(03-09-2022, 03:10 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: You keep repeating this false narrative so I'm going to put an end to it now.

A $10M RG and Trent Taylor at slot would not have won the Bengals the Super Bowl because it was the LG that gave up the pressure to Aaron Donald so Burrow couldn't complete the pass to Chase running open down the side line because Ramsey fell which essentially ended the game.

Geez, Spain lost on that one play, Adeniji was used the entire playoffs and SB... but it doesnt matter one more elite blocker on that line most likely wins us that game, we needed 51 more yards or a FG to tie.  You are playing semantics now, do better.

If you dont believe we would had been in a better position to win that SB with a top notch guard and TT at slot instead of what we had then that is your bad opinion. IMO

(03-09-2022, 05:38 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Replacing a starter with a 1st round pick is less of a risk than replacing a starter with a late round pick or a bottom of the roster Trent Taylor.

I'm beyond annoyed with the overpay a FS because of bad CBs when you have admitted repeatedly CBs are more important than FS.  If you need a starting CB, prioritize that position instead of overpaying a FS.

If you don't have any idea what Bates' value is then you don't know Boyd's trade value, either.


Wrong.  Replacing a starter with a first round pick is less risky than replacing a starter with a late round pick or 5'8", 178lbs, 4.63 forty Trent Taylor and his two receptions last season. And we have already agreed a rookie FS might develop behind a vet his first year. If you don't think a first round rookie FS is ready to start I don't understand why you think a later round rookie WR is ready to start and play 74% of the offensive snaps.


You knew Burrow was elite his first season.  Why? Because he is elite.  After four seasons you know Bates isn't, because he isn't.  That hole is covered by a cheap vet and a high draft pick.


You could have ended with, "Yes."  Why? Because you have already stated multiple times every little bit of cap space helps the team improves other positions. 


This is pure fantasy.  Taylor has never duplicated Boyd's production and only 1 of 33 WRs from last year's draft, including all the ones that run faster, did.

I'm confident a first round rookie FS can come in and not be elite just like Bates.


And I would take a great Olineman, an additional $5.6M to apply to another player, a starter at WR3, and the ability to draft a FS and 3T in the first two rounds of the draft. However many times you keep repeating Boyd is easily replaced the stats prove you wrong. And the Bengals are one injury away from Taylor and Morgan as two starters at WR. So you're one injury away from a position of strength turning into a position of weakness.  Same situation at FS.


This is a silly argument.  If your CBs suck, don't over pay a FS.  Pay a CB instead, sign an average FS. No one is forgetting a huge cap hit.  No one.  Matter of fact, I've repeatedly reminded you a Top 5 IOL is generally cheaper than a Top 5 FS. So if you want to try to work the huge cap hit angle, then don't overpay an inconsistent FS when NOT overpaying him is the fiscally conservative and responsible move.


If you move on from Bates, FS is addressed with a high draft pick and a cheap FA vet so depth is addressed.  If you get rid of Boyd, you're depth is Taylor, Morgan, Irwin, and Washington if the last three are tendered.

If you spend $12M on a FS that won't be here next year, that's $12M you can't use to sign Olineman to 3 year contracts. Remember when you stated every bit of cap space helps? Then start walking the walk instead of just talking it. Why pay Mercedes prices on a new 1 year lease for a Toyota Camry when you already have a Honda Accord for 2 years for less money which allows you to buy other stuff?

You are just a brick wall mentally.

Bates and Boyds value to the team currently are not even close.  We have no other players on the roster to take Bates spot and it is crucial if we are not upgrading the other CB big time, and I doubt JC is walking through that door.

Boyds production was with a terrible oline. IMO, a huge upgrade to the oline opens up the run game and more pass concepts to the 2 wideouts - with check downs to the TE and slot - non-priority positons.

I dont care what Boyds value is I just know it is at its max right now and will never be greater.  I want the draft pick and his $10M to go to the oline.  

Bates value is crucial because we would be replacing a higher value position with no depth or other CB as of yet.

Taking a chance on any rookie at WR3 is much less of a risk than a rookie at FS1 with our current roster.

