Most underrated backup QB we've had

[grampahol]

How about Marvin Jones? He got lucky a few times throwing the ball..

[EatonFan]

How about Sanu?

Check out this stat line for him

7 out of 8 passing
233 Yards
4 TDs
0 Ints

[grampahol]

(06-29-2021, 10:33 AM)EatonFan Wrote: How about Sanu?

Check out this stat line for him

7 out of 8 passing
233 Yards
4 TDs
0 Ints

I had him confused with Jones.. See what happens when you don't die young? 

[GreenCornBengal]

(06-29-2021, 10:18 AM)grampahol Wrote: I hate to bring it up, but backups are kind of expected to be able to play well in any game and not just one playoff game and then sit on the shelf the entirety of their time with the team. McCarron stank 99% of the time..period, end of story. Otherwise he would have been offered a huge multi year contract instead of going the way of the dodo bird..   If you wanna get technical Ken Riley was drafted to be a QB..He just happened to turn into a pretty good CB..

McCarron secured a home playoff birth by going 2-1 in his starts after Dalton was injured….

Isn’t that EXACTLY what you want from your backup?

[GreenCornBengal]

(06-29-2021, 12:52 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So we agree that it was the defense that kept the game close, not the play of McCarron.

That was my original point when some one gave AJ credit for "playing well enough to win".

But he did play well enough to win. That is why people are so disgusted with that 2015 game… the RB and defense threw that away, but McCarron literally played well enough to win….

‘Well enough’ is a flexible term. Did he play well? No. Well enough? Well yes actually he did.

[*Go Cards*]

Schonert was my personal favorite. If the ones who became starters later count then Blake, Fitz, and Kitna would make it a tough call.

Would lean toward Blake personally and think Kitna and Fitz have the same anchor that drags them down.

Both could have been elite QB's if not for having pedestrian arm strength per they were great at reading and processing defenses. Yet threw those wounded ducks constantly. Put their brain in a pre-shoulder injury Carson and they would've been elite imo.

Not here to enter the AJ vs Andy debate but will say Andy took Bengals to more playoffs than any other Bengals QB in history.

Including 4xPro Bowler, AFC Player of the Year, NFL MVP winner Boomer. In less years than Boomer had to do it and while taking over a horrid team that nobody thought would win anything his first season.

He just sucked once they got there. Of course Hills fumble, the defense collapse (somewhat ref aided) and Maualuga not being able to cover being exposed by Houston didn't help his cause.

That being said ready to put all that in the rearview mirror and get behind Burrow and these new Bengals.

[*Go Cards*]

By the way the most underrated QB from any former Bengals came from the staff and was Jay Gruden.

That dude could ball and hard to believe he never really got a chance in NFL. He was head and shoulders above some Louisville QB's that did get their chance.

Was always my favorite Louisville QB until Lamar and Teddy came along.

Has always been underrated in everything he does per not having the personality of his brother who I believe is overrated.

[fredtoast]

(06-29-2021, 11:07 AM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: But he did play well enough to win. That is why people are so disgusted with that 2015 game… the RB and defense threw that away, but McCarron literally played well enough to win….

‘Well enough’ is a flexible term. Did he play well? No. Well enough? Well yes  actually he did.

This is getting ridiculouse.

He did not play well at all. He had a passer rating in the 60's and fumbled 3 times. How many QBs win games when they suck that bad?

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(06-29-2021, 11:36 AM)Go Cards Wrote: By the way the most underrated QB from any former Bengals came from the staff and was Jay Gruden.

That dude could ball and hard to believe he never really got a chance in NFL. He was head and shoulders above some Louisville QB's that did get their chance.

Was always my favorite Louisville QB until Lamar and Teddy came along.

Has always been underrated in everything he does per not having the personality of his brother who I believe is overrated.

Totally agree. I always wondered why he never got a shot.

[GreenCornBengal]

(06-29-2021, 11:56 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is getting ridiculouse.

He did not play well at all. He had a passer rating in the 60's and fumbled 3 times. How many QBs win games when they suck that bad?

Well enough to win. That’s the point. Brady is 3-1 when throwing 3 ints in a playoff game. He played well enough to where they could still win. AJ had done the same until Hill fumbled and the defense stumbled.

