HairOnFire Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 A little reminder. On this very message board, and on more than one occasion, very reliable sources have implied my sweetie, TJ Jackson, is a lying bag of crap. No disrespect intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearcat1975 Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 A little reminder. On this very message board, and on more than one occasion, very reliable sources have implied my sweetie, TJ Jackson, is a lying bag of crap.Maybe TJ's opinion was wrong but how exactly did he lie?No disrespect intended. This, on the other hand, is a lie. You are consistent, I'll give you that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJJackson Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 very reliable sources have implied my sweetie, TJ Jackson, is a lying bag of crap.sources, yes. very reliable? uhhhhhhhmmmmmmmm yeah in the same sense that Paris Hilton is very chaste :-)In any case, yeah, I think it is still very topical that our first round draft pick has made a number of thick-headed decisions. Admittedly, none of these decisions were criminal or life threatening - no guns were waved at police, no cars were driven while intoxicated, no cars were parked on busy interstate bridges so the driver could get some sleep, no cocaine was consumed the night before the championship game, and no minors were corrupted by alcohol. Etc Etc.Nonetheless, a pattern of bad decisions, and one that has cost him game time - at a very, very important game (http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2008/12/29/704270/andre-smith-suspended-for). The potential that such a decision could cost him games as a Bengal is what keeps his thick-headedness very much germaine to the topic for meAll I was really asking was - ok, some football players at Alabama made a bad decision involving textbooks, was our boy one of the ones involved? Really, what i had read gave no names, so I was just askin' Had he been involved, I'd say this not only fit the already established pattern but would probably be the worst of the set, as the activity was basically theft (as I understood it from a cursory reading)In any case, i am glad to hear he was not involved, and certainly look forward to him signing early *fingers crossed* and bulldozerign DL's and LBs this season and for many seasons to come Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted June 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Yep, thought you were just reporting what you saw, but no I don't see much in what he did or didn't do as being an issue now that he's been drafted. Could those decisions have something to do with may or may not happen in the future ?? Maybe, but I'll wait for that time to worry about any of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whur CHad At? Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Back on topic...I believe he will be the longest holdout of the draft and possibly in history. The big issue will be a "weight" clause that needs to be included in the deal, and knowing Andre's history this will be a problem. He will command Jason Peters money. Like Boomer, I am very worried about him mentally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
w8th Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 My guess is they don't sign him until the Jags sign Monroe at #8. Another OT 2 spots away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Maybe TJ's opinion was wrong but how exactly did he lie? He didn't. But he did go fishing without a pole so I thought I'd add to a familiar running joke TJ and I share. And IMHO the very best thing about our little running joke is how TJ never gets upset....probably because he understands the joke. You on the other hand never seem to get jokes unless they're explained to you in detail, and if that doesn't happen you usually find a way to have a little hissy fit. And that's okay I guess because clueless anger is just one of the things that make you who you are. That said, I do like your new avatar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I believe he will be the longest holdout of the draft and possibly in history. The big issue will be a "weight" clause that needs to be included in the deal, and knowing Andre's history this will be a problem. I'm guessing the longest holdout in history is pretty unlikely. Granted, under these circumstances it's a given the Bengals will demand weight clauses be included in Smith's contract, but that in itself shouldn't be a deal breaker. Remember, in the very first interviews conducted after Smith's combine fiasco Keels attempted to downplay the concerns of any interested NFL team by agreeing to conditioning clauses being included in any future deal. So with that settled the only thing left to be determined are the numbers themselves. And on that point, the Bengals early decision to switch Smith to ORT should result in both sides agreeing upon a higher acceptable weight. In fact, I'm guessing the difference could be as great as 20 to 25 pounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I'm guessing the longest holdout in history is pretty unlikely.Probably true -- I mean, Hunley never did sign, right? But this could get ugly. Keels will cling to the Sanchez deal as if it were welded to his torso. Meanwhile, the front office will almost certainly be watching Jason Smith (2) and Eugene Monroe (8) and will want a deal about midway (with a lean toward Monroe) between what they get.My own sense is that the Bengals are prepared for a long holdout. I think that's a big part of why Whit and not Smith is at LT. But that brings up the bottom line, which is that with Whit and Collins, the Bengals have two starting-caliber tackles. Maybe not pro bowlers, but Whit can't possibly be worse than the gimpy Levi Jones (witness how play improved when they replaced Jones with a rookie Collins last year) and Stacy Andrews' play was nothing to write home about last season either.So while I'd like to see Smith signed ASAP, the Bengals are in a far better position than usual to weather a holdout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted June 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I'm guessing the longest holdout in history is pretty unlikely.Probably true -- I mean, Hunley never did sign, right? But this could get ugly. Keels will cling to the Sanchez deal as if it were welded to his torso. Meanwhile, the front office will almost