PDA

View Full Version : Bengals in downward spiral


Doppelganger
07-29-2011, 07:58 AM
They passed on Patterson becuase they were convinced they would retain Joseph. Now they have neither.

Palmer looks to be sitting for the year.

Ochostinko got his way and is out of Cincy.

Cedric Benson in legal trouble again.

Leon Hall a zone CB may be their best player now.

Section516
07-29-2011, 07:59 AM
Had to check the date to make sure I didn't travel back in time twenty years!

:spin:

HoustonFrog
07-29-2011, 08:04 AM
I'm realy surprised on Joseph and that the Texans got him. all indications were that the Bengals were going all in with him. Looks like they just don't care. Though they got a top WR in the draft and have my guy at QB for them now.

Stemp
07-29-2011, 08:18 AM
or maybe Joseph just wanted out of Cincy?

Texecutioner
07-29-2011, 10:01 AM
It would be nice to see Goodell and the NFL take over the team and sell it to someone else like they did with the Dodgers. They obviously can't do that, but I hate to see an owner throwing his franchise away over and over.

Dutchrudder
07-29-2011, 10:41 AM
Mike Brown is an evil genius, we just haven't seen his full plan come to fruition yet...

BetaV1
07-29-2011, 02:28 PM
I could've sworn the new CBA says the cap floor is 80% of the max cap, meaning teams must spend a certain amount of money on players. If you absolutely have to spend the money, why not spend it on quality players? It's wacky.

I assume Joseph really wanted out of Cincy.

Dutchrudder
07-29-2011, 02:29 PM
I could've sworn the new CBA says the cap floor is 80% of the max cap, meaning teams must spend a certain amount of money on players. If you absolutely have to spend the money, why not spend it on quality players? It's wacky.

I assume Joseph really wanted out of Cincy.

ClaytonESPN John Clayton
reminding everyone that the minimum spend of 89 percent doesn't start until 2013.

BetaV1
07-29-2011, 02:30 PM
ClaytonESPN John Clayton
reminding everyone that the minimum spend of 89 percent doesn't start until 2013.

Thanks for that. 89% is even better. Sucks for the wait. But man, can you imagine how a team like the Bucs would look if they were forced to spend the 50 or so million they're just sitting on right now?

Double Barrel
07-29-2011, 02:34 PM
I heard last night that the Bengals have had only two winning seasons in the past 20 years, which is also the same time that Mike Brown took control.

Downward spiral or just sucky franchise...not much of a difference, I guess.

BIG TORO
07-29-2011, 02:35 PM
I could've sworn the new CBA says the cap floor is 80% of the max cap, meaning teams must spend a certain amount of money on players. If you absolutely have to spend the money, why not spend it on quality players? It's wacky.

I assume Joseph really wanted out of Cincy.

Yea Houston to Joseph is like NY to Nnamdi!

Dutchrudder
07-29-2011, 02:43 PM
Thanks for that. 89% is even better. Sucks for the wait. But man, can you imagine how a team like the Bucs would look if they were forced to spend the 50 or so million they're just sitting on right now?

If I were a player right now, I would make it so my contract would have its guaranteed money run out for the 2013 free agency period. That offseason is going to be a huge feeding frenzy for teams.

beerlover
07-29-2011, 02:46 PM
I'm realy surprised on Joseph and that the Texans got him. all indications were that the Bengals were going all in with him. Looks like they just don't care. Though they got a top WR in the draft and have my guy at QB for them now.

they did a fine job replicating the Texans front office circa 07-2010.

Dutchrudder
07-29-2011, 02:48 PM
they did a fine job replicating the Texans front office circa 07-2010.

Cincy is the new Houston! Hahahaha!

Mr. White
07-29-2011, 02:56 PM
I heard last night that the Bengals have had only two winning seasons in the past 20 years, which is also the same time that Mike Brown took control.

Downward spiral or just sucky franchise...not much of a difference, I guess.

We've bitched about Bob McNair over the years, but we could have it so much worse.

Wolf
07-29-2011, 02:58 PM
que the lawsuits again 4.....3....2....1

Hervoyel
07-29-2011, 02:59 PM
I heard last night that the Bengals have had only two winning seasons in the past 20 years, which is also the same time that Mike Brown took control.

Downward spiral or just sucky franchise...not much of a difference, I guess.

We've had one in ten years (at least so far, 2011 has yet to play out I know) so we're on a frustratingly similar pace. Can you imagine what it would be like to be talking about two winning seasons in 20 years?

Being a Bengals fan is literally a waste of time.

texanmojo
07-29-2011, 03:13 PM
Should make for an easy win in December!!!!

Double Barrel
07-29-2011, 03:28 PM
We've had one in ten years (at least so far, 2011 has yet to play out I know) so we're on a frustratingly similar pace. Can you imagine what it would be like to be talking about two winning seasons in 20 years?

Being a Bengals fan is literally a waste of time.

