11-04-2018, 04:43 PM
(11-04-2018, 03:02 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I just looked it up to make sure, and Blake was 4-5 against the Steelers as a Bengal. I want to say Palmer was 4-8 and Dalton is like 3-11.
I get that we "own" Baltimore and Baltimore sorta "owns" Pitt, but nobody is dominating quite like Pitt dominates the Bengals.
Your first statement might be true, but not the second one.
The Steelers were just as dominant in the 90's. During the Blake era (94-99), the Steelers went 57-39 with a Super Bowl appearance and 3 conference championship appearances.
For comparison, over the last 6 years, the Steelers are 61-35 with 0 Super Bowl appearances and 1 conference championship appearance.
Even with Kordell at QB, they were a FAR better team than the Bengals. So how was Blake able to go 4-5 against them, when superior QB's (Palmer and Dalton) are much worse?
I think it's more their management philosophy that beats us than anything else. They typically beat our lines up and can run the ball against us very well. That's been the difference.
Honestly, Geoff Hobson was on a Pittsburgh radio station talking before we played them last time. While his stories on Bengals.com sound like Homer pieces, he actually pointed out something like the difference has been the Steelers can run the ball which is the difference.
Having a HOF QB doesn't hurt either though.
You look at the game earlier in the year and while the score was close, the Steelers had way more yards than us.
