+- 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: We could have kept Whit (/thread-11008.html)
We could have kept Whit - OrangeLacroix - 04-28-2017
If they jettisoned Pac Man and LaFell.
LeFell is 4.5 Mill/year Pac Man is like 8 Mill
They could have just put that money towards OL, knowing they were targeting a WR in round 1.
Boyd, AJ, Core, Draftee (Ross).
CB's: Kirk, Jackson, Dennard, Shaw, Draftee
OL: + Whit
I guess I am confused why they signed LaFell
RE: We could have kept Whit - ochocincos - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 12:51 PM)OrangeLacroix Wrote: If they jettisoned Pac Man and LaFell.
LeFell is 4.5 Mill/year Pac Man is like 8 Mill
They could have just put that money towards OL, knowing they were targeting a WR in round 1.
Boyd, AJ, Core, Draftee (Ross).
CB's: Kirk, Jackson, Dennard, Shaw, Draftee
OL: + Whit
I guess I am confused why they signed LaFell
Because FA happens before the draft and you never know if a prospect will be available when you draft.
RE: We could have kept Whit - Sabretooth - 04-28-2017
OP, what if Whit wanted to leave ?
No playoff wins, O line deteriorating,possible decreased playing time here,short term contract offered, change of scenery.
RE: We could have kept Whit - The Real Deal - 04-28-2017
You're still thinking about an old tackle that is inevitably going to fall off production-wise, and soon? Who cares, he's gone. Set him free.
RE: We could have kept Whit - THE PISTONS - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 12:51 PM)OrangeLacroix Wrote: If they jettisoned Pac Man and LaFell.
LeFell is 4.5 Mill/year Pac Man is like 8 Mill
They could have just put that money towards OL, knowing they were targeting a WR in round 1.
Boyd, AJ, Core, Draftee (Ross).
CB's: Kirk, Jackson, Dennard, Shaw, Draftee
OL: + Whit
I guess I am confused why they signed LaFell
Ross likely isn't a replacement for Lafell. He's likely a #3 this year. At 5 foot 10...he's more slot receiver than #2.
That said...receivers get injured all the time. It's a big position that you need depth at.
RE: We could have kept Whit - J24 - 04-28-2017
Yep but you know pacman has kids so can't get rid of him.
RE: We could have kept Whit - THE PISTONS - 04-28-2017
We kinda do still need Pacman.
Kirkpatrick is one starter.
Then Jackson, Dennard, or Shaw on the other side? None are really proven.
Jones is proven.
RE: We could have kept Whit - J24 - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:06 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We kinda do still need Pacman.
Kirkpatrick is one starter.
Then Jackson, Dennard, or Shaw on the other side? None are really proven.
Jones is proven.
Because Og and Fisher are proven? Whit is more important who are you trying to fool?
RE: We could have kept Whit - The Real Deal - 04-28-2017
The people complaining about the team moving on from whit are the same people that say that mike brown and Co. are too loyal. They made a move to get younger, a move that they felt was best for the future of this team. Some will just never be satisfied no matter what. It's always something with you people.
RE: We could have kept Whit - THE PISTONS - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:17 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: The people complaining about the team moving on from whit are the same people that say that mike brown and Co. are too loyal. They made a move to get younger, a move that they felt was best for the future of this team. Some will just never be satisfied no matter what. It's always something with you people.
That's not quite accurate. The Bengals WANTED to keep Whitworth. It's not like they just let him go to get younger.
They were apparently walking around the NFL Combine telling teams it was a done deal that Whitworth was coming back. Then...the Rams offered him a huge contract and he left.
RE: We could have kept Whit - J24 - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:17 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: The people complaining about the team moving on from whit are the same people that say that mike brown and Co. are too loyal. They made a move to get younger, a move that they felt was best for the future of this team. Some will just never be satisfied no matter what. It's always something with you people.
No people were upset because we let the best left tackle in the game and replaced him with the worst Right tackle in the game. Its ok keep falling for the Mike Brown propaganda machine.
RE: We could have kept Whit - Murdock2420 - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:17 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: The people complaining about the team moving on from whit are the same people that say that mike brown and Co. are too loyal. They made a move to get younger, a move that they felt was best for the future of this team. Some will just never be satisfied no matter what. It's always something with you people.