As to your idea of a player has to be elite his first year in the league, well that is nonsensical as well.  Players do get better in the league.


This is all common sense.  You can have a different way of doing things but this is reality with our current team today.

(03-09-2022, 03:24 PM)casear2727 Wrote: #1 Stop with Boyds production, the entire offense changes with a much better oline. More running and more 5-7 drop concepts for our 2 wideouts.  Saying a decent slot cant replace our 4th option who averaged 28yds in the playoffs is silly.

Stop quoting facts to counter your conjecture?  No.

I suggest you stop ignoring 82 receptions to focus on one drop. Your focus in on 1.2% drop rate instead of a 98.8% catch rate. But, you don't even focus on that because you only look at 19% of the data from one year. Because you only focus on 4 games instead of 21 games.

Now matter how many times you claim someone like Wan'Dale Robinson could step in and replace Boyd Week 1; guys like Elijah Moore and Rondale Moore who were projected to go higher, didn't replicate his results despite you thinking it would be no problem.

Quote:#2. You couldnt be further off base with your draft predictions and this repeated top 10 draft pick silliness.  

That's a summary of past performance from last year.  Past performance isn't a guarantee of future results, but it is a pretty good predictor of future performance in similar situations. I gave you objective data you can independently verify.  Show objective data to indicate otherwise.

Quote:#3. You have zero case for Boyd other than his ability to replace Chase or Higgins if injured, which i agree with.

And the Bengals play 3 WR sets 77% of the time and Boyd plays 74% of the offensive snaps making him a starter. And he did fill in for an injured Higgins last year. And he had more productions than 34 other examples of WRs you think can easily replace him.  Other than those six things, I have zero case.

Quote:Now tell me the deal you will get with trading Bates under the tag, along with your plan with the CB situation, this could be intriguing, if realistic.

Lions and Jets both have awful defenses.  Especially, pass defense.  They have a need at S.  They have top 10 or near top 10 cap space currently.  The have extra draft picks. Jets have 4, 10, 36, 38 . . . Lions have 2, 32, 34, 66 . . . I'd trade Bates for any of those 2nd round picks if they were willing trade partners. If they didn't want to trade, I'd let him walk, hope for a comp pick next year.

CB Darious Williams, Rams CB2 opposite Jalen Ramsey, have him fill same roll opposite Awuzie with Hilton as NCB
PFF projects 3 years, $33M
offer $15M signing bonus
Year 1: $4M base salary, $5M prorated signing bonus, $9M cap hit
Y2: 6/5/11
Y3: 8/5/13, $5M dead money if released, $8M cap savings, which could be reduced with roster bonuses in Y1/2 to off sets base salary in Y3 if you want less dead money in Y3

Quote:But Im done with Boyd its too obvious.

Quitter.  

(03-09-2022, 05:45 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Geez, Spain lost on that one play, Adeniji was used the entire playoffs and SB... but it doesnt matter one more elite blocker on that line most likely wins us that game, we needed 51 more yards or a FG to tie.  You are playing semantics now, do better.

If you dont believe we would had been in a better position to win that SB with a top notch guard and TT at slot instead of what we had then that is your bad opinion. IMO

Really? Like Boyd's one drop? Difference being Boyd has a catch rate 98.8% of the passes that were catchable.  Spain's didn't make 98.8% of his blocks.

Semantics?  You complain of Boyd's one drop and completely dismiss Spain gave up the pressure that prevented a winning TD.  That's semantics. Not only is it semantics, it's a double standard.  And you completely ignore the Rams were on a 15 drive to score the winning touchdown.  FIFTEEN.  And if it wasn't for a ticky tack defensive holding call they probably wouldn't have even been in position to score.

No, no, no.  You don't get to back track.  You made multiple claims the Bengals win the Super Bowl with a different RG and Trent Taylor in the slot because Boyd had a drop on third down.  You were demonstrably wrong.  Accept the L and move on.  If the LG made that one play the Bengals win regardless of any drop Boyd had. The game was on the line and the player you aren't blaming had a bad play. And what was all that crap about the Super Bowl is when it matters most and weigh that more heavily than the regular season? Well, stay consistent and stop talking out both sides of your mouth like a politician. And regardless of all that, I've stated from the beginning to improve the damn offensive line. This is tiresome.

