Curnutte Calls BS on Bengals FA Efforts

[HoosierCat]

The problem is the guys they are bringing in through the draft on defense, aren't making the impact we thought they would.

There are no starters on the defensive line that Marvin has drafted -- Geathers was often in after Robinson started. There's been two corners drafted that can't start over POS O'Neal and the legendary Tory James unless it's injury or character related.

What's the count of Marvin draftees that start?

Landon, M.Williams, Geathers (he'll start now with the bling he's making)??? Odell and Pollack could be out all next year. Hummmmm....

MY POINT isn't what Marvin is drafting. Just that the draft isn't close to being a reliable way to building a team.

Yeah, the Bengals have had bad luck drafting defensively, haven't they? Well, since it seems likely they'll lean heavily that way this April, let's hope they break the curse, eh?

[Stripes]

The Bengals last possible "Dynasty" was ended by free agency, or actually the lack of the Bengals activity into free agency. After the Bengals 1989 Super Bowl trip, the NFL started "free agency," and this is where the dismantling began. Bengal's fans watched player after player leave as other teams threw money at what was the foundation of the Bengals team. Paul and Mike Brown refused to spend money in free agency and so the "decade of woe" began. Imagine if the Bengals would have been a player in free agency from the get go, maybe the decade we all wish to forget now, would have never had hapened, and instead a decade that included multiple trips to the Super Bowl would have replaced it.

Either that, or we could have refrained from drafting the likes of David Klinger, Dan Wilkinson, Ki-Jana Carter, and Akili Smith.

[HairOnFire]

The Bengals last possible "Dynasty" was ended by free agency, or actually the lack of the Bengals activity into free agency. After the Bengals 1989 Super Bowl trip, the NFL started "free agency," and this is where the dismantling began. Bengal's fans watched player after player leave as other teams threw money at what was the foundation of the Bengals team. Paul and Mike Brown refused to spend money in free agency and so the "decade of woe" began.

Instead of still being pissed off about 1989...why not come to grips with the fact that the Bengals have since adopted a free agent strategy that emphasizes re-signing their own core players, thereby preventing other teams from chipping away at the foundation.

You're flawless logic and reasoning have no place on a Bengals fan site.

I wouldn't go that far. I think FattyJay proved he belonged by wrapping his thoughts around a Kenny Rogers lyric.

That's good eating.

[Whur CHad At?]

Sam Adams was not the No. 1 DT available. In fact, no one wanted him except us.

It is arguable, but who else was there? Grady Jackson? Kemoatu?

Rocky Bernard was the clear No. 1 -- and the deal he ended up signing was under $5m/year. Keo was also on the list. There were others whose names escape me at the moment but Adams' wasn't on anyone's list that I saw. Sam drew virtually no interest.

Actually I believe Miami was close to signing him before we were

[Kirkendall]

I don't mean to sound argumentative

Nah, please do. I will always pick a fight -- as long as I think I can win.

Good teams seem to have consistent success in drafting well

I partly agree. But not completely.

Let's examine the "good" drafting teams that draft somewhere past the 20th position. At that point, you're not picking the best available player... you're picking the guy that you can plug in for a departing player or a project. In other words, you're resupplying your team's depth.

If you examine the "bad" drafting teams. They are usually the one's that draft early because they suck really really bad. For example, the Lions always drafted early picking guys that had incredible talent but showed little, if any, net results. (crap shoot).

In other words, the good don't depend on a great pick while the bad can't afford not picking up the best. I hope that makes some sense. If you build your foundation and win every season, the draft isn't as critical. If you don't build the foundation and draft guys that don't pan out after three years, you're resupplying that position making other positions piss poor -- or unattended at least.

