Chad still on DWTS

[HairOnFire]

The time to trade him was after 2008, when they could have easily gotten a first and third minimum out of Danny Boy.

For those who don't want to trade Chad, or even consider it, well...take my advice and don't allow the debate to be about trade compensation, as attempted above.

Because if it boils down to getting the most player value possible, in trade as well as in play, then NOW is precisely the time to trade. Because not only do the Bengals have better depth at WR now, if the Bengals did attempt to trade Chad, and found they could no longer get a 1st and a 3rd....it's a rock solid bet they could still get MOST of that. And that's more than enough.

No, the only reason NOT to trade Chad is because you want to win now, and having Chad on the roster makes this a better team now. And there's the rub because the idea of trading Chad is remarkably attractive if looked at only in regards to him alone. Make it about the team and the idea becomes less attractive.

[ArmyBengal]

Really? trade Chad before the start of the season but after the draft? I respect you Army but you really haven't thought this one through. It is not a matter of a drop off it is a matter of risk. Antonio Bryant has never played in this system until you get him out into the field you have no real idea how he can perform within the context of this offense, practice and even preseason games mean nothing when teams are playing against themselves or worse running vanilla schemes to not give their playbooks away before the start of the games that matter. Everyone on this board thought that Laveneus Coles would be an at least acceptable replacement for TJ after all they were roughly the same age and Coles had similar numbers coming into last year, no one predicted that Coles would be such a failed experiment, quoting SEC "Blue Sky Rules" past performance is not always an accurate predictor of future sucess.

Matt Jones could be the second coming of Jerry Rice but until such time as you can make sure you can trust him to make good decisions off the field and be emotionally able to handle success you cannot risk your team on him, you cannot know the answer to this until next offseason if he makes the team at all.

Nobody else on the entire team has shown any ability to have consistent success at the NFL level.

In short this discussion would be better fleshed out if we were talking about next season BEFORE the draft, this season talk about trading Chad for virtually nothing in exchange that will help THIS season is just silly talk. (anything we get back would be in the form of draft picks for next year and this team is equipped to win today!). Keeping Chad gives us an anchor for this season, we know that he will perform. His statistics last season were remarkable considering the dimished playbook (because of O Line concerns), the loss of every TE worth a damn on the rosters, and the failure of Coles and the lack of development of Caldwell and Simpson. He will perform this year as well Chad is a constant we know what we are going to get with him. we know nothing else with regards to our passing game, I don't think it is likely that Bryant will flop the way that Coles did, or that Gresham, Kelly, and Coffman will all suffer season ending injuries, or that Caldwell, Shipley, Simpson, Briscoe, Brown (we always forget about Freddie Brown) will all fail to develop into NFL talents but if it does happen we always have Chad to fall back on and with just a little help I believe our passing game can return to at least 2006 levels.

Wraith, I've thought it through plenty. Believe me. However, with all the thought that can actually be made into this, I still counter all of my thoughts with thinking it won't happen and I'm good with that for most of the reasons you provide, so there's that.

Call it risk, call it drop off, but the question no one has been able to adequately answer is, "IF" in fact the coaches (who are the ones making statements) are to be believed about the other WR's not named Chad AND all the arguments about how deep the corps is, at what point in time do you sacrifice the future of solid players for one season. Couple that with how the improved roster will take plays from Chad and I actually think it worth considering. Not from an immediate improvement to the roster, but the future. Some think this is a Super Bowl team and I'm in on that thought, but I simply don't think as much of that is riding on what Chad does as opposed to many other considerations.

Once again, all that being said, Chad stays. I'm not arguing that. Only if it's indeed the smartest thing to do.

All of this is based on coaches opinions and statements. Hell, even Simpson is getting love. Not from me, but still...

I must also admit to continue arguing the point, because there is little to discuss and it keeps the board active.

A very good solution from my standpoint is to simply carry 7 WR's. Case closed...

[Sea Ray]

I don't think this team can trade Chad now, for future considerations, and still be considered as a contender for the AFC North title.

Last year he was the only receiver Carson was confident in where he'd be. Maybe these new folks will develop into reliable targets but it's too early to know

[Wraith]

But how do you carry 7 WRs without hurting depth for the rest of the team. To get to 7 WRs you have to cut back #'s of D Linemen, O Linemen, or TEs. We already have issues at the D Line, cutting guys who have been productive in the NFL (namely Frostee Rucker).

[BengalPimp]

I think this may be the first season where Chad is actually less of a factor than in years past.

Here's hoping.

