(10-27-2019, 01:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then n o one is going to offer anything for them.

 Wrong. They can be an addition that helps a good roster win NOW. Just because their production is declining doesn't mean they can't be a productive part on a playoff team. They just aren't players you build your roster around anymore like they once were here. 

Couldn't they split the stadium half & half to give hope to the bengals? awefuly RAM-a-fied.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha



F this team.

(10-27-2019, 07:08 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha 

If you are laughing that means you don't care about losing.

(10-27-2019, 01:59 PM)Fullrock Wrote:  Wrong. They can be an addition that helps a good roster win NOW. Just because their production is declining doesn't mean they can't be a productive part on a playoff team. They just aren't players you build your roster around anymore like they once were here. 

So we don't want players who are good enough to help playoff teams get better?

(10-27-2019, 07:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So we don't want players who are good enough to help playoff teams get better?

You can't really be this dense. It's not difficult to understand. This team is MILES from being competitive. They HAVE to look at rebuilding to be competitive 2-3 years from now. That plan can't include aging players whose production has begun to decline but still have trade value NOW. Not with the way this organization operates in free agency. 

How many ways do you want me to explain it to you?

(10-27-2019, 01:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 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.

You're (intentionally?) leaving out cap savings. It's not just a pick for a player, it's a pick + cap room for a player.

You make it sound as if it's as simple as we need fill Geno Atkins spot with only a 3rd round pick in return, when in reality we also be saving a ton of money.

I'll make it sample, pick one...

Would you rather have a.) Geno Atkins or b.) a 3rd round pick and 14 mil to spend elsewhere?

Would rather have a.) Carlos Dunlap or b.) a 4th round pick and 11 mil to spend elsewhere

If the Bengals were to move a bunch of these guys they could stockpile a handful of picks and have 40 mil plus extra to spend in free agency.  That buys a lot of quality starters. You can immediately fill glaring weaknesses (LBers) and it gives you a lot of flexibility in your rebuild.

(10-27-2019, 07:55 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: You're (intentionally?) leaving out cap savings. It's not just a pick for a player, it's a pick + cap room for a player.

You make it sound as if it's as simple as we need fill Geno Atkins spot with only a 3rd round pick in return, when in reality we also be saving a ton of money.

I'll make it sample, pick one...

Would you rather have a.) Geno Atkins or b.) a 3rd round pick and 14 mil to spend elsewhere?

Would rather have a.) Carlos Dunlap or b.) a 4th round pick and 11 mil to spend elsewhere

If the Bengals were to move a bunch of these guys they could stockpile a handful of picks and have 40 mil plus extra to spend in free agency.  That buys a lot of quality starters. You can immediately fill glaring weaknesses (LBers) and it gives you a lot of flexibility in your rebuild.

Not to mention you're trading 31+ year old players nearing the end of the line for 22 year old players at their start.

(10-27-2019, 07:55 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I'll make it sample, pick one...

Would you rather have a.) Geno Atkins or b.) a 3rd round pick and 14 mil to spend elsewhere?

Would rather have a.) Carlos Dunlap or b.) a 4th round pick and 11 mil to spend elsewhere

If the Bengals were to move a bunch of these guys they could stockpile a handful of picks and have 40 mil plus extra to spend in free agency.  That buys a lot of quality starters. You can immediately fill glaring weaknesses (LBers) and it gives you a lot of flexibility in your rebuild.

I get it.  I just think it will be very hard to find a player as good as Geno with a third round pick.  Same for Dunlap with a fourth.  So we end up with more money but also more holes to fill.

If these guys were 33-35 then I can see your point, but Dunlap is just 30 and Atkins 31.  I don't see them as being used up yet.

(10-27-2019, 08:00 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Not to mention you're trading 31+ year old players nearing the end of the line for 22 year old players at their start.

Then you were fully in favor of letting Whitworth walk when he was 35.

If 31 is near then end then 35 has to be past it, right?

(10-27-2019, 07:55 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: You're (intentionally?) leaving out cap savings. It's not just a pick for a player, it's a pick + cap room for a player.

You make it sound as if it's as simple as we need fill Geno Atkins spot with only a 3rd round pick in return, when in reality we also be saving a ton of money.

I'll make it sample, pick one...

Would you rather have a.) Geno Atkins or b.) a 3rd round pick and 14 mil to spend elsewhere?

Would rather have a.) Carlos Dunlap or b.) a 4th round pick and 11 mil to spend elsewhere

If the Bengals were to move a bunch of these guys they could stockpile a handful of picks and have 40 mil plus extra to spend in free agency.  That buys a lot of quality starters. You can immediately fill glaring weaknesses (LBers) and it gives you a lot of flexibility in your rebuild.

I'm sure Mikey is happy that you're so concerned about his money. But I'll take the better players. 

(10-27-2019, 08:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then you were fully in favor of letting Whitworth walk when he was 35.

If 31 is near then end then 35 has to be past it, right?

They still had a chance when they let Whit, Zeitler, Jones and Sanu go. There's no hope for this team anytime soon.

(10-27-2019, 08:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then you were fully in favor of letting Whitworth walk when he was 35.

If 31 is near then end then 35 has to be past it, right?

Difference was Whitworth's production hadn't declined at all. If you can't watch Geno and Dunlap and see their production isn't slipping then I don't know what to tell you. I mean Dunlap has what, 1 sack this year?

I'm at the point that I don't care what the front office does, keep guys, trade guys, who really cares. Mike Brown hears us, "Loud and clear", but he is going to do/ has done things his way and he has that right. Fine. I'm going to steal the Raider's motto,"Just Win Baby!" Don't care how they do it, "Just Win Baby!", and when they don't I'm going to *****, cry, and moan just like a little school girl. That's MY right.

(10-27-2019, 08:20 PM)Fullrock Wrote: Difference was Whitworth's production hadn't declined at all. If you can't watch Geno and Dunlap and see their production isn't slipping then I don't know what to tell you. I mean Dunlap has what, 1 sack this year?

It's a strawman anyways because the Bengals WANTED Whitworth back. They just botched it and lowballed him.

Remember: They were telling teams at the combine that he was coming back.

Plus, the other flaw is that just because Whitworth played well past 35 doesn't mean other guys will.

WR's like AJ Green sometimes fall off a cliff production-wise around 30. A LOT of his game is leaping.

Randy Moss's production fell of a cliff after his age 32 season for instance.

I'm less inclined to trade Geno and Atkins although the defense is terrible.

Honestly...any talk of rebuilding...via trades or free agents or loading up on cap space - Starts and ends with the fact that our management is terrible and our coaching staff may be the worst in the NFL.

It's hard to see an elite roster that performs well on the field being built out of this.

(10-27-2019, 08:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then you were fully in favor of letting Whitworth walk when he was 35.

If 31 is near then end then 35 has to be past it, right?

Well Cedric was younger than Whit, so...

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

Because different visions and goals?

A team with a good record but clear glaring holes are willing to fork over picks for players that will have an immediate impact. We're not one of those teams.

(10-27-2019, 09:16 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Because different visions and goals?

A team with a good record but clear glaring holes are willing to fork over picks for players that will have an immediate impact. We're not one of those teams.

We're a team that's 0-8 that thinks with a bounce here and there would be 5-3 or 6-2.

(10-27-2019, 09:19 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We're a team that's 0-8 that thinks with a bounce here and there would be 5-3 or 6-2.

That's the messed up part.

Their denial is going to push back a rebuild 2-3 years.