(02-23-2017, 11:45 AM)CageTheBengal Wrote: It's funny how when Kirk was in Dennard's position of being held back by injuries/playing time he was unfairly labeled a bust and fans couldn't wait to watch him hit the door. Now what a mere 3 years later I'm watching Dennard be labeled a bust unfairly and people are talking about how Kirk is the glue to our secondary.

We have very little to no idea what Dennard is capable of and we want to trade him for a OT that has actually had playing time and has flopped.

The real trade is

Unknown First Round Prospect vs First Round Bust

The Rams should jump all over that.

(02-23-2017, 03:16 PM)bengals67 Wrote: Marv's policy on not playing high draft picks is idiotic. This is the main issue with Dennard.

They aren't college freshman.

Is there any other team that does not give substantial PT to first and second round picks?

(02-23-2017, 04:56 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: I want Kirkpatrick back. If Pacman was going to be cut I think it would have happened already. WJ3 may be our best corner. Josh Shaw is good. Russell was a 3rd round pick last year and we obviously like his potential.

Darqueze is just wasting away on our team. If he gets a chance to play he gets hurt. Would we even notice if he was gone? Its been 3 years...

Another guy drafted much higher in the same year as Darqueze is having the same type of bust labeled career. He is a mammoth athletic prototype LT. Greg Robinson was the #2 overall pick in 2014 going to the horribly coached Rams. He started at G was moved out to T and now there is talk he will go back to G.

Dont get me wrong Marvin Lewis and the piano man are below average coaches. But they are not as bad as Jeff Fisher who coached Robinson with the Rams.

Greg Robinson is only 24 and with a new coaching staff taking over the Rams they may be willing to give up on a previous regimes draft bust. We may be in need of more bodies at T or just on the OL. The Rams could use help at CB. Robinson does have more game experience than Darqueze, though it isnt anything to brag about. The Rams are also missing their 1st and 3rd round picks in the draft this year due to the Goff trade.

I would trade Darqueze for Greg Robinson straight up. If they balk sweeten up the deal with a late 6th or 7th.

I loved Greg Robinson in the draft and think his career is salvageable. Would you trade Darqueze for Robinson?

(02-23-2017, 03:35 PM)Benton Wrote: Getting a little OT here, but...

It used to make sense. Under the old agreement with escalating contracts every year, if you drafted a guy in the first and paid an outrageous sum, you didn't want him getting overzealous in the first few games and being out 1-2 seasons with an injury. Better to keep him on the bench while he learns from the staff and teammates on how to play without getting a serious injury. Especially considering some of the bonus bucks (I think Bradford got something like $50 million in bonus on his rookie deal).

But that was years ago. Now, contracts are more level year to year. It's foolish not to put a guy out there and see what he's got. If he looks horrible by game 16, you know you need to do something in the off season. Which is — in my opinion — better than Marvin's approach of giving a guy a few years of irregular playing time and then trying to decide in the final year if he's "ready." By then, you're a year or two too late, and you run into our current problem with center, corner and (to an extent) receiver. With the latter two, we had guys on the roster who never saw much time so now that we need them, we aren't sure what they can do. So we spend more draft picks and hope somebody steps up.

(02-23-2017, 07:58 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: There seems to be a bit of a double standard.  Dalton, Green, Whit, Zeitler, Hill, even freakin' Bodine, that I can recollect in recent memory all started in Game 1 of their rookie season.  Maybe that is just his philosophy on defensive players?

(02-23-2017, 07:58 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: There seems to be a bit of a double standard.  Dalton, Green, Whit, Zeitler, Hill, even freakin' Bodine, that I can recollect in recent memory all started in Game 1 of their rookie season.  Maybe that is just his philosophy on defensive players?

(02-24-2017, 05:05 PM)ochocincos Wrote: What about Dennard for Cleveland bust Cameron Erving? He was expected to be a VERY good center prospect, but he hasn't panned out so far in Cleveland.
Dennard would give Cleveland another (potentially) decent CB besides Joe Haden.

If the Bengals aren't willing to ever draft a center early, this could be an opportunity to get an early-round pick who is still on his rookie contract with two years remaining (three if the option is picked up). The nice thing too is that this is Bodine's final year, so if the team were to decide to move on from Bodine, Erving would already be a year in the system and could take over as the starter in 2018 if he didn't emerge the starter sometime this coming season.

(02-23-2017, 03:35 PM)Benton Wrote: Getting a little OT here, but...

It used to make sense. Under the old agreement with escalating contracts every year, if you drafted a guy in the first and paid an outrageous sum, you didn't want him getting overzealous in the first few games and being out 1-2 seasons with an injury. Better to keep him on the bench while he learns from the staff and teammates on how to play without getting a serious injury. Especially considering some of the bonus bucks (I think Bradford got something like $50 million in bonus on his rookie deal).

