Jump to content

Chase, Pitts, or Sewell ??? (closing arguments in last days)


Chase, Pitts, or Sewell ??? (final arguments)  

47 members have voted

  1. 1. Assuming all 3 are available, who SHOULD the Bengals draft?

    • WR Ja'Marr Chase
      16
    • TE Kyle Pitts
      7
    • OT Penei Sewell
      24
  2. 2. Assuming all 3 are available, who do you PREDICT the Bengals will draft?

    • Chase
      35
    • Pitts
      1
    • Sewell
      11
  3. 3. Assuming Pitts is gone, who should the Bengals draft?

    • Chase
      21
    • Sewell
      26
  4. 4. Assuming Chase is gone, who should the Bengals draft?

    • Pitts
      9
    • Sewell
      38
  5. 5. Assuming Sewell is gone, who should the Bengals draft?

    • Chase
      26
    • Pitts
      21
  6. 6. Is there a case to be made for not taking any of these 3 and taking someone else?

    • Yes - (name them)
      7
    • No
      40
  7. 7. Would you support the Bengals trading back from #5?

    • Yes
      33
    • No
      14
  8. 8. Positionally right now, which is the weakest of the 3 on the team ?

    • WR Position
      7
    • TE Position
      12
    • OT Position
      28
  9. 9. Positionally right now, which is the strongest of the 3 on the team ?

    • WR Position
      36
    • TE Position
      5
    • OT Position
      6
  10. 10. Regardless of the team they go to, which of these 3 players do you predict is most likely to be an All-Pro first?

    • Chase
      11
    • Pitts
      29
    • Sewell
      7
  11. 11. Should it matter if Burrow wants Chase, and should the team let that override their decision?

    • Yes, give Joe what he wants
      5
    • No, a QB is not a GM
      17
    • Perhaps, or at least consider his view in a tie
      25


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, I_C_Deadpeople said:

If they did pick Sewell and then an OG in round 3 boom the OL could really rock


I can’t argue with you on this, but sadly I don’t see it happening.  The good news is that there’s somewhere around 8-10 offensive tackles who have 1st or 2nd round grades along with a handful of interior linemen.  We won’t be completely screwed if they take Chase or Pitts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Inigo Montoya said:


I can’t argue with you on this, but sadly I don’t see it happening.  The good news is that there’s somewhere around 8-10 offensive tackles who have 1st or 2nd round grades along with a handful of interior linemen.  We won’t be completely screwed if they take Chase or Pitts.

 

 

Assuming they actually commit to that when the time comes & then make the right pick out of the available leftovers.  

 

e02e5ffb5f980cd8262cf7f0ae00a4a9_press-x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, T-Dub said:

 

 

Assuming they actually commit to that when the time comes & then make the right pick out of the available leftovers.  

 

e02e5ffb5f980cd8262cf7f0ae00a4a9_press-x


So you think they’re going to skip o-line on Day 2 or make the wrong picks if they do take one (or two)?  Fair enough, but people outside the Bengals organization have also stated that this class has good depth at o-line.  Using your logic, I’m not sure why anything would be different even if they take Sewell.  The Bengals are incompetent and will screw up the later picks after him so what difference does it really make overall?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Have to be pretty damned new to this team in order to have any kind of meltdown over a bad draft pick.  More like

 

notsurprisedkirk.jpg

 

I hope your right but I'm not betting on ZERO meltdowns.  I'll standby for the tiny hands, short arms, low test scores, big tits, small school, one year wonder, wtf were they thinking, is fill in the blank calling the shots, Katie is certainly doable, Tobin could be replaced by a third grade soccer mom, let's start taking wagers on when fill in the blank gets hurt again, I knew all along, fill in the blank coach or coaches should be fired, etc... Ad nauseam...

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Numbers said:

 

I hope your right but I'm not betting on ZERO meltdowns.  I'll standby for the tiny hands, short arms, low test scores, big tits, small school, one year wonder, wtf were they thinking, is fill in the blank calling the shots, Katie is certainly doable, Tobin could be replaced by a third grade soccer mom, let's start taking wagers on when fill in the blank gets hurt again, I knew all along, fill in the blank coach or coaches should be fired, etc... Ad nauseam...

 

All this goes away if they start winning.  Well, except the part where Katie is doable 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:


So you think they’re going to skip o-line on Day 2 or make the wrong picks if they do take one (or two)?  Fair enough, but people outside the Bengals organization have also stated that this class has good depth at o-line.  Using your logic, I’m not sure why anything would be different even if they take Sewell.  The Bengals are incompetent and will screw up the later picks after him so what difference does it really make overall?

