(06-05-2015, 04:05 PM)Nately120 Wrote: What are the odds of this turning into a Michael Johnston-style "good riddance....hey, welcome back!" sort of thing.  Hmm......

(06-06-2015, 08:06 PM)JADefense Wrote: If you're talking about the organization, I don't think anyone wanted him gone.  The fans are another story.  Too bad Jungle Noise is gone because you can't go back to look for yourself.  There were many posters on the site that busted on Johnson, particularly after the 2013 season and then his decision to leave.  They simply looked at the sack numbers and ignored his strength against the run, total snaps played and overall leadership.  (Sort of similar to Justin Smith isn't it.)  These guys may not admit it now but they were there.  In fact, I'm not going to do the work for you but you can probably browse through the archives at Cincy Jungle and find some of the comments for yourself.

As you can see from the post being quoted it seems to me that he is referring to the organization itself and not so much fans that actually hold zero relevance as to whether a player comes or goes. Could be wrong but that is the way it sounds to me.

(06-05-2015, 03:56 PM)JSR18 Wrote: Would that be the system that discourages holding (especially on a big play) and being able to count to 2 (to avoid pre-snap penalties)??

Hope the Saints employ a much easier system...

Most likely. They would use him more as a receiver than an inline blocker.

But we do agree that Gresh can cut down on that 1 hold he had last year.  

(06-05-2015, 04:11 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Who was saying good riddance to Michael Johnson?

I didn't want him to go, but my thought at the time was that we just couldn't afford him, Dunlap, and Atkins, so I had accepted his leaving.  I had no idea our run defense would fall apart after he left.  I realize now his importance to our D Line.  He made the rotation work.

(06-05-2015, 02:47 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I just think Dalton's inaccuracy is overblown a bit. Sure he has a few games every year where he really sails some throws, but for the most part he's fairly on target. I don't think he's so bad that it gets in receiver's heads, or that Andy is to blame for drops. I just think some folks try to blame every problem on the QB. 

Sure, if you put any receiver with the QB's you named (all elite), they're probably going to be better off, but I don't think Gresh's problems were with the QB. I think they're in his head. He'd run incorrect routes, drop passes that were between the numbers and he had 6 fumbles in his last 108 catches. 

If he has those problems in NO, it won't matter how good Brees is, because Brees will start to ignore him. Elite QB's don't stand for that crap. Gresh had 1st round physical skills, but until he gets it together upstairs, he won't be any better in NO than he was here.

I couldn't agree more with you on this point at all. I also think that Andy's issues are all in his head as well, I even have said it on this board. 

What that makes you wonder is, what the hell is going on a PBS that so many guys come here with the tools and the talents, but end up with something that shakes their confidence or doesn't keep them focused on football. 

(06-07-2015, 01:52 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: I couldn't agree more with you on this point at all. I also think that Andy's issues are all in his head as well, I even have said it on this board. 

What that makes you wonder is, what the hell is going on a PBS that so many guys come here with the tools and the talents, but end up with something that shakes their confidence or doesn't keep them focused on football. 

It's the secret ingredient in Skyline Chili.

(06-07-2015, 01:52 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: I couldn't agree more with you on this point at all. I also think that Andy's issues are all in his head as well, I even have said it on this board. 

What that makes you wonder is, what the hell is going on a PBS that so many guys come here with the tools and the talents, but end up with something that shakes their confidence or doesn't keep them focused on football. 

That's definitely something we can agree on. How many players have we had through the years that flashed immense talent, but they just couldn't find consistency or they'd fall apart in clutch situations? Andy, Gresh and Palmer come to mind. Even AJ and Chad had their weaknesses as far as prime time and playoff games.

(06-07-2015, 04:00 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: It's the secret ingredient in Skyline Chili.

Marvin Lewis is the secret ingredient in Skyline Chili? Gross.

(06-03-2015, 11:34 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/03/report-jermaine-gresham-visiting-saints/

I'm hoping he signs, because it's possibly the best situation for a TE in the NFL. They pass more than any team and Graham put up monster numbers there.

Can't wait to see how Gresh does. I know a lot of folks thought our system held him back. If he signs with the Saints, we'll see about that.

