53 Man Roster

[Okeana]

(05-02-2017, 01:00 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: I saw Hobson has said the team is wanting to keep 7 WRs which makes me believe that Erickson makes the team. He did a very good job as a return man last year, so it makes sense. There will be some tough cuts this year and that's before they dig through other team's cuts. So I'm expecting them to keep Green, LaFell, Boyd, Core, Ross, Malone, and Erickson. I'm sure they'll keep Peerman which gives us 4 backs; Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Peerman. We know Dalton and McCarron are locks. So I'm thinking it will look something like this

QB(2)- Dalton, McCarron
RB(4)- Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Peerman
WR(7)- Green, LaFell, Boyd, Core, Ross, Malone, Erickson
TE(4)- Eifert, Kroft, Uzomah, Hewitt
T(3)- Ogbuehi, Fisher, Smith
G(4)- Boling, Westerman, Hopkins, Redmond
C(2)- Bodine, Johnson
DE(4)- Johnson, Dunlap, Clarke, Willis
DT(4)- Atkins, Billings, Hardison, Glasgow
LB(6)- Burfitct, Minter, Lawson, Vigil, Rey, Evans
CB(6)- Jones, Kirkpatrick, Dennard, Shaw, Russell, Jackson
S(4)- Iloka, Williams, Smith, Wilson
LS(1)- Harris
P(1)- Huber
K(1)- Elliott

Let me tell you, that was pretty tough. I had Winston as my last cut. Probably not a reality, but if keeping 7 WRs is really in the plan I had no idea who else to trim off the roster.

So yours is exactly the same as mine but instead of keeping erickson i had them keep Winston because they like having backup tackles more than a 7th receiver.  

[Au165]

(05-02-2017, 01:04 PM)BenZoo2 Wrote: Not sure how we keep 7 WRs and 3 qbs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's the struggle I am trying to figure out. Maybe they find another QB late in cuts they like better than driskell and take him straight to PS.

[milksheikh]

(05-02-2017, 10:23 AM)Okeana Wrote: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18_cLXbo8_eVE9dSOqP0RWviIj7kwKcioHoZ5kejQoEs/edit?usp=sharing

an updated version of my final 53. Lawson will act as the 7th LB and as a DE on the roster. I had us taking 6 WR in favor of keeping Redmon as a backup lineman. It basically came down to Core or Erickson and I think the measurables of Core are more favorable, but it could easily be Erickson. Running 6 CB's with Derron Smith acting as a swing 7th.

The Defensive line has to lose people this year. I think they keep Glasgow, but Hardison or Thompson has to go. So I put Thompson on IRI and started Hardison. Sims, Williams, and Gillberry all gone. Willis will be both DE and DT similar to Gil and he can play LDE.

I have Fejedelem losing out to Wilson and going PS and Flowers/PJ Dawson get cut in favor Jordan Evans and of course Lawson.

I like yours except I have Vigil over Vincent Rey.

[*ochocincos*]

(05-02-2017, 01:02 PM)Au165 Wrote: Probably. I don't think Hewitt gets cut though. I already explained the financials there, we would be paying him 60% of his salary not to play for us.

Might be better than paying him his full salary for playing only 20% of the offensive snaps like last year. The fact is his role has been diminishing for the past two seasons now.
2014: 43.8%
2015: 35.5%
2016: 20.2%

The Bengals have been in favor of using a TE over Hewitt when the OL blocking has been poor. Given the state of the OL right now, I'd expect more of the same and Hewitt's usage will be very low.

[Au165]

(05-02-2017, 01:07 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Might be better than paying him his full salary for playing only 20% of the offensive snaps like last year. The fact is his role has been diminishing for the past two seasons now.
2014: 43.8%
2015: 35.5%
2016: 20.2%

The Bengals have been in favor of using a TE over Hewitt when the OL blocking has been poor. Given the state of the OL right now, I'd expect more of the same and Hewitt's usage will be very low.

