Bobby Hart Re-Signed

[*Nately120*]

(03-12-2019, 10:29 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Absolutely. The Bengals.com article talks about how Taylor really liked Hart and is happy he's back.

Meh...I expected that Taylor would be a genius who is going to do all the things we wanted him to do until he did something we didn't like...I just didn't expect him to do something so against our wishes and to do it so quickly.  Oh well, here's hoping.

[Bengalitis]

Turner already rubbing off in a bad way. Seems he convinced Zac and the FO to keep Hart. Would have been nice to have had a more experienced HC.

[Au165]

(03-12-2019, 10:56 AM)Bengalitis Wrote: Turner already rubbing off in a bad way. Seems he convinced Zac and the FO to keep Hart.  Would have been nice to have had a more experienced HC.

I sincerely doubt he sold them on him. My guess is they were going that way no matter what and he was selling it versus saying his new employer is making a mistake. 

[bengals67]

(03-12-2019, 10:49 AM)Socal Bengals fan Wrote: Leave it to the Bengal apologists to make the Hart signing as anything but Horrible.   He was horrible as a giant.  He was cut.  He was horrible as a Bengal.  He’s just not very good at all.  If the plan is to suck for next 2 years then we are headed in the right direction

:andy: :andy: :andy:

[*Synric*]

Probably should start a thread with the actual contract details...

[THE PISTONS]

(03-12-2019, 12:11 AM)NKURyan Wrote: Is this just how it's going to always be? Yeah, we convinced ourselves that Mike Brown wasn't calling the shots anymore when they replaced coaches in the middle of the season, when they hired ZT, when they put Tobin more in the limelight, when they re-signed Atkins and Dunlap on the same day, when they did the Glenn trade last year, and when they did all of this other un-Bengallike stuff... but the minute something happens we don't like, OMG IT'S ALL MIKE BROWN'S FAULT.

Mike Brown is purely an excuse at this point, nothing more. I think his say is minimal at best these days in every facet of the organization.

Yep. I don't think the answer is as simple as he's totally out or totally in.

I don't think that Tobin or Katie are super GM's either.

I think that you see that in a lot of the decisions.

The Glenn trade last year...was our exposure to being in other NFL cities. Most teams make a couple nice moves each year. We're just not used to it.

[THE PISTONS]

(03-12-2019, 10:51 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Meh...I expected that Taylor would be a genius who is going to do all the things we wanted him to do until he did something we didn't like...I just didn't expect him to do something so against our wishes and to do it so quickly.  Oh well, here's hoping.

But, people assume Taylor is a genius because McVay is.

Taylor was the assistant WR Coach when Goff had his breakout year. Then last year he was the QB Coach.

I just don't see a ton of success on his resume outside the Rams. He was a bad OC at U of Cincy. He was mediocre in Miami.

[Aquapod770]

(03-11-2019, 04:58 PM)Joelist Wrote: 7 mil a year for the worst RT in football...

Same old Bungles. F' Mike Brown. 

[jj22]

(03-12-2019, 10:56 AM)Bengalitis Wrote: Turner already rubbing off in a bad way. Seems he convinced Zac and the FO to keep Hart.  Would have been nice to have had a more experienced HC.

Turner is proof as to how a bad hire can destroy any chances a HC has succeeding with a new team. He's singlehandedly damaged ZT's credibility and the Bengals 2019 offense outlook.

You're only as good as the people you hire. Turner continues to make a fool out of ZT.

[THE PISTONS]

(03-12-2019, 09:35 AM)Schmitbuck Wrote: Since my blood pressure meds have kicked in and I've had a chance to sleep on it, I'll take a step back and play along. 

I think/hope you're right about drafting a guy in the 2nd-3rd. Going into the draft, we had to have a RT capable of starting at least at an average level. Everyone sees the mock drafts of with the 2-3 tackles projected to go in the top half of the 1st. What if the staff doesn't like 1 or 2 of them? What if the other(s) go before 11? You are left reaching for a bad value player when you could have a difference maker at another position (*cough DT cough*). One thing I've heard/read over the years is Duke Tobin being very good at gauging how other teams will draft in front us. 

Regarding the money, everyone can see the stupid money being spent yesterday in FA. We were never going to spend the money needed to get Juwan James. Would I have preferred $4-5M/yr over 2 years instead, yeah, but we don't know what other teams were willing to pay him. My guess is the Bengals matched another offer Hart received. 

I hope he plays more than well enough to make those incentives. 

We signed Hart so quickly after negotiations started that I doubt Hart had another offer.

