At various points over the past two decades of NFL play, we have heard successful general managers rattle off terse responses to reporters who ask about their draft record, which, despite the team’s overall performance, doesn’t yield the font of talent that other clubs seem to find.
The frustration from the personnel side is obvious: If they are putting together a winning roster—by virtue of NFL economics and the (supposed) quest for parity—they will be punished when it comes to the draft system. The better you are, the worse the player you are supposed to get the following year.
This mechanism has yielded its own branch of roster-building theory. Teams such as the Rams, Seahawks and Patriots have all, to some degree, abandoned the idea of even picking in the bottom half of the first round, choosing to swap those picks for maturing talent ready to perform at the NFL level. But maybe the best roster-building plan is to not really have one, or to at least be flexible. As we saw with the Rams, and certainly the Patriots now, every avenue has its boundaries and limits.
Sam Greene/USA TODAY Sports
I bring this up trying to ease the concerns of Bengals fans looking at a 1–3 start. The team seems frustrated. The top of the AFC North has begun to separate itself. While the plucky Cardinals are next and theoretically a perfect opportunity for Cincinnati to climb back toward .500, the Bengals will face the Seahawks, 49ers and Bills in succession, with a divisional game against the Ravens on short rest looming after another unexpectedly difficult matchup with the Texans on Nov. 12.
In short, making the playoffs is going to be a difficult task for the Bengals. And even if they do, one would have to wonder about the personal cost to Joe Burrow slogging through the entirety of a season getting plastered due to his truncated mobility instead of just healing himself (the Bengals have, according to SI Sportsbook, the 11th-best odds of making the Super Bowl at +3,000). Could Cincinnati quickly turn its season around, especially after Burrow gets a bye week? Certainly. Is it likely, given the ascension of some very deep bona fide super teams? No.
The other option would be to admit that this season is what it is and, in the process, artfully bypass the difficulties faced by consistently competitive organizations that no longer get access to talented players.
While imperfect, my case study would be the 49ers, who traded for Jimmy Garoppolo on Oct. 30, 2017, and didn’t play him for a handful of weeks (and perhaps did not plan to play him at all during a clearly lost season with C.J. Beathard at the helm). Garoppolo went undefeated once he hit the lineup and cost the 49ers any number of talented players at the very top of the ’18 draft (Saquon Barkley, Roquan Smith, Denzel Ward, Bradley Chubb), but they still ended up with a top-10 pick and a better than average Band-Aid at the tackle position in Mike McGlinchey. The following year, with the team obviously primed to contend, Garoppolo tore his ACL. San Francisco bottomed out with a really good roster, drafted Nick Bosa and made the Super Bowl the following year.
The hiring and firing cycle in the NFL creates a pressure to win now and win forever or else. But the Bengals have a really interesting opportunity to set themselves up for continued success with the cost being one abysmal season (which, given how the past few years have gone juxtaposed with their long-term history, we know their fan base can take in stride). Cincinnati doesn’t have a lot of the same pressures. The Bengals have a respected and driven head of personnel (Duke Tobin). They love and adore their coach (Zac Taylor), who wants to stay in Cincinnati. None of that is going to change if they go 3–14 or 4–13 without their starting quarterback.
What will change? They would be in a powerful spot atop a potentially generational quarterback draft not needing a quarterback. While it is very early, the 2024 draft is rich in offensive linemen, edge rushers and one of the most sought-after receiver prospects (Ohio State’s Marvin Harrison Jr.) in a decade.
What a coincidence. The Bengals were just trying to figure out how to keep their troika of star receivers together as they prepare to pay Ja’Marr Chase something approaching $30 million per season. Trey Hendrickson, their top edge rusher, is on a deal expiring in 2025. The team took Myles Murphy out of Clemson at the back end of the first round this year, which was an acknowledgement that Hendrickson is getting very expensive and Sam Hubbard is approaching 30.
They have also been hurling cash at their offensive line. Remember when we’d argue over Chase vs. Penei Sewell? Here’s a chance to get both, assuming someone such as Penn State’s Olu Fashanu is there.
The draft is not absolute, but it does save the Bengals from having to write one incredibly massive check. It also frees them up to perhaps trade one of the players they will soon replace at the Oct. 31 deadline to avoid getting only a compensatory return. At the very least, the draft allows them to be flexible, and, as we’ve said, that is the only state that is truly amenable to consistent success in the NFL. I would guess 49ers fans are (for the most part) happy with how the years have gone and gladly would have traded 2018 for Bosa. As my colleague Albert Breer pointed out on the latest edition of the MMQB podcast, their down season in 2020 thanks to another Jimmy Garoppolo injury actually had them initially in the draft slot that yielded Micah Parsons (they wound up with Trey Lance, but the theory remains solid: They viewed a bad situation as a chance to get way, way better in a short period of time).
Once we realize that there will never again be a dynasty quite like the Patriots, we can stop trying to create it. The next best thing is to be really good most of the time. After a trip to the Super Bowl and conference title game in back-to-back years, the Bengals have earned enough equity to plan for 2024 and beyond.
