Per rotoworld: NFL.com's Adam Schefter reports that T.J. Houshmandzadeh will not get the Bengals' franchise tag this offseason. Schefter says Cincinnati will instead try to sign Housh to an extension before his contract expires in late February. The Bengals have tried doing this previously, but couldn't get Houshmandzadeh to come to terms. If Housh hits the 2009 market, there won't be a better free agent wideout available. Dec. 24 - 3:46 pm et Source: NFL.com I know half you guys want Houshmanzadeh and I wouldnt exactly complain. I might see where some of our other guys are at progress wise but he could really strengthen the position.
TJ is too pricey and I don't think he is too much of an upgrade. Besides how many years does he really have left?
If we're really one WR away from the championship, then go ahead. But I'd rather spend the $$$ improving the pass rush from the defensive front seven. The Miami offense hasn't been a problem. The inability to find someone consistently to pass rush with Joey Porter on the outside WHO ISN'T a liability also in pass coverage would be a much better investment of dollars.
I think they might go after Engram with a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't think we'll be too interested in a high-profile receiver. They'll take a Vet who is a possession WR and is not a me-first guy. With Bobby Engram, you can let guys like Bess, Ginn, Fasano, and Camarillo shine. With TJ, he'll need to be THE guy.
I'd rather see us stick to the draft and develop our own players, we have a good team with good chemistry, not sure we really need this guy, obviously he's not helping Cincy win anything.
Yea but as a DC. Something hes actually good at. Also, EOP and FFS72...is it really fair to kill him for not helping cincy win? I mean Im not sure the AFC pro bowl squad could get Cincy a playoff spot with that front office, staff, and overall lack of team discipline. I think we need a WR who adds an element of week to week consistency. Part of the reason we have had to have a different go to guy every week is because no one out of this WR group has really been consistent every single week. Camarillo, Bess, and even Ginn havent been awful but the lack of a go to guy has hurt us at times, at least as much as its helped us from a "who does the defense cover perspective".
I'm not necessarily blaming all of Cincy's problems on the guy, far from it just saying that I don't think he's really worth a ton of money for us. We already have a good team, I don't think we really need to chase after a guy like this who is going to get big money from someone or get franchised and cost us draft picks. He's not the key to us winning a title, he's just a good WR which is nice but I don't think he's the missing piece on this team. And really with the chemistry we have I'm not sure adding a guy from a team with terrible chemistry is a good idea, particularly if he costs a lot of money or draft picks. I don't see why we shouldn't trust this front office with draft picks, I think they can get a guy to fit what we want to do in the draft or cheaper.
Boik, in response to your question I quoted FF72 because I agree with him. It's nothing against TJ. And I shouldn't have implied he's a me-first guy, but I do believe that Bess, Ginn, and Camarillo will only get better with experience and continuity with Pennington. And to be honest, I'm thinking all 3 will be significantly better. I don't see the need to dump a huge contract on TJ, but I wouldn't mind adding the depth of a guy who doesn't care if he catches any balls in a veteran like Toomer or Engram. The kicker too is that we have two guys who have proven to be pretty decent pass-catching TEs in Martin and Fasano. And Ronnie ain't too shabby catching passes out of the backfield
Yea when you think about it we actually have a decent WR group, it would certainly be better with TJ but its been good with Camarillo out, it will be even better next year. Just not worth a big contract or trading for the guy, nothing against him I just don't think he's enough of a difference maker for this team to pull the trigger.
