Poll: Which team would you rather root for?
Team A
Team B
[Show Results]
 
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Which team has been more successful?
(03-13-2018, 03:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: As usual you don't get the gist at all.

This thread was drafted to see if people really are willing to tradee a bunch of winning seasons for losing seasons in exchange for 3 playoff wins over 15 years.

Nothing more.  Nothing less.

But it is clear that some people are embarrassed by the results so they are getting testy with me for bringing it up.


Don't break your elbow patting yourself on the back....

(BTW, team B is winning)


So, you're happier under Merv than you were with Forrest Gregg and Sam Wyche? Yeah, right. Because, I gotta tell ya....those Jags numbers are similar to how the Bengals were during that decade.
[Image: haoRwE.png]
Joined old board in fall of '10.....11k+ posts....28k+ rep, and tossed to the curb....thanks Son of Paul!

[Image: N7L2wTe.gif?1]
Reply/Quote
It started out with a simple poll.....then, you add snide remarks and insinuate that people are stupid for not agreeing with your opinion....not surprising.

Fact is, some people are fine with the regular season success and abject failure in the postseason, some aren't.  Some people understand that a lot of teams cash their chips in for a Super Bowl run, and often wind up dismantling it in short order due to the salary cap restraints, or the team gets old.  The Bengals don't do this, typically.  Those other teams will have down years because they aren't afraid of risk.  See NO. So, for some of us, having some down years here and there in order to field a Super Bowl threat for a couple of years is worth it. The "steady as she goes" Mike Brown Bengals are a threat to no one until they prove otherwise.
[Image: haoRwE.png]
Joined old board in fall of '10.....11k+ posts....28k+ rep, and tossed to the curb....thanks Son of Paul!

[Image: N7L2wTe.gif?1]
Reply/Quote
(03-13-2018, 04:53 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: It started out with a simple poll.....then, you add snide remarks and insinuate that people are stupid for not agreeing with your opinion....not surprising.

Fact is, some people are fine with the regular season success and abject failure in the postseason, some aren't.  Some people understand that a lot of teams cash their chips in for a Super Bowl run, and often wind up dismantling it in short order due to the salary cap restraints, or the team gets old.  The Bengals don't do this, typically.  Those other teams will have down years because they aren't afraid of risk.  See NO. So, for some of us, having some down years here and there in order to field a Super Bowl threat for a couple of years is worth it.


And this surprises you how?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply/Quote
(03-13-2018, 04:44 PM)Wyche Wrote: Don't break your elbow patting yourself on the back....

(BTW, team B is winning)


So, you're happier under Merv than you were with Forrest Gregg and Sam Wyche?  Yeah, right.


Toast's point could be that we could have avoided Super Bowl game losing heartbreak back then had Merv been the Head Coach for those two 80's teams, by having those two 80's teams be one and done in the playoffs.

Montana would not be a thorn in our sides now because Merv would have kept us at our current day one and done ceiling thus preventing any Super Bowl heartbreak back then by us not even being in those Super Bowls.

No way for him to prove this without a Time Machine but fans should prefer the last 15 years type of "success" to those 80's Bengal teams.

Middle of the road one and done playoff consistency with Marvin should Top the Forrest Gregg and Sam Wyche eras since winning playoff games themselves is unimportant to any fans that gets it.

At least that is how I am interpreting the OP here.

I've been enlightened and my appreciation for Marvin is growing. 
Reply/Quote
(03-13-2018, 04:59 PM)depthchart Wrote: Toast's point could be that we could have avoided Super Bowl game losing heartbreak back then had Merv been the Head Coach for those two 80's teams, by having those two 80's teams be one and done in the playoffs.

Montana would not be a thorn in our sides now because Merv would have kept us at our current day one and done ceiling thus preventing any Super Bowl heartbreak back then by us not even being in those Super Bowls.

No way for him to prove this without a Time Machine but fans should prefer the last 15 years type of "success" to those 80's Bengal teams.

Middle of the road one and done playoff consistency with Marvin should Top the Forrest Gregg and Sam Wyche eras since winning playoff games themselves is unimportant to any fans that gets it.

At least that is how I am interpreting the OP here.

