*UPDATE* Bengals and James Harrison reach agreement on a deal

[Bengals1181]

Just to get in on this "starter's money" and play devils' advocate a bit - 

 

How many LB's on this team are presently getting starter's money?  By my count, assuming you count Rey's contract at that level, we have a whopping total of 1.  

 

Just because Burfict is starting doesn't mean that he's getting paid starter's money.  Lawson was also an UDFA.  The odds of Moch remaining on the team are slim to none. Joiner is an UDFA.  Maybin has to be getting the minimum.  And Thomas Howard isn't under contract.

 

So feel free to disagree, but doesn't it look like we still have room for 2 starting LB's pay-wise.   

 

Even if we took a 2nd round guy his pay wouldn't compare to a competent NFL starter's salary.

 

Lastly, I'd also think that turning our weakest unit on the team (LB's) into a strength is worth overpaying a little and having 4 starter quality guys on the team (and we'd be right to assume that they'll use Harrison in a rotational capacity to keep him fresh, extend his overall durability, and to put in others with greater strengths on those packages for which he's the wrong fit).

 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with any of that.  But yours and my perspective /= Bengals perspective.

 

The Bengals won't give Maualuga $2M plus to be a backup and sit on the bench.  It doesn't matter what you and I would do.

[Bengals1181]

@DreKirkSWAG: We get James Harrison #omg it's going to be a good day in the #whodeynation

[alleycat]

Just to get in on this "starter's money" and play devils' advocate a bit - 

 

How many LB's on this team are presently getting starter's money?  By my count, assuming you count Rey's contract at that level, we have a whopping total of 1.  

 

Just because Burfict is starting doesn't mean that he's getting paid starter's money.  Lawson was also an UDFA.  The odds of Moch remaining on the team are slim to none. Joiner is an UDFA.  Maybin has to be getting the minimum.  And Thomas Howard isn't under contract.

 

So feel free to disagree, but doesn't it look like we still have room for 2 starting LB's pay-wise.   

 

Even if we took a 2nd round guy his pay wouldn't compare to a competent NFL starter's salary.

 

Lastly, I'd also think that turning our weakest unit on the team (LB's) into a strength is worth overpaying a little and having 4 starter quality guys on the team (and we'd be right to assume that they'll use Harrison in a rotational capacity to keep him fresh, extend his overall durability, and to put in others with greater strengths on those packages for which he's the wrong fit).

Yes, I'm quoting myself.  

 

Another way to think of this is: if the total $$ you are spending on a unit is the same, does it matter whether they guys who are getting paid the most are starting?  I think a lot of the analyses we've been reading lately (both on-site and off), are creating a false choice by following this particular logic.  

 

Let's say the Bengals sign Harrison.  Let's say they also get a crack at someone they really like at WSLB. Maybe talent too good to pass up at the spot (Ogeltree at 37?).  Who plays then?  I'd have a feeling they wouldn't be sitting Burfict at WSLB, but Rey at the middle (so Burfict could fit there).

 

Hell, we'd still be spending very low dollars (beneath the level of 3 solid vet starters) overall.

[alleycat]

 
The Bengals won't give Maualuga $2M plus to be a backup and sit on the bench. 

Says who? You?
 
I guess I'm wondering where this idea comes from.  It just sounds like a truism to me.  Jason Allen sat a whole year on the bench last year. We had 3-4 DE's that were getting starters money last year.  Why would the LB position be any different - especially when you consider that it's the weak unit on the team that they have an opportunity to fix?
 
The fact of the matter is, yes, we have some big contracts coming up in the next two years; but we've also drafted so well that we have a lot of position groups where pretty talented people are playing for not a whole lot of money - and so we have a little money to throw around.  Compound this with the relative value of incoming rookies post CBA and I think the historical logic of guys earning "starters money" having to start may be just a bit obsolete.

[Bengals1181]

Says who? You?
 
I guess I'm wondering where this idea comes from.  It just sounds like a truism to me.  Jason Allen sat a whole year on the bench last year. We had 3-4 DE's that were getting starters money last year.  Why would the LB position be any different - especially when you consider that it's the weak unit on the team that they have an opportunity to fix?
 
The fact of the matter is, yes, we have some big contracts coming up in the next two years; but we've also drafted so well that we have a lot of position groups where pretty talented people are playing for not a whole lot of money - and so we have a little money to throw around.  Compound this with the relative value of incoming rookies post CBA and I think the historical logic of guys earning "starters money" having to start may be just a bit obsolete.

