Week not for the weak

[Bengals1181]

[quote]Week not for the weak
By GEOFF HOBSON
March 7, 2008



Posted: 6:50 p.m.
This was no Idle of March.

Not this week in Bengaldom. Here are six takes, a six-pack to kick back.

[b]1. FREE-AGENT FRENZY:[/b] The week just ended may have been the Bengals' most aggressive and frenzied action in the first week of free agency since the unfettered process began 14 years ago.

Even more than head coach Marvin Lewis' first weekend that netted three defensive starters in tackle John Thornton, linebacker Kevin Hardy and cornerback Tory James, and an offensive anchor in tight end Reggie Kelly.

This time the Bengals emerged with Titans defensive end Antwan Odom, but not before they were forced to adjust in a fluid rush in which $100 million got shuffled around in a binge of contingency plans that began the morning free agency dawned last Friday.

They never stopped until they physically brought Odom back from the airport to sign the five-year, $29.5 million deal Monday night that ended the wackiest 72 hours in Bengaldom.

The week began with the mantra: Get The Best Defensive Lineman, and so it opened in negotiations with Detroit for the infamous no trade of Shaun Rogers.

[b]The Bengals will forever be drilled on this one even though a guy that was heavily involved in the trade, Rogers agent Kennard McGuire, insists the Bengals weren't at fault when the NFL voided the trade because of a technical problem in the roster bonus language.[/b] That gave the Lions and Browns a second life.

McGuire reiterated this Friday that the Bengals have been wrongly portrayed. From willing to take the hit on a $1 million roster bonus to laying out the parameters of a long-term mega deal, McGuire said again, [b]"The Bengals did everything they could to get Shaun. The fans shouldn't be left with the impression that they weren't aggressive or that they made a mistake." [/b]

[b]Indeed, when the NFL voided the trade because of a technicality in the March 1 roster bonus language, both the Bengals and Lions objected strongly.[/b] [b]But in the window of time it took the league to reflect on its decision and let the clubs know that, yes, the trade actually could go through the next morning, the Lions were allowed to leave the Bengals deal and go to Cleveland to make the trade for the player they wanted in cornerback Leigh Bodden. [/b]

And, McGuire insists that when Rogers moved his roster bonus date back a couple of days to help Cleveland get around the technicality that hung up the Bengals, which was merely to protect themselves if Rogers flunked the physical, McGuire said that his client would have done that for any team when he was told it was the best way he was going to get out of Detroit.

By the time the story hit the Internet Friday night, the Bengals were already in more trade talks, this time with the Jets for tackle Dewayne Robertson and over the weekend they [b]agreed to send fourth- and fifth-rounders to New York provided they could work out a new deal for Robertson that would have to border on something like $20 million over the next three years because his original deal called for $18 million over the next two[/b].

[b]The numbers were close enough that Robertson got on the plane Monday morning and the story got leaked,[/b] but what happened next on Monday afternoon as the trade died is anyone's guess. Bengals head coach Marvin Lewis said it wasn't a matter of money and reports in New York surfaced about Robertson's bone-on-bone knee condition.


[b]In between the Bengals were kicking the tires on Cardinals linebacker Calvin Pace, another major money player that ended up getting $22 million guaranteed from the Jets. As the Bengals mulled being competitive with Pace, who shares agents with Robert Geathers, they never pulled their eyes off Odom once they set up the Monday visit with him in the first hours of free agency. [/b]

At 26 and off an eight-sack season in his first season as a starter, Odom, is that kind of "ascending player" player Marvin Lewis loves.

[b]Whether they could have signed both Odom and Rogers, Robertson, or Pace is a guess. The fact is they turned to Odom as quickly as they did Robertson and while they got Robertson on the plane, they kept Odom off a plane bound for Phoenix. [/b]

It was that kind of week.

[b]2. TRIO GONE:[/b] Landon Johnson became the third Bengals defensive starter to leave via free agency in seven days when he went to the Panthers on Friday.

With the loss of Johnson, the club's leading tackler in three of his four seasons, and right end Justin Smith, fourth on the all-time sack list, the Bengals lose two productive guys stats-wise. In free safety Madieu Williams they lose speed and ball-hawking.

