Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise

(07-26-2022, 10:59 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: [ -> ] How do you know players ate fine with it overall, and how FO is thinkimg, it is your opinion thatvis fine but we rrally dont know wjay ovetall they are thinking

(07-26-2022, 10:59 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: [ -> ] How do you know players ate fine with it overall, and how FO is thinkimg, it is your opinion thatvis fine but we rrally dont know wjay ovetall they are thinking

Maybe personally, plenty aren't fine because it may be just who they are and/or it may be a money year for them and greater team success can mean more $$ for them and they don't want anything/anyone to deter that but publicly, all these guys want to make not only as much as they can but, more importantly in their eyes, as much as they feel they are worth. None of us ham n' eggers can sit where do we do today and say exactly what we would do in that type of situation where loyalty and ego on both sides is a huge power play.

Every player at some point/degree would love to be in this type of situation at least as being recognized as a top 5-10 player at their position and a % of them will be so you know sure as heck they're not going to say something that could jeopardize themselves or to look like they have egg on their face.

(07-27-2022, 11:27 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: [ -> ]We've all posted drunk before. Lol

Essex done got into the cough syrup. 

Zac kind of made it clear he was done talking about Bates..."he's not under contract"

(07-27-2022, 06:45 PM)pally Wrote: [ -> ]Zac kind of made it clear he was done talking about Bates..."he's not under contract"

Someone send Dunlap the depth chart with Jesse not on it so he can post it to his Instagram.

(07-27-2022, 11:14 AM)fredtoast Wrote: [ -> ]I think it bears repeating that this is different from a player who is under contract holding out. Bates has fulfilled his obligation under his contract with the Bengals. 

While very true, and thanks for reminding us all, the team still has rights as defined by the CBA.  They have exercised those rights and control his near term future.  His teammates are making all the right noises about wanting and expecting Bates to be "here".  So while you are "lawyerly" correct as usual, the expectations of the Bengals and Bates teammates is not so black and white, as most things usually are not.

Bottom Line is, Bates is not beholden to the Bengals through a signed contract, but he is via his membership in the NFLPA and the CBA agreed upon by both parties, and the Bengals exercising their rights under the agreement.  He plays for the Bengals or he doesn't play at all this year because the Bengals WILL NOT cut him.

(07-27-2022, 12:15 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: [ -> ]

OMG these two posts had me rolling LMAO!!!

(07-28-2022, 01:12 PM)Stewy Wrote: [ -> ]While very true, and thanks for reminding us all, the team still has rights as defined by the CBA.  They have exercised those rights and control his near term future.  His teammates are making all the right noises about wanting and expecting Bates to be "here".  So while you are "lawyerly" correct as usual, the expectations of the Bengals and Bates teammates is not so black and white, as most things usually are not.

Bottom Line is, Bates is not beholden to the Bengals through a signed contract, but he is via his membership in the NFLPA and the CBA agreed upon by both parties, and the Bengals exercising their rights under the agreement.  He plays for the Bengals or he doesn't play at all this year because the Bengals WILL NOT cut him.

Bates situation is very much like a draft pick who hasn't/won't sign the contract.
Technically not an employee yet despite the team having exclusivity rights to that player's services this year.
Until the contract (tag) is signed, not under contract and thus doesn't make sense to report to camp.

(07-28-2022, 04:36 PM)ochocincos Wrote: [ -> ]Bates situation is very much like a draft pick who hasn't/won't sign the contract.
Technically not an employee yet despite the team having exclusivity rights to that player's services this year.
Until the contract (tag) is signed, not under contract and thus doesn't make sense to report to camp.

Yes true, which is why I mentioned him needing to be rdy at the start of the season.  He has no financial reason to show up for training camp

(07-28-2022, 10:23 PM)Stewy Wrote: [ -> ]Yes true, which is why I mentioned him needing to be rdy at the start of the season.  He has no financial reason to show up for training camp

A player under contract who refuses to report to camp can be stuck with huge fines.  But since Bates is not under contract there is no penalty.

So let's all be honest here.  As a 5th year vet Bates does not need a training camp.  If he is not getting as much money as he wants then he sees the "free pass" to skip training camp as an added benefit.  There is no way he is not taking advantage of that.  And I would do the exact same thing.  

