(01-04-2024, 01:34 PM)casear2727 Wrote: We have the highest paid DLine in the NFL. 

We just extended TWO LBs coming off of very good seasons.

We replaced Bates with a 1st Rounder that had a year to learn.

We replaced Apple with CTB.

We replaced Bell with a Super Bowl starter.

If Lou such an awesome D Coord we should have dont better, especially since he is defensive back specialist. 


We were just bad on D, offense always sputters at times, and we couldnt win field position with our punter.

The Bengals total cap hit for the defensive line is 43.1 million.  The offensive line takes up 44.6 million of the cap so the Bengals are spending more money for the offensive line than they are the defensive line.  The offensive line is one of the top paid in the NFL.   Joe Burrow just signed a contract that makes him the highest paid player in the NFL.  At WR the Bengals have two #1s including a 3 time Pro Bowler.  Joe Mixon stands a good chance at making another Pro Bowl this year as 1st alternate.    The offense has a ton of talent and the Bengals organization has spent a lot of money and plans to spend even more and the best this offense can do is #20 in scoring?   and you want to complain about how horrible the defense is being ranked #21 in scoring when the offense is #20?  The question should be why cant the offense get the job done.  Zero points against K.C. in the 2nd half and 11 total against Pittsburgh the week before when a playoff spot has been on the line.

(01-04-2024, 11:17 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: The Bengals total cap hit for the defensive line is 43.1 million.  The offensive line takes up 44.6 million of the cap so the Bengals are spending more money for the offensive line than they are the defensive line.  The offensive line is one of the top paid in the NFL.   Joe Burrow just signed a contract that makes him the highest paid player in the NFL.  At WR the Bengals have two #1s including a 3 time Pro Bowler.  Joe Mixon stands a good chance at making another Pro Bowl this year as 1st alternate.    The offense has a ton of talent and the Bengals organization has spent a lot of money and plans to spend even more and the best this offense can do is #20 in scoring?   and you want to complain about how horrible the defense is being ranked #21 in scoring when the offense is #20?  The question should be why cant the offense get the job done.  Zero points against K.C. in the 2nd half and 11 total against Pittsburgh the week before when a playoff spot has been on the line.

(01-04-2024, 11:17 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: The Bengals total cap hit for the defensive line is 43.1 million.  The offensive line takes up 44.6 million of the cap so the Bengals are spending more money for the offensive line than they are the defensive line.

I agree with Nicomo's response to this, but also you just compared a position with 4 starters to a position with 5 starters. 

Also also the Bengals have only 7 guys on their entire roster making at least $10m/yr and 4 of them are on the DL. (The other 3 are Burrow, Orlando, and Boyd)

They are not "spending more money for the OL than the DL" they merely have a larger cap hit this year. Those are not the same thing. Kirk Cousins has a higher cap hit in 2023 than Joe Burrow, that does not mean the Vikings "spent more money" for their QBs than the Bengals.

By AAV, the Bengals have the 4th most money spent on DL this year in the entire NFL (though admittedly this is probably a little higher than it should be as I think pass rushing OLB are grouped under LBs). They are 19th for OL, 20th for WRs, 21st for RBs, and 29th for TEs. They have put very little money in the offense as a whole relative to the rest of the NFL outside of Burrow.

(01-04-2024, 11:17 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: The Bengals total cap hit for the defensive line is 43.1 million.  The offensive line takes up 44.6 million of the cap so the Bengals are spending more money for the offensive line than they are the defensive line.  The offensive line is one of the top paid in the NFL.   Joe Burrow just signed a contract that makes him the highest paid player in the NFL.  At WR the Bengals have two #1s including a 3 time Pro Bowler.  Joe Mixon stands a good chance at making another Pro Bowl this year as 1st alternate.    The offense has a ton of talent and the Bengals organization has spent a lot of money and plans to spend even more and the best this offense can do is #20 in scoring?   and you want to complain about how horrible the defense is being ranked #21 in scoring when the offense is #20?  The question should be why cant the offense get the job done.  Zero points against K.C. in the 2nd half and 11 total against Pittsburgh the week before when a playoff spot has been on the line.

Cant get much more apples to oranges than this.

Bengals are #1 in dline spending and number #5 in oline spending.  Neither played to their cost value.

The offense was excellent the 4 games Burrow was healthy.  Dismissing Burrows availability is massively unintelligent and unserious.

