“Grass definitely is greener” away from Cincinnati

[agreen_112]

Uhhh, what's one of those other needs you're taliing about? Adding another WR, right? And that's just the point because Washington produced as a WR and as a special teams player whenever he was given a chance. And not only wasn't he given much of a chance, largely because the Bengals wanted a player with Chris Henry's big play ability, but they used Washington's so-called inability to play special teams as justification for inactivating him nearly every game.

He didn't produce as a WR. He sucked as a WR. He couldn't even take the job when Henry was out. He dropped balls. He shied away from physical contact in the endzone. He had no idea how to use his body to shield defenders from the ball.

Lost in the recent KW love-fest, and claims that the Patsies found him as a diamond in the rough, is still the fact that he caught exactly 0 passes this year.

I think this sort of thread is coming from the recent Chad flake-out. But I think people have forgotten how bad a receiver KW was.

Sadly, I bet I could get you to agree with the things I'm saying if I blamed Mike Brown for the failure instead of Marvin Lewis.

If you told me that Mike Brown made the decision to cut KW I might reconsider my notion that he lacks any personnel evaluation skill.

There's no doubt that KW made a couple of plays on ST this year for the Patsies. The question is whether it's worth keeping a guy who has no hope of playing his presumed position (WR) and doesn't play a skill ST position (like KR or PR). If you're dressing him, it's solely as a kick coverage guy who can do nothing else capably. Is that worth it? Apparently, since that's how Belichick uses him. I don't think the Bengals could do that given their injury rates - they'd probably need that spot for a LB.

On this team, when KW was cut I still think we had more than enough receivers that he wasn't looking to dress. I'll take Chad, TJ, Henry, and Glen Holt over him any day. We were still counting on Tab at that point too. That means KW is, at best, 5th receiver, maybe 6th. Or put it this way - we had to cut a WR at that point to get to roster size. Who do you cut instead?

I'm not saying the coaching staff didn't make some head scratching moves. I don't remember them claiming that KW couldn't play special teams (I probably wouldn't have heard about it, or much cared), but I'll take your word for it. And I agree with Hoosier that it's nothing short of a mystery why they won't let Glen Holt play receiver.

But again, cutting KW isn't even on the top 100 list of things wrong with this team.

I'm sorry but on a WINNING team, there's a lot of pride... If you block a punt and return it for a TD, I think that would be enough to earn a spot on that squad. He may have only played ST's and caught 0 balls, but the Pats don't necessarily need another WR, they have a few good ones... Basically, I think the point that Hair is trying to make is that the Bengals desperately need a GM.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

I'm sorry but on a WINNING team, there's a lot of pride... If you block a punt and return it for a TD, I think that would be enough to earn a spot on that squad. He may have only played ST's and caught 0 balls, but the Pats don't necessarily need another WR, they have a few good ones... Basically, I think the point that Hair is trying to make is that the Bengals desperately need a GM.

That's funny, because I'm pretty sure that above all things Hair is most certainly not making that point. *I've* made that point and argued it with Hair.

In any event, you're right, the Patriots are lucky enough to have a roster spot for a pure special teams coverage guy. We don't.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

Oh, and I would love to see how great the Patriots would have

been if Brady wouldn`t have panned out . . .

And yet the Bengals' have a top 5 Qb and #1 over-all pick that just about any team in the NFL would want starting for them, outside of New England and Indy, and they can only manage one winning season in 5 years.

That's what really upsets me right now, there's really no excuse for not winning more often then they have, injuries or not, for at least 3-4 of those years he's been here.

There's always an excuse here.

[COB]

That's what really upsets me right now, there's really no excuse for not winning more often then they have, injuries or not, for at least 3-4 of those years he's been here.

42-38 for Marvin's five years. 7-3 vs the Ravens and 7-3 vs the Browns under Marvin. You're right, this nightmarish losing has to stop.

Having said that, and painful as it may be, I have to agree they should have won more in 3 of those years. And the injuries are one factor, but they aren't the cause.

