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
  #76  
Old 02-05-2013, 03:43 PM
berserkerone88's Avatar
berserkerone88 berserkerone88 is online now
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Did you get that thing I sencha?
Posts: 19,551
Rep Points: 22393
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by gardner30 View Post
THEY HAVE LIKE 50 MILLION DOLLARS IN CAP SPACE!!!!!!

Thats what the media said about the Steelers last year when they were like 15 mil over the cap.

I don't think they lost anyone.

The Ravens won't lose anybody they want to keep either.
50 million? Oh my god! That's like totes awesome. And let's say we re-sign the easy ones first.
Huber, Brown, Newman, Pacman, Gillberry, Gradkowski, Howard, Harris....now there is probably 10 or so million down in just those guys.

And another ~10 is set aside for the draft and UDFA.
So that brings us down to 30 million.

Now we have Andre, MJ and Geno to worry about.
Tag Andre or MJ. Both cost right around 10 million.
down to 20 million.

so you want to squeeze a front loaded Geno deal (easily in excess of 12-13 million for a front loaded deal; see Haloti Ngata average salary [one of the current highest paid DTs])

And then that gives us roughly 7 million for the other guy.
Not including any outside free agents or other costs against the cap.


Really? They will probably lose Mike Wallace. They also had to re-structure Ben's deal if I remember correctly.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 02-05-2013, 03:53 PM
Mike M (the other one) Mike M (the other one) is online now
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 3,788
Rep Points: 5540
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan View Post
Bryant McKinnie rode the pine all year except for playoffs when they put him at LT because of an injury to one of their O-lineman. Eugene Monroe isn't good, Jason Peters missed the entire year, and Jake Long isn't what he used to be(injuries).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truck_1_0_1_ View Post
Wha wha WTF?!?!?!?

First of all, there are 2 big guys on Carolina's line, not just Johnson.

Secondly, did you watch a single game this year (or know football teams in general)?

Clady's success is due to Manning, 'cause he ****** before Peyton came aboard.
McKinnie was in 132 of the Ravens 1086 offensive snaps this year. Oh yeah, outstanding indeed!
Eugene Monroe is passable.
Peters got injured BEFORE MINI-CAMPS.
Albert was hurt right away in the KC game, so he didn't face him much.
Long was hurt all year
TRENT WILLIAMS GOT HURT ON THE FIRST PLAY. You definitely didn't watch this game, as the commentators were beating a dead horse on the fact that Jordan Black was retired for a year prior to that game.

Wow at the inaccuracy...
Sorry I don't keep up with OL as much as I do other positions (and apparently neither does NFL.com with depth charts) and technically, in light of the new information, that makes it even stronger on my side that he does not deserve Charles Johnson money, he didn't have to face as many of the top LT's as I initially thought he did. So as I said, 5 years/40 mil is about right.

Truck, the guy was talking about similarities when Charles Johnson was given his contract. At the time when the contract was signed there was no other big men on the line (at least that were developed at that time). They had just lost Peppers the year before and had to do everything they could to keep Johnson from leaving too.

2010 starting defensive line.
RDE Everette Brown 3.5 Sacks Tyler Brayton 0 sacks, Greg Hardy 3 sacks
RDT Derek Landri 3 Sacks
LDT Nick Hayden 1 Sack, Edward Johnson 0 sacks
LDE Charles Johnson 11.5 Sacks

Hardy started to break out in 2011 (4 Sacks) season and then arrived in the 2012 (11 Sacks) season (I'm guessing that's the other big man that you are referring to), after the contract had already been given.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 02-05-2013, 03:58 PM
gardner30's Avatar
gardner30 gardner30 is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,901
Rep Points: 4231
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by berserkerone88 View Post
50 million? Oh my god! That's like totes awesome. And let's say we re-sign the easy ones first.
Huber, Brown, Newman, Pacman, Gillberry, Gradkowski, Howard, Harris....now there is probably 10 or so million down in just those guys.

