If Fournette is there at #9, the Bengals Take Him

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-04-2017, 01:57 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: In his prime, Whit beats him hands down. However, Zeitler has another 6 or 7 years of high level play and is rated as the top O-line FA pretty much everywhere you look. Whit has 2 more years at best because let's face it Father Time is undefeated. 

The money is there to sign both guys, but going forward Zeitler is going to be the better player, it's just about age. 

Zeitler needs an O-line coach that can teach him how to run block again.

Surprised teams are rating him so high when he is a terrible run blocker.

But i guess this goes back to our O-line coach once again. A team with a decent O-line coach could make Zeit All-pro.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-04-2017, 01:55 AM)Atomic Orange Wrote: He reminds me a lot of Hill before Hill lost whatever he had. But yeah worthless pick with a shit line.

Except Fournette is WAY faster, with better burst, did it behind a worse O-line at LSU hits the hole faster and doesn't hesitate...

LSU logo and size aside, they are completely different backs.

[*bfine32*]

(03-04-2017, 01:27 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: Horrendous idea!

The Bengals seem to be reverting to the 1990s where Mike Brown drafted zillions of skill players while ignoring the trenches.  On successful teams the lines are always addressed first.

What Trench player would you rake at 9?

I hope the Bengals follow the talent trumps need route and takes Fournette if he's their when we pick.  

[Okeana]

(03-04-2017, 02:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What Trench player would you rake at 9?

I hope the Bengals follow the talent trumps need route and takes Fournette if he's their when we pick.  

Agreed.  This whole idea that drafting a top tier running back is bad because our line sucks is totally the wrong way to think.  That's like saying don't draft Peyton Manning because you have a bad WR core.  

I also wish people would stop comparing him to Jeremy Hill.  They aren't similar on really any level of skill, physical traits, or mentality.  

Let me sum this whole argument up and put this to rest.  If LF would have played for Alabama all these people on this forum would be slobbin his knob.  

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(03-04-2017, 01:57 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: In his prime, Whit beats him hands down. However, Zeitler has another 6 or 7 years of high level play and is rated as the top O-line FA pretty much everywhere you look. Whit has 2 more years at best because let's face it Father Time is undefeated. 

The money is there to sign both guys, but going forward Zeitler is going to be the better player, it's just about age. 

"In his prime" as if he is still not playing at an elite level. Last I checked, the last three years Whit has been a 2x Pro Bowler, 1x 1st Team All-Pro, 1x 2nd Team-All Pro.

I will gladly take 2 years of elite LT play over 6 years of meh RG play. Even then, you said "the best guy on the line", not "the guy who may be the best in 4 years". Right now Whit is the best player on the line and it's not even close. I honestly would also probably take a healthy Boling over 2016 Zeitler, as well.

(03-04-2017, 02:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What Trench player would you rake at 9?

I hope the Bengals follow the talent trumps need route and takes Fournette if he's their when we pick.  

Derek Barnette

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-04-2017, 03:08 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: "In his prime" as if he is still not playing at an elite level. Last I checked, the last three years Whit has been a 2x Pro Bowler, 1x 1st Team All-Pro, 1x 2nd Team-All Pro.

I will gladly take 2 years of elite LT play over 6 years of meh RG play. Even then, you said "the best guy on the line", not "the guy who may be the best in 4 years". Right now Whit is the best player on the line and it's not even close. I honestly would also probably take a healthy Boling over 2016 Zeitler, as well.



Derek Barnette

I agree with...

All of this.

[yellowxdiscipline]

Unless they plan on fixing the oline I hope they do not take a back like Fournette. He'd be wasting his career running behind a turd like Bodine.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(03-04-2017, 10:38 AM)Atomic Orange Wrote: Jeremy Hill behind a good line.

Might as well title that "Jeremy Hill against boys and insurance/car salesmen."

You look at just about any single given player in the NFL, regardless of round drafted, and they have a video of them dominating in college. That's WHY they're in the NFL. It doesn't mean that they will continue to do so.

Trent Richardson and Akili Smith probably had amazing videos of them dominating in college, too. McCarron won three championships in college but came into the NFL and went 2-3 with great offensive weapons and a good (at the time) offensive line. Tim Tebow is no longer in the NFL. Margus Hunt had 8 sacks his senior year in college. Dontay Moch had 59 TFL, 26.5 Sacks, and 8 FF in his final three years of college.

College =/= Pros

[Fan_in_Kettering]

(03-03-2017, 11:13 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Hard to say if this is a smokescreen or Guenther's comments about how pick #9 should be guaranteed a very good defensive player.
It makes me think the Fournette is a smokescreen and the Bengals either hope he's gone before pick #9 to have more defensive players fall or have teams looking to trade up to 9 for Fournette.

