|westside bengal| Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Then it would cost you someone else as they've been saving that money for green, dalton, Atkins, etc...Basically they took the Palmer money after his trade and set it aside for extensions. JJoe is due $7.5m, $7.5m, and $8.5m over the next three years. Peel that off the cap and you lose out on a core guy due soon. OK I understand now. They saved $23 million on JJ and $50 million on Carson. So according to you the Bengals have plenty of money already saved to extend the players they want over the next 2-3-4 years. So if they don't resign MJ or Dunlap or Geno or AJ or Andy, it won't be because they won't have the money. I am relieved to hear that. All anyone has been saying is that they can't keep them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 The reason it's important to point out that "good" teams suffer these same losses is because it's all part of the process. Their process of decision making is what has elevated them to the quality of football team they are. They way they value and approach FA and their own players is part of that. I completely agree, but I think the way that MB approaches FA with players who are in demand needs to change. Whenever a quality player isn't extended and hits the FA market they are more than likely not going to outbid any other team for their services. It seems like management sets a certain value for a player and won't go higher regardless if they have the money or not. It seems to be penny wise but dollar foolish strategy because you might save a few bucks but you will still have to spend money to replace that player and you probably won't get a player who is at the same skill level as the player you let leave via FA. For example, when JJ left in FA the Bengals signed Clements, then Newman, and then drafted Kirkpatrick and we still don't have a player of the caliber of JJ. So sure the Bengals save a few bucks by letting JJ go in FA but they have scrambling to replace him and so far we haven't. Newman has been solid but he's not a long term solution and I don't expect him to have the same type of year he had last year and Kirkpatrick has been injury prone. We went from having one of the best CB tandems in the NFL to Hall and bunch of question marks. Everyone makes mistakes, and every team loses players they would like to keep in FA.. The difference between good teams and bad teams, is the process they use to make their decisions ensures a higher rate of success than the less successful franchises. Just because you have a bad result, does not mean you change the way you make those decisions in the future. You have to look at the overall success rate of your way of doing things and make adjustments accordingly.. I think a truly objective person would look at the overall recent success of the management of this team and see a positive trend that would seem to indicate a good process. This is were you lost me, of course you change the way you make decisions if the results are not what you expect, it would be insane not to. And I still contend that the Carson Palmer fiasco throws a huge wrench into the whole thing. Sure it turned out badly, but I am almost positive that had that not happened Joseph would still be on this team. Do you change the process for a situation like that? If the Bengals offered JJ more guaranteed money he would be a Bengal, or if they would've extended him before he became a FA he would be a Bengal, or if they tagged him he would be a Bengal..my point is there were multiple things the Bengals could've done to keep JJ around and they did none of them. I just hope history doesn't repeat itself with the other young talent players who deals are expiring in the next few years. We have the cap space to keep this roster intact so the only reason why MB wouldn't do so is because he doesn't want to spend the money to get it done. I feel like the Brown family owes it to the fans and the city to do all they can to win a Super Bowl and the fans and local media should expect nothing less and hold them to the fire until the do that. From the public funding of PBS to loyal fan support after the worst decade in pro sports from a management standpoint, they owe us. There is nothing wrong with the fans and the local media raising expectations of this franchise, why should we settle for mediocrity and be satisified with losing in the first round of the playoffs...Super Bowl or bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 OK I understand now. They saved $23 million on JJ and $50 million on Carson. So according to you the Bengals have plenty of money already saved to extend the players they want over the next 2-3-4 years. So if they don't resign MJ or Dunlap or Geno or AJ or Andy, it won't be because they won't have the money. I am relieved to hear that. All anyone has been saying is that they can't keep them all. some have said they WON'T keep them all, but I don't see why they can't. They are currently about $21M under the cap according to spotrac (I actually think it may be less than that). It'll be a little less than $20M once Eifert signs. That's roughly $20M they'll have to potentially extend both Atkins and MJ this summer, as well as roll forward into the future for the likes of Dalton, Gresham, Dunlap and Burfict. If Joseph is on the team (and I don't mean to imply that would be a bad thing), then you're only looking at around $12.5M to play with this year to extend Atkins and MJ, and then roll money forward for others. Basically in that case, you're probably not getting MJ done and are losing either he or Dunlap next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 This is were you lost me, of course you change the way you make decisions if the results are what you expect, it would be insane not to. Think of it as playing Poker. Just because you ride a losing hand doesn't mean you don't ride that same hand next time given the same situation. You have to look at overall success, a macro-oriented view rather than micro-oriented. Joseph didn't work out, we rode a hand and lost. The degree of failure is what is open to debate, and the value of the specific player to the franchise. What I don't think is up for debate is that the early results of the Bengals current process in it's approach to free agency and the draft is showing a trend of success that would indicate a good process. Do the Bengals "win" that hand if the Palmer fiasco does not occur? Was