 

 

The problem with that thinking is just because someone might be listed as an OL he fits our needs, when that's not entirely correct. It would be a way to shoe-horn a prospect into a position he might not be 1005 capable of, or the correct fit. It goes back to that thinking of Mike Brown's from the 70-80s era when he stupidly said "All offensive linemen are interchangeable pieces". Nothing could be further from the truth in reality.

 

I think Sewell best fits our immediate needs this year if they decide the need an immediate starter at right guard. He also has the capability to potentially be a day one starter at either tackle spot, which is the longer term concern, since Reiff is only on a one year deal and Jonah Williams career has been up and down and littered with injuries creating concerns he can actually play a whole season.

 

There's no other offensive lineman in this draft that meets all those capabilities, or has the potential of being a franchise/Pro Bowl tackle as Sewell does. All the other prospects lack the ability to have that ideal flexibility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the simplest terms, the most convenient definitions, when you have your shot you take it. At the end of the season, 98% of the fan base would tell you that offensive line was the team's biggest need. When you subsequently have the chance to take the best option in that area of need on the board, you take a swing and you don't miss. The rest is just window dressing. You don't get distracted by shiny things and then assume a guy you want might be there in the second or later rounds.

 

The Bengals play in the AFC North. Protect the QB, get their QB and run the ball. These are the keys to success in the division. Do them well, you have a chance. Do them poorly and get your ass handed to you. 

 

Remember one last thing. The Bengals are famous for telegraphing their pick to other teams. Numerous times teams have traded in front of them to grab the player they wanted before they could (see Frank Ragnow and Devin Bush) leaving them scrambling. I can totally see this happening to the Bengals in the second round if they take Chase in the first.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BengalFanInTO said:

In the simplest terms, the most convenient definitions, when you have your shot you take it. At the end of the season, 98% of the fan base would tell you that offensive line was the team's biggest need. When you subsequently have the chance to take the best option in that area of need on the board, you take a swing and you don't miss. The rest is just window dressing. You don't get distracted by shiny things and then assume a guy you want might be there in the second or later rounds.

 

The Bengals play in the AFC North. Protect the QB, get their QB and run the ball. These are the keys to success in the division. Do them well, you have a chance. Do them poorly and get your ass handed to you. 

 

Remember one last thing. The Bengals are famous for telegraphing their pick to other teams. Numerous times teams have traded in front of them to grab the player they wanted before they could (see Frank Ragnow and Devin Bush) leaving them scrambling. I can totally see this happening to the Bengals in the second round if they take Chase in the first.

 

 

 

Heck, someone could jump in front of the Bengals in the first round!  From the Athletic today:

 

NFL Draft: Falcons continue to hold trade talks for No. 4 pick, sources say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bengaled said:

 

 

The problem with that thinking is just because someone might be listed as an OL he fits our needs, when that's not entirely correct. It would be a way to shoe-horn a prospect into a position he might not be 1005 capable of, or the correct fit. It goes back to that thinking of Mike Brown's from the 70-80s era when he stupidly said "All offensive linemen are interchangeable pieces". Nothing could be further from the truth in reality.

 

I think Sewell best fits our immediate needs this year if they decide the need an immediate starter at right guard. He also has the capability to potentially be a day one starter at either tackle spot, which is the longer term concern, since Reiff is only on a one year deal and Jonah Williams career has been up and down and littered with injuries creating concerns he can actually play a whole season.

 

There's no other offensive lineman in this draft that meets all those capabilities, or has the potential of being a franchise/Pro Bowl tackle as Sewell does. All the other prospects lack the ability to have that ideal flexibility. 

 

Aren't you doing exactly the same thing by claiming he would be a good right guard?  Either they're interchangeable or they're not.  AFAIK, he's never played that position and hasn't been a right tackle since high school.  That's why he just made sure that people knew he had spent time the last few months training as a right tackle as well.

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a contradiction. Instead of having Sewell, Reiff, or Williams on the bench, put them all on the field. Sewell will be a tackle long term. Slater probably won't. It didn't hurt Whitworth to spend time at guard before starting at tackle.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

It's not a contradiction. Instead of having Sewell, Reiff, or Williams on the bench, put them all on the field. Sewell will be a tackle long term. Slater probably won't. It didn't hurt Whitworth to spend time at guard before starting at tackle.

 


IIRC much of the reason that Whit went in the 2nd was because people thought he would be too slow as a LT (and for speed rushers he did have some issues) and that he would be better served to be a guard.

