(11-06-2020, 04:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I believe in defending truth.

Classic.  There could be a sticky thread of how many posts you have created referring to your opinion as the "truth".  

Only in your head, dear Fred.  Only in your head.  

(11-06-2020, 05:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The debate started with a comment that Burrow is a QB who could win a Super Bowl.

I responded that if what he has shown so far proves he could win a Super Bowl then 95% of the QBs in the league could win a Super Bowl.

If you agree with that then we have no debate.

And this is where you are miles off base.  At least on planet Earth...

(11-06-2020, 06:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.

But you are talking about pretending what he will do in the future while i am talking about what he has done right now.

I agree he may develop into a very good NFL QB in the future, but he has not shown it on the filed yet.  He has never even played in a "big game" in the NFL.

His second start in the NFL is a road game, on a short week, against the Browns.  He goes 37/61 for 316 yards, 3 TDs and 0 INTs.  Your precious passer rating index had him at a 91, but he still kept coming back despite no protection, no rushing attack, and a very tough defense.  The Bengals defense got Cleveland to put ONCE the entire game.  L 30-35.

His sixth start in the NFL had him with a 21 point lead, on the road, against a first place team with the #1 defense in the NFL (at that time) where he goes 25/39 for 313 yards and 1 INT (at the end of the game, down four points).  His defense couldn't stop Indy one time in the second half.  L 27-31.

His last start, against another first place team, in a game with 30 MPH winds, he goes 26/37 with 249 yards and 2 TDs.  

If these were not big games, then I don't know what you are referring to.  Playoff games?  You are probably right.  He should have won a playoff game by now, in week 8 of his rookie season.

Again, your line of "if what he has done so far proves he can win a super bowl, then so can 95% of QBs in the league" is so crazy off base it barely warrants response, but you doubled down on it.  You have not seen what Burrow is doing this year from 95% of the QBs in this league.  You have maybe seen it from 5% of them, and those are the ones that will likely be hoisting a Lombardi.  

(11-07-2020, 10:02 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: If these were not big games, then I don't know what you are referring to. 

Of course you don't.

Because you never heard any talk about winning prime time games, or games against the Steelers, or games with playoff implications.

Because no one here ever discussed any of those things when making claims about a QBs ability to win a Super Bowl.


 

(11-07-2020, 03:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Of course you don't.

Because you never heard any talk about winning prime time games, or games against the Steelers, or games with playoff implications.

Because no one here ever discussed any of those things when making claims about a QBs ability to win a Super Bowl.


 

Interesting joke.  I didn't realize the new rules had games that started at 1pm or were against other teams contending for playoff spots (like four of them being in first place in their respective divisions at that time).  I am glad to know that only Primetime games (where he set a record in his only one for rookie completions without an INT) and steeler games count as games to qualify for the Super Bowl. 

We are only 0-1 in those games and we have two games against pittsburgh and one of them is primetime, so I am going to assume that counts double this year?

This is awesome.  They can still qualify for the Super Bowl if they just win the two steeler games.  Thanks for the update on the new rules.  I guess I missed that memo.  

(11-08-2020, 11:55 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Interesting joke.  I didn't realize the new rules had games that started at 1pm or were against other teams contending for playoff spots (like four of them being in first place in their respective divisions at that time).  I am glad to know that only Primetime games (where he set a record in his only one for rookie completions without an INT) and steeler games count as games to qualify for the Super Bowl. 

We are only 0-1 in those games and we have two games against pittsburgh and one of them is primetime, so I am going to assume that counts double this year?

This is awesome.  They can still qualify for the Super Bowl if they just win the two steeler games.  Thanks for the update on the new rules.  I guess I missed that memo.  

You can post as many imojis as you want, but everyone here knows you are a liar if you continue to claim you "have no idea" what people are talking about here when they talk about the requirement of "winning big games" in order to judge if a QB can win a Super Bowl.

(11-06-2020, 05:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The debate started with a comment that Burrow is a QB who could win a Super Bowl.

I responded that if what he has shown so far proves he could win a Super Bowl then 95% of the QBs in the league could win a Super Bowl.

