+- 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: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. (/Thread-Hill-Owes-Burfict-Dinner)
Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - GreenCornBengal - 01-12-2016
All of this angst SHOULD be channeled towards Jeremy Hill. He should be thanking Vontaze for taking the spotlight off of him.
Thanks for the blocks Vontaze! Thanks for sealing the game for us, and then becoming a national villain in a two minute period... yah sorry about that bro. Stay turnt!
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - fredtoast - 01-12-2016
Lots of Bengals made mistakes throughout the game. We were still in great shape to win even after Hill fumbled.
Hill doesn't owe Burfict anything.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - Brownshoe - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 03:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Lots of Bengals made mistakes throughout the game. We were still in great shape to win even after Hill fumbled.
Hill doesn't owe Burfict anything.
There were a lot of mistakes, but the Hill fumble easily is the biggest.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - GreenCornBengal - 01-12-2016
LMAO please Fred.
COME ON.
I guess we went from Godly position to Good position.
No, this game is all on Hill and everything else is just white noise.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - fredtoast - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 03:46 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: There were a lot of mistakes, but the Hill fumble easily is the biggest.
No it isn't.
The only way we lose the game after that fumble is if the defense blows it. Steelers were no where close to scoring position after that fumble
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - Aquapod770 - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 03:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it isn't.
The only way we lose the game after that fumble is if the defense blows it. Steelers were no where close to scoring position after that fumble
I agree. I don't know how we didn't blitz Ben at all on that drive. Even if he took oxy in the locker room one big hit would have killed his shoulder.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - GreenCornBengal - 01-12-2016
IDC what Fred says. Maybe he likes the little dances in the endzone.
When you have the ball with < 2 mins on the opposing 20, you should win.
This one is on Hill, thru and thru.
Vontaze ran off the field because he should have never had to come back.
Thanks Hill.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - fredtoast - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 03:52 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: IDC what Fred says. Maybe he likes the little dances in the endzone.
When you have the ball with < 2 mins on the opposing 20, you should win.
This one is on Hill, thru and thru.
Vontaze ran off the field because he should have never had to come back.
Thanks Hill.
I don't understand your logic. Who do you blame for our loss to the Cardinals?
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - Brownshoe - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 03:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't understand your logic. Who do you blame for our loss to the Cardinals?
The offense didn't fumble the ball against the Cadinals at the end of the game. They scored points against them. There's a big differece between those two things. Especially when the defense only allowed 15 points up until that point, and against the Cards they allowed more than double that.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - BigPapaKain - 01-12-2016
If the team was half as good as they were supposed to be, the ending should've never been in question.
The Bengals should've had the Steelers buried in the first half.
And Burfict and Jones owe the entire damn team dinner and hand jobs (if anyone owes anyone else in that locker room).
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - fredtoast - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 04:01 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: The offense didn't fumble the ball against the Cadinals at the end of the game. They scored points against them. There's a big differece between those two things. Especially when the defense only allowed 15 points up until that point, and against the Cards they allowed more than double that.
So the defense does not deserve any blame for letting the Cards march down the field and score? The offense is to blame for nmot scoring a td?
Interesting logic. I did not realize that the defense is never to be held responsible for anything like that.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - GreenCornBengal - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 03:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't understand your logic. Who do you blame for our loss to the Cardinals?
Those two games are nothing alike.
Cardinals game:
Under 2 minutes to go in the 4th we are behind in score 28-31
We tied the game up (8 play 59 yard drive), and after that, the defense gave them range. Defenses fault.
Steelers game:
Under 2 minutes to go we are ahead in score 16-15
DEFENSE GETS a turnover, and have the lead with ~1:30 left. Give the ball back to the offense, offense coughs it up (1 play drive, minimal time taken off clock). Offenses fault.
Then defense gives up range.
I don't even know why I'm arguing this with you. I know you have a brain and I know you aren't a moron and know these are completely different, you are just trying to find some way to defend your boy Hill. If Carson Palmer had turned it over after they got the ball back on the last drive and we fumbled it BACK to them and then they won, then ya maybe there would be a comparison.
There is no comparison between the two.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - Brownshoe - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 04:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So the defense does not deserve any blame for letting the Cards march down the field and score? The offense is to blame for nmot scoring a td?
