Thoughts on Loyalty?

[*SHRacerX*]

(08-26-2019, 09:24 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Clay Matthews was not offered a contract in 2019 after playing 10 years and 6 pro bowls for the Packers.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001044378/article/clay-matthews-heartwarming-homecoming-he-never-saw-coming?3

We have some guys coming up soon (AJ and Dalton to name 2) and others who have big contracts (Geno and Carlos).

How would you react if MB suddenly showed no loyalty to aging stars? BTW, Clay signed with the Rams and will be playing where he played in college and close to home again. Whitt is a team mate.

Cuts are coming. Trades are possible. Should FO and MB choose loyalty over winning?

I don't think the two have to be mutually exclusive.  

The Bengals have almost always honored a contract that they have signed without terminating it early.  There are not many teams with that kind of loyalty.  Has it helped them attract FAs?  Not at all...because the system is such that these agents make a % every time a new contract is signed.  I don't think they advice their clients that Cincy almost always honors the contracts.  If I were the Bengals, I would point that out to any prospective FAs.

In terms of Dalton/Green and the aging vets Dunlap and Geno, it will really be situational.  If all of a sudden, Carlos drops off the table, you would have to consider his release.  However, if any or all of them continue their production, I would honor the contract.  

I don't see any way they extend Gio beyond his current deal and he is a model player and teammate, but his production doesn't measure up to his contract whatsoever.  Now, people may argue that Marv and co never used him correctly.  We will see what ZT has in mind.  But there will have to be some tough decisions moving forward. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(08-26-2019, 10:31 AM)Sled21 Wrote: It's simple for most Bengals fans.... simply wait to see if the Front Office offers a contract or not, then criticize the decision.

I don’t see anyone criticizing Geno an Dunlap’s deals. In fact, most people were pleasantly surprised we took care of both.

[Luvnit2]

(08-26-2019, 10:29 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Ever since Johnny Unitas ran out the clock with the Chargers, it's been been standard for long-standing vets to part ways with their "one true" home and cash in on one final contract where they get to wear a uniform that looks weird on them.  Most of the time they fizzle out and people tend to forget this stuff.  The whole Luck retirement thing has me thinking how there was a good chance Manning going to the Broncos could have been a one-n-done overlooked footnote because his neck was so bad.

At any rate, fans get uppity for a year or so while the guy is "the enemy" and then he retires and people go back to seeing him as being only a member of his main team and such is life.  Only when you need some amusement do you find pictures of Franco Harris as a Seahawk, Oj Simpson as a 49er, Ken Stabler as an Oiler, Joe Namath as Ram and so on.

So it's more like the main team is loyal and we will welcome you back in our history but we will also let you take some poor sucker franchise to the cleaners for one last payday first.  Free, free...set them free (to paraphrase Sting paraphrasing someone else).

I watched all of those guys play. Johnny U. was my favorite as a child. I loved Stabler too.

I guess I am very old. 

[*Nately120*]

(08-26-2019, 12:21 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I watched all of those guys play. Johnny U. was my favorite as a child. I loved Stabler too.

I guess I am very old. 

I'm 37, but I'm a bit of an historian of odd stuff and sports heroes in the wrong uniforms at the end of their careers is an oddly appealing area to me.  

[Luvnit2]

(08-26-2019, 11:05 AM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: Mikey is overly loyal but he also seems to think that players should or will play for less as a result of this loyalty. Mikey always prefers making money over winning, we know this and that is a difficult structure under which you can build loyalty. 

Funny, there is no financial evidence of this after the 2011 CBA.

He is small market owner who pays like a mid or large market owner. He rolls over money every year for the cap, I don't know 1 year where he kept (pockeded) the extra cash since new CBA.

Please share if you can prove your statement.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2019, 09:24 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Clay Matthews was not offered a contract in 2019 after playing 10 years and 6 pro bowls for the Packers.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001044378/article/clay-matthews-heartwarming-homecoming-he-never-saw-coming?3

We have some guys coming up soon (AJ and Dalton to name 2) and others who have big contracts (Geno and Carlos).

How would you react if MB suddenly showed no loyalty to aging stars? BTW, Clay signed with the Rams and will be playing where he played in college and close to home again. Whitt is a team mate.

Cuts are coming. Trades are possible. Should FO and MB choose loyalty over winning?

Nope. Just win baby.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2019, 10:54 AM)Nately120 Wrote: In all fairness, people who wait until something is over to give an opinion can be seen as spineless or just lazy.  Taken to the extreme we may as well not predict the 2019 season and we should just talk about the past lest we make a prediction or criticism that is *gasp* wrong!

If someone asks me what I think the BEngals record will be in 2019 I'm not going to say "I don't know...I can't see the future, but I do know they went 7-9 in 1985 and I can assure you of that one!"

That's right. You better not step on grampahol's toes. 

[Hammerstripes]

(08-26-2019, 11:09 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I have argued MB is too loyal.

But, I do not see FA's flocking to Cincinnati because Mb is loyal.

I think a winning culture creates FA's desire in conjunction with big bucks to go to a team in FA over another team.

Well, you forgot the 2nd part - Mike Brown is cheap when it comes to paying outside help.  Thats why we don't have free agents flocking here.

