stick1 Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 They have a model to try to take players with a bad off the field past and get them for cheap. They feel like the players are undervalued because of their off the field trouble. A lot of people on here defend them for that philosophy. I've tried to think and haven't been able too. What franchise in Pro Football has been successful doing this? The NFL is such a copycat league that you would think common sense would say look at other smaller market teams and follow their lead? Are there any teams that have year after year gone after low character guys to build their franchise and been successful year in year out?
Blue Magic Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Someone said it on here last week and it's true. The Bengals are running a thrift store franchise. They're getting bargains on used, cheap players. We'll see how it works out next year.
theguru Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 In defense of the Bengals some guys work out. Dillion, Benson, and Henry to a degree come to mind off the top of my head.
stick1 Posted March 12, 2010 Author Posted March 12, 2010 In defense of the Bengals some guys work out. Dillion, Benson, and Henry to a degree come to mind off the top of my head. I hear ya same thing with Johnson this year. To me it seems like they take a bunch...throw them against the wall and see what sticks. They get one here and there so it looks kind of good. When you look at the big picture though record wise it has not been successful. I guess that's what bugs me with it. I had an old boss that used to drill in us that the def of insanity was trying the same thing over and over expecting different results. That's all I can think of when I see the Bengals shopping for low character talent. When you look at this off season it isn't guys like Brookings instead it's looking at Matt Jones, Antonio Bryant, TO, PacMan etc. The face or one of the 2 faces of their franchise is more popular for Dancing With The Stars + his VH1 dating instead of being a leader. Just don't see how an owner could expect to win with that formula on a consistant basis.
gametime Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Just don't see how an owner could expect to win with that formula on a consistant basis. And that's the fatal flaw in your logic. Mike Brown doesn't expect to win anything. Are we really still having this debate??? :idunno:
stick1 Posted March 12, 2010 Author Posted March 12, 2010 And that's the fatal flaw in your logic. Mike Brown doesn't expect to win anything. Are we really still having this debate??? :idunno: :lol: OK you got me.
futurecoach Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 They have a model to try to take players with a bad off the field past and get them for cheap. They feel like the players are undervalued because of their off the field trouble. A lot of people on here defend them for that philosophy. I've tried to think and haven't been able too. What franchise in Pro Football has been successful doing this? The NFL is such a copycat league that you would think common sense would say look at other smaller market teams and follow their lead? Are there any teams that have year after year gone after low character guys to build their franchise and been successful year in year out? I think the Bengals have done a lot of the same things oter smaller market teams have done. Like the other smaller market teams, they have tried to build through the draft and they have done that. Most of their core guys on that good defense are guys they drafted. On the offensive line, it will be mostly guys they drafted. The QB, and best WR is guys they have drafted. So most of their main guys have been through the draft, so they have built through the draft. The only thing different they do is that they try to fill in the missing pieces they have left with the guys you mentioned. If it works though then great, however I think its pretty obvious that they still mainly focus on building through the draft.
malachicrunch Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I think the Bengals have done a lot of the same things oter smaller market teams have done. Like the other smaller market teams, they have tried to build through the draft and they have done that. Most of their core guys on that good defense are guys they drafted. On the offensive line, it will be mostly guys they drafted. The QB, and best WR is guys they have drafted. So most of their main guys have been through the draft, so they have built through the draft. The only thing different they do is that they try to fill in the missing pieces they have left with the guys you mentioned. If it works though then great, however I think its pretty obvious that they still mainly focus on building through the draft. I'm trying to figure out the "smaller market" arguement. Mike Brown is making money hand over fist.
stick1 Posted March 12, 2010 Author Posted March 12, 2010 I think the Bengals have done a lot of the same things oter smaller market teams have done. Like the other smaller market teams, they have tried to build through the draft and they have done that. Most of their core guys on that good defense are guys they drafted. On the offensive line, it will be mostly guys they drafted. The QB, and best WR is guys they have drafted. So most of their main guys have been through the draft, so they have built through the draft. The only thing different they do is that they try to fill in the missing pieces they have left with the guys you mentioned. If it works though then great, however I think its pretty obvious that they still mainly focus on building through the draft. Why not follow the New England model and trade back picks then if you are going to build through the draft. Look back how much NE has traded back to stockpile picks. The Bengals almost always have a high draft pick so it would have been easy for them to do. Plus it's less money when you draft later. They also make it known if you come to the Pats then you will do it the Pat way or you will go home. The Bengals are the exact opposite. The inmates run the prison. They do what they want to do. Notice the Pats don't have trouble with guys like Moss, Welker, Dillon, Seau, Harrison, Taylor etc. I realize it's a bigger market but the expectations of how you conduct yourself are totally different. The Bengals can be good but if they ever want to take that next step to be great then you have to have that mentality or you will get crushed come crunch time much like they were in the playoffs.
futurecoach Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Why not follow the New England model and trade back picks then if you are going to build through the draft. Look back how much NE has traded back to stockpile picks. The Bengals almost always have a high draft pick so it would have been easy for them to do. Plus it's less money when you draft later. They also make it known if you come to the Pats then you will do it the Pat way or you will go home. The Bengals are the exact opposite. The inmates run the prison. They do what they want to do. Notice the Pats don't have trouble with guys like Moss, Welker, Dillon, Seau, Harrison, Taylor etc. I realize it's a bigger market but the expectations of how you conduct yourself are totally different. The Bengals can be good but if they ever want to take that next step to be great then you have to have that mentality or you will get crushed come crunch time much like they were in the playoffs. The Bengals have had guys like that, who they have brought in and who have played in the team concept. Yes 2006 was a horrible year for the Bengals, however since that year even with all these people they have brought in those guys have been good on and off the field. The only guy who has gotten in trouble is a guy they drafted and wouldn't have thought would have got in trouble like that in Rey Magulagua. Not to mention who really knows what the Pats style really is. For awhile there they seemed content with getting older free agents, and were not building as much through the draft anymore. Last year they finally went back to the approach of using younger players. So believe it or not, the Bengals have actually built theirselves a good team through the draft.
Jim Schue Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 The closest thing I can compare to the "Bengals model" is what the Raiders were doing in the '70s (with one huge difference, of course).
theguru Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 The closest thing I can compare to the "Bengals model" is what the Raiders were doing in the '70s (with one huge difference, of course). Jim, like it or not the Bengals did make the postseason last year so they did something right and deserve some credit.
Jim Schue Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Jim, like it or not the Bengals did make the postseason last year so they did something right and deserve some credit. So, they're batting about .100 over the past 20 years. Fact remains that the "Bengals Model" (or, more appropriately, the "Mike Brown Model") is not designed for long-term success.
theguru Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 So, they're batting about .100 over the past 20 years. Fact remains that the "Bengals Model" (or, more appropriately, the "Mike Brown Model") is not designed for long-term success. I hear you Jim but they also made the playoffs in 2005 and we really need to see what happens this year.
Jim Schue Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I hear you Jim but they also made the playoffs in 2005 and we really need to see what happens this year. Still, you've got to ask yourself, based on the history of the Mike Brown Era, is last year and 2005 more of a fluke than an actual "model" working?
Recommended Posts