+- 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: The argument of "Playoff Teams" (/thread-4175.html)
Pages:
1
2
The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Matt_Crimson - 01-01-2016
I'm wondering how people feel about the argument of "playoff teams" as a way of legitimizing the Bengals season this year. One thing in particular that seems to be coming up around here in various arguments is the loss to the Houston Texans. Obviously there are fans divided on the argument. Some say the loss to them was a bad loss, others say it's not that bad of a loss because the Texans are a "Playoff team". I feel like this type of argument can be very misleading because it ignores two very important things.
First off.... just because a team goes to the playoffs does not mean that they are necessarily a "good" team. As a matter of fact, if it wasn't for the NFL rule that a team from each division gets to go to the playoffs, then the Texans wouldn't even be in the playoffs right now. They would have been knocked out by the Steelers.... But since the Texans are the leader of their division right now they get to go to the playoffs as it currently stands. It's something that has been an issue with fans for a long time...
The 2010 NFL season is a great example of this actually because a lot of people complained about it. It's the same year that Marshawn Lynch ended up having his game saving Beast Mode touchdown against the Saints to win their playoff game. But the funny thing about it is that the Seahawks were only in the playoffs to begin with because of the technicality of the NFL rule regarding divisional winners. That year there were 3 other teams that had better records than the Seahawks, but the Seahawks got to go to the playoffs because they won their division with a 7-9 record. The three other teams that had better records than them that didn't get to go to the playoffs that year were the New York Giants/Tampa Bay Buccaneers (both 10-6) and the San Diego Chargers (9-7).
So does this mean that those teams weren't good because they didn't get to go to the playoffs but the 7-9 Seahawks did? Of course not, nor does it mean they're good teams vice versa. People need to stop looking at this as "Team (whoever) made it to the playoffs, so that means they're a good team/it wasn't a bad loss". There's so many variables you have to look at besides the fact that they made it to the playoffs.
A team can be good for a few weeks but then be terrible for the rest of the season. This means that just because a team beats the Patriots in week 2 or 3, doesn't mean that they are automatically a "good" team just as losing to the Patriots wouldn't make them a bad team either. They could be having a rough start, they could have injuries, they could have personnel issues etc... The main point is that you have to look at the meat and bones of the situation rather than just the outside of it, ie "They made it to the playoffs, thus they are a good team" or "They beat so and so that week, so that makes them the better team". A team could make it to the playoffs and lose their starting quarterback and get lose their first playoff game. Does that mean they were a bad team? No, they lost their starting QB for crying out loud... Teams change throughout the season, coaches change throughout the season, injuries happen, bad ref calls happen, basically.... a lot happens throughout the season to determine who are the greats and who are the not so greats. Just look at the Kansas City Chiefs this year. They won their first game of the season against the Texans and then lost their next 5 straight and people were laughing at them. Then they rebounded and have now won their last 9 games. Does that make them a good team or not? I dunno, you tell me.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - TexasorBusted - 01-01-2016
It's the NFL. The other teams get paid too. Parity is the ultimate goal of the league. The difference between being a good and bad team is pretty minimal. It's not like college football where there are true talent disparities. I would argue that the Bengals are the most talented team in the league, but they can still lose to "less talented" teams any given week. This is where injuries, character of the teams, leadership, coaching, preparation, etc come into play.
It's rare to see a team be favored by more than 14 points in Vegas for a reason. In college it's routine to see 28+ point spreads during the regular season, even in conference play.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Atomic Orange - 01-01-2016
I'm in the camp that the best records regardless of divisions should go to the playoffs.
Also, MLB needs a salary cap.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - TexasorBusted - 01-01-2016
(01-01-2016, 11:22 PM)Atomic Orange Wrote: I'm in the camp that the best records regardless of divisions should go to the playoffs.
Also, MLB needs a salary cap.
As long as the Yankees exist, that will never happen...
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Atomic Orange - 01-01-2016
(01-01-2016, 11:31 PM)TexasorBusted Wrote: As long as the Yankees exist, that will never happen...
QFT. And the reason why I am done with MLB after 38 year of service.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Nebuchadnezzar - 01-02-2016
The phrases of "Playoff Teams" and "Any Given Sunday" get under my skin.
I'm sorry but the Bengals should have wiped the floor with the Texans. No team as good as the Bengals should ever play as bad as they did in that game. "Any Given Sunday" is all well and good for a game like this past Sunday between the Ravens and Steelers, but not that Texans at Bengals game. That was an embarrassment and should have never had happened.
