The Way Too Early 2024 Draft Thread

[claptonrocks]

2 hours ago, spicoli said:

You can never have enough pass rushers. 

Or OTs.....or CBs...or DTs...😎

Take your pick in rd 1.

 

 

[Jamie_B]

If we draft another DE who are you cutting?

 

Sam? A local hero? Very doubtful. Sam plays out his contract.

Henrickson? LOL 

Murphy? No chance, we just drafted him.

 

That leaves Sample and Ossai.

 

I'm not saying neither of them can't be upgraded, but I'm also not super down on either of them either. Ossai had a down year that from what it sounds like from Lou was mostly due to not staying healthy and Sample has contributed. 

 

I think the Dline has had issues with consistent pass rush since Ogunjobi left. Zach Carter is a JAG, get another 3 tech. (And another NT while were at it)

 

DE is not a need.

[texbengal]

23 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

If we draft another DE who are you cutting?

 

Sam? A local hero? Very doubtful. Sam plays out his contract.

Henrickson? LOL 

Murphy? No chance, we just drafted him.

 

That leaves Sample and Ossai.

 

I'm not saying neither of them can't be upgraded, but I'm also not super down on either of them either. Ossai had a down year that from what it sounds like from Lou was mostly due to not staying healthy and Sample has contributed. 

 

I think the Dline has had issues with consistent pass rush since Ogunjobi left. Zach Carter is a JAG, get another 3 tech. (And another NT while were at it)

 

DE is not a need.

 

+1

 

[texbengal]

2 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

 

 

The bigger need is getting that pass rush from the inside.

I agree with this. We saw what Geno did for the pass rush, collapsing the pocket and driving QBs into the DEs.

 

Even this past year, we saw Aaron Donald, Jeffrey Simmons, Sheldon Rankins… all doing a job on the Bengals OL this past year… to name a few. In particular, Rankins destroyed Cappa and it was a huge part of the Houston game (along with Swiss cheese pass defense).

 

I thought Zack Carter might show something, but he played on skates most of the time, and all they have under contract is BJ Hill, who is solid, but that’s it. They have a few outside DEs who can slide inside on passing downs, but DT is a huge need. Especially a guy like Murphy or Newton. 

[JC]

Joseph Ossai is clearly not in their plans judging by how much he was phased out this year. I don’t think they would bat an eye at kicking him to the curb if they could add some more juice. I don’t think edge is off the table really ever, but especially day 1 or day 2 this year.

 

They do need to be proactive in replacing Carter and Tupou though. I’d expect at least two new bodies in the defensive tackle room and hopefully three.
 

 

[I_C_Deadpeople]

5 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

 

 

The bigger need is getting that pass rush from the inside.

Sure, but if you draft a DE that can rush one of the other DE's can move inside on passing downs or you put 5 DL on the filed and take out a LB...lots of options when you have more skilled players

[Jamie_B]

53 minutes ago, I_C_Deadpeople said:

Sure, but if you draft a DE that can rush one of the other DE's can move inside on passing downs or you put 5 DL on the filed and take out a LB...lots of options when you have more skilled players

Draft a DE and make him a DT. 

We're doing that with Zack Carter, unsuccessfully so far. 

I'd rather find a true 3-Tech

[sparky151]

OTC had an article comparing players 2024 cap numbers to median production for their position. It then calculated a % chance of the player being cut based on league wide experience. In other words it was basically a list of underachievers. Anyway, the Bengals had lots of players on the top 100 players on that list. Hubbard, BJ Hill, Hilton, Mixon, and Karras among them. Given the way our team operates I'd bet all of them are safe but with most teams they wouldn't be. 

[I_C_Deadpeople]

1 hour ago, Jamie_B said:

Draft a DE and make him a DT. 

We're doing that with Zack Carter, unsuccessfully so far. 

I'd rather find a true 3-Tech

No, I said draft a DE then on passing downs another DE can move inside, we already do this on some occasions. And depth is depth ,  need it for injuries 

[Jamie_B]

1 hour ago, I_C_Deadpeople said:

No, I said draft a DE then on passing downs another DE can move inside, we already do this on some occasions. And depth is depth ,  need it for injuries 

 

We carried 6 DEs last season, 5 of whom are worth a roster spot (when Ossai is healthy) 

 

I guess you could move on from Jeff Gunther but how many DEs deep do we need to be?

 

At what point is "never having enough DEs" taking away from having even quality starters at other positions?

[I_C_Deadpeople]

26 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

 

We carried 6 DEs last season, 5 of whom are worth a roster spot (when Ossai is healthy) 

 

I guess you could move on from Jeff Gunther but how many DEs deep do we need to be?

 

At what point is "never having enough DEs" taking away from having even quality starters at other positions?

Which 5 are you referring to?

[Jamie_B]

Just now, I_C_Deadpeople said:

Which 5 are you referring to?

 

Trey

Sam

Ossai

Sample

Murphy

 

The 6th was Gunther 

[I_C_Deadpeople]

14 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

 

Trey

Sam

Ossai

Sample

Murphy

 

The 6th was Gunther 

Well a first rounder could displace Sample

[I_C_Deadpeople]

Just now, I_C_Deadpeople said:

Well a first rounder could displace Sample

And Ossai 

[Jamie_B]

I have to pass on that. We have bigger needs and Sample and Ossai are both contributors.

[T-Dub]

6 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

I have to pass on that. We have bigger needs and Sample and Ossai are both contributors.

