(09-17-2017, 03:14 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: It was mainly the years that bothered me on that deal. Whit won't be the same player in 2-3 years. 

That said, it's possible the Rams set up that contract to be easily escapable in a year or two. If that's the case, I would've been for it.

Andrew Whitworth's contract by if he plays:

1 year played = essentially a 1yr/$12.5m deal ($5.83m dead cap space in '18)
2 years played = essentially a 2yr/$23m deal ($1.67m in dead cap space in '19)
3 years played = a 3yr/$33.75m deal

Would you have been okay with signing Whit to a 1yr/$12.5m deal? Or a 2yr/$23m deal? One would hope so after seeing how Whit played and how Ogbuehi played in '16. People too often hear "3yr/$33.75m" and go "I would have never given him 3 years!" when in reality it's easily a 1yr/$12.5m contract.

(09-17-2017, 04:52 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Andrew Whitworth's contract by if he plays:

1 year played = essentially a 1yr/$12.5m deal ($5.83m dead cap space in '18)
2 years played = essentially a 2yr/$23m deal ($1.67m in dead cap space in '19)
3 years played = a 3yr/$33.75m deal

Would you have been okay with signing Whit to a 1yr/$12.5m deal? Or a 2yr/$23m deal? One would hope so after seeing how Whit played and how Ogbuehi played in '16. People too often hear "3yr/$33.75m" and go "I would have never given him 3 years!" when in reality it's easily a 1yr/$12.5m contract.

But we need cap space for the future!

If we didn't spend so frugally over the past 3 offseasons we wouldn't have been able to field this great team!

(09-17-2017, 04:57 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: But we need cap space for the future!

If we didn't spend so frugally over the past 3 offseasons we wouldn't have been able to field this great team!

The real fun part is figuring out who exactly needs extended still lol

(09-17-2017, 04:52 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Andrew Whitworth's contract by if he plays:

1 year played = essentially a 1yr/$12.5m deal ($5.83m dead cap space in '18)
2 years played = essentially a 2yr/$23m deal ($1.67m in dead cap space in '19)
3 years played = a 3yr/$33.75m deal

Would you have been okay with signing Whit to a 1yr/$12.5m deal? Or a 2yr/$23m deal? One would hope so after seeing how Whit played and how Ogbuehi played in '16. People too often hear "3yr/$33.75m" and go "I would have never given him 3 years!" when in reality it's easily a 1yr/$12.5m contract.

Well that's what I was saying. If the contract is easily escapable after a year or two, I would've been fine with bringing Whit back.

Basically ANYTHING other than going all-in on the dynamic duo (or the tremendous trio if you include Bodine).

Like I said months ago...if they were so confident in Ogbuehi, they wouldn't have made any offer to Whit at all. The truth is that they realized Og was crap, tried to keep Whit, and when that backfired they just ignored free agency and tried to sell us on Og's potential. It has Mike Brown written all over it.

The valid claims are that this team has a hard time luring desirable free agents.

In other words...

If you have talent, you'd better retain it...  and YES you are going to pay more than average.

If they accepted this reality(and some of us as fans)then Whit and Zeitler would still be on this team.

No way they bring in any O-Line free agent as talented as these guys.

Even if Whit was "looking long in the tooth" and Zeitler had a ho-hum season.

The odds of coming close to magically replacing the talent of either were very low.

These two are going to missed.  Their plan failed.  It's still their fault for not at least retaining one of the two.

The stupidity, ignorance, ego, whatever never ceases to amaze me.

(09-17-2017, 01:45 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I thought about bringing up all the interior problems, but decided to just focus on the tackles since that's what bfine brought up.

That said, yeah you can basically say they've neglected the entire line outside of LG.

Exactly. Interior Oline is a totally different subject and one (IMO) you build differently than you do your OTs. 

(09-17-2017, 05:36 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: The valid claims are that this team has a hard time luring desirable free agents.

In other words...

If you have talent, you'd better retain it...  and YES you are going to pay more than average.

If they accepted this reality(and some of us as fans)then Whit and Zeitler would still be on this team.

