Cincinnati Bengals

Go Back   Cincinnati Bengals Message Boards - Forums > Cincinnati Bengals Football Discussion > The NFL Draft > Mock Drafts

Mock Drafts Post your mock here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-14-2013, 11:40 AM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

FA - Sign Reggie Bush (RB ), Jairus Bryd (S), Vet WR2, Vet CB4?
Extend - Smith, MJ, Pacman, Newman, Geathers, Gilberry, Howard, Maualuga, Skuta, Huber, Harris, Gradkowski

1 - Barrett Jones (C, Alabama) or Frederick (C, Wisconsin)
2a - Ogletree(LB, Georgia)
2b - Greene (LB, Rutgers)
3 - Rambo (S, Georgia)
4 - Kenjon Barner (RB, Oregon)
5 - Mike Williams (TE, Alabama)
6a - Dustin Hopkins (K, Florida State)
6b - RT2

2013 Depth Chart
QB - Dalton, Gradkowski
RB - Bush/BJGE/Barner/Peerman/Pressley
WR - Green/Jones, FA/Whalen, Sanu/Hawkins
TE - Gresham/Charles/Williams
Oline - Wht/Collins, Boling/Wharton, Jones or Frederick/Robinson, Zeitler, Smith/TBD

Dline - Dunlap/Geathers, Peko/Still, Atkins/Thompson/Sims, MJ/Gilberry
LB - Ogletree/Howard, Burfict/Maualuga, Greene/Skuta
S - Nelson/Iloka, Byrd/Mays/Rambo
CB - Hall, Dre Kirk/Newman, Pacman/Prater or Ghee

2014 Draft
1 - DE/CB (Upgrade Gilberry/Newman)
2 - DE/CB (Upgrade Gilberry/Newman)
3 - WR - (Upgrade Whalen)
4 - LG (Upgrade Wharton)
5 - LB (Upgrade Skuta)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-14-2013, 12:21 PM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Marketing Focus to FAs: The Bengals have gone to the playoffs in back-to-back years and in 3 of the last 4 seasons. With a young QB/WR pairing. Without a viable running threat.

Key Philosophies:
  • Fix Weakest Positional Groups (RB Corp, LB Corp, Safety Corp)
  • Upgrade Weakest Links: Dennis Roland, Kyle Cook
  • Build Up Offense for Andy (Establish Speed in RB corp, enable QB sneaks, Establish Balance in Offense between Pass/Rush)
By fixing the LB corp, opposing TEs will now be covered which should enable for more coverage sacks (especially if/when Dre Kirk gets on the field).

With Robinson starting an UDFA Center, there was not a big dropoff in production. It seems to me that this clearly indicates that Kyle Cook could/should be upgraded.

Michael Williams (TE from Alabama) will be a viable TE3 and also replace Dennis Roland on the heavy "3 TE" sets. Williams also is a receiving option on the heavy "3 TE" sets.

Dline was strong in 2012, perhaps a bit inconsistant. WTS, adding 2 playmaking rookie LBs (plus Howard) should enable Zimmer to dial up some quality and unique blitzes in 2013.

Last edited by mulligan; 01-14-2013 at 12:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-14-2013, 12:40 PM
pulses pulses is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Southeastern Indiana
Posts: 1,545
Rep Points: 632
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Only FA WR I'd be interested in is Hartline, young vet who wouldn't cost us a bunch but provide an upgrade to our team.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-14-2013, 01:02 PM
D.Boon's Avatar
D.Boon D.Boon is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,184
Rep Points: 2759
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Yes. this offseason would be totally boss. Here's where the trouble comes in paradise....do you really think that Bengals will sign both Byrd and Bush?

That being said it is hard for me to assume that realistically we make those upgrades in FA. I think we keep our own (smith and MJ + others) and wait and see how FA shakes out after the coveted guys (i.e. Bush, Byrd etc.) are all snatched up.

