Will Michael Johnson sign an extension?

[HairOnFire]

The same people still bitching over the loss of JJ, who was replaced fairly easily, are probably the same people who still bitch about the loss of Steinbach, who was replaced even easier.  

 

Hell, on my old board you can still hear a mostly stupid HoosierCat whining over the loss of Rucker and Fanene.

 

As for MJ, I continue to applaud the Bengals decision to grossly overpay for one season of work, but not four or five.

 

I also applaud their decision to draft some insurance in the event that MJ continues to demand more money than the Bengals are willing to pay.

[coup000]

The same people still bitching over the loss of JJ, who was replaced fairly easily, are probably the same people who still bitch about the loss of Steinbach, who was replaced even easier.  

 

Hell, on my old board you can still hear a mostly stupid HoosierCat whining over the loss of Rucker and Fanene.

 

As for MJ, I continue to applaud the Bengals decision to grossly overpay for one season of work, but not four or five.

 

I also applaud their decision to draft some insurance in the event that MJ continues to demand more money than the Bengals are willing to pay.

Yeah he was "replaced easily", in that we were able to find another human to do the same job he was once doing. "Replaced" in that that new human was able to do it close to his level? Not even close. I'm over it, I think the Bengals know they made a mistake and if you could ever get them to be honest, would admit it. Like I said, I think they've been pretty smart in managing the cap overall and we'll see what they do moving forward.

[Oldcat]

Yeah he was "replaced easily", in that we were able to find another human to do the same job he was once doing. "Replaced" in that that new human was able to do it close to his level? Not even close. I'm over it, I think the Bengals know they made a mistake and if you could ever get them to be honest, would admit it. Like I said, I think they've been pretty smart in managing the cap overall and we'll see what they do moving forward.

 

Steinbach was replaced by Whitworth, who everyone says was the best LG of all time.

 

Your point is exploded.

[Oldcat]

There have been plenty of teams in the last decade that have exploded by the back loaded contracts - The mid 2000 titans, who were blown up by the McNair contract to name 1.  Backloading is robbing Peter to pay Paul, and it only becomes a net win if your players never notice that all the players who got contracts a few years back are now getting cut before they can get that money.  Not to mention the pro-rated bonus money that is a dead loss on the cap if you cut someone early.

 

Sure, you might not get a player here or there because another team uses a sucker contract. But at least can look yourself in the face and say that you didn't have to spend your time lying in contract talks.  At least our way we can make an honest offer to a guy like JJ, and if he takes it, he can earn it all if he keeps playing well.  If because of other contracts we can't match another teams' offer, the fellow moves on and there's no bad blood.  And then we get a comp pick for it.

[coup000]

 

Steinbach was replaced by Whitworth, who everyone says was the best LG of all time.

 

Your point is exploded.

Was talking about JJ

[coup000]

There have been plenty of teams in the last decade that have exploded by the back loaded contracts - The mid 2000 titans, who were blown up by the McNair contract to name 1.  Backloading is robbing Peter to pay Paul, and it only becomes a net win if your players never notice that all the players who got contracts a few years back are now getting cut before they can get that money.  Not to mention the pro-rated bonus money that is a dead loss on the cap if you cut someone early.

 

Sure, you might not get a player here or there because another team uses a sucker contract. But at least can look yourself in the face and say that you didn't have to spend your time lying in contract talks.  At least our way we can make an honest offer to a guy like JJ, and if he takes it, he can earn it all if he keeps playing well.  If because of other contracts we can't match another teams' offer, the fellow moves on and there's no bad blood.  And then we get a comp pick for it.

So because some teams haven't done it right, that means it shouldn't be done? Please find me the last super bowl champion that didn't have at least a few large back loaded contracts. Maybe the original Patriots teams? They caught lightning in a bottle with a unknown (at the time) great QB and a superior coach. Other than it's been teams full of huge deals and all those teams eventually purged to some degree. Backloaded contracts ARE robbing peter to pay paul and that is exactly what you should do when you are on the cusp, which we will hopefully be in the next year or two.  

[sparky151]

For what it's worth, under the new CBA bonuses can only be prorated over 5 years at most.

