It was a tough game tonight no doubt but it's also coming off a short week. Also we just played a pretty physical Chargers team so all in all it was going to be a tough game for us. On top of the that missing Geno doesn't help as well as Daniels.

(09-18-2020, 01:23 AM)J24 Wrote: It was a tough game tonight no doubt but it's also coming off a short week. Also we just played a pretty physical Chargers team so all in all it was going to be a tough game for us. On top of the that missing Geno doesn't help as well as Daniels.

Didn't the Browns also play on a short week, after facing a better team than the Chargers?

(09-18-2020, 01:44 AM)Bengalholic Wrote: Didn't the Browns also play on a short week, after facing a better team than the Chargers?

Yes but it is much easier for a home team to play on a short week then a road team.

(09-18-2020, 01:48 AM)J24 Wrote: Yes but it is much easier for a home team to play on a short week then a road team.

Sorry brother, but that would be a more legit excuse if the game wasn't in-state. 

(09-18-2020, 01:51 AM)Bengalholic Wrote: Sorry brother, but that would be a more legit excuse if the game wasn't in-state.

That has nothing to do with it.

(09-18-2020, 01:55 AM)J24 Wrote: That has nothing to do with it.

So, tell me why this week was 'much easier' for the Browns than it was the Bengals?

Good point. Two teams had to play on a short week this week. One of those teams had to go on the road for the first time all offseason.

Much needed long break coming up hopefully getting some guys healthy and regaining our composure.

Come back out better next time.

I'd say this was pretty much the best case scenario for an away Thursday game. We played against a bad team at home, and our opponent was an instate, below average, definitely overhyped team, coming off a loss against a much better team at their opponents stadium.

There is no need for excuses... short week, refs, etc, etc..

It was a 2 win team that never addressed the O-line.... they are still going to be bad till they fix the line and fix the run defense.

(09-18-2020, 02:21 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: There is no need for excuses... short week, refs, etc, etc..

It was a 2 win team that never addressed the O-line.... they are still going to be bad till they fix the line and fix the run defense.

They did address there line though they added a first RD LT in Williams and signed RG in XSF!

(09-18-2020, 01:58 AM)Bengalholic Wrote: So, tell me why this week was 'much easier' for the Browns than it was the Bengals?

They were at home

(09-18-2020, 02:24 AM)J24 Wrote: They did address there line though they added a first RD LT in Williams and signed RG in XSF!

The got Williams back from injury and XSF was not a highly sought after lineman. That isn't addressing the line!

Address the line would have been signing a top RT to push Hart off the team, using a higher pick on an interior line guy. Instead, the signed an after thought at G, and have a dumpster fire standing at RT for the second year in a row.

(09-18-2020, 02:28 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: The got Williams back from injury and XSF was not a highly sought after lineman. That isn't addressing the line!

Address the line would have been signing a top RT to push Hart off the team, using a higher pick on an interior line guy. Instead, the signed an after thought at G, and have a dumpster fire standing at RT for the second year in a row.

Don’t forget drafting ST players in the 3rd and 4th rounds instead of OL

(09-18-2020, 02:28 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: The got Williams back from injury and XSF was not a highly sought after lineman. That isn't addressing the line!

Address the line would have been signing a top RT to push Hart off the team, using a higher pick on an interior line guy. Instead, the signed an after thought at G, and have a dumpster fire standing at RT for the second year in a row.

So adding to new starters isn't addressing the offensive line? I agree they didn't do enough but they did address it.

(09-18-2020, 02:29 AM)Bengals731 Wrote: Don’t forget drafting ST players in the 3rd and 4th rounds instead of OL

They drafted two starting future LBers with those picks though which was also a need.

(09-18-2020, 02:39 AM)J24 Wrote: So adding to new starters isn't addressing the offensive line? I agree they didn't do enough but they did address it.

They drafted two starting future LBers with those picks though which was also a need.

When you have as many holes as this team had, you have to be smarter with the draft. Why not trade out of the top pick at round 3, move back, and get another pick? Still should be able to get a starting LB and the extra pick goes to the O-line?

I love Higgins, and love the pick, but why not go O-line in 2 and get the luxury WR pick later?

It is just bad management... and it has been that way in Cincy for decades.

(09-18-2020, 03:05 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: When you have as many holes as this team had, you have to be smarter with the draft. Why not trade out of the top pick at round 3, move back, and get another pick? Still should be able to get a starting LB and the extra pick goes to the O-line?

I love Higgins, and love the pick, but why not go O-line in 2 and get the luxury WR pick later?

It is just bad management... and it has been that way in Cincy for decades.

WR wasn't a luxury though Ross and Green contracts are up after this season. Also they had Wilson has a high 2nd RD pick they were not confident he would be there much longer in the third.

What they should have done was sign RT in free agency over wasting money on Wayne's at CB.

(09-18-2020, 01:44 AM)Bengalholic Wrote: Didn't the Browns also play on a short week, after facing a better team than the Chargers?

Yeah but this amp goes to 11....    

(09-18-2020, 03:12 AM)J24 Wrote: WR wasn't a luxury though Ross and Green contracts are up after this season. Also they had Wilson has a high 2nd RD pick they were not confident he would be there much longer in the third.

What they should have done was sign RT in free agency over wasting money on Wayne's at CB.

Any option was better then putting Hart at RT for another season.

I said it before the draft, and got yelled at a lot for it, I'd have traded out of number 1, this team has too many holes to fill in one off-season and this O-line is going to have a negative impact on the Burrow long term. It sucks.

(09-18-2020, 03:12 AM)J24 Wrote: WR wasn't a luxury though Ross and Green contracts are up after this season. Also they had Wilson has a high 2nd RD pick they were not confident he would be there much longer in the third.

What they should have done was sign RT in free agency over wasting money on Wayne's at CB.

I think your excuse about traveling is pretty weak, but this I absolutely agree with. To think where else we could have spent all that money we gave an average CB is pretty frustrating.

(09-18-2020, 03:25 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: Any option was better then putting Hart at RT for another season.

I said it before the draft, and got yelled at a lot for it, I'd have traded out of number 1, this team has too many holes to fill in one off-season and this O-line is going to have a negative impact on the Burrow long term. It sucks.

Trading a #1 pick is a luxury only teams with a franchise QB have. And those teams usually aren’t picking #1 if they have one. No, they did the right thing by taking Burrow. He looks the part. But now if they’re serious about succeeding they need to build around him. Go out and get the best OL FA(‘s) on the market this offseason. Draft OL early and often in the next couple drafts.

You can absolutely build around Burrow and Mixon on the offensive side of the ball. Jonah has a ton of potential (even if it’s been ugly so far), Michael Jordan is probably at least serviceable, and Hopkins is solid. We just need a RT & RG.

And on defense some ***** pass rushers FFS!!!