SB Nation - J.T. O'Sullivan

Presenting the Cincinnati Bengals 53-man Roster; and immediate reaction, of course

Kirkendall — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:30:46 -0000

Now that the cuts are announced, let's make one thing clear. It's very unlikely that this is the final 53-man roster that will kickoff the season next weekend. With players being released and waived, the Bengals, like all other 31 NFL teams can pour over available players. If they decide to put a claim on a player, they will be sixth in line. If the other fives teams decide not to claim the player that the Bengals are interested in, then that player can be signed by the Bengals.

Let's take a look at the existing roster.

Quarterback (3)	Carson Palmer	Defensive Ends (5)	Antwan Odom
	J.T. O'Sullivan		Robert Geathers
	Jordan Palmer		Michael Johnson
			Jonathan Fanene
Running back (4)	Cedric Benson		Frostee Rucker
	Bernard Scott
	Brian Leonard	Defensive Tackles (3)	Domata Peko
	DeDe Dorsey		Pat Sims
			Tank Johnson
Fullbacks (1)	Jeremi Johnson
		Linebackers (6)	Keith Rivers
Tight End (3)	Daniel Coats		Dhani Jones
	Chase Coffman		Rashad Jeanty
	J.P. Foschi		Rey Maualuga
			Brandon Johnson
Wide Receivers (6)	Chad Ochocinco		Abdul Hodge
	Laveranues Coles
	Chris Henry	Cornerbacks (5)	Johnathan Joseph
	Andre Caldwell		Leon Hall
	Jerome Simpson		David Jones
	Quan Cosby		Geoffrey Pope
			Morgan Trent
Offensive Line (10)	Andrew Whitworth
	Anthony Collins	Safeties (5)	Chris Crocker
	Bobbie Williams		Roy Williams
	Nate Livings		Chinedum Ndukwe
	Kyle Cook		Tom Nelson
	Andre Smith *		Kyries Hebert
	Jonathan Luigs
	Scott Kooistra	Special (3)	Shayne Graham
	Evan Mathis		Kevin Huber
	Dennis Roland		Brad St. Louis

* Andre Smith has a roster exemption until September 14.

Immediate Reaction and Notes

We projected that the Bengals would take eight defensive linemen; we split it up four and four. While the Bengals actually did take eight, they went heavy with defensive ends, keeping oft-injured Frostee Rucker. I actually don't have a problem with this because Rucker can make plays. The only issue with him has been durability. If he has an injury-free season, he could be a surprise player. On the other hand, he missed two preseason games this year.
Can the Bengals sustain a three-man defensive tackle rotation? Rucker and Fanene both have experience playing defensive tackle also -- maybe the biggest reason for keeping Rucker.
The more we started thinking about it, we realized the Bengals would take five backs; four of whom could be running backs.
In the weeks leading up to today, I've watched J.P. Foschi and started feeling that the Bengals might keep him around. He's a decent blocker and I feel he could be a decent third-string Tight End in the NFL. However, he could also be babysitting the position if the Bengals sign someone after all of the cuts are final. In our projections, we thought it might make the team better keeping a second fullback than a third Tight End.
Save for Marvin White, all players that were waived -- 17 in all -- are eligible for the practice squad.
Somehow, I'm not surprised that Antonio Chatman went on Injured Reserved.
I thought cutting Darryl Blackstock was somewhat of a surprise. However, he wasn't replaced. The Bengals simply took six linebackers. He would have likely been the seventh.
I was very happy with Abdul Hodge making the team and felt, as we watched preseason unfold, that he was a lock for the sixth linebacker slot.
The Cincinnati Bengals tweet that David Jones and Scott Kooistra are the only players not healthy heading into the opener.

UPDATE: Carson Palmer didn't practice Saturday, Questionable against the St. Louis Rams

Kirkendall — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:44:59 -0000

Even though the Bengals next take the field on Thursday against the St. Louis Rams, Carson Palmer remains questionable. Joe Reedy writes that we "should know more on Palmer after he hits the practice field [later] this afternoon." [UPDATE: The Bengals tweet that Palmer didn't dress for practice on Saturday]

Palmer's absence Thursday allowed J.T. O'Sullivan to showcase his own talents with the first team. For the most part, he didn't make mistakes and late in the first half, he made a perfect throw to Chris Henry, which eventually won the game, in the face of an eight-man rush.

As this pace, O'Sullivan is the Cincinnati Bengals backup quarterback. It would take a disaster through the remaining two preseason games, as well as near perfection by Jordan Palmer, to shake up the depth chart. With that thought in mind, let's compare the numbers between O'Sullivan and Fitzpatrick through the first two games.

Quarterback comparison through two games.

Season	Quarterback	QB Rating	Comp.	Yards	TDs	INTs	Sacks
2009	J.T. O'Sullivan	136.3	79.2%	241	2	0	4
2008	Ryan Fitzpatrick	109.0	73.9%	170	1	0	2

Is the question about the Bengals backup quarterback answered?

Kirkendall — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 03:18:34 -0000

More photos » by Michael Dwyer - AP

2 months ago: Cincinnati Bengals quarterback J.T. O'Sullivan (4) hands off the ball in the first quarter of an NFL preseason football game against the New England Patriots, Thursday, Aug. 20, 2009, in Foxborough, Mass. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

Browse more photos »

During Training Camp, we kept hearing and reading stories that Jordan Palmer was impressive enough that conversation started warming up about the backup quarterback position. While Jordan was impressive, J.T. O'Sullivan was spotty and inconsistent. Clearly it was a growing question in coaches' minds, allowing Jordan to take snaps with the first team offense Thursday night against the New England Patriots -- on his first pass of the game, Jordan completed a 35-yard pass to Chad Ochocinco Johnson, who shaked off a tackle and outran linebacker Tedy Bruschi down the left sidelines.

Here's the most simple of stats to show who's leading the edge in the battle. The Bengals have scored only 14 points this preseason. Twelve of those points came from O'Sullivan's arm, who has yet to throw a pick, sporting a 136.3 passer rating. (Note, twelve of those points have also come from the hands of Chris Henry.) Much of O'Sullivan's performance against the Saints is a mixture of first and second team defensive players. On Thursday, arguably against a better defense, O'Sullivan was even better, in terms of passer rating.

	Comp	Att	PCT	Yards	TD	INT	Rating
@ New Orleans	9	11	81.8	100	1	0	134.8
@ New England	10	13	76.9	141	1	0	137.0
Total	19	24	79.2	241	2	0	136.3

In fairness to Jordan Palmer, against the Patriots, the Bengals clearly decided to rush the ball in a three-to-one rush-to-pass ratio with only four pass attempts in the fourth quarter.

	Comp	Att	PCT	Yards	TD	INT	Rating
@ New Orleans	7	11	63.6	59	0	1	39.6
@ New England	2	7	28.6	45	0	0	53.9
Total	9	18	50.0	104	0	1	44.7

While you could call foul on Palmer's playing time, you can't fault the way O'Sullivan is passing the football. Is he worth the topic of conversation of the team's starting quarterback? C'mon. You know me way better than that. I'm the guy that calls Carson Palmer "God of the Golden Arm." But is he, through the first two preseason games, clearly the choice as the team's backup quarterback? Yea.

The plight of backup Bengals quarterbacks; Fitzpatrick is falling, O'Sullivan isn't forgotten by 49ers fans

Kirkendall — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:22:21 -0000

More photos » by David Duprey - AP

3 months ago: Buffalo Bills' Ryan Fitzpatrick (14) signals during the NFL football team's training camp at St. John Fisher College in Pittsford, N.Y., Monday, July 27, 2009. (AP Photo/ David Duprey)

Browse more photos »

Apparently the Bills aren't blown away with Ryan Fitzpatrick's performances at this point in Buffalo. NFL.com's Jason LaCanfora writes that the "Bills have been sniffing around on back-up quarterbacks." What does that mean for Ryan Fitzpatrick, who completed six of 11 passes for 61 yards passing during Hall of Fame weekend? The Bills don't have that warm feeling trickling down their leg and Fitzpatrick might be in trouble. Bills fans agree.