If you agree with that then we have no debate.

I think 95% of NFL QB's could win a Super Bowl and it has been shown over history. The key is having a dominant OL and dominant defense.

I think the real question is can Joe Burrow or any NFL QB take a good and not great team and carry them on their back to win a Super Bowl.

Joe Flacco is not and never was an elite QB, but he had an elite defense and he got hot at the right time and played over his head of what we have seen in his entire career.

Eli Manning got lucky also, got hot at right moments and had a stellar team around him. Also had WR bail him out with nothing short of a spectacular catch at the right moment.

A look back in history shows many good and not elite QB's who have won it all (Brad Johnson & others).

So, if you give Burrow a Raven's defense the year Flacco won it, yep no doubt Joe has already shown he could win it. If given the Bear's defense the year McMahon won the SB, yep these guys showed average to good QB's could manage a Super Bowl win.

(11-08-2020, 01:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You can post as many imojis as you want, but everyone here knows you are a liar if you continue to claim you "have no idea" what people are talking about here when they talk about the requirement of "winning big games" in order to judge if a QB can win a Super Bowl.

Right, Fred. Once again you have proven that only you know the "rules" or "requirements" of what constitutes winning big games and how that translates to being able to win a Super Bowl.  Further clams that everyone "knows I am a liar" when these are matters of opinion just provides greater evidence of your arrogance and your ignorance (a bad combination).

(11-09-2020, 09:22 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Right, Fred. Once again you have proven that only you know the "rules" or "requirements" of what constitutes winning big games and how that translates to being able to win a Super Bowl.

Actually this has nothing to do with "only me".  Instead it is about the hundreds of discussions that have taken place on this board since you joined where many people claimed that a QB could never be considered "able to win a Super Bowl" unless he had proven he could win "big games" like primetime games, games against the Steelers, or actual playoff games.

But just to be clear, you are seriously claiming that you are completely unaware of any discussions like this ever taking place here?

(11-09-2020, 11:48 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually this has nothing to do with "only me".  Instead it is about the hundreds of discussions that have taken place on this board since you joined where many people claimed that a QB could never be considered "able to win a Super Bowl" unless he had proven he could win "big games" like primetime games, games against the Steelers, or actual playoff games.

But just to be clear, you are seriously claiming that you are completely unaware of any discussions like this ever taking place here?

You can try to deflect the attention here, Fred, but you are the only one to my knowledge that asserted that 95% of NFL QBs could win a Super Bowl right now.  

(11-07-2020, 09:42 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: It makes me a radical extremist to say that Burrow is playing at a level that could win a Super Bowl?  

Right now, I see a very small list of QBs playing well enough to win a Super Bowl.  Imagine you are playing the Chiefs, since they are the defending champs.  Your defense needs a couple stops...a tipped ball INT, a pass defenses, etc. that gets the Chiefs to punt a couple times.  To beat them, you need a QB that can put up 30 on a very tough defense.  

I see the following QBs having proven that THIS year:

Mahommes
Wilson 
Rogers
Brady (albeit a little inconsistent)
Piggy 

I would put Burrow in that category right now based on the play I am witnessing.  This, despite a HORRIBLE offensive line (that is starting to improve to mediocre), a poor rushing attack, not much of a defense to speak of, Boyd and a rookie WR being his best weapons, and very questionable coaching decisions early in the season.  

He was robbed of a win against the Chargers, and the Colts, Browns (2), and Philly games were lost because his defense couldn't stop anything.  Give him HALF those games and he is sitting at 4-3-1.  So, you can point to only two wins, but I don't care who was quarterbacking our team in those situations, they would not have won those games, either.  I will further add that no QB has taken the pounding that Burrow has this year, and yet, he keeps coming after you.  

He has rejuvenated Gio.  He made Tate look like a Pro Bowler.  He is learning to manipulate the pocket with a very inconsistent lineup lining up in front of him.  He is doing it with an underperforming Green and Mixon.  

After witnessing all of this, I state that he is playing at a Super Bowl level, and that gets you to call me a radical extremist.  I guess we have different definitions of what that is as well.  

