Have the Bengals Improved?

[BigPapaKain]

Premature question.

[WeezyBengal]

(03-15-2016, 04:50 PM)PDub80 Wrote: No, they haven't. But they haven't regressed yet, either.

Frankly, they had the best roster top to bottom in the NFL last year so i don't think they could have improved on #1. They can only improve by playing on the field and proving it.

How can you say they havent regressed? They lost their second and third best receivers and lost some depth on the offensive and defensive side of the ball. 


Could all this change before the season? Of course, but as of right now we have most definitely regressed.

[Mike M (the other one)]

Since the Bengals are a draft oriented team, you really need to wait until after that to ask this question. At the moment we are down some with the loss of both WR's, but the draft could change that.

[Bengalbug]

If they can keep Reggie Nelson on a cheap deal (looking more and more likely)

When they sign a veteran possession reciever and draft a WR in the first few rounds who can work the outside I will say we set ourselves up to be better than last year. Until then, as of 3/16, the bengals have regressed.

[jj22]

Not premature at all. Fred mentioned how many draft picks that contributed (many in secondary roles behind starters, not needed as starters) in 5 years. Now take that number divided by the number of picks we've taken and get the percentage of draft picks that have contributed for us their rookie year. If you do, you'll see why it's not promising to think this class will be very helpful year one.

Some of you guys are putting an awful lot on this rookie class to get us over the hump, I'm not sold we can rely on the rookie class to allow us to field a better team in 2016 then we had in 2015. We will see though.

[Bengalbug]

(03-16-2016, 10:41 AM)jj22 Wrote: Not premature at all. Fred mentioned how many draft picks that contributed (many in secondary roles behind starters, not needed as starters) in 5 years. Now take that number divided by the number of picks we've taken and get the percentage of draft picks that have contributed for us their rookie year.  If you do, you'll see why it's not promising to think this class will be very helpful year one.

You only need to hit on WR.

If we retain Reggie, and get can someone like Harvin who is a more dynamic version of sanu (if he can stay healthy) and if you get your outside guy in draft...

No reason this team can't be better than last

[jj22]

We need DT, and DE as well. Unless your counting on Hunt and Clark. We lost Wallace G. And our cb situation isn't as stable as they'd like us to think, or they wouldn't have re-signed a 33 year old cb to 7 million a year (not against that signing), but it told us a lot about where we stood at the cb position. Dre may not be back, and Dennard hasn't proven reliable. And we haven't mentioned LB or C.

I agree if we get Reggie back we have our centerfielder safety, and we won't field starting "in the box" strong safety's. This defense has always needed 3 safety's. And we don't know what we have in a 6th round pick Derron Smith to claim an upgrade.

We do need to hit on a couple wide receivers.... In a class that the top receivers would have been 3-4th round picks in prior draft classes.

[fredtoast]

(03-16-2016, 10:41 AM)jj22 Wrote: Not premature at all. Fred mentioned how many draft picks that contributed (many in secondary roles behind starters, not needed as starters) in 5 years. Now take that number divided by the number of picks we've taken and get the percentage of draft picks that have contributed for us their rookie year.  If you do, you'll see why it's not promising to think this class will be very helpful year one.

Okay I did the math and it shows that we will get a starter from our draft class.

How is producing a stater NOT helpful.

Either way, it had to be a joke to claim that the Bengals have not played rookies over the last 5 years, right?  That could not have been a serious statement, could it?

it is getting hard for me to tell with you.

[fredtoast]

(03-16-2016, 10:50 AM)jj22 Wrote:  We lost Wallace G. 

Where did he sign?

[jj22]

I thought it was common knowledge that our rookies aren't expected to produce year 1 (they get their redshirt year). Outside of Green/Dalton. Bodine arguably was thrown in there because we didn't have anyone, but that I believed was rare. Gio, Hill, and some of the others you mentioned were a luxury.

Are you arguing Marvin is known to start rookies.


Not with the Bengals.

[jj22]

(03-16-2016, 11:45 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Where did he sign?

Not with the Bengals.

