Bengals likely losing three starting defensive players

by Josh Kirkendall on Feb 26, 2008 12:31 PM EST in Contracts

By now you've probably heard that Madieu Williams and Landon Johnson will likely enter free agency without any deal with the Bengals. Even though the sides are talking, one has to wonder how far discussions will go at this point now that Landon Johnson's agent is saying "that's just the way it's headed - to free agency." A deal for Williams is looking bleak with his agent saying "There is a chance of that," Zuckerman said. "But it takes two (sides)."

Makes you wonder. Is the failure to find terms a product of cheap front office management? Possible. Or is it that neither player truly figures into the all-but-confirmed 3-4 conversion? Even Geoff Hobson makes the point that "Landon isn't the answer in a 3-4." I doubt the same logic applies to Madieu Williams which could simply be a failure to find a financial middle-ground. Williams could be overstating his value while the Bengals -- myself included -- haven't seen much reward in the safety after having high expectations when he was drafted in 2004.

At any rate, the Bengals are likely losing Williams, Landon and Justin Smith. Depending on what they do in the free agency market (likely nothing at all), the Bengals could have a decent number of compensatory draft picks next season to make up for losing three defensive starters.

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

No big deal

I don't have a problem with losing any of these players. You have to figure that someone is going to overpay for Justin Smith. It would be irresponsible to match these offers given the performance of the front 7 the past two seasons. A shakeup is needed and it's time to get some new guys in here (get Thornton out too for crying out loud...how does he make $4 million this year?).

I think Madieu is good but not great and I imagine he will also get higher offers than he is worth. We probably have confidence in our two young safeties and Dexter Jackson, while not a good starter, to me is a veteran safety that is fine to have around in the last year of his contract as a backup to Chinedum and Marvin. We also don't know what we are getting with Kyries Hebert (that CFL safety we signed).

As for Landon, I think he is a decent 3rd or 4th linebacker but he'll try to get paid like a 1 or a 2 (and he should). But with Odell and Ahmad coming back along with Jeanty and Jones (and Geathers if we go to a 4-3), there's no reason to force it.

To me, the only huge need this highlights is on the D-line (whether we are talking 3-4 or 4-3). Either way, I think we need two difference makers on the D-line. We have good players at LB, safety and corner but through the draft and free agency, we need at least a couple D-linemen.

by mp45242 on Feb 26, 2008 2:19 PM EST reply actions

I hate to see...

...Landon leave, but while he's a versatile, gives-110%-every-down type, he's in the same boat as Kaesviharn was last year: in Cincy, he'll always be first guy off the bench as his position. Someone will hand him $4-5 million a year and that'll be that.

Madieu never regained his rookie form following his injury, and with the Vikes supposedly poised to offer him a deal with $10 million in year one money, he's gone.

I do agree that the sheer number of deals that can't seem to get done -- Stacy's, Landon's, Justin's, Madieu's, etc. -- suggest the Bengals are pinching pennies again. OTOH, it's not like their recent history of big-bucks extensions has gone well: give $100 million to Carson, a week later Kimo rips his leg off; give two extensions to Chad and he becomes a cancer; show Willie the money and he promptly falls apart; back the Brink's truck up to Levi's door and he proceeds to blow out both knees. Long-term deals have become the kiss of death in Cincy...

by BeerRun on Feb 26, 2008 3:38 PM EST reply actions

Landon's a gamer,

an overachiever, really, but how long can you keep that house of cards up, you know? He'll end up getting paid not much more than we might give him elsewhere, coming off the bench and starring on special teams. I still think a 4-3 is our best bet, picking up Derrick Harvey or Calais Campbell- or both, in the draft to bookend Peko, Fanene, and/or Rucker with Geathers. Odell in the middle flanked by Brooks and Jeanty, maybe Dhani Jones, maybe a free agent like Vilma. I also think that kid from UC, the safety could be another Kaesviharn.

by IgnatiusJReilly on Feb 26, 2008 7:28 PM EST reply actions

I'd like to keep Johnson

Losing Smith isn't that big a deal because of his price tag. We can get a two DE rotation for less than his price, and one of them can be a pass rush specialist.

I would hate to see L. Johnson go because I think we need some continuity at linebacker and you can't deny that the guy is a player.

I'd like to see Williams in a Bengals jersey, but he has become expendable with the emergence of Ndukwe and White.

by goffchile on Feb 27, 2008 1:34 PM EST reply actions

Re:

I can't buy into it because the whole thing is like a mind trip.

If Smith, Landon and Williams aren't worth signing then how good are the players that they have behind them and how much are they making?

If Smith was worth 8+ mil last year then is he worth the 7+ mil number that they gave to Andrews or is he worth nothing at all?

Landon has been a leading tackler on the team for how many seasons now? I know that he's not labelled as a starter but he's managed to finish just about every season that he's been here and he's done so by being a steady player? What is a player like this worth? Is he worth a franchise tag? Is he worth at least the 4+ mil that they gave to Fanane who is basically an experienced rookie? You tell me!!

And what about Williams? What is he worth? If we have Jackson turn in a performance like he did last season I'm sure that the team will need to have extra depth. So what is a player of this caliber worth? 3, 4, 5 or nothing?

The whole thought is that I keep coming up with is that somewhere down the line the team has to stop turning the veterans over every year and make a commitment that they players that they have, except for a relative few, are the players that they want and the players that are going to get them into the playoffs. They seem to gotten to that position with the offense but not the defense. It appears that since they have had poor coaching and have made somewhat poor decisions according to players it's like they are continually retooling the defense in an effort to save money or find the right combination.

This should be the year that they change all of that and they should begin to build a solid defense.

by davidincincinnati on Feb 27, 2008 10:32 PM EST reply actions