(07-21-2015, 08:43 PM)Harmening Wrote: Nice try...

Once again, ladies and gentlemen, Harmening and Fred's arguments have been reduced to "we already showed you that but refuse to post a link, even though it's only three clicks away" and "it's not that easy, and we have no way to refute what you're saying, but it can't be that easy, so we're right and you're wrong because we say so, no logic is needed."

(07-21-2015, 10:05 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Once again, ladies and gentlemen, Harmening and Fred's arguments have been reduced to "we already showed you that but refuse to post a link, even though it's only three clicks away" and "it's not that easy, and we have no way to refute what you're saying, but it can't be that easy, so we're right and you're wrong because we say so, no logic is needed."

You poor kid.

(07-21-2015, 08:07 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: HA!

You have no idea what the hell you're talking about or even any clue of what my mind is capable of or the ideas I have, so how could you even pretend to make that claim?!

Just another diversion attempt to shift attention away from the fact that you have no answer for how you would stop it!!

You and Fred are both so childish!!

Wow. Looks like he hit your button. 


Jeeeeeez

(07-21-2015, 10:05 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Once again, ladies and gentlemen, Harmening and Fred's arguments have been reduced to "we already showed you that but refuse to post a link, even though it's only three clicks away" and "it's not that easy, and we have no way to refute what you're saying, but it can't be that easy, so we're right and you're wrong because we say so, no logic is needed."

It isn't that easy. Never coaching/playing or even being around high levels of football for years for 12 hours a day hinders us fans from being able to completely understand the game. It has become that complex. 

The reason I don't think, "just use the rookies properly up the seams!" isn't a viable strategy is because it has never successfully been done in the modern NFL (outside of 2011 Pats). Some message board fan has not come up with an unstoppable offense that zero offensive minds in the game can figure out. Given the facts that 1. rookie tight ends, especially 3rd/5th round guys with little experience in passing offenses) rarely produce at all, and 2. no NFL teams has made the system work, practically ever, show that it isn't simply easy. 

If you think the Bengals have literally the best set up in the history of the NFL for the system and Kroft is a rookie superstar, than maybe the two TE thing will work pretty well. I happen to live in the reality that Kroft is most likely going to struggle this year, like every other rookie TE, and that the Bengals aren't the be all end all spot ever for a rookie TE. 

I will also ask why every team with a good running game and good WR1 aren't falling over for TEs? If the system were so easy, teams would be doing everything in their power to draft/sign them. The Packers would be like, "woah what? You can run them up the seams? DRAFT EVERY TE! IT'S THAT EASY." The Eagles would have abused Celek/Ertz in 2013. The Colts wouldn't be drafting a WR in the first. I just really, really get the feeling that all of these coaches, and every coach/coordinator in history, probably know a bit more than you. 

Can you understand why we cannot explicitly tell you how to stop it, but we can explain why it probably isn't so simple that a fan has figured out a way to break the NFL?

(07-21-2015, 10:46 PM)MrRager Wrote: It isn't that easy. Never coaching/playing or even being around high levels of football for years for 12 hours a day hinders us fans from being able to completely understand the game. It has become that complex. 

The reason I don't think, "just use the rookies properly up the seams!" isn't a viable strategy is because it has never successfully been done in the modern NFL (outside of 2011 Pats). Some message board fan has not come up with an unstoppable offense that zero offensive minds in the game can figure out. Given the facts that 1. rookie tight ends, especially 3rd/5th round guys with little experience in passing offenses) rarely produce at all, and 2. no NFL teams has made the system work, practically ever, show that it isn't simply easy. 

If you think the Bengals have literally the best set up in the history of the NFL for the system and Kroft is a rookie superstar, than maybe the two TE thing will work pretty well. I happen to live in the reality that Kroft is most likely going to struggle this year, like every other rookie TE, and that the Bengals aren't the be all end all spot ever for a rookie TE. 

I will also ask why every team with a good running game and good WR1 aren't falling over for TEs? If the system were so easy, teams would be doing everything in their power to draft/sign them. The Packers would be like, "woah what? You can run them up the seams? DRAFT EVERY TE! IT'S THAT EASY." The Eagles would have abused Celek/Ertz in 2013. The Colts wouldn't be drafting a WR in the first. I just really, really get the feeling that all of these coaches, and every coach/coordinator in history, probably know a bit more than you. 

Can you understand why we cannot explicitly tell you how to stop it, but we can explain why it probably isn't so simple that a fan has figured out a way to break the NFL?