When Fitzpatrick left Cincinnati, where he was assured the backup job, for Buffalo, where it sounds like he could be a third-string quarterback (or simply unemployed), the Bengals went out and signed... J.T. O'Sullivan. And early reports indicate that O'Sullivan is being outperformed by Carson's Mini-Me, Jordan. Furthermore, fans in San Francisco are still struggling to get the taste that O'Sullivan left out of their mouths.

Game after game we would witness our 49ers throw away games as J.T.O. AKA Just Turn Overs, Just Terrible O'Sullivan, Just Take (him) Out, etc, would seemingly gift-wrap the ball and present it as a present to opponents time and time again. In the two wins he was leading the offense for (@ Seattle and vs. Detroit), he had 3 TDs and zero [interceptions]. It was the losses that killed him/us. In the six losses where he was at QB, he had 5 touchdowns, 11 interceptions, and 11 fumbles, six of them lost to the defense, resulting in a grand TD to INT ratio of 5:17, or 3.4 turnovers for every one touchdown thrown.

Well then. Our starting quarterback last year might lose his backup job in Buffalo. Our backup quarterback this year, and his bloodline two generations removed, is banned for life in San Francisco. Michael Vick anyone? (I am totally, totally, totally kidding!).

Bengals Training Camp: The Position without Competition

Kirkendall — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 15:27:09 -0000

More photos » by Tom Uhlman - AP

4 months ago: Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Carson Palmer, left, takes a snap during a play with his brother Jordan Palmer throwing behind him during football practice in Cincinnati, Thrusday, June 18, 2009. (AP Photo/Tom Uhlman)

Browse more photos »

If the Bengals have any position that won't bring a collection of suspects that vie for position, it's quarterback. In fact, one has to even wonder why you'd even need to talk about it. No one will unseat Carson Palmer. Over the offseason, the Bengals signed free agent J.T. O'Sullivan and of the 12 attempted passes in Jordan Palmer's career, two were intercepted -- of Palmer's seven career completions, the longest gained 13 yards. So really, what could we possibly say right now that we don't already know about quarterbacks in Training Camp?

That's not to say that there's no story line here. That, of course, isn't true. In fact, one of the team's larger story lines heading into Training Camp is Carson Palmer's return. Like heading into the 2006 Training Camp, this year we're wondering: How has Palmer recovered and will he return to Pro Bowl form? This, of course, also integrates a separate storyline that we'll examine later. The rebuilding project of the Bengals offensive line. If that project yields bad results, then it won't matter who's at quarterback.

	Quarterback
1	Carson Palmer
2	J.T. O'Sullivan
3	Jordan Palmer

A Cathartic Release of Tension: &%$# YOU JTO!

ProfessorBigelow — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:09:26 -0000

Ask, and ye shall receive, schlecko...

This is an idea straight from the Story Ideas Open Thread, one that I really enjoyed, and decided to turn into a front-page story. This, as the title insists, is a cathartic release of tension over the first half of the 2008 San Francisco 49ers season. More specifically, this is for you, the Niners Nation, to get your frustration out about this man, J.T. O'Sullivan...

via media.sacbee.com

This past season the San Francisco 49ers employed a quarterback by the name of John Thomas (or J.T.) O'Sullivan, a journeyman QB than had made eight stops at seven different NFL franchises along the way to the bay (Saints, Packers, Bears, Vikings, Patriots, Panthers, Bears again, and Lions).

Brought in as a QB familiar with new offensive coordinator Mike Martz's complicated-as-[site decorum] offensive scheme, J.T. was signed to a one-year contract on February 29th, 2008. At first, he was not expected to compete for the starting QB job. However, as the season progressed, we found out that J.T. had grasped Martz's offensive game plan quicker than the other QBs on the roster (being familiar with it from his stint with the Lions), and on August 22nd, 2008, then head coach Mike Nolan announced that J.T. had moved up the depth chart to the number 1 QB.

And then it happened...

Game after game we would witness our 49ers throw away games as J.T.O. AKA Just Turn Overs, Just Terrible O'Sullivan, Just Take (him) Out, etc, would seemingly gift-wrap the ball and present it as a present to opponents time and time again. In the two wins he was leading the offense for (@ Seattle and vs. Detroit), he had 3 TDs and zero intereceptions. It was the losses that killed him/us. In the six losses where he was at QB, he had 5 touchdowns, 11 interceptions, and 11 fumbles, six of them lost to the defense, resulting in a grand TD to INT ratio of 5:17, or 3.4 turnovers for every one touchdown thrown.

We all know what happened after that. Mike Nolan was fired after a loss to the NY Giants (it hurt, I was there) and Mike Singletary was named interim Head Coach. After JTO's week 8 debacle against Seattle (Fearless Leader's first game as a Head Coach) J.T. was benched for the remainder of the season, and Shaun Hill became QB of the 49ers, turning them around from 2-6 to 7-9 (that's a 5-3 tenure as starting QB there folks) where he had a 13:8 TD:INT ratio, be it not for that god-forsaken run up the middle on MNF by Michael Robinson vs the Cardinals, Hill might have led us to the playoffs (I can't believe it still hurts)...

Now, why did I give this outline of pain and anguish from last season? Because it is time to let it all out folks. Consider this your "I hate you J.T. O'Sullivan" thread. Vent your anguish over the last season, over how crappy JTO was, over how things could have been different if J.T. didn't hand other teams games. I understand there are people out there, such as Fooch, that are happy JTO came along. Without him, Sing would not be head coach, Martz and Nolan might still be in town, Hill might not be QB now, we might not have gotten Crabtree, whatever; I understand, and agree, with some of those positions. If that be the case for you, maybe you might want to skip this thread. For those still hurting from last season, you've come to the right place. Guys, let it out all at once, and lets move on.

I am going to make a rare exception to the rules here, and I'm going to put it in bold letters so everyone knows how super serial I am about this:

FOR THIS THREAD, AND THIS THREAD ONLY, I WILL ALLOW CURSING, SWEARING, AND AWFUL, AWFUL LANGUAGE. IF YOU ARE NOT OK WITH FOUL LANGUAGE, AVOID THIS THREAD LIKE THE PLAGUE. I REPEAT: FOR THIS THREAD, AND THIS THREAD ONLY, FOUL LANGUAGE IS ALLOWED ACROSS THE BOARD!!!

To set the stage for this abuse, I have a few clips for you guys to remind you how awful it was with J.T. at the helm of the team. We have Week 4 vs the Saints, Week 5 vs the Patriots (a game we DEFINATELY could have won), and his last game, Week 7 vs the Giants. Sorry...

Poll

How much do you hate J.T. O'Sullivan?

Not at all

170 votes

A little

65 votes

Somewhat

91 votes

A Lot

97 votes

I just mailed him a package full of my own poo

172 votes

595 votes | Poll has closed

Shallow Thoughts & Nearsighted Observations

Ted Bartlett — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 12:30:17 -0000

Happy Monday, fellow MHR community members. It's time for another version of ST&NO. We're getting to the part of the offseason where I am really starting to long for the preseason to start. When you get your information from your eyes, your eyes start to miss having anything to look at. Here's hoping the next 8 weeks goes by quickly.

Today, we'll look at the AFC North, since the Broncos will play all 4 teams this season. We'll also talk about some of the few headlines around the league, and maybe talk a little Brandon Marshall. It will make you laugh, it will make you cry (if it is your wont to cry over weird things.) It will be shallow, and narrow. Ready.... BEGIN!!!

