05-21-2017, 03:07 PM
(05-21-2017, 02:10 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: 1. My definition is clearly different than yours too, but that's fine.
2. (Bold Italic) I only said that because we had set the tone and dominated them the whole game; if you include stats:
- we outgained them by 130 yards
- No sacks (I believe 8 hurries were all the pressure surrendered by our line), while we had 2 and disrupted 'berger all night.
- No turnovers forced, while we had 2
- TOP won by 11:00+
- 7/17 3rd down, vs 3/12 for 'burgh
- Won by 10 and gave up 0 points in the 2nd half
So yeah, looking at that, we still dominated them. The ONLY thing they were better at that night, were penalties (3 vs 9 for us), but when have we ever had less penalties in a game than the Stoolers?
3. Indeed; we basically forced them into a Browns game and we dominated.
4. While we were indeed down 30-7 in the 4th, the EOG numbers were all VERY similar; it wasn't the one-sided affair that the first game was, but your argument is basically moot, as we split the season series, each having decent games against the other team, at home. If we were demolished in both contests, your argument is absolutely valid.
5. You're right; when MJ is full nelson'd and not a single holding penalty is called in 60 minutes of a football game, it isn't luck; its clear bias and bullshit.
6. Yeah, I'm not falling for the conspiracy crap or that "*****," crap; I guess Tomlin is a complete idiot who folds against Bmore, because he was born in Virginia, right?
Some things can't be explained; the problem with the world today is that everybody has to make everything out to be black and white, when 95% of EVERYTHING in the world, be it people, behaviours, sports, food, whatever the ****, is grey and is NEVER black and white.
How the AFC North plays each other is a complete grey situation and it always will be. History since 1990, proves that.
Sorry man, it's just not what I would call "domination". I honestly don't know how you can see it that way but hey, just different perspectives I guess. To each their own. That was not a dominating win to me. It left plenty to be desired. I remember Ben missing wide open receivers, steelers dropping passes and slipping while running routes and uncharacteristically missing tackles. It was great to see, but overall I would say both teams played like crap. Pittsburgh played worse IMO, we did nothing to really "force" them to look Brownish other than some defensive pressure. You can't give us credit for dominating them when they shot themselves in the foot all game long.
Addressing your 4th point, what exactly do you see as my argument? What is yours? I'm getting lost as to what we're even debating about here. You don't think Pitt has absolutely dominated Marvin Lewis over the years? Seems pretty cut and dry. Are you trying to use this one game to prove otherwise? That game from nearly 4 years ago I saw a rare win against Pittsburgh as a slop-fest and you saw it as a dominating win. That's pretty much the bottom line, isn't it? So what exactly makes my "argument moot"? If we want to look at the total record against Pitt that would absolutely make my argument valid, wouldn't it?
Yes, I absolutely agree there is a bias in Pitts favor, that I don't even think Pitt fans can debate. There always has been, always will be. It's nice we still came out on top despite that, but that win was mostly due to Pitt not taking advantage of the refs help.
Also the Marv-Pitt thing is not so much a conspiracy theory as an exaggeration. Though I do think anybody who grew up a diehard fan of a certain team would have a tough time going 100% all out to beat them. Could you honestly go all out against Cincy if you someday became Pittsburghs coach? Most likely not, I know I couldn't. I would try, of course. It wouldn't be on the surface, but I know somewhere in my subconscious I wouldn't be going all out. But again, it's an exaggeration. I mainly think Marv is just incompetent and wilts under pressure. For whatever reason, he almost always finds ways to lose against Pittsburgh.
And for the record, I'm not one that needs things in black and white. Far from it, in fact. I'm well aware the AFC north is full of parity, as are most all divisions in the NFL. That parity just doesn't favor the bengals over Pitt, hasn't for decades. And Marvin clearly isn't the one who's going to change that. The 90's are an entirely different story, Pitt was just better in every facet. They're not in this era. We aren't that seperate in terms of overall talent. At this point the biggest reason we can't beat Pitt is coaching.