I think we see a revert back to lining up with a FB. If you look back that was Hills most productive year, and I think with our current O line it would do us well to get out of so much shotgun. Using a lead blocker and a power running game is the best remedy to a bad o line.

[*ochocincos*]

(05-02-2017, 01:09 PM)Au165 Wrote: I think we see a revert back to lining up with a FB. If you look back that was Hills most productive year, and I think with our current O line it would do us well to get out of so much shotgun.

Also, the cap hit for Hewitt isn't that bad at all.
Only dead money of $1.125 mill over the course of two seasons.

[*psychdoctor*]

(05-02-2017, 01:00 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: I saw Hobson has said the team is wanting to keep 7 WRs which makes me believe that Erickson makes the team. He did a very good job as a return man last year, so it makes sense. There will be some tough cuts this year and that's before they dig through other team's cuts. So I'm expecting them to keep Green, LaFell, Boyd, Core, Ross, Malone, and Erickson. I'm sure they'll keep Peerman which gives us 4 backs; Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Peerman. We know Dalton and McCarron are locks. So I'm thinking it will look something like this

QB(2)- Dalton, McCarron
RB(4)- Hill, Bernard, Mixon, Peerman
WR(7)- Green, LaFell, Boyd, Core, Ross, Malone, Erickson
TE(4)- Eifert, Kroft, Uzomah, Hewitt
T(3)- Ogbuehi, Fisher, Smith
G(4)- Boling, Westerman, Hopkins, Redmond
C(2)- Bodine, Johnson
DE(4)- Johnson, Dunlap, Clarke, Willis
DT(4)- Atkins, Billings, Hardison, Glasgow
LB(6)- Burfitct, Minter, Lawson, Vigil, Rey, Evans
CB(6)- Jones, Kirkpatrick, Dennard, Shaw, Russell, Jackson
S(4)- Iloka, Williams, Smith, Wilson
LS(1)- Harris
P(1)- Huber
K(1)- Elliott

Let me tell you, that was pretty tough. I had Winston as my last cut. Probably not a reality, but if keeping 7 WRs is really in the plan I had no idea who else to trim off the roster.

I would think Winston makes it over Hopkins because the Bengals are so thin at OT.  If Og gets injured, the team is in serious trouble.  

I also think the keep a vet on the D-Line in Gilberry or Sims.  I just do not see how they could justify keeping 7 WR unless there is an injury somewhere.  

The toughest pick will be between Wilson, Peerman, and FEJ.  All three can contribute on ST.  Wilson is more versatile and FEJ is a decent safety.  Both of the aforementioned players are younger and less expensive compared to Peerman.  However, Peerman is the spiritual leader.  Pro-bowl ST.  Leader in the locker room.  

[*ochocincos*]

(05-02-2017, 01:09 PM)Au165 Wrote: I think we see a revert back to lining up with a FB. If you look back that was Hills most productive year, and I think with our current O line it would do us well to get out of so much shotgun. Using a lead blocker and a power running game is the best remedy to a bad o line.

I hope you're right, but what the Bengals do and what we think they should do typically don't line up.
For the record, I like Hewitt and I think he's underutilized. I'm simply speculating based on trends.

[*psychdoctor*]

(05-02-2017, 01:13 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I hope you're right, but what the Bengals do and what we think they should do typically don't line up.
For the record, I like Hewitt and I think he's underutilized. I'm simply speculating based on trends.

The team could keep Hewitt and cut Kroft or Uzi.  With Eifert seemingly on the injured list each week, I wish the team would have drafted another good TE.

I think they need Hewitt to get to the backers for the rush to be effective. Especially in goal-line situations.

[*ochocincos*]

(05-02-2017, 01:16 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: The team could keep Hewitt and cut Kroft or Uzi.  

They could, but Kroft and Uzomah were used ~35% of offensive snaps each last year whereas Hewitt was only 20%.

