(06-04-2015, 11:05 AM)jason Wrote: Exactly... To be fair the rookie WR is a stud.  My point was the vets who had been Bengalized (TO, Carson, Chad...) were kicked to the curb.  That 2010 team should have been better than 4-12, and we all know it.  2010 was sandwiched between  10-6 and 9-7 teams.

A lot of people don't like looking at the schedule and other factors of 2010 and just like to think that team was "bad" so they can give Andy an award for turning around this terrible franchise by himself.

(06-04-2015, 11:05 AM)jason Wrote: Exactly... To be fair the rookie WR is a stud.  My point was the vets who had been Bengalized (TO, Carson, Chad...) were kicked to the curb.  That 2010 team should have been better than 4-12, and we all know it.  2010 was sandwiched between  10-6 and 9-7 teams.

I agree.  Granted Palmer, Chad, and TO were "Bengalized".  They were our top skill players on the team.  To replace them with two rookies and go on the consistent streak that we have says a lot about the guys they were replaced with.  

(06-04-2015, 10:29 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: With all the stats, injuries, and coaching factors involved, I don't think he'll ever get the monkey off his back until this team (with him at QB) wins at least one playoff game.  And at this point, that might not even be enough.  Fair or not.  Just my two cents.

I agree.  And I think it might be his last chance.  The Bengals can walk away from his contract after this year and I can't see Mike Brown continuing to pay him what he's paying him if he doesn't win a playoff game.

(06-04-2015, 11:07 AM)djs7685 Wrote: A lot of people don't like looking at the schedule and other factors of 2010 and just like to think that team was "bad" so they can give Andy an award for turning around this terrible franchise by himself.

And some people want to make excuses for a 4-12 team so they don't have to give Andy an award for being a big part of turning the franchise around.  He is only the QB after all.

No biggie.

(06-04-2015, 11:04 AM)djs7685 Wrote: You get very combative and unnecessarily condescending unless someone has an extremist-positive view about Andy Dalton.

That's what I don't understand.

Pot meet kettle. 

(06-04-2015, 11:10 AM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: And some people want to make excuses for a 4-12 team so they don't have to give Andy an award for being a big part of turning the franchise around.  He is only the QB after all.

No biggie.

(06-04-2015, 11:12 AM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: Pot meet kettle. 

The difference is, you're being condescending to people that are giving Andy credit.

Where am I being extreme or combative? I'm agreeing with Jason who is giving Andy credit for the turnaround, we just both refuse to give 1 single player 100% of the credit for it. I don't see how anybody could disagree with that, but for some reason you feel the need to reply and become combative with somebody that gave a very reasonable, non-extreme opinion.

(06-04-2015, 11:07 AM)djs7685 Wrote: A lot of people don't like looking at the schedule and other factors of 2010 and just like to think that team was "bad" so they can give Andy an award for turning around this terrible franchise by himself

2013 schedule was tough.  2014 schedule had a horrible flow to it.  The bye was useless, 3 road games in a row...  They won 10 and 11 games.

Andy definitely deserves some credit for helping to bring this team to where it's at now, but there are a hell of a lot of other people who had big parts in that turnaround as well. He deserves credit for helping this team become a relevant year after year contender, but also the criticism for not helping this team become anything more than the worst team in the playoffs each of the last 4 years.

(06-04-2015, 11:17 AM)jason Wrote: 2013 schedule was tough.  2014 schedule had a horrible flow to it.  The bye was useless, 3 road games in a row...  They won 10 and 11 games.

The 2013 team was probably the best all around team we've seen in years, so what's the point? They were 8-0 at home and they beat some good teams in the regular season. Showing that our best team in years overcame a rough schedule doesn't really go against what I'm saying.

The 2010 team wasn't as bad as the super Andy homers want to claim. These nerds want to say "it's not excuses, it's reasons!" for everything pro-Andy related, yet they call anything I'll say about 2010 "excuses".

That's why I'm not going into this again. Anyone that thinks Andy is a "good" QB can have fun and think that. Just know the proof is out there that shows otherwise unless you want to cherry pick 2 stats and forget the rest and not actually watch him play the game.

(06-04-2015, 11:22 AM)djs7685 Wrote: ...These nerds want to say "it's not excuses, it's reasons!" for everything pro-Andy related, yet they call anything I'll say about 2010 "excuses".

No "condescension" here.  

(06-04-2015, 11:20 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Andy definitely deserves some credit for helping to bring this team to where it's at now, but there are a hell of a lot of other people who had big parts in that turnaround as well.  He deserves credit for helping this team become a relevant year after year contender, but also the criticism for not helping this team become anything more than the worst team in the playoffs each of the last 4 years.

Not much you could argue with here.

(06-04-2015, 11:24 AM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: No "condescension" here.  

Wouldn't have happened if I didn't have to deal with people like you.

Forget that Benson ran for 3.5 YPC in 2010 but 3.9 YPC in 2011.

Forget that the defense was ranked middle of the pack in 2010 and then top 10 in 2011.

Forget that we went from 95 rushing YPG in 2010 to 111 rushing YPG in 2011.

Forget that our passing yardage and passing stats in general went DOWN from 2010 to 2011.

Forget that the 2010 schedule was absolutely insane and in 2011 we were playing a 4th place schedule.

