+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: ESPN ranks positions (/thread-32843.html)
Pages:
1
2
ESPN ranks positions - J24 - 08-20-2022
https://es.pn/3candyI
https://es.pn/3c8WK4v
Bengals ratings
QB- 7th
RB- 14th
WR 1st
OL-12th
TE- 22nd
DT-10th
DE-11th
LB-20th
CB-16th
S-2nd
4th Overall
RE: ESPN ranks positions - TheFan - 08-20-2022
(08-20-2022, 11:34 PM)J24 Wrote: https://es.pn/3candyI
https://es.pn/3c8WK4v
Bengals ratings
QB- 7th
RB- 14th
WR 1st
OL-12th
TE- 22nd
DT-10th
DE-11th
LB-20th
CB-16th
S-2nd
4th Overall
I don't have ESPN + so I can't see the rational for each position but I feel like LB Is a bit underrated. Awuzie and Hilton I think should make them a bit higher than 16th as well given they're both top 10 CBs for their positions.
Overall though I don't think it's far off though. OL maybe a bit high given what happened last year coupled with the current group having never played together (including TC), a black hole at LG, and at best a pair of fringe top 10 players.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - AlphaBengal - 08-21-2022
For once I dont completely disagree with an ESPN piece. Corners could maybe a little but that’s really it.
Edit: I also assume QB is taking into account every QB on the roster, so I don't have an issue with 7th.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - CJD - 08-21-2022
(08-20-2022, 11:34 PM)J24 Wrote: https://es.pn/3candyI
https://es.pn/3c8WK4v
Bengals ratings
QB- 7th
RB- 14th
WR 1st
OL-12th
TE- 22nd
DT-10th
DE-11th
LB-20th
CB-16th
S-2nd
4th Overall
I'm going to assume RB is lower than I would expect because of our lack of depth, because Mixon himself is a top 10 RB easy (and may be a top 5 RB). Otherwise, having Washington, NYG, Dallas, Denver, LA Chargers, New England, and Carolina above us is pretty silly.
I don't agree with ranking Stafford or Herbert above Burrow, but I understand people are biased towards those two at the moment.
I generally agree with the rest of their rankings though. I think CB could be higher, but I understand people don't trust Eli Apple. Truthfully, I don't fully trust him either. But Awuzie and Hilton are a really good pair at CB1 and NCB.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - J24 - 08-21-2022
Also interesting that they rated the Steelers with the worst Oline, Ravens with the worst WRs, and the Browns with the worst DT.
It seems that the Bengals are the only one without a fatal flaw.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - Nicomo Cosca - 08-21-2022
I’m a little higher on our LBers than that, but nothing too controversial here.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - SHRacerX - 08-21-2022
(08-20-2022, 11:34 PM)J24 Wrote: https://es.pn/3candyI
https://es.pn/3c8WK4v
Bengals ratings
QB- 7th
RB- 14th
WR 1st
OL-12th
TE- 22nd
DT-10th
DE-11th
LB-20th
CB-16th
S-2nd
4th Overall
Everything seems pretty in order except the rankings for CB and LB.
Chido is a beast. There are guys making twice what he does that aren't the same player. He has been incredible in stripes. Aggressive tackler, tough as nails, and a great coverage guy. The depth at CB might be where they are being knocked, but Apple ranked pretty well after a rough start and they also have one of the best nickel cover guys in Hilton.
The LB ranking is absurd. That is like someone ranked them just by their PFF rankings and doesn't know what their roles are. Wilson and Pratt are top tier LBs and they have really good depth with ADG and Bailey. There is no way in hell there are 19 LB squads I would take over ours. In fact, there are very few. Given their age, yet experience and upside, I think they are a really good LB corps.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - tBengal - 08-21-2022
I’d have our LB crew higher than that.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - KillerGoose - 08-21-2022
(08-21-2022, 02:47 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I'm going to assume RB is lower than I would expect because of our lack of depth, because Mixon himself is a top 10 RB easy (and may be a top 5 RB). Otherwise, having Washington, NYG, Dallas, Denver, LA Chargers, New England, and Carolina above us is pretty silly.
