clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Approval Poll: Did Bengals make right move re-signing Randy Bullock?

Did the Bengals get it right in re-signing kicker Randy Bullock after he failed to succeed on his only important kick so far with the team?

Pittsburgh Steelers v Cincinnati Bengals Photo by Andy Lyons/Getty Images

On Thursday, the Bengals announced that kicker Randy Bullock had been re-signed to a two year deal.

It didn’t come as a much of a surprise, being that the Bengals don’t have a kicker with any pro experience right now. Jon Brown is a project as a former soccer player, who probably isn’t making a 53-man roster anytime soon, though, it would be a great story if he did.

But is it really smart for the Bengals to seemingly ‘settle’ on Bullock?

To recap, the veteran kicker was claimed off waivers in December, after a brief sting with the Steelers. He spent most of 2016 out of the league and has appeared in just 16 games total with five teams since the 2014 season, which shows you how little stay he has in the NFL when he’s being used as nothing more than an injury replacement for other team’s primary kickers.

The good news is Bullock did convert 6-of-6 extra points in three games with the Bengals and 5-of-6 field goal attempts, but the one miss would have been a game-winning 42-yarder in Houston.

It’s hard to say if he’ll end up being much, if any upgrade on the disaster that was Mike Nugent, but it looks like Bullock can at least get the extra points down. Still, Cincinnati will likely bring in some competition this offseason, whether it be another free agent or through the draft. And as long as the Bengal signed Bullock to a cheap deal with little guaranteed money, they won't feel obligated to keep him if they find a better option at some point.

All said, this looks like a decent move for the Bengals that's low-risk and medium-reward. Do you agree?