Possibly the most no-brainer poll ever on this board. Of course you do everything you can to re-sign the best player on your defense. Unless you didn't learn a damn thing from Whitworth and Bates.

(Yesterday, 12:22 PM)Speedy Thomas Wrote: Possibly the most no-brainer poll ever on this board. Of course you do everything you can to re-sign the best player on your defense. Unless you didn't learn a damn thing from Whitworth and Bates.

Whit is the best comparison. If you have a guy literally playing at an All Pro level, and not showing any signs of slowing down, then age be dammed. Some guys are worth making an exception for.

(Yesterday, 12:11 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Lost me there. The rest of it I agree with though.

Out of curiosity would you still be so adamant about not re-signing him if he didn’t miss so much time? Just wondering if it’s a matter of being fundamentally against paying 2 WR’s, or if it’s just in this particular situation with Tee.

(Yesterday, 12:32 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Out of curiosity would you still be so adamant about not re-signing him if he didn’t miss so much time? Just wondering if it’s a matter of being fundamentally against paying 2 WR’s, or if it’s just in this particular situation with Tee.

I would at least be less against it so if he weren't constantly hurt.... But I guess also if he weren't constantly hurt I guess he would be more of a $30m/yr WR, and then we'd be talking about having to sign a $38m/yr AND a $30m/yr WR on the same team, so perhaps at that point I would be right back to my current level of being against it? Lol

It's just way too much money to funnel into one position while the rest of the team needs help, and the Bengals aren't going to flip the bird to the future salary cap by doing crazy gymnastics like the Eagles are doing (and even they still need great drafting on top of that to pull it off). The fact that he is so frequently unavailable just makes it a much easier decision.

I've never denied that he's a talented WR and someone will likely pay him low #1 money, though. So I am not downplaying his talent. Talent just means a whole lot less when you can't stay on the field.

(01-20-2025, 09:03 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: No question - Extend him.  He was about 98% of the Bengals pass rush this season.  Don’t be afraid to pay for a year of diminished play to get that championship now.  In 3 years he will most likely still be a good pass rusher/3rd down specialist and with the way salaries are escalating he won’t be that over paid by then.

Just think of how bad this defense would have been without him.

Look how bad they were with him.

(Yesterday, 01:50 PM)PCB Bengal Fan Wrote: Look how bad they were with him.

Yes, and imagine how much worse off they would have been without him..

(Yesterday, 01:56 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Yes, and imagine how much worse off they would have been without him..

Bingo

By any measure this team has a lot of holes right now. You can break it down several ways in order of priority. RG, LG, DT, LDE, CB, WR2, (if Tee leaves) S and so on.

If for whatever reason they don't have Trey next season it's just an impossible hurdle to get over, just puts us in too big a hole!! So another Joe Burrow season down the drain before we even get season started.

Getting pressure on opposing QB's is of VITAL importance in today's game. How are you gonna replace his production? How can you rely on a rookie draft pick and our current roster without him?

Just too big a roll pf the dice IMHO.

To be fair, opposing teams scoring 58 instead of 48 still (likely) results in a loss.

(Yesterday, 01:02 AM)jj22 Wrote: Yes but our defense is bad with Trey. The needle doesn’t change with him playing or without him. 

Not to ignore his clutch play when we do win games. 

The problem with the defense right now is it lacks talent.  You dont make the defense better letting the talent you do have leave.  You make the defense better by keeping the talent you have and adding more talent to it.

This would be another Lou situation with the new DC.  You let the best talent leave from the defense, draft a Myles Murphy type player to replace him and then fans complain when the defense sucks because the draft picks dont pan out.  Just because you draft a player even with a high pick doesnt mean those guys are going to be good.  You cant let your best players leave and think the solution is using a draft pick on an unknown college kid or signing a middle of the road value pick in free agency.

Eventually we do have to hit in the draft I agree.

One of the reasons for my vote to trade is because of the deep draft class at defensive in in the top 90 picks. This is the draft to load up on ends if we had enough picks (and enough holes at other spots filled in FA; which freeing up the cash/cap by trading Trey could help do. Especially if people want to keep Tee).

(Yesterday, 04:03 PM)jj22 Wrote: Eventually we do have to hit in the draft I agree.

