What do you think of our offseason moves so far

[HairOnFire]

But to repeat myself, Pitt could easily take several steps back and still finish with 10+ wins. And so far their only real step back has been letting Burress go, and that was a small one at most. Hard to consider Bell much of a loss, considering they went 15-1 almost completely without him.

I'll argue that Burress and Bell represent two of the higher profile FA signings this offseason. You can downplay their significance to the Steelers if you want, but they haven't been replaced in free agency and losing talent like that hardly frees up the Steelers draft plans. Plus, if the Steelers don't have another perfect season and do finish with 10 wins then IMO we're right there with them.

[membengal]

Keeping your own players that have proven themselves should be a given ( like it is with any other winning team in the NFL ).

Should be a given, yes...but it seems to me as if more and more teams are having a hard time doing this. The ones that don't lose a lot of their proven players, as you said, are the winning teams. It's good to see Cincinnati following that mold rather than the tactic of many other teams out there that seem to rely so heavily on the free agent market.

Why in the world should that be "a given". Why, then did was Baltimore unable to retain Ed Hartwell? Or Gary Baxter?

Retaining your own players in this market is far from a given.

[HairOnFire]

Cleveland is rebuilding, yes. But so what? Must I remind you that last year the Cleveland Browns completely totally and absolutely sucked...yet they still beat the Bengals once (soundly) and the next time the two teams met we needed 58 points to even the score?

Who was the Browns starting QB in either of those games?

Are either of those players still with the team?

Last, assuming for a moment that Carson Palmer doesn't improve a lick this season...something I consider improbable at best...wouldn't you give him a punchers chance to outpoint Trent Dilfer?

[HoosierCat]

You can downplay their significance to the Steelers if you want, but they haven't been replaced in free agency and losing talent like that hardly frees up the Steelers draft plans.

Well, I'm not talking about draft plans here, I'm talking about whether they're a significantly better or worse team right now. Pitt isn't either...but like I said before when you're 15-1 that's OK.

But as to the issue of whether signing Rudi and TJ freed up Bengals draft plans...I'd argue that it didn't have that much of an effect. Thanks to the franchise tag, Rudi was going to be a Bengal regardless, so that was figured into their draft plans from the start. And even tho we have TJ, WR remains a very real possibility starting at pick 17.

[HairOnFire]

Baltimore lost Hartwell, but more than made up for that in their other signings. Net-net they look like a much better team to me right now...and they still have draft picks to come, just like us.

Baltimore lost good players at several positions and replaced them with better ones. (Props.) The also lost Hartwell due to money issues and replaced him with a nice player who was cheaper but not better. (Props to a point.) They've lost starters on their O-line that have to be replaced and worked carefully into the mix. (Possible props...possible problems.) And last, they've still got Boller. (Propped up.)

So I'd say they were a 9-7 team last year who finished one game ahead of the Bengals, and beyond that I won't say much at all....except this team can now compete with them and beat them without anyone raising an eyebrow.

[HoosierCat]

Cleveland is rebuilding, yes. But so what? Must I remind you that last year the Cleveland Browns completely totally and absolutely sucked...yet they still beat the Bengals once (soundly) and the next time the two teams met we needed 58 points to even the score? 

Who was the Browns starting QB in either of those games?

Are either of those players still with the team?

Last, assuming for a moment that Carson Palmer doesn't improve a lick this season...something I consider improbable at best...wouldn't you give him a punchers chance to outpoint Trent Dilfer?

I might...but your own example would prove me a fool for doing so, wouldn't it?

They beat us with Jeff "I'm not gay" Garcia at the helm.

Then they racked up 48 points with Kelly "I'm not a girl" Holcomb in charge.

What will they do with Trent "I won a Super Bowl, got cut, and Baltimore hasn't had a QB since" Dilfer under center? Hell, I dunno...but based on the above, who the Clowns' QB is don't seem to matter much, do it?

[The_Next_Big_Thing]

All this Cleveland beat us we suck talk is just plain dumb Joisey. The Browns/Bengals rivalry is such that even if the Browns didn't win another game all season and the Bengals didn't lose another game all season, it would still be a good close game because both teams are up for it because of the rivalry.

