CRAPPY POLL: TO or Bryant?

[StompLord]

[TheBurn]

Went with Bryant based on age... but I'd be pretty stoked with either one.

[StompLord]

Went with Bryant based on age... but I'd be pretty stoked with either one.

Yeah, me too.

I look at it like this: Our #1 offseason need was finding a top-level #2 receiver. These two guys are two of the top three UFAs on the market (the other being Kevin Walter.)

We sign either, and it's a job well done.

[skycruiser]

i'm shocked i was the only one who picked TO. i'm actually starting to warm up to the idea

[Bengals1]

i'm shocked i was the only one who picked TO. i'm actually starting to warm up to the idea

That's just the alcohol talking....

[scooper]

Bryant, for the age, the speed and for fewer headaches.

[skycruiser]

could be...ya'll can blame it all on the alcohal

think about it though.

FINALLY we have a legit WR that can draw coverage away from chad. hell, having TO might just be what chad needs to actually reach his potential. you got 2 ego manic narsassist and they'll compete like all hell to prove their the best. it might be exactly what TO needs to get back to greatness. he doesn't have a whole lot of time left on his body, so this might be his last chance to compete on a team with a shot to make it to the superbowl.
the dude is game. he played in the superbowl on a busted ankle. he's one of the best downfield blockers. he makes crazy plays after the catch. (given he catches the ball).

could this be crazy enough to actually work?

[Bengals1]

What makes anyone think at 37 TO still commands the kind of attention from DB's he garnered 3 or 4 years ago? Nothing he did last year in Buffalo supports that. I realize he'd be on a better team in Cincy but still, he's thirty friggin' seven people!!! What makes anyone here believe he'll give Chad any more space than Caldwell did? And who can say for sure that's all Chad needs to get back to 1000+ yard seasons!?! Two starting wide receivers on the wrong side of 30? is that really what you want to go to war with!?!

The days of this team signing overthehill usedtobe's should be long gone. Sign Bryant if you need a questionable veteran and then draft Tate or Williams out of SC. We need youth and speed folks, not old and beaten up.

Sheesh....

[scooper]

We need youth and speed folks, not old and beaten up.

Sheesh....

Yet we let you post here.

Agreed, though.

[skycruiser]

caldwell did better this year than TO would ahve? he's as young and as fast as they come.

TO at 37 is waaaaay better than bryant at 29

[PocketPasser9]

I'm going to go ahead and vote TO.

With the stipulation that we draft Golden Tate or Damian Williams.

[StompLord]

I think signing TO in no way alters whatever plans the team might have to draft a wide receiver, other than possibly delaying the pick by a round.

Signing Bryant, however, probably pushes that WR draft pick down several rounds. Bryant won't come on a one-year contract. He'll demand multiple years.

With the NFL potentially not playing games in 2011, that has to be something to consider.

[Deadcat]

I read this whole thread thinking the same thing Stomp. What I like about T.O. is we know this is a one, maybe two year lease. No way is this guy a long term solution. I don't think Bryant is a long term solution either but I bet management would. I'd like to see us draft a wide receiver in rounds 1 or 2. If think if sign Bryant they avoid that.

Plus, just imagine the circus of T.O. and Chad scoring TDs. It would be a super awesome game of one-up-manship. Then you've got the celebrations after the TDs. As a Bengals fan, this would be fun to watch. Now on the other side, if we lose, it could get ugly. So let's just not lose and take the AFC North again. If we can add T.O., strengthen our defense we guys off injury and an infusion of new talent, we could do it. Pittsburgh's D and Balt's D ain't what they used to be, but ours is legit. Plus we've got the ball control back which helps. Pitts and Balt don't have that. And let's not talk about Cleveland, child please!

[PocketPasser9]

I think signing TO in no way alters whatever plans the team might have to draft a wide receiver, other than possibly delaying the pick by a round.

Signing Bryant, however, probably pushes that WR draft pick down several rounds. Bryant won't come on a one-year contract. He'll demand multiple years.

With the NFL potentially not playing games in 2011, that has to be something to consider.

I read this whole thread thinking the same thing Stomp. What I like about T.O. is we know this is a one, maybe two year lease. No way is this guy a long term solution. I don't think Bryant is a long term solution either but I bet management would. I'd like to see us draft a wide receiver in rounds 1 or 2. If think if sign Bryant they avoid that.

Plus, just imagine the circus of T.O. and Chad scoring TDs. It would be a super awesome game of one-up-manship. Then you've got the celebrations after the TDs. As a Bengals fan, this would be fun to watch. Now on the other side, if we lose, it could get ugly. So let's just not lose and take the AFC North again. If we can add T.O., strengthen our defense we guys off injury and an infusion of new talent, we could do it. Pittsburgh's D and Balt's D ain't what they used to be, but ours is legit. Plus we've got the ball control back which helps. Pitts and Balt don't have that. And let's not talk about Cleveland, child please!

All very, very good points. :claps:

[Bengals1]

You're right about one thing, if we sign TO it will be used as an excuse NOT to draft a WR in the first round, perhaps even in the 2nd round as well. That means we won't get one of the top receivers......again. And for what? A 37 year old usedtobe.


Yeah, that makes sense.....

[Deadcat]

You're right about one thing, if we sign TO it will be used as an excuse NOT to draft a WR in the first round, perhaps even in the 2nd round as well. That means we won't get one of the top receivers......again. And for what? A 37 year old usedtobe.


Yeah, that makes sense.....

I actually think it's NOT an excuse for passing on a long term solution. I think Bryant IS, because of his age. If we were to sign T.O. and not draft a wideout early, it would be a mistake. But we've made mistakes before (yeah Jerome Simpson, I'm talking about you).

[Bengals1]

You're right about one thing, if we sign TO it will be used as an excuse NOT to draft a WR in the first round, perhaps even in the 2nd round as well. That means we won't get one of the top receivers......again. And for what? A 37 year old usedtobe.


Yeah, that makes sense.....

I actually think it's NOT an excuse for passing on a long term solution.

The problem is, you're not making the drafting decisions for the Bengals, SoP is....

[CincyBobcat]

I voted Bryant. Of course, they already have him signed, so the point is moo. I waffled on this for quite some time, but the more I looked at it the more I liked Bryant's age and speed.

[Bengals1]

I voted Bryant. Of course, they already have him signed, so the point is moo.

Ahh, you're just milking this....