Discus fish salesman
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Mar 31, 2018
- Posts:
- 14,575
- Liked Posts:
- 15,555
This is a lot of nonsense rambling.But it is a matter of how they allocate resources. Only Lane Johnson is making big money on that OL. They also paying him 24m next year but then taking it down to 14m in subsequent years when they have to start paying JM big money. One is also 25 while the other is 32 so they really aren't on the same timeline.
Likewise, AJ Brown is signed thru 2026. Smith is a FA in 2026. By the time they have to pay Smith, they can remove AJ's contract off the books and probably will have already drafted AJ's replacement.
The issue the Bengals will have is they have too many guys clustered together. Sure you can still sign them but it will have a greater effect on the rest of the roster than how the Eagles have managed it. They would be better off turning Higgins into a younger resource IMO and creating a bigger spread between their stars. Higgins is a luxury really not a necessity. That money is better spent elsewhere IMO.
The difference with the Bears is we have few stars we have to pay and we don't know if Fields is a franchise QB. If you are trading for Higgins then you are doing so to help Fields develop. If I already knew Fields was a franchise QB and elite passer then I would roll with Mooney and Claypool and dump far more resources in the OL and keeping that D good. I would then use the draft to get a WR so that if he becomes good, by the time I have to pay him Mooney and Claypool can be moved off the books if need be. A legit franchise QB does not need two no 1 WRs. They just need competent WRs.
Bengals probably will eventually trade Higgins. 0 reason to do that now though as chase big money won't hit until 4 years from now and burrows (even if extended this offseason) big money won't hit until 3 years from now. They have 2 and 3 years left on their rookie contracts, so why would cincy expedite losing a big piece (higgins) to a championship contending core?