(08-08-2017, 11:28 AM)Au165 Wrote: People keep talking about multiple tags but that is financially irresponsible for a TE. Assuming the tag jumps a similar 600ishk like it did from 16-17 we are looking at a tag number of 10.4 million to tag him next year (highest paid TE in league at this). The tag then jumps 120% of his previous tag taking him to 12.48 million for his second tag. It would be insane to pay him that much over two years when we could realistically get him for an average of 9-9.5 a year with some protections through playing time bonuses. There aren't people scrambling to go play on the tag. Most guys hate the tag because it offers little security, so they take less to have security.

Agreed. I think we just sign him and live with the injury risk that he presents.

We've signed other players that got injured. It's the big unknown in football.

(08-08-2017, 12:21 PM)Whatever Wrote: However, they signed Andre to play RG, not LT.  You can't just assume they wouldn't bring him back on the cheap if they tagged Whit.

The $18 mil number is also based on our 51 biggest contracts, our actual number after final cuts will be in the $17 mil range with the 2 bubble guys added, which drops the extension/rollover/injury fund to the $6 mil range.

If the team had lost in the AFCCG or something, then going all in like that makes sense.  Coming off a 6 win season and a Top 10 pick, it makes more sense to focus on guys that have plenty of years left in the league.  You also have to figure out if you already have Whit's replacement or if you need to address it next year.

If you don't retain Marvin next year, rolling over cap funds will be a big help to the next coach in bringing in guys that fit his system.

Oh my...

So because we won 6 games last year it makes sense to not bring back Whitworth and try winning this year? The NFL is the classic worst to first league.

I should have stopped reading when you reduced the $18 million cap space down to $17 million...to help prove your point.

Well if age was the issue with Whitworth, why not bring in a proven guy to upgrade the line?

(08-08-2017, 12:58 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Oh my...

So because we won 6 games last year it makes sense to not bring back Whitworth and try winning this year? The NFL is the classic worst to first league.

I should have stopped reading when you reduced the $18 million cap space down to $17 million...to help prove your point.

Well if age was the issue with Whitworth, why not bring in a proven guy to upgrade the line?

Or even why did they even offer him? They said "here take this or leave" and he left. Bluff called. 

(08-08-2017, 12:58 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Oh my...

So because we won 6 games last year it makes sense to not bring back Whitworth and try winning this year? The NFL is the classic worst to first league.

I should have stopped reading when you reduced the $18 million cap space down to $17 million...to help prove your point.

Well if age was the issue with Whitworth, why not bring in a proven guy to upgrade the line?

I would've liked Whit back and so would have the team, but you can't let  Pro Bowl players in their primes slip through your fingers to keep a 34 year old T for another year, especially when you already drafted his replacement.  We still haven't won a playoff game with this core of players, so it's logical t think we were more than 1-2 guys away.

I don't understand what your issue is with the correct cap information being pointed out is.  $18 mil is not the correct figure, as it doesn't account for all the players that will make the roster.

What proven guy would you bring in?  Clady retired and wasn't going to play for backup money.  Hate to say it, but if I'm MB, Alexander hasn't missed on a 1st or 2nd round T yet.  If he says Og and Fish can handle it, I have to trust him on it.  If they fail, then he's out the door with Marvin.

(08-08-2017, 02:02 PM)Whatever Wrote: I would've liked Whit back and so would have the team, but you can't let  Pro Bowl players in their primes slip through your fingers to keep a 34 year old T for another year, especially when you already drafted his replacement *who sucked*.  We still haven't won a playoff game with this core of players, so it's logical t think we were more than 1-2 guys away. 

I don't understand what your issue is with the correct cap information being pointed out is.  $18 mil is not the correct figure, as it doesn't account for all the players that will make the roster.

What proven guy would you bring in?  Clady retired and wasn't going to play for backup money.  Hate to say it, but if I'm MB, Alexander hasn't missed on a 1st or 2nd round T yet.  If he says Og and Fish can handle it, I have to trust him on it.  If they fail, then he's out the door with Marvin.

