Armon Binns is terrible.

[Servo]

Plenty of guys here thought it was a perfectly fine idea

like who? I dont remember anyone saying that they wanted Binns or Tate as the #2.

 

[flamingrey]

Many people were perfectly fine not going after Simpson or going after a vet #2.

 

[Servo]

I dont remember that. It seemed like most people wanted to bring in a Mario Manningham type to play opposite AJ. I seem to remember a lot of people not wanting Simpson back.

 

[flamingrey]

Well if they weren't advocating not going after a vet #2, they were definitely justifying it after the fact. Hobson...err Crash comes to mind.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I wanted Maningham.

I had no issues with letting Simpson walk. Just too inconsistent. Really. I don't think there's going to be much dropoff in the #2 position. Binns or Tate may not leap over people, but I think they'll catch a few more balls that Simpson would have dropped.

Of course, if Dalton doesn't get any more time by the OL to throw the ball without scrambling for his life, it won't matter who the #2 WR is...he's going to get crushed before he can throw the ball.

 

[ckhokie]

like who? I dont remember anyone saying that they wanted Binns or Tate as the #2.

plenty of guys.


even you mentioned in a couple threads how you didn't mind him getting a shot. It's not really guys coming out as much and saying "Binns should be our #2 guy," as it was just no one caring that we weren't considering ANYONE during free agency, and making excuses why we shouldn't go after guys like Plax, Manningham, Mike Wallace, Jacoby Jones, shit, even Jabbar Gaffney. Any of those guys would be an upgrade this year.

 

[Servo]

I have no problem with Binns (or anyone else) competing for a job or a roster spot. I do have an issue with projecting a guy that has never played in the NFL and that was cut by a WR deprived team as the starter. So yeah, I thought there should have been better veteran competition for the #2 spot going into camp...but that ship has sailed. I think the #2 spot for the Bengals is really weak at this point...but as a whole I think the WR's and TE's are strong and will get better. We'll see whether Tate or Binns can be a serviceable stop gap until Sanu or Jones take hold of the spot.

 

[cincygrad]

Look back at the discussions regarding Jabar Gaffney. The idea of adding a vet was frowned upon by many. I wish we had a vet.

 

[Servo]

Look back at the discussions regarding Jabar Gaffney. The idea of adding a vet was frowned upon by many. I wish we had a vet.

If by many you mean Vance then its true. Here is the thread.

http://www.sportshoopla.com/forums/cincinnati-bengals/69605-jabar-gaffney-released.html

Of course there's only like 5 of us who post on here so not a great sample size, but the notion that the majority of this board was in favor of not adding a WR via FA is not accurate at all. I'm sure if you dig up the old 'what do we need in FA' most everyone would've identified WR as a need. I know I wanted an OG, CB, and WR as the major needs

 

[Servo]

Also, I watched the game last night...Binns made a really nice (and difficult) catch on the 1 yard line. He's not a world beater but he's not terrible.

 

[bengaldoug]

Look back at the discussions regarding Jabar Gaffney. The idea of adding a vet was frowned upon by many. I wish we had a vet.

I believe I started one of those threads.....I know I really wanted them to sign Gaffney for this year......

 

[flamingrey]

Also, I watched the game last night...Binns made a really nice (and difficult) catch on the 1 yard line. He's not a world beater but he's not terrible.

As I mentioned earlier, both him and Tate make nice plays every now and then. Their biggest problem is and will be consistency. Simpson wasn't a world-beater either, but he was able to get by with his athleticism. We'll see if Binns eventually is able to take advantage of his size more consistently, but he hasn't shown it yet.

 

[cincygrad]

My bad.... I thought there more than a few agains the addition of a vet.

Regardless, this wouldn't be as bad if Marvin weren't Marvin. You get the sense that he'll ride Marvin Jones on the bench for the better part of the year as the team struggles. He'll probably do the same with Sanu, a guy that was scene as a good second receiver that might be ready from the start.

