I’m a huge proponent of keeping our Offensive core together. The NFL begins with offense. And Im hoping the front office does everything they can to keep Higgins, Chase, Boyd, even Hurst together for the foreseeable future. We know Burrow and Chase are the priority, and Higgins right after that.

All of that being said, if signing Higgins means letting go of some defensive studs, I’m not actually sure we should. So my simple question is, who has been more valuable in the playoffs, last year and this year- Higgins or Pratt? As crazy as it sounds, I think Pratt has been more of a difference maker in the post season. Do we beat the raiders last year and Ravens this year without him? Maybe, maybe not. Do we win those games without Higgins? Maybe, maybe not.

Pratt will be much cheaper than Higgins so I think the better question is are we better off with Higgins or Pratt + Wilson going forward?


I’d like to keep them all, but that won’t happen once Burrow gets paid, and rightfully so. I hope they can keep Chase, Higgins, Pratt, Wilson, Bates, etc. but a couple are going to be the off man out.

I think by nature, WRs provide more value than LBers unless there is a severe discrepancy between their abilities. They also seem to be more difficult to replace.

Don't think it's a Higgins vs Pratt type conversation.

Higgins as a #1 WR (but not top-of-the-line #1 WR) will be getting $25m/yr, Pratt as a great 2-down ILB will get $7-10m/yr.

It'll take ~3 Pratts to equal 1 Higgins as far as money goes. Pratt seems like he's going to be chasing the biggest FA $ he can with his earlier comments of needing to play 3rd down because he was "leaving too much money on the table". Higgins is just probably going to cost too much when paired with Burrow and Chase who are absolutely going to get extended this year and next, respectively. (Not just too cap space, but too much guaranteed $ that needs to be put into escrow by the Bengals, too.)

When you have good players, you're going to lose some good players. You just keep the core that you need and can afford and replace the rest to keep on keeping on. If Burrow is as great as we all think he is then there's going to be a time where he's going to have to deal with having just 1 great and 1 good weapon and then just raise the talent of some other guys around him. Don't pull a Rodgers or Tannehill on Burrow where you trade his only good weapon and give him nothing but scrubs, but we're more in a Mahomes with Kelce/Tyreek situation where you keep the best (Chase) and use the other to get draft capital and tons of excess salary cap space that can help build a more complete team than a seriously topheavy team with holes everywhere.

- - - -

TLDR, I think both are going to be on different teams in 2024, if not 2023. We'll make do and keep moving on.

(01-27-2023, 01:20 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: I think by nature, WRs provide more value than LBers unless there is a severe discrepancy between their abilities. They also seem to be more difficult to replace.

I agree. But who has been more valuable in post season? I would argue Pratt

Honestly it's probably more of a Wilson vs Pratt discussion because I don't think they keep both. I would imagine they will have a number they want to spend on that group and that will dictate who stays. The other discussion item is that do you move Boyds money to Higgins and get Irwin at a lower deal and then keep a Chase/Higgins/Irwin combo plus one or both linebackers?

I think there are ways to do this. I'd rather cut Mixon and Boyd and keep the rest of the team together if I was being completely honest. This HB class like most all will present starters on day 3 and I just think the idea of having money tied into a HB is insane with where the team is heading financially.

It's a tough call, but on that play against the Raiders, people tend to forget that Apple had the WR blanketed well short of the GL. If Apple doesn't break up the pass, he should've easily made the tackle short of the goal
I'm not taking a thing away from Pratt's huge game sealing INT, but the Raiders likely wouldn't have scored anyway.

In the post season alone maybe Pratt. But maybe we don't get to the post season, or at least not with as high a seed without Higgins.

I will say I have noticed we are a good team historically at turning WRs into productive players. Maybe that is an argument for letting Higgins walk as we can replace him more easily than an LB (based on our history).

I wonder if we can do some contract magic to at least get a few more years with Tee. Pay him more in his first year so we'll take a lower hit when it is time to extend Chase?

(01-27-2023, 01:57 PM)Au165 Wrote: Honestly it's probably more of a Wilson vs Pratt discussion because I don't think they keep both. I would imagine they will have a number they want to spend on that group and that will dictate who stays. The other discussion item is that do you move Boyds money to Higgins and get Irwin at a lower deal and then keep a Chase/Higgins/Irwin combo plus one or both linebackers?

I think there are ways to do this. I'd rather cut Mixon and Boyd and keep the rest of the team together if I was being completely honest. This HB class like most all will present starters on day 3 and I just think the idea of having money tied into a HB is insane with where the team is heading financially.

Tyler Boyd was a huge factor in the growth of Tee Higgins, Ja'Marr Chase, and even Joe Burrow but now Chase is seeing an increased role inside because of the coverage and even Hayden Hurst is eating into his touches. Boyd is less effective on the outside. 

I love our guys but the way burrow is seeing the field he could complete passes to a garbage can on wheels being pushed off the line.

Chase has got to stay but after that id rather see them keep key defensive players.

(01-27-2023, 02:34 PM)motoarch Wrote: I love our guys but the way burrow is seeing the field he could complete passes to a garbage can on wheels being pushed off the line.

Chase has got to stay but after that id rather see them keep key defensive players.

You can almost argue Lou is doing the same thing though. He is running Eli Apple out as a #1 CB and making it work. 

(01-27-2023, 02:41 PM)Au165 Wrote: You can almost argue Lou is doing the same thing though. He is running Eli Apple out as a #1 CB and making it work. 

Lou-Dey !

(01-27-2023, 01:15 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: I’m a huge proponent of keeping our Offensive core together. The NFL begins with offense. And Im hoping the front office does everything they can to keep Higgins, Chase, Boyd, even Hurst together for the foreseeable future. We know Burrow and Chase are the priority, and Higgins right after that.