 

Yeah it's interesting to me that they want to be 6-7 deep on the DL with solid players but try to squeak by with like 4.33 starting quality OL at best.  They obviously put a lot of value on the one group but go scratch & dent on the opposites matching up with them for every snap.  How is "keeping guys fresh" the goal everywhere but for what is probably the most physically grueling positions in the game?  Doesn't add up.

 

Realistically they need 6 average or better OL to get through a season without there being a weakness because someone is bound to miss games. Can't tell where though so more like 7 assuming one of them can play G as well as T or C. Right now we've got what, 3 of them before the talent level goes over a cliff?

[gupps]

Maybe we should start calling the o-line the "Walmart Wall"? 

 

I'm still half convinced the o-lines problems are coaching and not talent for the simple fact that no one can be that incompetent drafting players but I could be convinced otherwise. 

[Jamie_B]

4 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Yeah it's interesting to me that they want to be 6-7 deep on the DL with solid players but try to squeak by with like 4.33 starting quality OL at best.  They obviously put a lot of value on the one group but go scratch & dent on the opposites matching up with them for every snap.  How is "keeping guys fresh" the goal everywhere but for what is probably the most physically grueling positions in the game?  Doesn't add up.

 

Realistically they need 6 average or better OL to get through a season without there being a weakness because someone is bound to miss games. Can't tell where though so more like 7 assuming one of them can play G as well as T or C. Right now we've got what, 3 of them before the talent level goes over a cliff?

 

 

I'm a believer in BPA too, but at some point filling out a position that you already have guys at while not addressing others doesn't help the team. If we need Dlinemen, we need DT's both a 3-tech to do what Ogunjobi did (because Zach Carter isn't cutting it) and likely 2 Nose Tackles as we are unsure of the status of Reader.

[Le Tigre]

37 minutes ago, gupps said:

I'm still half convinced the o-lines problems are coaching and not talent for the simple fact that no one can be that incompetent drafting players but I could be convinced otherwise. 

When a lineman reaches the NFL level, he has already shown talent enough. If they don’t know how to block by this time, something was missing at the lower levels…which is virtually impossible to get through. 
 

“Coaching” is subjective. An offensive line coach at the NFL level has also reached the top of the game. They also didn’t “squeak by”—their talents are known. 
 

My long-standing belief, is that success or failures of offensive lines (and defensive lines for that matter) is entirely based on schemes/tactics of the coordinators and/or HC’s. How the linemen are placed, and the x/o movements, equate to success/failure. This is coupled with placing x lineman with the noted talents to operate within said scheme/tactics. 
 

The lack of offensive line production here appears to be historically square peg/round hole. The linemen are not fitting into the schemes/tactics set by the coordinators. And that is all on the scouts and Tobin to fit the correct part into the machine. Or have the machine altered to fit the part. 

[Jamie_B]

The expanded use of spread offenses has left many college linemen missing skills coming into the league though. I posted a whole article about that

[spicoli]

48 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

The expanded use of spread offenses has left many college linemen missing skills coming into the league though. I posted a whole article about that

This is 100% accurate. The biggest deficiencies they come with are in the running game. Very few college OL can run block worth a shit anymore. It’s not just a Bengals issue, it’s a league issue. 

[I_C_Deadpeople]

6 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Yeah it's interesting to me that they want to be 6-7 deep on the DL with solid players but try to squeak by with like 4.33 starting quality OL at best.  They obviously put a lot of value on the one group but go scratch & dent on the opposites matching up with them for every snap.  How is "keeping guys fresh" the goal everywhere but for what is probably the most physically grueling positions in the game?  Doesn't add up.

 

Realistically they need 6 average or better OL to get through a season without there being a weakness because someone is bound to miss games. Can't tell where though so more like 7 assuming one of them can play G as well as T or C. Right now we've got what, 3 of them before the talent level goes over a cliff?

I agree with the lack of OL depth (and quality of the starters) but note that you need more depth at DL becuse those players rotate in/out each game whereas the starting OL plays the entire game barring injury.

[claptonrocks]

8 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Yeah it's interesting to me that they want to be 6-7 deep on the DL with solid players but try to squeak by with like 4.33 starting quality OL at best.  They obviously put a lot of value on the one group but go scratch & dent on the opposites matching up with them for every snap.  How is "keeping guys fresh" the goal everywhere but for what is probably the most physically grueling positions in the game?  Doesn't add up.

 

Realistically they need 6 average or better OL to get through a season without there being a weakness because someone is bound to miss games. Can't tell where though so more like 7 assuming one of them can play G as well as T or C. Right now we've got what, 3 of them before the talent level goes over a cliff?

Good points...

[sparky151]

5 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

 

 

I'm a believer in BPA too, but at some point filling out a position that you already have guys at while not addressing others doesn't help the team. If we need Dlinemen, we need DT's both a 3-tech to do what Ogunjobi did (because Zach Carter isn't cutting it) and likely 2 Nose Tackles as we are unsure of the status of Reader.

 

Yes, drafting BPA doesn't build as strong a roster as Most Value Added, which compares a draft prospect to the player he'd bump off the roster if picked. 

[Cricket]

12 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

 

Yes, drafting BPA doesn't build as strong a roster as Most Value Added, which compares a draft prospect to the player he'd bump off the roster if picked. 

Yes, and the powers-that-be are making those decisions/evaluations based upon Year 1, AND Year 2, AND Year 3, etc.