NO NFL Network analyst picked us to return to Super Bowl

[THE PISTONS]

(09-06-2022, 03:13 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Yeah, who cares what people say no doubt.

Still it is the truth and at least we know it.

We didn't have our roster and coaches dismantled that lost the Superbowl like most team's do...

This is a big deal.

Some media members picked the Browns to breakout the past 5 years. Now Mayfield is gone!

[THE PISTONS]

I'd probably pick a Bucs vs Bills SB. But, I sure hope it's a Bucs vs Bengals. And it could be.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(09-06-2022, 11:26 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Teams who lose, or win, the Super Bowl usually do not return for several reasons. Injuries can derail a season, but more specifically if you make it to the SB, usually by the time next year rolls around most of your assistant coaches have been plucked for other jobs, high end players may sign elsewhere for more money, etc. This team is different. All the coaches are back, as are most of the players. And last year Chase was a rookie and Burrow nad Higgins were in their sophmore seasons. All 3 should be even better now. The system is the same. No reason for this team not to pick up right where it left off.

We lost Al Golden of the assistant coach's who was replaced with Betcher a proven DC in the NFL. If that is our big loss along
with Ogunjobi and Uzomah that isn't bad and even could very well be an improvement with Zach Carter, Cam Sample backing 
up BJ Hill and Hurst being a better pass catching option at TE.

[Joelist]

(09-06-2022, 10:28 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We had a good year for injuries by NFL standards. We had some, but not many.

Then, yeah late season we lost Reiff and Larry O in the playoffs. But, we had some good health overall.

And people keep forgetting the MASH unit state of the OL by season's end. It's all part of the all out psychosis against any idea that the Bengals might really be good and did not fluke themselves into the Super Bowl (which absent a horrendous bad PI call on us they win). 

[Joelist]

(09-06-2022, 01:37 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Losing Super Bowl teams dont go back is such a lazy take.  

Who were those teams?
Who were those QBs?
How many lost players or coaches or both the next season?

How many of those losing Super Bowl teams:
Had 10 starters return on defense?
Had 6 starters return on offense with 4 upgrades?
Had 3 new CBs the SB season and they all return?
Had a new starter at MLB and returned?
Had 2 new starters on the Dline and returned?
Had the top rated QB return?
Had a Top 3 WR return?
Had the best WR trio in the league return?
Had a Top 5 back return?
Had the HC, DC, OC, STC all return?

Teams that did lose and return to the SB had great QBs - Griese, Kelley, Brady.
Which great QB'S didnt return?
Marino - held out the next year and they still went to the AFC title game.
Manning - left the Colts
Favre - new HC
Mahomes - AFC title game
Elway - lost oline and dline



And sure the Bengals were healthy last season, the 7th healthiest team in the league. But why does this only matter with us?  The Chiefs and Bills were the Top 2 healthiest teams last season yet I see no mention of this?

The Bengals lost 5 games by 3 points, twice in OT.
Do we lose to SF without 2 muffed punts in their redzone?
Do we lose to the Bears if Burrow doesnt throw 3 picks in a row?

The Rams (9-2) and the Bengals (8-3) were the hottest teams to end the season, yet only the Rams are picked to continue their success?

Bunch of hogwash...I hope the lack of respect fuels our guys even more.

Thanks for mentioning the SF game. That was EXTREMELY fluky (having your punt returner fumble twice is not normal at all). That was also the game where it was visibly evident Burrow was fully back and really trusted the knee. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-06-2022, 02:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You can't just pretend a game never happened because it makes Herbert look better.

If they don't play the same number of games then post per-game averages to compare them.

Who's pretending? I'm looking at the hype Herbert got/gets with 5,000 yds and 38 tds and saying, through 16 games, Burrow was on the same trajectory but didn't need to play in the last game. 

If you want to see their per game averages, go look them up. I just showed you a head-to-head 16 game span from game 1 to game 16. 

This isn't rocket surgery people. 

