Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 77

Thread: Standings for draft purposes

  1. #16
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Just to show I am serious with my all O-Line approach.

    First round=Michael Oher(OT-Ole Miss)
    Second Round=Alex Mack(C-California)
    Third Round=Trevor Canfield(G-Cincinnati)

    Starting O-Line:
    LT-Michael Oher
    LG-Andrew Whitworth
    C-Alex Mack
    RG-Trevor Canfield
    RT-Stacy Andrews

    A lot will be contingent on re-signing Stacy Andrews. Levi could be the odd man out, and he has struggled lately.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,207

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    I agree with your thoughts WV, but I have no interest in re-signing Andrews. I really see nothing in him that makes him worthy of a long term contract.
    Franchise TJ, let Andrews go, draft a tackle and a center.

    Let Levi and AC battle for LT, insert rookie at RT, sign a vet Center, and we're in business.
    When people say that I donít know what Iím talking about when it comes to sports or writing, I think: Man, you should see me in the rest of my life.
    ---Joe Posnanski

  4. #18
    Member 15fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    5,521

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    I think whoever drafts Matt Stafford is going to be disappointed.

    He's a good QB, but I don't think he'll be a franchise QB to match the hype & high pick prognostications that are floating around.

  5. #19
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Quote Originally Posted by 15fan View Post
    I think whoever drafts Matt Stafford is going to be disappointed.

    He's a good QB, but I don't think he'll be a franchise QB to match the hype & high pick prognostications that are floating around.
    A lot is going to depend on pre-draft and the bowl games. Stafford shows to be the best pro-QB and could have the quickest adjustment, as opposed to Bradford(shotgun only) and Tebow(spread).
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  6. #20
    On the brink of disaster acredsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    627

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    I'm starting a campaign for the bengals to use their first round pick on P Kevin Huber out of the University of Cincinnati. We need a punter, and shoot, we're going to screw up the first round pick anyway, so what the heck. Let's just punt our turn and hope to gain good position in the next round. If we don't pick one of the upper tier players, it stands to reason that someone will be able to be had for a bargain in the second. We will use that opportunity to take a long-shot downfield by drafting a issue-prone WR. Of course we will completely miss completing that, but then the opponets have to respect our deep game so we can continue to run ourselves into the ground.

    Sorry, I've been drinking the Kool-Aid again...
    "I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual." -- House

    "You guys are still thinking like doctors when you should be thinking like plumbers. Come on, I wanna see some butt crack." -- House

  7. #21
    Member Marc D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,776

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    As a Buckeye fan I was hoping that maybe the threat of the two Ohio "pro" teams lurking in the top 5-10 of the draft might somehow help keep Beanie at OSU 1 more year to avoid being drafted by either but alas, they will be in the top 5-10 again next year so he might as well go.

    Good luck Beanie.

  8. #22
    Member cincrazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    South Vienna, OH
    Posts
    4,398

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Quote Originally Posted by Redhook View Post
    The 2 mock drafts I've seen thus far have the Mike Brungles taking Beanie Wells or Jeremy Maclin. Wells, I could almost live with because he's damn good, but Maclin makes less than no sense. I've seen Maclin play a lot because my wife's family is from Mizzou. He's fast and explosive. He's basically Teddy Ginn Jr. all over again.

    They need guys in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Difference makers. It's so simple, yet Mikey boy doesn't get it and never will.



    P.S. - I still hate him.
    If the Bengals select Jeremy Maclin, the NFL will be dead to me.

  9. #23
    Hisssssssss Yachtzee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Land of the Lost
    Posts
    7,267

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Quote Originally Posted by cincrazy View Post
    If the Bengals select Jeremy Maclin, the NFL will be dead to me.
    The NFL is already on life support for me. I've watched maybe 1 game the whole way through all season. Until the NFL 1) does something to clamp down on players who sign contracts with huge up-front signing bonuses and then try to hold their teams hostage for a trade or new contract; and 2) treats all teams equally when it comes to things like disciplinary matters and violating league rules, I'm going to be a tough sell. I might jump on the bandwagon if the Bengals are doing well, but I just don't think I can get into it as much as I used to anymore.
    Burn down the disco. Hang the blessed DJ. Because the music that he constantly plays, it says nothing to me about my life.

  10. #24
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,054

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Quote Originally Posted by WVRed View Post
    The Detroit Lions did this with Charles Rogers, Roy Williams, and Mike Williams at wideout. Needless to say, they are going to most likely be making the first pick in the draft.

    As for known commodities, offensive linemen are the safest picks you can make in the NFL draft. Not the flashiest, but a definite necessity for any successful team.

    I'm just throwing this out there, but with the character antics of Chad Johnson growing a bit stale and TJ refusing to discuss a contract extension, would anybody be opposed to taking Michael Crabtree? My biggest issue is that I see a lot of Peter Warrick in him potentially. Not so much the character as much as productivity.
    A fair argument if it were the same, but the difference in what the Lions did and Maualuga is that Rey is just not talented like Rogers or college polished like M. Williams he's a combination of both plus more. Why you brought Roy Williams up is beyond me, he's a good WR with a poor team around him (when he was there). Let Calvin Johnson shoulder that load a while and see how he produces. And while I agree with O-Lineman being relatively safe I only view Smith as a legit top 5 pick and I believe he's gone before our slot. Now I'm not opposed to trading down in round 1 because this draft might end up being the deepest draft of all time. But I wouldn't trade out of the top 10 unless someone just blows me away, but even then it's gonna have to be a really good offer.

