Whitworth-Bengals lowballed

[3wt]

(12-04-2018, 05:56 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Which is why I think the Rams were very smart with how they structured the deal. They minimized their own risk, and are now reaping the benefits. Apparently the other deals he was offered were very similar...except for the one from the Bengals.

Which begs the question: why couldn't the Bengals figure this out?

They seem to treat their players like morons.  They disrespect them with their offers and wonder why they want to play somewhere else.  There's no sense of the Bengals figuring out how to meet the players' needs in a way that's mutually beneficial.  They expect the players to fall into line.

They're old school, "Don't let the inmates run the asylum".

But this is a business where you need to figure out what your employees need in order for you to put a product together to please your customer.  In a real sense your employees have become a customer themselves. 

[Whatever]

(12-04-2018, 05:48 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Not defending the Bengals by any means...but it's virtually unprecedented what Whitworth is doing at age 35 and beyond. Most tackles play falls off of a cliff at that point in their career.

That's a big reason why this turned out to be a bad move.  If Whit downturned like 99.9999999999% of OT's did, the Rams look stupid.  If Og or Fisher turned the corner like they should have, it doesn't look that bad.  It's the fact they missed horribly with the 2 guys they drafted to replace him that makes it terrible.  This is the main disadvantage of coaches scouting players.  Because the coaches scouted those players, they are not going to be willing to fall on their sword and admit they are busts.  They are going to defend them to the last.

[Whatever]

(12-04-2018, 08:06 PM)3wt Wrote: Which begs the question: why couldn't the Bengals figure this out?

They seem to treat their players like morons.  They disrespect them with their offers and wonder why they want to play somewhere else.  There's no sense of the Bengals figuring out how to meet the players' needs in a way that's mutually beneficial.  They expect the players to fall into line.

They're old school, "Don't let the inmates run the asylum".

But this is a business where you need to figure out what your employees need in order for you to put a product together to please your customer.  In a real sense your employees have become a customer themselves. 

Keep in mind that Whit admitted he wanted to leave when he was set to hit the market.  His agent wasn't likely going back to the Bengals with the numbers being thrown around before FA started.  

The Bengals were likely off base because they overestimated Whit's loyalty to the organization.  From the Bengals' end, the $10 mil deal they offered was a substantial raise over what he was paid the previous year.  Frankly, the fact that they offered a player of Whit's age a raise is very out of the ordinary.  Whit was at the age where you usually start expecting guys to take pay cuts, not ask for raises, particularly when it's a guy you've given multiple extensions to and taken care of financially over the years.

[Sled21]

(12-04-2018, 04:31 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I didn't read OP's article, but the Whit quote he showed mentions nothing of length, just that the Bengals offer wasn't on par with the others.

You could read that as money or length, really. Something tells me it was a bit of both.

The Bengals offered one year, at the same amount per year, but the other teams offered longer contracts. What this thread proves is some people either cannot read or refuse to let facts get in their way....

[Sled21]

(12-04-2018, 01:19 PM)jj22 Wrote: One day someone will leave the Bengals and have something nice to say about them.

Lots of players have left here an had nice things to say...… 

[McC]

(12-04-2018, 08:06 PM)3wt Wrote: Which begs the question: why couldn't the Bengals figure this out?

They seem to treat their players like morons.  They disrespect them with their offers and wonder why they want to play somewhere else.  There's no sense of the Bengals figuring out how to meet the players' needs in a way that's mutually beneficial.  They expect the players to fall into line.

They're old school, "Don't let the inmates run the asylum".

But this is a business where you need to figure out what your employees need in order for you to put a product together to please your customer.  In a real sense your employees have become a customer themselves. 

At the root of all of it is the fact that they listened to P ***** A.  He told them he had it covered.  Kinda like we can take Britain from the air or not a bomb will fall on Berlin.  I believe this is known as famous last words.