 

they didn't want Allen to sit on the bench though.  He couldn't stay healthy, and when he was he was getting outplayed by Newman and Jones.  Newman wasn't even a guarantee to make the roster when he signed.  At the time Allen signed, he would have been the #2 CB on the depth chart.  That's why he got as big of a contract as he did.  The plan was likely for Allen to start opposite Hall, Jones or Newman in the slot and Jones to see more time on special teams.  Injuries to Allen and the later drafted Kirkpatrick made a mess of things and luckily Jones and Newman pulled out stellar years. 

[MichaelWeston]

they won't pay that much for a backup LB.

He can backup 2 positions. Maybe they gave him that much without realizing that they could get Harrison.

I am just grabbing at straws because I think Maualuga at MLB is dumb.

[blueridge]

@DreKirkSWAG: We get James Harrison #omg it's going to be a good day in the #whodeynation

 

The other side of a possible Harrison signing is how it will received by the other guys on the team. I would guess it might be more positive than on this board.

Says who? You?
 
I guess I'm wondering where this idea comes from.  It just sounds like a truism to me.  Jason Allen sat a whole year on the bench last year. We had 3-4 DE's that were getting starters money last year.  Why would the LB position be any different - especially when you consider that it's the weak unit on the team that they have an opportunity to fix?
 
The fact of the matter is, yes, we have some big contracts coming up in the next two years; but we've also drafted so well that we have a lot of position groups where pretty talented people are playing for not a whole lot of money - and so we have a little money to throw around.  Compound this with the relative value of incoming rookies post CBA and I think the historical logic of guys earning "starters money" having to start may be just a bit obsolete.

I can imagine the reaction of Zimmer if he is told that he has to play a guy because of what the guy is being paid.

[Bengals1181]

 

I can imagine the reaction of Zimmer if he is told that he has to play a guy because of what the guy is being paid.

 

 

 

you've got it backwards.  How much he's making is a reflection of how much playing time Zimmer told the front office he should expect to get. If Zimmer said "I'd like Rey back as a backup," then they would have offered him backup money.

[alleycat]

 

they didn't want Allen to sit on the bench though.  He couldn't stay healthy, and when he was he was getting outplayed by Newman and Jones.  Newman wasn't even a guarantee to make the roster when he signed.  At the time Allen signed, he would have been the #2 CB on the depth chart.  That's why he got as big of a contract as he did.  The plan was likely for Allen to start opposite Hall, Jones or Newman in the slot and Jones to see more time on special teams.  Injuries to Allen and the later drafted Kirkpatrick made a mess of things and luckily Jones and Newman pulled out stellar years. 

You've just made my point for me.  Regardless of what their plans may have been, all of those guys who just listed, including our #1 drafted CB, were on the Roster the whole season.  The guys who played were the best guys - even though they weren't paid like it.  Allen was hurt early, but once healthy he never got to sniff the field.  At that point, given your logic of having to start or cut a guy getting paid starter's money, they should have cut him.  And yet they didn't.  

 

Either the rules have changed, or an old cliché is still a cliché.

[Bengals1181]

You've just made my point for me.  Regardless of what their plans may have been, all of those guys who just listed, including our #1 drafted CB, were on the Roster the whole season.  The guys who played were the best guys - even though they weren't paid like it.  Allen was hurt early, but once healthy he never got to sniff the field.  At that point, given your logic of having to start or cut a guy getting paid starter's money, they should have cut him.  And yet they didn't.  

 

Either the rules have changed, or an old cliché is still a cliché.

 

 

he was injured 3 different times in the season and if I recall missed most of camp.  Even once he's healthy you can't just throw a guy out there if he's not ready.  He barely even had any mental reps with the D let alone the chance to get on the field much.  

 

It's safe to say nothing went as planned with the Allen signing, which is why its not a great example.  

[alleycat]

 

 

he was injured 3 different times in the season and if I recall missed most of camp.  Even once he's healthy you can't just throw a guy out there if he's not ready.  He barely even had any mental reps with the D let alone the chance to get on the field much.  

 

It's safe to say nothing went as planned with the Allen signing, which is why its not a great example.  

But why didn't they cut him?

[Bengals1181]

But why didn't they cut him?

 

 

I would assume they wanted to get something out of the nearly $3M they had already given him.  Plus, again the Kirkpatrick injury.  Not to mention Clements and Hall also missed time early in the season with injuries.

 

I imagine they felt they had to keep every warm body at cb that they had.  While this team had 6 former first round picks on the roster at corner (counting clements), if you'll remember early on in the season they couldn't get more than 3 of them healthy and on the active roster at the same time.  They weren't in a position to cut anyone.