+1

-85 (points, not the player)

[ArmyBengal]

But how do you carry 7 WRs without hurting depth for the rest of the team. To get to 7 WRs you have to cut back #'s of D Linemen, O Linemen, or TEs. We already have issues at the D Line, cutting guys who have been productive in the NFL (namely Frostee Rucker).

The team slots in order to carry 4 RB's, but they only carried 3 for about 10 weeks out of the season last year. They bumped it back to 4 when Benson got dinged. Simply start the season with 3 RB's allowing for your 7 WR's and then let it play out. If one of the RB's get hurt, you can make adjustments then.

I'd be more than ok with Benson, Leonard, and Scott as the starting 3 RB's if it allowed us to carry 7 WR's.

[BengalPimp]

I'd be more than ok with Benson, Leonard, and Scott as the starting 3 RB's if it allowed us to carry 7 WR's.

I would too.

[Wraith]

If we carry 3 QBs, 3 RBs, 1 FB, 5 WRs, 10 O Linemen, 3 TEs, 9 D Linemen, 6 LBs, 10 DBs, 3 Special Teams Guys. That comes to 53, Do we cut to 2 QBs? Jordan Palmer is no longer capable of being placed on the PS. 3 is the minimum for RBs. 3 TEs are the minimum unless we want to cut Coffman after his rookie year. 10 O Linemen could be cut back to 9 but that means that either Luigs or Livings get cut. 9 would have to be the minimum for the D Line unless Sims or Fanene gets cut. We could possibly get by with 5 LBs which means no Jeanty and at 9 DBs we cut either Hebert, Trent, or A. Jones. I just don't see we have the room to add two more WRs that means cutting an O Linemen and cutting a DB from this list which affects potentially two many slots on the team, I think they go with 5 WRs.

[Kazkal]

Only see us carrying 6 wr's & 3 DB's...If we go deep anywhere it's on defense can't really can't see them going light on it for offense.

If I took a guess at numbers would be like

QB:3

RB:3

FB:1

tE:3

WR:6

OL:9

total:25

I could see them going 10 Oline but being most backups are scrubs anyways I wouldn't shed a tear to see livings cut o even \cough Collins cut.

DL:8

LB:7

CB:5

S:5

Total:25

Defense is where it gets interesting and I see someone coaches really like getting cut...Rucker,Hubert.Jeanty or even Geathers? We gotta go light somewhere.

[ArmyBengal]

If we carry 3 QBs, 3 RBs, 1 FB, 5 WRs, 10 O Linemen, 3 TEs, 9 D Linemen, 6 LBs, 10 DBs, 3 Special Teams Guys. That comes to 53, Do we cut to 2 QBs? Jordan Palmer is no longer capable of being placed on the PS. 3 is the minimum for RBs. 3 TEs are the minimum unless we want to cut Coffman after his rookie year. 10 O Linemen could be cut back to 9 but that means that either Luigs or Livings get cut. 9 would have to be the minimum for the D Line unless Sims or Fanene gets cut. We could possibly get by with 5 LBs which means no Jeanty and at 9 DBs we cut either Hebert, Trent, or A. Jones. I just don't see we have the room to add two more WRs that means cutting an O Linemen and cutting a DB from this list which affects potentially two many slots on the team, I think they go with 5 WRs.

I get where you are going with this, but we only have what the team carried last season (which has been their norm) to consider in any discussion.

You say:

3 QBs, 3 RBs, 1 FB, 5 WRs, 10 O-linemen, 3 TEs, 9 D-linemen, 6 LBs, 10 DBs, and 3 ST guys.

The only difference is they typically carry:

3 QBs, 4 RBs, 1 FB, 6 WRs, 9 O-linemen, 3 TEs, 8 D-linemen, 6 LBs, 10 DB's, and 3 ST guys.

They typically drop one lineman on each side of the ball from what you are suggesting and carry an additional RB.

In looking at the d-line: Odom, Geathers, Johnson, and Dunlap I think are givens at this point. Add to that, Peko, Tank, Sims, and Atkins and you have your 8. Rucker and Fanene may be the odd men out and looking at what we have, I can't say as that would bother me right now.

In looking at the o-line: Whitworth, Smith, Cook, Williams, and Livings are probably the starters. Add to that Roland, Mathis, Collins, and Luigs and you are set with your 9. Shirley is injured (see done) and both draft guys are PS at best. That really only leaves you with Santucci to consider, but not enough to warrant adding an additional player to the original 9.

I don't know, there are many ways to look at it and it will certainly play itself out. Injuries and everything else considered.

