(07-16-2019, 03:38 PM)PhilHos Wrote: How many times have we all lamented that certain players are retained long after they should be (say like Oughebhi sp?)? It's those players I'm thinking of.

But my point was pointing out the absurdity of replacing only Dalton or only those around Dalton. Instead of upgrading whereever is needed (including coaching staff)

(07-16-2019, 03:26 PM)PhilHos Wrote: False. Dude has a winning record as a starting QB in the NFL. That's not easy to do over the course of 5+ seasons. Especially for a franchise run by a guy trying to run it like it's still the 70s.


You must be filthy rich what with winning the lottery all the time.


You don't seem to realize that coaching can play a huge role. That's not to say that the oline will be better this year, but it's possible if it's the same players that our current coaching staff can overcome their deficiencies unlike the last coaching staff. Yes, it's unknown if they will, but it's still possible.


He doesn't need all stars around him to win. That's been evident by his having a winning record. We have enough talent to win a playoff game or 2. It's going to come down to coaching and lack of injuries. 


Spoken like someone who CLEARLY doesn't understand the game of football. The Bengals can be successful in numerous ways: Dalton playing even better, sure, but ZT being a better HC than Merv, the defense playing at an elite level, other players on offense lifting Dalton to higher levels, etc.

If you think the only way for the Bengals to be successful is for Dalton to be an elite QB, well, I'm going to start calling you Mike Brown because that's the exact same thought process he has and I would be embarrassed if MB and I looked at football the same way.

(07-16-2019, 03:50 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: The difference is you think that MB cares what you and the rest of us think. We know we could do a better job than him but alas we don't own the Bengals and MB does. If Dalton doesn't improve the attendance will drop and MB will have no choice but to replace Dalton. Marvin would still be here if the seats would have stayed full. There has to be a scapegoat and MB isn't going to accept that role.

(07-16-2019, 03:54 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I don't disagree with anything in this paragraph, but what the [BLEEP] does this have to do with the conversation at hand?

(07-16-2019, 03:54 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I don't disagree with anything in this paragraph, but what the [BLEEP] does this have to do with the conversation at hand?

(07-16-2019, 03:04 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote:  The only way for the Bengals to be successful this year is for Dalton and Dalton alone to improve his game beyond what he has done in the past. 

(07-16-2019, 04:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This just is not true.  

(07-16-2019, 05:52 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: You seemed to really put your brain into that comment. Don't over think the subject at hand.

(07-16-2019, 06:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is pretty simple.  If the defense and running game improve the Bengals can be successful without Andy having to have a 106+ passer rating.


Everyone else got it except you.

(07-16-2019, 07:42 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: I got you and the rest of the Andy lovers pegged to a T. Its never going to be Andy's fault. Its the other 52 guys. If the others do more we can win with a sub par QB like the Ravens did with Dilfer. Only problem is we don't have a top defense. Andy is great , on a par with Brady, Brees , both Mannings,  Montana, Rodgers. Am I missing anyone?

(07-16-2019, 03:44 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I understand, but you also have to admit we are pretty selective in our excuses.  Marvin and Lazor were so bad last year that we'd be fools to judge Dalton and Ross, or say AJ is done...but we are also sure that Driskel is total crap even though he was playing under the same hopeless circumstances as the guys we want to keep.

That's all I'm saying.

(07-16-2019, 08:40 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I'm not sure that Lazor was bad last year, let alone "so bad". Prior to losing Eifert and Green the team put up some high scoring games.

Gotta remember that our top two TEs went down for the season, then Green, then Andy. Driskel is a couple levels below Andy. Andy didn't look all that good without Eifert and Green, Driskel looked worse.

The things is, Ross never did step up, even when Andy was in there and even when Green was out there to draw coverage away from everyone else. Instead, Ross just sorta tuned out. Can't lump Andy into the same category as Ross.

This is not a make or break year for Andy, but it sure is for Ross.

(07-15-2019, 06:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That is what gets so frustrating around here.  People just make stuff up out of thin air and claim it is true.

(07-16-2019, 07:42 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: I got you and the rest of the Andy lovers pegged to a T. Its never going to be Andy's fault. Its the other 52 guys. If the others do more we can win with a sub par QB like the Ravens did with Dilfer. Only problem is we don't have a top defense. Andy is great , on a par with Brady, Brees , both Mannings,  Montana, Rodgers. Am I missing anyone?

(07-16-2019, 09:40 PM)WhodeyRay Wrote: I don't see how any QB can be judged with an OLine that is this bad for the last few years. 

(07-16-2019, 11:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The only thing you seem to be missing is an elementary understanding of logical argument.

Using Brady, or any other great QB, as an example to prove the error in your beliefs such as "quaterbacks can win with no talent around them"  is NOT the same as comparing Dalton directly to those.  Here is an example so simplistic even you should be able to understand.  If someone says my son is a wimp because he plays lacross and I reply that Jim Brown played lacross in college that does NOT mean I am saying my son is the same as Jim Brown.  I am simply making a comment on the flaw in his logic.

Get it now?

(07-16-2019, 11:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The only thing you seem to be missing is an elementary understanding of logical argument.

Using Brady, or any other great QB, as an example to prove the error in your beliefs such as "quaterbacks can win with no talent around them"  is NOT the same as comparing Dalton directly to those.  Here is an example so simplistic even you should be able to understand.  If someone says my son is a wimp because he plays lacross and I reply that Jim Brown played lacross in college that does NOT mean I am saying my son is the same as Jim Brown.  I am simply making a comment on the flaw in his logic.

Get it now?

(07-17-2019, 08:16 AM)Catmandude123 Wrote: What I get is how you and your cohorts are blind to the fact that this team can't succeed with the "same old Andy". The goal for all32 teams is? To win the Super Bowl. I'll put it in terms you can understand. If my son played baseball but couldn't hit a fastball I wouldn't let him hit cleanup. Get it ???

(07-17-2019, 08:16 AM)Catmandude123 Wrote: What I get is how you and your cohorts are blind to the fact that this team can't succeed with the "same old Andy".