The Cincinnati Bengals have made a massive splash by trading for superstar defensive tackle Dexter Lawrence, a move that understandably left Bengals legend Chad Johnson ecstatic. But while Johnson celebrated the blockbuster acquisition on a recent episode of their hit podcast “Nightcap,” his co-host Shannon Sharpe was quick to pump the brakes.
According to the Hall of Fame tight end, the trade means nothing if Cincinnati’s front office doesn’t follow up with a massive, and highly uncharacteristic, financial commitment.
Why the Bengals Must Spend to Keep Dexter Lawrence in Cincinnati
Sharpe’s primary concern centers on Cincinnati’s historical reluctance to hand out massive guaranteed contracts. This is the exact reason Lawrence forced his way out of New York in the first place; with no guaranteed money left on his current deal, the dominant defender is looking for long-term security.
If the Bengals aren’t prepared to immediately open their checkbook, Sharpe argues, the front office has committed a major blunder.
To illustrate his point, Sharpe drew a direct comparison to the New York Jets’ disastrous handling of the Haason Reddick trade. The Jets acquired the star pass rusher from the Philadelphia Eagles but failed to secure a new contract beforehand, leading to a protracted and messy holdout.
Sharpe fears the Bengals are walking blindly into the exact same trap: “You trade for him if you’re not going to give him a contract and you thought he was going to come. So if the Bengals, if you’re not going to give him a contract, you just wasted [the trade].”
Why the Bengals Must Pay Dexter Lawrence for the Future, Not the Past
During the 2025 season, Lawrence did have a drop in production. He went from 9 sacks in 2024 to 0.5 in 2025, while playing in five more games.
This also hurt his PFSN DT Impact metric score. In 2024, he had an 82.1, but in 2025, he dropped to a 77.3, ranking 38th among defensive tackles.
When Johnson pushed back, arguing that Lawrence’s history of dominance warrants the trade and immediate compensation regardless of risk, Sharpe offered his co-host a harsh lesson in NFL general management.
In Sharpe’s eyes, the Giants were right to be hesitant about committing more guaranteed money to Lawrence following a recent dip in production.
“That’s why you couldn’t be a GM, because you going to pay everybody based on what they’ve done,” Sharpe explained. “He already got a big contract. I can’t keep paying him based on what the hell he’s done. I gotta pay you based on what I believe you’ll do moving forward.”
Never one to pass up a comedic moment, Sharpe injected his signature humor into the debate, ruthlessly exaggerating Lawrence’s recent statistical drop in output to hammer home his point.
“I don’t believe the Giants can do that based on the half a sack that he gave them last year,” Sharpe joked. “I was just at Whole Foods this morning. I had two sacks than what he had all year in 17 games. I was in the self-checkout. Two sacks.”
BE AN NFL GM: PFSN’s Ultimate GM Simulator
While the joke landed perfectly with Johnson, Sharpe’s underlying message to Cincinnati remains deadly serious. The Bengals have undoubtedly secured a game-changing talent for their defensive line, but acquiring him is only half the battle.
If the notoriously frugal front office refuses to hand Lawrence a lucrative extension, this blockbuster acquisition could quickly sour into a monumental misstep.
