Since 2005 the Bengals haven't had this on defense

[Shake n Blake]

(05-30-2017, 01:47 PM)3wt Wrote: And I think there's a wisdom in this.   You don't want to toss a guy into the mix who's not totally ready.

And he's not the only coach that does this.  Belichick did the same thing with Brady riding the pine before Bledsoe got hurt.   I think it was clearly dawning on them that Brady was a prospect that was a lot better than they thought he would be.  But it took Bledsoe getting hurt for them to stick Brady in there.

Obviously the flip side of the coin is that you are squandering a superior talent you've not qualified while you make continue with a known commodity that is good but not great.

So it took an injury to get Burfict into the lineup despite his excellent pre-season performance.

Damned if you don't and you miss time with a potential pro bowl player;  damned if you do and you spoil a player before he's ready for prime time.

In the present case I think he'll get enough reps for Lawson and Willis to see if they show the potential to upgrade the pedestrian pass rush of an otherwise good quality player in Johnson.  If Willis shows both against the run and as a pass rusher he may get significant time.   I think Lawson will be a situational pass rusher while he trains at OLB.

Your flip side is kinda what I'm talking about. Obvious talent that is probably ready, but Marv makes them wait...seemingly out of respect to the incumbent vet. Burfict was ready. Atkins was a beast in his rookie preseason. Jeremy Hill looked like a beast early in his career, but had to wait on an injury to become starter. I wouldn't use Dunlap as an example, as he was playing plenty...just not "starting". 

Fwiw, I also think Brady is bad example because he wasn't drafted to actually take the job. Bledsoe was firmly entrenched as the franchise guy, while Brady was drafted in the 6th to probably compete for a backup spot. I get what you were saying though. But I just think we've had guys that could've made an impact initially, but they were just made to wait. This isn't super common, but it has happened.

[*SHRacerX*]

(05-30-2017, 05:47 PM)lostpoet2 Wrote: Arizona chose to sign Karlos Dansby instead of re-signing Minter because they wanted to improve the pass coverage capabilities of their linebackers.  Minter is a more of a 2-down Maualuga replacement.

I think you have been listening to Arizona homer radio, because they traded a 26 year old who was the 3rd ranked LB in coverage last year (I think that was what I saw on here) for a 36 year old who may have experience, but has no wheels.  

[eoxyod]

(05-30-2017, 11:05 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Your flip side is kinda what I'm talking about. Obvious talent that is probably ready, but Marv makes them wait...seemingly out of respect to the incumbent vet. Burfict was ready. Atkins was a beast in his rookie preseason. Jeremy Hill looked like a beast early in his career, but had to wait on an injury to become starter. I wouldn't use Dunlap as an example, as he was playing plenty...just not "starting". 

Interesting thing with the Dunlap thing actually. He did eventually become a psuedo starter, but Marvin has a superstition about changing the depth chart midseason. The biggest example I remember was in Marvin Jones' second year, he was listed ahead of Brandon Tate in one game, but got hurt on the opening kickoff. That's why you'll hear "X player is starting in Z players place" rather than make them an official starter

[eoxyod]

(05-31-2017, 08:19 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I think you have been listening to Arizona homer radio, because they traded a 26 year old who was the 3rd ranked LB in coverage last year (I think that was what I saw on here) for a 36 year old who may have experience, but has no wheels.  

Yeah for sure. Even if PFF's ratings aren't the best, Minter is 10x better than Dansby is now, and Minter is only at the slightly above average level in coverage

[Shake n Blake]

(05-31-2017, 08:19 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I think you have been listening to Arizona homer radio, because they traded a 26 year old who was the 3rd ranked LB in coverage last year (I think that was what I saw on here) for a 36 year old who may have experience, but has no wheels.  

Everything I've seen says Minter is weak in coverage.

His scouting report: http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/kevin-minter?id=2540159

Quote:Lacks desirable range in coverage because of lost ground when forced to open up hips, turn, and run. 


Sees pass and reacts to it in coverage, but doesn't move any sooner.