At Chicago's lowest point and Green Bay's high point, Chicago beat Green Bay. It's the nature of a rivalry.

[HoosierCat]

All this Cleveland beat us we suck talk is just plain dumb Joisey. The Browns/Bengals rivalry is such that even if the Browns didn't win another game all season and the Bengals didn't lose another game all season, it would still be a good close game because both teams are up for it because of the rivalry.

Where did I say we suck because Cleveland beat us?

Please, show me that.

I agree with you: Clowns/Bengals will always be a tough game, no matter the state of either team. Which is why I can't dismiss the possibility we could lose one or both games no matter how Cleveland does vs. the rest of the league. And last year is the perfect example. The Clowns were 1-1 vs. us and 2-12 vs. everyone else. Hair, on the other hand, appears to feel the Browns are nothing to worry about. I have to disagree.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Sorry, just kidding. I just wanted to see what the wet blanket thing was like. Not really feeling it though.

Well maybe you'd start to feel it if you changed you name from "HairOnFire," to "Don'tPushMe'sEvilTwin, then gave it another go."

[jjakq27]

I agree with you: Clowns/Bengals will always be a tough game, no matter the state of either team. Which is why I can't dismiss the possibility we could lose one or both games no matter how Cleveland does vs. the rest of the league. And last year is the perfect example. The Clowns were 1-1 vs. us and 2-12 vs. everyone else. Hair, on the other hand, appears to feel the Browns are nothing to worry about. I have to disagree.

I remember a few times back in the 90's where the Bengals beat the Steelers when they had no business doing that. In fact I think one of the two wins in 2002 was against Pittsburgh.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Hair, on the other hand, appears to feel the Browns are nothing to worry about. I have to disagree.

As do I. They improved themselves somewhat by the addition of Rueben Droughns from Denver, and by the subtraction of Garcia out of Cleveland!

[HairOnFire]

Hair, on the other hand, appears to feel the Browns are nothing to worry about. I have to disagree.

Are you putting words in my mouth?

I haven't said that the Browns represent no threat. All I've done is point out that neither of the QB's from last seasons shootouts are still with the team. They've been replaced by Trent Dilfer, a QB that hasn't seen a shootout since the movie "Open Range" left the theaters. And last, it's no surprise that you worry about the Browns since it's your habit to worry about everything.

Frankly, you're a hard guy to cheer up. (Vote for Pedro)

[HoosierCat]

I agree with you: Clowns/Bengals will always be a tough game, no matter the state of either team. Which is why I can't dismiss the possibility we could lose one or both games no matter how Cleveland does vs. the rest of the league. And last year is the perfect example. The Clowns were 1-1 vs. us and 2-12 vs. everyone else. Hair, on the other hand, appears to feel the Browns are nothing to worry about. I have to disagree.

I remember a few times back in the 90's where the Bengals beat the Steelers when they had no business doing that. In fact I think one of the two wins in 2002 was against Pittsburgh.

Close. Our 2 wins in '02 were vs. NO and Houston (Chad's guarantee game). You're thinking of the tail end of the 6-10 '01 season when, in Pitt, under two minutes and needing a TD to win, Jon Kitna suddenly, briefly, morphs into Joe Montana and drives the Bengals down the field and into the end zone in one of those awe-inspiring, gee-didn't-that-look-effortless performances. :player:

[HoosierCat]

Hair, on the other hand, appears to feel the Browns are nothing to worry about. I have to disagree.

Are you putting words in my mouth?

I haven't said that the Browns represent no threat. All I've done is point out that neither of the QB's from last seasons shootouts are still with the team.

I stand corrected. (Pedro sucks)

[HairOnFire]

Hair, on the other hand, appears to feel the Browns are nothing to worry about. I have to disagree.

As do I. They improved themselves somewhat by the addition of Rueben Droughns from Denver, and by the subtraction of Garcia out of Cleveland!

Ignoring the impact of Joisey's smear campaign for just a moment, did you guys see where Droughns reported to the Browns practice facility just long enough to ask for a new contract that doubles his pay?

As for Dilfer, what makes him a better band-aid than Garcia was supposed to be?

[HairOnFire]

(Pedro sucks)

He sure does. In fact, that's why I'm voting for him.