Johnson is the guy you would have liked to have had: Tough, smart, stoic, versatile.

As much as you might love Smith's motor, $45 million should bring 12 sacks. As much as you might love Williams' potential, $7 million per year is too much to pay a guy that was in the middle of defenses that finished 30th and 27th the past two years.

But Johnson ...

You get the feeling that if the Bengals offered him in January what they offered him Thursday night, he would have stayed. He can play all three backer spots so reliably.

It seemed to come down to starter money and the club must see guys like Ahmad Brooks, Odell Thurman, Eric Henderson and Rashad Jeanty making their moves. It's understandable for some housecleaning. The Bengals have been no better than No. 27 in defense with guys like Smith, Williams and Johnson the past three seasons. But Johnson was the guy in the moon suit who always cleaned up the mess.

He was always there when Nate Webster, David Pollack and Ahmad Brooks got hurt, and Thurman got suspended.

Now what happens?

If the kids emerge and Dhani Jones can do what Johnson did in all three spots, the Bengals will take it.

[b]3. BACK TO THE FUTURE?:[/b] Nine years and 11 months after the Bengals drafted them in the first round, linebackers Takeo Spikes (cut by the Eagles) and Brian Simmons (cut by the Saints) are on the street.

Spikes just turned 31. Simmons turns 33 in June. Both want to keep playing, but it doesn't look like the script is going to play out. At least right away.

Spikes couldn't be reached for comment. Simmons, cut by the Bengals just before free agency started last year, said he wouldn't cross anyone off the list.

"I'd consider it if they'd consider it," Simmons said. "I sure didn't play (much) last year, so I'm fresh. I know I can still play."

Just a few weeks ago at the NFL Scouting Combine, Spikes talked about how highly he regards Lewis.

You'd have to figure for anything to happen there, it wouldn't happen until closer to training camp and the Bengals discovered a sudden need.

[b]
4. NEXT?:[/b] With about $4 million to spend and free agency plucked to the bone, the best place to look might be to the current roster. The first guy, of course, is Pro Bowl wide receiver T.J. Houshmandzadeh with one year left on his deal. It doesn't look like much is bubbling there at the moment. McGuire, his agent, has been tied up with Rogers and Javon Walker.

But there are also young established starters who have a year or two before they come up that could be targeted in defensive tackle Domata Peko and left guard Andrew Whitworth. The one thing free agency proves every year is that it's cheaper now than later.

[b]5. PICKS FOR GRABS: [/b]The nice thing if the Bengals can lure tight end Ben Utecht away from the Colts in restricted free agency is that it would almost be like picking up two picks for defense. They don't have to give up one for compensation and they wouldn't have to use a draft choice on a tight end.

That would be big because you'd probably be talking about a guy fairly high, in the second or third round, and maybe the fourth.

But this one will go slowly because the Colts have the right to match, so he'll take a visit to the Jets and maybe New Orleans.

Another thing free agency reminds is that draft picks are like gold because, say, if you don't get a defensive tackle in the draft, you have to mortgage the house in free agency, make a trade, or shake your head.

Johnson's signing in Carolina means the Bengals probably get a compensatory draft pick in 2008 that is higher than a seventh-rounder. The formula takes into account the new contract and playing time, among other things.

[b]6. FIRST-ROUND WORRIES: [/b]Maybe this is why the fans are out of sorts when a wide receiver and running back are discussed at No. 9 for the Bengals in the draft.

The Bengals top all-time runners and receivers have almost never come in the first round.

OK, for receivers, Isaac Curtis went in the first round. So did Eddie Brown. But Chad Johnson, Carl Pickens and Cris Collinsworth all went in the second and T.J. Houshmandzadeh went in the seventh.

Of the Bengals top all-time seven rushers, only James Brooks is a first-rounder and he was drafted by San Diego. In fact, none of the team's top 10 rushers were picked first by the Bengals.