Yeah, we all know who the radical extremist is round here lol

(11-09-2020, 03:47 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: You can try to deflect the attention here, Fred, but you are the only one to my knowledge that asserted that 95% of NFL QBs could win a Super Bowl right now.  

I never said that.

All I said was that if a QB who is ranked 24th in the league and has a career winning percentage of .313 can win a Super Bowl then 95% of NFL QBs probably could also.


But you are the one trying to claim that you have no idea that most people here define "big games" as "Primetime, Playoff, or Against the Steelers" when talking about what a QB has to do in order to prove he can win a Super Bowl.

You have been here 5 years and never ever heard anything like that.

Amazing.

(11-09-2020, 06:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: All I said was that if a QB who is ranked 24th in the league and has a career winning percentage of .313 can win a Super Bowl then 95% of NFL QBs probably could also.

Quite a lot wrong with your thinking.

1.) He would need to be ranked 30th to meet your 95% mark.  And that's assuming we're going to forget everything else about I'm about to say below.

2.) You can't use his current record when people are talking about the future.  It's too small a sample size, with too poor of a roster, to apply that winning percentage to him alone.  Until you see him play for years, with different players around him, it's not fair to attatch that to Joe Burrow's skill level.

3.) I don't know if this is a new concept to you, but people usually project rookies to improve.  Shocking, I know.  When you see a young player, in any sport, be it a rookie, or say a freshman, if they are able to contribute right away many start to project the down the road as being even better.  It's true.

If you have a Freshman Center who averages 10 and 8 in basketball, you'll often find people say thinks like "This guy is going to be All-Conference in a few years."  If you have a rookie WR who throws up a 800 yard 8 TD season, people will generally consider that a success.  And going into the following years people may envision him getting even better.

So, when you only look at Joe Burrow's QB rating (24th), you're purposely leaving out a lot of other things.  Like the fact he has one of the worst OL's in the NFL, or that he has no run game, or that he has no deep threat, or that he's got a bottom of the barrel tight end.  OR THAT HE'S A ROOKIE!!!

If someone said that they think Joe Burrow can go to the Super Bowl this year, then I'd be right with you.  I'd be point out those same stats.  But when they're talking about down the road, only an idiot ignores all of the above.  You can look at the big picture and project that there's a very good chance that this kid will be a top 10 QB down the line.  But, for whatever reason, you choose not to do that.

(11-09-2020, 07:26 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: 2.) You can't use his current record when people are talking about the future.  It's too small a sample size, with too poor of a roster, to apply that winning percentage to him alone.  Until you see him play for years, with different players around him, it's not fair to attatch that to Joe Burrow's skill level.

If it is too small of a sample size to say he will be bad then it is also too small of a sample size to say he will be good.

(11-09-2020, 07:26 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: 3.) I don't know if this is a new concept to you, but people usually project rookies to improve.  Shocking, I know.  When you see a young player, in any sport, be it a rookie, or say a freshman, if they are able to contribute right away many start to project the down the road as being even better.  It's true.

Halfway through the '11 season Dalton was 6-2 and the 15th ranked QB in the league.

Yet a lot of people claim Dalton could never win a Super Bowl here.

Burrow is 2-5-1 and is the 24th ranked QB in the league.

Understand my point now?  

It is just too early to make these sort of claims.

(11-09-2020, 07:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If it is too small of a sample size to say he will be bad then it is also too small of a sample size to say he will be good.

Who's using his record as a statistic to say he will be good?

You're using a very specific statistic (W/L %) to paint your picture.  I'm saying that it's too small of a sample size to use that specific statistic, not everything else.

I'm using a number of things, and namely my eyeballs, to say there's a good chance he will be a top 10 QB down the road.  Just because I think it's too small a sample size for one thing doesn't mean I calling to dismiss everything else.

This is such a stupid debate to have anyways.  I really don't know why I'm bothering to enter into the fray.  Almost everyone agrees this kid has a fantastic start to his career.  I'm not sure what anyone would go out of their way to try to diminish that. 

And for the record, I never said anything initially about a Super Bowl, as I feel that's way more on the TEAM than any single player.  But because you called everyone out I took the bait.  I should've known better.  

