey been so great?  He came into a team with shitloads of draft capital, a pretty fair amount of talent already on the team and a crazy amount of cap space and an owner who doomed previous regimes with his own goofy decision making who finally decided to keep his nose out of it.

Dorsey did not build the thing from the ground up.  Granted, he has made bold moves.  But he was handed a situation where bold moves were possible.   Let's see how he sustains it from now on.  But he won't.  He'll move on.

I think his money will be earned (or not) when he has to start managing the cap after Baker is off his rookie deal. I think he's better at evaluating talent. He nails mid-round picks:

Travis Kelce (third round, 2013), 
Hill (fifth round, 2016) 
Kareem Hunt (third round, 2017) 

Zach Fulton and Laurent Duvernay-Tardif were both sixth-rounders in 2014. 
Cornerback Steve Nelson and wide receiver Chris Conley, both third-rounders in 2015
Defensive lineman Rakeem Nunez-Rochez (sixth round 2015) 
linebacker Ramik Wilson (fourth round, 2015) 

(04-23-2019, 12:33 PM)kevin Wrote: That's amazing considering Bengals and Mike Brown have NEVER had a GM.  Your good friend Mike Tobin has some kind of player personell job.  He is NOT a GM.  So in ranking GM's in NFL Bengals would be last just because they have never had a GM.  Now if we consider Mike Brown as GM then they are still last for no play-off wins under Mike Brown since 1991 to now. 

BECAUSE BENGALS HAVE NOBODY LISTED AS A GM, BENGALS HAVE TO RANK LAST WHEN RANKING GM'S.

The Brown family has refused giving coaches power to coach, has refused to hire a GM.  Some have great hopes that Brown daughter Katie will someday take over, but I still see that as All In The Family.  The Brown Family power control really holds this team back.  There is no leadership. They won't allow coaches to have the needed leadership.  If this was bar rescue or restaurant rescue TV shows, the blame for no play-off wins and poor franchise falls on ownership's refusal to admit they are in need of letting others manage and run the winning football games part of the team. Lack of quality leadership kills the Bengals.  I'm for letting the new coach have The Power, but Brown Family are control freaks, even if it means more losing.

So the Bengals should hire a GM but then give all the power to the coaches?  That doesn't make any sense.

And I say if we don't have a GM then we need to be listed FIRST because our GM has never made any mistakes.

I've always felt like the whole "we don't have a GM thing" is overstated. It's an easy excuse to use when they're bad, but nobody ever mentioned it from 2011-2015 when they hit on player after player to build that roster.

How many GMs did the Browns go through with nothing to show for it before finally hitting on one who might - and it's still a might - make them a competitor again? I'll take the Bengals approach to that any day.

(04-23-2019, 01:34 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: He nails mid-round picks:

Travis Kelce (third round, 2013), 
Hill (fifth round, 2016) 
Kareem Hunt (third round, 2017) 

Zach Fulton and Laurent Duvernay-Tardif were both sixth-rounders in 2014. 
Cornerback Steve Nelson and wide receiver Chris Conley, both third-rounders in 2015
Defensive lineman Rakeem Nunez-Rochez (sixth round 2015) 
linebacker Ramik Wilson (fourth round, 2015) 

TBH the Bengals have a pretty good record of that as well.

Today on the radio Dave Lapham says he gets the impression that Mike Brown is as un-involved in the draft process as ever, going so far to say he may not even be the one with final say on who they take.

(04-23-2019, 12:33 PM)kevin Wrote: That's amazing considering Bengals and Mike Brown have NEVER had a GM.  Your good friend Mike Tobin has some kind of player personell job.  He is NOT a GM.  So in ranking GM's in NFL Bengals would be last just because they have never had a GM.  Now if we consider Mike Brown as GM then they are still last for no play-off wins under Mike Brown since 1991 to now. 

BECAUSE BENGALS HAVE NOBODY LISTED AS A GM, BENGALS HAVE TO RANK LAST WHEN RANKING GM'S.

