Bernard released

[Nicomo Cosca]

(04-08-2021, 09:32 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Gotta be Huber?

Dammit. That should have been obvious. Lol

[Schmitbuck]

(04-08-2021, 09:35 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: This is the logical place for those dollars, although I am still holding out hope for someone like Kerrigan or Aldon Smith.  

Hubbard, although coming off a disappointing year (largely due to injury), and Bates are cornerstones.  Locking them up now would make a ton of sense, but I really want a veteran pass rusher.  

I might be in the minority, but I think they should consider holding off on signing Bates long-term. Whenever he gets a long term deal, it's going to be at the top of the market. It may make sense to franchise tag him for a year or two before doing a long-term deal. I think the cap hit would be lower. 

[*Synric*]

(04-08-2021, 10:14 AM)Schmitbuck Wrote: I might be in the minority, but I think they should consider holding off on signing Bates long-term. Whenever he gets a long term deal, it's going to be at the top of the market. It may make sense to franchise tag him for a year or two before doing a long-term deal. I think the cap hit would be lower. 

If the Salary Cap rises the way everyone is expecting next year then they should get a deal done this year because salaries are going to double like the cap.

[Schmitbuck]

(04-08-2021, 10:19 AM)Synric Wrote: If the Salary Cap rises the way everyone is expecting next year then they should get a deal done this year because salaries are going to double like the cap.

I think I read that the one year 'pandemic hit' was being spread over 2-3 years to lower the salary cap otherwise this year would have been much worse. But good point of the cap going up quite a bit, especially with the new TV contracts. I guess they have multiple options on how to approach the contracts and if anything the Bengals will structure it in a mostly team friendly way.. 

[Luvnit2]

(04-08-2021, 09:55 AM)BenZoo2 Wrote: Could you provide examples of years they spent over the cap?  It seems most years they are among teams in the top 10 in cap space and we get hobspins tales of woes about leaving enough to sign the rookies (mostly legit) and injuries (arbitrary)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you are not understanding fully how a rollover works. Ant of the money they roll over, gives the team extra cap money the following year.

The cap in 2021 is 185 million for all teams. Teams that spent their cap money only have 185 million. The Bengals always roll over the cap money(not they don't pocket it) that is not spent to the cap allotment.

So, I think in 2021 instead of having 185 million we had 197 or 198 million. If we had spent it 2020, we would have had only 185 million and right now only 12 or 13 million left with 8 million needed for rookie contracts.

So, in 2021 Bengals were one of few teams that did not have to restructure deals (these teams get future cap hits for 2 to 4 years per deal). In other words, some teams are already spending money in 2022 ad beyond that they are actually paying out in future years to keep players. I call it kicking the can down the road and worrying about it later.

This tactic worked great as long as the cap kept increasing by 10 to 20% a year, but in 2021 the cap decreased so left many teams in a bind. Do Eagles trade Wentz if they have no cap issues? I say no, but since he was disgruntled and they had to get rid of a big salary, they traded him in my opinion. I think they will trade Zac Ertz for same reason as they still have cap issues.

Hopefully this explains it, Bengals spend 100% of their cap, just do 2 ways, one being rolling it over so their cap money is spent over 2 year period. Others spend 100% of cap and go the other way and spend in current year future cap dollars bonuses paid now and become dead money if player is cut or traded or goes against their cap each year until the prorated portion of the bonus is paid off.

[masonbengals fan]

(04-07-2021, 01:48 PM)Joelist Wrote: Hopefully this pans out better but it looks right now like the front office Bungled this badly.

Gio is the best blocking back in football not to mention a playmaker out of the backfield when receiving. So...we cut him in favor of backs unproven in blocking.

Pretty much suns up my feelings. Even more disappointing when they still haven't made much of a splash in helping strengthen our o-line. 

Good luck Gio. Hope you catch onto a team with an actual chance to win something. 

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

I hate to see it, love Gio, but I get the business end of it.

Best of luck to Gio, and the FO needs to do something creative with the savings.

[*SHRacerX*]

(04-08-2021, 10:14 AM)Schmitbuck Wrote: I might be in the minority, but I think they should consider holding off on signing Bates long-term. Whenever he gets a long term deal, it's going to be at the top of the market. It may make sense to franchise tag him for a year or two before doing a long-term deal. I think the cap hit would be lower. 

While that is true to safeites getting the FT, I like the message a long term deal for these guys shows the younger players.  I know, you shouldn't let emotions get in the way of hard line business decisions, but they have lost so many of their own draft picks recently that I think it is becoming a trend. 

[BenZoo2]

(04-08-2021, 10:59 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I think you are not understanding fully how a rollover works. Ant of the money they roll over, gives the team extra cap money the following year.

The cap in 2021 is 185 million for all teams. Teams that spent their cap money only have 185 million. The Bengals always roll over the cap money(not they don't pocket it) that is not spent to the cap allotment.

