Its hard to argue that. But the question was, "Who is the worst team in the NFL right now?"
Looking at the entire body of work over the course of the year, I might go with the Panthers. But right now? The Panthers sure didnt look all that bad on the road against the Browns. They almost pulled that off. The Cardinals performance on Monday night at home against a bad Niners teams speaks for itself.
http://www.cincyjungle.com/2010/12/13/1874780/are-the-bengals-the-worst-team-in-the-nfl
Are the Bengals the Worst Team in the NFL?
by Jason Garrison on Dec 13, 2010 9:25 PM EST
More photos » Gene J. Puskar - AP
3 days ago: Cincinnati Bengals coach Marvin Lewis, right, leaves the field after a 23-7 loss to the Pittsburgh Steelers in an NFL football game in Pittsburgh, Sunday, Dec 12, 2010. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar)
Buy Photo »
Browse more photos »
Let's disregard the records of the Bengals and the Panthers for the purpose of this article. However, let's not disregard the game between the Bengals and the Panthers. The Bengals won that game by a score of 20-7 and they played against rookie Jimmy Clausen in his first ever NFL start. Unless my memory is failing me, I remember the Bengals not looking so hot in that game.
Now, let's look at the Browns. Two of the teams that they have beaten this season are the Patriots and the Saints. Does that mean that the Browns are better than the Patriots or Saints? Absolutely not. If the Patriots/Saints played the Browns 10 times, they would win nine of the games. It was just a good game by the Browns and a bad week for the other team. If we combine the fact that Clausen was starting for the first time and the fact that sometimes teams just have bad weeks, is it possible to assume that the Bengals victory over the Panthers was a fluke? It's possible.
So, if that game was a fluke, then we could probably assume that the win over Baltimore was a fluke too. I feel the same way about the Ravens and Bengals as I do the Patriots and Browns. Let the two teams play 10 times and see what happens. I promise, the Ravens will come out on top.
Then we can factor in the talent level. There is no doubt in my mind that the Bengals are the worst most talented team in the NFL. The Panthers don't have Terrell Owens, Chad Ochocinco, Jordan Shipley and Jermaine Gresham catching passes, Cedric Benson running the ball and Carson Palmer throwing. Not many teams have that much talent loaded up at their skill positions and I can almost guarantee that if any other team other than the Bengals had that much talent, they would have already won the super bowl.
So, considering that certain wins are flukes and the Bengals have way, way too much talent to have a 2-11 record, do you think it's fair to say that the Bengals are actually the worst team in the NFL?
Who would win if the Bengals and Panthers played 10 times. Would the Panthers win most of them making the Bengals the worst team in the NFL?
Are the Bengals the Worst Team in the NFL?
More photos » Gene J. Puskar - AP 3 days ago: Cincinnati Bengals coach Marvin Lewis, right, leaves the field after a 23-7 loss to the Pittsburgh Steelers in an NFL football game in Pittsburgh, Sunday, Dec 12, 2010. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar)
Buy Photo »
Browse more photos »
Let's disregard the records of the Bengals and the Panthers for the purpose of this article. However, let's not disregard the game between the Bengals and the Panthers. The Bengals won that game by a score of 20-7 and they played against rookie Jimmy Clausen in his first ever NFL start. Unless my memory is failing me, I remember the Bengals not looking so hot in that game.
Now, let's look at the Browns. Two of the teams that they have beaten this season are the Patriots and the Saints. Does that mean that the Browns are better than the Patriots or Saints? Absolutely not. If the Patriots/Saints played the Browns 10 times, they would win nine of the games. It was just a good game by the Browns and a bad week for the other team. If we combine the fact that Clausen was starting for the first time and the fact that sometimes teams just have bad weeks, is it possible to assume that the Bengals victory over the Panthers was a fluke? It's possible.
So, if that game was a fluke, then we could probably assume that the win over Baltimore was a fluke too. I feel the same way about the Ravens and Bengals as I do the Patriots and Browns. Let the two teams play 10 times and see what happens. I promise, the Ravens will come out on top.
Then we can factor in the talent level. There is no doubt in my mind that the Bengals are the worst most talented team in the NFL. The Panthers don't have Terrell Owens, Chad Ochocinco, Jordan Shipley and Jermaine Gresham catching passes, Cedric Benson running the ball and Carson Palmer throwing. Not many teams have that much talent loaded up at their skill positions and I can almost guarantee that if any other team other than the Bengals had that much talent, they would have already won the super bowl.
So, considering that certain wins are flukes and the Bengals have way, way too much talent to have a 2-11 record, do you think it's fair to say that the Bengals are actually the worst team in the NFL?
Who would win if the Bengals and Panthers played 10 times. Would the Panthers win most of them making the Bengals the worst team in the NFL?