The cause is that the team-first ethos required for winning football is destroyed by a few malcontent pu**ies who can't see past their own stats and glory. Look at what happened to the Giants when Shockey went down. One disruptive force, especially when it's strong personality like Shockey, can absolutely wreck a team.

Marvin has tried to turn it around. But in my opinion he's been blocked by Mike Brown's bizarre desire to hang on to his favorite player. This offseason will be the test. Pro football isn't a contest between contract lawyers. It's not Katie and Mike versus Rosenhaus and Upshaw. It's the Bengals versus whoever they're playing. The stubborn battle of wills regarding contracts should be subordinate to the overall goal - what will put the best TEAM on the field.

I keep claiming Mike Brown has learned and evolved. That he's making better decisions. How he handles this Chad Johnson issue is the acid test. Sit tight, and make 85 either retire or, worse, show up at camp next year so he can poison the whole season just to show that By God, You Sign a Contract and We'll Make You Stick To It, and Shula, you will be proven right.

But if he recognizes that this team would be better off without 85, and then does something about it, (even though he'll appear to have caved to a player and he'll have to take a cap hit), then I'll stop being a Mike Brown apologist, because then Mike Brown won't have anything to apologize for.

Rant/Thread Hijack Over.

[HairOnFire]

He didn't produce as a WR. He sucked as a WR.

He didn't suck as a wideout when given a chance. His production as a rookie was very good, better than most of the players drafted ahead of him, but it was never built upon. Instead, the Bengals went back to the well again and again and again....always searching for a 3rd WR who could provide more big play bang than Washington. Or perhaps they felt they had to have a WR who could also be a kick returner. Well, how did those plans turn out?

He couldn't even take the job when Henry was out.

He couldn't take the job because the Bengals were always determined to give it to Henry or Perry whenver they were available. But Washington did produce when given a chance. He produced more than 80 yards in one game that Henry was out...yet the following week had exactly one ball thrown his way. When Marvin sat Henry down against Detroit K-Dub cashed in yet again. And if you don't think the Bengals could have used Washington's services this season when Henry sat out the first 8 games then you're sniffin' glue. But sadly, the Bengals had exhausted their ability to keep Washington for emergencies, but not use him. So instead, they turned one last time to all of the options they liked better than Washington at the 3rd and 4th WR spots. Antonio Chatman. Tab Perry. Benny Brazell. Reggie McNeal. Glenn Holt.

Isn't it amazing how little return a team can get out of a whole buttload of return specialists?

Lost in the recent KW love-fest, and claims that the Patsies found him as a diamond in the rough, is still the fact that he caught exactly 0 passes this year.

It's not a love-fest. Scroll back into the archives and you can find posts where I predicted Washington wouldn't make New Englands roster due to their outstanding depth at WR. But that's just the point, as the Bengals don't have that kind of WR depth, and Washington would have been far more valuable as a wideout for the Bengals than he was for the Patriots.

There's no doubt that KW made a couple of plays on ST this year for the Patsies. The question is whether it's worth keeping a guy who has no hope of playing his presumed position (WR) and doesn't play a skill ST position (like KR or PR). If you're dressing him, it's solely as a kick coverage guy who can do nothing else capably. Is that worth it? Apparently, since that's how Belichick uses him.

And that touches on the other point I'm making. The Bengals actually do keep players on their roster who play no role whatsover other than special teams, as all teams do. However, it's become painfully clear that they misjudged Washington's ability to play special teams, and had they not he would have been activated more often and contributed more as a wideout. Instead, they not only wasted his talent by not playing him at all, but compounded their error by doing everything they could to hold onto him as long as possible.

And I agree with Hoosier that it's nothing short of a mystery why they won't let Glen Holt play receiver.

Where's the mystery? Isn't it obvious that the Bengals don't consider Holt to be a viable WR and will consider him in that role only in an emergency? Isn't it obvious that Holt earns a roster spot almost soley because of his value as a KR? And isn't it just as obvious that a year or so from now, maybe less, you'll be writing a post very much like the one I'm writing now...differing only in the names used?

