(08-12-2017, 10:33 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Can you really say they haven't earned their "Wrong until proven right" reputation?  I could see Mike Brown turning down all but the most slam dunk of trades because shifting the roster during the season is a pain in the ass and it's not like he's going to lose his job if he makes a wrong move anyways.  Why bother?

As I've said before. Mike Brown has made some great personnel decisions. Anyone simply saying not trading is stupid because Mike Brown is clueless of personnel decisions is just letting their dislike spill into areas it does not belong.

There is no doubt that Mike Brown is the #1 reason this franchise has not been overly successful over the last couple decades; however, it is not because of the personnel (on field) decisions he has made.

Folks should save their displeasure for things Mikey actually does that warrants displeasure, such as running (funding) the organization as a five and dime. He's generally made smart personnel decisions, it's what he does to help them succeed once they get here that is to be questioned.

I do not understand the thinking of the posters advocating trading McCarron. Do you not want to win now? You might think a second round choice last April would have put us over the top -- I seriously doubt that -- but in my mind it wasn't worth the risk. AJM is worth his weight in gold as a proven backup. He's like that term life insurance policy that you hope your wife never cashes, but you pay for it every month because you realize the reality and the need. If, God forbid, Andy were to go down, AJM still gives us a chance. No chance without him.

Keeping McCarron is about winning NOW.

We should've taken the pick. That's not a knock in any way on McCarron or Brown. At best, we'll net a 3rd round comp pick when he signs elsewhere (whatever season that is).

I do not dislike McCarron. I have absolutely nothing against him. He is a good back up and could probably be a good starter in the NFL. What I don't like is some have crowned him the savior over Dalton as soon as he was drafted. No matter what, they will always overvalue McCarron simply for the fact he's not Dalton. I haven't seen enough from him to feel that the hype is warranted. He's played a handful of games. However, it's perfectly acceptable to say he's worth a 1st round pick at minimum, he would be just as good as Dalton at the very least, that he's the best backup in the League, and that the Bengals should move on from Dalton's bloated contract and hand the job over to him. On the flip side, it's okay to say Driskel sucks and only looks good against 3s in one game even with less to go on than McCarron. It's not okay to say anything negative about McCarron because he hasn't had enough playing time, but it's perfectly acceptable to judge Driskel on no playing time. Go figure.

I feel the season will be over if Dalton goes down regardless of who is the backup. That's not a knock on anyone's talent, but the team will go vanilla on offense and that will be that. So take the second, groom Driskel, and look to draft another backup in the future. Besides, it would give McCarron his chance to become a starter. I do believe he deserves a chance, but it's not going to happen as long as Dalton is healthy.

(08-12-2017, 10:42 AM)bfine32 Wrote: As I've said before. Mike Brown has made some great personnel decisions. Anyone simply saying not trading is stupid because Mike Brown is clueless of personnel decisions is just letting their dislike spill into areas it does not belong.

There is no doubt that Mike Brown is the #1 reason this franchise has not been overly successful over the last couple decades; however, it is not because of the personnel (on field) decisions he has made.

Folks should save their displeasure for things Mikey actually does that warrants displeasure, such as running (funding) the organization as a five and dime. He's generally made smart personnel decisions, it's what he does to help them succeed once they get here that is to be questioned.

It's possible I'm being overly negative, but I can't help but be irked by people who have "Can never be fired ever ever ever no matter what" clauses tied to their jobs.  That sort of thing just permeates any decisions or options that arise.  We've all seen GMs and HCs who are too worried about their jobs make terrible and short-sighted deals in an effort to save themselves, so that's the example of the opposite being detrimental.

In Mike's case I just expect more out of a guy who has been a GM for over a quarter of a century.

(08-11-2017, 06:23 PM)firstand10 Wrote: This second round turn down is interesting. I see one of two things that could have happened. 1 Maybe they figure his stock will go up if they keep him around because another team might need a backup QB if their starting QB gets hurt? 2. Maybe they know something we don't know in the trade winds?