1. As previously mentioned, our around-the-league discussion turns to the AFC North this week. As I live in the first suburb west of Cleveland, I get a fair amount of exposure to the division, so, hopefully that helps me with this 8-week road show I am on. See you after the jump.

a. Pittsburgh Steelers (2008 Record 12-4, Won Super Bowl)

Smart Personnel Moves - Kraig Urbik, a 3rd round choice from Wisconsin, has a chance to start at Guard on the Steelers' terrible offensive line. He is a big, physical run-blocker, who fits the personality of the team. I think Ziggy Hood is a good 4-3 DT, but I have my doubts about him as a 5-technique DE in the Steelers' style of 3-4. Giving Kevin Colbert the benefit of the doubt, and assuming Hood's skill set translates well, he'll probably be a rotation contributor as a rookie. Shaun McDonald is an average slot WR, which is better than the Steelers have had in that role lately.

Questionable Personnel Moves - Not that Marvel Smith is a great player, because he isn't, but I don't see how you let him leave when your offensive line is already one of the worst in the NFL. Max Starks sure isn't the answer on a 1-year, $8.5 million deal. I'm also not Bryant McFadden's biggest fan, but he'll also be somewhat challenging to replace. I didn't really care for the rest of Pittsburgh's draft, but they have to hope that either Joe Burnett or Keenan Lewis can contribute at CB as rookies. I am also not sold on the full-time promotion of Lawrence Timmons or the release of Larry Foote. Truth be told, I almost never like Pittsburgh's offseasons, so take it for what it's worth.

ST&NO Outlook - The Steelers will do what they have been doing for 35 years. They'll run the ball, stop the run, and pressure opposing QBs. Their potential for improvement comes from Rashard Mendenhall and Limas Sweed, their top 2 picks in 2008, who gave the team virtually nothing as rookies. Both are talented, and if they develop their skills, could add new dimensions to the Steelers' offense.

This team will have to keep Ben Roethlisberger healthy, which I expect they'll have some trouble doing. Their line (Did you hear? It's awful) really struggles in pass protection, and I don't expect the arrival of Urbik to substantially change that. The defense should again be good in the front 7, but I expect that a team which can pass-protect, like the Broncos, will be able to accomplish some things against their below-average secondary.

The Steelers will again be in the mix to play in another Super Bowl, but I expect them to take a half-step backwards from last season.

b. Baltimore Ravens (2008 Record 11-5, Lost in Divisional Playoffs)

Smart Personnel Moves - I like virtually their entire draft, which is typical for them. Michael Oher is a big-time talent, and I think he will eventually move Jared Gaither to RT, where he really belongs. Paul Kruger is a high-motor pass rusher, and a favorite of mine. I expect him to compete for snaps right away. Jason Phillips was an undervalued ILB from Texas Christian, and represented good value in the 5th round. I expect him to help make up for the loss of Bart Scott. On the free agency front, I liked the low-dollar signings of CB-RS Chris Carr and TE L.J. Smith, and I think both can make the team and contribute. The Ravens had to re-sign Ray Lewis, and did it eventually.

Questionable Personnel Moves - They lost the talent exchange huge in signing C Matt Birk, and letting Jason Brown leave as a UFA. Brown is a mauler, who fit the Ravens' style, and Birk is totally a finesse guy. Domonique Foxworth is a great guy, and an average CB, and there's no way he warranted a 4-year, $28 million contract. He can't replace Chris McAllister, who was cut in a somewhat weird salary dump. I also would take Jim Leonhard over Dawan Landry any day, and I think the Ravens should have tried harder to retain Leonhard.

ST&NO Outlook - I believe that the Ravens overachieved in 2008, and I expect them to take a step backwards to 8-8 or 9-7 this season. I didn't address the loss of Bart Scott in either of the two categories above, but I think it will hurt the interior of the defense. I also think the only above-average player in the secondary now is Ed Reed, and that portends for trouble. I do like the promotion of Greg Mattison to defensive coordinator. He worked as co-Defensive Coordinator at the University of Florida for 3 years, which is how I came to be familiar with him.

On offense, Joe Flacco had a very nice rookie season, and I'll be interested to see what kind of improvement he experiences in his second year. The offense isn't great, and if the defense isn't dominant, it would be hard to imagine them having a lot of comeback ability. That's the scenario which I envision for the Ravens in 2009. They'll be well-coached, but a little short on talent.

c. Cincinnati Bengals (2008 Record 4-11-1, Missed Playoffs)

Smart Personnel Moves - In the draft, I really liked the selection of TE Chase Coffman from Missouri. I think he will grow to become their best pass-catcher at TE since Dan Ross in the 1980s. On talent, you have to like T Andre Smith, ILB Rey Maualuga, and DE Michael Johnson, but all three are considered major threats to underachieve. Since we're in benefit-of-the-doubt mode, we'll just focus on the talent for now. In my opinion, Laveranues Coles is a more threatening player than the departed T.J. Houshmandzadeh, and they got him for less than Who's-your-mama cost Seattle. I liked the trade for RB Brian Leonard, which fell a little under the radar. He has some similarities to Peyton Hillis, that I think Bengals fans will enjoy. They also paid reasonable money (2 years, $7 million) for Cedric Benson, who really played pretty well for them last season.

Questionable Personnel Moves - I would have moved WR Chad Ochocinco out of town, and not thought twice about it. With the signing of Coles, and the high draft picks spent on Jerome Simpson and Andre Caldwell last season, Ocho isn't worth the headache that you know he is going to be. I think J.T. O'Sullivan is a big downgrade from Ryan Fitzpatrick as a backup QB, which I guess reminds you how little I think of J.T. S Roy Williams is not the answer for the Bengals secondary. He ought to just move to WLB, where he may actually be able to be a good player.

ST&NO Outlook -The Bengals are likely to struggle again in 2008. The main reason they have been so consistently bad is their cheap approach to business. Their coaches are all low-paid relative to their peers, and you don't get quality that way. The team should have fired Marvin Lewis two years ago, but money seems to have prevented that. The Bengals spend by far the least money on scouting, and they rely very heavily on The National service for their evaluations.

Offensively, the key variable is Carson Palmer. I believe that he has never been the same player since that catastrophic knee injury in the 2006 playoff game. Now, he is coming off a serious elbow injury, and he chose not to have Tommy John surgery for it. I am not terribly optimistic for him, or the Bengals' offense.

The defense will be bad against the pass, but could improve against the run, if Keith Rivers returns from injury well, and Rey Maualuga is able to help some against base personnel packages on first and second down. The Bengals need better play out of Johnathan Joseph and Leon Hall at CB, as both were first-round picks.

c. Cleveland Browns (2008 Record 4-12, Missed Playoffs)

Smart Personnel Moves - Their best moves were non-moves. It was the right thing to do in holding on to Brady Quinn and Braylon Edwards. People here in Cleveland are down on Edwards, but if he plays better, that will be a distant memory. Fan attitudes in Cleveland change like the weather. I liked the acquisition of DE Kenyon Coleman, S Abram Elam, and QB Brett Ratliff in the trade for the #5 overall pick. Regular readers will note that I don't like top-10 picks, but Coleman and Elam are likely to start, and I think Ratliff will end up backing up Quinn. Brian Robiskie will be a good possession WR, even if the Browns over-drafted him. I really liked the acquisition of Mike Furrey in free agency. He is one of the best slot guys in the NFL when he is used correctly.

Questionable Personnel Moves - I didn't care for the Alex Mack pick on a couple of levels. I like Eric Wood better, but that's a difference of opinion. Really, though, the Browns needed to take Chris Wells or Donald Brown. The Browns' RB situation is abysmal, and it's hard to have an identity as a running team, without the horses to do it. Kevin Shaffer was lousy at RT, but John St. Clair is worse, so I don't see how you let Shaffer go. Sean Jones should have also been re-signed. In the draft, I was not a lover of the Mohammed Massaquoi pick. I have seen him a lot, and he is just a guy.

ST&NO Outlook - I think the Browns are on the right track, generally. If any team needs a coach to ignore the howls of the local radio idiots and their un-knowledgeable callers, it's the Browns. Eric Mangini is the embodiment of the guy who doesn't care what Mike Trivisonno thinks about anything. You hear about stuff like the rookies taking a bus trip, and coaches working until midnight, but I tend to think Mangini's prickliness is OK, because he knows how to build a program. He was on the way in New York, and he got hamstrung by the Favre expectations, and then lost his job when it didn't work out.

