Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise

(09-03-2016, 12:53 PM)StoneTheCrow Wrote: [ -> ]Good. I like what Tobin said about how the Vikings situation shows just why we need AJ.

Exactly. I don't want AJ going anywhere anytime soon. 

(09-03-2016, 12:44 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: [ -> ]McCarron is under contract for two more years, both '16 and '17. Both significantly cheaper than Bradford. If anything, if McCarron played well for the Vikings and Bridgewater comes back 100% for '17, then they could retrade McCarron and recoup their value. Possibly get more depending on how well he played.

Hopefully we don't find out later the Bengals were offered ridiculous amounts and refused to talk to anyone. It'd be Akili Smith/Ricky Williams all over again.

I was making the point that if McCarron was traded NEXT year, and played well, he would be due the large dollar amount.  That was why I said next year. 

There is no way I would trade McCarron this year. 

(09-03-2016, 12:03 PM)Nately120 Wrote: [ -> ]I guess they figure Chase Daniels or Sam Bradford could both get injurebenched for Wentz equally well.  They're going to roll with Wentz after a month or so either way, so why have two overpaid QBs in front of him when you can do it with one?  I figure the Eagles fanbase would riot with Sam "trade me now, ok I give in" Bradford starting and then once he gets injurbenched having to sit through Chase "I'm way overpaid because the new HC is my pal" Daniels before they get to boo Wentz.

Philly fans, I tells ya!

I actually think Chase Daniels could be a surprising QB and starting against the Browns defense is a good way to get off to a good start. 

Wentz is the starter. Daniel might start one game, but good move by Philly. They atone for the price they paid for Wentz and are going to throw him right out there. What if we trade AJ? And Dalton goes down. We become the Vikings. A team desperate, in the middle of a competitive run, forced to overpay for average.

(09-03-2016, 12:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: [ -> ]He can turn around and hand off to 28 without getting injured.

you sure?

There's a reason why Bradford keeps getting traded for 1st round picks. It's easy (and fair) to question his numbers and his health.

That said, when has the guy ever had even a decent team around him? His last 2 seasons have yielded passer ratings of 90.9 and 86.4. Very solid. Now quick, name his receivers with the Rams without using the Google. He didn't have much better in Philly after Chippy gutted the team.

Not saying the guy is a stud or anything, but I can see why a QB desperate team would be more than happy to land Bradford. He's at least going to give you someone "decent" at the position, and IMO he could be more than decent on the right team with some weapons around him.

I wonder how important it would be from certain posters on the board to still believe in turning down any offers for AJ even though it's a 1st and 4th rounder

(09-03-2016, 05:46 PM)ItsOdellThurman Wrote: [ -> ]Wentz is the starter.  Daniel might start one game, but good move by Philly.  They atone for the price they paid for Wentz and are going to throw him right out there.  What if we trade AJ?  And Dalton goes down.  We become the Vikings.  A team desperate, in the middle of a competitive run, forced to overpay for average.

(09-03-2016, 08:10 PM)GodFather Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder how important it would be from certain posters on the board to still believe in turning down any offers for AJ even though it's a 1st and 4th rounder

I'd have considered a 1st and 4th as long as I could get another QB without spending those picks and costing me a mini-fortune in salary. McCarron's salary is a big plus for the team who has him. And, he'll likely be worth more at the end of 2016 than he is now.

(09-03-2016, 11:50 AM)pally Wrote: [ -> ]The Vikings traded for QB Sam Bradford.  Vikings reportedly give up 2017 1st and 4th round draft picks.

The trade talk is over with Vikings. 

But every time their is a injury the "trade McCarron" talk will boomerang back into action. 

Why ? Because he is a back up with nice value and is not the teams future without career ending injury to Dalton. 

Glad to still have him though, good insurance policy. Would have taken a 1st and 4th though for the 5th rounder if offered. 

It would have been a gamble but you have to roll the dice sometimes. Probably was not offered though.

