(07-19-2024, 04:31 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: The Jags were 8-3 when Browning beat them, sure, they collapsed after the loss to us but they were a very good team when we beat them.

That’s fair. And that was definitely the best win they had without Burrow last year.

(07-17-2024, 05:20 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Sean Payton?

What year is it? lol

Historically he has been downright awful without Drew Brees.

(07-19-2024, 08:23 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Hang your hat on that record if you want. Me, I like context. And the fact is Zac beat the likes of Nick Mullens, Gardner Minshew, and Jeff Driskel for 3 of those 4 wins.

Here's hoping The Bengals hang their hat on Record this year. You roll with context

(07-19-2024, 07:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yeah, but you cannot take out a game Browning didn't start and came in cold when we were behind and also take out a game in which he started and assert you're going apples to apples. 

I don't need anyone to tell me Zac Taylor is a good coach and I also don't need anyone to tell Browning's record last year was anything other than 4-3. 

When Joe Burrow got injured the game was 10-7 Bengals. It's not like the game was way out of reach.

(07-19-2024, 10:47 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: When Joe Burrow got injured the game was 10-7 Bengals. It's not like the game was way out of reach.

Where did I say the game was out of reach? We were trailing when Browning took the field.

What are we trying to do here? 

(07-19-2024, 08:23 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Hang your hat on that record if you want. Me, I like context. And the fact is Zac beat the likes of Nick Mullens, Gardner Minshew, and Jeff Driskel for 3 of those 4 wins.

Would it had been better if Zac lost to those 3 back up QBs? 

(07-20-2024, 12:03 AM)sandwedge Wrote: Would it had been better if Zac lost to those 3 back up QBs? 

It's context

(07-20-2024, 12:03 AM)sandwedge Wrote: Would it had been better if Zac lost to those 3 back up QBs? 

Ask me again in a few years once we see how Mims turns out.

(07-19-2024, 08:23 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Hang your hat on that record if you want. Me, I like context. And the fact is Zac beat the likes of Nick Mullens, Gardner Minshew, and Jeff Driskel for 3 of those 4 wins.

Jake Browning having little experience essentially and zero as a starter completed 70% of his passes. The staff took over the offense completely and allowed him zero latitude to change. They managed Jake excellently. Maybe they know what they are doing. The defense wasn’t good. The fact they finished as well as they did should give fans more confidence. Despite the QB’s they beat they were favored in few. That being said your premise has some degree of validity

(07-19-2024, 08:33 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: That’s fair. And that was definitely the best win they had without Burrow last year.

For sure and it was in Jacksonville to boot in primetime.

(07-19-2024, 05:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It did but Balt drove down and took back the lead on the next series. When Browning came in we were losing. 

Thanks, that is true.

(07-20-2024, 12:27 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Jake Browning having little experience essentially and zero as a starter completed 70% of his passes. The staff took over the offense completely and allowed him zero latitude to change. They managed Jake excellently. Maybe they know what they are doing. The defense wasn’t good. The fact they finished as well as they did should give fans more confidence. Despite the QB’s they beat they were favored in few. That being said your premise has some degree of validity

There are/were those who wanted the team to suck completely after the Burrow injury. The main reason was "higher draft choice" but there were a few that wanted to be able to continue the "Zac can't win without Burrow" narrative and a few may be closet Steelers fans.

I feel it worked out as well as could be expected. We ended the season with a winning record and found out we have a backup QB able to win games in Burrow's absence. We also got what a few consider the most gifted OT in the draft. My personal "dram pick" Troy Fautanu was even there, but we chose not to take him.

(07-20-2024, 06:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There are/were those who wanted the team to suck completely after the Burrow injury. The main reason was "higher draft choice" but there were a few that wanted to be able to continue the "Zac can't win without Burrow" narrative and a few may be closet Steelers fans.

I feel it worked out as well as could be expected. We ended the season with a winning record and found out we have a backup QB able to win games in Burrow's absence. We also got what a few consider the most gifted OT in the draft. My personal "dram pick" Troy Fautanu was even there, but we chose not to take him.

Mims has more upside but Fautanu was less risky. Sometimes we are too enamored with players from top programs. Washington surely was this past year. They were hesitant on Anton Harrison from OU last year. He for whatever reason didn’t have much tape vs NFL current or future players. Maybe that hindered Troy. Who knows? And it looks like Mims better be ready.

(07-20-2024, 06:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There are/were those who wanted the team to suck completely after the Burrow injury. The main reason was "higher draft choice" but there were a few that wanted to be able to continue the "Zac can't win without Burrow" narrative and a few may be closet Steelers fans.

I feel it worked out as well as could be expected. We ended the season with a winning record and found out we have a backup QB able to win games in Burrow's absence. We also got what a few consider the most gifted OT in the draft. My personal "dram pick" Troy Fautanu was even there, but we chose not to take him.

I know for positive Browning couldn’t deviate from the calls. He had no approval to audible. He had 2 plays based on the defense look. Makes you wonder.

Lol

I find myself wondering who it was that decided not to acquire a NT after cutdowns. Was it Taylor? Tobin? Both?

But hey that roster spot for Trayveon Williams is sooo important to keep.

A random guy at CBS Sports thinks Zac may not last the year:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-week-2-overreactions-will-bengals-zac-taylor-survive-2024-season-seahawks-geno-smith-most-clutch-qb

(09-17-2024, 07:38 AM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: A random guy at CBS Sports thinks Zac may not last the year:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-week-2-overreactions-will-bengals-zac-taylor-survive-2024-season-seahawks-geno-smith-most-clutch-qb

Well, CBS is known for hiring idiots.

(09-17-2024, 07:38 AM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: A random guy at CBS Sports thinks Zac may not last the year:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-week-2-overreactions-will-bengals-zac-taylor-survive-2024-season-seahawks-geno-smith-most-clutch-qb

Guy might as well have said, "Hey, I know literally nothing about the Bengals" and just moved on to something else

(09-17-2024, 07:38 AM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: A random guy at CBS Sports thinks Zac may not last the year:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-week-2-overreactions-will-bengals-zac-taylor-survive-2024-season-seahawks-geno-smith-most-clutch-qb

ZT might not last the year of 2038.