(08-22-2022, 09:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Your trollish schtick has grown old with me.

There was nothing flukish about our 2022 season. We had a talented well-coached team, who stayed at/near the top of the division from week 1 to week 17. After we played 13 games (for some reason a very important point in the season to you) we were leading our division and the #4 seed in the AFC. EXACTLY where we finished the season. 

Yep there are no flukes in the NFL. What the Pats have done is not the norm. It's not like baseball where a guy goes around the league and hits .350 his first two months and then all of a sudden they're throwing him sliders away and he hit .170 the next two. You are who you are in this league. A few plays a game do/can determine winners and losers weekly. Just look back at the Bengals of the 90's and they were in so many games mid/late 4th quarter and then the wheels fell off. A couple drops on 3rd down. a terrible punt, a couple bad penalties and their opponent went down and won the game.

There are very very very subtle differences between a team that goes 5-12 and 12-5. Damn near every athlete at each position in the NFL is identical in size speed, size,athletic ability, etc. Yes, a tremendous QB goes without saying, but the teams that go 5-12 are usually teams very high in penalties and turnovers with players that also aren't on the same page as the coaches. Losing attitude can diminish the will to win.

Last season offensive line was terrible. This season should be top 10 on paper. Chase hadn't played meaningful football in 20 + months now he is coming off of ROTY. Burrow was coming back from a shredded knee so we were limiting pass attempts through first half of season. Even by Fred's logic on here from week 13 on we were arguably best team in football.

(08-23-2022, 09:40 AM)PDub80 Wrote: So, you think all teams and players are equal in terms of ability to get better over the entirety of a season? 

No.  Not at all.  The teams with quality coaching get better quicker.

(08-23-2022, 09:40 AM)PDub80 Wrote: You don't believe Joey B and the training staff and the coaches when they all said he didn't get back to being/feeling himself from the knee injury until the middle of the season? That, to you, doesn't matter? No, wait... let me guess. I can fill in this blank for you: They are all paid employees of the Bengals, so they aren't telling the truth. That's your go to, right?

Actually I have said many times that the biggest key to the turnaround was the fact that Burrrow was leading the league in interceptions over the first 14 weeks then just threw 2 over his final 7 games.  But since you can never argue with what I actually say you just make up straw men to knock down.  

But from what I recall Burrow did not blame his knee injury for the interceptions.  Instead it was poor decision making.  He was trying to force too much.  A coach can't fix an injury, but he should be able to manage his QBs decision making.

(08-23-2022, 09:40 AM)PDub80 Wrote: You don't think Jamarr Chase or Tee Higgins or anyone else new to the team learned anything more, faster, or better and were able to apply things in a new offense/defense the same in game 20 as they did in game 1? No adjustments were made at all on the Bengals that other teams didn't also do?

Exactly.  The Bengals made adjustments over the course of the season just like every other NFL team.

(08-23-2022, 09:40 AM)PDub80 Wrote: You're equating ZT's experience of 3 seasons with other tenured NFL coaches, like Andy Reid? John Harbaugh? Mike Tomlin? - Whom the Bengals all played 2x. You feel as though this 3 years as a HC and OC is all it takes to reach maximum, end potential to be equal to guys like I just mentioned?

 Actually guys like Reid, Harbaugh and Tomlin were winners in their second seasons as head coaches.  Tomlin won a Lombardi in his second season.  Harbaugh took over a 5 win team and won playoff games his first two seasons.  Andy Reid took over a 3 win season and won a playoff game in his second season.

(08-23-2022, 09:40 AM)PDub80 Wrote: WTF is wrong w you? That's not rhetorical. WTF.... is wrong... w you? Please bow out of this thread. Your posts have ventured out beyond your typical, steady obtuse and reached ludicrous speed. Just, take your ball, and go home w it.

Nothing is wrong with me.

You are the one who is triggered by my comments and begging me to stop.

(08-23-2022, 10:00 AM)casear2727 Wrote:  EVERY YEAR TEAMS IMPROVE THROUGHOUT THE SEASON - such a Fred DH take, lol.

No they don't.  I could provide hundreds of examples of teams that got worse over the second half of a season.

Know any Raiders fans?

(08-23-2022, 10:37 AM)Soonerpeace Wrote: He’s demented

Pretty ironic that you pick a word based on "dementia" when you are the one having trouble remembering what you said just last week.