 

The Bengals would have been well served to re-sign Joseph. Newman is an adequate corner but won't be around much longer. Kirkpatrick is unproven and we could have used the pick at another position. We have a lot of depth at CB but not a lot of quality after Leon. Clements was a 1 year stopgap. Newman was signed as a stopgap but played well enough to get an extension. Let's hope he doesn't decline as much from year 1 to 2 as Clements did.

[Oldcat]

So because some teams haven't done it right, that means it shouldn't be done? Please find me the last super bowl champion that didn't have at least a few large back loaded contracts. Maybe the original Patriots teams? They caught lightning in a bottle with a unknown (at the time) great QB and a superior coach. Other than it's been teams full of huge deals and all those teams eventually purged to some degree. Backloaded contracts ARE robbing peter to pay paul and that is exactly what you should do when you are on the cusp, which we will hopefully be in the next year or two.  

 

I thought what everyone wanted was a long term sustainable winning tradition, not a reckless gamble for one year followed by, win or lose, the dismantling of the roster.  I don't know of any recent Superbowl team that has been doing what you advise.

 

Many contracts have larger cap values in the latter years, if not all of them, because the cap might go up.  The difference in the heavy backloader is that the team never had any intention or ability to live up to the deal.  Another example is Snyder in DC with his perpetual renegotiations with everyone to get under the cap.  This got them nowhere, and it took a return to drafting to get them back in the playoffs.  Sure, they blew a lot of future draft picks on RGIII and this might hurt them down the line some, but it looks like a better bet than the chasing after Rex Grossman or Donovan McNabb they did before that.

[Bengals1181]

For what it's worth, under the new CBA bonuses can only be prorated over 5 years at most.

 

 

 

 

and there's the reason, thanks.

[Oldcat]

For what it's worth, under the new CBA bonuses can only be prorated over 5 years at most.

 

The Bengals would have been well served to re-sign Joseph. Newman is an adequate corner but won't be around much longer. Kirkpatrick is unproven and we could have used the pick at another position. We have a lot of depth at CB but not a lot of quality after Leon. Clements was a 1 year stopgap. Newman was signed as a stopgap but played well enough to get an extension. Let's hope he doesn't decline as much from year 1 to 2 as Clements did.

 

That's why they gave him a good offer. Houston didn't offer him much more cash wise.  It was other reasons besides cash that led him off to Houston.

[coup000]

 

I thought what everyone wanted was a long term sustainable winning tradition, not a reckless gamble for one year followed by, win or lose, the dismantling of the roster.  I don't know of any recent Superbowl team that has been doing what you advise.

 

Many contracts have larger cap values in the latter years, if not all of them, because the cap might go up.  The difference in the heavy backloader is that the team never had any intention or ability to live up to the deal.  Another example is Snyder in DC with his perpetual renegotiations with everyone to get under the cap.  This got them nowhere, and it took a return to drafting to get them back in the playoffs.  Sure, they blew a lot of future draft picks on RGIII and this might hurt them down the line some, but it looks like a better bet than the chasing after Rex Grossman or Donovan McNabb they did before that.

Yes, everyone wants a long term sustainable tradition, like the Steelers and Ravens have had for virtually the entire decade. Have you ever looked at the extensions they give their guys? Often massively backloaded. Which eventually creates cuts and dead money but when the trade off for those eventual cuts and dead money is a better team it is well worth it. Also, when managed correctly even backloaded contracts don't result in complete purges like they did 4 or 5 years ago.  I honestly feel like I am talking to people that have never watched the NFL in some of these conversations. The Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Giants all have had some huge money guys on their teams in recent years, a significant number, if not all, of those contracts were back loaded. If you draft really well you have to be willing to go cash over cap to keep your guys or you will not be able to build up your talent level to championship caliber. All of those teams have proven that. It isn't a question.  

 

And once again, just because the Redskins were morons doesn't mean we have to be. I am advocating using your cap space and flexibility to keep your young players and to supplement them, spending more money doesn't mean you have to be stupid about it. So far they appear to be doing well. Signing Atkins and the structure of the deal if he does sign should tell us a lot. Are they smartly positioning the cap hits in different years to allow themselves to sign all the key guys? Or are they intentionally limiting our cap flexibility in the near term with consistent front loading?