If they're going to trade him, they need to do it without him getting too much more playing time. The more he plays, the more apparent that his arm isn't that strong--very little zip at all--and he still floats/throws high way too much. 

(08-12-2017, 10:42 AM)bfine32 Wrote: As I've said before. Mike Brown has made some great personnel decisions. Anyone simply saying not trading is stupid because Mike Brown is clueless of personnel decisions is just letting their dislike spill into areas it does not belong.

There is no doubt that Mike Brown is the #1 reason this franchise has not been overly successful over the last couple decades; however, it is not because of the personnel (on field) decisions he has made.

Folks should save their displeasure for things Mikey actually does that warrants displeasure, such as running (funding) the organization as a five and dime. He's generally made smart personnel decisions, it's what he does to help them succeed once they get here that is to be questioned.

I'd say he's about 30% or worse on any personnel decisions. Why? Any of the players we have drafted that wound up getting significant PT are negated by letting a few of them walk ...and by doing exactly jack shit in FA.  Who knows....one or two good players in FA instead of bargain bin scrap heap types may have put us over that mythical hump.  One thing's for sure.....with the way Son of Paul does things....we'll most likely never know.  Drafting duds like Og and Dennard aren't exactly helping his case either. We won't even get into the horrible decisions during the lost decade.....

(08-12-2017, 11:21 AM)Nately120 Wrote: It's possible I'm being overly negative, but I can't help but be irked by people who have "Can never be fired ever ever ever no matter what" clauses tied to their jobs.  That sort of thing just permeates any decisions or options that arise.  We've all seen GMs and HCs who are too worried about their jobs make terrible and short-sighted deals in an effort to save themselves, so that's the example of the opposite being detrimental.

In Mike's case I just expect more out of a guy who has been a GM for over a quarter of a century.

This.

(08-12-2017, 06:56 PM)Wyche Wrote: I'd say he's about 30% or worse on any personnel decisions. Why? Any of the players we have drafted that wound up getting significant PT are negated by letting a few of them walk ...and by doing exactly jack shit in FA.  

This is just kind made up. We've kept plenty of our own.

Quick question? What recent draft choice have we let walk that went on to excel elsewhere?

The best I can think of is J. Jo; however, we had to choose between him and Leon. I can list a bunch we let go that didn't make a beep in the league after we let them go.

If I were Bengal king. I'd make Mikey GM and emplace an owner that is totally dedicated to winning.  

Mikey has done very good in personnel moves. Anyone that cannot see that is just blinded by their dislike of the man. 

(08-12-2017, 07:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This is just kind made up. We've kept plenty of our own.

Quick question? What recent draft choice have we let walk that went on to excel elsewhere?

The best I can think of is J. Jo; however, we had to choose between him and Leon. I can list a bunch we let go that didn't make a beep in the league after we let them go.

If I were Bengal king. I'd make Mikey GM and emplace an owner that is totally dedicated to winning.  

Mikey has done very good in personnel moves. Anyone that cannot see that is just blinded by their dislike of the man. 

I said a few....not a lot....but a few.  We let MJ go...Zeit...JJo....J.Smith....Nelson (not a draft pick, but good player although old)....a few over the years. The main gripe is piss poor FA. Agree to disagree I guess.

I know our organization sucks but I have a hard time believing we were offered a 2nd for AJM and turned it down.

Its more likely to me that we ASKED for a 2nd rounder and got turned down.

(08-10-2017, 10:41 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I think that Driskel being really bad factors in. Get rid of McCarron and you have Driskel. That's a massive drop off.

We don't know that. Driskel was a late round pick just like McCarron.

That said, even if you don't like Driskel, there are decent backups on the market that can hold us over for a couple games if needed.

(08-10-2017, 11:02 PM)Whatever Wrote: That's because most teams don't have a backup QB with even game manager starter potential.  You think you're going to get one of the Chiefs top 2 QB's for a 2nd?

Ponder has a 75.9 career QBR to McCarron's 97.1.  There's a large discrepancy, there.  RGIII has a toxic locker room rep and a long injury history.  Kaepernick nobody will touch because of all the bad pr that comes along with him.