 

Moral of the story; those projecting Slater as a guard need not be paid attention to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:


So you think they’re going to skip o-line on Day 2 or make the wrong picks if they do take one (or two)?

 

Given their recent drafting, yes, this seems like a real possibility.

 

 

18 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:


Fair enough, but people outside the Bengals organization have also stated that this class has good depth at o-line.  

 

I'm aware of that but it doesn't change the team's ability to recognize it or their commitment to actually drafting them.  It's also silly to think that whichever OL is left over at 38 will be anywhere near the level of Sewell or Slater, or even the several other linemen that will be drafted before we then maybe try to get our "best of the rest".

 

 

18 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:


I’m not sure why anything would be different even if they take Sewell.  The Bengals are incompetent and will screw up the later picks after him so what difference does it really make overall?

 

The difference between having the best OL prospect in the draft, and not.

 

Pretty simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to believe a decision to settle the Bengal Fan "civil war" will be tomorrow. What will we even talk about after?

 

What pick was "right" and what pick was "wrong" likely won't be settled for years to come. Hopefully when everything is all said and done, we can all at least agree that the 5th OA pick should help the team in some fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:


.....  The Bengals are incompetent and will screw up the later picks after him so what difference does it really make overall?

The Power of Negative Thinking at work.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, spicoli said:

Andrew Whitworth Weighs in on the Penei Sewell Vs. Ja'Marr Chase Debate

https://www.si.com/nfl/bengals/gm-report/andrew-whitworth-weighs-in-on-the-penei-sewell-vs-jamarr-chase-debate

 

Not sure what to think of the non-committal answer. 

 

"If we can protect for one more second maybe we win, but what if we don't have to protect for one more second because we got the electric guy that gets open?"

 

Really the true question boils down to which position is truly harder to find a premiere player.  There are arguments for both.

 

Taking into account longevity then the answer is clear.  Nope.  The shelf life of an OT is longer than a WR but only by about a year.

 

1st round picks make it clear.  Nope.  Neither requires a 1st round to be great. 

 

I went back and forth on the issues surrounding the benefits of both.  In the end, there's a glut of WRs available with few available OTs that could reach the category of potential greatness.  Oh sure I'll wait for the inevitable, "we could have gotten one in free agency"...  Who was available again ?  None were considered blue chip prospects.   The same thing happens every year IMHO.  Couple of great prospects at OT which are chewed up by mid 1st round.  Several WRs would be available all the way into the late 1st round and some in the upper 2nd round.  In short, OT is a position of need but more importantly it's also (outside of QB) the hardest position to fill because there's such a shortage compared to other positions.  

 

In short, you can never go wrong by protecting your most valuable asset, Joe Burrow.

 

See Greg Cook...  Great QB that could have been the GOAT 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Given their recent drafting, yes, this seems like a real possibility.

 

 

 

I'm aware of that but it doesn't change the team's ability to recognize it or their commitment to actually drafting them.  It's also silly to think that whichever OL is left over at 38 will be anywhere near the level of Sewell or Slater, or even the several other linemen that will be drafted before we then maybe try to get our "best of the rest".

 

 

 

The difference between having the best OL prospect in the draft, and not.

 

Pretty simple.


So basically if they take Sewell everything is wonderful and there’s no need to worry about the rest of their picks because we’ll have the best o-line prospect in the draft.  But if they don’t take Sewell we’re completely screwed and there’s little chance of anything working out given their recent draft failures.  That’s nonsense and you know it.  
 

Good players are available after Round 1 and they will have options at o-line on Day 2 with whoever they take.  Whether they hit on the picks won’t be known for awhile.  Nobody expects a player taken after Sewell to be a better prospect.  That’s why he’s the top rated OL in the draft.  I just don’t agree that taking Chase/Pitts plus OL in rounds 2-3 (or both) is some sort of guaranteed failure draft strategy.  Last year’s depth at WR worked to our advantage with Higgins and it’s entirely possible for the same to happen this year with OL.  
 

I’m on record wanting Sewell but I can see the logic of waiting on OL because of the depth and because Chase/Pitts are both elite pass catchers and we need to replace AJ.  Not saying it’s the best move just that it’s not a terrible strategy.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Numbers said:

 

Not sure what to think of the non-committal answer. 

 

"If we can protect for one more second maybe we win, but what if we don't have to protect for one more second because we got the electric guy that gets open?"

 

Really the true question boils down to which position is truly harder to find a premiere player.  There are arguments for both.

 

Taking into account longevity then the answer is clear.  Nope.  The shelf life of an OT is longer than a WR but only by about a year.

 

1st round picks make it clear.  Nope.  Neither requires a 1st round to be great. 