Stop. You never proved him wrong...

(07-21-2015, 10:46 PM)MrRager Wrote: It isn't that easy. Never coaching/playing or even being around high levels of football for years for 12 hours a day hinders us fans from being able to completely understand the game. It has become that complex. 

The reason I don't think, "just use the rookies properly up the seams!" isn't a viable strategy is because it has never successfully been done in the modern NFL (outside of 2011 Pats). Some message board fan has not come up with an unstoppable offense that zero offensive minds in the game can figure out. Given the facts that 1. rookie tight ends, especially 3rd/5th round guys with little experience in passing offenses) rarely produce at all, and 2. no NFL teams has made the system work, practically ever, show that it isn't simply easy. 

If you think the Bengals have literally the best set up in the history of the NFL for the system and Kroft is a rookie superstar, than maybe the two TE thing will work pretty well. I happen to live in the reality that Kroft is most likely going to struggle this year, like every other rookie TE, and that the Bengals aren't the be all end all spot ever for a rookie TE. 

I will also ask why every team with a good running game and good WR1 aren't falling over for TEs? If the system were so easy, teams would be doing everything in their power to draft/sign them. The Packers would be like, "woah what? You can run them up the seams? DRAFT EVERY TE! IT'S THAT EASY." The Eagles would have abused Celek/Ertz in 2013. The Colts wouldn't be drafting a WR in the first. I just really, really get the feeling that all of these coaches, and every coach/coordinator in history, probably know a bit more than you. 

Can you understand why we cannot explicitly tell you how to stop it, but we can explain why it probably isn't so simple that a fan has figured out a way to break the NFL?

Good WR1?  You think AJ is just a "good WR1"?  That's why you lose credibility in arguments.

You think that Hill, who was the best back in the NFL in the second half of the season, despite not getting many carries in a few games, is only a "good back"?  I guess he has to break Hall of Fame numbers, right?  Just being one of the best in the league isn't good enough?

I don't think the Bengals have the best set-up in history at tight end, but you claim that Kroft isn't that good because he's a 3rd round pick, when, if you were educated on anything about the team and didn't just post bullshit, you'd know that the Bengals had him as our top rated TE on the draft board.  Maybe you are educated enough to know that, but you leave it out because it doesn't fit your argument.

Receiving tight ends don't grow on trees, and not many backs can run as good as Hill without a fullback, and not to mention that not many teams have a receiver with AJ's talent.

So explain why it's not as simple of logic with Hill and AJ, not to mention TEs of the talent that we have.

(07-21-2015, 11:01 PM)Harmening Wrote: Stop. You never proved him wrong...

lol..........  him posting a long reply with a bunch of garbage doesn't make it more credible than a short answer with garbage.

(07-22-2015, 03:49 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: So explain why it's not as simple of logic with Hill and AJ, not to mention TEs of the talent that we have.

Because every coach in the NFL is smarter than you, and would shut your elaborate best ever play down in a heartbeat.

(07-21-2015, 02:32 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: You call it homerism, I say it's being realistic. I'd bet a paycheck that the production of our TE's this year won't be ranked 21-30. People whine about experience, but what experience do they want behind Eifert/Kroft/Uzomah? As I pointed out (and no one has refuted), there simply aren't many quality backup TE's with starting experience in the NFL. 

Tbh, I'd rather have a promising rookie like Kroft on the field than some washed up Alex Smith-type player, and that's what most teams have sitting on their bench. I think a lot of folks are just mad we let Gresh go. But I think Eifert will prove to be a (slightly) better player, and Gresh probably wouldn't want to sit the bench.

I call it homerism because our guys haven't really put anything on the field yet, other than a nice job by Eifert as a TE2 for 1 season 2 years ago.

I'd bet a paycheck that the production of our TEs this year won't be ranked 21-32 either, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve to be in the 21-32 ranking bracket until they actually put it on NFL tape. That's been my entire point. I don't really need another TE behind our 3 guys, but it's silly to say they're anything more than one of the most unproven groups in the league as of right now.

To go back to another example of a different positional group, I think Teddy Bridgewater is probably going to end up being a better NFL QB than a lot of guys that I currently rank ahead of him, same with Carr, Bortles, and even Winston. I rank all of those guys near the bottom of the 32 and I believe that you agree with me on that. Why not use the same logic with TEs? Why does a Bengals fan's assumed, hypothetical, future production outweigh what guys have done on the field when it comes to the TE group? I don't really get that. There may not be many backups that have done much in the NFL, but they've done more than absolutely nothing, which happens to be more than both of our backups combined right now.

