(05-26-2015, 09:45 AM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: Good thing it is only his 5th season in the league.  Most QBs improve the more they play.

Most good QBs don't have the second worse passer rating of their career in their 4th year starting while maintaining a career 85. I know, injuries happened, understandable, but throwing 17 INT in a reduced role is just unacceptable. I think that most good QBs also don't have a career 57.8 rating in the playoffs with less than 900 yards and a 1-6 TD/INT ratio in 4 games. I'm sure there are exceptions to this, but in general I don't think most QBs that end up having a great career usually look this mediocre.

People want to bring up that the defense shit the bed in the playoffs as well, and I completely agree...but at least they were usually damn good in the regular season. We had a top 10 defense for 3 of Andy's 4 years.

I will promise you that more people would cut Andy slack if he was a consensus top 5 or top 10 QB in the regular season, even if he had some blunders in the playoffs. I know that he would still have plenty of critics, but I guarantee that he would be given a break by a lot of the "haters" if he was more than ol' Average Andy from September - January every year.

With that said, I believe in Andy in 2015. I don't agree with the people saying that as long as Andy is here that there's no way this team can succeed. If he gets hot at the right time, this team could be very dangerous. The only problem is that Andy hasn't shown much to make any of us think he can go on a streak like October 2013 when it really counts. People bring up that month a lot on here, but he never did anything like that beforehand and he still has yet to replicate it since. I'm sure I can find some crappy QBs of the past that had 1 hot month of their career, and I doubt many of the uber-Andy-homers would be propping those guys up because of it. I don't want to downplay what Andy did because it was definitely impressive, but how impressive is it if it doesn't happen again? Joe Flacco gets respect around the league because of the way he's learned to turn his game up in the playoffs. I don't think many people would be so impressed with him had he gone on his streaks in October instead.

There are things about Andy that make me excited for 2015, but at the same time, the criticism and skepticism is absolutely warranted. He's such a polarizing figure, and I doubt many other teams' fanbases have these kinds of discussions about their QB on a daily basis. I think that right there proves that he clearly isn't a great or an awful QB, at least 99% of us should be able to agree on that.

(05-26-2015, 10:10 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Most good QBs don't have the second worse passer rating of their career in their 4th year starting while maintaining a career 85. I know, injuries happened, understandable, but throwing 17 INT in a reduced role is just unacceptable. I think that most good QBs also don't have a career 57.8 rating in the playoffs with less than 900 yards and a 1-6 TD/INT ratio in 4 games. I'm sure there are exceptions to this, but in general I don't think most QBs that end up having a great career usually look this mediocre.

People want to bring up that the defense shit the bed in the playoffs as well, and I completely agree...but at least they were usually damn good in the regular season. We had a top 10 defense for 3 of Andy's 4 years.

I will promise you that more people would cut Andy slack if he was a consensus top 5 or top 10 QB in the regular season, even if he had some blunders in the playoffs. I know that he would still have plenty of critics, but I guarantee that he would be given a break by a lot of the "haters" if he was more than ol' Average Andy from September - January every year.

With that said, I believe in Andy in 2015. I don't agree with the people saying that as long as Andy is here that there's no way this team can succeed. If he gets hot at the right time, this team could be very dangerous. The only problem is that Andy hasn't shown much to make any of us think he can go on a streak like October 2013 when it really counts. People bring up that month a lot on here, but he never did anything like that beforehand and he still has yet to replicate it since. I'm sure I can find some crappy QBs of the past that had 1 hot month of their career, and I doubt many of the uber-Andy-homers would be propping those guys up because of it. I don't want to downplay what Andy did because it was definitely impressive, but how impressive is it if it doesn't happen again? Joe Flacco gets respect around the league because of the way he's learned to turn his game up in the playoffs. I don't think many people would be so impressed with him had he gone on his streaks in October instead.

