(03-15-2017, 10:54 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Where do you work where cashiers set set prices and make decisions on product selection? Where do stock boys make decisions on corporate expansion? Where do burger flippers determine the size of the work force and the wages they earn. Where do janitors design and implement marketing plans?
All you have proven by your comments is that you have have never had a real job.
I don't know what you're talking about. All you're proving in your comments is that you are out of touch with the working class. None of those people make decisions. But they all should be consulted. The burger boy knows how many burgers go out the place and how many employees it takes to get the job done (someone should ask them before they make a cut in burger boys. They don't they just make a cut and expect the burger boy to flip 3 times the number of burgers, get attacked for slow output). The stock boys know the workforce needed to stock shelves properly (someone should ask them before making decisions on corporate expansions). The cashiers get attacked over prices all the time. They are the front line (maybe their opinion on customer satisfaction should be taken into account). All you are doing is proving my point. The big wigs look at us as "burger flippers" and "stock boys". And wonder why morale is low.
Quote:"Success doesn’t mean every single move they make is good" ~ Anonymous "Let not the dumb have to educate" ~ jj22
(03-15-2017, 10:24 AM)BenZoo2 Wrote: I didn't take carlos' statement as ripping the organization. If you did that's your right, I suppose. And comparing sack ratios of a situational pass rusher to a full time player doesn't seem to jive. Let's see Clarke do it game in and game out, all game. Would eliminate the need for a high draft pick a pass rusher that could help fill the gaping holes on our o line
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dunlap's sack totals could be down due to bad players surrounding him.....you know, those "locker room guys" and players "familiar with the system", i.e. cheap. Good coaches scheme around good opponents if they can, and it's easy to do when other guys are not a real threat. If the shit show FO had signed just one or two impact FAs (like another pass rusher or backer) instead of the typical dumpster dive, this team may have made some noise by now. Apparently, we can't do this because our system must be so complex, that we can't sign anyone that has never been a part of it............until we do because they're 35+ and cheap.
(03-14-2017, 07:54 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I'm not a genius, or an expert at much of anything, but I can recognize the significance of some things when they happen. Now that Whit has left the team, Dunlap is not pretty much a senior leader on this team. One of the worst things that this team could do, in it's now fragile state, is to upset the veteran leadership that remains. If the Bengals organization loses the confidence of guys like Dunlap, Atkins, and AJ Green, they might as well cash it in, and move onto selling used cars.
(03-15-2017, 08:39 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Carlos does nnot see it because he has not seen who they are going to draft and sign in free agency.
And like all other good teams the bengals don't tell their players exactly who they are going to keep and/or releaase. that is because it is not the players job to be scouts and make front office decisions.
If the Bengals draft BPA then even they don't know who they will draft until they see who is available when they are on the clock.
Dunlap has observed what the Bengals have done in free agency so far this season and also every season since he joined the Bengals. Looking at the details of Whitworth's contract, the Bengals look pretty foolish not to have done that deal.
(03-15-2017, 11:12 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If the Bengals draft BPA then even they don't know who they will draft until they see who is available when they are on the clock.
Dunlap has observed what the Bengals have done in free agency so far this season and also every season since he joined the Bengals. Looking at the details of Whitworth's contract, the Bengals look pretty foolish not to have done that deal.
Really.....it's not that hard of a concept to grasp, unless one wants to be purposely obtuse. We've seen this show since FA was a thing. We all know what the Bungals FO is going to do.......unless someone slipped Mikey a Mickey.
(03-15-2017, 11:05 AM)Wyche Wrote: Dunlap's sack totals could be down due to bad players surrounding him.....you know, those "locker room guys" and players "familiar with the system", i.e. cheap. Good coaches scheme around good opponents if they can, and it's easy to do when other guys are not a real threat. If the shit show FO had signed just one or two impact FAs (like another pass rusher or backer) instead of the typical dumpster dive, this team may have made some noise by now. Apparently, we can't do this because our system must be so complex, that we can't sign anyone that has never been a part of it............until we do because they're 35+ and cheap.
Brilliant logic. Dunlaps sack totals went down from '15 to '16 because of all the different guys who were around in '15 but gone in '16 like, uh,....er.....
