With Bridgewater seriously injured, could there be a Mccarron trade?

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(08-30-2016, 09:39 PM)TGISunday Wrote: The chiefs have more room to deal qbs. Murray is apparently on the trading block as Foles is now back with Andy Reid.

Any defenders we could look at that would be worth it from Minny?

[Essex Johnson]

I think we are at the point where we need to create a McCarron only thread like we did for Dalton, this is getting hilarious

[hollodero]

(08-30-2016, 09:33 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: We have Keith Wenning.

And I have a bag of rubber bands. Equally useful.
Really, no offence, but that is basically having nothing but good wishes.

(08-30-2016, 09:33 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Which isn't saying much, but the laws of probability are on our side.

Again, Dalton has only been injured once. We're securing our future in the long-run by getting the most value we can get from him now. It's a conservative move that's consistent with how the Bengals have ran things. Why are we hesitating over something that's unlikely to happen?

Is it though?
Maybe I overlook several events, but I do not really recall the Bengals trading away an awful lot of players for picks since Carson or Ochocinco. Here's what in my perception the Bengals do. They keep players and take the compensatory pick should they sign a big contract elsewhere as an FA.

--- And I just learned McCarron isn't an FA next year. So there goes this point.

[Benton]

I hope not.

Minnesota isn't just a QB away from winning. If we get into the situation we were last year, then we would be.

we've got a great team. Having a good back up that can keep us in a couple games if Dalton gets injured could be the difference in our season.

backup QB is one of the most underrated positions. Why get rid of a good one? So we can get a draft pick and get another corner or lineman?

[bonesaw]

Stefon Diggs and a 1st?

['E']

Keep Mccarron for this season, make sure last years edition of Dalton still exists, then re-evaluate the situation after the season.

[*Go Cards*]

This saddens me as a huge Bridgewater fan.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2016, 09:15 PM)BonnieBengal Wrote:  Is McCarron a free agent next year?  If he is, he is gone anyway.  Might as well get something for him.

No.  he is under contract for next year.

that is why all this trade talk is so puzzling.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2016, 09:33 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote:  It's a conservative move that's consistent with how the Bengals have ran things. Why are we hesitating over something that's unlikely to happen?

It is the opposit of a "conservative move".  It is a gamble.

The reason we are hesitating over something that is unlikely to happen is the consequences if it does happen.

It is unlikely that your house will burn down, but I pretty much guarantee every homeowner here has insurance against such an event.

[*Go Cards*]

(08-30-2016, 09:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  he is under contract for next year.

that is why all this trade talk is so puzzling.

But will almost certainly have to do this next year or lose him for nothing. 
If right offer hit the table it would be foolish to not do it.

We hold all the cards and can be very shrewd or keep him. It is a win, win scenerio and would be foolish not to entertain offers if Zimmer comes calling.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2016, 10:00 PM)Go Cards Wrote: But will almost certainly have to do this next year or lose him for nothing. 
If right offer hit the table it would be foolish to not do it.

We hold all the cards and can be very shrewd or keep him. It is a win, win scenerio and would be foolish not to entertain offers if Zimmer comes calling.

It would be foolish to trade away our only viable back up QB.

#2 QB is a very important position, and some people claim McCarron is the best back up QB in the league.  If we trade way McCarron we are making out team MUCH weaker.

[*wildcats forever*]

Any NFL front office (with a team like ours) worth its salt would only make a trade that would strengthen it's chances to win the Super Bowl. We have AJ for 2 more years, and for all we know he very well may be the future for us. A lot can happen in the next 2 years, both good and bad. Why do anything that only makes us a weaker team?

[*Go Cards*]

They did draft a WR we were interested in right before our selection
Laquon Treadwell

[*Go Cards*]

(08-30-2016, 10:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It would be foolish to trade away our only viable back up QB.

#2 QB is a very important position, and some people claim McCarron is the best back up QB in the league.  If we trade way McCarron we are making out team MUCH weaker.

Understand this but we have went through many seasons without a great back up qb. 

Sure they have one that can be thrown in. 

LIke I said though, we hold all the cards, can keep him if they are not willing to be raped. 

But if they ante up ? Think it would be foolish not to do it.

[THE Bigzoman]

(08-30-2016, 09:45 PM)hollodero Wrote: And I have a bag of rubber bands. Equally useful.
Really, no offence, but that is basically having nothing but good wishes.


Is it though?
Maybe I overlook several events, but I do not really recall the Bengals trading away an awful lot of players for picks since Carson or Ochocinco. Here's what in my perception the Bengals do. They keep players and take the compensatory pick should they sign a big contract elsewhere as an FA.

--- And I just learned McCarron isn't an FA next year. So there goes this point.

Yes.

The Bengals always make decisions with the future in mind. 

[Joelist]

Why not turn the question around?

What offer would it take to get you to pull the trigger and take the risk of Andy getting injured without a proven backup? A 2nd? A 1st? Two 1s? Mike Ditka comes back and offers their whole 2017 draft for AJ McCarron?

[bengalguy71]

(08-30-2016, 09:15 PM)BonnieBengal Wrote: I don't think trading McCarron is writing off the season.  I'm not saying we should even do it, but I'm wondering if they are considering it.  Is McCarron a free agent next year?  If he is, he is gone anyway.  Might as well get something for him.

Going on what we know about Brown/Lewis and what happened last year with Dalton, I don't think it will even be considered.  Now, if something like this were to happen near the end of McCarron's contract, then absolutely.

[THE Bigzoman]

(08-30-2016, 10:21 PM)Joelist Wrote: Why not turn the question around?

What offer would it take to get you to pull the trigger and take the risk of Andy getting injured without a proven backup? A 2nd? A 1st? Two 1s? Mike Ditka comes back and offers their whole 2017 draft for AJ McCarron?

I'd consider a 2nd round pick.

No questions i'm doing it for a first.

[THE Bigzoman]

I can see the merits of keeping him this year. I don't see the QB market getting better and his value is going nowhere but up.

If the Bengals are smart they get the train rolling after this season though.

Plenty of teams win it all without good backups. Some teams even win without a good quarterback at all. There's no need to overstate the actual value of a good backup, especially with a team that has almost always been defensive minded anyway.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(08-30-2016, 09:45 PM)Benton Wrote: I hope not.

Minnesota isn't just a QB away from winning. If we get into the situation we were last year, then we would be.

we've got a great team. Having a good back up that can keep us in a couple games if Dalton gets injured could be the difference in our season.

backup QB is one of the most underrated positions. Why get rid of a good one? So we can get a draft pick and get another corner or lineman?

?

Minnesota won their division last year and had a QB who only threw 14 TDs. They are most certainly just a QB away from winning.