Are the bengals really that cheap?

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(03-04-2016, 01:53 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Also underspending — as of Feb. 9, when the NFLPA calculated the numbers — were: the Carolina Panthers (80.8%), New York Jets (81.16%), Jacksonville Jaguars (82.2%), Dallas Cowboys (82.6%), New England (82.7%), New Orleans Saints (86.2%), Washington Redskins (87%), New York Giants (87.9%) and Pittsburgh Steelers (88.3%).


So I guess underspending isn't all that bad.

It's because they wouldn't pay Dre Kirkpatrick $7.5m, or Rey Maualuga a $7m cap hit in one year, or Leon Hall $9m to be a backup player, etc.

Those teams would demand a pay cut, or cut the player and then proceed to save that money and actually use it on someone better when the opportunity arises. (Case and point, when the Patriots went and signed Revis to win a Super Bowl.)

The Panthers might have won the Super bowl if they spent some more of that on a WR and maybe an OL.

Pittsburgh might have won something if they spent more on a secondary that wasn't atrocious.