There were "some people" around the NFL who recently told The Athletic 's Dianna Russini that the Bengals should've let wide receiver Tee Higgins enter free agency instead of placing the franchise tag on him with the intent of signing him to a long-term extension.
Russini discussed the topic of the Bengals' plan to pay Higgins along with Ja'Marr Chase and Trey Hendrickson with former NFL quarterback Chase Daniel on the Scoop City podcast.
"They're just really, really top-heavy," Russini said of the Bengals' roster. "When you talk to people around the league about the Bengals situation, because a lot of people were watching this guy, 'how are they going to pay these guys? How is this going to work out?' You know, there were some people who felt that they should just let Tee walk.
"Just let Tee hit free agency," Russini continued. "Go get a second receiver somewhere, pay Ja'Marr [Chase], at least extend Trey Hendrickson. They've got six picks in this upcoming draft, so, in terms of overall team building, I'm curious about the philosophy there too. I'm not saying I disagree with what they're doing, but they're spending a lot of money. It's top, top-heavy on offense. Here, when their biggest problem. Last year was clearly on defense.
Before I get into the meat of this, let's address some things.
- "They're just really, really top-heavy," which is polite for, "the rest of the roster isn't good," and that's true. But saving money by not paying a star doesn't mean you'll have enough money to build the rest of the team up to the same level you were previously at. It's not an either-or situation. You still need to draft very well no matter what route you take.
- "A lot of people were watching this guy," I bet! He was widely considered the top impending free agent. That player typically has ample suitors, particularly those who do not already have a Chase or Higgins on their own team. I can't imagine why there would be interest from around the league in what happens with Higgins unless I was thinking facetiously.
- "Just let Tee hit free agency," why not trade him at least? Why do they have to accept a 2027 third-round compensatory pick as a result of letting him walk instead of trying to snag two first-round picks in a franchise tag-and-trade first? Even if they're unsuccessful in orchestrating said trade, the comp pick just comes a year later after he plays on the tag again. This is an objectively confusing thing to say even if the Bengals would actually be dirtbags if they make him actually play on the tag again. Let's just cross that bridge if it gets to that point.
- "Go get a second receiver somewhere," where? In this extremely underwhelming free agency class, or in this draft class where running back and tight end are comparatively stronger position groups? They now have to make concessions at what would've previously been a position of strength because they have to address the defense? Refer back to the first bullet point. The defense can be at least salvaged and paired with an elite passing offense without spending ungodly amounts of money on it. This argument doesn't hold up.
What 'some people' are really saying here
They, "some people," only feel Cincinnati should've left Higgins alone, or have communicated to Russini as such, because they actually don't want the Bengals to keep Higgins for themselves. From the perspective of the team that has Higgins currently, this is how it sounds:
"You?! You can't pay him. But US??? WE can pay him no problem!"
"You just wouldn't pay him in a way that makes sense for your team, ya know?"
That second point actually has some truth to it. The Bengals don't maximize their salary cap space correctly and it limits how efficiently they can construct their roster. The contract they're likely to sign Higgins to may not be structured in a way that gives them preferred flexibility like you'd find around the league.
And if it needs to be clarified again, the Bengals tagged Higgins for a second time, "with the intent of continuing to work toward a long-term deal in Cincinnati." They said this exactly in their own press release from Monday:
The Bengals today designated WR Tee Higgins as the team's franchise player, with the intent of continuing to work toward a long-term deal in Cincinnati. - Bengals.com
Drafting better would greatly help solve the problem of loading the team's talent level sufficiently, but if we accept that not every team will draft consistently well (like the Philadelphia Eagles), then proper cap management becomes even more important.
People within the NFL recognize the Bengals don't spend their money as wise as they should, but why do they even care? Why do "some people" who represent other clubs care about another competitor messing up its cap situation?? Doesn't that benefit them in a sport where the margins are razor thin? This is a complaint for the fans, not for anyone else.
The only reason why any competitors wouldn't want this to happen is that they feel the Bengals could beat them if it does happen. If it makes the Bengals a worse team, they should let it happen and do nothing to fight against it instead of feeding deceit and manipulation tactics to the media.
Go back just one year. Was there anybody within league circles who thought it was a good idea for the New York Giants to let Saquon Barkley go? Even the Giants' own owner didn't want that to happen and it happened regardless! If they knew the eventual Offensive Player of the Year would end up on New York's most hated rival, AND he'd win them a Super Bowl the very next year, they'd have laughed hysterically at the idea of the Giants relinquishing control of Barkley.
There was an argument to be made that the Giants weren't equipped to maximize Barkley's talents, and it'd be harder to build a competitive team with him on it making the money he's making now. That ultimately didn't matter because they knew another team would be better with Barkley, and the Giants would be worse after letting him walk for nothing.
But the Bengals are supposed to be the team that should let their star player leave and get paid by a desperate competitor. And when I say desperate, I mean they'd pay Higgins more than what the Bengals are prepared to pay him.
We'll never know for sure since the Bengals don't plan on allowing that to happen.
There's not even a consensus among Cincinnatians about the Bengals actually paying Higgins. A contingent exists that believes the resources would be better spent elsewhere. The one thing everyone in the debate agrees with is it would've been ridiculous to just let him walk out the door without at least trying to make the best out of the situation. Trading him was always the route if he wasn't going to be on the team anymore.
It's the only route "some people" can hope for, but those hopes aren't looking too strong at the moment.