[casear2727]

(09-06-2022, 05:31 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Who's pretending? I'm looking at the hype Herbert got/gets with 5,000 yds and 38 tds and saying, through 16 games, Burrow was on the same trajectory but didn't need to play in the last game. 

If you want to see their per game averages, go look them up. I just showed you a head-to-head 16 game span from game 1 to game 16. 

This isn't rocket surgery people. 

Fred needing attention again...

Your post was very clear and spot on.

[fredtoast]

(09-06-2022, 06:24 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Fred needing attention again...

Well at least I seek attention by discussing football instead of another member that I am obsessed with.

[fredtoast]

(09-06-2022, 05:31 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Who's pretending? I'm looking at the hype Herbert got/gets with 5,000 yds and 38 tds and saying, through 16 games, Burrow was on the same trajectory but didn't need to play in the last game. 

If you want to see their per game averages, go look them up. I just showed you a head-to-head 16 game span from game 1 to game 16. 

This isn't rocket surgery people. 

Pretty convenient for Burrow that he got to dodge the team that held him to a 69.0 passer rating in their first game.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-06-2022, 06:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Pretty convenient for Burrow that he got to dodge the team that held him to a 69.0 passer rating in their first game.

Sure.

[*bengalfan74*]

(09-06-2022, 06:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Pretty convenient for Burrow that he got to dodge the team that held him to a 69.0 passer rating in their first game.

Damn it ! That really bothers me that Burrow got to dodge that. The P.O.S. need put in his place as the turd he is.

He couldn't hold a candle to Herbert.

[Essex Johnson]

(09-06-2022, 01:02 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: No one said he's average. He's a very good QB. When you look at the numbers comparatively, Herbert has played more games due to injury and playing in the last game last year where Burrow didn't. 

My post was pointing out that, before the last game of last year, the "big" numbers, yds, tds, ints were almost the same. It was that last game against the Raiders that gave Herbert the 5,000yds and almost 40 tds that made his year look, statistically, that much better. 

I think we start down splitting hairs when we look at a single game difference etc..  in that case Herbert would have added even more to his rookie year record of 31 TDs, since he did not start till 2nd game.. Over their first two years they are very comparable in stats and wins/losses but Burrow moved ahead with Bengals making playoffs and getting to Super Bowl.  We should have had the same or better consideration for getting to Super Bowl again this year no doubt about it, out of 25 analyst that surprised me though in the end I feel they got the Bills right, they should be favored but no way we should not be mentioned...

[THE PISTONS]

(09-06-2022, 03:42 PM)Joelist Wrote: And people keep forgetting the MASH unit state of the OL by season's end. It's all part of the all out psychosis against any idea that the Bengals might really be good and did not fluke themselves into the Super Bowl (which absent a horrendous bad PI call on us they win). 

Yep. The line was below average, but with injuries was bad.

[*Synric*]

One big change that can effect if the whole Super Bowl losers not returning to the superbowl is the new 14 team playoffs. In the second year of this new system we had both 4th seed teams go the the superbowl and that's the first time a team without a first round bye has won the superbowl since the Ravens. Teams without the first round bye winning the superbowl used to be very rare but now I expect it to happen quite a bit.

It will be interesting to see how the whole losers returning to the superbowl thing plays out over rhe next decade because of the new playoff system.

Edit: Also that 17 game schedule. Some of those 9-7 teams on that list could become 10-7 and earn that final wild card spot.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-06-2022, 07:40 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I think we start down splitting hairs when we look at a single game difference etc..  in that case Herbert would have added even more to his rookie year record of 31 TDs, since he did not start till 2nd game.. Over their first two years they are very comparable in stats and wins/losses but Burrow moved ahead with Bengals making playoffs and getting to Super Bowl.  We should have had the same or better consideration for getting to Super Bowl again this year no doubt about it, out of 25 analyst that surprised me though in the end I feel they got the Bills right, they should be favored but no way we should not be mentioned...

