Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Bengals Free Agency
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Cincinnati Bengals
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
wrminning


Joined: 06 Jan 2007
Posts: 1965
Location: Cincinnati
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hokie wrote:
Considering the other holes we have on the roster (LG, SLB, CB, WR), it would be nice to see us fill a couple of them with free agents instead of just banking on the draft to solve everything, especially when he have 20-something million in cap space.

It should be pointed out that the Bengal's did fill a couple of needs with Free Agents, they signed a backup QB and OT. As far as the rest of the list goes I disagree about the need to sign a SLB or WR we are deep at both positions and there are better prospects in the middle of the Draft then in Free Agency, I think CB and LG will be addressed in the Draft.
As fall as the 20 million goes that includes up to 10 million for the draft and remember the team has the right to roll that money over to next year when they have Dalton AJ and Atkins contracts to rework. BY rolling over money they can front load the contracts and keep from the position that Dallas, Pittsburg and Baltimore put themselves in the last couple of years, when they back loaded contracts and then were forces to cut players they wanted to keep.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
theJ


Moderator
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 19262
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wrminning wrote:
Hokie wrote:
Considering the other holes we have on the roster (LG, SLB, CB, WR), it would be nice to see us fill a couple of them with free agents instead of just banking on the draft to solve everything, especially when he have 20-something million in cap space.

It should be pointed out that the Bengal's did fill a couple of needs with Free Agents, they signed a backup QB and OT. As far as the rest of the list goes I disagree about the need to sign a SLB or WR we are deep at both positions and there are better prospects in the middle of the Draft then in Free Agency, I think CB and LG will be addressed in the Draft.
As fall as the 20 million goes that includes up to 10 million for the draft and remember the team has the right to roll that money over to next year when they have Dalton AJ and Atkins contracts to rework. BY rolling over money they can front load the contracts and keep from the position that Dallas, Pittsburg and Baltimore put themselves in the last couple of years, when they back loaded contracts and then were forces to cut players they wanted to keep.

His point is that it would have been nice to address one or two positions before the draft outside of backups that won't see the field. I sort of agree. But at the same time, there weren't many good FA's out there that were a fit. All of the good players got huge contracts, which is a huge risk when you know you have guys to sign.

As for the cap situation, this happens every year because the Bengals pay ahead. They will always be in the top 10% of cap room available because they don't push money out. It doesn't mean they aren't spending - their cash spending number is always pretty high and they aren't afraid to pay their own guys. When we get to training camp time and they get AJ, Dalton and Burfict done their cap number will be in line with the rest of the league. So i get the frustration, but i also get the method the Bengals are going for.

At least they have a method. Others team just do whatever and lose constantly.
_________________


Don't follow your passion, take your passion with you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DatDudeKB3


Joined: 23 Jan 2014
Posts: 466
Location: Portsmouth/Wheelersburg, OH
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We're finalizing a 1 year deal with Danieal Manning. Vance obviously wanted him.

Good move imo. Lets Williams focus on being more of a SS and Mays focus more on being a nickel backer. Couple that with Manning being a solid player and I like the move.
_________________
Follow me on Twitter: @DatDudeKB3
Add me on Xbox Live: DatDudeKB3
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HangOnSloopy


Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Posts: 262
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't mind Manning as a depth signing what so ever.
_________________

"Work Hard, Play Hard"
daboyle250 on the sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ochocinco4pres


Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 23519
Location: Indianapolis Indiana
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So are we keeping 5 safeties or putting Mays at LB?
_________________


Big thanks to kacymcbryant18 for the sig....^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hokie


Joined: 01 Apr 2012
Posts: 851
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wrminning wrote:
Hokie wrote:
Considering the other holes we have on the roster (LG, SLB, CB, WR), it would be nice to see us fill a couple of them with free agents instead of just banking on the draft to solve everything, especially when he have 20-something million in cap space.

It should be pointed out that the Bengal's did fill a couple of needs with Free Agents, they signed a backup QB and OT. As far as the rest of the list goes I disagree about the need to sign a SLB or WR we are deep at both positions and there are better prospects in the middle of the Draft then in Free Agency, I think CB and LG will be addressed in the Draft.
As fall as the 20 million goes that includes up to 10 million for the draft and remember the team has the right to roll that money over to next year when they have Dalton AJ and Atkins contracts to rework. BY rolling over money they can front load the contracts and keep from the position that Dallas, Pittsburg and Baltimore put themselves in the last couple of years, when they back loaded contracts and then were forces to cut players they wanted to keep.