Marvin has placed heavy emphasis on linebackers and defensive backs, and he has done a pretty good job in that regard IMO

I think the potential is there. But honestly, right now going into 2007, our defense is in desperate need of an overhaul. Dexter Jackson, Brian Simmons, Tory James (FA), Bryan Robinson, John Thornton and Sam Adams ain't getting younger. Deltha O'Neal is all about himself and wouldn't mind if we ditch his selfish ass.

In four drafts, this defense has M.Williams, Landon, JJ, and Geathers as their young foundation. These are talented guys, no doubt. But in four years, we've picked up four starters (with only Williams as the constant starter), to me, its a bad ratio.

Of course things like Thurman and Pollack are just things you can't account. They are the unexpected that happens in all walks of life. And likely, if the world was different and both started all year, then we'd be in a different boat. But we're not. We're in the same boat as we were last season.

Do NOT get me wrong. I don't blame Lewis for his defensive picks. Hell, I really don't blame anyone -- blame solves nothing. However, those are the facts.

Now, here's THE question. We need guys like A.J. Nicholson, Ahmad Brooks, Peko, and Rucker to step up and not only make a contribution... but make a difference. Hey, it could happen. But if the word "if" were gold, then all Bengals fans would be millionaires.

Yeah, the Bengals have had bad luck drafting defensively, haven't they? Well, since it seems likely they'll lean heavily that way this April, let's hope they break the curse, eh?

That's exactly what is it. Bad luck. Admittedly though, we may see our 2006 draftees this season with kickass results. A.J., Peko, Brooks, Rucker... they could be super-studs. Or more bad luck.

[HoosierCat]

In other words, the good don't depend on a great pick while the bad can't afford not picking up the best. I hope that makes some sense. If you build your foundation and win every season, the draft isn't as critical. If you don't build the foundation and draft guys that don't pan out after three years, you're resupplying that position making other positions piss poor -- or unattended at least.

Yup, yup and yup. Truer words were ne'er spoken and all that.

[Stripes]

Let's examine the "good" drafting teams that draft somewhere past the 20th position. At that point, you're not picking the best available player... you're picking the guy that you can plug in for a departing player or a project. In other words, you're resupplying your team's depth.

If you examine the "bad" drafting teams. They are usually the one's that draft early because they suck really really bad. For example, the Lions always drafted early picking guys that had incredible talent but showed little, if any, net results. (crap shoot).

In other words, the good don't depend on a great pick while the bad can't afford not picking up the best. I hope that makes some sense. If you build your foundation and win every season, the draft isn't as critical. If you don't build the foundation and draft guys that don't pan out after three years, you're resupplying that position making other positions piss poor -- or unattended at least.

I agree with all of this, and it more or less is what I was getting at myself. Good teams have it easier on draft day because they're already good teams. Bad teams have to take more chances, and naturally their ability to improve is somewhat resticted. That leaves the middle teams, like the Bengals, to do a little of both. We've drafted for depth with Chris Perry, sought larger impact players like David Pollack, and taken risks to get over the top with guys like Odell Thurman or Chris Henry.

Hell, I really don't blame anyone -- blame solves nothing. However, those are the facts.

Er, in that case we agree completely.

The Bengals have hit some and they've missed some, but they're still in good shape with plenty of potential to continue improving as they have been all along under Marvin's reign.

[Sportsdoc]

Sam Adams was not the No. 1 DT available. In fact, no one wanted him except us.

It is arguable, but who else was there? Grady Jackson? Kemoatu?

Rocky Bernard was the clear No. 1 -- and the deal he ended up signing was under $5m/year. Keo was also on the list. There were others whose names escape me at the moment but Adams' wasn't on anyone's list that I saw. Sam drew virtually no interest.

Dexter you're right about, he was generally ranked second behind Archuletta, but again it was clearly a money thing. When Archuletta's asking price went above the X the Bengals had pencilled in they abandoned him and switched to Dexter.

