(02-28-2021, 12:27 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You say that the Bengals have tons of very good players, 

(02-28-2021, 12:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  I never said that.

I just said Lawson and Jackson were not the reason our defense was bad.

(02-28-2021, 01:05 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Sure you did.  You specifically said that there are tons of very good players on bad teams.  So going off of your own logic, the Bengals must be loaded with very good players.

(02-28-2021, 11:32 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So basically you never want to have a good defense?

Lawson and Jackson were not the reason we had a bad defense.  Look around the league,  There are tons of very good players that play on bad teams.  The theory that in those cases you just give up and never spend to keep good players while trying to improve is ridiculous.

(02-28-2021, 03:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You fail.

If I had said there are lots of good RBs on bad teams would you assume I mean that EVERY SINGLE bad team has lots of good RBs?

(02-28-2021, 12:14 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: In the 16 games that Lawson played, he played at least 60% of the snaps in 13 of them. He had 2.5 sacks and 2 TFL in those 13 games.

In the 3 games Lawson played less than 60% of the snaps, he had 3 sacks and 2 TFL.

- - - - - - - - -

Because the Bengals were nowhere near competitive on defense last year and they need ~$30m this offseason just to bring themselves back to that poor level of last in sacks, giving up 400 rushing yards to the Ravens, 26th overall, etc

Defense was punted away from being competitive this year the second they decided to bring Anarumo back. 

They ignored offense last offseason to spend heavily on defense and all it got them was a shitty defense and a broken 1st overall pick.