(05-12-2019, 03:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I see you are not used to how certain members here spin everything to shit on the Bengals.

Like you said, lots of teams would have made the exact same move.  The stategy was not the problem.  The problem was the execution.  The replacement they drafted was a bust.

But it is not good enough for people to just say Mike Bropwn is not smart at football.  Instead they have to make him evil and greedy.

Being 'not smart at football' is kind of a big thing if you own a team and refuse to hire a GM and call the shots.

As far as the greedy part...there have been stories written about the lack of practice facility. The stadium deal that the county largely pays. How the Bengals ration deodorant and Gatorade. How Ki-Jana Carter had to buy towels for the team.

I do think that the Bengals spend a decent portion of their salary cap, but when you ration Gatorade and deodorant for players and that gets out...it's REALLY HARD to change the perception that you are cheap.

I don't think he's evil. I think he's probably a very caring guy. Family-oriented. He gives players 2nd and 3rd chances that I don't know if I would.

As for Whitworth and most teams doing the same. He had 3 or 4 offers so atleast some teams wanted him. Remember the talk that the Bengals were telling people at the combine that he was going to stay? To say the execution is an understatement.

(05-12-2019, 03:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I see you are not used to how certain members here spin everything to shit on the Bengals.

Like you said, lots of teams would have made the exact same move.  The stategy was not the problem.  The problem was the execution.  The replacement they drafted was a bust.

But it is not good enough for people to just say Mike Bropwn is not smart at football.  Instead they have to make him evil and greedy.

But he is greedy. 

Seriously, we have the smallest FO/scouting department in the league, we borrow a practice facility from a local college, bused over to a soccer complex for years (which is pathetic and sad), we've had legendary tales of renting out TV's and not buying towels in the past. The guy is a miser. Maybe not with his own players, but I often wonder if the reason we promote "build exclusively through the draft" is because he's able to indoctrinate these young guys into taking these contracts that are skimpy on guaranteed money. 

Good free agents will mostly balk at the idea of taking less guaranteed, but with our own free agents, they have to consider uprooting their families, learning new coaches, playbooks, teammates, etc. Not saying I'm 100% sure on this, but it's a theory of mine that would tie together our love of the draft, compensatory picks and signing our own, as well as our loathing of (quality) free agents.

(05-12-2019, 05:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: But he is greedy. 

Seriously, we have the smallest FO/scouting department in the league, we borrow a practice facility from a local college, bused over to a soccer complex for years (which is pathetic and sad), we've had legendary tales of renting out TV's and not buying towels in the past. The guy is a miser. Maybe not with his own players, but I often wonder if the reason we promote "build exclusively through the draft" is because he's able to indoctrinate these young guys into taking these contracts that are skimpy on guaranteed money. 

Good free agents will mostly balk at the idea of taking less guaranteed, but with our own free agents, they have to consider uprooting their families, learning new coaches, playbooks, teammates, etc. Not saying I'm 100% sure on this, but it's a theory of mine that would tie together our love of the draft, compensatory picks and signing our own, as well as our loathing of (quality) free agents.

Agreed. This is kind of a funny debate. The Pro Mike Brown/Bengals side's argument is basically that "Mike Brown lacks football smarts and the Bengals have had average success."

How many other fanbases are on a message board touting success for their franchise by stating that a Head Coach was a success despite going 0-7 in the playoffs because his overall record was right around .500!?!? 

How many other fanbases would be like "Our owner isn't greedy! He just is bad at managing a football team!" 

It's laughable how low the expectations are for this franchise.

(05-12-2019, 03:22 PM)Whatever Wrote: All those things are fair criticisms in the running of the franchise as a competitive sports team for sure.  As a business, not so much.

If the team moved, they would have that honeymoon period for a few years in most markets.  They would move a lot of tickets, a ton of merchandise, and make tons of money with corporate sponsorships.  That would mean more money to invest into the team and would potentially lead to an Art Modell type situation where he can win that title early and solidify the fan base.  As it stands, it's basically Mike and the fans in a game of don't blink.  Mike won't spend with the big boys because he needs to maintain profitability and he isn't getting enough income to do so and the fans won't spend until they they see that playoff win drought ended.  Both sides are working against each other.

