(09-07-2016, 01:46 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: What you mean?  we have been to the playoffs 5 times not zero.

(09-07-2016, 09:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Only to bandwagon fans who don't pay attention until the playoffs.

Anyone who says the Bengals and Browns deserve the same level of respect over the last 5 years is a clown.

(09-07-2016, 12:37 PM)J24 Wrote: What Bengal fan isn't salty about the playoff loss? As far as the Steelers and us; where the greasers and their the socs. They are going to get the benefit of the doubt and we will not. We have to deal with that.

(09-07-2016, 10:58 AM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: How do you figure that the Bengals have been the best team in the NFL for the last five years?  The Patriots, Seahawks, and Broncos have all been to multiple Super Bowls during this time, each winning one.  The Bengals have not won a single playoff game.  All three teams also have a better regular season record than Cincinnati.  Yes, the Bengals have performed well in the regular season, but they have in no way been the best team in the NFL.

As for college, the preseason rankings take into effect who graduated and left for the NFL.  They don't automatically award it to the National Championship team from the year before.

(09-07-2016, 06:51 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I clearly meant to say playoff wins.  My bad.

Anyways, I don't think the average analyst/expert/talking head thinks the Bengals are going to be bad, but we have finished in 12th place 5 years running and we are pretty much predicted to do the same thing again. What's the big deal? The optimists want acknowledgement for the past 5 years and we're getting it...Bengals...10th place or so again this year.

Seems fair to me. I just don't get the point of stomping our feet and wondering why 5 straight 12th place finishes don't make us the favorite to be #1. You can't trade in 5 12th place ribbons for one 1st place trophy...though that DOES make me think of the carnivals where you can trade 4 small prizes for medium and then trade 4 mediums for a large, and so on.

(09-06-2016, 04:59 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: In a way, they're both right (Solly and Norman). Yes, the Bengals played without discipline and it was embarrassing. Yet, the Steelers are applauded for similar chippy/dirty tactics. There's definitely some hypocrisy there. The only difference between the Bengals and the Steelers is that the Steelers have been playing that way for decades and have it down to a science. The Bengals (Adam and Tez particularly) let the emotion overcome them. They're less methodical when they're playing "on the edge".

As for Boomer, I think he cares about the Bengals and wants them to win in his own way. I've seen him get excited when the Bengals are rolling. I was okay with him calling out the Bengals, but I do think he was a little too overzealous with it and I would've respected it more if he would've called out the Steelers as well. It's more than a bit ridiculous to act like it was one-sided.

Hopefully both teams reel it in some this year, but still play with fire. Unfortunately, the Steelers have no incentive to reel it in because they weren't disciplined for anything. Munchak's tiny fine was rescinded and Shazier got off scott free with a helmet-to-helmet on Gio. As for the Bengals, Tez and Pacman have still been running their mouths on twitter, so I'm not sure if they've learned anything. Guess we'll see soon enough.

(09-06-2016, 07:56 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Meh, winning cures all ills.  You think it's a coincidence the Steelers have the most SB rings and are a team that just happens to be allowed to get away with murder?  Give me a break.

Win.  Win the game, win the SB, win and shut 'em all up.  We hain't winning and this is what not winning gets ya.

(09-08-2016, 12:51 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: But the Greasers won in the end...

(09-08-2016, 08:31 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Dead on.  It will always make me clench a fist when I think of that crap with Porter, Munchak, and Shazier.  The NFL succeeded in neutering Burfict as it will only take one hit that someone deems to be questionable and he will likely be gone for a season.  There would never be a similar standard held to any player on New England or pittsburgh. 

My dream is that the Bengals humiliate the steelers week 2 on their home field and they implode with stupid penalties and get destroyed by the media (that is where it becomes unrealistic) only to struggle through the season and head toward obscurity as their team sucks for a decade (or longer). 

(09-07-2016, 05:19 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Idk man. Better than Brady? Rodgers? I think saying Ben is better than those 2 is homerism. Ben has always been considered top 5ish, but I've never seen anyone outside of Bradshaw say he's for sure the best. Personally, I'd put him behind Brees as well, who has put up some of the best passing numbers in NFL history to go along with his ring.

Ben had 21 TDs to 16 INTs last year. Ranked 11th in passer rating. Has averaged 3582 yards and 22.7 TDs per season for his career. Good numbers for the most part, but he hasn't had many "elite" seasons, including last year. 1 playoff win (handed to him) over the last 5 years. Hasn't won diddly squat since Lebeau and that elite defense went away. Played like crap in his Super Bowls. I'm not saying he sucks, but you never hear any of this from the media while they're slobbering over him over the last 2 years. I just read a CBS article where they said Bradshaw was right, then they cherry picked stats (including ESPN's QBR), and conveniently left out his TD/INTs and passer rating.

I don't think there's any argument to be made whatsoever that Ben is better than Brady. So definitely some homerism (or stupidity - it is Bradshaw) there. I guess you could make an argument that Ben is 2nd, but I think 99% of the country would take Rodgers. I'd take Brees 3rd, but at this point I think people might be more split on that one. Brees put up better numbers over the last 2 years (and pretty much throughout their careers), but he doesn't have Ben's run game and he also has the worst defense in the NFL, so he's not winning.

(09-06-2016, 03:31 PM)GodFather Wrote: That's funny because I (and most other Bengal fans) have been waiting for that bad ass player to bring in some serious attitude to our defense. He brings in a whole new level of excitement. I finally feel with him on the team and we play against the Steelers they are the ones intimidated not us going out on that field intimidated like years past. Cant wait to see Burfict back on the field as tough as ever and make a few more level headed decisions in the moment. They will be watching his every move looking for another reason to suspend him.

