2023-24 Bengals

**paulxu** · 09-06-2023, 04:12 PM

There is a wonderful article in the Washington Post on the “genius” of Joe Burrow.
Great reading of you can get to it.

**Xville** · 09-06-2023, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by xu82

Burrow is terrific, for sure, but I’m not worried (as a Bills fan) long term about the Bengals. I just don’t think they can sustain it by having the cash to pay everyone.

The Raiders a few years ago lost some key pieces because they just plain could not afford to put up all the guaranteed money. The salary cap does NOT create an even playing field. The advantage still goes to the wealthiest.

Josh Allen’s deal is now old news, but that was $150 Mil guaranteed that had to go into escrow when he signed that deal. Can the Bengals handle that plus more for Burrows, and still keep the team around him when their deals are up, many as soon as next year?

Advantage goes to wealthiest and smartest. If it was just wealthiest, then the panthers, cowboys would win the Super Bowl almost every year.

I think the bengals can handle long termed success (whatever that means in the nfl) if they are smart. As good as Higgins is, you gotta let him go due to salary cap etc. burrow and chase are the priorities and you can’t sign everyone.

**xu82** · 09-06-2023, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by Xville

Advantage goes to wealthiest and smartest. If it was just wealthiest, then the panthers, cowboys would win the Super Bowl almost every year.

I think the bengals can handle long termed success (whatever that means in the nfl) if they are smart. As good as Higgins is, you gotta let him go due to salary cap etc. burrow and chase are the priorities and you can’t sign everyone.

Yes, you must be smart AND wealthy. No matter how smart you are, if you can’t afford to do the smart thing you are at a disadvantage. Most people leading NFL franchises are smart (sorry, Jerruh, not you!). But you need to be able to stroke the checks. I think I read the Raiders and Bengals have the “poorest” owners.

EDIT: I do think I like the way the Bengals draft. Haven’t they drafted well the last few years beyond a QB and a WR? I don’t love the Bills drafts, so advantage Bengals there. That’s great because that’s where the cheap talent comes from.

.

**boozehound** · 09-07-2023, 11:53 AM

My understanding is due to the revenue sharing pretty much any team should be able to afford to spend to the salary cap. Whether they choose to or not is a different question. I believe that the Bengals have spent very close to the salary cap in recent years. There is also a rule that a team has to spend at least 89% of the salary cap over a rolling 4 year period.

All that to say that I don't think the Bengals are going to spend less than other teams because they aren't as wealthy as other owners. That's not really how the NFL works.

**waggy** · 09-07-2023, 12:22 PM

11% of the current salary cap almost $25M. Not a bad gig if you can get it. I believe though the Bengals are usually about mid pac.

**Xville** · 09-07-2023, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by xu82

Burrow is terrific, for sure, but I’m not worried (as a Bills fan) long term about the Bengals. I just don’t think they can sustain it by having the cash to pay everyone.

The Raiders a few years ago lost some key pieces because they just plain could not afford to put up all the guaranteed money. The salary cap does NOT create an even playing field. The advantage still goes to the wealthiest.

Josh Allen’s deal is now old news, but that was $150 Mil guaranteed that had to go into escrow when he signed that deal. Can the Bengals handle that plus more for Burrows, and still keep the team around him when their deals are up, many as soon as next year?

You sure about that guaranteed money portion? From what I understand it can be paid out in annual installments so I’m not following what you’re putting down.

I think the real problem is giving money to the wrong people i.e. not being smart within the confines of the cap

**D-West & PO-Z** · 09-07-2023, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by boozehound

My understanding is due to the revenue sharing pretty much any team should be able to afford to spend to the salary cap. Whether they choose to or not is a different question. I believe that the Bengals have spent very close to the salary cap in recent years. There is also a rule that a team has to spend at least 89% of the salary cap over a rolling 4 year period.

All that to say that I don't think the Bengals are going to spend less than other teams because they aren't as wealthy as other owners. That's not really how the NFL works.

I think you are missing 82's point. Yes most teams spend right up to the cap and there is a floor of how much you have to spend. 82's point does carry some weight (although I am not saying it is true or not true for the Bengals) in that you have to pony up the guaranteed amount in all these contracts right away.

So if Burrow gets (just made up numbers) a 300 millions dollar contract with 200 million in guarantees, once the contract is signed that 200 million had to be produced by the Bengals and put into escrow. Obviously the Bengals will be happy to do so for Burrow. But it does beg the question will they be happy or able to do so for others, especially when they seem to have a lot of young big time players up for extensions. So you have big guarantees that need to be ponied up for Burrow and Chase which are obvious but will they want to do the same for Higgins etc.

**D-West & PO-Z** · 09-07-2023, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by Xville

You sure about that guaranteed money portion? From what I understand it can be paid out in annual installments so I’m not following what you’re putting down.

I think the real problem is giving money to the wrong people i.e. not being smart within the confines of the cap

i am pretty sure he is right. It isn't paid to the player right away but the total amount has to be put up right away.