Bengals Roster Ranked Near the Bottom of the NFL

[fredtoast]

(07-09-2021, 11:53 AM)Frank Booth Wrote: stop wasting your breath.. umm no, that's not right

stop wasting finger energy on nico and the other poster

...yeah, finger energy

At least Murdock mentioned a football player in his post.

When you talk about wasting "finger energy" I think of guys who just make posts to attack other member here instead of discussing football.

[*Nately120*]

(07-09-2021, 10:11 AM)SHRacerX Wrote:

A truly horrendous movie...but I did laugh a couple times.  And Phoebe Cates?  Yes, please.  

Rik Mayall starring in a movie for Americans was a bizarre choice, that's for sure. 

[Wes Mantooth]

(07-09-2021, 01:52 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Rik Mayall starring in a movie for Americans was a bizarre choice, that's for sure. 

I can only imagine the pitches in Hollywood in the few years after the success of this...

[*Nately120*]

(07-09-2021, 02:13 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I can only imagine the pitches in Hollywood in the few years  after the success of this...

I'd say the issue was Drop Dead Fred was an imaginary friend, not a "look how crazy a British person in a different country is" movie.

Though I guess that scenario sort of led to Mr Belvidere.  What was this thread about, again?  Oh weak roster.  Of course our roster is weak, we are 2 years removed from having a roster so weak that even our ace coaching staff of genius winners went 2-14. 

[BengalChris]

(07-08-2021, 10:00 PM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: You can't see why that changes anything because you've already made up your mind and are trying to shoe-horn the evidence into your pre-determined narrative. Be a bit more open-minded.

Jessie Bates improved his play to an all-pro level under/despite the current coaches.

According to PFF Sam Hubbard and Trey Hopkins, improved their play in 2019 compared to 2018 and in 2020 compared to 2019. Other than Boyd (improved from 2019 to 2020) that's all the starters PFF listed who were here under the previous coaching regime. 

Vonn Bell went from a PFF grade of 62.8 in 2019 before he joined to 71.5 under the Bengals' coaching staff.

If they improved why can't the 1/3 new arrivals? Or the 1/3 who have only been here a year and who haven't had a full pre-season under the coaches yet? Or the 1/3 who were held back by injury. This is a rebuilt roster who we've seen very little of. 

Chances are we again see a better team in 2021 than in 2020. How much better remains to be seen. Maybe the team won't improve enough but to argue the team can't improve under the coaches would be asinine and contrary to the evidence available. Maybe they'll only take small improvements like Hubbard and Hopkins. Maybe they'll make big improvements like Jessie Bates. I'll be hoping the latter.

It's a 53 man roster, plus numerous practice squad guys and I see you've managed to come up with 5 guys you feel have improved their play. That's less than 10% of the roster. Nothing against those guys either, they're all good young players who have managed to improve while the bulk of the roster has not, as witnessed by the teams decline in the win column.

How about counting the guys who played worse after Taylor and his pals arrived? There is the other side of the coin to consider and count. The declining team record shows this. Even Jon Ross, as bad as he was under Marvin, found ways to get even worse under Taylor, a coach many people thought would actually be a help to Ross.

How about the disfunction of the defensive scheme? How does this Lou character even have a job in the NFL?

How about the fixation on the 11 personnel formation on offense? Where's this offensive genius we were promised?

A decent coaching staff would have gotten more out of this roster. For that I am certain. I'd think that would be rather plain and obvious to even the most casual fan.

 

[fredtoast]

(07-09-2021, 04:49 PM)BengalChris Wrote: A decent coaching staff would have gotten more out of this roster. For that I am certain. I'd think that would be rather plain and obvious to even the most casual fan.

Certainly to the "most casual fan" who doesn't know what he is talking about would agree with you.  But not these experts who ranked our roster at #24. They are saying that the team is finishing right where the talent indicates it should.

[BengalChris]

(07-09-2021, 05:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Certainly to the "most casual fan" who doesn't know what he is talking about would agree with you.  But not these experts who ranked our roster at #24. They are saying that the team is finishing right where the talent indicates it should.

Or not. Would they say that if this roster belonged to Bill Belichick? I doubt it.

 

[Murdock2420]

(07-09-2021, 05:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Certainly to the "most casual fan" who doesn't know what he is talking about would agree with you.  But not these experts who ranked our roster at #24. They are saying that the team is finishing right where the talent indicates it should.

(07-09-2021, 05:23 PM)BengalChris Wrote: Or not. Would they say that if this roster belonged to Bill Belichick? I doubt it.

 

That is a really interesting debate. Would the players be ranked higher with better coaching. 

Some of them probably would be, or at least would appear to be better if you had a coach that was designing his offense to fit the players. Something that might actually been seen if this season is another terrible year and Taylor gets shown the door.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

Our roster isn't that bad, it has been our coaching. Pollack and Hobby should really help our roster out.

We will see if Taylor and Lou can up their game, they have been bad to say the least.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(07-09-2021, 10:11 AM)SHRacerX Wrote:

A truly horrendous movie...but I did laugh a couple times.  And Phoebe Cates?  Yes, please.  