[redsfan2]

Signing high profile free agent after high profile free agent and expecting them to immediately fit the system doesn't work. Just ask Dan Snyder in Washington.

Sorry .... but it just cracks me up that you'd put that statement over a picture of CD wearing his new duds.

Squaring this statement with your earlier ones that went on and on ad nauseum about how great CD would be with the Patriots seems a bit of a reach.

But that's just me. Sorry

[redsfan2]

Keeping your own players that have proven themselves should be a given ( like it is with any other winning team in the NFL ).

Should be a given, yes...but it seems to me as if more and more teams are having a hard time doing this. The ones that don't lose a lot of their proven players, as you said, are the winning teams. It's good to see Cincinnati following that mold rather than the tactic of many other teams out there that seem to rely so heavily on the free agent market.

I agree ... to that point. You keep your best players on the team with rewards for doing well. Shows the new guys what they have in store for them when they produce and gives them Positive role models. Importance of that can't be overstated. At the same time, you can't sit on your thumb and ignore holes on your team that could be filled ..... for the most part in the interim by Quality free agents.

Now, that I agree with. I think Marvin Lewis has tried to fill needs via free agency.

The reason it hasn't happened, I think, is not for lack of trying, but because Lewis placed a value on those guys and refuses to overpay. While it may hurt now, because we see all these people walk through our doors and go to another team, I think it's a strategy that will pay off in the long term. I think Lewis is more interested in building a Patriots type of dynasty than a team that gets a burst of improvement with the addition of a free agent, and then falls back a step or two when they can't afford everyone the following season.

Now, you may disagree with the Bengals on who is or is not worth the sacrifice, but I think the philosohpy is the same...

I've made this statement before, but I'll repeat it as it applies to this topic. In his first off season, Coach Lewis identified people that he was interested in ... brought them into town and in his own words didn't let them get back on the plane til a deal was done. Now, as you said you can agree or disagree with his selections, but its hard to argue with his methods and the results they yielded. Players were signed, and as the coach also said " We're not bringing them here for free lunches."

Last year and this year ( so far ) we delved into the free agent market .... timidly at best ...... and like before ..... the results showed the effort put in. We gave away several free lunches last year and at least one so far this year ..... with none of our lunch dates ending up in uniform. We look indecisive .... and reactionary. That doesn't project an image that attracts top FA's. It also doesn't generate confidence in the fan base as to who REALLY has his finger on the button.

Now if the coach doesn't think we need to participate in free agency, then I'm certainly not going to argue with him. I would feel better in fact if we did that instead of releasing statements like... in the future we may agree to agree to work on a deal. Not sure if that's a direct quote or not, but it was along those lines.

FA's ?????? depends on who it is and the circumstances I guess .... What I'd really like to see them do is shine 'em on ... or jump in with both feet.

But that's just me.

[Kirkendall]

[redsfan2]

[HairOnFire]

In his first off season, Coach Lewis identified people that he was interested in ... brought them into town and in his own words didn't let them get back on the plane til a deal was done. Now, as you said you can agree or disagree with his selections, but its hard to argue with his methods and the results they yielded. Players were signed, and as the coach also said " We're not bringing them here for free lunches."

Last year and this year ( so far ) we delved into the free agent market .... timidly at best ...... and like before ..... the results showed the effort put in. We gave away several free lunches last year and at least one so far this year ..... with none of our lunch dates ending up in uniform. We look indecisive .... and reactionary. That doesn't project an image that attracts top FA's. It also doesn't generate confidence in the fan base as to who REALLY has his finger on the button.

First, lets do a little housekeeping. The Bengals did sign one of their free lunch dates this year. Granted, the true pessimist doesn't seem to respect the signing of Robinson enough to remember it from one day to the next, but I say it still counts.

Moving on, I'll never understand the fascination Bengal fans have over the issue of who has their finger on the button at any given period of time. Your post actually implies that Marvin had more control as a rookie coach than he does now, a conclusion I find laughable.

But that's just me.

[redsfan2]

In his first off season, Coach Lewis identified people that he was interested in ... brought them into town and in his own words didn't let them get back on the plane til a deal was done. Now, as you said you can agree or disagree with his selections, but its hard to argue with his methods and the results they yielded. Players were signed, and as the coach also said " We're not bringing them here for free lunches."

