+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season (/thread-5310.html)
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - fredtoast - 02-24-2016
(02-24-2016, 11:21 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: The difference is their goal. The Titans aren't in the same position as the Bengals, they are rebuilding, we are supposed to be in our window.
So you don't really grade teams on how good they are?
You actually give a 4 win team a higher grade than the Bengals?
That makes no sense at all.
But at least you gave the '11 Bengals an "A", right?
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - Bengalfan11164 - 02-25-2016
(02-23-2016, 05:37 PM)jj22 Wrote: No I'm not blaming McCarron, but the issue with not winning big games late in the season against playoff teams is typical even with our starting qb's of the past (outside of last years game against the Broncos, even though we turned around and lost the division lead to the Steelers the following week). So there was no improvement there you can point to.
After starting 8-0, we ended 4-4. 4-5 if you include the playoffs.
THIS is accurate.
The Bengals snatched defeat out of the mouth of victory. Imploded on national television in a disgraceful way. Embarrassing.
Who cares how the season started? What matters is how the season ended?
Were the Bengals entertaining? Yes! Absolutely. But, we are judging the overall season, so . . .
But, down the stretch they failed to beat a playoff team ( Pittsburgh twice, Arizona, Houston, Denver) beating the Browns twice, Rams, 49ers.
Beat bad teams.
Lose every game to any good team.
Average. And disappointing.
B- at best.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - fredtoast - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 01:01 AM)Bengalfan11164 Wrote: Who cares how the season started? What matters is how the season ended?So you are judging the whole season but the first half doesn't matter?
But, we are judging the overall season, so . . .
I give you credit for giving them a "B" (that is what I gave them) But I don't understand why victories over the Chiefs, Seahawks, and Steelers don't count. Seems like people are just making up random rules in order bto belittle the Bengals.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - PDub80 - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 02:37 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So you are judging the whole season but the first half doesn't matter?
I give you credit for giving them a "B" (that is what I gave them) But I don't understand why victories over the Chiefs, Seahawks, and Steelers don't count. Seems like people are just making up random rules in order bto belittle the Bengals.
Fred, why do you weight the beginning of the season equal much to the end, especially on a playoff team, where the end is clearly more important?
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - PDub80 - 02-25-2016
My Bengals TEAM report card looked at as two semesters and a final exam....
- A+ for the first half (semester) of the season: Didn't lose.
- D for the 2nd half (semester) of the season: The Texans game was inexcusable, the Broncos game was gaffed away at the end and shown to be HUGE at the end in terms of mattering, the Cardinals game was there to be won - but lost, and the QB threw a pick at a crucial moment against PITT and then broke his hand. All 4 of those losses were to teams the Bengals were more talented than and they were in a position to beat if they hadn't beaten themselves. The Bengals beat the bottom tier NFL teams, which kept this from being an F. I explain the D more below....
I don't care about the QB getting hurt. Other quality teams deal with that and win just fine - as they should. NO QUALITY WINS in the 2nd half of the season, an embarrassing loss to the Texans on MNF WITH Andy at the helm. That game would have made all the difference in the world at the end (1st round bye & 1st seed). With or without the starting QB the team and offense looked about the same in the 2nd half of the season once McCarron and the coaches got comfortable - after the 49ers game.
- Playoff Game (Finals) they get an F: They failed. End of story. They were dominated for most of the game (15 to 0 after 3 quarters), came back at the end to be in a position to win annnnnnd..... SELF DESTRUCTED. Blew up in the most embarrassing fashion imaginable with the game well in hand. NO discipline or concentration on offense (Hill's fumble while fighting for meaningless yards with the game won), and NO discipline or concentration on defense (Gave up a long drive with under 2 minutes to play to lose and of course the double PERSONAL FOULS TO LOSE)
Final Grade:
I came up with my final grade by using the GPA scale and weighting their finals performance/result. Both semesters averaged averaged together net a 2.5 C+, but the Bengals getting an F on their final exam showed that they hadn't learned anything or, if they did, were unable to actually apply it. I also would weigh the final exam (playoffs) much heavier than the first half of the season. It's what's most important and the whole reason they went to school (played the season) in the first place. When I consider HOW the Bengals lost their "finals" (triple meltdown with game in hand), who they lost it to (Steelers), and where they lost it (at home) and couple that along with the Texans debacle on MNF with their starting QB - effectively losing home field advantage, along with NO WINS over quality teams in the back half of the season they get a big fat......
