+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed (/thread-18336.html)
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - TheLeonardLeap - 12-05-2018
(12-05-2018, 10:26 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: THIS IS GREAT!
You know, at the time...A LOT of this board stood with Mike Brown in not paying a Guard that much money. Well...THIS is the roster we got...and they made all of those bad investments that you detailed!
Yeah, I am not against paying a Guard Zeitler-money. I was just against paying Zeitler Zeitler-money. Lol
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - Whatever - 12-05-2018
(12-05-2018, 10:28 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: It's a total myth that the Bengals thought they had his replacement. Ced had already struggled at RT at that point.
Also, there is no way they offer him even a 1 year deal if they felt that Ced and Fisher could do it.
Look...they're starting Hart this year at RT who was terrible last year and waived by the Giants. Sometimes they just do what's cheap.
Supposedly, Giggles and Piano Man reassured Mike on Og and Fisher. Of course, Piano Man was reportedly slamming his fist on the table for those two in the draft, so they were likely hoping they could turn them around to save face more than giving an honest evaluation.
They knew they weren't paying Zeitler and they would have an open starting spot. They knew Whit could play G and they also thought Og and Fisher could, too. I remember the old Piano Man quote about how "If you can play T, you can play G." Of course, those 2 schmucks couldn't play either.
There was talk about moving Whit to G to extend his career around this time(not that it seems like he needs it), so the thinking was likely playing Whit at G and having him as a fallback at T in case Og or Fisher didn't come around.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - 3wt - 12-06-2018
(12-05-2018, 12:51 AM)Benton Wrote: I think Mike brown believes he's loyal to his players and he expects them to reciprocate.
Which is silly. Drafting a guy abd waiting till the final year of their deal to play them considerably or resigning a guy isnt being loyal to them.
I think that loyalty has always been a Brown family value. We all have our blind spots and it's one of theirs in the sense that they give it to a fault and require it to a fault.
Remember the gag rule they imposed that lost one of our punters (last name Johnson I believe) his job?
And I can't help but feel that one of the reasons that they hired Tiger Johnson over Bill Walsh was 1) They were loyal to Tiger and 2) I don't think they felt Walsh was all that loyal to them, or should have been loyal enough to stay under Johnson.
So it may have played into their approach. But I think Whit was sending them the message that he believed he was worth a multiyear contract and the Bengals just disagreed.
And they were wrong.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - McC - 12-06-2018
(12-06-2018, 08:30 PM)3wt Wrote: I think that loyalty has always been a Brown family value. We all have our blind spots and it's one of theirs in the sense that they give it to a fault and require it to a fault.
Remember the gag rule they imposed that lost one of our punters (last name Johnson I believe) his job?
And I can't help but feel that one of the reasons that they hired Tiger Johnson over Bill Walsh was 1) They were loyal to Tiger and 2) I don't think they felt Walsh was all that loyal to them, or should have been loyal enough to stay under Johnson.
So it may have played into their approach. But I think Whit was sending them the message that he believed he was worth a multiyear contract and the Bengals just disagreed.
And they were wrong.
If ever anyone had a case for going opposite, it is MB. If every decision you ever make is wrong...
Actually, most people, if they had a company that was guaranteed to reap a huge pile of cash annually, no matter how bad they were at their business, would surround themselves with friends and family. There are very few such buffers in the world. The Brown family will never win a championship until they actually strt trying nd that would only ever happen if they lost their golden goose and that will never happen.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - Wyche'sWarrior - 12-07-2018
(12-06-2018, 08:30 PM)3wt Wrote: I think that loyalty has always been a Brown family value. We all have our blind spots and it's one of theirs in the sense that they give it to a fault and require it to a fault.
Remember the gag rule they imposed that lost one of our punters (last name Johnson I believe) his job?
And I can't help but feel that one of the reasons that they hired Tiger Johnson over Bill Walsh was 1) They were loyal to Tiger and 2) I don't think they felt Walsh was all that loyal to them, or should have been loyal enough to stay under Johnson.
So it may have played into their approach. But I think Whit was sending them the message that he believed he was worth a multiyear contract and the Bengals just disagreed.
And they were wrong.
Lee Johnson. You know it's bad when the punter is calling out ownership.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - yellowxdiscipline - 12-07-2018
(12-06-2018, 08:30 PM)3wt Wrote: I think that loyalty has always been a Brown family value. We all have our blind spots and it's one of theirs in the sense that they give it to a fault and require it to a fault.
