+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Browns wanted McCarron and were close (/thread-13242.html)
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - rfaulk34 - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:11 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: I don't believe in Marv but am I going to whine about the fact we almost got 2 high value picks for a player that won't see the field for us? No because that's ludicrous. Maybe it's time to find a new hobby if you can't even enjoy the idea of something positive happening to your team. There's enough negative aspects about being a Bengals without whiners hellbent on throwing a pity party.
Maybe you should stop assigning verbs to situations where they don't belong. I just don't care for the move. It's ok, you do care for it and i'm not going to call you names just because my opinion differs.
I would have been ecstatic if they would have tried to make a move for a player that could help them out this year.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - HarleyDog - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 05:50 PM)Au165 Wrote: Baltimore shouldn't laugh at anyone, they have had their own clock issues involving draft picks.
Don’t point the finger. We suck and deserve the attention.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - Shake n Blake - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 08:57 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: So losing a guy for nothing is better than something?
That's just weird logic man.
McCarron is bad. We know this.
We could have got the first pick in rd2 and rd 3.
Those are PRIME fodder to move up in the first too.
This trade failing could set this franchise back a lot. (you know, relatively to how far they set themselves back anyways)
Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying. You're better than strawmen so I'm not sure why you're using one. I've already said I would've preferred picks over "nothing" (a compensatory pick). What I'm saying is that a 2nd and a 3rd isn't some magic elixir to turn this team around or get us winning playoff games.
Again...these picks have *maybe* a 50% chance of panning out and probably a 5% chance of netting us a star player. On top of these poor odds, we are notorious for letting young guys sit behind incumbent vets. So the current core of Green, Atkins, Dunlap, Dalton, etc probably will be nearing the end when and IF these picks start getting returns.
Plus these picks won't fix (a) Mike Brown or (b) Ivory Tickler's stunning inability to draft linemen of late.
Sorry for being so unenthused about our almost trade. I'm surprised so many still have so much faith in the draft to fix all of this franchise's woes even after all these years of proof that it doesn't.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - rfaulk34 - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:12 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: 1. The Browns.
2. Hue Jackson
so....
Certainly can't argue that. Hopefully we will find out which picks they were...well, just the second, cause they only have 1 in the 3rd.
Where's JimO when you need him?
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - RoyleRedlegs - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:14 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Nah. I'm not happy with getting any picks (obv an overall #1-5 would suffice) because there's no track record of better than average success from them. Heap on the fact they have needs and a few guys were moved that could have helped the Bengals this year...and i think one or two that were rumored to be available.
Stop it.
This would have been a great and incredibly rare smart move.
You aren't going to fleece many teams for a bad player like we almost did to the Browns.
No team with OL to trade needs McCarron. Buffalo and Houston were the only known OL sellers and they have QBs who are both vastly better than AJM.
Getting high value picks for AJM is the best possible outcome. Stop thinking about it as players. Think about it as swapping a 5th for a 2nd and 3rd. Because that's what it is.
Oh and:
Carlos Dunlap
Jordan Shipley (not holding injuries against him)
Mohamed Sanu
Giovani Bernard
Somehow forgot Andy Dalton
Tyler Kroft looks to be a solid NFL player. Which after the first round, that's a win.
This team is only going to win if they build through the draft until Mike Brown dies.
So the best bet is to just get as many picks as possible at the lowest cost. Trading a bad player for picks is a good thing
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - rfaulk34 - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:17 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying. You're better than strawmen so I'm not sure why you're using one. I've already said I would've preferred picks over "nothing" (a compensatory pick). What I'm saying is that a 2nd and a 3rd isn't some magic elixir to turn this team around or get us winning playoff games.
Again...these picks have *maybe* a 50% chance of panning out and probably a 5% chance of netting us a star player. On top of these poor odds, we are notorious for letting young guys sit behind incumbent vets. So the current core of Green, Atkins, Dunlap, Dalton, etc probably will be nearing the end when and IF these picks start getting returns.
