(01-28-2019, 01:10 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: With a new coach, multiple free agents and the core we have this team can contend now. Weather or not the FO goes all in is the key.

I also believe that to be a possibility. Again, we were 4-1 with a pathetic defense that did get us a few miracle TO's to help us win those games. But, what if they hadn't given up so many points in the first place. The offense was rolling pretty good there at the beginning of the season. And then Lazor got figured out, the Steelers hurt our feelings again - and  the season tide changed after that.

Id entertain the thought of trading Driskel.to the Redskins.

(01-28-2019, 02:16 PM)impactplaya Wrote: Id entertain the thought of trading Driskel.to the Redskins.

You mean Dalton? Nobody is giving us anything for Driskel.

And don't forget the key play for that Steeler game winning score was an uncalled illegal pick play. Which came after Andy led what should have been yet another game winning drive.

More on topic, I think we just need to see what the new HC says once they are announced. Given that the LB and OL units were the obvious issues with the team I have to think his top priorities will be fixing them. And getting another good TE will probably be up there on the list as well. But the single biggest thing will hopefully be changing the club culture.

(01-28-2019, 03:41 PM)Joelist Wrote: And don't forget the key play for that Steeler game winning score was an uncalled illegal pick play. Which came after Andy led what should have been yet another game winning drive.

More on topic, I think we just need to see what the new HC says once they are announced. Given that the LB and OL units were the obvious issues with the team I have to think his top priorities will be fixing them. And getting another good TE will probably be up there on the list as well. But the single biggest thing will hopefully be changing the club culture.

Nice post as usual Joelist. Gonna be excited to hear what Taylor and the new coaches say. Man, i was getting tired and i am sure the players were even getting tired in hearing the same old, same old coming out of Marv's mouth in the Press Conferences. We needed a change so bad. Who knows how Dalton and the rest respond?

(01-27-2019, 05:26 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Do we count the years that the FO made him play without a decent o-line. To just discount Dalton as just another QB before actually having someone waiting in the wings or kicking down the door is plain stupid. Dalton has been the ultimate team player even if he failed when the lights were their the brightest. With Mixon the run game should improve which would definitely help Dalton immensely. He could get better, he could be worse. I think his loyalty to his team mates has earned him at least one more season.

That's the point, we don't aggressively chase to have anyone waiting in the wings. Draft a QB 1st round and give Dalton 1-2 seasons.

Loyalty is worthless on this team. Mike Brown was loyal to Marvin. The word loyal should disappear until you have real success with someone or something. Don't be loyal to your job, most likely, the company is not loyal to you.

Browns have passed us and it's because of the QB.

this franchise has the luxury of not needing to start
a rookie qb in 2019 if they draft one.much like the Chiefs in 2017.
Dalton may have his career revived under Taylor

(01-28-2019, 06:17 PM)reuben.ah Wrote: Browns have passed us and it's because of the QB.

Well it only took them twenty something years and god only knows how many first round picks to get a QB who could ALMOST get them to .500. I'm not willing to wait that long for those kind of results. 

(01-28-2019, 12:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Bridgewater would be a clear downgrade from Dalton though. Career highs of 3231 yards and 14 TD's. 3 straight years of rehabbing or sitting on benches. If we could get him on something like a 1 year - $8 million "prove it" deal, he might make sense as a stopgap with a young QB behind him. That said, if the price of Nick Foles were even remotely similar, I'd probably rather roll with him as a stopgap. Or just keep Andy and see what he he can do with Taylor. 

Tbh, I don't know what I want. For once, I'm glad I'm not making the decisions. 

Yeah, he is.....but so is Carr and Tannehill, and they are expensive.  That was the whole point.  If you're going to trade Dalton to get draft picks, don't turn around and pay a guy that is a worse player more money.  If you're going to get a worse player as a bridge, do so cheaply.  Hence, Teddy Bridgewater.

Foles is gonna be high dollar.   It will cripple you on the cap end of things.....which would be the whole reason in moving Dalton....saving money at the QB position and stocking draft picks to surround your franchise QB of the future with talent.

If the team is looking at a FA bridge that is more expansive, you may as well give Andy the opportunity to be the bridge and see what happens.  He's relatively cheap.....unless you ask some folks.

(01-28-2019, 01:25 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Do you really expect Tannehill to join a team he has little or no chance of winning with? Why are so many enamored over a QB who would have to improve just to be the same as the one we have? With a new coach, multiple free agents and the core we have this team can contend now. Weather or not the FO goes all in is the key.

I think you're misunderstanding what I am saying......read it again.  I don't want Tannehill or Carr.  They're more expensive than Dalton.

(01-28-2019, 09:37 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Well it only took them twenty something years and god only knows how many first round picks to get a QB who could ALMOST get them to .500. I'm not willing to wait that long for those kind of results. 

The post you replied to was bullshit anyway.  They were still losing with that QB until the coaching was changed.  Also, the MAIN reason the Browns have "passed us" is because the meddling owner got out of the way and hired a seasoned, winning GM in Dorsey.  I don't think they've "passed us" to be honest.  Last season was a lame duck, we'll see how it goes in 2019.

(01-28-2019, 12:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Everytime that I mentioned that Marvin was handicapped by coaching under Mike Brown there was a whole cadre of posters who claimed the Bengals had enough talented players to win and it was just Marvin's fault for not winning with them



It is "change for the sake of change" when you wish we were "starting over with a new expansion team".  It is absurd to argue that we don't have a single good player on our team or that we have to get rid of every single player just because he played under Marvin.