The Bengals did make an upgrade a backup QB; they now have one of the better backup QBs in the league. They still need to draft someone as a possible Dalton replacement down the road, or at least to be a good backup. Someone like Aaron Murray in the 4th round would fit the bill.

As for filling a need at OT, completely disagree with you now. They lost Collins (who got paid big time) and signed Marshall Newhouse (who graded out as one of the worst linemen in the league last year and signed for dirt cheap). Collins to Newhouse is a huge downgrade. There's no other way to spin that.

We're not deep at SLB. Who on the roster has experience playing SLB other than Maualuga? Has Rey or Lamur? I honestly don't know, but I don't believe they have. A SLB rushes the passer more than a MLB or WLB; I think the Bengals will be targeting one at some point in the draft.

We're deep at WR but not as deep as we were when we had Hawkins. Our top 3 is good but we have a lot of unknowns beyond that. I disagree with everyone who is saying that Sazenbacher will fill in for Hawkins. They're both slot receivers but that's where the similarities end. We need more depth at the position.

We're not reworking Atkins' contract. Maybe you meant Burifict. But this is where I get tired of hearing the "we have to save for extensions!" excuse. Why can other teams in the NFL sign their stars to extensions, sign their draft picks, AND bring in a decent player or two via free agency? I've yet to see one person answer this question with something other than "the Bengals just don't operate that way."

And you exaggerated how much will be allocated to rookies. More like $5 million instead of $10.

The fact is that signing a decent free agent or two wouldn't have hurt us down the line in terms of signing extensions. We have PLENTY of cap space. The problem is that Mike Brown is a stubborn old man who wants to win HIS way. All I have to say is good luck, because it's probably never going to happen. The Bengals show up to the fight with one hand tied behind their back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hokie


Joined: 01 Apr 2012
Posts: 851
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ochocinco4pres wrote:
So are we keeping 5 safeties or putting Mays at LB?


Looks like they're going to use Mays strictly in a nickel role. I imagine he'll see some time as a hybrid LB (like Lamur in 2012) and maybe some time in the slot, where he was quite effective last season. I don't think he'll see time at safety unless it's an emergency situation.

Given how we now have four safeties, and five if you include Mays, I think we're definitely set at the position. Not crazy about Manning because he's been pretty crappy the last two seasons, but hopefully he can provide some sort of veteran presence. I'd be shocked if he took a starting spot away from Iloka though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sparky151


Joined: 07 Feb 2012
Posts: 2055
Location: Columbus, OH
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When examing the Bengals cap situation, rookies should be ignored. There is a sublimit in spending on rookies, called the rookie pool. It's how much a team can spend on rookies beyond their minimum salaries. But it has no effect on the overall cap. So when Hobson talks about setting money aside from the overall cap to sign rookies, he's just blowing smoke and misinforming any readers left who don't know better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hokie


Joined: 01 Apr 2012
Posts: 851
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sparky151 wrote:
When examing the Bengals cap situation, rookies should be ignored. There is a sublimit in spending on rookies, called the rookie pool. It's how much a team can spend on rookies beyond their minimum salaries. But it has no effect on the overall cap. So when Hobson talks about setting money aside from the overall cap to sign rookies, he's just blowing smoke and misinforming any readers left who don't know better.


As he does with virtually every writeup he posts. I stopped reading his crap years ago.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theJ


Moderator
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 19262
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sparky151 wrote:
When examing the Bengals cap situation, rookies should be ignored. There is a sublimit in spending on rookies, called the rookie pool. It's how much a team can spend on rookies beyond their minimum salaries. But it has no effect on the overall cap. So when Hobson talks about setting money aside from the overall cap to sign rookies, he's just blowing smoke and misinforming any readers left who don't know better.

This is incorrect and a common misconception.

http://overthecap.com/explaining-the-nfl-rookie-pool-and-its-impact-on-the-salary-cap/

Quote:
This is probably the most confusing aspect for most people. Some people this its additional money added on top of the salary cap which is not the case at all. The “Rookie Pool” is a cap within the salary cap. It is essentially money that your team needs to place aside for your rookies. It is not added to your salary cap at all.


Bengals rookie pool estimates

So they need to set aside $5.5 million out of the reported ~$24mil in cap space.
_________________


Don't follow your passion, take your passion with you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sparky151


Joined: 07 Feb 2012
Posts: 2055
Location: Columbus, OH
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2014 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

theJ wrote:
sparky151 wrote:
When examing the Bengals cap situation, rookies should be ignored. There is a sublimit in spending on rookies, called the rookie pool. It's how much a team can spend on rookies beyond their minimum salaries. But it has no effect on the overall cap. So when Hobson talks about setting money aside from the overall cap to sign rookies, he's just blowing smoke and misinforming any readers left who don't know better.

