Your 2025 Draft Grade: The Poll

[CottonHill]

Have we found a draft pundit who was high on Shemar? I'm looking for some positive grades/narratives on the pick but having trouble. Can anyone find a link?

[Whatever]

(7 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: The Bengals only target 260 lb. and above DE.

At 17, the options were limited because that eliminated:
Green
Pierce

No DE/Edge was taken until round 2 and the OSU kid met the requirement, but taken prior to our pick. Remove all those around 250 lbs. are the choiced are extremely limited.

DT Harmon was a very good choice, but Goldne seems to think DE was the biggest priority and I agree because of Trey's contract ended after 2025.

As for all eggs in one basket, I disagree. I think Ossai proved last year he is a much better pass rusher than 2024 starter Hubbard. 

As others have mentioned, Stewart has experience playing inside as well at DT. I can see on passing downs (3rd and 10 or more)
Trey and Murphy outside and Ossai and Stewart inside. 

Stewart and Ossai have expereince rushing the passing inside.

Ossai was 256 at the Combine, so it hasn't been a complete deal breaker in the Taylor era, but historically, you're right in that they typically prefer larger edge rushers, especially at LDE.  

I always thought DT would be a rough position to take early simply because they just signed Hill and Slayton to significant FA deals and just spent a 2nd and 3rd on Jenkins and Jackson.  You typically dress 4 on game day, so who sits?

A lot of folks wanted one of the S's, but Starks tested pretty poorly and Emmanwori has a history of loafing and taking plays off, so neither was a can't miss type of guy.

Some wanted a G, but there wasn't one worth the pick, imo.  Zabel was high on a lot of lists, but I'm not spending a 1st on a short armed T moving to G from D2.

To me, the board fell about as bad as it could have in Round 1, and obviously, we know nobody was looking to trade up because Seattle was looking to move down and couldn't find a partner.  They went with a guy with elite traits and great character.  I know Golden greatly valued the fact that he could play anywhere from the 4I to Wide 9 alignment.  Hopefully, they can coach him up on finishing and put him in situations where he can get to the QB.  

[*bfine32*]

(Yesterday, 10:58 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: The only 20 year old free agents are UDFA.

But I will agree that 2025 is mot important than 2029. But it doesn’t seem to be all the important to the Bengals by not attacking FA, drafting a project for round 1, a LB for round 2, settling for Fairchild to compete against Volson and the other back up we signed from the saints (who had a bad line), not replacing Stone, not resigning Trey, adding zero corners when every single one of our corners last year got burned over and over again.

But hey we gave Tee and Chase big contracts. All is well. 9-8 here we come.

Well I was talking about the current 20 year olds who will be 24 in 4 years when DK is "too old" to play. 

As to the rest everyone has issues with who we didn't draft/sign but we only had so many picks and so much money. 2/3 of our draft focused on player types that Golden employees on his D and IOL. We gave our new coaches some toys.  

As to CB our 2 starters went down last year (Ward/Hill), but we have spent a lot of draft capital there lately because Lou was a DB guy. I've always said I'd love to see CTB tied at Safety since the day we drafted him. He has the perfect skillset for coverage, but apparently too much of a liability tackling. 

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(Yesterday, 12:06 PM)samhain Wrote: I gave it an F.  

For positives, we replaced Hubbard with a guy in Stewart who's solid vs the run and can kick inside.  His potential is obviously far greater than Hubbard.  He's a souped up Sam until he managed to turn pressures into actual sacks.  Problem is, Sam wasn't the 17th overall pick.  At least he seems like he has a really good work ethic.

I'm unsure about the linebackers.  Prioritizing the position is new to this regime.  Knight seems like a 2 down backer in an established defense.  Speed seem like an issue, but it's not like this defense was lighting the world on fire vs the run.  Time will tell if it sticks.

Fairchild seems like the lower end of potential plug and play guards.  It's another reflection of what the organization think of positional value on the interior.  They most definitely could have done better by using a 2nd.  Rarely will they throw more than a 3rd at it, and they have no qualms about sticking a failing player in there to fill a hole.  Hopefully Fairchild isn't that.  Volson was.

The rest is fine.  Expecting to hang our hat on late day 3 guys is a stretch.  Some on here point to the lack of success in later rounds as an indictment on the team's draft strategy.  IMO, guys taken in that range are all suspects anyway.  If you get a solid backup that plays for 4 or 5 years, you're playing with house money.  The real indictment of the draft approach is what happens in rounds 1 and 2. Despite the locks like 9 and 1, these guys piss away more high value draft capital than they can afford.  Also, they consistently do it when actual solutions are staring them right in the face (Starks, Ratlege).  