There are things about Andy that make me excited for 2015, but at the same time, the criticism and skepticism is absolutely warranted. He's such a polarizing figure, and I doubt many other teams' fanbases have these kinds of discussions about their QB on a daily basis. I think that right there proves that he clearly isn't a great or an awful QB, at least 99% of us should be able to agree on that.

Just an overall statement to your post...NO, most QBs with Andy's skillset do not even make the playoffs...that is the point...Leading back to the argument of who is the magical QB that 1. Is available...2. Is better than what we have in Dalton....QBs like Luck, Brady, Manning, Rodgers and so on do not grow on trees...Dalton is what we have at this time....We cannot just go out and get a QB that is guaranteed to be better, it does not work that way....I have asked this question a million times....Please name a QB that is available and better than Dalton that could come to the Bengals and start tomorrow? The problem is that QB does not exist....I am not supporting Dalton, I am just looking at the other side of the coin....

I will name one that could be available next year if he does not sign an extension...Philip Rivers...but I doubt that the Chargers let him walk

(05-26-2015, 08:18 AM)t3r3e3 Wrote: The problem with the "placed on shoulders" argument is we're not talking about a rookie QB here, or a career backup.  Dalton has been a starter for four years in the NFL.  Shouldn't he be expected to carry the burden as a veteran starter playing the most important position in football?  Instead, we talk of marginalizing  his influence on the game flow.  Why?  Because he's never shown he could handle it in the most crucial situations.  The problem is those are exactly the types of situations the Bengals will find themselves in if they make the Playoffs or expect to win and advance.  Andy has failed miserably every time he gets those chances.

Same as above...Please name the QB to replace him...I will await your answer...I almost put money on it that Mariota and Winston do not have the success that Dalton has had and they were the 1 and 2 picks in this year's draft...Ohio State exposed Mariota as a one read QB that everyone knows never works in the NFL and Winston's head will probably explode in the next couple of years..

(05-26-2015, 11:43 AM)spazz70 Wrote: Same as above...Please name the QB to replace him...I will await your answer...I almost put money on it that Mariota and Winston do not have the success that Dalton has had and they were the 1 and 2 picks in this year's draft...Ohio State exposed Mariota as a one read QB that everyone knows never works in the NFL and Winston's head will probably explode in the next couple of years..

I get what you're saying a basically totally agree.

The problem with Dalton though is he has such extremes ! Every QB has bad games there's no doubt. But Andy's floor is way below just having a bad game ! He has to drastically improve that overall floor or I just don't think there's much use in keeping him.

In my mind if he bombs out again this season, we must move on, at whatever the cost.

(05-26-2015, 11:55 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I get what you're saying a basically totally agree.

The problem with Dalton though is he has such extremes ! Every QB has bad games there's no doubt. But Andy's floor is way below just having a bad game ! He has to drastically improve that overall floor or I just don't think there's much use in keeping him.

In my mind if he bombs out again this season, we must move on, at whatever the cost.

And that may be the case...he contract was structured that way...So we will see...I do not think that McAaron is the answer either..I see him as Dalton 2.0...And next year's draft class is terrible...

(05-25-2015, 11:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 25th rated would be "average" if there were around 48-52 starting NFL QBs.

Dalton is 25th rated if you're only looking at last season. Looking at his career as a whole, you'll find him ranked more towards the middle of the pack, hence the average rating.

(05-26-2015, 12:14 AM)CornerBlitz Wrote: You were insinuating that 90s mike brown never got it right. He was looking for a highly talented QB with all the physical gifts it takes to be a great QB and he failed miserably in finding one.

Wrong again. I was pointing out that Mike Brown was always looking for that strong armed QB. And I admitted to kind of always wanting the strong armed QB as well.

(05-26-2015, 11:39 AM)spazz70 Wrote: Just an overall statement to your post...NO, most QBs with Andy's skillset do not even make the playoffs...that is the point...Leading back to the argument of who is the magical QB that 1. Is available...2. Is better than what we have in Dalton....QBs like Luck, Brady, Manning, Rodgers and so on do not grow on trees...Dalton is what we have at this time....We cannot just go out and get a QB that is guaranteed to be better, it does not work that way....I have asked this question a million times....Please name a QB that is available and better than Dalton that could come to the Bengals and start tomorrow?   The problem is that QB does not exist....I am not supporting Dalton, I am just looking at the other side of the coin....