(09-07-2016, 05:19 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Idk man. Better than Brady? Rodgers? I think saying Ben is better than those 2 is homerism. Ben has always been considered top 5ish, but I've never seen anyone outside of Bradshaw say he's for sure the best. Personally, I'd put him behind Brees as well, who has put up some of the best passing numbers in NFL history to go along with his ring.

Ben had 21 TDs to 16 INTs last year. Ranked 11th in passer rating. Has averaged 3582 yards and 22.7 TDs per season for his career. Good numbers for the most part, but he hasn't had many "elite" seasons, including last year. 1 playoff win (handed to him) over the last 5 years. Hasn't won diddly squat since Lebeau and that elite defense went away. Played like crap in his Super Bowls. I'm not saying he sucks, but you never hear any of this from the media while they're slobbering over him over the last 2 years. I just read a CBS article where they said Bradshaw was right, then they cherry picked stats (including ESPN's QBR), and conveniently left out his TD/INTs and passer rating.

I don't think there's any argument to be made whatsoever that Ben is better than Brady. So definitely some homerism (or stupidity - it is Bradshaw) there. I guess you could make an argument that Ben is 2nd, but I think 99% of the country would take Rodgers. I'd take Brees 3rd, but at this point I think people might be more split on that one. Brees put up better numbers over the last 2 years (and pretty much throughout their careers), but he doesn't have Ben's run game and he also has the worst defense in the NFL, so he's not winning.

(09-08-2016, 01:33 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: I personally would put him behind both Brady and Rodgers.  I was just saying that it is possible to make the argument for him.  It's not like Jim Kelly came out and said Tyrod Taylor is the best quarterback in the NFL.  To me, that would be "blind homerism".  I would put Brees and Roethlisburger right there, sort of 3A and 3B, but Pittsburgh has much better weapons than New Orleans.

(09-08-2016, 04:12 AM)Jpoore Wrote: Agree with this just wanted to say something about the begginning of your argument. Nfl.com guy forget who it was predicted 4-12 for the bengals.

(09-07-2016, 03:14 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: And Wilcox's position makes no sense.  For a number of reasons:

1.) The difference between the Steelers and Ravens, vs the Bengals is that those team won.  Not only won, but won big.  We're talking Superbowls, rings, trophies, parades, etc.  They won the whole freaking thing, many of those involved multiple times.  And even when they weren't accomplishing being the very best team in football, they were often advancing further than we have.

The reality is, winning cures a lot of ails.  Namely, people will forget or forgive more in a game or a season that results in victory vs defeat.  Teh Bengals play, while probably no more dirty than that of these peers, is going to draw more attention to itself than it would had it not resulted in a complete implosion.

Not only did they commit a terrible foul, they committed two in a row.  This after they prematurely celebrated a victory by running into the tunnel.  They completely imploded.  They looked foolish in their behavior.

It should not hard to understand that committing back to back personal fouls that cost you the game looks worse than committing a random personal foul in a win.

2.) Forget wins and losses, let's talk about the integrity of the game, sportsmanship, and all that...

The fact of the matter is, in 2016 there is bigger emphasis on any type of hit that is to the head.  Period.  Forget the team the Bengals, or the Steelers, or the Ravens or whoever.  Forget whether the team won, lost, or tied.  Even forget when the penalty occurred. 

A player making a questionable hit in 2015 is going to be a bigger talking point than a player making the same hit in 2005.  Period.  End of story.  It has nothing to do with the players or teams.  Any hit to the head is a bigger deal now than then.  When Junior Seau  offs himself, and you hear the stories of guys like Jim McMahon, you see movies like Concussion and you know what you know now, you're going to notice hits like that more.

Wilcotts can gripe all he wants.  This team cost themselves a game in an embarrassing fashion, and featured a hit that draws more scrunity now than in 2005.  Ray Lewis and James Harrison played for better teams, didn't cost their teams games, and were at the peak of their careers 10 years ago.  The sport has changed. 

Like I said, not that hard to understand.

(09-08-2016, 06:43 PM)PlayerFormerlyKnownAsMousecop Wrote: Listen, I don't think anyone is saying the Bengals didn't do some stupid shit to blow that game at the end. Burfict running into the tunnel was comical, as Pittsburgh had plenty of time on the clock to come back and win the thing. We quite simply looked like we weren't ready to end the playoff drought. We "over-celebrated" in a way. 

But this thread is about Boomer and his position on the national stage. If Boomer really supports the Bengals, and isn't just giving lip service to a team that he secretly despises due to long-standing grudges and issues with the Brown family, then he needs to suck it up, and play the homer every once in awhile.

I have seen him commend the team when we were playing well the past couple of years. That's not what I'm talking about.

There seems to be this issue with a certain segment of the Bengals fan population: Some of you are so traumatized by the way this organization WAS that you can't look at it for what it IS.

Playoff success notwithstanding, this has been one of the best teams in the NFL in the past 5 or 6 years.

That playoff game was bogus. Any "fan" attempting to write it off as another "same ole' Bungles" isn't really a fan if you ask me. Sometimes (especially if you have a national audience), you have to support your team when shit gets rough, even if they're not totally in the right. I agree that the Bengals had a hand in imploding during that playoff game. But I also acknowledge that the Pittsburgh Steelers have a history of bending the rules and playing dirty, particularly against our team (the Huber hit, the Rivers hit, etc). Eventually, the picked on kid was GOING to hit back. It was simply a matter of time. To blame the kid for retaliating simply doesn't give due credit to the deterministic nature of things in this world. 

Pittsburgh gets away with this shit because of their fanbase. In fact, they're ENCOURAGED to do it because deep down, everybody knows that a "hard hitting" Steelers football team is good for publicity.

A hard-hitting Bengals team isn't. Not yet at least. I can't see how anybody not acknowledging that can call themselves a Bengals fan.