Hooky Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 i bet ESPN laughs their collective ass off when they whisper a possibility and fans jump all over it. I wouldn't be surprised if they have a contest to see who comes up with the goofiest scenario that actually takes off. Also, it's a business. Major signing don't get done just to stick it to a rival. It's business. And if it does happen, it's bad business. When this "story" broke, Schlereth mentioned that sticking it to the stealers would be a good reason to sign him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldcat Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1329923902' post='1098179'] if I understand what you're saying here right, the stealers don't have any choice in where wallace ends up and which draft pick they get. It's wallace who decides which offer from another team to sign. [/quote] That's so, and would be a reason a team from like the Browns would be a dark horse. Would Wallace like playing for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1329923902' post='1098179'] if I understand what you're saying here right, the stealers don't have any choice in where wallace ends up and which draft pick they get. It's wallace who decides which offer from another team to sign. [/quote] Sorry, my mind is a little gooey this morning. I need another cup of coffee... Anyway, I meant that Bengals front office will have a pretty good idea if Wallace will sign away from Pittsburgh (all signs point to yes here regardless). I don't think you make an offer if you question the likelihood of them getting a first from someone else for him. If you as GM feel pittsburgh will be getting that 1st from someone regardless then I don't think you put that on the scale while weighing the decision. The only thing that matters in that case is what [i]you[/i] will get for the draft pick in either scenario, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1329924217' post='1098188'] Sorry, my mind is a little gooey this morning. I need another cup of coffee... Anyway, I meant that Bengals front office will have a pretty good idea if Wallace will sign away from Pittsburgh (all signs point to yes here regardless). I don't think you make an offer if you question the likelihood of them getting a first from someone else for him. If you as GM feel pittsburgh will be getting that 1st from someone regardless then I don't think you put that on the scale while weighing the decision. The only thing that matters in that case is what [i]you[/i] will get for the draft pick in either scenario, [/quote] gotcha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorclaws Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1329924013' post='1098184'] disagree. I'm guessing you have to give up your original pick. [/quote] I'm pretty sure you have to give up your own pick as well. There was a situation similar a few years ago but I don't remember what. Possibly when NE had to give up their 1st for cheating and they had to give up their original pick... although that was the later pick as well. edit: also, if you could trade any 1st round pick for a RFA, what would stop you from trading down to #32 before signing the RFA? You'd pick up the extra draft picks and still get the guy you want. It must be your original pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricket Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='gatorclaws' timestamp='1329924402' post='1098192'] I'm pretty sure you have to give up your own pick as well. There was a situation similar a few years ago but I don't remember what. Possibly when NE had to give up their 1st for cheating and they had to give up their original pick... although that was the later pick as well. edit: also, if you could trade any 1st round pick for a RFA, what would stop you from trading down to #32 before signing the RFA? You'd pick up the extra draft picks and still get the guy you want. It must be your original pick. [/quote] Bingo. As I was reading thru this thread I was planning on making the same point you did with regards to trading back. I'm guessing that it has to be your team's original draft position in the first round...and if you don't have it, you can't make an offer to a player with a 1st-round tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBengal Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 With all the needs we have to fill... two guard spots, WR, RB, CB, S, possibly LB, and D-Line depending on what happens with Rucker, Fanane, and Sims... it doesn't make sense to burn a 1st round pick PLUS all the salary cap room needes to fill other positions... just to solidify one position. If we were talking about an elite WR maybe. But Wallace is not worth it. Free agents are always overpriced due to the competitive free agent market with teams bidding against each other. The draft is the one way the Bengals can sit back and have their choice of elite talent at a low price without having to compete with other teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter addressed the two most talked about issues of the Steelers' offseason so far: the future of wide receiver [url="http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/12601/mike-wallace"]Mike Wallace[/url] and the relationship between quarterback [url="http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/5536/ben-roethlisberger"]Ben Roethlisberger[/url] and offensive coordinator Todd Haley. In his mailbag, Schefter writes that the Steelers [url="http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/blog/_/name/schefter_adam/id/7602003/mailbag-mike-wallace-free-agency-nfl-combine"]are vulnerable to losing Wallace[/url] and it's not by choice. Pittsburgh might be forced to put the first-round tender on Wallace instead of the franchise tag because it's $11 million over the salary cap. He named the [url="http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/bal/baltimore-ravens"]Baltimore