But, I don't blame Spain for the loss because any one play could have gone differently ending in a different result.  It wasn't just one play.

(03-08-2022, 08:14 PM)J24 Wrote: Trade Boyd? Don't get me wrong I like him(and would only trade them for good value) as a player but at the same he seems very replaceable. If we trade Boyd we would save nearly 8 Million in cap space.

Case for trading Boyd

1.) Since the 2018 season  this was his first season without 100 targets and his least amount of yards in a season.

2.) He had a poor post season for us  averaging only 28 yards per a game,  only 7 first downs, and 1 TD. Per a 17 game season 476 yards, 30 first downs,  and 4 TDs. Is that 10 million dollars worth production?

3.) We have two elite  Wrs on the roster in Chase and Higgins. Also neither  have hit their prime so their stock is only going to go up. Its going to be tough for Boyd to get his normal production.

3b.) We have 3 seasons left of Higgins 2 under his rookie contract + a franchise tag. If he is to expensive to re-sign in 4 years Boyd still wouldn't be a great option to replace  him . He would be in his thirties + Tee is an outside WR vs Tyler who is a slot.

4.) I think Stanley  Morgan can replace him and I think the Bengals think that as well.  1.) He was a good College player; in his final two seasons he had over 1, 900 yards and 17 Tds, 2.) He had a similar RAS to Boyd as a prospect,  well respected  in the Lockerroom, tough as nails, and he was playing meaningful  Wr snaps later in the season.   Him + Taylor+ a top 100 draft pick should fill the role.

5) He would have a lot of interest on the trade Market. I could see at the very least getting back a 3rd rd pick for him. I could see the Raiders, Packers, Cowboys,  Patriots, Colts, and Bucs(if they trade Goodwin) as potential suitors.

Get a Patriots o-line from 07 & it won't matter who the receivers are. Burrow would torch every team in the league. If we can trade Boyd to get a stud lineman, you have to consider it.

Guy, you’re refusal to understand context is very frustrating.

I contend Boyd’s production is a direct result of our poor pass blocking causing us to operate solely in a 3-step drop/quick pass offense.

Immediate go routes or underneath quick passes to Boyd covered by a LB.

In my scenario we upgrade the Oline as close as we can in some spots to elite status which vastly opens up the run game and allows for 5-7 drop pass concepts such as deep routes and double moves for Tee & Chase. WR3 & TE will primarily be check downs minus some slants and seams.

Moore and Moore don’t play with Burrow & our 2 wideouts - totally irrelevant.

Spain was in on every play, many vs AD, I hate that he totally screwed up the last play and I want to replace him too. So again irrelvant. My Boyd in SB complaints were made to simply counter the vet/reliability argument.

For the last time, every single Boyd take you have doesnt counter anything I have said with the exception of him being insurance if we lose Higgins or Chase. And Im seriously done discussing this hypothetical with you. You dont understand context and you have tunnel vision focus only on your opinion.

I'll gladly entertain your opinion on Bates in a different post.

(03-09-2022, 06:44 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Lions and Jets both have awful defenses.  Especially, pass defense.  They have a need at S.  They have top 10 or near top 10 cap space currently.  The have extra draft picks. Jets have 4, 10, 36, 38 . . . Lions have 2, 32, 34, 66 . . . I'd trade Bates for any of those 2nd round picks if they were willing trade partners. If they didn't want to trade, I'd let him walk, hope for a comp pick next year.

CB Darious Williams, Rams CB2 opposite Jalen Ramsey, have him fill same roll opposite Awuzie with Hilton as NCB
PFF projects 3 years, $33M
offer $15M signing bonus
Year 1: $4M base salary, $5M prorated signing bonus, $9M cap hit
Y2: 6/5/11
Y3: 8/5/13, $5M dead money if released, $8M cap savings, which could be reduced with roster bonuses in Y1/2 to off sets base salary in Y3 if you want less dead money in Y3

This is a legitimate post by you... finally.