I am nearly certain that Brady Quinn will win the starting QB job. He is very technically sound, and he processes the game really quickly and decisively, which is the opposite of Derek Anderson. The left side of the O-Line is very good, although there are odd rumors that Eric Steinbach is out of favor, as noted in this space last week. I think that Jamal Lewis is washed-up, and that rookie James Davis may beat him out for a lot of carries.

The defense is kind of a disaster story. NT Shaun Rogers is outstanding, and I have always liked CB Brandon McDonald (who was the burnee on Eddie Royal's 93-yard TD last season.) Beyond that, I am not too fond of anybody on their defensive unit. Eric Wright has talent, and may improve, and Kamerion Wimbley could be good if he ever learned to do anything more than speed rush.

We'll see the Browns in Week 2, but they are at least one draft away from being very scary. I'd rather be them than the Bengals, though.

2. I think it is absurd that Brandon Marshall may face additional discipline if he is convicted in the Watley case, which has now been postponed until August. It seems to me that the NFL is having it two ways, and that it's unfair. Think about it like this. In the Paul Tagliabue days, the League always waited until after legal matters were resolved to levy punishments. Roger Goodell has asserted his right to rule before legal matters are finalized, and in fact, it seems that that is standard practice.

So, when Marshall was suspended last year, for getting arrested a few times, it seemed that that penalty encompassed this allegation, as well as all of Brandon's past transgressions. That the NFL is saying they can still penalize Brandon for the known allegation would not be fair. Guru said that he speculated the NFL's position to be maintenance of flexibility in the event that new allegations emerge in this trial, which would be slightly more understandable. My position is that the underlying allegation has been penalized, and that the NFL should stop saber-rattling, and do nothing further. I would say that even if we were talking about Philip Rivers.

3. Brett Favre had surgery to fix his shoulder. Good times, huh? It looks like he'll be a Viking this season. It says here that Brett will not deliver a championship for them, and that they'll struggle to even make the playoffs with him in the lineup. He is a chemistry killer at this point in his career.

4. I liked what I heard from Josh McDaniels about how he planned to use Peyton Hillis this season. I think any smart coach would look for ways to use a guy like Peyton, in both the running and passing games.

5. Coming back to Marshall, I don't think that there is very much substance to this business about him holding out for more money. It is just the kind of thing that a Pork Chop or one of his ilk will try to make a big deal about, to fill some space. While I am sure that Marshall would like more money, it's not a big deal until he starts skipping mandatory events.

6. Mike Lombardi had an interesting nugget in his Sunday at the Post column.

Word I hear out of Denver is that the Broncos are very happy with both quarterbacks. However; Kyle Orton should be the starter when the season starts. Chris Simms is getting better with each practice, speeding his game up and making decisions faster. But Orton still has the upper hand.

My goodness, two QBs who can play? Who saw that coming? How could a team be happy about Orton and Simms?

With a slow news week comes a short list. We'll see you next week, for more ST&NO. We'll talk about the AFC East, and anything that may come up this week.

Poll

Who will win the AFC North this season?

Pittsburgh Steelers

439 votes

Baltimore Ravens

100 votes

Cincinnati Bengals

15 votes

Cleveland Browns

14 votes

568 votes | Poll has closed

Optimism and the 2009 San Francisco 49ers: Will They Make the Quantum Leap?

Florida Danny — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 16:50:43 -0000

AUTHOR'S NOTE: I haven't posted in over a month, and we have a fair amount of newcomers to Niners Nation, so I figure a quick (re)introduction is in order. As you can see, my name's Danny. I'm currently getting my PhD in sport psychology at the University of Florida (but actually reside in Fort Lauderdale, FL...don't ask). I've been a 49er fan since the team's Super Bowl XIX victory over the hometown Dolphins on my 7^th birthday in 1985. My job title on Niners Nation is "Resident Stats Nerd" or something to that effect. During the season, I do a statistical preview and review of each 49ers' game. In addition to these game-specific posts, I also write up general stat-based articles on 49er-related news of the moment. You can find my previous posts here. Hopefully, you enjoy reading my articles, or, at the very least, learn something 49er-related from them. Two warnings, though: (1) My articles tend to be on the longish side; and (2) I fully realize that stats can only go so far in explaining and predicting football performance. If you don't like what the stats seem to suggest, feel free to ignore them. Oh, and one last thing...I mostly rely on defense-adjusted value over average (DVOA) and other alternative statistics developed by Football Outsiders (FO) because they're the best measures of NFL performance currently available to the public. For an explanation of FO's stats, see here.

For the second time in 3 years, there's a good bit of optimism surrounding our beloved 49ers (not here, of course). Many fans (including this one) feel a real sense that 2009 will be the season that ends SF's 6-year playoff drought. The reasons for such optimism are numerous. First, there's the whole, "they finally have a competent head coach" thing. Second, there's the fact that they finally have a real WR corps (thank you Al Davis). Third, they actually seem to be - gasp - tailoring their offensive and defensive schemes around the players' strengths and weaknesses. Fourth, rather than just putting up a words-not-deeds-style banner, they've actually enumerated a "Formula for Success" that tells players and fans exactly how the team plans to "Win the West."

So the 49ers' goal this upcoming season - in the minds of players, coaches, and fans alike - is to make the playoffs. As ARI showed last season - and as PIT showed in 2005 - anything can happen once a team gets in the postseason tourney. In this article, I'm going to address the general question, "Is our optimism justified from a statistical perspective?" More specifically, I'm going to look at the major statistical characteristics of teams that make the quantum leap into playoff participation from one season to the next, and evaluate whether or not the 2009 49ers appear to fit the profile.

After the jump, I'll try to stay optimistic...

IDENTIFYING GROUPS

In the current NFL, there are two groups of teams each season: A group of 12 who make the playoffs and a group of 20 who don't. But what happens to these teams the following season? Do the teams who make the playoffs one season, follow it up with another playoff appearance the next? Conversely, do the teams who miss the playoffs one season, follow it up with another January chock-full of tee times? If we take into account each team's playoff status in Season A, as well as its playoff status the next season, Season B, then we get 4 groups of teams:

Repeaters - teams that made the playoffs in Seasons A and B.
Fallers - teams that missed the playoffs in Season B after making them in Season A.
Leapers - teams that made the playoffs in Season B after missing them in Season A.
No-Shows - teams that missed the playoffs in Seasons A and B.

Using this categorization, there have been 39 Repeaters, 45 Fallers, 45 Leapers, and 94 No-Shows since 2002 (The 2002 Texans aren't included because they didn't play in 2001). As Don Banks of SI noted, these totals indicate that about 6 teams per season make the quantum leap into playoff participation. Based on the fact that the 2008 49ers didn't make the playoffs, this season's incarnation has the potential to be one of these Leapers. Of course, they also have the potential to be a No-Show. Therefore, it's useful to identify what differentiates these two groups. In other words, what changes occur from one season to the next that distinguish teams who make the playoff leap from those who have consecutive seasons ending in Week 17?

Obviously, there are a whole host of usual suspects here. Perhaps the Leapers change coaches, perhaps the Leapers change QBs, perhaps the Leapers get substantially better on offense and/or defense, or perhaps the Leapers simply end up with an easier schedule than the one they played the previous season. Not coincidentally, these are exactly the factors I'll be looking at for the rest of this artricle.

HEAD COACHING CHANGES

It's not news to anyone that the Niners' head coach in Week 1 of this upcoming season will be different from the dapper fellow who manned the sidelines in Week 1 of 2008. In my statistical world, that qualifies as a coaching change. We can quibble about how Mike Singletary was a mid-season replacement last season, but the value of a full offseason and maximum flexibility over assistant coach hires can't be overstated.

