(01-13-2016, 03:17 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: We're not talking about Dalton. We're talking about McCarron.

And McCarron wasn't good this game.

Not comparing him to anyone else but himself.

I will repeat again for probably the 5th time - I bring up Andy Dalton as a rhetorical device for everyone who says McCarron stunk/sucked/played bad.

They are essentially arguing that Andy is a worse playoff QB than McCarron, and stinks worse, sucks more, and played worse.

They are ruining their own argument.

If I hold your hand and lead you through it, I can get you there.

(01-13-2016, 03:23 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: How many times has McCarron won a playoff game? How many times has McCarron beaten a team that had more than 5 wins?

How many turnovers did McCarron have within the Steelers 30 yard line?

McCarron did not have a good game. Plain and simple.

I mean, if we're comparing the two. Andy Dalton only has one more fumble (4) than McCarron does (3) in playoff games.

Although, Dalton played in 4 games. McCarron in 1.

McCarron had no control over Bodine losing his grip on the snap and pinning it on the side of his leg.

How many rainstorms did Andy play in?

You haters are so irrational.

(01-13-2016, 03:45 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Yep. If you criticized the weapons or even suggested they weren't top 5, you were "tearing down the team to prop up Andy". 

As opposed to claiming the weapons are the only reason AJM has been able to accomplish anything good and the team has had to carry him?

There doesn't seem to be much objectivity on this topic.  A lot of axe grinding.

(01-13-2016, 05:54 PM)BigSeph Wrote: As opposed to claiming the weapons are the only reason AJM has been able to accomplish anything good and the team has had to carry him?

There doesn't seem to be much objectivity on this topic.  A lot of axe grinding.

And it all seems to be based on a guy or two pimping AJM in the preseason to take over for Andy.

At the end of the day its not like AJ rose up and took over.
Lets face it if Taze doesnt knock Ben out for the 4th quarter we get mudstomped.

The inept offense benefited from better starting position on possessions and from Pitt going into full on Holy @$$! just hang on Prevent D.


Once again guys AJ played well enough to win the game due to the circumstances. He also made enough mistakes at times to get us blown out of the building.
But there are just way toooooo many variables to make any sort of comparisons between both QBs in the playoffs.

(01-13-2016, 05:57 PM)Junglejuice Wrote: At the end of the day its not like AJ rose up and took over.
Lets face it if Taze doesnt knock Ben out for the 4th quarter we get mudstomped.

The inept offense benefited from better starting position on possessions and from Pitt going into full on Holy @$$! just hang on Prevent D.


Once again guys AJ played well enough to win the game due to the circumstances. He also made enough mistakes at times to get us blown out of the building.
But there are just way toooooo many variables to make any sort of comparisons between both QBs in the playoffs.

1.  He sort of did.  From the end of the 3rd til the end of the game, he was driving the team down the field.

Bengals last 3rd quarter drive started at the Cincy 20, ended at Steelers 23 (Gio/Shazier fiasco)

Bengals first 4th quarter drive started at the Steelers 46, ended in a Bengals TD.

Bengals second 4th quarter drive started at the Cincy 13, ended at Steelers 17 (Nugent FG)

Bengals third 4th quarter drive started at Steelers 45, ended in a Bengals TD.

Bengals last drive was 1 carry to Hill, fumble, turnover.

So apart from a horsecrap non-call on crown of helmet personal foul, he took the team down the field and put points on the board every drive from the end of the 3rd til the end of the game.  It's "not like he rose up and took over?"

2.  Ben wasn't mudstomping anybody the first 3 quarters, Martavis Bryant's 44-yard reverse was the biggest play they had on offense really.  They put up 15 points.

3.  The drive that started at the Cincy 13 and resulted in a short FG flies in the face of your assertion.

4.  There are a ton of variables.  If anything McCarron should get even MORE credit considering the elements and his inexperience, and the way he finished out the game.

(01-13-2016, 06:09 PM)BigSeph Wrote: 1.  He sort of did.  From the end of the 3rd til the end of the game, he was driving the team down the field.

