(06-04-2022, 03:33 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Whit played within the system that the team was using. Dunlap just wanted to freelance and rush the passer on every play.

Uh, no, Whit was not going to play AT ALL.

And Dunlap was supposed to rush the passer.  

(06-04-2022, 12:21 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: This is a massive assumption based off of one comment from a man who has made over $87m in his career. I feel safe that he didn't genuinely mean his family "needed it". Lol.

“My family needed it” doesn’t have to mean money. It could mean security. It’s probably tough raising kids when you don’t know what school they’re going to be going to next year, or even the next 2-3.

(06-04-2022, 04:40 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: “My family needed it” doesn’t have to mean money. It could mean security. It’s probably tough raising kids when you don’t know what school they’re going to be going to next year, or even the next 2-3.

This.

(06-04-2022, 03:53 PM)puddycat Wrote: What a player threatens to do to the front office is almost completely divorced from what they do on the field.  Whitworth had never hit free agency without signing an extension until that last 1 year extension with the Bengals.  He valued the security and the Bengals didn't want to give it to him.  As the Bengals now know, a player without a future contract might have great contract year play, and might have insecure unfocused play.  Every player is different.
Whitworth didn't mail it in his last year in Cincinnati.  The Bengals got exactly what they wanted, and what they deserved.  The Rams signed the 4th highest contract for an LT the 2017 offseason(about 10th highest LT per year overall) and got an All-Pro. Get over it.

This is why I appreciate what Whit did. He didn't sit out, he didn't whine on Social media. he didn't "leak" his unhappiness through his agent. He explained his stance to the owner and never took a play off or publicly distracted from the team. 

None of us know what Whit would have done if PB hadn't agreed to the extension, but Whit played the card he had.

As to parting ways with Whit: I always said the Bengals did it right; it's just the results didn't reap what we'd hoped. 

(06-04-2022, 04:40 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: “My family needed it” doesn’t have to mean money. It could mean security. It’s probably tough raising kids when you don’t know what school they’re going to be going to next year, or even the next 2-3.

I agree with you, but that wasn’t what I responding to. JJ said it was clear that Whit was having financial issues. I think Whit’s statement could be fluff for the story or interpreted in other ways rather than clear financial distress.

(06-04-2022, 04:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Uh, no, Whit was not going to play AT ALL.

And Dunlap was supposed to rush the passer.  

On some plays. On others he was supposed to contain the run lane instead of going deep trying to get around the tackle. Just like Hubbard does. Dunlap refused to play that way. I don't know why you continue to support that.

(06-04-2022, 11:02 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Most teams would have done the same as the Bengals.  People here always complain about Mike Brown being "too loyal" and praise the Patriots for letting a player go "a year too early" instead of "a year too late".  Then they do a 180 spin and complain about Mike Brown not being loyal enough.

They should have franchised Whit in 2017 at the very least. They new Cedric was a terrible player and that's why the benched him in 2016. Plus they wanted to sign Whit but they were not prepared for a bidding war. The Front office handheld the situation like complete crap.

(06-04-2022, 12:27 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: For sure, destroyed us not bringing back Whit but who knew he had THAT much left in the tank?

People go out of the way to defend  the front office for not signing Whitworth and Zeitler but the truth is the front  didn't have a replacement for Z and they new  Cedric was an awful player. 

(06-04-2022, 10:07 AM)J24 Wrote: Whit was right and I don't recall it being a major problem at that time. Also Daltons thumb injury cost us a Championship that year.

A championship might be optimistic. They were good but I didn't trust that staff to scheme like the top dogs or have the team ready 

Keep in mind, as much as we all hated the failures of the front office in the past, they all led to the current team so just have to accyit as fait.

With leaders like Whitworth, it's pretty apparent why we constantly fell short in big games. And seriously, what kind of a turd is still whining in the media about his contract years after the fact?

(06-04-2022, 04:40 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: “My family needed it” doesn’t have to mean money. It could mean security. It’s probably tough raising kids when you don’t know what school they’re going to be going to next year, or even the next 2-3.

With all those millions why is this even a issue? He could have retired and stayed in Cinci to keep his kids in their same school. If he was willing to quit and go elsewhere kids changing schools is something that comes with playing in the league...

(06-04-2022, 07:16 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: I agree with you, but that wasn’t what I responding to. JJ said it was clear that Whit was having financial issues. I think Whit’s statement could be fluff for the story or interpreted in other ways rather than clear financial distress.

Does a 1 year extension really make players feel any more secure? I'm not sure what else it could have been but financial. Bad business deals will eat into those millions. I find it odd he settled for a 1 year deal when he was so unhappy he wrote the owner of the team and threatened to quit. 1 more year did nothing to answer the kids in school question...  

(06-05-2022, 01:02 AM)jj22 Wrote: Does a 1 year extension really make players feel any more secure? I'm not sure what else it could have been but financial. Bad business deals will eat into those millions. I find it odd he settled for a 1 year deal when he was so unhappy he wrote the owner of the team and threatened to quit. 1 more year did nothing to answer the kids in school question...  