(07-22-2015, 09:18 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I call it homerism because our guys haven't really put anything on the field yet, other than a nice job by Eifert as a TE2 for 1 season 2 years ago.

I'd bet a paycheck that the production of our TEs this year won't be ranked 21-32 either, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve to be in the 21-32 ranking bracket until they actually put it on NFL tape. That's been my entire point. I don't really need another TE behind our 3 guys, but it's silly to say they're anything more than one of the most unproven groups in the league as of right now.

To go back to another example of a different positional group, I think Teddy Bridgewater is probably going to end up being a better NFL QB than a lot of guys that I currently rank ahead of him, same with Carr, Bortles, and even Winston. I rank all of those guys near the bottom of the 32 and I believe that you agree with me on that. Why not use the same logic with TEs? Why does a Bengals fan's assumed, hypothetical, future production outweigh what guys have done on the field when it comes to the TE group? I don't really get that. There may not be many backups that have done much in the NFL, but they've done more than absolutely nothing, which happens to be more than both of our backups combined right now.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is spot on IMHO

I also think too many ignore the (blocking aspects at least 50% of snaps) of the TE position pumping up the as catchers an ignoring the complete TE's like Heath.

(07-22-2015, 09:23 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is spot on IMHO

I also think too many ignore the blocking aspects at least 50%) of the TE position pumping up the as catchers an ignoring the complete TE's like Heath.

Absolutely, blocking is a pretty big deal that people have been leaving out of the discussion.

Some people may not have heard of other team's backups like Daniel Fells and Virgil Green, but those guys are some of your better backup TEs as far as blocking goes.

I can't see ranking guys by potential because IMO, it makes your personal opinion weigh a lot more than it really should in these matters. If you're a person that really likes one of our draft picks, you may rank him higher than he should be by "potential" without realizing that other teams have young, unproven players with plenty of potential themselves. We're Bengals fans, so most of us are going to be biased when it comes to our unproven players and a lot of people around here bash other team's unproven guys as being garbage.

Again, it always seems like going back to the QB position brings out the easiest examples. I ranked Andy somewhere around the middle of the pack, but he certainly has potential to be better. Should I have given him a top 10 ranking because he could potentially be a top 10 QB next year? If I do that, then I need to also realize that others around the league have potential as well. Blake Bortles could be the best QB in the league in 3 years, but wouldn't I be crazy to rank him in the top 10 just because I think he's going to be maybe, possibly good in the future?

In my opinion, player rankings should be about what they've done in the league with maybe a litttttle bit of potential in the mix. If you weigh player potential greatly, it will let bias and homerism get in the way since we obviously know a lot more about our own young guys than others around the NFL since we (most of us at least) follow the Bengals under a microscope much, much more than any other team.

(07-21-2015, 07:24 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I don't think you realize how fast things happen in the NFL.  A defender has a split-second to decide if he's going to cover his man or commit to the run, and then he has to get to his man and try and run with him when he doesn't know where he's going.  Our tight ends don't fire off the ball when the ball is snapped. then stop, look at the safety and linebackers and say "do you need another few seconds to decide on whether or not to cover me?"

This applies to every single DB that ever plays press coverage.  If playing press coverage made it impossible to cover a receiver then I doubt so many teams would use it so often.

(07-22-2015, 03:49 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Receiving tight ends don't grow on trees,

Yet Kroft was not taken until the 85th selection in the draft.

I am not bashing Kroft.  I actually like the pick.  But if he was the kind of player that would make a very simplistic play undefendable against NFL players I think he would have been taken a little sooner.

(07-22-2015, 09:18 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I call it homerism because our guys haven't really put anything on the field yet, other than a nice job by Eifert as a TE2 for 1 season 2 years ago.

I'd bet a paycheck that the production of our TEs this year won't be ranked 21-32 either, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve to be in the 21-32 ranking bracket until they actually put it on NFL tape. That's been my entire point. I don't really need another TE behind our 3 guys, but it's silly to say they're anything more than one of the most unproven groups in the league as of right now.