that an outlier "joker" that left us needing to find an alternate solution? It's also not the slightest bit irrelevant that the alternate solution turned out more than adequate. Yet another indication of a solid approach to team building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 OK I understand now. They saved $23 million on JJ and $50 million on Carson. So according to you the Bengals have plenty of money already saved to extend the players they want over the next 2-3-4 years. So if they don't resign MJ or Dunlap or Geno or AJ or Andy, it won't be because they won't have the money. I am relieved to hear that. All anyone has been saying is that they can't keep them all. Some people will give this organization every excuse for being cheap and not doing all they can to bring this city a Super Bowl winner. They fall for every bs excuse that they give for settling for mediocrity and will defend every bad decision. I feel like MB does enough to remain competitive and hopes that one day they will get lucky and win a Super Bowl instead of doing all he can to win a Super Bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup000 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 I wasn't ignoring you, i just hadn't gotten around to reading this thread until now.. I think the biggest point of diversion here in opinion centers on the value of Joseph to the franchise and it's perception among some of the fan base. I have freely admitted that the Bengals may very well agree with the assertion that they should have used the franchise tag. It's purely my opinion, but I think if they viewed him as crucial to the composition of the defense as some here do, they would have done more to make sure he was in the fold. From my perspective, it seems they managed to lock up the CB they viewed most valuable, and that isn't meant as a statement on Josephs value as a player per say, nor the Bengals desire to keep him. A matter of degrees perhaps? I have also freely admitted that the Bengals do indeed make mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes... There is simply no such thing as an infallible person or even collective of people. The point I have been trying to make is that you don't have access to the results at the time you are making your decisions. You have to rely on analysis of the situation and try to make a decision that is going to have the highest chance of success, or least chance of failure depending.. As far as the Bengals are concerned (or should be concerned) "success" is measured by the quality of the team, and whether it is improving. The reason it's important to point out that "good" teams suffer these same losses is because it's all part of the process. Their process of decision making is what has elevated them to the quality of football team they are. They way they value and approach FA and their own players is part of that. Everyone makes mistakes, and every team loses players they would like to keep in FA.. The difference between good teams and bad teams, is the process they use to make their decisions ensures a higher rate of success than the less successful franchises. Just because you have a bad result, does not mean you change the way you make those decisions in the future. You have to look at the overall success rate of your way of doing things and make adjustments accordingly.. I think a truly objective person would look at the overall recent success of the management of this team and see a positive trend that would seem to indicate a good process. And I still contend that the Carson Palmer fiasco throws a huge wrench into the whole thing. Sure it turned out badly, but I am almost positive that had that not happened Joseph would still be on this team. Do you change the process for a situation like that? It's not really worth discussing anymore, when you have the ability to protect your assets, you do so. Whether you value that asset as elite or very good is irrelevant, it's clearly an asset. The Bengals had an opportunity to protect their asset and chose not to. The only reasonable explanation for not protecting that asset was financial (i.e. being cheap). That decision resulted in them losing their asset for nothing. The process was bad and the result was bad. And for everyone saying had we signed him we would have all these cap issues: 1. $50M for a pro bowl corner is a bargain. His level of play is so far above what Clements and now Newman have given us, our defense would have been at a whole different level. 2. We wouldn't have signed Clements and Newman and possibly Jones so lets not act like his entire salary would just add right on to the salaries we've already got on the books. 3. It is also extremely unlikely we would have taken Dre in the first round so we would have had another first round pick to replace a mid level salary guy at another position. At this point it is complete speculation, but I bet the net of all this stuff wouldn't be more than $5M added to our cap. We would most likely be fine cap wise. And we would most likely be a better team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Some people will give this organization every excuse for being cheap and not doing all they can to bring this city a Super Bowl winner. They fall for every bs excuse that they give for settling for mediocrity and will defend every bad decision. I feel like MB does enough to remain competitive and hopes that one day they will get lucky and win a Super Bowl instead of doing all he can to win a Super Bowl. I have pointed out for years during the CP years that the evidence at the time indicated an improving process, and was accused of this kind of bullshit.. Now I see the results of what appear to be a good philosophy for building a quality football team, and the future is looking pretty good. Of course, I could be wrong and things could all go to shit again. But at this point I think I feel comfortable with my position then and now. If you really feel this way, it simply means that you're a sucker for supporting the product. Not trying to be a dick, but it's how I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Think of it as playing Poker. Just because you ride a losing hand doesn't mean you don't ride that same hand next time given the same situation. You have to look at overall success, a macro-oriented view rather than micro-oriented. Joseph didn't work out, we rode a hand and lost. The degree of failure is what is open to debate, and