kungfoodude

Yes but he doesn't do that on the bench. Hence why your argument is basically completely invalid. If it had any validity to it, how did we win last Sunday?

I think this could be a very good game. The more I think about it, I just don't see our secondary being able to contain their WR's because Burrow is a dramatically superior QB to the Minshew in Bryce Young clothing version that we saw Sunday. I think our inability to consistently create pressure on Burrow will lead to issues defensively that we just aren't able to overcome. There are Asians in the Bengals armor, however. They do not run the ball well and they do not defend the run well. If we can control that aspect of the game, we might be able to force them to be fairly one dimensional. I am actually looking forward to this matchup.

Gunslingers always tote higher INT's. They gamble big. Hence the name.

There are always going to be guys on every team that you just know don't have the ability to be relied on. Usually backup guys but sometimes starters. That's usually just a morale issue and not truly toxic. Toxic would be any of the Josh Daniels stints or Brian Flores. Those are scenarios where people are actively sowing division or torpedoing morale intentionally. Bryce is not intentionally doing anything. He just isn't confident or capable of doing the job. So, with that, him just not being a starter essentially removes that. If he was actively toxic we would have lost against the Raiders because the morale was still ruined by his active negative presence. I have experienced all of this in various workplaces. If you have a co-worker that just sucks at their job, it can impact morale negatively because you know everyone else has to either carry their load or the team as a whole is at a reduced level of effectiveness because of the weakness created by them. Toxic is wholly different. That's someone(as an example) pitting co-workers against each other for any number of reasons and essentially actively and intentionally destroying morale for their own reasons. Bryce is not that latter thing.

And Jimmy ended up being a huge liability everywhere because he committed the unforgivable sin of a game manager all too often.....turn the ball over(TD:TO ratio close to 1:1) . And he usually did it at crippling times.

I don't think he is anything close to toxic. I think what you are seeing is just the fact that all of his teammates know he cannot do the job at the necessary level to win. So in that regard its demoralizing to watch him fail and the team suffer. That doesn't necessitate his immediate removal, especially when removing him means that some of his teammates will likely be leaving with him or having to enter into contract negotiations during an active season.

If you want to see a guy taking career shortening hits, watch Anthony Richardson. That guy gets DESTROYED at least once a game, often more. As a result, he has already had one concussion and a season ending injury. THAT is the classic example of a guy that has drastically too little awareness of avoiding punishment.

If you look at the game, he still leans gunslinger. It's just who he is. But he is a relatively low TO gunslinger. If you look at the QB school tape, you will remember those couple of dropped INT's from the Raiders game. It could have been a less stellar game if those guys make those plays.

Yeah, it's a take with a lot of nuance. Lots of personal definitions.

The only thing that goes away is his base salary, which is very small.

I would disagree on Brady/Brees/Marino. Those are elite guys because they were capable of elevating play around them on a consistent basis. That puts them out of the game manager category for me.

Dalton is not a game manager. He was a multi-Pro Bowl player with the ability to elevate play around him but not consistently. He is very much in the Baker Mayfield-ish gunslinged mold(or rather Baker is in the Dalton mold, really). Both of them are on the lower end of the TO prone spectrum for a true gunslinger. The Favre-esque guys like Winston/Howell are on the high TO side of that, as an example.

A good current example would be a guy like Brissett. He is a very classic game manager type.

Basically a guy that is typically charged with limiting turnovers and making plays inside the scheme of the offense. Also not typically a guy that is capable of elevating the players around him but rather vice versa. It's often thrown a lot at less physically gifted QB's but I think that is generally inaccurate. It's not what your ceiling is physically, it's how you generally perform on the field. In short, a guy that isn't going to be the sole reason you win games very often but shouldn't be the sole reason you lose games either.

It's a rookie deal. All the signing bonus his is spread evenly over the life of the deal. That's our dead cap burden, which in this case we would be toting ~$22 mil of across this and next season. This is another reason you don't usually see 1st round picks moved until towards the end of their contracts. It actually is a substantial cap burden.

Probably any deal will be after the start of the league new year in 2025. That's basically the only way we can get something down without having to jettison $7 mil in salary or find someone(s) willing to start contract extension negotiations during the season. Hence why I really don't think you will see us do much with him until 2025. Ideally we agree in principle to a deal that will process after June 1st. Then we will minimalize the dead cap hit. It's likely to be another very tough offseason for us cap-wise so any assistance in alleviating that is likely worth more than a mid round versus late round draft pick.

We can't absorb $8.1 mil in dead cap. We would have to somehow clear $7 mil in cap before the NFL would allow us to even make the trade. Otherwise we are over the cap. Remember that we had to maniacally scramble to get under the cap prior to the season. This makes WAY more sense to deal with either in the offseason or after June 1st, 2025. There is no real risk to the team. His value is already quite low and it dropping from something like a 4th to a 6th/7th is relatively meaningless. Additionally, we don't really have a valid backup option behind Dalton without him(arguably we don't WITH him either).

Base salary hit transfers to the new team but all bonus money(which is prorated over the term of the contract) stays with the Panthers as dead money because it was already paid out.

The media distraction will fade if Dalton keeps being successful. If we ascend to a 5+ win team this season, most of the national media will ignore the Bryce storyline until the offseason(minus the trade deadline week).

I think OTC may be making a calculation error on the post June 1st trade option. That would be the same as a post-June 1st cut on the cap. We would be relieved of all base salary but the remaining bonus money accelerates to being an equal hit over this year and next year's cap. If you look at how that is calculating, it isn't accurate. For an example, go look at the same thing for Deshaun Watson. They show a net positive cap hit for trading him this season, which we know to be completely false.

When will the Dalton led Panthers lose a game. If you read through the thread you will see the consensus is that this will not happen in 2024 or early 2025. Unfortunately, we will be left searching for a QB for the 2025 season as Dalton will retire after his SB victory.

That completely ignores the significant cap ramifications. Hence my statement.

It's financially irresponsible to make that move now.

The Venn Diagram of teams believing we are solely to blame and that also thought he was the number 1 QB probably looks like a pair of eyeglasses.

bengals (0-3) - L bears (1-2) - W falcons (1-2) - L commanders (2-1) - L broncos (1-2) - W saints (2-1) - L giants (1-2) - W chiefs (3-0) - L bucs (2-1) - L cowboys (1-2) - L cards (1-2) - W