Posts: 1,390
Threads: 138
Reputation:
2331
Joined: May 2015
I think we should ABSOLUTELY go after Wisniewski! He would immediately upgrade the o-line and we would potentially not have anymore weaknesses on the line. According to BleacherReport, he shouldn't command more than $3m/yr so that is absolutely a good deal for us considering how average Bodine has been.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2616813-2016-nfl-free-agency-best-potential-bargain-at-every-offensive-position/page/9
Thoughts?
Former Contributor for StripeHype
Posts: 657
Threads: 20
Reputation:
933
Joined: May 2015
I'm not sure why people actually think the Bengals will replace Bodine. Nothing at all in their history of handling personnel says there is even a remote chance.
Bodine is in the category of Mike Nugent and Brandon Tate. He's going to be around for a long time and maligned every season regardless.
Posts: 1,390
Threads: 138
Reputation:
2331
Joined: May 2015
(02-16-2016, 12:04 PM)ItsOdellThurman Wrote: I'm not sure why people actually think the Bengals will replace Bodine. Nothing at all in their history of handling personnel says there is even a remote chance.
Bodine is in the category of Mike Nugent and Brandon Tate. He's going to be around for a long time and maligned every season regardless.
I hope this isn't true, considering how the center position is one of few weaknesses on the offensive side of the ball.
Former Contributor for StripeHype
Posts: 657
Threads: 20
Reputation:
933
Joined: May 2015
All I'm saying is we've kept the same shitty placekicker since 2010 and the same shitty kick returner since 2011. There aren't even flashes of greatness, or even above-average performance from either spot and neither guy offers any possible upside.
Posts: 505
Threads: 24
Reputation:
1013
Joined: May 2015
While I think Bodine needs to play better, I'm all for upgrading the one weakness on the oline, but know the bengals they will not address this at all.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(02-16-2016, 12:04 PM)ItsOdellThurman Wrote: I'm not sure why people actually think the Bengals will replace Bodine. Nothing at all in their history of handling personnel says there is even a remote chance.
Bodine is in the category of Mike Nugent and Brandon Tate. He's going to be around for a long time and maligned every season regardless.
(02-16-2016, 02:38 PM)Crowe Wrote: While I think Bodine needs to play better, I'm all for upgrading the one weakness on the oline, but know the bengals they will not address this at all.
Ghiacuic only lasted two years as a full time starter and Cooke only lasted 2 years after he got injured.
Bodine will probably get another year, but I would not be surprised if we drafted a possible replacement this year.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(02-16-2016, 12:10 PM)ItsOdellThurman Wrote: All I'm saying is we've kept the same shitty placekicker since 2010 and the same shitty kick returner since 2011. There aren't even flashes of greatness, or even above-average performance from either spot and neither guy offers any possible upside.
Tate has not been shitty. Most years he was above average, and he made some big returns that won games for us.
Not saying he isgreat at all, but he has been far from shitty.
Posts: 1,163
Threads: 13
Reputation:
2728
Joined: May 2015
Location: Essos
(02-16-2016, 03:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Tate has not been shitty. Most years he was above average, and he made some big returns that won games for us.
Not saying he isgreat at all, but he has been far from shitty.
So, lets get this straight:
We know he brings virtually no value as a receiver, maybe good for a play a year.
We know he is consistently average as a returner, who is hardly a threat to take it the distance.
The only valuable asset the man brings is... I guess he doesn't fumble returns.
Certainly we shouldn't reward this insane level of mediocrity by bringing him back, am I right?
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(02-16-2016, 03:10 PM)Stormborn Wrote: So, lets get this straight:
We know he brings virtually no value as a receiver, maybe good for a play a year.
We know he is consistently average as a returner, who is hardly a threat to take it the distance.
The only valuable asset the man brings is... I guess he doesn't fumble returns.
Certainly we shouldn't reward this insane level of mediocrity by bringing him back, am I right?
He has consistently been above average as a kick returner for most of his career here.He is better than most return men in the league. I don't see how that is an "insane level of mediocrity". Half of the players in the league are below average. It is not that easy to replace a guy who is above average at all. If it was then every team n the league would have had a return man better than Tate.
Posts: 13,473
Threads: 504
Joined: May 2015
Location: South Florida
We still have to pay Zeitler. So who will be be cheap guy on the line? You can't have 5 money makers. Yes maybe we get away for a couple of years since Cedric is on his rookie deal.
Posts: 5,548
Threads: 199
Reputation:
25210
Joined: May 2015
Location: Boise, ID
Depends what you want a returner for. What kind of game you play.