[BengalByTheBay]

There's no doubt that KW made a couple of plays on ST this year for the Patsies. The question is whether it's worth keeping a guy who has no hope of playing his presumed position (WR) and doesn't play a skill ST position (like KR or PR). If you're dressing him, it's solely as a kick coverage guy who can do nothing else capably. Is that worth it? Apparently, since that's how Belichick uses him.

And that touches on the other point I'm making. The Bengals actually do keep players on their roster who play no role whatsover other than special teams, as all teams do. However, it's become painfully clear that they misjudged Washington's ability to play special teams, and had they not he would have been activated more often and contributed more as a wideout. Instead, they not only wasted his talent by not playing him at all, but compounded their error by doing everything they could to hold onto him as long as possible.

It's true that the Bengals do carry a couple of ST only players. While it is interesting that KWash went to the Pats and became a successful ST player, I suppose my thought is that he accepted that was the only way to stay on a team that was predicted from the beginning of the year to win the SuperBowl. He may be a lot of things, but he's apparently not stupid. I recall many indications that KWash was not a particularly willing ST player when he was in Cincy. Whether that is because the coaches thought he couldn't do it, or whether it was because he didn't want to do it and, thus, didn't put much effort into it is a question that I certainly can't answer and I have my doubts anyone here has substantially more insight into it than me. That said, he's clearly motivated now to keep his spot and make his employer happy in a far-reduced role than he had here. Certainly, Tab Perry was probably preferred over KWash for his ability to play teams, on both sides, and fill a reserve WR role. That the coaches can now be held responsible that Tab Perry got hurt and KWash didn't seems a trifle disingenuous now. I always thought that the Squirrel gave pretty good bang-for-the-buck when he was active. His TD to catch ratio was pretty high, but there was a pretty small sample size. I don't think he was popular with the coaches - for whatever reason - and that probably did play against him here. I remain somewhat cynical, however, that KWash was somehow the good-guy, team player that he would suggest in his comments about Bengals team disfunction. I think he was out for himself just as much as anybody else. That the Pat's get players to sacrifice and keep quiet is as much a reflection of the demonstrated ability of the team to win SuperBowls as it is any proof that the "Patriot way" is so much superior. They are, much like USC, benefiting from their past success and it puts them in a position to get players like Randy Moss who (despite his supposed, current good citizenry) is one season removed from being TO. It doesn't take a genius (ala CD) to shut his mouth for a season (especially one in which your team is winning every, or almost every, game) for the fairly sizeable chance at getting a ring.

As a result, I can offer you -- Kelly Washington, SuperBowl winner.

[HairOnFire]

Certainly, Tab Perry was probably preferred over KWash for his ability to play teams, on both sides, and fill a reserve WR role. That the coaches can now be held responsible that Tab Perry got hurt and KWash didn't seems a trifle disingenuous now.

You might have a point if I had only said these things in hindsight, but that's not true at all. I've been saying them all along, and even went so far as to expess dismay that the Bengals were only able to secure a one-year contract when Washington was a RFA. Simply put, I thought then and still believe he was a far better option as the 3rd, 4th, or even last WR off the bench than the players the Bengals preferred to activate. And again, if they had kept him instead of wasting time with the Bennie Brazell's and Reggie McNeal's of the world they may have gotten better production from the 3rd WR slot last season.

[HairOnFire]

I always thought that the Squirrel gave pretty good bang-for-the-buck when he was active. His TD to catch ratio was pretty high, but there was a pretty small sample size.

The sample size was small because of a coaches decision....which is exactly what I'm calling into question.

I remain somewhat cynical, however, that KWash was somehow the good-guy, team player that he would suggest in his comments about Bengals team disfunction. I think he was out for himself just as much as anybody else.