Ohio State's Archie Griffin and LSU's Charles Alexander were first-rounders at Nos. 24 and 12, respectively. But in '76 the Bengals picked Oklahoma wide receiver Billy Brooks at No. 11 with their first first-rounder, and in '79 they opted for Washington State quarterback Jack Thompson at No. 3 before taking Alexander nine picks later.[/quote]


one of the more insightful, behind the scenes pieces we've ever seen from Hobson. I definately like that we got Odom for half of what Pace would have cost.


Hobson also reiterates a point I've made about Utecht. While I don't think he's better than every TE in the draft, the saved draft pick is invaluable whether its for a trade, or to use at another position. You can't trade your 4th for Robertson if you need it to draft a TE. It would also send a message to fans that we are finally going to use the TE more in the passing game.

[-GoBengals-]

ill never get the TE man love that goes around here...

we dont get more downs to make use of one. it would ahve helped when henry was gone, but frankly we have 3-5 better passing options than the TE will be...

WR #1-3 and watson/irons/perry could easily do damage out of the backfield.... and all of them are faster than any TE ive seen.


would it come in handy? suuuure.

but it doesnt break open some magical lair of sweet offensive schemes we never had.

its a TE...

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='GoBengals' post='641507' date='Mar 7 2008, 11:51 PM']ill never get the TE man love that goes around here...

we dont get more downs to make use of one. it would ahve helped when henry was gone, but frankly we have 3-5 better passing options than the TE will be...

WR #1-3 and watson/irons/perry could easily do damage out of the backfield.... and all of them are faster than any TE ive seen.


would it come in handy? suuuure.

but it doesnt break open some magical lair of sweet offensive schemes we never had.

its a TE...[/quote]


I disagree slightly. Who other than TJ do we have that is willing/able to go over the middle? I agree that Chad, TJ, and Henry would be my first options for having the ball in their hands, but outside of Henry, none of them can create a mismatch size wise on a LB over the middle and in the redzone. A receiving TE adds versatility and different looks, even if they aren't the best threat on the field. It would be a welcome addition considering defenses last year were saying they were able to predict our plays from time to time.

[|OneHeartBeat|]

the more weapons you can add the better

[-GoBengals-]

[quote name='Bengals1181' post='641508' date='Mar 7 2008, 11:55 PM']I disagree slightly. Who other than TJ do we have that is willing/able to go over the middle? I agree that Chad, TJ, and Henry would be my first options for having the ball in their hands, but outside of Henry, none of them can create a mismatch size wise on a LB over the middle and in the redzone. A receiving TE adds versatility and different looks, even if they aren't the best threat on the field. It would be a welcome addition considering defenses last year were saying they were able to predict our plays from time to time.[/quote]

how many people can you have going over the middle? and actually henry runs many routes over the middle. and we do have two te's who are ok.. nothing great... its the "OMG WE NEED STAR TE crowd i mostly disagree with. the position can be upgraded for sure.. but its hardly a high need. center and other oline depth is well about a TE in my book. there isnt a single problem ive seen in the last 3 years that would be fixed by a better TE....better LB, DL, safeties, health, oline, RB, etc.. all would of helped.. but TE.. i dont think we win any more games with a better TE...

[quote name='OneHeartBeat' post='641509' date='Mar 7 2008, 11:58 PM']the more weapons you can add the better[/quote]

true. but money and picks are limited, do we win more games improving the Oline or TE, RB or TE, LB's or TE, etc..

i just thing TE falls down the need chart pretty quickly when you look at the big picture.. i'd like an upgrade or bigger threat.. but we have serviceable guys there currently..

[Captain Awesome]

The fact that it is finally coming out that the NFL made a mistake with the ruling on Shaun Rogers, makes me wonder if the NFL will compensate the Bengals for it.

The Ravens got a draft pick for all the mess around T.O. when they traded for him, and I think the Bengals are entitled to something here.

Rogers was drafted in the 2nd Round by the Lions, so the Bengals should get a 2nd Round pick as compensation for the NFL screwing us.

[akiliMVP]

[quote name='Captain Awesome' post='641517' date='Mar 8 2008, 12:38 AM']The fact that it is finally coming out that the NFL made a mistake with the ruling on Shaun Rogers, makes me wonder if the NFL will compensate the Bengals for it.