To go back to another example of a different positional group, I think Teddy Bridgewater is probably going to end up being a better NFL QB than a lot of guys that I currently rank ahead of him, same with Carr, Bortles, and even Winston. I rank all of those guys near the bottom of the 32 and I believe that you agree with me on that. Why not use the same logic with TEs? Why does a Bengals fan's assumed, hypothetical, future production outweigh what guys have done on the field when it comes to the TE group? I don't really get that. There may not be many backups that have done much in the NFL, but they've done more than absolutely nothing, which happens to be more than both of our backups combined right now.

I usually agree with you on most things but I don't understand your logic on this one. You are predicting the Bengals TEs to be better than 20 yet when you rank them you put them between 22-30?

Let me give you a clear example of why this is absurd. When Lebon James was a rookie he was considered the Cavs best player by almost everyone even though he had never played in the NBA. Using your logic he would be ranked as one of the worst Cavs players because he hadn't ever played in the NBA.

Makes no sense my man. We all know Eifert is a good player regardless of how much he's played. Nobody in this forum is saying he is the best TE in the league but we certainly know he will produce better than 21-30. That is the point we are making.

How you rank TEs (catching skills vs blocking skills etc) is about personal preference and team scheme.

Some people don't give a flying hoot how well a TE can block if the can still run good routes, get open and catch the ball (Jimmy Graham)

Both kinds of TEs can provide value. Just different kinds.

(07-22-2015, 11:17 AM)CornerBlitz Wrote: I usually agree with you on most things but I don't understand your logic on this one. You are predicting the Bengals TEs to be better than 20 yet when you rank them you put them between 22-30?

Let me give you a clear example of why this is absurd. When Lebon James was a rookie he was considered the Cavs best player by almost everyone even though he had never played in the NBA. Using your logic he would be ranked as one of the worst Cavs players because he hadn't ever played in the NBA.

Makes no sense my man. We all know Eifert is a good player regardless of how much he's played. Nobody in this forum is saying he is the best TE in the league but we certainly know he will produce better than 21-30. That is the point we are making.

Tyler Eifert is no can't miss prospect like LeBron James or Andrew Luck. There are VERY rare occasions that I don't see an issue putting a rookie/young guy higher in the rankings, but Tyler Eifert doesn't really count. Everybody in the universe had high hopes for LBJ, so if you can show me Eifert getting that type of universal love around the whole league, then I'll jump on board too.

I certainly know he will likely produce better than 21 - 30, but this is rankings as a group, and I don't think any of us are even NEAR certain (unless you go full-homer) that either of the rookies will produce and be able to block better than 20 backups in the NFL this season. I believe our new beat writer has even mentioned that Hewitt will likely be seeing most of the time at TE2 as of now because the rookies are so raw.

(07-22-2015, 11:18 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: How you rank TEs (catching skills vs blocking skills etc) is about personal preference and team scheme.

Some people don't give a flying hoot how well a TE can block if the can still run good routes, get open and catch the ball (Jimmy Graham)

Both kinds of TEs can provide value. Just different kinds.

If you're as good of a receiving TE as Jimmy Graham, you don't really need to be a superb blocker. He's sort of an extreme example.

I'm just wondering why some people are focusing solely on receiving production in their explanations for rankings, yet they aren't talking about blocking which is obviously a huge factor for a lot of TEs around the league. I don't care if a few team's backups haven't put up 500+ yards, if those guys have been the better blockers in the league, you better bet your ass I'm rating them higher than 2 guys that haven't even taken a snap yet.

(07-22-2015, 11:17 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yet Kroft was not taken until the 85th selection in the draft.

I am not bashing Kroft.  I actually like the pick.  But if he was the kind of player that would make a very simplistic play undefendable against NFL players I think he would have been taken a little sooner.

I have to admit that you can count on JPP's right index finger the number of off-seasons we have gone without someone claiming some player on the Bengals with 0's across his resume is going to be "unconverable."

I propose the Bengals Message Board "Uncoverable" Curse
2011:  Jerome Simpson
2012:  Armonhammer "Discount" Binns
2013:  2 TE's
2014:  2 TE's
2015:  Tyler Krofts

(07-22-2015, 11:39 AM)Nately120 Wrote: I have to admit that you can count on JPP's right index finger the number of off-seasons we have gone without someone claiming some player on the Bengals with 0's across his resume is going to be "unconverable."

I propose the Bengals Message Board "Uncoverable" Curse
2011:  Jerome Simpson
2012:  Armonhammer "Discount" Binns
2013:  2 TE's
2014:  2 TE's
2015:  Tyler Krofts

I personally find it funny how there hasn't been an uncoverable formation, receiver, play, or really any other "unstoppable" part of the entire game since it's inception, yet some people seem to think they KNOW how to create an uncoverable, unbeatable offense.

