(07-07-2019, 03:59 PM)Whatever Wrote: They met with Williams at the Combine and also went to his Pro Day, so I highly doubt they didn't do their due diligence on him.  Every team has it's own big board and guys fall all the time.  

Besides which, if they are missing medical issues, that's more of an issue with the medical staff than the scouting department.  

If there was a preexisting issue, it's likely they knew and made the pick anyway.  Due to the rookie salary structure, it's much more appealing to teams to take a kid that may need a medical red shirt year.  Jeffrey Simmons isn't going to play this year with a torn ACL and still went in the top 20.  If Williams is a franchise LT as advertised, then missing his rookie year isn't going to mean much 7-8 years from now.  The draft is chess, not checkers.  My guess is that they thought he could play through it this year, then get it fixed in the off season without missing time.  

They took a chance on Munoz with known medical issues.  Turned out just fine.

(07-05-2019, 01:01 PM)fortyyearfan Wrote: To start with, I would give ross 3-4 super good plays and allow him to just learn them inside and out,and as the season rolls along give him more,some guys struggle to learn all of that stuff,I know I would,and some players just cannot grasp a lot at once,their attention is not long term and their memory is not good enough.Too much wacky weed early in life and you struggle to remember anything for very lone,that stuff destroys brain cells by the millions.I hated to see friends smoke that crap and I was always a stay in shape guy,like lifting weights,running the road and all that.I believe he will be good this season,but he has to prove himself or else ZT will say good bye. :andy:

I like this concept.   Some players just are slow studies, but can end up being great players.  Chad Johnson flourished in Cincinnati, but it took him a while to pan out.  And he flopped out in New England's complex scheme.

You have make your scheme fit the player sometimes, even if it start out on a limited basis.   Three schemes in 3 years is tough for a guy with a slow learning curve.

(07-08-2019, 04:20 PM)3wt Wrote: They took a chance on Munoz with known medical issues.  Turned out just fine.

EVERY TEAM IN THE LEAGUE drafts guys with injury issues from college. The year we took Ross at #9 three of the 8 guys taken ahead of him were dealing with injury issues from college (Myles Garrett, Leonard Fournette, Christian McCafferty).


If you took everyone off your draft bord who had been injured in college you would not have a lot left. 

(07-08-2019, 02:14 PM)Whatever Wrote: The Rams also allowed 2 more QB Hits than the Bengals last year.  

I'm not saying we have a great line at all. You vastly overrate how good the Rams OL is and are trying to push this "you have to have a great OL to run the Rams offense", which is false.  The Rams offense actually helps mask talent deficiency on the OL.  Glenn has been quoted as saying it's a lot easier to play OL in the new offense.  Lapham has said the same thing.  

PFF ranked the Rams with the 6th best offensive line for 2018. They rated ours 27.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-2018-nfl-offensive-line-rankings-all-32-teams-units-after-week-17

Ross needs to be more physical in his game. He easily got hung up by corners, pushed off his line, and had a hard time with 50/50 balls. He needs to find his inner Steve Smith.

(07-08-2019, 04:45 PM)Synric Wrote: Ross needs to be more physical in his game. He easily got hung up by corners, pushed off his line, and had a hard time with 50/50 balls. He needs to find his inner Steve Smith.

That's a great point and it illustrates what he's lacked to this point. Is the lack of being physical mental? It could be atleast partially.

(07-08-2019, 01:34 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Usage is one thing and I agree that our coaches weren't that innovative...BUT that doesn't negate the fact that he got a lot of opportunities in Year 2 and had a REALLY low catch rate.

Heck for several games he was the #1 WR.

I fail to see how calling different plays will make him catch it.

As a group, we seem to have this confusion with "receptions/targets - catch rate" and "drops".  How many drops did Ross have?  How many did he have in the Red Zone?  Did he seem to have fewer drops as the season wore on?  For what was essentially his rookie season, I thought he progressed well in his limited role.  

I am not saying he is anywhere near Pro Bowl level, nor is he proving himself worthy of the #9 overall pick, but I saw enough to think that with the right mind as OC, he might just surprise this year.  

For the life of me, I can't fathom why the never ran screens or slants with him when his coverage was so far off...Seemed like easy pickings to me, especially for Dalton with his quick release.  

