(12-24-2015, 04:28 PM)gobobro Wrote: Being on a 12-2 team doesn't mean anything. Being the second fiddle at tight end also doesn't mean a whole lot... Gresham is also insulated from causing too much harm because they don't depend on him for anything.

If you like Gresham, that's fine. Any argument that suggests the Bengals did, though, is going to be tough to find evidence for.

Gresham was a fine blocker that burned the team too many times when they depended on him. I think they found that skillset replaceable.

I bring up that he is on a top offense on a 12-2 team because I have a feeling if he were on a god awful team people would say "Wow, look how good the Browns are doing with Gresham...NOT!"  Also, I'm pointing out that Gresham isn't catching TE#1 in AZ, which he wouldn't be here, anyways.  People want it to be Gresham vs. Eifert when it's really Gresham vs. Kroft or the other guy.

It's no big deal since we can look at our record and say we don't miss the guy, but he's being used by a team that has a better record than we do, so meh.  I just think a big part of the Gresham hate comes from the fact that he isn't on the Bengals anymore.  I guess he's being a cancer in AZ but it doesn't matter because Palmer is going to quit on them any day now and sour grapes and blah blah blah.

To summarize:  Eifert >>> Gresham, but some perspective is nice

(12-24-2015, 04:28 PM)gobobro Wrote: ...you'll have to define "best," because he didn't lead in any playoff game in receptions or yards. We also differ on "a lot of teams wanted" him. The feeds and posts I was watching showed no interest in him to the point people were asking Lap and the beat guys if he'd wind up back here if no one made any offers. For the record, Lap was pretty sure the Bengals wanted nothing to do with him.

The first Texans game, he had a team high in receptions and only had one less yard than AJ despite being targeted half as much

SD game he had 1 fewer catches than Marvin while being targeted 4 less times and scored our only TD.

As to nobody wanting him: Do you know how the herniated disc was discovered?

I wanted Palmer and Gresh gone while they were still in stripes. It felt like it was time to move on in both cases, and in both cases it did benefit the team to move on.

Why people still pine for Gresh is hard to figure out. I think he was a personal favorite for some of you guys, but we have a very promising young player behind Eifert in 3rd round pick Tyler Kroft. Kroft has been solid in Eifert's absence.

(12-25-2015, 02:54 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I wanted Palmer and Gresh gone while they were still in stripes. It felt like it was time to move on in both cases, and in both cases it did benefit the team to move on.

Why people still pine for Gresh is hard to figure out. I think he was a personal favorite for some of you guys, but we have a very promising young player behind Eifert in 3rd round pick Tyler Kroft. Kroft has been solid in Eifert's absence.

Jermaine Gresham had tremendous potential.

 But you know what potential means? Ain't done it yet. 

He never lived up to his hype. There were flashes but there was just too much inconsistency. He became a serious liability to this team with his bone headed mistakes. He may have been on his way out anyways but the altercation with Lapham sealed his fate. 

Not once have I found myself wishing we had Jermaine back. Quite frankly I haven't thought of him since he left except for when I saw him during the Arizona game and when he is brought up in here.  We are much better off without him. 

(12-25-2015, 02:54 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I wanted Palmer and Gresh gone while they were still in stripes. It felt like it was time to move on in both cases, and in both cases it did benefit the team to move on.

Why people still pine for Gresh is hard to figure out. I think he was a personal favorite for some of you guys, but we have a very promising young player behind Eifert in 3rd round pick Tyler Kroft. Kroft has been solid in Eifert's absence.

I agree with you.

Now that Eifert has emerged and used successfully as a receiving threat.

The problem I had with letting Gresham go was the uncertainty that Eifert would be durable enough and be used in that way consistently.

Yes there were flashes of it... but would it last? 

The track record of this team the last decade kind of loomed.

Even you have to admit Gresham was head and shoulders above the previous "applicants"... more like appli-cant's.

I'm glad he's gone because of his strange moodswings and disappearing act if the ball wasn't fed to him early in games.

Would it have been nice to see him step in during Eifert's absence?  Sure.  

Kroft is serviceable for the moment. Not too much of a threat for the long haul as TE #1 if need be this season.

It really all depends on plays designed in his realm of abilities.

As far as Palmer goes. Yeah his time here was winding down IMO.

Not sure if that was more of a mental thing or just needed a new scheme.

Who knows. Maybe Gruden might have been the remedy for that though.

You gotta admit it. Palmer would have loved him some AJ Green.

