Has anyone heard who the Bengals are going to tag? I expect they use it on either Lawson or Jackson, and I believe it needs to be used today. Any knowledge on this?

(03-09-2021, 01:33 PM)Rubekahn29 Wrote: Has anyone heard who the Bengals are going to tag? I expect they use it on either Lawson or Jackson, and I believe it needs to be used today. Any knowledge on this?

I've heard teams are waiting to find out what the cap is going to be before they decide whether to use tag and on whom.

No news is good news, because there's nobody who should get the tag this year. Just because you have it doesn't mean you should use it.

(03-09-2021, 02:00 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: No news is good news, because there's nobody who should get the tag this year. Just because you have it doesn't mean you should use it.

So you’re going to let both Lawson and Jackson walk?

(03-09-2021, 02:02 PM)Rubekahn29 Wrote: So you’re going to let both Lawson and Jackson walk?

If the price tag for them are $17.8m or $16.3m? Yes.

(Those are the franchise tag numbers for DE and CB last year.)

(03-09-2021, 02:02 PM)Rubekahn29 Wrote: So you’re going to let both Lawson and Jackson walk?

Lawson is over hyped and can be replaced and Jackson hasn't played too well himself. I'd rather go out and get someone like Van Noy to replace Lawson and I'm sure they can find another serviceable CB

neither one of those guys is worth tag money.

The defense was awful last year and will be awful this year with or without Lawson and the WJ III.

First and only priority is building an o line o protect the future. Second priority is adding the Florida TE or Chase at WR.

I find it interesting people are so willing to simply punt on playing any semblance of defense next year. If you want to be in a shootout that means Burrow is going to be dropping back 50 times a game again. Even with better protection, 50 dropbacks a game lends itself to a greater risk of injury. We need another pass rusher along with Carl Lawson, if we simply swap out Lawson for one we are probably as bad or worse in terms of our ability to get to the QB next year.

I get people like toys and all, but we have to have some sort of defense out there or else we will see gaudy stats but still a ton of losses.

(03-09-2021, 03:49 PM)Au165 Wrote: I find it interesting people are so willing to simply punt on playing any semblance of defense next year. If you want to be in a shootout that means Burrow is going to be dropping back 50 times a game again. Even with better protection, 50 dropbacks a game lends itself to a greater risk of injury. We need another pass rusher along with Carl Lawson, if we simply swap out Lawson for one we are probably as bad or worse in terms of our ability to get to the QB next year.

I get people like toys and all, but we have to have some sort of defense out there or else we will see gaudy stats but still a ton of losses.

This!

(03-09-2021, 03:49 PM)Au165 Wrote: I find it interesting people are so willing to simply punt on playing any semblance of defense next year. If you want to be in a shootout that means Burrow is going to be dropping back 50 times a game again. Even with better protection, 50 dropbacks a game lends itself to a greater risk of injury. We need another pass rusher along with Carl Lawson, if we simply swap out Lawson for one we are probably as bad or worse in terms of our ability to get to the QB next year.

I get people like toys and all, but we have to have some sort of defense out there or else we will see gaudy stats but still a ton of losses.

I find it more interesting people are so willing to spend what is predicted to be ~$30m of the $46.6m in cap space the Bengals have in order to keep the 26th ranked defense together while their 1st overall pick QB is rehabbing from a destroyed knee behind a shitty OL.

Burrow was ALREADY dropping back an enormous amount, even with Lawson. That's Zac Taylor's "scheme". As of halftime of the Washington game, Burrow was averaging 42 passes per game. He was on pace to tie for the 6th most attempts ever in a single season.

The year before that, Dalton averaged 40.6 passes per start under Taylor, on pace for the 17th most pass attempts ever in a single season. As long as Taylor is calling the plays, they are going to throw a TON. That's just something you should already accept. So not planning and getting the best possible protection for your injured 1st overall pick QB in order to hold together the 26th ranked defense is folly.

The Bengals were already dead last in sacks in 2020 with Lawson. I wasn't aware you could get worse than last.

(03-09-2021, 04:02 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I find it more interesting people are so willing to spend what is predicted to be ~$30m of the $46.6m in cap space the Bengals have in order to keep the 26th ranked defense together while their 1st overall pick QB is rehabbing from a destroyed knee behind a shitty OL.

