Bengals extend Atkins 5yrs -55million

[CrashDavisSports]

That's the best you can do? It is a well known FACT that both sides had agreed to a contract but the agent botched the signing.

First example off the top of my head, and Denver is considered a first class organization. I was just responding. If you don't like my answer, so be it.

 

[futballiscool]

Before commenting on how the Bengals came away with a steal, I'd like to see how the contract is termed. It could be for a boat load of money early on with it tapering off in the later years which could lead to a hold out.

Atkins strikes me as an absolute class act. I don't see a holdout on the way.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

I just do not see why Atkins would hold out. He is getting 11 million a year average with basically all of it guaranteed, because it is a front loaded contract, so it would basically be stupid on the Bengals part to let him go if he is going to get cheaper as the years go by, unless he gets hurt and is worthless. In this case, best for Atkins he get paid as early as possible also.

 

[cincygrad]

There was exactly a 0% chance Atkins wouldn't have resigned. Just like there will be exactly a 0% chance we don't resign Dunlap and Dalton if we choose to keep them, assuming we don't absolutely low ball them in the beginning. All for the fact that they are on 2nd round or later contract money. They could wait a year or 2 and risk injury and sign a contract for almost $10 million more than what we offer and they'd still be worse off having been paid that year or 2 at a much lower salary than they'd have gotten had they extended.

I just don't see that as being "commendable". It also won't be "commendable" when they're able to resign Green either. I didn't include him in the above list because he's making much more than those other guys, but there's probably a 3% chance we don't resign him. It's just how the business works.

Meanwhile there are at least 24 or so teams that would immediately trade for our roster.... I'm not as high on our recent drafts as some folks around here, but it's hard to debate the talent that exists on this roster. And it strikes me that the only real talent that we immediately regretted losing was J-Joe.* So, what's your explanation for our 'new' ability to have talent vs all those years where we were bottom 5 in talent on the roster?

*You could also make the argument for Justin Smith, but he really didn't blossom until put in a 3-4.

 

[flamingrey]

Meanwhile there are at least 24 or so teams that would immediately trade for our roster.... I'm not as high on our recent drafts as some folks around here, but it's hard to debate the talent that exists on this roster. And it strikes me that the only real talent that we immediately regretted losing was J-Joe.* So, what's your explanation for our 'new' ability to have talent vs all those years where we were bottom 5 in talent on the roster?

*You could also make the argument for Justin Smith, but he really didn't blossom until put in a 3-4.

When did this conversation turn to the draft? I'm talking signing Atkins. Or any future signings of Dalton, Dunlap, or Green. None of it is "commendable". None of the dealings that we've had with any FA signings has been "commendable" either - how can it be when we're only ever looking at 3rd tier players?

My explanation for the talent is we've been able to hit on a number of players in the draft over the past few years (Atkins, Green, Dunlap, Johnson) and have hit on both our DC and OC who have been able to put it together. Relating to retaining talent, we've NEVER had that issue (aside from Joseph). Carson was signed easily, Hall was signed easily. I can't really think of much else since we'd never previously drafted or signed anyone of any real worth.

Business as usual. Only difference is there are more players with bigger names.

 

[flamingrey]

I just do not see why Atkins would hold out. He is getting 11 million a year average with basically all of it guaranteed, because it is a front loaded contract, so it would basically be stupid on the Bengals part to let him go if he is going to get cheaper as the years go by, unless he gets hurt and is worthless. In this case, best for Atkins he get paid as early as possible also.

I still don't know the terms of the contract so I can't comment on whether he might be inclined to hold out. Furthermore, "average" means nothing unless he's actually getting paid the "average" every single year which I highly doubt.

First, the franchise tender for a DT is $8.45 million this year. Whatever we're paying him this year and probably well exceeds that (the average exceeds it as well). If his salary is below that number in years 4 or 5 - which it very well may - we could see a hold out.

 

[cincygrad]

When did this conversation turn to the draft? I'm talking signing Atkins. Or any future signings of Dalton, Dunlap, or Green. None of it is "commendable". None of the dealings that we've had with any FA signings has been "commendable" either - how can it be when we're only ever looking at 3rd tier players?

My explanation for the talent is we've been able to hit on a number of players in the draft over the past few years (Atkins, Green, Dunlap, Johnson) and have hit on both our DC and OC who have been able to put it together. Relating to retaining talent, we've NEVER had that issue (aside from Joseph). Carson was signed easily, Hall was signed easily. I can't really think of much else since we'd never previously drafted or signed anyone of any real worth.

Business as usual. Only difference is there are more players with bigger names.