I'll gladly take one of those 2nd round picks and sign Cine or another top FS.

I also like Williams at CB, which give us room to also sign a veteran FS as a stop gap if our Rookie isnt ready.

Good job, Let's go!

(03-08-2022, 10:26 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Good luck brother, they all shot me down a month ago with this.  

I cant get the same ones to answer this - Do we win that SB with a $10M RG and Trent Taylor in the slot instead of Boyd and his wrong freaking route causing a sack after the INT and late 4th QTR dropped pass on 3rd down?

We have the only fans who are ok with a WR3 making $10M per while 4 starters on an awful oline in the Super Bowl barely made $9M combined.

These guys would lose their shit if they were Patriots fans as Belichick cut and traded fan favorites in order to pay PRIORITY positions.

We may have the only fan base in the NFL that believes a championship formula is for the Free Safety to be the highest paid guy on Defense and the WR3 and RB to be highest paid on offense... 

To be fair the majority of those that drive me nuts are on twitter, I just followed you btw (bpoe).

I go back and forth on what I Think about possibly trading Boyd.

In a vacuum, if it was Boyd and rookie guard vs a fa guard and rookie wr- I would take the vet guard and rookie wr.

I think a speedster on outside, chase in slot, Tee on the other outside is pretty dangerous.


But I wouldn’t cut Boyd to keep Hill, Ogenjobi, or Bates. If I had to choose between Bates and Boyd, I’m keeping Boyd. W Burrow we need and have the potential to be a top 3 offense in NFL.

I would also consider cutting/trading Boyd and making a run at Mike Evans. That would never happen, but could you imagine Chase, Higgins, Evans ?

(03-08-2022, 10:26 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Good luck brother, they all shot me down a month ago with this.  

I cant get the same ones to answer this - Do we win that SB with a $10M RG and Trent Taylor in the slot instead of Boyd and his wrong freaking route causing a sack after the INT and late 4th QTR dropped pass on 3rd down?

We have the only fans who are ok with a WR3 making $10M per while 4 starters on an awful oline in the Super Bowl barely made $9M combined.

These guys would lose their shit if they were Patriots fans as Belichick cut and traded fan favorites in order to pay PRIORITY positions.

We may have the only fan base in the NFL that believes a championship formula is for the Free Safety to be the highest paid guy on Defense and the WR3 and RB to be highest paid on offense... 

To be fair the majority of those that drive me nuts are on twitter, I just followed you btw (bpoe).

I go back and forth on what I Think about possibly trading Boyd.

In a vacuum, if it was Boyd and rookie guard vs a fa guard and rookie wr- I would take the vet guard and rookie wr.

I think a speedster on outside, chase in slot, Tee on the other outside is pretty dangerous.


But I wouldn’t cut Boyd to keep Hill, Ogenjobi, or Bates. If I had to choose between Bates and Boyd, I’m keeping Boyd. W Burrow we need and have the potential to be a top 3 offense in NFL.

I would also consider cutting/trading Boyd and making a run at Mike Evans. That would never happen, but could you imagine Chase, Higgins, Evans ?

(03-09-2022, 09:48 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: I go back and forth on what I Think about possibly trading Boyd.

In a vacuum, if it was Boyd and rookie guard vs a fa guard and rookie wr- I would take the vet guard and rookie wr.

I think a speedster on outside, chase in slot, Tee on the other outside is pretty dangerous.


But I wouldn’t cut Boyd to keep Hill, Ogenjobi, or Bates. If I had to choose between Bates and Boyd, I’m keeping Boyd. W Burrow we need and have the potential to be a top 3 offense in NFL.

I would also consider cutting/trading Boyd and making a run at Mike Evans. That would never happen, but could you imagine Chase, Higgins, Evans ?

I almost agree with everything you said instead of keeping Boyd over Bates.

#1 With our current roster we have no other safeties so no way we could cut Bates.

#2. WR3's are always easier to find than a solid FS1.


But I appreciate the comments, good stuff.

(03-09-2022, 06:02 PM)casear2727 Wrote: You are just a brick wall mentally.