(07-08-2019, 02:06 PM)BengalChris Wrote: Ross has only played in one game under Zampese (where he got his only touch in 2017 and fumbled it) and the rest of the games were under Lazor. Lazor was able to get a lot out of other receivers and he was able to design plays to get Ross involved near the end zone, and they did attempt to get Ross the ball on longer plays, but for whatever reason, Ross and the QBs didn't connect on much. Ross gets lost in space.

Lazor, when he had the personnel, had a productive offense in both the passing and running games. Clearly most of the guys starting after all the injuries weren't able to do what the starters had done. The only exceptions really were Mixon and Boyd who continued to produce.


I hope Ross puts something together. But the more he blames others the less likely it is that he'll actually improve much.

Has he been doing this?

(07-08-2019, 04:53 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Has he been doing this?

Yep.  Posting videos from practice to try and show that he deserved more playing time than the coaches were giving him.

(07-08-2019, 04:43 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: PFF ranked the Rams with the 6th best offensive line for 2018. They rated ours 27.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-2018-nfl-offensive-line-rankings-all-32-teams-units-after-week-17

You are missing the point.  We have already been discussing the PFF rankings.  We are pointing out that their mysterious rankings based on subjective bonus points don't seem to match up with actual production.

That being said I still agree that the Rams had a much better O-line than the Bengals.  Footballoutsiders uses actual objective stats in their formulas and they rank the Bengals run blocking 22nd overall but 7th best in power running situations.  And they rank the Bengals pass protection 19th.  

Better than the PFF rankings, but not really worth fighting over because 22nd and 19th are still not close to as good as the Rams.

(07-08-2019, 04:43 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: PFF ranked the Rams with the 6th best offensive line for 2018. They rated ours 27.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-2018-nfl-offensive-line-rankings-all-32-teams-units-after-week-17

And their rankings are garbage.  In 2017, they ranked Seattle 27th and us 28th and Seattle gave up 51 more pressures than we did.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-ranking-all-32-offensive-lines-from-the-2017-nfl-season

Conveniently this year they didn't list pressures in their rankings.

(07-08-2019, 05:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are missing the point.  We have already been discussing the PFF rankings.  We are pointing out that their mysterious rankings based on subjective bonus points don't seem to match up with actual production.

That being said I still agree that the Rams had a much better O-line than the Bengals.  Footballoutsiders uses actual objective stats in their formulas and they rank the Bengals run blocking 22nd overall but 7th best in power running situations.  And they rank the Bengals pass protection 19th.  

Better than the PFF rankings, but not really worth fighting over because 22nd and 19th are still not close to as good as the Rams.

FootballOutsider's ranking seems more realistic.  At least their data seems to jive more with their rankings.

On film, there is no question the Rams OL outperformed ours.  However, that is due to a combination of players, coaching, and scheme.  Pistons seems to believe it's based almost solely on player talent and PFF is a measure of player talent, neither of which is the case.

(07-08-2019, 07:14 PM)Whatever Wrote: FootballOutsider's ranking seems more realistic.  At least their data seems to jive more with their rankings.

On film, there is no question the Rams OL outperformed ours.  However, that is due to a combination of players, coaching, and scheme.  Pistons seems to believe it's based almost solely on player talent and PFF is a measure of player talent, neither of which is the case.

PFF rankings are based on performance. I do like the football outsider rankings too...but RB's making nice cuts kind of factor in that. But, still they're a good measure. And like Fred said, by any measure, our line wasn't good.

I'd say actual player talent is 70% of the equation. Scheme and coaching the remaining 30% of on field performance.

(07-08-2019, 04:52 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: As a group, we seem to have this confusion with "receptions/targets - catch rate" and "drops".  How many drops did Ross have?  How many did he have in the Red Zone?  Did he seem to have fewer drops as the season wore on?  For what was essentially his rookie season, I thought he progressed well in his limited role.  

I am not saying he is anywhere near Pro Bowl level, nor is he proving himself worthy of the #9 overall pick, but I saw enough to think that with the right mind as OC, he might just surprise this year.  

For the life of me, I can't fathom why the never ran screens or slants with him when his coverage was so far off...Seemed like easy pickings to me, especially for Dalton with his quick release.  