But yeah, Andy Dalton is definitely the MAIN reason the team "turned it around" after 2010. Keep thinking that.

(06-04-2015, 11:07 AM)djs7685 Wrote: A lot of people don't like looking at the schedule and other factors of 2010 and just like to think that team was "bad" so they can give Andy an award for turning around this terrible franchise by himself.

We had a pretty tough schedule last year, especially for a team that lost it's top 2 receivers, top TE, and top LB a big chunk of the year.  Yet we won 10 games.

(06-04-2015, 11:38 AM)BonnieBengal Wrote: We had a pretty tough schedule last year, especially for a team that lost it's top 2 receivers, top TE, and top LB a big chunk of the year.  Yet we won 10 games.

Yep. The defense also gave up a lot of yardage last year, way too much.

I do like Eifert and think he's going to be very good, but I don't know if I can call him a "top TE" with not even 500 career receiving yards. Also, our #1 receiver was healthy for a good portion of the season, it's not like Green was IR'd in week 1.

With that said, Andy played very well at times, the defense came up with timely turnovers at times, and Jeremy Hill is a great football player. It took a full team effort last year and I think a lot of people were surprised that they came away with 10 wins.

It's not like Andy rose up and overcame the odds to win 10 games by himself. He had a below average statistical season overall. How was 2014 any sort of proof that Andy is the "main reason" for the team's success?

(06-04-2015, 11:31 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Wouldn't have happened if I didn't have to deal with people like you.

Forget that Benson ran for 3.5 YPC in 2010 but 3.9 YPC in 2011.

Forget that the defense was ranked middle of the pack in 2010 and then top 10 in 2011.

Forget that we went from 95 rushing YPG in 2010 to 111 rushing YPG in 2011.

Forget that our passing yardage and passing stats in general went DOWN from 2010 to 2011.

Forget that the 2010 schedule was absolutely insane and in 2011 we were playing a 4th place schedule.

But yeah, Andy Dalton is definitely the MAIN reason the team "turned it around" after 2010. Keep thinking that.

Forget that we had a rookie QB who didn't even have the luxury of a training camp.  Palmer had the luxury of a year on the bench while being first pick in the draft.  

Forget that we were very inexperienced at the skill positions.

Forget that the 2011 team turned the ball over 12 less times times than the 2010 team. 

Forget that the 2011 team scored 20 more points than the 2010 team.   

(06-04-2015, 11:54 AM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: Forget that we had a rookie QB who didn't even have the luxury of a training camp.  Palmer had the luxury of a year on the bench while being first pick in the draft.  

Forget that we were very inexperienced at the skill positions.

Forget that the 2011 team turned the ball over 12 less times times than the 2010 team. 

Forget that the 2011 team scored 20 more points than the 2010 team.   

Passing stats went down.

Everything else improved statistically.

Yet you still honestly believe that Andy was the "main reason" the team had a better record in 2011 than in 2010?

(06-04-2015, 11:57 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Passing stats went down.

Everything else improved statistically.

Yet you still honestly believe that Andy was the "main reason" the team had a better record in 2011 than in 2010?

In 2010 16.3 % of our drives ended in an offensive turnover.  30.5% ended in an offensive score.  

In 2011 9.6 % of our drives ended in a turnover.  32.5% ended in an offensive score.

(06-04-2015, 12:05 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: In 2010 16.3 % of our drives ended in an offensive turnover.  30.5% ended in an offensive score.  

In 2011 9.6 % of our drives ended in a turnover.  32.5% ended in an offensive score.

Okay?

Why do you keep running away from direct QB talk? Why is everything "the offense"?

The passing game got worse from 2010 to 2011.

The running game, defense, and special teams got better from 2010 to 2011.

Yet you STILL think Andy was the "main reason" the team "turned around" from that 4-12 season.

You're right, you're the smartest guy ever. I don't know how anyone else could look at 2+2=4 directly and say "NO!!!!".

Take care, bud.

(06-04-2015, 12:08 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Okay?

Why do you keep running away from direct QB talk? Why is everything "the offense"?

The passing game got worse from 2010 to 2011.

The running game, defense, and special teams got better from 2010 to 2011.

Yet you STILL think Andy was the "main reason" the team "turned around" from that 4-12 season.

You're right, you're the smartest guy ever. I don't know how anyone else could look at 2+2=4 directly and say "NO!!!!".

Take care, bud.

Isn't the QB in charge of running the offense?  I know how much you hate talking about "volume numbers".  

(06-04-2015, 12:15 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: Isn't the QB in charge of running the offense?  I know how much you hate talking about "volume numbers".  

Yes, WhoDeyWho, you completely got me! You bringing up turnovers by other members of the team is really refuting my stance that the passing game declined and every other facet of the game improved. Other than Andy throwing less INT in 2011 than Carson in 2010, everything else about the passing game declined from 2010. I'm showing the entire picture, you're showing the 1 point that doesn't even make sense in a feeble attempt to not look silly. I don't know why you do this. Do you know, it's perfectly reasonable to change your opinions based on new information that someone gives you? I'm showing you that everything EXCEPT the passing game improved, yet you refuse to say anything but Andy being the "main reason" the team improved. lolwat

2+2=4. "NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" STOMP STOMP STOMP. WHERE'S MY BOTTLE?!?!