Remember the gag rule they imposed that lost one of our punters (last name Johnson I believe) his job?
And I can't help but feel that one of the reasons that they hired Tiger Johnson over Bill Walsh was 1) They were loyal to Tiger and 2) I don't think they felt Walsh was all that loyal to them, or should have been loyal enough to stay under Johnson.
So it may have played into their approach. But I think Whit was sending them the message that he believed he was worth a multiyear contract and the Bengals just disagreed.
And they were wrong.
Sometimes you have to take risks. Taking a risk to keep an aging left tackle whos still playing high level football, not to mention he's a role model within the locker room, seems like a no brainer. It was pretty clear at the time that Fisher and Ogbhuei werent not coming along fast enough. But Mike with his profit driven robot logic decided that Whitworth wasnt worth the risk, and he was wrong, but he'll never admit to that.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - THE PISTONS - 12-07-2018
(12-07-2018, 11:46 AM)yellowxdiscipline Wrote: Sometimes you have to take risks. Taking a risk to keep an aging left tackle whos still playing high level football, not to mention he's a role model within the locker room, seems like a no brainer. It was pretty clear at the time that Fisher and Ogbhuei werent not coming along fast enough. But Mike with his profit driven robot logic decided that Whitworth wasnt worth the risk, and he was wrong, but he'll never admit to that.
Or, if you don't want to keep the LT because of age...why not keep the Guard that you picked in the 1st Round?
One thing that bothered me was it seemed like the never tried to negotiate with Zeitler other than low-balling him BEFORE he was a free agent.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - Catmandude123 - 12-07-2018
(12-05-2018, 02:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Their fans have had one winning season in the last 15 years, so they can't chuckle at anyone.
And getting rid of older players is the Patriots way of running their organization, so are you going to turn your nose up on a team that has won 4 Super Bowls in the last 15 years or a team that has only one winning season over that span?
I like how you skew stats to fit your narrative. You could have went back eighteen years and the were in two SBs and won one. Trying to make the Bengals look good by referencing other teams shortcomings doesn't change the fact that the Bengals way of doing things don't work.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - Catmandude123 - 12-07-2018
(12-05-2018, 02:38 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Yeah, it was the JJo situation.
I don't know where that post is, but it was a pretty absurd list of money/picks spent over the following 4 years trying to replace JJo's production
JJO left because he couldn't get free gatorade
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - THE PISTONS - 12-07-2018
(12-07-2018, 02:29 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: I like how you skew stats to fit your narrative. You could have went back eighteen years and the were in two SBs and won one. Trying to make the Bengals look good by referencing other teams shortcomings doesn't change the fact that the Bengals way of doing things don't work.
The reality is, teams like the Rams fire their HC and GM's multiple times and eventually field a great team.
Teams like the Bengals are cool with sustained mediocrity.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - McC - 12-07-2018
(12-07-2018, 10:54 AM)Wyche Wrote: Lee Johnson. You know it's bad when the punter is calling out ownership.
For sure. Supposed to be seen and not heard.
But punters and kickers can be a wacky bunch. And he was the long distance kicker and kicked off, so he was both.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 12-07-2018
(12-04-2018, 12:04 PM)pally Wrote: Throw away the myth that the Bengals were in the running with their money offer to Whitworth and it was the length of contract that drove him away. Per Whit, the Bengals were the low dollar outlier of all his offers.
https://bengalswire.usatoday.com/2018/12/04/andrew-whitworth-reveals-bengals-lowballed-him-contract-discussions/
Whitworth himself said on the Rams Revealed podcast that the Bengals weren’t close to “three or four” other offers:
“For me honestly I had three or four offers that were all really right the same. The only real offer for me, unfortunately, that wasn’t really equivalent to the others was the team I was with, the Cincinnati Bengals, were really the only team that was the outlier in the offers I received. So I knew that that probably meant for me, really the situation I was under, and the excitement to try and go win, really not having much of a commitment from them, felt like I was going to have to go somewhere.”
One of the biggest blunders by this team and one that pretty much destroyed our last 3 years.
They always talk about the loyalty of Mike Brown but where was the loyalty to one of the best Bengals ever?
This was pathetic honestly, it was the one thing we had to do in that Offseason and we didn't even try.
Makes me mad honestly. Hope Whit gets a ring with the Rams.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - BengalsRocker - 12-07-2018
(12-07-2018, 07:28 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: One of the biggest blunders by this team and one that pretty much destroyed our last 3 years.
They always talk about the loyalty of Mike Brown but where was the loyalty to one of the best Bengals ever?