There's also big discrepancies in how many games they've started. For all we know, McCarron would unravel if he started more games. Tbh, it seemed he was already unraveling in 2015, if you look at the stats LeonardLeap posted. 5.24 YPA for the season after the 1st half of the Broncos game?

There was also a big discrepancy in talent level at receiver.

(08-10-2017, 11:14 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Ponder signed with the 49ers last year for $800k. He's as backup-y as they come and could hold you over for 1-2 games if Dalton gets a concussion.

(If Dalton has a long term injury, it doesn't matter if it's McCarron or Ponder, season's over.)

I would take Ponder and a 2nd rounder over McCarron, and you only pay $100k more. Easy choice.

This. Shaun Hill, RGIII, Charlie Whitehurst and Thad Lewis are worth mentioning as well. Some of these guys have been thorns in the Bengals sides in the past.

(08-12-2017, 10:47 AM)Speedy Thomas Wrote: I do not understand the thinking of the posters advocating trading McCarron.  Do you not want to win now?  You might think a second round choice last April would have put us over the top -- I seriously doubt that -- but in my mind it wasn't worth the risk.  AJM is worth his  weight in gold as a proven backup.  He's like that term life insurance policy that you hope your wife never cashes, but you pay for it every month because you realize the reality and the need.  If, God forbid, Andy were to go down, AJM still gives us a chance.  No chance without him.  

His weight in gold is worth about  $4,576,000.

I'm inclined to believe that the Bengals should've traded McCarron for the pick. If Dalton goes down, McCarron is not going to lead this team, as currently constructed, to the playoffs. We like McCarron so much, but the truth is that every young QB is untested until they're tested. The better teams will sell high on a young backup QB and then take fliers on more young QBs as a rinse and repeat, at least the teams with established QB's. If the Bengals were unsure of who their QB was, then fine, but that pick could be used to draft someone who would enhance Dalton's value and keep him upright or give us another playmaker on defense. A player can't be super valuable when they're not actually on the field. If a team has no other holes, by all means, hold on to McCarron, but this team has holes and that would enable the Bengals to fill one of those with a second round pick, which have been pretty darn valuable lately.

(08-13-2017, 03:59 AM)Wyche Wrote: I said a few....not a lot....but a few.  We let MJ go...Zeit...JJo....J.Smith....Nelson (not a draft pick, but good player although old)....a few over the years. The main gripe is piss poor FA. Agree to disagree I guess.

I usually agree with a lot of your posts, but I think the FO has been awesome since Carson publicly crapped on them.. To address the guys you listed as negatives that they left....

- MJ: There's a thread on MJ a few posts down pointing out how not good or impactful he is. The Bucs paid him a ton, the Bengals elected to pay Dunlap a ton. Who got the better end of that deal? The Bengals by far! MJ is now back on the team after he didn't earn the contract he was given and  a lower rate. WINNER: Bengals

- ZEITLER: You know who pays Guards $60 million? Bad teams pay guards $60 million dollars. Good teams usually don't. The Browns (bad team) had to pay through the nose and it will kill them when it comes to signing actual talent where it SHOULD be expensive. Gs are NOT that expensive in the NFL compared to many other positions. The Bengals were smart here to not pay a king's ransom for a G. Look at how things played out... A UDFA is going to start at G for the Bengals this season and he's a good player. A 4th rounder (Bolling) is going to start at the other G. He's a very good player. WINNER: Bengals

Paying a guard THAT much would have crushed paying Burfict (WAYYYYY better and more important than Zeitler) and Eifert (see Burfict comment). It was the right move.

Joe Thuney was a 3rd round Guard and played every snap for the Patriots last year. THAT'S how you bring in a Guard. Not pay them $60 MILLION.