I haven't bothered commenting on his thoughts about the Bengals or the Patriots. Only how his time as a Bengal was essentially wasted...in large part because of coaching decisions that always seemed dubious at best. For those who question his ability as WR I say look at his rookie production because that was the only time he was given a fair chance to show what he can do. And for those who still cling to the now discredited explanation that he couldn't play special teams, and thus couldn't be activated over more complete players, well.....good luck with that.

[BengalByTheBay]

Certainly, Tab Perry was probably preferred over KWash for his ability to play teams, on both sides, and fill a reserve WR role. That the coaches can now be held responsible that Tab Perry got hurt and KWash didn't seems a trifle disingenuous now.

You might have a point if I had only said these things in hindsight, but that's not true at all. I've been saying them all along, and even went so far as to expess dismay that the Bengals were only able to secure a one-year contract when Washington was a RFA. Simply put, I thought then and still believe he was a far better option as the 3rd, 4th, or even last WR off the bench than the players the Bengals preferred to activate. And again, if they had kept him instead of wasting time with the Bennie Brazell's and Reggie McNeal's of the world they may have gotten better production from the 3rd WR slot last season.

I don't recall you suggesting that between Perry and Washington, they should've kept Washington. Nonetheless, I don't disagree with the premise that they had no pressing need to cut KW when they did. I also tend to agree that they were overly-enamored with the Brazell and McNeal experiments -- maybe even to the point of thinking that cutting KW made sense because of the existence of these two (and Chatman, Green....) on the roster. Not that there is anything necessarily wrong with carrying an experiment, but it should not have taken a roster spot from a guy who had proven that he could catch TD's in a regular game. In short, I was surprised when KW was cut. As for sample size, sure that was the coaches decision. But that decision isn't wrong based on what he's done with the Pat's because that is all at ST's. It was wrong because the guys the coaches wanted to push ahead of him couldn't get it done or, as in Perry's case, got hurt, or both.

Just on the issue of his ST's play, however, I still believe that he was unmotivated to do it here because he probably thought (with some justification) that it might take away from his chances to catch the ball. Am I right? I don't know. But I definitely recall that he had some resistence to it here. That resistence melted when it was between playing for a SuperBowl and getting a real job.

[HoosierCat]

I believe that Kwash wasn't cut, but rather was a UFA they chose not to re-sign. That decision was accompanied by the usual rumors that Kwash had attitude problems, was a source of dissention in the locker room, was a possible candidate for the player who leaked the "Chad's halftime fight" story, etc. In other words, the usual. I agree that the Bengals seemed to glom onto Brazell, McNeal, Chatman, Perry, yadda yadda yadda, far too quickly, and seemed all too eager to throw Kwash under the bus.

The bottom line for me is that both the Kwash story and current Chad saga seem all too damn familiar, and I'm surprised more people aren't growing tired of it.

[BengalByTheBay]

I believe that Kwash wasn't cut, but rather was a UFA they chose not to re-sign. That decision was accompanied by the usual rumors that Kwash had attitude problems, was a source of dissention in the locker room, was a possible candidate for the player who leaked the "Chad's halftime fight" story, etc. In other words, the usual. I agree that the Bengals seemed to glom onto Brazell, McNeal, Chatman, Perry, yadda yadda yadda, far too quickly, and seemed all too eager to throw Kwash under the bus.

The bottom line for me is that both the Kwash story and current Chad saga seem all too damn familiar, and I'm surprised more people aren't growing tired of it.

My bad -- you're correct that he wasn't actually cut. I'm guessing that Bengals fans are tired of the "Chad saga" and non-Bengal fans are simply amused by it. I know KW was unpopular here because of the ridiculous first down theatrics, but he always seemed a capable and productive receiver to me, making it all the more likely that the coaching staff had problems with him.

[HairOnFire]

I don't recall you suggesting that between Perry and Washington, they should've kept Washington. Nonetheless, I don't disagree with the premise that they had no pressing need to cut KW when they did.

I won't bust your chops on this one because I read forward and saw where Hoosier already corrected you about Washington being cut.

