03-05-2019, 01:09 PM
(03-05-2019, 11:35 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: And...0 Playoff wins in 27+ years in a league where most teams have won 5+ playoff games over that span.
Calling Dennard, Gresham, Kirkpatrick, and Eifert hits is stretching it. Eifert has played way under half of the games in his career.
Gresham while not a bust, underperformed. Kirkpatrick played limited snaps for 3-4 years and is now a mediocre starter. Dennard has what 2-3 interceptions in 5 years and is a mediocre 3rd corner.
Because pinning the Bengals postseason failures solely on a bunch of good players they drafted makes a whole lot of sense. Three to four years ago the national media was calling the Bengals quite possibly the most talented team in the league, and we're going to fault their postseason failures solely on them not being good enough? I mean... Marvin, is that you, trying to find some new excuse? That's just a ridiculous argument to make.
I didn't say they were stars, but they've been contributing members of NFL teams for years now, so the Bengals sure as heck didn't miss on these guys. Dennard's about to get paid. Gresham has been in the league for 9+ years now. Kirkpatrick's still a starting CB in the league AND he's a team leader (and I get that people hate that and don't want to give him credit, but it's true and if he wasn't starting here he'd be starting somewhere). Eifert's an elite level talent that the Bengals were 100% correct in taking, injuries or not. Sure some of have been somewhat disappointing, but they haven't missed on any of these guys... they're all NFL caliber talents.
And what exactly do you think a larger scouting department would've accomplished all these years, anyways? Do you think having more scouts meant that the Bengals would've looked at Eifert - a man who had zero injury history in college - and come up away with the impression that no, he's totally not going to work out in the NFL? Do you think being a scout instantly allows you to see the future and know the freak occurrences that will happen?