J.Jo: Really good player. Would have probably excelled big time under Zimmer. The Bengals offered the same money, Joseph chose to leave. Can't help that. Looking at the statistics, Adam Jones has been a considerably better player over the same time period. So, Joseph leaving and Hall staying, coupled along with the growth of the 2ndary in general didn't really hurt or have a negative effect. This worked out in the Bengals favor as well or is at least a push (speaking on field.. not off field issues)
WINNER: Bengals

Justin Smith: Had a career revival in San Fran as a 3-4 end. The Bengals never used him properly and a lot of his career was wasted next to sub par players and the Bengals not realizing his strengths and playing to them. Smith grossly under performed in his last 2 years in Cincinnati and there was no real reason to continue to pay him the way they were based on his production in the Bengals scheme. WINNER: 49ers & Justin Smith Tough to call the Bengals a loser here, however, given the above mentioned reasons Smith never flourished. The Bengals did the right thing and the 49ers got the right result.

Reggie Nelson: Can't pay a player that age to stick around. You can't do it. I agree with what the Bengals did in Paying Jones and letting Nelson go. They couldn't pay them both. Reggie Nelson was a fabulous player for the Bengals and a STEAL when they traded for him for a song. They got the best out of Reggie Nelson, but the Bengals had talent behind him and were getting old on defense. in 2016, the Benglas had the OLDEST starting defense in the NFL. They need to get and stay young and keep (read: PAY) guys in their prime. Reggie Nelson's prime is behind him and George Iloka's is in front. WINNER: PUSH


On the FA Front:


The Bengals have done a great job choosing and picking the right guys to keep and bringing in filler around them. Look at how they've maneuvered through the cap and kept actual starts: Green, Dalton, Atkins, Dunlap, Burfict, Bernard, the Safeties, DreKirk, Jones, etc. Those have been awesome players with bright futures compared to the guys above (save for Zeitler and JJoe) I can't think of many FAs who have gone to any team and just killed it or put them over the top. Did the Doplphins signing Mike Wallace, or the Redskins getting DeShawn Jackson make any difference at all? What about Mario WIlliams to the Bills? Julius Peppers make any kind of monster difference in Greenbay or Chicago? How about Josh Norman? NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE. Those teams all were about the same. I think if you look, that is going to be the case 95 times out of 100 big name FAs. 

That's typically NOT how you win in the NFL. Look at the teams like the Pats, Steelers, Cowboys, Packers, Seahawks, and other perennially successful franchises and see what FAs they bring in. They rarely pay anyone big money. It's just not smart. 

On the thread topic, I would trade McCarron for a 3rd and another late rounder now in a heartbeat. This gives them a guaranteed 3rd in next years draft (2018) rather than a 3rd in the draft after (2019) plus potentially a 5th or 6th. If they can find a strong Tackle prospect I would look at that as well.

They can then keep Driskel without eating up a roster spot, whom I think has HUGE potential. If you guys read up on him I think you'll find an outstanding prospect with an incredibly high ceiling. Get the picks for McCarron now, give Driskel more reps, and move along. 6-5 QBs with fantastic arms who are big time athletes are rare. Driskel was a huge prospect out of college and would have been a star at Florida. He went 11-2 there as a Sophomore, but broke his leg and lost his starting job the following year. Bad luck, but the kid is a monster in the waiting should AD go down.

(08-13-2017, 09:38 PM)PDub80 Wrote: On the thread topic, I would trade McCarron for a 3rd and another late rounder now in a heartbeat. This gives them a guaranteed 3rd in next years draft (2018) rather than a 3rd in the draft after (2019) plus potentially a 5th or 6th. If they can find a strong Tackle prospect I would look at that as well.

They can then keep Driskel without eating up a roster spot, whom I think has HUGE potential. If you guys read up on him I think you'll find an outstanding prospect with an incredibly high ceiling. Get the picks for McCarron now, give Driskel more reps, and move along. 6-5 QBs with fantastic arms who are big time athletes are rare. Driskel was a huge prospect out of college and would have been a star at Florida. He went 11-2 there as a Sophomore, but broke his leg and lost his starting job the following year. Bad luck, but the kid is a monster in the waiting should AD go down.

