+- 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: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him (/thread-10224.html)
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - coachmcneil71 - 03-06-2017
(03-06-2017, 06:00 PM)ochocincos Wrote: How often have we heard that teams like the Steelers use the strategy of double teaming AJ Green and then stacking the box or at least playing short coverage everywhere else? This is because the Bengals have no one else to stretch the field. Adding LF is just going to cause that same issue. The Bengals need another downfield threat over a better RB.
There's only 11 players on the field bro. You do the math? If 8 & 9 guys are in the box, how many does that leave to cover the receivers? Damn sure not enough to double AJ without a WR standing uncovered somewhere.
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - ochocincos - 03-06-2017
(03-06-2017, 06:37 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: There's only 11 players on the field bro. You do the math? If 8 & 9 guys are in the box, how many does that leave to cover the receivers? Damn sure not enough to double AJ without a WR standing uncovered somewhere.
Thus why I said "or playing short coverage". Opposing defenses play in shorter coverage because they don't have to fear getting beat by anyone besides AJ Green. The only other true "vertical" threat to go up to get the ball is Eifert, but he's missed a lot of games. Therefore, teams expect the Bengals to do shallow or mid routes or run the ball, meaning more guys are closer to the LOS.
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 03-06-2017
(03-06-2017, 05:53 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: I like both backs but comparing what Bama was able to do against LF & LSU is not a very good point of reference, nor is it accurate. First of all LSU was bereft of offensive talent other than LF. Now throw in the play calling.
Now consider that the Bengals are a PRO team that has a PB caliber TE,WR, & QB. Apple's and oranges people, apples & oranges. If a team tries to do what Bama did against LSU & Andy doesn't audible and throw it down field to AJ, he should be benched!!! Counting the S Bama was putting 8 & 9 guys in the box against LSU.
Can't argue with that coach, Fournette would do much better on a team with a passing game no question.
Just saying i think Dalvin Cook is a better fit for the Bengals.
Would be all for Fournette in stripes too though.
(03-06-2017, 06:00 PM)ochocincos Wrote: How often have we heard that teams like the Steelers use the strategy of double teaming AJ Green and then stacking the box or at least playing short coverage everywhere else? This is because the Bengals have no one else to stretch the field. Adding LF is just going to cause that same issue. The Bengals need another downfield threat over a better RB.
John Ross or Corey Davis.
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - Essex Johnson - 03-06-2017
(03-03-2017, 08:27 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: That's the difference between AJ Green and Jermaine Gresham...
...just sayin', and I don't even want Fournette.
40 speed for RB is way overated.. i did not dig into it but a better comparison is a short shuttle run or 5 to 10 yards burst.. Coached enough football myself to know 40 speed means little for RBs...
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 03-06-2017
(03-06-2017, 07:57 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: 40 speed for RB is way overated.. i did not dig into it but a better comparison is a short shuttle run or 5 to 10 yards burst.. Coached enough football myself to know 40 speed means little for RBs...
Fournette is one of the fastest football players in the draft, not just RB. He hit speeds with the ball in his hands last year
that were higher than any pro in the NFL last season according to the other Fournette thread vid. Blew my mind he could
run as fast or faster than a guy like Tyreke Hill.
Speed means tons, but i agree with not putting too much stock in the forty unless it is really fast or really slow.
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - NATI BENGALS - 03-06-2017
I would want to put him on a scale right before we drafted him if we were going to do it at 9.
He admits he doesn't watch other backs. So he really isn't a football junkie.
And he came to the biggest interview of his life at 240lbs and blamed it on water weight.
Is he one of the guys who got by on sheer physical talent and doesn't work for it or care enough to work for it?
Giving millions to a guy who already didn't care enough to come into the combine in tip top shape after skipping his bowl game and having months to prepare....
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 03-06-2017
(03-06-2017, 08:18 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: I would want to put him on a scale right before we drafted him if we were going to do it at 9.
He admits he doesn't watch other backs. So he really isn't a football junkie.
And he came to the biggest interview of his life at 240lbs and blamed it on water weight.
Is he one of the guys who got by on sheer physical talent and doesn't work for it or care enough to work for it?
Giving millions to a guy who already didn't care enough to come into the combine in tip top shape after skipping his bowl game and having months to prepare....
If that is Fournette out of shape...
Dude looked stacked and ran a 4.50 forty at 240 pounds.
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - Essex Johnson - 03-07-2017
(03-06-2017, 08:56 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: If that is Fournette out of shape...
Dude looked stacked and ran a 4.50 forty at 240 pounds.
well speed is one thing when you are not being tackled.. extra weight and a ankle that has been a chronic problem is another. I don;t think I would take him at 9 with his ankle history regardless of his speed. We have more pressing needs than at RB for a top ten pick
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 03-07-2017
(03-07-2017, 01:40 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: well speed is one thing when you are not being tackled.. extra weight and a ankle that has been a chronic problem is another. I don;t think I would take him at 9 with his ankle history regardless of his speed. We have more pressing needs than at RB for a top ten pick
If there was a game changing pass rusher there you should take him over Fournette i agree.
But if not, i would be fine with selecting the dude. That ankle didn't look bad and he looked anything but slow and fat.
He has rare talents but i still like Dalvin Cook better or even McCaffrey in the 2nd better.
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - NATI BENGALS - 03-08-2017
(03-07-2017, 07:43 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: If there was a game changing pass rusher there you should take him over Fournette i agree.Im not saying he was fat. Just a little bit of a concern he shows up weighing more than he was ever listed at to the event people usually drop weight for when speed is the desired positional trait.
But if not, i would be fine with selecting the dude. That ankle didn't look bad and he looked anything but slow and fat.
He has rare talents but i still like Dalvin Cook better or even McCaffrey in the 2nd better.
RE: If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 03-08-2017
(03-08-2017, 01:48 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Im not saying he was fat. Just a little bit of a concern he shows up weighing more than he was ever listed at to the event people usually drop weight for when speed is the desired positional trait.
I have always seen Fournette listed right around 232 or so. 8 pounds isn't crazy if he was just pumping weights
which is sure what it looked like he was doing. Maybe not the best strategy going into the combine but he didn't
slow down too much. Running that fast at that weight is even more impressive to me.