Terrence Marshall LSU WR

[pulses]

(02-14-2021, 10:15 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: People keep pushing Kyle Pitts, like Zac Taylor is somehow going to re-engineer the Bengals offense to utilize the TE as a featured, down field, pass catching weapon.  I don't see it happening.  They chose Drew Sample for a reason, they like his skill set for the role a TE plays in Zac's offense.  If Uzomah is going to be phased out, then I would look for a TE selection like that Long from Boston Coll.

It's just possible that ZT never utilized his TE's all that much because let's be honest their's not a whole lot of talent there. You draft someone like Pitts who can flank out and move all over the field and you might be surprised at how much he uses him. THe Rams never had a TE with the talent of Pitts either. Hard to use what you don't have.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-15-2021, 12:57 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: A WR3 isn't hard to find, weather through the draft or on the FA market, they are a plenty.  A WR3 is a minor detail compared to the real issue of fixing the OL.

This team has a franchise QB, 2 high quality WRs, a strong feature back and a good 2nd back.  They are hurting at OL, that's the source of all the offensive misery, the reason why our QB and RB went down with season ending injuries.  The answer isn't adding more weapons, it's building it's blocking wall.

Not sure why we’re talking about the OL in here? There are plenty of threads dedicated to that. Fact is we also need more weapons as well. We only have 3 WR’s under contract for next season; Boyd, Tee, Tate. That’s it. And Tate is not good enough to be a starter in Taylor’s 11 personnel. Our TE group is also a guy coming off a torn Achilles, Drew Sample, and a bunch of scrubs.

So Marshall could be a nice option in the 2nd if we go OL in the first, and there isn’t a pass rusher we like on the board. Or they could sign a Josh Reynolds or Curtis Samuel and focus on the lines in the draft. Nothing should be off the table though.

[pulses]

(02-15-2021, 01:11 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not sure why we’re talking about the OL in here? There are plenty of threads dedicated to that. Fact is we also need more weapons as well. We only have 3 WR’s under contract for next season; Boyd, Tee, Tate. That’s it. And Tate is not good enough to be a starter in Taylor’s 11 personnel. Our TE group is also a guy coming off a torn Achilles, Drew Sample, and a bunch of scrubs.

So Marshall could be a nice option in the 2nd if we go OL in the first, and there isn’t a pass rusher we like on the board. Or they could sign a Josh Reynolds or Curtis Samuel and focus on the lines in the draft. Nothing should be off the table though.

I would like Reynolds and he will be cheaper than Samuel also.

[coachmcneil71]

(02-14-2021, 09:11 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Everyone hyping Pitts made me start watching Florida games... and now I really want Kadarius Toney. Damn it he is fun to watch

Yeah, Toney is big time as well as Pitts. Both should contribute in their Rookie season.

[SunsetBengal]

(02-15-2021, 01:11 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not sure why we’re talking about the OL in here? There are plenty of threads dedicated to that. Fact is we also need more weapons as well. We only have 3 WR’s under contract for next season; Boyd, Tee, Tate. That’s it. And Tate is not good enough to be a starter in Taylor’s 11 personnel. Our TE group is also a guy coming off a torn Achilles, Drew Sample, and a bunch of scrubs.

So Marshall could be a nice option in the 2nd if we go OL in the first, and there isn’t a pass rusher we like on the board. Or they could sign a Josh Reynolds or Curtis Samuel and focus on the lines in the draft. Nothing should be off the table though.

We're talking about the OL, because that is the key to "fixing" the offense.  Adding weapons is nice, and we do need to add WRs to the roster, but adding weapons alone won't come close to fixing the problems with the offense, only a concerted effort to fix the OL will do that.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-15-2021, 01:26 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: We're talking about the OL, because that is the key to "fixing" the offense.  Adding weapons is nice, and we do need to add WRs to the roster, but adding weapons alone won't come close to fixing the problems with the offense, only a concerted effort to fix the OL will do that.

Right, but this is a thread about a particular WR...

Anyway, I think everyone that even casually follows this team knows the OL is an issue, but they’re not going to take linemen with every pick. Especially if we hit it hard in FA.

[coachmcneil71]

(02-15-2021, 01:26 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: We're talking about the OL, because that is the key to "fixing" the offense.  Adding weapons is nice, and we do need to add WRs to the roster, but adding weapons alone won't come close to fixing the problems with the offense, only a concerted effort to fix the OL will do that.

(02-15-2021, 01:36 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Right, but this is a thread about a particular WR...

Anyway, I think everyone that even casually follows this team knows the OL is an issue, but they’re not going to take linemen with every pick. Especially if we hit it hard in FA.

Not to derail this thread at all. Ts,this is off topic for the thread. Only reason I'm bringing it up is because I just read said article after replying to this thread. There's a pretty nice trade back scenario mock making the rounds. Cant remember the source. It uses Denver as our trade partner. Doesn't add a ton of ball skill talent on offense, but was managable. However, it really addresses the defense and oline. 