"Playoff Team" is another that should never gain traction for the reasons stated in the OP.
Another that gets on my nerves is "There are no bad teams in the NFL". I'm sorry, the Cleveland Browns are a bad team. They have only 3 wins for a reason and that reason is because they are bad.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Essex Johnson - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 12:14 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: The phrases of "Playoff Teams" and "Any Given Sunday" get under my skin.
I'm sorry but the Bengals should have wiped the floor with the Texans. No team as good as the Bengals should ever play as bad as they did in that game. "Any Given Sunday" is all well and good for a game like this past Sunday between the Ravens and Steelers, but not that Texans at Bengals game. That was an embarrassment and should have never had happened.
"Playoff Team" is another that should never gain traction for the reasons stated in the OP.
Another that gets on my nerves is "There are no bad teams in the NFL". I'm sorry, the Cleveland Browns are a bad team. They have only 3 wins for a reason and that reason is because they are bad.
Wow you just don;t understand the NFL.. it is the elite of the elite.. this is not some Madden football video game.. get real.. it is the NFL.. on one sunday for one game.. the odds are much more narrow than you think on who wins and who loses.
Besides that.. how in gods name can you say that Steelers losing to a worse team at home with the Ravens is not the same or maybe even worse than the Bengals loss to Texans.. makes totally no sense
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - TexasorBusted - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 12:14 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: The phrases of "Playoff Teams" and "Any Given Sunday" get under my skin.
I'm sorry but the Bengals should have wiped the floor with the Texans. No team as good as the Bengals should ever play as bad as they did in that game. "Any Given Sunday" is all well and good for a game like this past Sunday between the Ravens and Steelers, but not that Texans at Bengals game. That was an embarrassment and should have never had happened.
"Playoff Team" is another that should never gain traction for the reasons stated in the OP.
Another that gets on my nerves is "There are no bad teams in the NFL". I'm sorry, the Cleveland Browns are a bad team. They have only 3 wins for a reason and that reason is because they are bad.
Why did the Patriots get embarrassed in Foxboro by the Eagles that gave up 40+ points to the Bucs and Lions in back-to-back weeks? Are the Eagles a "good" team? Are the Bucs and Lions "good" teams?
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Nebuchadnezzar - 01-02-2016
Another phrase "This isn't Madden" always cracks me up.
I don't play Madden. The last time I played a Madden game was in 2007 and it was boring. I don't play fantasy football either so that argument just flies out the window as well.
If the Browns are "Elite", did anyone here pick them to win any game this season?
Of course, I guess this is just my opinion. If you want to think there are no bad teams, that's cool, I'll stick with my opinion that there are.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - BengalChris - 01-02-2016
The Houston loss was a bad loss simply because it was at home against an inferior team. If it were on the road it wouldn't be as bad. I don't count the Pittsburgh loss the same way because of the Dalton injury early that sorta set the team back.
But this team could match the win total of the 1981 and 1988 teams if they win Sunday. Still not in the same league as those teams unless this team makes it to the super bowl. The two 80's teams expected to win in the playoffs. This team isn't so sure.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Matt_Crimson - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 12:14 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: The phrases of "Playoff Teams" and "Any Given Sunday" get under my skin.
I'm sorry but the Bengals should have wiped the floor with the Texans. No team as good as the Bengals should ever play as bad as they did in that game. "Any Given Sunday" is all well and good for a game like this past Sunday between the Ravens and Steelers, but not that Texans at Bengals game. That was an embarrassment and should have never had happened.
"Playoff Team" is another that should never gain traction for the reasons stated in the OP.
Another that gets on my nerves is "There are no bad teams in the NFL". I'm sorry, the Cleveland Browns are a bad team. They have only 3 wins for a reason and that reason is because they are bad.
I'm with you on this one. In my eyes, we should have destroyed the Texans, especially considering that their starting quarterback got injured and they had to put in T.J Yates for the remainder of the game.
And the notion that there are no bad teams in the NFL is laughable. The Browns and Raiders are consistently two of the worst teams in the NFL almost every year. The Raiders haven't had a winning season since they went to the Super Bowl (And lost) in 2002. The Cleveland Brown's last good season was in 2007 when they went 10-6. To put it more into perspective, the Browns record over the last 10 years is 57-119 and the Raiders are 54-121
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Essex Johnson - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 01:41 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: I'm with you on this one. In my eyes, we should have destroyed the Texans, especially considering that their starting quarterback got injured and they had to put in T.J Yates for the remainder of the game.