Bates and Boyds value to the team currently are not even close.  We have no other players on the roster to take Bates spot and it is crucial
if we are not upgrading the other CB big time, and I doubt JC is walking through that door.

Boyds production was with a terrible oline. IMO, a huge upgrade to the oline opens up the run game and more pass concepts to the 2 wideouts - with check downs to the TE and slot - non-priority positons.

I dont care what Boyds value is I just know it is at its max right now and will never be greater.  I want the draft pick and his $10M to go to the oline.  

Bates value is crucial because we would be replacing a higher value position with no depth or other CB as of yet.

Taking a chance on any rookie at WR3 is much less of a risk than a rookie at FS1 with our current roster.

As to your idea of a player has to be elite his first year in the league, well that is nonsensical as well.  Players do get better in the league.


This is all common sense.  You can have a different way of doing things but this is reality with our current team today.

Zac Taylor’s offense has used 3 WR sets more than any other team in the NFL two out of three years and finished 2nd in the third year. Or more than any other team in the NFL over the past three seasons. This means WR3 is more valuable to Zac Taylor’s offense than any other offense in the NFL.

Chase, Higgins, and Boyd received 35%, 30%, and 26% of the WR targets.

Boyd had more targets than either Uzomah or Mixon. Those two combined only got 15% more targets than Boyd.

Boyd was the most targeted WR3 in the league. He caught 98.8% of catchable passes with less drops than Chase, Higgins, Uzomah, and Mixon.

All this makes Boyd the most valuable WR3 in the entire NFL. He isn’t a “non-priority” position. If you think otherwise you haven’t paid attention or don’t understand the numbers you haven’t even bothered to research because unsupported subjective statements are so much easier. Bates isn’t more valuable. You just don’t understand Boyd’s value because you haven’t checked anything to have an informed opinion.

Improving the Oline will decrease sacks, but won’t reduce Boyd’s production because that’s how he is used by design. That’s how Taylor runs his offense. Taylor’s offense features the WR3 more than the TE and RB on this team and more than the WR3 on any other team.

And the Bengals aren’t increasing cap space by $10M by releasing/trading Boyd. Just one more thing you’re confused about.

In this thread you doubt JC Jackson walks in the door and in another thread you discuss the Bengals signing him. Your multiple personalities’ ability to contradict each other with double speak is legendary.

And I guess you would have knowingly overpaid AJ Green last year because without his replacement on the team you’d be too scared to release him and too anxious to rely on a first round replacement.

Replacing WR3 in this offense with a late round rookie is more risky than any other offense because of how Taylor uses the WR3. And a 1st round rookie FS is less risky than a late round WR3 in this offense.

I never claimed a rookie WR3 had to be elite. I just wrote that only one outside of the Top 10 matched Boyd’s production. You’re the one that just characterized that production as elite.

(03-09-2022, 08:41 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Guy, you’re refusal to understand context is very frustrating.

I contend Boyd’s production is a direct result of our poor pass blocking causing us to operate solely in a 3-step drop/quick pass offense.

Immediate go routes or underneath quick passes to Boyd covered by a LB.

In my scenario we upgrade the Oline as close as we can in some spots to elite status which vastly opens up the run game and allows for 5-7 drop pass concepts such as deep routes and double moves for Tee & Chase. WR3 & TE will primarily be check downs minus some slants and seams.

Moore and Moore don’t play with Burrow & our 2 wideouts - totally irrelevant.

Spain was in on every play, many vs AD, I hate that he totally screwed up the last play and I want to replace him too. So again irrelvant. My Boyd in SB complaints were made to simply counter the vet/reliability argument.

For the last time, every single Boyd take you have doesnt counter anything I have said with the exception of him being insurance if we lose Higgins or Chase. And Im seriously done discussing this hypothetical with you. You dont understand context and you have tunnel vision focus only on your opinion.

I'll gladly entertain your opinion on Bates in a different post.

You can contend it. Still wrong though

(03-09-2022, 08:45 PM)casear2727 Wrote: This is a legitimate post by you... finally.

