+- 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: Soloman Thomas # 9?? (/thread-10866.html)
Pages:
1
2
Soloman Thomas # 9?? - Steve - 04-19-2017
I checked out one of my fav mock sites earlier....Walterfootball.com now has Solomon Thomas dropping to us at #9.....
S.F. at #2 picking RB Fournette...
& they said S.T. is somewhat polarizing....you either like him a lot or you don't....so some teams may pass....
I was surprised to read this....but hope it comes true.....
would be a great fit for us....
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - CJD - 04-19-2017
I honestly wouldn't really like it.
He's not a 4-3 Dlineman.
I'm also weary of those players that have been in the national spotlight for a long time and suddenly jumps from a 2nd rounder to a top 5 pick because of one single game.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 04-19-2017
I like him cause of his physicality and he is a 3 down End cause he can stop the run and rush the passer.
Been wondering why everyone thought he was such an early pick though. He is not a great pass rusher like Barnett or Garrett
and was out produced by Jonathan Allen by quite a bit in college. The combine can influence a lot of people.
Solomon Thomas was a very good player at Stanford but Jonathan Allen had more production at Alabama.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - phil413 - 04-19-2017
No way he falls to 9, just
..no way. Walter isn't the best football site as a whole.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 04-19-2017
(04-19-2017, 10:51 PM)phil413 Wrote: No way he falls to 9, just
..no way. Walter isn't the best football site as a whole.
Just because of the combine?
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - J24 - 04-19-2017
(04-19-2017, 10:32 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I honestly wouldn't really like it.
He's not a 4-3 Dlineman.
I'm also weary of those players that have been in the national spotlight for a long time and suddenly jumps from a 2nd rounder to a top 5 pick because of one single game.
This is silly he replaces Gilberry day 1. Also he can fill in at the three technique when Geno takes his breaks.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - CJD - 04-19-2017
(04-19-2017, 11:40 PM)J24 Wrote: This is silly he replaces Gilberry day 1. Also he can fill in at the three technique when Geno takes his breaks.
I want to replace Michael Johnson, not Wallace Gilberry.
Thomas is as tweener as you can get. And without the one game against North Carolina, he's solidly in the 2nd day. I don't get the hype.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - NATI BENGALS - 04-19-2017
(04-19-2017, 10:46 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I like him cause of his physicality and he is a 3 down End cause he can stop the run and rush the passer.
Been wondering why everyone thought he was such an early pick though. He is not a great pass rusher like Barnett or Garrett
and was out produced by Jonathan Allen by quite a bit in college. The combine can influence a lot of people.
Solomon Thomas was a very good player at Stanford but Jonathan Allen had more production at Alabama.
Solomon is a redshirt Sophomore. Allen is a senior.
What kind of production do you think Solomon would have if he played out his next two years of eligibility?
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - J24 - 04-20-2017
(04-19-2017, 11:45 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I want to replace Michael Johnson, not Wallace Gilberry.
Thomas is as tweener as you can get. And without the one game against North Carolina, he's solidly in the 2nd day. I don't get the hype.
We need to replace both gilberry and Johnson ; Thomas was PFF number 1 run defender, had 8 sacks last year (in his sophomore year), and he was by far the most impressive player at the combine. How do you not get the hype?
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - The D.O.Z. - 04-20-2017
I like Thomas because of his motor. I've watched some highlights of the guy and he seems relentless! I'd much prefer him to Barnett, even though Barnett has the better "production" at the college level. As we all know, college production doesn't always translate to the NFL. Thomas, to me..is a day 1 starter and three down lineman. Barnett?..looks to be more situational what with the lack of arsenal in his pass rush techniques. Thats not to say Barnett won't be a stud..I just think Thomas is more ready to step into an every down role early. We need a guy at #9 that's gonna make a difference right off the bat.
Here's some food for thought:
If Thomas and Barnett are somehow both sitting there at #9, who would you take?
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - phil413 - 04-20-2017
Have to agree with the last few posts. He's wreaking havoc at a young age. A tweener is a guy handcuffed without an ideal position, Thomas is a versatile player you move around if needed to confuse the offense. They already slide these types inside on passing downs.
He won't be there at 9 though, there aren't enough real red flags on him compared to others. I can't see how the Bears at 3 pass on him, let alone the Panthers at 8. Don't forget trade spots like the Titans at 5 and the Chargers moving down and still getting a S or WR.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - J24 - 04-20-2017
(04-20-2017, 12:25 AM)phil413 Wrote: Have to agree with the last few posts. He's wreaking havoc at a young age. A tweener is a guy handcuffed without an ideal position, Thomas is a versatile player you move around if needed to confuse the offense. They already slide these types inside on passing downs.
