(08-19-2019, 10:59 AM)Bengalitis Wrote: You should never rely on a kicker. Even if you think you have the best kicker in the NFL. They will eventually flop when it counts.

100% disagree.  I've seen so many games the Ravens won because Justin Tucker made a couple of clutch FGs. Kickers are actually really important. They're the difference between points and no points when you're on the opponents ~30 yard line.

(08-16-2019, 09:36 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: When the new dude kicked one deep, you could see Simmons saying something to him on the sideline and he wasn't real happy. I think the coaches want them to kick it high and to the goal line, giving the kicking team time to get down and drop them inside the 20. 

I saw this as well.  I get practicing but I will never understand that mentality.  Having the other team take it at the 25 but you avoid the most injury plagued play in the game seems like a fair trade off to me.  

(08-16-2019, 10:32 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I'm not getting all geeked up over a 57 yard kick. He has to be accurate and consistent from 37 first.

Agreed, but that looked like it would have been good from 65.  And that was on grass in Washington DC.  That's stupid distance and it wasn't on turf and it wasn't thin air or wind-aided.  Hope he can demonstrate more consistency.  

(08-18-2019, 10:50 PM)Nately120 Wrote: It's like 3 losing seasons in a row makes people want to change things, or something.

So lets start punting on third down.

Change is the answer to everything, right?  Doesn't matter what.  Just change.

(08-18-2019, 05:29 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Believe Elliott kicked like a 62 or 63 yarder in one of those Playoff games to win it.

Could be wrong but i remember something of this sort.

That was a regular season game.

Elliott missed 2 XPs in the '07 postseason including his first one in the Super Bowl.  That miss led to the Eagles going for 2 after two tds and failing both times.  If it had been a closer game those three missing points could have cost them the victory.

Last year both Bullock and Elliott were 2-5 from 50+.  On the rest of their attempts Bullock was better (94.4 to 92.3).  Bullock was also better than Elliott in XP% (95.1 to 94.3)

No one shits on Bengal players more than some Bengal "fans".

(08-20-2019, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So lets start punting on third down.

Change is the answer to everything, right?  Doesn't matter what.  Just change.

Maybe not that silliness, but going for it more on 4th down, going for 2, and just being more aggressive in general could be a welcome change.

But I know you don’t even believe Marvin was too conservative, so I’m clearly wasting my time...

(08-20-2019, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So lets start punting on third down.

Change is the answer to everything, right?  Doesn't matter what.  Just change.

I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying I can see why people want to change things up.  I can also see why people like the idea of waiting until a specific position is our most glaring need before changing anything, too.

We are on 3 losing seasons in a row, so the whole "stay the course" mentality is bound to erode. 

A big leg on a kicker is nice but I will always side with accuracy.

Fat Randy is damn near automatic from 40 and under. I will always side with taking those points.
Sure he is gonna be unreliable from 50+ but what team plans on 50+ yrd kicks being the norm.


The most common kicks are 30-45yrds.
Id rather have the guy that crushes those and misses some crazy boots or just play the field position game than a guy than can hit from 60 but you are rolling the dice from 30-45.

(08-20-2019, 12:13 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying I can see why people want to change things up.  I can also see why people like the idea of waiting until a specific position is our most glaring need before changing anything, too.

We are on 3 losing seasons in a row, so the whole "stay the course" mentality is bound to erode. 

Adding 2-3 quality upgrades in free agency would have been a welcome change.

(08-20-2019, 12:39 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Adding 2-3 quality upgrades in free agency would have been a welcome change.

That's the thing...I'm not saying we're doomed but this notion that we are following the new trend in the NFL by hiring a young offensive minded HC is a start, but we're leaving out the aggressive FA and trade moves the Rams/Bears/Chiefs made.  We don't seem to be as "all in" as people might hope.

Fingers crossed, and all.

(08-20-2019, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So lets start punting on third down.

Change is the answer to everything, right?  Doesn't matter what.  Just change.

Why do you hate change so much?

(08-20-2019, 12:11 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Maybe not that silliness, but going for it more on 4th down, going for 2, and just being more aggressive in general could be a welcome change.

But I know you don’t even believe Marvin was too conservative, so I’m clearly wasting my time...

You're wasting your time because the post(er) you replied to is the king of going to the extreme and making shit up. 