Not upset at all though. Can see both sides here and nobody knows the correct answer until seasons end and it is known how much he was played.   

(09-03-2016, 08:10 PM)GodFather Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder how important it would be from certain posters on the board to still believe in turning down any offers for AJ even though it's a 1st and 4th rounder

That 4th round pick turns into a 2nd round pick if Vikings win SB in next 2 years. 

Would have done it if offered but get why some do not want to as well.  

Plus his wife is hot, just ask Brent Musberger.  

(09-03-2016, 12:44 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: [ -> ]McCarron is under contract for two more years, both '16 and '17. Both significantly cheaper than Bradford. If anything, if McCarron played well for the Vikings and Bridgewater comes back 100% for '17, then they could retrade McCarron and recoup their value. Possibly get more depending on how well he played.

Hopefully we don't find out later the Bengals were offered ridiculous amounts and refused to talk to anyone. It'd be Akili Smith/Ricky Williams all over again.

Bridgewater with this type of injury wont be back till 18 usually with this type of injury it takes between a year and a half and 2 years to heal. That is assuming his leg and knee heal right or all the way and his carreer isnt over.

(09-03-2016, 07:57 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: [ -> ]There's a reason why Bradford keeps getting traded for 1st round picks. It's easy (and fair) to question his numbers and his health.

That said, when has the guy ever had even a decent team around him? His last 2 seasons have yielded passer ratings of 90.9 and 86.4. Very solid. Now quick, name his receivers with the Rams without using the Google. He didn't have much better in Philly after Chippy gutted the team.

Not saying the guy is a stud or anything, but I can see why a QB desperate team would be more than happy to land Bradford. He's at least going to give you someone "decent" at the position, and IMO he could be more than decent on the right team with some weapons around him.

Good Luck, Vikes!  Can someone with skills make this guy a Vikes helmet?

(09-04-2016, 01:25 AM)Go Cards Wrote: [ -> ]Plus his wife is hot, just ask Brent Musberger.  

No matter what happens to AJ, his wife has to stay in Cincy!!!

(09-04-2016, 11:03 AM)GodFather Wrote: [ -> ]No matter what happens to AJ, his wife has to stay in Cincy!!!

Absolutely !

Have said before but will extend offer again in case she missed it. 

Any game she needs a seat ? Will evict my friend in seat next to me and give it to her. 

This offer never expires ! Plus my friend and significant other already understand this clearly.  

(09-03-2016, 07:57 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: [ -> ]There's a reason why Bradford keeps getting traded for 1st round picks. It's easy (and fair) to question his numbers and his health.

That said, when has the guy ever had even a decent team around him? His last 2 seasons have yielded passer ratings of 90.9 and 86.4. Very solid. Now quick, name his receivers with the Rams without using the Google. He didn't have much better in Philly after Chippy gutted the team.

Not saying the guy is a stud or anything, but I can see why a QB desperate team would be more than happy to land Bradford. He's at least going to give you someone "decent" at the position, and IMO he could be more than decent on the right team with some weapons around him.

Yeah, but then like one day later Mark Sanchez got released. Would you rather have Sam Bradford for 6-10 games (before getting hurt) or Mark Sanchez, a 1st round pick, and a 4th round pick?

(09-04-2016, 10:12 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, but then like one day later Mark Sanchez got released. Would you rather have Sam Bradford for 6-10 games (before getting hurt) or Mark Sanchez, a 1st round pick, and a 4th round pick?

Fair question and I have to wonder if the Vikings are kicking themselves. Like I said in a different thread though, Bradford has a very low 2.27 INT% for his career. Sanchez is at 3.75, which is higher than average. For a team that's planning on running AP and protecting the football, I'd say Bradford was a better choice. Sanchez for free still sounds enticing compared to what they gave up for Bradford though.

Tough call. That's assuming Sanchez was in play for them though.

Tough call when factoring in the draft picks.

But face value Bradford is better than Sanchez easily.