The guys these people claim are going to be unbeatable are always quite the beatable receivers. It's never a Calvin Johnson or Jimmy Graham that our fans are pumping up as the unstoppable force, it's Armon Binns and Tyler Kroft. Heh, it's amusing here at times.

(07-22-2015, 03:49 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Good WR1?  You think AJ is just a "good WR1"?  That's why you lose credibility in arguments.

You think that Hill, who was the best back in the NFL in the second half of the season, despite not getting many carries in a few games, is only a "good back"?  I guess he has to break Hall of Fame numbers, right?  Just being one of the best in the league isn't good enough?

I don't think the Bengals have the best set-up in history at tight end, but you claim that Kroft isn't that good because he's a 3rd round pick, when, if you were educated on anything about the team and didn't just post bullshit, you'd know that the Bengals had him as our top rated TE on the draft board.  Maybe you are educated enough to know that, but you leave it out because it doesn't fit your argument.

Receiving tight ends don't grow on trees, and not many backs can run as good as Hill without a fullback, and not to mention that not many teams have a receiver with AJ's talent.

So explain why it's not as simple of logic with Hill and AJ, not to mention TEs of the talent that we have.


lol..........  him posting a long reply with a bunch of garbage doesn't make it more credible than a short answer with garbage.

Way to freak out over what adjective I used and completely ignore the main point and most of the post. Would you like me to repost it with the word "great?" Would you actually be able to handle a conversation then? 

I know Kroft was our highest rated TE, but that doesn't change the fact he was worth no more than a 3rd rounder. Apparently we had zero TEs with a first or second round grade. That doesn't automatically make him great. That makes it an extremely weak tight end draft class.

I also explained it to you already, but you flipped your shit because of an adjective I used instead of actually reading what I posted. Should I explain again? No teams have worked the two TE system before and rookie TEs have historically struggled. Why? I'm not sure, but I guess it's because football isn't that simple. If zero people in the NFL have figured this out, I highly doubt a random message board fan has. 

But, no, please freak out again and attempt to cry about how simple it is that you, based Bradfitz, how cracked the NFL and have created a scheme better than every single coach in the history of the NFL.

(07-22-2015, 11:57 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I personally find it funny how there hasn't been an uncoverable formation, receiver, play, or really any other "unstoppable" part of the entire game since it's inception, yet some people seem to think they KNOW how to create an uncoverable, unbeatable offense.

The guys these people claim are going to be unbeatable are always quite the beatable receivers. It's never a Calvin Johnson or Jimmy Graham that our fans are pumping up as the unstoppable force, it's Armon Binns and Tyler Kroft. Heh, it's amusing here at times.

It's fandom.  We are going to shut down Calvin Johnson and Jimmy Graham (so overrated) when we play them, and Aaron Rogers and Peyton Manning aren't going to be able to complete many passes when we blitz 'em hard and they spend the entire game picking turf outta their teeth!  Also, we are going to march our UDFA WR and rookie TE out there and the other team's defense is going to be like
AHHHHH HELLLP!!! WHAT DO WE DO!!?!?!?!  100 YEARS OF FOOTBALL KNOWLEDGE IS WORTHLESS AGAINST THEM GUYS!!!!

HEEEEELLLP!!!!! UNCOVERABLE!!!!! DEFENSE NO GOOD!!!! HELP!!!

(07-22-2015, 12:12 PM)Nately120 Wrote: It's fandom.  We are going to shut down Calvin Johnson and Jimmy Graham (so overrated) when we play them, and Aaron Rogers and Peyton Manning aren't going to be able to complete many passes when we blitz 'em hard and they spend the entire game picking turf outta their teeth!  Also, we are going to march our UDFA WR and rookie TE out there and the other team's defense is going to be like
AHHHHH HELLLP!!! WHAT DO WE DO!!?!?!?!  100 YEARS OF FOOTBALL KNOWLEDGE IS WORTHLESS AGAINST THEM GUYS!!!!

HEEEEELLLP!!!!!  UNCOVERABLE!!!!!  DEFENSE NO GOOD!!!! HELP!!!

Explain it then. Seriously. If we have two TEs, Hill, and AJ then it is LITERALLY impossible to stop. Try to explain. YOU CAN'T LOL!