That's what i was saying. Their stats align pretty well. Burrow is better on comp% and ypa which makes his rating higher, but their yards per game, touchdowns per game and ints per game are about the same. 

Burrow has been there, done that and Herbert hasn't which is sparking all the Herbert talk this year. They're going to promote that until he gets over the hump or falls on his face. 

[Stewy]

(09-05-2022, 04:23 PM)Tony Wrote: This the dumbest take in all of sports. So sick of seeing it. None of those other teams that lost are the Bengals. What the **** is the point? Saying they have a smaller chance than a team like the Chargers who didn't even make the playoffs is ridiculous..

It's not a take, it's statistics.

Get over yourself.

[fredtoast]

(09-06-2022, 07:18 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Sure.

It wasn't meant as a shot to Burrow.  It was meant to show how silly your statistical analysis is.

It makes just as much sense to project another game played by Burrow against the Browns as it does to pretend Herbert didn't throw for 400 yds and 3 tds against the Raiders.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-06-2022, 08:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It wasn't meant as a shot to Burrow.  It was meant to show how silly your statistical analysis is.

It makes just as much sense to project another game played by Burrow against the Browns as it does to pretend Herbert didn't throw for 400 yds and 3 tds against the Raiders.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand. 

"It makes just as much sense to project...". Yeah, that's what i'm saying. If both had played 17 games, Burrows numbers would have more than likely been similar to Herberts. Just as they have been throughout their short careers. 

I don't see how or why anything else you posted is even necessary. "Silly statistical analysis"? What is that? There was nothing added, subtracted or skewed to make one look better or worse. I posted the exact stats for each QB after the first 16 games played. 

And i'm guessing you still can't see why i've said in the past, you add or take away from something someone has said or create some kind of argument that isn't there?

[samhain]

I understand the idea that they overachieved considering the o-line and overall youth on offense.

That said, I don't necessarily see that as a disqualifier with this group. Peaking early and overachieving aren't necessarily the same. If anything, the Bengals could be even better with the young offensive players gaining experience and snaps together. I also think the defense is better than they were ranked in the 2021 regular season, and the playoffs started to reflect that.

The Bengals have been adding defensive pieces for 3 offseasons. Many of them came from other teams. It takes time for guys from outside the organization to get on the same page, particularly when there are several coming in at the same time. This year brings more stability. I think this is an underrated factor. We basically have the same group of starters retuning for the first time in the Taylor era, and they were pretty good together last year. I feel like they can be even better.

[Soonerpeace]

(09-06-2022, 01:37 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Losing Super Bowl teams dont go back is such a lazy take.

Who were those teams?
Who were those QBs?
How many lost players or coaches or both the next season?

How many of those losing Super Bowl teams:
Had 10 starters return on defense?
Had 6 starters return on offense with 4 upgrades?
Had 3 new CBs the SB season and they all return?
Had a new starter at MLB and returned?
Had 2 new starters on the Dline and returned?
Had the top rated QB return?
Had a Top 3 WR return?
Had the best WR trio in the league return?
Had a Top 5 back return?
Had the HC, DC, OC, STC all return?

Teams that did lose and return to the SB had great QBs - Griese, Kelley, Brady.
Which great QB'S didnt return?
Marino - held out the next year and they still went to the AFC title game.
Manning - left the Colts
Favre - new HC
Mahomes - AFC title game
Elway - lost oline and dline



And sure the Bengals were healthy last season, the 7th healthiest team in the league. But why does this only matter with us? The Chiefs and Bills were the Top 2 healthiest teams last season yet I see no mention of this?

The Bengals lost 5 games by 3 points, twice in OT.
Do we lose to SF without 2 muffed punts in their redzone?
Do we lose to the Bears if Burrow doesnt throw 3 picks in a row?

The Rams (9-2) and the Bengals (8-3) were the hottest teams to end the season, yet only the Rams are picked to continue their success?

Bunch of hogwash...I hope the lack of respect fuels our guys even more.

Best post in long time.