I'll gladly take one of those 2nd round picks and sign Cine or another top FS.

I also like Williams at CB, which give us room to also sign a veteran FS as a stop gap if our Rookie isnt ready.

Good job, Let's go!

The others have been legit. And filled with data to support the conclusions. Unfortunately only one of us is data driven.

(03-10-2022, 12:34 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The others have been legit. And filled with data to support the conclusions. Unfortunately only one of us is data driven.

You're special, argue with someone else, I should have taken the advice of others when this started. Your reputation proceeds you.

(03-09-2022, 02:17 PM)Au165 Wrote: There are actually a lot of examples of them from FA's that refused to come here because of it but it's not usually publicized because they simply sign somewhere else and move on. Agents steer their clients away because of this approach in a lot of cases. It was literally just brought up by agents this past weekend at the combine, players want to come here but agents are skeptical of the Bengals contract structure. 

As to saying you get why for a guy like Lawson...it literally was the same deal Trey took with no injury concerns. Point is, this is how we do deals and it is WELL known around the league. Now that isn't saying Burrow and this team can't overcome that issue and be a destination but this is not a one off issue.

They can steer their clients to a point, but at the end of the day, they work for their clients.  It's a lot harder to steer a client away from someplace they really want to go than it is to steer them away from someplace they really don't care to go, which is what we've been in the past.

Agents are going to posture for the structure they want, but the reality is, their clients would have lost a lot of marketability if they had come here in the past, which costs them money.  That's a big reason why bad teams have to overpay in FA, regardless of structure.

I get why Lawson wanted a lot guaranteed at signing because he was highly injury prone.  Obviously, it worked out for him.  For the Jets, not so much.  A lot of places had Hendrickson rated higher as a FA last year and structure didn't seem to be an issue for him.  

With the kinds of players the Bengals are getting linked to, it seems likely that they will have to break their mold just to get '22 cap numbers down, anyways. 

(03-09-2022, 09:48 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: But I wouldn’t cut Boyd to keep Hill, Ogenjobi, or Bates. If I had to choose between Bates and Boyd, I’m keeping Boyd. W Burrow we need and have the potential to be a top 3 offense in NFL.

This.....

(03-09-2022, 10:27 PM)casear2727 Wrote: I almost agree with everything you said instead of keeping Boyd over Bates.

#1 With our current roster we have no other safeties so no way we could cut Bates.

#2. WR3's are always easier to find than a solid FS1.


But I appreciate the comments, good stuff.

I would DEFINITELY keep Boyd over Bates. Boyd has been steady his entire career, a 1000 yd WR. Bates has been inconsistent, and was almost a liability this year during the regular season. In fact, Vonn Bell has outplayed him at a cheaper price. It's too late now, we've already overpaid him.

(03-10-2022, 02:06 AM)Whatever Wrote: They can steer their clients to a point, but at the end of the day, they work for their clients.  It's a lot harder to steer a client away from someplace they really want to go than it is to steer them away from someplace they really don't care to go, which is what we've been in the past.

Agents are going to posture for the structure they want, but the reality is, their clients would have lost a lot of marketability if they had come here in the past, which costs them money.  That's a big reason why bad teams have to overpay in FA, regardless of structure.

I get why Lawson wanted a lot guaranteed at signing because he was highly injury prone.  Obviously, it worked out for him.  For the Jets, not so much.  A lot of places had Hendrickson rated higher as a FA last year and structure didn't seem to be an issue for him.  

With the kinds of players the Bengals are getting linked to, it seems likely that they will have to break their mold just to get '22 cap numbers down, anyways. 

In my opinion, I think the guaranteed money is the most important factor to signing free agents in general.  I think the Bengals could continue to structure the contracts as they usually do, but guarantee more of the base salary during the first two years of the contract.  The players get more security and the Bengals can still avoid the dead money at the end of the contract if they choose to release the player. The structure of the contract can remain the same while still increasing the guaranteed portion.

(03-10-2022, 09:56 AM)Wyche Wrote: I would DEFINITELY keep Boyd over Bates. Boyd has been steady his entire career, a 1000 yd WR. Bates has been inconsistent, and was almost a liability this year during the regular season. In fact, Vonn Bell has outplayed him at a cheaper price. It's too late now, we've already overpaid him.

