What Vegas and the National Media is not talking about

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-28-2022, 01:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: NFL Hall-of-Fame quarterback Kurt Warner disagrees and has film to back up his opinion.

I believe him over you.  Especially since he points it out on film.

I watched a bit of that vid you provided. He is right at times for sure, love Kurt. Great man and great QB but a lot of what
he says in that vid are assumptions on what Mahomes saw. Doesn't change the fact our Defense confused Mahomes. You 
are saying it was all a fluke 2 times we played him where we held Mahomes Offense to a total of 6 points twice.

Kurt Warner isn't saying that, you are the one with the extreme view here Fred. No way any of this was a fluke.

[IsaacCurtis]

Because the nfl narrative has nothing to do with Bengals this year.

They were a flash in he pan. This year, Raiders, Denver, Pittsburgh , Buffalo will be all the rage.

[Eraserhead]

(08-28-2022, 01:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So who is the troll here?

[gman657]

Unbearable. If everyone on here was saying it was a fluke then Fred would be making baseball analogies trying to prove it wasn’t.

[fredtoast]

(08-28-2022, 03:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It was a personal attack. You did not disagree; you told the dude he didn't know the definition of a word.

Troll Post:

"You don't know the definition of fluke"

Rational Post

"I disagree with your view of not a fluke"

You are doing nothing here but playing with semantics.  I can use any rhetorical style I wish to tell someone I disagree with them and it will not be a personal attack unless I somehow insult their character, morals, integrity or something like that.

Based on your logic everything I disagree with someone they can squeal that it is a personal attack.  It is ridiculous to claim that disagreeing with someones opinion is the same as calling them a troll.

(08-28-2022, 03:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You ignored about 85% of the points made; 

No I di not.  I knew you would make some silly claim like that.  And that is why I asked that you use the quote button.  Idid not ignore anything.  I addressed every reasonable argument put forth.

(08-28-2022, 03:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You've provided nothing to dispute the Bengals had a great season last year because of skill and planning.

I have never claimed that the entire season was a fluke.  All I did was point to the fact that every single one of our last 4 victories were decided on the last play of the game and they all went our way.

I also pointed out that our "skill and planning" only resulted in a #7 ranked offense and a defense that was in the bottom half of the league.  So "skill and planning" did not seem to make us a Super Bowl level team.  

It seems that we need some explanation for why "skill and planning" only appeared in 2 second halves instead of all season long.  We had the same players and coaches, so what is your answer?

(08-28-2022, 03:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: And then when asked: "Did Andy Reid plan to lose the games" you come up with crickets...

I came up with crickets because that was a complete non-sequitur that had nothing to do with what we were discussing.  Not one single person was trying to argue that Andy Reid had executed his plan perfectly.

When people throw out silly comments that don't mean anything I just ignore them.

(08-28-2022, 03:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The Bengals went to the Super Bowl last year because of skill and planning.

Then we should get new players who use their skills all for entire games year and coaches who make plans for entire games all year.  As the Super Bowl proved when you don't use your "skill and planning" for the entire game you sometimes lose.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-29-2022, 11:16 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I addressed every reasonable argument put forth.

I'm still waiting on you to point out where in the video I posted on the 3rd-and-27 play the fluke you claim was responsible for the conversion occurs.

[fredtoast]

(08-28-2022, 04:50 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote:  You are saying it was all a fluke 2 times we played him where we held Mahomes Offense to a total of 6 points twice.

Kansas City averaged 27.5 points and 394 yards per game against us.

Over the course of a season that would rank their offense #6 in scoring and #3 in yards.

Thye scorched our defense.

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 11:21 AM)PhilHos Wrote:


I'm still waiting on you to point out where in the video I posted on the 3rd-and-27 play the fluke you claim was responsible for the conversion occurs.