The Ravens got a draft pick for all the mess around T.O. when they traded for him, and I think the Bengals are entitled to something here.

Rogers was drafted in the 2nd Round by the Lions, so the Bengals should get a 2nd Round pick as compensation for the NFL screwing us.[/quote]
*Looks at who the commissioner of the NFL is*


:rofl:

[DanvilleBengal]

Were the Bengals really serious in giving Shaun Rogers a mega-deal to try to improve their defense? That is really out of character for this team. Just by that non-move there, and the fact that it does seem that they are actively wanting a defensive tackle on this team makes me think that the end may be finally near for John Thornton, especially considering that we do have Michael Myers to take over as the veteran of the crew.


If the Bengals are really jonesin for a Longhorn DT, go after Frank Okan or whatever his name is. He should be available in the second round if we are unable to get either Ellis or Dorsey. Only problem is that we may have to put him through that same fat camp that Sam Adams went through......

[DanvilleBengal]

[quote name='Captain Awesome' post='641517' date='Mar 8 2008, 12:38 AM']The fact that it is finally coming out that the NFL made a mistake with the ruling on Shaun Rogers, makes me wonder if the NFL will compensate the Bengals for it.

The Ravens got a draft pick for all the mess around T.O. when they traded for him, and I think the Bengals are entitled to something here.

Rogers was drafted in the 2nd Round by the Lions, so the Bengals should get a 2nd Round pick as compensation for the NFL screwing us.[/quote]

When did the Ravens get that extra draft pick? The year that it happened, or the next year? I don't remember, but if this is a similar case, I would have to blindly believe that the Bengals would have 11 picks again, as opposed to 10.

And to go off subject, having a guy like Utecht to play opposite of Reggie would essentially have us in a 3-reciever set whenever we line up as 2 TE's. However, I do wonder how much of Utecht's recent sucess is due to playing with a QB like Peyton and also having teammates like Dallas Clark and Bryan Fletcher (also TEs) playing with him. Was he a trusted checkdown option to Peyton, or just a guy that would just rotate in and happen to get open? Second, we do put a bit of a premium on blocking for our TE's. I think that Utecht was considered the blocking TE with the Colts, but he does have pretty good recieving skills. Would his blocking translate here? I know his size would be an asset in the red zone (6-6, 251) to go with Chris Henry (6-4, 210?), but how does he do in splitting the safeties or getting open down the seam, or running an inside curl that is 8-10 yards deep?

If Marvin is serious about finding TEs with pretty good receiveing skills, then it seems that Utecht would fit perfectly here. Considered as a blocking TE for the Colts, bout could becoumd a pretty decent target for Carson.

We need to go out and get him, like yesterday.

[Captain Awesome]

[quote name='DanvilleBengal' post='641539' date='Mar 8 2008, 03:47 AM']When did the Ravens get that extra draft pick? The year that it happened, or the next year? I don't remember, but if this is a similar case, I would have to blindly believe that the Bengals would have 11 picks again, as opposed to 10.

And to go off subject, having a guy like Utecht to play opposite of Reggie would essentially have us in a 3-reciever set whenever we line up as 2 TE's. However, I do wonder how much of Utecht's recent sucess is due to playing with a QB like Peyton and also having teammates like Dallas Clark and Bryan Fletcher (also TEs) playing with him. Was he a trusted checkdown option to Peyton, or just a guy that would just rotate in and happen to get open? Second, we do put a bit of a premium on blocking for our TE's. I think that Utecht was considered the blocking TE with the Colts, but he does have pretty good recieving skills. Would his blocking translate here? I know his size would be an asset in the red zone (6-6, 251) to go with Chris Henry (6-4, 210?), but how does he do in splitting the safeties or getting open down the seam, or running an inside curl that is 8-10 yards deep?

If Marvin is serious about finding TEs with pretty good receiveing skills, then it seems that Utecht would fit perfectly here. Considered as a blocking TE for the Colts, bout could becoumd a pretty decent target for Carson.

We need to go out and get him, like yesterday.[/quote]



The Ravens protested the same year it happened, 2004 I think, and they went to arbitration. The arbitrator awarded the Ravens got back the draft pick they sent to the 49ers for TO, and then the Eagles (the team that TO went to) gave one of their picks (4th or 5th rounder) to the Eagles.