I don't agree with ranking Stafford or Herbert above Burrow, but I understand people are biased towards those two at the moment.
I generally agree with the rest of their rankings though. I think CB could be higher, but I understand people don't trust Eli Apple. Truthfully, I don't fully trust him either. But Awuzie and Hilton are a really good pair at CB1 and NCB.
This may be nitpicky because I’m not disagreeing with your statement in general, but I’d have LAC over Cincinnati at RB. I would take Ekeler over Mixon right now.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - pally - 08-21-2022
(08-20-2022, 11:54 PM)TheFan Wrote: I don't have ESPN + so I can't see the rational for each position but I feel like LB Is a bit underrated. Awuzie and Hilton I think should make them a bit higher than 16th as well given they're both top 10 CBs for their positions.
Overall though I don't think it's far off though. OL maybe a bit high given what happened last year coupled with the current group having never played together (including TC), a black hole at LG, and at best a pair of fringe top 10 players.
The Bengals had the OL to watch
Quote:Unit to watch: Cincinnati Bengals
After watching franchise quarterback Joe Burrow take 70 sacks in 20 games last season, Cincinnati was aggressive in upgrading its Achilles' heel during the offseason. The Bengals signed a pair of solid interior players in center Ted Karras and right guard Alex Cappa, and the biggest upgrade came via new right tackle La'el Collins. Add 24-year-old left tackle Jonah Williams and 2021 second-rounder Jackson Carman at left guard, and the Bengals' line suddenly has a chance to be an asset rather than a major liability.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - samhain - 08-21-2022
I can't read the article. I can live with the linebacker rating if the article is lumping 4-3 and 3-4 guys all into the same pile. The position isn't really as big of a priority in Anarumo's defense, perhaps even less with Hill onboard when Bates returns. We are very likely to see 6 DBs on the field with 4 down linemen and 1 linebacker. We have a couple of good ones, but there's no need to be loaded at the linebacker position if you're rarely going to have more than 2 on the field.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - NUGDUKWE - 08-21-2022
It's nice to see they consider our WR 1st. I thought we might last year but starting 2nd guessing it lately with our lack of depth and other teams adding to they're groups. But continuity plays a role and I really think we could make do with any one of our top 3 as our main guy if we had to.
LB seems accurate to me as we don't have that athletic freak like some teams do and they may be counting 3-4 linebackers.
Corner again seems accurate as we don't really have that true shutdown corner. I'd say all of our guys are at the back end of a creating turnovers standpoint. I really like our guys and I think the argument for rating them higher would be that they all seem to play good together and within the scheme.
OL could be rated a little high and I really think we need and hope we add some more depth. But at this point your just rating it on paper and they may be accurate.
RB may be the position I would rate higher. Mixon may not have true home run speed. But he has proven to have the talent to be a top back. Perine certainly has some flaws but again has shown he can handle the load when needed and has big play potential. I think Chris Evans is what really moves us up as I think we haven't seen anywhere near his ceiling yet. But again it's rated on paper and while I'm basing my Evans opinion on his flashes from last season statistically he hasn't proven it yet.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - Gdale_Bengal - 08-21-2022
I think QB is about 4 spots too low. They can put Rodgers and Brady as 1 and 2 but burrow was better than everyone else last year.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - ATOTR - 08-21-2022
(08-20-2022, 11:34 PM)J24 Wrote: https://es.pn/3candyI
https://es.pn/3c8WK4v
Bengals ratings
QB- 7th
RB- 14th
WR 1st
OL-12th
TE- 22nd
DT-10th
DE-11th
LB-20th
CB-16th
S-2nd
4th Overall
With a viable backup, our qb rating would be top 3
I have no idea why an enterprise like the bengals would have Brandon Allen as their insurance policy.
Teams use their backups. Quarterbacks get injured. They miss games. You need a option to step in and not forfeit games by their existence.