Ravens[/url], [url="http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/cin/cincinnati-bengals"]Cincinnati Bengals[/url], [url="http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/ne/new-england-patriots"]New England Patriots[/url] and [url="http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/sf/san-francisco-49ers"]San Francisco 49ers[/url] as teams who might sign Wallace to an offer sheet. "That team can load up that contract with a big roster bonus that would count against the Steelers' salary cap this season," Schefter writes. "If Wallace signs an offer sheet that contains a $20 million roster bonus, the Steelers are left with two choices: they can match the offer sheet, keep Wallace and then have to cut $20 million worth of players; or they can decline to match, lose Wallace and get that cap space along with a first-round pick." In terms of the AFC North, I see Cincinnati as being a more likely destination than Baltimore. Ravens general manager Ozzie Newsome made it sound like the team [url="http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_/id/42614/will-ravens-and-bengals-pursue-wallace"]wouldn't be pursuing[/url] restricted free agents. “There’s going to be some restricted free agents that we would like, but is it going to be worth giving up a significant amount of cash and cap and a draft pick?," Newsome said at the Ravens' season-ending news conference. "When you deal with that double-whammy, even though the rules have been relaxed, you just go, ‘Nah, no, I wouldn’t do it.’ That’s just my philosophy.” [url="http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_/id/42768/schefter-on-the-steelers-offseason-issues"]http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_/id/42768/schefter-on-the-steelers-offseason-issues[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengaled Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='happyrid' timestamp='1329923620' post='1098172'] I think the only problem with your scenario is the timing. Cleveland will have to make their FA decisions, including whether to pursue Wallace and give up a 1st, well before the draft. At that point, they will have no idea if they are going to get RG3 or if Washington, Miami, Seattle or someone else is going to trade up to 2 or 3 to take him. Plus, I'm not 100% positive about how this all works, but is it possible that you have to give up your own 1st round pick? For the Bengals, it would be the later pick, #21. But for the Browns, their own pick is actually #4 and there's no way they'd give that for Wallace. I do think that team like NE and San Fran, who badlly need a deep threat and are picking very late in the 1st are probably the most likely to make this type of move. [/quote] i would imagine ANY 1st round pick would be adequate compensation. i could be wrong, but there's no logical reason why it would have to be your original one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengaled Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='gatorclaws' timestamp='1329924402' post='1098192'] I'm pretty sure you have to give up your own pick as well. There was a situation similar a few years ago but I don't remember what. Possibly when NE had to give up their 1st for cheating and they had to give up their original pick... although that was the later pick as well. edit: also, if you could trade any 1st round pick for a RFA, what would stop you from trading down to #32 before signing the RFA? You'd pick up the extra draft picks and still get the guy you want. It must be your original pick. [/quote] hmmm, that is a point i didn't consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='gatorclaws' timestamp='1329924402' post='1098192'] I'm pretty sure you have to give up your own pick as well. There was a situation similar a few years ago but I don't remember what. Possibly when NE had to give up their 1st for cheating and they had to give up their original pick... although that was the later pick as well. [b]edit: also, if you could trade any 1st round pick for a RFA, what would stop you from trading down to #32 before signing the RFA? You'd pick up the extra draft picks and still get the guy you want. It must be your original pick.[/b] [/quote] well for one, RFA tenders are typically made at the beginning of free agency and opposing teams only have 2 weeks to make an offer, and no team is going to trade draft position until draft day, which is a good month after the deadline to make offers to RFA's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorclaws Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1329938859' post='1098240'] well for one, RFA tenders are typically made at the beginning of free agency and opposing teams only have 2 weeks to make an offer, and no team is going to trade draft position until draft day, which is a good month after the deadline to make offers to RFA's. [/quote] you won't get as much value, but I'd bet the Giants would trade with us for an extra 4th right now. Even if it was for nothing extra, you'd still give the Steelers a worse pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='gatorclaws' timestamp='1329939567' post='1098241'] you won't get as much value, but I'd bet the Giants would trade with us for an extra 4th right now. Even if it was for nothing extra, you'd still give the Steelers a worse pick. [/quote] why on earth would the Bengals do that though? No team is going to trade down in the draft prior to the draft without knowing what will be available at that pick. There's a reason you never see it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorclaws Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1329943892' post='1098255'] why on earth would the Bengals do that though? No team is going to trade down in the draft prior to the draft without knowing what will be available at that pick. There's a reason you never see it happen. [/quote] Because if we're giving our 1st to the steelers, would you rather give them #21 or give them #32 while also getting a 