(03-20-2016, 10:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes you do.  Otherwise you would not claim that it is impossible to disagree with you unless losing in the first round is acceptable.  The fact is that it is possible to disagree with you and still not be satisfied that we lose in the first round.  I am pretty sure that if your football knowledge was infallible you would be working for an nFL team right now.

What is sad about you is that you have to make up stuff to cry about.  

You claim the Bengals never have rookies contribute and that is a complete lie.  

Never claimed that. Try again numbnuts. 

You claim they never change, yet since we made the playoffs in 2011 we have turned over almost half of our starting lineup and gone through 2 DCs and 3 OCs.  

Lol. Losing them to other teams when you can't stop it is unavoidable. Only numbnuts fred would praise them for that. 

You claim the Bengals won't spend money yet last year they spent OVER the NFL league salary cap.

How much was spend trying to get better and not just simply retain? 

You claim that every other team gets better in free agency, but in fact every big signing by one team is a loss by another team.  So it is impossible for every team to get better in free agency every year.  

Again, never claimed this. More fred bullshit. No one is this stupid except you. 

Basically you claim the Bengals suck at drafting and never sign free agents yet you have no explanation of why they have won so many more games than most every other team in the league over the last 5 years.

And now you are too chicken to make a bet to back up what you were whining about.  Why ***** and moan about the team being the same when you KNOW it will not be the same.  .  .  .  unless you just love to cry.

(03-20-2016, 10:42 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You claim they never change, yet since we made the playoffs in 2011 we have turned over almost half of our starting lineup and gone through 2 DCs and 3 OCs.  


Lol. Losing them to other teams when you can't stop it is unavoidable. Only numbnuts fred would praise them for that. 

(03-20-2016, 10:42 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You claim the Bengals won't spend money yet last year they spent OVER the NFL league salary cap.

How much was spend trying to get better and not just simply retain? 

(03-20-2016, 10:42 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You claim the Bengals never have rookies contribute and that is a complete lie.  

Never claimed that. Try again numbnuts. 

(03-20-2016, 02:50 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: How many rookies play more than special teams for us? 
How many rookies see significant enough snaps to change the make up of the team? 

Not many.

(03-20-2016, 10:47 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: And btw fred, didn't you backtrack on a bet on the old board?

(03-17-2016, 10:19 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Adam Jones and Pat Sims haven't been factored into this yet. The number will drop drastically. The Bengals should then be right there with Carolina and Minnesota.

(03-21-2016, 10:46 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Adam Jones and Pats Sims now factored into that link. Bengals still 10th with $21.3m... I guess they need $21.3m for injuries, rookies, and Mike Brown's backup longsnapper contract.

Near Carolina now, but Vikings are still like $6.2m less than the Bengals.

(03-21-2016, 08:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Right.  Obviously the Bengals should be ripped to pieces when the coordinators they hire are so good at their jobs that other teams hire them away as head coaches.

I mean that proves how bad the team sucks, right?  What kind of loser front office hires coordinators that are among the best in the league?

(03-21-2016, 08:34 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Here we are back at the argument that free agent losses do not count when looking at free agency.  Every team that signs a free agent gets better, but the teams that lose these free agents do not lose anything.  Instead of spending money to "retain" guys like Green, Burfict, and Dalton we should spend all of our money to "get better" in free agency.

But since you asked we made a big move last year to bring in Michael Johnson.

(03-21-2016, 08:43 AM)fredtoast Wrote: C'mon, man.  You clearly said we could not be any better this year becuase we have the "same team".  when I ask you about the draft this is what you said.




Then when i showed you that we have averaged 1-2 rookies with major impacts over the last 7 years you tried to claim that didn't mean anything.

(03-21-2016, 08:47 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Finally I want to point out something about Royal. Whenever i make him look bad all he can do is rely on personal insults instead of football knowledge.

(03-21-2016, 08:48 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I did back out of a bet, but it was before anything had changed that would effect my chances of winning.  I have never backed out of a bet after I lost or when something happened to change my chances of winning.

(03-21-2016, 11:45 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: No but it's unavoidable. So stop acting like it's them doing it to intentionally get better. That's the point. 

(03-21-2016, 11:45 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: MJ wasn't a big move. 

(03-21-2016, 11:45 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote:  I mean keeping mediocre-average players. Your Vincent Rey, Pat Sims, Rey Maualuga...etc etc and essentially seeming disinterested in actually trying to improve there. But shh...don't let things like that get in your way. 

(03-21-2016, 11:45 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Yes. Because "not many" is not the same as "never". Wouldn't a lawyer understand that? 1 a year for the last 3 years....sounds like "not many" to me. Only you could would quote me actually saying "not many" and try to argue it means "never"