Based on comments from Paul Guenther and Duke Tobin, I believe Cincinnati is going defense in the first round of the 2017 draft. I look for the Bengals to take either Malik Hooker from Ohio State, Alabama defensive back Minkah Fitzpatrick, or most likely Reuben Foster, the Alabama linebacker who was just sent home from the NFL Combine for arguing with hospital personnel. This incident might cause Foster to be selected later in the draft for less money which are two attractive qualities in Cincinnati.

[Hammerstripes]

(03-02-2017, 08:06 PM)Okeana Wrote: I would laugh so hard if they try and put hill on the Practice squad because his ego would be so crushed.  Ive hated that kid for years and I just don't see how other people can justify him being on the team.  One of the most selfish childish players Ive ever seen and I will never forgive him for losing that Steelers playoff game.  

Hill isn't eligible for the practice squad.

(03-03-2017, 07:12 AM)Jpoore Wrote: God i hope not.i really do not want a rb at 9. In terms of a pure runner, hes not even the best one in the class.  Hes athletically gifted yeah but no for me.

He's about as a good as a running back prospect as we've seen in years.

(03-03-2017, 08:04 AM)Wyche Wrote: Selfish.....like sitting out your team's bowl game?  

That was a coach's decision more so than Fournette's.

[Jpoore]

(03-06-2017, 01:26 AM)Hammerstripes Wrote: He's about as a good as a running back prospect as we've seen in years.

Hes the most athletically gifted, but in terms of pure runner as i said mixon is the best pure runner. He just gets it. And zeke is a better back imo.

[*ochocincos*]

(03-05-2017, 07:28 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: Based on comments from Paul Guenther and Duke Tobin, I believe Cincinnati is going defense in the first round of the 2017 draft. I look for the Bengals to take either Malik Hooker from Ohio State, Alabama defensive back Minkah Fitzpatrick, or most likely Reuben Foster, the Alabama linebacker who was just sent home from the NFL Combine for arguing with hospital personnel.  This incident might cause Foster to be selected later in the draft for less money which are two attractive qualities in Cincinnati.

Fitzpatrick isn't in this year's draft.

[CJD]

A month ago I would have absolutely hated this pick.

Today, I wouldn't love it, but I would recognize that it would improve this team in a significant way.

The kid can play.

He just needs to learn to read his blocks better.

The fact that he times at, basically, the same 40 as Cook was very eye opening as well.

I know the 40 is overrated, but prior to the draft, Cook was pitched as the "fast, quick RB" and Fournette was the "big, bruiser."

Well, the big bruiser is basically as fast as the fast quick RB in regards to straight line speed. And it shows up on film as well.

I would prefer we address a bigger need at 9, such as DE or possibly LB (although the only LB worth a top 10 pick had a pretty shitty combine weekend) , but if Fournette is sitting right there and there aren't any premium players left at those positions, I would be happy to have the kid on our team.

[McC]

(03-06-2017, 10:45 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: A month ago I would have absolutely hated this pick.

Today, I wouldn't love it, but I would recognize that it would improve this team in a significant way.

The kid can play.

He just needs to learn to read his blocks better.

The fact that he times at, basically, the same 40 as Cook was very eye opening as well.

I know the 40 is overrated, but prior to the draft, Cook was pitched as the "fast, quick RB" and Fournette was the "big, bruiser."

Well, the big bruiser is basically as fast as the fast quick RB in regards to straight line speed. And it shows up on film as well.

I would prefer we address a bigger need at 9, such as DE or possibly LB (although the only LB worth a top 10 pick had a pretty shitty combine weekend) , but if Fournette is sitting right there and there aren't any premium players left at those positions, I would be happy to have the kid on our team.

If there's not a run on QB's this could very well be the case.  It could be that a RB or WR or even a CB is at the top of the board.  What do you do then?  You're looking for a difference maker, someone to make you better.  You can still go and get pass rushers and linemen with your next 10 picks.  Or, how do you pass on OJ Howard, for instance?  You might think and even say you want defense first but it might not work out that way.

Every time you improve one side of the ball, you make it better for the other side of the ball too.  

[Bengalholic]

(03-06-2017, 10:45 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: A month ago I would have absolutely hated this pick.

Today, I wouldn't love it, but I would recognize that it would improve this team in a significant way.

The kid can play.

He just needs to learn to read his blocks better.

The fact that he times at, basically, the same 40 as Cook was very eye opening as well.

