(07-08-2016, 11:49 AM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: This is what I don't think some people understand.  You can think AJ did a good job, especially for the situation he walked into (coming off the bench against the Steelers in the middle of a playoff run), and still be happy with Andy's level of play last year.  And trying to compare Dalton's season with what AJ did is pointless... Dalton was a fifth year starter, the guy that the offense is tailored around.  McCarron is the backup, we all hope that Dalton is able to continue to grow and to achieve even more than he did last year.  I don't see anyone calling for McCarron to take his job.

There was plenty of that even last year. which is a different level of dumb.   

I don't dislike McCarron because I like Dalton I dislike all the board members hyping him up to be better than our current starter when he hadn't played a snap.

McCarron did okay for a backup stepping into the situation he did.  But we also had a loaded team when he took over which greatly helped.  If he had stepped in late for the browns last year what would the prespective be?

He might be the best backup in the NFL.. for all I know I don't look at all the teams backup QBs and seeing as many never get tot play that season.
he might actually fit that bill.

But I also didn't see anyone offering anything for him in the offseason.  dispite a good portion of the board thinking we would get a 2nd round pick for him? hahahahahaha...

Why anyone still thinks Sanchez is going to carry a team is a mystery, but who knows? Perhaps his time in NY and Philly made him a better player, but I wouldn't bet my best pile of sawdust over it..

I think EVERYONE remembers Kearns and I'm a Jays fan, living in Canada my whole life.

He had a couple good years.

(07-08-2016, 11:56 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: The on contrary I can;t believe some of the over the top hype on McCarron.  4 games is too little of a sample to judge a QB.  I always fall back on a Reds player named Austin Kearns,  had a outstanding rookie year, batting 315 , 13 home runs and 56 RBI in 107 games.  Never hit more than 265 as a Red and was a below average player with the Reds, traded 4 years later.

McCarron might end up having a nice QB career but he also might end up out of the league in a few years... we need more of a sample to fairly judge McCarron, I don;t think 4 starting games warrants the best backup QB in the league and if it does it shows how weak backups overall are right now.

yeah that's basically what I was trying to say. I saw enough to know id rather him be here backing Dalton up but I don't know what I saw warrants #1 backup.  Or was this poll about backups w/ hottest wives??

(07-07-2016, 08:44 PM)bonesaw Wrote: Pretty sure teams did inquire about him.  I seem to remember reading some articles about it, but can't say for sure

(07-07-2016, 08:46 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: They didn't.

Hue had first hand experience with McCarron and he picked RG3 over him too. I hope that McCarron gets a starting spot on another team so I can laugh at how bad he does.

Teams most likely inquired about him, but the asking price was too high. RG3 was cut while McCarron would've cost a 1st or 2nd.

(07-08-2016, 10:30 AM)bfine32 Wrote: What is negative? 3/4 of one game?

He never had a good game though.

(07-08-2016, 04:28 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: Teams most likely inquired about him, but the asking price was too high. RG3 was cut while McCarron would've cost a 1st or 2nd.

No one asked for him. We would have known if one did. If someone sneezes wrong or loses their luggage we know about it. We would 100% know if someone was interested in McCarron.

(07-08-2016, 04:31 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: No one asked for him. We would have known if one did. If someone sneezes wrong or loses their luggage we know about it. We would 100% know if someone was interested in McCarron.

Not from this team. They keep things like this quiet. Most people know that.

(07-08-2016, 04:43 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: Not from this team. They keep things like this quiet. Most people know that.

And what's stopping the other team from talking about it? There is talk all over the league when someone is trying out for another team, or if their interested in the player; especially QBs. We hear plenty of noise from this organization too. It's not like we didn't know that LaFell or Dansby wasn't trying out for the team. If someone was interested in McCarron we would have heard all about it.

(07-08-2016, 10:23 AM)muskiesfan Wrote: I know. Dalton has had it pretty rough since Day 1. It would be nice if he could finally get some credit for what he's done.