Heck with the 10 DB's they typically carry, they usually go 6 CB's and 4 safeties. I think that stands to be shaken a bit as well.

[Kazkal]

The only difference is they typically carry:

3 QBs, 4 RBs, 1 FB, 6 WRs, 9 O-linemen, 3 TEs, 8 D-linemen, 6 LBs, 10 DB's, and 3 ST guys.

Wasn't last year the first time we carried 4 backs in the marvin lewis era? Most years they went with 3 (Rudi,Kenny & Perry until he got injured then we activated a practice squader)...Being we only have some FA Scrub's for the 4th spot I just can't see them keeping 4 RB's....

Heck with the 10 DB's they typically carry, they usually go 6 CB's and 4 safeties. I think that stands to be shaken a bit as well.

Ya though last year was first time they broke that mold I see it sticking with them wanting to keep Hubert as a special teamer...Plus with Joseph,Hall,Ghee,Pacman,Trent do we really need a 6th CB? heh

[Wraith]

What about Hudson, are you going to cut our 5th round pick? I guess it is possible it would certainly be a waste of a pretty good pick.

Fanene looked really good last season as did Rucker, Fanene had 6 sacks and is still a young guy.

The problem is our depth at Safety, 5 CBs is a given I say there is no way David Jones makes this team unless Adam bombs. At Safety you have Williams and Crocker who are just signed to contract extensions, Wilson who is recently signed, NDukwe who while erratic has enough talent to be a very good starter going into his 3 NFL season and Hebert who is your best special teams cover guy and your special teams captain. That is not mentioning second year Tom Nelson or the two rookies Evans and Miles who appear to be PS material.

[ArmyBengal]

What about Hudson, are you going to cut our 5th round pick? I guess it is possible it would certainly be a waste of a pretty good pick.

Fanene looked really good last season as did Rucker, Fanene had 6 sacks and is still a young guy.

The problem is our depth at Safety, 5 CBs is a given I say there is no way David Jones makes this team unless Adam bombs. At Safety you have Williams and Crocker who are just signed to contract extensions, Wilson who is recently signed, NDukwe who while erratic has enough talent to be a very good starter going into his 3 NFL season and Hebert who is your best special teams cover guy and your special teams captain. That is not mentioning second year Tom Nelson or the two rookies Evans and Miles who appear to be PS material.

Hudson ?? Yeah, practice squad with NO doubt in my mind. Wasted pick who would have been there in the 7th round.

I like Fanene and Rucker got some looks last year, but when picks come in, someone must go. Better said, you don't draft guys in the 2nd and 3rd round to send them to the practice squad, so someone will pay the price of a roster spot for their selections. Fanene and Rucker just seem like the logical choices at this time.

The secondary should be a fun roster battle to watch and I really am looking forward to seeing it play out in the preseason. If we go with the mentioned 10 DB's:

Hall and Joseph are locks, as are Crocker, Williams, and Wilson. (5)

Adam Jones and Ghee should be fun to watch battle for the 3rd CB spot, but I like both. (7)

Then you have guys like Ratliff, Trent, and Nelson getting looks at both CB and S spots and I could see two making it from this group. (9)

Hebert has been the special teams beast for two years running and I simply don't see us being able to take the hit of his absence. (10)

Ndukwe is my surprise cut of the group, but you could easily put him in the group with Ratliff, Trent, and Nelson.

That has the appearance of a pretty solid secondary from my standpoint.

[HairOnFire]

Best case scenario?

The Bengals stash Briscoe on the practice squad....another team eventually claims him....thereby dictating the Bengals get their 6th round draft pick back in compensation the following year.

Watch.

[Sea Ray]

Best case scenario?

The Bengals stash Briscoe on the practice squad....another team eventually claims him....thereby dictating the Bengals get their 6th round draft pick back in compensation the following year.

Watch.

Do we get a comp pick if another team picks up our waived players as PS folks technically are waived players? I'd be surprised if that's the case

[HairOnFire]

Best case scenario?

The Bengals stash Briscoe on the practice squad....another team eventually claims him....thereby dictating the Bengals get their 6th round draft pick back in compensation the following year.

Watch.

Do we get a comp pick if another team picks up our waived players as PS folks technically are waived players? I'd be surprised if that's the case

I'm not sure I understand the question. Regardless...

All players signed to the practice squad have to pass waivers before doing so. Opposing teams can then raid another teams practice squad if they agree to add the player in question to their active roster for the remainder of the season....a move that can be matched by the parent team. However, if the parent team doesn't match they lose the player....but are granted compensation that matches where the player was drafted. Obviously if the player was an UDFA the parent team receives no compensation.

