Per PFT, McCarron's status as RFA or UFA will be determined on February 15

Should have been traded before the season even started.

At this point we should be planning for the worst outcome here. If we get him for one more year that's great, but if not we should be prepared with a strong idea of who will be our backup going forward (or what round we'll draft one).

(01-01-2018, 02:57 PM)Go Cards Wrote: Should have been traded before the season even started.

nope.. great move to hold him and actually had the trade value up during the season if the Browns did not bungle it.. 

So this will happen a week from Thursday.

I think this will not only be a big decision for McCarron and the Bengals, but also Bridgewater and the Vikings. Apparently there is a similar discussion there about his contract tolling an additional year due to him being on the PUP.

If this is going to be an influence to two clubs, I have the feeling it will be found in favor of the Bengals.

(01-01-2018, 02:57 PM)Go Cards Wrote: Should have been traded before the season even started.

Negative. A good backup qb is more important than you'd think. Look at the Vikings and Eagles. Played in the NFC Championship games without their starting QBs. Obviously our season was a wash but we didn't foresee it being as bad as it turned out to be.

(01-01-2018, 02:32 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: Per PFT, McCarron's status as RFA or UFA will be determined on February 15

Still can't believe it took this long.  Something that happened four years ago?  It seriously handicapped the Bengal's ability to make a deal.  If he doesn't get that year and is not a FA, he is worth so much more to another team last year.  

Had he been a Cowboy, Pat, steeler (puke) last year his fate would have already been determined. 

Screw you, NFL.  

(02-05-2018, 09:18 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Still can't believe it took this long.  Something that happened four years ago?  It seriously handicapped the Bengal's ability to make a deal.  If he doesn't get that year and is not a FA, he is worth so much more to another team last year.  

Had he been a Cowboy, Pat, steeler (puke) last year his fate would have already been determined. 

Screw you, NFL.  

Your right. It shouldn’t have taken this long. At least we will know next week so we have an idea which direction we’re going.

(02-05-2018, 09:41 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: Your right. It shouldn’t have taken this long. At least we will know next week so we have an idea which direction we’re going.

And although I think AJ is a really good guy, team comes first...if he doesn't win his case (and frankly, I don't see how he does), the team wins big-time.  They can either get a pretty good draft pick for him (I wouldn't take less than a second rounder, in which case Adam Schein owes me dinner at the Pine Club) or they keep him as an inexpensive back up for another season.  

I would bet the latter.  

They still have to find a trading partner willing to give you something of value in return. Trades don't magically happen just because fans think they're great ideas.
Sure, we SHOULD trade him for the moon, stars and the sun, but who's willing to give up their slice of outer space for him ?

We shall see how it goes, but asking for more than teams will give up for years and then letting him walk for a comp pick has seemed like the most likely outcome for a while, here.

(01-01-2018, 02:57 PM)Go Cards Wrote: Should have been traded before the season even started.

no he was traded.. The mistake on the lake....Browns screwed it up

(02-05-2018, 09:18 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Still can't believe it took this long.  Something that happened four years ago?  It seriously handicapped the Bengal's ability to make a deal.  If he doesn't get that year and is not a FA, he is worth so much more to another team last year.  

Had he been a Cowboy, Pat, steeler (puke) last year his fate would have already been determined. 

Screw you, NFL.  

He didn't file his grievance until mid-season, so there was nothing to be determined.  The rule states he is not a FA, but he disagrees with the reasoning and is excercising his right to challenge it.

And it had zero bearing on the ability to trade for him, as there was a trade made for him.  Just as the 49ers traded for the unknown abilities of Jimmy G on an expiring contract.

(02-05-2018, 10:40 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: He didn't file his grievance until mid-season, so there was nothing to be determined.  The rule states he is not a FA, but he disagrees with the reasoning and is excercising his right to challenge it.

And it had zero bearing on the ability to trade for him, as there was a trade made for him.  Just as the 49ers traded for the unknown abilities of Jimmy G on an expiring contract.

I don't know when he filed, but it has been discussed for over a year.  And you can't say it had zero bearing as only one team made the trade offer, and didn't even execute it correctly.  If he had another year of FA, it significantly improved his value.  

(02-05-2018, 10:03 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: no he was traded.. The mistake on the lake....Browns screwed it up

I don't think they screwed it up.  I think they changed their minds at the last minute and decided not to get reamed for a mediocre QB.

(02-06-2018, 10:49 AM)McC Wrote: I don't think they screwed it up.  I think they changed their minds at the last minute and decided not to get reamed for a mediocre QB.

Why not just come out and state that they changed their mind. They have every right to change their mind; in this case it looks like they are incompetent and a only adds to the narrative that it's the worst franchise in sports.

(02-06-2018, 09:29 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I don't know when he filed, but it has been discussed for over a year.  And you can't say it had zero bearing as only one team made the trade offer, and didn't even execute it correctly.  If he had another year of FA, it significantly improved his value.  

But it doesn't, as someone trading for him is most likely going to want to negotiate a new contract prior to execution of the deal.  Otherwise they tag him.  His value was never as high as people wanted the market to be, and then Cleveland got desperate.

(02-06-2018, 10:49 AM)McC Wrote: I don't think they screwed it up.  I think they changed their minds at the last minute and decided not to get reamed for a mediocre QB.

At this point, we don’t know if McCarron is mediocre. We only have about 5 real NFL games to form an opinion. That’s not enough, unless you have a preconceived notion, as you already seem to have. That said, AJ had the team in position to finally win a Playoff game when the Bungles snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. He also had a better passer rating than in any of Andy’s Playoff games. Hard to call that mediocre.

(02-07-2018, 10:56 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: But it doesn't, as someone trading for him is most likely going to want to negotiate a new contract prior to execution of the deal.  Otherwise they tag him.  His value was never as high as people wanted the market to be, and then Cleveland got desperate.

Wrong.  Why give him a deal until he proves he would earn it?  If he doesn't win and become a free agent, maybe we will see this happen, but I bet the Bengals will keep him in that case.  

With Teddy B, Foles, and others on the market, plus a QB rich draft class, I think we'd serve AJ and our franchise better by hanging on to him for another year. I say that because I don't think we can get a 2d rounder for him. If I'm wrong on that count and we can, then by all means trade him. I just don't think we'll see a second rounder for him.

Should we take a third rounder for him? How much do you trust Jeff Driskell?