Loyal to guys who they shouldn't be such as Pacman who has had way too many chances.
Meanwhile, Whit hasn't seen his play decline and has never had an off-field issue.
That is the complaint by many about "loyalty" They keep an aging CB who is starting to decline and will be suspended by the league again and is just a giant black eye for the team, but they cut lose a guy who was a true leader, and was exactly what you want the face of the franchise to be.
RE: We could have kept Whit - The Real Deal - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:31 PM)J24 Wrote: No people were upset because we let the best left tackle in the game and replaced him with the worst Right tackle in the game. Its ok keep falling for the Mike Brown propaganda machine.
I'm not falling for anything. If we re-signed whit for way too much (because the contract he got at his age was stupid)and he suffers his inevitable drop off this year or next, what tune are you singing? Because then I'm guessing the "bengals are too loyal to their own crowd" which just so happens to also be the "always complaining crowd" will start popping off at the mouth. And I bet you'd be first in line.
RE: We could have kept Whit - OrangeLacroix - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:17 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: The people complaining about the team moving on from whit are the same people that say that mike brown and Co. are too loyal. They made a move to get younger, a move that they felt was best for the future of this team. Some will just never be satisfied no matter what. It's always something with you people.
I'm saying they should have let Jones and LaFell go.
How is that loyal?
Whit was good. Who cares about his age. You love Mike Brown, lol
RE: We could have kept Whit - The Real Deal - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:38 PM)OrangeLacroix Wrote: I'm saying they should have let Jones and LaFell go.
How is that loyal?
Whit was good. Who cares about his age. You love Mike Brown, lol
Whit was slowly declining and the organization knew it. It is only going to speed up as he continues to get older. So who cares if, as your thread title says, "we could have kept Whit". He was overpayed by the rams and it will show sooner rather than later.
RE: We could have kept Whit - BengalChris - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 01:22 PM)Sabretooth Wrote: OP, what if Whit wanted to leave ?
No playoff wins, O line deteriorating,possible decreased playing time here,short term contract offered, change of scenery.
You left out getting away from notorious low baller Mike Brown, who believes an unproven draft pick (and even a proven failed draft pick) is better than a proven vet in his aging years.
RE: We could have kept Whit - eoxyod - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:06 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We kinda do still need Pacman.
Kirkpatrick is one starter.
Then Jackson, Dennard, or Shaw on the other side? None are really proven.
Jones is proven.
The fear of the unknown is what leads to failure. Players can't prove themselves until they play
RE: We could have kept Whit - OrangeLacroix - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 02:52 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: Whit was slowly declining and the organization knew it. It is only going to speed up as he continues to get older. So who cares if, as your thread title says, "we could have kept Whit". He was overpayed by the rams and it will show sooner rather than later.
He was graded the 5th best OL in th NFL last year. Far ahead of Joe Thomas and even Tyron Smith
If he declines, he can be released.
Whit has two more plus years in his tank, and would be well worth the 12 million per year compared to PAC Man and LaFell.
I guess you enjoy being a laughingstock organization. PAC Mans production dropped precipitously, yet you have no problem confining to pay for him.
RE: We could have kept Whit - The Real Deal - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 03:16 PM)OrangeLacroix Wrote: He was graded the 5th best tackle in th NFL last year. Far ahead of Joe Thomas and even Tyron Smith
If he declines, he can be released.
Whit has two more plus years in his tank, and would be well worth the 12 million per year compared to PAC Man and LaFell.
I guess you enjoy being a laughingstock organization. PAC Mans production dropped precipitously, yet you have no problem confining to pay for him.
Do you ever almost forget to switch between your alts and almost post something as the wrong one?
RE: We could have kept Whit - OrangeLacroix - 04-28-2017
(04-28-2017, 03:19 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: Do you ever almost forget to switch between your alts and almost post something as the wrong one?
No idea what your talking about.
But I guess when you are made to look foolish, accusing a poster of having multiple accounts is a safe play for you.
I noticed you won't discuss the football aspect of this anymore.
Gottcha.