We can discuss this in another thread, but you guys try to find it. It's different, but not bad at all. They essentially add Slater, W.Davis, and Thuney for starters.

[BURROWorBUST]

(02-15-2021, 12:32 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: AJ’s 100+ targets have to go to someone next season. Maybe that’s a Josh Reynolds, but if they don’t bring in a decent WR3 they’re going to have to feature the TE more.

And if a mediocre player like Uzomah saw 11 targets in 1.5 games then I’m pretty sure Taylor would use an elite weapon like Pitts even more.

Exactly. I remember being a little surpised by how much Zac was using the TE (Uzomah) as a viable target. Sample, too, got alot of targets in a few games. It's not like we don't use the TE as some would suggest. 

Pitts is a legit option at #5 IMHO, though Sewell would still be my top choice. If we are lucky enough to get Sewell, then T. Marshall becomes a legit option in 2, though I think it would be better to take Carlos Basham. Pass protection & pass rush. We need loads of both. 

[Essex Johnson]

(02-15-2021, 12:57 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: A WR3 isn't hard to find, weather through the draft or on the FA market, they are a plenty.  A WR3 is a minor detail compared to the real issue of fixing the OL.

This team has a franchise QB, 2 high quality WRs, a strong feature back and a good 2nd back.  They are hurting at OL, that's the source of all the offensive misery, the reason why our QB and RB went down with season ending injuries.  The answer isn't adding more weapons, it's building it's blocking wall.

Well said and agree OL over WR/TE is a must.

[impactplaya]

(02-15-2021, 12:49 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Well said and agree OL over WR/TE is a must.

Why not address oline in free agency ??
Does it have to be the pick.at 5??

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-15-2021, 12:57 PM)impactplaya Wrote: Why not address oline in free agency ??
Does it have to be the pick.at 5??

It’s imperative to address it in FA. For one, we get proven starters ready to protect Burrow now. Not projects or players that need to develop and learn on the job. It also opens up the draft so we’re not locked in to any one position and we can truly go BPA. Say Sewell is gone by 5, and we don’t like any of the trade back offers, but we desperately need OL since we didn’t bring in actual bonafide starters (not XSF, Quinton Spain types) then they could feel the need to reach for the 2nd or 3rd best OT on most people’s boards with a top 5 pick. That would be very bad, imo. Take care of business in FA, and then if Sewell is still there for us, it’s a great choice between the top OT in the class or some of the best playmakers.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(02-15-2021, 01:11 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not sure why we’re talking about the OL in here? There are plenty of threads dedicated to that. Fact is we also need more weapons as well. We only have 3 WR’s under contract for next season; Boyd, Tee, Tate. That’s it. And Tate is not good enough to be a starter in Taylor’s 11 personnel. Our TE group is also a guy coming off a torn Achilles, Drew Sample, and a bunch of scrubs.

So Marshall could be a nice option in the 2nd if we go OL in the first, and there isn’t a pass rusher we like on the board. Or they could sign a Josh Reynolds or Curtis Samuel and focus on the lines in the draft. Nothing should be off the table though.

Could have just used the last 4 words and saved yourself some typing.

[fortyyearfan]

(02-15-2021, 12:57 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: A WR3 isn't hard to find, weather through the draft or on the FA market, they are a plenty.  A WR3 is a minor detail compared to the real issue of fixing the OL.

This team has a franchise QB, 2 high quality WRs, a strong feature back and a good 2nd back.  They are hurting at OL, that's the source of all the offensive misery, the reason why our QB and RB went down with season ending injuries.  The answer isn't adding more weapons, it's building it's blocking wall.

They will FIX THE O-line through free agency and the draft.They do not need to draft a O-lineman with the first pick.Get you take the top off wide receiver in MR.Chase and then go after your linemen.Both sides of the ball.And I really like the running back from Ohio State,I think his name is Sermon,That guy is the man,Yes we have Joe Mixon and I get that,however he gets hurt every season and I am not sold on Gio,he needs to go.

A middle linebacker I like is number 47 of the Buckeyes.Hillard I believe his name is,he brings the wood and is super against the run,I am not sold on the backers we have as of yet.They are decent but not hair on fire guys.Hillard is.When he hits you, you are down.

[Essex Johnson]

(02-15-2021, 12:57 PM)impactplaya Wrote: Why not address oline in free agency ??
Does it have to be the pick.at 5??

First it is not as easy as people make it out to acquire a person in FA.. other suitors price etc come into play.. but even if we are successful on getting 2 FAs that is not enough.. and there are very good Oline we can take at #5 or trade back a few and add another at min 3rd pick and we can build picks for a decent WR.

[impactplaya]

(02-15-2021, 09:14 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: First it is not as easy as people make it out to acquire a person in FA.. other suitors price etc come into play.. but even if we are successful on getting 2 FAs that is not enough.. and there are very good Oline we can take at #5 or trade back a few and add another at min 3rd pick and we can build picks for a decent WR.

