I don't believe anyone is saying we can or even should re-sign everyone. The point is, the Bengals rolled over $6.6m from last year to this year. They were also some $5m below their adjusted cap last year. That's another $11-12m that could've been used to keep someone or bring in someone.

Including DreK, Winston, Johnson, LaFell, Andre Smith and subtracting the rookie pool, the Bengals are still sitting pretty with $15-20m in cap space. So they could've kept someone else or they could be much more active in free agency instead of stacking comp picks. That's the point I'm trying to make. The money is there.

(03-16-2017, 12:11 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: I don't believe anyone is saying we can or even should re-sign everyone. The point is, the Bengals rolled over $6.6m from last year to this year. They were also some $5m below their adjusted cap last year. That's another $11-12m that could've been used to keep someone or bring in someone.

Including DreK, Winston, Johnson, LaFell, Andre Smith and subtracting the rookie pool, the Bengals are still sitting pretty with $15-20m in cap space. So they could've kept someone else or they could be much more active in free agency instead of stacking comp picks. That's the point I'm trying to make. The money is there.

Quite frankly, if Ced was an average to above average LT...this wouldn't be an issue.

The Bengals plan was to get rid of Whitworth's $10+ million a year salary and Smith's $5.3 million a year salary in 2016 with 2 Tackles that made much less.

Whitworth complained to the Press that they drafted his replacement...so they extended him 1 year to let the Tackles get ready.

They just never developed. (The Bengals NEVER intended to keep Whitworth past that extension.) Ceds lack of development kind of forced their hand though in the court of public opinion.

(03-16-2017, 12:17 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Quite frankly, if Ced was an average to above average LT...this wouldn't be an issue.

The Bengals plan was to get rid of Whitworth's $10+ million a year salary and Smith's $5.3 million a year salary in 2016 with 2 Tackles that made much less.

Whitworth complained to the Press that they drafted his replacement...so they extended him 1 year to let the Tackles get ready.

They just never developed. (The Bengals NEVER intended to keep Whitworth past that extension.) Ceds lack of development kind of forced their hand though in the court of public opinion.

True. However, if Ced were at least passable, they could be using their cap money to bring in other players to improve the team. Instead, we're still bargain shopping so we can hopefully get the max 4 comp picks.

Letting Whit leave hurt because he meant more than just a solid LT. With his age, I can understand letting him walk. I even understand letting Zeitler go because he certainly is not worth the money he got paid.

My issue is with the approach and the unused cap. Why not bring in players that are actually in their prime and could potentially help win now instead of bringing in former players and cut players so you can protect comp picks? The logic is seriously flawed.

(03-16-2017, 12:22 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: True. However, if Ced were at least passable, they could be using their cap money to bring in other players to improve the team. Instead, we're still bargain shopping so we can hopefully get the max 4 comp picks.

Letting Whit leave hurt because he meant more than just a solid LT. With his age, I can understand letting him walk. I even understand letting Zeitler go because he certainly is not worth the money he got paid.

My issue is with the approach and the unused cap. Why not bring in players that are actually in their prime and could potentially help win now instead of bringing in former players and cut players so you can protect comp picks? The logic is seriously flawed.

That's just it...they would have NEVER used that cap money to bring in free agents. Not how they operate.

Whitworth's days were numbered when they drafted Ced...just like Gresham's were when they drafted Eifert. Fans thought they were planning some visionary 2 TE system like the Patriots. It was just a move to reduce salary at a position.

And I agree on the flawed logic. They're willing to invest 90% of their resources into winning...but if they'd just invest that remaining 10%...like other teams do.

Like the Steelers trying to sign Hightower after keeping Brown and Bell. They tried to sign Kirkpatrick. They whiffed...but our biggest try was Barwin...who doesn't come close to fitting our system.

(03-16-2017, 11:54 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If that is the case then you don't need to be complaining until after the draft and there are no free agents available on the market.