    Umm Crabtree IDK, while I can see the rational WR's are not real good top 10 targets. Their success rate is pretty low. I'd prefer to re-sign T.J. and keep Chad despite their off field issues. However if they decide to deal Chad or not Re-sign TJ (the latter would be dumb depending on the money) I still like Simpson and Caldwell and the good Henry at least showed up this past week and he's stayed out of trouble for the most part so I think we're fine there assuming things stay that way.

    I wonder if it would be wise to explore a deal based on Chad to KC for Larry Johnson. I know all the potential ramifications but does a said deal have any potential for a positive outcome. I imagine we would have to include a little something extra as RB is up the pole a notch in offensive positions heirarchy. Just a thought but one that could have a significant impact on our potential as a playoff team. And one in which might have to be explored due to a window that in my view has started to close in a sense but isn't yet closed.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes

  11. #25
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,054

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Quote Originally Posted by 15fan View Post
    I think whoever drafts Matt Stafford is going to be disappointed.

    He's a good QB, but I don't think he'll be a franchise QB to match the hype & high pick prognostications that are floating around.
    He's only being bandied about up there because he has the best potential of the QB's due to the arm strength advantage he has over the rest. He has the raw talent to be elite whereas the others are more questionable at this point. That said I'd take Bradford if I had to take a QB.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes

  12. #26
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    Why you brought Roy Williams up is beyond me, he's a good WR with a poor team around him (when he was there).
    The reason I brought him up was for the sake of overloading at a position of strength just because it is the "best player available". Although when Calvin Johnson arrived, Charles Rogers and Mike Williams were more or less on their way out.

    The only way I would trade out would be if say Philly offers both of their first rounders for the pick to take somebody like Crabtree.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  13. #27
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,054

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Quote Originally Posted by WVRed View Post
    The reason I brought him up was for the sake of overloading at a position of strength just because it is the "best player available". Although when Calvin Johnson arrived, Charles Rogers and Mike Williams were more or less on their way out.
    Ok, but I think we have more good O-Lineman than LB's. But I guess you don't agree. Dhani Jones too me is a pretty good stop gap and nothing more and Jeanty isn't much either IMO. Rivers, Maualuga and Brandon Johnson/Blackstock might be interesting to watch develop.

    The only way I would trade out would be if say Philly offers both of their first rounders for the pick to take somebody like Crabtree.
    Philly's 2 1st rounders plus a 3rd or a player maybe, they are loaded on their D-Line which could help a great deal. I could see them moving up to the middle of round 1 or a little sooner to p/u Cushing or Laurainaitis. But up to our spot would likely be too prohibitive.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes

  14. #28
    Vampire Weekend @Bernie's camisadelgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    11,492

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    The Bengals' linebacking unit could have been great if David Pollack were healthy, Ahmad Brooks understood how to play football, and Odell Thurman didn't make such stupid mistakes. Instead, the Bengals are stuck with Rivers and a bunch of stopgaps. Ideally, linebackers aren't drafted in the first round, but if the Bengals have a chance to get Maualuga, I think they should jump on it. As bad as the offensive line appears to be, they'll look a lot better when Carson Palmer is healthy.

  15. #29
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,054

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    Quote Originally Posted by camisadelgolf View Post
    The Bengals' linebacking unit could have been great if David Pollack were healthy, Ahmad Brooks understood how to play football, and Odell Thurman didn't make such stupid mistakes. Instead, the Bengals are stuck with Rivers and a bunch of stopgaps. Ideally, linebackers aren't drafted in the first round, but if the Bengals have a chance to get Maualuga, I think they should jump on it. As bad as the offensive line appears to be, they'll look a lot better when Carson Palmer is healthy.
    I agree. But LB's aren't usually drafted in the 1st round because there are usually so few worth taking that high. This draft is loaded with them, maybe the best 1st round since Brooking/Spikes/Simmons. Maualuga, Laurainaitis, Cushing, Curry and a few hybrid 3-4 OLB types like Everette from Fla. St.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes

  16. #30
    Winning the Human Race TheBigLebowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Titletown, FL
    Posts
    3,857

    Re: Standings for draft purposes

    There is no way the Bengals take Jeremy Maclin. He's not a top-10 talent.

    Michael Johnson is falling on most draft boards. Doesn't mean he doesn't fill a need because he would - I just think we'd be reaching if we took him with a top 5 pick.

    We all know well of the Bengals draft day blunders. There could be a novel about them. Still, it's just too obvious this year that the O-line is our most pressing need and there are two legit top 5 picks at that position in this draft class. Smith is my first target but, if we happen to win one of our very winnable remaining two games (Browns & Chiefs), we can forget Smith and possibly even Oher.

    I would be happy, although not thrilled with Mailauga. Some other Bengals fans have been kicking about the idea of taking Laurinitis if we fall out of the top 5. I would be appalled with that selection. JL is a good college LB who is maxed out physically and is not a top 5 selection in any draft class whatsoever.

    Michael Crabtree is going to be a fine NFL WR but, if we take him, we're almost Matt Millen dumb. We blew 2nd and 3rd round picks on WR's last year knowing full well that we'd take Henry back as soon as we could and also after refusing to trade Chad Johnson. Without an O-Line that can actually block people. all the skill players in the world won't make your offense good. Look how bad Palmer was this year. Look how often he got banged around. You all think Chad just suddenly forgot how to play football? Other than the Lions' line, ours was the worst in football. That has to be rectified before ANYTHING else (other than Mike Brown).
    Founder and Ruling Elite of the Derrick Robinson Fan Club. Limited amount of memberships available.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25