And another ~10 is set aside for the draft and UDFA.
So that brings us down to 30 million.

Now we have Andre, MJ and Geno to worry about.
Tag Andre or MJ. Both cost right around 10 million.
down to 20 million.

so you want to squeeze a front loaded Geno deal (easily in excess of 12-13 million for a front loaded deal; see Haloti Ngata average salary [one of the current highest paid DTs])

And then that gives us roughly 7 million for the other guy.
Not including any outside free agents or other costs against the cap.


Really? They will probably lose Mike Wallace. They also had to re-structure Ben's deal if I remember correctly.
Lol.

Your right man, they can't keep them all, its too hard.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 02-05-2013, 04:00 PM
berserkerone88's Avatar
berserkerone88 berserkerone88 is online now
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Did you get that thing I sencha?
Posts: 19,551
Rep Points: 22393
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by gardner30 View Post
Lol.

Your right man, they can't keep them all, its too hard.
Come on man. Explain to me how the Bengals can keep all their core players (the Newmans and Gilberrys of the team), sign the draft picks, bring in any filler free agents and sign 3 guys to contracts at or above 10 million a year (using your idea of extending Geno on a frontloaded deal)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 02-05-2013, 04:09 PM
Mike M (the other one) Mike M (the other one) is online now
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 3,788
Rep Points: 5540
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by berserkerone88 View Post
Come on man. Explain to me how the Bengals can keep all their core players (the Newmans and Gilberrys of the team), sign the draft picks, bring in any filler free agents and sign 3 guys to contracts at or above 10 million a year (using your idea of extending Geno on a frontloaded deal)
And be prepared to extend AJ Green and AD next year?
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 02-05-2013, 04:11 PM
berserkerone88's Avatar
berserkerone88 berserkerone88 is online now
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Did you get that thing I sencha?
Posts: 19,551
Rep Points: 22393
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike M (the other one) View Post
And be prepared to extend AJ Green and AD next year?
And possibly Gresham, Dunlap, Burfict....
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 02-05-2013, 04:25 PM
Mike M (the other one) Mike M (the other one) is online now
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 3,788
Rep Points: 5540
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by berserkerone88 View Post
And possibly Gresham, Dunlap, Burfict....
Those guys aren't so high on my list. I'd like to keep them, but MJ is currently worth more than Dunlap based on durability alone. I see us losing Gresham and Dunlap, but it all depends on how they perform this next year.

GA, AJ, AD, MJ and AS are the priority signings and in that order.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 02-05-2013, 04:37 PM
berserkerone88's Avatar
berserkerone88 berserkerone88 is online now
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Did you get that thing I sencha?
Posts: 19,551
Rep Points: 22393
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike M (the other one) View Post
Those guys aren't so high on my list. I'd like to keep them, but MJ is currently worth more than Dunlap based on durability alone. I see us losing Gresham and Dunlap, but it all depends on how they perform this next year.

GA, AJ, AD, MJ and AS are the priority signings and in that order.
Id put AS above MJ.
MJ could yet be a product of Geno being Geno. We don't know yet.

Are they top priority? No, but they would be worth keeping and while none will likely command that type of coin, those 4-5 million deals add up
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 02-05-2013, 05:33 PM
gardner30's Avatar
gardner30 gardner30 is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,901
Rep Points: 4231
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by berserkerone88 View Post
Come on man. Explain to me how the Bengals can keep all their core players (the Newmans and Gilberrys of the team), sign the draft picks, bring in any filler free agents and sign 3 guys to contracts at or above 10 million a year (using your idea of extending Geno on a frontloaded deal)
This will be long.

Lets say we re-sign MJ for 5yrs-50mil with 25 guaranteed, slightly less than Charles Johnson.

Andre gets 5yrs-30mil with 12 guaranteed, slightly more than David Stewart.

