McCarron will be RFA in 2018

[Bengalholic]

Cincy shouldn't be in a rush to move AJ McCarron. He's a RFA in '18 because he spent most of his rookie year on the nonfootball injury list. https://t.co/SZ10zaDsAu

— Joel Corry (@corryjoel) February 2, 2017

It is true that #Bengals QB AJ McCarron is under contract through ’18. It means he remains an attractive QB for teams in need of one.

— Jim Owczarski (@JimOwczarski) February 2, 2017

[CageTheBengal]

The quicker the trade happens the quicker we can reap the rewards so unless the offers just flat out aren't matching the Bengals expectations then I'd like to see them pull the trigger sooner rather than later.

[leonardfan40]

(02-02-2017, 03:03 PM)Bengalholic Wrote:

Cincy shouldn't be in a rush to move AJ McCarron. He's a RFA in '18 because he spent most of his rookie year on the nonfootball injury list. https://t.co/SZ10zaDsAu

— Joel Corry (@corryjoel) February 2, 2017

It is true that #Bengals QB AJ McCarron is under contract through ’18. It means he remains an attractive QB for teams in need of one.

— Jim Owczarski (@JimOwczarski) February 2, 2017

Awesome! Thanks for posting, I was not aware of that

[Joelist]

Lest we forget per Jim on this forum we got no offers of note for McCarron. Why would that change?

[3wt]

(02-02-2017, 03:41 PM)Joelist Wrote: Lest we forget per Jim on this forum we got no offers of note for McCarron. Why would that change?

Not lately.  But it sounds like we received a 2nd round pick - plus - last year.  I don't know what we're asking this year - if anything.

Garopolo is apparently a more desirable prospect.  Cleveland clearly not interested.

[*wildcats forever*]

Having a competent backup for Dalton in the form of AJ has been a luxury of sorts. We know the season wouldn't be a total loss if we lost Dalton. If Driskel can prove he is just as capable, then trading AJ this year might happen. I'd be surprised if it happened before Driskel gets a lot of work in camp though.

[corpjet]

I think they are high on or at least think Jeff Driskell is a competent backup hence why they kept him on the 53 man all year.

With what the original poster said, that only makes McCarrons value higher, which is great for us.

I have said it from the start I would rather get a proven player back in return but if we trade for draft picks he will get us a 2nd and 4th round pick.

[*ochocincos*]

(02-02-2017, 04:56 PM)corpjet Wrote: I think they are high on or at least think Jeff Driskell is a competent backup hence why they kept him on the 53 man all year.

With what the original poster said, that only makes McCarrons value higher, which is great for us.

I have said it from the start I would rather get a proven player back in return but if we trade for draft picks he will get us a 2nd and 4th round pick.

Honestly, I'd be happy if they just got a 2nd or 3rd rounder. Given the Bengals could use help at DE, LB, WR, RB, DB, and multiple OL spots, it's not going to be possible to fit all of those needs within the first four rounds (even with two potential 4th round comps). They likely will have to invest a late round pick into one of those spots, but if they trade McCarron for just one early-mid round pick, they can invest that late rounder into a backup QB (if desired) and have the extra early-mid rounder go to help fill a more urgent position.

[Goalpost]

I don't mind keeping him another year. We have plenty of comps this year. If we have eleven picks this year, do we need any more? Seems like if we trade him he could add picks to next year's draft, while still having him this year as a quality back up just in case.

[yellowxdiscipline]

His value will be more this year, trade him.

You get a guy under a rookie deal for 2 seasons to assess whether he's your guy or not. Better then trading for a guy with one year left on his deal, he balls out, and now you have a lengthy contract dispute on your hands.

[Marlon23]

If he is traded it will be a disaster for the Bengals. He will be successful and we will be stuck with Old Plumpy Andy Dalton who can't win a playoff game. Wait and See Andy is going to get plumpy in the next 2-3 years he is almost 30 already.

[Brownshoe]

(02-02-2017, 03:59 PM)3wt Wrote: Not lately.  But it sounds like we received a 2nd round pick - plus - last year.  I don't know what we're asking this year - if anything.

Garopolo is apparently a more desirable prospect.  Cleveland clearly not interested.

Jim said we have received no offers for McCarron even last year.

[*Nately120*]

(02-02-2017, 06:09 PM)Marlon23 Wrote: If he is traded it will be a disaster for the Bengals.  He will be successful and we will be stuck with Old Plumpy Andy Dalton who can't win a playoff game.  Wait and See Andy is going to get plumpy in the next 2-3 years he is almost 30 already.

Could you use less technical terms, please?

[NATI BENGALS]

Had no idea.

The way Hobson makes it sound if we trade him it wont be until after camp.

I guess i need to quit counting on an early draft pick from trading him this year.

[Joelist]

(02-02-2017, 03:59 PM)3wt Wrote: Not lately.  But it sounds like we received a 2nd round pick - plus - last year.  I don't know what we're asking this year - if anything.

Garopolo is apparently a more desirable prospect.  Cleveland clearly not interested.

Actually that was part of what Jim debunked. No offers of note at all.

[Whacked]

Mark my words. It's a Bungle curse.

The second we trade AJ, AD will get injured.

Sorry. Just the way it works in this town.

[guyofthetiger]

Macaroni isn't going anywhere soon. He'll be a Bengal in 2017. Why? No other team is interested.

[Murdock2420]

If McCarron isn't dealt, then Driskel needs to be off the 53. Seems silly to waste a spot on a 3rd string QB.

[Benton]

(02-02-2017, 05:11 PM)Goalpost Wrote: I don't mind keeping him another year.  We have plenty of comps this year.  If we have eleven picks this year, do we need any more?  Seems like if we trade him he could add picks to next year's draft, while still having him this year as a quality back up just in case.

That's a big part of it for me, for two reasons.

1- We've got a butt load of picks. Adding one more doesn't seem likely to help all that much. If we were bundling and trading up to get another 1st or 2nd, sure. But that's as likely as Brady refusing to play for anyone but Marvin Lewis.

2- We've got a butt load of picks. You'll see the 1st and 2nd pick sometime in 2018 (if we get lucky). 3-6 will be four-year projects; one of those will work out and start a few games before his contract expires. 6-11 one of them will develop after a few years. If we get lucky and the Bengals follow the recent bad luck with injuries and growth, that's 2-3 guys you'll see contribute in a few years. McCarron may not be starting, but he's a contributor in his role. We've just been lucky not to need that role filled much.

[*SHRacerX*]

(02-02-2017, 03:41 PM)Joelist Wrote: Lest we forget per Jim on this forum we got no offers of note for McCarron. Why would that change?

I can't help but think that the Bengals don't want him to go to Cleveland...but if they offered something like their 2nd rounder, which is #33 overall, that the Bengals would take it.  Anything less than that, he is worth more as our backup.  Injuries that happen during the season could even raise his value. (See Palmer, Quitter).