[masonbengals fan]

No, they haven't improved at this point. Yes, it's still to be determined how the rest of FA & the draft plays out. Hopefully after the season we can say those were the moves that put us over the top.

[fredtoast]

(03-16-2016, 11:45 AM)jj22 Wrote: Are you arguing Marvin is known to start rookies.


Not with the Bengals.

Yep.  Marvin has been known to start rookies.  In fact it has happened almost every year over the last five years when you claimed we "never played rookies".

Before that there a long list of rookies who started from opening  day.  Gresham, Maualuga, Rivers, Pollack, Odell Thurman. Madieu Williams, and Eric Steinbach.  In addition to those guys there were lots of rookies who started multiple games or had major contributions as rookies including Leon Hall,  Johnathan Jospeh, Andrew Whitworth, Jordan Shipley, Geno Atkins, and Carlos Dunlap.

[CJD]

I think we got through what was going to be an extremely painful free agency period with relatively few dings.

Losing Jones sucks, but I agree with just about every other signing and non-signing.

Except Nelson. I think we need to re-sign him, but we can wait until his price goes down a little bit.

Hopefully.

We didn't improve by any means, but we did not crumble as badly as I was worried we would.

[fredtoast]

(03-16-2016, 11:47 AM)jj22 Wrote: Not with the Bengals.

Oh, I forget that you twist your view of free agency in order to make the Bengals look as bad as possible.

In your version of reality we had "lost" Iloka before we signed him.

[jj22]

(03-16-2016, 11:56 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yep.  Marvin has been known to start rookies.  In fact it has happened almost every year over the last five years when you claimed we "never played rookies".

Before that there a long list of rookies who started from opening  day.  Gresham, Maualuga, Rivers, Pollack, Odell Thurman. Madieu Williams, and Eric Steinbach.  In addition to those guys there were lots of rookies who started multiple games or had major contributions as rookies including Leon Hall,  Johnathan Jospeh, Andrew Whitworth, Jordan Shipley, Geno Atkins, and Carlos Dunlap.

Ahh, but did I not say in the last 4-5 years.... How about those percentages you calculated? What are they again.... But fair enough. You believe Marvin starts rookies over his vets, I believe Marvin has always been a coach that preferred his vets. We disagree. It's cool.

[jj22]

(03-16-2016, 11:59 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Oh, I forget that you twist your view of free agency in order to make the Bengals look as bad as possible.

In your version of reality we had "lost" Iloka before we signed him.

I never claimed we lost Iloka. There was many mentions they were trying to re-sign him, Hobs, Pundits etc. Not so much about Wallace G.

In your twisted view I guess Geathers is still a Bengal.

[XenoMorph]

(03-15-2016, 04:49 PM)jj22 Wrote: The offseason has begun, and all the big moves are basically over. Nothing left but bargain shopping and camp signings. How do you guys feel going into the 2017 season? Has the team improved? Why or why not?

Not considering the draft, because we haven't used our draft picks their rookie year for the last 4-5 years. Doubt any will come in and be used right away this year.

How about we wait till Free agency is over and the draft for that matter before we can really answer this question.

We dont even know who the final roster will be so there is no way to say if we improved or not.

[fredtoast]

(03-16-2016, 12:12 PM)jj22 Wrote: Ahh, but did I not say in the last 4-5 years.... How about those percentages you calculated? What are they again.... 

Four first day starters in five seasons (Zeitler, Bodine, Dalton, Green).  Almost one per season.  And both Hill and Bernard lead the team in touches as rookies.  Technically they were not "first day starters" but I think even you would admit that they made huge contributions as rookies.  So I would say at least 6 in the last 5 years.

Sorry that I did not "show my work" initially because I assumed a Bengal fan woiuld knowm about all of these starters.

If we go back 6 years then we add Gresham as a day one starter plus 9.5 sacks from a rookie (Dunlap) and 52 receptions from a rookie (Shipley)

If you go back 7 years we have two more first day rookie starters (Maualuga, Huber).

If you go back 8 years we add Rivers as another first day rookie starter.

[Ricky Spanish]

Not yet. See what the draft does and who else they can get in FA