bfiner Mock (2025)

[SunsetBengal]

(04-01-2025, 07:26 PM)Bengalstripes9 Wrote: Bengals need a guard—probably two. I like the pick.

He shouldn’t need to play tackle so I don’t really care if he can play tackle or not.

He can play either guard spot and it’s a need.

If he’s legit it’s a home run pick and at least 1 guard spot is solved on the cheap for 5 years.

4 years on the cheap, that 5th year is going to cost a bit. However, I would love if the Bengals changed their mindset back to that of Paul Brown, and started building their teams from the inside out.

[Whatever]

(04-01-2025, 06:24 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I get that Booker is not a sexy pick and that there are tons more High-Floor picks out there, but we know this dude can protect his quarterback and is durable.

Some folks want a more versatile player (Jackson, NDSU kid). We don't know that Booker cannot play Tackle, we just know he hasn't been asked.

Dude definitely has the build to play OT at 6'5" and 34.5" Arms, Jackson has 33.5" arms and the NDSU kid has 32" Arms

I wouldn't say I would want a more versatile player in regards to position.  Jackson I think could survive at T if you needed him to in an emergency, but I wouldn't peg him as Brown's heir apparent, either.  Zabel, probably the same, though the really short arms make it sketchy.  I don't see him being a T and often see C as what he'll be in the pro's, which he hasn't played before, due to arm length.

To me, it's more of an issue of Booker being limited schematically and the fact that philosophically, the OL needs to get more athletic.  We have had the least athletic OL in the league the last several years, and it shows.  We dumped Pollack because his "glass eaters" philosophy was a complete failure, but Booker doesn't really represent a step forward, just further digging in to that philosophy.

[*ochocincos*]

(Yesterday, 12:46 PM)Whatever Wrote: I wouldn't say I would want a more versatile player in regards to position.  Jackson I think could survive at T if you needed him to in an emergency, but I wouldn't peg him as Brown's heir apparent, either.  Zabel, probably the same, though the really short arms make it sketchy.  I don't see him being a T and often see C as what he'll be in the pro's, which he hasn't played before, due to arm length.

To me, it's more of an issue of Booker being limited schematically and the fact that philosophically, the OL needs to get more athletic.  We have had the least athletic OL in the league the last several years, and it shows.  We dumped Pollack because his "glass eaters" philosophy was a complete failure, but Booker doesn't really represent a step forward, just further digging in to that philosophy.

In a perfect world, Bengals get a guy who has:
A) Played at least one full season of Guard in college
B) Played well across multiple seasons in college
C) Been a starter for multiple years in college
D) Has the necessary athleticism and power to succeed in multiple schemes
E) Has proven himself both as a run blocker and pass blocker
F) Has gone against FBS talent

Bonus of being able to swing out to OT or inside to C in a pinch.

To me, that's very few of the OL in this draft class.