So, Yahoo thinks the Bengals had the worst Free Agency period in the NFL. Seattle and San Fran are also pretty near the bottom of the list, but they get the disclaimer of having the best rosters in the NFL so they don't need to do much. The Bengals have probably the deepest roster in the NFL outside of those two teams and seem to have ready replacements for everything they lost, including coordinators.
Here's my two cents, though I doubt many would give two cents for it.
Promote: Hue Jackson, Paul Guenther
The Bengals lost a lot. Though it wasn't unforeseen and they had replacements waiting in the wings for every loss. The roster is so deep they didn't need to be active in Free Agency. The tried and true strategy of signing a couple bargain players and drafting for the future seems to be lifting this franchise to a level that the majority of the NFL would like to be at. How many fan bases would love to say their team was in the playoffs three years running. Once you rule out the main stays like New England, Indianapolis, San Fran and Denver. Then account for recent SB winnners Seattle, Baltimore, GB, Pitt, NY Giants and New Orleans. That leaves 21 teams that are battling to create a winner and even though post season success hasn't followed a few good regular seasons in Cincinnati, those teams are trying to get where the Bengals are now.
I only question a few minor parts of the past month. First is Robert Ayers, he seems to fit the Bengals FA mold perfectly. A former 1st round pick that would have cost only a couple millions dollars. He would have been Geathers 2.0. At worst a good rotation player behind, Hunt and Gilberry, and at best starts opposite Dunlap.
Second, why sign Manning after Iloka had such a solid season. Bengal nation has been yelling about safety depth for years and now that a draft pick has stepped up and put in enough solid play to quiet that yelling, they pounce on a veteran. Just makes me scratch my head.