PFF (via Rotoworld): http://www.rotoworld.com/recent/nfl/8443/kevin-minter (2015)

Quote:A disappointment through two seasons, Minter played only 344 snaps last year, earning positive run-defense grades from PFF but struggling in coverage. The Cardinals hope the more-athletic Weatherspoon will key their pass coverage at inside linebacker. Minter will only be an early-down player.

http://raisingzona.com/2017/02/16/arizona-cardinals-free-agent-preview-kevin-minter/ (looks like Cincy Jungle)

Quote:A technically sound player, Minter is intelligent and has good instincts for the position. The biggest problem is that he just doesn’t have the athleticism that the top inside linebackers have. He tackles well, and has good field vision, but there are times when he just lacks the burst to make the play, or over-pursues and misses the play. He also is inconsistent in coverage, which was one of the knocks on him coming out of college.

Typical comment from Cardinals fan after Minter signed with Bengals:

Quote:AZ has a very good defense and us fans look at Minter, along with CB2 opposite Peterson, as the weak links we needed to upgrade. He’s been a disappointment but in his final year was good against the run but slow on pass coverage. The Cards D coaches adapted to using him to succeed where they knew he could and he did what was asked, but none of us in the Cardinals message board wanted or expected a re-signing unless he became a backup. We know Dansby well and old Dansby is an upgrade on Minter…and we still want an upgrade on Dansby.

Sure sounds a lot like a younger Maualuga. Even with what their message board and fans thought of him. Obviously for us it's still an upgrade, as a young Maualuga is certainly better than the Maualuga we had last year. I guess we'll get to form our own opinions soon enough. Either way, I liked the signing.

[*SHRacerX*]

(05-31-2017, 12:41 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Everything I've seen says Minter is weak in coverage.

His scouting report: http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/kevin-minter?id=2540159



PFF (via Rotoworld): http://www.rotoworld.com/recent/nfl/8443/kevin-minter (2015)





http://raisingzona.com/2017/02/16/arizona-cardinals-free-agent-preview-kevin-minter/ (looks like Cincy Jungle)






Typical comment from Cardinals fan after Minter signed with Bengals:





Sure sounds a lot like a younger Maualuga. Even with what their message board and fans thought of him. Obviously for us it's still an upgrade, as a young Maualuga is certainly better than the Maualuga we had last year. I guess we'll get to form our own opinions soon enough. Either way, I liked the signing.

Your PFF was from 2015.  Here is what he was ranked (5th) in 2016 and what was said about his coverage:

5. Kevin Minter, Arizona Cardinals (81.0)

Another player with a track record of poor play prior to the 2016 season, Minter had an interesting season in which he had five excellent games paired with four really bad games. In the end, he came out with an above-average overall grade with his play in coverage being the best. If Minter is able to continue flashing those great games and reduce his number of poor games, a few of them marred by several missed tackles (missed 20 in 2016), the former LSU Tiger has potential to become a solid every down LB.

[*Synric*]

(06-01-2017, 06:15 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Your PFF was from 2015.  Here is what he was ranked (5th) in 2016 and what was said about his coverage:

5. Kevin Minter, Arizona Cardinals (81.0)

Another player with a track record of poor play prior to the 2016 season, Minter had an interesting season in which he had five excellent games paired with four really bad games. In the end, he came out with an above-average overall grade with his play in coverage being the best. If Minter is able to continue flashing those great games and reduce his number of poor games, a few of them marred by several missed tackles (missed 20 in 2016), the former LSU Tiger has potential to become a solid every down LB.

Context. Minter is decent dropping back in zone and keeping the play in front of him, but if you ask him to man up with a RB or TE youre asking for failure.The Cards defense played did an excellent job game planning around Minter weakness. Fact is Minter is a hammer used in the run game that misses alot of tackles.

[Bengalbug]

(05-29-2017, 02:50 PM)impactplaya Wrote: I'm talking a Joey Bosa, Jevon Kearse kinda year not merely a hood year a great year!!

Those types of players don't grow on trees.

