In 2017, he can be franchised, will be for around 10 Million.

I would look to sign him to an 4 year, 32 million dollar extension, with a 5th year option for 10 M. I would also make 16 MIllion of it guaranteed.

Thoughts?

(01-29-2016, 09:47 PM)513312 Wrote: In 2017, he can be franchised, will be for around 10 Million.

I would look to sign him to an 4 year,  32 million dollar extension, with a 5th year option for 10 M.  I would also make 16 MIllion of it guaranteed.

Thoughts?

My thoughts are you pay him whatever it takes to keep him. Difference maker.

Make him play a full season healthy and productive before you drop that much money on a guy.

3 seasons...
28 starts / 94 catches / 1,097 yards / 15 TD

That's $8m/yr to a guy who is averaging 31 / 366 / 5 a year. They should see how 2016 goes and then see about paying Eifert He has a fourth year and then a 5th year option, so there shouldn't be any serious contract talks with him yet.

(01-29-2016, 10:13 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Make him play a full season healthy and productive before you drop that much money on a guy.

3 seasons...
28 starts / 94 catches / 1,097 yards / 15 TD

That's $8m/yr to a guy who is averaging 31 / 366 / 5 a year. They should see how 2016 goes and then see about paying Eifert He has a fourth year and then a 5th year option, so there shouldn't be any serious contract talks with him yet.

Hard to hold a freak elbow injury and a headhunted shot against him. He does nothing but produce otherwise. If next year goes how this season did, you pay him and you don't think twice about it.

(01-29-2016, 10:13 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Make him play a full season healthy and productive before you drop that much money on a guy.

3 seasons...
28 starts / 94 catches / 1,097 yards / 15 TD

That's $8m/yr to a guy who is averaging 31 / 366 / 5 a year. They should see how 2016 goes and then see about paying Eifert He has a fourth year and then a 5th year option, so there shouldn't be any serious contract talks with him yet.

Seems like a bad way to look at it, one was his rookie year where TEs usually need to have time to adjust and year 2 was a freak accident. 


Look at the difference he makes on Offense, not to mention TEs always get banged up just look at Gronk.

I got no problem waiting a year since we have the tag option but I would not be at all concerned if we extended him tomorrow.

Phillie just gave Ertz 5 yr 42 mil 21 mil guaranteed

Chiefs just gave Kelce 5 yr 47 mil 20 mil guaranteed

(01-29-2016, 09:47 PM)513312 Wrote: In 2017, he can be franchised, will be for around 10 Million.

I would look to sign him to an 4 year,  32 million dollar extension, with a 5th year option for 10 M.  I would also make 16 MIllion of it guaranteed.

Thoughts?

I think he would be dumb to take less money than Ertz and Kelce who just set the market for TEs. We have him under control for the next 2 years. And the franchise tag for TEs is one of the lowest out of all positions. So the roughly 20 mil that Ertz and Kelce were just guaranteed is about what it would cost us to use the 5th year option then franchise tag if something wasnt worked out. 

We have more glaring holes right now. An Eifert extension should be way down the priority list.

(01-29-2016, 10:49 PM)Goalpost Wrote: Phillie just gave Ertz 5 yr 42 mil 21 mil guaranteed

Chiefs just gave Celek 5 yr 47 mil 20 mil guaranteed

Kelce hasn't missed a game since his rookie year, and has been more productive than Eifert (besides TDs) despite having one less start.

Also the big difference is that Kelce was a 3rd round pick, so he only had a 4 year contract. Eifert was a 1st round pick, so he gets a 4 year + 5th year option contract.

Bengals control Eifert for 2 more year without having to use the tag, Chiefs only had Kelce for 1 more. Ertz was in the same situation (though I think the Ertz deal will end up being a bad one).

Bengals don't lose anything by waiting another year and letting Eifert try to put up Gronk numbers in order to get Gronk money.

Kelce missed 15 games of his rookie season. Eifert missed 15 games of his 2nd season.

Outside of that, Kelce hasn't missed a game, while Eifert has missed a whopping 4 games, with 3 of those coming from a dirty head shot that was flagged and fined.

Yet one is totally okay and one is made of glass? C'mon now...

(01-29-2016, 11:10 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Kelce missed 15 games of his rookie season. Eifert missed 15 games of his 2nd season.

Outside of that, Kelce hasn't missed a game, while Eifert has missed a whopping 4 games, with 3 of those coming from a dirty head shot that was flagged and fined.

Yet one is totally okay and one is made of glass? C'mon now...

The people that tear down eifert boggle my mind. I just don't get it.

(01-29-2016, 11:10 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Kelce missed 15 games of his rookie season. Eifert missed 15 games of his 2nd season.

Outside of that, Kelce hasn't missed a game, while Eifert has missed a whopping 4 games, with 3 of those coming from a dirty head shot that was flagged and fined.

Yet one is totally okay and one is made of glass? C'mon now...

Fine, take away those seasons for each of them, and you have...

Kelce: 139 catches / 1,737 yards / 10 TD
Eifert: 91 catches / 1,060 yards / 15 TD

Why is it so bad for someone to want to see Eifert do better at non-TD things while trying to stay healthy in a full season's workload? I said the exact same thing about Marvin Jones after his 2013 season when he had 10 TD. Some people were jumping all over him as being amazing, and how the Bengals now had two #1 WR. He ended up following it up by missing the entire next season and basically being 2011 Jerome Simpson the year after that.

There's no reason to not hold off until we see more. If he tosses up 800-900+ yards and 10+ TDs in 2016, I will be first in line to call for Eifert to be paid.

(01-29-2016, 11:36 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Fine, take away those seasons for each of them, and you have...