[JC]

I can only think of three linebackers that played ST's last season (Lamur, Vinny, and Skuta).  Am I missing anyone?  Couldn't remember if Burfict did.  I doubt we sign another backer that can't play special teams after signing Harrison.

[alleycat]

 

They weren't in a position to cut anyone.

Because injuries happen, right?  And they needed quality guys who could step in and play when they occurred.  

 

Why wouldn't LB be any different?

 

The fact remains, we have 6 and possibly 7 LB spots on the team, and right now only one is getting (lower-end) "starter's money."  If Harrison signs that'll make it 2.  I'd venture that he'll also be getting something on the lower end. I'm not saying they'll do it, but I am saying that there's room to bring in another guy who's making that kind of cash.

 

But none of that should dictate who starts or sits.

I can only think of three linebackers that played ST's last season (Lamur, Vinny, and Skuta).  Am I missing anyone?  Couldn't remember if Burfict did.  I doubt we sign another backer that can't play special teams after signing Harrison.

I don't disagree - we certainly have the TC space.

[Jamie_B]

Im not convinced that signing him means we don't have to draft a LB, I cant imagine it will be a long term contract, I would think 2 years would be the max with it more likely being a 1 year deal. Long term we still need 2 LBs to play with Taz, being that Rey is only here 2 years and Harrison would be a year 2 years max. The Bengals typically, though not always as in the case of Rey, don't like to play rookies right away, if you want LBs and time to groom them you need to grab at least 1 this year and 1 next year early.

[Bengals1181]

Because injuries happen, right?  And they needed quality guys who could step in and play when they occurred.  

 

Why wouldn't LB be any different?

 

The fact remains, we have 6 and possibly 7 LB spots on the team, and right now only one is getting (lower-end) "starter's money."  If Harrison signs that'll make it 2.  I'd venture that he'll also be getting something on the lower end. I'm not saying they'll do it, but I am saying that there's room to bring in another guy who's making that kind of cash.

 

But none of that should dictate who starts or sits.

I don't disagree - we certainly have the TC space.

 

 

you're still not getting it.  Sure, injuries happened.  That doesn't change the fact that Allen was given a contract to be a starter.  Likewise, Maualuga was given a contract to be a starter.

 

That doesn't mean injuries won't happen and things won't change.  It does mean however they're not going to go out and sign a Dansby and move a healthy Maualuga to the bench.  

 

 

The difference in the examples is that Allen was replaced by guys making backup money.  We're also talking about an example that happened in August, not April.

[T-Dub]

T-Dub, you're a hater. You will continue to hate Harrison. However, I would like to be sitting by you when he lights-up Ben Ben. I am sure you will be cheering his name!
I think we will sign him to a two year deal.

If not wanting some schmuck on this team because he beats women makes me a "hater" I can live with that. I guess we have different priorities, you & I...

[alleycat]

Jamie Collins.

 

Yes, I'm beating a dead horse, but if we sign Harrison I'd like to beat it even louder.  Why?

 

Harrison is exactly the kind of guy that so many people on this board are constantly saying can't play here - a big, slow, 3-4 OLB.  And yet by all indications we are going to sign him.  The fact is, Marvin's been looking for a 4-3 SAM that can rush the passer forever.  This kind of Joker player adds so much versatility.  He can put his hand in the dirt (as he's done so often in Pitt) on passing downs and he's stout against the run.  I wouldn't even doubt seeing us do some 3-4 or 4-4 alignments from time to time.

 

Sign him to a 1-2 year deal and then take a guy with insane measurables and promise in the draft to learn under him.  That could be a falling Jarvis Jones in the first, but I think Jamie Collins is going to be a steal.

[alleycat]

 

 

you're still not getting it.  Sure, injuries happened.  That doesn't change the fact that Allen was given a contract to be a starter.  Likewise, Maualuga was given a contract to be a starter.

 

That doesn't mean injuries won't happen and things won't change.  It does mean however they're not going to go out and sign a Dansby and move a healthy Maualuga to the bench.  

 

 

The difference in the examples is that Allen was replaced by guys making backup money.  We're also talking about an example that happened in August, not April.

Actually, I am getting it.

 

All of my references to signing Dansby AND Harrison came with emoticons, because I don't really believe that we'll do that.  In fact, the greater point that I was making (the one you're still not getting) was that we could still easily draft one of Ogeltree, Brown, Greene, Moore, or Collins - and Rey could still find himself on the Bench.  That's my point.  