The defense was bad in so many games, when were they good?  Rams, Colts, Bills?  The offense even with Browning was good in many.

Comparing 2 position groups with different number of players is comical.  Crying about games with a backup QB and without Chase is kinda petty.

The offense has the excuse being without Burrow and he proved that in games he was healthy.  The defense doesnt really have an excuse except for youth and Awuzie not being back to full speed.

(01-05-2024, 12:55 AM)casear2727 Wrote: Cant get much more apples to oranges than this.

Bengals are #1 in dline spending and number #5 in oline spending.  Neither played to their cost value.

The offense was excellent the 4 games Burrow was healthy.  Dismissing Burrows availability is massively unintelligent and unserious.

The defense was bad in so many games, when were they good?  Rams, Colts, Bills?  The offense even with Browning was good in many.

Comparing 2 position groups with different number of players is comical.  Crying about games with a backup QB and without Chase is kinda petty.

The offense has the excuse being without Burrow and he proved that in games he was healthy.  The defense doesnt really have an excuse except for youth and Awuzie not being back to full speed.

At the end of the day for whatever excuse you would like to make, the offense is currently #20 in scoring while the defense is #21.  The offense has a top 5 paid offensive line.  They have Joe Burrow who just signed a 55 million per year contract.  They have two #1 wide receivers which includes one of the best in football.  They have a running back that stands a good chance at making his 2nd Pro Bowl.  Overall the Bengals spend the 6th most in the NFL on offense at 106.1 million of their total cap space.  Defense by comparison is #10 overall at 86.4 million so the Bengals are spending more and are ranked higher in the NFL on spending money for the offense vs the defense.  The question should be why is the offense so horrible with the amount of money that is already invested?

(01-05-2024, 01:57 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: At the end of the day for whatever excuse you would like to make, the offense is currently #20 in scoring while the defense is #21.  The offense has a top 5 paid offensive line.  They have Joe Burrow who just signed a 55 million per year contract.  They have two #1 wide receivers which includes one of the best in football.  They have a running back that stands a good chance at making his 2nd Pro Bowl.  Overall the Bengals spend the 6th most in the NFL on offense at 106.1 million of their total cap space.  Defense by comparison is #10 overall at 86.4 million so the Bengals are spending more and are ranked higher in the NFL on spending money for the offense vs the defense.  The question should be why is the offense so horrible with the amount of money that is already invested?

Who was healthy for all of 5 games. Where they went 4-1, and beat some top teams like the 9ers and Bills.

(01-05-2024, 02:06 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Who was healthy for all of 5 games. Where they went 4-1, and beat some top teams like the 9ers and Bills.

and what did the defense do against the 49ers and Bills when the offense actually did something instead of hanging the defense out to dry?  The defense held the 49ers to 17 and the Bills to 18.

(01-05-2024, 02:27 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: and what did the defense do against the 49ers and Bills when the offense actually did something instead of hanging the defense out to dry?  The defense held the 49ers to 17 and the Bills to 18.

It goes without saying that one side of the ball affects the other. It works both ways. One of the worst things for this team is getting down early. Teams can tee off with their pass rush, and Zac will usually abandon the run entirely.

(01-05-2024, 01:57 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: At the end of the day for whatever excuse you would like to make, the offense is currently #20 in scoring while the defense is #21.  The offense has a top 5 paid offensive line.  They have Joe Burrow who just signed a 55 million per year contract.  They have two #1 wide receivers which includes one of the best in football.  They have a running back that stands a good chance at making his 2nd Pro Bowl.  Overall the Bengals spend the 6th most in the NFL on offense at 106.1 million of their total cap space.  Defense by comparison is #10 overall at 86.4 million so the Bengals are spending more and are ranked higher in the NFL on spending money for the offense vs the defense.  The question should be why is the offense so horrible with the amount of money that is already invested?

Comparing the numbers of a 4 man unit to a 5 man unit is silly.  Mentioning Burrow when he was unhealthy for all but 5 games is beyond silly.


"The question should be why is the offense so horrible with the amount of money that is already invested?"  You seriously do not know this answer?  Maybe read a book called NFL 101, the chapter titled; Losing a franchise QB is detrimental to an offense....?  That statement is fatuous and absurd.

We can agree that both sides are getting paid way more than they are producing.   I can agree that the lack of offense is part of the reason why the defense was so bad this year. 

But let's not act like we dont understand the impact of losing Burrow.