After the 2010 season our defense lost the following players

Dhani Jones...16 starts
Keith Rivers...13 starts
John Joseph...12 starts
Roy Williams..11 starts
Tank Johnson..7 starts

The defense was re-built and finished #7 in the league in 2011.  And most of the key additions (Nate Clements, Manny Lawson, Thomas Howard) were not added early in free agency.

They were signed after the draft, yes.

But Geno Atkins was already on the team. They traded for Reggie Nelson as well.

Plus, Lawson, Clements, Howard, and Nelson were all former 1st round picks. Howard, Lawson, and Nelson were 28 or younger.

We can HOPE they will add pieces. But from all signs, it seems like they're content with the offensive line and building in the draft outside of possibly signing a LB or DE.

(03-16-2017, 11:00 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: I saw an interesting tweet the other day. I added 2 players to the top part.

Gone since the wild card debacle vs. PIT: Marvin Jones, Sanu, Whit, Zeitler, Nelson, Peko, Burkhead, Hue Jackson

Still here: Adam Jones, Jeremy Hill, Burfict, and Lewis.


While I don't see an issue with Burfict being on this team, the rest is something to think about.

That really speaks volumes

(03-16-2017, 10:52 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes they can.

If you really were 100% correct about everything you believe then you would be running an NFL team instaed of posting on amessage board.

You are entitled to your opinion.  You are not entitled to claim that you are infallible and your opinion is a "fact".

Ah, so only people who are 100% correct can be GMs? Why aren't you a GM?

Tell me what qualities and training make Mike Brown a good GM?

I'll help . . .

1) Nepotism

(03-16-2017, 11:34 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Production wise Mike Johnson is a top 30 DE in the league and not overpaid.  If we cut him to pay for an O-lineman then  where does the moeny come from to replace Johnson?

I'd like to see the list, please.

(03-16-2017, 11:54 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If that is the case then you don't need to be complaining until after the draft and there are no free agents available on the market.

After the 2010 season our defense lost the following players

Dhani Jones...16 starts
Keith Rivers...13 starts
John Joseph...12 starts
Roy Williams..11 starts
Tank Johnson..7 starts

The defense was re-built and finished #7 in the league in 2011.  And most of the key additions (Nate Clements, Manny Lawson, Thomas Howard) were not added early in free agency.

Manny Lawson a key addition?

(03-16-2017, 11:54 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If that is the case then you don't need to be complaining until after the draft and there are no free agents available on the market.

After the 2010 season our defense lost the following players

Dhani Jones...16 starts
Keith Rivers...13 starts
John Joseph...12 starts
Roy Williams..11 starts
Tank Johnson..7 starts

The defense was re-built and finished #7 in the league in 2011.  And most of the key additions (Nate Clements, Manny Lawson, Thomas Howard) were not added early in free agency.

Sorry Fred I think I am missing your point.

I know you like to defend Bengals management everytime but are you really suggesting that this off season has been what you were hoping for?

Yes the draft should help. It is one of the benefits of finishing ninth from the bottom (ps that is not good). But how many starters are you hoping come from the draft? Grabbing a few vets mid to end of free agency is also not a bad move but it is a gamble. Usually you get what you got from Hawk and Dansby. Useful parts but not key components. Be as optimistic as you want --maybe the O-Line comes together and surprises everyone but as you know the best way to build a team is not to count on surprises.

(03-16-2017, 05:10 PM)CanadianBengal Wrote: Sorry Fred I think I am missing your point.

I know you like to defend Bengals management everytime but are you really suggesting that this off season has been what you were hoping for?

Yes the draft should help. It is one of the benefits of finishing ninth from the bottom (ps that is not good). But how many starters are you hoping come from the draft? Grabbing a few vets mid to end of free agency is also not a bad move but it is a gamble. Usually you get what you got from Hawk and Dansby. Useful parts but not key components. Be as optimistic as you want --maybe the O-Line comes together and surprises everyone but as you know the best way to build a team is not to count on surprises.

