(12-11-2020, 01:28 AM)jason Wrote: That's a stat that not enough people are talking about. Taylor has many flaws, but you can't say that he doesn't win the games that he does. I like how he appreciates the fans too. He makes sure he wins those games at home for the 9,500 faithfully gathered at PBS.

(12-11-2020, 03:20 AM)BengalChris Wrote: Yes, the Bengals are microscopically higher than the worst two teams in the league.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. It's still a worthless clock. Sort of like our coaching staff.

Sadly, Mikey doesn't mind his clocks being screwy.

 

(12-11-2020, 12:34 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Being close only matters in horseshoes and hand grenades.

In football, a loss is a loss. And you aren't getting to the postseason with close losses vs blowout losses. You need wins.

(12-11-2020, 12:53 PM)Sled21 Wrote: True, a loss is a loss, and good coaches find ways to win close games.... yada yada yada. But the reason people talk about losses by 3 points, etc., is that they show that the team is close  and not just getting blown out constantly. Although I know that's not the popular narrative around here. 

(12-11-2020, 12:59 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The hope is that eventually those close losses turn into wins. So far, it's still losses.
Maybe the close losses under Taylor gives some people confidence there will be more wins, but I don't have that confidence.

(12-11-2020, 12:59 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The hope is that eventually those close losses turn into wins. So far, it's still losses.
Maybe the close losses under Taylor gives some people confidence there will be more wins, but I don't have that confidence.

(12-11-2020, 12:53 PM)Sled21 Wrote: But the reason people talk about losses by 3 points, etc., is that they show that the team is close  and not just getting blown out constantly. Although I know that's not the popular narrative around here. 

(12-11-2020, 12:53 PM)Sled21 Wrote: True, a loss is a loss, and good coaches find ways to win close games.... yada yada yada. But the reason people talk about losses by 3 points, etc., is that they show that the team is close  and not just getting blown out constantly. Although I know that's not the popular narrative around here. 

(12-11-2020, 01:04 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Right, the hope is that close losses turn into wins, and with as many close losses as we suffer, it would lead to a pretty good record. When you factor in injuries this year, one cannot objectively think some of those would be wins if they were healthier.  Some will jump up and say injuries are not an excuse, but come on, this team was devastated this year.

(12-11-2020, 01:33 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Did you even read the initial post?

Losing by less than a score doesn't mean you're any closer than any of the other majority of teams that are losing in the same fashion.  No team gets blown out constantly.

Even the Jets, who have an historically bad team this year, have 4 one score losses.

Let's take a look at the 2017 Browns, one of the worst teams of all time.  Here are some of their losses:

21-18 to the Steelers
31-28 to the Colts
17-14 to the Jets
12-9 to the Titans
27-21 to the Packers
28-24 to the the Steelers

(12-11-2020, 01:51 AM)bfine32 Wrote: If that's not impressive enough: He has won EVERY game in which a team he coached outscored the opponent. 

(12-11-2020, 01:51 AM)bfine32 Wrote: If that's not impressive enough: He has won EVERY game in which a team he coached outscored the opponent. 

(12-11-2020, 01:04 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Right, the hope is that close losses turn into wins, and with as many close losses as we suffer, it would lead to a pretty good record. When you factor in injuries this year, one cannot objectively think some of those would be wins if they were healthier.  Some will jump up and say injuries are not an excuse, but come on, this team was devastated this year.

(12-11-2020, 01:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I agree that close losses are still losses, but you are losing me as you go to these extremes.

Everyone from TV analyst to Vegas bookmakers to the guys who make computer programs to rank college teams all look at point differential to judge teams.  So it is not as meaningless as you claim.  The worse teams get beaten my more points than the better teams.

And I have no idea what you think you are proving by showing that the 2017 Browns got beat my more than a single score 10 times while it has only happened to us 4 times this year.  Seems to me you are proving the point for the other side with that stat.

(12-11-2020, 01:04 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Right, the hope is that close losses turn into wins, and with as many close losses as we suffer, it would lead to a pretty good record. When you factor in injuries this year, one cannot objectively think some of those would be wins if they were healthier.  Some will jump up and say injuries are not an excuse, but come on, this team was devastated this year.

(12-11-2020, 02:05 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Every team has injuries.  For some of those games you're magically turning into wins, where we get out injured players back, are you giving the opponent their injured players back as well?  Because, if that's the case, you can't objectively say anything.  It's a complete unknown.

It's really easy to look at a game like the Eagles, and say "Man, if we had so and so back we probably win that game."  You're just magically insert Reader and Atkins, Trae Waynes, XSF and think that that's make us better.  And it does, no doubt.  But here's what you're not thinking about or doing...

The Eagles were down Alshon Jeffrey, Desean Jackson, Jalen Reagor, and Dallas Goedert.  That's 4 of their top 5 weapons, and all 3 of the starting receivers.  That not enough?  They were also out 3 of the starting offensive lineman.  Not to mention, 2 defensive starters.

So really, if you're going to play this game, be fair.  If we're actually trying to look at games and how they would be played without injuries, account for both teams.  Otherwise, what you're essentially saying is that if our team is 100% healthy we can beat another team who is clearly not.  What does that tell us?  A:) Not much.

You want to talk injuries?  Look at the 49'ers.  They had multiple games this season where they were down there QB1, WR1, TE1, RB1, and their all Pro DL Bosa. 

Garrapolo has missed 6 games.  Mosert has missed 6 games. Kittle has missed 6 games.  Deebo Samuel has missed 6 games.  Nick Bosa has missed 10 games!!!!

Their record?  5-6.  Do we really want to ***** about inuries when you look at a situation like that?

Look at the Patriots.  They had 8 players opt on this season.  8!!!  Two of their best defenders in Hightower and Chung, and one of their only proven receiving threats outside of Edleman in Marquis Lee.

Edleman has gone on to miss 50% of the season and hasn't played in months.  All 3 of their running backs have missed time, and their other decent one opted out.

This has all happen in what everyone expected to be a rebuilding year with a new, washed up QB serving as a placeholder, and with them right up againt the cap, with no money to spend.

Their record?  6-7.  They beat a team last week 42-0.

Nothing gets overstated on here more than our injuries.  Every year I hear the same thing, that we're cursed because we have players injured.  "Oh my God, we can never win without AJ Green and Jonah Williams!!!"  Meanwhile, a team like the Eagles loses an MVP front runner in Carson Wentz at the end of the year, adn wins a Superbowl with their backup QB.  But here we act like being down 1 single DT in the first 3 weeks, and a CB1 explains away all of our problems.

Balgona.  It's like some of you don't pay attention to any other teams outside of this one.  Every team deals with this.