(11-09-2020, 07:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Halfway through the '11 season Dalton was 6-2 and the 15th ranked QB in the league.

Yet a lot of people claim Dalton could never win a Super Bowl here.

Burrow is 2-5-1 and is the 24th ranked QB in the league.

Understand my point now?  

It is just too early to make these sort of claims.

You're using the comments of one or two people to debate anyone who is praising this kid. 

How many people specifcally said they think he will win a Super Bowl here?  Show me.  I'd like to know, since you called everyone radical extremists.

For the record, I don't think anyone can win a Super Bowl here until the Front Office is overhauled.  But I do think Joe Burrow has looked about as good as possible, and I see him as tremendous building piece.  So if you would like to have a debate on my words, and not someone elses, then have at it.  And I'd suggest you do that with everyone else as well. 

Quit taking minority statements to paint everyone who is complimentary as completely irrational.

Fred... I'm all for people playing devils advocate as I do it myself.

However if you are only negative it becomes a tired act fast.

Can you try rooting for the Bengals this decade?

(11-09-2020, 07:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If it is too small of a sample size to say he will be bad then it is also too small of a sample size to say he will be good.

Uh. No. 

You should really get on the Youtube and type in Joe Burrow and watch the many videos of people who know these things, break down his game. It's almost impossible to go a day without someone singing his praises and it's not because he throws for 400 yards and 4 touchdowns every game. It is his game. The way he plays, that translates to whether someone thinks he can win a SB. 

There's no doubt that what you've been saying about people (i'm sure i'm one of them) around here talking about "big games" is true but that's something that cements itself years into a career when the number of big games won is minimal. 

Former QBs, WRs, defenders, many people who have played the game and played with great players can see that he has the ability to lift a team like an elite QB does. And don't get me wrong, i'm not saying he's elite right now. He's not. He's just very, very good. 

You're having trouble believing that someone hasn't seen what you're talking about, while being here for the last 5 years. I'm having trouble believing you can't see how he performed under the bright lights last year while putting together the greatest statistical season in college football history and what he's done with this team, this year. I shudder to think what an Andy Dalton or Ryan Finley or Jake Dolegalalala would have done behind this line. I can assure you though, that it would be pretty bad. I made a bigass post last year about how a different QB, on the same type of play, could make a different decision than your average QB, to a more positive result. Burrow is exactly the type of guy i was talking about. He just seems to (almost) always throw it to the exact right place and i've heard several people say that. 

Everyone under the Sun, that has a voice in the digital or social media sings this guys praises constantly and you can't find anyone with just the slightest bit of reputation that doesn't like his game. I'm not sure why you've taken up this flag unless you've simply never read or watched anything that anyone has said about him. 

That reminds me. I was listening to Bengals line and they were talking about an Athletic article that was written about him today. I need to go check that out. 

(11-09-2020, 11:34 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: . And don't get me wrong, i'm not saying he's elite right now. He's not. He's just very, very good. 

You don't have to write ten pages just to agree with me.

I have always said he has the potential to be a very good QB.  But that is not enough  for some people.

I just find it funny that the same people that for years demanded that a QB prove he can win big games before he be anointed as great are now frothing at the mouth over a QB who has not accomplished anything of note in the NFL.  And that people who used to cliam that great QB don't need to be surrounded by great players because they "make everyone around them better" are now saying "We have to get an O-line and a better TE, and a better play caller so Burrow can win".

I am thrilled that we had a chance to get one of the best QB prospects in years when we crashed so bad to get the #1 overall pick.  We had to move on from Dalton.  But I have always had a more realistic view of Burrow because I actually watched him play in 2018 when he was in his 4th season of college ball but did not have a record number of NFL draft picks or an NFL level OC.  He was good but far from great.

Joe was a much higher rated prospect than Dalton.  He should become a much better NFL QB, but just a few months ago people were telling me he did not need an O-line because he was better under pressure than throwing from a clean pocket.  And that he was going to fix our offense just by "holding players accountable". Those are the people I have most disagreements with.  But unfortunately any comment that is less than "Burrow can walk on water" is considered "hate" around here right now.