(09-18-2017, 10:09 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I have a strong feeling that they punished him for the fumble without getting a clear picture of it.

The Bengals were catching some flack for that after the game. That guy's helmet hit square on the ball.

I forget who I was listening to, it might have been Mo Egger with Tony Pike, that said something to the effect of:  "They punish the guy for a fumble on a really good hit, but stupid personal foul penalties never went punished".


That was one of those points where I was just kind of left speechless....

(09-19-2017, 07:38 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I forget who I was listening to, it might have been Mo Egger with Tony Pike, that said something to the effect of:  "They punish the guy for a fumble on a really good hit, but stupid personal foul penalties never went punished".


That was one of those points where I was just kind of left speechless....

It's all part of the wacky way Marvelous Marv does things.  You know, randomly, not consistently, not across the board.

(09-18-2017, 09:01 PM)Pat5775 Wrote: Dalton did very well, but they didnt trail at the end of that game. If it came down to the waning moments like the SC-Texas game did, would Dalton have gotten them into field goal range with under a minute to go? Based on what I've seen from Dalton under pressure (both pressure from the defense and big game pressure), I'm not so sure...

But as you said, it was college. And he was playing for Patterson, not Marv. Lots of variables that make it so we can only speculate, but never know. 

In any case, I hope whoever replaces Marv gives Dalton a shot and doesn't trade him right off the bat. I've wanted to see what Dalton can do without Marv for years... I just hope the offensive line doesn't permanently ruin him in the meantime 

Yup, and Palmer was a stud at SC too...no light was too bright....until he became Marvinized.

TCU didn't trail at the end of that Rose Bowl, but it came down to the wire, and was a struggle the entire game.  If memory serves, the Frogs took the lead late, and the defense made a goal line stand to ice it.  Even AJM fumbled away a bye in Denver....Bengals being Bengals.

(09-19-2017, 10:23 AM)Wyche Wrote: Yup, and Palmer was a stud at SC too...no light was too bright....until he became Marvinized.

TCU didn't trail at the end of that Rose Bowl, but it came down to the wire, and was a struggle the entire game.  If memory serves, the Frogs took the lead late, and the defense made a goal line stand to ice it.  Even AJM fumbled away a bye in Denver....Bengals being Bengals.

The weirdest thing about all this, the thing I've never seen anyone explains is, what the hell does Marvin do before or during big games to ruin guys?  It defies logic.

Can somebody just once explain this to me, please.

(09-19-2017, 12:21 PM)McC Wrote: The weirdest thing about all this, the thing I've never seen anyone explains is, what the hell does Marvin do before or during big games to ruin guys?  It defies logic.

Can somebody just once explain this to me, please.

I think it goes beyond Marvin. I think if you work in an environment for years where you see subtle signs that they're not investing everything into winning...such as retaining a coach that is 0-7 in the playoffs, not signing free agents, touting losing guys so you can get Comp Picks...that it destroys morale and maybe you prepare just a little less than you would have. Then over years that makes you worse.

(09-19-2017, 12:25 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I think it goes beyond Marvin. I think if you work in an environment for years where you see subtle signs that they're not investing everything into winning...such as retaining a coach that is 0-7 in the playoffs, not signing free agents, touting losing guys so you can get Comp Picks...that it destroys morale and maybe you prepare just a little less than you would have. Then over years that makes you worse.

Okay.  That makes sense.  But it still doesn't explain how they can win enough to get to the playoffs then look like frightened children once they get there.

Does he walk around the locker room blowing into a paper bag, freaking out all over everybody?  What the hell does he do on  game day?  Not only does he not lift his team up, somehow he brings them down?  How the hell does he do that?

(09-19-2017, 10:23 AM)Wyche Wrote: Yup, and Palmer was a stud at SC too...no light was too bright....until he became Marvinized.

TCU didn't trail at the end of that Rose Bowl, but it came down to the wire, and was a struggle the entire game.  If memory serves, the Frogs took the lead late, and the defense made a goal line stand to ice it.  Even AJM fumbled away a bye in Denver....Bengals being Bengals.

You mean that Rose Bowl game where Andy Dalton beat JJ Watt to the edge and ran it in for six?!?!

(09-19-2017, 12:37 PM)McC Wrote: Okay.  That makes sense.  But it still doesn't explain how they can win enough to get to the playoffs then look like frightened children once they get there.

Does he walk around the locker room blowing into a paper bag, freaking out all over everybody?  What the hell does he do on  game day?  Not only does he not lift his team up, somehow he brings them down?  How the hell does he do that?

I think that when you get to the playoffs you're generally playing the best organizations - coaching and players that year. While we have taken a great leap from where we were in the 90's to respectable...our organizational culture and coaching hold us down.

I think it's mental too. When you have the 'We haven't won a big primetime game or playoff game' always out there...and you focus on winning those...then you play not to lose it instead of playing normally and focusing on your best performance and then let the results fall where they may. ie The Bengals play tight in big games.

How many times, even during the 90's has this franchise had a terrible regular season only to win 2 of the final 3 games once the pressure was off?

My point got missed...but had Palmer not blew out his knee in the playoff game against the Steelers and we won that game...our trajectory might have changed. We wouldn't have had the mental block that is winning a playoff game and actually performed better in past seasons.

(09-19-2017, 01:19 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I think that when you get to the playoffs you're generally playing the best organizations - coaching and players that year. While we have taken a great leap from where we were in the 90's to respectable...our organizational culture and coaching hold us down.