And the notion that there are no bad teams in the NFL is laughable. The Browns and Raiders are consistently two of the worst teams in the NFL almost every year. The Raiders haven't had a winning season since they went to the Super Bowl (And lost) in 2002. The Cleveland Brown's last good season was in 2007 when they went 10-6. To put it more into perspective, the Browns record over the last 10 years is 57-119 and the Raiders are 54-121
You are totally missing it.. I can probably pick every team with a winning record and each year they lose to someone with a losing record.. You are focused on one week for one game.. lets focus on 16 games... For example the Bengals probably favored so far in 11 games .. so they won 8 out of 10 of those games .. 80 percent winning.
Actually without going back and looking at all the games the last 5 years.. the Bengals have done a pretty good job of being teams they are favored against over most of the other teams in the league
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Passepartout - 01-02-2016
It is about the team getting over the hump. As really the playoffs are a curse for the team. They need to stop choking on the big important games.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - GodFather - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 02:01 AM)Passepartout Wrote: It is about the team getting over the hump. As really the playoffs are a curse for the team. They need to stop choking on the big important games.
It always starts from the top and works its way down. Look at Marvin, his losses with different players and OC/DC.... the result is always the same under him.
The important thing is the losses are ALWAYS in the same fashion. Will it change this year? I don't know if you put your hand on a hot stove 6 times and burn yourself, do you think you won't on the 7th try?
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - BayouBengal - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 01:17 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Another phrase "This isn't Madden" always cracks me up.
I don't play Madden. The last time I played a Madden game was in 2007 and it was boring. I don't play fantasy football either so that argument just flies out the window as well.
If the Browns are "Elite", did anyone here pick them to win any game this season?
Of course, I guess this is just my opinion. If you want to think there are no bad teams, that's cool, I'll stick with my opinion that there are.
Madden is so lucky that franchise tagged him lol. Any who, Madden does kinda prove how much a QB means to an offense. Basically any team can beat any team any time as long as the QB plays well. Its the only position that makes or breaks a team. If you don't believe that play my 14yr old cousin as the Pats v Browns, I bet he still wins. So I don't believe there are truly Elite teams in the NFL only elite players. Carolina just got beat, no ones untouchable.
The playoff situation occasionally lets in undeserving teams over more deserving ones, true.
So... No a playoff team is not necessarily having a good year. Whether or not a season went well depends on plenty of factors which all boil down to "is the team heading in the right direction" (how about that phrase lol).
If the team surpassed expectations and or came alive late in the season then that is a good year. The playoffs don't exactly legitimize the Bengals season because its where we expected to be. Plus with the free agent decisions to make after this season... getting to the playoffs alone isn't going to be enough to legitimize the organization's success with this roster talent this year.
It's a problem when fans have high expectations. Lot's of people know I'm an Alabama fan and I can tell you that the expectations for that team are always to be National Champs. The proof is in how they upset SEC fans and Vegas by losing their bowl games when they get left out of the big game. Why? Because who cares. No one in Alabama. But, for the other team it may mean something to be in a bowl game.
Cincy is becoming a Bama with all the talent on this roster. Expectations are high and a playoff appearance alone won't cut it, not this year. Sorry. We need a deep run at least, just to prove we can do it.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Matt_Crimson - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 02:00 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: You are totally missing it.. I can probably pick every team with a winning record and each year they lose to someone with a losing record.. You are focused on one week for one game.. lets focus on 16 games... For example the Bengals probably favored so far in 11 games .. so they won 8 out of 10 of those games .. 80 percent winning.
Actually without going back and looking at all the games the last 5 years.. the Bengals have done a pretty good job of being teams they are favored against over most of the other teams in the league
How am I totally missing it? The Bengals loss to the Texans this season was BAD, plain and simple. I'm not saying good teams can't lose to bad teams, I'm saying the Bengals absolutely chocked in that game because we played bad not because the Texans were good. People want to say we lost to the Texans because "They are a playoff team" when that didn't even matter at that point because it was only week 10, nor does it matter now.
The Bengals were 8-0 and the Texans were 3-5. We came into the game averaging 28 points a game, which is equivalent to 4 touchdowns a game. The Texans came into the game with opposing teams scoring an average of 25 points a game on them, which is equivalent to at least three touchdowns a game. We were at home, they were not. We were ranked 2nd in Power Rankings that week, they were ranked 27th. They lost their starting quarterback in the 3rd quarter, we had ours the entire game. They came into the game with the worst red zone defense in the AFC and somehow all we scored were two field goals on them. If you can't see how that was a bad loss I don't know what to tell you. Oh and I know I already said it, but I'll say it again. We were at home.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - TGISunday - 01-02-2016
Every playoff team has a loss this year to a non-playoff team. If our bad loss was to a playoff team, I'm really not worried....based on this criteria we're using.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - 2MinutesHate - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 02:10 AM)GodFather Wrote: It always starts from the top and works its way down. Look at Marvin, his losses with different players and OC/DC.... the result is always the same under him.