Phoebe was one hot babe no doubt.

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-09-2021, 10:11 AM)SHRacerX Wrote:

A truly horrendous movie...but I did laugh a couple times.  And Phoebe Cates?  Yes, please.  

You simply cannot use the words "truly horrendous movie" without following it with "freddy got fingered". 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(07-09-2021, 08:22 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You simply cannot use the words "truly horrendous movie" without following it with "freddy got fingered". 

Daddy would you like some sausage?!

[Frank Booth]

(07-09-2021, 08:22 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You simply cannot use the words "truly horrendous movie" without following it with "freddy got fingered". 

Nice original opinion you got there. Haven’t heard heard that one before

Freddy got fingered is supposed to be a stupid comedy. That’s all it’s trying to be. And it is funny

It’s my hooooves!

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-09-2021, 09:04 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: Nice original opinion you got there. Haven’t heard heard that one before

Freddy got fingered is supposed to be a stupid comedy. That’s all it’s trying to be. And it is funny

It’s my hooooves!

Thanks, Captian Obvious. I love actual stupid comedy. That pile of shit that Tom Green wrote, directed and "starred" in fell about 72,000 miles from anything that can loosely be considered comedy. It was, however, really stupid. 

Your taste in movies is bad and you should feel bad. 

[Frank Booth]

(07-09-2021, 09:17 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Thanks, Captian Obvious. I love actual stupid comedy. That pile of shit that Tom Green wrote, directed and "starred" in fell about 72,000 miles from anything that can loosely be considered comedy. It was, however, really stupid. 

Your taste in movies is bad and you should feel bad. 

ah yes, my taste in movies is bad because I think there are worse movies than freddy got fingered. Yep mhmm makes logical sense to me.

I dont even believe you've actually seen it. You're just jumping on the old hate bandwagon from years ago after Roger Ebert called it the worst movie ever.

Much worse movies out there than freddy got fingered. Like anything with Kevin Costner that isnt Field of dreams. Or anything directed by Michael Mann

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-09-2021, 09:21 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: I dont believe you've actually seen it. You're just jumping on the old hate bandwagon from years ago after Roger Ebert called it the worst movie ever.

Much worse movies out there than freddy got fingered. Like anything with Kevin Costner that isnt Field of dreams. Or anything directed by Michael Mann

Color me surprised that you're wrong. I've seen every minute of it. I wouldn't bother talking about how terrible it was if i hadn't. 

I even put it ahead of Feast 3, which is an utterly terrible movie. Feast 3 gets residual props though since it's a sequel of one of the best B horror movies of all time. 

[Frank Booth]

(07-09-2021, 09:33 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Color me surprised that you're wrong. I've seen every minute of it. I wouldn't bother talking about how terrible it was if i hadn't. 

I even put it ahead of Feast 3, which is an utterly terrible movie. Feast 3 gets residual props though since it's a sequel of one of the best B horror movies of all time. 

yuck, you're a b movie guy. 

go listen to some rockabilly

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-09-2021, 09:37 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: yuck, you're a b movie guy. 

go listen to some rockabilly

I get raging mega-boners from B movies. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(07-09-2021, 09:21 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: ah yes, my taste in movies is bad because I think there are worse movies than freddy got fingered. Yep mhmm makes logical sense to me.

I dont even believe you've actually seen it. You're just jumping on the old hate bandwagon from years ago after Roger Ebert called it the worst movie ever.

Much worse movies out there than freddy got fingered. Like anything with Kevin Costner that isnt Field of dreams. Or anything directed by Michael Mann

Damn…I actually thought you had decent taste in movies when you first joined with that Blue Velvet avi…

But Costner has definitely been in some good movies that aren’t Field of Dreams:

The Untouchables
Bull Durham (which I actually like better than FoD)
JFK

Just to name a few. He’s also done some great tv (Yellowstone, Hatfields & McCoys).

As for Michael Mann? He’s made some absolute classics like Heat and Last of the Mohicans. Collateral is super underrated, and should be shown to anyone that thinks Tom Cruise can’t act. Thief was also a great directorial debut, which still holds up today.

[Frank Booth]

(07-09-2021, 10:31 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Damn…I actually thought you had decent taste in movies when you first joined with that Blue Velvet avi…

But Costner has definitely been in some good movies that aren’t Field of Dreams:

The Untouchables
Bull Durham (which I actually like better than FoD)
JFK

Just to name a few. He’s also done some great tv (Yellowstone, Hatfields & McCoys).

As for Michael Mann? He’s made some absolute classics like Heat and Last of the Mohicans. Collateral is super underrated, and should be shown to anyone that thinks Tom Cruise can’t act. Thief was also a great directorial debut, which still holds up today.

Untouchables? 

GARBAGE *Pacman Jones voice* 

jfk stinks because oliver stone is just a terrible director. Thanks for reminding me of natural born killers, that piece of junk.

Manhunter is laughable. Heat is shallow dreck. Enough with the stupid lens filters