Burrow was ALREADY dropping back an enormous amount, even with Lawson. That's Zac Taylor's "scheme". As of halftime of the Washington game, Burrow was averaging 42 passes per game. He was on pace to tie for the 6th most attempts ever in a single season.

The year before that, Dalton averaged 40.6 passes per start under Taylor, on pace for the 17th most pass attempts ever in a single season. As long as Taylor is calling the plays, they are going to throw a TON. That's just something you should already accept. So not planning and getting the best possible protection for your injured 1st overall pick QB in order to hold together the 26th ranked defense is folly.

The Bengals were already dead last in sacks in 2020 with Lawson. I wasn't aware you could get worse than last.

I never actually said to keep both pieces. I think you have to keep Lawson, but you and I have done this round and round before. Keep Lawson ADD another rusher and then add vet corners, which there are a ton of, to fill out the back end.

(03-09-2021, 03:49 PM)Au165 Wrote: I find it interesting people are so willing to simply punt on playing any semblance of defense next year. If you want to be in a shootout that means Burrow is going to be dropping back 50 times a game again. Even with better protection, 50 dropbacks a game lends itself to a greater risk of injury. We need another pass rusher along with Carl Lawson, if we simply swap out Lawson for one we are probably as bad or worse in terms of our ability to get to the QB next year.

I get people like toys and all, but we have to have some sort of defense out there or else we will see gaudy stats but still a ton of losses.

Who says people are willing to "punt on playing any semblance of defense"? 

Because they don't want to overpay Lawson, or invest 30 million dollars in 2021 cap space into CB1 and CB2?

You can use that money elsewhere.  Hell, you could get two really good veterans (say a DE and a DT or a LB) for the price of Lawson's tag.  Who is to say that doesn't do more to help the defense than paying Lawson almost double his actual worth?

(03-09-2021, 05:02 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Who says people are willing to "punt on playing any semblance of defense"? 

Because they don't want to overpay Lawson, or invest 30 million dollars in 2021 cap space into CB1 and CB2?

You can use that money elsewhere.  Hell, you could get two really good veterans (say a DE and a DT or a LB) for the price of Lawson's tag.  Who is to say that doesn't do more to help the defense than paying Lawson almost double his actual worth?

Who are these two "really good veterans" you are getting for a combined 17.75? With Lawson gone you need two ends now too as Hubbard isn't really giving you anything as a pass rusher, so can you find two pass rushers for 17.75? Are either under 30 or are we going with big names who used to be good?

(03-09-2021, 04:02 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I find it more interesting people are so willing to spend what is predicted to be ~$30m of the $46.6m in cap space the Bengals have in order to keep the 26th ranked defense together while their 1st overall pick QB is rehabbing from a destroyed knee behind a shitty OL.

I'm forever amazing at the relunctance of some to move on from certain players.  I swear, there's some people on here that are seemingly in favor of keeping everyone.

Lawson?  We gotta keep that guy. 

Jackson? We gotta keep that guy.

Geno?  I'd like to keep him around if he restructures.

Bynes?  I think we should probably keep him.

Alexander?  Definitely keep that guy.

Green, Gio, Uzomah, Hart...

A lot of people on here are in favor of keeping all but one or two of these player, if not every single one.  It really is amazing.

It's like, guys, you know we've won 6 games over the last 2 seasons, right?  Team hasn't made the playoffs in 6 years.  Maybe it's time to try some new players in some certain spots?

"Nah, Carl Lawon and William Jackson play for my team.  I know who they are.  There are no other options.  I don't care how much it costs, our players are irrreplaceable. Let's run it back again!"

(03-09-2021, 05:09 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I'm forever amazing at the relunctance of some to move on from certain players.  I swear, there's some people on here that are seemingly in favor of keeping everyone.

Lawson?  We gotta keep that guy. 

Jackson? We gotta keep that guy.

Geno?  I'd like to keep him around if he restructures.

Bynes?  I think we should probably keep him.

Alexander?  Definitely keep that guy.

Green, Gio, Uzomah, Hart...

A lot of people on here are in favor of keeping all but one or two of these player, if not every single one.  It really is amazing.

It's like, guys, you know we've won 6 games over the last 2 seasons, right?  Team hasn't made the playoffs in 6 years.  Maybe it's time to try some new players in some certain spots?

"Nah, Carl Lawon and William Jackson play for my team.  I know who they are.  There are no other options.  I don't care how much it costs, our players are irrreplaceable.  Let's run it back again!"

