(02-16-2017, 05:01 PM)yellowxdiscipline Wrote: What would you consider overpaying, because I don't think anyone is suggesting we give a guy like Zeitler Flacco type of money?

I don't know about you, but I've missed the incessant hyperbole, out of context quotes, and gross generalizations painted with HUGE brush strokes.

(02-16-2017, 05:01 PM)yellowxdiscipline Wrote: What would you consider overpaying, because I don't think anyone is suggesting we give a guy like Zeitler Flacco type of money?

No, but as I said, I was speaking to the team philosophy of not overpaying in general terms.... that not overpaying players is not a bad thing, and that sometimes overpaying one or two players wrecks a team. As for Zeitler specifically, if Kevin wants to test the market to see what he can bring, and the Bengals wait for that number to see if they want to match it, I see nothing wrong with that. Why offer him 10 mil a year if the market is only going to bring him 8? And if he gets offered 10, then the Bengals have the opportunity to match it.

(02-16-2017, 05:21 PM)Seled21 Wrote: No, but as I said, I was speaking to the team philosophy of not overpaying in general terms.... that not overpaying players is not a bad thing, and that sometimes overpaying one or two players wrecks a team. As for Zeitler specifically, if Kevin wants to test the market to see what he can bring, and the Bengals wait for that number to see if they want to match it, I see nothing wrong with that. Why offer him 10 mil a year if the market is only going to bring him 8? And if he gets offered 10, then the Bengals have the opportunity to match it.

Wasn't that pretty much happened with Andre Smith as well on his first extension too?

I seem to remember if was a mix of the Bengals paying the patient game and Smith looking for bigger numbers than he was going to get and that turned out okay for the team. Not that this tactic doesn't obviously have the risk of the player leaving no matter what a bit like MLJ who wanted to be the go to guy even for the same money (or a little less I believe).

(02-14-2017, 10:11 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: As much as I am annoyed that we are about to let Zeitler walk and probably going to lose a guy like Dre as well, the Bengals have signed some of their bigger name players to extensions. Green, Burfict, Atkins, Dalton and they did actually try with Marvin Jones (even though I think they tried too late and never should have let him hit FA.)

The issue is, they do a little work at keeping their own, which would be great if they were signing a few guys to replace the missing pieces. Instead, they "keep their own" and let important pieces walk before dumpster diving the last weeks of FA to get bodies around. It just looks cheap and unprepared.

This is all true, but if they start letting the good players of the O-line go it is worse than we have seen since the 90's.

This was our biggest weakness last year and not only would this be making it a bigger one it hurts all those players you
mentioned who have to stick around. This could cause another major uproar, even worse than Palmers and doom this
franchise for a long time or until MB is gone.

I bet we bring back Whit and Zeitler atleast. This would make no sense whatsoever not to...

Even according to what we have done in the past this would be insane.

(02-16-2017, 09:23 AM)Sled21 Wrote: I fail to see what's wrong with that. They could be like the Ravens and overpay one player so much the rest of the team sucks....

Do you think the Bengals haven't done that because

A:  Mike Brown is super smart and a great GM

or

B:  Mike Brown has never had decide what to do with a QB who went a single playoff game without puking all over himself, much less one that went on a tear through the post-season, won the SB, and was the SB MVP?

(02-16-2017, 01:12 PM)Wyche Wrote: I agree with this sentiment, but in the particular instance of Flacco, Sled has a solid point.

I get that, but doesn't it seem a little sour-grapish to brag up that we never overpaid a SB MVP QB?  I just can't see us calling for a team-friendly deal or the highway for Dalton if he pulled a 2013 Flacco-run for us.

(02-16-2017, 01:36 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: He does. I think the key is drafting.

For every guy you pay a huge amount of money...you have to have starters on rookie contracts as that offsets it because rookie deals are cheap.

If you look at the Bengals...they don't have many starters at all on rookie deals.

Agreed. Getting no to little production from guys like Dennard, Ced, Fisher, Hunt, Dawson , Bodine, Hardson etc. has set them back.

(02-16-2017, 09:23 AM)Sled21 Wrote: I fail to see what's wrong with that. They could be like the Ravens and overpay one player so much the rest of the team sucks....

The overpay came after the Ravens won their second Lombardi.  I doubt anyone on here would rather have Mike Brown's uber conservative, max profit margin strategy over the Modell/Newsome's let's win Playoff games and multiple titles strategy.  The Ravens are light years ahead of Mike Brown.

(02-16-2017, 05:21 PM)Sled21 Wrote: No, but as I said, I was speaking to the team philosophy of not overpaying in general terms.... that not overpaying players is not a bad thing, and that sometimes overpaying one or two players wrecks a team. As for Zeitler specifically, if Kevin wants to test the market to see what he can bring, and the Bengals wait for that number to see if they want to match it, I see nothing wrong with that. Why offer him 10 mil a year if the market is only going to bring him 8? And if he gets offered 10, then the Bengals have the opportunity to match it.