(01-05-2024, 02:27 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: and what did the defense do against the 49ers and Bills when the offense actually did something instead of hanging the defense out to dry?  The defense held the 49ers to 17 and the Bills to 18.

The defense gave up 460 yards to the 49ers....

The offense and the punter did hang the D out to dry too often, but the defense was still awful, as was the offense without a healthy Burrow.  Not sure why this is so difficult?

(01-05-2024, 08:28 PM)casear2727 Wrote: The defense gave up 460 yards to the 49ers....

The offense and the punter did hang the D out to dry too often, but the defense was still awful, as was the offense without a healthy Burrow.  Not sure why this is so difficult?

And that was without Deebo and Trent Williams.

(01-05-2024, 08:26 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Comparing the numbers of a 4 man unit to a 5 man unit is silly.  Mentioning Burrow when he was unhealthy for all but 5 games is beyond silly.


"The question should be why is the offense so horrible with the amount of money that is already invested?"  You seriously do not know this answer?  Maybe read a book called NFL 101, the chapter titled; Losing a franchise QB is detrimental to an offense....?  That statement is fatuous and absurd.

We can agree that both sides are getting paid way more than they are producing.   I can agree that the lack of offense is part of the reason why the defense was so bad this year. 

But let's not act like we dont understand the impact of losing Burrow.

I also compared total spending for offense being at 106.1 million which is 6th most in the NFL vs. the defense at 86.4 million which is 10th.  Both defense and offense require 11 guys plus their backups so it is what it is.   The Bengals have invested more in their offense but lets blame Lou and the defense when the offense is just as bad yet has more money invested into it.  If the Bengals had spent that much money on defense, they wouldnt have needed Nick Scott and could have brought back both Bates and Bell.


Its also funny to hear how great the offense was for a 5 game stretch of a 17 game season.   We need more than 5 good games from a 106 million dollar offense if we want to make the playoffs.   I guess 106 million for an offense doesnt buy what it used to.  

(01-06-2024, 01:57 AM)007BengalsFan Wrote: I also compared total spending for offense being at 106.1 million which is 6th most in the NFL vs. the defense at 86.4 million which is 10th.  Both defense and offense require 11 guys plus their backups so it is what it is.   The Bengals have invested more in their offense but lets blame Lou and the defense when the offense is just as bad yet has more money invested into it.  If the Bengals had spent that much money on defense, they wouldnt have needed Nick Scott and could have brought back both Bates and Bell.


Its also funny to hear how great the offense was for a 5 game stretch of a 17 game season.   We need more than 5 good games from a 106 million dollar offense if we want to make the playoffs.   I guess 106 million for an offense doesnt buy what it used to.  

So lets just agree that you have an agenda or you simply are not very bright.  

Burrow was only healthy for 5 games, only the very dimwitted does not understand the negative impact that has on the offense, especially since he played very well in the 5 games he was healthy and we beat good teams.  If you are not capable of grasping this concept I suggest you become a putt putt golf expert instead of NFL message board analyst making insanely odd comments.


You dont seem to understand the rookie pay scale or the salary cap in general.   The fact you do not understand that Burrows cap hit is 20M this year is on you, not to mention that Chase and Tee are in the higher pay slots of their deal.

The defense has more rookies and none of them make as much as Tee.  None of them will ever hit Chase's numbers on his rookie deal.  

You simply do not understand how the salaries work and your assumption that we should not lose any games without Burrow being at full health reveals a total lack of understanding. 

(01-03-2024, 02:43 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: you dont think the NFL will use a flacco super bowl run to help pump up the 1 legged rodgers run next year?

I've just gotta root for the NFC this year. Browns winning a superbowl would hurt more than the Ravens, at least the Ravens were supposed to be a good team. Browns winning a SB before Burrow would make zero sense. It also would make no sense for their roster, did they even need Nick Chubb? Wtf lol. It'd be like us winning without Ja'marr for most of the year.

(01-06-2024, 04:17 AM)casear2727 Wrote: So lets just agree that you have an agenda or you simply are not very bright.  

Burrow was only healthy for 5 games, only the very dimwitted does not understand the negative impact that has on the offense, especially since he played very well in the 5 games he was healthy and we beat good teams.  If you are not capable of grasping this concept I suggest you become a putt putt golf expert instead of NFL message board analyst making insanely odd comments.

