(06-24-2015, 05:45 AM)OSUfan Wrote: Hold the press.

Did you or did you not chastise another poster for suggesting that the majority of blame for the teams postseason lack of success lies with the head coach?

Then here we go again..........if you do not completely agree with CB then you are not objective.

Andy has not shined in the postseason. However, to state he is not very good is not accurate either. He has been the QB for a team that has amassed 40 regular season wins in 4 seasons and please do not even start the ignorant winning in spite of. He has been the QB of a team that have won against the greats like Manning, Brees, Rodgers, and Brady.

Does he need to show more consistency? Yes he absolutely does. Does he need to show an ability to shine in the postseason to remain the starting QB? Yes he does.

Which position does Andy play on defense?

I'm up for the discussion if you want to discuss the different defenses that Andy has played great against, but let's immediately stop with the bullshit of bringing up that "Andy isn't very good" gets debunked because our defenses stopped elite QBs in the past. Sort of silly, isn't it?

You usually don't win 40 games in 4 years with a terrible QB, but we all know that Andy isn't terrible. The TEAM winning 40 games doesn't automatically make the QB a good one though. I don't think calling Andy bad is fair, but neither is calling him good. I don't think saying "Andy isn't a very good QB" is off by much, especially not off by enough to go off on a tangent bringing up how it's untrue since the defense has sometimes stopped good QBs around the league. That is flat out illogical to come to that conclusion.

(06-24-2015, 08:15 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Which position does Andy play on defense?

I'm up for the discussion if you want to discuss the different defenses that Andy has played great against, but let's immediately stop with the bullshit of bringing up that "Andy isn't very good" gets debunked because our defenses stopped elite QBs in the past. Sort of silly, isn't it?

You usually don't win 40 games in 4 years with a terrible QB, but we all know that Andy isn't terrible. The TEAM winning 40 games doesn't automatically make the QB a good one though. I don't think calling Andy bad is fair, but neither is calling him good. I don't think saying "Andy isn't a very good QB" is off by much, especially not off by enough to go off on a tangent bringing up how it's untrue since the defense has sometimes stopped good QBs around the league. That is flat out illogical to come to that conclusion.

But the QB losing 4 playoff games makes him a bad QB..  

(06-23-2015, 04:00 PM)Nately120 Wrote: You tell him!  Next thing he'll try to say is the defense has a harder time defending a 20-yard field follwoing an offensive turnover.  Don't fall for it!

You tell him!  Tell him how Russell Wilson got his team to the Super Bowl despite FOUR first half INTs and the worst game he had ever played at any level, and his defense and special teams clearly gave up because they weren't motivated by their QB!  Next thing you will be telling him 450 total yards with 150+ yards rushing allowed and zero sacks is a solid defensive effort and a mediocre QB would be able to win those games,  Don't fall for it! 

(06-24-2015, 09:13 AM)spazz70 Wrote: But the QB losing 4 playoff games makes him a bad QB..  

No, the QB playing poorly in the playoff games makes him need to play better in the playoffs.

I'm not a fan of putting wins OR losses on one specific player. I think it's stupid when people put a W/L record on a QB. Football is a team sport more so than any of the other "popular" ones. LeBron can single-handedly take over a game, Corey Crawford and Johnny Cueto can pitch a shutout, but at the end of the day Andy still relies on at LEAST one other player to be in position to win or lose a game.

I fully agree with people that say QB is the most important position on the field, but it's not quite like other sports where 1 guy can really dominate a game by himself. I'm not saying the other guys need 0 help, Cueto still needs guys to hit the ball, Crawford still needs guys to score goals, and LeBron still needs some help on defense and even offensively as well, but if you had to pick 1 sport where 1 single player absolutely shouldn't have a W/L record, it's American football.

We all know what the problems in the playoffs are: the QB plays poorly, the receivers drop key TD catches and have trouble getting open, the defense suddenly can't stop the run or the pass, the coaches aren't any help.

The team just doesn't play like itself on a bigger stage and the teams they have played against do.

Listing the specifics of each part of the team just tells us that we got whooped on both sides of the ball and the coaches got out coached consistently.

Don't blame it all on Dalton, but don't praise him either. His performances in the playoffs just weren't praise worthy.

(06-24-2015, 03:36 AM)CornerBlitz Wrote: The only reason it gets "ugly" is because of the people that cannot get themselves to admit things that are clear to everyone outside of Cincinnati.

The QB is not very good.

The head coach is not very good.

