He’ll always be a Bengal to me after that smackdown on the dancing queen.

(03-14-2023, 03:17 AM)guyofthetiger Wrote: My perspective on the guaranteed money offers is I too would avoid them. If you hired an individual wanting guaranteed pay over 3 years, would you go for it? Especially if the job involved potential injuries. I just think the Bengals are being money conscience. Makes business sense.

I don't think it does. Football is a tough sport with injury potential but saying that your not walking away from a guy because of injury unless they are constant for at least 2 years. I understand not giving a fully guaranteed contract. But giving a player some security isn't a bad thing. Letting both safeties walk is a bad football/business decision.

(03-13-2023, 04:35 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: It's only a deal in principle, the Bengals could still make Vonn Bell and offer before he can legally sign with the Panthers.

That is certainly true. We probably all remember how we worried about that situation with Cappa last year, when Brady unretired and tried to woo him back before he actually inked the contract with the Bengals. But I don't see it in the Bengals DNA to try and have a player break an oral agreement.

(03-13-2023, 04:29 PM)Au165 Wrote: CGJ, Thornhill, and a couple others I think could be in play.

I would LOVE to see Thornhill paired with Dax Hill.  Immediately more athletic at both safety spots.  


For comparison:

Thornhill is 27 years old, 6' 205lbs, and had a PFF grade in 2022 of 72.7 overall with a coverage grade of 75.2 and run defense grade of 65.4

Bell is 28 years old, 5'11" and 215 lbs, and had a PFF grade in 2022 of 69.3 overall with a coverage grade of 68.4 and run defense grade of 66.1

It has been some time since they tested at the combine, but here is there testing comparison:

Thornhill:  4.42 forty yard dash, 44" vertical (!), 11'9" broad jump, and 21 reps on bench of 225

Bell:  Injured and DNP, nor did he test at OSU pro day.  

I think we got to trust the coaching staff and FO for now. I liked Bell a lot but he wasn't the greatest in coverage, and maybe the Bengals did not want to overpay when they could replace him with someone maybe even better for cheaper or similar cost. It's not great we lost both safeties but Lou has done a good job with the secondary overall and I think his scheme is DB friendly so hopefully the hit isn't too bad, plus you can't resign everyone and the fastest way to have your window close is overpay for your own guys who are mid at best. We just need to sign a new FA SS and hope Hill is ready to replace Bates.

(03-13-2023, 10:00 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They front loaded Pratt's deal, they must have just decided that they wanted to go cheap at Safety.  If that is the case, it was a huge mistake.  Good Safeties are cheaper than good CBs, but having good Safeties allows a defense to get by with average CBs..  You can pay the Safeties or you can pay the CBs, otherwise the secondary will be toast at some point.

Agreed.  This was a mistake.  He was the continuity we needed in the secondary, a baller and a locker room gem.   Should have paid him.

(03-14-2023, 09:20 AM)Garrus Wrote: I think we got to trust the coaching staff and FO for now. I liked Bell a lot but he wasn't the greatest in coverage, and maybe the Bengals did not want to overpay when they could replace him with someone maybe even better for cheaper or similar cost. It's not great we lost both safeties but Lou has done a good job with the secondary overall and I think his scheme is DB friendly so hopefully the hit isn't too bad, plus you can't resign everyone and the fastest way to have your window close is overpay for your own guys who are mid at best. We just need to sign a new FA SS and hope Hill is ready to replace Bates.

There's competition in the NFL to sign guys. It isn't as easy as just keeping all the guys you want. And when guys leave it doesn't always mean that their team didn't want them.

Bell got like $3 million guaranteed money from us when we signed him. He got $13 million from Carolina. I'm sure that was big to him. And I'm fairly sure the Bengals wouldn't give him that much guaranteed.

(03-13-2023, 10:00 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They front loaded Pratt's deal, they must have just decided that they wanted to go cheap at Safety.  If that is the case, it was a huge mistake.  Good Safeties are cheaper than good CBs, but having good Safeties allows a defense to get by with average CBs..  You can pay the Safeties or you can pay the CBs, otherwise the secondary will be toast at some point.

And that's a great point Sunset.

I think people think Lou is some savant that just can will a team to a great defense, but we had some pretty good personnel on defense and veteran safeties, which let this team do some things.

