http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bShbeyVDGCU

 

Good evening Bengals fans! Here's my season preview for you guys. Good luck this year!

 

Em

Well done and thanks for posting it.. Don't really have an argument with anything you said.

Pretty cool except for your take about Bernard not being explosive enough. Also, agree with Cobi Hamilton as a sleeper pick along with Shawn Williams.

If that one WR you were talking about is a mixture of T.O. and Stevie Johnson then we hit the Jackpot.

If that one WR you were talking about is a mixture of T.O. and Stevie Johnson then we hit the Jackpot.

 

As long as it's not a mixture of their mental state.

I agree with Bernard.  I don't think he is the homerun threat in the NFL.  He was fast enought in college, but won't be in the NFL.

It's been impressive to watch the improvement in the quality of your pieces and their production value.  I thought you might like to hear some unsolicited suggestions on things you could do to go even further.

 

Presentation:

 

Your graphics have gotten really good, and are distinctive.  I was impressed with your intro especially.

 

When you cut to yourself in the studio setting, it's a definite improvement, but it's the one place where production value is still looking a bit home-made compared to the rest of the piece.  You can pretty much DIY with blue/green-screen these days.  Or consider putting yourself in front of a background with some depth - and hopefully some lighting. (I'd go with the green-screen).

 

Still photos are effective for introducing players or concepts, but then we want VIDEO!!!  You've used enough that you don't seem to be worrying about rights/clearance issues, so I would simply say that you should use it whenever you can.  It's more action packed, and that's what we like to see, especially when looking at something that features our team.  As a side note, you might even want to take the time to feature video which profiles the given strengths or weaknesses of a player as you mention them.  It will add a whole new force to your arguments.  

 

(Not enough time?  Hire a free intern or two.  I'm sure there are some high school or college kids out there who love the Bengals and want to get into broadcasting or communications/media that would love the chance to learn some Non Linear Editing programs and pad their resumes with real-world experience - I'd think a young kid putting in some time and producing some tape with you could easily find his way into an internship with ESPN, and from there keep going).

 

I'd also think about organization.  The title card you use at the end of the piece is helpful, and I'd think doing more of that, even in your discussion of players/positions (e.g. a player or position group's strengths/weakness) would not only be more dynamic but would help us have a greater since of the flow and structure of your presentation - and (most importantly) keep us the most engaged (the chalk-board is cute).  But in general, I think we want some Big Ideas up front, instead of just rolling through position groups, followed by the big ideas.  Lastly, I think for some of these lists you should work on superimposing them over video of you giving the presentation.  You could reduce your size and still have the chalkboard beside you, for example.  Looking that those lists for too long becomes overly static.

 

Your delivery:

 

Maintain the same enthusiasm that you have in your lead-in for the entire piece. Also, maintain the same audio levels.  When we cut to the more subdued you (and lower audio level) after the intro, it deflates the energy of the piece.  I think Jaws is the prefect example of a guy who, though perhaps a little over the top, speaks with such fire and excitement that it infects the viewer.

 

Cut back to yourself talking "in-studio" at times, especially when you are making sizable transitions (for example, when you switch to the O-line and talk about Wharton and Cook, giving us what is pretty much expositional information (versus action), cut back to yourself telling us that, and then cut away again to game footage of the Robinson/Boiling etc.).  It's a much more dynamic approach that will hold viewer interest (the secret is to put our brains on autopilot, and manipulate us without our awareness). Do your whole piece on camera (multiple takes), and then you are free to pick and choose where you want to re-present yourself (and after all, promoting yourself should be one of the biggest goals of what you are doing).

 

Your speech tones can also do more to mark transitions between one topic and another.  Right now, it feels like you're running down a list.  Again, you could cut back to yourself in studio, but even if not, taking appropriate pauses and/or using your voice level/tone to change it up would go a long way (when you start talking about Geno Atkins, for example, you could come in with a lot more BANG).

 

Lastly, I would do multiple takes of your audio (ideally while filming yourself) and then cut in the pieces that work the best - and cut out the mistakes, the repetitions, and the words/moments that seem conditional or weak. This will do a couple of things.  For one, it will free you up to concentrate on each moment rather than face yourself with the daunting task of hitting a whole 12 minute stretch in one go.  It will also help you with your transitions.  For example, at the end of the piece you give your prediction. That could really use YOU introducing the segment, not just the title card.  If you're doing non-linear editing, you have the liberty to make changes after the fact, rather than be anchored to this one long piece.

 

All in all, great work. Keep it up. Looking forward to the continued progress.

