(10-05-2017, 03:08 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I can't blame Andy Dalton for prime-time and playoff wins/losses due to the lengthy history of failure in such situations under Marvin Lewis. It hasn't mattered who the QB is. Marvin is 0-3 in the playoffs with other QB's, and his prime-time reputation preceded Dalton.

It's simply not fair to pin all of that on one player. Not when there's a list of others who haven't performed in the same situations. Palmer got better elsewhere, and because of that, I can't help but feel Dalton would as well. And I disagree that the good Andy/bad Andy talk comes strictly from that. People have specifically stated that Dalton has more bad games and worse games than other QBs.

Here's an example, and the reason I made this thread:

http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Tale-of-Two-Andy-s?page=2

Shake,

I appreciate the thread. I will go back and crunch these numbers as well as I am struggling to understand your %s and how they add up to over 100%.

Also, I totally disagree with how you weight the QB position in general. It's by far the most important position in all of sports. There's no close 2nd place to that. You are weighing Andy's impact on the game the same as everyone else when it's 10x that.

I also disagree with you laying everything at the feet of the HC and giving Andy Dalton a pass. Marvin doesn't make Andy have back, to back, to back, turnovers against the Chargers in the playoffs with the Bengals leading. Marvin doesn't miss wide open WRs. Marvin doesn't throw INTs. Marvin doesn't throw and INT on the Steelers 4 yard line and then go break Andy's thumb while he's trying to make a tackle. Marvin Lewis doesn't miss seeing wide open WRs on the field or call a play for Andy to stare down AJ or throw it away. That's all on AD.

I lay about 80% of the Bengals current 1-3 record squarely on Andy Dalton. 20% better play from him and they are 4-0. He influences the game more than any other player and he was disgustingly bad the first two games and not very good when it mattered against Green Bay. 2 FG attempts in the 2nd half and no TDs is not good at all.

I think Marvin has his short comings and that AD can be a great QB. But he has to find consistency for the Bengals to be really really good. And, frankly, he has to not suck as hard as he does when he is having an off game. In general, the team around him has been supremely talented and he hasn't done much with it.

(10-05-2017, 03:08 PM)Wyche Wrote: Agreed.....but then you factor in Marv's failures in those games with different QBs, and you get the ball rolling again on this debate.  I think that's why it has effectively reached a stalemate until either Dalton or Marv leaves.

A coach can make a huuuuge difference. At some point though, if you're on the field with other good players, you need to get over every once in a while, despite the poo that's standing over on the sidelines. Even if it's only a couple times. But you have to at some point just to show what you are/can be. 

(10-05-2017, 03:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Good post. I agree with much of what you say, but passer rating is the best measurement we have available, and I do think think it balances out. What I mean by that is if a QB has a career passer rating near 90...he's probably had a good career and it's safe to say he's a good QB. 

Or if Dalton has fewer bad ratings than Joe Flacco over the course of 7-10 seasons, it's probably not a fluke or something you can chalk up to as Dalton padding his stats late in bad games. That's honestly something all QB's do, and Dalton has had fewer chances to do it seeing how he's been on a winning team.

You bring up Tony Romo, and he's another guy who I felt didn't deserve all the criticism aimed at him. Lo and behold, he happened to play for the only other owner that refused to hire a GM and had a heavy hand in shaping the roster. But anyway, I feel the Cowboys never had a great team around Romo, and he always got a disproportionate amount of blame for their shortcomings. They rarely had a good defense and Jason Garrett is about as mediocre as it gets as a HC.

This is going to sound like a bash, but i don't want/mean it to. 

When it comes to passer rating, you have to keep in mind the sliding scale. I spent some time a couple years ago looking at the passer rating, and when adjust for era, 90 is the new 85. 