The Bengals are probably pinning their hopes on catch lightning in a bottle again like they did by adding "key addition" Manny Lawson who was critical to their success.

(03-16-2017, 11:00 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: I saw an interesting tweet the other day. I added 2 players to the top part.

Gone since the wild card debacle vs. PIT: Marvin Jones, Sanu, Whit, Zeitler, Nelson, Peko, Burkhead, Hue Jackson

Still here: Adam Jones, Jeremy Hill, Burfict, and Lewis.


While I don't see an issue with Burfict being on this team, the rest is something to think about.

This is so depressing. Explains so many issues with this franchise in so little words.

(03-16-2017, 11:31 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You mean the Bengals do exactly what every other team in the league does?

Because I have been wondering whyere all those free agents on the market come from if the Bengals are the only team in the league who does not pay every player as much as he asks for.

In no universe are they exactly like every other team in the league.  They may do some things other teams do but they always have their own little spin on it. 

It's okay to be different if your different is better than everyone else's same. 

To a degree, what the Bengals do works.  But doing it this way means you slowly collect enough talent to make a run and you basically get one shot at it.  See: Bengals, 2015.  Reds, 2010. 

If you don't get it done in that ultimate year, it falls apart.  If you're not like the Patriots and able to find ways to keep improving while having to replace players, you get one, maybe two shots.  And you have to be right about players a whole lot of the time.

This franchise stands in a bit of a mess of its own making.  If you're a fan of this team, it's pretty damned disheartening to go from 2015 to last year and then follow it up with this.  We won 6 and lost two critical pieces and one valuable piece.  Pretty hard to see that and not think we got worse.  How many do we win last year without Whit and Z?

If any fans or players on the team are pissed, they have earned the ***** right.  Anybody who says otherwise is just being a doosh.

(03-16-2017, 12:17 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Quite frankly, if Ced was an average to above average LT...this wouldn't be an issue.

The Bengals plan was to get rid of Whitworth's $10+ million a year salary and Smith's $5.3 million a year salary in 2016 with 2 Tackles that made much less.

Whitworth complained to the Press that they drafted his replacement...so they extended him 1 year to let the Tackles get ready.

They just never developed. (The Bengals NEVER intended to keep Whitworth past that extension.) Ceds lack of development kind of forced their hand though in the court of public opinion.

Hence, the value of a backup plan.

We're in uncharted waters right now and may or may not find land, but the ship hasn't sunk quite yet. Dunlap may not see the plan, but he hasn't played the upcoming season yet either. Free agency isn't over yet and the draft is still quite a ways off.
I'm not a believer in the boogie man under my bed. No, Mike Brown doesn't live there. I check every night to make sure. 

(03-14-2017, 07:51 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I guess Mike Brown's 25+ years of sub-par ownership and a list of former players who left in absolute disgust aren't quite conclusive enough for some people.

Diiiiiivaaaaaaaaaas

(03-17-2017, 12:42 AM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Diiiiiivaaaaaaaaaas

If you're not being sarcastic: Where's the long list of similar players for the other 31 teams? We can't be the only team with a 25 year long diva problem, right?

If you're being sarcastic: Apologies. Carry on.

I am really hoping this plan is for Hue Jackson to trade us the Browns two number 1's for A.J. Mccarron and then come back and be the head coach of the Bengals next year.

Basically they had a Plan A which was chancy (all the picks had to pan out quickly and none get injured) and no Plan B. The result is what we see now.

(03-17-2017, 12:42 AM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Diiiiiivaaaaaaaaaas

What do the cool kids in kindergarten say? "Takes one to know one."

(03-09-2017, 09:35 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: I can't another rebuild. I can't.

I can't take the "jerry jones makes more money than me" rationale the bengals has for not "keeping their own"

Whitworth was our rock. But it turns out he was just another Nately "diva".


Screw this. My girlfriend is a boys fan. I'm out.

You're out, remember? Damn Diiiiiivaaaaaaaaaas always wanting attention.