Geno gets the biggest contract ever by a DT at 5yrs-67mil with 40 mil guaranteed.

Geno gets real numbers not the inflated 100 mil bull crap phony money contract like Haynesworth.

Lets break down the Adkins deal 5yrs 67 mil with 40 guaranteed.

2013- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus, 4 mil roster bonus = 15.4mil cap hit
2014- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus = 10.4 mil cap hit
2015- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus = 10.4 cap hit
2016- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus = 10.4 cap hit
2017- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus, 6 mil roster bonus = 17.4 cap hit


Smith has the most risk so lets break down his deal 5yr-30mil with 12 guaranteed.

2013- 1.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus, 3 mil roster bonus = 5.6mil cap hit
2014- 1.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus = 6.6mil cap hit
2015- 3.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus = 4.6mil cap hit
2016- 5.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus = 2.6mil cap hit
2017- 5.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus, 4 mil roster bonus = 10.6mil cap hit

Front and backloaded his deal with the last roster bonus injury only guaranteed.

Lets break down MJ 5yr-50mil with 25 guaranteed.

2013- 3 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus, 2.5mil roster bonus = 8 mil cap hit
2014- 6 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus = 8.5mil cap hit
2015- 6 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus = 8.5mil cap hit
2016- 4 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus, 4 mil roster bonus = 10.5mil cap hit
2017- 6 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus, 6 mil roster bonus = 14.5mil cap hit

Front and backloaded his deal with the last roster bonus injury only guaranteed.

In 2013, those 3 deals would eat up 29 mil of cap space this year and more importantly give them cap space in 2014 and 2015 for the WR and QB.

You can also play around with those numbers quite a bit.

Last edited by gardner30; 02-05-2013 at 05:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 02-05-2013, 11:35 PM
Hammerstripes Hammerstripes is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Atkinson, NE
Posts: 7,528
Rep Points: 6377
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

I would definitely re-sign MJ - and here's why:

This is his first year of truly playing 1 position. How many times have they asked him to lose weight, gain weight, play LB, play DE, gain weight, lose weight.

Some people point to his big season and say it's all because he was in a contract year, I look at it and say that the team finally figured out what to do with him and he performed.

People will complain that he was inconsistent, well, he's durable and he's shown the ability to give elite tackles (Joe Thomas) all they can handle.

Sure, he may have ups and downs, but don't forget that he's coming into his prime and he's very young. It's a no brainer to re-sign him.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 02-05-2013, 11:39 PM
Anderson_fan1988's Avatar
Anderson_fan1988 Anderson_fan1988 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Centerville, OH
Posts: 307
Rep Points: 440
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerstripes View Post
I would definitely re-sign MJ - and here's why:

This is his first year of truly playing 1 position. How many times have they asked him to lose weight, gain weight, play LB, play DE, gain weight, lose weight.

Some people point to his big season and say it's all because he was in a contract year, I look at it and say that the team finally figured out what to do with him and he performed.

People will complain that he was inconsistent, well, he's durable and he's shown the ability to give elite tackles (Joe Thomas) all they can handle.

Sure, he may have ups and downs, but don't forget that he's coming into his prime and he's very young. It's a no brainer to re-sign him.
I agree, 11.5 sacks isn't a fluke season to me. This was MJs breakout year and to not resign him and keep the strengh of not only our defense, but our team as well, in tact would be a big mistake imo.
__________________
I'm Garrus Vakarian, and this is my favorite team in the NFL
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 02-06-2013, 11:58 AM
THE PISTONS's Avatar
THE PISTONS THE PISTONS is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 9,732
Rep Points: 8668
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anderson_fan1988 View Post
I agree, 11.5 sacks isn't a fluke season to me. This was MJs breakout year and to not resign him and keep the strengh of not only our defense, but our team as well, in tact would be a big mistake imo.
It's hard to say. Geathers had 10 sacks then never sniffed that again.