I hold fast to the belief that Dalton is a consistent upper middle QB who can be 6-10 when he's not throwing the ball to the other team (which he's done a good job of cutting down on since '14--with the exception of the last game against Bmore when he blew his chance at a 90+ and top 10 finish). But if he can overcome Marv for the most part (that's what this discussion is about--his quantity of good games vs bad) in the regular season, he needs to do it in the post season. 

It doesn't matter how good, and how often, he can be in the regular season, playing for the Bengals he's not going to be remembered for that if he can't win in the post season. 

Speaking of Romo, he's a good comparison based on this. His career rating puts him ahead of a guy like Big Ben, but because of their differing post season records, he's not looked upon as an equal to Ben. Not even close, really.

Comparing Ben to Andy based on stats alone, is pointless. Ben produces better outcomes, regardless of the stats. Ben is a game changer. Ben can take over a game on his own. You're comparing an elite player, to a mediocre one.

(10-05-2017, 09:29 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Shake,

I appreciate the thread. I will go back and crunch these numbers as well as I am struggling to understand your %s and how they add up to over 100%.

Also, I totally disagree with how you weight the QB position in general. It's by far the most important position in all of sports. There's no close 2nd place to that. You are weighing Andy's impact on the game the same as everyone else when it's 10x that.

I also disagree with you laying everything at the feet of the HC and giving Andy Dalton a pass. Marvin doesn't make Andy have back, to back, to back, to back turnovers against the Chargers in the playoffs with the Bengals leading. Marvin doesn't miss wide open WRs. Marvin doesn't throw INTs. Marvin doesn't throw and INT on the Steelers 4 yard line and then go break Andy's thumb while he's trying to make a tackle. Marvin Lewis doesn't miss seeing wide open WRs on the field or call a play for Andy to stare down AJ or throw it away. That's all on AD.

I lay about 80% of the Bengals current 1-3 record squarely on Andy Dalton. 20% better play from him and they are 4-0. He influences the game more than any other player and he was disgustingly bad the first two games and not very good when it mattered against Green Bay. 2 FG attempts in the 2nd half and no TDs is not good at all.

I think Marvin has his short comings and that AD can be a great QB. But he has to find consistency for the Bengals to be really really good. And, frankly, he has to not suck as hard as he does when he is having an off game. In general, the team around him has been supremely talented and he hasn't done much with it.

The bold is not really true. Goalie in hockey is very close. In fact, I'd argue a case can made it's just as important since they're playing the entire game. 

(10-05-2017, 06:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. I don't think his career rating undermines anything. It's actually reflective of how good he's been. Dalton is currently 9th among active QB's in passer rating at 89.1. He's actually ahead of some guys that I think are his equal or in the same tier. He's ahead of Carr, Palmer, Luck, Stafford, Newton, Tannehill, Smith, Bradford, Eli, and Flacco among others.

Yeah that's on me. Language problem. I did not mean to say "undermine" but "underline".

(10-05-2017, 06:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 2. I sincerely believe that if you swapped their teams, Flacco would be the choker and Dalton would be wearing a ring. Not talking about the rubber one. It just seems the Ravens are a more professional franchise that rises in big moments. They don't look out of place. They put their players in good spots to succeed. 

Well... for that one season one might make that point, but there were some very mediocre seasons as well. Of course, I do attribute them to Flacco to a large portion, who just isn't very good overall.

(10-05-2017, 06:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 3. I feel Romo botched that hold in his first playoff game, and that reputation stuck with him after that. I don't feel he had a bunch of choke worthy moments after that, really. It was mostly just team-wide disappointment. Going 8-8 several years in a row. The team performed below expectations (expectations that were probably high because they have stars on their helmets) and people blamed Romo for it due to his rep. 

It seems the only way to change a reputation like that is to win it all. Eli Manning was viewed as a semi-bust before he got a ring. Then people suddenly started muttering the "e" word when talking about him. Saying he was better than Peyton (lol). Seriously, perception in sports is so off sometimes.

