I'd say the Bengals are probably pretty close to done. They're already claiming they only have $3.8m left for free agency right now. That's more than likely not going to bring in an upgrade anywhere.
If/when Dalton gets dealt, they may sift through the bargain bin and see what's left, but that's best case scenario. A Dalton trade isn't guaranteed and may not even happen this month. As per the usual, the Bengals real free agency is the draft.
(03-16-2020, 11:01 PM)Nately120 Wrote: We haven't had a winning season since 2015 so it's hard to label frustrated Bengals fans as wanting instant anything.
Not saying the path to glory lies in flashy day 1 FA stuff, but the slow and steady stuff played better when we were winning.
And that's why they're labeled of not caring about winning, and rightfully so.
(03-17-2020, 09:17 AM)Nately120 Wrote: The Jaguars might give away a pick to get that Foles contract off the books so if the Bears want a vet QB and have cap space to burn Foles is probably a more attractive prospect than trying to pry Dalton from Mike Brown.
NE seems likely to be left in the lurch, though.
Possibly, I guess it depends on if the Bears only want competition for Trubisky or see Foles as their long-term solution. His contract has 3 years left and more $ per I believe. Seems like Dalton would be the lower risk option.
(03-16-2020, 11:23 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Everyone wants to be a critic, yet no one wants to present a solution? C'mon guys, put your brains where your mouths are. Do like I did, pull out a calculator and a pencil and do some work.
Tell me who you would cut, and who you would propose replacing that player with that is not only better, but will cost the same or less.
Not sure how I'm being a critic by saying they're risk adverse. The problem with doing this is it's not based on reality. I can sit here and type all the moves I would make, but I am not running this team. Not sure how that provides any solution. It creates a false fantasy of something that will not happen.
(03-17-2020, 09:32 AM)Schmitbuck Wrote: Possibly, I guess it depends on if the Bears only want competition for Trubisky or see Foles as their long-term solution. His contract has 3 years left and more $ per I believe. Seems like Dalton would be the lower risk option.
They have a desperate GM who isn't likely to be there to suffer the fallout from his next move, so he might not care about risk.
Foles is a higher risk option but he can probably sell himself on a QB who has been the SB MVP rather than one who hasn't had a winning season in 4 years. Fair or not, that's what I think could put us behind the eight ball.
Dalton requires a trade with one of the less flexible GMs in the business and the other QB options have more "pointless zing" appeal. The Jaguars are desperate to sell Foles and we may sit on Dalton or ask for the moon.
(03-17-2020, 08:54 AM)Schmitbuck Wrote: A few people were speculating online yesterday that the Bears showing interest in Bridgewater & Foles was just posturing to pressure in the Bengals to lower their asking price. Some think the Bears are currently offering their 4th round compensatory pick.
Just read that Brady's contract was officially voided at midnight yesterday. Maybe that means he's able to talk to teams starting today.
That makes sense if they are trying to stand firm on their 4th round pick. The Bears dont have a lot of draft picks this year, and its not like Andy is coming off a big season or is still in his 20's.
That should be the Bengals cap hits per player for 2020. Right now the Bengals have roughly $36M to spend in free agency because you forgot about their rollover. And that also includes the money to sign the rookies. So we aren’t subtracting the rookie pool from that $36M because the $36M to spend is after accounting for the rookies contracts.
So adding Conklin at $14M still leaves us with $22M. Also, if the Bengals sign someone that means another player’s contract will fall off. Let’s say it’s a minimum salary player. So we have $22.6M left.
There is no way I’m carrying Dalton’s $17M into the season. Even if I have to cut him instead of trade him. That gives us $39.6M. I’m already got more than when I started and I’ve added a starting RT.
That still leaves them more cap space than they currently have for tenders, to re-sign guys like Billings, and once the regular season starts they will need room for the practice squad and either two or four roster spots, and the infamous injury cushion (which we don’t need because we carry over every year since the carry over has been available.)
Edited to add: Amari Cooper re-signed with Cowboys for $100M/5 yrs. If the Bengals signed him @ $110M/5 yrs instead of franchising Green that would leave the Bengals sitting at roughly $35.6M after cutting Dalton instead of $39.6M. They could have gotten younger at WR and better at RT and still have roughly the same cap space as they do now.