 

And HIRE AN INTERN!!!

If that one WR you were talking about is a mixture of T.O. and Stevie Johnson then we hit the Jackpot.

 

I'm glad I wasn't driving or chewing gum when I heard him say that.

 

No complaints though.

 

Or rather, nothing new as I've previously disagreed with Diggy about his concerns with the Bernard and Hunt picks. And as for the claim Bernard isn't a true homerun hitter, I remind you, dear reader, that I wasn't in the camp that was bleating for that quality. Rather, I wanted a so-called airback with special teams skills, and I placed a greater priority on pass blocking than top end speed. All things considered I got my guy and I'm not that concerned that some of you homerun types wanted someone else. You'll come around eventually.

 

Moving on, I thought Diggy did a great job of looking at the Bengals roster beyond the more well known names, including repeated mentions of late round picks and UDFAs. That said, why was there no mention of Brandon Ghee when the CB group was discussed?

 

Last, I loved the prediction of 1st place in the AFCN and I thought the list of 3 things the Bengals needed this season to reach the Superbowl were suprisingly obtainable.   

He has an irrational dislike of Gio. Saying Burkhead is "much more explosive"? Just not true. Considering a few established NFL writers have tabbed Gio as a solid rookie of the year pick, I have a hard time figuring out how some people are so down on this pick.

He has an irrational dislike of Gio. Saying Burkhead is "much more explosive"? Just not true. Considering a few established NFL writers have tabbed Gio as a solid rookie of the year pick, I have a hard time figuring out how some people are so down on this pick.

 

Because Lacy was supposed to be the first RB off the board.

I agree with him on the RB pick. There are a couple of other RB's that should have gone before him that we could have gotten. Time will tell though. I am happy now that we have him and will support him just hope we didn't reach for him and that we got the Best RB in the draft. Monte Ball would have been sick though.

He has an irrational dislike of Gio. Saying Burkhead is "much more explosive"? Just not true. Considering a few established NFL writers have tabbed Gio as a solid rookie of the year pick, I have a hard time figuring out how some people are so down on this pick.

 

Actually, you might be able to argue that Burkhead is more explosive.  But that's not what Gio brings.  Gio brings incredible agility, vision, versatility, and he's so smooth he can walk on water.  

 

Burkhead, in my mind, is a sensible low-cost back-up and possible future replacement for BJGE. In other words, like BenJarvus, the perfect compliment to a guy like Gio.

 

I'm glad I wasn't driving or chewing gum when I heard him say that.

 

No complaints though.

 

Or rather, nothing new as I've previously disagreed with Diggy about his concerns with the Bernard and Hunt picks. And as for the claim Bernard isn't a true homerun hitter, I remind you, dear reader, that I wasn't in the camp that was bleating for that quality. Rather, I wanted a so-called airback with special teams skills, and I placed a greater priority on pass blocking than top end speed. All things considered I got my guy and I'm not that concerned that some of you homerun types wanted someone else. You'll come around eventually.

 

Moving on, I thought Diggy did a great job of looking at the Bengals roster beyond the more well known names, including repeated mentions of late round picks and UDFAs. That said, why was there no mention of Brandon Ghee when the CB group was discussed?

 

Last, I loved the prediction of 1st place in the AFCN and I thought the list of 3 things the Bengals needed this season to reach the Superbowl were suprisingly obtainable.   

I think breakaway speed for running backs is so overrated. It's not even in the top five qualities I would want in a running back. How often does a RB, even the true burners, rush for a long TD anyway?  Lateral quickness is so much more important than straight-line speed, and Bernard has a ton of that. 

 
And HIRE A HOT INTERN!!!

FIXT

Just preordered, thanks for looking out, sir.

I agree with Bernard.  I don't think he is the homerun threat in the NFL.  He was fast enought in college, but won't be in the NFL.

Bernard won't necessarily be as much of a home run threat. That remains to be seen. But considering a running back's damage is done over the first 5-10 yards for the most part, I think we may have hit the jackpot in this guy. He hits the hole harder and gets up to speed quicker than any other back in this year's draft class. Plus you can't teach his outstanding vision, wiggle and make-you-miss ability which can turn a 1 yard gain into a 6-7 yard gain.

This is what is mean't by a complimentary/cop back. The objective is to keep the defense honest and open up the passing game more for Dalton.

So Bernard not scampering 50+ yards for a score doesn't bother me so much due to his ability to consistently sustain damage to the defense over those first 5-10 yards on snap-to-snap basis.