(03-15-2017, 11:12 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Looking at the details of Whitworth's contract, the Bengals look pretty foolish not to have done that deal.
No they don't.
If the Patriots had decided that a guy Whit's age was not worth $13 million guaranteed they would have been called brilliant. The only way you can say the decision was stupid is if you just automatically say any move is stupid if the Bengals do it.
(03-15-2017, 11:23 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No they don't.
If the Patriots had decided that a guy Whit's age was not worth $13 million guaranteed they would have been called brilliant. The only way you can say the decision was stupid is if you just automatically say any move is stupid if the Bengals do it.
The difference being the Patriots are winning Superbowls.
No comparison between these franchises until the Bengals prove they can at least win a damn playoff game.
(03-15-2017, 11:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Brilliant logic. Dunlaps sack totals went down from '15 to '16 because of all the different guys who were around in '15 but gone in '16 like, uh,....er.....
Can you help me out with the details here Wyche?
Your myopic views don't do you justice......PAST moves are biting this team in the ass NOW. But you are not ignorant, and you know what was meant in that post.....you're just here to stir up the pot.
(03-15-2017, 09:54 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You must not have much experience in "real life". In "real life" Upper management makes the decisions and they very rarely let the workers know what they are doing before they do it.
Same with football teams. Like I said before, if you ask any of the Patriot players what moves teh front office was going to make this offseason I bet every one of them wo9uld say that they do not know.
So the players can't possible know or criticize the plan if they don't know the specific players the Bengals are going to sign before free agency begins?
Because if that is the case, then it's impossible for the Bengals to know the plan, also.
(03-15-2017, 11:23 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No they don't.
If the Patriots had decided that a guy Whit's age was not worth $13 million guaranteed they would have been called brilliant. The only way you can say the decision was stupid is if you just automatically say any move is stupid if the Bengals do it.
The Bengals were willing to pay him $10 million for this season. The Rams pay him $166,667 dollars more than the Bengals did last season. If his level of play suddenly drops off a cliff they can cut him wit only $3.3 million in dead money which they could split to $1.67 million over two years.
So to not sign Whit because of a potential $3.3 million in dead money if Whit starts to suck and they release him when they were willing to pay $10 million for one season is stupid.
Anyone who isn't smart enough to recognize that is just defending everything the Bengals do or don't do because they defend everything the Bengals do or don't do.
(03-15-2017, 11:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Brilliant logic. Dunlaps sack totals went down from '15 to '16 because of all the different guys who were around in '15 but gone in '16 like, uh,....er.....
Can you help me out with the details here Wyche?
I would say Michael Johnson did not play well at all...Peko has been on the decline which is why I wasn't one complaining about that "loss". However, the biggest loss on the team from last year on the defensive side had to be Reggie Nelson. Better coverage in the secondary leads to more sacks up front. Pacman didn't play as well last year as the year before either so those things add up. It wasn't all from losses because a lot of it was decline in play (why some guys should be cut) but the losses always add up as well if you don't upgrade the talent.
This is getting silly. It is not Dunlap's role to see the plan of the organization. He is a 28 year old lineman whose role is to get after the QB and stop the run. It was a silly thing to say, and just because some folks point it out does not mean they are "attacking" Dunlap. The "attacking" should be reserved for the FA, coaches, and players that under-perform; amiright?
DO I think less of Dunlap for saying what he said? Hell know, as I do not find it that critical of his employer, but he is correct in identifying his role in the process.
As a manager I do not share higher's plan with all my employees; my job is to make them as successful as I can while also keeping the bosses happy with the bottom line. Given there are times when you would be a more popular manager if you shared every detail with your employees and I do as the situation allowed. WTS, guess what I would tell one of my employees if he or she came into my office and said they guess it's not their role to see the plan? Now if that same employee came into my office and told me he or she was unclear of the way forward, I would share all I know with them.
So if Carlos comes out and says he asked about the plan and was denied then I have issue.
Bravo to Carlos! He said what most of us have been saying. What is the real plan? How can the plan be to win when we keep letting players walk, replacing them with cheaper alternatives off the scrap heap, and just sitting on cap space instead of trying to win now. I'm sure he's not the only player who doesn't understand and is frustrated by how Mike does things.