So, I think in 2021 instead of having 185 million we had 197 or 198 million. If we had spent it 2020, we would have had only 185 million and right now only 12 or 13 million left with 8 million needed for rookie contracts.

So, in 2021 Bengals were one of few teams that did not have to restructure deals (these teams get future cap hits for 2 to 4 years per deal). In other words, some teams are already spending money in 2022 ad beyond that they are actually paying out in future years to keep players. I call it kicking the can down the road and worrying about it later.

This tactic worked great as long as the cap kept increasing by 10 to 20% a year, but in 2021 the cap decreased so left many teams in a bind. Do Eagles trade Wentz if they have no cap issues? I say no, but since he was disgruntled and they had to get rid of a big salary, they traded him in my opinion. I think they will trade Zac Ertz for same reason as they still have cap issues.

Hopefully this explains it, Bengals spend 100% of their cap, just do 2 ways, one being rolling it over so their cap money is spent over 2 year period. Others spend 100% of cap and go the other way and spend in current year future cap dollars bonuses paid now and become dead money if player is cut or traded or goes against their cap each year until the prorated portion of the bonus is paid off.

I generally get the concept. Teams like the saints that continually push money into future years eventually have to pay the bill.

I was just asking Fred to provide an example because it generally seems they don’t spend to the cap, let alone go over it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fredtoast]

(04-08-2021, 12:43 PM)BenZoo Wrote: I was just asking Fred to provide an example because it generally seems they don’t spend to the cap, let alone go over

I will give examples when I have more time.

Bengals don't spend up to their cap but their cap is always higher than the league cap because they roll over unused cap space. So they can spend over the league cap without spending to their cap.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-07-2021, 01:13 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: On one hand it seems like an honorable thing for the FO to do. And, it is!

Ts, it shows a lack of tact as well. I think the other GMs have MB and his staff figured out. One would think that they could have found a suitable trade partner that would have suited both parties. The money part made it difficult, but I think the minute that Bengals float a name out for possible trade the other GMs know to wait. They know that Cincy will release said player if they can't find another team to play ball.

Just an observation over the years.

We don't know all the particulars CoachMcNeil. Gio evidently didn't want to take a pay cut, we don't know if it was Gio's agent
floating around the trade either. But that is what I would do with most teams or agents floating around a name I want rather 
than trading for them, wait for the cut and grab them up.

Whoever gets Gio will get one of the best backup 3rd down scat backs in the league and I think he will do well wherever he goes.

I am not bitter at this and neither should Gio be IMO.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(04-08-2021, 01:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I will give examples when I have more time.

Bengals don't spend up to their cap but their cap is always higher than the league cap because they roll over unused cap space. So they can spend over the league cap without spending to their cap.

I think the vast majority of fans are aware of the difference between the salary cap and the effective salary cap. And you’ve proven you understand the difference and that the Bengals don’t, in fact, exceed their effective cap.

[Luvnit2]

(04-08-2021, 12:43 PM)BenZoo2 Wrote: I generally get the concept.  Teams like the saints that continually push money into future years eventually have to pay the bill.

I was just asking Fred to provide an example because it generally seems they don’t spend to the cap, let alone go over it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they roll over 13 million, then have 13 million left the next year, they indeed spend 100% of the cap for the previous year.

Bengals have a savings plan (rollover) and Saints a huge credit card they can't pay off, only can afford payments each year

[Shake n Blake]

(04-08-2021, 02:15 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: He's all but guaranteed to get at least a little hurt at some point. He's missed multiple games in 3 of his 4 seasons. Maybe all but guaranteed is a strong phrase, but it is highly likely that Mixon will miss at least a game or two.


I never expected that Gio could be a bellcow back or anything, but the Bengals did indeed fail to get the most out of Gio's skill set. I think Jay and Hue came the closest, and everyone after him just utterly failed outright. 

With his pass blocking and pass receiving skills, he could have easily put up Sproles type receiving numbers, but with the size to handle the 150-170 rushes that Sproles couldn't.

I really do think that Gio's potential under a really good OC was just an ever so slightly worse Alvin Kamara, which is still a really good football player.

Gio under the only NFL-caliber OCs he has ever had (3 years):
492 rushes/2,105 yards (4.3 YPC)/12 TDs
148 catches/1,335 yards (9.0 AVG)/5 TDs

Alvin Kamara under Sean Payton (First 3 years):
485 rushes/2,408 yards (5.0 YPC)/27 TDs
243 catches/2,068 yards (8.5 YPC)/10 TDs

Can only wonder what kind of career Gio would have had if he had been drafted by someone like Payton or Reid.

I hate to insist on this, because it makes me look like a Gio hater - which I'm definitely not - but he was never on the level of Sproles or Kamara. Those guys were more explosive than Gio ever was. Gio rarely made splash plays.