With an extra win or loss often times deciding who makes the playoffs. It really is negligent to have this caliber of a team. And then have the backup qb be a total scrub
RE: ESPN ranks positions - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 08-21-2022
Agree with others that LB and Corner should be higher. I wouldn't take many Corners over Chido right now and I
definitely wouldn't take any, not 1 single Slot Corner over Mike Hilton. Apple is getting more consistent and has
always been extremely talented. The additions of Dax Hill who can play Corner and CTB make this one of the best
Corner rooms in the NFL in my opinion.
LB with Logan Wilson, Germaine Pratt, ADG, Bachie, Bailey and Clay Johnston is pretty frickin' good all the while
having Betcher as their coach. Think both Logan and ADG are going to blow up the league this year and become
one of the top duos in the NFL. We play a lot of 5-2 fronts.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - M.W. - 08-21-2022
(08-21-2022, 01:20 PM)ATOTR Wrote: With a viable backup, our qb rating would be top 3
I have no idea why an enterprise like the bengals would have Brandon Allen as their insurance policy.
Teams use their backups. Quarterbacks get injured. They miss games. You need a option to step in and not forfeit games by their existence.
With an extra win or loss often times deciding who makes the playoffs. It really is negligent to have this caliber of a team. And then have the backup qb be a total scrub
I absolutely agree, I don't think Brandon Allen is good enough to be in the NFL. I really don't understand why he is on the team.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 08-21-2022
(08-21-2022, 02:00 PM)M.W. Wrote: I absolutely agree, I don't think Brandon Allen is good enough to be in the NFL. I really don't understand why he is on the team.
This negative posture actually has substance and I am as positive as it gets.
I wouldn't even play Brandon Allen tonight. Play Browning and that dude Drew Plitt who had a perfect game his last outing
should have the majority of the snaps so we can see what we got with these 2 guys. If they struggle we might have to add
somebody else, Allen is not the answer. He runs right into sacks, is bad at avoiding pressure and cannot throw on the run.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - ATOTR - 08-21-2022
(08-21-2022, 02:00 PM)M.W. Wrote: I absolutely agree, I don't think Brandon Allen is good enough to be in the NFL. I really don't understand why he is on the team.
The best likening I can make.
Is building a million dollar home in Indian hill.
Paying 600k for the lot.
Then another 100k on furniture and appliances.
Then the builder suggests adding a sump pump to avoid water damage for 10k. And you say no, let’s just wing it and hope we never get a lot of rain.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - Soonerpeace - 08-21-2022
Interesting comparing to the Ravens.
They look to be playing a lot of 3 safety looks. Their secondary better. But their WR last but TE first. Their other defensive spots not great. Looks to me like beating Baltimore may require more attacking with the run. Personally I think they (Raven staff) realize Lamar’s shortcomings. I think Zac’s clear strategy from the day he took over is win the division. Covering the TE’s and containing Lamar seems to be an easy task. I think we are positioned well to compete in the division with the head to head matchups.
RE: ESPN ranks positions - CJD - 08-21-2022
(08-21-2022, 09:57 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: This may be nitpicky because I’m not disagreeing with your statement in general, but I’d have LAC over Cincinnati at RB. I would take Ekeler over Mixon right now.
LAC were the ones I was most hesitant to put on that list, so I see where you're coming from. Ekeler does offer a lot as a receiver out of the backfield. I guess I am evaluating them as running backs that take carries rather than as an all around weapon. Mixon, as a runner and as a bell cow back, is superior to Ekeler in my opinion. If we replaced Mixon with Ekeler in the Bengals offense, I don't think it would make the offense better. Ekeler is good because he's a high volume target in the passing game. Last year, he had 94 targets whereas Mixon only had 48. Given our wide receivers, I don't know if taking almost 50 touches away from them and giving them to our running back would be a net gain. After all, Ekeler only averaged 6.9 yards per target, which isn't that much higher than Mixon's 6.5 yards per target.
For a comparison, Chase, Higgins and Boyd gained 11.4 yards, 9.9 yards and 8.8 yards per each of their respective targets. Even Uzomah averaged 7.8 yards per target.
I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that, if the offense were designed for it, Mixon could get just as many targets as Ekeler and would produce on nearly the same level while also being a better runner.
With all that said, having a reliable safety valve is really good so Ekeler vs Mixon is close.