There is always an excuse for the offense not getting the job done especially if it has to do with the 55 million dollar injury prone Burrow.  When you invest that kind of money into players and the offense, they need to do a better job.  Burrow has zero 4th quarter TDs in playoff games in his career.  Defense had to score in the Baltimore playoff game last year for the Bengals to win because Burrow and the offense couldn't get it done.  The K.C. AFC championship game the defense held K.C. to just 23 which is a lot better than the Eagles did in the Super Bowl.  We had a chance to win that championship game in the 4th quarter but the last two drives Burrow throws an interception then takes the team on a 7 play possession and punt.   Every year its some excuse, Burrows hamstring, his wrist, his finger, his offensive line, his TEs, his running backs etc... etc... etc....  The Bengals have the 6th highest paid offense in the NFL including the 5th highest paid offensive line.  At some point dont you have to stop making excuses and expect more out of your offense?

(01-06-2024, 04:17 AM)casear2727 Wrote: You dont seem to understand the rookie pay scale or the salary cap in general.   The fact you do not understand that Burrows cap hit is 20M this year is on you, not to mention that Chase and Tee are in the higher pay slots of their deal.

What point are you even trying to make with this statement?    This year even with Burrow's cap hit being 20m, the Bengals are still spending 106 million on offense which is more than they spend on the defense.  That is a fact.  Guess what happens next year?  Burrows cap hit goes up close to 30 million, then it goes to 46 million.  Yes Higgins and Chase are making more this year than last year.  Next year they will be paid even more.  Does this come as a surprise to you? 

(01-06-2024, 04:17 AM)casear2727 Wrote: The defense has more rookies and none of them make as much as Tee.  None of them will ever hit Chase's numbers on his rookie deal.  

You simply do not understand how the salaries work...

I understand how it works, it appears you are the one that doesn't.  If you take away proven talent like Bates and Bell because you dont want to pay them and you replace them with guys who are not as talented but cheaper like Dax Hill and Nick Scott, you end up with a less talented defense but you saved money.  Its pretty simple to understand.  Im not sure why you cant grasp it.

(01-06-2024, 05:03 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: There is always an excuse for the offense not getting the job done especially if it has to do with the 55 million dollar injury prone Burrow.  When you invest that kind of money into players and the offense, they need to do a better job.  Burrow has zero 4th quarter TDs in playoff games in his career.  Defense had to score in the Baltimore playoff game last year for the Bengals to win because Burrow and the offense couldn't get it done.  The K.C. AFC championship game the defense held K.C. to just 23 which is a lot better than the Eagles did in the Super Bowl.  We had a chance to win that championship game in the 4th quarter but the last two drives Burrow throws an interception then takes the team on a 7 play possession and punt.   Every year its some excuse, Burrows hamstring, his wrist, his finger, his offensive line, his TEs, his running backs etc... etc... etc....  The Bengals have the 6th highest paid offense in the NFL including the 5th highest paid offensive line.  At some point dont you have to stop making excuses and expect more out of your offense?


What point are you even trying to make with this statement?    This year even with Burrow's cap hit being 20m, the Bengals are still spending 106 million on offense which is more than they spend on the defense.  That is a fact.  Guess what happens next year?  Burrows cap hit goes up close to 30 million, then it goes to 46 million.  Yes Higgins and Chase are making more this year than last year.  Next year they will be paid even more.  Does this come as a surprise to you? 

I understand how it works, it appears you are the one that doesn't.  If you take away proven talent like Bates and Bell because you dont want to pay them and you replace them with guys who are not as talented but cheaper like Dax Hill and Nick Scott, you end up with a less talented defense but you saved money.  Its pretty simple to understand.  Im not sure why you cant grasp it.

We get it, you are a Burrow hater.  Maybe go be a Browns fan?   Your lack of understanding is so comical that I sense you are simply trolling us now as I would hope no real Bengals fan is this addle-brained.

The defense has 5 starters/rotating players on rookie deals.  You dont seem to understand how this impacts spending.  The offense has 4, and 2 of those were the #1 and #5 picks in the draft whose rookie deals place them in the upper level of the cap hit, whereas none of the defensive rookies come close.  Spending more on offense is going to be the most common trait of all NFL teams with a franchise QB on their extension, especially if they have a highly paid receiver(s).  Maybe review a positional spending chart by position?

Dax was a 1st round draft choice and no team really does better than that to replace a high priced veteran at a low value position.  It is clear you dont understand this.  Bell was an unexpected loss, it happens in the NFL, those that have watched for awhile understand this.