[GreenCornBengal]

(04-08-2021, 04:15 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I hate to insist on this, because it makes me look like a Gio hater - which I'm definitely not - but he was never on the level of Sproles or Kamara. Those guys were more explosive than Gio ever was. Gio rarely made splash plays.

More importantly, he lacks durability to some degree. He’s a tough mofo and played through a lot but I think he had a lot of nagging things that limited his snap counts. Felt like after Shazier blasted him he didn’t get nearly as many touches.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(04-08-2021, 04:15 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I hate to insist on this, because it makes me look like a Gio hater - which I'm definitely  not - but he was never on the level of Sproles or Kamara. Those guys were more explosive than Gio ever was. Gio rarely made splash plays.

Except how much of that was Sproles and Kamara and how much of that was Sean Payton/Drew Brees/a good OL?

Darren Sproles averaged 1.1 more yards per carry in his 3 years with New Orleans than he did anywhere else in his career, despite it being the middle of his career and age 28-30 seasons. In 3 years at New Orleans, Sproles never had less than 600 yards receiving. In his other 11 years, he only reached 500 yards receiving 1 time (520).

Drew Brees is a HoF QB who can hit guys in stride so they can get the most YAC. Sean Payton is a HoF offensive mind who can scheme guys to get the ball in space.

Most of the time Gio got the ball, it seemed he was standing there waiting to see if the ball would get to him first, or the defender would just lay him out. (How many times did we see hospital balls thrown to the flats?)

Being able to catch a ball in space while in full stride is going to make anybody look better. I'm willing to admit that Gio was physically inferior to Kamara in explosiveness at the starts of their careers, but I don't think it's as much as you think.

Look at Kareem Hunt going from Andy Reid to the Browns. Still a good running back, but a notably huge dip when he loses a great offensive mind. Or how Alex Smith performed after going to Reid.

(04-08-2021, 04:17 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: More importantly, he lacks durability to some degree. He’s a tough mofo and played through a lot but I think he had a lot of nagging things that limited his snap counts. Felt like after Shazier blasted him he didn’t get nearly as many touches.

So would Sproles and Kamara if they played in the AFCN.

[XenoMorph]

(04-08-2021, 04:15 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I hate to insist on this, because it makes me look like a Gio hater - which I'm definitely  not - but he was never on the level of Sproles or Kamara. Those guys were more explosive than Gio ever was. Gio rarely made splash plays.

Like long TD runs and such i remember a few(well at least 1 really long run).    Was he given a ton of chances?  he mainly came into block

[BobJohnson55]

(04-08-2021, 01:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I will give examples when I have more time.

You tell them bud, you're a very busy man with being such a ladies man whooing the ladies. 

[Shake n Blake]

(04-08-2021, 05:24 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Like long TD runs and such i remember a few(well at least 1 really long run).    Was he given a ton of chances?  he mainly came into block

Tbh, Gio was fine as a receiver. Running the ball is where he struggled with explosive plays. For comparison:

Gio: 921 career carries - 15 runs of 20+ (once every 61.4 carries) - 1 run of 40+ (once every 921 carries lol)

J.Hill: 704 carries (as a Bengal) - 14 runs of 20+ (once every 50.3 carries) - 6 runs of 40+ (once every 117.3 carries)

Mixon: 812 career carries - 22 runs of 20+ (once every 36.9 carries) - 4 runs of 40+ (once every 203 carries)

--------------------

So we can't really blame the line or the coaches there...when Hill and Mixon dealt with the same and produced far better results.

Then lets compare him to Sproles and Kamara:

Sproles: 732 carries - 24 runs of 20+ (once every 30.5 carries) - 2 runs of 40+ (once every 366 carries)

Kamara: 672 carries - 18 runs of 20+ (once every 37.3 carries) - 5 runs of 40+ (once every 134.4 carries)

---------------------

The receiving numbers are much better for Gio. He was way better at explosive plays than Hill or Mixon, and on par with Sproles and Kamara. I guess I'm going a long way to admit that we probably did misuse Gio. We should've ran him a lot less and involved him a bit more as a receiver. It doesn't seem his QB held him back though...judging off the explosive passing plays.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(04-08-2021, 09:34 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I don't think this is an accurate statement. The Bengals want to pay him his 2021 market value. I don't think that is 4.1 million. We will see soon enough when a team signs him his market value, he will take the best deal he can get and not go to a team for less money for a chance to win a Super Bowl. He may test the waters and find the Bengals offer was the best and comeback. Time will tell if Bengals were correct to cut bait for 4.1 million.

Again, this isn’t a case in which the Bengals wanted to move on and save $4.1M. This is a case in which the Bengals wanted to bring Bernard back at a reduced salary. Basically, renegotiate in the middle of his contract they agreed to pay. If Bernard takes 50% less the Bengals save $2M. So asking Bernard to take less is about saving $2M when they already have more than $20M in cap space available to sign or re-sign anyone they want. They obviously don’t need that money right now because they haven’t used the money. And if they need the money later they could release Bernard anytime before opening day.