I know you were talking about McCarron, but the exact same could be said for Dalton. What's funny is that most of McCarron's biggest supporters are Andy's biggest detractors. They refuse to give Andy credit for what he's done for this franchise, but want McCarron to be lauded with praise and affection.

I have nothing against McCarron and want him to be successful. I think people are off their rockers when they say he should be starting over Dalton. Dalton is annually one of the best in the League in deep balls and people on this board destroy him if every deep ball isn't perfect. However, McCarron throws lame duck wobblers that Green has to come back for and wait on but that's a great throw.

To some fans, the best thing going for McCarron is that his name isn't Andy Dalton.

You might get some over the top trolling going on but no reasonable member of this board ever said he should start over Andy.  It just never happened.

And there is no hype.  That's a myth too.  He got credit for manning up in a tough situation but nobody ever proclaimed him the savior of anything.  It's not Andy vs AJ.  Andy is the starter and AJ is a reasonably good backup who showed inexperience and promise.  Why does it have to be one against the other?

(07-07-2016, 08:46 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: They didn't.

Hue had first hand experience with McCarron and he picked RG3 over him too. I hope that McCarron gets a starting spot on another team so I can laugh at how bad he does.

Seriously, did the guy do something to you personally?  That's the only possible explanation for your weird war on the backup QB.

(07-08-2016, 05:48 PM)McC Wrote: Seriously, did the guy do something to you personally?  That's the only possible explanation for your weird war on the backup QB.

I have nothing against McCarron. I'm just doing what I always do. Call a spade a spade. McCarron was bad the majority of the time he was on the field, and that's a fact.

(07-08-2016, 10:30 AM)bfine32 Wrote: What is negative? 3/4 of one game?

He did well with what he was asked to do...for the most part. That said, there was more negatives than just 3/4 of one game.

1. The fumble @Denver. It pretty much cost us the BYE. The kid had as many fumbles as Dalton in only 4 starts. It's something to keep an eye on if he winds up starting for an extended stretch again. People have attributed the 3 fumbles vs Pitt to the weather, but how many fumbles did Ben have in the same conditions?

2. He holds the ball too long, leading to sacks (and possibly more fumbles). Without looking it up, I think he was sacked like 15 times in 5 games.

3. The offense wasn't productive with him under center. They had less than 300 total yards like 4 times, after dipping below that number only once under Dalton.

4. Kid throws some real ducks and head scratchers at times. He has a below average arm and if he doesn't fully set his feet, he can throw some passes that look straight out of div III college football.

Kid looks like a backup. A good backup, but a backup. Hue did a great job of managing him and keeping him from killing our chances. The playoff game was bordering on disaster and McC was the biggest reason we had zero points through 3 quarters.

I did like that he hung in there and made some clutch throws near the end, but without an outstanding effort from our defense, none of it would have mattered. Dalton had maybe 1 game where the defense was even semi-respectable (Texans 2.0). So who knows if he could be "clutch"?

Btw, that game proved (again) that multiple turnovers from a QB don't kill the defense. Which is an argument you used to make when Dalton had turnovers and the D gave up around 30 points and 400 yards.

(07-08-2016, 08:37 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: He did well with what he was asked to do...for the most part. That said, there was more negatives than just 3/4 of one game.

1. The fumble @Denver. It pretty much cost us the BYE. The kid had as many fumbles as Dalton in only 4 starts. It's something to keep an eye on if he winds up starting for an extended stretch again. People have attributed the 3 fumbles vs Pitt to the weather, but how many fumbles did Ben have in the same conditions?

2. He holds the ball too long, leading to sacks (and possibly more fumbles). Without looking it up, I think he was sacked like 15 times in 5 games.

3. The offense wasn't productive with him under center. They had less than 300 total yards like 4 times, after dipping below that number only once under Dalton.

4. Kid throws some real ducks and head scratchers at times. He has a below average arm and if he doesn't fully set his feet, he can throw some passes that look straight out of div III college football.

Kid looks like a backup. A good backup, but a backup. Hue did a great job of managing him and keeping him from killing our chances. The playoff game was bordering on disaster and McC was the biggest reason we had zero points through 3 quarters.