Hysterical....there is a salary cap correct? So what you actually mean to say is that they do not sign ignorant mega deals that will financially hamper a team for many years to come. Perfect example is the dynasty that was the Ravens and stupid Flacco deal.

You may have had an argument in past seasons but since 2015 the Bengals have had less than the league average in cap space so even that is trend that has been changing. Signing stupidly large deals is not a way to win consistently.

(05-12-2019, 05:47 PM)OSUfan Wrote: Hysterical....there is a salary cap correct? So what you actually mean to say is that they do not sign ignorant mega deals that will financially hamper a team for many years to come. Perfect example is the dynasty that was the Ravens and stupid Flacco deal.

You may have had an argument in past seasons but since 2015 the Bengals have had less than the league average in cap space so even that is trend that has been changing. Signing stupidly large deals is not a way to win consistently.

The Ravens have also won 2 Super Bowls and won 15 playoff games since 2000. Oh...but, they'll eventually run into cap trouble is what people always say about the Ravens and Steelers.

Well, we kept a clean salary cap and have won 0 playoff games and 0 Super Bowls. AND, 3 years ago, our team was tore apart by free agency. (Sanu, Jones, Whitworth, Zeitler, Andre Smith, Nelson, Hall, etc.) So it's not like we didn't experience cap issues too.

This whole free agency is bad thing is ridiculous. There are guys every year who can be signed to reasonable contracts. Instead, the anti-free agency crowd looks at the ones who sign the largest deals. I don't think anyone here advocates that.

But, signing mediocre to bad guys like Miller, Hart, and Webb ARE NOT how you win. Webb and Miller had arguably 1 average season in the NFL...and we overpay them.

We act like free agency is bad here, and want to copy McVay with the Rams but when he became coach, they added: Whitworth, Kayvon Webster, Robert Woods, John Sullivan, and Connor Barwin. Add 5 quality free agents to our roster and we'd probably be a playoff contender.

(05-12-2019, 05:47 PM)OSUfan Wrote: Hysterical....there is a salary cap correct? So what you actually mean to say is that they do not sign ignorant mega deals that will financially hamper a team for many years to come. Perfect example is the dynasty that was the Ravens and stupid Flacco deal.

You may have had an argument in past seasons but since 2015 the Bengals have had less than the league average in cap space so even that is trend that has been changing. Signing stupidly large deals is not a way to win consistently.

There are a lot of other things besides player costs that people point to as hamstringing the Bengals compared to other teams.  Indoor practice facility, undersized scouting department, etc. all cost money, but don't cost cap dollars.  

(05-12-2019, 07:34 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: The Ravens have also won 2 Super Bowls and won 15 playoff games since 2000. Oh...but, they'll eventually run into cap trouble is what people always say about the Ravens and Steelers.

Well, we kept a clean salary cap and have won 0 playoff games and 0 Super Bowls. AND, 3 years ago, our team was tore apart by free agency. (Sanu, Jones, Whitworth, Zeitler, Andre Smith, Nelson, Hall, etc.) So it's not like we didn't experience cap issues too.

This whole free agency is bad thing is ridiculous. There are guys every year who can be signed to reasonable contracts. Instead, the anti-free agency crowd looks at the ones who sign the largest deals. I don't think anyone here advocates that.

But, signing mediocre to bad guys like Miller, Hart, and Webb ARE NOT how you win. Webb and Miller had arguably 1 average season in the NFL...and we overpay them.

We act like free agency is bad here, and want to copy McVay with the Rams but when he became coach, they added: Whitworth, Kayvon Webster, Robert Woods, John Sullivan, and Connor Barwin. Add 5 quality free agents to our roster and we'd probably be a playoff contender.

Webster got cut after his first year with the Rams. Barwin was signed on a cheap 1 year deal and not resigned after a dissappointing 5 sack campaign.   They cut Sullivan loose after last year.  Woods had a great year last year, but had never had a 1000 yard season before that and signed for under $7 mil a year.