I will name one that could be available next year if he does not sign an extension...Philip Rivers...but I doubt that the Chargers let him walk

Which is exactly why I've always said that I think it's insane that some people want to just up and cut Andy yesterday. I'm not a supporter of booting Andy right now, but that doesn't mean I have to believe he's a good QB.

I would like to see the team go into a different direction at QB if Andy doesn't step it up next year. Just because I can't name a specific player that you deem as an upgrade doesn't mean that I'm not allowed to want Andy potentially replaced in the future. If there are no better options available next year, and if I don't think the risk would be worth taking with a guy that isn't a "sure thing", then maybe I'll be okay with Andy again in 2016. I just don't think I will be if he is still the same mediocre QB after 2015. We were doomed to hell and a 0-16 season and we drafted this guy in the second round that hasn't been terrible so far in his career. Why can't we try to do that again if he doesn't work out? If he can't get above mediocre in 5 years, I'd be okay with taking a slight risk in the draft.

People act like it's ridiculous to want to take risks unless you're guaranteed to get Andrew Luck or Aaron Rodgers on your team. I just want out of the first round of the playoffs, QB is a very important position, and Andy may not be the guy to take us there. For me and my opinion, 2015 is a big make or break year for Andy. I don't want him booted onto the streets as of right now, but the risk may be worth it after this season depending on how things go down. Hopefully Andy lights it up with a 100+ passer rating and we win the Super Bowl so that all of these conversations won't even matter.

(05-26-2015, 10:10 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Most good QBs don't have the second worse passer rating of their career in their 4th year starting while maintaining a career 85.

It happened to Peyton Manning. His 4th year starting was his 2nd worse passer rating of his career up 'til that point. Manning's career passer rating after his 4th season? 85.1

Was Peyton not a good QB after his 4th year?

(05-26-2015, 10:10 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I know, injuries happened, understandable, but throwing 17 INT in a reduced role is just unacceptable.

His role was not reduced. The Bengals went with a different philosophy (they wanted to run more), but that doesn't mean Dalton's role was reduced. He still had to read defenses and was still tasked with changing the play if the defense matched up too well with what the play was called.

Plus, according to NFL.com, the Bengals called 507 passing plays and 492 rushing plays. So, even if you want to equate Dalton throwing less passes as a reduced role, he still was called to pass more than the running backs were called to run (remember some of those runs were Dalton runs).

With that said, 17 INTs is inexcusable, in my mind, no matter the role of the QB. DON'T TURN THE BALL OVER!

(05-26-2015, 10:10 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I think that most good QBs also don't have a career 57.8 rating in the playoffs with less than 900 yards and a 1-6 TD/INT ratio in 4 games. I'm sure there are exceptions to this, but in general I don't think most QBs that end up having a great career usually look this mediocre.

And has been demonstrated time and again, many QBs have started off with poor (and poorer than Dalton's) playoff stats and yet have won a Super Bowl. Flacco is the first that comes to mind.

(05-26-2015, 10:10 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I will promise you that more people would cut Andy slack if he was a consensus top 5 or top 10 QB in the regular season, even if he had some blunders in the playoffs. I know that he would still have plenty of critics, but I guarantee that he would be given a break by a lot of the "haters" if he was more than ol' Average Andy from September - January every year.

I can agree with this, plus add that if Andy was also like your "prototypical QB." If Andy had the cannon arm and was super athletic and was drafted in the 1st round, then I would think he'd also be given more latitude.

