(03-16-2018, 09:20 AM)Okeana Wrote: I love how Eifert tried to spin this into " I owe the team and city another year " when the truth is that no one would pay him a long term contract under his circumstances.  I wish people would just be honest instead of putting spin on everything these days.

He might not have been offered a long term contract anywhere, but there is no doubt there are a myriad of teams who would jump on signing him to a deal similar to the one he got here, or even a little better, to have the Red Zone production he brings..... and maybe, just maybe, Eifert does have some loyalty to his team.... (unlike Whit)

(03-16-2018, 11:06 AM)Sled21 Wrote: He might not have been offered a long term contract anywhere, but there is no doubt there are a myriad of teams who would jump on signing him to a deal similar to the one he got here, or even a little better, to have the Red Zone production he brings..... and maybe, just maybe, Eifert does have some loyalty to his team.... (unlike Whit)

That is jumping to conclusions.

Whit was a 35 year old OT nearing the end of his career. The bengals offered him a 1 year 10m deal.

The rams gave him a 3 year deal @ 12m per. You can’t fault the guy, at this point in his career going for one last payday.

NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported the deal is for three years, worth $36 million with $15 million guaranteed, including $2.5 million guaranteed in Year 2. The deal pays more than $13 million in the first season and $24.5 million over the first two years.

(03-16-2018, 11:06 AM)Sled21 Wrote: He might not have been offered a long term contract anywhere, but there is no doubt there are a myriad of teams who would jump on signing him to a deal similar to the one he got here, or even a little better, to have the Red Zone production he brings..... and maybe, just maybe, Eifert does have some loyalty to his team.... (unlike Whit)

It looks like the Rams tried to sign Eifert and the Bengals matched their offer.

49ers were also interested.

I could see how being injured and unable to help the team yet getting paid all this time would have Eifert feeling a sense of owing the Bengals some amount of loyalty, if offers are close in amount.

(03-16-2018, 11:23 AM)depthchart Wrote: It looks like the Rams tried to sign Eifert and the Bengals matched their offer.

49ers were also interested.

I could see how being injured and unable to help the team yet getting paid all this time would have Eifert feeling a sense of owing the Bengals some amount of loyalty, if offers are close in amount.

Or if Eifert thinks he really is healthy and can hit escalators he thinks this is his best payday.

If you are Eifert what is better?

rams/9ers offer (hypothetically) 5m/1 year
Bengals offer 3.5 up to 8/1 year

(03-16-2018, 11:26 AM)Bengalbug Wrote: Or if Eifert thinks he really is healthy and can hit escalators he thinks this is his best payday.

If you are Eifert what is better?

rams/9ers offer (hypothetically) 5m/1 year
Bengals offer 3.5 up to 8/1 year

Plus he has been establishing some roots here in the city. Would have to uproot and move.

I would also expect the State tax rate in California to be higher along with the cost of living.

(03-16-2018, 10:20 AM)jj22 Wrote: Ok. 99.999999999999999% of us do.

No they don't.  Apparently you have not read the majority of the posts in this thread where people have hope that he will not be injured this year.  In fact you are one of a very small minority complaining about this deal.  If 99% "knew" he would get injured then they would be complaining about the deal.

We all know there is a chance he will get injured again, but you are about the only one guaranteeing it will happen.

(03-16-2018, 10:56 AM)Takedown Wrote: You are one of the few who might bet against one of our players staying healthy.

Eifert. Um yea. That's not a reach by any means.

Facts matter.

(03-16-2018, 11:47 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No they don't.  Apparently you have not read the majority of the posts in this thread where people have hope that he will not be injured this year.  In fact you are one of a very small minority complaining about this deal.  If 99% "knew" he would get injured then they would be complaining about the deal.

We all know there is a chance he will get injured again, but you are about the only one guaranteeing it will happen.

