The kicking battle should be over...

[*ochocincos*]

(08-20-2019, 02:19 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Right. Health and a new coaching staff getting something out of some of our underachievers is our hope.

But, we arguably lost our 2 best offensive lineman. Green is hurt. So health is looking like it won't be there. Ross has also been hurt all camp.

We just put soo much pressure on our draft and getting production out of the guys. It's a model that I can't see working long term.

People see the Rams going from a bad team to a good team when they hired McVay, but they added guys too. It wasn't McVay and status quo.

From their 4-12 team, they added McVay, Barwin, Sullivan at Center who was good that year, Kayvon Webster, Whitworth, Woods, plus some decent draft guys. And they traded for Watkins.

IF you added 3-4 upgrades to our roster...we'd be in great shape! Whitworth has been THE BEST Tackle in the NFL. Imagine if we added that and say a quality LB.

The fans wanted Whitworth to retire a Bengal.
He wasn't showing signs of slowing down.
However, he was 35 years old and I really believe the FO didn't believe he'd sustain this level of play this late into his career. The great Anthony Munoz was 34 in his last season.
It was a mistake on their part. They risked letting him go due to his age and they've paid the price for it ever since.

[fredtoast]

(08-22-2019, 10:05 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: "For the sake of change" doesn't make a lot of sense.  What has this team done in recent years to not warrant significant change?  That isn't logical?

I have no problem with change.  But it has to be for a logical reason.  Just because we have had three straight losing years I am not going to bench Geno Atkins and A J Green.  That is the point I am making.  You can't justify any and every change with a blanket statement like "We had a losing record so we have to change everything."

[sandwedge]

(08-19-2019, 12:58 AM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Yeah we need to rebuild man like the Browns, the best team in the world....

Yep, we're going to rebuild this team thru the draft and we're starting with a new Kicker......

[*psychdoctor*]

Here is some food for thought for those who wished Elliot should have stayed on team (I wanted Gonzalez by the way ):

Here are last two years FG% splits. Elliott has been fine. But the better numbers are pretty clear cut.

Elliott/Bullock
30-39: 77.7/87.5
40-49: 90.4/90.9
50+: 63.6/50.0
OVERALL FGs: 83.9/86.0
PAT: 93.5/94.6 https://t.co/1PzPsqhDYr

— Paul Dehner Jr. (@pauldehnerjr) August 22, 2019

I do not understand the hate toward Bullock.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-22-2019, 03:31 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: Here is some food for thought for those who wished Elliot should have stayed on team (I wanted Gonzalez by the way   ):

Here are last two years FG% splits. Elliott has been fine. But the better numbers are pretty clear cut.

Elliott/Bullock
30-39: 77.7/87.5
40-49: 90.4/90.9
50+: 63.6/50.0
OVERALL FGs: 83.9/86.0
PAT: 93.5/94.6 https://t.co/1PzPsqhDYr

— Paul Dehner Jr. (@pauldehnerjr) August 22, 2019

I do not understand the hate toward Bullock.

Same reason as the hate toward Dalton. Both dudes aren't physical specimens with super powerful limbs.

[*psychdoctor*]

(08-22-2019, 03:51 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Same reason as the hate toward Dalton. Both dudes aren't physical specimens with super powerful limbs.

Isn't Elliot like a "fly-Weight"  kicker?  If I remember correctly, he was barely 160 pounds.  

[THE PISTONS]

(08-22-2019, 10:22 AM)ochocincos Wrote: The fans wanted Whitworth to retire a Bengal.
He wasn't showing signs of slowing down.
However, he was 35 years old and I really believe the FO didn't believe he'd sustain this level of play this late into his career. The great Anthony Munoz was 34 in his last season.
It was a mistake on their part. They risked letting him go due to his age and they've paid the price for it ever since.

Yeah I wasn't trying to rehash why we let him go. More trying to point out the guys the Rams brought in IN ADDITION to McVay with the performances.

IF we added a guy that graded out as a Top 3 Tackle, and a couple Top 30 WR's and a Top 15 Center, imagine how much better off we'd be.

[THE PISTONS]

(08-22-2019, 03:31 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: Here is some food for thought for those who wished Elliot should have stayed on team (I wanted Gonzalez by the way   ):

Here are last two years FG% splits. Elliott has been fine. But the better numbers are pretty clear cut.