Therefore from my perspective I'd like to see a safety higher. I love the 2nd round and adding the athleticism to the LB corp. Even if they didn't make a splash in FA this draft will make them much better.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-14-2013, 02:09 PM
50yarder 50yarder is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 113
Rep Points: 105
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Where would Jones or Frederick play we have 2 good centers under contract. Ogletree likely won't be there at that point. No need for Micheal Williams we have Roland who does a great job and two great young TE.
I'd prefer Gillislee over Barner a player who actually can run between the tackles and not always self inflicted sweeps.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-14-2013, 03:00 PM
CincyGuy344 CincyGuy344 is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 838
Rep Points: 499
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Love it
Greene and Ogletree with Burfict would be nasty
Jones at OC would make our offense much better Dalton needs great interior linement to be successful.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-14-2013, 03:35 PM
OchoCincos's Avatar
OchoCincos OchoCincos is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,084
Rep Points: 2469
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post
Where would Jones or Frederick play we have 2 good centers under contract. Ogletree likely won't be there at that point. No need for Micheal Williams we have Roland who does a great job and two great young TE.
I'd prefer Gillislee over Barner a player who actually can run between the tackles and not always self inflicted sweeps.
Two great centers? I count one decently good one and one bad one. Robinson being the good one, Cook being bad. Frederick and Jones can play both C and OG, which means you can have a competition for LG and C. The best two to emerge for LG and C get the jobs.

Michael Williams would make teams actually think that we have a chance of passing if he's in. When Roland is in, we run. Williams is both a great blocker and also can go out and actually catch a pass, unlike Roland.

Barner has run between the tackles before. He just isn't very big. But if we used him in tandem with BJGE, he shouldn't take as much punishment as he would being a full time RB.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:24 PM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by D.Boon View Post
Yes. this offseason would be totally boss. Here's where the trouble comes in paradise....do you really think that Bengals will sign both Byrd and Bush?

That being said it is hard for me to assume that realistically we make those upgrades in FA. I think we keep our own (smith and MJ + others) and wait and see how FA shakes out after the coveted guys (i.e. Bush, Byrd etc.) are all snatched up.

Therefore from my perspective I'd like to see a safety higher. I love the 2nd round and adding the athleticism to the LB corp. Even if they didn't make a splash in FA this draft will make them much better.
In recent history (especially in the Free Agency of 2012), RBs came on the cheap.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...running-backs/

WTS, I think that the Bengals can make another push for a veteran RB similar to the BJGE push last off-season.

http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/featu...tion=WR&y=2013
There are plenty of veteran FA WRs available this offseason.

For the most part, the Bengals simply need a "patch" at the WR2 position to buy time for the younger WRs to develop and step up.

As for signing Byrd, I have to believe that at some point free agents are going to start WANTING to be on the Bengals. We have made the playoffs the last 2 years and 3 of the last 4 years. We have three picks in the first 2 rounds in 2013. We have THE best WR (Green) and DT (Atkins) in all of the NFL. And, the Bengals had a horrible running attack and NOBODY at WR2. Come on board now and win a Super Bowl with us in 2013!

Of course, the Bengals may stay firm without pursuing "big name" free agents. If this is the case, then I would tweak this draft a bit.

Last edited by mulligan; 01-14-2013 at 10:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:26 PM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by OchoCincos View Post
Two great centers? I count one decently good one and one bad one. Robinson being the good one, Cook being bad. Frederick and Jones can play both C and OG, which means you can have a competition for LG and C. The best two to emerge for LG and C get the jobs.

Michael Williams would make teams actually think that we have a chance of passing if he's in. When Roland is in, we run. Williams is both a great blocker and also can go out and actually catch a pass, unlike Roland.

Barner has run between the tackles before. He just isn't very big. But if we used him in tandem with BJGE, he shouldn't take as much punishment as he would being a full time RB.
I am hoping that the Bengals may also sign Reggie Bush.

RB Corp: Bush/BJGE/Barner/Peerman
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:30 PM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post
Where would Jones or Frederick play we have 2 good centers under contract.
Jones/Frederick would start at Center. Robinson would be the back up. And Kyle Cook would get cut. See 53 man depth chart in OP.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cincinnat...als/kyle-cook/
Cook has $1.92 million remaining in pro-rated bonsues.

If the Bengals would cut him, the $1.92 million would be "dead cost."

But, he is projected to have a $3.34 million salary cap hit next year if he is a Bengal.

Cutting Cook would free up $1.42 million for the Bengals in 2013, $3.34 in 2014, and $3.34 in 2015.