But that was years ago. Now, contracts are more level year to year. It's foolish not to put a guy out there and see what he's got. If he looks horrible by game 16, you know you need to do something in the off season. Which is — in my opinion — better than Marvin's approach of giving a guy a few years of irregular playing time and then trying to decide in the final year if he's "ready." By then, you're a year or two too late, and you run into our current problem with center, corner and (to an extent) receiver. With the latter two, we had guys on the roster who never saw much time so now that we need them, we aren't sure what they can do. So we spend more draft picks and hope somebody steps up.

(02-23-2017, 11:45 AM)CageTheBengal Wrote: It's funny how when Kirk was in Dennard's position of being held back by injuries/playing time he was unfairly labeled a bust and fans couldn't wait to watch him hit the door. Now what a mere 3 years later I'm watching Dennard be labeled a bust unfairly and people are talking about how Kirk is the glue to our secondary.

We have very little to no idea what Dennard is capable of and we want to trade him for a OT that has actually had playing time and has flopped.

The real trade is

Unknown First Round Prospect vs First Round Bust

The Rams should jump all over that.

(02-23-2017, 11:45 AM)CageTheBengal Wrote: It's funny how when Kirk was in Dennard's position of being held back by injuries/playing time he was unfairly labeled a bust and fans couldn't wait to watch him hit the door. Now what a mere 3 years later I'm watching Dennard be labeled a bust unfairly and people are talking about how Kirk is the glue to our secondary.

We have very little to no idea what Dennard is capable of and we want to trade him for a OT that has actually had playing time and has flopped.

The real trade is

Unknown First Round Prospect vs First Round Bust

The Rams should jump all over that.

(02-25-2017, 08:19 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Cage, the title of Bust is all about draft position and production relative to that position.

A 1st round pick who takes 5 years to be a decent starter is a bust.
A 7th round pick who takes 5 years to be a decent starter is a diamond in the rough.

It doesn't matter if it was injuries, or what. If a player performed well below their draft order/status expectation, they are a bust. Kirkpatrick would have been a great 6th round pick, but he wasn't a 6th round pick. He was a 1st round pick, and as a 1st round pick, he was a bust. The same applies to Dennard, he is a bust.

There's no such thing in the NFL as a 1st round pick heading into his 4th year/age 26 season, who is a prospect.

(02-25-2017, 08:19 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Cage, the title of Bust is all about draft position and production relative to that position.

A 1st round pick who takes 5 years to be a decent starter is a bust.
A 7th round pick who takes 5 years to be a decent starter is a diamond in the rough.

It doesn't matter if it was injuries, or what. If a player performed well below their draft order/status expectation, they are a bust. Kirkpatrick would have been a great 6th round pick, but he wasn't a 6th round pick. He was a 1st round pick, and as a 1st round pick, he was a bust. The same applies to Dennard, he is a bust.

There's no such thing in the NFL as a 1st round pick heading into his 4th year/age 26 season, who is a prospect.

(02-25-2017, 08:35 PM)bengalhoel Wrote: This is truth!!!  How the hell do we know how good Dennard is?  When we were out of the playoffs at the end of the year, everyone who was an unknown quantity should have been starting to see what we had. Now we still have no clue who Dennard is. Marvin's "strategy" pisses me off so bad sometimes.

(02-25-2017, 08:42 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: So a key requirement to being labeled a bust to you is if a player performed well below their draft order/expectation. The thing is Dennard hasn't had a chance to perform yet and Kirk didn't get his shot until late for the same reasons as Dennard but when he did he proved he had football ability. Your definition of a bust is illogical because you toss it on players who haven't even had a chance to perform.

You essentially want to call young players busts because the Bengals FO drafted them to a stacked team at CB, because Marvin is loyal to veterans and hesitant to start young players and they get injured. None of that has anything to do with their potential football skill.

Funny how Aaron Rodgers was one year away from being a bust by your standards.

(02-25-2017, 08:45 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: If Dennard becomes a shutdown Corner you cannot call him a bust.

It is a big IF but still...


On this one injury has been the big problem and players in front of him. Sure, there were times (maybe a couple)
in 14' when i wanted Dennard or Shaw to start ahead of Kirkpatrick but in the end it might of been the right decision.

Dre played good last year and i bet we bring him back. Dennard and Shaw most of all could be real good.

Garrett and then bringing in Benwikere were good moves too IMHO.

Not like these guys always make piss poor moves. The Secondary could be good. Coyle has been a good coach for
us before. Not ready to give up on this coach. There are a lot of positives on this team. They aren't bad.

Just need to make the right moves to prevent us from being so.