(05-26-2015, 10:10 AM)djs7685 Wrote: With that said, I believe in Andy in 2015. I don't agree with the people saying that as long as Andy is here that there's no way this team can succeed. If he gets hot at the right time, this team could be very dangerous. The only problem is that Andy hasn't shown much to make any of us think he can go on a streak like October 2013 when it really counts. People bring up that month a lot on here, but he never did anything like that beforehand and he still has yet to replicate it since. I'm sure I can find some crappy QBs of the past that had 1 hot month of their career, and I doubt many of the uber-Andy-homers would be propping those guys up because of it. I don't want to downplay what Andy did because it was definitely impressive, but how impressive is it if it doesn't happen again? Joe Flacco gets respect around the league because of the way he's learned to turn his game up in the playoffs. I don't think many people would be so impressed with him had he gone on his streaks in October instead.

Let's not forget, that the first 6 games last year, Andy was pretty consistent (his other big criticism). He wasn't flashy, but he was getting the job done. That's one of the reasons I have hope that Andy can turn around his playoff performances.

(05-26-2015, 11:55 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: In my mind if he bombs out again this season, we must move on, at whatever the cost.

And, as a Dalton defender, I'll be right there next to you asking for him to be replaced.

(05-26-2015, 10:10 AM)djs7685 Wrote: People want to bring up that the defense shit the bed in the playoffs as well, and I completely agree...but at least they were usually damn good in the regular season. We had a top 10 defense for 3 of Andy's 4 years.

Hahahaha that made me laugh. How hypocritical.

(05-26-2015, 12:05 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I would like to see the team go into a different direction at QB if Andy doesn't step it up next year.

And this is the reason for this thread. I'm at the stage that, while I think Andy CAN get the job done, I'm beginning to tire of waiting for him to do it. If Andy continues his average level of play (or worse), then I'll be ready to move on regardless of if it's with a known, better quantity or not.

It's just that deep down, I'm wishing that Pryor gets a chance and ends up being that guy. Please note: that is a singular wish. It's not that I first wish that Pryor gets a chance. No, I only want him to get a chance IF he ends up being a great QB. And I find myself wishing this because of Dalton's inconsistent play.

(05-26-2015, 12:21 PM)PhilHos Wrote: It happened to Peyton Manning. His 4th year starting was his 2nd worse passer rating of his career up 'til that point. Manning's career passer rating after his 4th season? 85.1

Was Peyton not a good QB after his 4th year?

And has been demonstrated time and again, many QBs have started off with poor (and poorer than Dalton's) playoff stats and yet have won a Super Bowl. Flacco is the first that comes to mind.

Like I said, there will definitely be exceptions. I believe Tom Brady may even fall into that as well, statistically in the regular season at least. It sucks because there's no way to really debate certain aspects of someone's game other than with stats, but I don't think there was any question that either Brady or Manning were destined for greatness even if their statistics didn't reflect that. That's just opinion, but I seem to remember it being the general consensus of pretty much anyone involved in the game of football whether it was players, fans, or the media. Statistically yes, there will be exceptions to what I said though when it comes to their passer ratings, absolutely.

(05-26-2015, 12:21 PM)PhilHos Wrote: His role was not reduced. The Bengals went with a different philosophy (they wanted to run more), but that doesn't mean Dalton's role was reduced. He still had to read defenses and was still tasked with changing the play if the defense matched up too well with what the play was called.

Plus, according to NFL.com, the Bengals called 507 passing plays and 492 rushing plays. So, even if you want to equate Dalton throwing less passes as a reduced role, he still was called to pass more than the running backs were called to run (remember some of those runs were Dalton runs).

With that said, 17 INTs is inexcusable, in my mind, no matter the role of the QB. DON'T TURN THE BALL OVER!

Yeah I meant reduced role as in many less attempts compared to previous years. He had the least attempts of his career last season and 100+ less than 2013. I'm sure everybody should agree that 17 INTs were just too many last year.

