Jump to content

Hewitt


Recommended Posts

  • 2 months later...

So...after five games I have to ask: what was the point of this extension? Not that I don't think Hewitt was worth it, but if they aren't going to use him, why did the give him all that cash?

So far this year, Hewitt has played just 20% offensive snaps, down from 50% last year. In the passing game he has 0 targets, 0 receptions and 0 yards. Last year he caught 8 balls for 99 yards and in 2014 he caught 10 for 86, despite playing just 17% of snaps all year.

I realize offenses have changed since the days of Pete Johnson, but hell, the Bengals got some pretty good mileage out of the FB position as recently as 2005 when Jeremi Johnson had 12 catches for 65 yards and 3 touchdowns. I keep reading about how the red zone offense is suffering because Eifert's hurt and Sanu and Jones are gone, well, why not actually use what weapons you still have? Never mind possibly getting the run game going too.

Baffling.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I certainly can't defend Zampese right now. We can only hope he gets better. But still, they re-upped Hewitt in August, after Zampese had been OC for months and, presumably, had some idea of the shape his offense was going to take and who the key players would be.

After five games it seems pretty clear that Hewitt wasn't one of those key guys. So why hand him a deal that makes him either the second or fourth-highest paid FB in the league? Heck, he was still under contract for 2016 and would only have been an RFA in 2017, so they could have hung onto him for two more seasons for practically nothing.

Yet a team that constantly cries poverty instead gave him $7.5 million so he could spend 80% of the game on the bench.

I just can't make any sense of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, HoosierCat said:

Well, I certainly can't defend Zampese right now. We can only hope he gets better. But still, they re-upped Hewitt in August, after Zampese had been OC for months and, presumably, had some idea of the shape his offense was going to take and who the key players would be.

After five games it seems pretty clear that Hewitt wasn't one of those key guys. So why hand him a deal that makes him either the second or fourth-highest paid FB in the league? Heck, he was still under contract for 2016 and would only have been an RFA in 2017, so they could have hung onto him for two more seasons for practically nothing.

Yet a team that constantly cries poverty instead gave him $7.5 million so he could spend 80% of the game on the bench.

I just can't make any sense of it.

What is making sense anymore with this team? Everything has changed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, cincyhokie said:

Right.  That's on Zampese.  He doesn't know how to use him apparently.

Clearly true. I guess my mystification is aimed more at the front office and Marvin. We know Marvin operates on a budget, we know the FO doesn't pay anyone unless they absolutely have to and we know that players who do get paid, play, even when better options at their position are available. This has all been true in Cincinnati since forever. So was there not a conversation along these lines in, oh, July:

Marvin: Hey, Ken, there's a little left in the player budget this year. I'm looking at the roster and Hewitt is still on his rookie deal. Do you see him as an important piece of your offense going forward? If so I'd like to lock him up now because he'll only get more expensive. If not, we'll just figure on giving him the lowest tender next season and maybe draft a new fullback in 2018.

Ken: Oh definitely, he'll be a big part of the the offense! Or alternatively: With all these double TE sets and three wides and Gio to catch out of the backfield there's not a lot of space for Ryan on the field.

So did that not happen? Did it happen and then Zampese changed his mind? Did the FO freelance on this extension because Hewitt has naked pics of Katie or something? I don't expect that anyone has an actual answer. Just expressing my bafflement as to how this came to pass. It's just totally unlike the Bengals to pay a guy to sit on the bench.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, StripesInSuffolk said:

They could use him in pass protection too.  With Hill injured his utility might be even lower though.

Great point. The whole thing looks like a cluster. It's baffling but one thing not mentioned in the team's use all of the cap. Maybe that plays a role. Heck, if they just need to flush cash, I can forward my phone #. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, HoosierCat said:

Clearly true. I guess my mystification is aimed more at the front office and Marvin. We know Marvin operates on a budget, we know the FO doesn't pay anyone unless they absolutely have to and we know that players who do get paid, play, even when better options at their position are available. This has all been true in Cincinnati since forever. So was there not a conversation along these lines in, oh, July:

Marvin: Hey, Ken, there's a little left in the player budget this year. I'm looking at the roster and Hewitt is still on his rookie deal. Do you see him as an important piece of your offense going forward? If so I'd like to lock him up now because he'll only get more expensive. If not, we'll just figure on giving him the lowest tender next season and maybe draft a new fullback in 2018.

Ken: Oh definitely, he'll be a big part of the the offense! Or alternatively: With all these double TE sets and three wides and Gio to catch out of the backfield there's not a lot of space for Ryan on the field.

So did that not happen? Did it happen and then Zampese changed his mind? Did the FO freelance on this extension because Hewitt has naked pics of Katie or something? I don't expect that anyone has an actual answer. Just expressing my bafflement as to how this came to pass. It's just totally unlike the Bengals to pay a guy to sit on the bench.

It is bizarre.  Makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drunk man get pissed at wife, tries to take weedeater to her roses, but he's so hammered he staggers into the hedge and gouges the shit out of it instead, then falls to his knees and barfs on himself, the weedeater still sputtering on the ground beside him.  He's so pissed he destroyed the hedge that he throws the running weedeater onto the driveway.  It causes a spark and catches fire.  It's a small fire, only the weedeater burns.  The man falls forward and passes out in his vomit, the weedeater sort of half melts itself to the driveway.  That's our whole football operation right now.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CJ explores Hewitt's absence. Their conclusion? It's Ced's fault (and maybe some of Zeitler and Bodine's, too). The theory is that the oline is playing so poorly that they need an extra TE to block or extra WR to spread out the D. Putting Hewitt in would only bring another guy into the box for the line to deal with.

That's certainly a reasonable answer. And it dovetails into a couple of other subjects in other threads like Bodine and Ced and what's wrong with the anemic offense in general. Bodine looks better this year, yes, but that's at least in part because they aren't asking him to do much more than block his guy. So you trade offensive flexibility for better C play. Now your RT blows goats, so you trade further offensive flexibility (Hewitt) to shore up the line. Sigh...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...