The latter is certainly true. About Romo, I'm quite done talking about him :)

(10-05-2017, 11:16 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The bold is not really true. Goalie in hockey is very close. In fact, I'd argue a case can made it's just as important since they're playing the entire game. 

I see where you're coming from, but I disagree from the stand point of goalies don't influence the game as much in terms of time because they don't have the puck. YES, stopping goals is important, but time on task with the ball/puck is vastly different between goalie and QB. That's like saying the catcher in baseball is the most important because without him the game would take days to play because there's no one to stop the ball from flying by.

Perhaps I should have said INFLUENTIAL rather than important. On all but a few plays a game (special teams) the QB has the ball first, or decides to change the play, and what he does with it makes that the most INFLUENTIAL position in sports.

I can show you more games where a hockey goalie has been trash, below avg, or average and their team still won more than I can a Quarterback being equally as bad, below avg, or avg and still winning.

(10-06-2017, 03:24 PM)PDub80 Wrote: I see where you're coming from, but I disagree from the stand point of goalies don't influence the game as much in terms of time because they don't have the puck. YES, stopping goals is important, but time on task with the ball/puck is vastly different between goalie and QB. That's like saying the catcher in baseball is the most important because without him the game would take days to play because there's no one to stop the ball from flying by.

Perhaps I should have said INFLUENTIAL rather than important. On all but a few plays a game (special teams) the QB has the ball first, or decides to change the play, and what he does with it makes that the most INFLUENTIAL position in sports.

I can show you more games where a hockey goalie has been trash, below avg, or average and their team still won more than I can a Quarterback being equally as bad, below avg, or avg and still winning.

Sure a poor goalie can win some games here and there with a good enough team in front of him, but a mediocre/bad goalie ain't winning a Stanley Cup very often. It takes 16 wins to do so. Hardest trophy to win in all of sports. I've seen plenty of mediocre QBs win SB's with dominant defenses and running games though. To me they're two most important/influential positions, and are pretty close. But we can agree to disagree. 

(10-05-2017, 09:29 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: No doubt, a little help from others every once in a while would be nice...but i can't let go of the 2nd half of the Chargers game and place the blame anywhere but him for how badly he played. Had a very nice 1st half, crapped the bed the 2nd half. And it would certainly help his cause if he hits that one pass to AJ, in Houston, with 3 minutes left in the game that would have given the Bengals a lead. As much as it can be pointed out how well he plays, overall, in the regular season, you also can't ignore how most of his Sun/Mon night games and all of his playoff games have been poop. I just don't get how he can't have a couple really good prime time games in wins against a good team and at least one good complete playoff game. I get "because Marv" and i agree he's milquetoast poo, but sometimes...hell, once or twice, you have to be able to overcome that and ball out over the course of 6 seasons. 


I was meaning that it should only be specifically because of that. 

Yeah Andy has mostly looked like ass in the playoffs. Including some of those moments you mention. But if I blame Andy for his own performance, then I can't let any player off the hook.

Jon Kitna throwing a pair of INTs in the 2nd half
Chad Johnson being invisible in 2 playoff games.
Housh only catching 4 of his 11 targets for 25 yards.
Chris Perry catching 6 passes for a whopping 11 yards.
Carson going 18 of 36 for 146 yards (4.06 YPA) and a 58.3 rating
Shayne Graham missing 2 FGs.
Benson going for 12 yards on 8 touches with a drive-killing drop (vs Texans)
AJ Green mostly disappearing.
Atkins and Dunlap disappearing in 3 out of 4 games.
Gio with 2 key fumbles (although the Shazier one wasn't his fault - dirty hit)
Hill with an epic fumble.
Burfict and Pacman losing composure.
Sanu catching only 3 of 7 targets for 31 yards when we desperately needed him (all WRs out).
McCarron with 2 turnovers, 3 drive killing fumbles and a 68.3 rating
Defense getting killed by guys like Sanchez, Yates, Dan Herron, Fitzgerald Toissaint, Jordan Todman and Shonn Greene.