 

I went back and forth on the issues surrounding the benefits of both.  In the end, there's a glut of WRs available with few available OTs that could reach the category of potential greatness.  Oh sure I'll wait for the inevitable, "we could have gotten one in free agency"...  Who was available again ?  None were considered blue chip prospects.   The same thing happens every year IMHO.  Couple of great prospects at OT which are chewed up by mid 1st round.  Several WRs would be available all the way into the late 1st round and some in the upper 2nd round.  In short, OT is a position of need but more importantly it's also (outside of QB) the hardest position to fill because there's such a shortage compared to other positions.  

 

In short, you can never go wrong by protecting your most valuable asset, Joe Burrow.

 

See Greg Cook...  Great QB that could have been the GOAT 


Fantastic post 👏

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Numbers said:

 

Not sure what to think of the non-committal answer. 

 

"If we can protect for one more second maybe we win, but what if we don't have to protect for one more second because we got the electric guy that gets open?"

 

Really the true question boils down to which position is truly harder to find a premiere player.  There are arguments for both.

 

Taking into account longevity then the answer is clear.  Nope.  The shelf life of an OT is longer than a WR but only by about a year.

 

1st round picks make it clear.  Nope.  Neither requires a 1st round to be great. 

 

I went back and forth on the issues surrounding the benefits of both.  In the end, there's a glut of WRs available with few available OTs that could reach the category of potential greatness.  Oh sure I'll wait for the inevitable, "we could have gotten one in free agency"...  Who was available again ?  None were considered blue chip prospects.   The same thing happens every year IMHO.  Couple of great prospects at OT which are chewed up by mid 1st round.  Several WRs would be available all the way into the late 1st round and some in the upper 2nd round.  In short, OT is a position of need but more importantly it's also (outside of QB) the hardest position to fill because there's such a shortage compared to other positions.  

 

In short, you can never go wrong by protecting your most valuable asset, Joe Burrow.

 

See Greg Cook...  Great QB that could have been the GOAT 

Cook was injured on a (sort of) tackle while scrambling. Tore his rotator cuff, which never received the proper treatment. Nothing really Bengal-like, back then everyone got “cortisone treatment” for pretty much everything. This was (I think) the photo of the tackle (and article) 

 

From The Enquirer 
GALLERY: Worst sports injuries in Cincinnati 
Bengals quarterback Greg Cook was the AFL rookie of the year in 1969, but a tackle by the Chiefs' Jim Lynch injured his shoulder. He had an undiagnosed torn rotator cuff which detereorated after the season and led to an early end to his career. 

https://www.cincinnati.com/picture-gallery/sports/2020/11/22/gallery-worst-sports-injuries-cincinnati/6385323002/image/6385513002/#slide:6385513002 


 


 

Sent from my iPhone
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Le Tigre said:

Cook was injured on a (sort of) tackle while scrambling. Tore his rotator cuff, which never received the proper treatment. Nothing really Bengal-like, back then everyone got “cortisone treatment” for pretty much everything. This was (I think) the photo of the tackle (and article) 

 

From The Enquirer 
GALLERY: Worst sports injuries in Cincinnati 
Bengals quarterback Greg Cook was the AFL rookie of the year in 1969, but a tackle by the Chiefs' Jim Lynch injured his shoulder. He had an undiagnosed torn rotator cuff which detereorated after the season and led to an early end to his career. 

https://www.cincinnati.com/picture-gallery/sports/2020/11/22/gallery-worst-sports-injuries-cincinnati/6385323002/image/6385513002/#slide:6385513002 
 
Sent from my iPhone

 

It's sadder because he still put up great numbers even after the injury.  An injury because somebody couldn't pick up a linebacker.  Could have just been a fluke but I don't need to look back and give an answer we all know too well.  Call it the pre Munoz years or post Munoz years.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/26/2021 at 7:35 PM, snarkster said:

my 2nd Rd pick would be Leatherwood 

 

I think Leatherwood could be the best tackle of the entire class. He has the classic build / frame, arm length, and attributes that you want in a tackle, whereas Sewell to me is more of a guard (albeit a dominant pro bowl one).

 

 

 

56 minutes ago, Numbers said:

"If we can protect for one more second maybe we win, but what if we don't have to protect for one more second because we got the electric guy that gets open?"

 

There are 2 ways to protect a QB

1. Have a good OL that can hold up against a blitz. 
2. Have such dominant WRs / TEs that teams cannot blitz you to begin with, or else they will get burned. 

 

Taking Chase or Pitts actually helps the OL in many ways. One could even argue as much or more than taking Sewell does. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...