It seems to me that the Bengals are interested in free up cash to sign some big time free agents if not in 2013, especially in 2014 and beyond. (MJ, Smith, Dalton, Green, Gresham?).

Perhaps, some forgot that Trevor Robinson was a rookie in 2012. It is a known fact that olinemen really take a step forward from year 1 to year 2 in strength and playbook understanding.

Despite the shift from a veteran Center to an UDFA, the drop off in production was negligible from Cook to Robinson. IMO, this hurts Cook's status.

Some question why the Bengals started Kyle Cook against the Steelers, Ravens, and Texans. I believe it was based on knowledge and experience against more complex blitzes.

WTS, I believe that Robinson will both bolster his strength and understanding in 2013 which could thereby further reduce Kyle Cook to an expensive bench-warmer.

Hence, I think that the Bengals will consider cutting Kyle Cook in 2013 and perhaps upgrading a Center in the 2013 draft.

Last edited by mulligan; 01-14-2013 at 10:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:33 PM
pulses pulses is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Southeastern Indiana
Posts: 1,545
Rep Points: 632
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post
Where would Jones or Frederick play we have 2 good centers under contract. Ogletree likely won't be there at that point. No need for Micheal Williams we have Roland who does a great job and two great young TE.
I'd prefer Gillislee over Barner a player who actually can run between the tackles and not always self inflicted sweeps.

your delusional if u think we have 2 good centers
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:36 PM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post
Ogletree likely won't be there at that point. No need for Micheal Williams we have Roland who does a great job and two great young TE.
I'd prefer Gillislee over Barner a player who actually can run between the tackles and not always self inflicted sweeps.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/p...kings/2013/ILB
CBS Sports ranks Ogletree as the 53rd. If this is roughly accurate, then the Bengals should be able to get him with the 37th pick. WTS, I would feel that Ogletree will have a greater impact on the Bengals than our 1st round selection. For me at the 2012 draft, I got more excited about Zeitler's contribution than Dre Kirk's. I feel the same greater excitmenet for Ogletree over upgrading our Center. Though, both will be quality contributors in 2013.

Michael Williams would be a HUGE upgrade over Roland. Williams is a solid blocker and has the capacity to catch the ball.

Gillislee may be a better RB, but in my mock, I prioritised getting depth at safety in the 3rd over getting a better RB in the 3rd. In my view, in 2012 without an upgraded center, the Bengals were able to create ENORMOUS holes in the oline. With Barner's speed, he would be able to hit that ENORMOUS hole and take it to the house. In my view, the drop off from Rambo to the next Safety was greater than the drop off of Gillislee to Barner. This is just my perspective.

Last edited by mulligan; 01-14-2013 at 10:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:44 PM
50yarder 50yarder is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 113
Rep Points: 105
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by mulligan View Post
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/p...kings/2013/ILB
CBS Sports ranks Ogletree as the 53rd. If this is roughly accurate, then the Bengals should be able to get him with the 37th pick.

Michael Williams would be a HUGE upgrade over Roland. Williams is a solid blocker and has the capacity to catch the ball.

Gillislee may be a better RB, but in my mock, I prioritised getting depth at safety in the 3rd over getting a better RB in the 3rd. In my view, in 2012 without an upgraded center, the Bengals were able to create ENORMOUS holes in the oline. With Barner's speed, he would be able to hit that ENORMOUS hole and take it to the house. In my view, the drop off from Rambo to the next Safety was greater than the drop off of Gillislee to Barner. This is just my perspective.
The RB point makes scence but a blocking TE not so much when you have 2 capable on the roster. Makes more scence just to find a solid RT late and get depth at the position rather than TE but hey who knows the team may feel the same as you.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:48 PM
50yarder 50yarder is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 113
Rep Points: 105
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

[quote=pulses;2778858]your delusional if u think we have 2 good centers[/QUOTE
That all depends on how you look at the position and the history of this team taking centers in the draft. Heck I could be wrong but I think the last time we took a center in the draft in the 1st couple rounds Paul Brown was running things.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:50 PM
50yarder 50yarder is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 113
Rep Points: 105
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by mulligan View Post
Jones/Frederick would start at Center. Robinson would be the back up. And Kyle Cook would get cut. See 53 man depth chart in OP.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cincinnat...als/kyle-cook/
Cook has $1.92 million remaining in pro-rated bonsues.

