Jump to content

Bengals Free Agency Thread.


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BengalFanInTO said:

 

His typical shit. Hobsoning the numbers. Shaving down the available cap saying they have to pay the rookie pool, practice squad and other such things. Isn't even using accurate numbers but essentially has them down to about $20 million to spend in total. As usual, he's just doing his job and setting us all up for heartbreak by trying to pre-justify the Bengals lack of activity. It's just nauseating to read. I do not know how he doesn't constantly gag as he writes this fucking drivel. 

Hobknob is a such sorry PoS with this same crap every year.  Next thing you know he's gonna have them holding back money for those they didn't sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, snarkster said:

Hobknob is a such sorry PoS with this same crap every year.  Next thing you know he's gonna have them holding back money for those they didn't sign.

And included in 'this same crap' is the annual training camp reports about how awesome certain players are looking - Ross, Green, etc only to be followed by useless play

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, snarkster said:

Hobknob is a such sorry PoS with this same crap every year.  Next thing you know he's gonna have them holding back money for those they didn't sign.

 

Yeah, isn't he still pretending that the rookie pool is a pot of money taken from the cap rather than simply a sublimit within the cap on how much can be spent on rookie signing bonus and incentives? The team can effectively operate as if the rookie pool cost $0 since the rookies as a group displace more expensive veteran players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

 

Yeah, isn't he still pretending that the rookie pool is a pot of money taken from the cap rather than simply a sublimit within the cap on how much can be spent on rookie signing bonus and incentives? The team can effectively operate as if the rookie pool cost $0 since the rookies as a group displace more expensive veteran players.

Im not sure about rook money set aside..

I did think you deduct the 10mil owed to rooks with 5th pick in each round from the cap..

Tks for the updated knowledge..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, claptonrocks said:

Im not sure about rook money set aside..

I did think you deduct the 10mil owed to rooks with 5th pick in each round from the cap..

Tks for the updated knowledge..

 

The rookie pool is a limit put in by the union to cap how much can be paid to rookies beyond their minimum salary. It was in the CBA the year after Sam Bradford got a 57 mil contract as the top pick. The limit is determined by how many and which draft picks a team has but it's easy to stay under the limit since the picks are all slotted and go up (or this year go down) as the cap moves up or down. 

 

Hobson makes it sound to the uninformed as if the rookie pool is some pot of money that has to be taken from the team's cap and set aside for just rookies. As if they didn't count against the 53 man roster limit. Teams don't need to sign their rookies until the beginning of camp and it's not unusual for teams to go to camp with less unused cap space than their rookie pool before signing any of the draftees. It's entirely not worth discussing in the context of cap management. But he likes to throw it in as a red herring, along with words he doesn't understand like "escalators".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

 

The rookie pool is a limit put in by the union to cap how much can be paid to rookies beyond their minimum salary. It was in the CBA the year after Sam Bradford got a 57 mil contract as the top pick. The limit is determined by how many and which draft picks a team has but it's easy to stay under the limit since the picks are all slotted and go up (or this year go down) as the cap moves up or down. 

 

Hobson makes it sound to the uninformed as if the rookie pool is some pot of money that has to be taken from the team's cap and set aside for just rookies. As if they didn't count against the 53 man roster limit. Teams don't need to sign their rookies until the beginning of camp and it's not unusual for teams to go to camp with less unused cap space than their rookie pool before signing any of the draftees. It's entirely not worth discussing in the context of cap management. But he likes to throw it in as a red herring, along with words he doesn't understand like "escalators".

 

Bingo. This is the most succinct and well struck post about the rookie pool, the Bengals and the way Hobson tries to use it that I've seen. Well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is the kind of stuff that becomes hard to swallow at times.

 

I'm actually really curious to see what their plan is for the offseason. Maybe they're thinking about being more aggressive on the defensive side of the ball in free agency and focusing on the offensive line in the draft. Not the way I would have gone but, I've got my popcorn.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, claptonrocks said:

Id rather have Hendrickson than Lawson at DE..

13.5 sacks and 25 hits looks better than Lawsin's 5.5 and 32 hits..

Same age...

 

Don't forget that Hendrickson was on a top 5 defense and Lawson... wasn't.  Not saying Hendrickson isn't better than Lawson but looking at just stats would be misleading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, claptonrocks said:

Id rather have Hendrickson than Lawson at DE..

13.5 sacks and 25 hits looks better than Lawsin's 5.5 and 32 hits..

Same age...

 

 

Well Lawson is no longer an option, he has signed with the Jets. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...