Yes if.you.approach FA hpw the Brown family has done pre 2020 you.are right it's not easy. 
It's not rocket science you pursue Schreff or Thuney and if you have to over pay for either well thats the price of making sure Burrow is around for 16 games.
Or the Brown family.can sign a RT and and OG in free agency thus not forcing them.to.draft a OT at 5. 

[Essex Johnson]

(02-15-2021, 09:23 PM)impactplaya Wrote: Yes if.you.approach FA hpw the Brown family has done pre 2020 you.are right it's not easy. 
It's not rocket science you pursue Schreff or Thuney and if you have to over pay for either well thats the price of making sure Burrow is around for 16 games.
Or the Brown family.can sign a RT and and OG in free agency thus not forcing them.to.draft a OT at 5. 

Sorry but it is not easy anyway... do you think there will only be the Bengals as suitors for a top tier Oline ? some of those players will have a few offers.. some players will take less to go to a contender also.. it is not a video game either...  Why is it forcing to draft a OT at #5 ?  they might want to draft a Oline also especially since most FA signing are normally for 2/3 years....then they move one. 

[impactplaya]

(02-15-2021, 09:52 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Sorry but it is not easy anyway... do you think there will only be the Bengals as suitors for a top tier Oline ? some of those players will have a few offers.. some players will take less to go to a contender also.. it is not a video game either...  Why is it forcing to draft a OT at #5 ?  they might want to draft a Oline also especially since most FA signing are normally for 2/3 years....then they move one. 

I realize their will be high demand for the Thuneys and Scherffs of the NFL free agent game. But these 2 OGs  can be locked
Up for I think more than 2/3 years.
It sounds like if the Bengals draft a OT in RD 1 or 2 he will end up playing RT. 
But I don't see that big of a dropoff in the draft if you wait to.go OT in RD 2. But I do.see a dropoff in the TE talent after Pitts greater than the dropoff say with OTs after Sewell.

[Whatever]

(02-15-2021, 09:52 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Sorry but it is not easy anyway... do you think there will only be the Bengals as suitors for a top tier Oline ? some of those players will have a few offers.. some players will take less to go to a contender also.. it is not a video game either...  Why is it forcing to draft a OT at #5 ?  they might want to draft a Oline also especially since most FA signing are normally for 2/3 years....then they move one. 

It's forcing to draft an OL at 5 if there's no OL worth taking at left on the board when the pick comes up.  There's one in the draft worth taking that high, and that's Sewell.  I don't think anyone has an issue taking Sewell, but it's a coin flip whether he falls to us or not.  If you neglect the OL in FA gambling on Sewell being there and he's not, your options are to reach for the next best OL or just not address it at all.

Quality FA OL in their prime are not signing 2-3 year deals, either.  

[Essex Johnson]

(02-16-2021, 01:59 PM)Whatever Wrote: It's forcing to draft an OL at 5 if there's no OL worth taking at left on the board when the pick comes up.  There's one in the draft worth taking that high, and that's Sewell.  I don't think anyone has an issue taking Sewell, but it's a coin flip whether he falls to us or not.  If you neglect the OL in FA gambling on Sewell being there and he's not, your options are to reach for the next best OL or just not address it at all.

Quality FA OL in their prime are not signing 2-3 year deals, either.  

I don;t see the Bengals neglecting the line in FA but I still see a major need to draft a OT so i say the war room if they have another tackle outside of Sewell ( from most mocks Slater is in that top 10 range and couple even have him ahead of Sewell though I don;t again ) I don;t see a problem at all taking the 2nd tackle or i could also see them slide back and take the tackle and add more picks to this draft. 

[Whatever]

(02-16-2021, 04:53 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I don;t see the Bengals neglecting the line in FA but I still see a major need to draft a OT  so  i  say the war room if they have another tackle outside of Sewell ( from most mocks Slater is in that top 10 range and couple even have him ahead of Sewell though I don;t again ) I don;t see a problem at all taking the 2nd tackle or i could also see them slide back and take the tackle and add more picks to this draft. 

According to NFLDraftDataBase's Consensus Big Board, Slater is ranked 13th on average based on big boards and mock drafts around the web.  Besides, you aren't drafting a T with physical concerns that may force him to G at 5.  Talking trade down is nice and all, but you can't count on it, and trading down and hoping a player at a position of need is still on the board is a set up for failure.

Jonah showed enough last year to think he is the LT of the future.  Johnson and Adeniji are serviceable backups who are still on rookie contracts and early in the development curve.  The elephant in that room is Hart at RT, but the fact of the matter is he's better than any G we have on the roster and outplayed Hopkins last year.  Plus Hopkins will likely be PUP'd to start the year.  IOL is the priority.  T is a position that would be nice to upgrade if there's value.  They honestly have a pretty solid 2 deep at T.  People just have a target fixation on Hart because he was so terrible when he first came here, but he developed into a serviceable starting T last year.