(08-31-2015, 02:41 PM)Stormborn Wrote: I think Julio deserves more than A.J. if we're just talking production.

Here's what his numbers would look like had he played 61 games instead of 48:

354 Catches, 573 Targets, 5,502 Yards, 33 TDs, 37 Drops

Compare these to A.J.'s 61 games:

329 Catches, 580 Targets, 4,874 yards, 35 TDs, 30 Drops

He was nearly completely healthy in his contract year (missed one from a strained oblique, unrelated to his fractured foot in 2013) and increased his mind-numbing yards/game with over 1500 this year.

Now you wanna bring up "who means more to the offense" and even bring in QB play, whatever, but going off actual numbers, Julio's been more productive on a game to game basis, which is what really matters as long as his injuries haven't showed signs of long term effectiveness. He may end up being made of glass, but its a risk you have to take with a player of his caliber

I'm ok with giving A.J. slightly more guaranteed money because he's been healthier and also has been consistent on and off the field, but Julio deserves the higher APY.

But you're not going off actual numbers.

Mike always signs his best players to a second deal. It will happen.

(08-31-2015, 10:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But you're not going off actual numbers.

He averages more yards per catch, more yards per game, more catches per game. That's real.

A.J. will get more because he's the last to get a deal done, he's worth it because you have to sign him, but Julio out produces in most categories on an average game.

(08-31-2015, 03:13 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Trying?  Who said anything about whether they're trying or not?  Trying and doing are two entirely different things.

Get it done.  Simple as that.  The market is set and he's earned it.  Shouldn't be anything more to discuss beyond actually doing it.

If only it were as simple as throwing money at someone. Language of the contract, clauses, guaranteed money - all that and more can delay contract signings.

This ain't Madden where it's stagnant numbers; we're talking real life binding (to a point) contracts.

I Like Green but I would not sign a WR with a 50 mil guarantee. We have a good young team with tons a FA's to sign, why risk losing half of those good players to sign 1 elite player. Sorry I think the team is more important than 1 player. The best thing for this team would be to let him go. 

PS how the Hell do I post a new reply, sorry still new to this board.

(08-31-2015, 11:09 PM)TKUHL Wrote: PS how the Hell do I post a new reply, sorry still new to this board.

Pretty sure you just did

AJ needs to be signed, and I think it will happen, but if he drops another pass like he did in that playoff game vs. the Chargers, dear lord help me baby jeezus, I will burn his jersey. That was amateur hour bulls**t.

(08-31-2015, 11:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Pretty sure you just did

I had to delete the other persons reply

I'm not surprised that someone who doesn't think we should sign AJ Green, can't find the new reply button.

(09-01-2015, 12:41 AM)TKUHL Wrote: I had to delete the other persons reply

Bottom of the page. 
Black "New Reply" button

(09-01-2015, 12:41 AM)TKUHL Wrote: I had to delete the other persons reply

if you dont want their quote use the quick reply feature at the bottom of each page

(09-01-2015, 03:13 AM)Thundercloud Wrote: I'm not surprised that someone who doesn't think we should sign AJ Green, can't find the new reply button.

If you want to go back to the Carl Pickens days then sure pay the man. If they sign Green you can say bye to half the team.

(09-01-2015, 10:25 PM)TKUHL Wrote: If you want to go back to the Carl Pickens days then sure pay the man. If they sign Green you can say bye to half the team.

You'll see more role players and maybe a starter or two go, but the core can remain intact.

That's what happens when you have an A.J. Green, you make the necessary sacrifices and stay afloat.

True most teams do but we are talking about Mike Brown. A 50 million dollar deal might as well be 80 with 30 mil in Mikey's pocket.

(09-01-2015, 10:54 PM)TKUHL Wrote: True most teams do but we are talking about Mike Brown. A 50 million dollar deal might as well be 80 with 30 mil in Mikey's pocket.

No arguing with that logic, you're a smart person.

(09-01-2015, 10:25 PM)TKUHL Wrote: If you want to go back to the Carl Pickens days then sure pay the man. If they sign Green you can say bye to half the team.

This makes me want to start some sort of question of keeping Andy and losing AJ or keeping AJ and losing Andy.  Andy to MLJ or McCarron to AJ?!

GASP!!!  Let's argue!!!!

I think we have just entered the Twilight Zone.

(09-01-2015, 10:54 PM)TKUHL Wrote: True most teams do but we are talking about Mike Brown. A 50 million dollar deal might as well be 80 with 30 mil in Mikey's pocket.

We can sign/extend almost every single starter that's coming off the books in 2016 while still being able to kick tires with some garbage heap FAs and sign our role players as well. We'll probably lose either Sanu or Jones due to another team paying them more than they're worth to us. Past that, this team will likely be very much intact (as long as the Bengals want it to be at least) even with an A.J. extension.

Let's ignore that A.J.'s extension would only see an increase to his salary cap hit by approximately $4-ish million per year compared to what we're going to be paying him in 2015. But hey, let's not worry about all of that, we can sit here and throw out huge, random numbers like $50 million and $80 million and pretend that we know something about the NFL salary cap and how things work.

I've been a very, very big "MB hater" in the past, but I'm not going to bash him without legitimate reason. Your statement here just doesn't make any sense.

(09-01-2015, 10:25 PM)TKUHL Wrote: If you want to go back to the Carl Pickens days then sure pay the man. If they sign Green you can say bye to half the team.

They've supposedly been setting aside money for this for the last 4 years though.

And I'm not sure I understand the logic that by paying top tier receiver you're destined to become the 90's Bengals.  Are the Lions doomed?  Are the Falcons?  Cowboys?  Broncos?  Hell the Broncos have about 40 million into Manning and Thomas alone.  They keep winning.  They can afford to field a whole roster and everything.

We can afford to pay AJ Green.  He's earned the money.  There should be no hesitation in doing so because of cap concerns.  It's bologna.  If you value him and aren't cheap it's easily doable, with sacrificing the rest of your team.

(09-02-2015, 09:30 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: They've supposedly been setting aside money for this for the last 4 years though.

And I'm not sure I understand the logic that by paying top tier receiver you're destined to become the 90's Bengals.  Are the Lions doomed?  Are the Falcons?  Cowboys?  Broncos?  Hell the Broncos have about 40 million into Manning and Thomas alone.  They keep winning.  They can afford to field a whole roster and everything.

We can afford to pay AJ Green.  He's earned the money.  There should be no hesitation in doing so because of cap concerns.  It's bologna.  If you value him and aren't cheap it's easily doable, with sacrificing the rest of your team.

I agree the cap money for 2015 is not an issue. The key is getting a great deal for both the team and AJ long term.

As for 2015, AJ is already getting 10 million so adding 4 to 8 million in 2015 may help 2016 cap as the more we pay now (guaranteed), the less guaranteed money later in the contract. These types of details have to worked out and agreed upon by both parties, one side can't get a deal signed, they both have to agree.