It's possible that the Bengals offensive line is improved and overall talent...yet we don't perform as well as last year.

The AFC is pretty loaded.

I tend to think we'll win 11/12 games. But there are scenarios where we could win 9-10 and be a wildcard or slightly miss the playoffs.

538 did a piece several weeks ago. ( Search 538, NFL, and luck and it'll pop up.) Their statistical nerds came up with a way to judge which teams lost close games, so close that one play made the difference between a win and a loss. Given Fred's typical BS in this thread, it would seem logical to think the Bengals would be on the list of luckiest teams, right?

But you (and Fred) would be wrong. They show the Bengals as one of the LEAST (7th) lucky teams. Their model shows with just a slightly different outcome, the Bengals would have finished 13-4.

And Fred being Fred and wanting to argue all points, the list also shows negative records if just one play had gone wrong, and the Bengals were not on that list. (The Ravens were the only team on both lists.)

(08-23-2022, 10:34 AM)fredtoast Wrote: But from what I recall Burrow did not blame his knee injury for the interceptions.  Instead it was poor decision making.  He was trying to force too much.  A coach can't fix an injury, but he should be able to manage his QBs decision making.

So, Andy Reid forgot how to manage Mahommes the first part of last year?

1 more point I would like to add the Bills had 6 games in a weak AFC east that 1 of those 6 was in gale force winds against only other decent team in their division They also had games against Jags, Texans, Panthers, Falcons and Saints with 3rd string QB. Yet many analysts proclaimed Bills best team in the NFL that got robbed by OT yet Bengals were faced with same scenario following week and overcame.

(08-22-2022, 07:03 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: 1. The Continuity and gained experience of Zac,Lou,and Brian foremost but the staff in general.
2. The Continuity of Joe and his receivers
3. The Continuity of all 11 defensive starters returning
4. The improved OL will help in our biggest weaknesses the red zone and short yardage
5. The improved OL should expand our playbook. In the Athletic Podcast earlier this summer Brian and Zac lamented how it severely limited what they wanted to do on offense.
6. The Bengals weren’t a fluke. Flukes don’t beat KC twice. Flukes don’t beat Baltimore 41-17 & 41-21 Pittsburg 41-10 & 24-10 Beat the Raiders 32-13 on the road. Go win in the playoffs on the road in OT & last 30 seconds. They were 6-2 to end the season ( not counting the Browns)

With all due respect, Baltimore had no secondary. Big Ben had no arm, we had a last place schedule and played the worst combined pass defense rating in the league last year. So the skepticism has validity.

But I agree, the team is being slept on too much. One more year to grow, I don’t see us losing the division.

(08-23-2022, 11:10 AM)AlphaBengal Wrote: played the worst combined pass defense rating in the league last year. So the skepticism has validity.

Well that’s because Joe Burrow.

(08-23-2022, 10:59 AM)MTBengalsFan Wrote: 538 did a piece several weeks ago. ( Search 538, NFL, and luck and it'll pop up.) Their statistical nerds came up with a way to judge which teams lost close games, so close that one play made the difference between a win and a loss. Given Fred's typical BS in this thread, it would seem logical to think the Bengals would be on the list of luckiest teams, right?

But you (and Fred) would be wrong. They show the Bengals as one of the LEAST (7th) lucky teams. Their model shows with just a slightly different outcome, the Bengals would have finished 13-4.

And Fred being Fred and wanting to argue all points, the list also shows negative records if just one play had gone wrong, and the Bengals were not on that list. (The Ravens were the only team on both lists.)

I have to disagree with any claim that we did not have at least 3 "coin-flip" wins.

We literally won three games on the last play of the game (Vikes, Jags, Chiefs) in the regular season.

And this study does not include the postseason.

And show me the math on the Bengals being on of the 7 least lucky teams in the league.  This story does not even provide the records for all the so-called "coin-flip" games. So I don't see how you came up with that number.

(08-23-2022, 11:02 AM)Bengalfan4life27c Wrote: 1 more point I would like to add the Bills had 6 games in a weak AFC east that 1 of those 6 was in gale force winds against only other decent team in their division They also had games against Jags, Texans, Panthers, Falcons and Saints with 3rd string QB. Yet many analysts proclaimed Bills best team in the NFL that got robbed by OT yet Bengals were faced with same scenario following week and overcame.

Bills had 10 regular season games against teams that finished with a winning record.  Bengals only played 7.