Elliott/Bullock
30-39: 77.7/87.5
40-49: 90.4/90.9
50+: 63.6/50.0
OVERALL FGs: 83.9/86.0
PAT: 93.5/94.6 https://t.co/1PzPsqhDYr

— Paul Dehner Jr. (@pauldehnerjr) August 22, 2019

I do not understand the hate toward Bullock.

Great post.

I think Randy doesn't have the strongest leg, but inside 50 he's pretty reliable.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-22-2019, 03:52 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: Isn't Elliot like a "fly-Weight"  kicker?  If I remember correctly, he was barely 160 pounds.  

Yeah, but dude had a monster of a leg. MONSTER of a leg. MONSTER

[*Nately120*]

(08-22-2019, 03:31 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: I do not understand the hate toward Bullock.

It's more about people wanting to roll the dice on some new guy being great over an actual vet who has offered solid production.  It's not so much that people are down on the vet, it's just that they are afraid they are missing out on something great because they aren't starting an unknown at the position.  It's not an entirely logical situation.

Add in the fact that every year in the NFL new players emerge and are great, and there is enough faulty logic to lead fans to believe they're missing out.  Hell, one huge knock against Marvin was that he insisted on playing vets over young guys who might be great.  Every year we go into the season griping that our bench is full of young could-be stars that are going to forever languish behind the Randy Bullocks, Brandon Lafells, etc.  

For proof, we replaced a HC with a winning record with a QB coach and people are over the flippin' moon about it. Nothing can compare to the feeling of newness and projected optimism.

[*ochocincos*]

(08-22-2019, 03:53 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yeah I wasn't trying to rehash why we let him go. More trying to point out the guys the Rams brought in IN ADDITION to McVay with the performances.

IF we added a guy that graded out as a Top 3 Tackle, and a couple Top 30 WR's and a Top 15 Center, imagine how much better off we'd be.

A top 15 C would cost $7+ mill a year.
A top 3 OT would cost $12+ mill a year.
A couple top 30 WRs would cost $8+ mill a year each ($16+ mill a year combined).
----------------------------------------------
~$35 mill a year

Obviously, you're referring to the caliber player and not their contract, as the Rams had a cap hit in 2017 of the following players:
Whitworth - $9.1 mill (contract was back-loaded)
Sullivan - $1 mill
Woods+Watkins - $8 mill combined (Watkins was on rookie deal)
---------------------
$18.1 mill

Rams were able to play the cap well, find a gem in Sullivan, and were willing to trade Gaines and a 2nd rounder for Watkins to save some cap too.

On the flip side, the Bengals (over?)value their current players and draft picks a lot. I don't know if they'd ever consider trading Dre Kirkpatrick, for example, to get some OL, LB, or receiver help. Or would they be willing to part with a 2nd rounder for a player entering the last year of his rookie deal, knowing there was risk the player could leave in FA the next year? Would they risk signing OL from outside FA to big money?
I'm not confident they would do any of these things.

[*bfine32*]

(08-22-2019, 03:31 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: Here is some food for thought for those who wished Elliot should have stayed on team (I wanted Gonzalez by the way   ):

Here are last two years FG% splits. Elliott has been fine. But the better numbers are pretty clear cut.

Elliott/Bullock
30-39: 77.7/87.5
40-49: 90.4/90.9
50+: 63.6/50.0
OVERALL FGs: 83.9/86.0
PAT: 93.5/94.6 https://t.co/1PzPsqhDYr

— Paul Dehner Jr. (@pauldehnerjr) August 22, 2019

I do not understand the hate toward Bullock.

Chicks love the long ball

[*ochocincos*]

(08-22-2019, 04:15 PM)Nately120 Wrote: It's more about people wanting to roll the dice on some new guy being great over an actual vet who has offered solid production.  It's not so much that people are down on the vet, it's just that they are afraid they are missing out on something great because they aren't starting an unknown at the position.  It's not an entirely logical situation.

Add in the fact that every year in the NFL new players emerge and are great, and there is enough faulty logic to lead fans to believe they're missing out.  Hell, one huge knock against Marvin was that he insisted on playing vets over young guys who might be great.  Every year we go into the season griping that our bench is full of young could-be stars that are going to forever languish behind the Randy Bullocks, Brandon Lafells, etc.  

For proof, we replaced a HC with a winning record with a QB coach and people are over the flippin' moon about it.  Nothing can compare to the feeling of newness and projected optimism.

To expand on this, the fans view Bullock in the same light they viewed Peko, Michael Johnson, Brandon LaFell, etc.
They were solid contributors but they had a lower ceiling. The fans want someone with a higher ceiling and want the team to take a risk rather than play it safe. Unfortunately, sometimes this backfires but they expect and trust that the organization can identify good talent and turn them into elite players.

