(08-23-2023, 12:30 PM)Housh Wrote: I think he’s earned a spot on the 53 with his play so far. And we also have a super hole at backup NT so he’s kinda in by default. I think he’s made enough plays tho to get a spot.

If we sign a NT then he or Gunther is in trouble but right now he should be ok.

(08-23-2023, 12:44 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Never know with these tweener types. He certainly didn’t stand out much to me last season, so I’m glad to hear he’s flashing some.

(08-23-2023, 01:01 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Carter is a lock for the 53. He is not a NT, however. That is Reader & Tupou.

There is a zero percent chance we only keep 4 NT/DT types. Zero. Reader, Hill, Tupou, & Carter are locks. Tufele has the lead on the 5th spot, but Davis is there as well. Keeping 6 is likelier than keeping 4.

The last couple dpots will come down to if we keep:

1. 3 or 4 RBs. I think 4.
2. 6 or 7 WRs. I think 6.
3. 9 or 10 OL. I think 9 (Collins PUP).
4. 5 or 6 DEs. I think 5.
5. 6 or 7 CBs. I think 6.
6. 4 or 5 S's. I think 4.
----------
7. 5 or 6 DT/NTs. I think 5.
8. 3 or 4 TEs. I think 3.

Those numbers add up to 52. 1 spot left. Maybe 2 if we only keep 3 RBs. That's the final battle for the last 1-2 spits between

RB#4: Evans
WR#7: Morgan, Taylor, Jackson
TE#4: Hudson, Asiasi
OL #10: Smith, Adeniji, Ford, Hill, B. Brown (2 will already be on 51-52)
DE #6: Basham, Gunter, R. Johnson, Carney
DT #6: Tufele, Davis (one will be DT#5)
CB#7: S. Jones, George (I have Ivey as in)
S#5: Thomas

(08-23-2023, 12:44 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Never know with these tweener types. He certainly didn’t stand out much to me last season, so I’m glad to hear he’s flashing some.

(08-23-2023, 12:26 PM)ochocincos Wrote: John Sheeran has written an article about how well Zach Carter is doing this preseason.
https://atozsports.com/cincinnati/bengals-defensive-tackle-zach-carter-is-on-the-verge-of-a-breakout-year-2023/

He has been at practices and seen it for his own eyes, per his Twitter (I'll never call it X).

In the article, a post from Andrew Russell lists the preseason pass rush win rates for all the Bengals DL.
Carter is at the top of the list with 17.2%.
Domenique Davis is 15.8%
Ossai 14.3%
Then a huge drop off down to under 6% for Myles Murphy, Jay Tufele, and Jeff Gunter.

Carter had also put on 20 lbs of muscle since his rookie season ended.
It appears that added muscle is not just for show, but it's helping Carter be more productive (likely along with improved technique and other things).

This article from John gives me some hope that Carter might become the heir we want at UT after Hill leaves, and if anything could provide some added juice to the interior pass rush as a rotational guy.

(08-23-2023, 12:30 PM)Housh Wrote: I think he’s earned a spot on the 53 with his play so far. And we also have a super hole at backup NT so he’s kinda in by default. I think he’s made enough plays tho to get a spot.

If we sign a NT then he or Gunther is in trouble but right now he should be ok.

(08-23-2023, 01:46 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I thought Zach Carter has been looking much better this Preseason and yes, the extra 20 pounds of muscle has really
helped. We need a 3-tech to collapse the interior, BJ can do it, but he is kind of in between a 3-tech and a NT. When we
drafted Carter I thought it was a couple years down the road before he could make the move, but he certainly put in the 
work in the Offseason to help make it sooner rather than later. Love hearing this about Carter.

If we can get push from the middle of the DL it will help our Defense become elite more than anything else.


Dude, you are talking about completely different positions. 

Carter is a 3-tech, Gunter is an End. Reader, Tupou and Tufele are Nose Tackles.

We don't need to sign a NT, we need one in the Draft for the future when Reader leaves. We need a 3-tech right now to collapse
the interior of OL's and that is what we are hoping for with Zach Carter.

(08-23-2023, 01:12 PM)ochocincos Wrote: 10 DL feels overly excessive when most of the time only 4 are out there, doesn't it?
Why can't the Bengals go with just 9 DL?