You realize Whit was a pro-bowler and first team all-pro right? And by this logic, Pats should not re-sign Tom Brady. i mean he's 40!!

You mean to say you trust what this staff is saying to you, one that hasn't won a playoff game since the Oilers were around word on that? The same thing that was said last year before Ced crapped down his leg? And you still buy it? 

Anyone who blindly trusts a staff, that is leading a franchise into its 27 straight season without a playoff win, is funny.

Letting Whit walk at this juncture was a serious mistake.

Zeitler too in my book.

(08-08-2017, 02:34 PM)Go Cards Wrote: Letting Whit walk at this juncture was a serious mistake.

Everyone keeps saying they LET Whit walk. Personally I don't think the Bengals even knew he was considering other offers until they seen he signed with the rams on the espn ticker.

(08-08-2017, 02:42 PM)Synric Wrote: Everyone keeps saying they LET Whit walk. Personally I don't think the Bengals even knew he was considering other offers until they seen he signed with the rams on the espn ticker.

That doesn't make it better. They should have tagged him but Thier stupid.

(08-08-2017, 02:36 PM)Go Cards Wrote: Zeitler too in my book.

Agreed on both.   They should have made a competitive offer to Zeitler the year before.  If you're showing by your offer that it's a business what do you expect him to do.    Could have probably saved a couple of million dollars a year and had him in the fold before 2017.  Then tag Whit and see how things play out.

With those two here and Fisher coming on I think we have a legitimate shot at an awesome season.

If you're playing the develop your own and keep them here card you need to stick to it.   I think both Og and Fisher will be better - but not good enough.  I've heard enough about Og to be very afraid.

(08-08-2017, 04:18 PM)3wt Wrote: Agreed on both.   They should have made a competitive offer to Zeitler the year before.  If you're showing by your offer that it's a business what do you expect him to do.    Could have probably saved a couple of million dollars a year and had him in the fold before 2017.  Then tag Whit and see how things play out.

With those two here and Fisher coming on I think we have a legitimate shot at an awesome season.

If you're playing the develop your own and keep them here card you need to stick to it.   I think both Og and Fisher will be better - but not good enough.  I've heard enough about Og to be very afraid.

Agreed.  I said that through the whole ordeal.  The only answers you get are that "we couldn't spend that much on Z".  Well, had you locked him beforehand, at the then current market, you wouldn't be paying him what he got in Cleveland, and we wouldn't be relying on Andre Smith to learn Guard.  *crickets*  

It was almost as stupid as passing on the Saints draft for Akili Smith......almost.

Agree totally with the rest of the post as well.

(08-08-2017, 02:24 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: You realize Whit was a pro-bowler and first team all-pro right? And by this logic, Pats should not re-sign Tom Brady. i mean he's 40!!

You mean to say you trust what this staff is saying to you, one that hasn't won a playoff game since the Oilers were around word on that? The same thing that was said last year before Ced crapped down his leg? And you still buy it? 

I do realize Whit's accomplishments.  I also realize his days are numbered and his play could fall off a cliff at any time.  I also realize that if they tagged him this year and let him walk next year, they'd be in the exact same boat.  If he retired next year, they'd be in the same boat.  

The Brady instance is just silly.  The 49'ers let Montana go because they had Young.  The Packers let Favre go because they had Rodgers.  The Colts let Manning go because they could get Luck.  If I thought Garrapolo was my next franchise QB, I let Brady walk.  If I don't, and I had just won the SB, Id hold onto him and try to get another ring.  However, look around the league and the successful teams don't hold on too long, and they certainly don't FT linemen in their mid 30's.

If I was MB, and I trusted the word of some fans on the internet who have never won a preseason game and likely never will over the word of one of my coaches whose salary I pay, that coach shouldn't be working for me anymore.

(08-08-2017, 04:48 PM)Whatever Wrote: I do realize Whit's accomplishments.  I also realize his days are numbered and his play could fall off a cliff at any time.  I also realize that if they tagged him this year and let him walk next year, they'd be in the exact same boat.  If he retired next year, they'd be in the same boat.  

