Chad still on DWTS

[TJJackson]

if lendale white was gone for a 5th

higher paid player with weight and other issues, poor production of late

,.. And adam carakker

basically a bust, and highly compensated in that capacity

yeah, I can see how these two players did not fetch much in the trade market. Can you?

... Cosby cant be worth too much...

Yeah, young inexpensive durable pro-bowl level performers, who'd want a player like that?

What was I thinking?

[TJJackson]

lol

glad we've established your mental age in the mid to late tweens, based on the use of that 'word'

What are we gonna get in a trade for Cosby? Go head and enlighten me.

Nah. Recommend you actually know a little about what you are talking about before you spew, but hey, if you plan to play the part of complete dumbass number 6 around here, be my guest. JoeWrong, agreen/gizzle, pushy, momslikeme, whurchadat - plenty of folks here who are about your speed. There's room on the short bus.

I like Quan but he has very little trade value.

Clue for you, free of charge - saying something patently untrue twice doesnt make it more true. Nor on the third time. Or the 4th. But you go keep repeating inanities all you want.

your funny

your (proper use of the word) attention level to grammar lessons was (is?) clearly pretty limited. You may want to get a tutor. T-U-T-O-R.

Only real trade value is Chad and itll only get us a second or something like that.

He's stuck here.

If he'll get us a 2nd he's certainly not stuck here. or a third. or a 6-pack of YooHoo and an expired Big Mac coupon. Bon Voyage, Estaban

[bwillycuse]

lol

glad we've established your mental age in the mid to late tweens, based on the use of that 'word'

roflmfao at you

Better get them kids off your lawn. Bed time soon.

(I quoted incorrectly - lets see if there is an attack on that as well.)

And you called me Pongian(whom i blocked a year and a half ago), and Agreen who I defended from yet another one of your attacks a while back.

I wonder if I can make that list. Though the only person I have seemed to 'upset' here is you.

[bwillycuse]

Yeah - If Simpson finds 'it' then awesome. Im not holding my breath though.

Yeah, why wait for a receiver to actually develope when it's so easy to just draft another one and start all over again?

If its development he needs and he has progressed each year then I am all for him having a role in the offense. In the last two years though, we haven't seen or heard much of anything that he was progressing well. Itll be tough to keep him on the roster this year though if he doesn't shine.

All I have heard is that Carson told him to get out of his huddle because he didnt know the plays. Then Purify took the roster spot last year.

He did make a nice catch the other day. (Looked very skinny though)

Simpson is an enigma to me.

[HairOnFire]

If its development he needs and he has progressed each year then I am all for him having a role in the offense.

Well, what role do you envision? Because it seems to me the only reason Simpson was drafted was as insurance should Chad actually sit out a season, as he had threatened to do. And there's the rub because when Chad didn't follow through on his threat there was no immediate role for Simpson to fill. And quite frankly, there still isn't a role for Simpson to play unless you're willing to get rid of Chad, which few beside myself are willing to consider.

Frankly, I'm suprised so many blame Simpson for the failure when in reality the pick was wasted years ago, on draft day, due to Chad's antics.

Itll be tough to keep him on the roster this year though if he doesn't shine.

But by most accounts he is shining...when given the opportunity. Furthermore, those same sources often admit how Simpson's performance won't mean a damn thing now.

Simpson is an enigma to me.

What's so hard to figure out? The part about him being an obvious luxury pick doomed to be wasted in an endless cycle of churning and burning? Or Hoosier's rant about why guys like Simpson simply have to be drafted in the first place?

[BengalPimp]

I say a 2-3% chance of Chad being traded.

Sounds about right. That said, I'd do it....in a heartbeat.

There is absolutely ZERO chance Chad will be traded. Chad is still Carson's best weapon. Those of you who say trade him, will be the same ones bashing Palmer if he has another average season. Why not trade Gresham and Bryant while you're at it.

Man, after decades, this is finally a deep, solid team. Yet, some of you want to break it up just to do it? To gain what? a future pick? Just sacrifice another season? WOW !!!!!

[HairOnFire]

I say a 2-3% chance of Chad being traded.

Sounds about right. That said, I'd do it....in a heartbeat.