[RASCAL]

(12-04-2018, 08:30 PM)Whatever Wrote: That's a big reason why this turned out to be a bad move.  If Whit downturned like 99.9999999999% of OT's did, the Rams look stupid.  If Og or Fisher turned the corner like they should have, it doesn't look that bad.  It's the fact they missed horribly with the 2 guys they drafted to replace him that makes it terrible.  This is the main disadvantage of coaches scouting players.  Because the coaches scouted those players, they are not going to be willing to fall on their sword and admit they are busts.  They are going to defend them to the last.

If If If    what IF the bear hadn't stopped to take a shit in the woods, he would of caught the rabbit!!!

[RASCAL]

(12-04-2018, 08:51 PM)Whatever Wrote: Keep in mind that Whit admitted he wanted to leave when he was set to hit the market.  His agent wasn't likely going back to the Bengals with the numbers being thrown around before FA started.  

The Bengals were likely off base because they overestimated Whit's loyalty to the organization.  From the Bengals' end, the $10 mil deal they offered was a substantial raise over what he was paid the previous year.  Frankly, the fact that they offered a player of Whit's age a raise is very out of the ordinary.  Whit was at the age where you usually start expecting guys to take pay cuts, not ask for raises, particularly when it's a guy you've given multiple extensions to and taken care of financially over the years.

again, I will take what Whit said over you anyday!!!

[Sled21]

(12-04-2018, 09:23 PM)RASCAL Wrote: again, I will take what Whit said over you anyday!!!

Whit said he got a better deal. You are inferring he was talking about money. To a man who doesn't think he is ready to retire, a 3 year deal is better than a one year deal. 

[yellowxdiscipline]

When I read these types of things it really makes me hate this effing team.

[Whatever]

(12-04-2018, 09:23 PM)RASCAL Wrote: again, I will take what Whit said over you anyday!!!

I don't believe that Whit ever addressed how common or uncommon it is for a 34 year old non-QB who is making several times the league minimum to ask for a significant raise on their next contract.

[Destro]

How are people defending the Bengals decision here? We have three parties here. The Bengals, the Rams and Whitworth. Which of those three are the losers in this situation? If you are surprised, then you haven't been paying attention.

[Whatever]

(12-04-2018, 04:51 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Except it is unlikely they offered $12m.

The Franchise Tag that year for OL was just a little over $14m.

What we already "knew" was that Hobson loves to spin things with lies, and the Bengals are cheap. Also that there's a segment of the Bengals fandom that will readily believe anything they read from Hobson for God-knows-what reason.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

That said, Andrew Whitworth actually got $12.5m in the first year, including a $5m signing bonus which means he got that upfront.

Then he had another $2.5m guaranteed.

So even if the Rams cut him after 1 year, he would have walked away with $15m.

So lets pretend the Bengals DID offer him 1yr/$12m. That's not the same as a guarantee of 1yr/$15m, with $5m of that coming the second you sign on the dotted line. Was ANY of the Bengals offer guaranteed? Potential money isn't the same as real guaranteed money.

In comparison, Burfict got a $3.3m signing bonus from the Bengals on a $32.5m deal. There is a huge difference on getting $5m today or getting $5m over the span of 12-14 months in terms of how much money you can then make by investing that money.

The Bengals are cheap.

Hard to say.  The initial offer wasn't $12 mil, but sources said they would have been willing to go to $12 mil, but not for multiple years.  It's kind of irrelevant, because the only way the Bengals could have paid him more guaranteed money on a 1 year deal than he got from the Rams is paying him more than the FT that year, which wasn't happening.

We don't know how much guaranteed money the Bengals put on the table.  He got $2 mil at signing when he signed his previous 1 year extension.  Payment schedule is important, but you also have to consider that he's paying to move his family cross country into a city with an insanely high cost of living.

At the end of the day, the Bengals should have just used the FT on him if they weren't willing to commit to a multi-year deal, so in that way, they were cheap.  However, they would still be looking to replace him this upcoming year.  The biggest issue isn't that Whit left.  It's that the guys they drafted to replace him were busts and they were slow to recognize it.

[*bengalfan74*]

(12-04-2018, 11:14 PM)Whatever Wrote:   The biggest issue isn't that Whit left.  It's that the guys they drafted to replace him were busts and they were slow to recognize it.

