Bills Game Will See How Much Has Changed

[Eraserhead]

(10-13-2015, 11:50 PM)eoxyod Wrote: Eventually the team has to lose. So they can't pass every 'test' possibly given

Of course they won't win them all, there is a reason its only been done once. However this team looks good enough to do it, even if they don't it nice knowing they have the talent to overcome anything put in front of them if everything clicks.

[*PhilHos*]

(10-13-2015, 11:50 PM)eoxyod Wrote: Eventually the team has to lose. So they can't pass every 'test' possibly given

The only test I care about is the "Can they win in the playoffs?" test.

[djs7685]

(10-14-2015, 09:00 AM)PhilHos Wrote: The only test I care about is the "Can they win in the playoffs?" test.

I'll care about that one a lot more after they pass the "can they clinch the playoffs" test.

How embarrassing would it be for the team to completely miss the playoffs after starting the season like this? Yiiiiiiikes. The odds are obviously in our favor here, but anything can happen and it's scary to think about what the media would be saying for the next year if that would happen.

[BengalFanInNJ]

I hate the fact that they play the Steelers off a bye week. The record off bye weeks is abysmal.

[Goalpost]

As long as NE and Denver keep winning, the Bengals have to also.

[djs7685]

(10-14-2015, 10:58 AM)BengalFanInNJ Wrote: I hate the fact that they play the Steelers off a bye week. The record off bye weeks is abysmal.

Eh? The Bengals are 2-2 in the Andy era coming off of a bye.

1 blowout win, 1 blowout loss, and 2 close games.

I mean, the Bengals went on a pretty bad losing streak after the bye in the mid 2000s, but what do those teams have anything to do with who is on the field right now? This team is drastically different from 2011-2012 let alone the teams from 2003 - 2010.

[BengalHawk62]

(10-13-2015, 04:27 PM)McC Wrote: I honestly don't think Buffalo is all that good.  They've lost their last two home games.  I don't think they're as good as Seattle or San Diego and maybe not even Baltimore.  And they are about a tossup with KC and Oakland.

The only reason out there for doubting the Bengals are rooted in the past, not based on the last five weeks.

Can I have a little of what your having?  What did you put in that orange flavored kool-aid? 

[OrlandoBengal]

(10-13-2015, 04:27 PM)McC Wrote: I honestly don't think Buffalo is all that good.  They've lost their last two home games.  I don't think they're as good as Seattle or San Diego and maybe not even Baltimore.  And they are about a tossup with KC and Oakland.

The only reason out there for doubting the Bengals are rooted in the past, not based on the last five weeks.

The Bills were getting a lot of off season hype because of Rex Ryan.  I get what the OP is saying about Bengals' teams of the past, but that is not this team.  The teams of the past would not have had the mental fortitude to come back from a 17 point fourth quarter deficit against the Seahawks.  This is a different team.

I believe the Bills are ranked #24 against the pass.  Seems like Dalton and the boys will have another big day.

[HarleyDog]

On paper the Bengals look to have an easy game in the air against Buffalo. However, lets not forget Buffalo plays Patriots twice a year and even though they are 2-8 against the Patriots in the last 10 games, they always find a way to stay in it and sometimes win. I think there are a lot of similarities between Patriots and Bengals who both have so many weapons at their disposal. The term "Any given Sunday" applies here so they better not walk in thinking "we got this."

I'm sure we can win this as long as they stay focused.

[XenoMorph]

Marvin jones vs Rex Ryans Defense.... they might be tough against the run but look what the patriots did to them

[Big Boss]

I try not to get hung up on stats, because whatever fans expect to happen based off of them, the opposite tends to happen.

Case in point: I saw many people say that Seattle's offensive line was so bad that they'd have a hard time running the ball and protecting Wilson. That did not end up being the case. Well, the first part anyway.

The Bills being ranked #24 in pass defense means nothing to me. Because right when I assume Dalton will have a field day with them, the Bills will hold him to 100 yards.

[OrlandoBengal]

(10-14-2015, 12:17 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: On paper the Bengals look to have an easy game in the air against Buffalo. However, lets not forget Buffalo plays Patriots twice a year and even though they are 2-8 against the Patriots in the last 10 games, they always find a way to stay in it and sometimes win. I think there are a lot of similarities between Patriots and Bengals who both have so many weapons at their disposal. The term "Any given Sunday" applies here so they better not walk in thinking "we got this."

I'm sure we can win this as long as they stay focused.

I think this is because they are in the same division and see each other so much.  It's the same as the Browns... they are terrible, but still play the AFC North teams tough.

