Trey Hendrickson Update

[SunsetBengal]

(Yesterday, 07:48 PM)ERIC1 Wrote: Quit  obsfucating sunset..stick to the issue.. my golf game  is terrible always has been but I enjoy the friends and booze. And driving those lil carts...

Wow, I'm seeing a whole new issue that the board should be addressing. It would appear that you're a drunken hack at Golf and enjoy endangering other peoples lives while driving Golf carts while drunk.

[Luvnit2]

(Yesterday, 08:06 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wow, I'm seeing a whole new issue that the board should be addressing. It would appear that you're a drunken hack at Golf and enjoy endangering other peoples lives while driving Golf carts while drunk.

A hack can be many things, but most don't hit the ball hard enough to injure anyone, I know personally. As for the cart, he probably has DGC driver for safety. 

[*Synric*]

(Yesterday, 07:34 PM)Nepa Wrote: True, according to this chart (if it is accurate) that shows only 9 teams (and most strongly for the Steelers) spend more on their defensive units than their offensive units. 

The Rams are even worse than the Bengals, but the Bengals are lopsided in this regard.

https://overthecap.com/positional-spending

QB position and skew the numbers when breaking down Offensive/Defensive Cap splits. Ravens are a good example.

[SunsetBengal]

(Yesterday, 08:09 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: A hack can be many things, but most don't hit the ball hard enough to injure anyone, I know personally.As for the cart, he probably has DGC d river for safety. 

He specifically said that he enjoys driving the cart.

[ERIC1]

(Yesterday, 08:09 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: A hack can be many things, but most don't hit the ball hard enough to injure anyone, I know personally. As for the cart, he probably has DGC driver for safety. 

Hyde Park Country Club has strict rules...but a few years back we got thrown out and they syspended our membership for thirty days..our wives were none too happy and we now are angels...Sadly..Sunset has been placed on my ignore list along with three others...rather disappointing..I liked the guy...life goes on

[*rfaulk34*]

(Yesterday, 06:20 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why did you only post 4 Bengals and then go for 7 to 13 for other teams. I get where you are going, but I dont agree to discount how we give a lot to Burrow and that is a bad thing.

4 players = 400+ million for Bengals

Then the next 6 guys average around 12 million (and Trey is excluded and he was over 40 million when he signed in 2023 the extension) so minimum of 475 million in our top 10 as well which puts us close or above others you mentioned.

 I just don't see we are much lower in guarantees when all of them are counted like was said earlier by another poster that we were the worst. Not even close to being the worst.

I would argue some teams you listed are very poor managing money as well like the Dolphins who zilch to show for that huge spend in guarantees. Simply, it is one piece of the puzzle. I believe in effeciency. One issue we have is our drafts have been poor, this has caused us effeciency in every way.

Check the post holmes. That is the top 300 players, with the highest amount of guaranteed money. Across the board. There were only 4 Bengals in the top 300 while the other teams had more. 

I'm not sure why you keep thinking i'm trying to skewer stats. I'm about as honest a person as you will find, so when i post something, there's zero chance that it's meant to mislead or deceive. 

The point of this exercise was to show different teams and how many of their players were in the top 300 of guaranteed money and how much it was. It would be nice if it was sortable by team or by team totals, so that we could see where the Bengals rank overall for all guaranteed money but i don't know that it does that. I counted each team manually going through the top 300 each time. 

It can be sorted manually any way you want. I just chose to only look at the top 300, and for the teams i chose. The link will allow you to go there and do any type of research you choose. 

I don't disagree that some teams spend poorly. I'm just pointing out that when it comes to guaranteed money, the Bengals don't like to do it, whereas a lot of the other "top teams"--teams that want to compete for a SB, do it because they feel it's necessary to field a competetive team. 

[Joelist]

(Yesterday, 06:31 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cash/_/year/2023
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cash/_/year/2024
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cash/_/year/2025

The Bengals in 2023 were 12th in cash spend, in 2024 were 13th and this far in 2025 are 23rd with Trey extension and 1st and 2nd round picks not signed yet). They will leap Baltimore if they sign Stewart and will jump others if they extend Trey.

Average out and the Bengals are 16th worst case scenario or middle of the NFL, far from cheap as some claim. 16th is technically top 50% in the league.

The problem with those cash figures is they do not include the guarantee. Remember that whether it is into escrow or paid to the player as bonus the entire guarantee is paid in cash at signing. So...

Chase - 112 million guarantee (and thus 112 million in cash paid)
Tee - 40.9 million guarantee (and thus 40.9 million in cash paid)

Just on these two that cash number is low by almost 70 million. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(Yesterday, 06:34 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because the Bengals are disproportionally distributing the money. Spending all of that money on offensive weapons leaves nothing left to build a strong defense and OL from. As rfaulk illustrated, that number should be closer to $500M, spread evenly over the various position groups.

