(01-19-2020, 11:07 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: I don't want to keep him.
It is not backwards logic to say that this stupid ass franchise will sign even more worthless players like Hart and Preston Brown type deals.
Excuse me if a backup who CAN win a game in the NFL makes more sense to come into a game than a dumbass like Hart who is a detriment to the success of the team EVERY time he steps on the field.
Is Dalton actually worth 17-18 million to this team? No. Probably not. Yet I can easily see them waste the same if not MORE money on bad Free Agents.
What in the hell is so hard to see there. You've watched what The Family & Tobin do. To act like they won't is backwards logic to me.
We've got Gio hardly getting any production and grossly overpaid. Idiocy at it's best.
It's basically saying we should make a dumb move because the Bengals might make a dumb move (cutting Andy without reinvesting any of it).
The Bengals usually go into each season around 10 million under the cap. I doubt they'll go into the season $28 million under after releasing Andy.
They'll spend it somehow.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
Just because Brown doesn't typically sign people doesn't mean that they should make bad moves. Keeping Andy Dalton vs. spending $15 million a year on Bryan Bulaga would be a bad call. I've seen a lot of this defeatism to justify making bad moves type of thought lately and I just can't wrap my head around it. "Don't draft a good QB prospect because the team sucks and they'd ruin him." Ok...that's just a bad move that will compound the other bad moves. Spending $17 million a year on a backup is unheard of. 31 other teams don't behave like that because it's straight up goofy.
(01-19-2020, 11:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No need to belittle our fellow board members in this forum; leave that to those in charge. Hope springs eternal; nothing wrong with our friends thinking Mikey will use Andy's $ to sign an All Pro OG, superstar LB, excellent back up and outstanding mentor QB.
They are most likely wrong, but don't slam them for dreaming.
So, you've never advocated for a move that you think is in the Bengals best interest, even though that move alone might not directly effect anything else they do?
(01-19-2020, 11:48 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: Just because Brown doesn't typically sign people doesn't mean that they should make bad moves. Keeping Andy Dalton vs. spending $15 million a year on Bryan Bulaga would be a bad call. I've seen a lot of this defeatism to justify making bad moves type of thought lately and I just can't wrap my head around it. "Don't draft a good QB prospect because the team sucks and they'd ruin him." Ok...that's just a bad move that will compound the other bad moves. Spending $17 million a year on a backup is unheard of. 31 other teams don't behave like that because it's straight up goofy.
NYG did it last year (actually paid $6 mil more) and KCC (hey what are they doing in 2 weeks) paid Smith much more than that while taking Mahomes.
(01-19-2020, 11:52 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: So, you've never advocated for a move that you think is in the Bengals best interest, even though that move alone might not effect anything else they do?
Sure I have, just not I'm sure I implied someone else was stupid for disagreeing with it.
With no reasonable trade offer Andy will be on this team with Burrow. Mike Brown isn't going to just cut Andy so it'll have to be a reasonable trade offer that benefits this team and nobody knows who might get hurt early in the season, especially a QB on the bengals or any reasonable trade partner with a lot to offer for his services for next season.. For all we know Burrow may have more injuries to his ribs than the media is/isn't reporting too so there's also a possibility Andy starts the season. All kinds of weird stuff could happen between now and opening day. Heck, the Brown family might sell the team to a tampon manufacturer for all we know..
In the immortal words of my old man, "Wait'll you get to be my age!"
Chicago sounds rough to the maker of verse, but the one comfort we have is Cincinnati sounds worse. ~Oliver Wendal Holmes Sr.
Dalton says he wants to start. A disgruntled force in the locker room and using 17.7 million of the cap for a QB who won't start seems totally stupid. But that being said the FO can't seem to get out of their own way. If they don't attack free agency and rely on the signing of Burrow to boost enthusiasm while pocketing the rest of the salary cap money then they are still using the fans as patsies.
(01-19-2020, 11:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No need to belittle our fellow board members in this forum; leave that to those in charge. Hope springs eternal; nothing wrong with our friends thinking Mikey will use Andy's $ to sign an All Pro OG, superstar LB, excellent back up and outstanding mentor QB.
They are most likely wrong, but don't slam them for dreaming just counter them with logic and civility.