(08-20-2019, 02:10 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Why do you hate change so much?

change for the sake of change isn't always the answer.. sometimes it takes you in the wrong direction....

(08-20-2019, 12:30 PM)Junglejuice Wrote: A big leg on a kicker is nice but I will always side with accuracy.

Fat Randy is damn near automatic from 40 and under.  I will always side with taking those points.
Sure he is gonna be unreliable from 50+ but what team plans on 50+ yrd kicks being the norm.


The most common kicks are 30-45yrds.
Id rather have the guy that crushes those and misses some crazy boots or just play the field position game than a guy than can hit from 60 but you are rolling the dice from 30-45.

Bullock is a good, solid kicker and there's really no need to replace him at this point. 

(08-20-2019, 12:43 PM)Nately120 Wrote: That's the thing...I'm not saying we're doomed but this notion that we are following the new trend in the NFL by hiring a young offensive minded HC is a start, but we're leaving out the aggressive FA and trade moves the Rams/Bears/Chiefs made.  We don't seem to be as "all in" as people might hope.

Fingers crossed, and all.

Right. Health and a new coaching staff getting something out of some of our underachievers is our hope.

But, we arguably lost our 2 best offensive lineman. Green is hurt. So health is looking like it won't be there. Ross has also been hurt all camp.

We just put soo much pressure on our draft and getting production out of the guys. It's a model that I can't see working long term.

People see the Rams going from a bad team to a good team when they hired McVay, but they added guys too. It wasn't McVay and status quo.

From their 4-12 team, they added McVay, Barwin, Sullivan at Center who was good that year, Kayvon Webster, Whitworth, Woods, plus some decent draft guys. And they traded for Watkins.

IF you added 3-4 upgrades to our roster...we'd be in great shape! Whitworth has been THE BEST Tackle in the NFL. Imagine if we added that and say a quality LB.

(08-20-2019, 02:13 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: change for the sake of change isn't always the answer.. sometimes it takes you in the wrong direction....

I'm not advocating change for the sake of change. I'm saying, don't be afraid to upgrade if you (the coach/fo) think you have something better. EX: Finley for Dalton. If you think Finley's upside is enough that any growing pains are worth it for a greater reward later, make the change. Don't stick with a guy just because he's been solid for a few years. That goes for any position. 

If it fails, move on and try something new. Just don't stay status quo, because '90s. 

People were happy with '11-'15 because there were a bunch of winning seasons and a lot of Sundays to enjoy along the way. But it kept ending the same way. After a while, i get tired of the same ending and the fun Sundays are less fun when you have an expected outcome.

(08-20-2019, 02:19 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Right. Health and a new coaching staff getting something out of some of our underachievers is our hope.

But, we arguably lost our 2 best offensive lineman. Green is hurt. So health is looking like it won't be there. Ross has also been hurt all camp.

We just put soo much pressure on our draft and getting production out of the guys. It's a model that I can't see working long term.

People see the Rams going from a bad team to a good team when they hired McVay, but they added guys too. It wasn't McVay and status quo.

From their 4-12 team, they added McVay, Barwin, Sullivan at Center who was good that year, Kayvon Webster, Whitworth, Woods, plus some decent draft guys. And they traded for Watkins.

IF you added 3-4 upgrades to our roster...we'd be in great shape! Whitworth has been THE BEST Tackle in the NFL. Imagine if we added that and say a quality LB.

Yeah, I get it...it's fandom and we can't see the future and all.  But we are high on a new HC and philosophy changing things up...meanwhille the Browns have many overhauls and (mostly) logical additions and changes and we're like "Meh...still the Browns."

(08-20-2019, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So lets start punting on third down.

Change is the answer to everything, right?  Doesn't matter what.  Just change.

You prefer doing the same stupid thing over and over again and expecting a different result? 

(08-22-2019, 07:38 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: You prefer doing the same stupid thing over and over again and expecting a different result? 

No.  I prefer making changes based on logical reasons instead of just change for the sake of change.

How about you?

(08-22-2019, 09:17 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  I prefer making changes based on logical reasons instead of just change for the sake of change.

How about you?

"For the sake of change" doesn't make a lot of sense.  What has this team done in recent years to not warrant significant change?  That isn't logical?