The Brady instance is just silly.  The 49'ers let Montana go because they had Young.  The Packers let Favre go because they had Rodgers.  The Colts let Manning go because they could get Luck.  If I thought Garrapolo was my next franchise QB, I let Brady walk.  If I don't, and I had just won the SB, Id hold onto him and try to get another ring.  However, look around the league and the successful teams don't hold on too long, and they certainly don't FT linemen in their mid 30's.

If I was MB, and I trusted the word of some fans on the internet who have never won a preseason game and likely never will over the word of one of my coaches whose salary I pay, that coach shouldn't be working for me anymore.

How can anybody - NFL coach or not - tell when or if someone's play will drop off? I never said anything about a tag. Had they really wanted to keep Whit, you structure a deal almost identical as Rams did. Gives you options after his first year to cut without a huge penalty. Simply put: they preach being "a family", but can't sit down and come to terms with a legend over a year or two of shoddy play? The Rams said we'll work with you on a deal where we can give you some years while also putting outs in place if you do crap down your leg. It's ridiculous how people can in any way defend this move. The Bengals really screwed this one up and further proves the point that MB is cheap and IMO proves he also has very little interest/knowledge in forming a SB caliber team.

And the Brady reference was strictly based on the premise we should of walked from Whit because of his age. The NFL is very smart in protecting their assets. Ask a old time NFL player what it was like 10-20 years ago. Practices were bush league and violent. Go to an NFL camp and practice now. Some don't even hit each other or an extended period of time. Some tackle robotic tackle dummies. Shits way different now and rules are put into place for these players to play longer. We can't use past time in service vs current because it's not an accurate comparison

(08-08-2017, 02:42 PM)Synric Wrote: Everyone keeps saying they LET Whit walk. Personally I don't think the Bengals even knew he was considering other offers until they seen he signed with the rams on the espn ticker.

Disagree and believe they did know exactly what was going on.

If not ? Then they are fools to assume no team would be in search of a good LT in free agency. 

Some teams actually use FA unlike Bengals who claim to build through draft yet often watch them walk for the new cheaper drafted player. 

(08-08-2017, 06:13 PM)Go Cards Wrote: Disagree and believe they did know exactly what was going on.

If not ? Then they are fools to assume no team would be in search of a good LT in free agency. 

Some teams actually use FA unlike Bengals who claim to build through draft yet often watch them walk for the new cheaper drafted player. 

I believe they actually tried to play hard ball with Whit. They figured he would get very few offers if any and that they wouldn't be for much. Then they could resign him for just a touch over the peanuts he was offered if any.

It backfired on them.

(08-08-2017, 05:41 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: How can anybody - NFL coach or not - tell when or if someone's play will drop off? I never said anything about a tag. Had they really wanted to keep Whit, you structure a deal almost identical as Rams did. Gives you options after his first year to cut without a huge penalty. Simply put: they preach being "a family", but can't sit down and come to terms with a legend over a year or two of shoddy play? The Rams said we'll work with you on a deal where we can give you some years while also putting outs in place if you do crap down your leg. It's ridiculous how people can in any way defend this move. The Bengals really screwed this one up and further proves the point that MB is cheap and IMO proves he also has very little interest/knowledge in forming a SB caliber team.

And the Brady reference was strictly based on the premise we should of walked from Whit because of his age. The NFL is very smart in protecting their assets. Ask a old time NFL player what it was like 10-20 years ago. Practices were bush league and violent. Go to an NFL camp and practice now. Some don't even hit each other or an extended period of time. Some tackle robotic tackle dummies. Shits way different now and rules are put into place for these players to play longer. We can't use past time in service vs current because it's not an accurate comparison

Whit still played very well last year, but he did drop off a bit from previous years.  He is already starting to slide.  In the NFL, you want to move on before the bottom totally drops out.  

