Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 4.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
"We're not trading that guy"
#6
(10-10-2019, 05:33 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: AJ has missed 19 of the last 38 games. It is nice owning a Lamborghini until you have to pay to fix it. He has earned 89 million with the Bengals. If he wants huge upfront money I would let him walk. Gambling on a 32 year old injury prone receiver isn't really too smart. But hey we are the Bengals.

Even if AJ had played in all 5 games this season, and performed to his typical standards of production, some fans would still be griping.  They would just be saying "But he's missed 14 of the last 38 games.  We can't give that guy $18M/per, he might stub his toe and miss a few games.  THEN where would we be??"
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]

Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations

-Frank Booth 1/9/23
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
"We're not trading that guy" - pally - 10-10-2019, 05:10 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Okeana - 10-10-2019, 08:06 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - SunsetBengal - 10-10-2019, 05:49 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - JSR18 - 10-12-2019, 12:24 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - J24 - 10-10-2019, 06:30 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-10-2019, 08:58 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 08:27 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 02:09 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 02:33 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 08:20 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Synric - 10-10-2019, 09:39 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Synric - 10-11-2019, 07:29 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - HuDey - 10-11-2019, 12:42 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 05:28 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 06:07 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)