(12-30-2021, 04:51 PM)Bengalfan4life27c Wrote: pre thumb injury and post thumb injury they were different players. Dalton's problem after the thumb injury you took away his first read and provided pressure he generally folded like a lawn chair. We had good lines his first few years probably helped a bit as well. He was a Top 3 MVP candidate before the thumb injury.

What did his thumb have any to-do with his bad reads?

(12-31-2021, 03:23 PM)Housh Wrote: I liked Andy didn’t love him.

I love Burrow


With that said Andy had more success as of right now than Burrow. I know it’s a technicality because Burrow is only 2 years in but we can’t crown him until he at least matches Andy’s 5 playoff appearances. And in like 2 of those appearances Andy play very well.


With all that said if Burrow comes out and wins one playoff game he’s already better than anything Andy did

Andy had 4 playoff appearances. 2 tds 7ints is not good at all. It's horrible.. He was downright horrible in the playoffs.. He lost to TJ Yates and and inferior Charger team. He was doo doo in the playoffs.. Average in the regular season, until the lights got bright. Andy in a nutshell, not good enough..

You all know I defend Andy around here a lot.  But I have also been "fair and balanced" enough to share this stat I looked up.

From '12 through '16 only 3 QBs (Wilson, Brees, Rodgers) had more games with a 120+ passer rating than Andy Dalton

From '12 through '16 only 1 QB (Fitzpatrick) had more games with a passer rating under 70 than Andy Dalton.



A lot of people don't give him enough credit for how good he was when he was on, but when he wasn't on he was really bad.  He was maddeningly inconsistent.

(12-31-2021, 04:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You all know I defend Andy around here a lot.  But I have also been "fair and balanced" enough to share this stat I looked up.

From '12 through '16 only 3 QBs (Wilson, Brees, Rodgers) had more games with a 120+ passer rating than Andy Dalton

From '12 through '16 only 1 QB (Fitzpatrick) had more games with a passer rating under 70 than Andy Dalton.



A lot of people don't give him enough credit for how good he was when he was on, but when he wasn't on he was really bad.  He was maddeningly inconsistent.

I gave him tons of crap the last few years, but that was something i pointed out all the time. His ceiling was really high but his floor was also really low. He spent way too much time on the floor. 

First 2 years: 
Dalton 32 games
Burrow 25 games

Sub 70 rated games:
Dalton 11 games (34%)
Burrow 4 games (16%)

120+ rated games:
Dalton 3 games (9%) none in year 1
Burrow 5 games (20%) none in year 1

100+ rated games:
Dalton 10 games (31%) 
Burrow 12 games (48%)

Burrow has never had a rating below 66.1 (his first game)
Dalton has 10 games below 66.1


Dalton was a good QB for the Bengals but they should have been looking to upgrade him after 2016.

(12-31-2021, 03:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I guaranteed the Cam would be a complete bust in the NFL.

He was a "one year wonder".

Lots of character issues going back to his Florida days.

All he did in college was make one read and then run the ball.

He was not even an elusive runner like Vick or Vince Young.  He was more of a power runner which would not be as successful against NFL men as college boys.

And that is why I am not a NFL scout. 

Those high rainbow passes too...  ooof.  He looked like NFL interception throwing machine ready to happen.

(12-31-2021, 03:23 PM)Housh Wrote: I liked Andy didn’t love him.

I love Burrow


With that said Andy had more success as of right now than Burrow. I know it’s a technicality because Burrow is only 2 years in but we can’t crown him until he at least matches Andy’s 5 playoff appearances. And in like 2 of those appearances Andy play very well.


With all that said if Burrow comes out and wins one playoff game he’s already better than anything Andy did

(12-31-2021, 04:45 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I gave him tons of crap the last few years, but that was something i pointed out all the time. His ceiling was really high but his floor was also really low. He spent way too much time on the floor. 

First 2 years: 
Dalton 32 games
Burrow 25 games

Sub 70 rated games:
Dalton 11 games (34%)
Burrow 4 games (16%)

120+ rated games:
Dalton 3 games (9%) none in year 1
Burrow 5 games (20%) none in year 1

100+ rated games:
Dalton 10 games (31%) 
Burrow 12 games (48%)

Burrow has never had a rating below 66.1 (his first game)
Dalton has 10 games below 66.1


Dalton was a good QB for the Bengals but they should have been looking to upgrade him after 2016.

Yep the old good andy - bad andy thing. 

A bit of this teams playoff problems were AD. But a shit ton were not AD.

So why is it necessary to diss Andy in order to praise Burrow? Joe's really good and no reference to past quarterbacks is necessary. Live in the present.