I also tend to agree that they were overly-enamored with the Brazell and McNeal experiments --

And Tab Perry. We all saw his potential but the fact of the matter is Perry's career receiving stats look like one good day for an average wideout. Something like 10 catches, 100 yards, and one lone TD. But with Henry assuming the role of 3rd WR and Tab being granted the 4th spot Washington was essentially buried and forgotten after the '04 season. And he stayed buried for the next two seasons...including the last one that saw them keep him as a RFA but deactivate him in 11 or 12 games.

As for sample size, sure that was the coaches decision. But that decision isn't wrong based on what he's done with the Pat's because that is all at ST's. It was wrong because the guys the coaches wanted to push ahead of him couldn't get it done or, as in Perry's case, got hurt, or both.

Tab Perry, healthy or not, was never going to score a TD every seventh or eight ball caught. And that's what Washington was doing before the Bengals pulled the rug out from under him after the '04 season.

[HoosierCat]

FWIW, I think there are 2 issues here.

One relates to the question of the Bengals coaching staff and whether they can be trusted to develop players. Whether you think, as I do, that they need more scouts so coaches can concentrate on coaching, or as Hair does, that they need more coaches is, on a practical level, immaterial. Clearly, some help is needed so that players who can contribute don't slip through the net as often as they have.

Second, as related specifically to the WR position, perhaps we should not be so quick to dump Chad Johnson over the side. The team has not shown any ability whatsoever to find or develop WRs. Our two top wideouts, TJ and Chad, both predate Marvin, and the one guy he has drafted who showed promise, Henry, has turned out to be a character disaster. I don't think anyone (even folks like myself and membengal who have harped on the need to draft WR) is anxious to spend a high pick on the position in the upcoming draft.

[Horsemen]

One relates to the question of the Bengals coaching staff and whether they can be trusted to develop players.

Easy, they can't. At least not with the current system. It's time to experiment.

Whether you think, as I do, that they need more scouts so coaches can concentrate on coaching, or as Hair does, that they need more coaches is, on a practical level, immaterial.

Both. Get more scouts and a captain steering the ship. If that doesn't work, get more coaches. If that doesn't work, blow the whole thing up and start from HC on down to practice squad and rebuild.

Clearly, some help is needed so that players who can contribute don't slip through the net as often as they have.

Indeed. Hell yeah, actually. It's a must. Kinda makes me personally at least doubletake on getting rid of anyone just yet. If they go somewhere better coached/ran and turn out good our loss obviously.

Second, as related specifically to the WR position, perhaps we should not be so quick to dump Chad Johnson over the side. The team has not shown any ability whatsoever to find or develop WRs.

This is true and concerns me as well.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

FWIW, I think there are 2 issues here.

One relates to the question of the Bengals coaching staff and whether they can be trusted to develop players. Whether you think, as I do, that they need more scouts so coaches can concentrate on coaching, or as Hair does, that they need more coaches is, on a practical level, immaterial. Clearly, some help is needed so that players who can contribute don't slip through the net as often as they have.

Second, as related specifically to the WR position, perhaps we should not be so quick to dump Chad Johnson over the side. The team has not shown any ability whatsoever to find or develop WRs. Our two top wideouts, TJ and Chad, both predate Marvin, and the one guy he has drafted who showed promise, Henry, has turned out to be a character disaster. I don't think anyone (even folks like myself and membengal who have harped on the need to draft WR) is anxious to spend a high pick on the position in the upcoming draft.

Yeah but who have they really drafted at WR since ole Marv has been here? One 3rd round pick in Henry as you mentioned, a couple 7th rounders and Chatman? And I would say they did a good job with Henry when he was actually able to play. He's still a pretty amazing talent, just doesn't have the brains to be a #1 guy.

It looks like letting both Walter and Squirrel go was a bad idea, should've kept one. No one mentions Walter's #'s in Houston this year, pretty impressive for a guy who would've been a very solid #3 here all season. Instead they relied on a guy who missed most of last season with an injury. Same with MLB and RT. Cheap.