No way they bring in any O-Line free agent as talented as these guys.

Even if Whit was "looking long in the tooth" and Zeitler had a ho-hum season.

The odds of coming close to magically replacing the talent of either were very low.

These two are going to missed.  Their plan failed.  It's still their fault for not at least retaining one of the two.

The stupidity, ignorance, ego, whatever never ceases to amaze me.

We don't know if we have trouble landing talented free agents as we wait until the dust settles of the 1st week of free agency before we start to bring guys in for visits.

We generally have cap space. Like this year...we had somewhere around $22 million in cap space yet teams with much less cap space like the Steelers tagged Bell, extended Brown and Tuitt to huge contracts AND signed Haden to a large contract.

(09-17-2017, 06:59 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We don't know if we have trouble landing talented free agents as we wait until the dust settles of the 1st week of free agency before we start to bring guys in for visits.

We generally have cap space. Like this year...we had somewhere around $22 million in cap space yet teams with much less cap space like the Steelers tagged Bell, extended Brown and Tuitt to huge contracts AND signed Haden to a large contract.

We're saving up for re-signing players who will be eventually disgruntled because they also like to win. 

Only more money will keep them here and we'll just call them "long-in-the-tooth" when they want to go elsewhere.

Of course they're old.  They've wasted away with bad coaching and management that won't bring in FAs to win NOW.

I'm hoping the Oline struggles have more to do with Zampese's scheme than it has to do with talent, except for Bodine of course.

(09-17-2017, 04:50 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Honestly, why would a player take less money to come here?

Generally players take less money to go somewhere to chase a Super Bowl. That's not happening here.

One could argue that the Rams are a better chance to win. They had a bad year last year and FIRED THEIR COACH. ie Ownership wasn't complacent and made a change to try to win. Their defense is every bit as good as ours.

The have a #1 pick at QB. Their RB in Gurley is better than any RB on our roster. They just need an offensive line.

There's a number of reasons why Whit could have potentially taken less money to stay.  Possibly loyalty to the club.  After all, they drafted him and gave him the opportunity to play in the NFL and made him a very rich man with numerous contract extension.  He was a team leader, so perhaps loyalty to his teammates.  Maybe he wanted to finally win a playoff game here.  Maybe he didn't want to pack his family up and move cross country in the twilight of his career.

If Whit thought this team had no shot of winning a playoff game, then he should have never been a team captain.  How is a captain supposed to get the other players to give 100% when they don't believe they can succeed themselves?

The Rams aren't close, dude.  We all know that.  Unless Whit is extremely gullible, he's not buying that line. I'm sure if winning was a priority to him, he could have gone to a contender other than the Bengals for less money, but he chose to go to the Rams.  He's made a ton of money already in his playing career, so it's not like he needs the biggest payday he can possibly get to set himself up for retirement.

Again, I understand that all NFL players have a limited shelf life to get what they can.  I have no issue with Whit making a business decision to make as much as he can during his career.  My issue is with the notion that the Bengals were wrong to not pay him whatever he wanted because of loyalty, but it's ok for him to cast the notion of loyalty and leave.  If the reported $9 mil offer is true, that would've still put him in the Top 16 for LT's this year.  It was a reasonable offer for a player his age.  It wasn't like he was asked to play for peanuts.  

(09-17-2017, 11:04 PM)Whatever Wrote: There's a number of reasons why Whit could have potentially taken less money to stay.  Possibly loyalty to the club.  After all, they drafted him and gave him the opportunity to play in the NFL and made him a very rich man with numerous contract extension.  He was a team leader, so perhaps loyalty to his teammates.  Maybe he wanted to finally win a playoff game here.  Maybe he didn't want to pack his family up and move cross country in the twilight of his career.

If Whit thought this team had no shot of winning a playoff game, then he should have never been a team captain.  How is a captain supposed to get the other players to give 100% when they don't believe they can succeed themselves?

The Rams aren't close, dude.  We all know that.  Unless Whit is extremely gullible, he's not buying that line. I'm sure if winning was a priority to him, he could have gone to a contender other than the Bengals for less money, but he chose to go to the Rams.  He's made a ton of money already in his playing career, so it's not like he needs the biggest payday he can possibly get to set himself up for retirement.