Since 2002, 36 of the 139 non-playoff teams had a new head coach in Week 1 of the following season. Not surprisingly, these 36 teams were generally the worst of the worst before the coaching change, especially when it came to passing offense. Specifically, among these 139 non-playoff teams, the 36 teams that changed head coaches averaged about 2 fewer wins (4.8 vs. 6.6), and had an average pass offense DVOA* ranking 4 spots lower, than the 103 non-playoff teams that didn't change coaches. So lesson #1 is that, for the most part, non-playoff teams change head coaches when they (a) suck reeeeeeeeally bad, and (b) can't pass the ball to save their lives. Looks like the Niners were a year late on firing Mike Nolan after all.

So how have these coach-changers fared in the season after making the switch? Well, 10 of the 36, or 27.8%, made the playoffs the next season. Three examples that fit the bill in 2008 were the Dolphins, Falcons, and Ravens. Considering that these new head coaches were taking the helm of sinking ships, these seem like Jack Sparrow-esque performances (without the grog-induced slurred speech). However, to get a valid read on this "leap rate," we need to compare it to the performance of the 103 non-playoff teams who didn't change coaches. In other words, how much did a coaching change matter among non-playoff teams?

It turns out not all that much. The leap rate for coach-keepers was 34.0%, or 35 out of 103. The 6.2% leap rate difference between the coach-changers and the coach-keepers is not even close to being statistically significant, which means that the coaching change had no meaningful impact on making the playoff leap above and beyond what would have been expected from dumb luck. Basically, about 30% of non-playoff teams have made the playoff leap the following season regardless of whether they changed coaches or not, a percentage that corresponds perfectly with the average playoff turnover of about 6 teams per season (i.e., 6 out of 20 is 30%).

Obviously, each specific coaching change occurs in its own context, and the move from Nolan to Singletary is no exception. All the stats tell us here is that, based on the last 7 years of the NFL, our optimism about a 49er playoff appearance in 2009 should not rest on the shoulders of Samurai Mike.

QUARTERBACK CHANGES

Another major change (for the better) this offseason has been the jettisoning of J.T. O'Mulligan as the 49ers' Week 1 starting QB. As was the case with the coaching change, a full offseason of first team reps in OTAs and training camp trumps "he actually became the starter last season" when it comes to classifying "Shaun Hill, 2009 Week 1 starter" as a QB change. Also, in figuring out the "starter" for a given team in a given season, the preferred measure is whether or not he started a majority of the team's 16 games. When there's no majority, the tiebreaker goes to the QB who was the originally designated starter that season. As this relates to the 49ers, neither Shaun Hill (8 starts) nor O'Mulligan (8 starts) reached the 9-start threshold. Therefore, I gave O'Mulligan the "2008 SF starter" classification because he was the originally designated starter last year, and classified "Shaun Hill, 2009 Week 1 starter" as a QB change because, well, he's not O'Mulligan (thankfully).

Since 2002, a whopping 75 of the 139 non-playoff teams had a different starting QB the next season. Not surprisingly, the non-playoff teams that made a QB change were coming off a particularly offensive season on offense (pun intended) when compared with non-playoff teams that didn't end up changing QBs. Specifically, the QB-changers ranked, on average, 5 spots lower than QB-keepers in offense DVOA. What might come as a surprise to some is that these QB-changers were statistically significantly worse in both pass and rush offense. What this says to me is that non-playoff teams change QBs when they experience systematic offensive ineptitude, not necessarily when the passing game is all that's rotten.

So has a QB change made any difference when it comes to non-playoff teams making the quantum leap? Surprisingly, no. Although Chad Pennington, Matt Ryan, and Joe Flacco brought sexy back for their teams in 2008, the last 7 years of NFL football seem to suggest that these were exceptions rather than the rule. That's because, as was the case with coaching changes, about 30% of non-playoff teams made the quantum leap a year later regardless of whether they changed QBs (33.3%) or not (31.2%).

Now, you might be saying, "Danny, not all QB changes are created equally!" You'd be right, so I classified QB changes into 4 groups based on the type of change. Based on this classification, 50 of the 75 non-playoff QB-changers simply got rid of the previous year's starter in favor of a new one (See "2008 New York Jets"), 11 had to replace their previous year's starter due to a major injury (See "2008 Detroit Lions"), 9 benched their previous year's starter in favor of his backup (See "2008 Minnesota Vikings"), and 5 had an established starter return from major injury to reclaim his earlier role (See "2008 Carolina Panthers"). For our purposes, the move from O'Mulligan to Shaun Hill qualifies as your run-of-the-mill "kick ‘em to the curb" type of QB change.

So is there an impact if we look at type of QB change? Once again, the answer is no, at least in terms of statistical significance. However, it's of practical importance to note that the "kick ‘em to the curb" club, which the 2009 49ers will become a member of in September, actually had the worst leap rate of the 4 types (28.0%). Therefore, taken together, the stats I've presented in this section seem to suggest that our optimism about a 49er playoff appearance in 2009 should not necessarily rest on the shoulders of Shaun Hill. You'll see in a moment why I've thrown that "necessarily" in there.

The next two potential differences between Leapers and No-Shows have to do with changes on the field; namely, offensive and defensive performance. I'll tackle offense in the next section (pun intended), and then attack the defense in the section after that (pun also intended).

OFFENSIVE PERFORMANCE CHANGES

So far, I'm probably raining on your playoff parade. Don't fret. Stick with me here. I promise the clouds are going to part very shortly...OK, how about right now?

It shouldn't come as a shock that, since 2002, the 140 non-playoff teams have been worse on offense than their 84 playoff-bound counterparts. Here's a table showing statistically significant differences with respect to offense DVOA:

Category	Playoff Teams	Non-Playoff Teams	Difference
Avg. Pass Offense DVOA	17.1%	-6.0%	23.1%
Avg. Rush Offense DVOA	3.0%	-5.5%	8.5%
Avg. Offense DVOA	10.4%	-5.5%	15.9%

Obviously, playoff teams have been better on offense than non-playoff teams. However, breaking down offensive performance into passing and rushing, the stats suggest that the vast majority of the difference between these two groups is in the passing game. Given that playoff teams are better in the passing game, it stands to reason that the main offensive avenue through which a non-playoff team makes the quantum leap is by vastly improving its aerial attack the next season. To investigate this, let's only focus on non-playoff teams, and examine differences between Leapers and No-Shows with respect to how their respective offensive stats change from Season A to Season B. Here are the relevant stats:

Category	Leapers	No-Shows	Difference
Avg. Pass Offense DVOA Improvement in Season B	+15.8%	+0.5%	15.3%
Avg. Rush Offense DVOA Improvement in Season B	+5.4%	+1.7%	3.7%
Avg. Offense DVOA Improvement in Season B	+10.7%	+1.0%	9.7%

Although the average non-playoff team has improved on offense the following season, those that go from playoff spectator one season to playoff participant the next season (i.e., Leapers) improve almost 11 times more. Furthermore, the vast majority of offensive improvement occurs - as expected - in the passing game. If we compare the differences in pass offense and rush offense improvement, we can conclude the following: If a non-playoff team hopes to make a quantum leap the following season, it's somewhere around 4 times more important for that team to improve its pass offense than its rush offense.

Relating these stats back to the 49ers, their pass offense DVOA last season was a pathetic -18.5%. The average improvement for Leapers, as shown in the table, has been 15.8%. So in order for us to get optimistic about a Niner playoff berth in 2009, we have to ask ourselves, "Do I think the 49ers' passing offense is going to be about as good as the league average (i.e., approximately 0.0%) next season?"

At the moment, I tend to believe that the answer to this question is yes. First, there's the "look what I found" addition of Michael Crabtree. Second, there's the maturation of Jason Hill and Josh Morgan. Third, there's the apparent (and much-needed) change in VD's role. Fourth, there's the return to a run-based offense, which is likely to help the passing game by proxy. Finally, and most importantly, there's the simple fact that the Niners' pass offense DVOA was about 30% better with Shaun Hill starting the final 8 games of 2008.

