Who Dey Dish: Hue Jackson’s Concerns


The Cincinnati Bengals and the Arizona Cardinals will face off this Sunday. Here’s what you need to know about the Bengals, plus more news around the league.

Rummaging through the internet to bring you latest news about the Cincinnati Bengals and the NFL so that you don’t have to do it – this is your Who Dey Dish for Friday, November 20.

One Bengals player says former QB Carson Palmer ‘quit on us’ (CBS Sports)

"Even without any added narratives, Sunday’s tilt between the Bengals and Cardinals stands out. Both teams lead their respective divisions and have combined for just three losses. But throw in the fact that Cardinals quarterback Carson Palmer is taking on his former team and the matchup becomes even juicier.Luckily, neither side is pretending like this is any other game.For context, let’s rehash the messy divorce that played out after the 2010 season. Palmer, who was drafted first overall by the Bengals in 2003, wanted out of Cincinnati following a 4-12 season in 2010. The team refused his request and Palmer reportedly declared he wouldn’t ever “set foot in Paul Brown Stadium again.”“I have $80 million in the bank,” Palmer reportedly said. “I don’t have to play football for money. I’ll play it for the love of the game but that would have to be elsewhere. I’m prepared to live my life.”But in 2011, the Bengals drafted Andy Dalton and eventually shipped Palmer to the Raiders in exchange for two early draft picks. Before Palmer was traded, he didn’t show up to the Bengals’ team workouts. That might be what the unnamed Bengals player is referencing in his quote above."

Four years later, Carson Palmer still won’t talk about leaving Bengals (ESPN)

"Like any story, the one about Arizona Cardinals quarterback Carson Palmer’s departure from the Cincinnati Bengals has three sides.His story: “I’m not going to get into a ‘he said, she said’ situation with [Bengals owner] Mike Brown,” Palmer said. “We obviously disagreed, and it ended in a very colorful, heated argument, and we disagree with each other. That’s how it ended, but now is not the time or place to get into a ‘what he said, what she said’ type of deal.”Brown’s story: “We sat here in the office on a couple of occasions and argued about what the future should be for him and us,” Brown told FoxSports.com. “Whether he really believed it or not, I rather doubt. But my argument then with him was, ‘You’re a top quarterback and you’ve got real productive years in front of you.’“He would say to me, ‘Oh, no. I’m all beat up. I’ll be lucky to play another year or two,’ which I didn’t take to heart.”And the truth: Who knows?"

Hue Jackson’s concerns go deeper than Bengals’ run game (ESPN)

"Yes, Hue Jackson thinks about the Cincinnati Bengals‘ running game, but he’s not devoting as much time to worrying about it as you might believe.That’s because the Bengals’ offensive coordinator feels he has broader concerns that go deeper than how successful his team is at running the football.“We’re trying to win games. It’s not about running the ball. Please,” Jackson said at the end of a testier-than-normal exchange with reporters. “That’s not the only thing we do. We throw the ball, too. You asked me about running the ball and you said, ‘Are we going to jump-start the running game?’ And I said, ‘We’re running the ball.’ So I don’t understand what it is that you guys are looking for.”"

Bengals-Cardinals Capsule (USA Today)

"CINCINNATI (8-1) At ARIZONA (7-2)Sunday, 8:30 p.m., ET, NBCOPENING LINE — Cardinals by 3RECORD VS. SPREAD — Bengals 7-1-1, Cardinals 6-3SERIES RECORD — Bengals lead 6-4LAST MEETING — Bengals beat Cardinals 23-16, Dec. 24, 2011LAST WEEK — Bengals lost to Texans 10-6; Cardinals beat Seahawks 39-32AP PRO32 RANKING — Bengals No. 4, Cardinals No. 3BENGALS OFFENSE — OVERALL (7), RUSH (13), PASS (11)BENGALS DEFENSE — OVERALL (11), RUSH (13), PASS (13)CARDINALS OFFENSE — OVERALL (1), RUSH (8), PASS (4)CARDINALS DEFENSE — OVERALL (3), RUSH (4), PASS (7)"

Bengals Week 11 Thursday practice report: Adam Jones, Michael Johnson, Pat Sims miss practice (Cincy Jungle)