Geno Stone remaining a starter is a failure and a big one.  I think passing on a TE like Helm to fill in for the loss of All is another oversight.  Gesicki is a TE in name only.  Dude is our slot receiver.  If you remove him from that room, what are you left with?  

In summary, this team isn't much better than they were when the season ended from a personnel standpoint.  That leaves me at the key point of concern for us as fans:  It's on the staff to make this work.  It all hinges on development of talent that is in sore need of it and fast.  I personally have zero faith in that happening.  As I've said, he's Al freaking Golden, not Monte Kiffin or Bill Bellichick or Steve Spagnuolo.  He has less success as an NFL DC than Third and Teryl Austin.  That's a lot of hopes and dreams tied up in an unknown.

I get not liking the Stewart and Knight picks a bit because you wanted Starks and Ratledge more, but we don't know Golden's plan for 
the Defense nor if Fairchild ends up being the better pro than Ratledge. Knight they definitely wanted and didn't think he would be there
in the 3rd round. I also understand wanting a TE after the All injury, but other than that we have to wait and see.

I still think the upside of Stewart, the way Knight attacks the LOS, how physical Fairchild is makes this at least a B Draft. I don't get giving
it an F. Stewart might be the most talented End we have ever drafted if he can keep his head up and finish. Love this after getting Mims 
last Draft on the other side of the ball.

[Luvnit2]

I know many fans think we are worse after free agency. It is just one take and of course not the know all about 2025. NFL.com power rankins has us 12th after the draft.

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-post-2025-nfl-draft-who-s-up-down

"I think the theme is they love football, all six of these guys," head coach Zac Taylor said of his 2025 draft class. And the comment didn't come off as typical post-draft fodder to me; it felt more like an indirect statement on what happened in 2024, which was a cavalcade of drama, disputes and unrealized expectations in what became a more chaotic situation in Cincinnati. The Bengals were Super Bowl contenders, except for the winning part, and that was part of the problem. The team spent the offseason focused on players who wanted to be there and players the front office and coaches wanted there, and the draft carried that forward with a haul of hungry, talented and motivated players at need positions. We'll see what happens with reigning NFL sack king Trey Hendrickson, because the last thing Cincy needs is another protracted contract squabble entering training camp, but the Bengals can't be forgotten as one of the more talented outfits out there.

[Whatever]

(5 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: I know many fans think we are worse after free agency. It is just one take and of course not the know all about 2025. NFL.com power rankins has us 12th after the draft.

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-post-2025-nfl-draft-who-s-up-down

"I think the theme is they love football, all six of these guys," head coach Zac Taylor said of his 2025 draft class. And the comment didn't come off as typical post-draft fodder to me; it felt more like an indirect statement on what happened in 2024, which was a cavalcade of drama, disputes and unrealized expectations in what became a more chaotic situation in Cincinnati. The Bengals were Super Bowl contenders, except for the winning part, and that was part of the problem. The team spent the offseason focused on players who wanted to be there and players the front office and coaches wanted there, and the draft carried that forward with a haul of hungry, talented and motivated players at need positions. We'll see what happens with reigning NFL sack king Trey Hendrickson, because the last thing Cincy needs is another protracted contract squabble entering training camp, but the Bengals can't be forgotten as one of the more talented outfits out there.

I'm not really sure how we could logically say we are worse than last year.

QB=No change 

RB=Lost Williams and Herbert, added Perrine and Brooks.  Arguably, slightly better, as Williams was a liability as a position player.

WR=No change

TE=Slightly worse, due to All's injury and no real replacement.

T=Lost Brown and Smith, added Rivers.  On paper, this looks like we're worse, but then when you factor in the fact that Smith was on IR all year and Brown was injured early, it really seems to be zero sum.

G=Lost Cappa, added Patrick and Fairchild.  Honestly, it would be tough for Patrick or anyone else to be as bad as Cappa was last year. Tough to say how much of an upgrade Fairchild will be over Volson as a rookie, but overall, this group is at least slightly better on paper, arguably significantly better.