In total, then, based on the last 7 years of the NFL, our optimism about a 49er playoff appearance in 2009 might indeed rest on the shoulders of Shaun Hill after all. At the very least, it rests on the shoulders of Hill and his WRs.

DEFENSIVE PERFORMANCE CHANGES

As was the case on offense, playoff teams since 2002 have been better on defense than non-playoff teams (Remember, negative DVOA numbers on defense indicate above average performance):

Category	Playoff Teams	Non-Playoff Teams	Difference
Avg. Pass Defense DVOA	-4.8%	7.9%	12.7%
Avg. Rush Defense DVOA	-5.9%	-0.1%	5.8%
Avg. Defense DVOA	-5.3%	4.1%	9.4%

Again, we see here that the passing game - this time on defense - is primarily what separates playoff and non-playoff teams. It stands to reason, then, that, if we focus on the non-playoff teams, Leapers tend to improve their pass defense considerably in Season B, right? Here are the relevant stats (for the sake of clarity, I've made it so that plus signs indicate improvement):

Category	Leapers	No-Shows	Difference
Avg. Pass Defense DVOA Improvement in Season B	+8.2%	-1.5%	9.7%
Avg. Rush Defense DVOA Improvement in Season B	+3.8%	-1.1%	4.9%
Avg. Defense DVOA Improvement in Season B	+6.3%	-1.4%	7.7%

As expected, Leapers improve all aspects of their defense, while No-Shows don't improve any aspects of theirs. Also as expected, the majority of the difference in season-to-season defense DVOA change is in the passing game. The conclusion here is that it's about twice as important for a non-playoff team to improve its pass defense as it is for them to improve their rush defense.

Going back to the 49ers, their pass defense DVOA in 2008 was ranked 20^th at 15.7%. The average improvement for Leapers, as shown in the table, has been 8.2%. So, if we want to determine an appropriate level of optimism, the question becomes, "Do I think the 2009 49ers' pass defense will be half as bad as it was in 2008?"

This one's a little tougher to answer. On the positive side, there's the "it's about freaking time" demotion of Mark Roman, the apparent (and much-needed) change in Manny Lawson's pass rush role, the return of Shawntae Spencer, and the overall establishment of an attacking defensive identity. However, on the negative side, Walt Harris is done for the year, and Singletary's pass defense in the second half of 2008 actually was 23.2% worse than Nolan's during the first half of last season. So I don't know. Based on the stats, it's a tough call. If you want to err on the side of optimism here, be my guest.

STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE CHANGES

The final factor I'll look at that might distinguish Leapers from No-Shows has to do with changes in strength of schedule (SOS) from one season to the next. Specifically, do non-playoff teams make the quantum leap because their schedules get considerably easier?

The answer to this one is a resounding, "Yes!" Of all the comparisons I did in preparation for this article, SOS change had the strongest impact on playoff turnover from season to season.

First, though, it's useful to point out that playoff teams have had statistically significantly easier schedules than non-playoff teams over the past 7 seasons: opponents of playoff teams have had an average winning percentage of 48.0%, whereas opponents of non-playoff teams have had an average winning percentage of 51.2%. You might think that a 3.2% difference isn't that big. Remember, though, that the entire range of SOSs for the 224 teams from 2002-2008 is 41.4% to 59.0%, with 95% of these teams having an SOS between 43.2% and 56.8%. So that 3.2% difference is actually huge, representing a 9-spot difference in SOS ranking (13^th-toughest vs. 22^nd-toughest).

In terms of season-to-season change, the SOS difference between Leapers and No-Shows is almost perfectly symmetrical with that of the playoff vs. non-playoff difference. Specifically, whereas No-Shows' SOSs do not get any easier in Season B, Leapers' schedules get 3.4% easier. Again, that's not a big difference until you look at rankings: a 3.4% easier schedule translates to about a 10-spot difference in the SOS rankings. So the moral of the story here is that, if you want to be optimistic about the 49ers in 2009, hope that their schedule gets a lot easier. But how likely is that?

Well, the Niners' SOS in 2008 was an unbelievably easy 44.7%, meaning that an average Leaper improvement in SOS would take their 2009 SOS into uncharted territory. As I said a minute ago, the easiest schedule over the past 7 years was 41.4%, which the 2007 Seattle Seahawks happily converted into a playoff berth. In this context, a 3.4% easier schedule for the Niners in 2009 means that their SOS for next season would be 41.3%, or, in other words, the easiest schedule of any team since division realignment. So basically, we're banking on one hell of a statistical anomaly here.

Now, you might say, "Well, NFL.com tells me that the 49ers have the 7^th-easiest schedule next year, so maybe they'll pull off that miracle." My response to this is that, as I said in a previous post, a team's SOS based on opponents' records from last season bears no resemblance to their actual SOS based on opponents' records from this season. OK, let me rephrase that. Around 95% of a team's actual SOS has absolutely nothing to do with its before-the-season projected SOS, and projected SOS doesn't exhibit any of the huge statistical relationships that are consistently demonstrated by actual SOS with performance measures like, you know, wins, DVOA, and - particularly relevant to this discussion - playoff turnover. Essentially, you should treat projected SOS like Paris Hilton. It's fun to talk about, but totally meaningless.

BOTTOM LINE

The goal here was to determine whether our optimism about the 49ers in 2009 is justified based on the statistical characteristics of previous teams who made the quantum leap into playoff participation. Here's what the stats suggest:

Despite the MIA-ATL-BAL trifecta in 2008, changing head coaches doesn't seem to forebode an immediate quantum leap into NFL playoff participation. Therefore, don't rest your hopes on the 49ers' change from Nolan to Singletary.
Despite the Pennington-Ryan-Flacco trifecta in 2008, changing QBs also doesn't seem to forebode an immediate quantum leap into NFL playoff participation. Therefore, don't rest your hopes on the 49ers' change from O'Mulligan to Shaun Hill.
On offense, the majority of performance improvement for Leapers is in the passing game. The addition of Crabtree, the maturation of Jason Hill and Josh Morgan, the proper use of VD, the return to offensive balance, and the demonstrated passing game improvement with Shaun Hill at QB over the last half of 2008 all bode well for the Niners. Therefore, optimism seems justified when it comes to pass offense improvement.
On defense, the majority of performance improvement for Leapers is also in the passing game. For the 2009 49ers, some offseason changes bode well (e.g., Dashon Goldson replacing Roman, and Lawson rushing the passer more), while other changes don't bode so well (e.g., Harris blowing out his knee, and the pass defense sucking the big one during the last half of 2008). Therefore, optimism remains in the eye of the beholder when it comes to pass defense improvement.
The primary identifying characteristic of Leapers is that their SOS gets much easier the next season. The problem is that we have no way of knowing just how much easier (or more difficult) the 49ers' schedule is going to be in 2009. Therefore, break out your voodoo dolls and get to work on Kurt Warner et al. Interestingly enough, optimism is directly proportional to how talented you are in Black Magic.

**DVOA statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

Poll

How do you think the 49ers' pass defense in 2009 will compare to its pass defense in 2008?

Much better in 2009

444 votes

Slightly better in 2009

538 votes

Just as good/bad in 2009

81 votes

Slightly worse in 2009

20 votes

Much worse in 2009

8 votes

1091 votes | Poll has closed

Golden Nuggets: Bleacher Report anybody?

Fooch — Fri, 15 May 2009 10:00:16 -0000

Completely unrelated to anything, but I've got one last final this year tomorrow morning at 9am. After that I'll be done with year 2 of law school. Seeing as I finish my exam at noon, it's safe to say I could be passed out by 3pm. Goooooood times.

Also, some questions for you guys about BleacherReport.com towards the end of the links. Let me know your thoughts.

