+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Draft Central (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: Mock 2.0 TDN (/thread-32050.html)
Pages:
1
2
Mock 2.0 TDN - SunsetBengal - 04-23-2022
31. Andrew Booth Jr. CB, Clemson
63. Jamaree Salyer IOL, Georgia
95.Nick Cross S, Maryland
136. Charlie Kolar TE, Iowa State
174. Braxton Jones OT, Southern Utah
209. Mike Rose LB, Iowa State
226. Tanner Conner WR, Idaho State
252. Erik Ezukanma WR, Texas Tech
Picks 1-4, no explanation necessary. Braxton Jones will be a good developmental T, Rose is a long, rangy LB good in coverage. Tanner Connor large bodied, fast, can develop into big slot presence. Erik Ezuanma (Who?) It was the 7th round and his profile seemed like he'd make good competition for back of the roster in camp.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - TecmoBengals - 04-23-2022
(04-23-2022, 09:52 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: 31. Andrew Booth Jr. CB, Clemson
63. Jamaree Salyer IOL, Georgia
95.Nick Cross S, Maryland
136. Charlie Kolar TE, Iowa State
174. Braxton Jones OT, Southern Utah
209. Mike Rose LB, Iowa State
226. Tanner Conner WR, Idaho State
252. Erik Ezukanma WR, Texas Tech
Picks 1-4, no explanation necessary. Braxton Jones will be a good developmental T, Rose is a long, rangy LB good in coverage. Tanner Connor large bodied, fast, can develop into big slot presence. Erik Ezuanma (Who?) It was the 7th round and his profile seemed like he'd make good competition for back of the roster in camp.
I love pick 4. I've been reading many pundits who suggest he has rising stock among the TE group.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - WhoDeyK - 04-23-2022
Love it. Booth and Salyer are two of my favorites. Curious to see where Salyer goes. I’ve seen him anywhere between rounds 2-4. For what it’s worth NFL.com has his comp as Quinton Spain. I just watched Kolars highlights and wow. This might be an unpopular opinion but I don’t agree with the “consensus” TE rankings leading up to the draft at all. Kolar looks complete and his catch radius in traffic is something that I believe will serve him well in the NFL. Wouldn’t shock me at all to see him, Ruckert, Ferguson and even potentially Woods much higher on the Bengals board than people expect.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - sandwedge - 04-23-2022
Absolutely like this draft!! Booth falling to 31 might seem like a dream, but you never can tell. I've been chanting Kolar since the beginning. Same with Cross!
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - WVUHomer - 04-23-2022
Not a fan of a small sample sized DB thats coming in injured but outside of that, I like this draft a lot.
Just curious, what other OL and CBs were available in rounds 1/2 if you can remember.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - Whatever - 04-23-2022
(04-23-2022, 09:52 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: 31. Andrew Booth Jr. CB, Clemson
63. Jamaree Salyer IOL, Georgia
95.Nick Cross S, Maryland
136. Charlie Kolar TE, Iowa State
174. Braxton Jones OT, Southern Utah
209. Mike Rose LB, Iowa State
226. Tanner Conner WR, Idaho State
252. Erik Ezukanma WR, Texas Tech
Picks 1-4, no explanation necessary. Braxton Jones will be a good developmental T, Rose is a long, rangy LB good in coverage. Tanner Connor large bodied, fast, can develop into big slot presence. Erik Ezuanma (Who?) It was the 7th round and his profile seemed like he'd make good competition for back of the roster in camp.
Health concerns and a deep CB class have me taking Booth out of Round 1 consideration, personally. Not a fan of Salyer and don't see him as an upgrade over Carman. Cross is looking like a steal in 3 and I like Kolar where you have him.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - SunsetBengal - 04-23-2022
(04-23-2022, 01:54 PM)Whatever Wrote: Health concerns and a deep CB class have me taking Booth out of Round 1 consideration, personally. Not a fan of Salyer and don't see him as an upgrade over Carman. Cross is looking like a steal in 3 and I like Kolar where you have him.
The nice thing is, that we wouldn't need for Booth to assume an immediate starting role. In other words, he has time to get healthy and develop his skills under Anarumo. And, as long as Salyer doesn't have herniated disc issues, I see him as an immediate upgrade over Carman.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - Whatever - 04-23-2022
(04-23-2022, 03:48 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The nice thing is, that we wouldn't need for Booth to assume an immediate starting role. In other words, he has time to get healthy and develop his skills under Anarumo. And, as long as Salyer doesn't have herniated disc issues, I see him as an immediate upgrade over Carman.