(05-12-2019, 08:15 PM)Whatever Wrote: Webster got cut after his first year with the Rams. Barwin was signed on a cheap 1 year deal and not resigned after a dissappointing 5 sack campaign.   They cut Sullivan loose after last year.  Woods had a great year last year, but had never had a 1000 yard season before that and signed for under $7 mil a year.

You attempt to minimize what the Rams do. But, Whitworth made the Pro Bowl twice so far and I believe he graded out as the Top Tackle on PFF.

Sullivan vastly upgraded them at Center? Why did they let him go as a free agent? Well because they drafted his replacement a couple years ago.

In 2018, Woods had 86 receptions for 1219 yards and 157 rushing yards. That's a REALLY GOOD signing.

So 3 guys who were vast upgrades to what they had. And Watkins had almost 600 yards receiving in his year there.

In Taylor's 1st year here, we added Hart, Miller, and Webb. I doubt that we'll be talking about the great years any of those guys had.

(05-12-2019, 08:05 PM)Whatever Wrote: There are a lot of other things besides player costs that people point to as hamstringing the Bengals compared to other teams.  Indoor practice facility, undersized scouting department, etc. all cost money, but don't cost cap dollars.  

It seems the only one griping about their scouting situation are fans who believe they know something about the internal operations of the franchise. It cracks me up. As a coach why would you not want to be heavily involved in the scouting process? I absolutely would want to be. I would want to know that the players we were looking to add to our team are the guys that I want to be coaching. Not sure why so many have such a problem with this.

Here is a good article:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/nfl/bengals/2018/01/08/mike-brown-marvin-lewis-fact-fiction-cincinnati-bengals-cheap-players/1008947001/

(05-12-2019, 05:40 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: How many other fanbases are on a message board touting success for their franchise by stating that a Head Coach was a success despite going 0-7 in the playoffs because his overall record was right around .500!?!? 

How many?

Half the league can't say anything about going .500 because they have not over the period that Marvin did.  And half the league also did not make the playoffs 7 times during that span.

But the big issue is that no one here is satisfied with that so I don't know why you keep repeating that line.  Why are you so desperate to prove that you are superior to other fans?   

How many fanbases make up total bullshit lies in order to shit on their own team (Claiming we told Whitworth we were no interested when in fact we had made him an offer).  

How many fan bases ignore what the team spends on players salaries and instead obsess over Gatorade just to make their own team look worse?

There is no other fanbase in the league that can match the value some Bengal fans place on their victim cards.  They absolutely refuse to acknowledge anything positive the team ever does and turn on any of their fellow fans who disagree with them.

(05-12-2019, 07:34 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We act like free agency is bad here,

No we don't, and neither does the front office.

In 2011 the Bengals rebuilt their defense by signing 3 free agent starters, and that defense went on to finish in the top 10 5 of the next 6 years.  But you refuse to acknowledge that ever happened.  Instead you keep repeating the lie that the Bengals never sign any decent free agents.  

And as for the fans expectations and what they will accept, please give me a list of names of fans who say we should not be more active in free agency.  Most of us can be critical can be critical of the Bengals but still give them credit for what they do right.  We don't have to put on blinders to anything positive.  We are not obsessed with being "the worst in the league".  

(05-10-2019, 07:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You just kinda say things don't you?

Nobody said Ben and Brady are good QBs because of these draft picks. 

Assumption Junction that's Fred's function. The major problem with the Bengals compared to winning teams like the Pats is they have an owner who spends money because he wants to win where we have an owner who has no money but wants to make some. Little or no scouting department, second rate free agents and a general conception around the league that we are totally bush league puts the team on a definite disadvantage. I believe that those of you who believe Marvin had no say in who we took in the draft are misinformed and only want to bolster their opinion to make the FO look inept.

(05-12-2019, 09:20 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: The major problem with the Bengals compared to winning teams like the Pats is they have an owner who spends money because he wants to win where we have an owner who has no money but wants to make some.

2018 Bengals had the fifth highest cash payroll ($239.7 million).  That was 5th highest in the league and over $40 million more than the Steelers and patriots.