[Shake n Blake]

(06-01-2017, 06:15 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Your PFF was from 2015.  Here is what he was ranked (5th) in 2016 and what was said about his coverage:

5. Kevin Minter, Arizona Cardinals (81.0)

Another player with a track record of poor play prior to the 2016 season, Minter had an interesting season in which he had five excellent games paired with four really bad games. In the end, he came out with an above-average overall grade with his play in coverage being the best. If Minter is able to continue flashing those great games and reduce his number of poor games, a few of them marred by several missed tackles (missed 20 in 2016), the former LSU Tiger has potential to become a solid every down LB.

I know it was from 2015. That's why I put (2015) next to it. 

I was unable to find a PFF link from 2016, trust me I tried. I did link the article from the Cardinals fansite, which called him inconsistent in coverage in 2016, which is the same thing PFF says in a nutshell. If you want to be positive, you can say it was a sign of progress. The few great games could also be a fluke. Kinda odd that he would grade great in some games and terrible in others. Makes me wonder why. I've heard many say that coaches game planned to help Minter in this area. Synric is probably right about zone/man.

Fwiw, I'm not trying to bash Minter to death. I liked the signing and still do. He's young, capable of calling out plays, and while not quite fast in any way, he's certainly an upgrade from washed up Maualuga (who is still a free agent BTW) in that department. I just know he's probably not going to be a flawless player. Coverage is a question mark at best, and missed tackles were mentioned more than anything.

[Shake n Blake]

(05-31-2017, 11:56 AM)eoxyod Wrote: Interesting thing with the Dunlap thing actually. He did eventually become a psuedo starter, but Marvin has a superstition about changing the depth chart midseason. The biggest example I remember was in Marvin Jones' second year, he was listed ahead of Brandon Tate in one game, but got hurt on the opening kickoff. That's why you'll hear "X player is starting in Z players place" rather than make them an official starter

I can't remember everything about the Dunlap situation, but I do remember that Dunlap was playing all pass rush downs, while Geathers (?) was still technically starting and playing running downs. Marvin seemed to have some kind of issue with Dunlap back then, but I can't remember exactly what it was. That's when people were still questioning Dunlap's motor and work ethic. Seems silly now, but I guess back then it was legit. Fans all wanted Dunlap to "start" and play more because he was already showing what a beast he was.

[*SHRacerX*]

(06-01-2017, 10:00 AM)Synric Wrote: Context. Minter is decent dropping back in zone and keeping the play in front of him, but if you ask him to man up with a RB or TE youre asking for failure.The Cards defense played did an excellent job game planning around Minter weakness. Fact is Minter is a hammer used in the run game that misses alot of tackles.

Then I will be surprised if he is on the field in nickel instead of Burfict with Vigil.  

[*SHRacerX*]

(06-01-2017, 11:21 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I know it was from 2015. That's why I put (2015) next to it. 

I was unable to find a PFF link from 2016, trust me I tried. I did link the article from the Cardinals fansite, which called him inconsistent in coverage in 2016, which is the same thing PFF says in a nutshell. If you want to be positive, you can say it was a sign of progress. The few great games could also be a fluke. Kinda odd that he would grade great in some games and terrible in others. Makes me wonder why. I've heard many say that coaches game planned to help Minter in this area. Synric is probably right about zone/man.

Fwiw, I'm not trying to bash Minter to death. I liked the signing and still do. He's young, capable of calling out plays, and while not quite fast in any way, he's certainly an upgrade from washed up Maualuga (who is still a free agent BTW) in that department. I just know he's probably not going to be a flawless player. Coverage is a question mark at best, and missed tackles were mentioned more than anything.

I get it, but we sure were told a different story when he originally signed.  It seemed to be a very positive assessment of his abilities.  Also, I am beginning to think that he won't see the field over Burfict and Vigil in nickel.  

[*Synric*]

(06-01-2017, 01:18 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: I get it, but we sure were told a different story when he originally signed.  It seemed to be a very positive assessment of his abilities.  Also, I am beginning to think that he won't see the field over Burfict and Vigil in nickel.  

