Evan Mathis cut by philly. Should we sign him?

[J24]

(06-11-2015, 05:55 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: No.

Why would you want to bring in a guy that seems to wear out his welcome, wherever his goes, just to mess up the chemistry of an already great OL?

Because he all pro player when right. Also we could improve to positions at once move Boiling to Center which would be an upgrade over bodine an we add an  all pro LG in Mathis.

[BonnieBengal]

We're pretty stacked at OT. Plus Mathis is a constant whiner. No thanks.

[*Nately120*]

No, signing free agents of any type is for crappy teams like the Buccaneers and Browns!

But teh Colts n Patriots sign agents free and look Super Bowl-worthy!


No Grover, they shall fail!  Our o-line is stacked...our bench could stymie the 85 Bears driving bulldozers!

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-11-2015, 05:13 PM)J24 Wrote: Should we sign him? Move Clint to Center and put him at LG it could make our Offensive line pretty unstoppable but he did leave on bad terms last time he was here.

From a player stand point i would of said yes.

But the dude sounds like a malcontent so i voted no and we already have
Zeitler, Boling, Fisher, Hopkins,Bodine and even Whit who can play Guard
in a pinch.

[Stormborn]

(06-12-2015, 11:56 AM)Nately120 Wrote: No, signing free agents of any type is for crappy teams like the Buccaneers and Browns!

But teh Colts n Patriots sign agents free and look Super Bowl-worthy!


No Grover, they shall fail!  Our o-line is stacked...our bench could stymie the 85 Bears driving bulldozers!

Out of all the position groups to risk this experiment with, let's not use it on the one where we invested over 25 million and two high draft picks with.

[*Nately120*]

(06-12-2015, 12:20 PM)Stormborn Wrote: Out of all the position groups to risk this experiment with, let's not use it on the one where we invested over 25 million and two high draft picks with.

Oh, I'm not saying we should.  I just like to stir the pot every time there is any sort of free agent thread on a Bengals board and it goes like this:

"Should we take a look at ______?"

NO!
no.
hell no!
NEVER!
Cancer!
(something about too much money and not being able to re-sign any of our current players)
no
We're already way too super-awesome at _____'s position!
NOPE
NO!
etc.

[milksheikh]

HELL NO!!

We didn't just spend our 2 first picks on O-line for nothing.

[Stormborn]

(06-12-2015, 12:35 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Oh, I'm not saying we should.  I just like to stir the pot every time there is any sort of free agent thread on a Bengals board and it goes like this:

"Should we take a look at ______?"

NO!
no.
hell no!
NEVER!
Cancer!
(something about too much money and not being able to re-sign any of our current players)
no
We're already way too super-awesome at _____'s position!
NOPE
NO!
etc.

Your game isn't a secret, but you play it well.

I usually entertain certain suggestions, but I simply can't get on board with this one.

[XenoMorph]

(06-11-2015, 05:13 PM)J24 Wrote: Should we sign him? Move Clint to Center and put him at LG it could make our Offensive line pretty unstoppable but he did leave on bad terms last time he was here.

if moving clint to center wouldnt it be more prudent to get jake fisher some playing time at lg than signing mathis?

[*Nately120*]

(06-12-2015, 12:40 PM)Stormborn Wrote: Your game isn't a secret, but you play it well.

I usually entertain certain suggestions, but I simply can't get on board with this one.

I'm more about commenting on people's reactions when it coems to stuff like this rather than having a set opinion.  Either way, the guy isn't coming here, so it's more interesting to see how people handle such things.  I honestly haven't read through this thread, but I am curious to sort of go through and see if the key words I pointed out have been used.

Has anyone said "Cancer" yet?

[fredtoast]

(06-12-2015, 12:35 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Oh, I'm not saying we should.  I just like to stir the pot every time there is any sort of free agent thread on a Bengals board and it goes like this:

"Should we take a look at ______?"

NO!
no.
hell no!
NEVER!
Cancer!
(something about too much money and not being able to re-sign any of our current players)
no
We're already way too super-awesome at _____'s position!
NOPE
NO!
etc.

Why look at the facts of the situation when you can just stir the pot?

Keeps you from having to do all that hard thinking stuff.

