(05-05-2021, 07:48 PM)t3r3e3 Wrote: Tate is a replacement level NFL WR. Keeping scrubs like Tate and Ericson does not improve the team. They offer zero upside.

(05-05-2021, 07:47 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: You forget about this?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/auden-tates-agent-is-unhappy-and-could-seek-a-trade/ar-BB19bvz4

Dude might get passed over with Chase being drafted, Thomas still retained, he ain't a KR/PR, new rooks/FAs getting looks.

Tate could be WR 4 but not a total lock.

(05-05-2021, 08:19 PM)SadFaceBengal15 Wrote: Yes I did forget.... that’s from week two last year lol smh

(05-02-2021, 10:36 AM)fredtoast Wrote: -Going into free agency I predicted that we would sign at least one mid-tier WR with some proven production in the NFL.  Top level WRs get a lot of money, but there are always decent veterans available for a reasonable price.

-Going into the draft I predicted that we would select multiple WRs with at least one in the top 3 rounds.

-In Bengals offense the #3 WR is basically a starter and we often run 4 WR sets.

So I still see a big hole in our offense at the #4 WR position.  Are there any decent free agents still out there? Are there any likely to be released post draft?  I wouldn't count on an UDFA to contribute this year, but are there any decent ones out there we could sign for depth?

(05-02-2021, 11:24 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 1. Riley Lees

2. Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish, feed him for a lifetime..

(05-05-2021, 08:29 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: 2020  Stats Auden Tate  Cincinnati Bengals



9 Games

14 Receptions

150  Yards

10.7  Average

19  Long

0   TD


U right.  It's boredom.  I'm gonna just file this under WGAF

(05-02-2021, 11:42 AM)Spider Wrote: I think if coached up on route running Auden Tate can surely become more reliable..I think plenty of teams would love to have Auden Tate as possibly their #4 wide out...His height is a huge advantage...Not sure how football smart he is though

(05-02-2021, 04:42 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: He has 1 career TD in 3 years...

I like Tate well enough (and I’ve even defended him a lot here), but he just never became the red zone weapon I hoped he’d be.

(05-04-2021, 10:50 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I haven't forgotten about Tate's stat line of 2019, it just wasn't impressive, TBH.
Tate only put up 40 receptions on 80 targets that year when he played 647 offensive snaps, the second-most snaps among WRs.
He did just about the same as Alex Erickson, who put up 43 receptions for 529 yards on 615 offensive snaps that year.
The difference is Erickson had added value as a returner.

(05-05-2021, 10:01 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Hard to be a red zone weapon when you get a total of 4 targets inside the 20 and zero inside the 10. 

(05-05-2021, 08:17 PM)SadFaceBengal15 Wrote: I’m sorry to put Erickson and Tate in the same sentence tells me ur medication don’t work.  My lord people.  If u think Tate is gonna get the same interest as Erickson u should not b near a football team.

(05-04-2021, 11:53 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Well, given that was essentially his rookie season from a playing time standpoint, he at least showed some improvement in his limited opportunities in 2020.  22 targets and 14 receptions.  Including a perfect 7 targets and 7 receptions at Tennessee for 65 yards.  Plus, he is a very solid blocker as a WR.  Erickson was in his fourth year as well, as opposed to the second year for Tate, and his first year of seeing some real playing time.

I am not saying I want Tate on the field over Boyd, but when Boyd needs a spell or when they go 4 wide, I like Tate a lot better than Mike Thomas.  

(05-02-2021, 10:36 AM)fredtoast Wrote:  I wouldn't count on an UDFA to contribute this year, but are there any decent ones out there we could sign for depth?