(10-27-2019, 12:02 PM)J24 Wrote: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchise_tag#targetText=In%20the%20National%20Football%20League,if%20certain%20conditions%20are%20met.

That's just a wikipedia page for the franchise tag. There's nothing there regarding any rules or exceptions.

(10-27-2019, 11:57 AM)jfkbengals Wrote: How could they possibly argue he is not elligible?

His contract expires, thus the team in possession of his contract (aka rights) has the option of using the various tagging mechanisms to either retain him or receive compensation provided he has not already been tagged three times as was collectively bargained.

This is the same way the Patriots and Ravens will trade for, or claim off of waivers, a guy with an expiring contract who they have no intent to re-sign in order to rent their services in the short term and still get a compensatory pick when that player leaves.

Not sure, just repeating what I heard.

Fwiw, it was either Lance or Ken Broo on 700. They had made mention that Green wouldn't be eligible for the tag if he were traded in his final year. I don't think they were certain but this topic did come up. (Trading him and then resigning him)

Could be built into the CBA for vets, who knows.  I'm not at all sure. Dont want to state it as fact like J24 has.  Its really all a moot point anyways because 32 year old guys never get tagged to begin with.

(10-27-2019, 10:42 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Alright, it's official.

I hate Duke Tobin.

I hate him after drafting Sample in round 2.

I hope the Bengals lose 80-0 today.

(10-27-2019, 12:21 PM)CincinnatiKid Wrote: I hope the Bengals lose 80-0 today.

It would be difficult because the other team will have mercy. I'm thinking a 50 burger on Taylor's ass is reasonable.

ZT is seeing how bad it really is working with this FO.

They are doing him dirty in this new age NFL. It's disappointing to think no one in the family group can see what's needed to keep up and compete and sell tickets.

But the "Model" worked to keep the Paul Brown money flowing through the family, and the great grandkids has to be taken care of, so can't shake it up too much and risk Elroy's college fund.

(10-27-2019, 11:07 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Because they're trying to win a Superbowl this year.

Just because a player may be a good fit for a contender in the short term doesn't mean they're a good fit for a team approaching a 2-3 year long rebuild.

Are you really this obtuse or do you just like trolling?

Insults aside.

It seems our players are committed to the organization (except Cordy) and you have 0 idea how many years of a rebuild we're in. Just last year we were the youngest team in the NFL:
https://www.phillyvoice.com/ranking-nfl-teams-age-after-53-man-cutdowns-2018-edition/

There's absolutely nothing to suggest we could get our superstar WR and future LT healthy, make a move or two and be contenders next year. Just because you and others are ready to give up onthis team 7 games into a new regime doesn't mean the players are.

As to the Insult:

(10-27-2019, 08:53 AM)Fullrock Wrote: From Ian Rapoport:

The Bengals have told anyone who would listen they don't plan on doing any deals. As Duke Tobin will offer teams, they aren't in the business of sending away good players. The only one it seems who has a chance at being traded is TE Tyler Eifert, for whom Cincy would ask for a third-rounder. That seems quite rich, though perhaps there is some wiggle room there.

1. Asking for a 3rd rounder for Eifert is COMICAL.
2. Not in the business of sending away good players. You know, the ones who have this team staring at 0-16. LOLOLOLOL!

Just a complete and utter inept franchise incapable of any vision or plan for success. It's honestly depressing.

Not a surprise and if they hold on to everyone and then have some blah draft where they trade back a couple times to get some more 4th rounders and tell everyone how they just need to stay the course and they will be just fine with better health and another year in the system...my reaction will be F you, you cheap, backwards-ass pathetic farce of a franchise and i can confirm, on record, that i will be done with this shit show of a team.

But that all remains to be seen...

(10-27-2019, 10:38 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Then why would teams that want to win give anything for them?

If a team feels they're close and that player can help them this year, and maybe next, they will make the deal. 

(10-27-2019, 01:18 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: If a team feels they're close and that player can help them this year, and maybe next, they will make the deal. 

Why can't they help us next year?