[ElkValleyBengal]

(08-26-2019, 10:56 AM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: I still can’t see a photo of Anthony Munoz in a Buccaneer uniform without feeling a gut punch.

The fact he never played a down for them (regular season anyway) made that one less painful for me.  So officially he was a Bengal lifer.

[fredtoast]

Whine about Mike Brown being too loyal.

Whine about Mike Brown not re-signing Whitworth, Zeitler and every other decent player who ever left in free agency.

Whine. Rinse. Repeat.

[J24]

To me it's simple if their a good player sign them and if and when they become bad cut them and move on.
The goal is to compete for a championship annually if you're not able to perform to that level then it is time to move on.
However there is a classy way to do things when it's time to move on and I think the Bengals could do a lot better at honoring past players.

[Dcity614]

MB has shown loyalty to his staff just look how long the Paul Alexander was around, look how long Marvin Lewis was allowed to stay around. Loyalty to players is another thing....they will be offered a contract and other teams will be able to match it or beat it and that will be that. Unless the team wins a Superbowl then there is really no reason to overpay just because a guy has played out his contract and say it is in the name of loyalty (other than winning a SuperBowl).

[*psychdoctor*]

I would say loyalty to coaches and loyalty to players are two different issues. MB Loyalty to coaches ended last year when ZT was hired. The Front Office cleaned house so to speak. Hopefully Coaches that do not perform are not retained.

What I had issues in the past was certain athletes and coaches were retained that were under performing, at least from a fan's perspective. Talented players with red flags for character issues and past history of alleged criminal activity were given a pass. It appeared to the average fan that Loyalty superseded the need to hold Coaches and players accountable.

I have no issue with rewarding a star player with a lucrative contract. I do take issue, however, playing vets who under perform over a rookie or younger player who is clearly more talented. What I find refreshing with ZT, is the willingness to play the best athletes regardless where he was drafted or is paid and the willingness to sit vets. It conveys the message that the new coaching staff wants to win.

The NFL is a business, with the arching goal to win games, win the division, win the conference, and ultimately win the super bowl. The NFL is not a half-way house to rehabilitate individuals with character problems.

[I_C_DeadPeople]

(08-26-2019, 12:26 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Funny, there is no financial evidence of this after the 2011 CBA.

He is small market owner who pays like a mid or large market owner. He rolls over money every year for teh cap, I don't know 1 year where he kept (pockeded) the extra cash since new CBA.

Please share if you can prove your statement.

He makes his money by cheating out on office staff such as scouts and if you rollover cap space every year while the revenue you revive goes up every year this is income. 

[Luvnit2]

(08-26-2019, 05:36 PM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: He makes his money by cheating out on office staff such as scouts and if you rollover cap space every year while the revenue you revive goes up every year this is income. 

No, it is not income at all. It is an expense for future years.

The cap number also goes up each year. The cap is a guaranteed spend based on the escalating revenue.

[Hammerstripes]

Mike Brown has no problem paying big money to his own players. The problem with that is if you can't draft 4 new starters very year, you will eventually have holes all over the roster and with an externally cheap owner, no way to fill them.

[I_C_DeadPeople]

(08-26-2019, 06:10 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: No, it is not income at all. It is an expense for future years.

The cap number also goes up each year. The cap is a guaranteed spend based on the escalating revenue.

I am a CPA, I know how Mikey makes his extra money each year of the salary cap system

[Luvnit2]

(08-27-2019, 10:47 AM)Hammerstripes Wrote: Mike Brown has no problem paying big money to his own players.  The problem with that is if you can't draft 4 new starters very year, you will eventually have holes all over the roster and with an externally cheap owner, no way to fill them.

I agree, but any team who misses consistently with picks 1 to 3 will have issues. Our drafting is backwards, we seem more successful in round 4 of any round which makes no sense is scouting (paying for it) is the issue.

[Luvnit2]

(08-26-2019, 11:15 AM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: Players can move fairly freely from team to team these days and the teams themselves can cut players freely as well. I think it is known in the league circles that the Bengals tend to honor contracts signed. That is about as much loyalty as there can be. If the team ever combined this with the desire to win they may be on to something. Until then, it is groundhog day.

The winning culture is non existent, I agree you are correct.

[BengalChris]

(08-26-2019, 09:24 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Clay Matthews was not offered a contract in 2019 after playing 10 years and 6 pro bowls for the Packers.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001044378/article/clay-matthews-heartwarming-homecoming-he-never-saw-coming?3

We have some guys coming up soon (AJ and Dalton to name 2) and others who have big contracts (Geno and Carlos).

How would you react if MB suddenly showed no loyalty to aging stars? BTW, Clay signed with the Rams and will be playing where he played in college and close to home again. Whitt is a team mate.

Cuts are coming. Trades are possible. Should FO and MB choose loyalty over winning?

For me it all depends on what he does with the cash saved by cutting those guys loose and what quality of player is brought in to replace the aging star.

If the front office finds good talent to replace aging guys, then great. If they do another Ogbuehi thing, then the whole team suffers.


Also, it depends of if they give big contracts to sucky younger guys to show they tried and spent some money.

The team only improves if the players they add are better than the players departing.

So should they choose loyalty over winning? NO

Should they they get rid of highly productive players just because they are getting older? NO

Should they keep guys on their rookie deals who aren't really getting it done just because they are cheap? NO - Replace them with better players.