This is incorrect and a common misconception.

http://overthecap.com/explaining-the-nfl-rookie-pool-and-its-impact-on-the-salary-cap/

Quote:
This is probably the most confusing aspect for most people. Some people this its additional money added on top of the salary cap which is not the case at all. The “Rookie Pool” is a cap within the salary cap. It is essentially money that your team needs to place aside for your rookies. It is not added to your salary cap at all.


Bengals rookie pool estimates

So they need to set aside $5.5 million out of the reported ~$24mil in cap space.


Uh, no. The links you cite don't lead to your conclusion. If the Bengals stay in the current draft slots, they will have a rookie pool number of 5.5 mil. That's simply a limit on how much the rookies can be paid beyond the minimum first year salary in 2014. Whether the team keeps all the draftees and some UDFAs or no rookies at all won't affect the overall cap beyond their cap numbers and dead money. Or to put it another way, rookies are competing for 53 man roster spots with vets. They aren't given additional roster spots.

So ignore Hobson on anything cap related and ignore anyone who brings up the rookies when discussing the team's cap situation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theJ


Moderator
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 19262
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2014 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sparky151 wrote:
Uh, no. The links you cite don't lead to your conclusion. If the Bengals stay in the current draft slots, they will have a rookie pool number of 5.5 mil. That's simply a limit on how much the rookies can be paid beyond the minimum first year salary in 2014. Whether the team keeps all the draftees and some UDFAs or no rookies at all won't affect the overall cap beyond their cap numbers and dead money. Or to put it another way, rookies are competing for 53 man roster spots with vets. They aren't given additional roster spots.

So ignore Hobson on anything cap related and ignore anyone who brings up the rookies when discussing the team's cap situation.

Maybe i was unclear. I'm pointing out that the rookies wages certainly count against the cap. Because what you said was:
Quote:
There is a sublimit in spending on rookies, called the rookie pool. It's how much a team can spend on rookies beyond their minimum salaries. But it has no effect on the overall cap.

Either you were unclear, or wrong, because the rookies contracts count against the same cap number everyone else goes against. Whether there's a sub-limit or whatever other nonsense they do, you can't spend all $24 million of cap space and magically get the money for you rookies from another pool of money.

Obviously i'm simplifying this a bit because of the rule of 51. The Bengals probably won't need all 5.5 million (actually, not even close - they'll only need about $1.8 million as of last estimate). So i was wrong on the number. But the real conclusion i'm trying to reach here is that they do need to set aside some money for rookies. It's not a separate cap.

And stop referencing Hobson. Haven't read his @#%^ in years, stop assuming.
_________________


Don't follow your passion, take your passion with you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrCincinnati


Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Posts: 1116
Location: Hamilton, OH
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't see Mays as a lock now with the Manning signing. I think the Bengals are better off with just 6 CB's and 4 S's. Even though Mays could play some LB spots, there is so much potential at LB right now that they will probably go with just 6 guys there. Only way I see Mays making it is if they want to split the bill on the secondary and go 5 CB's and 5 S's.

Danieal Manning's contract has been made a 1 year deal that is worth 1.6 Million btw.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ochocinco4pres


Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 23519
Location: Indianapolis Indiana
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrCincinnati wrote:
I don't see Mays as a lock now with the Manning signing. I think the Bengals are better off with just 6 CB's and 4 S's. Even though Mays could play some LB spots, there is so much potential at LB right now that they will probably go with just 6 guys there. Only way I see Mays making it is if they want to split the bill on the secondary and go 5 CB's and 5 S's.

Danieal Manning's contract has been made a 1 year deal that is worth 1.6 Million btw.


I don't think he is a lock, but the way he played last year before getting hurt along with his age and the fact we traded for him originally makes me think he is pretty close to it
_________________


Big thanks to kacymcbryant18 for the sig....^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DatDudeKB3


Joined: 23 Jan 2014
Posts: 466
Location: Portsmouth/Wheelersburg, OH
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2014 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sanzenbacher has been re-signed. No word on if it's a new contract or he just signed his tender.

EDIT: Looks like he signed his tender.
_________________
Follow me on Twitter: @DatDudeKB3
Add me on Xbox Live: DatDudeKB3
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Cincinnati Bengals All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next
Page 18 of 21

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group