I thought there was some rule that only the 52(?) biggest cap hits counted. Can anyone confirm?
(03-17-2020, 10:15 AM)TJHoushmandzadehs Shiny Shoes Wrote: I thought there was some rule that only the 52(?) biggest cap hits counted. Can anyone confirm?
Just google practice squad rules to confirm for yourself.
But, it’s a new CBA and the roster has been expanded. So the rules could have changed in the past week.
Two years ago we signed the leagues leading tackler and traded for the 8th highest paid OT in the league.
Just because moves don't work out that dos not mean they don't try.
Right, but when it doesn't work out with Brown you re him up just to cut him in the same year? You seen how bad he was and still thought he was good enough to play (and give a bump in pay)? And then didn't know that OT was being traded because he was an oft-injured locker room cancer? Does that not seem pretty lazy/lack of knowledge/etc way of doing things? Fine, they tried, but they're clearly not very good at what they do, totally unwillingness to change, etc still leads me to believe they don't have winning in their best interest. That's what bullshit, them completely and utterly failing to be a modern NFL team vs saying "can't blame us for giving least amount of effort possible"
Two years ago we signed the leagues leading tackler and traded for the 8th highest paid OT in the league.
Just because moves don't work out that dos not mean they don't try.
Then the issue isn't trying so much as failing to bring in someone who can try and maybe have a better shot at doing it right. I can try to fix my wife's car 1000 times but she's eventually going to tell me that if we don't take the thing to someone who knows how to fix a car then we aren't really trying.
Fair or not, the Bengal method of running all ideas up the Mike Brown flagpole has gone back to being stable and unsuccessful.
(03-17-2020, 12:32 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Then the issue isn't trying so much as failing to bring in someone who can try and maybe have a better shot at doing it right. I can try to fix my wife's car 1000 times but she's eventually going to tell me that if we don't take the thing to someone who knows how to fix a car then we aren't really trying.
Fair or not, the Bengal method of running all ideas up the Mike Brown flagpole has gone back to being stable and unsuccessful.
Right !
I can try and shoot a soda can offhand with a .22 pistol at 500 yards all day, without success. Just looking at the .308 bolt action rifle sitting on the bench beside me.
(03-17-2020, 01:21 PM)RunKijanaRun Wrote: I'm starting to think Mikey and Hobspin might have hit us with the old 3 card Monte.
Wouldn't they imply some sort of bait and switch on their part? Was there some sort of promise that we'd go ape on day 1 of free agency quote from Mike Brown or Dud Tobin that I missed?
As far as I could see the articles about us being active in FA were the same type of speculative "fake news" as the ones that said Joe Burrow would hold out if we draft him.
(03-17-2020, 01:32 PM)Nately120 Wrote: As far as I could see the articles about us being active in FA were the same type of speculative "fake news" as the ones that said Joe Burrow would hold out if we draft him.
We can still be much more active and aggressive in free agency than in the past without going crazy with a day one signing.
I'd say a majority of the huge first day signings don't end up being worth the money. And there are a lot of good players below the first day signings but above the bargain bin type the Bengals usually sign
Still plenty of time and plenty of players left. I never expected them to be active in the first wave, anyway. If we get into Thursday and start getting scrub signings like Webb and Wynn types rolling in, then I'll start questioning the effort a bit more.
(03-17-2020, 01:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: We can still be much more active and aggressive in free agency than in the past without going crazy with a day one signing.
I'd say a majority of the huge first day signings don't end up being worth the money. And there are a lot of good players below the first day signings but above the bargain bin type the Bengals usually sign
I agree, I'm just saying that it seems like we are always convinced that the next change we make is going to lead to a total 180 of the Mike Brown way. ZT is gonna change the front office! No wait...the front office is gonna change to woo Burrow!
2021 hot take - Burrow is going to DEMAND change to the front office!
(03-17-2020, 01:42 PM)samhain Wrote: Still plenty of time and plenty of players left. I never expected them to be active in the first wave, anyway. If we get into Thursday and start getting scrub signings like Webb and Wynn types rolling in, then I'll start questioning the effort a bit more.
Or if we don't at least start re-signing our own players that we wanted to keep like Dennard and Billings.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: i-8rLM4gw-M.jpg]](https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-8rLM4gw/0/a325f03c/M/i-8rLM4gw-M.jpg)