Here's my take on it. If you draft a guy like Kevin Zeitler, develop him, and he becomes one of the better right guards in the league. He and Whitworth are the best offensive lineman on the whole team, so he is already somewhat irreplaceable. You put a value on him going into free agency. Do you feel if he walks you can replace him with someone on the roster or a rookie? If you aren't 100% sure that you can, then you need to consider that paying him more than what you initially valued him at is something you might have to accept. Letting a guy walk just because he asks for more money is a silly way to approach negotiations. If you truly value the player paying him more than what you initially valued him at shouldn't be off the table. Now you obviously cant take this approach with every player.

(02-16-2017, 06:17 PM)Southendbengal Wrote: Wasn't that pretty much happened with Andre Smith as well on his first extension too?

I seem to remember if was a mix of the Bengals paying the patient game and Smith looking for bigger numbers than he was going to get and that turned out okay for the team. Not that this tactic doesn't obviously have the risk of the player leaving no matter what a bit like MLJ who wanted to be the go to guy even for the same money (or a little less I believe).

It's exactly what happened with Smith. He thought he was worth way more than the market brought him. If they Bengals had not let him find out he wasn't "all that and a bag of chips" to the other teams looking for RT's, they would have had to overpay him. Instead, they let him test the market, he got his bubble burst, and they made a deal. Now, like I said, I want them to resign Zeitler, and I think they will. But I also want them to be smart about it, and I think they are.....

(02-16-2017, 10:23 AM)yellowxdiscipline Wrote: Still won 2 Superbowls tho...

^ The butchering of Joe Flacco's contract, which consequently hamstrung the team's cap was actually AFTER Flacco won the Superbowls. It is the cause of their current cap situation and poor roster and NOT the reason that they won two Superbowls. Paying a guy for what he did makes little sense in the NFL. Team's are much much better off projecting and signing guys off of what they think they will do in the upcoming seasons.

The Ravens, since giving Flacco that huge deal have finished 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd in the AFCN and missed the playoffs every season. They just had to give him an insane $44mm signing bonus on an extension/restructuring that saved the Ravens only $6mm in cap room. The Ravens are a mess money wise and have been since the big Flacco deal. They will NOT be able to keep much young talent as their rookie deals expire or new sign impact FAs.

How the Bengals use and work the cap is fine by me. I don't see many FA's coming in and making monster differences. They need to draft better. MUCH better than they have the last 3 or 4 seasons. Not getting much major impact out of 1st & 2nd rounders as of late is what's KILLING them. It's not the big $$$ FA's that they are passing on or the players they choose to not resign. The Bengals have done superbly in managing the Cap since the new CBA.

For what it's worth, I have ZERO issues letting Zeitler go in FA. ZERO. The Pats drafted Thuney in the 3rd round last year and the kid started guard every game, didn't miss a snap, and protected an old QB perfectly well all the way to the trophy. Whitworth was a 2nd round guard. Boling 4th. There are plenty.. plenty.. plenty for excellent linemen available without the premium of a first round pick or huge contract.

This years draft is light on high Oline grades. But there will be talent there in the 2nd or 3rd. Who's to say the bengals don't trade back a little in the 1st and pick up an extra 2nd or 3rd?

Pre-combine Oline grades as of today: http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/tracker?icampaign=draft-sub_nav_bar-drafteventpage-tracker#dt-tabs:dt-by-position/dt-by-position-input:ol

What if they resigned Whitworth, moved OG into guard, and then took another young OT in the 2nd? That would give them Bengals 3 young linemen to develop and NOT have to pay Zeitler. I'm not as down on OG as most people. He had a bad first year (rookie year he basically missed). Perhaps he's a better G than T and they just need to work him in that way. I'm willing to let the big money G go and draft.

Hell, I would rather the Bengals let Zeitler go - Draft an OT or G - and spread his money around to maybe sign a guy like Mario Williams (better at this point in a rotation) to a 2 year deal and add another impact LB, WR or something.

(02-16-2017, 06:17 PM)Southendbengal Wrote: Wasn't that pretty much happened with Andre Smith as well on his first extension too?

I seem to remember if was a mix of the Bengals paying the patient game and Smith looking for bigger numbers than he was going to get and that turned out okay for the team. Not that this tactic doesn't obviously have the risk of the player leaving no matter what a bit like MLJ who wanted to be the go to guy even for the same money (or a little less I believe).

Andre hurt his own stock up to that point. He had the red flags coming into the 09 draft. The hold out, the injured foot, the sluggish play his first real season (2010). He expected some huge deal for basically one good season, but no one wanted to gamble on him. The Bengals had their offer, but Andre seemed to want out of here. Night two of the draft roles around and the Bengals threaten to take Menalik Watson in the 2nd. Andre caved and took the deal. He goes into another offseason where he's met with another cold market and stuck with a 1 year prove it deal. It's unlikely he'll get anything close to what we gave him in 2013 this year.