This happened because of a mistake on Owens' agent part and the Ravens were compensated. So what is a mistake on the league's part worth?

[DanvilleBengal]

Maybe a 4th? I'm reasonable. I know that we wouldn't be able to get yet another 3rd rounder, and it isn't possible that we would be compensated both picks that we would have used to get Rogers, which would have been a 3rd (a possible Ahmad Brooks) and a 4th( a possible Robert Geathers) since the trade didn't go through.


I like draft picks, the more the merrier. This year is a prime year to move up, and we have the ammo to do it with possibly 4 additional picks to go with the 6 that we already have. Why not get yet another pick? There really isn't any way that 11 players are gonna make this roster and practice squad unless every single one of them blow us away like the Giants rooks did this year.

Hell, I would like it if we could move Big Willie or JT for draft picks. I'm pretty sure that ATL or Oakland would like to get a perennial Pro Bowl RT (when healthy) for the ability to swap picks. It's time to see if we made the right decision in putting the tag on Stacy Andrews. If he's anywhere near close to the level of his twin brother Shaun Andrews (and all I've seen seems to point to that), then he's a keeper that deserves to have a long-term commitment.

[LudwigVan Kubrick]

[quote name='GoBengals' post='641507' date='Mar 7 2008, 11:51 PM']ill never get the TE man love that goes around here...[/quote]

I know... its funny how some people just don't get it. Doesn't make you any less wrong though.


[quote]we dont get more downs to make use of one. it would ahve helped when henry was gone, but frankly we have 3-5 better passing options than the TE will be...[/quote]

For a guy who follows football as you do, a pretty stupid comment.


[quote]WR #1-3 and watson/irons/perry could easily do damage out of the backfield.... and all of them are faster than any TE ive seen.[/quote]

Did you just use two injured guys as supporting evidence?


[quote]would it come in handy? suuuure.

but it doesnt break open some magical lair of sweet offensive schemes we never had.

its a TE...[/quote]


Sigh... ok one more time. Not having a viable pass catching TE allows the LBs and DBs to "cheat" toward the WRs. This makes it harder on the QB because his window is smaller and it makes it harder on the WRs for the same reason. This has a snowballing effect down through the offense that even effects the running game. When the defense isn't worried about the TE after he breaks containment, then you have yet another aspect to be exploited.

There are countless reasons why we need a pass catching TE. As countless as the ways our offense struggled last season.

[quote]ill never get the TE man love that goes around here...[/quote]

I know ya won't, big fella. But keep trying...

[TigerJ@w]

[quote name='LudwigVan Kubrick' post='641557' date='Mar 8 2008, 10:00 AM']I know... its funny how some people just don't get it. Doesn't make you any less wrong though.




For a guy who follows football as you do, a pretty stupid comment.




Did you just use two injured guys as supporting evidence?





Sigh... ok one more time. Not having a viable pass catching TE allows the LBs and DBs to "cheat" toward the WRs. This makes it harder on the QB because his window is smaller and it makes it harder on the WRs for the same reason. This has a snowballing effect down through the offense that even effects the running game. When the defense isn't worried about the TE after he breaks containment, then you have yet another aspect to be exploited.

There are countless reasons why we need a pass catching TE. As countless as the ways our offense struggled last season.



I know ya won't, big fella. But keep trying... [/quote]

I don't like using this word, but um....

WORD!



Also, what about our Redzone Issues? How has this panned out with 3 to 4 WR set or even using a RB out of backfield? Not very good, but go look at successful teams in the Redzone and see what they use to do exactly what you stated. Yea, we need to keep the same methods because they work so well, quote MFB and ML.

[Patmo]

Picture yourself as a defensive coordinator.Then consider that you're preparing for the COLTS,RAVENS,CHARGERS or STEELERS.Clark,Heap,Gates and Miller have to require a lot of planning.In short, a team has to prepare for all the opponents weapons.NOW, consider that you're planning for the Bengals.How much time are you going to spend on the TE position.

