Good info into the Dunlap saga

[Hoofhearted]

From John Sheeran and Anthony on Cincy Jungle. https://youtu.be/RYEDbsFTUSc

[Sled21]

So in short order, Carlos just didn't like his DC and wanted to play the way he wanted to and not the way the coaches wanted him to.

[Geno_Can_Dunk]

Indeed it's interesting and lots of good insight. But let's remember it's all from Dunlap's perspective. The notion that the coaching staff was trying to devalue him to force the front office to deal him as really speculative. There's no way they can possibly know that. Dunlap's camp will always want to see it as anything but his fault, so they need to concoct explanations for his benching.

[Sled21]

(10-29-2020, 01:40 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: Indeed it's interesting and lots of good insight. But let's remember it's all from Dunlap's perspective. The notion that the coaching staff was trying to devalue him to force the front office to deal him as really speculative. There's no way they can possibly know that. Dunlap's camp will always want to see it as anything but his fault, so they need to concoct explanations for his benching.

Unfortunately for them, the tape of the first games are out there, so anyone who wonders why he was benched needs only to watch his effort....

[fredtoast]

(10-29-2020, 01:34 PM)Sled21 Wrote: So in short order, Carlos just didn't like his DC and wanted to play the way he wanted to and not the way the coaches wanted him to.

Don't know how that is what you got out of the story.

Zac and Lou wanted to get rid of a DE who was one of the best at his position over the last half of last year when he got healthy.  Front office overruled Zac and Lou.  Zac and Lou responded by benching Dunlap in order to make him look bad.

Lou wants to coach like an authoritarian, but he has done nothing to earn the respect of veterans.  That will always be a problem.

Anyone who ever had a clueless boss who gets petty when fails will understand.

[fredtoast]

(10-29-2020, 01:42 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Unfortunately for them, the tape of the first games are out there, so anyone who wonders why he was benched needs only to watch his effort....

The tape shows him outperforming the guys who he was benched for.

[Sled21]

(10-29-2020, 01:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Don't know how that is what you got out of the story.

Zac and Lou wanted to get rid of a DE who was one of the best at his position over the last half of last year when he got healthy.  Front office overruled Zac and Lou.  Zac and Lou responded by benching Dunlap in order to make him look bad.

Lou wants to coach like an authoritarian, but he has done nothing to earn the respect of veterans.  That will always be a problem.

Anyone who ever had a clueless boss who gets petty when fails will understand.

That's Carlos' camp's story. Carlos, by their own admission did not like Lou's system, or want to follow his coach's directions.  So he just showed little to no effort. Of course they benched him for that. Veteran players who do not think they have to follow the program are always distractions. Notice he is the only one....

[Sled21]

(10-29-2020, 01:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The tape shows him outperforming the guys who he was benched for.

Who are rookies who should be nowhere near as good as a player making Dunlap's money. The fact they are trying, and not just taking up space, makes his dogging it all the more apparent.

[RiverRat13]

In the long run Dunlap potentially did the team a favor. Had he played close to average, they would have kept him and his large cap number for next year. Now that money can be better spent elsewhere.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

So....in summation, the stubbornness of the FO led to all of this. All they had to do was move him last year, and non e of this happens. Yojimbo, take a bow, you were correct. Posting rotation and depth chart was still Bush League, but the rest of it does now have some merit. When things change, and someone can't, or won't adapt, you move on from one party or the other. So, you either fire the DC, or move the player in this instance. Common sense.

[Wes Mantooth]

Anybody kind enough to give me a time stamp to some of the relevant stuff?

[Whatever]

(10-29-2020, 01:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The tape shows him outperforming the guys who he was benched for.

When was this?  Dunlap has a 53 PFF grade.  Kareem has a 60+ grade.  Hunt came in off the street and posted a 57 against the Browns.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(10-29-2020, 01:40 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: Indeed it's interesting and lots of good insight. But let's remember it's all from Dunlap's perspective. The notion that the coaching staff was trying to devalue him to force the front office to deal him as really speculative. There's no way they can possibly know that. Dunlap's camp will always want to see it as anything but his fault, so they need to concoct explanations for his benching.

That's true, normally. But this is Mike Brown, after all. We've seen it once for sure with Palmer. There's a chance that both the staff, and Carlos wanted to move on, but the FO wouldn't budge. Coaches may have benched him for effort, and rightfully so, or they benched him to force the FOs hand. Then, Carlos also forced their hand with his outbursts.

[cincyfan429]

(10-29-2020, 02:04 PM)RiverRat13 Wrote: In the long run Dunlap potentially did the team a favor.  Had he played close to average, they would have kept him and his large cap number for next year.  Now that money can be better spent elsewhere.

So you think Mike Brown is going out there, and spending money on a big name defensive end. Never happen money straight to his pocket.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(10-29-2020, 02:06 PM)Whatever Wrote: When was this?  Dunlap has a 53 PFF grade.  Kareem has a 60+ grade.  Hunt came in off the street and posted a 57 against the Browns.

I thought Hunt was in the 70s last week....highest rated defender. That makes it even worse.

[Sled21]

(10-29-2020, 02:06 PM)Whatever Wrote: When was this?  Dunlap has a 53 PFF grade.  Kareem has a 60+ grade.  Hunt came in off the street and posted a 57 against the Browns.

Fred evidently thinks the veterans should play regardless of if they are giving any effort or not. He would have been great on Marvin's staff.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(10-29-2020, 01:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Don't know how that is what you got out of the story.

Zac and Lou wanted to get rid of a DE who was one of the best at his position over the last half of last year when he got healthy.  Front office overruled Zac and Lou.  Zac and Lou responded by benching Dunlap in order to make him look bad.

Lou wants to coach like an authoritarian, but he has done nothing to earn the respect of veterans.  That will always be a problem.

Anyone who ever had a clueless boss who gets petty when fails will understand.

Somewhat true....but guys like Reader apparently had no problem with him judging by what he said in interviews early in the year. My guess would be that they wanted to change up Dunlaps role in the defense, and he didn't like it. Then when Anarumo got a little testy with him over it, he flaked out. Like was said in the podcast, sometimes it's best to just move on. This one looks to be on the FO yet again for being stubborn. If you support your coaching staff, you don't undermine their authority. Mike did the same shit to Marvin.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(10-29-2020, 02:05 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Anybody kind enough to give me a time stamp to some of the relevant stuff?

Pretty much the entire first 20 minutes or so is about Dunlap.

[fredtoast]

(10-29-2020, 01:59 PM)Sled21 Wrote:  Notice he is the only one....

Actually I have noticed that Darius Phillips and Shawn Williams have also complained publicly about "wasting talent".

Multiple sources have said Atkins is frustrated, but the Bengals are just lucky that Geno NEVER talks about anything.

[Wes Mantooth]

So, I just listened to section where the guy goes over what Dunlap Sr. said.

If any of this is true then it just speaks to just how terrible our front office is. Disfunctional is the perfect decription.

We had our coaching staff bench a player to devalue him so much that they would force the FO to part ways? We intentioanlly tanked his trade value just so we'd forced to trade him? I mean, what????????????

I take all of this with a grain of salt because of the source, but the entire saga shows disfunction. He should've been traded last year. And if there was any question from the staff about his role going into the season then he should've been traded/cut in the offseason. Yet we let it reach such a boiling point that we have no other option to ship him off for peanuts, all the while wasting cap space that could have bettered this team in 2020.

Man, do I hate this team sometimes. The way this entire situation played out is absolutely ridiculous.