If the Bengals would cut him, the $1.92 million would be "dead cost."

But, he is projected to have a $3.34 million salary cap hit next year if he is a Bengal.

Cutting Cook would free up $1.42 million for the Bengals in 2013, $3.34 in 2014, and $3.34 in 2015.

It seems to me that the Bengals are interested in free up cash to sign some big time free agents if not in 2013, especially in 2014 and beyond. (MJ, Smith, Dalton, Green, Gresham?).

Perhaps, some forgot that Trevor Robinson was a rookie in 2012. It is a known fact that olinemen really take a step forward from year 1 to year 2 in strength and playbook understanding.

Despite the shift from a veteran Center to an UDFA, the drop off in production was negligible from Cook to Robinson. IMO, this hurts Cook's status.

Some question why the Bengals started Kyle Cook against the Steelers, Ravens, and Texans. I believe it was based on knowledge and experience against more complex blitzes.

WTS, I believe that Robinson will both bolster his strength and understanding in 2013 which could thereby further reduce Kyle Cook to an expensive bench-warmer.

Hence, I think that the Bengals will consider cutting Kyle Cook in 2013 and perhaps upgrading a Center in the 2013 draft.
That makes alot of scense until you factor in MB.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-14-2013, 10:58 PM
pulses pulses is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Southeastern Indiana
Posts: 1,545
Rep Points: 632
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

[quote=50yarder;2778879]
Quote:
Originally Posted by pulses View Post
your delusional if u think we have 2 good centers[/QUOTE
That all depends on how you look at the position and the history of this team taking centers in the draft. Heck I could be wrong but I think the last time we took a center in the draft in the 1st couple rounds Paul Brown was running things.
It has nothing to do with that. We DONT have 2 good centers NOW that's where U ARE WRONG
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-14-2013, 11:15 PM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

[quote=50yarder;2778879]
Quote:
Originally Posted by pulses View Post
your delusional if u think we have 2 good centers[/QUOTE
That all depends on how you look at the position and the history of this team taking centers in the draft. Heck I could be wrong but I think the last time we took a center in the draft in the 1st couple rounds Paul Brown was running things.
And prior to drafting Gresham, when did the Bengals drafted a TE in the 1st round TE?

And prior to drafting Zeitler, when did the Bengals draft an OG in the 1st round?

And prior to 2011/2012 seasons, when did the Bengals go to back-to-back playoffs?

Eventually and hopefully, all statements like yours will end, because they don't reflect the current happenings in the Bengals front office.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-14-2013, 11:21 PM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post
That makes alot of scense until you factor in MB.
The Bengals cut Chris Crocker loose early last year.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-14-2013, 11:31 PM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post
The RB point makes scence but a blocking TE not so much when you have 2 capable on the roster. Makes more scence just to find a solid RT late and get depth at the position rather than TE but hey who knows the team may feel the same as you.
The Bengals technically have 4 TEs on their current roster with 3 traditional TEs (Gresham/Charles/Quinn) and 1 LS hybrid (Bryce Davis).

Drafting Michael Williams accomplishes multiple things.

First, it upgrades Richard Quinn and the overall TE corp.

I still project the Bengals to draft a RT2 in the 6th round. If the Bengals were to get a 5th round compensatory pick, I would be on board with drafting a RT2 with the 5th round comp.

I don't believe that the Bengals activate 9 olinemen on Sunday's anyway. So, the later round RT2 wouldn't be activated on most Sunday's.

But, the Bengals could/would activate Michael Williams to fill the Roland's spot on the 45 man roster.

Collins would still be the 1st Tackle to go on the field in the event of an injury to Whit or Smith.



2 scenarios for 2013 45 man active roster:
  • 3 Tackles (Whit/Smith/Collins) & 3 TEs (Gresham/Charles/Williams)
  • 4 Tackles (Whit/Smith/Collins/Roland) & 2 TEs (Gresham/Charles)
I am going with first option EVERY TIME. Because it provides more depth at TE and a better 3 TE set option than with Roland.

In my view, I can see the Bengals drafting a 1st round OT in the 2015 draft.