I get the desire but I'm not sure I agree with the logic of trading your stars; however, I won't call anyone obtuse or a troll simply because they want a fire sale. 

1. There is no such thing as a 3 or 4 year rebuild in the NFL.

2. The only way you come out ahead trading good players for draft picks is if you get multiple picks. Otherwise you are just using the pick to replace the hole you create by sending off a good player.

(10-27-2019, 01:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why can't they help us next year?

I get the desire but I'm not sure I agree with the logic of trading your stars; however, I won't call anyone obtuse or a troll simply because they want a fire sale. 

They could. You have to decide if you want a few 30+ players on a team that may not win for a couple more years (then when they start winning, those players are 2-3 years older) or if you want younger, talented (high draft pick) players to try and build the team back up for 5-10 years. 

(10-27-2019, 01:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 1.  There is no such thing as a 3 or 4 year rebuild in the NFL.  

2.  The only way you come out ahead trading good players for draft picks is if you get multiple picks.  Otherwise you are just using the pick to replace the hole you create by sending off a good player.

..or if the player has shown a desire to go elsewhere. For instance I'd trade Glenn for a 5th rounder and be happy with the pick. As to trading AJ for a 1st, no way. 

(10-27-2019, 01:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why can't they help us next year?

I get the desire but I'm not sure I agree with the logic of trading your stars; however, I won't call anyone obtuse or a troll simply because they want a fire sale. 

To this point, say we trade our great receiver, dt, and end.  Now we need another great receiver, dt, and end to help the franchise in the future.

First round draft picks have a success rate of around 50%, and that is just for being successful in the NFL, not great.  So statistically we need to use 6 picks to replace the three players we already had, instead of retaining what we have and using those picks to try and upgrade the bottom of the roster.

(10-27-2019, 01:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 1.  There is no such thing as a 3 or 4 year rebuild in the NFL.  

2.  The only way you come out ahead trading good players for draft picks is if you get multiple picks.  Otherwise you are just using the pick to replace the hole you create by sending off a good player.

That is part of it, but you have (or you need to have) players already on your team to take some of those places. 

Beyond that, you're trading an older good player for a younger, cheaper (for a while) good player. 

(10-27-2019, 01:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why can't they help us next year?

I get the desire but I'm not sure I agree with the logic of trading your stars; however, I won't call anyone obtuse or a troll simply because they want a fire sale. 

They could if and only if the team had a plan to improve via free agency. You can't fix this team with one standard draft. But given their philosophy of never being players for top tier free agents, the only way to rebuild this team is through the draft. That's why they should entertain trading guys like AJ, Dunlap, and Geno while they can still get something for them instead of them playing out their contracts here when this team is far from competitive. 

(10-27-2019, 01:26 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: They could. You have to decide if you want a few 30+ players on a team that may not win for a couple more years (then when they start winning, those players are 2-3 years older) or if you want younger, talented (high draft pick) players to try and build the team back up for 5-10 years. 

So you mean a second round pick like Devon Still instead of Geno Atkins?

The draft is a gamble, and unless you get multiple picks for a player you are just using the pick to fill the hole you create.

(10-27-2019, 01:26 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: They could. You have to decide if you want a few 30+ players on a team that may not win for a couple more years (then when they start winning, those players are 2-3 years older) or if you want younger, talented (high draft pick) players to try and build the team back up for 5-10 years. 

There's serious thought that we may be changing the guard at QB next year. Ask yourself would that new QB be better served with a rookie WR and RB or with AJ Green and Joe Mixon. As I showed in the link last year we were the youngest team in the NFL (and that's not even counting Doogie Taylor). How much younger to we want to get

(10-27-2019, 01:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The draft is a gamble

Funny, I rarely see this statement made when it comes to complaints about lack of activity in free agency. Then, it's all about building through the draft.

But now we're saying the draft is a gamble.  Perhaps I can expect you to rip the team in the future for ignoring proven talent upgrades, and relying only on the gamble that is the NFL draft?

Also, the players that are valuable on our team are rapidly deteriorating. They are old. We cannot place value on them based on what they've done in the past (which, combined, has amounted to zero playoff wins). Only their potential for the future.