Booth has also had a torn patellar and has missed games with various soft tissue injuries going back to high school. In a weaker CB class, I would probably overlook it. A stacked as CB is in this class, though, I would want a clean prospect if I'm taking one in the first. If he were the actual pick, I would likely be optimistic about him, to be fair.
Aside from his punch and position versatility, there's not a lot I like about Salyer, especially in wide zone. Carman was a slightly higher rated prospect in a better OL class and has better feet. Lance Zierlein comped him to Quenton Spain. He also doesn't represent a value you just can't pass up at 63.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - bengalfan74 - 04-23-2022
I'm not sure I'm crazy about Salyer ? But the rest seem solid.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - pulses - 04-23-2022
(04-23-2022, 05:20 PM)Whatever Wrote: Booth has also had a torn patellar and has missed games with various soft tissue injuries going back to high school. In a weaker CB class, I would probably overlook it. A stacked as CB is in this class, though, I would want a clean prospect if I'm taking one in the first. If he were the actual pick, I would likely be optimistic about him, to be fair.
Aside from his punch and position versatility, there's not a lot I like about Salyer, especially in wide zone. Carman was a slightly higher rated prospect in a better OL class and has better feet. Lance Zierlein comped him to Quenton Spain. He also doesn't represent a value you just can't pass up at 63.
totally agree much better value than Salyer in round 2. He's been going in all the mocks i've seen in round 4 or 5 so he is dropping a bit.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - OSUfan - 04-25-2022
(04-23-2022, 09:52 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: 31. Andrew Booth Jr. CB, ClemsonI would disagree that 1-4 need no explanation. I feel that Salyer is not a real good fit for our offensive scheme at all. He fits more of a power running game that does not highlight movement for the linemen. While the wide zone does not focus on running to the edges it does require linemen that are athletic and fluid in their movement skills. I don't believe he fits that profile.
63. Jamaree Salyer IOL, Georgia
95.Nick Cross S, Maryland
136. Charlie Kolar TE, Iowa State
174. Braxton Jones OT, Southern Utah
209. Mike Rose LB, Iowa State
226. Tanner Conner WR, Idaho State
252. Erik Ezukanma WR, Texas Tech
Picks 1-4, no explanation necessary. Braxton Jones will be a good developmental T, Rose is a long, rangy LB good in coverage. Tanner Connor large bodied, fast, can develop into big slot presence. Erik Ezuanma (Who?) It was the 7th round and his profile seemed like he'd make good competition for back of the roster in camp.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - SunsetBengal - 04-25-2022
(04-23-2022, 07:37 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I'm not sure I'm crazy about Salyer ? But the rest seem solid.
(04-23-2022, 07:55 PM)pulses Wrote: totally agree much better value than Salyer in round 2. He's been going in all the mocks i've seen in round 4 or 5 so he is dropping a bit.
(04-25-2022, 12:10 PM)OSUfan Wrote: I would disagree that 1-4 need no explanation. I feel that Salyer is not a real good fit for our offensive scheme at all. He fits more of a power running game that does not highlight movement for the linemen. While the wide zone does not focus on running to the edges it does require linemen that are athletic and fluid in their movement skills. I don't believe he fits that profile.
You guys are right, he's not the Guard we would be wanting in the 2nd round. Not sure if I had him confused with someone else, or what.
Anyway, not sure why everyone keeps bringing up Wide Zone like it's the gospel or something. Wide Zone isn't an offensive scheme, it's literally a play. Any successful team must be able to execute from a variety of styles. One of the biggest issues with the Bengals OL last season, was an inability to get a yard, when they needed a yard.
On 3rd, 4th and short? You're not running a wide zone play, you're most likely wanting to QB sneak behind the LG and C, or hand it to your RB in a straight line through the same hole.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - bengalfan74 - 04-25-2022
(04-25-2022, 12:55 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You guys are right, he's not the Guard we would be wanting in the 2nd round. Not sure if I had him confused with someone else, or what.
Anyway, not sure why everyone keeps bringing up Wide Zone like it's the gospel or something. Wide Zone isn't an offensive scheme, it's literally a play. Any successful team must be able to execute from a variety of styles. One of the biggest issues with the Bengals OL last season, was an inability to get a yard, when they needed a yard.
On 3rd, 4th and short? You're not running a wide zone play, you're most likely wanting to QB sneak behind the LG and C, or hand it to your RB in a straight line through the same hole.
I'm no modern NFL catch phrase/scheme guru to say the least. But I do know, as you say, our when you have to have a yard or two run blocking sucks.