As long as Bates reports in top shape and plays at his top level then the coaches will not give a shit that he skipped training camp.

(07-28-2022, 11:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: [ -> ]A player under contract who refuses to report to camp can be stuck with huge fines.  But since Bates is not under contract there is no penalty.

So let's all be honest here.  As a 5th year vet Bates does not need a training camp.  If he is not getting as much money as he wants then he sees the "free pass" to skip training camp as an added benefit.  There is no way he is not taking advantage of that.  And I would do the exact same thing.  

As long as Bates reports in top shape and plays at his top level then the coaches will not give a shit that he skipped training camp.

The problem is last year Bates was distracted by his contract situation and played poorly even with TC.  There's no logical reason to assume he's going to play better than he did last year with both the distraction of a contract year and a missed TC.  Bates has had a history of whiffing on tackles throughout his career, so his tackling is a concern coming in with no padded practices or preseason.  

(07-28-2022, 11:53 PM)Whatever Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is last year Bates was distracted by his contract situation and played poorly even with TC.  There's no logical reason to assume he's going to play better than he did last year with both the distraction of a contract year and a missed TC.  Bates has had a history of whiffing on tackles throughout his career, so his tackling is a concern coming in with no padded practices or preseason.  

That was only for about the first half of the season or so.
Once he acknowledged the contract situation was a distraction, he changed his focus and played way better.
One should assume he learned from his mistake last year and will have the right focus this year.
If not, it could cost him $$ on his next contract.

(07-28-2022, 11:53 PM)Whatever Wrote: [ -> ] There's no logical reason to assume he's going to play better than he did last year with both the distraction of a contract year and a missed TC. 

Sure there is.  He got over the distraction last year and played well later in the season.

13 games into last season Burrow was leading the league in interceptions.  You think that is going to happen again this year?  I don't because Burrow straightened out that problem last year.

(07-27-2022, 12:21 PM)higgy100 Wrote: [ -> ]None of us ham n' eggers

What the f*** did you just call us? 

At the end of the day what percent chance he plays against steelers week 1 75 percent? by week 10 for a year of service time 90? could he theoretically show up for the playoffs only if we make it that far?

(07-29-2022, 12:51 PM)EasyPeasy Wrote: [ -> ]What the f*** did you just call us? 

Ham n' eggas?

(07-29-2022, 02:02 PM)Bengalfan4life27c Wrote: [ -> ]At the end of the day what percent chance he plays against steelers week 1 75 percent? by week 10 for a year of service time 90? 

Week 1..........90%
Week 10........110%

(07-29-2022, 03:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: [ -> ]Week 1..........90%
Week 10........110%

Exactly, because he has to play half the games or he doesn't accrue a year of experience.....but also it's important to realize that if he doesn't play at all, the Bengals still own his rights for the next year and can re-place a FIRST year franchise tag on him, since he wouldn't have played or accrued credit.  So he'll play at least half the season just to accrue a year and force the Bengals into a more expensive tag the next year.

(07-29-2022, 05:20 PM)Stewy Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly, because he has to play half the games or he doesn't accrue a year of experience.....but also it's important to realize that if he doesn't play at all, the Bengals still own his rights for the next year and can re-place a FIRST year franchise tag on him, since he wouldn't have played or accrued credit.  So he'll play at least half the season just to accrue a year and force the Bengals into a more expensive tag the next year.

The way the CBA is written, Bates really has no options, hold out and give up 12.9 million dollars, and face the chance that he is tagged again next year.  

If he skips TC. He will not be in football shape.  The injury risk escalates.  

Bates will not skip more than a week of TC.  

There is a reason only one player has held out the entire season, and that player was the top player at his position, and has since admitted he played Russian roulette with his career and lost.

(07-29-2022, 05:56 PM)Nickslycat Wrote: [ -> ]The way the CBA is written, Bates really has no options, hold out and give up 12.9 million dollars, and face the chance that he is tagged again next year.  

If he skips TC. He will not be in football shape.  The injury risk escalates.  

Bates will not skip more than a week of TC.  

There is a reason only one player has held out the entire season, and that player was the top player at his position, and has since admitted he played Russian roulette with his career and lost.

On top of that it was the second tag for him, so he already banked some big pay.  No one has ever sat out the first tag, but some people still insist it is a possibility for Bates.