[scharm]

Bengals need a dependable TE that come up with a 2 to 3 knife in the back catches that convert first downs and convert FGs into TDs.

Nothing Huge. It would open alot for this offense, just to give the safeties something else to think about on 3rd down.

They also need to look towards JJ's way a little more. His first two years he had some big catches out of the backfield and it seems that those have gone away.

[Cricket]

[quote name='Captain Awesome' post='641541' date='Mar 8 2008, 04:48 AM']The Ravens protested the same year it happened, 2004 I think, and they went to arbitration. The arbitrator awarded the Ravens got back the draft pick they sent to the 49ers for TO, and then the Eagles (the team that TO went to) gave one of their picks (4th or 5th rounder) to the Eagles.

This happened because of a mistake on Owens' agent part and the Ravens were compensated. So what is a mistake on the league's part worth?[/quote]


In the Shaun Rogers/Cincinnati Bengals case, I think Goodell might very likely look at it like this:

Cincy was to trade two draft picks for Rogers...a net loss of one "player". Therefore Goodell would be more inclined to justify that the Bengals should [b]give up[/b] a draft pick instead of [b]getting[/b] a draft pick. ...that bastard.


As for the Terrell Owens/Ravens/Eagles/49ers fiasco, the arbitrator did not make a determination, as the three teams came to an agreement. And based on this article, apparently the arbitrator was determining whether or not T.O. was a free agent.

[url="http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2004/03/16/owens040316.html"]http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2004/03/16/owens040316.html[/url]

[quote][b][size=4]Settlement sends Owens to Eagles[/size][/b]
[size=1][b]Last Updated: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 | 8:31 PM ET
CBC Sports [/b][/size]

Disgruntled wide receiver Terrell Owens couldn't be happier.

The four-time Pro Bowler finally got his wish Tuesday, to play with Donovan McNabb and the Philadelphia Eagles.

On top of that, Owens was awarded a plush new seven-year deal with the Eagles.

Terrell Owens, seen hugging Jerry Rice, signed with the Eagles.(AP Photo)
Terrell Owens, seen hugging Jerry Rice, signed with the Eagles.(AP Photo)

"I'm so excited to be here and to play with D-Mac," said Owens, who has played with McNabb in three Pro Bowls.

"I feel like I fit in real nice here. I'm comfortable with the West Coast offence.

"The touchdowns I've had in the Pro Bowl, Donovan has thrown them to me. That just comes with two athletes going out there and making plays, just chemistry in the making."

After the University of Pennsylvania Law School professor Steven Burbank heard two hours of arguments from lawyers on Monday regarding the fate of Owens' controversial contract status, it was clear that Owens was going to win and be granted free agency status.

* RELATED: Player bio: Terrell Owens

But before Burbank made his ruling, the parties involved agreed to a trade that landed Owens in Philadelphia.

"My heart was in Philly," Owens said.

"If the arbitrator ruled he was a free agent, he could have gone anywhere," said Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFL Players' Association. "This was the Eagles assuring that he came to them."

The San Francisco 49ers get defensive end Brandon Whiting from the Eagles and the Baltimore Ravens acquired Philadelphia's fifth-round draft pick in 2004.

The deal is pending on Owens passing a physical with the Eagles.

The Ravens also get back the second-round pick they traded to San Francisco for Owens back on March 4.

"Our collective mind-set is to improve this team," Ravens head coach Brian Billick said. "We'll keep doing this through the draft, free agency and in other ways.

"It's a disappointment to not get T.O. But I'm confident in our abilities to raise the Ravens to the next level."

The 30-year-old Owens, who was looking forward to becoming a free agent this off-season after eight years with the San Francisco 49ers, was ruled to still be under contract to San Francisco by the NFL's Management Council in late February.

Owens' agent, David Joseph, apparently did not formally notify the 49ers that his client would void the final three years of his existing contract with San Francisco before the Feb. 21 deadline.

During Monday's hearing, filed on Owens' behalf by the NFL Players' Association, Owens seeked to be ruled a free agent because he and his agent were not formally notified of the changed deadline for notification.

Owens finished the 2003 season with 80 receptions for 1,102 yards and nine touchdowns before suffering a broken collarbone.