Yep. I did this at work and as i went, i jotted down the player, their place on the list and their guarantee. I wish i had emailed that to myself so i could list it here--i was going to do that then--but it got too late in the day and i had to go. Maybe, if it's still topical, i'll post each teams list of players. 

[*rfaulk34*]

Dorkball gives an opinion that there's nothing disproportionate, except that every player on the Bengals list is on offense. 

Yep, i'm def going to post the complete list i made and then someone can show him how wrong he is AGAIN. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(Yesterday, 07:22 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Do you have any stats to back that up, or are you just making shit up again?

I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION!! 

PICK ME, PICK ME!

[*rfaulk34*]

(Yesterday, 08:06 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wow, I'm seeing a whole new issue that the board should be addressing. It would appear that you're a drunken hack at Golf and enjoy endangering other peoples lives while driving Golf carts while drunk.

My opinion is, i see a lot of truth in this statement and my opinion is all that matters. 

You're welcome.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(Yesterday, 08:19 PM)ERIC1 Wrote: Hyde Park Country Club has strict rules...but a few years back we got thrown out and they syspended our membership for thirty days..our wives were none too happy and we now are angels...Sadly..Sunset has been placed on my ignore list along with three others...rather disappointing..I liked the guy...life goes on

Man, if you placed Sunset one of our most respectful posters on your ignore list you just don't want to hear any truth at all or you are just drunk
as he said driving around on golf carts endangering lives drinking shitty bourbon. Put me on you ignore list as well lol

[*rfaulk34*]

(Yesterday, 09:50 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Man, if you placed Sunset one of our most respectful posters on your ignore list you just don't want to hear any truth at all or you are just drunk
as he said driving around on golf carts endangering lives drinking shitty bourbon. Put me on you ignore list as well lol

Trust me. If you have half a brain, his ignore list is where you WANT to be. Absolutely nothing of value comes from him. 

[Luvnit2]

(Yesterday, 09:07 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Check the post holmes. That is the top 300 players, with the highest amount of guaranteed money. Across the board. There were only 4 Bengals in the top 300 while the other teams had more. 

I'm not sure why you keep thinking i'm trying to skewer stats. I'm about as honest a person as you will find, so when i post something, there's zero chance that it's meant to mislead or deceive. 

The point of this exercise was to show different teams and how many of their players were in the top 300 of guaranteed money and how much it was. It would be nice if it was sortable by team or by team totals, so that we could see where the Bengals rank overall for all guaranteed money but i don't know that it does that. I counted each team manually going through the top 300 each time. 

It can be sorted manually any way you want. I just chose to only look at the top 300, and for the teams i chose. The link will allow you to go there and do any type of research you choose. 

I don't disagree that some teams spend poorly. I'm just pointing out that when it comes to guaranteed money, the Bengals don't like to do it, whereas a lot of the other "top teams"--teams that want to compete for a SB, do it because they feel it's necessary to field a competetive team. 

My apologies. It was not my intent, but it looked like it was since I lterally used the word. Can I get a mulligan from Drunk Eric or am I also one of the 3 he has on ignore.

To your point, yes our top 3 players with 2 being highest contracts when they signed them for dollars and guarantees play offense. As I said to Sunset, only way to get around it was to not sign Tee long term and use money on Trey, they chose not to do it.

[sandwedge]

(Yesterday, 08:11 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: He specifically said that he enjoys driving the cart.

Jesus, take the wheel...

[*rfaulk34*]

So this doesn't really prove anything but i couldn't stop wondering, so i went back to the list and looked at it team by team to see how many total players had guaranteed money written into their contract. 

The Bengals have a total of 63 players with guaranteed money. 
There were 3 other teams that had 63 players; Bears, Raiders, Buccaneers
There was 1 team that had 62 players; Packers
There were 2 teams that had 61 players; Browns, Titans

As i said, this doesn't really prove anything, just goes to my point that if we're talking about payouts, (seemingly) regardless of what type of payout that is, the Bengals are going to be at or near the bottom of every one of those lists. They're not at the bottom of this list, as there are 6 other eams with the same or less players due guaranteed money...but...they're still near the bottom. 

It is only fair to point out that the majority of teams had a number in the 60s, with a few hitting 70+. Jax actually had 81, which is the most in the league.

[Luvnit2]

(5 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: So this doesn't really prove anything but i couldn't stop wondering, so i went back to the list and looked at it team by team to see how many total players had guaranteed money written into their contract. 