These things are not that clear to everyone outside of Cincinnati.  You are just making that up.

How do you explain the fact that so many media experts picked the Bengals to beat the Colts in the playoffs last year?

I (and most people here) will admit that neither Dalton or Lewis are elite, but if they were not good we would not be having as much success as we are.

And don't start with the old "Making the playoffs is not success."  No one is happy with just making the playoffs, but it is hard to do and we are much more successful than most other teams in the league.

(06-24-2015, 10:05 AM)BengalChris Wrote: Don't blame it all on Dalton, but don't praise him either. His performances in the playoffs just weren't praise worthy.

This.

Can everyone here on both sides agree with this simple statement?

(06-24-2015, 09:35 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: You tell him!  Tell him how Russell Wilson got his team to the Super Bowl despite FOUR first half INTs and the worst game he had ever played at any level, and his defense and special teams clearly gave up because they weren't motivated by their QB!  Next thing you will be telling him 450 total yards with 150+ yards rushing allowed and zero sacks is a solid defensive effort and a mediocre QB would be able to win those games,  Don't fall for it! 

Meh, Russell Wilson played like crap, but you are failing to mention that he also threw for a TD and rushed for a TD in that game, so even in the game that proves he was carried by the rest of the team he scored twice as many TDs as Andy Dalton has in 4 postseason games.

But by all means, let's toss this example into the blender of excuses.

Russell Wilson threw 4 INTs and won a playoff game = any QB can throw 4 INTs and win
Tom Brady was taken in the 6th round = no QB can ever be doubted based on draft round
Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl = any QB can win a Super Bowl
John Elway won his first Super Bowl when he was 38 = can't count a QB out until he is eligible for AARP
Pig Ben won a Super Bowl by posting a 22.6 QB rating = a QB can play like total garbage during the biggest game and still win

Did I miss any?  I mean, if we take all these exceptions into account it's pretty obvious there is an excuse for everything a QB is or does when it comes to winning the big, or biggest games in the NFL.  A 38 year old QB taken in the 6th round can throw for 4 INTs and post a 22.6 QB rating and we can't say he deserves to lose because the Wilson/Brady/Dilfer/Elway/Pig Ben excuse applies.

Astounding.

(06-24-2015, 10:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This.

Can everyone here on both sides agree with this simple statement?

I don't think anybody on here gives Andy ALL the blame for the playoff losses, so I can't see why anyone would disagree with it.

I surely think it's a fair point.

(06-24-2015, 10:05 AM)BengalChris Wrote: We all know what the problems in the playoffs are: the QB plays poorly, the receivers drop key TD catches and have trouble getting open, the defense suddenly can't stop the run or the pass, the coaches aren't any help.

The team just doesn't play like itself on a bigger stage and the teams they have played against do.

Listing the specifics of each part of the team just tells us that we got whooped on both sides of the ball and the coaches got out coached consistently.

Don't blame it all on Dalton, but don't praise him either. His performances in the playoffs just weren't praise worthy.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is on the money.

(06-24-2015, 10:34 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I don't think anybody on here gives Andy ALL the blame for the playoff losses, so I can't see why anyone would disagree with it.

I surely think it's a fair point.

Andy doesn't deserve all the blame, but a 1:8 TD to TO ratio is just so flippin' compelling that I can certainly understand why anyone (especially those who aren't Bengals fans) tend to get tunnel-vision regarding the post-season issues.

I have a question.

For the guys that feel the need to defend just about every single player and coach on the team, what is the issue? Why can't this team win playoff games if you never talk about which coach/player specifically needs replaced?

There has to be SOME issue to point at, so which coaches/players do the more positive crowd actually think are part of the problem and not the solution?

I know Fred isn't the biggest fan of Hue, but he hasn't been here long.
Luvnit and OSU, I don't even know.
Bfine has an issue with Andy but not sure about any other coaches/players specifically.

There are many more in the relatively "positive" crowd that I'm missing, so anybody is free to answer this. Finding out who the less than homer-ish people have a problem with is quite easy as we're usually always pointing fingers. The positive crowd is tough to see though because they usually spend more time defending and less time letting their opinion be known of what they actually believe the problem is.

I'm genuinely curious about this.

(06-24-2015, 10:47 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I have a question.

For the guys that feel the need to defend just about every single player and coach on the team, what is the issue? Why can't this team win playoff games if you never talk about which coach/player specifically needs replaced?

There has to be SOME issue to point at, so which coaches/players do the more positive crowd actually think are part of the problem and not the solution?