Last year and this year ( so far ) we delved into the free agent market .... timidly at best ...... and like before ..... the results showed the effort put in. We gave away several free lunches last year and at least one so far this year ..... with none of our lunch dates ending up in uniform.  We look indecisive .... and reactionary. That doesn't project an image that attracts top FA's.  It also doesn't generate confidence in the fan base as to who REALLY has his finger on the button.

First, lets do a little housekeeping. The Bengals did sign one of their free lunch dates this year. Granted, the true pessimist doesn't seem to respect the signing of Robinson enough to remember it from one day to the next, but I say it still counts.

Moving on, I'll never understand the fascination Bengal fans have over the issue of who has their finger on the button at any given period of time. Your post actually implies that Marvin had more control as a rookie coach than he does now, a conclusion I find laughable.

But that's just me.

Since he did indeed sign, he by definition is not a free lunchdate. As to whether he is an upgrade or not .......... I'll wait to see how he pans out and take the coachs' word for it in the mean time.

As to the amount of control that the coach has ..... I was referring to the speculations that arise every time we go through one of these exercises. Since you responded in a manner that leads me to believe that you've noticed it as well, I'll take that as illustrating my point.

Since the coach cut ... fired ... didn't match offers .... traded and probably threw in the river most of the team that was in place when he got here ..... he obviously had more input then than he has had in the next two due to the slowing of the turnover / bloodbath. So I find that more laudable than laughable. If you wanted to prove that the coach had complete control of the team, you should have pointed to the firing of Frazier. One thing that MB has never done of his own accord was to fire a coach at any level .... or allow it to be done for that matter.

I never said that the coach didn't have control of the decisions. I said it didn't generate a lot of confidence in the fan base about who had their finger on the button by which you assumed it wasn't the coach. ............... But that's just you

Actually I think that the approach the team has taken looks more like it's being done by committee ......... Katie ..... her ol man ..... Coach Lewis .... and lastly with veto power Mike Brown. He does own the team after all ... so I'd think that's only fair.

But .... again .... that's just me. Wanna see a card trick ???????????

[HairOnFire]

I never said that the coach didn't have control of the decisions. I said it didn't generate a lot of confidence in the fan base about who had their finger on the button...

You're kidding, right? Anyone who bothers paying attention knows that generating confidence in THIS fanbase is a futile gesture. Or hadn't you heard the rumor that Marvin is leaving?

This is a broken fanbase.

Around here each new day is an ugly decade long.

Let's move on.

In Marvin's rookie season everything was about change. From the players to the lunchroom menu to the paint on the walls. But change for the sake of change is as pointless as it is entertaining. At some point you've got to stop swapping faces and develope somebody. Or if you prefer, at some point you've got to protect your gains. You've got to salvage whatever good you inherited. Perhaps that means you've got to lock up a young player capable of setting the team rushing record even if it means paying dearly for that production. It might mean you've got to pay up more than you might have budgeted when the longshot WR finds a way to produce at a higher level than most thought possible. And if making those moves also limit your ability to add even more new faces to the constantly swirling mix then so be it.

Frankly, it amazes me how little respect is given to the idea of retaining talent and paying for production. It's hardly a new thing. Lot's of teams do it. Among them are the great teams as well as teams that aspire to be great.

However, in my opinion there's little support shown for securing this teams own talent precisely because many members of this fanbase have grown more comfortable hating this teams players rather than embracing them. Swap 'em out. Give me something new. Whose next? Bring out the gimp. (Perry)

Generate confidence in this fanbase? Please. Many of these lovable but goofy bastards can't get over the fact that the Bengals didn't sign a FA they claimed all along the team had ZERO chance of signing. Others are still clinging to the idea that Lamont Jordon represented a way to save some bucks at the RB position. Saved dollars that would solve everyones problems.

But still, your point is well taken. Perhaps the fans of this team would be more confident if the Bengals hadn't bothered making a run at Sharper. Because you can't disappoint the masses if you don't give 'em hope, right?

[Kirkendall]

It's off-season, welcome to the NFL.

[HairOnFire]

It's yesterday, welcome to Cincy.