I honestly think that I'd just stop watching the NFL if we end up with two winning seasons in 20 years.

At least the Bengals have some success in franchise history. They lost Super Bowls, but they still went to them.

The Texans...yeah...we've got that winning season... :spin:

Doppelganger
07-29-2011, 04:29 PM
Thanks for that. 89% is even better. Sucks for the wait. But man, can you imagine how a team like the Bucs would look if they were forced to spend the 50 or so million they're just sitting on right now?

They'd start handing out million dollar plus contracts to fans to sit in the stands!!!

The Pencil Neck
07-29-2011, 05:01 PM
I could've sworn the new CBA says the cap floor is 80% of the max cap, meaning teams must spend a certain amount of money on players. If you absolutely have to spend the money, why not spend it on quality players? It's wacky.

I assume Joseph really wanted out of Cincy.

I expected them to franchise him. I didn't expect him to get to free agency.

Norg
07-30-2011, 04:17 AM
Watch when we play them they give us all we can handle

Mike zimmer runs a good defensive

And heck maybe Carson and ochio were just bad

Maybe Dalton and aj green will tear us up. And I say Dalton cause I don't think Bruce will last to dec

Corrosion
07-30-2011, 04:27 AM
Watch when we play them they give us all we can handle

Mike zimmer runs a good defensive

And heck maybe Carson and ochio were just bad

Maybe Dalton and aj green will tear us up. And I say Dalton cause I don't think Bruce will last to dec

85 takes a lot of heat .... mostly for his antics off the field which I think is kinda bull****. He's does crazy **** but its all legal .... just different. He can flat out play , no doubt about that. I kinda like the guy .... He's not afraid to be himself in a world that judges everyone and every action.

I think the majority of the problems they had on O were with protecting Palmer rather than the skills of either of those two.

85 will tear it up in NE with Brady.

I doubt Bruce or Dalton lasts the year .... Whoever's starting at QB in Cincy will be pickin his ass up off the turf more often than not on passing downs. Sure hope Dalton doesnt develop HHWNBM syndrome.

thunderkyss
07-30-2011, 04:34 AM
Thanks for that. 89% is even better. Sucks for the wait. But man, can you imagine how a team like the Bucs would look if they were forced to spend the 50 or so million they're just sitting on right now?

We don't think money can fix the school systems, or any of our social dilemmas....

But that's all you need to fix a football team.


If owners aren't spending the money, it's because the talent isn't there. Spending is just going to force owners to overpay the crap they got on their 53.

CloakNNNdagger
07-30-2011, 08:02 AM
ClaytonESPN John Clayton
reminding everyone that the minimum spend of 89 percent doesn't start until 2013.

Per-team spending minimum doesn’t apply until 2013 (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/30/per-team-spending-minimum-doesnt-apply-until-2013/)



One of the highlights of the labor deal, from the perspective of the players, comes from the requirement that each team muat spend at least 89 percent of the salary cap in cash on an annual basis. “We cannot have teams like KC spend only 67% of the cap like they did in 2009,” Saints quarterback Drew Brees wrote in an e-mail to his teammates. “It doesn’t matter how high the cap is if they are only going to spend that much. So with a minimum in place, it requires all teams to be at or above that minimum. More money in players pockets.”

The players got what they wanted. But it doesn’t apply until 2013.

Yes, for 2011 and 2012 no minimum cash spending requirement applies on a per-team basis. We were first alerted to this reality on Thursday morning, during a weekly segment with Steve Davis and Ed Norris of 105.7 the Fan in Baltimore. Davis said that Ravens president Dick Cass had explained the situation in a recent on-air interview, and Davis forwarded the audio to us later in the day.

The summary of the final deal that we obtained on Monday confirms that, indeed, the “minimum team cash spend” applies on a four-year basis from 2013 through 2016, and from 2017 through 2020. No minimum per-team expenditure applies for 2011 and 2012.

Still, on a league-wide basis, the labor deal requires the NFL to spend 99 percent of the salary cap in cash in 2011 and 2012.

So what happens if too many teams spend so little that the league isn’t able to average 99 percent of the cap in actual cash spent? NFL general counsel Jeff Pash, via NFL spokesman Greg Aiello, explained Friday night that the league would be required to pay the difference to the players.

That said, the league doesn’t believe that it will be a problem, even if teams like the Bucs and Bengals and Chiefs decide to spend as little as possible over the next two years. Based on the money spent to date, the league thinks that the average expenditure of $119 million per team easily will be met.

Remember, it’s not cap space but cash spent. So when a team like the Panthers gives defensive end Charles Johnson a $30 million signing bonus on a six-year deal, only $5 million counts against the cap — but $30 million counts against the league’s total spending requirement of $3.8 billion.

The more relevant point, for the next two years, is that teams like the Bucs, Bengals, and Chiefs can choose to stay as far below the salary cap as they want.