"The Cincinnati Bengals hit the practice field Thursday after spending Wednesday in University of Cincinnati’s bubble as they prepare for Sunday’s clash with the Arizona Cardinals.Andre Smith was once again present with his helmet on as it appears he’s close to being ready to return to action on Sunday. The starting right tackle missed the past two games with a concussion, but two straight practices is a good sign he’ll be fully cleared to play this weekend. The Bengals will certainly need all hands on deck when they face a Cardinals’ defense that ranks third overall and fourth against the run. Having Smith back should help pave the way for a Bengals ground game that’s been struggling and not improving with him sidelined. He was limited though on Wednesday, so it will be interesting to see if he gets a full or limited session in on Thursday."


What we learned: Jaguars make their AFC South move (NFL)

"The Jaguars had netted just nine points off of six trips into Titans’ territory prior to [Rashad] Greene’s [63-yard] punt return. Spooked by a Brian Orakpo third-down sack at the 5-yard line just before halftime, the coaching staff went conservative in the second half, at one point running backup tailback Denard Robinson three straight times inside the 7-yard line.Blake Bortles entered the game on pace for 34 touchdown passes. The Jaguars invested $46 million in red-zone specialist Julius Thomas. They spent second-round draft picks on spectacular leaper Allen Robinson and dual-purpose running back T.J. Yeldon. Second-year receiver Allen Hurns had been the only player in the NFL with a touchdown catch in seven consecutive games. Head coach Gus Bradley and offensive coordinator Greg Olson need to trust their playmakers to do what they were acquired to do in key situations."

Lawyers ask court to reject concussion deal because it excludes CTE (ESPN)

"Former players appealing the NFL’s $1 billion plan to address concussion-linked injuries asked a court on Thursday to reject the settlement because it excludes what they call the signature brain disease of football.Critics insist that any deal include future payments for chronic traumatic encephalopathy, the brain decay found in dozens of former players after their deaths.“CTE was the soundpiece of the original (lawsuit),” lawyer Steven F. Molo argued before the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. “It is a fundamental issue in the case. It is mentioned 14 times.”The settlement would resolve thousands of lawsuits and cover more than 20,000 NFL retirees for the next 65 years. The league estimates that 6,000 former players, or nearly three in 10, could develop Alzheimer’s disease or moderate dementia.They would receive an average of $190,000, although the awards could reach several million dollars in the most serious cases, which include young men with Parkinson’s disease or Lou Gehrig’s disease.The lead negotiators, in response to the criticism, said former players might otherwise have gotten nothing because the NFL had pushed for the complaints to be thrown out of court and sent to arbitration. And the science behind CTE is in its early stages; the damage cannot currently be diagnosed in the living."

As for an NFL return to Los Angeles, here’s where we stand (Los Angeles Times)

"Is the NFL going to be back in Los Angeles next season?There’s a good possibility, but no one can say for sure — not any of the owners and not Commissioner Roger Goodell. We’re closer to its being a reality than at any time since the late 1990s, when L.A. and Houston were in the running for the 32nd franchise, but anyone who says they absolutely know what’s going to happen is lying either to you or themselves.Would this be decided by a vote of the owners?Any relocation requires a three-quarters majority approval from the 32 NFL owners. But in this case, the league would manage the outcome instead of pitting the two projects against each other for an up-or-down vote. The NFL doesn’t want one or two teams to emerge as losers and get sent back to markets they tried to leave. That means there would be lots of negotiations (and probably a grand bargain) before anything comes to a vote.Could a team move to L.A. without league approval?It’s possible, and happened before with Al Davis and the Raiders. But that is unlikely in this instance. The NFL could deny that team any financial help in building the stadium, withhold the right to host Super Bowls, and take other measures to make it an unsavory option.When would a vote happen?People involved in the process are all over the map on that. The league had hoped to schedule a vote in January, but owners say that might be overly optimistic. Goodell has said the likely window is in January or February. But the NFL does not want to upstage the Super Bowl — especially a Super Bowl in the Bay Area, with a vote critical to the future of a Bay Area team. A logical time could be between the Feb. 7 Super Bowl and the scouting combine, which starts Feb. 23."