[*psychdoctor*]

(05-02-2017, 01:17 PM)ochocincos Wrote: They could, but Kroft and Uzomah were used ~35% of offensive snaps each last year whereas Hewitt was only 20%.

If the Bengals go no-huddle or true West Coast offense, then they will do more 2 WR 1 TE sets with Mixon and Hewitt.  Mixon and Hewitt can both catch the ball and it would keep safeties near the box to respect the run.

[*ochocincos*]

(05-02-2017, 01:21 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: If the Bengals go no-huddle or true West Coast offense, then they will do more 2 WR 1 TE sets with Mixon and Hewitt.  Mixon and Hewitt can both catch the ball and it would keep safeties near the box to respect the run.

I understand what Hewitt can do. As already stated earlier, I'm simply speculating based on usage trends.
What we think the Bengals should do and what they actually do are often two different things.

But what I think the Bengals want is for LESS defenders in the box. That's why they got speed at WR and RBs that can catch. They want to spread out the defense. It makes it so the pass opens up the run (at least that's what they seem to hope).

[Whatever]

(05-02-2017, 12:44 PM)Au165 Wrote: Yea we will have to wait and see. I think it makes no sense to keep a less talented guy to return when you have guys who have done it well in college. Boyd was good at it in college, but we were so thin last year at WR they didn't want top risk using him. Pacman can return punts and with the youth a CB maybe we see him do it more.

As for Erickson being Ross's back up, that is laughable. Erickson is nothing like Ross, other than he is small. Alex ERickson is a slot receiver and nothing else, Ross will play all over the field. Malone is much closer to Ross than Erickson. You don't put core on the PS because he has decent game tape and you don't risk losing him. Heading in to the draft they were referring to him as the future 2 possibly. You don't put him on PS if you have any plans of cutting bait with LaFell next year.

It makes no sense to cut a conference leading return man when they will get a lot more touches than a #5-6 WR and your top 4 WR's are set for the next 2 years.  What exactly makes Core a more talented prospect?  Erickson is a better route runner and is faster(4.44 to 4.47 in the 40).  Core is a better jump ball target, but that's it.

Erickson and Ross have great footwork and use it tocreate seperation.  Erickson ran a lot of the red zone routes in preseason that you saw Ross run at Washington.  Ross obviously has better top end speed, but it's not like Erickson is slow.  Erickson is 6'0", btw, which is far from small.  Statements like this make it seem like you are just jock riding Core and really don't have a clue about what Erickson brings to the table.  Erickson is a better slot guy, but 6'0" and 4.44 in the 40 is big and fast enough to play outside if needed.  Malone is a bad route runner, fyi.  The only thing he is remotely similar in is speed.  Finally, if I was targeting Ross in the draft, it would make sense to put up a smokescreen by talking up my current WR'S.

[Sled21]

(05-02-2017, 01:04 PM)BenZoo2 Wrote: Not sure how we keep 7 WRs and 3 qbs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We usually stash the 3rd QB on the practice squad....

[Au165]

(05-02-2017, 01:33 PM)Whatever Wrote: Erickson and Ross have great footwork and use it tocreate seperation.  Erickson ran a lot of the red zone routes in preseason that you saw Ross run at Washington.  Ross obviously has better top end speed, but it's not like Erickson is slow.  Erickson is 6'0", btw, which is far from small.  Statements like this make it seem like you are just jock riding Core and really don't have a clue about what Erickson brings to the table.  Erickson is a better slot guy, but 6'0" and 4.44 in the 40 is big and fast enough to play outside if needed.  Malone is a bad route runner, fyi.  The only thing he is remotely similar in is speed.  Finally, if I was targeting Ross in the draft, it would make sense to put up a smokescreen by talking up my current WR'S.

 5"11/6'0 for WR is "small". Their tape is nothing alike Erickson is a 4.52 guy by the way not a 4.44 guy. Erickson isn't getting separation on the outside and isn't scaring anyone over top. Saying Alex Erickson is anything like john Ross is laughable and I preferred the other two WRs to Ross haha. Erickson will be another over hyped slot guy, which makes your jock riding comment funny because that's what your doing to an UDFA slot guy.

