(08-14-2017, 09:09 PM)TSwigZ Wrote: None of these cuts you guys mention are really that "surprising"

What would be surprising to you? AJ Green? I've seen some big names and current starters mentioned, I just don't see any huge stars getting cut. Now if this were 2018, I'd throw Gio's name in the mix, but it'd be too much dead money as of now.

(08-14-2017, 10:10 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: What would be surprising to you? AJ Green? I've seen some big names and current starters mentioned, I just don't see any huge stars getting cut. Now if this were 2018, I'd throw Gio's name in the mix, but it'd be too much dead money as of now.

*cough*Hill*cough*

If the Bengals decide to roll with 6 WRs, I'm worried my man Core will be cut. I'm a big fan and would love to see him get more playing time, but we have a lot of talent at WR.

I'd like to see Johnson, Smith, or Peerman go, but I doubt it.

The big question I have is what are we going to do at QB? Dalton is the starter, McCarron is going nowhere, and if they want to keep Driskel they have to put him on the 53. Rolling with 3 QBs seems like a luxury to me. Especially with some of the position battles going on.

(08-14-2017, 11:02 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: If the Bengals decide to roll with 6 WRs, I'm worried my man Core will be cut. I'm a big fan and would love to see him get more playing time, but we have a lot of talent at WR.

I'd like to see Johnson, Smith, or Peerman go, but I doubt it.

The big question I have is what are we going to do at QB? Dalton is the starter, McCarron is going nowhere, and if they want to keep Driskel they have to put him on the 53. Rolling with 3 QBs seems like a luxury to me. Especially with some of the position battles going on.

If Driskell keeps playing the way he's playing, he's no doubt one of the 53 best guys on the roster.  Keeping him would make it easier to move McCarron if the right deal presents itself, either early in the year or next offseason.

(08-14-2017, 11:07 PM)Whatever Wrote: If Driskell keeps playing the way he's playing, he's no doubt one of the 53 best guys on the roster.  Keeping him would make it easier to move McCarron if the right deal presents itself, either early in the year or next offseason.

I agree. I think Driskel has to make the roster. I don't see the team trading McCarron though. I think if they knew for sure if he were going to be a RFA or UFA, that would tip their hand. If he's restricted, they can slap a first round tender on him and let it ride. If he's unrestricted, get what you can now.

(08-14-2017, 10:18 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: *cough*Hill*cough*

I would go with Hill for this year, but he's still on that cheap rookie contract. Unless they feel he won't handle a demotion well, I don't see him getting cut. You never know though.

(08-14-2017, 11:45 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I would go with Hill for this year, but he's still on that cheap rookie contract. Unless they feel he won't handle a demotion well, I don't see him getting cut. You never know though.

That's why he'd be a surprise because his play dictates he should be on the block but you know this team wont ditch that cheap contract. 

(08-14-2017, 11:07 PM)Whatever Wrote: If Driskell keeps playing the way he's playing, he's no doubt one of the 53 best guys on the roster.  Keeping him would make it easier to move McCarron if the right deal presents itself, either early in the year or next offseason.

They like Driskell. I don't see them cutting him unless they have to

(08-14-2017, 11:47 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: That's why he'd be a surprise because his play dictates he should be on the block but you know this team wont ditch that cheap contract. 

Sorry very few teams would even consider cutting Hill....Hill has been up and down in the 3 years but his play does not dictate being cut... very few teams would consider cutting a guy that has averaged close to 10 TDS a year and 900 yards a year for three years... plus most coaches would call someone nuts for the suggestion when you have a rookie that has never played in the NFL with a some major baggage plus another RB coming off knee surgery

(08-14-2017, 11:07 PM)Whatever Wrote: If Driskell keeps playing the way he's playing, he's no doubt one of the 53 best guys on the roster.  Keeping him would make it easier to move McCarron if the right deal presents itself, either early in the year or next offseason.

If Driskel keeps playing well, maybe teams come asking about him.

I'll keep saying it.

Brandon Lafell.

(08-15-2017, 01:26 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Sorry very few teams would even consider cutting Hill....Hill has been up and down in the 3 years but his play does not dictate being cut... very few teams would consider cutting a guy that has averaged close to 10 TDS a year and 900 yards a year for three years... plus most coaches would call someone nuts for the suggestion when you have a rookie that has never played in the NFL with a some major baggage plus another RB coming off knee surgery

2.9 yards per carry without the Browns games that are major outlying performances. 

(08-15-2017, 10:11 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: 2.9 yards per carry without the Browns games that are major outlying performances. 

TD machine is not an outlying performance.. you can pick those cherries all you want

(08-15-2017, 11:07 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: TD machine is not an outlying performance.. you can pick those cherries all you want

Not cherry picking. 

Averaging 2.9 ypc and a lot of TDs is a sign of getting a lot runs inside the 10 yard line and the team not willing to throw. 

(08-14-2017, 11:02 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: If the Bengals decide to roll with 6 WRs, I'm worried my man Core will be cut. I'm a big fan and would love to see him get more playing time, but we have a lot of talent at WR.