If you want to say Bernard wasn't the best back available, you could argue that.

 

But you make it sound like he won't help the Bengals, and that is just silly.

Montee Ball a better back than Gio Bernard?  The video takes a big hit right there.

Think I said this before post-draft but I think what could make Gio more of a homerun threat is not his top speed but his acceleration and how low he cuts. It doesn't necessarily matter if someone is a step faster when he's already got a two-step lead on them, basically. They're generally not going to have more than 60-80 yards to catch him & that's not a lot of room in which to catch up to somebody.

 

They can give him a hearty pat on the back in the endzone, though.

It's been impressive to watch the improvement in the quality of your pieces and their production value.  I thought you might like to hear some unsolicited suggestions on things you could do to go even further.

 

Presentation:

 

Your graphics have gotten really good, and are distinctive.  I was impressed with your intro especially.

 

When you cut to yourself in the studio setting, it's a definite improvement, but it's the one place where production value is still looking a bit home-made compared to the rest of the piece.  You can pretty much DIY with blue/green-screen these days.  Or consider putting yourself in front of a background with some depth - and hopefully some lighting. (I'd go with the green-screen).

 

Still photos are effective for introducing players or concepts, but then we want VIDEO!!!  You've used enough that you don't seem to be worrying about rights/clearance issues, so I would simply say that you should use it whenever you can.  It's more action packed, and that's what we like to see, especially when looking at something that features our team.  As a side note, you might even want to take the time to feature video which profiles the given strengths or weaknesses of a player as you mention them.  It will add a whole new force to your arguments.  

 

(Not enough time?  Hire a free intern or two.  I'm sure there are some high school or college kids out there who love the Bengals and want to get into broadcasting or communications/media that would love the chance to learn some Non Linear Editing programs and pad their resumes with real-world experience - I'd think a young kid putting in some time and producing some tape with you could easily find his way into an internship with ESPN, and from there keep going).

 

I'd also think about organization.  The title card you use at the end of the piece is helpful, and I'd think doing more of that, even in your discussion of players/positions (e.g. a player or position group's strengths/weakness) would not only be more dynamic but would help us have a greater since of the flow and structure of your presentation - and (most importantly) keep us the most engaged (the chalk-board is cute).  But in general, I think we want some Big Ideas up front, instead of just rolling through position groups, followed by the big ideas.  Lastly, I think for some of these lists you should work on superimposing them over video of you giving the presentation.  You could reduce your size and still have the chalkboard beside you, for example.  Looking that those lists for too long becomes overly static.

 

Your delivery:

 

Maintain the same enthusiasm that you have in your lead-in for the entire piece. Also, maintain the same audio levels.  When we cut to the more subdued you (and lower audio level) after the intro, it deflates the energy of the piece.  I think Jaws is the prefect example of a guy who, though perhaps a little over the top, speaks with such fire and excitement that it infects the viewer.

 

Cut back to yourself talking "in-studio" at times, especially when you are making sizable transitions (for example, when you switch to the O-line and talk about Wharton and Cook, giving us what is pretty much expositional information (versus action), cut back to yourself telling us that, and then cut away again to game footage of the Robinson/Boiling etc.).  It's a much more dynamic approach that will hold viewer interest (the secret is to put our brains on autopilot, and manipulate us without our awareness). Do your whole piece on camera (multiple takes), and then you are free to pick and choose where you want to re-present yourself (and after all, promoting yourself should be one of the biggest goals of what you are doing).

 

Your speech tones can also do more to mark transitions between one topic and another.  Right now, it feels like you're running down a list.  Again, you could cut back to yourself in studio, but even if not, taking appropriate pauses and/or using your voice level/tone to change it up would go a long way (when you start talking about Geno Atkins, for example, you could come in with a lot more BANG).

 

Lastly, I would do multiple takes of your audio (ideally while filming yourself) and then cut in the pieces that work the best - and cut out the mistakes, the repetitions, and the words/moments that seem conditional or weak. This will do a couple of things.  For one, it will free you up to concentrate on each moment rather than face yourself with the daunting task of hitting a whole 12 minute stretch in one go.  It will also help you with your transitions.  For example, at the end of the piece you give your prediction. That could really use YOU introducing the segment, not just the title card.  If you're doing non-linear editing, you have the liberty to make changes after the fact, rather than be anchored to this one long piece.

 

All in all, great work. Keep it up. Looking forward to the continued progress.

 

And HIRE AN INTERN!!!

 

Thanks for the feedback Cap'n! Much appreciated as always!