[fredtoast]

(06-12-2015, 12:46 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm more about commenting on people's reactions when it coems to stuff like this rather than having a set opinion.  Either way, the guy isn't coming here, so it's more interesting to see how people handle such things.  I honestly haven't read through this thread, but I am curious to sort of go through and see if the key words I pointed out have been used.

Has anyone said "Cancer" yet?

Wow. You are so clever.  Who would have thought that the term "cancer" would be used with Evan Mathis?

How many times was the term "cancer" used when people suggested we make a run a Peyton Manning?

[*Nately120*]

(06-12-2015, 02:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Wow. You are so clever.  Who would have thought that the term "cancer" would be used with Evan Mathis?

How many times was the term "cancer" used when people suggested we make a run a Peyton Manning?

I'm clever as hell, whether you want to be a snarky jerkface aboot it or not!

And when people suggested Peyton Manning the fear factor (face it, we FEAR free agents) involved him totally demolishing Andy's confidence...so I guess he would have destroyed our young nucleus in a covert cancerous way.  Regardless, any free agent that is mentioned (that has no chance of signing here) is usually determined to not only be a "NO" but is a "NO" because he is going to absolutely decimate the franchise.

Yes, people were worried about Peyton Manning damaging  the Bengals because he was too awesome.  I guess he wasn't cancer, so let's just call him a heart attack-ack-ack-ack-ack-ack.

[*ochocincos*]

With all the new contracts coming up after this season, it'd be very shortsided to sign Mathis back. If Mathis was signed, it likely would mean that both Whitworth and Smith would be forced to walk, which could force one (or both) of our rookie OTs to become a starting OT. Plus, if the Bengals re-sign Whitworth after this season (hopefully), they would likely have 3-4 players that could play LG (Boling, Whitworth, Fisher, possibly Ogbuehi).

[fredtoast]

(06-12-2015, 02:25 PM)Nately120 Wrote: And when people suggested Peyton Manning the fear factor (face it, we FEAR free agents) involved him totally demolishing Andy's confidence...so I guess he would have destroyed our young nucleus in a covert cancerous way.  Regardless, any free agent that is mentioned (that has no chance of signing here) is usually determined to not only be a "NO" but is a "NO" because he is going to absolutely decimate the franchise.

Yes, people were worried about Peyton Manning damaging  the Bengals because he was too awesome.  I guess he wasn't cancer, so let's just call him a heart attack-ack-ack-ack-ack-ack.

We don't fear free agents.

No one called Manning a cancer.  The only concerns was his injury.

No matter how clever you thin you are you can't just make stuff up and claim it is true.

[*Nately120*]

(06-12-2015, 02:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: We don't fear free agents.

No one called Manning a cancer.  The only concerns was his injury.

No matter how clever you thin you are you can't just make stuff up and claim it is true.

Come on, go through my checklist and see how many times those things were said.  Between this post and your last post complaining about me someone even mentioned the ever-important "We can't sign him because we have other free agents coming up."  Lord, forgive me for having more fun with this sort of thing than you.  Here, I'll compose a REAL post on this topic to appease you.

No, we already have enough O-lineman and this guy seems like a pain in the ass who wants too much money. 

Better?

EDIT: And I never said anyone called Manning a cancer, but there were people who were terrified of his presence ruining Dalton for life. Get on the internet archive and read it for yourself.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-12-2015, 02:27 PM)ochocincos Wrote: With all the new contracts coming up after this season, it'd be very shortsided to sign Mathis back. If Mathis was signed, it likely would mean that both Whitworth and Smith would be forced to walk, which could force one (or both) of our rookie OTs to become a starting OT. Plus, if the Bengals re-sign Whitworth after this season (hopefully), they would likely have 3-4 players that could play LG (Boling, Whitworth, Fisher, possibly Ogbuehi).

Bodine, Zeitler, Hopkins could also play LG if we really needed it.

[*ochocincos*]

(06-12-2015, 02:43 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Bodine, Zeitler, Hopkins could also play LG if we really needed it.

That's true as well. Even further proof that Mathis is not as worthwhile since the Bengals have LG depth and Mathis doesn't really play any other position.