I do believe the passing plays v rushing plays that you provided are a bit misleading to people that don't know how the average NFL offense is run. I don't think it's a very telling statistic unless your team has an extreme difference like the 2014 Raiders. They were dead last in rushing attempts on the year but #4 in passing attempts per game. Now THAT is a big difference. Most teams are going to hover somewhere around 50%+ with a few more passes than runs per game. That's just how the NFL is now. I guess I shouldn't say it's misleading because I'm not sure what you were trying to say with that and I don't want to put words in your mouth. To clarify my earlier points, I wasn't trying to say "reduced role" as in the coaches were trying to keep the ball out of his hands or anything if that's what you thought I meant, I was only pointing out why 17 INTs was such a big deal to me because he had over 100 less attempts than 2013 with only 3 less INT.

(05-26-2015, 12:21 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Let's not forget, that the first 6 games last year, Andy was pretty consistent (his other big criticism). He wasn't flashy, but he was getting the job done. That's one of the reasons I have hope that Andy can turn around his playoff performances.

For sure, I was actually very happy with Andy early last year. He wasn't real flashy throwing all over the field like he was in October 2013 though. I personally wouldn't complain if he kept up the efficient and quality performances of weeks 1-6 (games 1-5. game 6 was the IND game that I'm sure we'd all like to forget) in 2014. He only had a sub-90 rating in 1 of the first 5 games, and went 3 of the 5 without an INT. He wasn't on pace for a million yards or TDs, but he was playing like I've been wanting him to for years now. Give me 2014 week 1-6 Andy for at least the majority of a season and in the playoffs and I'll be a happy camper!

(05-26-2015, 12:35 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Hahahaha that made me laugh. How hypocritical.

You should probably know what that word means before using it.

How is that hypocritical, even in the slightest?

I think you wanted to be an asshole so bad that you intentionally missed the entire point of me bringing up the defense being top 10 in the regular season for 3 of Andy's 4 years.

I was trying to say that Andy would be cut slack by both the media and the fanbase if he were a consensus top 10 QB in the regular season but then played poorly in the playoffs. Do you honestly disagree with that??? I'm not saying that he would have zero critics, but I guarantee that there would be less criticism thrown his direction. I don't know how anybody could believe otherwise. I thought I made my points clearly and objectively, I don't need some Andy nuthugger laughing at something taken out of context.

(05-26-2015, 10:10 AM)djs7685 Wrote: People want to bring up that the defense shit the bed in the playoffs as well, and I completely agree...but at least they were usually damn good in the regular season. We had a top 10 defense for 3 of Andy's 4 years.

See, here's the thing: shouldn't the defense be bashed MORE for shitting the bed in the playoffs? I mean, you've got a guy who is average and arguably slightly above and below average (in other words, an argument can be made for him being slightly above average and an argument can be made for him being slightly below average) and you've got an elite defense.

In the playoffs, both your average QB and elite defense play like the 30th ranked. I would think that the element that was higher ranked would be more criticized. Yet, somehow it's not.

Yes, I know a lot of people bring this argument up as a defense of Andy, but forget about that for a second. Shouldn't the defense be receiving MORE flak for being MORE of a let down in the playoffs? (This isn't an accusation I'm leveling at you, djs, FYI)

(05-26-2015, 12:47 PM)PhilHos Wrote: See, here's the thing: shouldn't the defense be bashed MORE for shitting the bed in the playoffs? I mean, you've got a guy who is average and arguably slightly above and below average (in other words, an argument can be made for him being slightly above average and an argument can be made for him being slightly below average) and you've got an elite defense.

In the playoffs, both your average QB and elite defense play like the 30th ranked. I would think that the element that was higher ranked would be more criticized. Yet, somehow it's not.

Yes, I know a lot of people bring this argument up as a defense of Andy, but forget about that for a second. Shouldn't the defense be receiving MORE flak for being MORE of a let down in the playoffs? (This isn't an accusation I'm leveling at you, djs, FYI)

In a way I understand this line of thinking. But at the same time, personally, I'm going to cut somebody slack that is proven to be great at what they do. The Bengals defense was a proven commodity that they were year in and year out a great squad. Was it VERY disappointing when they shit the bed? YES! I just think some fans and the media cut them slack because A.) They're not the QB (easiest target), and B.) They've proven to be great

I wasn't trying to make the statement to excuse the defense as much as I was trying to explain that Andy would probably get off the hook by more people if he was a top 5/10 QB throughout his career. He would definitely still have people bashing him, no doubt, but I know there would be more people like me out there that would give him a break because he has proven to be so good.

