(11-25-2017, 05:51 PM)bengalhoel Wrote: Maybe we can sign him with a clause that states that Eifert has to be a player scout if he gets hurt again. Either we get a Pro Bowl Caliber TE for a whole season or we double the size of our scouting dept.  Win Win baby!!

They'd likely use him in the Ticket Sales Department instead. 

(11-25-2017, 06:21 PM)bengalsturntup5532 Wrote: No just let him go ,I'm tired of counting on him and he can't play. There's good tight ends coming out about every year,same with all skill positions.look at kroft for example.

Who? 

No one from the 2017 draft has been amazing...yet. I'll give them time.

2016 the best of the bunch would be Chargers Hunter Henry...

2015 Kroft and Jesse James might be thr best of the bunch and they aren't anything to write home about.

2014 You have Austin Seferian-Jenkins...

2013 was the year for Tight Ends. Eifert, Ertz, Kelce, and Reed......What a draft for TEs.


Did I miss anyone?

(11-25-2017, 06:34 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Gronk had major back surgery and he is doing just fine this season not sure if Eifert is that different. 

Once again...Eifert has played in 39 out of 80 potential regular season games.

I don't believe this is his 1st back surgery. I believe he's had multiple surgeries dating back to his time in college.

Gronk has played in 11 or more games 5 times in 7 years and he's been healthy this year so far including atleast 15 games 4 times.

Eifert has played over 11 games in 2 out of 5 seasons. He's played in 15 games ONCE.

Gronkowski is way more reliable.

This would be what you are getting.

(11-25-2017, 06:43 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Once again...Eifert has played in 39 out of 80 potential regular season games.

I don't believe this is his 1st back surgery. I believe he's had multiple surgeries dating back to his time in college.

Gronk has played in 11 or more games 5 times in 7 years and he's been healthy this year so far including atleast 15 games 4 times.

Eifert has played over 11 games in 2 out of 5 seasons. He's played in 15 games ONCE.

Gronkowski is way more reliable.

Ok let's be real 
1.) Eifert is an elite talent and has produced  at an elite level during his career when he has played.
2.) Tight ends is an injury riddled position so its not liker any other TE your going to sign will not have similar issues.
3.) We have so many issues on the Offensive line that the majority of the money and draft picks will likely spent on that unit. Getting Eifert on a cheap deal could be the best we can realistically do to improve that position next season.
4.) If he doesn't pass the physical then don't sign him but if he does then why the hell not.

(11-25-2017, 06:58 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Ok let's be real 
1.) Eifert is an elite talent and has produced  at an elite level during his career when he has played.
2.) Tight ends is an injury riddled position so its not liker any other TE your going to sign will not have similar issues.
3.) We have so many issues on the Offensive line that the majority of the money and draft picks will likely spent on that unit. Getting Eifert on a cheap deal could be the best we can realistically do to improve that position next season.
4.) If he doesn't pass the physical then don't sign him but if he does then why the hell not.

I don't think I'd call Eifert elite. He's a Good TE. And at some point all of these injuries are going to impact how good he is when he actually plays.

His best receiving year was 615 yards. Then 445 yards. Then 394 yards. Then 39 yards. Then 37 yards. Those aren't elite numbers.

52 receptions is his career high. Then 39. 29. 4. 3.

It's not like he's a 1000 yard receiving TE.

What's wrong with Kroft? He's probably a better blocker than Eifert and he's been fairly productive and he's under contract. Why not stick with him and let Eifert go?

IF Eifert costed $4 million...I'd rather spend that money on a Center or Guard.

(11-25-2017, 07:05 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I don't think I'd call Eifert elite. He's a Good TE. And at some point all of these injuries are going to impact how good he is when he actually plays.

His best receiving year was 615 yards. Then 445 yards. Then 394 yards. Then 39 yards. Then 37 yards. Those aren't elite numbers.

52 receptions is his career high. Then 39. 29. 4. 3.

It's not like he's a 1000 yard receiving TE.

What's wrong with Kroft? He's probably a better blocker than Eifert and he's been fairly productive and he's under contract. Why not stick with him and let Eifert go?

IF Eifert costed $4 million...I'd rather spend that money on a Center or Guard.

I agree with like 90% of your post here EXCEPT that Kroft has been fairly productive. On a team desperate for someone to step up as the #2 receiving target, he's on pace for a 45 catch/485 yard/6.4 TD season... after putting up 22/221/1 in his first two years combined. That's not even sniffing Bengals Gresham productivity.

He's also under contract for only 1 more year.

They need to find a TE in the draft or throw a pile of cash at Jimmy Graham in FA. Kroft is not the TE1 answer. He could be a decent TE2 though.

Yeah...I'm not totally sold on Kroft yet either...but I think he has potential of some sort. I'd likely still look for another TE in the draft.

But, I'd rather use Kroft as a stopgap for 1 year than re-sign Eifert.

(11-25-2017, 08:20 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yeah...I'm not totally sold on Kroft yet either...but I think he has potential of some sort. I'd likely still look for another TE in the draft.

But, I'd rather use Kroft as a stopgap for 1 year than re-sign Eifert.

Agreed.

The main question I have is IF we don't pay Eifert, which player's contract will be the excuse given for why we can't sign FA's.

Bottom line: Eifert is definitely not as athletic as a WR, but he catching ability is certainly elite. His blocking is serviceable. He is hurt often, but Cincinnati loves him. I think a health oriented contract is not out of the question, because no matter where he is in the league he has the consider the long term consequences of the position he plays. It is just a fact that refs do no protect TEs like they do WRs [insert Burfict preseason suspension joke here or was that a FB?]. As a fan, I'd love to keep him here. I don't think Eifert will agree to such a conditional contract though.