Kelce: 139 catches / 1,737 yards / 10 TD
Eifert: 91 catches / 1,060 yards / 15 TD

Why is it so bad for someone to want to see Eifert do better at non-TD things while trying to stay healthy in a full season's workload? I said the exact same thing about Marvin Jones after his 2013 season when he had 10 TD. Some people were jumping all over him as being amazing, and how the Bengals now had two #1 WR. He ended up following it up by missing the entire next season. ..

There's no reason to not hold off until we see more. If he tosses up 800-900+ yards and 10+ TDs in 2016, I will be first in line to call for Eifert to be paid.

In my opinion the difference is the abundance of talent on this team since eifert has been here. The ball gets spread around so much that I don't think there is any way he puts up the amount of receptions and yards the others do. We don't have to lean on him as a crutch, whereas the Chiefs with Kielce do. But make no mistake, he is still just as important

(01-29-2016, 11:36 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Fine, take away those seasons for each of them, and you have...

Kelce: 139 catches / 1,737 yards / 10 TD
Eifert: 91 catches / 1,060 yards / 15 TD

Why is it so bad for someone to want to see Eifert do better at non-TD things while trying to stay healthy in a full season's workload? I said the exact same thing about Marvin Jones after his 2013 season when he had 10 TD. Some people were jumping all over him as being amazing, and how the Bengals now had two #1 WR. He ended up following it up by missing the entire next season and basically being 2011 Jerome Simpson the year after that.

There's no reason to not hold off until we see more. If he tosses up 800-900+ yards and 10+ TDs in 2016, I will be first in line to call for Eifert to be paid.

Because the difference is largely volume and design of the offense. 

Travis Kelce was the #1 target of his team in 2014 and #2 target in 2015.
Tyler Eifert was the #3 target this year and 6th in 2013 (rookie year). 

This offense runs through AJ Green. The "yards" territory (between the 20s) is where AJ moves the ball. 
If Kelce had AJ on his team, his numbers wouldn't look like that. 

(01-29-2016, 09:47 PM)513312 Wrote: In 2017, he can be franchised, will be for around 10 Million.

I would look to sign him to an 4 year,  32 million dollar extension, with a 5th year option for 10 M.  I would also make 16 MIllion of it guaranteed.

Thoughts?

I would say there are more pressing free agents to resign before the draft. The team will exercise the 5th option by the deadline, which is in a few months.

The Bengals were the 15th ranked passing offense in '15, the 13th ranked running offense and the 15th ranked overall offense.

There's no reason Eifert can't be in the 70+ catch, 900+ yards range. He was near that pace before he was injured.

There's too much room for improvement to say he's not that guy because he's not a "primary" target in this offense.

If they try and sign him before this next season, which is unlikely, i'd say 5yr 32/35M. If he improves next year and keeps getting in the EZ like he did this year, then he goes up to 5yr 45/50M.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/TE

(01-29-2016, 11:36 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Fine, take away those seasons for each of them, and you have...

Kelce: 139 catches / 1,737 yards / 10 TD
Eifert: 91 catches / 1,060 yards / 15 TD

Why is it so bad for someone to want to see Eifert do better at non-TD things while trying to stay healthy in a full season's workload? I said the exact same thing about Marvin Jones after his 2013 season when he had 10 TD. Some people were jumping all over him as being amazing, and how the Bengals now had two #1 WR. He ended up following it up by missing the entire next season and basically being 2011 Jerome Simpson the year after that.

There's no reason to not hold off until we see more. If he tosses up 800-900+ yards and 10+ TDs in 2016, I will be first in line to call for Eifert to be paid.

First off this is like comparing apples and oranges considering they are two different types of TE's. 

Eifert is a redzone nightmare for opposing Defenses and solid all around.

Kelce is a better receiver but not as dangerous in the redzone. 

Yards are great but when it counts I take Eifert 10 times out of 10. Your numbers look great when you compare the 2 but considering Kelce got to come in his second year after injury and be the guy catching the ball while Eifert had to sit behind Gresham a year then suffered his injury it kind of kills the comparison. Eifert more than double Kelces TD total over 2 season in 1.

Sure you can say he may see a reduction in TD's next year and he likely will but we have no reason to believe that he won't still be the primary redzone target and what he brings to the offense changes the way Defenses play us. 

Honestly if Zach Ertz is getting over 8 million a year I fully expect Eifert to be 9+ after next season.

(01-30-2016, 12:30 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: If they try and sign him before this next season, which is unlikely, i'd say 5yr 32/35M. If he improves next year and keeps getting in the EZ like he did this year, then he goes up to 5yr 45/50M.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/TE

That's be great, but you're low balling the market.  Ertz  just got the money you want to give Eifert if he improves next year.  So did Kelce.  It'll take a good deal more than 5/35 to keep Eifert, and possibly more than 5/50 if he puts up 10+ TD's next year and more yards.

I seriously doubt that they're going to even try to lowball Eifert unless for some unforeseen reason he goes backwards in his development or has another serious injury that dictates it. No, Tyler Eifert is going to be well paid for his services and probably won't have to move into a homeless shelter anytime soon..

(01-30-2016, 05:28 AM)t3r3e3 Wrote: That's be great, but you're low balling the market.  Ertz  just got the money you want to give Eifert if he improves next year.  So did Kelce.  It'll take a good deal more than 5/35 to keep Eifert, and possibly more than 5/50 if he puts up 10+ TD's next year and more yards.

He has potential but he hasn't done enough to deserve more than 32/35 to this point. 

Sure, this time next year, with another year as good or better than this year, it will more than likely take more than 50. There are a few guys looking to get paid after next year though, so if it goes up, it wouldn't be surprising at all. 

Dude needs to be on the field though.