I feel like with the lengthy DB injuries that have happened over recent years and often playing 5 DBs, I'd rather keep an extra DB over a 10th DL.

(08-23-2023, 02:17 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Nope. We haven't kept fewer than 10 anytime recently that I can recall. I can recall 11. 

1) We often play with 5, not 4. 3 DT/NT types and two ends. Especially against running teams (Balt, Cle, Pitt).  This is why 4 NT/DT is not an option. If Tupou gets hurt, then Reader has to play the whole game? Or vice versa. You can kick a strong end (Hubbard, Sample, Murphy) inside to cover if one of the DTs goes down, but it won't hold up at NT. 

2) Short yardage & goal line require more beef, and more DL. 

3) DL is not OL. These guys get rotated in game. Usually they are all active, or at least 9.  The top 8 play every game & 9 has to be ready to come in. 

Snaps D/ST, & games: 
Hill: 816/69, 16 
Hubbard: 801/37, 15 
Hendrickson: 629/1, 15 
Reader: 397/37, 10 
------------ 
C  Sample:  412/75, 16 
Carter: 396/71, 16 
Ossai: 334/31, 16 
Tupou: 272/44, 11 
----------
Tufele: 138/16, 7 
--------------
Davis: 38/3, 2
Gunter: 37/79, 10 
Shelvin: 24/0, 2 

At min, 4 DEs and 4 NT/DTs play every game, and you need 1 backup at each spot. So 10. 

(08-23-2023, 02:20 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I thought Bengals were most often running in 4-2-5?
I know occasionally they run 5 DL, but I didn't think it was most of the time?
Do you have a percentage of snaps that 5 DL are in?

(08-23-2023, 02:20 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I thought Bengals were most often running in 4-2-5?
I know occasionally they run 5 DL, but I didn't think it was most of the time?
Do you have a percentage of snaps that 5 DL are in?

(08-23-2023, 02:36 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: I didn't say it was most of the time, but we do do it often, especially vs run first teams. And in short yardage/goal line you have at least that. 

Sure, 4-2-5 is the base D, but 5 up front certainly happens.  As does 6 in the secondary, or even 7. 

(08-23-2023, 02:32 PM)ochocincos Wrote: So it looks like the Bengals played about 1036 defensive snaps in the regular season.
If you multiply that by 4 (4-man front), that's 4144.

Every single DL combined number of snaps was 4294.
So 150 total snaps out of 1036 possible snaps.

That shows that the Bengals are not frequently out there running 5 DL.
Only about 13-14% of all the snaps are running 5 DL.

Is it worth keeping an extra DL just for 13-14% of the instances where 5 DL are used?
Or perhaps, maybe, if 5 DL are needed/wanted in the very rare occasion, the Bengals could just have the DL play a handful more?

(08-23-2023, 03:33 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: You get points for industry, but your math sucks. 

We were in 5 DL or more much more than that.  150/1,036 = 14.47%, not 3%. That's assuming it was never 6 DL/7DL for a play, which likely happened some. Well over 10% of the time, total. And more vs Balt/Cle type teams. 

And again, the 5th DT/NT plays more than RB3/4, WR7, OL 8-10, CB7, and S4/5. 

10 DL (or more) is a mortal freaking lock. Period. End of story. Our scheme demands it. Plus it is one of the deeper spots we have. 

2019: 11. 
https://www.cincyjungle.com/2019/8/31/20842473/cincinnati-bengals-53-man-roster-2019

2020: We started with 9: 

DE: Dunlap, Hubbard, Lawson, Kareem 
DT/NT: Reader, Atkins, Daniels, Covington, Brown 

Bledsoe (312), Hunt (292), and X. Williams (310) ended up playing a lot. McKenzie with over 100. 

Even with 9, we still had 5 DT/NT types, we skimped on ends. 

2021:  10 

DE: Hendrickson, Hubbard, Kareem, Sample, Hodge 
NT/DT: Reader, Ojunjobi, Tupou, Hill, Shelvin 


Kareem went to IR & we claimed Wyatt Ray, I believe. 

2022: 10 

https://www.cincyjungle.com/2022/8/30/23329019/bengals-53-man-roster-cuts-2022

Kareem to IR + we added Tufele before the opener. 


We have always carried at oeast 5 DT/NT types under Zach/Lou. We will always will. The schemecdictates it.