1. That "cadre of posters" was referring to Marvin's overall tenure, not specifically the last 3 years. You're manipulating and putting words in people's mouths to make some easy point to argue against.

2. I made the expansion comment tongue in cheek, and I've never said we should dump every single player that ever played under Marvin. Just that if we continue losing in the same scenarios, I'd consider clearing out more of the guys who spent a long time playing under Marvin. You always try to make valid points sound irrational through word manipulation. 

(01-29-2019, 11:46 AM)Wyche Wrote: Yeah, he is.....but so is Carr and Tannehill, and they are expensive.  That was the whole point.  If you're going to trade Dalton to get draft picks, don't turn around and pay a guy that is a worse player more money.  If you're going to get a worse player as a bridge, do so cheaply.  Hence, Teddy Bridgewater.

Foles is gonna be high dollar.   It will cripple you on the cap end of things.....which would be the whole reason in moving Dalton....saving money at the QB position and stocking draft picks to surround your franchise QB of the future with talent.

If the team is looking at a FA bridge that is more expansive, you may as well give Andy the opportunity to be the bridge and see what happens.  He's relatively cheap.....unless you ask some folks.

Due to talent/price ratio, I think keeping Dalton will probably be the sensible way to go. Even if we draft a QB, we could make it a Flacco/Jackson scenario...although I'd hope for a better QB than Jackson, who I wasn't all that impressed with.

(01-29-2019, 02:07 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. That "cadre of posters" was referring to Marvin's overall tenure, not specifically the last 3 years. You're manipulating and putting words in people's mouths to make some easy point to argue against.

2. I made the expansion comment tongue in cheek, and I've never said we should dump every single player that ever played under Marvin. Just that if we continue losing in the same scenarios, I'd consider clearing out more of the guys who spent a long time playing under Marvin. You always try to make valid points sound irrational through word manipulation. 


Due to talent/price ratio, I think keeping Dalton will probably be the sensible way to go. Even if we draft a QB, we could make it a Flacco/Jackson scenario...although I'd hope for a better QB than Jackson, who I wasn't all that impressed with.

I'd like to second that. Jackson, as far as I can tell, will set back the Raven's franchise for several years. San Diego gave the blue print for beating them and I don't see them making the playoffs again with Jackson at QB.

According to Draft Wires Luke Easterling, His thoughts are that the Bengals will trade with the Bucanners to move up to fifth and select Haskins? If so does this mean Dalton will stay to tutor Haskins?

(01-29-2019, 02:23 PM)firstand10 Wrote: According to Draft Wires Luke Easterling, His thoughts are that the Bengals will trade with the Bucanners to move up to fifth and select Haskins? If so does this mean Dalton will stay to tutor Haskins?

The problem with that scenario is how do we address Tackle? Without upgrading the offensive line, a rookie QB is going to have issues developing.

(01-29-2019, 02:07 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Due to talent/price ratio, I think keeping Dalton will probably be the sensible way to go. Even if we draft a QB, we could make it a Flacco/Jackson scenario...although I'd hope for a better QB than Jackson, who I wasn't all that impressed with.

I do too.....that's why, for me, a guy like Bridgewater is the only one that makes any sense.  If a team gambles on him, I think he will take a cheap deal to get another crack at starting.  He was never impressive, as you noted, but he made smart decisions at Louisville, and is as tough as they come. We didn't really get to see what he could have developed into at the NFL level. He also played while AP was the feature on the Vikings offense, but he's never gonna be a 5500 yrd, 40 TD machine.

(01-29-2019, 02:22 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I'd like to second that. Jackson, as far as I can tell, will set back the Raven's franchise for several years. San Diego gave the blue print for beating them and I don't see them making the playoffs again with Jackson at QB.

Agree with you both.  Jackson was a reach in the 1st, in my opinion.  He may go on to develop into a solid starter, but at the moment, he's got a ways to go.

I'm intrigued by the idea of someone like Bridgewater. We need someone who can take care of the ball, but doesn't have to throw 40 times per game because Mixon would be the catalyst to the offense. But honestly, if we are going to do that, we might as well keep Dalton. Unless of course some desperate team (*cough Washington*) wants to give us a ton of picks for him.

(01-29-2019, 02:22 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I'd like to second that. Jackson, as far as I can tell, will set back the Raven's franchise for several years. San Diego gave the blue print for beating them and I don't see them making the playoffs again with Jackson at QB.

His coaches didn't do him any favors by not having a backup plan to their high school offense.  He's not a great passer but he's not horrible.  What were they thinking?

(01-29-2019, 02:30 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: The problem with that scenario is how do we address Tackle? Without upgrading the offensive line, a rookie QB is going to have issues developing.

Lets ask David Klingler about that.... Wasn't he sacked like 12 times his first game?

(01-29-2019, 03:26 PM)Earendil Wrote: I'm intrigued by the idea of someone like Bridgewater.  We need someone who can take care of the ball, but doesn't have to throw 40 times per game because Mixon would be the catalyst to the offense.  But honestly, if we are going to do that, we might as well keep Dalton.  Unless of course some desperate team (*cough Washington*) wants to give us a ton of picks for him.

I do think we are going to fling the ball around a lot more under the new staff as opposed to the old...