"It's a nice addition to a good football team," Eagles head coach Andy Reid said. "To put him in the mix, it presents itself to be an explosive package."[/quote]

[color="#0000FF"]If anything like this were to happen in the Bengals/Rogers affair, it would be something like this (IMO):

Bengals make their case to the NFL that our trade should have gone through, Rogers should be a Bengal.

After the NFL denies the Bengals, the Bengals pursue the issue all the way through to arbitration.

[size=4][b]If [/b][/size](notice it's a big "if"), it appears that the Bengals might have any chance of winning the case, the Browns might offer the Bengals a draft pick to STFU...Savage: "Hey, Mike. Would you be willing to drop the issue if we send you our 5th-round draft pick?"

[/color]

I don't see any of this happening, so you can forget about getting an additional pick due to the league's screw up....IMO.

[Oldcat]

[quote name='Captain Awesome' post='641517' date='Mar 7 2008, 09:38 PM']The fact that it is finally coming out that the NFL made a mistake with the ruling on Shaun Rogers, makes me wonder if the NFL will compensate the Bengals for it.

The Ravens got a draft pick for all the mess around T.O. when they traded for him, and I think the Bengals are entitled to something here.

Rogers was drafted in the 2nd Round by the Lions, so the Bengals should get a 2nd Round pick as compensation for the NFL screwing us.[/quote]

More likely theyll just suspend Odell for another year

[BengalsOwn]

[quote]Bengals weren't at fault when the NFL voided the trade because of a technical problem in the roster bonus language[/quote]

Why in the world would the NFL be responsible and even consider giving the bengals draft picks (lol) because the contract wasn't written correctly?

Are you people delusional?

edit Ok after re-reading it, it looks like there was a problem with the CBA, that EVERY owner in the NFL had an opportunity to read every word of.

[Cricket]

[quote name='BengalsOwn' post='641599' date='Mar 8 2008, 12:02 PM']Why in the world would the NFL be responsible and even consider giving the bengals draft picks (lol) because the contract wasn't written correctly?

Are you people delusional?[/quote]

Delusional? Did you even read Hobson's article?

I don't think we'll get any compensation, but it's certainly reasonable to interpret this (from Hobson's article) as the league saying they actually deemed the initial contract to be okay:

[quote]...when the NFL voided the trade because of a technicality in the March 1 roster bonus language, both the Bengals and Lions objected strongly. But in the window of time it took [b]the league to reflect on its decision and let the clubs know that, yes, the trade actually could go through[/b] the next morning, the Lions were allowed to leave the Bengals deal and go to Cleveland to make the trade for the player they wanted in cornerback Leigh Bodden.[/quote]

[BengalsOwn]

[quote name='Cricket' post='641603' date='Mar 8 2008, 12:14 PM']Delusional? Did you even read Hobson's article?

I don't think we'll get any compensation, but it's certainly reasonable to interpret this (from Hobson's article) as the league saying they actually deemed the initial contract to be okay:[/quote]

Wow so the league took some time to debate the issue and in the mean time the Lions figured something else out to do?

Why would the league be responsible for giving the Bengals another draft pick to waste?

[Tigris]

[quote name='GoBengals' post='641507' date='Mar 7 2008, 11:51 PM']ill never get the TE man love that goes around here...

we dont get more downs to make use of one. it would ahve helped when henry was gone, but frankly we have 3-5 better passing options than the TE will be...

WR #1-3 and watson/irons/perry could easily do damage out of the backfield.... and all of them are faster than any TE ive seen.


would it come in handy? suuuure.

but it doesnt break open some magical lair of sweet offensive schemes we never had.

its a TE...[/quote]
Having a receiving tight end would do wonders when we're inside the 20. It sure did seem like Shayne kicked a bunch of short yardage field goals last year.

[quote name='TigerJ@w' post='641560' date='Mar 8 2008, 10:11 AM']I don't like using this word, but um....

WORD!



