Whur CHad At? Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 according to the website, the bengals might be pursuing Dewayne RObertson from the Jets. Bah.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurgan74 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 if the Nfl does not change its stance I say go for Stroud first then Robertson if that falls through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalsfansince68 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 if the Nfl does not change its stance It's not out of the realm of possibility that this can still work out for us.Really wierd situation, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 If Goodell vetoed the deal due to Roger's character issues, then Stroud probably wouldn't be allowed either. Robertson is definitely better than Thornton but also definitely not as good as Stroud, Rogers, or Jenkins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalsfansince68 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 If Goodell vetoed the deal due to Roger's character issues, then Stroud probably wouldn't be allowed either. Robertson is definitely better than Thornton but also definitely not as good as Stroud, Rogers, or Jenkins.Come on guys, conjecture is rampant tonight. Character issues couldn't possibly be the reason for holding up this deal. I don't think he could sell that as a policy to Art Modell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 If Goodell vetoed the deal due to Roger's character issues, then Stroud probably wouldn't be allowed either. Robertson is definitely better than Thornton but also definitely not as good as Stroud, Rogers, or Jenkins.Come on guys, conjecture is rampant tonight. Character issues couldn't possibly be the reason for holding up this deal. I don't think he could sell that as a policy to Art Modell. Conjecture is all we have since the league isn't being clear as to what happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalsfansince68 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Conjecture is all we have since the league isn't being clear as to what happened. My point exactly, sir. We have nothing until someone tells us what happened.However...On a Lions board, someone posted that the Lions confirmed the deal and then told reporters that Millen and Marinelli would not be available for comment.I don't know that to be true, but if it is true... doesn't it seem strange that these guys had just traded away one of the faces of the franchise and no one is available for comment.If true, it seems shady and it has degenerated to this?WOW, I'm a little pissed here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJ29 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Robertson's not very good, IMO. I'd much rather see us go after Stroud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Variety Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Stroud is almost dead. The guy hasn't been productive for about 3 years now. He's always hurt. Last season Robertson recorded 4 sacks from the nose tackle position, not even Jamal Williams, Casey Hampton or Vince Wilfork were able to do that. And people compare his playing style to Sedrick Ellis and Dorsey. Plus he is only 26 years old, an extremely hard worker and has a non stop motor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 If Goodell vetoed the deal due to Roger's character issues, then Stroud probably wouldn't be allowed either. Robertson is definitely better than Thornton but also definitely not as good as Stroud, Rogers, or Jenkins.Come on guys, conjecture is rampant tonight. Character issues couldn't possibly be the reason for holding up this deal. I don't think he could sell that as a policy to Art Modell.I can't put anything past Goodell at this point.Salary cap reasons? That makes no sense either.Tell me what the reason was, so I can let this go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaldreedle Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Robertson is no better than what we already have. He is listed at only 317 lbs. on ESPN's website; he is not big enough to help our defense at the tackle position. I am tired of seeing ML try to fill our DT position with guys that are too light. That is why I was hoping/impressed with the Rodgers deal, I thought that ML might have finally learned his lesson as far as small DTs are concerned. Hopefully he says no to a Robertson trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walzav29 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Roberston sucks. This really screws us. Now we've shown are hand for the draft. I'd really like to know how this story leaked. It makes the Bengals look dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 It didn't "leak". The Lions announced it as a done deal. What part of that don't you understand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walzav29 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 I'm still surprised it came out and was false. When was the last time you've seen that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Um, never? Not when the team announcing the deal is the one trading the player. So, yeah, consider my conspiracy side, usually kept deep down inside and not let out, given free reign to think the worst of the league, Goodell, and the Lions/Browns this morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurgan74 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 I have nothing against RObertson, but the reason he is available is that he does not fit into a 3-4 and it certainly appears that the Bengals may head in that direction. However, the Bengals could land Frank Okham or Red Bryant in the 2nd round to get the Big you NT they are looking for. If robertson at 31 could play DE in a 3-4 this would not b bad then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals44 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 I have nothing against RObertson, but the reason he is available is that he does not fit into a 3-4 and it certainly appears that the Bengals may head in that direction. However, the Bengals could land Frank Okham or Red Bryant in the 2nd round to get the Big you NT they are looking for. If robertson at 31 could play DE in a 3-4 this would not b bad then.Robertson is not 31, he is listed as 26 on the Jets site... Last year he had 57 tackles (36 were solo) and 4 sacks... Rogers had 66, 41 and 7 respectively... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 I have no problems with them trying to get Robertson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 The roadblock that may stop a deal for Robertson is his current contract. If what I've read is accurate it dwarfs what Rogers, Jenkins, and Stroud were being paid. As for Stroud, he is being openly and actively shopped and the trade compensation price has been set, so...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesperateDerelict Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 ...the Bengals could land Frank Okham or Red Bryant in the 2nd round to get the Big you NT they are looking for.Red Bryant only did 20 reps at the combine, and would have to show alot more to be a NT - or to get drafted before the third.Okan ate a cheeseburger while running his 40 at Indy, and has the work ethic of a crack ho'. He isn't worth drafting in the top 100.IF NEITHER C.LONG, GHOLSTON, ELLIS, OR DORSEY ARE AVAILABLE, WE TRADE DOWN. We can get a good DE or LB or great DE/OLB (much) later in the round.Rubin from Iowa could be a good NT after development (35 reps, faster than a 5.0).Unfortunately, we don't have a position coach that can develop him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidge Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Trevor Laws a possibility if we trade down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJJackson Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 IF NEITHER C.LONG, GHOLSTON, ELLIS, OR DORSEY ARE AVAILABLE, WE TRADE DOWN. We can get a good DE or LB or great DE/OLB (much) later in the roundCan't count on that, unfortunately, you need a willing trading partner and (as of today) also have to pray God-dell doesn't come down from on high and nix it right as the ten minute time period to make your pick expires Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalboomer7 Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 Robertson is no better than what we already have. He is listed at only 317 lbs. on ESPN's website; he is not big enough to help our defense at the tackle position. I am tired of seeing ML try to fill our DT position with guys that are too light. That is why I was hoping/impressed with the Rodgers deal, I thought that ML might have finally learned his lesson as far as small DTs are concerned. Hopefully he says no to a Robertson trade.Big Fat Sam Adams didn't work out so well either. Plain and simple, big or small, you gotta have talent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarsonDaMan Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 Since when is 317 too light for a tackle? I'd like to think that is the perfect size for a guy at that position. Big enough to be stout vs the run and not to big to the point where he can't rush the passer.Now Robertson isn't a premium player but he is better than what we have. Given that he was a top four draft pick and is only 26 years old i'd say there is still plenty of upside to having him. Especially with a change of scenery having the ability to jumpstart his career. He doesn't belong in a 3-4 and the Jets switching to that definitely cut his progress as a player.If they can get him at a fair price i'd say it's a solid pickup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 The roadblock that may stop a deal for Robertson is his current contract.Yep. Robertson is slated to make just under $10 million this year -- $6.8 million in salary and $3 million in a June roster bonus. And he's only signed through next year, so I doubt he's in any hurry to take a big pay cut and extend his deal. The Bengals would have to either eat a huge $9.8 million cap charge, and then decide whether to offer him a long-term deal next year -- or just back the Brink's truck up to his door now.In short, it looks like the cost of Robertson would be a 3rd and a 5th and $10 million (minimum). That's pretty damn steep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.