I am a huge Chad fan but the quite in the huddle would have made Palmer a tad bit happy in that point in time.

We can still see a Palmer Dalton superbowl, but I'd say Macaroni can't see any playoff time, because if he wins - he's probably going to continue until he loses, and then we have a strange situation next year regardless.

(12-25-2015, 10:36 AM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: We can still see a Palmer Dalton superbowl, but I'd say Macaroni can't see any playoff time, because if he wins - he's probably going to continue until he loses, and then we have a strange situation next year regardless.

Unless macaroni wins a super bowl and looks damn good doing it, there will be no QB controversy. And even then, there probably isn't,  this is AD's team. Macaroni would literally have to play  like Brady  for them to consider cutting ties with Dalton. That being said, I hope something like that happens because regardless of the one they pick, there will be serious trade potential for the other. 

Yes, but here's the problem of sorts. If Macaroni wins the 1st playoff game that Dalton can't play, if Dalton is suddenly healthy - does he get play time. I think we already have a thread about that. Considering Dalton's playoff record so far (lol), not sure he would get a chance unless Macaroni is playing poorly very quickly in another game.

Given that, if Macaroni reels off a couple playoff wins with this stacked Bengals squad, I wonder what that means. Maybe nothing, Dalton starts again next year, but the pundits will have a lot of BS to talk about.

If macaroni wins a superbowl then we have something strange going on. Hard to not root for the Bengals, so whoever is at QB if and when that happens, we will all be happy.

Just stop with the "Macaroni" already... it's stupid as hell and you all sound like 13 year old school girls....

no, Mccarron isn't fun to type, AJ is his real name and people get confused with with AJ Green. For that reason alone, A. Dalton needs to come back quickly.

(12-25-2015, 12:00 PM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: Yes, but here's the problem of sorts. If Macaroni wins the 1st playoff game that Dalton can't play, if Dalton is suddenly healthy - does he get play time. I think we already have a thread about that. Considering Dalton's playoff record so far (lol), not sure he would get a chance unless Macaroni is playing poorly very quickly in another game.

Given that, if Macaroni reels off a couple playoff wins with this stacked Bengals squad, I wonder what that means. Maybe nothing, Dalton starts again next year, but the pundits will have a lot of BS to talk about.

If macaroni wins a superbowl then we have something strange going on. Hard to not root for the Bengals, so whoever is at QB if and when that happens, we will all be happy.

I would guess that as soon as Dalton is healthy enough to play he is given the ball again this season,no matter how far macaroni has taken them. Now if macaroni does in fact play the entire postseason and win the Super Bowl, then you're right the pundits will be all over it and it really is a win/win situation for us. 

That being said, I don't think macaroni will take us that far. We need the Dalton we've seen all season to win this thing. Nothing against macaroni because I actually really like macaroni, but I just don't see it happening. 

(12-25-2015, 10:13 AM)The Real Deal Wrote: Not once have I found myself wishing we had Jermaine back. Quite frankly I haven't thought of him since he left except for when I saw him during the Arizona game and when he is brought up in here.  We are much better off without him. 

Is Kroft really leaps and bounds better than Gresham?  Remember, we aren't facing an Eifert or Gresham scenario here, we could have had both and spent a 3rd round pick on something other than a TE.  I'm not bashing Kroft, I just don't see why we are so confident he is so much better than Gresham.

(12-25-2015, 01:10 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Just stop with the "Macaroni" already... it's stupid as hell and you all sound like 13 year old school girls....

How about we call him AJMC?

(12-25-2015, 01:25 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Is Kroft really leaps and bounds better than Gresham?  Remember, we aren't facing an Eifert or Gresham scenario here, we could have had both and spent a 3rd round pick on something other than a TE.  I'm not bashing Kroft, I just don't see why we are so confident he is so much better than Gresham.

It's not so much that I think kroft is that much better as much as I just feel like Gresham was a pretty big liability.  What he gave us didn't outweigh the ignorant penalties he would commit on a regular basis in big situations. He was a headcase and a crybaby. ML and staff have done a great job weeding out the bad seeds and in my opinion they hit another home run in this category by letting him go. 

(12-25-2015, 01:25 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Is Kroft really leaps and bounds better than Gresham?  Remember, we aren't facing an Eifert or Gresham scenario here, we could have had both and spent a 3rd round pick on something other than a TE.  I'm not bashing Kroft, I just don't see why we are so confident he is so much better than Gresham.