[b]Also, what about our Redzone Issues? [/b] How has this panned out with 3 to 4 WR set or even using a RB out of backfield? Not very good, but go look at successful teams in the Redzone and see what they use to do exactly what you stated. Yea, we need to keep the same methods because they work so well, quote MFB and ML. [/quote]
Exactly... red zone all the way. How many times have we done that play-action to TJ across the middle the past couple of years? That's a tight end play right there... and splitting TJ on the outside in those situations could really spread out the defense and not force Carson to throw a perfect dart to the middle of the field in the heart of the defense.
[quote name='Cricket' post='641590' date='Mar 8 2008, 11:27 AM']In the Shaun Rogers/Cincinnati Bengals case, I think Goodell might very likely look at it like this:

[b]Cincy was to trade two draft picks for Rogers...a net loss of one "player". Therefore Goodell would be more inclined to justify that the Bengals should [b]give up[/b] a draft pick instead of [b]getting[/b] a draft pick. ...that bastard. [/b]


As for the Terrell Owens/Ravens/Eagles/49ers fiasco, the arbitrator did not make a determination, as the three teams came to an agreement. And based on this article, apparently the arbitrator was determining whether or not T.O. was a free agent.

[url="http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2004/03/16/owens040316.html"]http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2004/03/16/owens040316.html[/url]



[color="#0000FF"]If anything like this were to happen in the Bengals/Rogers affair, it would be something like this (IMO):

Bengals make their case to the NFL that our trade should have gone through, Rogers should be a Bengal.

After the NFL denies the Bengals, the Bengals pursue the issue all the way through to arbitration.

[size=4][b]If [/b][/size](notice it's a big "if"), it appears that the Bengals might have any chance of winning the case, the Browns might offer the Bengals a draft pick to STFU...Savage: "Hey, Mike. Would you be willing to drop the issue if we send you our 5th-round draft pick?"

[/color]

I don't see any of this happening, so you can forget about getting an additional pick due to the league's screw up....IMO.[/quote]

[ThurmanMunster]

[quote name='Tigris' post='641617' date='Mar 8 2008, 12:45 PM']Having a receiving tight end would do wonders when we're inside the 20. It sure did seem like Shayne kicked a bunch of short yardage field goals last year.[/quote]

it hurt way more not having henry for 16 games and then him not having timing with carson when he came back more than not having a TE.

[Inigo Montoya]

"[b]Indeed, when the NFL voided the trade because of a technicality in the March 1 roster bonus language, both the Bengals and Lions objected strongly. But in the window of time it took the league to reflect on its decision and let the clubs know that, yes, the trade actually could go through the next morning, the Lions were allowed to leave the Bengals deal and go to Cleveland to make the trade for the player they wanted in cornerback Leigh Bodden.[/b]"


The Lions objected so strongly that they proceeded to make a better deal within the next couple of hours. What a joke you are, Hobson.

The Lions leveraged us for a better deal and Rodgers managed to snag a new contract. Both the Bengals and the Browns were played by Matt Millen, of all fucking people.

[Captain Awesome]

[quote name='BengalsOwn' post='641607' date='Mar 8 2008, 12:28 PM']Wow so the league took some time to debate the issue and in the mean time the Lions figured something else out to do?

Why would the league be responsible for giving the Bengals another draft pick to waste?[/quote]


Ummmm the reasoning behind it is pretty simple. I'll type slowly and use small words in hopes that you are able to comprehend it.

B-u-t............ f-o-r............. t-h-e............. N-F-L........... m-a-k-i-n-g............. a........... m-i-s-t-a-k-e.............. S-h-a-u-n............. R-o-g-e-r-s.......... w-o-u-l-d........... b-e........... a........... B-e-n-g-a-l.................. n-o-w.




Wow so I guess you aren't the only person who can be a condesending prick on a message board.


[Edited to add the double finger. ]

[bengaled]

[quote name='Captain Awesome' post='641677' date='Mar 8 2008, 03:56 PM']B-u-t............ f-o-r............. t-h-e............. N-F-L........... m-a-k-i-n-g............. a........... m-i-s-t-a-k-e.............. S-h-a-u-n............. R-o-g-e-r-s.......... w-o-u-l-d........... b-e........... a........... B-e-n-g-a-l.................. n-o-w.[/quote]

in a league that publicly prides itself on parity, that is absolutely disgusting.