Marvin Lewis plays field position. The thought of a special teams gaff probably gives him fits. So he sees B. Tate as valuable. He rarely goes backwards.. gets you 5-10% of the field in yardage, and doesn't turn it over.
Pete Carroll on the other hand wants excitement. He understands the effect momentum and splash plays can make on the game. He drafts a guy like Lockette because he provides that for their team when its needed. He has been great for them.
Bruce Arians put Patrick Peterson back to return punts to get that excitement and he cost them the game by fumbling it away.
There are pros and cons to both strategies.... We have less muffed punts than most teams in the league I believe. Our special teams is VERY consistent, which is a good thing, but they aren't very exciting. Pacman brought that, but he couldn't do it last year... hopefully we draft a new corner and he can delegate some of his time back to returning.
Posts: 3,742
Threads: 44
Reputation:
13919
Joined: May 2015
Location: Ohio, but with hookers and blackjack
Peterson gave them the best shot at a big return, not just excitement.
Same with Lockett
Same thing we do with Pacman....we put Pacman back there when we need a spark because Tate is anything but
Posts: 13,473
Threads: 504
Joined: May 2015
Location: South Florida
(02-16-2016, 04:12 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Peterson gave them the best shot at a big return, not just excitement.
Same with Lockett
Same thing we do with Pacman....we put Pacman back there when we need a spark because Tate is anything but
Every returner we have had on the marvin era have been safe and smart always make the catch guys. The only exciting returners I can remember are Pdub and Pacman. Obviously simmons values consistent and smart play at that position.
Posts: 3,742
Threads: 44
Reputation:
13919
Joined: May 2015
Location: Ohio, but with hookers and blackjack
(02-16-2016, 04:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Every returner we have had on the marvin era have been safe and smart always make the catch guys. The only exciting returners I can remember are Pdub and Pacman. Obviously simmons values consistent and smart play at that position.
Do we actually know that?
When have we ever given Simmons a chance to have another option? The few times we allow Pac to return?
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(02-16-2016, 05:07 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Do we actually know that?
When have we ever given Simmons a chance to have another option? The few times we allow Pac to return?
I am pretty sure that Marvin would love to have a returner like Pac that he could put back there every time.
But they are just not that easy to find.
Posts: 5,609
Threads: 36
Reputation:
36341
Joined: May 2015
Location: Vancouver, WA
(02-16-2016, 04:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Every returner we have had on the marvin era have been safe and smart always make the catch guys. The only exciting returners I can remember are Pdub and Pacman. Obviously simmons values consistent and smart play at that position.
We almost had one 2006. Our 2nd round pick was between Whitworth and Devin Hester. We chose Whit because we had a 1st round grade on him and Marvin didn't think he could find an offensive/defensive position for Hester.
You can always trust an dishonest man to be dishonest. Honestly, it's the honest ones you have to look out for.
"Winning makes believers of us all"-Paul Brown
Posts: 3,742
Threads: 44
Reputation:
13919
Joined: May 2015
Location: Ohio, but with hookers and blackjack
(02-16-2016, 05:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am pretty sure that Marvin would love to have a returner like Pac that he could put back there every time.
But they are just not that easy to find.
You actually have to look to find them.
We don't look.
Tyler Lockett was right there to take. Plain as day he was an impact return guy.
NFL Punt returners by average:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/returning/sort/yardsPerPuntReturn
Tate is 22 of 24.
Yawn.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(02-16-2016, 05:59 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You actually have to look to find them.
We don't look.
Tyler Lockett was right there to take. Plain as day he was an impact return guy.
NFL Punt returners by average:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/returning/sort/yardsPerPuntReturn
Tate is 22 of 24.
Yawn.
We would have had to take him a full half round earlier than he was ranked. Hindsight is always 20/20 but clearly at least half of the teams in the league felt he was not worth the 53rd pick.
Posts: 3,742
Threads: 44
Reputation:
13919
Joined: May 2015
Location: Ohio, but with hookers and blackjack
(02-16-2016, 06:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: We would have had to take him a full half round earlier than he was ranked. Hindsight is always 20/20 but clearly at least half of the teams in the league felt he was not worth the 53rd pick.
You know, novel idea here....trade up for him.
Fewer than 20 spots in the third round.
Wouldn't be too hard.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(02-16-2016, 06:05 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You know, novel idea here....trade up for him.
Fewer than 20 spots in the third round.
Wouldn't be too hard.
It takes two teams to trade. It is not always possible to trade up to get a guy. The Bengals might have tried. We just don't know.
I actually like Lockets potential a lot. But obviously most other NFL teams did not have him ranked that highly. He went at 69, and no other team traded up to get him.
|