I did like that he hung in there and made some clutch throws near the end, but without an outstanding effort from our defense, none of it would have mattered. Dalton had maybe 1 game where the defense was even semi-respectable (Texans 2.0). So who knows if he could be "clutch"?

Btw, that game proved (again) that multiple turnovers from a QB don't kill the defense. Which is an argument you used to make when Dalton had turnovers and the D gave up around 30 points and 400 yards.

The only game Dalton really had a turnover problem in the playoffs was against the Chargers. I know some people are going to bring up the 2011 wildcard game, but 2 out of the 3 INTs he had really wasn't his fault. One was just a freak play by JJ Watt and another was on 4th down and an INT was a better option than the sack he was about to take.

(07-07-2016, 04:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: In the 5th of those games he had the best playoff performance by a Bengal QB since Boomer Esiason.

If anyone has anything negative to say about a kid who has only started 4 NFL in his career, they are just looking too hard for the negative.

That contradicts itself. You say I'm trying "too hard" to say McCarron had a bad game. Not really trying too hard to find negatives because we all saw the game. We saw how poorly he played.

You tried too hard with the "best playoff perfomance by a Bengals QB since Boomer Esiason". That means absolutely nothing when your QB throws for 212 yards, 3 fumbles, an INT, and has a QB rating of 68.3.

Don't care what anyone did before him. McCarron did not play well in the playoff game. That's not even trying too hard to look at negatives. That's just a fact. Just like how Dalton played poorly in playoff games. All facts.

(07-08-2016, 04:28 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: Teams most likely inquired about him, but the asking price was too high. RG3 was cut while McCarron would've cost a 1st or 2nd.

The Bengals went on record saying they wouldn't trade McCarron. But if they were offered a 2nd round pick they would listen.

Take that for what it's worth. Didn't hear of any teams calling for him. But also didn't hear any clear word saying no one called about him.

(07-08-2016, 06:34 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: I have nothing against McCarron. I'm just doing what I always do. Call a spade a spade. McCarron was bad the majority of the time he was on the field, and that's a fact.

BS on that.  The ten thousand times you have argued with anyone and everyone who said a good thing about him says otherwise.  It's practically a crusade with you.  Calling a spade a spade is one thing.  You, on this subject, are about a hundred levels above that.

McCarron did very well given he had ZERO experience. That tells me he has a very high ceiling.

His potential is the only reason he's considered the best backup.

(07-09-2016, 02:03 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: McCarron did very well given he had ZERO experience. That tells me he has a very high ceiling.

His potential is the only reason he's considered the best backup.

That doesn't mean anything though. He wasn't amazing by any means. But backup QBs are supposed to do that. Even rookie ones.

Heck, that's how some got great contracts. Look at Matt Cassel, Matt Flynn, and Charlie Whitehurst. But there are successes such as Matt Schaub.

(07-08-2016, 05:46 PM)McC Wrote: You might get some over the top trolling going on but no reasonable member of this board ever said he should start over Andy.  It just never happened.

And there is no hype.  That's a myth too.  He got credit for manning up in a tough situation but nobody ever proclaimed him the savior of anything.  It's not Andy vs AJ.  Andy is the starter and AJ is a reasonably good backup who showed inexperience and promise.  Why does it have to be one against the other?

You can do a quick search on the board and see where people were saying that they wanted a "true" QB competition when McCarron was drafted because they felt he was better than Dalton. Another quick search shows that there is a thread where people were discussing that Dalton should be traded and McCarron should be the starter going forward.

I'm not saying that it's everyone, but some Bengals do say those things and have suggested they feel the team would be better with McCarron as the starter. There are posts on this very board saying exactly that.

I agree with you that it should not be Andy V. McCarron. While you'll probably say I'm lying, I like McCarron. He's the best backup Andy has had. I think it's premature to say that he has shown the promise of being a good starting QB with such a small sample size. I think it's also premature to say he won't hack it at the NFL level. The point I generally try to make is that people are willing to overlook McCarron's mistakes while keeping Dalton under a microscope.