How about we call him AJMC?

I'm not sure what's wrong with his given name, McCarron. But AJM, AJMC and just about anything else is better than that other crap.

(12-25-2015, 01:33 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: It's not so much that I think kroft is that much better as much as I just feel like Gresham was a pretty big liability.  What he gave us didn't outweigh the ignorant penalties he would commit on a regular basis in big situations. He was a headcase and a crybaby. ML and staff have done a great job weeding out the bad seeds and in my opinion they hit another home run in this category by letting him go. 

Well, I can't agree with this so I guess we've reached an impasse. To me saying Greasham was a drive-killing headcase is like saying Eifert is made of glass and we should let him go. It's just a little too deductive for my tastes.

(12-25-2015, 01:38 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I'm not sure what's wrong with his given name, McCarron. But AJM, AJMC and just about anything else is better than that other crap.

I just call him AJ and let the context of the sentence relay whether he is the QB or the WR.  Should AJ be our QB if Dalton is healthy?  Ida know, why would a WR play QB?

Eifert was a non participant today. Not sounding good for playing Monday night.

(12-25-2015, 01:10 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Just stop with the "Macaroni" already... it's stupid as hell and you all sound like 13 year old school girls....

Agreed. Childish and immature.

(12-25-2015, 01:59 PM)cinci4life Wrote: Eifert was a non participant today. Not sounding good for playing Monday night.

They are not practicing on Christmas Day so everyone is a non participant today. 

(12-25-2015, 10:19 AM)BengalsRocker Wrote: I agree with you.

Now that Eifert has emerged and used successfully as a receiving threat.

1. The problem I had with letting Gresham go was the uncertainty that Eifert would be durable enough and be used in that way consistently.

2. Yes there were flashes of it... but would it last? 

3. The track record of this team the last decade kind of loomed.

4. Even you have to admit Gresham was head and shoulders above the previous "applicants"... more like appli-cant's.

I'm glad he's gone because of his strange moodswings and disappearing act if the ball wasn't fed to him early in games.

Would it have been nice to see him step in during Eifert's absence?  Sure.  

5. Kroft is serviceable for the moment. Not too much of a threat for the long haul as TE #1 if need be this season.

It really all depends on plays designed in his realm of abilities.

As far as Palmer goes. Yeah his time here was winding down IMO.

6. Not sure if that was more of a mental thing or just needed a new scheme.

Who knows. Maybe Gruden might have been the remedy for that though.

You gotta admit it. Palmer would have loved him some AJ Green.

I am a huge Chad fan but the quite in the huddle would have made Palmer a tad bit happy in that point in time.

1. The risk/reward didn't balance out for me. It seemed Gresh burned some bridges here. Was it worth the mood swings and mental lapses to keep an insurance policy that's capable of producing at an average level? May as well start fresh with a young player who isn't so polarizing.

2. I saw more reasons to believe in Eifert than reasons for doubt. He was a first round pick, best prospect in that draft and he produced Gresh-like numbers (445 yards) while playing 2nd fiddle as a rookie. Rookies TEs typically struggle, so Eifert's production made me believe he'd only be better in a featured role with more experience.

3. While we never really had reliable receiving TEs before Gresh, I think this had more to do with Marv's priorities (blocking) than their inability to find a good receiving TE. They loved Reggie Kelly despite his lack as a receiver. I just believe the priorities have changed.

4. Gresh was our best TE since Tony McGee, but again, I don't think pass catching was the trait that Marv was interested in, initially.

5. I think you're selling Kroft short. He's posted a statline of 4-62-1 in 2 games without Eifert. That would project to 32-496-8. Very Gresh like numbers. Sure it's a small sample size, but I think he's doing well so far.

6. I think it was a little of both. Things were stagnant and obviously Mike Brown wasn't going to make a change. Could Palmer have enjoyed a resurgance with Jay Gruden and AJ Green replacing Brat and a clearly aging (not distracted) Chad Johnson? Probably, but IMO we're already getting that type of production from a younger player. 

I guess what I'm getting at is that I don't think Palmer and Gresh were bad players. I just recognized that it was time to move on and I don't miss them because very promising and productive players have replaced them. Kroft included. I feel really good about that guy.

(12-25-2015, 02:43 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: They are not practicing on Christmas Day so everyone is a non participant today. 

Either they did or I just misunderstand this.

Quote:Eifert (concussion) was listed as a non-participant on Friday's estimated practice report, ESPN's Coley Harvey reports.