FFS just give him 10 years 5 million and be done with it.

(03-04-2016, 03:42 PM)Nately120 Wrote: So is Tate like the Mike Nugent of the return game?

Yes. Except Nugent gets two-year deals wheras Tate just keeps getting one-year deals.

(03-04-2016, 02:53 PM)Benton Wrote: Overreactions are strong in this thread.

If it's like his last one, we can cut him without losing much (40$K?) if a better opportunity presents itself in the draft or free agency. Nothing wrong with having him as a 'worst case scenario' heading into camp if we can't draft/sign a better option.

Now, if he's still here in August, I'll grouse. Nothing wrong till then.

This is the reaction to the overreaction every year.  "Well, they COULD cut him before the season.".  They never cut him.  They have a roster with AJ Green and a bunch of nobodies in the receiving corps.  They aren't cutting him, dude.  That may seem like a perfectly reasonable theory right now, but probably less likely now than any year before.

Just waiting for the impending Chris Crocker signing.

How he keeps his job is beyond me


Why not wait until later in the offseason to sign him. There's a reason he accepted the offer so fast. Guys whose phone is ringing don't accept the first offer they get right away.

Crazy to think he was such a huge priority to the team

(03-04-2016, 04:51 PM)Housh Wrote: How he keeps his job is beyond me


Why not wait until later in the offseason to sign him. There's a reason he accepted the offer so fast. Guys whose phone is ringing don't accept the first offer they get right away.

Crazy to think he was such a huge priority to the team

Yeah, I mean how in the hell is Taint, of all players, your first priority?  Certainly there wasn't another damn team in the entire league interested in that guy......was there?

(03-04-2016, 04:43 PM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: Just waiting for the impending Chris Crocker signing.

I'd rather have a 50 year old Chris Crocker than another year with Brandon Tate. At least Chris is intelligent and valuable from that aspect, Tate is an idiot. We'd be better off with Crocker out there returning kickoffs on crutches than Tate. At least he'd be smart enough to take a knee. He'd be almost as valuable in the receiving game too. Although Tate did have at least one nice grab I can remember last year so gotta give him props on that one

This is so much about optics over anything else.
It just looks and feels like settling from day one.

if they waited, it doesn't look like anything. but signing him right now says he's here to stay, good luck getting this job from him

Last season was his 5th season for us. In all of that time Tate has given us 33 catches, 3 TDs, 21 rushing yards, and 1 punt return TD.

I know Hobson beats it into us that he's the all-time PR leader for us, because I don't think anyone has ever gotten more than 2-3 season in that role, but this is just comical. Oh yeah, he returned a punt for a TD against us in 2010. Gotta mention that.

We most likely could've re-signed Tate after the "dust settled" from the beginning of free agency. Oh well, Groundhog Day.

(03-04-2016, 04:54 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: I'd rather have a 50 year old Chris Crocker than another year with Brandon Tate. At least Chris is intelligent and valuable from that aspect, Tate is an idiot. We'd be better off with Crocker out there returning kickoffs on crutches than Tate. At least he'd be smart enough to take a knee. He'd be almost as valuable in the receiving game too. Although Tate did have at least one nice grab I can remember last year so gotta give him props on that one

Nice! You made me laugh.

You do know that on Tate's KO returns we'd probably have been better off if we just put a child back there with the sole job of knocking the ball out of the end zone so that we'd get at the twenty.

(03-04-2016, 02:27 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: ...Brandon Tate. I have no idea what dirt he has on who, but somehow they still haven't had enough of his awfulness. One year deal.

https://twitter.com/Bengals/status/705805273470992385
https://twitter.com/AroundTheNFL/status/705805615285731328

Welcome to the start of Free Agency with the Bengals. You can't have any cap space or good players, but you can certainly have yourself a nice heaping serving of Tate.

you guys just need to get over yourselves and your hate of tate.