F : The most talented roster in the NFL shows they are unbeatable in the first half of the season, then goes 4-4 in the back half (only able to beat 4 of the worst teams in the league), only to melt down in what can be considered one of the top 5 most legendary "Bungling" ways to lose a playoff game in the entire history of the NFL.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - Se ky bengal - 02-25-2016
(02-24-2016, 09:20 PM)Derrick Wrote: D
Look, 8-0 is awesome! But they did their typical swan dive the rest of the season. That is 100% on Marvin Lewis PERIOD! Plot the season on a graph and a "C" looks like a gift. It will never get better with Marvy. Marvin has gotten a lot of credit that should have been awarded to Duke Tobin. Marvin IS a "C" at best.
maybe, just maybe it was because most of the last few games was where Dalton was out. Just a thought. Imo if Daltons playing bengals beat steelers and win couple of the games AJM dropped. I give the team a B- on season and D in po's
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - PDub80 - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 09:58 AM)Se ky bengal Wrote: maybe, just maybe it was because most of the last few games was where Dalton was out. Just a thought. Imo if Daltons playing bengals beat steelers and win couple of the games AJM dropped. I give the team a B- on season and D in po's
What do you base your opinion of why Dalton changes things on? I can tell you factually why I disagree...
- His lifetime record against the Steelers is pitiful.
- He threw an INT at the WORST time his very first series against them in the 2nd meeting this season
- AD was terrible against the Texans on MNF at HOME, the team came out flat and lost.
- Which gives me less faith in AD than McCarron in the on the road MNF in Denver, to be honest.
- Cardinals game was a close one, but they lost WITH AD.
I guess I just don't get the idea that AD would have changed things when there is a large enough history with AD/Marvin/This team to back up how he and the Bengals payed in the 2nd half of THIS season.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - fredtoast - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 10:31 AM)PDub80 Wrote: I guess I just don't get the idea that AD would have changed things when there is a large enough history with AD/Marvin/This team to back up how he and the Bengals payed in the 2nd half of THIS season.
Basically you are ignoring every other game Dalton played in '15 and are still trying to judge him based on '11-'14. You sound like one of the guys who always disliked Dalton anyway and just can't let go of the hate.
If you did not see Dalton take a huge step forward in '15 then I don't know what to say. If past history 100% controlled what happened last year then how do you explain Daltons 106 passer rating?
And I guess the first game against the Steelers last year never even happened, right?
And since you are so into history, what happened tha last time the Bengals played the steelers late in the season with a playoff spot on the line?
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - 2MinutesHate - 02-25-2016
Basically, I believe that there are two groups of fans who see this issue differently.
1. Those who see our season as a success because of our 12-4 record.
2. Those who see our season as a disappointment because of the playoff failure.
For example, I think the Raiders had a "B" season and the Bengals had a "C" season based on my own expectations of each team. I do consider their records but I don't think it should be the sole determining factor. The Raiders just might win a playoff game next year. I'd give them an "A" for that.
I don't think you're going to convince either group to see things differently. Heck, I'm still in complete disbelief. Well, not really, considering it's the Bengals and it's been so many years since we've won, so nothing should really be surprising.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - fredtoast - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 12:19 PM)2MinutesHate Wrote: Basically, I believe that there are two groups of fans who see this issue differently.
1. Those who see our season as a success because of our 12-4 record.
2. Those who see our season as a disappointment because of the playoff failure.
I don't know why ity has to be one or the other.
To me the bengals were successful in winning the division and making the playoffs, but I was still disappointed by
the playoff loss.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - fredtoast - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 12:19 PM)2MinutesHate Wrote: For example, I think the Raiders had a "B" season and the Bengals had a "C" season based on my own expectations of each team. I do consider their records but I don't think it should be the sole determining factor. The Raiders just might win a playoff game next year. I'd give them an "A" for that.
Giving a worse team a higher grade makes no sense at all. Basically you are rewarding them for not being able to build as good of a team.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - 2MinutesHate - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 12:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't know why ity has to be one or the other.
To me the bengals were successful in winning the division and making the playoffs, but I was still disappointed by
the playoff loss.