Would love to see him go there and put up monster numbers.  I hope he does well where ever he lands.

(06-06-2015, 09:29 PM)BonnieBengal Wrote: I didn't want him to go, but my thought at the time was that we just couldn't afford him, Dunlap, and Atkins, so I had accepted his leaving.  I had no idea our run defense would fall apart after he left.  I realize now his importance to our D Line.  He made the rotation work.

Same, i also thought Dunlap was the better pass rusher to keep and we made the right decision.

Dunlap took the cheaper extension and we got MJ back, thank the Lord. It all worked out for the best luckily.

(06-07-2015, 11:59 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: That's definitely something we can agree on. How many players have we had through the years that flashed immense talent, but they just couldn't find consistency or they'd fall apart in clutch situations? Andy, Gresh and Palmer come to mind. Even AJ and Chad had their weaknesses as far as prime time and playoff games.


Marvin Lewis is the secret ingredient in Skyline Chili? Gross.

Housh is the only real clutch player i can remember.

(06-07-2015, 03:17 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Housh is the only real clutch player i can remember.

I forget, was Housh any good when he left the Bengals? Didn't he retire after a year or two after leaving us? 

Then we get that Jets WR who ended up being terrible for us. 

(06-07-2015, 04:35 PM)magikod Wrote: I forget, was Housh any good when he left the Bengals? Didn't he retire after a year or two after leaving us? 

Then we get that Jets WR who ended up being terrible for us. 

Housh was solid for the Seahawks (79 catches, 911 yards), but it wasn't enough to justify the contract the Seahawks gave him.

He wasn't cut out to be a number 1 WR, especially at age 32, but I do wish we would've kept him.

It would've saved a lot of headaches with Coles and Bryant. Then we rented TO for a year and wasted picks on guys like Simpson and Caldwell.

(06-07-2015, 04:35 PM)magikod Wrote: I forget, was Housh any good when he left the Bengals? Didn't he retire after a year or two after leaving us? 

Then we get that Jets WR who ended up being terrible for us. 

Honestly, I feel like it makes us look even worse when players that were our starters go elsewhere and don't contribute.  Chad, TO, Housh, Benson, possibly Gresham,  so on and so forth.  

EDIT: Looks like Housh wasn't a total wash in Seattle. I do recall him ending his career with Palmer in Oakland.

(06-07-2015, 04:00 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: It's the secret ingredient in Skyline Chili.

Chocolate is the secret ingredient.  Therefore, chocolate is the reason Marvin's teams can't win in the playoffs.   In a situation that defies logic, this sounds like as good of an explanation as any.

(06-07-2015, 04:35 PM)magikod Wrote: I forget, was Housh any good when he left the Bengals? Didn't he retire after a year or two after leaving us? 

Then we get that Jets WR who ended up being terrible for us. 

(06-07-2015, 05:04 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Housh was solid for the Seahawks (79 catches, 911 yards), but it wasn't enough to justify the contract the Seahawks gave him.

He wasn't cut out to be a number 1 WR, especially at age 32, but I do wish we would've kept him.

It would've saved a lot of headaches with Coles and Bryant. Then we rented TO for a year and wasted picks on guys like Simpson and Caldwell.

Completely agree.

(06-07-2015, 06:48 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Honestly, I feel like it makes us look even worse when players that were our starters go elsewhere and don't contribute.  Chad, TO, Housh, Benson, possibly Gresham,  so on and so forth.  

EDIT:  Looks like Housh wasn't a total wash in Seattle.  I do recall him ending his career with Palmer in Oakland.

Why does that make us look worse? Other teams couldn't get the best out of players that were great for us?

I have always been a dude that doesn't like the FO and the coaches but this actually makes me think a little different.

MJ to add to that list even if he was injured.

Then there are guys like Takeo Spikes and Justin Smith that went elsewhere and were just as, if not more solid.

If we had more of those guys i would understand your point.

(06-07-2015, 09:11 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote:

Completely agree.

Why does that make us look worse? Other teams couldn't get the best out of players that were great for us?

I have always been a dude that doesn't like the FO and the coaches but this actually makes me think a little different.