[Bengals1181]

Yes, everyone wants a long term sustainable tradition, like the Steelers and Ravens have had for virtually the entire decade. Have you ever looked at the extensions they give their guys? Often massively backloaded. Which eventually creates cuts and dead money but when the trade off for those eventual cuts and dead money is a better team it is well worth it. Also, when managed correctly even backloaded contracts don't result in complete purges like they did 4 or 5 years ago.  I honestly feel like I am talking to people that have never watched the NFL in some of these conversations. The Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Giants all have had some huge money guys on their teams in recent years, a significant number, if not all, of those contracts were back loaded. If you draft really well you have to be willing to go cash over cap to keep your guys or you will not be able to build up your talent level to championship caliber. All of those teams have proven that. It isn't a question.  

 

And once again, just because the Redskins were morons doesn't mean we have to be. I am advocating using your cap space and flexibility to keep your young players and to supplement them, spending more money doesn't mean you have to be stupid about it. So far they appear to be doing well. Signing Atkins and the structure of the deal if he does sign should tell us a lot. Are they smartly positioning the cap hits in different years to allow themselves to sign all the key guys? Or are they intentionally limiting our cap flexibility in the near term with consistent front loading?

 

 

and the steelers had to let their best corner and best WR walk this year because of all the backloaded contracts they've been doing.  They also had to cut Harrison before they wanted to.

 

 

You can't only backload.

[HairOnFire]

 I'm over it, I think the Bengals know they made a mistake and if you could ever get them to be honest, would admit it.

 

I'm pretty sure they admitted it was a mistake the moment Joseph left.

 

But that only means they had a plan, a best case scenario, that failed.

 

It happens.

 

Fuck you, Carson Palmer.

 

But IMHO the backup plan at CB has been solid, inexpensive, and addresses both the future as well as the present.   

 

When I look at the Bengals CB group I don't see Joseph, but I also don't see a problem. The Bengals are talented, balanced, and deep. They've got an enviable mix of veterans and fresh faces. The sky didn't fall.

 

Nor will it fall if MJ goes.

[HairOnFire]

 The Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Giants all have had some huge money guys on their teams in recent years, a significant number, if not all, of those contracts were back loaded. If you draft really well you have to be willing to go cash over cap to keep your guys or you will not be able to build up your talent level to championship caliber. All of those teams have proven that. It isn't a question.

 

All four of those franchises are known for shedding a few quaility veteran players each year.

[HaydenM]

 
Peko may be looking somewhere else.

Not a chance. He's not going anywhere.

Some of you people are crazy.

[Oldcat]

Not that I study even the Steelers much, but I think the main reason they have been having cap issues is that the contract to Ben is putting an additional squeeze on the roster.  When they had a middling QB and a strong run game, they had more cash to spare for the D and they could sustain the veterans on defense better.  With Ben and a few loud contracts on offense for his tools, it is just that much harder to sustain, hence the shedding of players.

 

 

I just think it is a better long term policy to shed players at the end of a contract (saving times when the guy gets beat out by better players) rather than make a deal that you know from the start you aren't going to live up to, no matter how well the player does for you.

[|Lucid|]

So far they appear to be doing well.

 

 

Then what exactly are you complaining about?  You agree we have been stockpiling great talent in the draft, I imagine you also agree this is a deeper team than 05 (even if it can be argued some starting positions were stronger).  You have also conceded that you cannot point to a specific failure resulting in the way the Bengals have managed FA and the cap aside from a "close call" and a loss that occurred in probably the craziest conflagration of events to ever hit an NFL front office (at the very least in the salary cap era)....

 

Wait a minute! 

 

Are you simply playing devils advocate in order to spice conversation and provide entertainment for the sake of the community??  Good show sir!

[coup000]

 

 

and the steelers had to let their best corner and best WR walk this year because of all the backloaded contracts they've been doing.  They also had to cut Harrison before they wanted to.

 

 

You can't only backload.

