Were the pre-Joe Bengals as bad as most think?

[*Nately120*]

(01-31-2023, 09:57 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: So why didn't the media try to talk Herbert, Allen, Lawrence or Mahomes out of signing with those teams? Why does it feel like the Bengals get dismissed more than any of these teams?

We had what, 7 one and done's over a period of 30 years?  That's pretty bad, and even when we were good enough to make the playoffs we'd insantly faceplant.

Personally, I was over the "The Bengals are going to ruin Burrow" talk, but we have a thread where we are saying if Burrow had the Eagle's o-line he'd be in the SB right now, so it almost feels like we're back to square one on stuff like that.  Meh, who knows...maybe we can build one.

Also, Mahommes, Allen, and Herbert weren't taken at #1 overall and they weren't burdened with being instant franchise changers like Burrow was.  They were all high upside picks that needed work and development and were passed over by a number of teams.

Josh Allen was taken after Mayfield and Darnold, who went to the Browns and Jets so they were the franchises that were questioned when it comes to ruining QBs, not so much the Bills as Allen was a "wait and see" sort of prospect.

Mahommes was the 2nd QB off the board in 2017 and he also sat for almost all of his 1st year behind Alex Smith in Andy Reid's system, so the media was all in on that situation.

I'm just saying when the Bears or Browns or Jets take the first QB off the board they get the same sort of "They're gonna wreck this kid" narrative that we got with Burrow.  I also bet the Jeff Fisher-era Rams got a lot of skepticism drafting Goff at #1 overall after getting zilch out of Sam Bradford.  We aren't alone in stuff like this, because when you take a QB at #1 your team has issues and your franchise as a whole is probably one that gets questioned.  Such is life.