MJ to add to that list even if he was injured.

Then there are guys like Takeo Spikes and Justin Smith that went elsewhere and were just as, if not more solid.

If we had more of those guys i would understand your point.

You don't see how it looks bad when our #1 and #2 WRs in 2010 end up sitting the bench and/or getting cut before the season starts?  Ok, so (totally hypothetically speaking) if we let Dalton's contract expire and he ends up in the CFL in 2016 or no higher than 3rd on some other team's depth chart you're telling me that's not going to make you think less of him/the Bengals?

(06-07-2015, 09:32 PM)Nately120 Wrote: You don't see how it looks bad when our #1 and #2 WRs in 2010 end up sitting the bench and/or getting cut before the season starts?  Ok, so (totally hypothetically speaking) if we let Dalton's contract expire and he ends up in the CFL in 2016 or no higher than 3rd on some other team's depth chart you're telling me that's not going to make you think less of him/the Bengals?

Most of the guys you were talking about were past their prime and we let them go.

Good move by the FO.

If that happened with Dalton, yeah i think we made a back pick. But you are kind of insinuating
we are a bad drafting team. I honestly think we have been one of the best for the last 5 years or
so myself. So i still don't understand your point Nately.

(06-07-2015, 09:40 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Most of the guys you were talking about were past their prime and we let them go.

Good move by the FO.

If that happened with Dalton, yeah i think we made a back pick. But you are kind of insinuating
we are a bad drafting team. I honestly think we have been one of the best for the last 5 years or
so myself. So i still don't understand your point Nately.

My point is that in 2010 we were supposed to be building upon 2009 and competing for a title and after 2010 we found that no other NFL team wanted anything to do with our top 2 WRs.  It was just...bleh.  What is so hard to get about this?  If our starters can't get on the field for other teams, what good are they?  Don't we look stupid for having a guy #1 on our depth chart who isn't anywhere close to that when he is picked up elsewhere?

Maybe I'm the only one who thinks this way, Ida know.  To each his own, I guess.

(06-07-2015, 09:50 PM)Nately120 Wrote: My point is that in 2010 we were supposed to be building upon 2009 and competing for a title and after 2010 we found that no other NFL team wanted anything to do with our top 2 WRs.  It was just...bleh.  What is so hard to get about this?  If our starters can't get on the field for other teams, what good are they?  Don't we look stupid for having a guy #1 on our depth chart who isn't anywhere close to that when he is picked up elsewhere?

Maybe I'm the only one who thinks this way, Ida know.  To each his own, I guess.

I see what you're getting at, and I would agree, but I just don't think Chad or TO were washed up in 2010. They both still showed ability. 

Chad's issue in NE was that he just couldn't master the Pats' complex playbook. Even after the failure there, Miami still gave him a shot, but the domestic violence spat did him in. At that point he was too old and not worth the PR hit. 

TO's issue was that no teams wanted to touch him due to his issues with the 49ers/Cowboys/Eagles. It got to the point with him where the risk outweighed the reward. When he was 28, 32 or 34 years old, maybe. But not at 36-37 years old. That's why his last stops were Buffalo and Cincy. Teams he wouldn't have played for earlier in his career. Teams know at that age that he could drop off at any point, and do you want a possibly unproductive TO in your locker room? Again, not worth the risk.

Heck, TO dropped 222 yards against Cleveland and 141 and 2 td's on MNF vs Pittsburgh. That alone shows he wasn't done.

(06-07-2015, 05:04 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Housh was solid for the Seahawks (79 catches, 911 yards), but it wasn't enough to justify the contract the Seahawks gave him.

He wasn't cut out to be a number 1 WR, especially at age 32, but I do wish we would've kept him.

It would've saved a lot of headaches with Coles and Bryant. Then we rented TO for a year and wasted picks on guys like Simpson and Caldwell.

TJ was mainly released by Seattle because he didn't really buy into Carroll's system. The contract is what pushed it over the edge.

(06-08-2015, 04:16 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: TJ was mainly released by Seattle because he didn't really buy into Carroll's system. The contract is what pushed it over the edge.

Good memory. I forgot about Housh's clash with Carroll.