Protect Him or Arm Him?
As the Bengals face the very real possibilty of losing the bulk of their receiving corps to free agency and potential trades -- also, Cedric Benson -- the question is, what should Cincinnati do in the upcoming draft? Do they eschew the skill positions, regardless of who goes where, and focus on building an NFL-quality offensive line in order to protect Carson Palmer or do they go after the Michael Crabtrees and Beanie Wellses of the world?
At first, I was against the idea of drafting Wells (and Crabtree), but the Bengals are facing the potential losses of Ocho Johnson Cinco, Housh and Benson and it got me thinking: Is it better to build a wall around Palmer or give him some weapons to fight with? Personally, I'd like to see the Bengals go after an honest-to-goodness offensive line first. The defense and the skill positions can be addressed in free agency, or, if worse comes to worse, future drafts.
Let's see what you guys say:
0 recs |
12 comments
Comments
I still say
Build the offensive line as much as possible. I mean, it was because of the lack of protection that caused Palmer to miss most of the season and have this.


We also learned that a Palmer-less Bengals offense is the worst offense in the NFL.
OTOH, the point of picking up skill guys is very relevant.
Maybe Kenny Watson can move up to primary back until we address RB after the 2009 season and put our eggs in the basket of our sophomore receivers, along with Holt, Chatman, etc…
Are they great? No, not as we know them right now. However, with Palmer, they could be very serviceable.
Blogger at CincyJungle.com -- SB Nation Cincinnati Bengals blog.
by Kirkendall on Feb 18, 2009 5:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Six votes for skill players...
Hmm…Mike Brown, Katie Blackburn, Troy Blackburn, Paul Brown, Geoff Hobson and who else? ;)
by A Pragmatic Bengals Fan on Feb 18, 2009 7:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
A good O-line can make mediocre skill players look good,
but a Bad O-line can destroy even the most skillful of skill players. Build from the line for the love of God!
"Ryan, Things in here don't react too well to bullets." - Marko Ramius
by TarZander on Feb 18, 2009 7:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Initially...
I had that on the first poll, but I left it off after a few changes. The most important position in the NFL is the quarterback. Protecting one as potentially valuable as Carson should be the priority, IMO. There are a number of good defensive players available in free agency, if they decided to go that route.
by IFChris on Feb 18, 2009 9:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The trouble is...
…that I think Thornton hit the nail on the head in a blog post a couple days ago: you can almost bet on a holdout this year. The proration for signing bonuses has been squeezed (5 years instead of 6) but whoever they take is going to want a deal north of last year’s $50 million. Sure, there are ways to do that, but we all know how the front office feels about contract creativity. So: we draft an OT and then he spends August out of camp, signs somewhere in the last week/final hours, whenever the Bengals finally cave and give him the deal they could have signed him to six weeks before — and now with no time he gets dropped in and it’s “protect Carson!” time. As JT said, good luck with that.
Draft defense. More: draft defensive line, DT or DE. Even if you sign them the day before the season starts, all you have to do is tell them, sic the QB. Worked for Justin Smith.
by BeerRun on Feb 18, 2009 10:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How about "none of the above"
Seriously, does anyone really think they’re going to draft a center or left tackle that will be a great player from day one?
They drafted all those wideouts last year and you can’t blame Fitzpatrick for them not even making the field until the roster got too low.
Hey, I like Beanie Wells, but will he be Adrian Peterson in 2009 without a drastically improved O-Line?
People keep saying that the bengals NEED this position or that. But most of those positions wouldn’t be filled with a 16 game starter with anyone on the board, even if the bengals picked first.
You want an OT, they should find the unpolished phenom and let him sit for a few years behind a veteran free agent.
It looks very likely that the Colts will let Jeff Saturday test the market. With $30mil under the cap don’t you think the bengals could throw him a contract and drastically upgrade the Center Position?
There is one, and only one, player the bengals should draft at 6 if he’s available, and that’s Brian Orakpo. Look at how much the D improved last year, and then think about what it would look like with Rivers healthy and Orakpo as a DE/LB hybrid who not only can speed rush like Freeney, but could pick any one of our linemen up and carry them around like a toy. The man benches 550!
I reject the notion that you’re going to fix the offense with the #6 pick, history just doesn’t bear it out. But a player like orakpo makes a positive impact RIGHT NOW and makes an offense that was “meh, not too bad” in 08 potentially scary as hell in 09.
by Skyhook on Feb 18, 2009 8:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Orakpo
was handled fairly easily by Ohio State and could be a workout wonder. After seeing Josh’s pics in the first reply, how can an offensive not be the first and perhaps only thing you look at in April. And as for the pick, yes, I would expect a top-10 o-lineman to play right away.
Much like you’d expect Orakpo to.
by IFChris on Feb 18, 2009 9:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I prefer Raji...
…but Orapko is fine, too.
by BeerRun on Feb 18, 2009 8:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
They drafted all those wideouts last year and you can’t blame Fitzpatrick for them not even making the field until the roster got too low.
Actually, you can. With Carson under center, those youngsters perhaps inconsistent route running is not such a big deal. Fitz’s presence back there demanded Chad and TJ and discouraged any learning on the job.
That said, even with TJ and, hopefully, Chad gone, the most glaring need remains the O-Line but I think it can be gerrymandered without resorting to our first pick. Apparently, Stacy Andrew’s recovery seems solid and I think he’d actually benefit from a move to guard, opposite Bobbie Williams. If we put Whitworth and Collins at right and left tackles, respectively, a stud center in round two ought to solidify the line and backups could be picked up along the way.
It’s also possible a trade for TJ might be worked in which we receive a center- to Minnesota for Birk, maybe. The important thing, for both TJ and Chad is that we get something for them instead of just letting them walk- okay, Chad can’t walk but you get my point. Much as I’d like to have Maclin- or as a pipedream, Crabtree, defense it is.
by IgnatiusJReilly on Feb 18, 2009 8:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Reason not for defense
Typically, if you look through each draft in the first round, the Bengals would often have a reason for drafting who they did that was more than “best available”. They definitely go after needs, and this team desperately needs an offense that performs better than 32nd.
2003 – Obvious. They needed a quarterback. Carson Palmer available.
2004 – Negotiation leverage against Rudi Johnson, and “future” (laughable, I know)
2005 – Need DE/OLB, mostly a pass rusher
2006-7 – Bengals lack CB depth with guys like Tory James and Deltha O’Neal leaving
2008 – Desperate need for LBs after disastrous injury plagued group and no real foundation pieces
I would be shocked if they went defense having already suffered through an offense that ranked 32nd. Just my two cents.
Blogger at CincyJungle.com -- SB Nation Cincinnati Bengals blog.
by Kirkendall on Feb 18, 2009 8:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
…you just made the case for defense. Why spend the 6 on the O, which obviously needs way more help, versus the D, which actually has a chance to be good?
by BeerRun on Feb 18, 2009 9:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 



