I can show you a video of a guy making a basketball shot from the top of a thousand foot building.  Just from the video you would not be able to point to one single thing that proves it is lucky, yet he had to try it hundreds of times before he did it once.  Do you agree that what he did was "lucky" or will you claim it was all skill just because you can't point to anything "lucky" in the video?

The fact that the absolute best QBs in the entire league were unable to convert a 3rd-and-25 for 4 years proves it is not just the result of skill.  It takes some luck.

But since you are convinced it is all just skill would you be willing to have a standing sig bet on the Bengals ability to convert the next time they face a 3rd-and-25 situation?  I hate to bet against the Bengals, but I would in order to prove a point to you.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-29-2022, 11:39 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I can show you a video of a guy making a basketball shot from the top of a thousand foot building.  Just from the video you would not be able to point to one single thing that proves it is lucky, yet he had to try it hundreds of times before he did it once.  Do you agree that what he did was "lucky" or will you claim it was all skill just because you can't point to anything "lucky" in the video?

Except this wasn't some 1-in-a-million shot. I mean, you are aware that Burrow and Chase hooked up for even longer pass plays multiple times prior to this play, right? Just because it occurred on a 3rd-and-27 doesn't make it lucky all-of-a-sudden. Or, are you claiming that ALL of Burrow's deep passes are lucky?

So, again, I ask you, where was the luck?

(08-29-2022, 11:39 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The fact that the absolute best QBs in the entire league were unable to convert a 3rd-and-25 for 4 years proves it is not just the result of skill.  It takes some luck.

So every play that's set some kind of record in the NFL is the result of luck. Got it. 

BTW, why did you stop at 4 years? 

[*Go Cards*]

Justin Tucker was celebrating that Bengals 3rd and 27 yds to go conversion.

Because the Bengals already had Evan in FG range and that 67 yd FG was going to be the new record.

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 12:12 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Except this wasn't some 1-in-a-million shot.

Once every 4 years.

Once every 137 attempts.

Explain those numbers if all that is involved is "skill".

A video of someone doing something is not proof that no luck was involved.  That is ridiculous.  I can show you dozens of videos of kids making full court basketball shots and other incredibly lucky things.  Based on your logic nothing that has ever happened involved luck of any kind.  You just say that the fact that it happened proves there was no luck involved.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-29-2022, 11:23 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Kansas City averaged 27.5 points and 394 yards per game against us.

Over the course of a season that would rank their offense #6 in scoring and #3 in yards.

Thye scorched our defense.

Not in the 2nd half where it mattered the most. It isn't how you start it is how you finish...

You are not going to shutdown KC an entire game, just not going to happen. 

We were the team that shut them down when it mattered. Not the Bills Defense, the Bengals Defense did.

Everyone agrees on this but you, including Bills fans and Chiefs fans.

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 12:59 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Not in the 2nd half where it mattered the most. It isn't how you start it is how you finish...

Then how did we lose to the Bears when we outscored them 17-13 in the second half?

How did we lose to the Forty-niners when we outscored them 17-9 in the second half?

Claiming that the first half "doesn't count" is ridiculous.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-29-2022, 12:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Once every 4 years.

Once every 137 attempts.

Explain those numbers if all that is involved is "skill".

It wasn't once every 4 years. It wasn't once every 137 attempts. It was one of many deep passes Burrow made that season alone. Hell, it wasn't even his longest pass of the season. Your only claim to it being lucky is that it was a 3rd and 27. That's it. And frankly, that's a bullshit reason.

If that play was a 1st and 10 or a 3rd and 1, would you still claim it was lucky? Or would praise the skills of Burrow and Chase? I would suspect the latter. Just because it was 3rd and 27 doesn't make the play flukey or lucky. It was a skillful pass and a skillful reception by 2 great players. There was no luck involved. 

(08-29-2022, 12:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: A video of someone doing something is not proof that no luck was involved.  That is ridiculous.  I can show you dozens of videos of kids making full court basketball shots and other incredibly lucky things.  Based on your logic nothing that has ever happened involved luck of any kind.  You just say that the fact that it happened proves there was no luck involved.

