By the way, I heard that the diluting agent was the water that the NFL told him to drink because he couldn't pee. So this is going to come back on the NFL anyway. And water is a diluent according to NFL rules.
so, you don't consider trading fictional 9th and 12th round picks a loophole? the draft is only 7 rounds long. that aside, why would cincinnati give up two picks (well, a net of one) to draft palmer when they can keep those picks, stay where they are and be guarnateed to land palmer?
You could make those picks players, they could be Houston's picks, they could be anything with little value to either team this year (cinn- Hou). They could even be picks next year. They just have to be compensation to Dallas and Miami. The Bengals would do it because they get a an additional 3rd rounder and they still get Palmer. Houston would do it becuase they get the number one man they covet. Dallas and Miami would do it for the freebies whatever they may be. They could even be cash. They won't care. It's more than they would have had.
i think your desire to see rogers in houston is causing a logic meltdown on your end. this scenario of your defies common sense on so many levels, my head's spinning. first things first -- cincinnati has the first pick. palmer is their's; they don't have to do anything to get him but sit tight and call his name out in two weeks. THAT'S IT. over. done. end of story. why would they risk losing the guy they want for a third round pick? that would be worth it? the third round pick is gonna make up for the fact you had to settle for the third best player in the draft? but, whatever -- even if we were to assume cincinnati did want to complicate what's essentially a simple process, why have you randomly picked dallas and miami as the only two teams that pose a threat to move ahead of them? don't the panthers need a QB? how about the cardinals? is tommy maddux a long term answer in pittsburgh? there're also QB questions in chicago, seattle and baltimore; plus, there are several teams with aging QBs and no heir apparents (the packers, oakland, jacksonville, st. louis...). are you gonna pay off every team in which palmer would represent an upgrade? cause if so, you can throw in the giants and redskins, too. but, whatever -- maybe you're right. maybe only dallas and miami would move ahead of cincinnati. but that begs another question: why would those two teams pass on a franchise QB for, and i'll quote you here, "anything with little value to either team this year (cinn- Hou)"? your contention is that two currently terrible teams that desperately need a talent infusion (cin and hou) don't value draft picks... but miami and dallas would? and these picks "with little value this year" will one day have enough value to make up for passing on a franchise QB? dude, grab hold of the rheins. if cincinnati values palmer and leftwich equally, or if they rate another player other than rogers higher than the two QBs, then swapping with HOU and grabbing an extra pick makes a lot of sense on a lot of levels. but moving down two slots and paying off teams to not draft the guy you want, all for a measley 3, is ridiculous... especially when you have the first pick in the draft.
You don't get it. Dallas and Miami don't have a choice. Their backs are against the wall. That's why they settle for something rather than nothing. You're telling me if you were the Dallas owner you wouldn't take something rather than nothing. You're crazy. That defies logic. The only reason Dallas or any other teams says no is if they think Cincinnati is going to crush them for years. Not likely. Cincinnati holds all the cards right now. And like I said, Most of those teams cannot trade with Detroit. Detroit is not going to throw their draft away to trade with a team down in the draft. They have players they want that are top 10. The list of teams that can trade with Detroit is small. This is not impossible and everybody wins. When the #3 player in the draft is Palmer. Yeah. You take him and the 3rd rounder. That's why you guarantee that Palmer is #3. That's why teams trade down. It happens every year. You would be a fool not to consider the move if you are Cincinnati. And yes, you could buy off all those teams because they have no choice. They lose Palmer in either scenario. None of those teams even has an option to get Palmer. It's impossible given that Cincninati tells them flat out how it's going to happen. Is it worth it to the Bengals. Hell yeah. What's some cash or a couple of seventh rounders in the future (which have next to no value) for a chance to dramatically improve your team this year with Palmer and an early third rounder. It's not me wanting rogers by the way. It's the Texans. If you are Cincinnati and you don't explore this option you have completely closed the door on improving your team when you hold all the cards. They can't lose unless Detroit completely screws themselves. Which won't happen given their leadership.
i hope we get Charly Rogers because he is going to be a big impact next year. I agree with that dude in FSN to pick andre johnson i wouldnt pick him third.
what?!?! why are their backs against the wall? and what constitutes "nothing"? dallas has the fifth pick in the draft and QB is not their most glaring need. even if it were.... byron leftwich is almost a) guaranteed to still be there; b) considered by most to be equal to palmer and by quite a few as superior. you're making less and less sense. you're making less and less sense. again, assuming you're right -- dallas' back is aga-- you know what, i can't even pretend it's a possibility. if dallas wanted palmer bad enough, if they deemed him the draft's one and only playmaker... why would they instead settle for 7th round draft pick that you yourself said has "next to no value"? it defies even the most basic elements of common sense. even more illogical -- so illogical, it's actually devoid of any logic whatsoever... it'ssimply il_al -- is this notion that cincinnati is better off trading scores and scores of picks and players (all worthless, of course... which is why teams would line up for them, i suppose) to ensure they land palmer... when they can avoid all that, stay where they are and be guaranteed to land him. how does trading scores and scores of players and draft picks improve your team? oh, yeah -- you get an extra third rounder. and we all know what a sure thing a third rounder is. quick, name the texans' third round picks last year. i run a site on the texans, and i'd probably have to look it up. third rounders aren't ordinarily the difference between good teams and bad teams in the NFL. and you certainly don't dick with your future to obtain one.
It's not he Texans giving me the headache, I love them and I'll be glad with eithe Rogers or Johnson. It's PhiSlammaJamma's jibberish (no offense, just not too sure on what you're saying) and Ric trying to decifer it.
My 2 cents: Phi...your idea is feasible, and, Dallas and Miami, if offered, say, a 6th round pick to not trade up with Detroit, would take it given the scenario you've described - because if they don't take it, they are still at pick 5, and Palmer is still off the board (just at number one instead of number three). Nevertheless, what prevents one of the other teams from trading with Detroit. I know there are no picks to offer that Detroit would want, but if someone else sees Palmer for grabs and wants him bad enough, couldn't they trade real good players and future picks for him? It's a risk Cincinnati would be stupid to take, just to get an extra third round pick, as Ric has pointed out.
We've taken this pretty far so I give up and will concede that if we can't figure this out neither will the bengals . But JayZ understands the point. The Bengals would be required to eliminate all the risk to make it work. And as Ric keeps pointing out, it's not worth it.
I agree. Get Johnson and then McGahee. Either that, or we need to get ourselves in a position to draft Clarett at some point.