the value of the specific player to the franchise. What I don't think is up for debate is that the early results of the Bengals current process in it's approach to free agency and the draft is showing a trend of success that would indicate a good process. Do the Bengals "win" that hand if the Palmer fiasco does not occur? Was that an outlier "joker" that left us needing to find an alternate solution? It's also not the slightest bit irrelevant that the alternate solution turned out more than adequate. Yet another indication of a solid approach to team building. Using your analogy of playing Poker I can understand if you stick with your strategy even if it didn't work and you are a WSOP champ, but if you are a degenerate who lives in your mom's basement then you might want to rethink how you do things. I agree that their approach to the draft is working, no doubt about that but keeping quality FA's is up for debate..the next two years will show if their process and approach is successful or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup000 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Think of it as playing Poker. Just because you ride a losing hand doesn't mean you don't ride that same hand next time given the same situation. You have to look at overall success, a macro-oriented view rather than micro-oriented. Joseph didn't work out, we rode a hand and lost. The degree of failure is what is open to debate, and the value of the specific player to the franchise. What I don't think is up for debate is that the early results of the Bengals current process in it's approach to free agency and the draft is showing a trend of success that would indicate a good process. Do the Bengals "win" that hand if the Palmer fiasco does not occur? Was that an outlier "joker" that left us needing to find an alternate solution? It's also not the slightest bit irrelevant that the alternate solution turned out more than adequate. Yet another indication of a solid approach to team building. I'm sure you are a smart dude, so I am baffled that you keep arguing the process was correct here. Using your poker analogy, the Bengals held a trump card (yes, this trump card came with a financial cost but in no way an extreme one) that they chose not to play. They needlessly gambled and lost everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Using your analogy of playing Poker I can understand if you stick with your strategy even if it didn't work and you are a WSOP champ, but if you are a degenerate who lives in your mom's basement then you might want to rethink how you do things. I agree that their approach to the draft is working, no doubt about that but keeping quality FA's is up for debate..the next two years will show if their process and approach is successful or not. Is this true? Or are you stuck in the past? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 I'm sure you are a smart dude, so I am baffled that you keep arguing the process was correct here. Using your poker analogy, the Bengals held a trump card (yes, this trump card came with a financial cost but in no way an extreme one) that they chose not to play. They needlessly gambled and lost everything. I am defending a process that seems to have a good success rate of recent. Are you suggesting that the Palmer situation wasn't a "wild card" that dramatically changed the weight of the cards in play? I would agree that if Joseph was as valuable to the team as he is viewed by some people here, then it was a mistake to be avoided. You don't let franchise players hit the market. The debate is whether that is what happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup000 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 I am defending a process that seems to have a good success rate of recent. Are you suggesting that the Palmer situation wasn't a "wild card" that dramatically changed the weight of the cards in play? I would agree that if Joseph was as valuable to the team as he is viewed by some people here, then it was a mistake to be avoided. You don't let franchise players hit the market. The debate is whether that is what happened. Come on man, now you are just playing with semantics. Everyone in the world knew that JJ was a very very good corner, whether they viewed him as truly elite is irrelevant. They thought enough of him that they offered him basically the same contract he signed, so they valued him as highly as anyone else. If you are willing to give someone $45M why the hell aren't you willing to franchise him? What is the downside in doing so? And no, I don't believe the Carson situation mattered....because the franchise tag eliminates all that bullshit. You can either sign him or if he still bitches about Carson, trade him and get a return. If you want to get technical about the "process" they did deviate from their normal process. Looking back the Bengals use the franchise tag the vast majority of the time when they have an unsigned player they want back.....which they CLEARLY did with JJ regardless of how core or elite they viewed him. So they didn't follow their process and it backfired. The Bengals mishandled the situation. They wanted to sign him to a deal with no material difference to the one he signed, they had an ability to force him to sign with them or no one and they failed to use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Is this true? Or are you stuck in the past? The Bengals are the degenerate who has been on a bit of winning streak lately, but they still haven't won anything signifigance. Getting bounced in the first round of the playoffs 3 out of the last 4 years doesn't make you a success. If anything it says you need to change some things to get over the hump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Totally agree with your first sentence....and totally disagree with your second. First the agreement, I've said all along keeping Atkins, Green and one of the DEs should be seen as an excellent job by the front office. Anything less and things don't look so good. Although keeping Andre was a good start. On the AJ/Dalton comment, I couldn't disagree any more. I expect after this coming season AJ will be a clear top 3 WR (if he isn't already) and most people will see him on his way to being one of the all time greats. You cannot wait to sign a guy like that. Of course, if Dalton goes off and pulls a Flacco on us (at least the playoff version) it's a whole different conversation. I