There is absolutely ZERO chance Chad will be traded.

So one guy says 2 to 3 percent, I agree, and you counter with a caplocked zero.

Shrug.

Chad is still Carson's best weapon.

When did the Bengals trade Cedric Benson?

Why not trade Gresham and Bryant while you're at it.

Because neither of them have tanked a season, or waged a year long media war against the team in an attempt to extort more money. Plus, Bryant has a 4 year contract, and Gresham will soon sign for as long or longer.

Man, after decades, this is finally a deep, solid team. Yet, some of you want to break it up just to do it?

Well, which is it? Are they a deep and solid team or are they a one man band? I ask because if they're the deep and solid team you first claimed then they can withstand the loss of any single player, including Chad.

To gain what? a future pick? Just sacrifice another season?

Teams trade aging players all the time, including stars, and for no other reason than to gain a future pick. Why should this team operate differently? As for sacrificing another season, I don't believe the Bengals would be guilty of doing that, and they wouldn't for the very reasons you just cited. They're deep, and they're solid. And they're eleventy deep at WR, too.

[BengalPimp]

Man, after decades, this is finally a deep, solid team. Yet, some of you want to break it up just to do it?

Well, which is it? Are they a deep and solid team or are they a one man band? I ask because if they're the deep and solid team you first claimed then they can withstand the loss of any single player, including Chad.

Deep and Solid overall. But If you start breaking it up, it won't be. Chad is by far the best WR on the team, and yes they may be "eleventy deep" at WR, but Chad is the only constant. The others have more question marks than this guy's jacket.

[BengalPimp]

To gain what? a future pick? Just sacrifice another season?

Teams trade aging players all the time, including stars, and for no other reason than to gain a future pick. Why should this team operate differently?

They do, but they don't do it for spite (your still bent for him "tanking" a season he was injured, and a bluff on a holdout). Those teams usually trade away "aging" players because they have someone who they believe is an improvemt waiting in the wings......I ask you, who is that player on the Bengals?

Aging or not, quick, name the Bengal Pro Bowlers from last season? There was Chad....and.....and.....and.....and.....

[Trevor]

lol

glad we've established your mental age in the mid to late tweens, based on the use of that 'word'

What are we gonna get in a trade for Cosby? Go head and enlighten me.

Nah. Recommend you actually know a little about what you are talking about before you spew, but hey, if you plan to play the part of complete dumbass number 6 around here, be my guest. JoeWrong, agreen/gizzle, pushy, momslikeme, whurchadat - plenty of folks here who are about your speed. There's room on the short bus.

I like Quan but he has very little trade value.

Clue for you, free of charge - saying something patently untrue twice doesnt make it more true. Nor on the third time. Or the 4th. But you go keep repeating inanities all you want.

your funny

your (proper use of the word) attention level to grammar lessons was (is?) clearly pretty limited. You may want to get a tutor. T-U-T-O-R.

Only real trade value is Chad and itll only get us a second or something like that.

He's stuck here.

If he'll get us a 2nd he's certainly not stuck here. or a third. or a 6-pack of YooHoo and an expired Big Mac coupon. Bon Voyage, Estaban

Really?.. Because i dont think mike brown would trade chad for anything less than a 1st... And for the grammar... My bad, I usually do not post correctly,. I have to do enough correcting in my research papers for school.

And for quan, yes, I realize he had probowl level #'s as a punt returner... But in a leauge full of 22-25 year old return specialists... Where you can get guys pretty much just as skilled, why would you give up a draft pick?.. After one year of good returns, Devin hester stopped reurning well after his big year... Dante hall had ok years after his great 2... Josh cribbs seems to be the only consistant one and quan is no cribbs... I'm just saying IMO noone would give up more than a possible 7th... Now maybe we can package him and another reciever (simpson) for one player or so... But still, i cant see mike brown doing that... If you were a GM,.. What would you give up for a very good PUNT returner. MAybe a catch or two per game reciever?.. I wouldnt go higher than a 7th...

ps.. carrikker is not a bust,.. If they didnt move him from his spot he'd be very effective... I expect him to be very good this year. Same with lendale. And a few others too...