Last edited by mulligan; 01-14-2013 at 11:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-14-2013, 11:40 PM
50yarder 50yarder is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 113
Rep Points: 105
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

[quote=mulligan;2778919]
Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post

And prior to drafting Gresham, when did the Bengals drafted a TE in the 1st round TE?

And prior to drafting Zeitler, when did the Bengals draft an OG in the 1st round?

And prior to 2011/2012 seasons, when did the Bengals go to back-to-back playoffs?

Eventually and hopefully, all statements like yours will end, because they don't reflect the current happenings in the Bengals front office.
All those points are very true and things are heading in the right direction. I'm a diehard and a season holder since the Dave Shula era. This team still operates on an absolute need basis so I dont think in my gut that they take a center. Trevor played better than I thought he would and Cook had his moments but his value is knowing this offense inside out now does that make him an all pro no but does are situation at Center require us to take 1 my thinking is no. Heck Id like Barrett as an anchor as well but I just dont see it.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-15-2013, 12:41 AM
arsonist7 arsonist7 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: white oak
Posts: 188
Rep Points: 76
Thumbs up Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

not a fan of reggie bush, he's not good and he would get hammered in the afc north, and terence newman, crocker, and clements need to go, def think it is wise to sign a good FA wide reciever instead of drafting another one, both jones and sanu looked good, trevor robinson played fantastic at center, it wasn't until kyle cook came back that they struggled and when jeff faine was in playing early in the year, biggest needs are lb's that can cover the te's and backs, a good safety, possible DE in draft or sign a decent free agent like avril if we can't retain mj, and then grabbing a good speed back, bernard scott was a waste of a pick, they need to resign gilberry, smith, skuta, huber, one of the kickers, and possibly rey, but he needs to be moved from mlb or from starting, he can't cover at all, but we need to maintain that d-line as a strength, geathers can be let go, so can lawson as well.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-15-2013, 07:14 AM
mulligan mulligan is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 10,473
Rep Points: 6261
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post

All those points are very true and things are heading in the right direction. I'm a diehard and a season holder since the Dave Shula era. This team still operates on an absolute need basis so I dont think in my gut that they take a center. Trevor played better than I thought he would and Cook had his moments but his value is knowing this offense inside out now does that make him an all pro no but does are situation at Center require us to take 1 my thinking is no. Heck Id like Barrett as an anchor as well but I just dont see it.
They are moving away from drafting solely on a needs basis. There is a definite shift towards adding value over necessity.

For example, though the Bengals needed a RB last year, the Bengals drafted Devon Still the 2nd and Brandon Thompson in the 3rd.

These values exceeded the necessity and are a clear reflection that the Bengals are shifting away from "an absolute need basis" approach to the draft. Value can now trump need.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-15-2013, 10:24 AM
JungleRock85's Avatar
JungleRock85 JungleRock85 is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Portsmouth, Ohio
Posts: 1,801
Rep Points: 2268
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50yarder View Post
Where would Jones or Frederick play we have 2 good centers under contract. Ogletree likely won't be there at that point. No need for Micheal Williams we have Roland who does a great job and two great young TE.
I'd prefer Gillislee over Barner a player who actually can run between the tackles and not always self inflicted sweeps.
Do we watch the same games? Roland is terrible everytime he is on the field. If Smith would be injured we would be hurting at RT. We need to add depth to that spot and while Michael Williams does nothing for that a guy like Rick Wagner from Wisconsin could. We could still add Williams or another TE though to this team considering we had a guy named Richard Quinn on the team all season. More depth at both spots in the mid to late rounds is fine with me.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-15-2013, 10:29 AM
OchoCincos's Avatar
OchoCincos OchoCincos is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,084
Rep Points: 2469
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by pulses View Post

It has nothing to do with that. We DONT have 2 good centers NOW that's where U ARE WRONG
YOU ARE WRONG, LEONIDAS! YOU ARE WRONG!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-15-2013, 12:33 PM
pulses pulses is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Southeastern Indiana
Posts: 1,545
Rep Points: 632
Default Re: Mullinan 2013 Mock 2.0 & Beyond

Quote:
Originally Posted by OchoCincos View Post
YOU ARE WRONG, LEONIDAS! YOU ARE WRONG!
well if you think we do you must be smoking whatever he was.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2012 Cincinnati Bengals. All rights reserved. Do not duplicate in any form without permission of the Cincinnati Bengals.