Trey Hendrickson Update

[Luvnit2]

(7 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote:
You guys are blandly dismissing every word he says as well, and are stuck in your tunnel vision view of the always fallible FO doing what is absolutely wrong. 
Did you ever stop to think that other teams have the same salary cap to deal with, but have vastly richer owners who can more easily put the guaranteed cash in escrow accounts? The Browns are nowhere near as rich as most other NFL owners. Even though they all have to spend the same percentage of the cap on player's contracts, coming up with liquid assets is likely harder for them than it is the Krafts, Jones, Hunts, etc. 
Everybody has an opinion and his is as good as yours or Faulks or anyone else's. I swear, some of you guys hate the Brown family so much I really don't even understand why you root for this team.

This is 100% accurate. They can't win the argument so they attack the intelligence of those who disagree. They totally ignore all counter points, then when the are ignored throw a hissy fit.

[SunsetBengal]

(Yesterday, 05:44 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Again you are assuming you know better about the talent available right now than our FO. It is bad business and policy to spend money for the sake of spending money. But more so as I pointed out, they still with 6 weeks from TC have a ton of money left to extend Trey and sign the 2 draft picks and complete the roster.

If the Bengals did find a team willing to trade a stud, they could easily find more cap money by retsruturing Joe. But in my opinion it is dumb to do so unless you have the great player in your sights versus a possible wanna be signing.

OK, Eagles won the Super Bowl and also had a huge roster turnover. Has Detroit won anything yet? No, they have not won the NFC or made a Super Bowl so it could be argued they wasted money last year that could have been used in 2025 and beyond.

I know I am in the minority with a healthy Joe Burrow, we have a shot every year at winning the AFC and the Super Bowl. You don't think so and that is OK as well.

If they get Trey signed, we have a better shot, not great odds wise, but better so I. hope they get it done. 

(6 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: This is 100% accurate. They can't win the argument so they attack the intelligence of those who disagree. They totally ignore all counter points, then when the are ignored throw a hissy fit.

Can't "win" the argument? What "argument" are you making? All I've seen is your assertion that the status quo for the Bengals is just fine, and a lot of attempts to shout down any other opinions that don't agree and offer perspectives based on evidence of what other teams are doing to overcome constricting salary cap and cash flow issues.

[Sled21]

(7 hours ago)TecmoBengals Wrote: How do you not recognize this is just an emotional charged argument rooted in nothing because some fans approach their fandom differently than you? It's a total thought-control type of statement that people should engage their fandom the way you want. If it's a simple matter of you truly not understanding, it isn't that hard to narrow down the reasoning: people have high standards for the teams they follow, this is a message board with free flowing ideas, and people are uniquely different. These are just some reasons why it is easy to get the "why" behind people having a strong disliking for the Brown family approach to running an NFL team.

You've recently posted that you're not as supportive of Trey. He is member of the Cincinnati Bengals. Using your own logic, I could claim that if you aren't pro-Trey, one of the guys we actually watch on Sundays, as opposed to ownership, then "I don't even understand why you root for this team." I wouldn't make that statement because it's nonsensical. I'm guessing you're already swirling thoughts around as to why it's different to oppose the player and not the ownership when the only difference is owners have longevity with a franchise that exceeds the player's time with the team.

Fine, whatever, think people are total dumbasses for disliking the Brown family way of doing NFL business, but's not hard to understand.

It's not thought control because I never told anyone how to be a fan. I simply asked if you hate the owners that much why would you root for their team? I have a disdain for several owners in the NFL and other sports, and if I lived in one of those cities I would still not be a fan due to the owners. That's me, I never said it had to be anyone else. And I never said the Bengals FO doesn't sometimes make boneheaded moves. As for Trey, he lost me simply due to his yearly demand for a raise. It's tiring. And yes, this is a message board for free flowing ideas, so some people should stop with the attacks on other people who do not agree with them. It's as simple as that.

[Sled21]

(7 hours ago)SunsetBengal Wrote: Here's the thing, they don't need to be the wealthiest owners in the league, in order to achieve apex level cap and roster management. They need to be doing more to attract outside investment into the team, that is where they will find the liquid cash that seems to be lacking.

Man, if it's as easy as that I'm surprised you don't have your own team.

[Sled21]

(6 hours ago)Soonerpeace Wrote: Very fair but historically do you get the feeling that the Brown’s reputation of being cheap is unwarranted? Really it comes down to being more conservative than cheap. Burrow, Tee, and Chase say hi. I’ve used this analogy several times. The Brown’s are like a poker player in your group. He folds all the time but when he’s got a really good hand he’s all in. This causes everybody to fold. So he never loses much at poker night but seldom wins much either. 

I won't say is it unwarranted, but I think it is overstated. The Bengals have made many of their players the highest paid players in the league over the years at their respective positions. Mike Brown's problem (one of them) is there are certain positions he thinks he doesn't have to pay a lot for (like OG) Then there are the everlasting Lumina and Wendy's jokes that just perpetuate that myth. Funny how when Keanu Reeves takes the train, he is a cool dude just like one of us, but when Mike Brown drives an old car and likes fast food, he's a tightwad.