We did have a retention issue before Marvin Lewis. We failed to retain Takeo Spikes - Our best defender. We had soap operas with Carl Pickens and Corey Dillon. We failed to keep our best interior lineman when we let Eric Steinbach walk.... In fact, we mismanaged that entire offensive line by having them signed to deals that all expired at the same time. After 2005 we began signing guys a year early.... Now we are using the exclusive period (the year before the fourth season) to re-up our own guys. I think it's a good strategy and it assures us the ability to get these guys for good money.

 

[kramer1]

If he's inclined to hold out in those latter years then that means he's probably worth the extra he'd be asking for anyways.

 

[flamingrey]

We did have a retention issue before Marvin Lewis. We failed to retain Takeo Spikes - Our best defender. We had soap operas with Carl Pickens and Corey Dillon. We failed to keep our best interior lineman when we let Eric Steinbach walk.... In fact, we mismanaged that entire offensive line by having them signed to deals that all expired at the same time. After 2005 we began signing guys a year early.... Now we are using the exclusive period (the year before the fourth season) to re-up our own guys. I think it's a good strategy and it assures us the ability to get these guys for good money.

I agree with Takeo Spikes. Even the best teams have soap operas. It's a matter of whether you're able to hold onto your talent or not. 4 years after Spikes we lose Steinbach. 5 years later you're looking at Joseph. And now only 2 years later we're talking about how the Bengals are doing a "commendable" job.

For one, enough time hasn't even past to say they've broken the trend. 2nd, the new CBA makes it more difficult for teams to steal better players in their prime.

Not saying the Bengals haven't gotten better, but it's far too early to act like anything has changed (other than the CBA).

We'll see over the course of the next 2 years how they handle Green, Johnson, and Dalton.

 

[USCDoom]

Great deal for the Bengals.

Atkins could have leveraged much more money if he hit the open market

Great Deal for the Bucs too. McCoy is a FA after 2014, and he is probably going to be paid just under this. This would actually be a pay decrease for McCoy who is still playing under the old rookie pay scale (as the #3 overall pick).

 

[cincygrad]

I agree with Takeo Spikes. Even the best teams have soap operas. It's a matter of whether you're able to hold onto your talent or not. 4 years after Spikes we lose Steinbach. 5 years later you're looking at Joseph. And now only 2 years later we're talking about how the Bengals are doing a "commendable" job.

For one, enough time hasn't even past to say they've broken the trend. 2nd, the new CBA makes it more difficult for teams to steal better players in their prime.

Not saying the Bengals haven't gotten better, but it's far too early to act like anything has changed (other than the CBA).

We'll see over the course of the next 2 years how they handle Green, Johnson, and Dalton.

I've said at least twice that it could just be a 'fortunate' byproduct of the new CBA. No disagreement there.

But the Bengals have been trending this way for a few years now. They signed Robert Geathers to a long term deal back when he looked to be on his way to a nice career rushing the passer -- Didn't turn out that way, but he was still good value for a young guy back when we locked him up. We re-signed Whitworth long before his deal was up. We re-signed Hall before his deal was up. We gave Peko a deal before he was up.

It seems to me that in the past, Mike and the crew would be more likely to let other teams set the market for players. Their current strategy is both cheap and smart and I'm giving them credit for now.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I don't believe that Spikes was never going to re-sign here. Ever. He didn't feel like they were going to win. He left. Not much you can do there.

As for Steinbach, the Bengals had 3 OL to sign at the time, Eric, Levi, and Willie. They have never had a history of paying big $ for guards, and value tackles over guards. With the money they had, they invested in Anderson at RT and Jones at LT. Jones ended up with a bum knee, and Anderson's decline was a bit more rapid than I think they thought would occur. Hindsight, yeah, it was a bad move, but not completely unexpected. Most teams value tackles over guards, especially LT's and guys who have been with the organization their entire career, as Anderson had been up to that point.

Josph said in an interview that the money was comparable. I think he fell into the same boat as Spikes. He just felt that another team had a better chance of winning. Can't fault him for thinking that. Did the Bengals low-ball him with the first offer? Yeah, probably. But, in the end, he said the deal was comparable, but he chose to go to Houston. Again, can't fault him. That also freed up some money that went to signing 3 different players that would go on to help the team's defense that year, so it's tough to complain about that.

Again, this isn't to say that the Bengals have 100% turned the corner on signing their best talent, but anytime you extend guys you have hits and misses. Sometimes, guys just want to move on, and there isn't much you can do about it. Sometimes guys will take good deals to stay with teams that invested in them. I think we're starting to see an agressiev approach to signing good, young players, but it will always come with risk, like Geathers/Dunlap and who could forget Reinard Wilson after a career year (Yes, I know this isn't recent, but just pointing out the risk). Hopefully, guys like Atkins and Green, Dalton will reap more rewards than risks down the road.