don't think that is very likely though. While Green is a better player than Dalton, AJ is further from free agency. The team has an option on him for the 2015 season which can be (and will be) exercised after the 2013 season. He could then be tagged a couple times before it became impractical so AJ is looking at free agency in 2018. Dalton is out of contract after 2014 and unlikely to be tagged. Regarding Joseph, the team could have extended both JJ and Leon in 2010. They probably would have been cheaper than the deals they got in 2011 but even on their current contracts the signing bonus could have been made a roster bonus. With no need to sign Clements and Allen, the team would be in similar cap situation to where they are today. They'd probably still have signed Jones and Newman but not used a pick on Kirkpatrick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 And no, I don't believe the Carson situation mattered....because the franchise tag eliminates all that bullshit. You can either sign him or if he still bitches about Carson, trade him and get a return. sure it did. JJoe admitted it was part of why he didn't take the Bengals offer. You can't just pretend it didn't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Some people will give this organization every excuse for being cheap and not doing all they can to bring this city a Super Bowl winner. They fall for every bs excuse that they give for settling for mediocrity and will defend every bad decision. I feel like MB does enough to remain competitive and hopes that one day they will get lucky and win a Super Bowl instead of doing all he can to win a Super Bowl. Until Mike Brown wins a Superbowl he's not trying to win the Superbowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dautcom08 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 I think I'll stop coming back to this thread now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup000 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 sure it did. JJoe admitted it was part of why he didn't take the Bengals offer. You can't just pretend it didn't happen. From my earlier post... Lastly, do you know which contract offer professional athletes take 99.9% of the time? The one with the most money. And do you know what they do immediately after taking the most money.....start justifying how it wasn't about the money. When asked why he left the first thing he mentioned was guaranteed money, all that other stuff is just what he convinced himself was worth leaving the team, coaches and players he knew his whole career. We lost JJ over some amount under $5M, over 5 years. For a pro bowl corner. And we only had ourselves to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 From my earlier post... Lastly, do you know which contract offer professional athletes take 99.9% of the time? The one with the most money. And do you know what they do immediately after taking the most money.....start justifying how it wasn't about the money. When asked why he left the first thing he mentioned was guaranteed money, all that other stuff is just what he convinced himself was worth leaving the team, coaches and players he knew his whole career. We lost JJ over some amount under $5M, over 5 years. For a pro bowl corner. And we only had ourselves to blame. conjecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup000 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 While Green is a better player than Dalton, AJ is further from free agency. The team has an option on him for the 2015 season which can be (and will be) exercised after the 2013 season. He could then be tagged a couple times before it became impractical so AJ is looking at free agency in 2018. Dalton is out of contract after 2014 and unlikely to be tagged. Regarding Joseph, the team could have extended both JJ and Leon in 2010. They probably would have been cheaper than the deals they got in 2011 but even on their current contracts the signing bonus could have been made a roster bonus. With no need to sign Clements and Allen, the team would be in similar cap situation to where they are today. They'd probably still have signed Jones and Newman but not used a pick on Kirkpatrick. Good points on AJ/Dalton, forgot about that 5th year option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup000 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 conjecture. Of course it is conjecture, just like it is conjecture for you to assume that if he had two identical offers on the table from us and Houston that he would have taken Houston's. The only facts in this situation are 1. He took the offer with the most guaranteed money 2. We had the ability to ensure he would never even see that offer What he said after he signed the offer to justify signing it could be true or a complete lie. Regardless, situation shouldn't have ever gotten to that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 J.Joe is one example. It was a fuck up. There are several that go in favor of the Bengals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Of course it is conjecture, just like it is conjecture for you to assume that if he had two identical offers on the table from us and Houston that he would have taken Houston's. The only facts in this situation are 1. He took the offer with the most guaranteed money 2. We had the ability to ensure he would never even see that offer What he said after he signed the offer to justify signing it could be true or a complete lie. Regardless, situation shouldn't have ever gotten to that point. or at worse you get some compensation for him leaving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Of course it is conjecture, just like it is conjecture for you to assume that if he had two identical offers on the table from us and Houston that he would have taken Houston's. The only facts in this situation are 1. He took the offer with the most guaranteed money 2. We had the ability to ensure he would never even see that offer What he said after he signed the offer to justify signing it could be true or a complete lie. Regardless, situation shouldn't have ever gotten to that point. I don't recall ever stating the bolded. Also factored in, Texas has no income tax. 9 times out of 10 money is the biggest factor, but its rarely ever the ONLY factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 and better BBQ but Houston has worse humidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.