Is Shemar holding out?

[TecmoBengals]

(5 hours ago)Essex Johnson Wrote: Hey Dudette, don't get your panties in a bind there, I did go back and read you post and some of you logic is credible but have some holes in it but no one is perfect.

Don't get my panties in a bind because you couldn't comprehend the talking points?

[Sled21]

(Yesterday, 04:07 PM)Lucius Cincinnatus Wrote: I'd bet you can find several teams last year that had to play a few games without 3/4 players at a position. The poster also didn't say it was just last year that we had an inordinate number of injuries. They were seemingly blaming the last couple years on an inordinate number of injuries.

And again, he didn't say we had an inordinate number of injuries at one position. He was speaking in generalities which would imply looking at injuries across our roster vs. looking at 4 injuries specifically.

He didn't, I did. I made the point having all those injuries at one position is worse than the same injury count spread across the roster. That should not be that hard to understand.

[Lucius Cincinnatus]

(5 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote: He didn't, I did. I made the point having all those injuries at one position is worse than the same injury count spread across the roster. That should not be that hard to understand.

And your point is irrelevant to whether we had an inordinate amount of injuries over the last several years. That should not be that hard to understand. 

Me: We haven't had an inordinate amount of injuries over the last 5 years. 

You: We had a lot of DTs hurt at the same time last year

Cool...what does that have to do with what was being discussed lol?

[*jason*]

(4 hours ago)Lucius Cincinnatus Wrote: And your point is irrelevant to whether we had an inordinate amount of injuries over the last several years. That should not be that hard to understand. 

Me: We haven't had an inordinate amount of injuries over the last 5 years. 

You: We had a lot of DTs hurt at the same time last year

Cool...what does that have to do with what was being discussed lol?

It's relevant... But a few more details are being left out. We had a lot of DTs hurt last year on a poorly constructed roster which wasn't prepared for regular season games in September of 2024.

[Luvnit2]

I admit when I first saw this thread I thought, that is crazy with today's rookie contracts anyone would hold out.

Man was i wrong.

[SunsetBengal]

(4 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: I admit when I first saw this thread I thought, that is crazy with today's rookie contracts ayone hold out.

Man was i wrong.

I see both sides of the dispute at hand in this case. I see the player's perspective of "hey, that paragraph wasn't included in the Bengals 2024 1st round selection's contract", and I can also see it from the team's point of view where they may want some guarantees of their own ensuring that players honorably carry out their duties of the contract in exchange for the monetary guarantees.

Interestingly enough, I've heard it mentioned on NFL Radio that both Walter Nolen and Grey Zabel (picked right before and after Stewart) both signed their deals that included similar language. It's not something that just the Bengals came up with.

[Luvnit2]

(4 hours ago)SunsetBengal Wrote: I see both sides of the dispute at hand in this case. I see the player's perspective of "hey, that paragraph wasn't included in the Bengals 2024 1st round selection's contract", and I can also see it from the team's point of view where they may want some guarantees of their own ensuring that players honorably carry out their duties of the contract in exchange for the monetary guarantees.

Interestingly enough, I've heard it mentioned on NFL Radio that both Walter Nolen and Grey Zabel (picked right before and after Stewart) both signed their deals that included similar language. It's not something that just the Bengals came up with.

It does seem to be closer to a 50-50 issue as you said and not something just the Bengals are asking.

I guess if I had no intention of being a knucklehead, then why not agree as others have. I hope we did not miss potential character issues in our evaluation and probably not, but not sure if the rookie can win this battle as Bengals are not a lone wolf executing this clause.

[Sled21]

(3 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: It does seem to be closer to a 50-50 issue as you said and not something just the Bengals are asking.

I guess if I had no intention of being a knucklehead, then why not agree as others have. I hope we did not miss potential character issues in our evaluation and probably not, but not sure if the rookie can win this battle as Bengals are not a lone wolf executing this clause.

Sheduer (Sp) Sanders just got pulled over for driving over 101mph. These idiots just do not learn. That's why owners want this clause.

[Essex Johnson]

(5 hours ago)TecmoBengals Wrote: Don't get my panties in a bind because you couldn't comprehend the talking points?

I comprehend your talking points, just felt some lacked accuracy, sounds like your panties really got a bit tighter with that response.. who dey though... all is good , season is around the corner. and good luck in retaining your fantasy title.. 

