(01-26-2016, 03:45 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: See... This is exactly what I'm talking about Shake.

It's like speaking to a brick wall about FA.

What's so really hard to underunderstand for these posters?

Just to wish for a mid-tier FA that is younger and better than Hawk and an experienced Center who could solidify the line would have made most happy.

That's two signings to supplement the team that could have made impacts.

Yet we still have people "turtling" for free agents.

What a damn joke.

(01-25-2016, 07:32 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: Jesus F'n Christ.

Are we really going to do this carousel of rational to irrational thought again?

That this needs to be explained and debated by numb nuts who think we want Mike Brown to be a overboard spender in FA?

It's the same damn thing every year. 

It can't hurt to add experienced outside talent.  They did it with Nelson/Newman/ etc etc...

Why not add one or two who are still relatively young and near there prime sometime?

Is that really asking too much?

(01-26-2016, 05:35 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote:

(01-26-2016, 05:44 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: That wasn't meant derogatory towards you That was just merely pointing out the example you are giving it's always something we have to discuss every year no matter what. Quite frankly that crap is getting old.

(01-25-2016, 10:38 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Are we 1 or 2 players away from greatness, yet?

Seriously, we have the talent on this roster.  Had Andy not broken his thumb, I completely believe that we could be watching the Bengals VS. Panthers in the SB, this year.

(01-25-2016, 07:11 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Odds are stacked against you.. Denver had some success with FA's but we can also point to many failures by good teams also.  

I like the Bengals approach.. don;t sell all the equipment on the farm or you can;t farm at all.  They have had some quite success in FA's.. Nelson, Jones, Newman to name a few.  You also still have to develop the FA's... Denver seemed to do a good job there.

(01-25-2016, 10:24 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Re-sign Iloka and Marvin Jones.
Offer pacman a cheap one year deal.

Use the money from Hall and Nelson leaving to go get one real FA signing.
A LB or DT. Make the draft that much less of a necessity to hit on so many picks.

(02-01-2016, 02:09 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Almost zero chance he'll accept that. He was an All-Pro returner last year, and a Pro Bowl CB this year. He also held Antonio Brown to significantly less than the rest of the NFL did. (Most of Brown's damage came when Guenther decided to cover him with a LB or once I saw Dunlap.) This offseason will be his last chance to try to cash in with FA. There's no way anyone gets him on a cheap one year deal.

He'll probably get 2yr/$16m or 3yr/$21m.. something like that. Brandon Browner turned a worse performance and less playing time as a #2 CB into 3yr/$15m.

(02-01-2016, 11:57 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: He probably won't accept it, but not sure it's worth more than that right now. I'd rather spend a bit more into a player like Boykin
Shouldn't let other teams bad decisions impact our own decisions 

(02-01-2016, 01:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I think some overestimate how much Pacman will get on the open market. His past will always make some teams cross him off their lists. His incidents with Amari Cooper and Joey Porter will surely be looked at. His age is another check against him. I'd like to have him back, but not at 3/21. That's too long of a commitment for a CB who will be 33 this September. We saw with Nate Clements how quickly a CB can fall off from one year to the next.

(01-25-2016, 07:08 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Yep. If you look at almost any SB winner, you're going to see a balance of good drafting with some smart FA pickups mixed in.

Last year the Pats had Revis and Browner at CB. Those signings helped push them over the top.

Here we are after a 5th straight one-n-done and there's no sign that the Bengals will ever alter their approach to FA. Last year we had some lip service that amounted to nothing.

(02-01-2016, 01:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I think some overestimate how much Pacman will get on the open market. His past will always make some teams cross him off their lists. His incidents with Amari Cooper and Joey Porter will surely be looked at. His age is another check against him. I'd like to have him back, but not at 3/21. That's too long of a commitment for a CB who will be 33 this September. We saw with Nate Clements how quickly a CB can fall off from one year to the next.

(02-01-2016, 06:12 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Nate Clements was 32 when the Bengals gave him 2yr/$10.5m in 2011, and the cap was roughly $120m that year. It's expected to be roughly $154m in 2016. So cap %-wise, that would be the same as a 2yr/$13.475m deal today. He was 7 years removed from his last Pro Bowl, and had never been an All-Pro.

So I honestly don't think I am overestimating Adam Jones on this. The cap has escalated so quickly (~$34m in 4 years) that it needs to be taken into account. Also, while he is a year older, he also is coming off the two best football years of his career, both as a returner and a cornerback with an All-Pro and a Pro Bowl under his belt.

(02-01-2016, 01:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I think some overestimate how much Pacman will get on the open market. His past will always make some teams cross him off their lists. His incidents with Amari Cooper and Joey Porter will surely be looked at. His age is another check against him. I'd like to have him back, but not at 3/21. That's too long of a commitment for a CB who will be 33 this September. We saw with Nate Clements how quickly a CB can fall off from one year to the next.

(02-02-2016, 01:33 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Andre Johnson was 33 when he signed a contract for 3 years/21 million with the Colts last year. I guess that would be a more recent similar comparison, but Johnson is squeaky clean and Adam is well...Pacman. Plus WR's usually command more in FA than CBs.

Honestly we just went through this 3 years ago. Adam was a FA and generated no interest on the open market. That's why we were able to bring him back for peanuts (3 years/5.3 million, signed on March 21st). Sure Adam has solidified his status as a good starting option since then, but he's also 3 years older and has fresh on field incidents that were very public. Plus it's not like he was a scrub in 2012. Many considered him our top CB even then, and he had a great season returning punts.

I don't think we get him for 3/5 again, but I don't see 3/21 either. Maybe I'm wrong. We'll see next month.

(02-02-2016, 05:06 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: I could see it being like Rey M's deal. Yes, it was a 3 year deal, but it was a glorified 1 year deal because all the guaranteed money was in the first year. I can see us trying something similar with Pacman.

(02-02-2016, 11:30 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Maybe. It'd make sense to do so given his age. If they structure it that way I'd be happy with it.

I really want him back, but I'd like to see them be smart about it. 33 is pretty ancient for a CB. He's been a special athlete and he did miss a few years, so maybe he can play deep into his 30's. We shouldn't count on it though.

(02-03-2016, 11:07 AM)Au165 Wrote: IDK when Newman got here he was 34 and gave us a couple good years of production. I think Pacman still has two good years left, with a 3rd not as good year. Remember he did miss a lot of time throughout his career for the off field stuff, so his body (taking hit wise) isn't an "old" 33.

(01-25-2016, 04:32 PM)ochocincos Wrote: "Bob McGinn, of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, one of the most plugged-in NFL reporters in the country, reported over the weekend that McCarthy is "fed up" with Thompson's conservative approach to free agency.

"According to several sources, McCarthy is fed up with his boss' unwillingness to take a chance and reinforce the roster with veteran players that might be unknown to the Packers but have the talent to contribute," McGinn wrote in a column that lambasted both the GM and coach for a lost season."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000628115/article/mccarthy-fed-up-with-packers-freeagency-approach

The reason I am posting this in the Front Office sub-forum of Jungle Noise is because many fans have had the same complaints with the Bengals FA approach too. While the Bengals have had good consistent success following the same approach as the Packers do, they have still plateaued.

Is the Bengals FO feeling the same heat that the Packers FO is feeling to "win now"? Do they do anything at all to change their approach?

What would the Bengals have/need to do in FA to take that next step? Any players specifically that they should try to sign?