Also Palmer had a 75 rating in PT as a Bengal. Worse than Dalton. Somehow he's improved massively in that category since leaving.

So when I look at all of this, it's impossible for me to just single out Dalton. We have a choking culture. Or maybe we just don't put our players in the best positions to succeed. Either way, Dalton is just part of a long line of players that for whatever reason choked under Marvin. There's a mountain of evidence that people want to shove to the side - only for Dalton for some reason.

For me it's all or nothing. You either think Marv is the problem for everyone or no one. You can't blame him for everything BUT Dalton's performance.

(10-05-2017, 09:29 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Shake,

I appreciate the thread. I will go back and crunch these numbers as well as I am struggling to understand your %s and how they add up to over 100%.

Also, I totally disagree with how you weight the QB position in general. It's by far the most important position in all of sports. There's no close 2nd place to that. You are weighing Andy's impact on the game the same as everyone else when it's 10x that.

I also disagree with you laying everything at the feet of the HC and giving Andy Dalton a pass. Marvin doesn't make Andy have back, to back, to back, turnovers against the Chargers in the playoffs with the Bengals leading. Marvin doesn't miss wide open WRs. Marvin doesn't throw INTs. Marvin doesn't throw and INT on the Steelers 4 yard line and then go break Andy's thumb while he's trying to make a tackle. Marvin Lewis doesn't miss seeing wide open WRs on the field or call a play for Andy to stare down AJ or throw it away. That's all on AD.

I lay about 80% of the Bengals current 1-3 record squarely on Andy Dalton. 20% better play from him and they are 4-0. He influences the game more than any other player and he was disgustingly bad the first two games and not very good when it mattered against Green Bay. 2 FG attempts in the 2nd half and no TDs is not good at all.

I think Marvin has his short comings and that AD can be a great QB. But he has to find consistency for the Bengals to be really really good. And, frankly, he has to not suck as hard as he does when he is having an off game. In general, the team around him has been supremely talented and he hasn't done much with it.

that post was money

(10-07-2017, 01:40 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Yeah Andy has mostly looked like ass in the playoffs. Including some of those moments you mention. But if I blame Andy for his own performance, then I can't let any player off the hook.

Jon Kitna throwing a pair of INTs in the 2nd half
Chad Johnson being invisible in 2 playoff games.
Housh only catching 4 of his 11 targets for 25 yards.
Chris Perry catching 6 passes for a whopping 11 yards.
Carson going 18 of 36 for 146 yards (4.06 YPA) and a 58.3 rating
Shayne Graham missing 2 FGs.
Benson going for 12 yards on 8 touches with a drive-killing drop (vs Texans)
AJ Green mostly disappearing.
Atkins and Dunlap disappearing in 3 out of 4 games.
Gio with 2 key fumbles (although the Shazier one wasn't his fault - dirty hit)
Hill with an epic fumble.
Burfict and Pacman losing composure.
Sanu catching only 3 of 7 targets for 31 yards when we desperately needed him (all WRs out).
McCarron with 2 turnovers, 3 drive killing fumbles and a 68.3 rating
Defense getting killed by guys like Sanchez, Yates, Dan Herron, Fitzgerald Toissaint, Jordan Todman and Shonn Greene.

So when I look at all of this, it's impossible for me to just single out Dalton. We have a choking culture. Or maybe we just don't put our players in the best positions to succeed. Either way, Dalton is just part of a long line of players that for whatever reason choked under Marvin.

Yep. Isn't it great being a Bengals fan and, other than Benson in '09, seeing the entire team crap the bed 7 times?

Astounding when you think about it. 

(10-05-2017, 09:29 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Shake,

1. I appreciate the thread. I will go back and crunch these numbers as well as I am struggling to understand your %s and how they add up to over 100%.

2. Also, I totally disagree with how you weight the QB position in general. It's by far the most important position in all of sports. There's no close 2nd place to that. You are weighing Andy's impact on the game the same as everyone else when it's 10x that.