If you just look at Mixon's stats last season you'd be like hmm they're decent at running the ball. But we weren't. Oh we had games here, drives there, qtr's here, so on. But more often then not when the rubber really met the road. Those have to have it yards, 3rd and 2, 2nd and goal from the 3, so on. We got stuffed like a Christmas turkey. As you say.
And that's one of the bigger reasons I want another top prospect in this years draft. I don't want to be an injury and a half away from "here we go again" "same old song again" "our Oline sucks" "ha ha ha we are through".
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - Au165 - 04-25-2022
I'm probably looking for a 3t in the 2nd over IOL. Also think a punt returning WR probably comes off the board a little quicker to us.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - OSUfan - 04-25-2022
(04-25-2022, 12:55 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You guys are right, he's not the Guard we would be wanting in the 2nd round. Not sure if I had him confused with someone else, or what.
Anyway, not sure why everyone keeps bringing up Wide Zone like it's the gospel or something. Wide Zone isn't an offensive scheme, it's literally a play. Any successful team must be able to execute from a variety of styles. One of the biggest issues with the Bengals OL last season, was an inability to get a yard, when they needed a yard.
On 3rd, 4th and short? You're not running a wide zone play, you're most likely wanting to QB sneak behind the LG and C, or hand it to your RB in a straight line through the same hole.
Actually, it is a play and a scheme. The running game of Pollack is predicated off of the blocking techniques that are utilized in the wide zone play which require athletic movement ability of the linemen. The ideal is to stretch out the defensive line giving the back the option to cut inside or go outside. You are right the struggled in the run game and much of that had to do with linemen not being able to identify targets and to sustain blocks.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - pulses - 04-25-2022
(04-25-2022, 01:44 PM)Au165 Wrote: I'm probably looking for a 3t in the 2nd over IOL. Also think a punt returning WR probably comes off the board a little quicker to us.
Just wait and take Curtis Brooks in round 4 for the 3T IMO.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - OSUfan - 04-25-2022
(04-25-2022, 06:12 PM)pulses Wrote: Just wait and take Curtis Brooks in round 4 for the 3T IMO.
I would love to see the Bengals get Brooks.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - SunsetBengal - 04-26-2022
(04-25-2022, 05:04 PM)OSUfan Wrote: Actually, it is a play and a scheme. The running game of Pollack is predicated off of the blocking techniques that are utilized in the wide zone play which require athletic movement ability of the linemen. The ideal is to stretch out the defensive line giving the back the option to cut inside or go outside. You are right the struggled in the run game and much of that had to do with linemen not being able to identify targets and to sustain blocks.
In short yardage situations, it's fairly easy to identify the man directly in front of you. The question is "Do you have enough ass to move him, in order for your team to gain that needed yard?".
Too much is put on "he's a wide zone guy" or "he's a power guy", the truth of the matter is that precision execution is what makes any blocking plan work. For an Oline to be a good one, they need to not only be able to execute precision plays, but also be able to bow up and move the large man in front of him when needed.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - WVUHomer - 04-26-2022
(04-25-2022, 12:55 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You guys are right, he's not the Guard we would be wanting in the 2nd round. Not sure if I had him confused with someone else, or what.
Anyway, not sure why everyone keeps bringing up Wide Zone like it's the gospel or something. Wide Zone isn't an offensive scheme, it's literally a play. Any successful team must be able to execute from a variety of styles. One of the biggest issues with the Bengals OL last season, was an inability to get a yard, when they needed a yard.
On 3rd, 4th and short? You're not running a wide zone play, you're most likely wanting to QB sneak behind the LG and C, or hand it to your RB in a straight line through the same hole.
If you're set on an iOL that fits our scheme that MAY be available in 2, Cam Jurgens from Nebraska. Basically a poor man's Linderbaum that has length.
RE: Mock 2.0 TDN - SunsetBengal - 04-26-2022
(04-26-2022, 09:49 AM)WVUHomer Wrote: If you're set on an iOL that fits our scheme that MAY be available in 2, Cam Jurgens from Nebraska. Basically a poor man's Linderbaum that has length.
Here's the thing, I'm not even dead set on Linderbaum being "the guy". He might be, but evidence shows that he struggles to move large men from in front of him, when playing covered by an odd front. Linderbaum looks fantastic when he plays uncovered, getting on guys at the 2nd and even 3rd level, getting out there on screens, etc. But when you need a yard, you need to be able to move that 340# man in front of you off of the ball..