Dex is much better than Archie... Archie has hit too many people helmet to helmet.... I saw him a couple of time in DC in the fall... he was a shadow of himself compared to his rookie year

[maanster]

someone mentioned the ravens and their super bowl team. they brought in rod woodson and sam adams (he was younger and a top free agent) and mixed them in with the drafted guys. we need to do the same.

we have four to five difference makers on offense, can you name one on defense. with the thurman and pollack situations setting us back. this is the year to be aggressive.

[CantStop85]

Either that, or we could have refrained from drafting the likes of David Klinger, Dan Wilkinson, Ki-Jana Carter, and Akili Smith.

Or we could get more than one scout...you know...like the other 31 teams in the NFL.

[ThortonMelon]

Dexter you're right about, he was generally ranked second behind Archuletta, but again it was clearly a money thing. When Archuletta's asking price went above the X the Bengals had pencilled in they abandoned him and switched to Dexter.

You forgot to mention that Archuletta, like 90% of high-priced FAs, was a complete bust this year for the Skins that will probably be cut.

[hayburmill]

QUOTE(TDB @ Jan 30 2007, 04:55 PM)

Either that, or we could have refrained from drafting the likes of David Klinger, Dan Wilkinson, Ki-Jana Carter, and Akili Smith.

Or we could get more than one scout...you know...like the other 31 teams in the NFL.

I think all scouts had these guys rated pretty high.

I think the Bengals have better coaching than they have had in times past and a more talented roster than they have had in a long time ----- but for crying out loud can we get any of our defensive picks on the field.

Do you really think the plan was to have our starting LB corps to be what it was?

[jditty47]

id take briggs in a heartbeat. if we let justin smith go as a casualty or steinbach, so be it.

[Spain]

This is Spin, for years no one wanted to come here. I myslelf would like to see an experienced center. Ar keep bach and play him at center.

[Stripes]

This is Spin, for years no one wanted to come here. I myslelf would like to see an experienced center. Ar keep bach and play him at center.

Ghiaciuc improved a lot over the latter half of the season, and Wilkerson is still sitting right behind him. I don't think we need to pursue a center through FA or the draft.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

The 0-line will need help.

But as for defense - the Bengals' mantra has been to keep and over-pay their own crappy/average starters, and wait for the market to come to them, and end up signing sloths after all the good players are aggressively scooped up by winning teams.

If they re-sign Justin Smith I'll puke in my mouth.

Take that money and get the best defensive FA you can.

The defense has been ranked near the bottom every year Smith has been here, they won't miss him.

[Stripes]

But as for defense - the Bengals' mantra has been to keep and over-pay their own crappy/average starters, and wait for the market to come to them, and end up signing sloths after all the good players are aggressively scooped up by winning teams.

Those Redskins sure went far with Adam Archuleta. Don't forget the impact Grady Jackson had on that Atlanta defense. Kemoatu was a demon with those playoff bound Panthers.

Winning teams don't waste their money on this crap.

[HoosierCat]

You forgot to mention that Archuletta, like 90% of high-priced FAs, was a complete bust this year for the Skins that will probably be cut.

And he was a bust why? Hmmm...oh yeah, the Redskins sign a guy whose strength is being a hard-hitting, run-stuffing type of safety...and put him in coverage! And then bench him when he can't do something he wasn't signed to do. Well, if Snyder wants to throw away his coin that's fine by me, but Archuletta's struggles in DC aren't his fault.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

The 0-line will need help.

But as for defense - the Bengals' mantra has been to keep and over-pay their own crappy/average starters, and wait for the market to come to them, and end up signing sloths after all the good players are aggressively scooped up by winning teams.

If they re-sign Justin Smith I'll puke in my mouth.

Take that money and get the best defensive FA you can.

The defense has been ranked near the bottom every year Smith has been here, they won't miss him.