Its a good freaking signing so give it up its every year someone is crying and belly aching oh my god we resigned tate.

WithMJ and sanu hitting the market tate knows the system and is probly on a deal that makes him easy to cut if someone better is acquired.

Its a smart signing to fill roster needs before the draft. PR/KR and WR and ST gunner if need be...

if it was a 5 year deal id be upset but i bet my login here its not,.

(03-04-2016, 06:00 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: you guys just need to get over yourselves and your hate of tate.

Its a good freaking signing so give it up its every year someone is crying and belly aching oh my god we resigned tate.

WithMJ and sanu hitting the market tate knows the system and is probly on a deal that makes him easy to cut if someone better is acquired.

Its a smart signing to fill roster needs before the draft.  PR/KR and WR and ST gunner if need be...

if it was a 5 year deal id be upset but i bet my login here its not,.

It's not a good signing. What about it is good? He sucks as a WR. He's actually pretty terrible as a WR. He barely qualifies as one. 

As a return guy he's barely passable. He makes virtually no big plays. The one thing he does do is not fumble. Cool. Great signing. We decided to stay decidedly mediocre on returns. 

It seems like an annual ritual for heads to explode over a Tate re-signing. People seem to forget that in limited playing time, the guy made a couple of big plays for us, like in the win over the Chiefs.

He's Steady Freddie with returns, and hopefully we can draft someone who can electrify us as much as PacMan, but I'd rather go into camp with Tate than without him. If someone can unseat him, that's all good. But that hasn't happened. Evidently, Simmons and Marvin appreciate Tate's consistency. "It is what it is. (giggle)."

(03-04-2016, 06:05 PM)Shady Wrote: It seems like an annual ritual for heads to explode over a Tate re-signing. People seem to forget that in limited playing time, the guy made a couple of big plays for us, like in the win over the Chiefs.

He's Steady Freddie with returns, and hopefully we can draft someone who can electrify us as much as PacMan, but I'd rather go into camp with Tate than without him. If someone can unseat him, that's all good. But that hasn't happened. Evidently, Simmons and Marvin appreciate Tate's consistency. "It is what it is. (giggle)."

No one is given a chance to unseat him. How can you unseat him without being given the chance? 

He has made two big plays in FIVE ***** YEARS.
FIVE YEARS. 

of course they appreciate his consistency. It fits right in with their consistency in not being a better team than the year before. 

Brandon Tate is about our 6th receiving option and a reliable contributor on ST. His one year deal does not hinder anything we do in FA or draft.

Do I want someone better? Hell yeah! I want Percy Harvin. But regardless how much you hate Tate; he doesn't hurt the team.

(03-04-2016, 06:08 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: No one is given a chance to unseat him. How can you unseat him without being given the chance? 

He has made two big plays in FIVE ***** YEARS.
FIVE YEARS. 

of course they appreciate his consistency. It fits right in with their consistency in not being a better team than the year before. 

You don't think they see things (or not) in training camp? Just because we don't see alot of guys during pre-season doesn't mean that return skills haven't been evaluated in practice situations. 

(03-04-2016, 06:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Brandon Tate is about our 6th receiving option and a reliable contributor on ST. His one year deal does not hinder anything we do in FA or draft.

Do I want someone better? Hell yeah! I want Percy Harvin. But regardless how much you hate Tate; he doesn't hurt the team.

Except that history has shown he's a lock for the roster and they won't bring in serious competition to unseat him. And even if they do, they won't actually give them a chance. How is that not hurting the team? 

Championship

(03-04-2016, 06:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Brandon Tate is about our 6th receiving option and a reliable contributor on ST. His one year deal does not hinder anything we do in FA or draft.

Do I want someone better? Hell yeah! I want Percy Harvin. But regardless how much you hate Tate; he doesn't hurt the team.

Problem is he returns way to many kicks he has no business taking out of the endzone. Thus he does hurt the team by creating longer fields for the offense to drive.