Driskel looked pretty solid in the game against Tampa, makes it that much easier to say trading McCarron is a no-brainer at this point. Get what you can get for him, and roll with 2 QBs like everyone else does. Keep a rookie on the practice squad if need be, but there is not reason to keep all 3 on this roster and Driskel will be picked up if waived at this point with how he looked.

(08-13-2017, 09:28 PM)PDub80 Wrote: I usually agree with a lot of your posts, but I think the FO has been awesome since Carson publicly crapped on them.. To address the guys you listed as negatives that they left....

- MJ: There's a thread on MJ a few posts down pointing out how not good or impactful he is. The Bucs paid him a ton, the Bengals elected to pay Dunlap a ton. Who got the better end of that deal? The Bengals by far! MJ is now back on the team after he didn't earn the contract he was given and  a lower rate. WINNER: Bengals

- ZEITLER: You know who pays Guards $60 million? Bad teams pay guards $60 million dollars. Good teams usually don't. The Browns (bad team) had to pay through the nose and it will kill them when it comes to signing actual talent where it SHOULD be expensive. Gs are NOT that expensive in the NFL compared to many other positions. The Bengals were smart here to not pay a king's ransom for a G. Look at how things played out... A UDFA is going to start at G for the Bengals this season and he's a good player. A 4th rounder (Bolling) is going to start at the other G. He's a very good player. WINNER: Bengals

Paying a guard THAT much would have crushed paying Burfict (WAYYYYY better and more important than Zeitler) and Eifert (see Burfict comment). It was the right move.

Joe Thuney was a 3rd round Guard and played every snap for the Patriots last year. THAT'S how you bring in a Guard. Not pay them $60 MILLION.

J.Jo: Really good player. Would have probably excelled big time under Zimmer. The Bengals offered the same money, Joseph chose to leave. Can't help that. Looking at the statistics, Adam Jones has been a considerably better player over the same time period. So, Joseph leaving and Hall staying, coupled along with the growth of the 2ndary in general didn't really hurt or have a negative effect. This worked out in the Bengals favor as well or is at least a push (speaking on field.. not off field issues)
WINNER: Bengals

Justin Smith: Had a career revival in San Fran as a 3-4 end. The Bengals never used him properly and a lot of his career was wasted next to sub par players and the Bengals not realizing his strengths and playing to them. Smith grossly under performed in his last 2 years in Cincinnati and there was no real reason to continue to pay him the way they were based on his production in the Bengals scheme. WINNER: 49ers & Justin Smith Tough to call the Bengals a loser here, however, given the above mentioned reasons Smith never flourished. The Bengals did the right thing and the 49ers got the right result.

Reggie Nelson: Can't pay a player that age to stick around. You can't do it. I agree with what the Bengals did in Paying Jones and letting Nelson go. They couldn't pay them both. Reggie Nelson was a fabulous player for the Bengals and a STEAL when they traded for him for a song. They got the best out of Reggie Nelson, but the Bengals had talent behind him and were getting old on defense. in 2016, the Benglas had the OLDEST starting defense in the NFL. They need to get and stay young and keep (read: PAY) guys in their prime. Reggie Nelson's prime is behind him and George Iloka's is in front. WINNER: PUSH


On the FA Front:


The Bengals have done a great job choosing and picking the right guys to keep and bringing in filler around them. Look at how they've maneuvered through the cap and kept actual starts: Green, Dalton, Atkins, Dunlap, Burfict, Bernard, the Safeties, DreKirk, Jones, etc. Those have been awesome players with bright futures compared to the guys above (save for Zeitler and JJoe) I can't think of many FAs who have gone to any team and just killed it or put them over the top. Did the Doplphins signing Mike Wallace, or the Redskins getting DeShawn Jackson make any difference at all? What about Mario WIlliams to the Bills? Julius Peppers make any kind of monster difference in Greenbay or Chicago? How about Josh Norman? NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE. Those teams all were about the same. I think if you look, that is going to be the case 95 times out of 100 big name FAs. 

That's typically NOT how you win in the NFL. Look at the teams like the Pats, Steelers, Cowboys, Packers, Seahawks, and other perennially successful franchises and see what FAs they bring in. They rarely pay anyone big money. It's just not smart. 

