Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Stock Market "Buy" signals - 2016 deficiencies seem Upgraded in most areas for 2017
#21
(08-10-2017, 12:44 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: According to Hobspin. Please stop spreading that lie. We've seen how in the past that's not always as exactly the same as they have claimed.

Unless they offered a $5m signing bonus, they didn't offer the exact same 2017 money. If the Rams cut him after 2017, he walks away with $12.5m. That's not the exact same money as offering a guy a 1yr/$9m deal with $0 signing bonus and $0 guaranteed money.

Actually had a conversation with  former Bengals OL who told us Whittworth turned down the Bengals guaranteed 1 year deal that was a little higher than the Rams 2017 offer, but he wanted a 2 year deal and Bengals would not do a 2 year deal due to his age. What is your scource?
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
I am so ready for 2024 season. I love pro football and hoping for a great Bengals year. Regardless, always remember it is a game and entertainment. 
Reply/Quote
#22
(08-10-2017, 10:43 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Actually had a conversation with  former Bengals OL who told us Whittworth turned down the Bengals guaranteed 1 year deal that was a little higher than the Rams 2017 offer, but he wanted a 2 year deal and Bengals would not do a 2 year deal due to his age. What is your scource?

I read something similar too. They offered him a 1 year deal for somewhere around the Rams offer...but wouldn't go to 2 years.
Reply/Quote
#23
(08-10-2017, 10:43 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Actually had a conversation with  former Bengals OL who told us Whittworth turned down the Bengals guaranteed 1 year deal that was a little higher than the Rams 2017 offer, but he wanted a 2 year deal and Bengals would not do a 2 year deal due to his age. What is your scource?

(08-10-2017, 10:45 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I read something similar too. They offered him a 1 year deal for somewhere around the Rams offer...but wouldn't go to 2 years.

Heard this as well and makes me think they didn't want to pizz off Whit by franchise tagging him either.

This way he had a shot at a multiple year deal. MB and company are loyal to players like Whit and you don't want to stifle
the man if he gets a better deal elsewhere. No point bringing the man back if he is angry.

They might of made the right decision, sure as hell hope so and Og plays decent.
Reply/Quote





Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)