[Whatever]

(03-12-2019, 10:34 AM)Au165 Wrote: He he was the 48th Guard ( versus Hart being the 70th tackle). Not sure that is basically as bad. In 2017 while playing Tackle for Minnesota he was the 36 rated Tackle in the league. That is a huge upgrade from Hart as both a tackle and swing linemen who could play guard at a serviceable level. 

59.2 overall PFF grade vs 56.2 at an easier position.  

[THE PISTONS]

(03-12-2019, 09:42 AM)Schmitbuck Wrote: It would certainly make me feel a little better about the signing. We'll probably know the answer after our first round pick. 

So paying $21 million for 3 years for a Tackle who's bad that's never played Guard...being converted to Guard would make you feel good about the signing?

[THE PISTONS]

(03-12-2019, 09:57 AM)Whatever Wrote: Yeah, I get that.  However, do you really want to be down at the bottom of the FA pool and going "Alright guys, do we go with Erick Flowers or Cedric Ogbuehi?"

As bad as Hart was, there are tons of worse guys out there.  I mean, we had two of them.  The league is so desperate for T's right now that an average starter just became the highest paid RT in the league.

Honestly, Hart isn't much better than those guys. He's slightly better.

We could have always drafted a Tackle or signed Andre Smith for a year.

[Whatever]

(03-12-2019, 10:15 AM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: Hart was rated 75 out of 80 Tackles in league. There are only 64 STARTING tackles in the whole league....do the math my friend.

He's not good, I agree.  However there are still worse starters out there.  There are also a few backups better than him as evidenced by his rating.

[Au165]

(03-12-2019, 11:10 AM)Whatever Wrote: 59.2 overall PFF grade vs 56.2 at an easier position.  

It's relative to the group they play in. Certain positions tend to get beat up more in their ratings than others. In comparison he was a 72.1 the year before at tackle.

[*ochocincos*]

(03-12-2019, 11:11 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Honestly, Hart isn't much better than those guys. He's slightly better.

We could have always drafted a Tackle or signed Andre Smith for a year.

They could still re-sign Andre Smith.

[THE PISTONS]

(03-12-2019, 10:14 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: Bill Barnwell of ESPN:

Bobby Hart, T, Cincinnati Bengals

The deal: Three years, $21 million
Grade: D-
It's difficult to find a silver lining in Cincinnati's move to re-sign Hart, who was cut by the Giants last year amid concerns that he had quit on the team. (Hart would later deny those claims.) The 24-year-old cleared waivers and went to injured reserve before signing a one-year deal during the offseason with the Bengals, who eventually installed the Florida State product as their starting right tackle.
Here's where would I normally say things went well and led the Bengals to sign Hart to a long-term deal. That isn't really what happened. Hart appears to have played pretty poorly in his debut season with the Bengals. While he stayed healthy and started all 16 games for the first time in his pro career, the former seventh-round pick allowed 11.5 sacks, per Stats LLC. Hart also committed 14 penalties, which tied him for fourth in the league. Nine of those penalties were false starts, which you can spin in either direction; a Hart supporter could suggest that Hart will cut out the false starts with experience, while a detractor might find it frustrating that Hart can't manage to line up and get off the snap on time on a regular basis.

Either way, Hart hasn't shown much suggesting he's even a competent NFL tackle. Incoming offensive line coach Jim Turner hand-waved away the concerns about sacks and pressures by talking about how Hart has played with passion, but the bottoms of NFL rosters and practice squads are full of players who have passion. It's not hard to find a player who cares. The Bengals are paying Hart to be an effective NFL lineman, and he simply isn't one. I can't imagine that Cincinnati guaranteed more than one season to Hart as part of this three-year pact. Since he is just 24, the Bengals would be in position to keep Hart around if he does break out, but this doesn't appear to solve Cincinnati's offensive line woes. If anything, the signing solidifies them.

Right on:  The Bengals are paying Hart to be an effective NFL lineman, and he simply isn't one.

[*ochocincos*]

(03-12-2019, 11:10 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: So paying $21 million for 3 years for a Tackle who's bad that's never played Guard...being converted to Guard would make you feel good about the signing?

He has played guard. In college. Many draft analysts projected him to guard for the NFL. He just might be a better fit at guard than tackle.

[THE PISTONS]

The #Bengals' three-year deal with OT Bobby Hart is worth $16.15 million, including $7.4M in the first year. Max $21.15M with incentives and escalators.

— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) March 12, 2019

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[*Synric*]

(03-12-2019, 11:10 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: So paying $21 million for 3 years for a Tackle who's bad that's never played Guard...being converted to Guard would make you feel good about the signing?

The contract is 3 years for 16.15 million 5.3 million average. The 2019 cap hit is 5.4 million with the option to cut him in 2020 with no dead cap.