(01-06-2016, 05:02 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Personally I don't want a backup QB who plays at the level of a backup QB as the starter in the playoffs. Not converting on 3rd down almost 70% of the time won't get you anywhere against good teams. Going 4 for 14 against a bad 49ers defense is horrible. Converting 1 of 8 in the second half of the Broncos game is horrible. Converting 0 of 9 against Baltimore is horrible. 

I call you a troll because I refuse to believe that anyone could be that stupid. 

I'm not sure AJM is playing at the level of a backup. I've seen far worse backups and even some starters around the league. Instead, I believe he's playing more like a QB who has 3 starts under his belt. I'd rather not have a guy with 3 starts starting the playoffs, but I don't think we have much of a choice.

The 49ers had not given up more than 20 points all year at home and the Bengals scored 24 and could have scored more if the coaches hadn't reigned in the play calling. That's not the mark of a backup QB and was better than Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Russell Wilson and Carson Palmer put up in SF this year. All of the 49ers wins also came at home, zero on the road.

(01-06-2016, 05:24 PM)Hammerthis Wrote: No one? Ah...Skip Bayless for one said it.

wow...


Speechless. 

(01-06-2016, 11:34 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I'm not sure AJM is playing at the level of a backup. I've seen far worse backups and even some starters around the league. Instead, I believe he's playing more like a QB who has 3 starts under his belt. I'd rather not have a guy with 3 starts starting the playoffs, but I don't think we have much of a choice.

The 49ers had not given up more than 20 points all year at home and the Bengals scored 24 and could have scored more if the coaches hadn't reigned in the play calling. That's not the mark of a backup QB and was better than Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Russell Wilson and Carson Palmer put up in SF this year. All of the 49ers wins also came at home, zero on the road.

He has played okay for a back up ON THIS TEAM.

Just because lots of other teams have worse back ups than us the fact is that McvCarron has not played as well as our starter, so he is therefore "playing like a back up".

If he does play better than dalton then I would consider letting him continue to start, but he has not done that yet.  

(01-06-2016, 09:58 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Kurt Warner just announced his top 5 QBs of 2015:

1. Cam Newton
2. Tom Brady
3. Carson Palmer
4. Russell Wilson
5. Andy Dalton

And Russell Wilson moved into the top 5 due to his last 7 weeks.

(01-06-2016, 09:58 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Kurt Warner just announced his top 5 QBs of 2015:

1. Cam Newton
2. Tom Brady
3. Carson Palmer
4. Russell Wilson
5. Andy Dalton

Uh oh.....that's gonna make some agendas look foolish.....

(01-06-2016, 11:34 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I'm not sure AJM is playing at the level of a backup. I've seen far worse backups and even some starters around the league. Instead, I believe he's playing more like a QB who has 3 starts under his belt. I'd rather not have a guy with 3 starts starting the playoffs, but I don't think we have much of a choice.

The 49ers had not given up more than 20 points all year at home and the Bengals scored 24 and could have scored more if the coaches hadn't reigned in the play calling. That's not the mark of a backup QB and was better than Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Russell Wilson and Carson Palmer put up in SF this year. All of the 49ers wins also came at home, zero on the road.

I mean, with the Bengals offense a backup has a ton around him to help mask his problems. This is a stacked team. But McCarron hasn't really done anything spectacular by any means. He's playing as a game manager. He has a '14 Dalton-esque style to him. Sure, he has TDs. But he laos has turnovers. He has a 2:1 ratio.

McCarron didn't really win us that San Fran game. That was all defense.

Matt Ryan did a lot better against that defense than McCarron. Aaron Rodgers also did. Russel Wilson not so much.

You can't judge a QB just by score itself. McCarron threw for 174 passing yards (192 without sacks). The defense caught 3 interceptions and recovered a fumble. Then throw in 4 sacks.

Here are the Bengals TD scoring drives that game: 11 yards. 36 yards. 20 yards.

Yes. San Fran did well all year at home. Cool. But they're a bad team overall.

McCarron is playing like a backup. Only has over 200 passing yards twice this year. Under 200 in the other 2. McCarron is playing like a game manager. Which is a good thing, because we need that right now.

(01-06-2016, 11:59 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: And Russell Wilson moved into the top 5 due to his last 7 weeks.

First 9 weeks: 10 TDs, 91.7 rating
Last 7 weeks: 24 TDs, 132.8 rating

Pretty amazing turnaround really.

(01-07-2016, 12:09 AM)Wyche Wrote: Uh oh.....that's gonna make some agendas look foolish.....

Apparently Kurt hasn't seen McCarron play. 

(01-06-2016, 11:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: He has played okay for a back up ON THIS TEAM.

Just because lots of other teams have worse back ups than us the fact is that McvCarron has not played as well as our starter, so he is therefore "playing like a back up".

If he does play better than dalton then I would consider letting him continue to start, but he has not done that yet.  