This is definitely not a good look for the team. Not the Mike Brown cares. His bank account will continue to grow and that's the important part to him. Unfortunately, Dunlap may get labeled a malcontent, but who can blame him? Your career is only so long, your team was actually pretty close to contention, but the front office has done absolutely zero to try and get the team over the hump.
I read an article on CBS this morning that said the Bengals have not guaranteed an outside free agent more than $4.5m this decade. That contract happened to go to bringing Michael Johnson back. Mike Brown's thought process is obvious. If he can bring someone in on the cheap and not lose a comp pick, fine. The odds of these cheap pieces pushing this team to the top are very slim.
While the team says they do what the successful teams do, they come nowhere close. The similarities just about end with the fact they play in the same league.
(03-15-2017, 12:02 PM)JungleRock85 Wrote: I would say Michael Johnson did not play well at all...Peko has been on the decline which is why I wasn't one complaining about that "loss". However, the biggest loss on the team from last year on the defensive side had to be Reggie Nelson. Better coverage in the secondary leads to more sacks up front. Pacman didn't play as well last year as the year before either so those things add up. It wasn't all from losses because a lot of it was decline in play (why some guys should be cut) but the losses always add up as well if you don't upgrade the talent.
Right....it shouldn't have to be explained in watercolors and crayons.....as these discussions about these specific players vs upgrades over them have been discussed on these boards for the last several years ad nauseam.
I find it funny that a small handful of people quickly turn on a player when the player questions management. Whose side are we on? Has the management of this team provided reasons to have blind faith? Mike Brown certainly hasn't. Marv is a .500 coach with no playoff wins.
I'd argue that Carlos Dunlap has "done his job" better than any of the people running this franchise. I trust him, just as I trusted Palmer, Dillon, Pickens, Takeo, Chad, Boomer and every other player Mike Brown has pissed off. Open your eyes people. How many players need to get pissed before you realize something is wrong?
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
(03-15-2017, 12:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This is getting silly. It is not Dunlap's role to see the plan of the organization. He is a 28 year old lineman whose role is to get after the QB and stop the run. It was a silly thing to say, and just because some folks point it out does not mean they are "attacking" Dunlap. The "attacking" should be reserved for the FA, coaches, and players that under-perform; amiright?
DO I think less of Dunlap for saying what he said? Hell know, as I do not find it that critical of his employer, but he is correct in identifying his role in the process.
As a manager I do not share higher's plan with all my employees; my job is to make them as successful as I can while also keeping the bosses happy with the bottom line. Given there are times when you would be a more popular manager if you shared every detail with your employees and I do as the situation allowed. WTS, guess what I would tell one of my employees if he or she came into my office and said they guess it's not their role to see the plan? Now if that same employee came into my office and told me he or she was unclear of the way forward, I would share all I know with them.
So if Carlos comes out and says he asked about the plan and was denied then I have issue.
But that's where the similarity ends. Mike Brown is only concerned with the bottom line, and he's only been concerned about competing since the NFL told him he had to. So now he "competes," but doesn't care to win. Also, Dunlap is one of the key pieces on the team. If one of the key people in your business, one who is responsible for making you money, wasn't happy, you would hopefully try to fix that. Saying "Shut up and do your job," is not the answer. They would most likely leave.
(03-15-2017, 01:12 PM)BonnieBengal Wrote: But that's where the similarity ends. Mike Brown is only concerned with the bottom line, and he's only been concerned about competing since the NFL told him he had to. So now he "competes," but doesn't care to win. Also, Dunlap is one of the key pieces on the team. If one of the key people in your business, one who is responsible for making you money, wasn't happy, you would hopefully try to fix that. Saying "Shut up and do your job," is not the answer. They would most likely leave.
You have a good point here. We're not talking about average Joe at normal job. An NFL player of Dunlap's caliber will always be in high demand and he can take his services elsewhere if he wants. You can't just treat these players like replaceable peons. They can and will leave.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: fadQsr.png]](http://i.cubeupload.com/fadQsr.png)
![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png)