C=No change 

DE=Lost Hubbard, added Stewart.  All the respect in the world to Sam, but it was painfully obvious he had nothing left to give last year.  The play at LDE improved significantly as Ossai and Murphy got more snaps.  Stewart struggled to get sacks in college, but tough to imagine him being as bad as Hubbard was.  Slightly better, potentially a lot better if Stewart can be coached up to finish.

DT=Lost Rankins, Tufele, added Slayton.  Slayton I feel is an underrated add simply from the standpoint that he will allow Hill to move back to his more natural 3 tech spot.  Rankins was a non-entity before getting injured and Tufele was a low end rotation guy.  My gut says they will be better, but I'll call it a push for now due to the group appearing thinner on paper.

LB=Lost ADG, Bachie, added Burks, Knight, Carter.  ADG was a solid sub package player and spot starter.  Bachie primarily played on ST's.  To me, we look significantly better on paper, with how much so being determined by how quickly the rookies catch on.

CB=Lost Hilton.  This is one position that looks worse on paper, but it's also important to note that this group was ravaged by injuries last year, and may play better on the whole if they can stay healthy.  

S=Lost Bell.  This group is slightly worse on paper.  Bell, much like Hubbard, looked like a shell of himself last year and will only be missed from a depth perspective.

Specialists=No change 

[samhain]

(7 hours ago)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: My favorite offseason moves were all guys we brought back (Tee, Chase, Hill, Gesicki, even Ossai).

In FA, it was Burks. And the we drafted 2 LBs.

In the draft, I did not like one single pick we made. Fairchild was the least bad, though.

We'll struggle to make the POs. Chiefs, Bills, & Ravens will be elite. Chargers & Broncos will be good, along with Hou.

Us, Miami, Pitt and a surprise team competing for the last spot.

If we fail  Duke & ZT should finally be out.

I think another season of great play from the qb and receivers with no postseason results would spell the end for Zac at the very least.  Golden got a long leash in the draft, and if that doesn't work out he's probably toast, too.  Duke is a tough on to predict.  I'm not sure how much say he had vs Golden here.  It's not exactly like Tobin to pound the table for linebackers.  Al got the keys here, IMO.  

Just as well, though.  If the mini-restock fails, all of these coaches need to find work elsewhere next year.  Every year of Burrow that they waste is another weight around their necks as a franchise.

[NUGDUKWE]

? 2025 NFL Draft Team Grades

I´ve compiled 24 evaluations of the 2025 NFL draft and totaled the team grades.
Sorted by GPA for all 32 teams. I sorted the 24 evaluations by GPA as well. From left (soft) to right (hard graders).
Thanks to all who give out grades every year! ? pic.twitter.com/HW69yxX702

— René Bugner (@RNBWCV) April 28, 2025

[NUGDUKWE]

(2 hours ago)samhain Wrote: I think another season of great play from the qb and receivers with no postseason results would spell the end for Zac at the very least.  Golden got a long leash in the draft, and if that doesn't work out he's probably toast, too.  Duke is a tough on to predict.  I'm not sure how much say he had vs Golden here.  It's not exactly like Tobin to pound the table for linebackers.  Al got the keys here, IMO.  

Just as well, though.  If the mini-restock fails, all of these coaches need to find work elsewhere next year.  Every year of Burrow that they waste is another weight around their necks as a franchise.

I seriously doubt anyone would get fired outside of position coaches. Hopefully if we have another bad season we decide to push all in a bit more on FA. 

[*ochocincos*]

Went C+ to give myself a bit of optimism.

My favorite picks were, not surprisingly, the offensive players. Specifically Fairchild and Brooks. I see Jalen Rivers as a developmental, versatile depth piece. But 5th round is fine for that.

Stewart is a gamble.
He can get pressures, but he couldn't finish.
He has the potential to be great though with the right coaches.
But all the DEs projected Rd 1 at this point had some type of concern.

I think the worst for me was taking not just 1 but 2 LBs by Rd 4.
I didn't personally see a huge need for a LB given they still have Pratt and they signed Burks.
If they don't have Pratt in their plans, they should have traded or cut him back during FA and used his saved cap for someone else meaningful.
And many would argue DKJ was taken a round early, plus he's a 6-year player and only started one of those years.

If Bengals had taken a DT in Rd 2 instead of DKJ or Ratledge in Rd 2, DKJ in Rd 3, and a DT in Rd 4, I would have been far more supportive of this draft class.