I have said keep Lawson...literally, that's it. I said I'd hold on to Geno and see how the rest of FA shakes out and you go to him for money if/when needed (mainly because of the lack of pass-rushing 3T's in FA). Simply deciding all guys must be bad because they are on bad units is just as amazing. Carl Lawson is universally one of the top FA's in this class for a reason. He is young enough to build around and without him, your only player able to generate pressure is gone so you have to recruit at least one, maybe two, guys just to replace his pressures. When you have that guy, you don't let that guy walk just because the defense as a whole is bad.

(03-09-2021, 05:05 PM)Au165 Wrote: Who are these two "really good veterans" you are getting for a combined 17.75? With Lawson gone you need two ends now too as Hubbard isn't really giving you anything as a pass rusher, so can you find two pass rushers for 17.75? Are either under 30 or are we going with big names who used to be good?

This makes no sense.

Your argument is to keep Lawson to fill one DE spot.

My alternative that I offered has resulted in you challenging me to fill two DE spots.  It also appear you set an age requirement, or "big names"???

My point was that you could target a DE in FA, to replace Lawson @ a range of 5-11 million dollars per.  (I know this is wide range, but it's a large market and it's dependent on how we value other positions)

This would leave you with anywhere between 6 to 11 million to spend elsewhere (DT, LB, CB, another DE).

So the question comes down to this:  Would you rather keep Carl Lawon at 17 million, or would you rather you use that 17 million on multiple players that can help the defense?

Keep in mind, I didn't even say that one approach is necessarily the best, or fool proof.  I brought all of this up to point out how ridiculous it is to assume that if you're not for keeping Lawson and Jackson then you're automatically ignoring the defense, and that you only care about "toys" (whatever that means).

(03-09-2021, 05:23 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: This makes no sense.

Your argument is to keep Lawson to fill one DE spot.

My alternative that I offered has resulted in you challenging me to fill two DE spots.  It also appear you set an age requirement, or "big names"???

My point was that you could target a DE in FA, to replace Lawson @ a range of 5-11 million dollars per.  (I know this is wide range, but it's a large market and it's dependent on how we value other positions)

This would leave you with anywhere between 6 to 11 million to spend elsewhere (DT, LB, CB, another DE).

So the question comes down to this:  Would you rather keep Carl Lawon at 17 million, or would you rather you use that 17 million on multiple players that can help the defense?

Keep in mind, I didn't even say that one approach is necessarily the best, or fool proof.  I brought all of this up to point out how ridiculous it is to assume that if you're not for keeping Lawson and Jackson then you're automatically ignoring the defense, and that you only care about "toys" (whatever that means).

My argument is to keep him or else you need to fill two. 

Yes, because you need to replace 60+ pressures of production and you are also paying a premium for a 26-year-old with Lawson.

You aren't replacing Lawson with a player in the 6-11 million range that will produce close to him. You may replace him with a person, but not of equal value. Maybe you can get a guy like Dupree on a one-year deal for 10 or 11 but his stats last year were pretty sketchy when you look at his average time to throw on sacks and pressures.

All this is moot as the reports now are we have chosen to pass on tagging Lawson, or Jackson. I guess they are banking on a flooded market driving prices down but that could seriously come back to bite them with the maneuvering teams can do with the cap.

The Bengals are unlikely to use their franchise tag by the 4 p.m. ET deadline. Things can change but it's unlikely, per multiple sources. #Bengals

— Tyler Dragon (@TheTylerDragon) March 9, 2021

Worse Defensive line in the NFL just got worse.

(03-09-2021, 05:27 PM)Synric Wrote:

The Bengals are unlikely to use their franchise tag by the 4 p.m. ET deadline. Things can change but it's unlikely, per multiple sources. #Bengals

— Tyler Dragon (@TheTylerDragon) March 9, 2021

Worse Defensive line in the NFL just got worse.

My guess is a mid-tier vet and a prayer on a day 2 rusher.

(03-09-2021, 04:02 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I find it more interesting people are so willing to spend what is predicted to be ~$30m of the $46.6m in cap space the Bengals have in order to keep the 26th ranked defense together

The Bengals were already dead last in sacks in 2020 with Lawson. I wasn't aware you could get worse than last.

Anyone who judges individual players based on team stats does not know much about football.

Guess we can't sign Brandon Scherff to play OG for us because Washington had the #30 ranked offense with him starting for them.