Of course he hasn't played better than Dalton. If he were, in his first 3 starts, then we'd be trading Dalton this off season. A 3 start guy outplaying a 90 start guy gets the 90 start a one way ticket out of town.

But to not want him to start when he's the best option we have is sorta nonsensical.

(01-06-2016, 11:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If he does play better than dalton then I would consider letting him continue to start, but he has not done that yet.  

(01-07-2016, 01:30 AM)BengalChris Wrote: But to not want him to start when he's the best option we have is sorta nonsensical.

(01-07-2016, 01:39 AM)fredtoast Wrote:

Referring to an earlier post in the chain of quotes.

(01-07-2016, 01:46 AM)BengalChris Wrote: Referring to an earlier post in the chain of quotes.

In the same post you said that MCCarron was not playing as well as Dalton you claimed that McCarron was our best option.

Since I have not seen a single person say we should play Dalton if he is not healthy I don't understand what you are trying to say.

(01-07-2016, 01:48 AM)fredtoast Wrote: In the same post you said that MCCarron was not playing as well as Dalton you claimed that McCarron was our best option.

Since I have not seen a single person say we should play Dalton if he is not healthy I don't understand what you are trying to say.

(01-06-2016, 05:02 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Personally I don't want a backup QB who plays at the level of a backup QB as the starter in the playoffs. Not converting on 3rd down almost 70% of the time won't get you anywhere against good teams. Going 4 for 14 against a bad 49ers defense is horrible. Converting 1 of 8 in the second half of the Broncos game is horrible. Converting 0 of 9 against Baltimore is horrible.

I call you a troll because I refuse to believe that anyone could be that stupid.

If not AJM, then who? He's the best option for this team presently.

(01-07-2016, 07:37 AM)BengalChris Wrote: If not AJM, then who? He's the best option for this team presently.

Very true.

I think it's because it's playoff time that more people (myself included) are so vastly critical on McCarron. It's also because this is the deepest, most dominating roster we have had since the Super Bowl teams. Heck. On paper it may even be better.

Honestly, I think today's practice report will tell us if Dalton will be playing Saturday.

If he participates in practice, there's still some hope. If not, best case scenario he's the backup.

(01-07-2016, 10:04 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Very true.

I think it's because it's playoff time that more people (myself included) are so vastly critical on McCarron. It's also because this is the deepest, most dominating roster we have had since the Super Bowl teams. Heck. On paper it may even be better.

I was having this conversation with someone. McCarron is going to be put under a microscope more than Andy in his first playoff game because of the talent around him, and just the fan's desire to see a Playoff W. Hopefully he can do enough to win and the rest of the team shows how good they can be to win. 

(01-07-2016, 12:41 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: First 9 weeks: 10 TDs, 91.7 rating
Last 7 weeks: 24 TDs, 132.8 rating

Pretty amazing turnaround really.


Apparently Kurt hasn't seen McCarron play. 

Here are the others on Kirk's list...you may have missed it.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/0ap3000000618554/Kurt-Warner-s-Top-5-QBs-of-2015

5. Dalton
6. Cousins
7. Carr

looks like the custers tell a bit more of the story. 

So how do you feel about the guys at 6 & 7? In AD's league? I think they are about the same level as Dalton with Carr having a much better arm...what says you?

There is no doubt #1, #2, #3 are in a different league than  #5, #6, & #7. 

(01-07-2016, 07:37 AM)BengalChris Wrote: If not AJM, then who? He's the best option for this team presently.

The problem is that you and Hammerthis are unable to follow the conversation.  Brownshoe was responding to a claim by Hammerthis claiming the McCarron would be the better option EVEN WHEN HEALTHY.

Not a single person has said the Dalton should start over McCarron if he is not healthy.

Understand now?  You have to read the comments in context of the on going conversation.

(01-07-2016, 10:25 AM)Rhinocero23 Wrote: Here are the others on Kirk's list...you may have missed it.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/0ap3000000618554/Kurt-Warner-s-Top-5-QBs-of-2015

5. Dalton
6. Cousins
7. Carr

looks like the custers tell a bit more of the story. 

So how do you feel about the guys at 6 & 7? In AD's league? I think they are about the same level as Dalton with Carr having a much better arm...what says you?

There is no doubt #1, #2, #3 are in a different league than  #5, #6, & #7. 

....aaaaaaaannnnnnnddddddd the goalposts are moved again.

I can't believe there are people in here that still believe McCarron is the better option long term and would be just as good as Andy has been would he had been the starter to begin the year.

It is rare that QBs develop in a year. I like McCarron, but he does not react quick enough to me. He'll learn it, but I'd take Dalton all day every day over him.

(01-07-2016, 10:56 AM)Shouldamapads Wrote: I can't believe there are people in here that still believe McCarron is the better option long term and would be just as good as Andy has been would he had been the starter to begin the year.

It is rare that QBs develop in a year.  I like McCarron, but he does not react quick enough to me.  He'll learn it, but I'd take Dalton all day every day over him.

Are you sure about this?     You were a veteran from the mothership......you remember!