[R3stangs]

(4 hours ago)SunsetBengal Wrote: I see both sides of the dispute at hand in this case. I see the player's perspective of "hey, that paragraph wasn't included in the Bengals 2024 1st round selection's contract", and I can also see it from the team's point of view where they may want some guarantees of their own ensuring that players honorably carry out their duties of the contract in exchange for the monetary guarantees.

Interestingly enough, I've heard it mentioned on NFL Radio that both Walter Nolen and Grey Zabel (picked right before and after Stewart) both signed their deals that included similar language. It's not something that just the Bengals came up with.

They also shouldn't expect that theres never going to be any evolution in terms of contracts, etc. Things are naturally going to evolve over time. It concerns me that he has such an issue with that type of verbiage.

[SunsetBengal]

(3 hours ago)R3stangs Wrote: They also shouldn't expect that theres never going to be any evolution in terms of contracts, etc. Things are naturally going to evolve over time. It concerns me that he has such an issue with that type of verbiage.

Honestly, I don't think that it's too much for teams to ask young men that they are guaranteeing millions to, to carry and conduct themselves as grown ups and solid citizens.  I also feel like there should be some very specific conditions that must be met in order for any team to be able to actually execute such a clause.

[TecmoBengals]

(3 hours ago)Essex Johnson Wrote: I comprehend your talking points, just felt some lacked accuracy, sounds like your panties really got a bit tighter with that response.. who dey though... all is good , season is around the corner. and good luck in retaining your fantasy title.. 

I guess one can't reason with the unreasonable who then result to, and double down, on childish idioms.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(5 hours ago)TecmoBengals Wrote: Don't get my panties in a bind because you couldn't comprehend the talking points?

What's up with these guys giving you crap Tecmo?

[TecmoBengals]

(2 hours ago)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: What's up with these guys giving you crap Tecmo?

Quick summary:

Random dude: Bengals ownership is the main reason why the team has a good winning record the last 4 years.

Me: Incorrect, Burrow is the reason why the team has won games the past 4 years.

Essex: You're incorrect is incorrect because it might be Chase.

Dude couldn't comprehend the conversation is about the value of ownership v the player and the retorts with the panties remark. My incorrect comment is addressing the Brown family as owners. It wasn't a conversation about individual players contributions to winning. 

My lesson learned is it is dumb as hell of me to engage posters who continuously put together poorly written posts.

[*rfaulk34*]

(2 hours ago)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: What's up with these guys giving you crap Tecmo?

[ERIC1]

(2 hours ago)TecmoBengals Wrote: Quick summary:

Random dude: Bengals ownership is the main reason why the team has a good winning record the last 4 years.

Me: Incorrect, Burrow is the reason why the team has won games the past 4 years.

Essex: You're incorrect is incorrect because it might be Chase.

Dude couldn't comprehend the conversation is about the value of ownership v the player and the retorts with the panties remark. My incorrect comment is addressing the Brown family as owners. It wasn't a conversation about individual players contributions to winning. 

My lesson learned is it is dumb as hell of me to engage posters who continuously put together poorly written posts.

The lesson learned should be that other passionate fans..are allowed opinion also...eg...Burrow and Herbert were drafted same year...many wanted the team to trade the 1st pick and get Herbert.. The management of the Bengals...the Brown Family..decided otherwise..we have joe burrow a very good quarterback that has added immeasureably..at so many levels to this franchise...and .. by the way..as lucky as we are to have burrow...let us not forget the team was abysmal his first year...the Brown Family...was and is responsible for the building of the team around burrow...time for golf and Pappy...have a great day

[ERIC1]

(3 hours ago)SunsetBengal Wrote: Honestly, I don't think that it's too much for teams to ask young men that they are guaranteeing millions to, to carry and conduct themselves as grown ups and solid citizens.  I also feel like there should be some very specific conditions that must be met in order for any team to be able to actually execute such a clause.

1000%...and let us not forget these grown men are making millions of bucks

[TecmoBengals]

(2 hours ago)ERIC1 Wrote: The lesson learned should be that other passionate fans..are allowed opinion also...

Now you're just making a fallacious argument. If you believed this lesson you wouldn't continue to make the same replies over and over to random posters who do not favor ownership.

[R3stangs]

(3 hours ago)SunsetBengal Wrote: Honestly, I don't think that it's too much for teams to ask young men that they are guaranteeing millions to, to carry and conduct themselves as grown ups and solid citizens.  I also feel like there should be some very specific conditions that must be met in order for any team to be able to actually execute such a clause.

Agreed.