The problem with this analysis is that letting Z walk won't result in spreading the money to sign other players - in particular no one in their prime or close to it will be signed.

Also, they not only need to keep Zeitler, they need legit starter quality players for Center and Right Tackle.

Here's everyone's favorite part of free agency. This comes from Paul D. and Jim O. at the Enquirer.

Quote:The Cincinnati Bengals enter the 2017 offseason with an estimated $43 million in cap space, but will likely operate with about $20 million.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/nfl/bengals/2017/02/17/cincinnati-bengals-free-agent-tracker/98044374/

I don't know why anyone would be surprised.

(02-17-2017, 11:03 AM)Sled21 Wrote: It's exactly what happened with Smith. He thought he was worth way more than the market brought him. If they Bengals had not let him find out he wasn't "all that and a bag of chips" to the other teams looking for RT's, they would have had to overpay him. Instead, they let him test the market, he got his bubble burst, and they made a deal. Now, like I said, I want them to resign Zeitler, and I think they will. But I also want them to be smart about it, and I think they are.....

This "strategy" has an obvious risk of backfiring though, and it has backfired several times.

The problem I have with not "overpaying" for a guy like Zeitler is that we definitely overpay for mediocre players like Hall, Peko, Maualuga, etc. Of course, that is more of a "loyalty" issue. Mike doesn't like to offer much guaranteed money on contracts, so they make up for it by keeping players through the end of their contracts.

I've always applauded the front office for keeping us out of cap purgatory/cap hell. That's a good bit of work. However, to constantly cut our cap in half is total bullshit. I'm so tired of everything being set up for Mike Brown to be able to do the bare minimum every damn year.

Why are we keeping $5 million for injuries? How many seasons have the Bengals spent $5 million bringing in players during the season? This is a ridiculous number. There's no reason to keep that much set aside other than to not spend it.

The rookies have a wage scale. Yes, the Bengals covet those extra picks so they don't have to spend money elsewhere. We also know that the Bengals aren't trading up to get anyone. That costs too much, so throw that out the window right now. I could see them trading down and acquiring more picks (cheap labor for the win), so I guess their rookie pool could go up if they add even more picks. However, what are the odds that the 11 they already have make the team this season?

Rollover. Every year we have to kick the can down the road to sign players, but magically be out of ***** cap space when it comes time to re-sign them. So the $8 million or so they rolled over from last year isn't for these free agents, so it has to be kicked to next year plus add some more to it.

This shit gives me a headache. This team has got to understand that free agency can be a good thing and help the team. They're cutting their nose off to spit their face. It's funny that we're the only team we hear about all of these cap issues with.

We keep our own until they cost too much, then we draft a shitty replacement who will cant even do HALF of what the departing player can do.

Reggie Nelson walks

In comes Shawn Williams


What proceeds is some of the worst coverage play by a safety in my recent Bengals history


Great move FO

(02-18-2017, 01:44 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: I've always applauded the front office for keeping us out of cap purgatory/cap hell. That's a good bit of work. However, to constantly cut our cap in half is total bullshit. I'm so tired of everything being set up for Mike Brown to be able to do the bare minimum every damn year.

Why are we keeping $5 million for injuries? How many seasons have the Bengals spent $5 million bringing in players during the season? This is a ridiculous number. There's no reason to keep that much set aside other than to not spend it.

The rookies have a wage scale. Yes, the Bengals covet those extra picks so they don't have to spend money elsewhere. We also know that the Bengals aren't trading up to get anyone. That costs too much, so throw that out the window right now. I could see them trading down and acquiring more picks (cheap labor for the win), so I guess their rookie pool could go up if they add even more picks. However, what are the odds that the 11 they already have make the team this season?

Rollover. Every year we have to kick the can down the road to sign players, but magically be out of ***** cap space when it comes time to re-sign them. So the $8 million or so they rolled over from last year isn't for these free agents, so it has to be kicked to next year plus add some more to it.

This shit gives me a headache. This team has got to understand that free agency can be a good thing and help the team. They're cutting their nose off to spit their face. It's funny that we're the only team we hear about all of these cap issues with.

Let's face it. You can't teach an old brown dog new tricks. Nothing will change, period. Yes, it is tiresome and frustrating.

(02-18-2017, 06:28 PM)Housh Wrote: We keep our own until they cost too much, then we draft a shitty replacement who will cant even do HALF of what the departing player can do.

Reggie Nelson walks

In comes Shawn Williams


What proceeds is some of the worst coverage play by a safety in my recent Bengals history


Great move FO

Same move just about every other team in the league would have made.  Let the old guy go and move up the young promising looking player to replace him.

If you have a complaint about Williams it is on the coaches and scouts, nnot the front office.