[Sled21]

(6 hours ago)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Remember, our functional cap space is gonna be around $9 mil less than whatever figure is bouncing around on OTC/spotrac. 

You have to count 53 instead of 51 (+$2 mil-ish), you have to count the practice squad (+$3-$4 mil), you have to count guys on IR (All, over $1 mil), and you have to remember Stewart and Knight are signed yet, so they are not top 51 atm (+$1-2 mil over replacement). 

Our REAL cap space is more like $22-$23. 

And remember, those rewoeked deals did not save us much, cap wise. Volson's cap hit went from $3.8 to $3.1. Moss's a little more savings, but he is still $3.1 as well, and I *think* hexwas right around $4 mil to start. 

Point being, we could have saved twice what we did by cutting one of them. And we could still net nearly $2.5 mil by cutting Volson. 

I agree that now, we are unlikely to cut either after the renegotiations, but it is just bad cap management to pay RB3-4 and OG 4, who are just barely aboce practice squad level, over $6 mil a year. 

It is even sillier when you draw a line in the sand with the best pass rushing DE in the league. Sure, in a perfect world, I'd like to keep everyone for better depth. But if I have to choose, I would need to think hard, or long. Pay Trey, move on from the overpriced, underperforming depth. 

Heck, if I could turn that Moss/Volson $$ into a reliable starter level player elsewhere (Hernandez, Risner, Scherff, Blackmon) I think that would have been money much better spent. Don't you? 

And what happens when he blows a knee out week 2? Do we just give up on the season because we moved on from overprices underperforming depth?

[Tomcat]

Why do i click on this thread thinking there's going to actually be an update on Trey!

[Sled21]

(6 hours ago)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Remember, our functional cap space is gonna be around $9 mil less than whatever figure is bouncing around on OTC/spotrac. 

You have to count 53 instead of 51 (+$2 mil-ish), you have to count the practice squad (+$3-$4 mil), you have to count guys on IR (All, over $1 mil), and you have to remember Stewart and Knight are signed yet, so they are not top 51 atm (+$1-2 mil over replacement). 

Our REAL cap space is more like $22-$23. 

And remember, those rewoeked deals did not save us much, cap wise. Volson's cap hit went from $3.8 to $3.1. Moss's a little more savings, but he is still $3.1 as well, and I *think* hexwas right around $4 mil to start. 

Point being, we could have saved twice what we did by cutting one of them. And we could still net nearly $2.5 mil by cutting Volson. 

I agree that now, we are unlikely to cut either after the renegotiations, but it is just bad cap management to pay RB3-4 and OG 4, who are just barely aboce practice squad level, over $6 mil a year. 

It is even sillier when you draw a line in the sand with the best pass rushing DE in the league. Sure, in a perfect world, I'd like to keep everyone for better depth. But if I have to choose, I would need to think hard, or long. Pay Trey, move on from the overpriced, underperforming depth. 

Heck, if I could turn that Moss/Volson $$ into a reliable starter level player elsewhere (Hernandez, Risner, Scherff, Blackmon) I think that would have been money much better spent. Don't you? 

Serious question... are any of those guys even healthy? If so, why are they still available?

[Sled21]

(6 hours ago)MTBengalsFan Wrote: The Browns are not as wealthy as other owners,  but the salary cap percentage means they should have pocketed between $180-$230 million over each of the last 5 years. Yes, they need money to live, but if they are "frugal" and spend $25 million per year, they would have pocketed well over $500 million, just in the those five years.

As others have previously pointed out, God forbid they sold a 10% share, it would immediately solve any cash problems.

Are you even considering the costs of running an NFL team outside of the salary cap? There's facility maintenance and insurance, energy bills, advertising, non-player personnel salaries and benefits, plus the millions and millions they donate back to the community.... the list goes on and on. What do you think the liability policy costs for that stadium and grounds?

[*Synric*]

(7 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote: You guys are blandly dismissing every word he says as well, and are stuck in your tunnel vision view of the always fallible FO doing what is absolutely wrong. 
Did you ever stop to think that other teams have the same salary cap to deal with, but have vastly richer owners who can more easily put the guaranteed cash in escrow accounts? The Browns are nowhere near as rich as most other NFL owners. Even though they all have to spend the same percentage of the cap on player's contracts, coming up with liquid assets is likely harder for them than it is the Krafts, Jones, Hunts, etc. 
Everybody has an opinion and his is as good as yours or Faulks or anyone else's. I swear, some of you guys hate the Brown family so much I really don't even understand why you root for this team.

The Roonies who run the Steelers are also not rich as most NFL owners but the they are admittedly a better run organization. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(7 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote: You guys are blandly dismissing every word he says as well, and are stuck in your tunnel vision view of the always fallible FO doing what is absolutely wrong. 
Did you ever stop to think that other teams have the same salary cap to deal with, but have vastly richer owners who can more easily put the guaranteed cash in escrow accounts? The Browns are nowhere near as rich as most other NFL owners. Even though they all have to spend the same percentage of the cap on player's contracts, coming up with liquid assets is likely harder for them than it is the Krafts, Jones, Hunts, etc. 
Everybody has an opinion and his is as good as yours or Faulks or anyone else's. I swear, some of you guys hate the Brown family so much I really don't even understand why you root for this team.

