Cincy Jungle: Rumors swirling re Vikes/Giants & Whitworth

I was assuming Whitworth would hit the market. He still might and usually anything an Agent says I divide by 20, but would Cincy give him his 8 mill per that he might command?

Are the most likely destinations as win now teams with a huge need on the O line

but at what cost? For how long? 2-3 years?

You know my position on AW. I felt that Cincy has been kicking the can on the man for some time. He is coming off a 1 yr. contract. Previously, it was a 2 year contract. They haven't committed to him on a long-term in some time as they have been hopeful that their young talent would unseat him. Their problem is that AW is still at the top of his game (recent pro-bowl) talent wise. Knowing that he was going to be a FA, I assumed that he was finally going to be cut loose based on the declining lengths of his past contracts.

Of course, I have said that there always remains the possibility he would like to never wear another jersey. It's rare nowadays that players can continue their career for one team for so long.

I felt a 3 year contract that averages 8-9 million/year would work for both.

More from the Jungle.
Lonk - ( New Window )

was from January 21st..The latest one in the OP was January 27th..

plan at LT - it didn't work. Fine with bringing in a two or even one year stop gap. In 2000 we brought in a couple of old timers on the OL in Lomas Brown and Glenn Parker. Helped us go 12-4 and win an NFC title.

In comment 13342557 Diver_Down said:

Quote:

I felt a 3 year contract that averages 8-9 million/year would work for both.

I hope not much of that is guaranteed.

Tying $27 million to a 35-year-old isn't the most wise allocation of cap dollars.

to) like Brady will and Brees kost likely will, imo..

so I don't honestly believe his window is close to closing albeit I appear to be in the minority here with that opinion..

I've given your pro Whitworth posts more attention than I did at the outset of FA discussions and for 2-3 years, he could be huge for us. And, we can also let Flowers continue to develop his techniques(hopefully) while Whitworth is here, not to mention any youngins we draft..

In comment 13342576 bluepepper said:

Quote:

plan at LT - it didn't work. Fine with bringing in a two or even one year stop gap. In 2000 we brought in a couple of old timers on the OL in Lomas Brown and Glenn Parker. Helped us go 12-4 and win an NFC title.

And we can add that imo, Whitworth is 5 X the player Lomas was when he started for us in 2000

He's only 32 and a better player. A 3rd and a 5th should do it.

But I would prefer to pass on Whitworth. I'm just terrified that he might fall off a cliff at 36.

In comment 13342605 Stan in LA said:

Quote:

He's only 32 and a better player. A 3rd and a 5th should do it.

I'd be fine with that. Doubt the Browns would do it, but ya never know

for a 36 year old Offensive Tackle?

LMAO!

In comment 13342612 area junc said:

Quote:

for a 36 year old Offensive Tackle? LMAO!

So what's Trent Baalke have to say about it

In comment 13342612 area junc said:

Quote:

for a 36 year old Offensive Tackle? LMAO!

For the record, he is 35. His Birthday is December 12, 1981. He just turned 35 last month.

I'd give him a 2 year contract and structure it so there is no guaranteed money in year 2. If his age catches up to him or he suffers a serious injury he can be released with zero cap implication.

All that matters is what you guarantee him.

Personally, I'd love Whitworth here on a solid deal that effectively pays him for this year and next. He might fall off a cliff, but he's been playing at a high level up until now so you hope that he's good for at least another year or two. If he's not, you're out some cap space but nothing unreasonable.

Everyone says Joe Thomas, but Cleveland isn't trading him unless they get a top pick. They're not stupid - they might be rebuilding, but they're going to need someone to protect their QB, present or future, and that guy's not easy to find. Why would they part with a good one unless they're getting a good future asset in return?

all that aside, I doubt he leaves Cincy.

In comment 13342621 jcn56 said:

Quote:

All that matters is what you guarantee him. Personally, I'd love Whitworth here on a solid deal that effectively pays him for this year and next. He might fall off a cliff, but he's been playing at a high level up until now so you hope that he's good for at least another year or two. If he's not, you're out some cap space but nothing unreasonable. Everyone says Joe Thomas, but Cleveland isn't trading him unless they get a top pick. They're not stupid - they might be rebuilding, but they're going to need someone to protect their QB, present or future, and that guy's not easy to find. Why would they part with a good one unless they're getting a good future asset in return?

Makes sense, but they don't have their Franchise QB on the roster yet. No guarantee they'll get one this year, even if they pick one..If I'm Cleveland, I send to the highest bidder.

QB, then Thomas would come in handy. Still not sure, with all their holes, holding on to him is the prudent thing to do, imv

how the heck does a 6'7" 330lb Left Tackle remain in very good football shape at his age? If he writes a book, he can make some extra cash.

Even if you think the answer is "avoid injury" that begs the question, how, exactly?

Think this one through, don't fall into clickbait groupthink... They need a LT. If they trade Thomas, they'll need to get another one anyway.

They can either:
- Fill that hole via FA - and pay about what they're paying Thomas anyway, since he's signed to a reasonable deal.
- Fill that hole via draft - and pony up resources that they desperately need to address holes all over their roster.