They also won 2 super bowls and went to another!!! Are you telling me you wouldn't trade the cap issues they have had the last couple years for that kind of success??? The Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Giants are coming off damn near a decade of pretty consistent success, of course they have to let veterans go. We are still building while those teams are all in various stages of re-building/re-loading. You can't compare their behavior right now to us, they are at the level we are trying to get to, we still have to get significantly better. You don't do that by letting young productive player leave and you don't do that by purposely limiting your cap flexibility.

[T-Dub]

They also won 2 *a* super bowls and were gifted another, then went to another a 3rd!!!

 

FIFY

[|Lucid|]

They also won 2 super bowls and went to another!!! Are you telling me you wouldn't trade the cap issues they have had the last couple years for that kind of success??? The Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Giants are coming off damn near a decade of pretty consistent success, of course they have to let veterans go. We are still building while those teams are all in various stages of re-building/re-loading. You can't compare their behavior right now to us, they are at the level we are trying to get to, we still have to get significantly better. You don't do that by letting young productive player leave and you don't do that by purposely limiting your cap flexibility.

 

 

It seems they are doing the opposite.. They front loaded Dunlap's contract so the hit is smaller in the years where we will be paying big money to a few guys who's contracts are coming up (we all know who). Who knows, maybe they will go cash over cap if they see a narrow window closing and the need to make a big push for the final stretch.. That isn't the case right now, nor has what they done to this point tied their hands in that regard..

 

I guess I am still trying to understand what you are so worked up about.

[dex]

They also won 2 super bowls and went to another!!! Are you telling me you wouldn't trade the cap issues they have had the last couple years for that kind of success??? The Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Giants are coming off damn near a decade of pretty consistent success, of course they have to let veterans go. We are still building while those teams are all in various stages of re-building/re-loading. You can't compare their behavior right now to us, they are at the level we are trying to get to, we still have to get significantly better. You don't do that by letting young productive player leave and you don't do that by purposely limiting your cap flexibility.

There are some people in the NFl who believe the Bengals talent level is comparable to the 49ers and other top tier teams. Of course there are fewer top tier talent teams this in past years, especially in the AFC, but if the Bengals fail again in the playoffs I don't think it will be because of a talent gap. Might be a coaching gap, or maybe an experience gap, but not a talent gap. And even if those guys like Pete Prisco and Albert Breer are wrong about the Bengals talent level, I don't think there is an insurmountable talent gap to the Broncos or 49ers or whomever. And most of the talent can be sustained going forward.

[Oldcat]

They also won 2 super bowls and went to another!!! Are you telling me you wouldn't trade the cap issues they have had the last couple years for that kind of success??? The Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Giants are coming off damn near a decade of pretty consistent success, of course they have to let veterans go. We are still building while those teams are all in various stages of re-building/re-loading. You can't compare their behavior right now to us, they are at the level we are trying to get to, we still have to get significantly better. You don't do that by letting young productive player leave and you don't do that by purposely limiting your cap flexibility.

 

They didn't go there because of the cap hits.  They weren't in cap hell in 2005 - Ben, Troy and so were on their rookie deals.

[Bengals1181]

They also won 2 super bowls and went to another!!! Are you telling me you wouldn't trade the cap issues they have had the last couple years for that kind of success??? The Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Giants are coming off damn near a decade of pretty consistent success, of course they have to let veterans go. We are still building while those teams are all in various stages of re-building/re-loading. You can't compare their behavior right now to us, they are at the level we are trying to get to, we still have to get significantly better. You don't do that by letting young productive player leave and you don't do that by purposely limiting your cap flexibility.

 

 

sure I'd like their success, but it doesn't hide the fact that they put themselves in cap hell by backloading too many contracts and  in the end even they had to let good young talent leave, proving only backloading isn't the answer.

 

As for comparison's, you seem to be off the mark.  No one is saying that the Bengals now are in the same position as those teams.  They're saying the processes are very similar, and they are.  The difference is, as has already been mentioned, is that those teams have been doing it for a decade longer.  They have the proven veterans that the Bengals currently do not.  As the Bengals system continues to sustain itself, they'll reach that level where they have vets passing the torch to younger, cheaper talent every year.  Even then though, they'll lose young talent along the way and fans are just going to have to realize that.

 

 

The track records are different lengths, but the processes are basically the same.