+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Cincinnati-Bengals-NFL)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-JUNGLE-NOISE)
+--- Thread: Randy Bullock's FGs (/Thread-Randy-Bullock-s-FGs)
Pages:
1
2
Randy Bullock's FGs - PhilHos - 09-16-2017
For the record, I was one of the ones that wanted to go with Elliot because of potential and was worried about Bullock because of his journeyman career and missed game winner last year. I feel that's important to note.
With that said, I don't remember what, if any, wind was blowing and which direction and how hard and, etc. While I'm glad Randy made all 3 of his FGs, I can't help, being an Elliot fan, but notice his kicks were a little close to one side and not down the middle. And I can't help but think this is due to his form and may lead to some missed FGs in worse weather conditions.
I fully admit I'm most likely looking at them through my biased eyes, so I'm looking to the Bullock fans or the neutral fans to set my mind at ease. Reassure me that Bullock will be fine and I'm just looking for a problem where one doesn't exist.
Thanks.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - HarleyDog - 09-16-2017
I could only hope we had a team good enough to make FG's matter again?
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - Shake n Blake - 09-16-2017
I never felt nervous about any of his kicks, but that's just me. The guy has been money for us so far.
5-6/6-6 last year
6-7/2-2 in preseason
3-3/0-0 this year
Totals: 14-16 (.875) 8-8 on xp's
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - McC - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 10:32 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: I could only hope we had a team good enough to make FG's matter again?
Right. The chances of him even getting a chance at a game winner seem slim and none at the moment.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - PhilHos - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 10:32 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: I could only hope we had a team good enough to make FG's matter again?
(09-16-2017, 10:43 AM)McC Wrote: Right. The chances of him even getting a chance at a game winner seem slim and none at the moment.
That's oddly reassuring.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - jason - 09-16-2017
Who dey think gon' score some touchdowns?.... Noooobody!
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - CageTheBengal - 09-16-2017
His kicks don't ever seem to be real pretty.
I guess all that matters is that they make it through.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - CJD - 09-16-2017
Even during the pre-season I noticed Bullock was hitting close to the uprights.
I wish we kept Elliot because, while he did miss more, I remember his hits being right down the middle and still at considerable distances.
It kind of makes me sick thinking that we may still need to draft a kicker next year too, since we threw Elliot away and Bullock is almost certainly not a long term answer.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - bengalguy71 - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 10:16 AM)PhilHos Wrote: For the record, I was one of the ones that wanted to go with Elliot because of potential and was worried about Bullock because of his journeyman career and missed game winner last year. I feel that's important to note.
With that said, I don't remember what, if any, wind was blowing and which direction and how hard and, etc. While I'm glad Randy made all 3 of his FGs, I can't help, being an Elliot fan, but notice his kicks were a little close to one side and not down the middle. And I can't help but think this is due to his form and may lead to some missed FGs in worse weather conditions.
I fully admit I'm most likely looking at them through my biased eyes, so I'm looking to the Bullock fans or the neutral fans to set my mind at ease. Reassure me that Bullock will be fine and I'm just looking for a problem where one doesn't exist.
Thanks.
No disrespect, but, for me, this is way down on the priority list. They have a whole lot more that needs to be addressed before this.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - PhilHos - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 12:39 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: No disrespect, but, for me, this is way down on the priority list. They have a whole lot more that needs to be addressed before this.
None take, but remember, I'm a Bengals fan. We gotta complain about EVERYthing.
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEverything.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - grampahol - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 12:18 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: His kicks don't ever seem to be real pretty.
I guess all that matters is that they make it through.
Anywhere inside the uprights is the only thing that counts. Pretty doesn't really factor into it unless you play offensive line in Cincinnati then it's ALL that counts..Well that and being 'athletic'..
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - bengalguy71 - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 12:41 PM)PhilHos Wrote: None take, but remember, I'm a Bengals fan. We gotta complain about EVERYthing.
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEverything.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - PhilHos - 09-16-2017
Are you ... did you just HIT on me?
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - bengalguy71 - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 12:46 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Are you ... did you just HIT on me?
Not hardly, just acknowledging the attitude of so many Bengal fans. We can only go on history and history does not bode well for this franchise!
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - yellowxdiscipline - 09-16-2017
Id pick him up for FF, he might be our top scorer since we seem to have a problem making touchdowns.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - jason - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 01:27 PM)yellowxdiscipline Wrote: Id pick him up for FF, he might be our top scorer since we seem to have a problem making touchdowns.
Added him to my watch list...
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - bonesaw - 09-16-2017
Bullock is Phat. Don't you try and diminish his perfect performance. MVP...MVP...MVP
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - Sled21 - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 12:37 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Even during the pre-season I noticed Bullock was hitting close to the uprights.
I wish we kept Elliot because, while he did miss more, I remember his hits being right down the middle and still at considerable distances.
It kind of makes me sick thinking that we may still need to draft a kicker next year too, since we threw Elliot away and Bullock is almost certainly not a long term answer.
I agree with this. While Bullock clearly won the competition, I think Elliott had more upside.
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - TheLeonardLeap - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 12:37 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Even during the pre-season I noticed Bullock was hitting close to the uprights.
I wish we kept Elliot because, while he did miss more, I remember his hits being right down the middle and still at considerable distances.
It kind of makes me sick thinking that we may still need to draft a kicker next year too, since we threw Elliot away and Bullock is almost certainly not a long term answer.
Hold up... are you arguing for a less accurate kicker, who's made FGs are prettier, over a more accurate kicker who's FGs aren't pretty?
Because last I heard making 100% of your FGs to the right was better than making 60% of your FGs down the middle.
"Yeah, sure your car actually runs, but look at how pretty of a paint job my engine-less car has."
RE: Randy Bullock's FGs - HarleyDog - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 12:37 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I wish we kept Elliot because, while he did miss more, I remember his hits being right down the middle and still at considerable distances.
Not all of them. That was the problem.