I'd like to see Johnson, Smith, or Peerman go, but I doubt it.

The big question I have is what are we going to do at QB? Dalton is the starter, McCarron is going nowhere, and if they want to keep Driskel they have to put him on the 53. Rolling with 3 QBs seems like a luxury to me. Especially with some of the position battles going on.

I could actually see Core going to IR if his injury lingers with a plan to have him replace LaFell on the roster next year. That would result in 6 WRs this year (Green, LaFell, Ross, Boyd, Malone, Erickson) and then 6 next year (Green, Boyd, Ross, Malone, Core, Erickson).

(08-15-2017, 11:34 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I could actually see Core going to IR if his injury lingers with a plan to have him replace LaFell on the roster next year. That would result in 6 WRs this year (Green, LaFell, Ross, Boyd, Malone, Erickson) and then 6 next year (Green, Boyd, Ross, Malone, Core, Erickson).

This is what the Pats do, they throw someone to IR that they have future plans for but can't find a spot for. I'd be okay with it as we have two IR designations to return now so if we got in a jam we could bring him back.

(08-15-2017, 11:09 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Not cherry picking. 

Averaging 2.9 ypc and a lot of TDs is a sign of getting a lot runs inside the 10 yard line and the team not willing to throw. 

Well i sure know my stats were not cherry picking either

If all WRs stay healthy we will eventually have to cut either Cedric Peerman, Alex Erickson or Ryan Hewitt. All three are in "specialty" roles that are a luxury, and this year the coaches are going to have to decide which luxury they enjoy the most (ST ace, return specialist or dedicated H-back).

If I had to put put money down I would guess it will be Peerman.

Last year Hewitt saw the field so little that I was beginning to think priorities were shifting and he would be on the way out. However after that first preseason game it's clear he is receiving more intentional use in Zamp's second year offense. Similarly, Erickson still seems to be highly valued as our primary return specialist, and blossoming as a receiver. None of the young speedsters (Ross, Boyd, Mixon) have shown themselves to be a clear replacement to Erickson's return abilities, which further solidifies his spot.

Which brings us to Peerman. Ced has certainly been a special teams ace, but this is an extremely young team with a lot of speed and guys eager to step into leadership roles on ST. Last year Peerman was out most of the year, and multiple guys have emerged as ST "leaders" in his absence(s). Hobson just wrote an article about the emergence of Cody Core and Josh Shaw as ST leaders.

I think that Peerman is an excellent Bengal, and in a vacuum he is more than worthy of being a part of this team. But the talent and versatility we stand to lose by keeping him instead of Hewitt or Erickson makes it clear he ought to be the odd man out. For many years the Bengals kept only 3 RB. Peerman changed that with his excellent ST play. But in a year where you have Mixon, Hill and Bernard, I'm not sure keeping a fourth will be necessary, especially if we have other ST leaders waiting in the wings.

(08-15-2017, 12:01 PM)Slythe Wrote: If all WRs stay healthy we will eventually have to cut either Cedric Peerman, Alex Erickson or Ryan Hewitt. All three are in "specialty" roles that are a luxury, and this year the coaches are going to have to decide which luxury they enjoy the most (ST ace, return specialist or dedicated H-back).

If I had to put put money down I would guess it will be Peerman.

Last year Hewitt saw the field so little that I was beginning to think priorities were shifting and he would be on the way out. However after that first preseason game it's clear he is receiving more intentional use in Zamp's second year offense. Similarly, Erickson still seems to be highly valued as our primary return specialist, and blossoming as a receiver. None of the young speedsters (Ross, Boyd, Mixon) have shown themselves to be a clear replacement to Erickson's return abilities, which further solidifies his spot.

Which brings us to Peerman. Ced has certainly been a special teams ace, but this is an extremely young team with a lot of speed and guys eager to step into leadership roles on ST. Last year Peerman was out most of the year, and multiple guys have emerged as ST "leaders" in his absence(s). Hobson just wrote an article about the emergence of Cody Core and Josh Shaw as ST leaders.

I think that Peerman is an excellent Bengal, and in a vacuum he is more than worthy of being a part of this team. But the talent and versatility we stand to lose by keeping him instead of Hewitt or Erickson makes it clear he ought to be the odd man out. For many years the Bengals kept only 3 RB. Peerman changed that with his excellent ST play. But in a year where you have Mixon, Hill and Bernard, I'm not sure keeping a fourth will be necessary, especially if we have other ST leaders waiting in the wings.

I wouldn't cut Hewitt with Uzomah out with injury and Eifert's injury history.
And Peerman might revert to PUP or IR, so that decision might be forced.

(08-15-2017, 11:47 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Well i sure know my stats were not cherry picking either

Without context, touchdowns are the most over hyped, over rated stat in football.

YPC (for the most part) are not. It can, however, be bolstered by a great Oline. Last year the Bengals Oline was sub oar, but the year prior it was top shelf. The consistent thing there is Hill not getting great YPC either way.

Oh, and, PS, they are NOT cutting Jeremy Hill.