3. I also disagree with you laying everything at the feet of the HC and giving Andy Dalton a pass. Marvin doesn't make Andy have back, to back, to back, turnovers against the Chargers in the playoffs with the Bengals leading. Marvin doesn't miss wide open WRs. Marvin doesn't throw INTs. Marvin doesn't throw and INT on the Steelers 4 yard line and then go break Andy's thumb while he's trying to make a tackle. Marvin Lewis doesn't miss seeing wide open WRs on the field or call a play for Andy to stare down AJ or throw it away. That's all on AD.

I lay about 80% of the Bengals current 1-3 record squarely on Andy Dalton. 20% better play from him and they are 4-0. He influences the game more than any other player and he was disgustingly bad the first two games and not very good when it mattered against Green Bay. 2 FG attempts in the 2nd half and no TDs is not good at all.

I think Marvin has his short comings and that AD can be a great QB. But he has to find consistency for the Bengals to be really really good. And, frankly, he has to not suck as hard as he does when he is having an off game. In general, the team around him has been supremely talented and he hasn't done much with it.

1. The percentages aren't meant to add up to 100%. The reason for this is that 90+ ratings also include all the 100+ rating games. Same with 70 and below. That will also include all the ratings in the 50's, 60's and anything lower than 70.

2. What does that have to do with this thread? This thread is about how often Dalton has bad games (and good, great or mediocre ones). Full stop.

3. I just covered all of that in my reply to RFaulk. I'm giving ALL players a pass, not just Andy. I refuse to believe that laundry list of choke jobs is all coincidence. These are some Bengals legends were talking about, all dropping duds. It's not just Andy, and I'm not sure why we pretend it is.

And if you acknowledge that it's not just Andy, then why do we excuse everyone else, but hold Andy accountable? Is Andy supposed to be immune to what afflicts everyone else?

This proves a few things.

1. Dalton is highly inconsistent
2. There are other QBs in the NFL that are also inconsistent.

Guys like Carson and Newton are some of the most inconsistent players in league history along with Dalton. With guys like Carson and Newton, you don't know what you will get year to year. With Dalton, you don't know what you'll get game to game.

Let's also look at the players you decided to choose and realize what they've accomplished in their career.

Big ben has won two Super Bowls.
Flacco has won a super bowl and was the SB MVP.
Newton has made it to the super bowl and the conference championship. He's also been league MVP.


Andy Dalton has done absolute nothing note worthy in terms of team success other than a few decent regular season records. Perhaps if Dalton had actually done something in the playoffs we'd be a little bit more forgiving but the fact remains that not only is he inconsistent, but he hasn't gotten us close to what we truly want; heck you could make the case it was AJM that came closer.

(10-07-2017, 09:28 AM)CornerBlitz Wrote: This proves a few things.

1. Dalton is highly inconsistent
2. There are other QBs in the NFL that are also inconsistent.

Guys like Carson and Newton are some of the most inconsistent players in league history along with Dalton. With guys like Carson and Newton, you don't know what you will get year to year. With Dalton, you don't know what you'll get game to game.

Let's also look at the players you decided to choose and realize what they've accomplished in their career.

Big ben has won two Super Bowls.
Flacco has won a super bowl and was the SB MVP.
Newton has made it to the super bowl and the conference championship. He's also been league MVP.


Andy Dalton has done absolute nothing note worthy in terms of team success other than a few decent regular season records. Perhaps if Dalton had actually done something in the playoffs we'd be a little bit more forgiving but the fact remains that not only is he inconsistent, but he hasn't gotten us close to what we truly want; heck you could make the case it was AJM that came closer.

1. If you consider Dalton to be highly inconsistent based on these numbers, then you must think that most NFL QBs are highly inconsistent.

2. I explained why I decided to choose the QBs I listed, and Ben, Luck, Newton, Carson and Flacco are some of the better QBs in the NFL. I also offered to list the numbers for any QB you want me to look up. So if you're not happy with the list, shoot me some names.