The Brown family has refused giving coaches power to coach, has refused to hire a GM.  Some have great hopes that Brown daughter Katie will someday take over, but I still see that as All In The Family.  The Brown Family power control really holds this team back.  There is no leadership. They won't allow coaches to have the needed leadership.  If this was bar rescue or restaurant rescue TV shows, the blame for no play-off wins and poor franchise falls on ownership's refusal to admit they are in need of letting others manage and run the winning football games part of the team. Lack of quality leadership kills the Bengals.  I'm for letting the new coach have The Power, but Brown Family are control freaks, even if it means more losing.

Mike Brown admitted many years ago to paying himself a GM salary.

(04-23-2019, 06:09 PM)NKURyan Wrote: Today on the radio Dave Lapham says he gets the impression that Mike Brown is as un-involved in the draft process as ever, going so far to say he may not even be the one with final say on who they take.

We've heard this Mike has stepped back thing a dozen times since 2010 yet the team still keeps being ran exactly as it has been before, see this years free agency.

0 Pro Bowlers drafted in the last 5 years, 1 in the last 7 years.
3 straight losing seasons.
Tried to replace Andrew Whitworth with Cedric Ogbuehi.
Thought Bobby Hart was a viable starter, then when proven he wasn't, doubled down by throwing a 3 year deal at him.
Hasn't added a single LB of worth to the team since 2012, despite it constantly being a weak point/point of need.
Drafted an injured John Ross 9th overall.
Took Billy Price over Frank Ragnow.
Took Kevin Zeitler over David DeCastro (? Not sure how far back you want to credit/blame him.)
Chose Iloka+Williams over Nelson+Either.


There's likely more, but end of the day... point is, 16th is a vast overrating. He's not good.

I would say losing both Whit and Zeitler should move him down a few pegs. I will say this though his drafts are much better than what people think outside of 2015.

(04-23-2019, 06:57 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: I would say losing both Whit and Zeitler should move him down a few pegs. I will say this though his drafts are much better than what people think outside of 2015.

I would say the 2015 draft alone takes them down a few pegs. I don’t know how much say Duke had in that decision, but yes, replacing Whit with OG knowing he wasn’t that good is a black eye they won’t get rid of for a long time. That and their inability to be creative with the way they operate with their roster construction. The Pats are masters at getting a decent player for next to nothing. The Bengals sole reliance on the draft really hurts them when it doesn’t work out.

(04-23-2019, 06:35 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: 0 Pro Bowlers drafted in the last 5 years, 1 in the last 7 years.
3 straight losing seasons.
Tried to replace Andrew Whitworth with Cedric Ogbuehi.
Thought Bobby Hart was a viable starter, then when proven he wasn't, doubled down by throwing a 3 year deal at him.
Hasn't added a single LB of worth to the team since 2012, despite it constantly being a weak point/point of need.
Drafted an injured John Ross 9th overall.
Took Billy Price over Frank Ragnow.
Took Kevin Zeitler over David DeCastro (? Not sure how far back you want to credit/blame him.)
Chose Iloka+Williams over Nelson+Either.


There's likely more, but end of the day... point is, 16th is a vast overrating. He's not good.

Ragnow went to lions the pick before us. The LB part is extremely confusing to me. I don’t understand why they don’t seem to either develop or acquire better LBs.

(04-23-2019, 04:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: D

So the Bengals should hire a GM but then give all the power to the coaches?  That doesn't make any sense.

And I say if we don't have a GM then we need to be listed FIRST because our GM has never made any mistakes.

GM rankings are primarily on results.  The Bengals haven't done squat since Mike Brown and his career .418 winning percentage took over.  Zero Playoff wins in 26 years and winning at a 41% clip ensures Mike, the de facto GM (he's paid himself a GM salary) should bring up the rear.

(04-23-2019, 07:11 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Ragnow went to lions the pick before us. The LB part is extremely confusing to me. I don’t understand why they don’t seem to either develop or acquire better LBs.

Despite LB being far and away the biggest need on the team there are plenty of fans over in the draft section of these boards that will tell you the Bengals still shouldn't take one (plenty of "nah, let's just wait until the 2nd/3rd/4th round and take Player X"), so it's not just the Bengals FO who seem to think that way.