[*Synric*]

(10-14-2015, 11:13 AM)Goalpost Wrote: As long as NE and Denver keep winning, the Bengals have to also.

This. The Bengals are not only playing to get into the playoffs at this point. They are saying, "We want the #1 Seed. We are the best team in the AFC. We want the road to the Super Bowl to go through the Jungle." This is not a we want to win a playoff game year it's a we want the Lambardi year.

[OrlandoBengal]

(10-14-2015, 02:47 PM)Synric Wrote: This. The Bengals are not only playing to get into the playoffs at this point. They are saying, "We want the #1 Seed. We are the best team in the AFC. We want the road to the Super Bowl to go through the Jungle." This is not a we want to win a playoff game year it's a we want the Lambardi year.

Exactly.  All the regular talk about "win A playoff" game is out the window.  This teams needs to be focused on making a very deep run in the playoffs this year.

[McC]

(10-14-2015, 02:47 PM)Synric Wrote: This. The Bengals are not only playing to get into the playoffs at this point. They are saying, "We want the #1 Seed. We are the best team in the AFC. We want the road to the Super Bowl to go through the Jungle." This is not a we want to win a playoff game year it's a we want the Lambardi year.

I know it's still early but it seems like championship seasons tend to have a pretty cool story line to tell at the end.  I'm talking about amazing wins, players coming into their own, the team being a close knit family, ducks lining up, all that stuff.  So far, liking the hell out of the story.

But, Sssshhh...I've said too much already. Very determined not to be the guy who jinxed it.

[Shake n Blake]

(10-13-2015, 04:40 PM)PV Bengal Wrote: The Bills are certainly better (on paper) than the Raiders and the Chiefs (now, without Charles). They Bills have a tough run defense so I think we'll see 30+ passes by Dalton. That having been said, I think we'll win by 10-14 ... as long a "good Andy" and the defense show up. It could be more if EJ Manuel is the starting QB.

Not picking on you, but I think the whole "Good Andy, Bad Andy" narrative is so overblown. 

Dalton
69 games
24 with a 100+ passer rating (34.8% of all games played)
43 games with at least an 80.0 passer rating (62.3% of all games played)
26 games with a passer rating of 79.9 or below (37.7% of all games played)
9 games with a passer rating of 59.9 or below (13.0% of all games played)

Now compare that with...

Palmer 
149 games 
49 games with a 100+ passer rating (32.9%)
93 games with at least an 80.0 passer rating (62.4%)
56 games with a passer rating of 79.9 or below (37.6%)
20 games with a passer rating of 59.9 or below (13.4%)


The percentages of good games and bad are nearly identical. In fact, Dalton has a slightly better percentage of 100+ games and a slightly lower % of <59.9 games.

Yet we never here about "Good Palmer, Bad Palmer". I chose Palmer for obvious reasons, but I could've picked many different QB's for this, including Eli, Flacco, Luck, Stafford, Tannehill, etc. Yet we only hear about "Good Andy, Bad Andy" for some reason.

[Anderson HOF]

(10-14-2015, 06:16 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Not picking on you, but I think the whole "Good Andy, Bad Andy" narrative is so overblown. 

Dalton
69 games
24 with a 100+ passer rating (34.8% of all games played)
43 games with at least an 80.0 passer rating (62.3% of all games played)
26 games with a passer rating of 79.9 or below (37.7% of all games played)
9 games with a passer rating of 59.9 or below (13.0% of all games played)

Now compare that with...

Palmer 
149 games 
49 games with a 100+ passer rating (32.9%)
93 games with at least an 80.0 passer rating (62.4%)
56 games with a passer rating of 79.9 or below (37.6%)
20 games with a passer rating of 59.9 or below (13.4%)


The percentages of good games and bad are nearly identical. In fact, Dalton has a slightly better percentage of 100+ games and a slightly lower % of <59.9 games.

Yet we never here about "Good Palmer, Bad Palmer". I chose Palmer for obvious reasons, but I could've picked many different QB's for this, including Eli, Flacco, Luck, Stafford, Tannehill, etc. Yet we only hear about "Good Andy, Bad Andy" for some reason.

totally agree  good post,, great example of how the media can also influence perception of a plaer.

[fredtoast]

(10-13-2015, 11:50 PM)eoxyod Wrote: Eventually the team has to lose. 

No they don't.

[fredtoast]

(10-14-2015, 01:12 AM)SB50Champs Wrote: Of course they won't win them all, there is a reason its only been done once. 

We can win every game we play this year.