Burrow IS the offense, that is a major excuse, the only excuse needed when we look at the results of when he was healthy this year.  Losing Bates and Bell is an excuse for the defense but that doesnt explain the inability to stop the run, the lack of pass rush, and terrible LB play.  

But seriously I dont have time for amateur whining regarding injuries.  Nobody likes them, especially to the franchise QB.  30 teams in the NFL would have given Joe that deal.  

Burrow would have been 5-0 during the games he played while healthy were it not for a Tyler Boyd dropped TD.

In those 5 games, Burrow threw for 1480 yards, 12 TDs and 2 interceptions.  

Due to the level of the opponents during these 5 games it is very fair to extrapolate these numbers over a 17 game season:

5032 Yds, 41 TDs, 13 INTs, or what many would call an MVP season.

(01-06-2024, 06:40 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Burrow would have been 5-0 during the games he played while healthy were it not for a Tyler Boyd dropped TD.



Due to the level of the opponents during these 5 games it is very fair to extrapolate these numbers over a 17 game season:

You lost me here. 

It is never "fair" to extrapolate 5 games (29.4%) into a 17 game season for any player for any sport. Just look at the MLB COVID shortened season and how many guys did crazy fluke runs. Guys have good stretches and bad stretches all the time, and how does one determine if a player is healthy and just playing bad vs hurt? Is it just whenever they start playing well that they're suddenly healthy? It's also extra not fair to extrapolate a cherrypicked 29.4% of a season into a fully season for a player who has never made 17 healthy regular season starts in a season. I think Burrow's single season record right now is 14 in 2022.

Also it's amazing how quickly the narrative has been cemented that Boyd cost Burrow the W. Not the horrible redzone INT Burrow threw in the endzone for his 2nd INT, and ignore the fact that Boyd took a short pass 64 yards to put them on the 7 yard line to win it before Burrow took a sack to move them back to the 14 and then Burrow ran for 1 yard on 2nd and goal from the 14. Burrow won it and Boyd lost it, simple as that apparently. Boyd needed to catch it so he certainly had a hand in the loss, but just struck me as funny at how quickly it became he lost what Burrow had won.

(01-05-2024, 08:28 PM)casear2727 Wrote: The defense gave up 460 yards to the 49ers....

The offense and the punter did hang the D out to dry too often, but the defense was still awful, as was the offense without a healthy Burrow.  Not sure why this is so difficult?

160 of those yards was at the end of the half & the end of the game, the D's best games were the Bills & Niners.

(01-06-2024, 01:57 AM)007BengalsFan Wrote: I also compared total spending for offense being at 106.1 million which is 6th most in the NFL vs. the defense at 86.4 million which is 10th.  Both defense and offense require 11 guys plus their backups so it is what it is.   The Bengals have invested more in their offense but lets blame Lou and the defense when the offense is just as bad yet has more money invested into it.  If the Bengals had spent that much money on defense, they wouldnt have needed Nick Scott and could have brought back both Bates and Bell.


Its also funny to hear how great the offense was for a 5 game stretch of a 17 game season.   We need more than 5 good games from a 106 million dollar offense if we want to make the playoffs.   I guess 106 million for an offense doesnt buy what it used to.  

Does'nt change the fact that the Defense was terrible this year.

(01-06-2024, 07:25 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You lost me here. 

It is never "fair" to extrapolate 5 games (29.4%) into a 17 game season for any player for any sport. Just look at the MLB COVID shortened season and how many guys did crazy fluke runs. Guys have good stretches and bad stretches all the time, and how does one determine if a player is healthy and just playing bad vs hurt? Is it just whenever they start playing well that they're suddenly healthy? It's also extra not fair to extrapolate a cherrypicked 29.4% of a season into a fully season for a player who has never made 17 healthy regular season starts in a season. I think Burrow's single season record right now is 14 in 2022.

Also it's amazing how quickly the narrative has been cemented that Boyd cost Burrow the W. Not the horrible redzone INT Burrow threw in the endzone for his 2nd INT, and ignore the fact that Boyd took a short pass 64 yards to put them on the 7 yard line to win it before Burrow took a sack to move them back to the 14 and then Burrow ran for 1 yard on 2nd and goal from the 14. Burrow won it and Boyd lost it, simple as that apparently. Boyd needed to catch it so he certainly had a hand in the loss, but just struck me as funny at how quickly it became he lost what Burrow had won.

Does'nt change the fact the game was won if Boyd catches it, everything that happened prior is mute point.