When people say that Ross's 2nd year was essentially his rookie year...it loses me. He was on the team and practiced and was in the meeting rooms. IF anything he should have came away from that year really understanding the mental side of the game.

I do agree that screens and slants seem to be more of what he needed to see.

(07-08-2019, 07:14 PM)Whatever Wrote: FootballOutsider's ranking seems more realistic.  At least their data seems to jive more with their rankings.

On film, there is no question the Rams OL outperformed ours.  However, that is due to a combination of players, coaching, and scheme.  Pistons seems to believe it's based almost solely on player talent and PFF is a measure of player talent, neither of which is the case.

I understand what you are pointing out and trying to spin.

Bobby Hart, Fisher, and Redmond are pretty low talented players.

Those 3 were/are pretty much "never weres".

Boling historically had a down season.

Glenn historically had a down season.

Newbie center Price struggled with injuries.

That doesn't leave much in the talent pool for 2018.

If clinging to mixed stats is your angle to convince us that they "weren't that bad"... good luck to you sir.

(07-08-2019, 08:43 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: When people say that Ross's 2nd year was essentially his rookie year...it loses me. He was on the team and practiced and was in the meeting rooms. IF anything he should have came away from that year really understanding the mental side of the game.

I do agree that screens and slants seem to be more of what he needed to see.

Actually, for the better part of his rookie season, he was not able to practice (which led to him not playing) and then he was put on IR where he couldn't do anything.  I get what you are saying, but he was injured for all of OTAs and most of camp...that is critical times for a rookie.

Ross will either advance his game (with the help of some coaching adjustments, hopefully) or he will continue a downward slide to obscurity.  I saw just enough good last year to have some optimism for him this year.  

(07-08-2019, 09:05 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: I understand what you are pointing out and trying to spin.

Bobby Hart, Fisher, and Redmond are pretty low talented players.

Those 3 were/are pretty much "never weres".

Boling historically had a down season.

Glenn historically had a down season.

Newbie center Price struggled with injuries.

That doesn't leave much in the talent pool for 2018.

If clinging to mixed stats is your angle to convince us that they "weren't that bad"... good luck to you sir.

At the end of the day, the OL was good enough for the Bengals to be one of the the top offenses in the league before the skill players started dropping like flies.  It certainly wasn't pretty, but it was serviceable.  Even if Turner can cut down on the penalties this group takes, it would be a significant improvement.  Making the defense guess with play action will also help this group a lot. I don't think this will be a great unit, as there are obvious weak links, but I don't fall into this "season is over before it begins"group.

(07-08-2019, 04:23 PM)3wt Wrote: I like this concept.   Some players just are slow studies, but can end up being great players.  Chad Johnson flourished in Cincinnati, but it took him a while to pan out.  And he flopped out in New England's complex scheme.

You have make your scheme fit the player sometimes, even if it start out on a limited basis.   Three schemes in 3 years is tough for a guy with a slow learning curve.

Chad put up 1166 yards in his second season. Then he went on to 5 straight Pro Bowls which included 2 First-Team All-Pros.
I'd say Ross is more like Peter Warrick if we are comparing to former high draft picks of the Bengals, but even then Warrick put up 592+ yards in each of his first four seasons.

I really liked the Ross pick and thought he would become a difference maker, but this is a make-or-break year for him. If he can't catch on in Taylor's scheme, it shows it wasn't Marvin holding him back.

(07-08-2019, 02:14 PM)Whatever Wrote: The Rams also allowed 2 more QB Hits than the Bengals last year.  

I'm not saying we have a great line at all. You vastly overrate how good the Rams OL is and are trying to push this "you have to have a great OL to run the Rams offense", which is false.  The Rams offense actually helps mask talent deficiency on the OL.  Glenn has been quoted as saying it's a lot easier to play OL in the new offense.  Lapham has said the same thing.  

Rams also happened to run over a 100 more offensive plays than the Bengals did during the regular season last year.

(07-08-2019, 09:05 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: If clinging to mixed stats is your angle to convince us that they "weren't that bad"... good luck to you sir.

Who needs silly old stats when we can just have someone pull an opinion out of thin air.