No, there are plays that are unusual that can involve luck. I doubt there are any kids that can routinely make full court shots, so when one actually makes 1 full court shot, its lucky. Burrow and Chase were completing a LOT of long passes last season. This was not the only pass of 27 yards or more that these 2 connected on. Burrow himself had at least 1 pass of 39 yards in 12 separate games last season. So, to compare a pass play that Burrow and Chase made somewhat regularly to a shot a bunch of kids try all the time and almost never make is illogical and stupid. I can show you multiple videos of burrow and Chase completing passes of 27 yards or more. I doubt you can show me 1 video of a bunch of kids making multiple half court shots.

The only reason you refuse to point out where the luck was in the video is because you can't. Because there is none. It was a skillful play made by a top-notch QB to a top-notch WR. 

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-29-2022, 01:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then how did we lose to the Bears when we outscored them 17-13 in the second half?

How did we lose to the Forty-niners when we outscored them 17-9 in the second half?

Claiming that the first half "doesn't count" is ridiculous.

Burrow threw 3 straight interceptions against the Bears, that was how we lost to them. We didn't finish in the end.

The 49ers finished in OT, that is why we did not in that game. That is why we lost to the 49ers.

We finished against the Chiefs twice and that is what matters the most.

[*Synric*]

(08-28-2022, 01:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: NFL Hall-of-Fame quarterback Kurt Warner disagrees and has film to back up his opinion.

I believe him over you.  Especially since he points it out on film.

NFL Hall-of-Fame quarterback Kurt Warner was doing a film review from an aerial view which is completely different than standing on the field.

No Defense is perfect of course Mahomes had options. Andy Reid could have also adjusted and forced Lou to stop dropping 7 an 8 guys into coverage by playing heavy and running. The mixed coverage were obviously confusing Mahomes and Andy Reid didn't adjust.

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 01:25 PM)Synric Wrote: NFL Hall-of-Fame quarterback Kurt Warner was doing a film review from an aerial view which is completely different than standing on the field.

And you formed your opinion based on what you saw from standing on the field?

I honestly think a former NFL QB has some clue about what a QB is actually seeing standing on the field.

[*Synric*]

(08-29-2022, 01:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And you formed your opinion based on what you saw from standing on the field?

I honestly think a former NFL QB has some clue about what a QB is actually seeing standing on the field.

LoL your right Mahomes knew exactly what Kurt was looking at and decided to make the worst choice instead of the proper one. Makes perfect  sense.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-29-2022, 01:34 PM)Synric Wrote: LoL your right Mahomes knew exactly what Kurt was looking at and decided to make the worst choice instead of the proper one. Makes perfect  sense.

Yeah man, it was intentional.

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 01:19 PM)PhilHos Wrote: It wasn't once every 4 years. It wasn't once every 137 attempts. It was one of many deep passes Burrow made that season alone. Hell, it wasn't even his longest pass of the season. Your only claim to it being lucky is that it was a 3rd and 27. That's it. And frankly, that's a bullshit reason.

It is not bullshit.  The numbers prove I am correct.  You can't compare every long completion in every game situation to a long completion against a defense specifically designed to stop a 3rd and 25.


Over the last 4 years NFL QBs have completed 3841 passes for 25+ yards.  Only one has been on 3rd-and-25+.  13 different QBs have 100 or more completions for 25+ yards.  Not a single one of them has done it on 3rd-and 25+.

(08-29-2022, 01:19 PM)PhilHos Wrote: The only reason you refuse to point out where the luck was in the video is because you can't. Because there is none. It was a skillful play made by a top-notch QB to a top-notch WR. 

Actually the reason I can't point to luck is the exact same reason that you can't point to luck in a video of a ten year old making a full court shot.  And that reason is that just showing a video of something happening doesn't prove ANYTHING about how lucky it was.  That entire argument was a logical failure.