Interesting logic. I did not realize that the defense is never to be held responsible for anything like that.
Nope. I didn't say that. Nice try though.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - fredtoast - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 04:07 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Those two games are nothing alike.
Cardinals game:
Under 2 minutes to go in the 4th we are behind in score 28-31
We tied the game up (8 play 59 yard drive), and after that, the defense gave them range. Defenses fault.
Steelers game:
Under 2 minutes to go we are ahead in score 16-15
DEFENSE GETS a turnover, and have the lead with ~1:30 left. Give the ball back to the offense, offense coughs it up (1 play drive, minimal time taken off clock). Offenses fault.
Then defense gives up range.
I don't even know why I'm arguing this with you. I know you have a brain and I know you aren't a moron and know these are completely different, you are just trying to find some way to defend your boy Hill. If Carson Palmer had turned it over after they got the ball back on the last drive and we fumbled it BACK to them and then they won, then ya maybe there would be a comparison.
There is no comparison between the two.
Why are you making this a personal attack against me when many other people here agree with me?
The fact is that when the defense allows the other team to march down the field and make the winning score I blame the defense. Crazy right? And that is exactly what happened in both the cards game and the Steelers game. So the comparison is valid.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - fredtoast - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 04:08 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Nope. I didn't say that. Nice try though.
Okay then, let me ask a simple question.
When our defense allows the opposing team to drive the length of the field for the game winning score who do you blame?
What difference does it make how the other team got the ball. If the offense was stopped and punted the ball then do you blame the offense?
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - Brownshoe - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 04:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Why are you making this a personal attack against me when many other people here agree with me?
The fact is that when the defense allows the other team to march down the field and make the winning score I blame the defense. Crazy right? And that is exactly what happened in both the cards game and the Steelers game. So the comparison is valid.
It's actually not like the Cardinals game. You keep trying to make that comparison, but it's not the same. If the offense would have kicked a FG against the Steelers and they marched down the field and got a game winning TD that would be like the Cardinals game. See how they are not even close to being the same?
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - Beaker - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 03:50 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: I don't know how we didn't blitz Ben at all on that drive. Even if he took oxy in the locker room one big hit would have killed his shoulder.
Back when the ball was on the 10 yard line, or wherever the steelers started from, the coaches should have told one of the rotational D linemen to lay another hit on ben, even if it was late, and drive him into the turf again. That rotational lineman gets tossed, we get 15 yds and the ball moved out to the 25, and the steelers have to mount a drive with Landry Jones again.
Sweep the leg!
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - fredtoast - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 04:12 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: It's actually not like the Cardinals game. You keep trying to make that comparison, but it's not the same. If the offense would have kicked a FG against the Steelers and they marched down the field and got a game winning TD that would be like the Cardinals game. See how they are not even close to being the same?
I don't see how it matters how the other team got the ball at all. In both cases the the defense allowed the other team to drive the length of the field and make the winning score.
Against the Cards we settled for a FG instead of a TD, so based on your logic that loss was on the offense also, right?
What if our offense had been stopped and we punted to pin the Steelers inside the 20. If the defense allows them to march down the field and ascore is that loss blamed on the offense for being forced to punt?
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - GreenCornBengal - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 04:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Why are you making this a personal attack against me when many other people here agree with me?
The fact is that when the defense allows the other team to march down the field and make the winning score I blame the defense. Crazy right? And that is exactly what happened in both the cards game and the Steelers game. So the comparison is valid.
So then when the defense doesn't allow the other team to march down the field and make the potentially game winning turnover they did their job right? Cuz that's what happened if you don't remember.
The fact is that when the offense fumbles the ball giving the opposing team an opportunity to march down the field and make the winning score I blame the offense. Crazy huh?
That's exactly what didn't happen in the Cardinals game.
RE: Hill Owes Burfict Dinner. - Brownshoe - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Okay then, let me ask a simple question.
When our defense allows the opposing team to drive the length of the field for the game winning score who do you blame?
What difference does it make how the other team got the ball. If the offense was stopped and punted the ball then do you blame the offense?
So you're telling me when the offense scored 0 points in the first 3 quarters, and the defense still made it a close game it's on the defense? Amazing logic right there. Just simply amazing.