Fun fact, Core and Wright both had twice as many receptions last year than the "All-star" Alex Erickson.

[BenZoo2]

(05-02-2017, 01:40 PM)Sled21 Wrote: We usually stash the 3rd QB on the practice squad....

Usually. But not last year. Driskell was on the active roster all year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Luvnit2]

(05-02-2017, 01:33 PM)Whatever Wrote: It makes no sense to cut a conference leading return man when they will get a lot more touches than a #5-6 WR and your top 4 WR's are set for the next 2 years.  What exactly makes Core a more talented prospect?  Erickson is a better route runner and is faster(4.44 to 4.47 in the 40).  Core is a better jump ball target, but that's it.

Erickson and Ross have great footwork and use it tocreate seperation.  Erickson ran a lot of the red zone routes in preseason that you saw Ross run at Washington.  Ross obviously has better top end speed, but it's not like Erickson is slow.  Erickson is 6'0", btw, which is far from small.  Statements like this make it seem like you are just jock riding Core and really don't have a clue about what Erickson brings to the table.  Erickson is a better slot guy, but 6'0" and 4.44 in the 40 is big and fast enough to play outside if needed.  Malone is a bad route runner, fyi.  The only thing he is remotely similar in is speed.  Finally, if I was targeting Ross in the draft, it would make sense to put up a smokescreen by talking up my current WR'S.

I hope we keep 7 WR's in 2017 and do it simply by eliminating a QB from the 53 man roster.

As far as Core, I think as a WR he has advantage if he can develop into Green's backup and I think he can. He has the size, he has the speed. If I look at our WR's he is the only one as of now until Malone develops to be a minny AJG (obviously not near the talent, but no back up has elite starter's talent).

WR1 - Green - Core
WR2 -Lafell - Boyd - Ross, Core, Malone
 Slot - Boyd, Ross, Erickson

Is this sneario strictky from a WR, Erickson may be most expendable

ST  - Erickson great returner
Core - is very good gunner

Just an opinion

[Sled21]

(05-02-2017, 01:42 PM)BenZoo2 Wrote: Usually.  But not last year.  Driskell was on the active roster all year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think they were all waiting for Andy to get killed.... I suspect we only carry 2 this year... that is, if Ced looks decent in camp...

[Derrick]

(05-01-2017, 03:00 PM)ochocincos Wrote: My changes in bold. I think the big one will come down to 7 WRs vs keeping Hewitt, who has had his role reduced the past couple seasons. But seeing as the TEs are often injured and I think someone else can be just about as good of a returner as Erickson, I'll stick with Hewitt over Erickson for now.

Sadly for the OC, I fear that Hewitt will have to play the role of an Offensive "Backfield Tackle" limiting the formations and play calling options. This limitation will be due to POOR Oline play again.

[Whatever]

(05-02-2017, 01:42 PM)Au165 Wrote:  5"11/6'0 for WR is "small". Their tape is nothing alike Erickson is a 4.52 guy by the way not a 4.44 guy. Erickson isn't getting separation on the outside and isn't scaring anyone over top. Saying Alex Erickson is anything like john Ross is laughable and I preferred the other two WRs to Ross haha. Erickson will be another over hyped slot guy, which makes your jock riding comment funny because that's what your doing to an UDFA slot guy.

Fun fact, Core and Wright both had twice as many receptions last year than the "All-star" Alex Erickson.

Starting with an official 40 time of 4.44, Erickson showed that he has the speed to make a difference at the next level.


You want to compare total yardage for the year?  How about preseason receiving stats?  How about college stats?  Of course, Erickson was 1st team All Big 10 and Core was #2 to the biggest WR draft bust in the 1st round last yrar.  But hey, Core bumped those stats up with that meaningless Ravens game that Baltimore had packed it in beforehand