Again, I understand that all NFL players have a limited shelf life to get what they can.  I have no issue with Whit making a business decision to make as much as he can during his career.  My issue is with the notion that the Bengals were wrong to not pay him whatever he wanted because of loyalty, but it's ok for him to cast the notion of loyalty and leave.  If the reported $9 mil offer is true, that would've still put him in the Top 16 for LT's this year.  It was a reasonable offer for a player his age.  It wasn't like he was asked to play for peanuts.  

The Rams aren't close? Some 23 different teams have played in a Super Bowl since we've last won a playoff game. Statistically ANY team is closer than us.

Plus, the Rams actually make changes. They hired a new HC, etc.

(09-17-2017, 11:36 AM)bengals67 Wrote: I was OK letting Zeitler go for ridiculous money for a guard. He honestly is not that good.

They never should have let Whit walk. Absolutely no excuse.

Bodine should have been cut three years ago.

Had a change to watch Whit with the Rams today. The defensive rusher never laid a hand on the QB. Whit still looks really good. Compared to the Bengals tackles almost anyone would.

(09-17-2017, 11:23 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Obviously a lot of talk about the oline and everyone can see it is a work in progress. However, the one constant comment I see that doesn't seem to be based on reality is that the Bengals didn't "address" the oline.

In 2015 we realized that Whit was getting a little long in the tooth and Andre Smith was on the final year of his contract. So we draft 2 OTs in each of the first 2 rounds of the draft. Despite the amateur experts in this forum both were considered high draft choices and great prospects. Both were All Americans their final year (Walter Camp/Football writers).

The plan was perfect. Give Ced a "red shirt" year to heal while we didn't need him and let Jake get experience all along the oline. Andre leaves in 2016 and Ced is ready to get his feet wet at RT. He's not ready and gets benched. Understanding that their top prospect may not be ready for primetime they offer a 35 year old Whit a lucrative 1 year deal; unfortunately, LA was willing to employ him until he was 38. The Bengals could not wait that long to try and get return on their investments.

Will Ced and Jake work out? Who knows. But sometimes you have to crack a couple eggs to make an omelet.

100% accurate.  However, I will predict that over 75% of the people on here will disagree and say the Bengals never do anything right, their draft is terrible, and their owner is cheap.  After two games, they will decide this because their offensive coordinator had one of the worst possible schemes for attacking a defense with a strong front.  

One problem magnified 1000 times because it looked so bad and they are 0-2.  

Green Bay will be smarting after their loss last night, but if the Bengals find a way to win there, without Burfict, they will be right back in things.  If they lose, they will almost certainly be done, but we would be 100% certain of new leadership next year.  

(09-17-2017, 11:37 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The Bengals tried to do it right.  Thus far, their efforts appear to be failure.

This pretty much sums it all up.

(09-17-2017, 11:23 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Obviously a lot of talk about the oline and everyone can see it is a work in progress. However, the one constant comment I see that doesn't seem to be based on reality is that the Bengals didn't "address" the oline.

In 2015 we realized that Whit was getting a little long in the tooth and Andre Smith was on the final year of his contract. So we draft 2 OTs in each of the first 2 rounds of the draft. Despite the amateur experts in this forum both were considered high draft choices and great prospects. Both were All Americans their final year (Walter Camp/Football writers).

The plan was perfect. Give Ced a "red shirt" year to heal while we didn't need him and let Jake get experience all along the oline. Andre leaves in 2016 and Ced is ready to get his feet wet at RT. He's not ready and gets benched. Understanding that their top prospect may not be ready for primetime they offer a 35 year old Whit a lucrative 1 year deal; unfortunately, LA was willing to employ him until he was 38. The Bengals could not wait that long to try and get return on their investments.

Will Ced and Jake work out? Who knows. But sometimes you have to crack a couple eggs to make an omelet.

They addressed the o line for the future with that draft, that is true.  They ****** that draft up, and then failed to address it further.....that is the gripe.