I know Fred isn't the biggest fan of Hue, but he hasn't been here long.
Luvnit and OSU, I don't even know.
Bfine has an issue with Andy but not sure about any other coaches/players specifically.

There are many more in the relatively "positive" crowd that I'm missing, so anybody is free to answer this. Finding out who the less than homer-ish people have a problem with is quite easy as we're usually always pointing fingers. The positive crowd is tough to see though because they usually spend more time defending and less time letting their opinion be known of what they actually believe the problem is.

I'm genuinely curious about this.

I've asked FredToast this exact question in this thread but he refuses to answer the question. He just makes silly statements like the "team needs to play better" which is obvious but he will not address the root of the problem i.e. the coach and QB.

(06-24-2015, 10:47 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I have a question.

For the guys that feel the need to defend just about every single player and coach on the team, what is the issue? Why can't this team win playoff games if you never talk about which coach/player specifically needs replaced?

There has to be SOME issue to point at, so which coaches/players do the more positive crowd actually think are part of the problem and not the solution?

I know Fred isn't the biggest fan of Hue, but he hasn't been here long.
Luvnit and OSU, I don't even know.
Bfine has an issue with Andy but not sure about any other coaches/players specifically.

There are many more in the relatively "positive" crowd that I'm missing, so anybody is free to answer this. Finding out who the less than homer-ish people have a problem with is quite easy as we're usually always pointing fingers. The positive crowd is tough to see though because they usually spend more time defending and less time letting their opinion be known of what they actually believe the problem is.

I'm genuinely curious about this.

The team didn't have enough talent in 2011, and 2012 to overcome one of the best defense/rushing game in the league. In 2013 there were too many defensive injuries, and our OL had 2 starters in the playoffs. In 2014 we had too many offensive injuries, and the defense had key players injured / gone.

(06-24-2015, 12:09 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: The team didn't have enough talent in 2011, and 2012. In 2013 there were too many defensive injuries, and our OL had 2 starters in the playoffs. In 2014 we had too many offensive injuries, and the defense had key players injured / gone.

Uhm all I see is....EXCUSES. I could see 1 year maybe even 2 years but you got excuses for all 4 seasons. C'mon Man!

(06-24-2015, 12:10 PM)CornerBlitz Wrote: Uhm all I see is....EXCUSES. I could see 1 year maybe even 2 years but you got excuses for all 4 seasons. C'mon Man!

But you have to ask yourself if they are true, and could they actually cause us not to win the playoff games? the answer to both is yes.

(06-24-2015, 12:09 PM)CornerBlitz Wrote: I've asked FredToast this exact question in this thread but he refuses to answer the question. He just makes silly statements like the "team needs to play better" which is obvious but he will not address the root of the problem i.e. the coach and QB.

If I knew than answer then I would be running an NFL team.

What I do know is that we have good coaches and good players.  We just don't have elite coaches or many elite players.

The people who claim that we can win by just replacing coaches and QBs always refuse to give specific names of specific QBs or coaches we could bring in that would fix everything.  They cry for change, but when you look at the reality of the situation they don't really have any more answers than I do.  They refuse to acknowledge that just constantly changing coaches and QBs is not guaranteed to fix anything.

(06-24-2015, 12:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If I knew than answer then I would be running an NFL team.

What I do know is that we have good coaches and good players.  We just don't have elite coaches or many elite players.

The people who claim that we can win by just replacing coaches and QBs always refuse to give specific names of specific QBs or coaches we could bring in that would fix everything.  They cry for change, but when you look at the reality of the situation they don't really have any more answers than I do.  They refuse to acknowledge that just constantly changing coaches and QBs is not guaranteed to fix anything.

You don't have to be running an NFL team to have an opinion on specific players on the roster and the coaching staff.

I could be completely wrong, but I think guys like Rey Maualuga and Domata Peko are holding the defense back more than Carlos Dunlap and Adam Jones. For that reason, I'm usually involved in arguments and discussions when it comes to either of those guys because I think they're part of the problem and not necessarily part of the solution in Cincinnati. Just because I can't name a specific player that should come in and do their job better at this exact moment doesn't automatically make either of them better at their respective positions. I still think they're both mediocre at best whether there is a "clearly better" option available or not.