The important thing is the losses are ALWAYS in the same fashion. Will it change this year? I don't know if you put your hand on a hot stove 6 times and burn yourself, do you think you won't on the 7th try?
Do you think Marvin gives up after this season? Whether the Bengals run the table (he more or less said he would be done) or lose in the first round again (he more or less SHOULD be done), this should be his last season, right? The only other condition would be if we win the WC round but lose the next game. I can see him returning due to the reason of "unfinished business". Unfortunately, that could open the door for another vicious cycle. The Bengals always seem to come out flat after halftime when they have a lead, especially in the big games.
He's done a real good job of keeping the Bengals competitive over the years, but I think it's just time to try something different. We do have 2nd longest streak of consecutive playoff losses (7) where Marvin has been there for 6 of them. Just because you're not favored in the playoffs, doesn't mean you can't win either. Upsets happen all the time in the playoffs. Many say that we didn't belong in all those playoff games, but we had just as much right to be there as anyone else. I think it's sort of a cop-out.
What are our options? Well, we can't get Zimmer back, so I'd say promote Hue, send MB to a nice retirement home in Florida and promote Marvin to GM. We know that won't happen but we can still wish upon a star can't we?
Here's a link to an article from 2010 I believe, that shows recent playoff underdogs who overcame the odds.
http://www.betus.com.pa/sports-betting/nfl-football/articles/nfl-history-of-playoff-underdogs/
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Luvnit2 - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 01:05 PM)2MinutesHate Wrote: Do you think Marvin gives up after this season? Whether the Bengals run the table (he more or less said he would be done) or lose in the first round again (he more or less SHOULD be done), this should be his last season, right? The only other condition would be if we win the WC round but lose the next game. I can see him returning due to the reason of "unfinished business". Unfortunately, that could open the door for another vicious cycle. The Bengals always seem to come out flat after halftime when they have a lead, especially in the big games.
He's done a real good job of keeping the Bengals competitive over the years, but I think it's just time to try something different. We do have 2nd longest streak of consecutive playoff losses (7) where Marvin has been there for 6 of them. Just because you're not favored in the playoffs, doesn't mean you can't win either. Upsets happen all the time in the playoffs. Many say that we didn't belong in all those playoff games, but we had just as much right to be there as anyone else. I think it's sort of a cop-out.
What are our options? Well, we can't get Zimmer back, so I'd say promote Hue, send MB to a nice retirement home in Florida and promote Marvin to GM. We know that won't happen but we can still wish upon a star can't we?
Here's a link to an article from 2010 I believe, that shows recent playoff underdogs who overcame the odds.
http://www.betus.com.pa/sports-betting/nfl-football/articles/nfl-history-of-playoff-underdogs/
Vicious cycle of 5 straight playoff teams started with a rookie QB? What is vicious about that exactly? I would take 5 more playoffs (10 in a row as I believe it would be a NFL record) with odds we will start winning playoff games. No playoff game and no hope of winning one is not an option I want in the future.
RE: The argument of "Playoff Teams" - jfkbengals - 01-02-2016
(01-02-2016, 12:14 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: The phrases of "Playoff Teams" and "Any Given Sunday" get under my skin.
I'm sorry but the Bengals should have wiped the floor with the Texans. No team as good as the Bengals should ever play as bad as they did in that game. "Any Given Sunday" is all well and good for a game like this past Sunday between the Ravens and Steelers, but not that Texans at Bengals game. That was an embarrassment and should have never had happened.
"Playoff Team" is another that should never gain traction for the reasons stated in the OP.
Another that gets on my nerves is "There are no bad teams in the NFL". I'm sorry, the Cleveland Browns are a bad team. They have only 3 wins for a reason and that reason is because they are bad.
And if they are truly that bad, then they should have zero wins, but that has happened only once in a 16 game season, just as there has been only one team to get through 16 games without a loss.
Yes, there are teams who are on the top end of the spectrum of overall talent of the players and coaches, as well as teams on the bottom end of the spectrum. But, as has already been stated, the spectrum isn't very wide in the NFL. If it could be quantified, the spectrum would be a mile long in high school, a few hundered yards long in college, and only one foot long in the NFL.