3. I knew when I made this thread that people would try to deflect and start talking about accomplishments somehow making it "ok" for other QBs to be inconsistent, yada yada. This thread is about Andy Dalton supposedly being more inconsistent than other QBs. That's it, period. He either is or he isn't.

(10-04-2017, 10:39 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: This talk has been going on for about as long as we've had Dalton, but how true is it? Does Dalton have more bad games than other QB's?

First, we have to define what "bad" is. As hard as it is to get everyone to agree, I figure I'll just list all games that fall below a 60.0 rating, and well as games that fall below a 70.0, etc. Good games would be a 90+ rating and great games are 100+ and so on. I'll list each QB's total career games played, followed by the percentage of games that fall in each category.

All stats were compiled using pro football reference. I will put an indicator next to each % to show if the % is higher or lower than Dalton's in each category. If the percentages are close (less than 1% difference) then you'll see an = symbol.

Andy Dalton
97 games played
GREAT - 100+ rating: 38 games (39.2% of all games played)
GOOD- 90+: 47 games (48.5%)
SOLID- 80-89.9: 14 games (14.4%)
SUBPAR- 79.9 or below: 36 games (37.1%)
BAD- 69.9 or below: 27 games (27.8%)
AWFUL- 59.9 or below: 11 games (11.3%)

Ben Roethlisberger
189 games played
100+: 77 games (40.7%) ^
90+: 105 games (55.6%) ^^
80-89.9: 31 games (16.4%) ^
sub 79.9: 53 games (28.0%) vv
sub 69.9: 32 games (16.9%) vvv
sub 59.9: 20 games (10.6%) =

Ben is better across the board, but only marginally in the extremes. The % of "great" games and "awful" ones are nearly identical. But overall, Ben has more good games and fewer subpar ones. Of course, when people talk "bad Andy" they're usually not talking about the subpar games, they're talking about the awful ones, and Ben has just as many of those.

Joe Flacco
142 games played
100+: 43 games (30.3%) vvv
90+: 64 games (45.1%) v
80-89.9: 21 games (14.8%) =
sub 79.9: 57 games (40.1%) ^
sub 69.9: 37 games (26.1%) v
sub 59.9: 21 games (14.8%) ^

Flacco is worse in almost every category. More subpar games. More awful games. Far fewer great games to balance it out. Dalton is simply better and more consistent.

Carson Palmer
179 games played
100+: 62 games (34.6%) vv
90+: 90 games (50.3%) ^
80-89.9: 27 games (15.1%) =
sub 79.9: 62 games (34.6%) v
sub 69.9: 39 games (21.8%) vv
sub 59.9: 22 games (12.3%) ^

Palmer is slightly better at not having subpar games. When I say "slightly", I mean slightly. If you project the % of subpar games Carson has over the span of a 200 game career, he'd have 5 fewer subpar games than Andy. It's practically nothing, and that's with a 2.5% difference. Dalton makes up for this slight difference by having 4.6% more great games, although Palmer has more games that qualify as good (again, by a very slight margin - 1.8%)

Andrew Luck
70 games played
100+: 18 games (25.7%) vvv
90+: 32 games (45.7%) v
80-89.9: 13 games (18.6%) ^
sub 79.9: 25 games (35.7%) v
sub 69.9: 15 games (21.4%) v
sub 59.9: 8 games (11.4%) =

Luck is interesting. Slightly smaller % of subpar games (less than 2% difference), but he has FAR fewer great games, which is surprising. Again, it seems most QB's hover around 11% with their "awful" games.