The thing that makes me lol is people who act like us having success with Burrow I proving them right about drafting an elite QB...as if its as simple as plucking a Joe Burrow at the flea market. With Dalton, we were typically drafting in the mid twenties.

There were very few if any Joe's at those spots.

The time to replace Andy was 2016 and after, when we were losing. Tbh, we probably replaced him at the perfect time considering who we got.

(12-31-2021, 11:09 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Yep the old good andy - bad andy thing. 

A bit of this teams playoff problems were AD. But a shit ton were not AD.

0-3 with Kitna, Palmer and McCarron. None had a passer rating better than 68.

People make excuses, saying 2 guys were backups, but we lost to backups like TJ Yates.

Kitna started out on fire in 05 and faded in the 2nd half. That comes down to adjustments, which were often a problem for Marv.

I could run down all the other players who failed, and it's a huge list, but it will never change people's minds.

(12-31-2021, 02:46 PM)jason Wrote: Is it ok to like both Joe Burrow and and Andy Dalton? Asking for a friend.

Yes.

(12-31-2021, 10:41 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote:

One of the Texans games he’s was good. The D just shut the bed.



Maybe he only had one good game but one of them games he was on target

(01-01-2022, 03:55 AM)Housh Wrote: One of the Texans games he’s was good. The D just shut the bed.



Maybe he only had one good game but one of them games he was on target

Your memory is definitely off. He was dreadful against the Texans both times.


27/42 for 257 yds 0 TD 3 INT’s 51.4 rating

14/30 for 127 yds 0 TD 1 INT 44.7 rating

(01-01-2022, 04:24 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Your memory is definitely off. He was dreadful against the Texans both times.


27/42 for 257 yds 0 TD 3 INT’s 51.4 rating

14/30 for 127 yds 0 TD 1 INT 44.7 rating

If I remember correctly the first game wasn't as bad as what the stat line looks like. One of the INTs was on 4th down and basically was a punt. It would have been worse for us actually if the ball was batted down. The other was a freak INT from JJ Watt. I can't remember what the 3rd one was, because I haven't watched the game in a really long time. The second game he was kinda handicapped with play calling. I'm pretty sure we stopped running the ball when it was successful and Gresham dropped a few big passes. Plus I'm pretty sure we stopped throwing to Green in the 2nd half.

(01-01-2022, 01:07 AM)Rubekahn29 Wrote: Yes.

Its like this....from scarface
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKAKmgPWIhY

The year is 2042. Detroit Lions Super Bowl MVP Tom Brady announces that he will return for his record setting 42nd NFL season. Meanwhile on The Bengals Board fans continue to argue about Andy Dalton.

All of the former QBs that had any level of success in Cincinnati had outstanding offensive lines, including Dalton his first few years. Burrow? Ehh..not so much, but they are improving. Still, it's never a one man show regardless. A successful QB still needs a decent Oline, receivers that can get separation and catch the ball and RBs who can mow over tacklers..all without constant fumbling..  It's definitely a job I wouldn't want in the NFL regardless of how well the Oline plays, how great receivers are or how good the RB is.. I'm just not designed to have 300 pound guys run into me full force..  Pain just isn't one of my all time favorite pastimes.. 

(12-31-2021, 04:45 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I gave him tons of crap the last few years, but that was something i pointed out all the time. His ceiling was really high but his floor was also really low. He spent way too much time on the floor. 

First 2 years: 
Dalton 32 games
Burrow 25 games

Sub 70 rated games:
Dalton 11 games (34%)
Burrow 4 games (16%)

120+ rated games:
Dalton 3 games (9%) none in year 1
Burrow 5 games (20%) none in year 1

100+ rated games:
Dalton 10 games (31%) 
Burrow 12 games (48%)

Burrow has never had a rating below 66.1 (his first game)
Dalton has 10 games below 66.1


Dalton was a good QB for the Bengals but they should have been looking to upgrade him after 2016.

Yeah, but the problem with this comparison is that in order to be a straight up measuring stick, then I would have to buy into each supporting cast is equal and, I'm sorry, but that's not even close to being the case. 1st thing that you must consider . . . every snap of Andy Dalton's career prior to 2019 was under the leadership of Mediocre Marvin Lewis, who was a defensive mind. Zac Taylor is a former QB. 

Joe has had much better weapons whereas Dalton had AJ Green and a bunch of #4 WRs for almost his entire career until Boyd 'got it'. ARMON BINNS started 5 games as the #2 WR in the stats you are pulling from.