[Sea Ray]

Best case scenario?

The Bengals stash Briscoe on the practice squad....another team eventually claims him....thereby dictating the Bengals get their 6th round draft pick back in compensation the following year.

Watch.

Do we get a comp pick if another team picks up our waived players as PS folks technically are waived players? I'd be surprised if that's the case

I'm not sure I understand the question. Regardless...

All players signed to the practice squad have to pass waivers before doing so. Opposing teams can then raid another teams practice squad if they agree to add the player in question to their active roster for the remainder of the season....a move that can be matched by the parent team. However, if the parent team doesn't match they lose the player....but are granted compensation that matches where the player was drafted. Obviously if the player was an UDFA the parent team receives no compensation.

I don't know what rule you are referring to but I'll guess you're treating Briscoe as a restricted FA. However he doesn't qualify on a couple areas. First of all he's not been in the league for 3 yrs. Secondly under your scenario he wasn't offered a qualifying tender. I don't know under what rule we could get compensation for Briscoe next year. Please clarify

[Sea Ray]

Here's a rule that can be found in a number of sources that clearly states that PS squad players can be signed at any time without compensation:

Signing Practice Squad Players

Under the current NFL Practice Squad Rules, any player who is under contract on a scout team is free to sign a player contract with any team in the league, without compensation to the franchise whose practice squad he is a member of. However, the signing must be completed at least six days before the signing team's next game (10 days in the case of a bye week).

Further, I have yet to find anything that states that the PS player has to spend the rest of the season on the 53 man roster of the signing team

[HairOnFire]

I don't know under what rule we could get compensation for Briscoe next year. Please clarify

Cut him. Sign him to the practice squad. Wait and pray for a team to pluck him from the practice squad. Refuse to match. Get a 6th round pick in compensation.

Example: Matt "Big Toe" Toenia

[Sea Ray]

I don't know under what rule we could get compensation for Briscoe next year. Please clarify

Cut him. Sign him to the practice squad. Wait and pray for a team to pluck him from the practice squad. Refuse to match. Get a 6th round pick in compensation.

Example: Matt "Big Toe" Toenia

Oh now I see where you got this crazy idea. You assumed that because the Bengals got a 6th rd comp pick, it must have been due to Matt Big Toe. I got news for you. Matt was not a "qualifying FA". He didn't have enough service time.

Simply put, the Bengals got 4 comp picks in 2008 because they lost the following qualifying FAs:

K. Kaesviharn

Kelley washington

Eric Steinbach

Anthony Wright

It had nothing to do with Big Toe.

Glad I could clear that up.

[Walrus]

uh oh...

Ochocinco says he's injured

"I can't dance tonight due to injury, trying to squat 420 without a warm was dumb of me," Ochocinco tweeted Tuesday. "Truthfully I felt with me dancing the past 3 months I would've been able to start heavy n work my way down as usual."

But the injury is apparently not serious, and Ochocinco promised that he'd be ready to play in the Bengals' opener against the New England Patriots on September 12.

kind of hurts what little chance we had of trading him...

[HairOnFire]

Glad I could clear that up.

Hey, look at you. All grown up and wearing the big boy pants...

(sniff)

[Sea Ray]

Hey, I'm rootin' for you. I'd love it if it was that easy to get draft picks. Show me where it's happened or under what rule Briscoe would be covered...

[HairOnFire]

uh oh...

Ochocinco says he's injured

"I can't dance tonight due to injury, trying to squat 420 without a warm was dumb of me," Ochocinco tweeted Tuesday. "Truthfully I felt with me dancing the past 3 months I would've been able to start heavy n work my way down as usual."

But the injury is apparently not serious, and Ochocinco promised that he'd be ready to play in the Bengals' opener against the New England Patriots on September 12.

kind of hurts what little chance we had of trading him...

I hope it doesn't force VH-1 to cancel ManWhore.

[Trevor]

uh oh...

Ochocinco says he's injured

"I can't dance tonight due to injury, trying to squat 420 without a warm was dumb of me," Ochocinco tweeted Tuesday. "Truthfully I felt with me dancing the past 3 months I would've been able to start heavy n work my way down as usual."

But the injury is apparently not serious, and Ochocinco promised that he'd be ready to play in the Bengals' opener against the New England Patriots on September 12.

kind of hurts what little chance we had of trading him...

Goshdamnit chad... you better be 100 percent by training camp......