(09-17-2017, 11:23 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Obviously a lot of talk about the oline and everyone can see it is a work in progress. However, the one constant comment I see that doesn't seem to be based on reality is that the Bengals didn't "address" the oline.

In 2015 we realized that Whit was getting a little long in the tooth and Andre Smith was on the final year of his contract. So we draft 2 OTs in each of the first 2 rounds of the draft. Despite the amateur experts in this forum both were considered high draft choices and great prospects. Both were All Americans their final year (Walter Camp/Football writers).

The plan was perfect. Give Ced a "red shirt" year to heal while we didn't need him and let Jake get experience all along the oline. Andre leaves in 2016 and Ced is ready to get his feet wet at RT. He's not ready and gets benched. Understanding that their top prospect may not be ready for primetime they offer a 35 year old Whit a lucrative 1 year deal; unfortunately, LA was willing to employ him until he was 38. The Bengals could not wait that long to try and get return on their investments.

Will Ced and Jake work out? Who knows. But sometimes you have to crack a couple eggs to make an omelet.

Let your really good players walk and plug in crappy players to take their place. Sounds like a great plan. 

(09-17-2017, 09:59 PM)Devils Advocate Wrote: I'm hoping the Oline struggles have more to do with Zampese's scheme than it has to do with talent, except for Bodine of course.

It's Alexander's blocking scheme. My understanding is that he runs a more finesse scheme that allows the defender to engage the lineman 1st.

(09-17-2017, 04:20 PM)Pat5775 Wrote: Id rather have Darnold, personally. The USC offensive line did nothing to impress me either and the kid still found a way to win them the game when it counted. I think there was under 45 seconds to go when Texas took a 3 point lead. Darnold drove them down for a game tying FG effortlessly. Even after the beating he took. Not to open a huge can of worms but would Dalton have done the same under those circumstances? I still like Andy but when he faces pressure and takes a beating he folds up quick. 

If we pick in the top 3 and Darnold is there we'd have to take him. The offensive line can (and should) be rebuilt via free agency and the mid-rounds of the draft.

He did against Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl.....but that's college, same as Darnold.

I'd agree with you if Ced didn't see a snap last year. He did, and he showed he doesn't have what it takes to be a starting OT in the NFL. He got beat by every imaginable move. Not sure why some people thought moving to the left side would suddenly fix all that.

(09-17-2017, 11:23 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Obviously a lot of talk about the oline and everyone can see it is a work in progress. However, the one constant comment I see that doesn't seem to be based on reality is that the Bengals didn't "address" the oline.

In 2015 we realized that Whit was getting a little long in the tooth and Andre Smith was on the final year of his contract. So we draft 2 OTs in each of the first 2 rounds of the draft. Despite the amateur experts in this forum both were considered high draft choices and great prospects. Both were All Americans their final year (Walter Camp/Football writers).

The plan was perfect. Give Ced a "red shirt" year to heal while we didn't need him and let Jake get experience all along the oline. Andre leaves in 2016 and Ced is ready to get his feet wet at RT. He's not ready and gets benched. Understanding that their top prospect may not be ready for primetime they offer a 35 year old Whit a lucrative 1 year deal; unfortunately, LA was willing to employ him until he was 38. The Bengals could not wait that long to try and get return on their investments.

Will Ced and Jake work out? Who knows. But sometimes you have to crack a couple eggs to make an omelet.

There is no excuse for not re-signing Whit. He offered to play OG which would have allowed them to play Ogbuehi at LT and give them a viable insurance policy if he sucked at LT as much as he sucked at RT. Whit's deal is structured so that if he suddenly starts to suck the Rams can cut him with less than $6 million in dead money or $3 million for two seasons. His salary with bonus money during the first two years are less than what the Bengals offered him for one. If the Rams do cut him after this year the Rams will pay him his guaranteed money if $12.5 million. So basically, the Bengals didn't re-sign Whit because of a difference of $2.5 million in guaranteed money.

You can fail to plan or you can plan to fail, Mike Brown did both by gambling the season on what Ogbuehi had shown.

BTW, the Bengals are sitting on $12M in cap space.