You weren't trying to say that keeping Andy would be a smart move from a team standpoint, right? You were saying we should keep Andy (do a dumb move) because the Brown family won't spend the money. No one was calling you dumb, which actually would be a CoC violation.
FYI, calling out moderation publicly IS a CoC violation. Calling a (potential) personnel move "dumb" is not.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
(01-20-2020, 12:08 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: You weren't trying to say that keeping Andy would be a smart move from a team standpoint, right? You were saying we should keep Andy (do a dumb move) because the Brown family won't spend the money. No one was calling you dumb, which actually would be a CoC violation.
FYI, calling out moderation publicly IS a CoC violation. Calling a (potential) personnel move "dumb" is not.
(01-19-2020, 08:49 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: It makes the most sense to trade or cut Andy, use the 18m elsewhere and sign another reasonably priced vet to backup Burrow.
This
Plus it would be a dick move to do that to Andy imo.
The water tastes funny when you're far from your home,
yet it's only the thirsty that hunger to roam. Roam the Jungle !
(01-19-2020, 09:06 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Can't do that anymore, apparently; you need to spend otherwise you lose it and can't carry it over or something.
Can't remember where I read it.
The CBA ends this year. Until a new one is settled there is no carryover. Although the 4 year "floor" requirements are stiil in play.
I really don't think we have to worry about keeping Dalton. Keep in mind how Dalton was abruptly benched and how upset he was about it because his agent could've managed a trade. You don't think Dalton watched Tannehill in Tennessee and is thinking "I'm way better than that guy I can do the same if put in the right situation". ZT's plan was always moving on from Dalton after the season and I don't put it past Dalton to request a trade if he senses they'll keep him just to d*ck him around and name Burrow the starter regardless. Would MB care to go through another Carson situation?
I also don't expect them to use that money to significantly upgrade the team. I'm as optimistic as I've ever been and I'm still in wait and see mode. But absolutely no on keeping Dalton.
When it comes to what to do with Andy, it really boils down to these 3 options:
Option 1
Keep Andy on the roster
Pay him 17.7m as a backup
Don't allow him to pursue other opportunities
Create unneeded tension that doesn't need to exist
Pass on the possibility of getting an extra draft pick
Not have almost 18m available to spend elsewhere
Option 2
Keep Andy on the roster
Pay him 17.7m to remain the starter
Have him play most or all season while Burrow sits
Create a situation where Andy is n a no-win position
Pass on the possibility of getting an extra draft pick
Not have almost 18m available to spend elsewhere
Option 3
Move on from Andy with trade or release
Don't pay 17.7m for a backup
Allow him to pursue other opportunities
Eliminate situation that could cause unneeded tension
Have the opportunity to at least try for an extra draft pick
Have almost 18m extra to spend elsewhere
IMO, option 3 is the best option moving forward. The other 2 seem to be less than ideal and possibly even problematic. I'm not sure why either of those would be preferred over option 3. I know that some feels like even if the Bengals had the extra money, they wouldn't use it or use it wisely at least. But if the question is what's purely in the best interest of the team, I just feel 3 seems to make the most sense.
I think that the single most important thing to do is to funnel as much money as possible into protecting this guy physically. To do this, they should bring in 3 new linemen. There’s actually enough money there to fix this team by cutting a couple of guys, trading Andy and not signing AJ unless it’s for under 10 Mil a year. It’s not at all a good sign if a player hasn’t played in a year and a half. He’s obviously still not healthy or he would’ve played that last game to leverage a new deal.
Thinking back I wish we would have kept Whit to mentor Ced.
Now I do not hate Dalton and would love to keep him as back up if it were baseball and we were the deep pocket Yankees.
But there is a cap and we have many holes to try and fill and could use every single asset (money to spend. draft pick) we can get at this point of time imo.
Plus if Burrow turns out to be the savior ? Would hate to get him killed in his first season by not trying to bolster OL.
Think drafting Burrow and trading Dalton is the right play .
But if we are keeping Dalton ? Then I would trade #1 pick for everything I could get for it and draft QB next season.
The water tastes funny when you're far from your home,
yet it's only the thirsty that hunger to roam. Roam the Jungle !
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
