PHOENIX – Cincinnati Bengals owner Mike Brown spoke with reporters following league meetings here this week. He discussed coach Zac Taylor's acclimation, the futures of Andy Dalton and A.J. Green, his disagreement with expanded replay and more.

Here’s a collection of the five most revealing topics with Brown:



1. Brown said the Bengals will not consider extending quarterback Andy Dalton's contract (which runs through the 2020 season) before this season. His first year with offensive-minded coach Zac Taylor will be pivotal.

Brown: "I think it's a good year for (Dalton) to show like he can, like we think he will. After he re-establishes himself we would want to get together with him and see if we can extend it.

"I think Andy is a good player and that he will rebound off last year. He was hurt. We lost so many other pieces. It fell apart, but if he's healthy and we stay healthy enough, I have confidence in him."

2. From Brown's response, the Bengals will not hesitate to give star wideout A.J. Green a third contract (his current deal expires after the upcoming season). Injuries have sidelined the 30-year-old for significant time in two of the past three seasons.

Brown: "Oh, I think he's a proven commodity, isn't he? The price range for him will be something for him will be something we can figure out, will come together.

"It's true with anyone, if they suddenly get an injury that it reduces them. Well that changes the equation, but I never plan on that happening. I like to think that won't happen. If A.J. is healthy, he's as good a receiver as anybody in the league."

3. The Bengals parted ways with Vontaze Burfict, releasing the linebacker earlier this month after seven seasons together. Burfict recently signed with the Oakland Raiders. Was it a difficult decision to move on from Burfict?

Brown: "It was for me because Burfict, when he was healthy and playing at the level he could play, was exceptional. And all the stuff that came on detracted from his ability to play effectively and we suffered from it. It gives us a little clearer path forward. I don't expect we're going to have to be defending whoever is out there this year in the way we have had to defend Burfict. Some of the stuff he was accused of, in my mind, was overdrawn. But it was the fact that he was accused of it and we had all the repercussions of it."



4. On a first-time coach in Taylor and a staff that's overall much younger in average age than previously with Marvin Lewis:

Brown: "It's new. It's different and we're going to find out. You'll get a feel for (Taylor) as they go about it. They all have good certifications, good backgrounds and I'm as interested as anybody to see just how it fits together out on the field, how it all works. It's going to be quite different for us. That's the fact. I think that's what our fans wanted. They felt we needed that. I think maybe they're right in how they feel.

"Expectations are what you guys do. I don't have one of those crystal balls that tell me how we're going to end up. But I think we're going to be well prepared. We're going to look a little different and I have the feeling that it could lift us in a fashion we're hoping for, maybe sooner than people think but we'll see. I don't want to put some kind of public requirement on our guys. It doesn't work that way. They have a little time now to get their feet on the ground and get this thing put together."

More: Four things Bengals coach Zac Taylor said at NFL owners meetings

5. NFL owners voted 31-1 this week to allow offensive and defensive pass interference to be subject to coach's challenge and review. Brown was the lone negative vote.



Brown: "It has a long history. If you go back to the very beginning, and I'd be curious to know when that was (1976), we have been against it for all these years since. The reason that we are against it is that it interrupts the game. it changes the character of the game in my mind. I think it's in some ways sort of odd to see people all sitting there waiting for somebody in New York to tell them it is or it is isn't. I'd rather just play the game. The history of it is my father was against it.



"The argument is that we now have ways to provide this and it's a way to correct officiating error. So when they put it in they were smart enough to restrict it more than it is today and it was supposed to be used only when the play had a big impact on the game and otherwise you weren't supposed to use it. Well it evolved over time. Now they use it in all kinds of situations. I don't think that's good for the game. It is the fact that there's going to be officiating error. But it's also the fact that instant replay doesn't always correct it. It just compounds the problem on occasion. There is no answer, at least there is no answer that we're going to have instant replay and there won't be anymore bad pass interference calls. I don't think so. But we'll see, and this pass interference thing, they've penetrated a firebreak, if you will. We've never had instant replay for judgement calls. Suddenly we're going to have that. I don't know how it's going to sort out. It may be that it works great. We'll see. I have my doubts."