At the end of the day, it is what it is.
In Golden we (must) trust, as he supposedly played a heavy role in all these defensive guys taken and should be held primarily responsible if they don't perform.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(2 hours ago)NUGDUKWE Wrote:

? 2025 NFL Draft Team Grades

I´ve compiled 24 evaluations of the 2025 NFL draft and totaled the team grades.
Sorted by GPA for all 32 teams. I sorted the 24 evaluations by GPA as well. From left (soft) to right (hard graders).
Thanks to all who give out grades every year! ? pic.twitter.com/HW69yxX702

— René Bugner (@RNBWCV) April 28, 2025

I always chuckle when I see the guys who grade drafts but like 90-100% of the teams get a B or better. Like what's the point of it if every single team (or even 28/32 teams) did really well in the draft?

Chad Reuter is a great example here. Apparently no team did worse than B-, which makes me wonder what's the point of having 13 grades if you're only going to use 6 of them. It's up there with movie or video game rating sites where average or meh products get a 7/10... like what's the point of having 1-5 if you're not going to use them?

[Luvnit2]

(3 hours ago)Whatever Wrote: I'm not really sure how we could logically say we are worse than last year.

QB=No change 

RB=Lost Williams and Herbert, added Perrine and Brooks.  Arguably, slightly better, as Williams was a liability as a position player.

WR=No change

TE=Slightly worse, due to All's injury and no real replacement.

T=Lost Brown and Smith, added Rivers.  On paper, this looks like we're worse, but then when you factor in the fact that Smith was on IR all year and Brown was injured early, it really seems to be zero sum.

G=Lost Cappa, added Patrick and Fairchild.  Honestly, it would be tough for Patrick or anyone else to be as bad as Cappa was last year. Tough to say how much of an upgrade Fairchild will be over Volson as a rookie, but overall, this group is at least slightly better on paper, arguably significantly better.

C=No change 

DE=Lost Hubbard, added Stewart.  All the respect in the world to Sam, but it was painfully obvious he had nothing left to give last year.  The play at LDE improved significantly as Ossai and Murphy got more snaps.  Stewart struggled to get sacks in college, but tough to imagine him being as bad as Hubbard was.  Slightly better, potentially a lot better if Stewart can be coached up to finish.

DT=Lost Rankins, Tufele, added Slayton.  Slayton I feel is an underrated add simply from the standpoint that he will allow Hill to move back to his more natural 3 tech spot.  Rankins was a non-entity before getting injured and Tufele was a low end rotation guy.  My gut says they will be better, but I'll call it a push for now due to the group appearing thinner on paper.

LB=Lost ADG, Bachie, added Burks, Knight, Carter.  ADG was a solid sub package player and spot starter.  Bachie primarily played on ST's.  To me, we look significantly better on paper, with how much so being determined by how quickly the rookies catch on.

CB=Lost Hilton.  This is one position that looks worse on paper, but it's also important to note that this group was ravaged by injuries last year, and may play better on the whole if they can stay healthy.  

S=Lost Bell.  This group is slightly worse on paper.  Bell, much like Hubbard, looked like a shell of himself last year and will only be missed from a depth perspective.

Specialists=No change 

Very good positional break down. I agree, but many are still jumping off the cliff and doubling down.

[Soonerpeace]

(2 hours ago)NUGDUKWE Wrote:

? 2025 NFL Draft Team Grades

I´ve compiled 24 evaluations of the 2025 NFL draft and totaled the team grades.
Sorted by GPA for all 32 teams. I sorted the 24 evaluations by GPA as well. From left (soft) to right (hard graders).
Thanks to all who give out grades every year! ? pic.twitter.com/HW69yxX702

— René Bugner (@RNBWCV) April 28, 2025

What’s frustrating is seeing KC, Philly, and the Ravens all w/o great picks do well.

[NUGDUKWE]

(47 minutes ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I always chuckle when I see the guys who grade drafts but like 90-100% of the teams get a B or better. Like what's the point of it if every single team (or even 28/32 teams) did really well in the draft?

Chad Reuter is a great example here. Apparently no team did worse than B-, which makes me wonder what's the point of having 13 grades if you're only going to use 6 of them. It's up there with movie or video game rating sites where average or meh products get a 7/10... like what's the point of having 1-5 if you're not going to use them?

Yeah i saw nfl.com did that and I guess that's the Chad Reuter. I wondered if it's so they can grade the draft but still give all fans a good feeling. Don't want to get rid of any excitement.