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

[Shake n Blake]

(01-31-2023, 11:22 PM)Nately120 Wrote: It's different because you brought up Mahommes who was taken to be a project in a perfect situation.  When the Chiefs went 2-14 they did so when the draft famously had zero QBs worth a 1st round pick much less the 1st overall.  They got rid of Matt Cassel and Romeo Crenel and got Andy Reid and Alex Smith, turned the team from 2-14 to 11-5 on a dime and eventually drafted a project QB to develop.

We went 2-14, kept the coach that went 2-14 and drafted a 1st overall pick QB to start on day 1.  Both teams did the right thing in the end, but you have to admit we took the riskier route. 

I guess it does make more sense that the media would accredit more of our success to Burrow when we were 2-14 immediately prior to his drafting. As opposed to the Chiefs, who were already contending with Reid when they got Mahomes.

Still, I don't see the media constantly saying the Chiefs were a bad franchise prior to Reid.

We did take the riskier route, but I think both teams handled the situations as they should have. Our rebuild was just a bit more lengthy, and bc of that, I don't think we really got to properly guage whether or not Zac was a decent HC. Which was very risky when you take a QB as obviously talented as Burrow.