More like "refused to admit it"

And this isn't the first time.

[Whatever]

(12-04-2018, 11:40 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: More like "refused to admit it"

And this isn't the first time.

Well, they admitted it this year.  Otherwise, they wouldn't have traded for Glenn and Hart wouldn't be starting.  But it was definitely a year too late in coming.

[THE PISTONS]

(12-04-2018, 08:30 PM)Whatever Wrote: That's a big reason why this turned out to be a bad move.  If Whit downturned like 99.9999999999% of OT's did, the Rams look stupid.  If Og or Fisher turned the corner like they should have, it doesn't look that bad.  It's the fact they missed horribly with the 2 guys they drafted to replace him that makes it terrible.  This is the main disadvantage of coaches scouting players.  Because the coaches scouted those players, they are not going to be willing to fall on their sword and admit they are busts.  They are going to defend them to the last.

The Bengals should have just franchise tagged Whitworth or Zeitler.

At the point they let Whitworth go, they knew that Ced and Fisher didn't look good.

But agreed, had either 1 ended up even decent the move looks better. The move exploded like a watermelon after Gallagher hit it with a mallet.

[Benton]

(12-04-2018, 08:06 PM)3wt Wrote: Which begs the question: why couldn't the Bengals figure this out?

They seem to treat their players like morons.  They disrespect them with their offers and wonder why they want to play somewhere else.  There's no sense of the Bengals figuring out how to meet the players' needs in a way that's mutually beneficial.  They expect the players to fall into line.

They're old school, "Don't let the inmates run the asylum".

But this is a business where you need to figure out what your employees need in order for you to put a product together to please your customer.  In a real sense your employees have become a customer themselves. 

I think Mike brown believes he's loyal to his players and he expects them to reciprocate. 

Which is silly. Drafting a guy abd waiting till the final year of their deal to play them considerably or resigning a guy isnt being loyal to them.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(12-04-2018, 11:14 PM)Whatever Wrote: Hard to say.  The initial offer wasn't $12 mil, but sources said they would have been willing to go to $12 mil, but not for multiple years.  It's kind of irrelevant, because the only way the Bengals could have paid him more guaranteed money on a 1 year deal than he got from the Rams is paying him more than the FT that year, which wasn't happening.

We don't know how much guaranteed money the Bengals put on the table.  He got $2 mil at signing when he signed his previous 1 year extension.  Payment schedule is important, but you also have to consider that he's paying to move his family cross country into a city with an insanely high cost of living.

At the end of the day, the Bengals should have just used the FT on him if they weren't willing to commit to a multi-year deal, so in that way, they were cheap.  However, they would still be looking to replace him this upcoming year.  The biggest issue isn't that Whit left.  It's that the guys they drafted to replace him were busts and they were slow to recognize it.

Did you miss this earlier in the thread?

It wasn't close. They offered him a one year, incentive laden deal of UP to 10 million vs $13 million year 1 w/ the rams and at least $2.5 guaranteed the next year, almost assuring him he wouldn't be on the street in Year 2 at age 35.

— Katherine Terrell (@Kat_Terrell) December 4, 2018

What they were "willing" to go up to (according to them after the fact) and what they actually offered are not the same. They offered an incentive heavy deal that was worth up to $10m.

He got $15m guaranteed from the Rams including $5m in his pocket right then and there.



- - - - - - - - - - -
Agreed that they were slow to recognize it. After seeing Ogbuehi be the worst OL I had ever seen in my life in 2016 (and previously a little in 2015), I knew he was never ever going to be any good.

Players can make the jump from bad to good with experience, but 2nd year players who are the worst you've ever seen are just busts. It happens. He was the Ryan Leaf/Akili Smith of OL. For whatever reason they refused to just take the L and admit their mistake, doubling down.

It has helped ruin three seasons now, though. They're going to spend so many draft picks and so much money now trying to find a LT. It is a repeat of the JJo situation all over again.

[Whatever]

(12-05-2018, 01:07 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Did you miss this earlier in the thread?