I think the 1 yr ext was to show them he's still got it, but they didn't franchise him because they certainly didn't expect him to get the deal he got from the rams. In hindsight, it would have been worth it for the Bengals to keep him, but at the time, age, $$ and top draft pick, they were ready to move on. Just more or less ended up as just about the worst possible nightmare outcome.

(06-05-2022, 01:02 AM)jj22 Wrote: Does a 1 year extension really make players feel any more secure? I'm not sure what else it could have been but financial. Bad business deals will eat into those millions. I find it odd he settled for a 1 year deal when he was so unhappy he wrote the owner of the team and threatened to quit. 1 more year did nothing to answer the kids in school question...  

It could have also been fluff for the story. Again, it's a pretty large assumption to make that Whit, who has earned over $87m in his career, is in "clear" financial distress. Even using the point you're making, you have to make large assumptions about business deals going south in order to come to your conclusion. If you're privy to the quality of his deals, then I would be interested to know. Otherwise, that's my point. I don't know why he took the one year deal. Maybe he wanted to try to swing it into one last contract here in Cincinnati. Maybe there was something going on within that time frame that really benefitted them to stay in Cincinnati. Who knows? 

(06-04-2022, 10:30 PM)J24 Wrote: People go out of the way to defend  the front office for not signing Whitworth and Zeitler but the truth is the front  didn't have a replacement for Z and they new  Cedric was an awful player. 

That's because no one really expected Whit's play to not fall off drastically due to his age, and Zeitler got insane money from Cleveland. Do you really think the smart move is to pay an aging player who is at the point where most retire and give him a 3 year contract? They thought they had his replacement, they didn't. That does not mean it was a ad move, it just did not work out the way most would have thought and Whit beat father time for a while. If the Bengals had given him a huge 3 year deal, and paid Zeitler what Cleveland did, people would be blasting them for that as well. The front office just can't win with some fans.

(06-05-2022, 10:32 AM)Sled21 Wrote:  If the Bengals had given him a huge 3 year deal, and paid Zeitler what Cleveland did, people would be blasting them for that as well. 

Exactly.  Samr thing happened with Steinbach.  Both of those guys got overpaid contracts they did not deserve.  The Bengals were actually smart not to pay them what they got, yet fans criticize the Bengals for "not valuing offensiev guards enough".

(06-05-2022, 12:37 AM)Whatever Wrote: With leaders like Whitworth, it's pretty apparent why we constantly fell short in big games. 

Uh, Whit's team just beat our asses in the Super Bowl.

(06-05-2022, 10:32 AM)Sled21 Wrote: That's because no one really expected Whit's play to not fall off drastically due to his age, and Zeitler got insane money from Cleveland. Do you really think the smart move is to pay an aging player who is at the point where most retire and give him a 3 year contract? They thought they had his replacement, they didn't. That does not mean it was a ad move, it just did not work out the way most would have thought and Whit beat father time for a while. If the Bengals had given him a huge 3 year deal, and paid Zeitler what Cleveland did, people would be blasting them for that as well. The front office just can't win with some fans.

Zeitler wasn't worth what Cleveland gave him at the time. 

(06-05-2022, 11:44 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Uh, Whit's team just beat our asses in the Super Bowl.

The Rams won.  I wouldn't say they beat our asses.  If you look at Whit's group specifically, they gave up 2 sacks, 5 QB Hits, and only averaged 1.87 ypc in the run game.  Both of the sacks were at least partially on him.  Hendrickson beat him on both reps, getting the sack for himself on the first and forcing Stafford to step up into Reader on the second.  

Honestly, that '11-'15 OL group always under achieved in the playoffs, allowing 15 sacks in the 5 one and done's during that period.  

However, when your team is on an 8-0 start and one of your captains is more focused on threatening to quit mid season to strong arm the team into an extension instead of winning a SB(or even just one playoff game), there's a big issue. Frankly, there are a lot of guys in the NFL that are mostly about their money.  You can win with guys like that, but not by having them in core positions of leadership.

(06-05-2022, 09:37 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: It could have also been fluff for the story. Again, it's a pretty large assumption to make that Whit, who has earned over $87m in his career, is in "clear" financial distress. Even using the point you're making, you have to make large assumptions about business deals going south in order to come to your conclusion. If you're privy to the quality of his deals, then I would be interested to know. Otherwise, that's my point. I don't know why he took the one year deal. Maybe he wanted to try to swing it into one last contract here in Cincinnati. Maybe there was something going on within that time frame that really benefitted them to stay in Cincinnati. Who knows? 

Keep in mind that 70% of lottery winners wind up declaring bankruptcy.  There is a lot that goes into managing that kind of wealth.

As an example, one of my sister's close friends from college married an NFL player.  He was never at Whit's level from a play or pay standpoint, but he played 6 years in the league.  She would often tell my sister how frustrating it was trying to manage his finances so they would be set for life when his playing career ended because he would go out and blow money all the time.  His mind set was that he was going to get a big next contract and he'd worry about retirement then.  Most of the guys playing at the NFL level have huge egos, and everything Whit says makes it seem like he falls in this category.