IF they go with Hill and Anderson at Safety, it's going to limit our scheme. Heck, Hill alone may limit it.

Basically any CB we played looked decent this past season. And a lot of that was the Safeties.

I though Daxton Hill was good all year outside of those special teams gaffs

(03-14-2023, 02:53 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Isn't it always, with the Bengals?

A shame.

It's definitely a disturbing trend/ uncomfortable truth about this franchise that they won’t spend guaranteed money. The NFL is changing and players are wiser to how contracts worked in the NFL. If the Bengals don't wise up they will fall massively behind.

(03-14-2023, 02:24 PM)J24 Wrote: It's definitely a disturbing trend/ uncomfortable truth about this franchise that they won’t spend guaranteed money. The NFL is changing and players are wiser to how contracts worked in the NFL. If the Bengals don't wise up they will fall massively behind.

the steelers and packers do the same thing but everyone doesnt mind when they do it

(03-14-2023, 06:22 AM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: I don't think it does. Football is a tough sport with injury potential but saying that your not walking away from a guy because of injury unless they are constant for at least 2 years. I understand not giving a fully guaranteed contract. But giving a player some security isn't a bad thing. Letting both safeties walk is a bad football/business decision.

(03-14-2023, 01:20 PM)3wt Wrote: Agreed.  This was a mistake.  He was the continuity we needed in the secondary, a baller and a locker room gem.   Should have paid him.

Seriously?   People were whining over us letting CJ walk and some complained about losing Lawson, Hurst and Trey were better.

I don't understand this immediate negative reaction until we see what might transpire?  It's not like you guys haven't been through multiple off-seasons...

(03-14-2023, 02:25 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: the steelers and packers do the same thing but everyone doesnt mind when they do it

I don't know about. It seems that Aaron Rodgers is quite pissed at the Packers for being cheap.

(03-14-2023, 02:37 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Seriously?   People were whining over us letting CJ walk and some complained about losing Lawson, Hurst and Trey were better.

I don't understand this immediate negative reaction until we see what might transpire?  It's not like you guys haven't been through multiple off-seasons...

Seems it happens every year even from our vet fans/posters. 

We didn't sign Vonn until a week into FA when we got him in the first place.

(03-14-2023, 02:42 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Seems it happens every year even from our vet fans/posters. 

We didn't sign Vonn until a week into FA when we got him in the first place.

No doubt as there's still both a total lack of knowledge in how this works with Bengals fans and still a mistrust with Mike Brown. It's a reason we do what we do and the FO does what it does.

(03-14-2023, 02:41 PM)J24 Wrote: I don't know about. It seems that Aaron Rodgers is quite pissed at the Packers for being cheap.

Yep, they only made him the highest paid player in the history of the game 

(03-14-2023, 02:41 PM)J24 Wrote: I don't know about. It seems that Aaron Rodgers is quite pissed at the Packers for being cheap.

And yet both Ben and Roger's stayed with their teams for over 15 years. Roger's has been a pissed person his entire life, so being pissed at the Packers is nothing new for him. 

(03-14-2023, 02:41 PM)J24 Wrote: I don't know about. It seems that Aaron Rodgers is quite pissed at the Packers for being cheap.

Rodgers has mommy daddy issues

(03-14-2023, 02:37 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Seriously?   People were whining over us letting CJ walk and some complained about losing Lawson, Hurst and Trey were better.

I don't understand this immediate negative reaction until we see what might transpire?  It's not like you guys haven't been through multiple off-seasons...

fans gonna fan

(03-14-2023, 02:37 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Seriously?   People were whining over us letting CJ walk and some complained about losing Lawson, Hurst and Trey were better.

I don't understand this immediate negative reaction until we see what might transpire?  It's not like you guys haven't been through multiple off-seasons...

I loved Uzomah but from a production stand point I was not concerned about replacing him. Lawson I was never very high on so I was fine with moving on. It is early still and we may bring in a solid player to replace Bell. But I think the two units that are the hardest to find the right pieces to Gel our Oline and secondary. I really felt like we got lucky with the unit we had. The writing was on the wall with Bates unfortunately but losing both is gonna hurt and I think we all have to expect the defense to take a step backwards no matter who we bring in at least initially.