What you call the "weak" AFC East had three teams that finished with winning records.  AFC North only had 2.

Bills had the #1 scoring defense and #3 scoring offense playing against a first place schedule.  Bengals had the #7 scoring offense and #17 scoring defense playing against a last place schedule.

Bills won a playoff game by 30 points.

The fact that the Bills lost a game in overtime and the Bengals won one does not outweigh all the other factors.

(08-23-2022, 11:10 AM)AlphaBengal Wrote: With all due respect, Baltimore had no secondary. Big Ben had no arm, we had a last place schedule and played the worst combined pass defense rating in the league last year. So the skepticism has validity.

But I agree, the team is being slept on too much. One more year to grow, I don’t see us losing the division.

This.

It is possible to look at last season without blinders and still predict the Bengals to be great this year.

Our O-line was not just bad last year.  It was historically bad for a winning team.  I don't think any other team had a bigger weakness and no other team did as much as the Bengals (3 upgraded starters) to address their biggest weakness.

(08-23-2022, 11:10 AM)AlphaBengal Wrote: With all due respect, Baltimore had no secondary. Big Ben had no arm, we had a last place schedule and played the worst combined pass defense rating in the league last year. So the skepticism has validity.

But I agree, the team is being slept on too much. One more year to grow, I don’t see us losing the division.

I think there’s a difference between calling it a fluke versus very fortunate. We were fortunate in injuries. But all the those things you mentioned didn’t exist in the playoffs. They didn’t exist beating KC twice in the late season and playoffs. Yes we were fortunate in winning some close games but we also earned the victories with timely plays and managing our offense to win games with McPherson.

(08-22-2022, 08:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is a logical disconnect in your argument.

You can't claim the team had the same talent and planning the first 13 games when they were just 7-6 as they did winning 3 straight playoff games.  After 7 weeks into the season we only had one win against a team that would finish with a winning record (and just barely at 9-7-1)

There had to be something else coming into play because the results were very different.

Taylor blew most of the close games early in the season, he actually tired to give away the Vikings game. 

(08-23-2022, 11:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Bills had 10 regular season games against teams that finished with a winning record.  Bengals only played 7.

What you call the "weak" AFC East had three teams that finished with winning records.  AFC North only had 2.

Bills had the #1 scoring defense and #3 scoring offense playing against a first place schedule.  Bengals had the #7 scoring offense and #17 scoring defense playing against a last place schedule.

Bills won a playoff game by 30 points.

The fact that the Bills lost a game in overtime and the Bengals won one does not outweigh all the other factors.

Last season Fred who had the tougher division Bengals or Bills? Would you rather face AFC South or AFC West? Would rather face NFC South or NFC North. The only one of my 3 question that's even debatable is the last question.

(08-23-2022, 12:10 PM)Bengalfan4life27c Wrote: Last season Fred who had the tougher division Bengals or Bills. Would you rather face AFC South or AFC West? Would rather face NFC South or NFC North. The only one of my 3 question that's even debatable is the last question.

I don't care what division teams play in.  That makes no difference in how good they are.

Overall, I would much rather have had the Bengals schedule with only 7 winning teams (lowest number in the entire league) than the Bills schedule with 10 winning teams.  

The other playoff team in the AFC East was the Patriots (#2 scoring defense, #6 scoring offense).  The other playoff team in the AFC North was the Steelers (#20 scoring offense, #21 scoring defense)

Pretty simple to see that the Bengals had the easier schedule.

(08-23-2022, 12:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't care what division teams play in.  That makes no difference in how good they are.

Overall, I would much rather have had the Bengals schedule with only 7 winning teams (lowest number in the entire league) than the Bills schedule with 10 winning teams.  Pretty simple.

Part of the 10 you are referring to are the 2 games against Dolphins. Titans and Mike Vrabel disagree they were a good team last season. They got 1 more win because we rested our first unit week 18 against Browns not guaranteeing we would have won or anything. We would have had a much better shot than with our 2nd string. Ravens and Browns were better regardless of record.

(08-23-2022, 07:31 AM)casear2727 Wrote: Very true, but as you mentioned we maintained continuity and improved which bucks the trend of most Super Bowl losers.... IMO, we need to string together 2-3 successful seasons in a row to get past some institutional stigmas.

Yup. I think they have the talent and makeup to go back this year and hopefully a few more times. 

I just don't wonder why the NM or Vegas doesn't think so.