The Bengals did it right at OT

[THE PISTONS]

(09-17-2017, 04:46 PM)Whatever Wrote: Yes and no.  Loyalty is a two way street.  The Bengals could have offered Whit more.  Whit could have taken less to stay.  You see players take less money to stay with a team all the time.  If you have to hand a guy a blank check to get him to stay, then he obviously doesn't have much loyalty to you or your organization.  I like Whit as much as the next guy, but the first chance he got, he ran outta town to the highest bidder. The first time he was going into a season without a contract extension, he griped about it in the media. I don't hold that against him.  He made his choice based on his priorities.  

Honestly, why would a player take less money to come here?

Generally players take less money to go somewhere to chase a Super Bowl. That's not happening here.

One could argue that the Rams are a better chance to win. They had a bad year last year and FIRED THEIR COACH. ie Ownership wasn't complacent and made a change to try to win. Their defense is every bit as good as ours.

The have a #1 pick at QB. Their RB in Gurley is better than any RB on our roster. They just need an offensive line.