What good would a 3rd round pick do them? They get a marginal player in the draft in exchange for a guy playing LT at a high level, and at 32 could easily have another 4-5 years in him?

I don't doubt he's available, but it's not to the highest bidder, it's to someone willing to offer enough in trade to offset his loss.

In comment 13342580 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

And we can add that imo, Whitworth is 5 X the player Lomas was when he started for us in 2000

But Bruce, Lomas was far better at head butting opponents, IIRC.

In comment 13342634 mrvax said:

Quote:

In comment 13342580 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: And we can add that imo, Whitworth is 5 X the player Lomas was when he started for us in 2000 But Bruce, Lomas was far better at head butting opponents, IIRC.

Bob Whitfield, not Brown

In comment 13342633 jcn56 said:

Quote:

Think this one through, don't fall into clickbait groupthink... They need a LT. If they trade Thomas, they'll need to get another one anyway. They can either: - Fill that hole via FA - and pay about what they're paying Thomas anyway, since he's signed to a reasonable deal. - Fill that hole via draft - and pony up resources that they desperately need to address holes all over their roster. What good would a 3rd round pick do them? They get a marginal player in the draft in exchange for a guy playing LT at a high level, and at 32 could easily have another 4-5 years in him? I don't doubt he's available, but it's not to the highest bidder, it's to someone willing to offer enough in trade to offset his loss.

As I commented to Stan, does a 3 and a 5 do it? I don't think so..Would a 2 and a 5? I don't know. What I do know (think) is I would not be for parting with a 1

unless the deal is structured so cutting him after too doesn't amount to much dead cap. 35 is 35, he can fall off a cliff week 1.

if you can't get your price why bother, just because? A 3rd is a far cry from a 1st, if I was Cleveland I stay pat, and continue to make the team better.

In comment 13342641 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

unless the deal is structured so cutting him after too doesn't amount to much dead cap. 35 is 35, he can fall off a cliff week 1.

That's the thing - it can be 100 years. The years don't matter, the guarantees do. And I'm sure if they did sign him, it'd be some ridiculous sounding contract (5 years/40 million) that really ended up being 2 years at $8M each guaranteed, and a bunch of nonsensical promises after that nobody expects the player to see.

Cincy is 44 million under the cap. They can match any offer so you hav e to make sure the offer is high enough that they don't match

So forget about some reasonable deal. Overpay is the only way you get him. Unless he wants out, of which there is no indication

Giants fucked up not signing Penn last year. They might still be playing if they had.

So, I say don't make the same mistake twice

the guarantees, signing bonuses, whatever..People keep talking about the $200 million we "spent" last year, yet only about $80(?) million is guaranteed in some way. And, it's amortized

In comment 13342668 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

Cincy is 44 million under the cap. They can match any offer so you hav e to make sure the offer is high enough that they don't match So forget about some reasonable deal. Overpay is the only way you get him. Unless he wants out, of which there is no indication Giants fucked up not signing Penn last year. They might still be playing if they had. So, I say don't make the same mistake twice

Sorry Vanzetti you FINALLY need to get the facts straight with Penn..We made zero mistake(s) with him..He was at the airport for his scheduled flight to see us, when the Raiders called and gave him what he wanted..His allegiance was to the Raiders. As long as they ponied up, which they did at the eleventh hour, he was remaining a Raider..

In comment 13342605 Stan in LA said:

Quote:

He's only 32 and a better player. A 3rd and a 5th should do it.

Come on. Why would the Browns do that? They could get much more for Thomas. Heck, why not offer Dallas a 2nd and a 5th for T. Smith while we're drinking?

I just wouldn't have any guaranteed past 2 years is my point, maybe even 1.

In comment 13342671 BigBlueShock said:

Quote:

In comment 13342605 Stan in LA said: Quote: He's only 32 and a better player. A 3rd and a 5th should do it. Come on. Why would the Browns do that? They could get much more for Thomas. Heck, why not offer Dallas a 2nd and a 5th for T. Smith while we're drinking?

Because Stan said so?

Why the fuck would Cleveland give him away for 2 mid level picks? If we were in the same boat we'd be furious. He still has 2 years left, this isn't the last deal of his contract. There's zero reason for Cleveland to quickly get rid of him, zero.

Signing 35 year olds is a dangerous game.

You guys are crazy.

if someone approached Cinci, with a more than fair offer, they would jump at it.....I just hope it is not the Giants.....I am leery of signing someone to their last contract....and unfortunately, free agents, especially older ones, tend to age quickly when they become Giants......must be something in that Jersey air.....

inquire, but it seems like he'll stay with the Bengals, or get more than we'd be willing to offer for a 35 year old LT. My guess is he's not a Giant next season.

In comment 13342623 jcn56 said:

Quote:

all that aside, I doubt he leaves Cincy.

I think he does.

Factor is Reese. He can't ignore the issue like he did last season.