 

Rey may have been given starters money, but I fail to see how what someone is paid guarantees them a starting spot.  You like Brown.  Lets say the Bengals love him, he falls, and they take him with #37.  We also have Harrison.  Who would you put on the field? 

 

IMO, Maulauga would be the 4th LB in that scenario (the greater likelihood is that he and Harrison trade in and out more often and Harrison is emphasized in obvious passing situations).

 

You're saying just because we are paying Rey starters money we're not going to draft another guy that would result in putting Rey on the bench. And yet in this very thread you point out how we did just that last year, by taking Kirkpatrick when we already had Allen and Hall (and a scrum of other guys) at CB. We needed to solidify the CB position last year, and we need to solidify the LB position this year.

[cincity]

I'm starting to like the idea of signing Harrison.  I think he really could do damage if he gets the opportunity to basically roam.. Against the run, he could see the a lot better while being the on the second level.  

 

It's sounds strange that I'm going to say this, but (IMO) he would/will be more useful against the run to us as opposed to the pass.  Who do you take out for him to be in on passing downs, unless you swing Dunlap inside, but I think Still is going to occupy that position and you're not going to take MJ out of the RDE spot. He won't be too much help dropping back in coverage, I think Lamur and Burfict are going to occupy those duties.  

 

But against the run where he'll be on a TE blocking him... I think he'll be dominant.. 

[alleycat]

I'm starting to like the idea of signing Harrison.  I think he really could do damage if he gets the opportunity to basically roam.. Against the run, he could see the a lot better while being the on the second level.  

 

It's sounds strange that I'm going to say this, but (IMO) he would/will be more useful against the run to us as opposed to the pass.  Who do you take out for him to be in on passing downs, unless you swing Dunlap inside, but I think Still is going to occupy that position and you're not going to take MJ out of the RDE spot. He won't be too much help dropping back in coverage, I think Lamur and Burfict are going to occupy those duties.  

 

But against the run where he'll be on a TE blocking him... I think he'll be dominant.. 

My guess is they'll all be on the field as often as not, and he'll be a pass-rushing LB in obvious situations.

[Jason]

Actually, I am getting it.
 
All of my references to signing Dansby AND Harrison came with emoticons, because I don't really believe that we'll do that.  In fact, the greater point that I was making (the one you're still not getting) was that we could still easily draft one of Ogeltree, Brown, Greene, Moore, or Collins - and Rey could still find himself on the Bench.  That's my point.  
 
Rey may have been given starters money, but I fail to see how what someone is paid guarantees them a starting spot.  You like Brown.  Lets say the Bengals love him, he falls, and they take him with #37.  We also have Harrison.  Who would you put on the field? 
 
IMO, Maulauga would be the 4th LB in that scenario (the greater likelihood is that he and Harrison trade in and out more often and Harrison is emphasized in obvious passing situations).
 
You're saying just because we are paying Rey starters money we're not going to draft another guy that would result in putting Rey on the bench. And yet in this very thread you point out how we did just that last year, by taking Kirkpatrick when we already had Allen and Hall (and a scrum of other guys) at CB. We needed to solidify the CB position last year, and we need to solidify the LB position this year.

No, the money won't guarantee Rey a starting spot. The fact the coaches love him does. That's WHY they gave him the money. You think they would have paid him that if they didn't want him starting?

[Jeb]

Is Dansby due any money from the Phins?

 

 

 

 

Edit: http://www.nyjetscap.com/2012_Articles/salary-cap-explained.html

(good explanation of CBA and contracts, ...thought I'd pass it along)

 

Dead Money for Dansby = $4.65 million this season

 

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/03/12/fins-release-lb-karlos-dansby/

[alleycat]

No, the money won't guarantee Rey a starting spot. The fact the coaches love him does. That's WHY they gave him the money. You think they would have paid him that if they didn't want him starting?

No, I think they would have made him an offer before letting him walk away to Phoenix and side with another team.  Phoenix took a whiff, didn't like the smell, and signed someone else.  So he came back here and we gave him a middling salary.  I fail to make the leap of logic everyone else is making.  I'm not saying they don't start him.  I just saying paying him starters money doesn't preclude him from sitting the bench, or the team from drafting a player who effectively puts him there - because, clearly, they weren't too eager to have him here.

[alleycat]

They signed him to what amounts to a one year prove it deal.  From CincyJungle:

 

"The Bengals aren't responsible for a significant amount if they elect to release Maualuga from this contract next offseason as a June 1 cut (teams are allowed two June 1 cuts before the actual June 1 date), leaving only the remaining amount of his signing bonus as dead money."