Originally Posted by Stray
More of a problem for us as fans. Do you think free agents consider how that 1996 season went when they're deciding who to sign with?
I'm not saying he's always been great, but in recent years he has done an excellent job. Instead of living in the past I'd rather look forward, and I like that we do have a foundation to build around.
To say that this years team's weaknesses were due to a lack of scouting and a true GM...I just don't buy that at all.
Free agents don't sign places that have 50% smaller weight facilities than every other team. They don't sign places where there is no indoor practice facility. They don't sign places where there is zero hope of winning a playoff game.
You are correct, 1996 doesn't matter, but when you look at the ownership as a whole, this is what you see (from Wikipedia):
Since Brown became owner, the team has had only 2 winning seasons out of 20 and has a winning percentage of .361 (115-204-1) in the regular season and .000 (0-2) in the playoffs. In 2008, the Bengals set a record for the most games needed under one specific owner to attain 100 wins (288). In 2010, the team set a record for the least games needed to lose 200 (both considering and not considering playoffs) under one specific owner (314).
The Bengals hold a number of distinctions for the time frame of Brown's ownership: It is the only team with three nine-game-or-more losing streaks. It also holds six of the twenty-five 0-6 starts (24%) and four of the thirteen 0-8 starts (31%) in that time. The Bengals have gone winless in October eight different times in twenty years under five different head coaches (Sam Wyche was originally hired by Paul Brown).