I know the 40 is overrated, but prior to the draft, Cook was pitched as the "fast, quick RB" and Fournette was the "big, bruiser."

Well, the big bruiser is basically as fast as the fast quick RB in regards to straight line speed. And it shows up on film as well.

I would prefer we address a bigger need at 9, such as DE or possibly LB (although the only LB worth a top 10 pick had a pretty shitty combine weekend) , but if Fournette is sitting right there and there aren't any premium players left at those positions, I would be happy to have the kid on our team.

I have no issue with them taking Fournette if he's available and they feel he's the best value at that point. I also really like Solomon Thomas, Corey Davis and Malik Hooker if he somehow get to 9. 

[NKYRob]

Heard an interesting tidbit on the PFF podcast today where they compared Fournette to Cook. They argued that Fournette had a lesser ability to overcome poor run blocking than Cook, and provided some numbers (below)

Fournette
YPC with good run blocking: 8.7
YPC with poor run blocking: 4.6

Cook
YPC with good run blocking: 7.5
YPC with poor run blocking: 5.9

How they measure good vs. poor run blocking is an unknown, but thought it would be interesting to throw this out there given the current state of our OL.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(03-06-2017, 11:58 AM)NKYRob Wrote: Heard an interesting tidbit on the PFF podcast today where they compared Fournette to Cook.  They argued that Fournette had a lesser ability to overcome poor run blocking than Cook, and provided some numbers (below)

Fournette
YPC with good run blocking: 8.7
YPC with poor run blocking: 4.6

Cook
YPC with good run blocking: 7.5
YPC with poor run blocking: 5.9

How they measure good vs. poor run blocking is an unknown, but thought it would be interesting to throw this out there given the current state of our OL.

Maybe from point of first contact or something?  Anyway, just from casual observation, this is what I have seen as the biggest difference between the two....and a lot of running behind a FB from Fournette.  With our awful run blocking over the last decade plus, I'd go with Cook if I went RB.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-06-2017, 11:58 AM)NKYRob Wrote: Heard an interesting tidbit on the PFF podcast today where they compared Fournette to Cook.  They argued that Fournette had a lesser ability to overcome poor run blocking than Cook, and provided some numbers (below)

Fournette
YPC with good run blocking: 8.7
YPC with poor run blocking: 4.6

Cook
YPC with good run blocking: 7.5
YPC with poor run blocking: 5.9

How they measure good vs. poor run blocking is an unknown, but thought it would be interesting to throw this out there given the current state of our OL.

Thanks for this Rob. Makes sense to me. Fournette can lean a bit forward and get off balance, he does not have
the balance nor the cut back ability that Cook has nor the ability to make defenders miss. Defenses can gang tackle
Fournette and stop him like Bama did against him.

I really like Fournette and would be happy if we picked him but i definately like Dalvin Cook more for us.

[coachmcneil71]

(03-06-2017, 03:56 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Thanks for this Rob. Makes sense to me. Fournette can lean a bit forward and get off balance, he does not have
the balance nor the cut back ability that Cook has nor the ability to make defenders miss. Defenses can gang tackle
Fournette and stop him like Bama did against him.

I really like Fournette and would be happy if we picked him but i definately like Dalvin Cook more for us.

I like both backs but comparing what Bama was able to do against LF & LSU is not a very good point of reference, nor is it accurate. First of all LSU was bereft of offensive talent other than LF. Now throw in the play calling. 

Now consider that the Bengals are a PRO team that has a PB caliber TE,WR, & QB. Apple's and oranges people, apples & oranges. If a team tries to do what Bama did against LSU & Andy doesn't audible and throw it down field to AJ, he should be benched!!! Counting the S Bama was putting 8 & 9 guys in the box against LSU.

[*ochocincos*]

(03-06-2017, 05:53 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: I like both backs but comparing what Bama was able to do against LF & LSU is not a very good point of reference, nor is it accurate. First of all LSU was bereft of offensive talent other than LF. Now throw in the play calling. 

Now consider that the Bengals are a PRO team that has a PB caliber TE/WR & QB. Apple's and oranges people, apples & oranges. If a team tries to do what Bama did against LSU & Andy doesn't audible and throw it down field to AJ, he should be benched!!! Counting the S Bama was putting 8 & 9 guys in the box against LSU.

How often have we heard that teams like the Steelers use the strategy of double teaming AJ Green and then stacking the box or at least playing short coverage everywhere else? This is because the Bengals have no one else to stretch the field. Adding LF is just going to cause that same issue. The Bengals need another downfield threat over a better RB.