Solid points....and I do agree that they have most certainly gotten better since 2010.....but I'll address my stance a little more detailed on a couple of your points to give a better perspective.

MJ....agreed, but the fact remains, there was tag money available that year if my aging memory is correct.  He was coming off a career year, and really had no one to replace him.  Maybe he was enough to get us over the hump, maybe not.  The point I was making was we let him go with no real, viable backup plan in place.

Zeitler.....my point is, and always has been, you didn't have to pay him 60 mil if you had negotiated an extension prior to 2016.  Also, G is becoming more and more important in today's game with all of the movement in regards to pulling that Gs do these days.  Again, no solid backup plan in place.  Although, Hopkins looked fairly good Friday.  You say you keep your own, then, instead of negotiating an extension for your home grown talent, you let them walk.  Maybe it was a good decision, maybe not, (time will soon tell us) but don't piss down my leg and tell me it's raining....

JJo....seems I remember more guaranteed was offered in Houston, or something along those lines, that sweetened the pot for Joseph.  It's been a while, and I'm just too lazy to research it...lol.  I can somewhat agree it was a push....although JJo probably doesn't get us a 15 yarder against Pitt in the WC game.  At the end of the day, I'd rather have had him vs Pacman's antics....on and off the field.

J. Smith...I can mostly agree with you here, I just used him as an example of someone they let go.

Nelson.....had another good year in Oakland, saved a game with an INT, was coming off a league leading year in INTs when they let him walk.  I think they could have gotten a hometown deal, but it was my understanding they didn't even try.  You must admit, the back end of the defense looked WAY out of sync in the first half of the season, and Williams was underwhelming back there.  I give the advantage to the Raiders.

FA.....the only big name FA I would have even considered would have been Alex Mack.  You gotta admit, our line would have fared MUCH better with him anchoring it.  What I'm getting at.....how well did James Harrison serve us?  AJ Hawk?  Karlos Dansby?  Now, had we gotten a guy like Dansby earlier in his career, and shipped out the underperforming Rey Maualuga to make room for him, how much better could the middle of the defense been?  The Pats have brought in guys like Randy Moss, Corey Dillon, Derelle Revis, etc, and won Super Bowls.  You take a glaring weakness, and upgrade it, not stand pat or make it slightly worse.  Mike Wallace is a good example.  Did he make Miami a SB contender?  No, but by the same token, maybe a guy like Wallace opposite AJ Green is a winning combo.  The point is, you never know until you try.

(08-13-2017, 09:38 PM)PDub80 Wrote: On the thread topic, I would trade McCarron for a 3rd and another late rounder now in a heartbeat. This gives them a guaranteed 3rd in next years draft (2018) rather than a 3rd in the draft after (2019) plus potentially a 5th or 6th. If they can find a strong Tackle prospect I would look at that as well.

They can then keep Driskel without eating up a roster spot, whom I think has HUGE potential. If you guys read up on him I think you'll find an outstanding prospect with an incredibly high ceiling. Get the picks for McCarron now, give Driskel more reps, and move along. 6-5 QBs with fantastic arms who are big time athletes are rare. Driskel was a huge prospect out of college and would have been a star at Florida. He went 11-2 there as a Sophomore, but broke his leg and lost his starting job the following year. Bad luck, but the kid is a monster in the waiting should AD go down.

(08-13-2017, 11:20 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: Driskel looked pretty solid in the game against Tampa, makes it that much easier to say trading McCarron is a no-brainer at this point. Get what you can get for him, and roll with 2 QBs like everyone else does. Keep a rookie on the practice squad if need be, but there is not reason to keep all 3 on this roster and Driskel will be picked up if waived at this point with how he looked.

Agree on both posts gentlemen.  There's a reason they didn't let him get snuffed off our PS, in my opinion....so why keep McCarron if he's getting traction on the trade market?  

The Bengals are over valuing AJ (a backup QB) and its going to come back to bite them.

They should have traded for the seconded rounder.