[fredtoast]

(06-29-2021, 12:36 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Well enough to win. That’s the point. Brady is 3-1 when throwing 3 ints in a playoff game. He played well enough to where they could still win. AJ had done the same until Hill fumbled and the defense stumbled.

I still don't get it.

Basically you are saying that even if AJ had not completed a single pass in the entire game he played "well enough to win" just because we were ahead.

[GreenCornBengal]

(06-29-2021, 05:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I still don't get it.

Basically you are saying that even if AJ had not completed a single pass in the entire game he played "well enough to win" just because we were ahead.

We basically saw that unfold with another backup just last year with Finley. Guy couldn’t hit many passes yet played well enough to win… was he good? No! Did he play “well enough to win”.. yes.

[fredtoast]

(06-29-2021, 06:46 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: We basically saw that unfold with another backup just last year with Finley. Guy couldn’t hit many passes yet played well enough to win… was he good? No! Did he play “well enough to win”.. yes.

You can't define "good enough to win" by if a QB won or not and then say McCarron played "well enough to win" when he lost.

If a QB both loses and plays like shit then how did he "play well enough to win"?

[GreenCornBengal]

(06-29-2021, 07:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You can't define "good enough to win" by if a QB won or not and then say McCarron played "well enough to win" when he lost.

If a QB both loses and plays like shit then how did he "play well enough to win"?

I agree with you on that BUT the 2015 game was an anomaly. 99,999/100,000 times in that situation at the end of the game Cinci wins. In my head, AJ did enough to win that game but then the circus show happened.

To me that was a win that was stolen right out of our hands. I understand though that in your mind a loss is a loss which I get… I just don’t see things the same way.

Either way, this thread isn’t really about if McCarron is good or not, it got a bit derailed. He’s just underrated in my mind and almost accomplished more than any starter or backup in the last 30 years. Whether that’s because he just happened to be the starter that day on a really good Bengals team or not doesn’t really change that.

[*SHRacerX*]

(06-28-2021, 12:54 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Except being blind means he was ALWAYS going to fail at driving regardless of if he was drunk or not. Are we now saying that Jeremy Hill was always going to fail at not fumbling? That it was destined the second he was chosen to carry it? It doesn't make sense.

Your hypothetical fails on a couple levels there, Fred.

A better example of it is if someone (the defense) blows a beautiful glass bowl (a masterpiece of a game where they not only set up the lead but also then got what should have been a game sealing pick) only for the person responsible to put it on the shelf for sale (Hill) to drop it mid-way, breaking it in half. It might have been able to be repaired, but probably not. The glass blower then in a fit of rage stomped on it to make sure that the small chance of it being fixed turned to zero.

At the end of the day, Hill is still the asshole who dropped it and broke it when his task was a very small and simple, yet still important one. (Don't F'ing fumble, put two hands on the ball.)

Between both of your arguments, I sit here saying:  "Why didn't Marv just take a knee?"

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-30-2021, 09:10 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Between both of your arguments, I sit here saying:  "Why didn't Marv just take a knee?"

You lose a yard each time you take a knee. Would have pushed it back from a 43 yard FG to a 46 yard FG.

[fredtoast]

(06-30-2021, 09:10 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Between both of your arguments, I sit here saying:  "Why didn't Marv just take a knee?"

Steelers had 3 timeouts.  We needed a first down to kill the clock.

[fredtoast]

(06-29-2021, 10:00 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote:  In my head, AJ did enough to win that game but then the circus show happened.

But just to be clear.  Even if AJ had not completed a single pass or rushed for a single yard you would have said the exact same thing.

[*bfine32*]

(06-30-2021, 03:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But just to be clear.  Even if AJ had not completed a single pass or rushed for a single yard you would have said the exact same thing.

Far be it from me to get into this semantics argument; however, i think it's appropriate to say AJ played well enough not to look. Sorta like finley did last year versus Pittsburgh.

[*SHRacerX*]

(06-30-2021, 03:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Steelers had 3 timeouts.  We needed a first down to kill the clock.

Three time outs, and we were at, what yardline?  I thought there was like one minute left as well.