The Bengals have a total of 63 players with guaranteed money. 
There were 3 other teams that had 63 players; Bears, Raiders, Buccaneers
There was 1 team that had 62 players; Packers
There were 2 teams that had 61 players; Browns, Titans

As i said, this doesn't really prove anything, just goes to my point that if we're talking about payouts, (seemingly) regardless of what type of payout that is, the Bengals are going to be at or near the bottom of every one of those lists. They're not at the bottom of this list, as there are 6 other eams with the same or less players due guaranteed money...but...they're still near the bottom. 

It is only fair to point out that the majority of teams had a number in the 60s, with a few hitting 70+. Jax actually had 81, which is the most in the league.

Arguably our best defensive player is on year 3 of his deal. He has zero guaranteed money in 2025. Wouldn;t that impact these numbers if we have signed players to shorter term contracts so their guaranteed portion is at the end or gone versus new contracts signed that have the max guarantees still? Burrow is down the road on his deal for example, his guarantee today is a lot less than when he signed the deal.

I am not questioning your numbers, thanks for doing it, just having a converation on how to analyze it all.

[*rfaulk34*]

(4 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: Arguably our best defensive player is on year 3 of his deal. He has zero guaranteed money in 2025. Wouldn;t that impact these numbers if we have signed players to shorter term contracts so their guaranteed portion is at the end or gone versus new contracts signed that have the max guarantees still? Burrow is down the road on his deal for example, his guarantee today is a lot less than when he signed the deal.

I am not questioning your numbers, thanks for doing it, just having a converation on how to analyze it all.

I would think an issue like that wouldn't be any different from team to team, depending on when a contract was signed or when it was ending. 

The reality is, completely taking any kind of vitriol or malice out, the Bengals have a long, long, long history of being difficult when it comes to paying out money, whether it's simply getting a contract signed, or whether it's the specifics of a contract; from Paul Brown to now, they've always come to the table ready to fight for every penny. It's been documented by many players and free agents of the past. Then there's the issues of Spinney Field, small towels, community jock straps, gatorade gate, etc. 

They're simply not competetive when it comes to changing landscape and that goes for things like player amenities and facilities too, until long after other teams have been doing them. I've given credit and will again, when they "get with the times" and do things like gettng Burrow under contract relatively easily and for signing Ja'marr and Tee, getting a RoH, upgrading the stadium and facilities (practice bubble). The problem is, the way they drag their feet and always end up doing the current status quo, way later than everyone else and they still, constantly, have issues with getting players signed and using the cap to their advantage--like how they could have done Ja'marr and Tee differently. 

They still, desperately, hold on to the way things were done in the 'good ole days' of Paul Brown and that just doesn't work today. It frustrates me to no end how they could have done things differently, in a way that would allow them to retain lost players, sign current players easier and not cut corners like they do with the Oline and could have ended up with a couple teams that might have just won a SB already. 

[*Nately120*]

(Yesterday, 01:00 PM)ERIC1 Wrote: Trey played last year.,defense stunk

I shouldn't have to explain to a Bengals fan that things can always stink worse. 

[*jason*]

(4 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: I would think an issue like that wouldn't be any different from team to team, depending on when a contract was signed or when it was ending. 

The reality is, completely taking any kind of vitriol or malice out, the Bengals have a long, long, long history of being difficult when it comes to paying out money, whether it's simply getting a contract signed, or whether it's the specifics of a contract; from Paul Brown to now, they've always come to the table ready to fight for every penny. It's been documented by many players and free agents of the past. Then there's the issues of Spinney Field, small towels, community jock straps, gatorade gate, etc. 

They're simply not competetive when it comes to changing landscape and that goes for things like player amenities and facilities too, until long after other teams have been doing them. I've given credit and will again, when they "get with the times" and do things like gettng Burrow under contract relatively easily and for signing Ja'marr and Tee, getting a RoH, upgrading the stadium and facilities (practice bubble). The problem is, the way they drag their feet and always end up doing the current status quo, way later than everyone else and they still, constantly, have issues with getting players signed and using the cap to their advantage--like how they could have done Ja'marr and Tee differently. 

They still, desperately, hold on to the way things were done in the 'good ole days' of Paul Brown and that just doesn't work today. It frustrates me to no end how they could have done things differently, in a way that would allow them to retain lost players, sign current players easier and not cut corners like they do with the Oline and could have ended up with a couple teams that might have just won a SB already. 

I feel like Tee could've been re-signed in after the 22 season (for much less) AND there's no reason they couldn't have kept Bates on top of it. Yeah Tee and Ja'Marr are done, but it cost more than it should've.