I've been enlightened and my appreciation for Marvin is growing. 


[Image: thlght.gif]
[Image: haoRwE.png]
Joined old board in fall of '10.....11k+ posts....28k+ rep, and tossed to the curb....thanks Son of Paul!

[Image: N7L2wTe.gif?1]
Reply/Quote
All right - enough of this "You do this .....and you do that" BS. Stay on topic, and stop with the belittling and personal insults. Thank you.
What is obvious here is not readily apparent to the naked eye ....
Reply/Quote
(03-13-2018, 05:56 PM)wildcats forever Wrote: All right - enough of this "You do this .....and you do that" BS. Stay on topic, and stop with the belittling and personal insults. Thank you.

Bs deleted 
Reply/Quote
it's a hard question? One team seems to just keep trying and believe they can do it better next year with the same guys and formula. And that may be true with different breaks and maybe a few minor changes here and there.

The other team seems to get to a max out point and makes large scale changes and rebuild. Going into next season that option looks like it's paid off into a contender. But as we all know on paper is not close to reality in the NFL. Time will tell
Reply/Quote
(03-13-2018, 07:57 PM)bonesaw Wrote: it's a hard question?  One team seems to just keep trying and believe they can do it better next year with the same guys and formula.  And that may be true with different breaks and maybe a few minor changes here and there.  

The other team seems to get to a max out point and makes large scale changes and rebuild.  Going into next season that option looks like it's paid off into a contender.  But as we all know on paper is not close to reality in the NFL.  Time will tell


That's exactly how it is.  One team, the Bengals, are going with a steady approach.  It produces good teams, don't get me wrong.  The problem with it is, in my opinion, that it always leads the team to having a fatal flaw in the roster somewhere that gets exposed in games against upper echelon competition, especially in the post season.

The other philosophy is to "go all in", and supplement your draft picks with a solid to good FA or two to fill in those holes in the roster.  Or, change a stagnant coaching staff.  Sometimes it pays off, others it does not.  It's a bit risky, but when you hit, you can be rewarded with a deep playoff run or a bowl.
[Image: haoRwE.png]
Joined old board in fall of '10.....11k+ posts....28k+ rep, and tossed to the curb....thanks Son of Paul!

[Image: N7L2wTe.gif?1]
Reply/Quote
(03-13-2018, 07:57 PM)bonesaw Wrote: it's a hard question?  One team seems to just keep trying and believe they can do it better next year with the same guys and formula.  And that may be true with different breaks and maybe a few minor changes here and there.  

The other team seems to get to a max out point and makes large scale changes and rebuild.  Going into next season that option looks like it's paid off into a contender.  But as we all know on paper is not close to reality in the NFL.  Time will tell

I did not use "Bengals" and "Jags" for a reason.  I didn't want everyone to get caught up in just hating the Bengals because they are the bengals.  Since all I was trying to find out was how much fans value losing regular seasons compared to playoff wins I used "team A" and "team B".

Now no one is talkin g about the wins and losses.  instead they are saying they don't like team A because they are the Bengals and team B is the jags.
Reply/Quote
(03-14-2018, 09:42 AM)Wyche Wrote: That's exactly how it is.  One team, the Bengals, are going with a steady approach.  It produces good teams, don't get me wrong.  The problem with it is, in my opinion, that it always leads the team to having a fatal flaw in the roster somewhere that gets exposed in games against upper echelon competition, especially in the post season.

The other philosophy is to "go all in", and supplement your draft picks with a solid to good FA or two to fill in those holes in the roster.  Or, change a stagnant coaching staff.  Sometimes it pays off, others it does not.  It's a bit risky, but when you hit, you can be rewarded with a deep playoff run or a bowl.


But in my experience fans don't really reward "trying".  No matter what people like to say around here it is all about wins and losses.  When a team has 6 straight losing seasons they don't say "Yeah, at least we are trying. I am so happy with our team."  Instead they say "Our team sucks.  I wish we were going to the playoffs every year."

Right now people are happy with Glenn and Pollack, but if our O-line stinks and we go 4-12 not one person here is going to be saying "I am happy even though we only won 4 games because at least we made some changes."

It just does not work that way.
Reply/Quote





Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)