ArmyBengal Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 The one part of the article on the Thurman signing, from Bengals.com that speaks volumes about what we would love to see out of our defense:"Enjoy the situation you are in. Love it and live it, and be the best professional athlete you can be", Greene said. "Don't merely be a talent dripping with athletic ability and show great potential. Take it to the next level. Develop an attitude about your defense that you're going to break peoples asses every play and come after people." BREAK PEOPLES ASSES !!! That's what I'm talking about !!! :player: WHODEY !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 If Landon is as healthy as advertised, Pollack might have a spot of trouble getting the reps with the first team defense, which he will sorely need learning a new position. With Simmons manning one OLB and Thurman anchoring the middle, L J can slide into his more natural (and more productive IMO) position of OLB. I wouldn't worry. Whether Landon or Pollack starts on the outside -- even if Pollack doesn't sgn until five minutes before the first game begins -- it'll be an upgrade vs. Hardy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbusbengal Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 trying to see how cheap of an offer we can offer Pollack by waiting for Erasmus James. WHY ARE WE SO CHEAP ahhhhh!!??@!?#@?#@$? I don't think the Bengals are cheap when it comes to salaries. I don't think the Bengals have ever had a payroll in the bottom ten of all NFL teams. The problem with the Bengals signing players is that the Bengals want to be like New England (beat parity once they finally get good) and an important factor in doing that is to avoid spending too much on "up-front" money that counts against your salary cap after you are no longer getting any benefit from the player. The Browns were always cheap on things like facilities, accomodations, and coaching for the players. Marvin convinced them to leave the dark ages on these things. I don't believe payroll was ever much of an issue (giving money to the RIGHT players was though). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Bengal Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 I closed my eyes as i clicked onto the bengals.com link in my fav praying silently to myself I opened my eyes and boy i wish you could have seen the big smile on my face credit to the front office for sticking to their guns as its all about the future not just 1 quick season now Id expect pollack to be in camp by the end of the week if not sooner. Now thurman is tied up its one more for the front office to consentrate onWHO DEY!!! :player: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalByTheBay Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 trying to see how cheap of an offer we can offer Pollack by waiting for Erasmus James. WHY ARE WE SO CHEAP ahhhhh!!??@!?#@?#@$?I don't think the Bengals are cheap when it comes to salaries. I don't think the Bengals have ever had a payroll in the bottom ten of all NFL teams. The problem with the Bengals signing players is that the Bengals want to be like New England (beat parity once they finally get good) and an important factor in doing that is to avoid spending too much on "up-front" money that counts against your salary cap after you are no longer getting any benefit from the player. The Browns were always cheap on things like facilities, accomodations, and coaching for the players. Marvin convinced them to leave the dark ages on these things. I don't believe payroll was ever much of an issue (giving money to the RIGHT players was though). I agree -- I think the days of it being as simple as calling the Bengals "cheap" are over. OT's sticking point was contract length and the Bengals were right. Most of the deals coming in were 5 year and the team stuck to its guns and signed a market deal. I think the Bengals understand how to deal with contracts now and are not getting spooked if it takes a few extra days. I can't complain at this point. DP will sign soon. But it really doesn't matter anyway because we're basically going to have 4 LBs that can start. If DP isn't quite ready to start when the season begins, Landon will slide there and do a tremendous job. They might want to start Landon anyway just to minimize the pressure on DP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whur CHad At? Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 Pollack will be in camp wednesday, i gurantee it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 Count me among those who think signing Thurman to a 5-year contract vs. a 4-year one isn't that big of a deal. In fact, I can think of a couple negatives. 4 or 5 year deal, OT is a UFA at the end of it; if he's a stud we'll have to pay him, and the price tag will likely be cheaper 4 years down the road vs. 5. And if, gawd forbid, he busts, the longer length likely means a bigger cap hit if we cut him.I'm just happy the issue didn't result in a lengthy holdout. I don't think it would have been worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rizzy Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 The thurman deal was just made official and he will be in practice this afternoon according to the .com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 In fact, I can think of a couple negatives. And that's what makes you who you are. Not that I'm complaining. "You're my boy, Blue!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brownflushitdown Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 where do you see it is offical??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rizzy Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 where do you see it is offical??? bengals.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 In fact, I can think of a couple negatives.And that's what makes you who you are. Not that I'm complaining. "You're my boy, Blue!" I do it all for you, dearie. For the record, I can think of some positives as well, probably the biggest being that the team can get a look at Odell over three full seasons -- plenty of time for him to prove himself one way or another -- and then if warranted offer him a big-money extension between seasons 3 and 4, when he's still looking at 2 years before UFA. Start making top 10 money then, or play under your low-money rookie deal for 2 more years? That's certainly going to be more tempting than if he only had to wait one more season for freedom. And as the Chad Johnson example shows, what's top money one year is chump change two years later.All in all, it's a good thing, IMHO. I just didn't think it was worth a protracted holdout, and am glad Odell agrees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 All in all, it's a good thing, IMHO. I just didn't think it was worth a protracted holdout, and am glad Odell agrees. I think we all agree. Like I said previously, I had mixed feelings but a short holdout of just a couple days always seemed to be worth the price. Beyond that, no. 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.