Bengals last 3rd quarter drive started at the Cincy 20, ended at Steelers 23 (Gio/Shazier fiasco)

Bengals first 4th quarter drive started at the Steelers 46, ended in a Bengals TD.

Bengals second 4th quarter drive started at the Cincy 13, ended at Steelers 17 (Nugent FG)

Bengals third 4th quarter drive started at Steelers 45, ended in a Bengals TD.

Bengals last drive was 1 carry to Hill, fumble, turnover.

So apart from a horsecrap non-call on crown of helmet personal foul, he took the team down the field and put points on the board every drive from the end of the 3rd til the end of the game.  It's "not like he rose up and took over?"

2.  Ben wasn't mudstomping anybody the first 3 quarters, Martavis Bryant's 44-yard reverse was the biggest play they had on offense really.  They put up 15 points.

3.  The drive that started at the Cincy 13 and resulted in a short FG flies in the face of your assertion.

4.  There are a ton of variables.  If anything McCarron should get even MORE credit considering the elements and his inexperience, and the way he finished out the game.

Damn, so you're telling me McCarron only scored 3 points starting his drive on the Bengals side of the field... Interesting. Good thing he had a good defense and special teams play to help him bring it to the Steelers side of the field. Actually, now that I think about it. Most of the points McCarron has scored throughout all of his starts have been due to him starting on his opponents side of the field. Man, McCarron must be happy to have such a good defense and special team around him.

(01-13-2016, 06:09 PM)BigSeph Wrote: 1.  He sort of did.  From the end of the 3rd til the end of the game, he was driving the team down the field.

Bengals last 3rd quarter drive started at the Cincy 20, ended at Steelers 23 (Gio/Shazier fiasco)

Bengals first 4th quarter drive started at the Steelers 46, ended in a Bengals TD.

Bengals second 4th quarter drive started at the Cincy 13, ended at Steelers 17 (Nugent FG)

Bengals third 4th quarter drive started at Steelers 45, ended in a Bengals TD.

Bengals last drive was 1 carry to Hill, fumble, turnover.

So apart from a horsecrap non-call on crown of helmet personal foul, he took the team down the field and put points on the board every drive from the end of the 3rd til the end of the game.  It's "not like he rose up and took over?"

2.  Ben wasn't mudstomping anybody the first 3 quarters, Martavis Bryant's 44-yard reverse was the biggest play they had on offense really.  They put up 15 points.

3.  The drive that started at the Cincy 13 and resulted in a short FG flies in the face of your assertion.

4.  There are a ton of variables.  If anything McCarron should get even MORE credit considering the elements and his inexperience, and the way he finished out the game.

Another interesting stat... McCarron had 0 passing yards our first TD of the game
Another interesting stat... The running backs had more than half of the yards on the FG drive (The only points the Bengals scored while starting on their side of the field)

(01-13-2016, 06:26 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Damn, so you're telling me McCarron only scored 3 points starting his drive on the Bengals side of the field... Interesting. Good thing he had a good defense and special teams play to help him bring it to the Steelers side of the field. Actually, now that I think about it. Most of the points McCarron has scored throughout all of his starts have been due to him starting on his opponents side of the field. Man, McCarron must be happy to have such a good defense and special team around him.

If the Bengals had scored TDs on the long drives and Gio fumbles and Nugent kicks a FG on the 2 short drives, would you be saying the opposite?

You guys are hilarious.

(01-13-2016, 06:40 PM)BigSeph Wrote: If the Bengals had scored TDs on the long drives and Gio fumbles and Nugent kicks a FG on the 2 short drives, would you be saying the opposite?

You guys are hilarious.

Yeah, McCarrons narrative would be completely different if he could actually drive the length field and score points. Unfortunately he seems to have a problem with that, and mostly can only score points when he gets the ball on the opponents side of the field.

(01-13-2016, 06:59 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Yeah, McCarrons narrative would be completely different if he could actually drive the length field and score points. Unfortunately he seems to have a problem with that, and mostly can only score points when he gets the ball on the opponents side of the field.