One of the reasons for my vote to trade is because of the deep draft class at defensive in in the top 90 picks. This is the draft to load up on ends if we had enough picks (and enough holes at other spots filled in FA; which freeing up the cash/cap by trading Trey could help do. Especially if people want to keep Tee).

We do need to do better in the draft.  You cant keep relying on bringing in free agents to cover the talent gap that could be closed by good drafting.   I blame most of the problems with Bengals management.  They have the smallest scouting department in the NFL and they dont draft as well as other teams.  The scouting department needs to be beefed up.

(Yesterday, 04:34 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: We do need to do better in the draft.  You cant keep relying on bringing in free agents to cover the talent gap that could be closed by good drafting.   I blame most of the problems with Bengals management.  They have the smallest scouting department in the NFL and they dont draft as well as other teams.  The scouting department needs to be beefed up.

People always point to the small scouting department, which is an issue no doubt, but you can have all the scouts in the world, and still have Duke screw up the picks. It’s hard for me to believe GM’s like Brett Veach, Howie Roseman, or Brad Holmes couldn’t do a better job here.

(Yesterday, 03:38 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: The problem with the defense right now is it lacks talent.  You dont make the defense better letting the talent you do have leave.  You make the defense better by keeping the talent you have and adding more talent to it.

This would be another Lou situation with the new DC.  You let the best talent leave from the defense, draft a Myles Murphy type player to replace him and then fans complain when the defense sucks because the draft picks dont pan out.  Just because you draft a player even with a high pick doesnt mean those guys are going to be good.  You cant let your best players leave and think the solution is using a draft pick on an unknown college kid or signing a middle of the road value pick in free agency.

A lesson they should have learned with Murphy. The draft is a crap shoot, not a sure fire method of winning. 

This defense has to take a giant step just to get to average next season. With Trey gone it would be a huge, near impossible leap.

(Yesterday, 12:28 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Whit is the best comparison. If you have a guy literally playing at an All Pro level, and not showing any signs of slowing down, then age be dammed. Some guys are worth making an exception for.

Well said Nicomo. Whit is the best comparison and Trey has not shown a touch of falling off and he works his ass off like Whit.

(11 hours ago)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: People always point to the small scouting department, which is an issue no doubt, but you can have all the scouts in the world, and still have Duke screw up the picks. It’s hard for me to believe GM’s like Brett Veach, Howie Roseman, or Brad Holmes couldn’t do a better job here.

Agreed Duke probably has a draft profile or criteria he prefers and people usually don’t go against their gut instincts and beliefs. For instance it seems we rarely ever draft smaller more explosive edge guys even if they’re more productive and instead he opts for size. What does Duke look for in an offensive lineman ? Before Mims his last hit on an offensive lineman was 12 years ago with Kevin Zeitler. Can’t blame Pollack on everything because we blamed Jim Turner and Paul Alexander before him that’s 3 offensive line coaches. Even if a coach had input in the draft I’m sure Duke would veto it if he thought there was a vastly superior player on the board.

The mantra in NFL has been that you need a QB and a LT to protect the QB. Then you need a DE to rush QBs and a #1 corner to defend the pass.

If you have 75% of the requiem covered, why mess with it?

Pay the man his fair market value. Then go get a true #1 corner.

(01-20-2025, 09:59 PM)J24 Wrote: If they were to say sign a guy like Chase Young + A Barron Browning to fill his shoes + gain A first Rd pick for him. Then I think a trade word be worth it. 

Not Chase Young he’s not good enough and we can’t have guys taking plays off like he does. Idk who to sign in FA, but it’s not Young

(11 hours ago)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Well said Nicomo. Whit is the best comparison and Trey has not shown a touch of falling off and he works his ass off like Whit.

Yep, just pay the man and continue to enjoy his good work.

(8 hours ago)Gdale_Bengal Wrote: Not Chase Young he’s not good enough and we can’t have guys taking plays off like he does. Idk who to sign in FA, but it’s not Young

Can you please elaborate on why he is wouldn't be a good signing?

(7 hours ago)J24 Wrote: Can you please elaborate on why he is wouldn't be a good signing?

Did you happen to catch a glimpse of him at the CFB championship game last night? I missed it, but my son said his face/head looked swollen like he's not been taking good care of himself.