(11-25-2017, 09:33 PM)treee Wrote: Bottom line: Eifert is definitely not as athletic as a WR, but he catching ability is certainly elite. His blocking is serviceable. He is hurt often, but Cincinnati loves him. I think a health oriented contract is not out of the question, because no matter where he is in the league he has the consider the long term consequences of the position he plays. It is just a fact that refs do no protect TEs like they do WRs [insert Burfict preseason suspension joke here or was that a FB?]. As a fan, I'd love to keep him here. I don't think Eifert will agree to such a conditional contract though.

TE is basically 50% offensive lineman and 50% WR except they go over the middle a lot and get hit by big, fast LB's and safeties.

Eifert may have no choice. But seriously, why would the Bengals want a player who played in just 39 of 80 potential games?

He's played in over 13 games just once in 5 years.

(11-25-2017, 07:05 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I don't think I'd call Eifert elite. He's a Good TE. And at some point all of these injuries are going to impact how good he is when he actually plays.

His best receiving year was 615 yards. Then 445 yards. Then 394 yards. Then 39 yards. Then 37 yards. Those aren't elite numbers.

52 receptions is his career high. Then 39. 29. 4. 3.

It's not like he's a 1000 yard receiving TE.

What's wrong with Kroft? He's probably a better blocker than Eifert and he's been fairly productive and he's under contract. Why not stick with him and let Eifert go?

IF Eifert costed $4 million...I'd rather spend that money on a Center or Guard.

Dude had 13 touchdowns in a season how is that not elite? We can afford both a guard (if their is one that is good at  that price) and Ifert. We shouldn't have to pick between one or the other.

(11-25-2017, 10:27 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Dude had 13 touchdowns in a season how is that not elite? We can afford both a guard (if their is one that is good at  that price) and Ifert. We shouldn't have to pick between one or the other.

TD's aren't a measure of an elite receiver. IF he had 800 yards receiving and those TD's then maybe. Other guys do the work then he gets the ball in the endzone.

His best receiving year was 615 yards. Then 445 yards. Then 394 yards. Then 39 yards. Then 37 yards. Those aren't elite numbers.

52 receptions is his career high. Then 39. 29. 4. 3. Not elite receiving numbers either.

(11-25-2017, 06:39 PM)Synric Wrote: Who? 

No one from the 2017 draft has been amazing...yet. I'll give them time.

2016 the best of the bunch would be Chargers Hunter Henry...

2015 Kroft and Jesse James might be thr best of the bunch and they aren't anything to write home about.

2014 You have Austin Seferian-Jenkins...

2013 was the year for Tight Ends. Eifert, Ertz, Kelce, and Reed......What a draft for TEs.


Did I miss anyone?

Evan Engram is actually really good. No other offensive weapons for the Giants and the guy is still productive on a terrible team. 

Outside of that, you are correct, 2013 was the year and the Bengals just took the wrong guy. The others have had healthy and productive careers, Eifert just can't get there. Kelce would have looked great in stripes coming out of UC. 

(11-25-2017, 11:38 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: TD's aren't a measure of an elite receiver. IF he had 800 yards receiving and those TD's then maybe. Other guys do the work then he gets the ball in the endzone.

His best receiving year was 615 yards. Then 445 yards. Then 394 yards. Then 39 yards. Then 37 yards. Those aren't elite numbers.

52 receptions is his career high. Then 39. 29. 4. 3. Not elite receiving numbers either.

Bullshit just because it goes against your argument doesn't mean it doesn't measure up to being a great WR. Jesus man the league is built off weather you can get it in the end zone or settle for FGs. 

(11-25-2017, 11:38 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: TD's aren't a measure of an elite receiver. IF he had 800 yards receiving and those TD's then maybe. Other guys do the work then he gets the ball in the endzone.

His best receiving year was 615 yards. Then 445 yards. Then 394 yards. Then 39 yards. Then 37 yards. Those aren't elite numbers.

52 receptions is his career high. Then 39. 29. 4. 3. Not elite receiving numbers either.

You can try and bend the numbers anyway that you want, but the facts are simply. When healthy (which isn't often) Eifert is absolutely, an elite talent at TE.

He is a guy that the defense always has to be aware, creates match-up problems and scores TDs in the redzone, which is a huge asset that a lot of teams lack.

Now, you can argue that his numbers don't stack up against Kelce, and Whitten (who play more snaps) or against Gronk who plays in the most complete offense in the league.

Put Eifert in New England, you'd see the elite.

Put him on a team where he doesn't have to do as much blocking and stays healthy, once again you would see elite.

His numbers don't show the talent the guy has, you just have to watch the game to see the talent. And his is off the chart when he is out there.

I have a gut feeling he stays on an incentive laden contract t i.e. if he hits certain incentives he gets paid such as starting 12 games in a season or making pro bowl.

(11-25-2017, 09:40 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: TE is basically 50% offensive lineman...

Thank you. This is a crucial point and I am impressed The Pistons brought it up. +1. Tyler Eifert can easily regain much of his pass catching ability and his speed when running routes but it’s hard to regain your run blocking proficiency after you’ve been banged up and repaired. I really think the Bengals need to draft — or sign via free agency — a tight end who is primarily an offensive lineman. Remember Reggie Kelly? That man was a blocking beast!