Contract talks go both ways.  Could the Bengals have offered more money to Whit?  Yes.  Could Whit have given the team that had given him numerous extensions and made him a very rich man a bit of a hometown discount to stay?  Yes.  There was no reason for the Bengals to go over what they thought was fair when they had already drafted a replacement, and they offered him well over $10 million.  People act like the Bengals should start handing out blank checks every time one of their favorite player's contract is up.  They could also not just structure a multi year deal so he could easily be cut due to the Willie Anderson fiasco.  Willie was highly paid, oft injured and not that good anymore when they had to cut him, and the fanbase went ballistic.  Same thing would've happened with Whit.  

The unspoken part of the Whit deal is he was a lot of people's favorite player, and those people think the Bengals should have paid him whatever he wanted for as long as he wanted for him to retire a Bengal.  As much as you can call the Bengals cheap for letting Whit walk over a few million, on the flip side, it wasn't worth that few million to him to retire here.  Vince Wilfork, Revis, Welker, Vinatieri, etc were all beloved Patriot players who had tread left on their tires when they parted ways.  It sucks, but it's part of the business now if you want to be successful.

I think we can all agree , a Whitworth falling off a cliff is still better then a slightly improved OG. Having Whitworth at left tackle n I'd be thinking of a deep bengals playoff run. Now , not so much

(08-08-2017, 02:02 PM)Whatever Wrote: I would've liked Whit back and so would have the team, but you can't let  Pro Bowl players in their primes slip through your fingers to keep a 34 year old T for another year, especially when you already drafted his replacement.  We still haven't won a playoff game with this core of players, so it's logical t think we were more than 1-2 guys away.

I don't understand what your issue is with the correct cap information being pointed out is.  $18 mil is not the correct figure, as it doesn't account for all the players that will make the roster.

What proven guy would you bring in?  Clady retired and wasn't going to play for backup money.  Hate to say it, but if I'm MB, Alexander hasn't missed on a 1st or 2nd round T yet.  If he says Og and Fish can handle it, I have to trust him on it.  If they fail, then he's out the door with Marvin.

It's what the Bengals always do. When they had a Top 5 roster in the NFL a few years ago...they'd save cap space to re-sign future free agents. The cap keeps rising. They could keep those guys anyways.

Why not sign a LB with that money to upgrade from Maualuga? A guy like Darryl Smith. He signed for $3-4 million a year and could actually cover TE's.

Why not sign a Center? It was obvious that Center was a weakness. They didn't address it and we couldn't run the ball in the playoffs.

You can always say...the Bengals need to save their cap space to keep future guys...but they had $18 million cap space and let Zeitler AND Whitworth leave.

It's classic Bengals.

And the we were more than Whitworth away from winning in the playoffs because we didn't win with him argument is classic. I'll tell you how you don't win in the playoffs? Fielding a poor offensive line.

Some fans will root for the Bengals and say that management has a sound strategy financially. It's been 25 years without a playoff win. Some 90% of NFL franchise's have won 5+ playoff game since we've last won a single game. We've won a total of what 5 playoff games in our 49 year history...

The Bengals philosophy DOES NOT work if your objective is playoff success. It works for profit margin.

(08-08-2017, 04:24 PM)Wyche Wrote: Agreed.  I said that through the whole ordeal.  The only answers you get are that "we couldn't spend that much on Z".  Well, had you locked him beforehand, at the then current market, you wouldn't be paying him what he got in Cleveland, and we wouldn't be relying on Andre Smith to learn Guard.  *crickets*  

It was almost as stupid as passing on the Saints draft for Akili Smith......almost.

Agree totally with the rest of the post as well.

Agreed. Plus we have what $17-18 million cap space now. Smith costed what $3 million. That's 20 million cap space right there.

Tag Zeitler for $10-11 million a year for 1 year.

We'd still have $9-10 million cap space after that.

How many times do we have to see the same thing happen over and over and over...and see a team not win a single playoff game in 25+ years to realize that management is inept.

We're hanging our hat on making the playoffs 5 times. Most teams have won 5+ playoff games since we've last won 1!