If I'm holding my company back with an inferior work ethic, it doesn't make me good at my job just because there aren't people available in my field and lining up to replace me. If I'm holding them back, then I'm holding them back flat out, no disclaimers or need to have a specific guy's name ready to work in my position. If I'm bad enough, some companies will even fire me before having a replacement ready to go. Since I've been here for years and have a relationship with my peers and supervisors, they may give me the benefit of the doubt for an extended period of time even if I'm not doing the best job since they can't find a quality replacement yet. Other companies may have different policies and I'm sure there would have been other companies that would have fired me by now regardless of my relationship with any of them. I'm just glad I work for these guys that don't care if I'm not very good at my job, as long as we remain close, I should have more freedom and benefit from the lack of accountability. Do you see where I'm going with this? I don't think the Bengals are a shitty franchise that can't do anything right, but I do believe they are overly loyal at times. IMO, Maualuga and Peko would have been cut by plenty of other teams by now for their recent performance. Even if they were retained, I don't see them getting the contracts they received in Cincinnati in other places.

I see you and a few others spend most of your time defending players/coaches but never specifically pointing out which guys you think could be upgraded, which positions we're weak at, and which areas could be holding us back from a playoff victory. I don't think it's crazy to be curious of which guys you honestly believe are the weak links on the team or who you think could have been potentially upgraded this past offseason.

For what it's worth, if I thought you or the other guys were complete morons and didn't care at all about your opinions, then I wouldn't be trying to find this stuff out. "We didn't do enough to win" is for Marvin. This is a message board where we get to play armchair GM, so since you seem to defend a lot of the guys that I don't think are very good, what are the pieces missing to win a playoff game, in your opinion?

(06-24-2015, 12:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If I knew than answer then I would be running an NFL team.

What I do know is that we have good coaches and good players.  We just don't have elite coaches or many elite players.

The people who claim that we can win by just replacing coaches and QBs always refuse to give specific names of specific QBs or coaches we could bring in that would fix everything.  They cry for change, but when you look at the reality of the situation they don't really have any more answers than I do.  They refuse to acknowledge that just constantly changing coaches and QBs is not guaranteed to fix anything.

In all fairness we have discussed specific scenarios and specific players and coaches but the argument to not change a thing holds as well against specifics as it does against generalities.

Q:  Should we hire a new HC?
A:  No, changing HCs is what the Browns would do.

Q:  Would you want Jim Harbaugh to come here?
A:  No, he's a nut.  Changing HCs is what the Browns would do.

Q:  Do we need a new QB?
A:  No, Dalton has won 40 games in 4 years and/or Changing QBs is what the Browns would do.

Q:  Would you want Peyton Manning (circa 2012) to come here?
A:  No, Dalton made the playoffs, Peyton is too old. etc..

You get where I'm going with this.  Saying we made the playoffs 4 years in a row is good enough to dismiss the notion of bringing in general HCs or QBs etc and it's also enough to dismiss bringing anyone but Bill Bellyache and Aaron Rogers.  We've gone over specifics, some realistic, some not, and the general consensus around these parts (to my recollection) is that we should stand pat for the most part.  So be it.

(06-24-2015, 01:07 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: This place is starting to get ugly.  God help us when the season starts.

Maybe so, but the old boards used to get ugly and they were pretty successful.

(06-24-2015, 05:45 AM)OSUfan Wrote: Hold the press.

1. Did you or did you not chastise another poster for suggesting that the majority of blame for the teams postseason lack of success lies with the head coach?

Then here we go again..........if you do not completely agree with CB then you are not objective.

Andy has not shined in the postseason. However, to state he is not very good is not accurate either. He has been the QB for a team that has amassed 40 regular season wins in 4 seasons and please do not even start the ignorant winning in spite of. He has been the QB of a team that have won against the greats like Manning, Brees, Rodgers, and Brady.

Does he need to show more consistency? Yes he absolutely does. Does he need to show an ability to shine in the postseason to remain the starting QB? Yes he does.

1. Right. CB doesn't seem to think the QB can be affected by poor coaching, apparently.

2. "Very good" isn't how I'd describe Dalton's play. 

(06-24-2015, 10:32 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Meh, Russell Wilson played like crap, but you are failing to mention that he also threw for a TD and rushed for a TD in that game, so even in the game that proves he was carried by the rest of the team he scored twice as many TDs as Andy Dalton has in 4 postseason games.

You're missing the point. I've been told that 4 int's should've caused a team-wide collapse for the Seahawks. It didn't.

Also, what about the pair of games where Dalton only had 1 turnover?

Dalton hasn't been causing the team-wide collapse. Heck, he didn't even play against the Jets or Steelers.