I tend to think it was a breakout season although if MJ would leave in free agency, he won't have the benefit of Atkins and Dunlap on the same line. He'd see more double teams elsewhere and likely not produce as much.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 02-06-2013, 12:00 PM
THE PISTONS's Avatar
THE PISTONS THE PISTONS is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 9,732
Rep Points: 8668
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by gardner30 View Post
This will be long.

Lets say we re-sign MJ for 5yrs-50mil with 25 guaranteed, slightly less than Charles Johnson.

Andre gets 5yrs-30mil with 12 guaranteed, slightly more than David Stewart.

Geno gets the biggest contract ever by a DT at 5yrs-67mil with 40 mil guaranteed.

Geno gets real numbers not the inflated 100 mil bull crap phony money contract like Haynesworth.

Lets break down the Adkins deal 5yrs 67 mil with 40 guaranteed.

2013- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus, 4 mil roster bonus = 15.4mil cap hit
2014- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus = 10.4 mil cap hit
2015- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus = 10.4 cap hit
2016- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus = 10.4 cap hit
2017- 5.4 mil base, 6 mil signing bonus, 6 mil roster bonus = 17.4 cap hit


Smith has the most risk so lets break down his deal 5yr-30mil with 12 guaranteed.

2013- 1.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus, 3 mil roster bonus = 5.6mil cap hit
2014- 1.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus = 6.6mil cap hit
2015- 3.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus = 4.6mil cap hit
2016- 5.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus = 2.6mil cap hit
2017- 5.6 mil base, 1mil signing bonus, 4 mil roster bonus = 10.6mil cap hit

Front and backloaded his deal with the last roster bonus injury only guaranteed.

Lets break down MJ 5yr-50mil with 25 guaranteed.

2013- 3 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus, 2.5mil roster bonus = 8 mil cap hit
2014- 6 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus = 8.5mil cap hit
2015- 6 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus = 8.5mil cap hit
2016- 4 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus, 4 mil roster bonus = 10.5mil cap hit
2017- 6 mil base, 2.5mil signing bonus, 6 mil roster bonus = 14.5mil cap hit

Front and backloaded his deal with the last roster bonus injury only guaranteed.

In 2013, those 3 deals would eat up 29 mil of cap space this year and more importantly give them cap space in 2014 and 2015 for the WR and QB.

You can also play around with those numbers quite a bit.
I think those numbers are fairly realistic.

IF Smith signs that deal...we likely waive him before that final season so it's a 4 year deal.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 02-06-2013, 06:23 PM
Ryan Mc Ryan Mc is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,938
Rep Points: 8920
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by berserkerone88 View Post
.....As for the second, they are in danger of cutting several of those guys to sign Flacco and barely made the cap for 2012.
But, they do have a Superbowl win to show for it. Baltimore also won their other Superbowl back in 2000 with some high-priced free agents and had to gut the team and re-build two years later when they were in salary cap trouble. They probably will take a step back next season after having to cut some guys, but that's a small price to pay for a championship season.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 02-06-2013, 06:55 PM
Anderson_fan1988's Avatar
Anderson_fan1988 Anderson_fan1988 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Centerville, OH
Posts: 307
Rep Points: 440
Default Re: Tagging MJ not the great option that most think it is

Quote:
Originally Posted by THE PISTONS View Post
It's hard to say. Geathers had 10 sacks then never sniffed that again.

I tend to think it was a breakout season although if MJ would leave in free agency, he won't have the benefit of Atkins and Dunlap on the same line. He'd see more double teams elsewhere and likely not produce as much.
I agree, he wouldn't do as well. Yeah I forgot Geathers had that season, but he has never seemed to be a pass first DE like Johnson appears to be. I guess what i'm saying is that Johnson fits well here now, he likes the city and team and it would be a shame to draft this player, develop him and then let him leave once he is up to speed on the game.
__________________
I'm Garrus Vakarian, and this is my favorite team in the NFL
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 11:30 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.