But now the Bengals' are low balling their punter and making a #4 QB priorities, so, you know, this is how it goes with the Bengals. Instead of biting the bullet and signing promising, younger players, they hold onto Justin Smith's and broken down Willie Anderson, because they fall into their "money position categories."

It's all about efficiency and value.. And yes they need more scouts and personnel people outside of their little mafia operation.

[HoosierCat]

Yeah but who have they really drafted at WR since ole Marv has been here? One 3rd round pick in Henry as you mentioned, a couple 7th rounders and Chatman? And I would say they did a good job with Henry when he was actually able to play. He's still a pretty amazing talent, just doesn't have the brains to be a #1 guy.

Well, the Bengals have spent two 3rds (Henry, Kwash), a 5th (Mann) two 6ths (Tab, McNeal) and a 7th (Brazell) on wideout in the Marvin era. That's not an insubstantial amount of picks. And all they have to show for it is Henry.

[HairOnFire]

Yeah but who have they really drafted at WR since ole Marv has been here? One 3rd round pick in Henry as you mentioned, a couple 7th rounders and Chatman?

Oddly, you're forgetting the player whose at the core of this thread. But just like in the recent "can they draft" thread...IMHO it's not a matter of finding talent as Washington could very easily have been a 40 catch 500 yard 5 TD a year player if properly developed, Henry has even more potential than that, and Tab Perry flashed a little something something. Yet for numerous reasons, including many I've already mentioned, the position is almost as unsettled now as it was prior to Washington being drafted, and once again may need to be addressed on draft day.

It looks like letting both Walter and Squirrel go was a bad idea, should've kept one. No one mentions Walter's #'s in Houston this year, pretty impressive for a guy who would've been a very solid #3 here all season.

The Walter example is just more proof that the Bengals have far less problems finding talent than they do developing it or keeping it after it emerges.

But now the Bengals' are low balling their punter and making a #4 QB priorities, so, you know, this is how it goes with the Bengals.

All things aren't the same no matter how they first appear. I have no problem with the Bengals taking a flyer on Jordan Palmer, and I'd be thrilled if the Bengals replaced Larson. In regards to the latter, the final decision may come down to Larson's salary demands, but it could just as easily be made based upon his inept performance last season. Simply put, there's no freaking way I'd pay that guy a million bucks per season.

[HairOnFire]

I'm stepping out for a few days so this rant will have to go on...or die a quick death....without me. But one last thing before I go.

This was never intended to be a Kelley Washington love-fest. He's not worth that kind of attention.

But as I've now said in multiple threads, in my opinion the core issue has never been one of finding talent, but knowing what to do with it once you have it. Is it nurtured properly? Is it develped? Are the players allowed to show everything they can do or are they pigeon-holed into roles that are needlessly restrictive? And in a big-picture sense, are the Bengals guilty of constantly casting off or needlessly ignoring perfectly adequate offensive players due to their lust for the perfect offensive beast? And finally, does that greed result in the same offensive positions being constantly churned....thereby wasting assets that might be better used on the other side of the ball?

Just saying...

[HoosierCat]

But as I've now said in multiple threads, in my opinion the core issue has never been one of finding talent, but knowing what to do with it once you have it. Is it nurtured properly? Is it develped?

I think the answer is, by and large, no. How many players have we seen come in, have a promising rookie season...but never blossom? Or guys like Justin, who come in and play at a decent level, but never improve? There are exceptions, of course, but in most of those cases, it seems to me more a matter of the player himself being self-motivated than coached up.

My question is, would our coaches do a better job of developing players if they didn't have to spend half their time on scouting and talent evaluation?

Are the players allowed to show everything they can do or are they pigeon-holed into roles that are needlessly restrictive?

I would say pigeon-holed.

And in a big-picture sense, are the Bengals guilty of constantly casting off or needlessly ignoring perfectly adequate offensive players due to their lust for the perfect offensive beast? And finally, does that greed result in the same offensive positions being constantly churned....thereby wasting assets that might be better used on the other side of the ball?

Yup and yup. The RB position is exhibit A.