That actually goes for all NFL QBs.

They all score points more easily when inheriting field position in opponents' territory.

What's next, he sucks because he plays QB and throws a football?

Some of you are just embarrassing yourselves.  Give the guy a little credit.  Are you guys so traumatized by the 3 or 4 guys in preseason saying AJ should start that you can't bring yourselves to give him any credit?  I just read an article on Bengals.com that called his performance heroic.

Nobody's asking you to go that far.  Just say it was a gutsy performance.

(01-13-2016, 07:52 PM)BigSeph Wrote: That actually goes for all NFL QBs.

They all score points more easily when inheriting field position in opponents' territory.

What's next, he sucks because he plays QB and throws a football?

Some of you are just embarrassing yourselves.  Give the guy a little credit.  Are you guys so traumatized by the 3 or 4 guys in preseason saying AJ should start that you can't bring yourselves to give him any credit?  I just read an article on Bengals.com that called his performance heroic.

Nobody's asking you to go that far.  Just say it was a gutsy performance.

Obviously QB score points easier when they have good field possession. The thing is McCarron scores more than half of his points from short field position, because he can't drive down the field. When almost 60% of the points that your offense scores comes only when you get the ball on the opponents side of the field that's pretty pathetic.

(01-13-2016, 08:02 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: The thing is McCarron scores more than half of his points from short field position, because he can't drive down the field.

You mean like in the first half of the broncos game when he led scoring drives of 90 and 80 yards against the NFL's number 1 defense?

(01-13-2016, 08:04 PM)Beaker Wrote: You mean like in the first half of the broncos game when he led scoring drives of 90 and 80 yards against the NFL's number 1 defense?

What about how he couldn't lead the offense to any points against the 49ers if the ball didn't start on their side of the field. On top of that he only was able to convert 4/14 on 3rd down against that crappy defense. Or what about how about half of his points against the Ravens bad defense came the same way, and one of the TDs the offense did score that started on the Bengals side of the field came from a 40 yard run from Hill. Plus he wasn't able to convert a 3rd down against their bad defense. Good job McCarron you had two good drives against the Broncos defense. You da real MVP.

(01-13-2016, 08:07 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: What about how he couldn't lead the offense to any points against the 49ers if the ball didn't start on their side of the field. On top of that he only was able to convert 4/14 on 3rd down against that crappy defense. Or what about how about half of his points against the Ravens bad defense came the same way, and one of the TDs the offense did score that started on the Bengals side of the field came from a 40 yard run from Hill. Plus he wasn't able to convert a 3rd down against their bad defense. Good job McCarron you had two good drives against the Broncos defense. You da real MVP.

The O line had a terrible game vs the niners. In the ravens game, too much was made about no third down conversions. We had 2 4th down conversions, and many conversions on 1st and 2nd down. And the most important thing you overlooked....both of those games were wins. So please, go on.

(01-13-2016, 08:10 PM)Beaker Wrote: The O line had a terrible game vs the niners. In the ravens game, too much was made about no third down conversions. We had 2 4th down conversions, and many conversions on 1st and 2nd down. And the most important thing you overlooked....both of those games were wins. So please, go on.

My bad, I forgot getting wins over teams with less wins combined than the Bengals is an amazing achievement.

(01-13-2016, 08:10 PM)Beaker Wrote: The O line had a terrible game vs the niners. In the ravens game, too much was made about no third down conversions. We had 2 4th down conversions, and many conversions on 1st and 2nd down. And the most important thing you overlooked....both of those games were wins. So please, go on.

Oh and BTW. The Ravens had 5 more first downs than us in that game. We only converted once on 4th down.

I'm going to miss this biased back-n-forth when one of our QB's is taken to Cleveland by Hue Jassman.

(01-13-2016, 08:12 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: My bad, I forgot getting wins over teams with less wins combined than the Bengals is an amazing achievement.

So a better achievement would have been losses?

(01-13-2016, 08:15 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Oh and BTW. The Ravens had 5 more first downs than us in that game. We only converted once on 4th down.

The ravens lost.