Who gives a rat's ass about the division crown? Didn't make a difference to the Steelers because they just beat us anyway. I doubt you hear many Pats fans saying, "Well, we won our division!" It's just laughable.
You see the results of the season as above average or successful, and I see the results of the season as average and unsuccessful (because of the playoff loss), based on my expectations of this past year's team.
And that's why it's one way or another.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - fredtoast - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 12:57 PM)2MinutesHate Wrote: Who gives a rat's ass about the division crown? Didn't make a difference to the Steelers because they just beat us anyway. I doubt you hear many Pats fans saying, "Well, we won our division!" It's just laughable.
Actually I see fans of all teams celebrate when they win their division.
When was the last time you saw a team clinch a division title and all the fans just sit there and say "This is meaningless?" It never happens.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - Se ky bengal - 02-25-2016
(02-25-2016, 10:31 AM)PDub80 Wrote: What do you base your opinion of why Dalton changes things on? I can tell you factually why I disagree...
- His lifetime record against the Steelers is pitiful.
- He threw an INT at the WORST time his very first series against them in the 2nd meeting this season
- AD was terrible against the Texans on MNF at HOME, the team came out flat and lost.
- Which gives me less faith in AD than McCarron in the on the road MNF in Denver, to be honest.
- Cardinals game was a close one, but they lost WITH AD.
I guess I just don't get the idea that AD would have changed things when there is a large enough history with AD/Marvin/This team to back up how he and the Bengals payed in the 2nd half of THIS season.
So you think Andy would have lost the games AJM lost? Guess opinions are like a -holes we all have one. I may be mistaken, but Andy was having a break out year before his injury. I'm not knocking what AJM done,but he played as expected a game manager and a backup. Imo the Houston game was on his targets Eifert had 3-4, if not more drops.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - Nebuchadnezzar - 02-25-2016
I think if Andy Dalton doesn't break his thumb, the Bengals would be Super Bowl Champions right now.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - SHRacerX - 02-28-2016
(02-23-2016, 01:03 PM)Froob Wrote: http://www.skysports.com/nfl/news/12118/10171748/we-rate-cincinnati-bengals-pittsburgh-steelers-baltimore-ravens-cleveland-browns
They base it all off of the playoff loss and we surely deserve better. Funny how they don't even mention Dalton being injured before the playoffs.
Damn, what do you give the Cowboys who also lost their QB? I bet they ranked the Jets higher and someone had to KO their QB to win.
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - Hammerthis - 02-29-2016
(02-23-2016, 01:26 PM)His Nately120 Wrote: I admit I was going to attempt to brush off them not mentioning Dalton's injury as an excuse BUT the first thing they do with the Steelers is talk about how hurt Ben was all year. Meh.
Um....Ben's a future HOF with a big game reputation. His individual, none-statistical efforts alone contribute a lot to who they are as a team. Also, when key offensive players are out or just not playing well, often he's the difference maker.
On the other hand, our QB has never performed well in the post season, therefore, his post season reputation supersedes all things he accomplished in (2015) one great regular season. Until he proves differently, the assumption in the media will remain as such, "he's not likely to perform well when the lights shine brightest!"
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - Hammerthis - 02-29-2016
(02-25-2016, 01:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually I see fans of all teams celebrate when they win their division.
When was the last time you saw a team clinch a division title and all the fans just sit there and say "This is meaningless?" It never happens.
Super Bowl or bust!
RE: Bengals given a "C" Rating for 2015 Season - Hammerthis - 02-29-2016
(02-25-2016, 11:26 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Basically you are ignoring every other game Dalton played in '15 and are still trying to judge him based on '11-'14. You sound like one of the guys who always disliked Dalton anyway and just can't let go of the hate.Such BS! I get sick and tired of reading of the alleged hatred of Andy Dalton. No one here is hating. It's as simple as this Fred, you don't agree with him because you refuse to believe the truth. Some of us realize "Andy is subject to not performing well during the playoffs."
If you did not see Dalton take a huge step forward in '15 then I don't know what to say. If past history 100% controlled what happened last year then how do you explain Daltons 106 passer rating?
And I guess the first game against the Steelers last year never even happened, right?
And since you are so into history, what happened tha last time the Bengals played the steelers late in the season with a playoff spot on the line?
How can anyone blame fans or the media for concerns about Andy in regards to the playoffs?