Plus these picks won't fix (a) Mike Brown or (b) Ivory Tickler's stunning inability to draft linemen of late.
Sorry for being so unenthused about our almost trade. I'm surprised so many still have so much faith in the draft to fix all of this franchise's woes even after all these years of proof that it doesn't.
I'm just going to repeat what i said in your rep.
Such an excellent ***** post!
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - RoyleRedlegs - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:17 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying. You're better than strawmen so I'm not sure why you're using one. I've already said I would've preferred picks over "nothing" (a compensatory pick). What I'm saying is that a 2nd and a 3rd isn't some magic elixir to turn this team around or get us winning playoff games.
Again...these picks have *maybe* a 50% chance of panning out and probably a 5% chance of netting us a star player. On top of these poor odds, we are notorious for letting young guys sit behind incumbent vets. So the current core of Green, Atkins, Dunlap, Dalton, etc probably will be nearing the end when and IF these picks start getting returns.
Plus these picks won't fix (a) Mike Brown or (b) Ivory Tickler's stunning inability to draft linemen of late.
Sorry for being so unenthused about our almost trade. I'm surprised so many still have so much faith in the draft to fix all of this franchise's woes even after all these years of proof that it doesn't.
You do understand AJM is bad right?
Getting ANY value out of that is incredible and the fact we almost got more for him than the Pats did for Jimmy G is a borderline miracle.
It wouldn't fix the franchise because Mike Brown wasn't in the deal but it's a hell of a lot better than nothing, which sorry, is what you're advocating for if this trade didn't seem "worth it" or whatever you are claiming
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - Devils Advocate - 10-31-2017
Now they’re saying Bengals sent in wrong document, signed only by them where they should’ve sent in document(s) signed by both teams.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - rfaulk34 - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:19 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Stop it.
This would have been a great and incredibly rare smart move.
You aren't going to fleece many teams for a bad player like we almost did to the Browns.
No team with OL to trade needs McCarron. Buffalo and Houston were the only known OL sellers and they have QBs who are both vastly better than AJM.
Getting high value picks for AJM is the best possible outcome. Stop thinking about it as players. Think about it as swapping a 5th for a 2nd and 3rd. Because that's what it is.
Oh and:
Carlos Dunlap
Jordan Shipley (not holding injuries against him)
Mohamed Sanu
Giovani Bernard
Tyler Kroft looks to be a solid NFL player. Which after the first round, that's a win.
This team is only going to win if they build through the draft until Mike Brown dies.
So the best bet is to just get as many picks as possible at the lowest cost. Trading a bad player for picks is a good thing
But again, you're arguing something i'm not. While i'm not sold on the pics helping the Bengals--due to their recent 2 and 3 picks...i think it's a half-assed attempt. Basically, it's "well, let's see what we can get for a guy who doesn't see playing time for us". That is a bullshit way to do things. They have real needs right now. I'd rather see them try and address that, and seen them move McCarron in the off season (last off season) when it makes more sense. I couldn't really care less about future guys. How many times have you seen this board littered with platitudes of new draft picks and how they're going to take the NFL by storm, only to be disappointed when they flop or just 'average' their way out of the league or to another team?
Bengals are an organization that lives on half measures.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - snowy - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:21 PM)Devils Advocate Wrote: Now they’re saying Bengals sent in wrong document, signed only by them where they should’ve sent in document(s) signed by both teams.
Browns gonna Brown. Bengals gonna Bungle. Plenty of blame to go around. Like it or not, McCarron (or any player) deserves better.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - Shake n Blake - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:21 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You do understand AJM is bad right?
Getting ANY value out of that is incredible and the fact we almost got more for him than the Pats did for Jimmy G is a borderline miracle.
It wouldn't fix the franchise because Mike Brown wasn't in the deal but it's a hell of a lot better than nothing, which sorry, is what you're advocating for if this trade didn't seem "worth it" or whatever you are claiming
It's a great return for Mac. That's not my argument. I'm just explaining why this trade falling through doesn't bother me much. I'm more upset about other things. Particularly that the FO sat on it's damn hands after the beating they just witnessed and with us still mathematically very much in the hunt.