Cam Newton
97 games played
100+: 32 games (33.0%) v
90+: 40 games (41.2%) v
80-89.9: 15 games (15.5%) ^
sub 79.9: 42 games (43.3%) ^
sub 69.9: 24 games (24.7%) v
sub 59.9: 14 games (14.4%) ^

Cam has played fewer great games, fewer good games, more subpar games and more awful games. Does anyone call him "good Cam/bad Cam"?
______________________

I picked these QB's because they're Dalton's peers. Division guys and guys that are viewed as being on a similar level (except Ben). With the exception of Ben, the percentages are all similar and I'd argue that they mostly favor Dalton. He's certainly more consistent than Cam, Luck or Flacco. Palmer is roughly the same.

If you guys have any requests, I'll look it up and post the numbers for ya, but it seems pretty clear that the good Andy/bad Andy thing is a myth. All QB's have a similar % of bad games, outside of the elites I'd say, and Dalton is actually more consistent than many good QB's and has more big games to boot. This isn't to say he's better. This is simply to dispel the myth that Andy is far more prone to bad games or is more a roller coaster.

What’s the percentages for Andy if you count only prime time games and playoff games? I’m pretty sure every QB you compared him with has done something Andy has not/ possibly cannot, which is win a playoff game.

(10-07-2017, 02:17 PM)Stonyhands Wrote: What’s the percentages for Andy if you count only prime time games and playoff games?  I’m pretty sure every QB you compared him with has done something Andy has not/ possibly cannot, which is win a playoff game.

Doesn't matter to what the OP is about. It's an average of all games played not singling out specific ones.

Let me throw it at you a different way. If you go by just primetime and playoff wins who is better Ben Roethlisberger or Aaron Rodgers?

(10-07-2017, 04:07 PM)Synric Wrote: Doesn't matter to what the OP is about. It's an average of all games played not singling out specific ones.

Let me throw it at you a different way. If you go by just primetime and playoff wins who is better Ben Roethlisberger or Aaron Rodgers?

I already know Andy’s stats as far as wins and losses goes in the playoffs. I want to know what his Rating is in playoff games and prime time. Unless you don’t think how a QB performs matters to a team’s success or failure.

What the Hell does any of what Andy does matter if Andy’s percentage of terrible games in the playoffs is 100%. Fact is that some QBs have what it takes when it matters most and Andy’s career speaks volumes to that.

It’s one thing if Andy had a good playoff game and the defense let him down but that’s never happened. Hell since Andy has been a Bengal the closest we’ve been to winning a playoff game was with Andy on the sideline. His backup with only a few games under his belt had a better rating than any playoff game Andy has played in.

(10-07-2017, 05:10 PM)Stonyhands Wrote: I already know Andy’s stats as far as wins and losses goes in the playoffs.  I want to know what his Rating is in playoff games and prime time.  Unless you don’t think how a QB performs matters to a team’s success or failure.  

What the Hell does any of what Andy does matter if Andy’s percentage of terrible games in the playoffs is 100%.  Fact is that some QBs have what it takes when it matters most and Andy’s career speaks volumes to that.  

It’s one thing if Andy had a good playoff game and the defense let him down but that’s never happened.  Hell since Andy has been a Bengal the closest we’ve been to winning a playoff game was with Andy on the sideline.  His backup with only a few games under his belt had a better rating than any playoff game Andy has played in.

You quoted but didn't answer. You deflected.

According to your premise of playoff wins and primetime wins who is better Ben Roethlisberger or Aaron Rodgers?

Fact is before Andy Dalton the Bengals barely even got a chance to see playoffs.

(10-07-2017, 02:17 PM)Stonyhands Wrote: What’s the percentages for Andy if you count only prime time games and playoff games?  I’m pretty sure every QB you compared him with has done something Andy has not/ possibly cannot, which is win a playoff game.

If you want to make the 1,527th thread about Andy's prime time and playoff performances, feel free.

This thread is specifically addressing the notion that Dalton has more bad games than other QBs. That's. It.

Also, I'll say it yet again...If you have a QB you want him compared to, I'll pull up the stats for ya. 

Ease up on the personal attacks and calling posts "stupid". If you can't debate without insults, the posts will be deleted.