03-08-2025, 11:58 PM
(03-08-2025, 11:10 PM)Nepa Wrote: The chart that Isaac Curtis is likely referencing is the one publicized by Goodberry (from Reinhard) that shows that even with Burrow the Bengals were 7th from the bottom in terms of money committed to players overall. And some of those teams below the Bengals, such as Pittsburgh, did not even have a QB as part of their numbers. But it probably is irrelevant, as you note, as this will change soon with contracts to Chase, Higgins, and Hendrickson (fingers crossed).
Goodberry's point was that the Bengals have plenty of money to spend on players.
https://www.cincyjungle.com/2025/2/18/24367819/bengals-on-the-hook-for-7th-lowest-amount-of-cash-in-nfl#:~:text=The%20Bengals%20have%20the%20seventh,that%20aren't%20the%20QB.
And mine.