I also know that this team needs to make many fundamental changes to how they operate if we're ever to become a real contender. Until then, a couple draft picks = "so what" to me.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - TKUHL - 10-31-2017
Unfnbelieveable! I know the Browns screwed up but shouldn't this fall on the shoulders of both parties. There's a freakin deadline involved, how can something like this even happen. It's not like we haven't screwed up a trade before. But hey we don't need a GM. Freakin joke of 2 franchises.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - Essex Johnson - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 08:55 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: How many of our 2nd and 3rd round players have become pro-bowlers? Seriously. List them all off and show me. This team isn't a couple Jeremy Hill's or Tyler Boyd's away...and those are some of our better picks. I have zero faith in Paul Alexander to pick a good lineman after his recent history.
i was responding to your post that stated they don;t play after they are drafted.. has nothing to do with what your post above....
I did not say they were drafted and have been all pros etc.. though most teams don;t have that many all pros in their draft picks anyway.. that is a bit extreme regardless to compare all early picks to all pros
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - bfine32 - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 08:55 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: How many of our 2nd and 3rd round players have become pro-bowlers? Seriously. List them all off and show me. This team isn't a couple Jeremy Hill's or Tyler Boyd's away...and those are some of our better picks. I have zero faith in Paul Alexander to pick a good lineman after his recent history.
Top of my head:
Chad Johnson
Andrew Whitworth
Boomer Esiason
Andy Dalton
Corey Dillon
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - Shake n Blake - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Top of my head:
Chad Johnson
Andrew Whitworth
Boomer Esiason
Andy Dalton
Corey Dillon
You're going back 20-30 years for some of those. How about a complete list of 2nd and 3rd rounders during the Marvin era? I never said we never draft a good player. I said the odds are slim.
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - MrRager - 10-31-2017
(10-31-2017, 09:27 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: But again, you're arguing something i'm not. While i'm not sold on the pics helping the Bengals--due to their recent 2 and 3 picks...i think it's a half-assed attempt. Basically, it's "well, let's see what we can get for a guy who doesn't see playing time for us". That is a bullshit way to do things. They have real needs right now. I'd rather see them try and address that, and seen them move McCarron in the off season (last off season) when it makes more sense. I couldn't really care less about future guys. How many times have you seen this board littered with platitudes of new draft picks and how they're going to take the NFL by storm, only to be disappointed when they flop or just 'average' their way out of the league or to another team?There is pretty much nothing they could do right now to help the team? Like basically nothing.
Bengals are an organization that lives on half measures.
A high second and third rounder would be huge for us. To act like it means nothing is just stupid.
Shake has been in other threads saying we need to draft oline with every pick next year, but now the draft is meaningless and we won't get any good players? An extra second might be a guard or center on top of a DT or something. Sure it might not pan out, but having those two extra high picks for essentially nothing would be great for helping us rebuild the lines.
But because they didn't get another shitty lineman you guys don't care. Come on, you're both way smarter than this. I get we're all annoyed with the FO for this off-season and the line play this far, but there is nothing to be done now and two high picks would have been huge to either trade up for an elite pass blocker or take another couple swings for a G/C
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - StLucieBengal - 10-31-2017
No way Mike Brown didn’t do this correctly.
Sashi and the baseball guy probably did mess it up while they were high giving
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - SHRacerX - 10-31-2017
I still think the Jets or Denver were better options, but regardless, we have a very good QB tandem.
Now, can we address the line?
Browns wanted McCarron and were close - ochocincos - 10-31-2017
If this is the fault of the Bengals, I hope they lose out until Mike Brown is no longer owner.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RE: Browns wanted McCarron and were close - StoneTheCrow - 10-31-2017
It’s like a Three Stooges episode. All parties involved dick everything up without fail. I bet somebody stepped in a mop bucket and busted their ass on the way to the fax machine at 3:59.