[TJJackson]

Aging or not, quick, name the Bengal Pro Bowlers from last season? There was Chad....and.....and.....and.....and.....

......and who got in only when 374 or so other wide receivers (better wide receivers) declined to play in the sham that is the Pro Bowl

[TJJackson]

quan is no cribbs

do us all a favor and go look up the actual numbers for 2009, and then come back and tell me the difference between Cribb's PR average and Cosby's PR average.

Oh, and I've already checked. You clearly haven't.

What would you give up for a very good PUNT returner.

depends. Am I a team thinking it is at the verge of a superbowl run, but with a very weak PR?

In any case, Cosby is too valuable to the Bengals atm to consider trading

[Trevor]

quan is no cribbs

do us all a favor and go look up the actual numbers for 2009, and then come back and tell me the difference between Cribb's PR average and Cosby's PR average.

Oh, and I've already checked. You clearly haven't.

What would you give up for a very good PUNT returner.

depends. Am I a team thinking it is at the verge of a superbowl run, but with a very weak PR?

In any case, Cosby is too valuable to the Bengals atm to consider trading

I stand by what i said,.. No one is as good as cribbs... You don't here teams gameplanning against quan,.. I'm pretty sure if they did he'd have closer to 6-9 yd. average... And marvins said it himself he really just needs a guy who can get the ball, maybe get a few yards, and not fumble... Yes he had some big returns and im glad he did,.. But that is one season,.. he may have trouble this year after ppl get lots of film on him.. & Quan is perfect for the just catch and not fumble role.. But so is 3 other guys we have on this team (maybe not pacman).. I liked tom nelson as PR just as much as i liked quan in that preseason when they were battling...

[Trevor]

Aging or not, quick, name the Bengal Pro Bowlers from last season? There was Chad....and.....and.....and.....and.....

......and who got in only when 374 or so other wide receivers (better wide receivers) declined to play in the sham that is the Pro Bowl

WElker tore his acl... Thats why chad made it,.. Would i like it more if it was cause he had 1300 yds?.. Of course!, but hey...

[TJJackson]

I stand by what i said,.. No one is as good as cribbs

I understand, you wouldnt want something as unimportant as actual production at PR to factor into such a comparison

[TJJackson]

Aging or not, quick, name the Bengal Pro Bowlers from last season? There was Chad....and.....and.....and.....and.....

......and who got in only when 374 or so other wide receivers (better wide receivers) declined to play in the sham that is the Pro Bowl

WElker tore his acl... Thats why chad made it

ah, so you are admitting the whole "chad made the probowl" thing is fairly worthless, right?

so why even bother mentioning it?

we all know he got in (far) more on past repute than on current production

[HairOnFire]

Deep and Solid overall. But If you start breaking it up, it won't be.

Trading one player hardly qualifies as breaking up a team...especially one with as much depth at WR, TE, and RB as the Bengals now have.

Chad is by far the best WR on the team...

Perhaps, but if Antonio Bryant is healthy the margin isn't as great as you imply. Furthermore, if Chad were lost for any reason whatsoever, be it due injury, trade, or meltdown, the Bengals would still have a better WR corp than the Steelers and one roughly equal to the Ravens.

... and yes they may be "eleventy deep" at WR, but Chad is the only constant. The others have more question marks than this guy's jacket.

How ironic. After witnessing meltdown after meltdown throughout his career I have to confess I consider Chad to be a constant question mark.

[Trevor]

I stand by what i said,.. No one is as good as cribbs

I understand, you wouldnt want something as unimportant as actual production at PR to factor into such a comparison

ITs just common sense... If cribbs and quan were on the same team,.. And they both returned punts... Had similar maybe equal averages, Hell i'll go as far as to say quan had a little bit higher average... And one of them had to be cut... It would be quan,.. Quan is a terrible KR... He did have that scott return and he may have won the steeler game for us,.. But he is a below average Kr... But he is a top 5 PR... Would you rather have a (potentially) top flight KR and average to above average PR like pacman if he gets back to his game. (don't rip on me for saying it because it can very well happen and he was not in shape with the dallas moogirls). If it opened up a spot for a matt jones or dez briscoe... Than absolutely... Quans value then is still good but not great like what we already have...