This is easy to answer and the biggest part of the disconnect between the two sides. I can root for the team, because as i said in an earlier post, i root for the players. No one in the front office goes out on the field and takes a snap. You don't throw the baby out with the bath water. 

As far as opionions, no, also as i said before, all opinions are not created equal. Some are based in fact, some are based in fiction, some are based in ignorance. They're all allowed (to a point) but they're not all equal and they never have been in the history of man, in any situation. I'm not saying mine are always right, just that they're not the same, across the board.

[*rfaulk34*]

(7 hours ago)SunsetBengal Wrote: Here's the thing, they don't need to be the wealthiest owners in the league, in order to achieve apex level cap and roster management. They need to be doing more to attract outside investment into the team, that is where they will find the liquid cash that seems to be lacking.

Yep. Any number of people have already posted about what they could have done, factual based info with the cap in mind. They don't need to be oil tycoons to have built a better team, in previous years or this year. 

[Nepa]

If the Bengals could sign Trey, it might isolate Shemar Stewart and put pressure on him to sign. Right now, each benefits in negotiations from the fact that both Trey and Shemar are holding out.

[*rfaulk34*]

(6 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why am I nt permitted to express my opinion on an opinion based board? Sorry, but I don't agree with you or others who blatently trash the FO. I don't buy or agree with all of the arguments. 

You call it tunnel vision, yet ignore why I disagree. What does that say for you and others.

Last, I am nt going tso be bullied to join your negative circle jerk against the FO, I should not have to defend my thoughts to a modrerator who shares a different opinion. Very disappointing to be treated this way.

You're 100% allowed to express your opinion. You're also allowed to be called out on it, as is everyone else that posts here. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(6 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: This is 100% accurate. They can't win the argument so they attack the intelligence of those who disagree. They totally ignore all counter points, then when the are ignored throw a hissy fit.

This view is 100% wrong. 

[Luvnit2]

(4 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: You're 100% allowed to express your opinion. You're also allowed to be called out on it, as is everyone else that posts here. 

One thing to disagree, another to call me and others tupid for our opinion. What makes your opinion right? Who determines it? You and your minion who hate the FO and ignore anything positive the FO does.
Facts - Bengals are not cheap, look i the thread and I have shown their cash spend versus other teams.
Fact - FO made Burrow th ehighest paid player in NFL history which the team did not have to do. They could have tagged him to pay him less.
Fact - Bengals do spend up to 10 to 12 million or less every year on the cap.
Fact - They do not pocket money by structuring deals for the future, it is a like a credit card and the balance will come do some day in the future.
Fact - Chase was made the top paid NFL QB in history surpassing Garrett which the team did not have to do. They could have tagged him to payhim less.
Fact - They have given Trey not 1 but 2 new conracts in a short period of time.

My argument has never been I agree with the front office every move, my argument is I don't think the FO as you and others cry and whine about day after day and year after year. So yes I admit, your and the hate FO posts by others fall on deaf ears, I have the same arguments for 10 years, they are less valid each year in my opinion, nit stronger as you act. Your argument is not close to a slam dunk and it is your opiion based on ignoring facts. 


So, maybe we can agree, we are all guity of ignoring the other side because we have looked at the facts from our perspective and determined our take on the FO.


You think the FO is inept and anyone who disagrees is stupid. I disagree and think the naysayers are ignoring all of the facts that oppose their narrative, I may be in the minority and that is fine also, it does not make me wrong.

[Sled21]

(4 hours ago)Synric Wrote: The Roonies who run the Steelers are also not rich as most NFL owners but the they are admittedly a better run organization. 

Historically yes, lately not so much. 

[Sled21]

(4 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yep. Any number of people have already posted about what they could have done, factual based info with the cap in mind. They don't need to be oil tycoons to have built a better team, in previous years or this year. 

We have one of the most prolific offenses in the NFL. All we really need are a couple of defensive pieces. People act like all of our players are bottom of the barrel types.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(6 hours ago)Timanky12 Wrote: Opinions are like assholes, everyone’s got one. I have been criticized for my opinion, but it’s mine. 

My favourite of these types of lines is from the film Swimming Pool (which is a superb film, btw):

"Awards are like Hemorrhoids: eventually, every asshole gets one."

[SunsetBengal]

(5 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote: Man, if it's as easy as that I'm surprised you don't have your own team.

It doesn't take being an NFL team owner, in order to take a look around at what other franchise owners are doing in order to get over common obstacles and take notice that the management of one's favorite team is severely deficient in those areas. You go ahead and continue to defend the management's complacency and unwillingness to adapt to a more modern style of cap and roster management along with their steadfast adherence to their miserly ways. Such a noble position of you to take while watching that management pissing away prime years of a likely HOF QBs career.