I think it's mental too. When you have the 'We haven't won a big primetime game or playoff game' always out there...and you focus on winning those...then you play not to lose it instead of playing normally and focusing on your best performance and then let the results fall where they may. ie The Bengals play tight in big games.

How many times, even during the 90's has this franchise had a terrible regular season only to win 2 of the final 3 games once the pressure was off?

My point got missed...but had Palmer not blew out his knee in the playoff game against the Steelers and we won that game...our trajectory might have changed. We wouldn't have had the mental block that is winning a playoff game and actually performed better in past seasons.

It is a very large elephant in the room, to be sure.  Okay.  I call that an explanation.

I read a good book that talks about the process. If you listen to champions they talk about the process a lot too.

Basically every team wants to win the Super Bowl. But you can't win the Super Bowl in August. You have to go out and practice hard and give your all every minute of practice. Then you gameplan for games, watch video, practice hard, then play in the games hard.

It's up to the coaches to get players to do this stuff. It's up to coaches to prepare hard.

If you start focusing on the result of winning and losing...then the probably aren't focusing on the process that is needed to win.

(09-19-2017, 12:48 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You mean that Rose Bowl game where Andy Dalton beat JJ Watt to the edge and ran it in for six?!?!

:andy:  That'd be the one!

(09-19-2017, 12:21 PM)McC Wrote: The weirdest thing about all this, the thing I've never seen anyone explains is, what the hell does Marvin do before or during big games to ruin guys?  It defies logic.

Can somebody just once explain this to me, please.

You got some very explanations.....but I've been harping on this since the Mother Ship.....you can't tell me we have just been "lucky" enough to constantly draft, sign, re-sign, and trade for choke artists.  It just doesn't make sense to say that.  It's an organizational failure....from there, we can speculate on the causes.

(09-19-2017, 01:48 PM)Wyche Wrote: :andy:  That'd be the one!

That game was a fun one. Probably my second favorite Rose Bowl behind the Vince Young one.

(09-19-2017, 01:55 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: That game was a fun one. Probably my second favorite Rose Bowl behind the Vince Young one.

Both were very good games.....won by underdogs.

After watching last night's game and a couple LTs that went in the top 10 of their drafts I'm thinking we may have gotten a steal in Ced.

(09-19-2017, 01:34 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I read a good book that talks about the process. If you listen to champions they talk about the process a lot too.

Basically every team wants to win the Super Bowl. But you can't win the Super Bowl in August. You have to go out and practice hard and give your all every minute of practice. Then you gameplan for games, watch video, practice hard, then play in the games hard.

It's up to the coaches to get players to do this stuff. It's up to coaches to prepare hard.

If you start focusing on the result of winning and losing...then the probably aren't focusing on the process that is needed to win.

I do recall Marvin acting as if what the players do is on them once they hit the field.

What a sad way to look at things if you are one of the longest tenured coaches in the NFL today.

(09-18-2017, 05:38 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Must have been just that bad. He wasn't good for the Bengals in '15, and he was truly horrible for the Vikings in '16 before he got hurt. He's not the '12 Smith you might remember.


Even if they don't, it's a 1yr/$12.5m deal regardless if he gets cut today. That's still $3.5m more than the Bengals offered for 1 year of work and he's on a team with a win.

Yeah, but Good Lord, I rather have a store mannequin at LT over 70. He couldn't stay in front of a parked car.

(09-19-2017, 02:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: After watching last night's game and a couple LTs that went in the top 10 of their drafts I'm thinking we may have gotten a steal in Ced.

"All of the apples at the store were rotten but I found this one on the floor that was just bruised and dusty. What a steal!"

damn, this is weird again, but guys, I'm gonna have to be with bfine on this one too.  We knew Father Time is catching up to Whit and it was time to move on.  And no one in their right minds would have paid that much for Zeitler.  Yes, he was decent, but nowhere near a probowler. We drafted two guys in the first two rounds to replace Whit.  It was a plan that we have yet to see any fruition from, but damn, at least it was a plan.  If it doesn't improve much this year, I think we'll have to go back to the draft and do the same thing. I'm all for giving Og and Fisher more time.  Maybe at the end of the year, we'll be singing a different tune about them. 


My plan to fix any offensive line is to draft an OL within the first three rounds of every draft.  therefore we have a continual influx of talent all across the oline, every year. Talent plus Competition equals success.  

(09-22-2017, 03:14 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: damn, this is weird again, but guys, I'm gonna have to be with bfine on this one too.  We knew Father Time is catching up to Whit and it was time to move on.  And no one in their right minds would have paid that much for Zeitler.  Yes, he was decent, but nowhere near a probowler. We drafted two guys in the first two rounds to replace Whit.  It was a plan that we have yet to see any fruition from, but damn, at least it was a plan.  If it doesn't improve much this year, I think we'll have to go back to the draft and do the same thing. I'm all for giving Og and Fisher more time.  Maybe at the end of the year, we'll be singing a different tune about them. 


My plan to fix any offensive line is to draft an OL within the first three rounds of every draft.  therefore we have a continual influx of talent all across the oline, every year. Talent plus Competition equals success.  

As I've said before, I don't think the issue is that they drafted 2 tackles to replace Whit and whomever. The issue is after seeing how bad the OL was last year they did NOTHING to address it this past offseason.