We had our post about the McKillop/RJF signings, but Maiocco, Barrows and Sando had them as well. (Multiple Sources)

We had a similar story by Pro Football Weekly, Pro Football Talk, the SF Chronicle, and of course 49ers.com. (Multiple Sources)

Throughout the offseason, 49ers.com will be checking in with members of the "10-year Club," players who spent 10+ seasons with the club. This week it's on Harris Barton. (49ers.com)

This article is ESPN Insider from Football Outsiders about 10 teams with remaining unfilled needs. For those without Insider access, the 49ers are listed first for the position of QB. It says:

1. San Francisco 49ers: Quarterback

The last time San Francisco had a quarterback accrue positive DYAR with more than 100 passes thrown is 2003; since then, they've had the worst quarterback in the league by DYAR in 2005 (Alex Smith), 2007 (Trent Dilfer, with Smith in second-to-last) and 2008 (J.T. O'Sullivan). While Shaun Hill was better than O'Sullivan, his DVOA was 28th in the league, at minus-2.8 percent. San Francisco struck out on Kurt Warner and added only aging Damon Huard (-54.7% DVOA last year) and developmental prospect Nate Davis this offseason, leaving Hill as the starter by default.

Mike Sando had a chat session (full transcript) about the NFC West yesterday. Feel free to browse the entire transcript, but he also pulled out some of the issues he thought were worth more discussion. (ESPN.com)

The 49ers Examiner discusses the Manny Lawson weight gain issue. I'll reserve judgment until Lawson shows up to camp. (Examiner.com)

An article from last week about the NFL QB situations. Might have been posted before, but here it is if not. (InsideBayArea.com)

How many folks here read stuff over at Bleacher Report? I don't read much over there, but as this is a slow news day, I thought I'd post some of their content. Let me know what you think:

An article bowing down to the greatness of the 1994 San Francisco 49ers. (Bleacher Report)

Would you qualify Mike Singletary as the "heart and soul of the San Francisco 49ers?" (Bleacher Report)

Missing Pieces of the 49ers Playoff Puzzle. (Bleacher Report)

Again, I'd love to hear in the comments what people think of the Bleacher Report posts. Should we try to keep linking to them? Not worth your time?

Detailed Analysis of Bengals Roster - Examining likelihood of drafting each position

Kirkendall — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:48:06 -0000

Every so often we try to re-examine the team's current roster and how it relates to the NFL draft. Since we have less than a week to go, I figure it was time for us to examine the roster, look at (unscientific) probabilities that we'll draft at that position, and get a general feel for where this team stands. We'll do this all again a week or two after the draft to reexamine the team's roster. Note: Best and Worst Case scenarios are based on long-term visions that I have after drinking some funky blue stuff. Here goes.

QUARTERBACK (3)
Even though the Bengals signed J.T. O'Sullivan this off-season in response to Ryan Fitzpatrick departure for Buffalo, Cincinnati could look at drafting a quarterback, whom would compete with Jordan Palmer for that number-three emergency quarterback slot. If all goes well, and the Bengals select a late-draft quarterback (sixth round or later), there's a chance they could luck into finding a long-term backup solution. If all goes poorly, then we'll have another Jeff Rowe on our hands. I rated the Bengals quarterbacks as strong, weighting Palmer's return much more than any player does at any position. Without Palmer, it's a mediocre position.

Strength of position: Strong
Probability of drafting position: Maybe
Best case scenario: Find a quarterback late in the draft to eventually become a long-term backup solution.
Worst case scenario: Jeff Rowe
Highest round team could draft: Fifth Round

Carson Palmer
J.T. O'Sullivan
Jordan Palmer

RUNNING BACK (6)
This off-season, the Bengals were able to re-sign Cedric Benson to a two-year contract, and recently claimed Gary Russell off of waivers. Still on the roster is Kenny Watson, who briefly became the team's feature back in 2007 and recorded two 130-yard plus performances. Chris Perry's low yard-per-rush and propensity to fumble likely cost him. DeDe Dorsey and James Johnson will have to put together masterful off-season and training camp performances just to have a shot on the roster. The Bengals are likely drafting a running back to backup Benson while, we think, Russell will be primarily used as a short-yardage/goalline back.

Strength of position: Average
Probability of drafting position: High
Best case scenario: Draft a running back that plays behind Benson and eventually replaces him as the team's starting running back within a year or two.
Worst case scenario: Kenny Irons
Highest round team could draft: Second Round

Cedric Benson
Gary Russell
Kenny Watson
Chris Perry
DeDe Dorsey
James Johnson

FULLBACKS (2)
In 2004 and 2005, former Bengals running back Rudi Johnson broke franchise single-season rushing marks in back-to-back seasons. A large part of that contribution goes to quality blocking from the fullback spot. Daniel Coats moved to fullback last season. And while he did his best in the transformation from tight end to fullback, he's just not an NFL-caliber blocker.

Strength of position: Very Weak
Probability of drafting position: High
Best case scenario: A bull-dozer.
Worst case scenario: Not realizing the need for a quality fullback and doing nothing about it.
Highest round team could draft: Fifth Round

Daniel Coats
J.D. Runnels

WIDE RECEIVER (8)
This has been the most talked about position during the off-season; ranging from T.J. Houshmandzadeh's departure to trade rumors about Chad Johnson. Furthermore, the Bengals costliest free agent pickup was Laveranues Coles. With all that said and done, there's really no concrete idea of what the Bengals are going to do here. One argument suggests that the Bengals will pick up a top-tier wide receiver in the first round, with an opposite argument that the Bengals won't draft anyone. With Johnson, Coles and Chris Henry the top-three receivers on the depth chart, and Andre Caldwell and Jerome Simpson drafted last season, I don't see any way the Bengals draft a receiver. When and where would he play? Basing a conclusion at this position is a matter of conjecture and I don't believe the Bengals will, or even should, draft a receiver. If Johnson is traded, we'll see. However, I've been very clear on my position about the team drafting a receiver. I don't like it. However, this is the only position in which I rate "probability of drafting position" as unknown.

Strength of position: Strong (based on potential), Average overall
Probability of drafting position: Unknown
Best case scenario: Not drafting a receiver and Caldwell and Simpson come through.
Worst case scenario: Bengals use the first-round pick for a wide receiver and he never gets playing time.
Highest round team could draft: First through Fifth

Chad Johnson
Laveranues Coles
Chris Henry
Andre Caldwell
Jerome Simpson
Antonio Chatman
Mario Urrutia
Maurice Purify

TIGHT END (5)
We're a spoiled bunch when it comes to tight ends. No, not recently of course. Through our history, the franchise has seen all-pro quality tight ends with great hands. Then when the Bengals offense recently morphed back to a passing offense, the philosophy turned tight ends into blockers to help protection and limit trends between blocking and receiving specific ends. The question here is how do you think tight ends should be built in Cincinnati now?

Strength of position: Weak (if you think TEs should be receivers), Mediocre (overall)
Probability of drafting position: Low
Best case scenario: Utecht provides a reason why we should have signed him.
Worst case scenario: Kelly leaves after the year, Utecht is disappointing (or injured) again and Matt Sherry amounts to nothing.
Highest round team could draft: Fifth Round

Reggie Kelly
Ben Utecht
Matt Sherry
Nate Lawrie
Brad St. Louis (LS)

OFFENSIVE TACKLE (4)
We've talked about offensive tackles just as much, if not more than Chad Johnson rumors. The facts are appalling; 51 quarterback sacks allowed, and the league's 30th best yard-per-rush average. As it stands, Collins and Jones would figure to be the team's starting offensive tackles. However, Jones has been reportedly on the trading block, and additional reports suggest that he'll just be released if no suitors are found. There is an option that the Bengals could move guard Andrew Whitworth to tackle. However, until that happens, we're keeping Whitworth as a guard in our analysis.

Strength of position: Weak
Probability of drafting position: Certain
Best case scenario: First-round draft pick contributes to an offensive line rebound and multiple All-Pro selection.
Worst case scenario: Bengals do little to address the position leaving the line in a weakened state and pushing back personnel turnover to a point that rebuilding efforts are pushed back an additional year.
Highest round team could draft: First Round

Anthony Collins
Levi Jones
Dennis Roland
Scott Kooistra

GUARD (4)
While offensive tackle is rated as a certain need, guard really isn't that far behind. However the urgency is less because the team figures to have two starting guards, and a third guard that filled in decently when Whitworth went down in 2008. The issue here is 2010. After this year, the only guard on roster will be Andrew Whitworth. If the Bengals don't draft a guard or two this year, it will likely become a critical need in 2010.