Also in that time, Dalton was handing off to a running on fumes Ced Benson and a painfully obvious below average Benjarvis Green-Ellis. Compare that to an in his prime Joe Mixon, Giovani Bernard and Samaje Perine. Jermaine Gresham was a physical prototype for what you want in a TE but a total on-field headache. I still think every Bengal fan out there would take a consistent CJ Uzomah and his lack of drive killing penalties vs Gresham's amazing athleticism and boneheaded penalties, which usually, it seemed, came on a converted third down.

Look.

The guy that preceded him was a #1 overall pick
The guy that succeeded him was a #1 overall pick
He's the only Bengal QB to lead the team to 5 consecutive winning seasons and he took over a team that earned the #4 overall pick. The Bengals fans that know how special that is, appreciate that greatly. The Burrow fanboys act like Cincinnati has this great tradition with tremendous starting QBs, Dalton smeared shit all over the throne and the mighty Joe Burrow has risen to take back Cincinnati's rightful place as the center of the QB universe.

I am not a part of some stupid Dalton Gang. I'm just tired of supposed Bengals fans shitting all over a QB that put a pathetic franchise into territory they've never been before. That's one of the few things about this team we can celebrate and for some stupid, ****** up reason, you guys can't prop up an obvious star that doesn't need to be propped up without dumping on his predecessor. I'm just waiting for you all to grow out of this embarrassing stage you're in.

(01-01-2022, 03:13 PM)Forever Spinning Vinyl Wrote: Yeah, but the problem with this comparison is that in order to be a straight up measuring stick, then I would have to buy into each supporting cast is equal and, I'm sorry, but that's not even close to being the case. 1st thing that you must consider . . . every snap of Andy Dalton's career prior to 2019 was under the leadership of Mediocre Marvin Lewis, who was a defensive mind. Zac Taylor is a former QB. 

Joe has had much better weapons whereas Dalton had AJ Green and a bunch of #4 WRs for almost his entire career until Boyd 'got it'. ARMON BINNS started 5 games as the #2 WR in the stats you are pulling from.

Also in that time, Dalton was handing off to a running on fumes Ced Benson and a painfully obvious below average Benjarvis Green-Ellis. Compare that to an in his prime Joe Mixon, Giovani Bernard and Samaje Perine. Jermaine Gresham was a physical prototype for what you want in a TE but a total on-field headache. I still think every Bengal fan out there would take a consistent CJ Uzomah and his lack of drive killing penalties vs Gresham's amazing athleticism and boneheaded penalties, which usually, it seemed, came on a converted third down.

Look.

The guy that preceded him was a #1 overall pick
The guy that succeeded him was a #1 overall pick
He's the only Bengal QB to lead the team to 5 consecutive winning seasons and he took over a team that earned the #4 overall pick. The Bengals fans that know how special that is, appreciate that greatly. The Burrow fanboys act like Cincinnati has this great tradition with tremendous starting QBs, Dalton smeared shit all over the throne and the mighty Joe Burrow has risen to take back Cincinnati's rightful place as the center of the QB universe.

I am not a part of some stupid Dalton Gang. I'm just tired of supposed Bengals fans shitting all over a QB that put a pathetic franchise into territory they've never been before. That's one of the few things about this team we can celebrate and for some stupid, ****** up reason, you guys can't prop up an obvious star that doesn't need to be propped up without dumping on his predecessor. I'm just waiting for you all to grow out of this embarrassing stage you're in.

I'm not shitting on him, just pointing out the average time they've spent being good or bad. The main point being, Joe's floor is much higher than Dalton's, which allows his overall numbers to be better--besides the fact he's a better QB (none of that saying that Dalton is bad...just not as good as Joe). 

The highlighted part is a bit of a contradiction, as well as being disingenuous. If Dalton didn't have the same supporting cast--which can be argued legitimately--and he had so many truely bad games, you can't say he "put a pathetic franchise into territory they've never been before". He didn't, the cast (him included) did. 

Dalton was a good QB for the Bengals from 2011-2016 but he was imminently replaceable. Burrow is a guy with the type of talent that's not easily replaceable. 

As for what follows what i highlighted above, maybe you should learn to be less sensitive so that you don't have trouble discerning from a statistical comparison and an attempt to "dump" on someone. 

(01-01-2022, 03:37 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: The highlighted part is a bit of a contradiction, as well as being disingenuous. If Dalton didn't have the same supporting cast--which can be argued legitimately--and he had so many truely bad games, you can't say he "put a pathetic franchise into territory they've never been before". He didn't, the cast (him included) did. 

So how much credit does Burrow get for winning a Championship in college with the most talented roster in college football history?

Or how much credit does he get this year playing with the best trio of WRs in the league and the #2 RB in the league?

Why try to use an argument to discredit Dalton when it also discredits Burrow?  Why not give them BOTH credit for their accomplishments?