You mean like Denver signing Lynch and trading for Champ? Or the Colts signing Vinateri and trading for McFarland? The Pats signing Dillon, Harrison and Seau? The Ravens signing McNair and Mason (or Siragusa and Adams during their SB year)? The Giants signing Burress? (and Arrington was a good signing for them that didn't work out only because of injury)

Last I checked all those teams were in the playoffs this year and the Bengals' weren't. Of course you have to pay for someone who's worth it - and I think they can do just that with $ they'd otherwise spend on Smith.

Might be different if they could draft and scheme like Chicago on defense.

[ThortonMelon]

You forgot to mention that Archuletta, like 90% of high-priced FAs, was a complete bust this year for the Skins that will probably be cut.

And he was a bust why? Hmmm...oh yeah, the Redskins sign a guy whose strength is being a hard-hitting, run-stuffing type of safety...and put him in coverage! And then bench him when he can't do something he wasn't signed to do. Well, if Snyder wants to throw away his coin that's fine by me, but Archuletta's struggles in DC aren't his fault.

Safeties are required to cover. If he cant cover then he shouldnt be playing safety.

[HoosierCat]

You forgot to mention that Archuletta, like 90% of high-priced FAs, was a complete bust this year for the Skins that will probably be cut.

And he was a bust why? Hmmm...oh yeah, the Redskins sign a guy whose strength is being a hard-hitting, run-stuffing type of safety...and put him in coverage! And then bench him when he can't do something he wasn't signed to do. Well, if Snyder wants to throw away his coin that's fine by me, but Archuletta's struggles in DC aren't his fault.

Safeties are required to cover. If he cant cover then he shouldnt be playing safety.

Maybe not. But that's beside the point. If you sign a player who has strength X and weakness Y, presumably you are signing him bcause of X, right? And then if you turn around and ask him to do Y, the result is going to be pretty predictable.

[Sox]

But as for defense - the Bengals' mantra has been to keep and over-pay their own crappy/average starters, and wait for the market to come to them, and end up signing sloths after all the good players are aggressively scooped up by winning teams.

Those Redskins sure went far with Adam Archuleta. Don't forget the impact Grady Jackson had on that Atlanta defense. Kemoatu was a demon with those playoff bound Panthers.

Winning teams don't waste their money on this crap.

You mean like Baltimore did with Trevor Pryce?

Like Indianapolis did with Vinatieri?

Like the Jets did with Kimo?

Like San Diego did with Marlon McCree?

Like New Orleans did with Drew Brees?

Like Philadelphia did with Darren Howard?

Like Seattle did with Nate Burleson and Julian Peterson?

[HairOnFire]

If they re-sign Justin Smith I'll puke in my mouth.

That might be worth seeing. Or better yet, I'd love to see the Bengals replace Smith by drafting a bigger version, Adam Carriker.

Long live the bull rush.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

Noooooooo

But if they're dead set on a Justin Smith clone, I guess a cheaper version is better, if they use the savings wisely.

[HoosierCat]

... if they use the savings wisely.

And therein lies the crux of the matter. If they let Smith walk, and subsequently sign a stud player at a position of need, great. OTOH, if they let him go, putter around in FA as usual, and then end up trying to fill holes with rooks and bargain-bin FAs...well, hell, I'd rather see them "overpay" for Smith (or Steinbach).

If I had to make a bet, Shula, I'd say the chances of you throwing up in your mouth are pretty good. Unless they're prepared to abandon their long-standing approach to FA and play by the same rules everyone else does -- with all the funny money and backloaded deals and easy incentives and everything else -- Smith is probably the "best" FA they have a shot at, since he's the one they can tag and thus retain a right to match.

I think the Bengals probably make Justin a big "final" offer at the end of Feb., just before FA starts. Justin demurs politely, he wants to test the market; the Bengals leave the offer on the table, and probably stick the transition tag on him. FA starts, Justin visits some teams, and finds nothing that blows what Cincy is offering out of the water, and circles back to PBS. The aforementioned "final" offer gets a tweak or two...and we get to read Hobson's annual "this deal means they're done in FA" story.