In comment 13342702 Toth029 said:

Quote:

In comment 13342623 jcn56 said: Quote: all that aside, I doubt he leaves Cincy. I think he does. Factor is Reese. He can't ignore the issue like he did last season.

Which issue? LT? How did he ignore it?

He had a rookie who had an up and down season in his rookie season starting at OLT from day one with a high ankle sprain in the middle. Was there any reason he should've immediately moved Flowers to a different part of the line and filled LT?

Then there's the matter of who was available - of all the FAs, who do you think we *should* have signed? The only one you could make a case for was Penn, and it seems like he had no intention of leaving Oakland.

He is not a QB. Odds are so far against you for any position player not QB in the NFL at that age that it should be a non-starter as an idea.

And this player probably has enough leverage that there is really no way to structure a play-for-pay contract that puts all or most of the falling of a cliff risk on the player.

As someone to rely upon as a solution to offensive line issues and see how that works out for you.

and Brown was 37 when the Giants signed him and he was supposed to be just depth, and it turned out the old man could still play and he ended up starting for the Giants as a stop gap. I'm fine with Whitworth as a stopgap if the Giants can't find a better option going into the 2017 season. Upgrade from Flowers is one of the keys for 2017.

In comment 13342670 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

In comment 13342668 Vanzetti said: Quote: Cincy is 44 million under the cap. They can match any offer so you hav e to make sure the offer is high enough that they don't match So forget about some reasonable deal. Overpay is the only way you get him. Unless he wants out, of which there is no indication Giants fucked up not signing Penn last year. They might still be playing if they had. So, I say don't make the same mistake twice Sorry Vanzetti you FINALLY need to get the facts straight with Penn..We made zero mistake(s) with him..He was at the airport for his scheduled flight to see us, when the Raiders called and gave him what he wanted..His allegiance was to the Raiders. As long as they ponied up, which they did at the eleventh hour, he was remaining a Raider..

Sorry BB56. Giants wanted Penn to play RT. That was the stumbling block. If they had gone after Penn early in the process as a LT, he would have been a Giant. But they thought Flowers could do it.

In comment 13342750 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

In comment 13342670 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: In comment 13342668 Vanzetti said: Quote: Cincy is 44 million under the cap. They can match any offer so you hav e to make sure the offer is high enough that they don't match So forget about some reasonable deal. Overpay is the only way you get him. Unless he wants out, of which there is no indication Giants fucked up not signing Penn last year. They might still be playing if they had. So, I say don't make the same mistake twice Sorry Vanzetti you FINALLY need to get the facts straight with Penn..We made zero mistake(s) with him..He was at the airport for his scheduled flight to see us, when the Raiders called and gave him what he wanted..His allegiance was to the Raiders. As long as they ponied up, which they did at the eleventh hour, he was remaining a Raider.. Sorry BB56. Giants wanted Penn to play RT. That was the stumbling block. If they had gone after Penn early in the process as a LT, he would have been a Giant. But they thought Flowers could do it.

There was NO STUMBLING BLOCK, you're not "hearing" me..The Raiders didn't let him get on the plane. Period. He was coming here. Had his plane reservations..If, hypothetically he had flown in, met with the Giants and left without a contract, THEN AND ONLY THEN could you speculate about RT..But he never made it here, so there was zero stumbling block..What about this aren't you getting?

Draft Taylor Moton in the 2nd Round to play RT....move Justin Pugh to LT for this season..

LT Pugh
LG Flowers
OC Richburg
RG Warford
RT Moton

Roadgraders at LG, RG and RT
Hopeful Improvement at C
Enough smarts and Technique at LT

a priority like they did Snacks, Jenkins, and Vernon. If they did it would have been a different ball game. We came in late to the OL market. That changes everything. On top of that it was reported we had interest in 4 LTs but we wanted them as RTs. That kind of kills any real chance at landing an OL.

My mentality has been and will continue to be that there needs to be competition. If Flowers wins the job because he truly beat out a worthy opponent then fucking great. That has yet to happen the last years. Reese himself said the goal of free agency is to try to fill all your holes so you can draft for the best player available. That has not happened recently. In Reese's defense, although it is a group effort, the last 2 drafts have been a big improvement. So, we are tending in the right direction. But, just like the offense this last year, the slate gets wiped clean and nothing is guaranteed. McAdoo had a great first year but we cannot assume that it will continue. The defense had a remarkable year but we cannot assume that will continue. Our boat had leaks and we pulled our finger out of one hole to fill another. We cannot ignore our defense this offseason like we did our offense last season. If our defense stays the same we still need to add depth along the DL. Our DEs played way too many snaps. They need breaks to be at 100% every play they are on the field. We need more of a pass rush inside to collapse the pocket. We only have 1 first round pick and that one player will not cure all of our woes so take the player that will give us the best long term production so we don't have another hole ro fill in 3 years.

last year when Flowers was projected to improve? Fans keep mistaking a gameplan not working out with having none at all.

The plan didn't work, therefore there was no plan.

You don't spend a top 10 pick on a left tackle, then drop a boatload of money on a left tackle after one season.