Jump to content

Featured Replies

comment_1788962
2 hours ago, claptonrocks said:

Crazy as it sounds, I believe Burton is back as the backup to Chase..

Until they draft a WR he stays..

 

It's not crazy. They've already used a day 2 pick on him. He'll get plenty of chances to prove them right. Whether he does so or not is up to him. 

comment_1788965
1 minute ago, sparky151 said:

 

It's not crazy. They've already used a day 2 pick on him. He'll get plenty of chances to prove them right. Whether he does so or not is up to him. 

Burton still has all of the talent he arrived with - good size, good speed, great hands.

comment_1788969
1 minute ago, stan said:

I read somewhere that, he cleaned out his locker, at the end of the season.Are they sure,he will be back,with the Bengals?

He's used to cleaning out his stuff and moving on.

Years of practice at it.

 

Sometimes the light goes on..

The uncertainty of any light up there is the question 

comment_1788979
13 minutes ago, stan said:

I read somewhere that, he cleaned out his locker, at the end of the season.Are they sure,he will be back,with the Bengals?

 

Every player does that for the offseason. If they come in to workout or something, they bring their gear with them and take it home.

 

comment_1789074
On 3/8/2025 at 4:44 PM, sparky151 said:

 

Sigh. The team still hasn't learned its lesson. That's a terrible structure. It seems designed to maximize the cap hit and minimize expectations for outside additions. 

 

jesus man..

 

cash and cap are different things.. why do yall live like this?

 

literally WAITING... ITCHING... to complain...over EVERYTHING...

 

 

comment_1789112
12 hours ago, GoBengals said:

 

jesus man..

 

cash and cap are different things.. why do yall live like this?

 

literally WAITING... ITCHING... to complain...over EVERYTHING...

 

 

 

I don't care about the cash flow, though the player certainly does. But the cap management is actually not very hard to do, yet the Bengals consistently screw it up. It's structured as a 2 year deal with the 3rd year basically optional. That part is fine. But having a bigger year 1 salary than in year 2 is just a way to reduce the team's cap space for 2025 and reduce their flexibility. Basically it's putting an pre-excuse for failure in dollars and cents. 

 

A better team would have given Gesicki a vet min salary (and increased the signing bonus if necessary) for year 1. That would maximize their financial flexibility for this season when the team's social media claimed they were "all in". They claimed to have learned their lesson after wasting career years from the big 4. But this sure doesn't show it. 

comment_1789113
5 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

 

I don't care about the cash flow, though the player certainly does. But the cap management is actually not very hard to do, yet the Bengals consistently screw it up. It's structured as a 2 year deal with the 3rd year basically optional. That part is fine. But having a bigger year 1 salary than in year 2 is just a way to reduce the team's cap space for 2025 and reduce their flexibility. Basically it's putting an pre-excuse for failure in dollars and cents. 

 

A better team would have given Gesicki a vet min salary (and increased the signing bonus if necessary) for year 1. That would maximize their financial flexibility for this season when the team's social media claimed they were "all in". They claimed to have learned their lesson after wasting career years from the big 4. But this sure doesn't show it. 

We have always front loaded contracts while most other teams backload. In this case, they *may* be doing this becuase Chase's new deal will kick in next year? Not sure the team deserves the benefit of the doubt but that may be the reason.

comment_1789126
34 minutes ago, I_C_Deadpeople said:

We have always front loaded contracts while most other teams backload. In this case, they *may* be doing this becuase Chase's new deal will kick in next year? Not sure the team deserves the benefit of the doubt but that may be the reason.

 

No, they frontload contracts to either ensure future flexibility (that's how they would put it) or to look like they are more financially committed than they really are (as most league observers would put it).

comment_1789317
7 hours ago, Griever said:

Screenshot_20250310-123814.png

 

He felt like he had to pay a "Joe Burrow Tax"?  That's sad.  I know he owes much of last years success to Joe, but knowingly signing a discounted contract is bad for business in general IMHO and certainly isn't helping the Bengals reputation. 

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...
Background Picker
Customize Layout