[HairOnFire]

To gain what? a future pick? Just sacrifice another season?

Teams trade aging players all the time, including stars, and for no other reason than to gain a future pick. Why should this team operate differently?

They do, but they don't do it for spite (your still bent for him "tanking" a season he was injured, and a bluff on a holdout).

Not entirely. There's also the matter of Chad's contract status to consider, as well as the delicate balance between his current skill level and trade value....neither of which are likely to ever be higher than they are right now.

Those teams usually trade away "aging" players because they have someone who they believe is an improvemt waiting in the wings......I ask you, who is that player on the Bengals?

My answer is player(s), plural. And the improvement you speak of is indeed here. And there. And everywhere. Because the Bengals are either brilliantly or stupidly deep at every offensive skill position except QB.

Aging or not, quick, name the Bengal Pro Bowlers from last season? There was Chad....and.....and.....and.....and.....

...and with the above you've just confirmed why of all of the Bengals WR's that could realistically be traded, Chad would net the only significant return.

Full circle.

[TJJackson]

ITs just common sense

tdlong: player x is far better than player y

tjjackson: uhm, the stats say player y is every bit as good as player x, plus he's younger and less expensive

tdlong: it's just common sense that player x is far better than player y.

tjjackson: its a type of sense alright. non-sense.

[derekshank]

Chad is by far the best WR on the team...

Perhaps, but if Antonio Bryant is healthy the margin isn't as great as you imply. Furthermore, if Chad were lost for any reason whatsoever, be it due injury, trade, or meltdown, the Bengals would still have a better WR corp than the Steelers and one roughly equal to the Ravens.

Not only do I agree, but one could make a good argument that at this stage in their respective careers, Bryant is the better #1 and certainly has more upside. Chad's best years are behind him.

Bryant, Caldwell, and Shipley would also probably be more productive than Chad, Coles, and Caldwell were, simply because each of them would fit in the specific roles asked of them.

Plus, the Bengals are likely going to cut a WR who very well could be asked to play on Sundays for another team. In other words, the Bengals would be giving something valuable away, and getting nothing in return. Not only that, but if not traded, Chad will be in Cincy two more seasons at most... then walk, with the Bengals again getting nothing in return.

Trading Chad didn't make sense in '08. The WR depth was very questionable. Now, it's deeper than it has ever been, with no less that 3 players who have been brought in for the specific purpose of replacing Chad when the time comes.

I say the time is now.

[JoePong]

Did somebody actually claim that Cosby is a better punt returner than Cribbs??? LOL Funny stuff.

[Trevor]

ITs just common sense

tdlong: player x is far better than player y

tjjackson: uhm, the stats say player y is every bit as good as player x, plus he's younger and less expensive

tdlong: it's just common sense that player x is far better than player y.

tjjackson: its a type of sense alright. non-sense.

Quan is almost 2 years older than cribbs... Why do you keep saying he's young?.. He's really not...

[TJJackson]

ITs just common sense

tdlong: player x is far better than player y

tjjackson: uhm, the stats say player y is every bit as good as player x, plus he's younger and less expensive

tdlong: it's just common sense that player x is far better than player y.

tjjackson: its a type of sense alright. non-sense.

Quan is almost 2 years older than cribbs... Why do you keep saying he's young?.. He's really not...

Oh my god, are you going to use actual facts now? (this despite the fact that you're dodging the main issue to pursue a side item)

Thats so freakin awesome!

Way to go, sir! I commend you.

Now listen closely - yes, you're right, Quan is older (albeit its closer to 6 months than 2 years), and I have admitted this because (follow closely now) I went and checked the facts you presented. My bad. I made an assumption based on the number of years in league - Quan 1, Cribbs 5 (which btw means Cribbs has a lot more NFL wear and tear on him.)

Might want to go try that yourself......which segways nicely to......

.......now that we have the sideshow issue of 'player age' aside, back to the main issue..........

[TJJackson]

Did somebody actually claim that Cosby is a better punt returner than Cribbs??? LOL Funny stuff.

ah, I should have known a founding member of the BrainTrust triad would show up here eventually

Go find the quote for us, JoeWrong.

Good luck.