I get it but career stats mean nothing today.  WR3 is the 4th option, sometime 5th is the TE is having a big day, in this offense.

This is more about the position than the player, some really have a hard time distinguishing this aspect.

We have 2 better receivers than Boyd, and his position is not a priority.  It is much, much easier replacing a WR3 than any other position other than maybe RB.  We could easily draft a much faster, more electrifying WR next month or pick up a sure handed guy in FA.  With a solid line our focus should be on the 2 wideouts and expanded running game while we still have Mixon.

The other aspect is our current roster.  Getting rid of Bates, unless it involves a really good trade in some way, is much riskier as we only have Bell on our roster.  We have 2 safety spots that require 3-4 guys and this would leave us with only 1.

As to the comparison of each player Bates had a very average season but played out huge in the playoffs and in the Super Bowl. Boyd played solid in the regular season and hurt us in the Super Bowl in crucial moments.

But the gist of my argument is that WR3 will never, ever, ever be a top 2 paid position in this offense again with Burrow at QB. 4 receptions per game does not warrant getting paid 10M per year while 4 starters on the oline make 9M combined resulting in half of our playbook throw out the window and Burrow getting killed.

We have not developed any depth whatsoever at safety and with only Awuzie at CB, Bates is a millions times more essential - pre-free agency and pre-draft.  If we had a guy on the roster behind Bates I'd be ok with him going as well if we have a plan for a high draft pick to replace him.

(03-10-2022, 10:19 AM)casear2727 Wrote: I get it but career stats mean nothing today.  WR3 is the 4th option, sometime 5th is the TE is having a big day, in this offense.

This is more about the position than the player, some really have a hard time distinguishing this aspect.

We have 2 better receivers than Boyd, and his position is not a priority.  It is much, much easier replacing a WR3 than any other position other than maybe RB.  We could easily draft a much faster, more electrifying WR next month or pick up a sure handed guy in FA.  With a solid line our focus should be on the 2 wideouts and expanded running game while we still have Mixon.

The other aspect is our current roster.  Getting rid of Bates, unless it involves a really good trade in some way, is much riskier as we only have Bell on our roster.  We have 2 safety spots that require 3-4 guys and this would leave us with only 1.

As to the comparison of each player Bates had a very average season but played out huge in the playoffs and in the Super Bowl. Boyd played solid in the regular season and hurt us in the Super Bowl in crucial moments.

But the gist of my argument is that WR3 will never, ever, ever be a top 2 paid position in this offense again with Burrow at QB. 4 receptions per game does not warrant getting paid 10M per year while 4 starters on the oline make 9M combined resulting in half of our playbook throw out the window and Burrow getting killed.

We have not developed any depth whatsoever at safety and with only Awuzie at CB, Bates is a millions times more essential - pre-free agency and pre-draft.  If we had a guy on the roster behind Bates I'd be ok with him going as well if we have a plan for a high draft pick to replace him.

We have Awuzie and Hilton. I actually think they bring Apple back too. We don't have to draft a FS, we could've traded for one, get one in FA, etc and probably get the same production for cheaper. I like Jesse a lot, and he played well in the post season....but..... he's not worth being the highest paid safety in the league. In fact, I'd wager you could get very similar production for cheaper. Can you get a sure handed 1000 yd WR that easily? I don't think you can. Zac utilizes WR3 more than any HC in the league. We don't have to have a guy as good as Tyler, but we can't have a scrub either. Trent Taylor is not an option, sorry.

I noted earlier, and it never got noticed, you point to having Taylor and a RG vs Boyd as being a sure thing we win the SB. I would counter with this....do we even make the Bowl without the clutch performance in critical situations by TB? No one, that's right...no one, in the league has been as good on 3rd and 4th down as Tyler Boyd over the last few years. You're kinda glossing over that fact. 

As I mentioned, I'd be game with trading him so long as the return was worth losing him. I'd rather have traded Bates. However, neither are going anywhere.