certainly be watching Jason Smith (2) and Eugene Monroe (8) and will want a deal about midway (with a lean toward Monroe) between what they get.My own sense is that the Bengals are prepared for a long holdout. I think that's a big part of why Whit and not Smith is at LT. But that brings up the bottom line, which is that with Whit and Collins, the Bengals have two starting-caliber tackles. Maybe not pro bowlers, but Whit can't possibly be worse than the gimpy Levi Jones (witness how play improved when they replaced Jones with a rookie Collins last year) and Stacy Andrews' play was nothing to write home about last season either.So while I'd like to see Smith signed ASAP, the Bengals are in a far better position than usual to weather a holdout.I agree with this post wholeheartedly !!! Regardless of if the holdout actually happens or not, the Bengals have acted early and are prepared for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COB Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 Regardless of if the holdout actually happens or not, the Bengals have acted early and are prepared for it.The Bengals front office did something right? Is this possible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted June 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 Regardless of if the holdout actually happens or not, the Bengals have acted early and are prepared for it.The Bengals front office did something right? Is this possible? I believe the answer to that is, yes. They made the move immediately and started practicing that way from the jump. I can't think of anything they have done in quite some time that appears to be so freakin' smart. Nice to see...Here's a question for everyone...If there is a holdout, minus the issues surrounding that, would you still be horribly concerned seeing Whit on the left and Collins on the right ??I could think of far worse situations than that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearcat1975 Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 If there is a holdout, minus the issues surrounding that, would you still be horribly concerned seeing Whit on the left and Collins on the right ??I could think of far worse situations than that...Me too. Like what happens when one of them gets injured?"Depth chart BAAAAAADDDDDDD!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearcat1975 Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 Maybe TJ's opinion was wrong but how exactly did he lie? He didn't. But he did go fishing without a pole so I thought I'd add to a familiar running joke TJ and I share. And IMHO the very best thing about our little running joke is how TJ never gets upset....probably because he understands the joke. You on the other hand never seem to get jokes unless they're explained to you in detail, and if that doesn't happen you usually find a way to have a little hissy fit. And that's okay I guess because clueless anger is just one of the things that make you who you are. Somebody had to put you in your place. Your douchebaggery was getting out of hand. I'm pleased to see you have reeled it in a bit. That said, I do like your new avatar. I'm sure you like the new oline too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJJackson Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 To answer the main question posed - I think he'll sign a day too late to be of any help to us this year, much like many other Bengals 1st roundersIf I am running the show, the contract proposal has the day before training camp opens (right up til midnight) as a "pivot point", ie--if the contract is signed on on before that date, 90% of the non-salary money is guarenteed (signing and roster bonuses), and 10% is in performance bonuses--if the contract is signed after that date, 10% of the guarenteed money per day missed is shifted to performance bonuses (to a max of 10% guarenteed, 90% performance). After 10 days of missed camp, as far as i am concerned, the player's value to the team is virtually nothing for that year - they will be (barring injury to others, as always) a backup at bestThe fact that we have 4 tackles with game experience - Whitworth and Collins at LT, Kooistra and Roland at RT - means we can afford to play a little hardball. Do you want to play, or don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAPPYJAQ Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 The worst thing that happened is Sanchez signing before we could get a daal done with Dre. Now we're competing against a QB to get him signed. I like what the Bengals have done, in the event Dre doesn't make it to camp on time. Worst case scenario, Whit and Collins should be decent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted June 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2009 The worst thing that happened is Sanchez signing before we could get a daal done with Dre. Now we're competing against a QB to get him signed. I like what the Bengals have done, in the event Dre doesn't make it to camp on time. Worst case scenario, Whit and Collins should be decent.I just never envisioned a scenario where the Bengals were going to sign Smith before he was bracketed, so I don't see his signing as that much of a problem in the sense of timing. The problem is the fact he's a QB and his salary is set based on that fact. With Sanchez being signed and looking at what Gholston got last year, they have a good base to figure out what his range is going to be. I'll remain optimistic for some crazy reason... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted June 15, 2009 Report Share Posted June 15, 2009 Given the following:*The guy above him signed a New York QB type of deal at #5,*The guy below him will get a ridiculous deal from Al "cryptkeeper" Davis,*The deal above is mismatched in terms of years,*Last year's #6 got a waaaay too rich deal,*The pick is a total flake,*The agent gets off on playing hardball,and last but not least,*This is the Bengals,we have sort of a worst-case scenario in terms of getting this guy signed. I'm putting the over/under at, say, September 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted June 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2009 Well I think regardless of what last years #6 got, it's set in stone at this point and gives a number where to start the increase from.I don't see that as a bad thing, but the Sanchez deal may boggle things a bit. We shall see... 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.