Yeah, I see it as a risk/reward kinda thing.  Sort of like the Glenn trade.  Sure, injuries may be a concern, but of they pan out, they're GREAT moves.  Especially in the case of Eifert.  The deal is heavily incentive laden (like the one for Baker too, I might add), and if it doesn't pan out, you're not committed long term.  I sure hope he stays healthy, because if he does, he's a beast.  

I must admit, this is the best offseason thus far, in recent memory.  Aggressive, yet solid moves that a lot of us have been clamoring for have been made.  Not picking up Pacman's option, moving forward at DC and oline coach, getting creative with Baker/Eifert, Cordy Glenn.....sure, I'd like to have seen Merv gone, but this is at least steps in the right direction, in my humble opinion.

(03-16-2018, 11:49 AM)jj22 Wrote: Eifert. Um yea. That's not a reach by any means.

Facts matter.

Yes, but what happened in the past is not always guaranteed to happen in the future.  It is a gamble, but not a huge one financially and it's one worth taking.

(03-16-2018, 11:49 AM)jj22 Wrote: Eifert. Um yea. That's not a reach by any means.

Facts matter.

That's true as well.  My hope is that, with this deal, we're looking to shore up the trenches in the draft, and rely on the skill players already here.  It's what needed to happen in my mind.

(03-16-2018, 11:47 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No they don't.  Apparently you have not read the majority of the posts in this thread where people have hope that he will not be injured this year.  In fact you are one of a very small minority complaining about this deal.  If 99% "knew" he would get injured then they would be complaining about the deal.

We all know there is a chance he will get injured again, but you are about the only one guaranteeing it will happen.

The same posters that said our Oline would be fine last year, losing Jones/Sanu wouldn't hurt, and Ross would stay healthy etc. Yea, I know about those posters every offseason. By January they are on my side.

(03-16-2018, 11:49 AM)jj22 Wrote: Facts matter.

And your opinion does not equal fact.

Just a few months ago you claimed it was a "fact" that Paul Alexander and Adam Jones would be back next year and we would not make any big moves in free agency, remember?

(03-16-2018, 11:57 AM)jj22 Wrote: The same posters that said our Oline would be fine last year, losing Jones/Sanu wouldn't hurt, and Ross would stay healthy etc. Yea, I know about those posters every offseason. By January they are on my side.

Don't really remember anybody saying the line would be fine.

(03-16-2018, 11:57 AM)jj22 Wrote: The same posters that said our Oline would be fine last year,

Want to make a sig bet that everyone in this thread who feels Eifert might not get hurt also said the O-line would be fine last year?

Put up or shut up.

(03-16-2018, 12:01 PM)McC Wrote: Don't really remember anybody saying the line would be fine.

Some that justified not paying Whit and Z kinda hinted at that though.....

You want to make a sig bet Eifert doesn't get hurt?



That's what I thought.

(03-16-2018, 12:08 PM)jj22 Wrote: You want to make a sig bet Eifert doesn't get hurt?



That's what I thought.

Seems like you’d rather be right about him getting hurt than having him on the the field...

(03-16-2018, 12:08 PM)Wyche Wrote: Some that justified not paying Whit and Z kinda hinted at that though.....

I'm sure there was some wishful thinking that went on.  Probably wasn't a whole lot of conviction in it, though.  We all pretty much knew we were screwed.

(03-16-2018, 12:08 PM)jj22 Wrote: You want to make a sig bet Eifert doesn't get hurt?



That's what I thought.

Since you are 100% guaranteeing it will happen you don't mind giving me 100 to 1 odds do you?

You win you get to control my sig for a week.  I win I control yours for 100 weeks.

And it has to knock him out for a complete game.

(03-16-2018, 12:14 PM)McC Wrote:
I'm sure there was some wishful thinking that went on.  Probably wasn't a whole lot of conviction in it, though.  We all pretty much knew we were screwed.

That may be closer to the truth.  A whole helluva lot of us knew it would be a dumpster fire, and it was, but there were those out there talking about essentially being Ced's rookie year, Fish coming around....etc.  It woulda been kinda funny, if it hadn't tanked our season.