FA Losses Last Year Feels Different Than This Years

[Bengal Dude]

(03-13-2017, 09:45 PM)eoxyod Wrote: Here's the thing about the Marvin Jones loss, which was definitely the most felt and worst loss of last offseason:

I really don't think it was about being the main option. In the grand scheme of things, the Lions did offer more money that the Bengals wouldn't give. There would be no way the Bengals offered 20 million guaranteed, and there might have been some other numbers that might have not benefited Jones to stay here. That's where the real money is and why Jones left. The Bengals work around some gtd money a bit but he still left because those numbers just were not there

Agreed. Joseph mentioned that the Bengals matched the total contract from the Texans, but they wouldn't match the guaranteed money.

[Yojimbo]

Marv said it during the DreK press conference when asked about what FA this year has been like for him.

"Now, we're going to have another evolution of some players."

I think we're looking at a similar change over the past two years as was done in one season after '09. The big difference is we still have the most important piece for a roster in place in a starting QB.

[OrlandoBengal]

(03-12-2017, 02:08 PM)Housh Wrote: I truely believe we were on track to lose all 3 but when Mike sensed it he got off his ass and basically gave Dre a deal he couldn't refuse so he wouldn't look like a complete liar to the fans.


Miley is cheap with his money to the point that at times he finds himself having to overpay average players to give off the illusion that he was willing to spend big money the whole time. How you think guys like Rey M get 3 years 15 mil?

They got lucky in keeping Dre.  I read an article after he signed that flat out said he was offered more money than what he got in Cincinnati.  Said that he really likes his neighborhood and did not want to have to move.

[XenoMorph]

(03-12-2017, 01:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't think we have as many big holes as you claim, but I 100% agree that the losses this year are much bigger than last year because of the lack of clear replacements.

Last year we lost WR 2 and 3 and signed lafell coming off a down season... People were going crazy.


This year we lost  LT near retirement and RG just finishing his rookie deal..  Who 2 years ago we drafted 2 OTs in rounds 1 and 2 and last year we drafted an OG in round 3 (I believe maybe 4)

So we have the replacements on board.   people are nervous because of the unknown there is always unease when going into the unknown.  We saw a little Obg last year its unknown if he can regain the form that made him a 1st rounder.

We haven't seen much of Fischer on the OL
We haven't seen Westerman on the OL yet.

But these guys gotta play. or we will blow money of free agents never find out what we drafted and draft new ones all over again.

for years it seemed we hung onto guys too long and never played the young guys unless forced to. now we are pushing a little youth movement. This could help us or hurt us.

And lets be honest our OL even with Z and Whit last year was not clicking.  maybe something will click with the new unit.

[XenoMorph]

(03-14-2017, 04:17 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: Agreed. Joseph mentioned that the Bengals matched the total contract from the Texans, but they wouldn't match the guaranteed money.

it was off by around 1 mil I believe which shouldn't make much of a difference when your talking 40 mil or so.

I still think some tampering was going on with JJoe... As he was set to sign with the bengals before the lock out then hours after it ends (during which no players could talk to coaches or teams)  he signs that big deal with the Texans.

With M Jones.. He was injured a bit when he was here 1 complete season only.

[CanadianBengal]

(03-14-2017, 06:08 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: ,
Last year we lost WR 2 and 3 and signed lafell coming off a down season... People were going crazy.


This year we lost  LT near retirement and RG just finishing his rookie deal..  Who 2 years ago we drafted 2 OTs in rounds 1 and 2 and last year we drafted an OG in round 3 (I believe maybe 4)

So we have the replacements on board.   people are nervous because of the unknown there is always unease when going into the unknown.  We saw a little Obg last year its unknown if he can regain the form that made him a 1st rounder.

We haven't seen much of Fischer on the OL
We haven't seen Westerman on the OL yet.

But these guys gotta play. or we will blow money of free agents never find out what we drafted and draft new ones all over again.

for years it seemed we hung onto guys too long and never played the young guys unless forced to. now we are pushing a little youth movement. This could help us or hurt us.

And lets be honest our OL even with Z and Whit last year was not clicking.  maybe something will click with the new unit.

I don't disagree that the young guys have to play but handing someone a starting job when they have barely played is risky. You need to balance young guys earning more playing time and misguided loyalty to vets who are no longer getting the job done. 

Ced was given the job before he earned it. He struggled. Should have lost it earlier than he did. 
Fisher could not beat out Winston when Ced had to be replaced. If Fisher had of looked great in practice surely they go to him much earlier in the year?

Westerman didn't dress for a single game even when Boling was out. If coaches believe he was starting material why didn't they even dress him as a backup? 

Yes they hold onto guys too long ( Mauluaga, Johnson, Nugent) but who are the young guys who are pushing those guys off the roster? Remember when Dunlap was having trouble getting on the field despite making things happen when he played. That was a coach who had false loyalty to a vet (Geathers) 

The way they handled Boyd was the correct way. Gave him some opportunities and when he produced he earned more. 

Handing Westerman a starters job is a big risk. Putting all our faith in both Ced and Jake is a big risk. Bringing back Andre is misguided loyalty. Mauluaga being on this team is misguided loyalty