[*psychdoctor*]

(08-22-2019, 04:15 PM)Nately120 Wrote: It's more about people wanting to roll the dice on some new guy being great over an actual vet who has offered solid production.  It's not so much that people are down on the vet, it's just that they are afraid they are missing out on something great because they aren't starting an unknown at the position.  It's not an entirely logical situation.

Add in the fact that every year in the NFL new players emerge and are great, and there is enough faulty logic to lead fans to believe they're missing out.  Hell, one huge knock against Marvin was that he insisted on playing vets over young guys who might be great.  Every year we go into the season griping that our bench is full of young could-be stars that are going to forever languish behind the Randy Bullocks, Brandon Lafells, etc.  

For proof, we replaced a HC with a winning record with a QB coach and people are over the flippin' moon about it.  Nothing can compare to the feeling of newness and projected optimism.

So if I may paraphrase what you are saying:

Fans of a franchise with historic failures, that has not won a playoff game in nearly 30 years, search for novelty and change; even if such changes do not necessarily lead to better performance.  Therefore, some Bengal fans crave the excitement of hope & change so that they can maintain optimism and sanity.  Sounds about right.  

[*Nately120*]

(08-22-2019, 05:10 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: So if I may paraphrase what you are saying:

Fans of a franchise with historic failures, that has not won a playoff game in nearly 30 years, search for novelty and change; even if such changes do not necessarily lead to better performance.  Therefore, some Bengal fans crave the excitement of hope & change so that they can maintain optimism and sanity.  Sounds about right.  

Someone else!  Someone else!  We want someone else!

[*SHRacerX*]

(08-22-2019, 01:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have no problem with change.  But it has to be for a logical reason.  Just because we have had three straight losing years I am not going to bench Geno Atkins and A J Green.  That is the point I am making.  You can't justify any and every change with a blanket statement like "We had a losing record so we have to change everything."

Not sure who did, but you can absolutely decide to trade away all your talent (yes, even them), compile draft picks and money, and rebuild from ground zero.  Ask the Browns.  It seems to be working there.  Not saying at all that is what I want, and I don't think the Bengals are as far away as many would lead you to believe, but it isn't illogical.  

[THE PISTONS]

(08-23-2019, 07:32 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Not sure who did, but you can absolutely decide to trade away all your talent (yes, even them), compile draft picks and money, and rebuild from ground zero.  Ask the Browns.  It seems to be working there.  Not saying at all that is what I want, and I don't think the Bengals are as far away as many would lead you to believe, but it isn't illogical.  

I actually don't think it's necessary in the NFL to go total rebuild like the Raiders and Browns.

You just need 2-3 good grafts in a row and 2-3 good free agents.

Of course, we've been missing on 1st Round draft picks lately which hurts...and we all know how free agency went this year.

But, imagine IF we added a solid external LB to our group in free agency.

[Bengalitis]

Randy is from the Marvin era thus his fate is sealed.

[BengalsRocker]

(08-23-2019, 10:17 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I actually don't think it's necessary in the NFL to go total rebuild like the Raiders and Browns.

You just need 2-3 good grafts in a row and 2-3 good free agents.

Of course, we've been missing on 1st Round draft picks lately which hurts...and we all know how free agency went this year.

But, imagine IF we added a solid external LB to our group in free agency.

You know.

Guys like Dansby, Hawk, and others would have been nice linebacker signings if it wasn't at the end of their careers.

All I'd like for the "New Dey" is signing guys at least in the middle of them.

Preston Brown being only included in handful of ones that fit that category in two decades and hasn't done much.

They need to get better at signing FAs as well as drafting.

[fredtoast]

(08-23-2019, 07:32 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Not sure who did, but you can absolutely decide to trade away all your talent (yes, even them), compile draft picks and money, and rebuild from ground zero.  Ask the Browns.  It seems to be working there.  Not saying at all that is what I want, and I don't think the Bengals are as far away as many would lead you to believe, but it isn't illogical.  

I don't believe the Browns ever traded away a Pro Bowl level player.  I know for sure they never traded Joe Thomas.

The Browns mainly acquired more draft picks by trading their original first round picks.  Unfortunately the Bengals do not suck enough to get picks in the top 3 of the draft every year that bring lots of picks back in trade.

And finally, since I don't want to go 20 years without even making the playoffs I don't think I'll ask the Brown anything about re-building.