Chad Johnson also not on team anymore

C'mon, man. It's the Bengals. Do they have a logical reason for anything they do?

The entire Bengal organization just sounds like a mess.

Willie Anderson was in the Pro Bowl two years ago, but he has injury issues and demonstrates just how quickly football players can go downhill because of age.

So by your logic the Rams should have cut Pace then.
Anderson gets picked up before the regular season starts. Count on it.

Raider Joe wins it in One move!

Well played, sir.

I suggest, that if this ever gets to 84 comments, that RJ also logs in for number ocho-cinco withthe same comment.

free Kenny Watson!

Barring me becoming totally demented with the power of owning an NFL franchise, there's no way I could do worse than the Bungles within my lifetime.

The Bengals nursed Brooks along for quite a while, but between injuries, lack of effort, and the fact that they had to keep dumbing things down for him, I can see why they cut him. That said, I think it's insane to only have six linebackers, given what happened at the position last year. I'm hoping we're going to bring in a seventh off waivers.

And given Perry's injury history, DeDe Dorsey's fragile nature, and Kenny Watson's age (he's very underrated; DVOA vindicates him!), it wouldn't be a bad idea to bring in another RB, as well, heh.

Let me get this straight. The Bengals franchised Anderson, and then cut him? WTF? I didn't know that you could do that.

Stacy Andrews is who the bengals franchised this year

This is exactly why I'm glad my fantasy draft is on Labor Day. Now, I'll be interested to see where Chris Perry goes in my draft. I might take a flier on him in the 10th.

Perry was going in the 10th round of fantasy drafts before Rudi was released. Look for him to go in the 8th or so now (assuming 12 team draft.)

Thanks langsty. I misread an article on Cincinnati.com.

It turns out to be the least surprising news ever. When your replacement gets the franchise tag, don't buy any green bananas.

as a browns fan, i enjoy looking at the bengals and laughing.

Rudi will not be missed, but it should be highly worrisome that the Bengals can't get good production out of Anderson anymore. The offense seems to be regressing while the defense fails to improve.

Criag -

I don't think you understand the term logic. Schatz wasn't advocating cutting all older, injured lineman.

On Rudi: He was never that good to begin with. Does one thing well, and that thing is very replaceable.

On Willie: Love the guy. He made the 2006 season watchable. Would love to have him around still, but not at that price. He's exhibit 1A why teams should pay for future expectations (Eric Steinbach) over past performance.

On Deltha: The ability is there, he never gets credit for being phenomenal in 2005, but he's just not an impact player for this team at this point. Really, not a big deal.

On Ahmad: In about February, I put him and Chris Perry in the same category. I expected absolutely nothing out of either. Whatever they gave was just bonus. He has not "played well so far." LB coach Jeff FitzGerald has molded similar talents into elite backers, and he was never high on Brooks. That speaks volumes. Still, I'll probably always look back at opening night last year against Baltimore and think What Might Have Been with him.

The 49ers have claimed Brooks off waivers. I like the signing, he's one of the most TED shaped linebackers in the game and he can only benefit from having Mike Singletary as his position coach. If he could become a big, run stuffing, thumper next to Willis then that would really help to fill out the niners' defense, though I don't really expect much from him immediately.

Can anybody give me a good reason why the Bears should not pick up Anderson?

allllll right!!! 7 and 9 here they come!!!

Jerico a favorite trick of reporters, lawyers and politicians is disguising their views as someone elses. Here Schatz claims it was due to age and injury, but the very article he linked to tells you it was because Anderson refused to take a pay cut.

He further fudges his facts by saying Anderson was a Pro Bowler 2 years ago, when in fact it was after th 06 season. Last year was the 1st time he wasn't a Pro Bowler in 5 seasons. That was also mentioned in the article.

re: 18
No, none at all.

20. From the article: He became a backup to Stacy Andrews in training camp, and declined to take a pay cut Saturday to stay with the team.

Who's fudging the facts now? He became a backup player, was asked to take a pay cut to reflect his new ability status, refused, and got cut. So I'd say Schatz was pretty on-point.

and by 18 I of course mean 19.

RE: 21 Maybe my math is a little off. I've never been too great at it. But I thought 2006 was 2 years before 2008. Please, go back to FOXsports.com and keep your comments where they belong.

Re:25. Yes your math is off. He was a pro-bowler for 06 season, for which the pro-bowl game was played in 07. Since then we only had 07 season. So the very moment he was playing in the pro-bowl game, he could have been said to be pro-bowler a year ago if we go with your math.
I disagree with 21 that Schatz misrepresented the facts. But he got his fact right about the pro-bowl.

Since then we only had 07 season.

And he wasn't a pro-bowler for the 07 season. He was a pro-bowler two years ago. I don't see a problem with the initial statement.

23 No it makes it a salary cap issue, not an age /injury issue.

And for the math/reading comp challenged out there, let's try this one more time. Here is the statement.

Willie Anderson was in the Pro Bowl two years
ago

That bold word in makes it clear the writer is talking about the actual Pro Bowl game, which was played in Feb 07, or just over 1.5 years ago.

All aforementioned players are too law abiding to be a part of the Bengals. They lack the killer instinct of a Chris Henry, that is why they have been cut.

Update: O'Neal has signed with NE

That and Willie Anderson, who was in a Pro Bowl as recently as 2007 lost his starting job which indicates some sort of decline in his ability. Age and injury (that made him miss 9 games last season) definitely played a role. The salary cap problem came in play because he was a back-up getting paid like a starter.

The Lions are bringing in Rudi Johnson for a visit.

The Lions RB situation is a mess with only rookie Kevin Smith, the painfully bad Tatum Bell, and a rookie just picked up off of waivers cut by SD.

There's rumors that Rudi is being asked to take a physical, so some are suggesting a contract has already been agreed upon.

Either way, until the OL comes together, no RB will make a difference, although Rudi will certainly be an upgrade over softy tatum bell

28. It was a salary cap issue because his ability declined. If he hadn't lost his job to another player, there would have been no salary issues.

33 If you want to see a story, where age/injury are the issue, read the very next EP about Jon Janson.

I forgot to mention the Lions have signed Rudi Johnson. Bad move on their part.

Thank God for that. One Ahman Green is quite enough, thank you very much.

36 The Lions released Tatum Bell, to make room for johnson. Let's see if he gets re-united with Kubiak.

Re 35:

Deck chairs.