 

[vancelot23]

Both Tate and Binns had a play here or there that was nice. Binns had that route run perfectly on the fake before slant that brough the ball to the 1 yard line. Tate had a nice catch earlier. The biggest issue is and will be consistency. The nice plays look real nice like with any other receiver, but the rest of the time they struggle to get separation, and we saw a lot of that last nice. Neither is a prototypical #2, not even close. Simpson wasn't great but his speed and athleticism allowed him to get by.

Teams would kill to have Green and that's it. I'm sure there are teams out there that wouldn't mind having Gresham's talent, but truth be told, he hasn't shown anything yet - though I don't believe it's entirely his fault - for anyone to drool over. There are no other pass catchers on this roster that would even be intriguing to anyone.

You're going to knock Binns and Tate for consistency, while extolling the virtues of Mr Inconsistency himself? That's a bit laughable.

 

[Servo]

My bad.... I thought there more than a few agains the addition of a vet.

Regardless, this wouldn't be as bad if Marvin weren't Marvin. You get the sense that he'll ride Marvin Jones on the bench for the better part of the year as the team struggles. He'll probably do the same with Sanu, a guy that was scene as a good second receiver that might be ready from the start.

Marv catches a lot of flak for that but I think he has changed his approach to playing rookies. Look at last year, it was two rookies that were a huge part of this team getting to the playoffs. I think all the WR's will get looks during the season. The one who produces will get more PT. Of course, the coaching staff will need to trust the rooks on the field that they know their responsibilities (which I think was an issue in the past for some rooks not seeing the field).

 

[flamingrey]

You're going to knock Binns and Tate for consistency, while extolling the virtues of Mr Inconsistency himself? That's a bit laughable.

Here's the difference:

There is a very wide range of skill level, talent, etc a player has to fall within to be a starting QB in the league; however, to be a starting #2 receiver in this league, that range is minuscule in comparison. #2 receivers can either get open or they can't. They can either catch the ball or they can't. They can either make the defense respect them or they can't. The gray areas that you see within an analysis of a QB, you don't with a #2 receiver.

So, inconsistent or not, Carson is a legitimate starting QB in this league. As of now, because of their inconsistencies, neither Tate nor Binns are legitimate #2 receivers.

Please don't hijack this thread with your infatuation with me and/or Carson. If you would like to argue the points I've made about Binns' and/or Tate's play, please feel free to do so.

 

[vancelot23]

I didn't say anything about Carson. Reading comprehension??

 

[cincygrad]

Here's the difference:

There is a very wide range of skill level, talent, etc a player has to fall within to be a starting QB in the league; however, to be a starting #2 receiver in this league, that range is minuscule in comparison. #2 receivers can either get open or they can't. They can either catch the ball or they can't. They can either make the defense respect them or they can't. The gray areas that you see within an analysis of a QB, you don't with a #2 receiver.

So, inconsistent or not, Carson is a legitimate starting QB in this league. As of now, because of their inconsistencies, neither Tate nor Binns are legitimate #2 receivers.

Please don't hijack this thread with your infatuation with me and/or Carson. If you would like to argue the points I've made about Binns' and/or Tate's play, please feel free to do so.

Pretty sure he was referring to Simpson.

 

[vancelot23]

Pretty sure he was referring to Simpson.

I was.

 

[flamingrey]

Oops. Coming off the Palmer thread seemed like a dead giveaway.

"Extolling the virtues..."? Now, THAT'S laughable. Exaggerate much?

The only thing I said about Simpson was his athleticism allowed him to get by. And neither of those statements is deniable.

As I said before, while he isn't the prototypical #2 receiver, he still managed 700+ yards and 4 TDs in a new offense with a rookie QB. To this point neither Binns nor Tate have shown they'll be able to pull off the same "success". Heck, they couldn't even get open against the Packers' porous pass defense.