Strength of position: Average
Probability of drafting position: Maybe-High
Best case scenario: Bengals draft a quality guard this year, allowing Williams to mentor him for a season and becomes starter in 2010.
Worst case scenario: As typical with the Bengals perception, guards aren't all that critical. Therefore don't address the position and draft guards next year simply to fill the roster.
Highest round team could draft: Fourth Round

Bobbie Williams
Andre Whitworth
Nate Livings
Evan Mathis

CENTER (3)
The first draft pick by the Cincinnati Bengals franchise was a center. That's how Paul Brown viewed the offensive line; build from the center out. During the height of the Bengals offensive success during the Carson Palmer era, Rich Braham occupied center, directing traffic and handling the beasts of the AFC North. After his injury in 2006, the Bengals offense began to depreciate. No, we're not blaming Eric Ghiaciuc here -- there's was a general lack of effort by the coaches and front office to rebuild the offensive line allowing the team to suffer so poorly in 2008.

Strength of position: Mediocre
Probability of drafting position: Certain
Best case scenario: Bengals draft one of the top-three centers in the second round as part of a long-term offensive line rebuilding project.
Worst case scenario: Bengals do nothing and put all their faith with the centers on roster, once again, deciding that rebuilding the team's offensive line isn't critical.
Highest round team could draft: Second Round

Dan Santucci
Kyle Cook
Andrew Crummey

DEFENSIVE END (5)
You know the issue here; two highly paid defensive ends failed to pressure the quarterback with any consistency evident by terrible sack numbers. However, because both defensive ends are highly paid, we don't project the Bengals drafting a defensive end on the first day of the NFL draft. However (part 2), because of the Bengals terrible pass rush, many experts are projecting that the Bengals will draft a defensive end high; even in the first round. While they've made some plays in the past, the Bengals roster of backup defensive ends can be, and perhaps should be, easily replaced.

Strength of position: Mediocre
Probability of drafting position: Maybe
Best case scenario: Bengals find a gem in the fifth round or later that challenges the two highly paid defensive end to put in some production. Also, Antwan Odom and Robert Geathers were hurt last year; having a "gem" as a backup player that can get to the quarterback will help immensely if injury becomes a factor again.
Worst case scenario: 2008
Highest round team could draft: First

Robert Geathers
Antwan Odom
Frostee Rucker
Jonathan Fanene
Chris Harrington

DEFENSIVE TACKLE (5)
Last year, the Bengals had defensive tackles Sedrick Ellis and Glenn Dorsey high on their board. This year, with the potential we've seen from Pat Sims, the signing of Tank Johnson and the potential of Jason Shirley, the Bengals could totally leave defensive tackle alone in the NFL draft. On the other hand, the Bengals could draft a defensive tackle high in the draft to complete a four-man rotation of Peko, Sims, Tank and super-massive defensive tackle, forcing the team into a combinations of rush-defensive tackles and pass-defensive tackles. Still, we don't see it. It seems more likely that the Bengals could be content with defensive tackle already.

Strength of position: Average-Strong (based on potential)
Probability of drafting position: Low-Maybe
Best case scenario: Bengals rely on their two draft picks in 2008 and Pat Sims and Jason Shirley \ come through.
Worst case scenario: Tank lost gas in the... well... and Sims and Shirley play average at best.
Highest round team could draft: First... more likely Fourth or later.

Domata Peko
Pat Sims
Tank Johnson
Jason Shirley
Orien Harris

LINEBACKERS (7)
I've pointed out before that linebackers could be a serious concern after 2009. Everyone save for Keith Rivers and Dhani Jones will be free agents. It's to the point that if the Bengals don't draft a linebacker this year, this could be the primary focus during the weeks leading up to the 2010 NFL Draft. However, it's speculated that Aaron Curry is on top of the Bengals board this year, and if he falls, the Bengals could pounce on him. If that's the case, then the "need" is tremendously reduced. The question at this point would be, at what cost to the offensive line.

Strength of position: Average
Probability of drafting position: Likely
Best case scenario: Bengals draft as many as two linebackers, one middle and one strong-side to eventually replace the current starters.
Worst case scenario: Rivers is hurt again, Jones feels his age and the Bengals don't draft a linebacker in 2009.
Highest round team could draft: First (if Curry falls to us); Fourth or later if he doesn't.

Keith Rivers
Dhani Jones
Rashad Jeanty
Brandon Johnson
Darryl Blackstock
Abdul Hodge
Jim Maxwell

CORNERBACKS (5)
If you base grades on the starters, I believe that the Bengals cornerbacks are very strong. While they're not shutdown backs, perhaps not even elite backs, I think they've made their share of great plays on defense. David Jones showed he has some talent but there's plenty of room for improvement. The difference between the teams cornerbacks and backups is pretty significant. Mike Zimmer has said that he'd love to draft a cornerback to play nickel and/or coverage-specific safety. I believe that the Bengals will address cornerbacks later in the draft to improve their depth.

Strength of position: Strong
Probability of drafting position: Maybe
Best case scenario: Bengals draft a coverage-excellent cornerback and improves the overall depth at the position.
Worst case scenario: Bengals bank on injury-free season at cornerback and do nothing to improve their depth.
Highest round team could draft: Third-Fourth

Johnathan Joseph
Leon Hall
David Jones
Simeon Castille
Geoffrey Pope

SAFETY (6)
This is another position that we could make a strong case for. However, that projection is based on potential. Corey Lynch started well in 2008 before falling to injury. Marvin White has his moments -- good and bad -- but also fell to injury. Chris Crocker was an awesome surprise and now he's talking leadership. Chinedum Ndukwe is the team's best seventh-round pick since drafting Houshmandzadeh. At the same time, there's weaknesses at safety against the pass. How many plays were there when a pass went over the top while the safeties were sprinting to catch up with wide receivers that blazed by him? We suspect that the Bengals will address safety in the draft to acquire a guy that's better suited to defend the pass.

Strength of position: Average-Strong (based on potential)
Probability of drafting position: High
Best case scenario: Bengals find another start-quality safety stacking the position with potential talent.
Worst case scenario: Crocker slumps, Lynch is hurt again and the Bengals have to rely on lesser talent on the team's depth.
Highest round team could draft: Third-Fourth

Chinedum Ndukwe
Chris Crocker
Corey Lynch
Marvin White
Mike Doss
Kyries Hebert

PUNTER (2)
If the Bengals had a good performance from Kyle Larson last year, this might not be a big deal. However, when your offense is forced to punt 100 times in a season, that means a lot depends on field position. And we didn't get that. Opposing teams had shorter field positions and the Bengals were often playing from behind with a terrible offense. A good punter could have helped that. Not only have the Bengals brought in competition for Larson, but there seems to be a very high likelihood that the Bengals draft a punter.

Strength of position: Weak
Probability of drafting position: High
Best case scenario: Bengals draft UC's Kevin Huber; a guy they've targeted since the end of the season.
Worst case scenario: Larson returns as the team's punter.
Highest round team could draft: Sixth

Kyle Larson
Ryan Plackemeier

KICKER (1)
This is an interesting position. Place kicker Shayne Graham still hasn't signed his franchise contract. There's a chance that if Graham doesn't sign a long-term deal by the end of 2009, he could be gone for free agency. Will that mean that the Bengals will draft a kicker this year? No. Next year? Well, probably no.

Strength of position: Strong
Probability of drafting position: Unlikely
Best case scenario: Graham resigns
Worst case scenario: Graham doesn't resign
Highest round team could draft: Eighth

Shayne Graham (unsigned)

That's my analysis. You might agree, you might not. Either way, I expect to hear from your perspectives as the NFL draft is scary close.