This was pathetic honestly, it was the one thing we had to do in that Offseason and we didn't even try.
Makes me mad honestly. Hope Whit gets a ring with the Rams.
One poster mentioned about how it was rumored that they were walking around acting like his signing was a done deal.
Boy what a f-up that was.
Thinking Whit was going to base his decision on team loyalty even if a lower offer.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - Sled21 - 12-07-2018
(12-07-2018, 02:41 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: The reality is, teams like the Rams fire their HC and GM's multiple times and eventually field a great team.
Teams like the Bengals are cool with sustained mediocrity.
Everybody is creaming all over the Rams this year, talking about all the great moves them made. In reality, they hit on a rookie QB in the draft, and are paying him very little comparatively with other QB's in the league. When Goff hits his second contract, watch a whole lot of talent disappear off that roster due to money....
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - Bengalsrob - 12-07-2018
(12-07-2018, 10:24 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Everybody is creaming all over the Rams this year, talking about all the great moves them made. In reality, they hit on a rookie QB in the draft, and are paying him very little comparatively with other QB's in the league. When Goff hits his second contract, watch a whole lot of talent disappear off that roster due to money....
Rams hell; this team is making me jealous of the Browns!
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - THE PISTONS - 12-08-2018
(12-07-2018, 10:24 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Everybody is creaming all over the Rams this year, talking about all the great moves them made. In reality, they hit on a rookie QB in the draft, and are paying him very little comparatively with other QB's in the league. When Goff hits his second contract, watch a whole lot of talent disappear off that roster due to money....
Typical Bengal fan talk. They explain away other teams success with...Gee let's see if they can afford to keep all these guys. Just like people have done with the Steelers and Rams.
How many QB's on rookie deals have we had and failed to build a playoff winner around?
Dalton is currently paid lower than a lot of non-rookie starters.
Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - BenZoo2 - 12-08-2018
(12-07-2018, 10:24 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Everybody is creaming all over the Rams this year, talking about all the great moves them made. In reality, they hit on a rookie QB in the draft, and are paying him very little comparatively with other QB's in the league. When Goff hits his second contract, watch a whole lot of talent disappear off that roster due to money....
Well that does seem to be the new model. The rookie qb becomes a success, is surrounded by other draft picks that hit, the teams signs some good free agents and they’re in the midst of a potential super bowl run or two.
Ebenezer would stockpile comp picks, cap space and one and dones
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - fredtoast - 12-08-2018
The term "low ball" comes from a form of poker where the lowest hand wins. people who make "low ball" offers are hoping to win something with the lowest bid.
The term "high ball" come from an old railway signal with a large ball. If it was raised it meant that it was safe for the train to proceed at top speed. So "high balling" came to mean "top speed".
So, for example, "The Bengals low balled Whitworth so he high balled it out of Cincinnati."
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - Whatever - 12-08-2018
(12-07-2018, 07:28 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: One of the biggest blunders by this team and one that pretty much destroyed our last 3 years.
They always talk about the loyalty of Mike Brown but where was the loyalty to one of the best Bengals ever?
This was pathetic honestly, it was the one thing we had to do in that Offseason and we didn't even try.
Makes me mad honestly. Hope Whit gets a ring with the Rams.
It was a bad blunder, but it really hasn't set the franchise back appreciably. We were a 6 win team in '16 with Whit, a 7 win team in '17, and will probably be a 5-6 win team this year. It's not like this team was making the playoffs or making a run this year or last with Whit. We would still need to be looking for his replacement due to his age and Og and Fisher being busts. Honestly, the Og and Fisher picks set us further back than losing Whit.
The Bengals offer was a raise over what he got the previous year. I don't know a lot of vets getting raises at 34. I'm not vilifying Whit for taking the Rams offer, but again, loyalty is a two way street. He could have stayed and he would have still been very well compensated for a player his age at his position. He made a business decision to maximize his earnings, which is his right. However, it's not really fair to say one side needs to negotiate based on loyalty while the other side is free to do whatever they feel is in their best interest.
RE: Whitworth-Bengals lowballed - fredtoast - 12-08-2018
(12-07-2018, 02:41 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: The reality is, teams like the Rams fire their HC and GM's multiple times and eventually field a great team.
Teams like the Bengals are cool with sustained mediocrity.
2018 Rams.......11-1....#2 points scored...….#19 points allowed.....121 point differential
2015 Bengals....10-2....#4 points scored...….#1 points allowed......138 point differential
Which team is better?