But besides all the negatives Minter is a perfect fit for the Bengals scheme and he could really shine in cincy.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(05-30-2017, 12:31 AM)Quantum Bengal Wrote: Willis and Lawson both have me excited, but i don't think they'll get enough snaps for DROY

Feel the same way, both will be in a rotation and while Willis is a 3 down End he will still be in a rotation.

They may use Lawson on passing downs more than Willis actually so he may be the leading candidate for our team's DROY.

On Offense i truly believe both Mixon and Ross should be major contributors as rookies. Mixon the most, most likely cause of
the lack of competition. People can talk about Hill all they want but if Mixon is a better pass blocker he may start come opening
day. Hill still has an identity problem from what i can see and Gio is coming off injury.

Ross should have a huge impact in the Redzone, i expect a lot of Ross TD's. He is just what this Offense needed after last year.

[Yojimbo]

Bengals espn writer has an article up today about rookie playing times. Shows from 2011-2016 Bengals are 31st in the league in rookie snaps on defense. Completely opposite for offensive rookies.

http://www.espn.com/blog/cincinnati-bengals/post/_/id/26940/how-much-will-bengals-rookies-john-ross-joe-mixon-see-the-field

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-01-2017, 02:10 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Bengals espn writer has an article up today about rookie playing times. Shows from 2011-2016 Bengals are 31st in the league in rookie snaps on defense. Completely opposite for offensive rookies.

http://www.espn.com/blog/cincinnati-bengals/post/_/id/26940/how-much-will-bengals-rookies-john-ross-joe-mixon-see-the-field

Makes sense, we had an established Defense for quite a few years.

But this is our turnover year, we got much younger, we were getting old.

I expect more snaps this year from Willis and Lawson than what we had in the past with Defensive rookies.

Should, we needed some pass rushers opposite Dunlap probably more than anything on D.

[depthchart]

(06-01-2017, 02:10 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Bengals espn writer has an article up today about rookie playing times. Shows from 2011-2016 Bengals are 31st in the league in rookie snaps on defense. Completely opposite for offensive rookies.

http://www.espn.com/blog/cincinnati-bengals/post/_/id/26940/how-much-will-bengals-rookies-john-ross-joe-mixon-see-the-field

The Atlanta Falcons had 4 rookie starters on Defense last year.

Hopefully, the Bengals are aware of this as teams tend to mimic other successful teams approaches and we decide to let the rookies play sooner & more often.

Marvin also had to notice how the Steelers let rookie Artie Burns play at Corner last season.

Maybe they move up from the 31st ranking and get the young players feet wet sooner & more often going forward.

[Bengal Dude]

(06-01-2017, 11:33 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I can't remember everything about the Dunlap situation, but I do remember that Dunlap was playing all pass rush downs, while Geathers (?) was still technically starting and playing running downs. Marvin seemed to have some kind of issue with Dunlap back then, but I can't remember exactly what it was. That's when people were still questioning Dunlap's motor and work ethic. Seems silly now, but I guess back then it was legit. Fans all wanted Dunlap to "start" and play more because he was already showing what a beast he was.

Marvin's issue was Dunlap wasn't taking practice seriously. Dunlap's playing time increased when the light came on for him.

[*rfaulk34*]

(06-01-2017, 03:41 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: Marvin's issue was Dunlap wasn't taking practice seriously. Dunlap's playing time increased when the light came on for him.

Marv specifically said, on more than one occasion, that he needed to learn how to practice and prepare.

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2010/11/8/1801178/marvin-lewis-on-carlos-dunlap-he-needs-to-learn-how-to-prepare-in-the

[Gdale_Bengal]

No. What we need are the 2 defensive players who we drafted last year to take meaningful snaps this year.

We need our defensive backfield to compliment our front 7, and our front 7 needs to rush the passer better and stop the run more effectively to compliment our secondary and give more opportunities for turnovers.

WE NEED MORE TURNOVERS! I don't know how many turnovers we had last year, but it felt like we had very few. We need more turnovers so the offense can get more snaps, find there rhythm, and score points.

We need good football.

I need football.