4th round pick.The Bengals wouldn't be picking at #21 or at #32 so they wouldn't care who's available. In this scenario they've determined they'd rather have Wallace. At the end of the day, the Bengals either have Wallace or Wallace + a 4th. That's why they'd do it. It doesn't happen because I'm fairly sure the rules state you must trade your original pick for the RFA and you'd have to be sure the Steelers wouldn't match the offer which would blow this strategy up. There's too much of a possibility to get screwed over, but in theory it could work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='gatorclaws' timestamp='1329945249' post='1098264'] Because if we're giving our 1st to the steelers, would you rather give them #21 or give them #32 while also getting a 4th round pick.The Bengals wouldn't be picking at #21 or at #32 so they wouldn't care who's available. In this scenario they've determined they'd rather have Wallace. At the end of the day, the Bengals either have Wallace or Wallace + a 4th. That's why they'd do it. It doesn't happen because I'm fairly sure the rules state you must trade your original pick for the RFA and you'd have to be sure the Steelers wouldn't match the offer which would blow this strategy up. There's too much of a possibility to get screwed over, but in theory it could work. [/quote] not to be critical, but that scenario only works in a fantasy world. You'd have to make the trade with the giants and sign wallace instantaneously, and hope the stealers don't somehow match it. You can't make the trade after you sign wallace, you've already committed the draft pick elsewhere in the leagues eyes. You'd have to be pretty ballsy, and pretty confident to pull it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldcat Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='bengaled' timestamp='1329938562' post='1098239'] hmmm, that is a point i didn't consider. [/quote] Why consider it? the superbowl winners first rounder is still a first rounder if they use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengaled Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Oldcat' timestamp='1329946001' post='1098270'] Why consider it? the superbowl winners first rounder is still a first rounder if they use it. [/quote] what??????????????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldcat Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='bengaled' timestamp='1329946202' post='1098273'] what??????????????????? [/quote] If the Giants snag Wallace, their pick is good enough for compensation. Why should it suddenly be unworthy of consideration if we trade for it and use it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorclaws Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1329945722' post='1098267'] not to be critical, but that scenario only works in a fantasy world. You'd have to make the trade with the giants and sign wallace instantaneously, and hope the stealers don't somehow match it. You can't make the trade after you sign wallace, you've already committed the draft pick elsewhere in the leagues eyes. You'd have to be pretty ballsy, and pretty confident to pull it off. [/quote] not critical at all, it is purely fantasy scenario talk. I'm bored. It would take the perfect storm of events to happen. You would need the Wallace deal already agreed to under the table (and hope he doesn't pull a Donte) and it would need to be structured in a way that there's no way the steelers could match due to the cap. It would be fun to see though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Oldcat' timestamp='1329946350' post='1098275'] If the Giants snag Wallace, their pick is good enough for compensation. Why should it suddenly be unworthy of consideration if we trade for it and use it? [/quote] Ok, so what if the Bengals have the Giants sign Wallace to a contract offer, then have a trade set up to get Wallace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldcat Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1329946475' post='1098277'] Ok, so what if the Bengals have the Giants sign Wallace to a contract offer, then have a trade set up to get Wallace? [/quote] I don't see anything "illegal" about it, as long as everybody is cap happy during the process. Good thing the Giants are such nice folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Oldcat' timestamp='1329946592' post='1098278'] I don't see anything "illegal" about it, as long as everybody is cap happy during the process. Good thing the Giants are such nice folks. [/quote] No they just really like Gold Star chili coneys. If you have tried one of those Sonic New York style hot dogs you would no why the Giants would be willing to do this for the Bengals in exchanged for a Coney Crate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldcat Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1329946867' post='1098280'] No they just really like Gold Star chili coneys. If you have tried one of those Sonic New York style hot dogs you would no why the Giants would be willing to do this for the Bengals in exchanged for a Coney Crate. [/quote] Gold Star! Skyline is the only true Coney, you heretic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1329946475' post='1098277'] Ok, so what if the Bengals have the Giants sign Wallace to a contract offer, then have a trade set up to get Wallace? [/quote] now THAT is actually a pretty decent idea. Bengals get Wallace and an extra pick, the Giants get a better first rounder, and the stealers get a worse first round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengaled Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Oldcat' timestamp='1329946350' post='1098275'] If the Giants snag Wallace, their pick is good enough for compensation. Why should it suddenly be unworthy of consideration if we trade for it and use it? [/quote] i guess you must have missed the previous conversations pertaining to all this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.