Cincinnati Bengals

Go Back   Cincinnati Bengals Message Boards - Forums > Cincinnati Bengals Football Discussion > Jungle Noise

Jungle Noise Bengals Football Discussion for BENGALS FANS ONLY. Visiting team fans please keep your postings in one of our other forums.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 12-30-2012, 05:11 PM
Tommy Casanova 72-77 Tommy Casanova 72-77 is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,453
Rep Points: 1251
Default Re: Michael Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Housh View Post
Thats why we have coaches and a FO. THEY see this guy in practice everyday and THEY know how good he is. Its not fair to him to say Geno makes him look better. When you get 10 sacks, you are good PERIOD. When you are the best DE for a #1 defense you are good PERIOD. Geno probably gets him alot of 1 on 1s but he still has to win those matchups and he goes against some pretty darn good offensive lineman. If you can remember the years we were BEGGING for a dline you know that some guys cant even win 1 on 1. We have 2 ends that can on the same line.......
Did they and us as well not think Reinard Wilson or Robert Geathers were better than they actually were after their contract year?

I would love them to sign all 3 plus Wallace.....but if they cannot....It's hard to choose between Dunalp and Johnson.... as Wallace would be easier to sign instead of either Dunalp and Johnson.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-30-2012, 05:12 PM
Night's Watch's Avatar
Night's Watch Night's Watch is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,375
Rep Points: 2545
Default Re: Michael Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shake n Blake View Post
MJ is important, and I hope we get him under contract, but exactly how good is he? Wallace Gilberry had 6.5 sacks as a part time player who was signed mid-season. I'm just saying I don't think MJ is worth a mega contract. Especially if that means we lose the real difference makers like Geno and AJ.
I would point out, that he isn't just a MJ replacement. A lot of times he comes on for Peko and we roll with Dunlap, MJ, Atkins, and Gilberry. He sometimes also replaces Dunlap. Just saying, his 6.5 sacks isnt from the same position as MJ.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-30-2012, 05:13 PM
Tommy Casanova 72-77 Tommy Casanova 72-77 is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,453
Rep Points: 1251
Default Re: Michael Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by DWright View Post
Not as much as people are saying. No matter how you look at it MJ has 11 sacks on the season he is winning his matchup. Gillberry has 6.5 he is beating his man. These are DE people not DT if it was Sims or Peko with the sacks then ya I would say that Atkins is drawing all the double teams and they are doing great because of it, but these two are going against the LT and winning.
I would prefer they get rid of Peko (Still and Thompson are here) and then Geathers is gone....so then yes....they can afford all 4 really.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-30-2012, 05:13 PM
McC's Avatar
McC McC is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,175
Rep Points: 18650
Default Re: Michael Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy Casanova 72-77 View Post
Did they and us as well not think Reinard Wilson or Robert Geathers were better than they actually were after their contract year?

I would love them to sign all 3 plus Wallace.....but if they cannot....It's hard to choose between Dunalp and Johnson.... as Wallace would be easier to sign instead of either Dunalp and Johnson.
The cap room should be there to keep them all. They are the engine that's driving the bus.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-30-2012, 05:14 PM
Housh's Avatar
Housh Housh is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fort Lewis, WA/Trotwood, Ohio
Posts: 3,307
Rep Points: 3022
Default Re: Michael Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy Casanova 72-77 View Post
Did they and us as well not think Reinard Wilson or Robert Geathers were better than they actually were after their contract year?

I would love them to sign all 3 plus Wallace.....but if they cannot....It's hard to choose between Dunalp and Johnson.... as Wallace would be easier to sign instead of either Dunalp and Johnson.
Man why is wallace on that list? He was picked up off of waivers for scraps. ANY contract we'll give Wallace will not hinder ANYTHING we could offer to Dunlap or MJ.


What im saying is when we go to sign one of our heavy hitters we'll never be like "Ahhh man that contract we gave Gilberry really hurt us"

Guy came in off the street....Just in case we didnt realize....pretty much ANY backup lineman we have will look amazing if he has ANY skill at all.
__________________
LOVE YOU BETHANY AND BENGALS!!! LET HAVE A GOOD 2013 TOGETHER!!!


Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 12-30-2012, 05:20 PM
NATI BENGALS's Avatar
NATI BENGALS NATI BENGALS is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,683
Rep Points: 4224
Default Re: Michael Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Housh View Post
They are refering to the people that say dont sign him if he wants too much. I think 4 years 16-18 mil is good for him, especially if we add in incentives that could get up to like 5-7 mil a year if he stays at a 10 sack a year pace.
If you offer him 4 year 14 mil you might as well spit in his face too. Fanene got 3 years and 12 mil, Frostee got a 5 year 20 mil deal. In his 4 years MJ is 1.5 sacks behind the combined 14 year total put up by Fanene and Frostee.

DE is the highest paid position on defense. MJ isn't going to take a contract worth 20+ million less than what he could get elsewhere to stay a Bengal.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-30-2012, 05:27 PM
ibengals's Avatar
ibengals ibengals is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,308
Rep Points: 5169
Default Re: Michael Johnson

Him and Andre need to be signed ASAP. Two players that if we lost, would seriously hurt this team.

5 year/35-40 million for Andre

5 year/35 for MJ

Last edited by ibengals; 12-30-2012 at 05:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-30-2012, 05:30 PM
Night's Watch's Avatar
Night's Watch Night's Watch is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,375
Rep Points: 2545
Default Re: Michael Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by NATI BENGALS View Post
If you offer him 4 year 14 mil you might as well spit in his face too. Fanene got 3 years and 12 mil, Frostee got a 5 year 20 mil deal. In his 4 years MJ is 1.5 sacks behind the combined 14 year total put up by Fanene and Frostee.

DE is the highest paid position on defense. MJ isn't going to take a contract worth 20+ million less than what he could get elsewhere to stay a Bengal.
I agree, it depends on the year amount, but I could see 5 yrs between 30-35 million, with possible incentintives put in. If 4 years, probably around 25-28 million. Neither of these destroy our cap space. Its funny to me how people can call Mike Brown cheap in one breath and then in the other say this player or that player is too expensive.

We have the cap space, We have to spend it next year, if we are going to build thru the draft then you have to pay your players first. Otherwise you will always be taking steps backwards.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2012 Cincinnati Bengals. All rights reserved. Do not duplicate in any form without permission of the Cincinnati Bengals.