Mike Brown will consider honoring players...

[Shake n Blake]

(07-29-2016, 10:56 AM)Wyche Wrote: Yeah b.....who are the three?  I'd feel there would be at least enough to fill out a ring of honor....I mean, if UK football has one......

Pillsbury Throw Boy could fill out a UK football ROH all by himself. 

(07-29-2016, 04:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well I doubt Paul Brown would be on it; as his name is on the front door. So Munoz, Anderson, Riley. After that we're down to "really good" players.

C'mon man...not all franchises are littered with HOF'ers. You don't think guys like Chad, Corey, Boomer, Willie, etc would be on just about any teams ROH based on their careers? All 4 of those guys are probably just one rung below HOF consideration. They are definitely worthy of spots in a team ROH, as are many others. If we were talking about the HOF, I'd understand your take, but the standards are a little lower for a team ROH. 

Shoot, the Reds have guys like Sean Casey in theirs.

(07-30-2016, 05:47 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Call me a downer, but I think starting a Bengals ROH would actually bring more attention to the decent players we've had that left under less than stellar terms during the Mike Brown era and/or are known for being critical of the franchise.  As bfine said, it would look like we'd have 3 guys in there and people asking why Boomer, Collinsworth, and one of our best WRs are so anti-Bengals.

Meh, a ROH that features some 3 guys for 50 years of existence?  Ick, it might be best to just let it be.

Now this is a valid point and I don't think bfine was going there. I personally think we should only look at on-field accomplishments. Especially with this franchise. Mike Brown might not see it that way, but he should if he has any regrets for the way he ran this franchise for 15-20 years. All of those players had valid gripes. Refusing to honor their careers based on complaints they had over what was universally considered a poorly run franchise seems petty.