He won't be there at 9 though, there aren't enough real red flags on him compared to others. I can't see how the Bears at 3 pass on him, let alone the Panthers at 8. Don't forget trade spots like the Titans at 5 and the Chargers moving down and still getting a S or WR.
I don't know I think teams are over thinking on him because of his size, lack of position, and not as phenomenal pass rush numbers as others. I don't see him being a top 5 pick and I really wouldn't be surprised if Bengals past on him as well. I agree though that he is definitely worth a top 5 pick I just don't think teams do.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - CJD - 04-20-2017
(04-20-2017, 12:09 AM)J24 Wrote: We need to replace both gilberry and Johnson ; Thomas was PFF number 1 run defender, had 8 sacks last year (in his sophomore year), and he was by far the most impressive player at the combine. How do you not get the hype?
Because he's an average pass rusher.
We don't need run defense as much as pass rush.
And, like I said, he's a tweener.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - Crowe - 04-20-2017
(04-19-2017, 11:45 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I want to replace Michael Johnson, not Wallace Gilberry.
Thomas is as tweener as you can get. And without the one game against North Carolina, he's solidly in the 2nd day. I don't get the hype.
Why would you want to replace Johnson over Gillberry?? I know that Johnson isn't a premier pass rusher and he's not my favorite player, but at least he's more competent than Gilberry who is stealing a roster spot at this moment. TBH, I'd like to replace both, but if I had to choose 1 or the other to get rid of it's Gilberry, he's been toast for 3 seasons now.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - CJD - 04-20-2017
(04-20-2017, 08:22 AM)Crowe Wrote: Why would you want to replace Johnson over Gillberry?? I know that Johnson isn't a premier pass rusher and he's not my favorite player, but at least he's more competent than Gilberry who is stealing a roster spot at this moment. TBH, I'd like to replace both, but if I had to choose 1 or the other to get rid of it's Gilberry, he's been toast for 3 seasons now.
Because Michael Johnson is the starter.
Replacing a back up is not my ideal for a top 10 pick. I want to replace a starter. And Michael Johnson is a bad starting defensive end at this stage of his career.
Gilberry actually had a very productive season last year after being picked up off the street.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - Socal Bengals fan - 04-20-2017
I don't get the hype as well. He was in most eyes a solid 2nd rounder then came the bowl game and then suddenly he's a high first rounder. And most of his sacks or production came from inside when he moved the DT on passing downs . That won't happen here as we have Geno. I much rather have Barnette , he would replace MJ instantly , and he would stay at the RDE spot all 3 downs just like Dunlap stay at LDE.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - lostpoet2 - 04-20-2017
Thomas seems to me like a more twitchy version of Michael Bennet or Justin Smith, and possibly has the upside of a short JJ Watt.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 04-20-2017
(04-19-2017, 11:53 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Solomon is a redshirt Sophomore. Allen is a senior.
What kind of production do you think Solomon would have if he played out his next two years of eligibility?
Good point, i was just emphasizing my reasons for Solomon to be there at 9.
It is not out of the realm of possibility.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 04-20-2017
(04-20-2017, 10:50 AM)Socal Bengals fan Wrote: I don't get the hype as well. He was in most eyes a solid 2nd rounder then came the bowl game and then suddenly he's a high first rounder. And most of his sacks or production came from inside when he moved the DT on passing downs . That won't happen here as we have Geno. I much rather have Barnette , he would replace MJ instantly , and he would stay at the RDE spot all 3 downs just like Dunlap stay at LDE.
Barnett better get a lot better at stopping the run before he starts on running downs.
That is why Solomon would start earlier, he is ten times the run stopper that Barnett is and he CAN rush the passer.
Just not as good as Barnett, pick your poison. I am down with either pick myself.
RE: Soloman Thomas # 9?? - Whatever - 04-20-2017
(04-20-2017, 10:50 AM)Socal Bengals fan Wrote: I don't get the hype as well. He was in most eyes a solid 2nd rounder then came the bowl game and then suddenly he's a high first rounder. And most of his sacks or production came from inside when he moved the DT on passing downs . That won't happen here as we have Geno. I much rather have Barnette , he would replace MJ instantly , and he would stay at the RDE spot all 3 downs just like Dunlap stay at LDE.
He has good production in a big boy conference, great athletic traits, and is very young. That's what the hype is about. He has a very high ceiling and a high floor.
Barnett is undersized and won't hold up against the run. He is strictly a pass rush specialist as a rookie. He is only 259 pounds, and watching video of his Pro Day, he's carrying a lot of bad weight around his midsection. I don't know if he can put on enough muscle mass to be a 3 down player.
With Thomas, we usually move Atkins to NT and slide a DE in at UT on obvious passing downs, anyways. Thomas can slide down and we can bring in Clarke st RDE.