Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About TigerCub

  • Rank
  • Birthday 06/07/1973

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Hamilton, OH

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. TigerCub


  2. Jonah Williams injury happened before training camp, so he was placed on the PUP (Physically Unable to Perform) list. After the start of training camp, if you get injured and placed on IR, then you have to stay on IR all year long. If you make the initial 53 man roster and are injured, after the the rosters are "final", then you can be placed IR with the ability to be recalled after 6 weeks. Once a player is recalled, they have a 2 week roster exemption, where they can practice but not play until 8 weeks. The team then has 21 days to make a decision. if after 21 days they are still injured, then the player can go back on IR for the rest of the year. The PUP list rules are outside of the IR rules. PUP rules allow players to come back to the roster after six weeks. Once able to practice, the player from the PUP list has to be either re-instated to the roster within 6 more weeks, released, or they can be placed on IR for the rest of the season. The six weeks does not start until the player is able to practice. In Jonah's case, his six weeks has not started yet, as he has not yet practiced with the team. This is how they can be kept on the PUP List like AJ McCarron was in 2014, if they are unable to practice. Players on the PUP or IR list do not count against the 53-man roster while they are out, but they do count against the 90-man roster limit. With Jonah Williams, once he is cleared to practice, he then would have 6 weeks to be re-instated or placed on IR, meaning that he could return all the way through December. See below: https://www.cincyjungle.com/2018/8/31/17797904/explaining-pup-nfi-ir-other-injury-nfl-roster-designations-cuts-53-man-roster
  3. While I agree that they paid too much for Bobby Hart (especially based on how he played last year), I am actually not completely against it either. After all, he is only 24 years old and has started most of his career. I believe that the Bengals signed him solely based on his potential and not his production. If he does not reach that potential, they can cut him after the first year and I believe, only cost them around $7M, which is more than some current backups make at the position. While I'm not in love with this signing, I'm actually not all bent out of shape over it either. I think it is blown out of proportion a bit considering that it is not a fully guaranteed 3 year contract at $21M, like it seems to be advertised as in the media. Especially if they wind up drafting a tackle that can compete with him this year and take the position next year.
  4. The Bengals website is reporting it is only a 1 year deal. Anyone know for certain if that is accurate, or if it is a 3 year deal?
  • Create New...