Your 2025 Draft Grade: The Poll

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Just throwing this out there during the current War Between the Negatives and the Positives () and there's probably plenty more votes to come on this thread, but at least as of right now...

2023 GtD Poll: 38.85% gave an A  / 1.28% gave a D or worse
2024 GtD Poll: 24.70% gave an A- or better / 0.00% gave a D+ or worse
2025 GtD Poll: 3.57% gave an A- or better / 25.00% gave a D+ or worse

[J24]

Best Pick Tahj Brooks RB

Worst pick- Demetrius Knight LB

View- The FO new we needed a pass rush and immediate offensive line up. Yet they draft an edge who had one and half  sacks last season and a two down lb with the first two picks? 

I, feel like this team doesn't value the proper traits to build a team. They're too focused on being big then being athletic. Particularly on offensive line and  front 7. Right now, we lack game changers in those areas.

Grade D

[puddycat]

Biggest needs were OG and pass rush which they addressed.
Day 2 picks were both taken a round earlier than projected.
Pass rush "fixed" with boom/bust pick that I hate, the only pick to address DL.
Got 3 new LBs in FA and the draft to replace 1 lost and 1 anticipated cut. No LB additions will help pass rush.
Stood pat at DT and Safety, two of the weakest units on defense. (did get a FA NT to replace FA bust.)
OG additions will not help the run game and may make it worse.

Gave a "C" for addressing crucial needs, but not addressing key depth. I see 1-2 players picked with upside.

[THE PISTONS]

(7 hours ago)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I'm not mad at all. Just not as flashy or the exact players I wanted like most fans I think lol

Sucks just having 6 picks.

I feel like this was a weaker draft crop overall compared to past years. Not our picks. The pool of players to pick from.

[PDub80]

I graded this higher than what I thought I would as it was happening: B+

Generally speaking, I felt like this entire draft class was just kind of bleh. Nothing even remotely exciting.

After marinating on Stewart, I actually like that in a field of less than spectacular options @ 17, the Bengals went with a guy who's upside is the highest possible. I'm happy with that.

- The 25 year old LB is puzzling, but they are dumping Pratt, so they need a vet to step in. This is as close as they're going to get.

I like the G from GA they got better than the one they passed on.

I think the G from Miami is fine. I like the RB. The other lB is a good player.

In a draft that sucked, the Bengals did better than suck. I think they cut Pratt and add a starting RG. That will be good, too.

Also, I LOVE the UDFAs so far.

PS: On a D that has a bunch of religious dudes, I like that the Bengals drafted a big time swagger guy with a monkey chain.

[TecmoBengals]

I just watched a lot of the Golden interviews and got excited. B+ it is!

[phil413]

I agree with some that has been said, it's hard to grade this year. I trust the staff's eye over mine, but their track record is average at best the last few years in the draft. We can think critically without being negative and expecting the worst from these kids & Knight.

I'm one of those types that values the trade down option as opposed to "we weren't going to get our guy I'm round 3 so we took him 25 slots early". Maybe that's because I believe that if you grade these guys out that someone like Knight Jr. can't be so highly rated above the handful of BPAs if you dealt down 10-15 picks and lost him. Just a maximizing value issue and not falling for a player so hard that alternatives don't exist.

I'm going to trust Golden and move my C+ to a B-. I like their overall plan and doubling down on need spots with descent players. I hate drafting for need, but we're here. I like the idea of Stewart setting the edge for these instinctive young NFL ready LBs to clean up. I would like to see a vet FA guard but if they don't then I'm content with how they addressed it here especially counting McLaughlin long term.

[Whatever]

I give it a C. They obviously had a plan and executed it, but I seriously question the wisdom of double dipping at OL and LB, which were two of the weakest position groups in this class. That, combined with pinning all their hopes on fixing the pass rush on Stewart worries me. But I liked a lot of the prospects themselves, just thought that Knight and Fairchild were a Round early.

[Isaac Curtis: The Real #85]

I gave it a D, and that was kind.

Kiper has us ranked 32nd. Us and Atlanta were the only C's he gave out, and they gave up a 1st to move up and take Pearce, and still were ranked ahead of us.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2025/insider/story/_/id/44792146/2025-nfl-draft-grades-32-teams-kiper-winners-losers-steals-sleepers-favorite-picks-classes

Fairchild was the only pick I did not actively dislike and it was still a reach.

Now, that is not to say I hate the players. It isn't their fault we picked them too high. Or just kept picking guys at the same spot and ignoring others.

But I don't think any of these guys make us better on Day 1. And if so, not by much (Knight over Pratt).

Stewart & Fairchild both have high ceilings and I hope they get their eventually.

Carter gives us better LB depth, and hopefully he can cover some, but looks LB4 to me. Rivers also ups our OL depth and is an upgrade over Stueber/Kirkland/Cochran. Or at least I think he is.