Yesterday, 08:01 AM
(10-30-2024, 01:30 PM)ochocincos Wrote: My point of saying those other players was because of the comment that the coach for the championship years is the same as now.
However, the players are not, and that's a big reason why the team is underperforming now compared to 2 years ago.
The team would have enough $$ to have Bates and Reader both if:
A) Let Higgins and Hill walk and allocate that ~$25-35 mill APY to another position, and...
B) Not having Rankins and/or Stone on the roster next year, freeing up $6.5 mill for Stone and $10.5 mill for Rankins
They could also do what more and more teams are doing in voided extra years to lower the cap in the short term. Yes, there are detriments that it results in dead money spent in future years down the road, but certain teams always find a way to keep pushing further and further without hitting a wall.
I will not speak for all fans, but this fan personally doesn't care about the future financial implications pushing contracts into future years to field a better team now, knowing there's a risk the team could be terrible for 3-5 years after an "all-in" window.
I just want to see a Super Bowl victory, even if it means a few seasons of really down years. It's better than riding the middle-of-the-pack for a decade. I know it might not be better financially for the Bengals ownership, but I'm not them.
While I wasn't specifically referring to you, but this place in general. We want to sign everybody. But to your point that the team would have enough money to sign Bates and Reader if we let Higgins, Hill and Stone and Rankins walk would be great, but we have to pay their replacements, right? If we let Hill and Rankins go, who's playing DT? Stone I can see cutting because we have someone behind him that is probably better upside.