All of that being said, if signing Higgins means letting go of some defensive studs, I’m not actually sure we should. So my simple question is, who has been more valuable in the playoffs, last year and this year- Higgins or Pratt? As crazy as it sounds, I think Pratt has been more of a difference maker in the post season. Do we beat the raiders last year and Ravens this year without him? Maybe, maybe not. Do we win those games without Higgins? Maybe, maybe not.

Pratt will be much cheaper than Higgins so I think the better question is are we better off with Higgins or Pratt + Wilson going forward?


I’d like to keep them all, but that won’t happen once Burrow gets paid, and rightfully so. I hope they can keep Chase, Higgins, Pratt, Wilson, Bates, etc. but a couple are going to be the off man out.

Sucks, but I am thinking Pratt is the odd man out. Have to keep Logan Wilson who is younger and hopefully Tee.

Bengals can free up a lot of cap money and cash by cutting/trading Boyd and cutting Wilson's 2 million and no dead cap in 2023.

Who is more important Boyd or Higgins? I love Boyd, but he is heading towards 30, will be 29 in November of 2023.

I think we keep Tee over Boyd and Wilson, they will need more money, but they can structure a Higgins contract to be 6 to 8 million in 2023 (right now it is less than 4 million and 10 to 12 million in 2024. It will take cash immediately so the structure the bonus over a 5 or 6 year contract.

Burrow also can be structured to get a huge signing bonus for a 10 year contract, they can minimize his cap hit in the early years.

I do believe the Bengals sold naming rights for PBS to Paycor to have a cash infusion guaranteed each year.

Time will tell, but I see the Bengals having Tee, Chase and Burrow under contract for 4 to 6 years minimum for each by 2024.

(01-27-2023, 03:05 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Bengals can free up a lot of cap money and cash by cutting/trading Boyd and cutting Wilson's 2 million and no dead cap in 2023.

Who is more important Boyd or Higgins? I love Boyd, but he is heading towards 30, will be 29 in November of 2023.

I think we keep Tee over Boyd and Wilson, they will need more money, but they can structure a Higgins contract to be 6 to 8 million in 2023 (right now it is less than 4 million and 10 to 12 million in 2024. It will take cash immediately so the structure the bonus over  a 5 or 6 year contract.

Burrow also can be structured to get a huge signing bonus for a 10 year contract, they can minimize his cap hit in the early years.

I do believe the Bengals sold naming rights for PBS to Paycor to have a cash infusion guaranteed each year.

Time will tell, but I see the Bengals having Tee, Chase and Burrow under contract for 4 to 6 years minimum for each by 2024.

I don't see us cutting Wilson, no way.

(01-27-2023, 02:41 PM)Au165 Wrote: You can almost argue Lou is doing the same thing though. He is running Eli Apple out as a #1 CB and making it work. 

That's a legit counterpoint 

(01-27-2023, 01:15 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: I’m a huge proponent of keeping our Offensive core together. The NFL begins with offense. And Im hoping the front office does everything they can to keep Higgins, Chase, Boyd, even Hurst together for the foreseeable future. We know Burrow and Chase are the priority, and Higgins right after that.

All of that being said, if signing Higgins means letting go of some defensive studs, I’m not actually sure we should. So my simple question is, who has been more valuable in the playoffs, last year and this year- Higgins or Pratt? As crazy as it sounds, I think Pratt has been more of a difference maker in the post season. Do we beat the raiders last year and Ravens this year without him? Maybe, maybe not. Do we win those games without Higgins? Maybe, maybe not.

Pratt will be much cheaper than Higgins so I think the better question is are we better off with Higgins or Pratt + Wilson going forward?


I’d like to keep them all, but that won’t happen once Burrow gets paid, and rightfully so. I hope they can keep Chase, Higgins, Pratt, Wilson, Bates, etc. but a couple are going to be the off man out.

WR seem to be much easier to replace, look around the league , every year multiple new faces are having solid years.. impact LBs are much harder, also the NFL seems to begin with a very good QB.. but teams that put too much money in their offense have paid the price on defense... balance is best

(01-27-2023, 02:41 PM)Au165 Wrote: You can almost argue Lou is doing the same thing though. He is running Eli Apple out as a #1 CB and making it work. 

Captian Lou did an extraordinary job taking the leagues "We like this guy but not as much as this guy." free agents and turning them into one of the most dangerous defenses in the NFL.

On offense you either need to keep Chase and Higgins or give Burrow an elite offensive line. You can't give him a bunch of mediocre receivers with a mediocre O line. He couldn't compete effectively.

Look at Mahomes right now. He has an elite O line which is much better than Burrow has. His RB is better than Burrow has. His TE is better than what Burrow has. The only thing Burrow has an advantage on is his WRs and even then K.C. still has some really good talent at WR with tons of speed.

You can't let Burrow have such a lack of talent around him competing with Mahomes and all the talent he is surrounded with.

I feel like Uzomah sort of set the stage for what will happen to a lot of our non Chase pass catchers. They get that Burrow bump in the stats and then they cash in and good for them. I could see Higgins getting paid to be a #1 WR for a WR needy team, for sure.

Burrow has embraced his role as an elevator. There's no reason why Hurst, and especially Taylor, Irwin, Wilcox, et. al, should be doing what they're doing. They just elevate their games in limited opportunities. That's the sign of an elevator. All of which is to say that I love Uno and Tee and I see them as the best tandem in the NFL (not even including Boyd as the wily veteran glue guy), but we'll be fine regardless.

I doubt they can co-exist on the same payroll long-term without hurting the team elsewhere but I don't really care. I'll enjoy them while they're here. Burrow will take care of the rest like all the greats do. If Burrow needs them to be great, that almost implies Burrow himself is not great. And that's nonsense.