Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Are the bengals really that cheap?
#22
(03-04-2016, 04:43 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I think overly cautious is more like it.  A lot of big time FAs are busts, but that's often a result of signing for the sake of signing. But sometimes there is a guy that can really help.   And how is it every single year that the Bengals have little cap space?  There is a perception that other teams say, "We are going to do what we have to do", and the Bengals say, "Wish we could, but nothing we can do about it.  See.  Hands tied."

This right here. I guess the Bengals have been "middle of the pack" lately in spending. My frustration isn't so much with that, it's more with the fact that I've never seen this team be proactive in FA unless they're replacing someone that was more expensive.

Antwan Odom? Replaced Justin Smith at a fraction of what the 49ers paid for him.
Lavernues Coles? Replaced Housh for less than what the Seahawks paid.
Antonio Bryant? Still trying to replace Housh.
Nate Clements? Replaced JJo at a fraction of the cost.
Jason Allen? Still trying to fill the void left by JJo.
Benny? Replacing Benson.
Benson? Total desperation after cutting Rudi and Perry looking like turd.

The Bengals seem to view FA as a last resort type of thing and it's really unfortunate.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
RE: Are the bengals really that cheap? - Shake n Blake - 03-04-2016, 08:20 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)