(05-26-2015, 12:44 PM)djs7685 Wrote: You should probably know what that word means before using it.

How is that hypocritical, even in the slightest?

I think you wanted to be an asshole so bad that you intentionally missed the entire point of me bringing up the defense being top 10 in the regular season for 3 of Andy's 4 years.

I was trying to say that Andy would be cut slack by both the media and the fanbase if he were a consensus top 10 QB in the regular season but then played poorly in the playoffs. Do you honestly disagree with that??? I'm not saying that he would have zero critics, but I guarantee that there would be less criticism thrown his direction. I don't know how anybody could believe otherwise. I thought I made my points clearly and objectively, I don't need some Andy nuthugger laughing at something taken out of context.

I'm pretty sure the offense was top 10 under Dalton even though the run game was bad. Nice try though.

(05-26-2015, 12:56 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: I'm pretty sure the offense was top 10 under Dalton even though the run game was bad. Nice try though.

In which universe was Andy a consensus top 5/10 QB in the league in at least 3 of the last 4 years?

I'm sorry, but I must have missed that since the point of my post was that he wasn't. Are you intentionally just trying to be combative instead of comprehending my point to this?

(05-26-2015, 12:43 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Like I said, there will definitely be exceptions. I believe Tom Brady may even fall into that as well, statistically in the regular season at least. It sucks because there's no way to really debate certain aspects of someone's game other than with stats, but I don't think there was any question that either Brady or Manning were destined for greatness even if their statistics didn't reflect that. That's just opinion, but I seem to remember it being the general consensus of pretty much anyone involved in the game of football whether it was players, fans, or the media. Statistically yes, there will be exceptions to what I said though when it comes to their passer ratings, absolutely.

Are they exceptions, though? Manning's worst season (in terms of passer rating) was his 4th. Brady's was his 10th. Brees, 3rd. Roethlisberger, 4th. Flacco, 7th.

(05-26-2015, 12:43 PM)djs7685 Wrote: To clarify my earlier points, I wasn't trying to say "reduced role" as in the coaches were trying to keep the ball out of his hands or anything if that's what you thought I meant,

No, I figured that's what you were trying to say that's why I think it better to term it as a "change in philosphy".

(05-26-2015, 12:43 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I personally wouldn't complain if he kept up the efficient and quality performances of weeks 1-6 (games 1-5. game 6 was the IND game that I'm sure we'd all like to forget) in 2014.

Yeah, meant first 6 weeks, not games.

(05-26-2015, 01:05 PM)djs7685 Wrote:

In which universe was Andy a consensus top 5/10 QB in the league in at least 3 of the last 4 years?

I'm sorry, but I must have missed that since the point of my post was that he wasn't. Are you intentionally just trying to be combative instead of comprehending my point to this?

A consensus to something actually doesn't make it true. If that was the case then the earth would be flat, because back in the day everyone thought it was flat.

(05-26-2015, 12:51 PM)djs7685 Wrote: In a way I understand this line of thinking. But at the same time, personally, I'm going to cut somebody slack that is proven to be great at what they do. The Bengals defense was a proven commodity that they were year in and year out a great squad. Was it VERY disappointing when they shit the bed? YES! I just think some fans and the media cut them slack because A.) They're not the QB (easiest target), and B.) They've proven to be great

But how great are they if they continue to shit the bed in the playoffs?

I just don't understand why better players are held to lower standards. It should be the opposite. Think of it this way: you have 2 kids, twins, and they take all the same classes. One is always getting A's the other is always getting C's. On their final exam, they both get Fs. According to some Bengals fans, you should ream out the C student and punish them severely and the A student should just be like, "Meh," Seriously? I just don't get it.