2018 Bengals used $180.3 million in cap space.  That was 9th highest in the league and again more than the Steelers (by $20 million) and Pats (by $5 million).

Maybe the Bengals should invest more in the scouting department, but acting like they are "cheap" with players contracts so that they can maximize profits is just not true.

(05-12-2019, 08:15 PM)Whatever Wrote: Webster got cut after his first year with the Rams. Barwin was signed on a cheap 1 year deal and not resigned after a dissappointing 5 sack campaign.   They cut Sullivan loose after last year.  Woods had a great year last year, but had never had a 1000 yard season before that and signed for under $7 mil a year.

Those would all be top tier free agents by Bengals standards. I don't think we've signed that many decent free agents (in one off-season) since 2003. Whitworth was a high dollar signing that we almost never make. The rest of those guys would usually be the jewel of our FA class. 

(05-12-2019, 03:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I see you are not used to how certain members here spin everything to shit on the Bengals.

Like you said, lots of teams would have made the exact same move.  The stategy was not the problem.  The problem was the execution.  The replacement they drafted was a bust.

But it is not good enough for people to just say Mike Bropwn is not smart at football.  Instead they have to make him evil and greedy.

Its not that he doesn't spend but he doesn't spend wisely. He takes all his money for a season and spends it on a few players instead of getting free agents who will put the team over the top. In other words he won't put profits next year's profits in risk for this years success. That's not how other teams do it . They rework contracts to make cap room to sign others who help them win year in and year out.

(05-12-2019, 09:38 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 2018 Bengals had the fifth highest cash payroll ($239.7 million).  That was 5th highest in the league and over $40 million more than the Steelers and patriots.

2018 Bengals used $180.3 million in cap space.  That was 9th highest in the league and again more than the Steelers (by $20 million) and Pats (by $5 million).

Maybe the Bengals should invest more in the scouting department, but acting like they are "cheap" with players contracts so that they can maximize profits is just not true.

I Steelers didn't have the 22mil contract to Bell so they may have spent less. They constantly rework contracts to minipulate  the cap which the Bengals never do.

(05-12-2019, 09:50 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Its not that he doesn't spend but he doesn't spend wisely. He takes all his money for a season and spends it on a few players instead of getting free agents who will put the team over the top. In other words he won't put profits next year's profits in risk for this years success. That's not how other teams do it . They rework contracts to make cap room to sign others who help them win year in and year out.

Jim Owszarski (sp?) the old beat writer confirmed here that because the Bengals tend to offer less guaranteed money on contracts, they make it up to players by offering more loyalty. That's pretty much why you don't see them cutting guys and restructuring contracts as often as other teams. 

(05-12-2019, 09:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No we don't, and neither does the front office.

In 2011 the Bengals rebuilt their defense by signing 3 free agent starters, and that defense went on to finish in the top 10 5 of the next 6 years.  But you refuse to acknowledge that ever happened.  Instead you keep repeating the lie that the Bengals never sign any decent free agents.  

And as for the fans expectations and what they will accept, please give me a list of names of fans who say we should not be more active in free agency.  Most of us can be critical can be critical of the Bengals but still give them credit for what they do right.  We don't have to put on blinders to anything positive.  We are not obsessed with being "the worst in the league".  

Lawson , Howard and Clemons total contracts were 10 mil while they jettisoned Carson's salary which was 14 mil. Tell me again how they spend on top FA's.

(05-12-2019, 09:50 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote:  He takes all his money for a season and spends it on a few players instead of getting free agents who will put the team over the top.

How is "spending money on a few [layers" different from "getting free agents"?

Sounds like the same thing to me.

Just last year he brought in the league 8th highest paid OT? How is that not spending money to get over the top?

(05-12-2019, 10:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How is "spending money on a few [layers" different from "getting free agents"?

Sounds like the same thing to me.

Just last year he brought in the league 8th highest paid OT? How is that not spending money to get over the top?

He didn't BUY him he traded for him knowing he was going to be able to cut him if he couldn't perform. Basically a one year contract that he could renew at his discretion. Like I said earlier he isn't going to risk next years bottom line for the possibility to put the team over the top. That's my opinion from watching how he operates.