It wasn't close. They offered him a one year, incentive laden deal of UP to 10 million vs $13 million year 1 w/ the rams and at least $2.5 guaranteed the next year, almost assuring him he wouldn't be on the street in Year 2 at age 35.

— Katherine Terrell (@Kat_Terrell) December 4, 2018

What they were "willing" to go up to (according to them after the fact) and what they actually offered are not the same. They offered an incentive heavy deal that was worth up to $10m.

He got $15m guaranteed from the Rams including $5m in his pocket right then and there.



- - - - - - - - - - -
Agreed that they were slow to recognize it. After seeing Ogbuehi be the worst OL I had ever seen in my life in 2016 (and previously a little in 2015), I knew he was never ever going to be any good.

Players can make the jump from bad to good with experience, but 2nd year players who are the worst you've ever seen are just busts. It happens. He was the Ryan Leaf/Akili Smith of OL. For whatever reason they refused to just take the L and admit their mistake, doubling down.

It has helped ruin three seasons now, though. They're going to spend so many draft picks and so much money now trying to find a LT. It is a repeat of the JJo situation all over again.

No, I caught that earlier.  It's hard to say based on that how much he would have realistically earned.  How much was guaranteed at signing, how much was salary, how much was incentives, and how easy were the incentives to reach?  It really doesn't matter, because he was going to get more guaranteed money with the multi-year deal with the Rams than any one year deal the Bengals would realistically offer.  It still offered at least an opportunity to earn more than he did the year prior, and not a lot of teams are giving well paid 34 year old trench players pay raises, but again, we don't know how much he realistically would have made.

I think a lot of it was Paul Alexander and he supposedly beat his fist on the table for Og and Fisher in the draft.  For the Bengals, you knew Whit was getting up there, you planned to replace him, and Piano Man didn't have any high round busts to that point.  Paul probably bamboozled Mikey with some "Last year was basically his rookie year," "They were banged up,""LT is his natural position," BS to avoid looking incompetent.  I think that ultimately cost him his job.

It isn't as bad as JJo because JJo was in his prime.  Whit is realistically on borrowed time and it's freakish that he's as good as he is at his age.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(12-05-2018, 01:55 AM)Whatever Wrote: No, I caught that earlier.  It's hard to say based on that how much he would have realistically earned.  How much was guaranteed at signing, how much was salary, how much was incentives, and how easy were the incentives to reach?  It really doesn't matter, because he was going to get more guaranteed money with the multi-year deal with the Rams than any one year deal the Bengals would realistically offer.  It still offered at least an opportunity to earn more than he did the year prior, and not a lot of teams are giving well paid 34 year old trench players pay raises, but again, we don't know how much he realistically would have made.

I think a lot of it was Paul Alexander and he supposedly beat his fist on the table for Og and Fisher in the draft.  For the Bengals, you knew Whit was getting up there, you planned to replace him, and Piano Man didn't have any high round busts to that point.  Paul probably bamboozled Mikey with some "Last year was basically his rookie year," "They were banged up,""LT is his natural position," BS to avoid looking incompetent.  I think that ultimately cost him his job.

It isn't as bad as JJo because JJo was in his prime.  Whit is realistically on borrowed time and it's freakish that he's as good as he is at his age.

Well, the max was $10m. That's if he hit ALL of his incentives. If it was really easy to hit all of his incentives, they wouldn't have made them incentives, and he wouldn't have called it a lowball offer. No matter how many of them he hit, it was still going to be less Year 1 money than the other four offers.

The Bengals are historically a very low signing bonus team. Andy Dalton got a $12m signing bonus. Andrew Luck got $32m, Cam Newton got $22.5m, Russell Wilson got $31m, Joe Flacco got $40m, Alex Smith got $27m.

You can say it was a "raise" all you want, but that is only if he hit every single incentive. You can also say "not a lot of teams" would give him a raise, but 4 did offer him raises. They were all offering roughly the same deal, with only the Bengals being significantly lower.

No matter how much you keep trying to spin it.