Jake Browning appreciation thread

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(12-05-2023, 07:24 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: That's what I wonder??

I elated that Browning had a great game, and happy for the team. But I can't help but wonder, was this just a guy having his day in the sun? Or did he cross the bridge and now can be a reliable backup that can win a game here and there? Or even more?

At least now there's a reason to watch the games.

That is the question, we will see in this Colts game next week if he was just in the zone last night. If he can be consistent and 
Zac, the other coaches, the OL and the other players help him out and Browning gets another win against the Colts we will see 
if we have something special in our backup or not. It was just one game and before this he wasn't very good in either appearance
even if the Ravens game shouldn't count as he was thrown into the fire.

I still don't like the Brandon Allen comparison though, sure, he had a good game against the Texans but that team wasn't near as
good as the one Jake Browning played great against last night.

[Bengalfan4life27c]

I'm looking at his pre - draft report card I see none of his weaknesses at present. It's almost like he was downgraded for 2 shoulder injuries he apparently played through injury and was considered a negative by NFL personnel and scouts. I know it's 1 game but besides for Burrow and Maybe 2015 Dalton pre thumb injury and prime Carson. I havent seen that kind of QB play out of a Bengals offense man was impressive.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-05-2023, 01:16 PM)NotBigzo Wrote: Burrow wasn't hurt that game until he reaggervated his injury later than a game. The comparison is between a healthy Browning vs a hurt Burrow, not a Healthy Browning vs a healthy Burrow.

Joe wasn’t even close to being healthy in week 2. He was still an absolute statue at that point. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

ETA: you also literally started a thread talking about how mad you are that Zac didn’t start Browning the first 4 weeks. And now Joe was healthy in week 2? You seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(12-05-2023, 08:34 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Joe wasn’t even close to being healthy in week 2. He was still an absolute statue at that point. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

ETA: you also literally started a thread talking about how mad you are that Zac didn’t start Browning the first 4 weeks. And now Joe was healthy in week 2? You seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.

He does that at times.

[NotBigzo]

(12-05-2023, 08:34 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Joe wasn’t even close to being healthy in week 2. He was still an absolute statue at that point. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

ETA: you also literally started a thread talking about how mad you are that Zac didn’t start Browning the first 4 weeks. And now Joe was healthy in week 2? You seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Compare Burrow's stats in that Baltimore game to LA, Cleveland, and Tennessee. They also came out and stated that Burrow [b]Reaggravated/b] his injury. He was healthy week 2 and then took a step backwards. 

Some of you go to great lengths to rewrite history, it seems. 

Whether Zac played a hurt Burrow for 3 games or 4 doesn't really matter. It's just you nitpicking text instead of ever addressing the greater point: He still preferred a hurt Burrow for at least a number of games

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-05-2023, 10:54 PM)NotBigzo Wrote: Compare Burrow's stats in that Baltimore game to LA, Cleveland, and Tennessee. They also came out and stated that Burrow Reaggravated his injury. He was healthy week 2 and then took a step backwards. 

Some of you go to great lengths to rewrite history, it seems.

Whether Zac played a hurt Burrow for 3 games or 4 doesn't really matter. It's just you nitpicking text instead of ever addressing the greater point: He still preferred a hurt Burrow for at least a number of games

No, it’s you that is going to great lengths to just not admit you were wrong. Burrow did in fact score (multiple times) against a top AFCN defense while he was not even close to being 100%. Period.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(12-05-2023, 11:15 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: No, it’s you that is going to great lengths to just not admit you were wrong. Burrow did in fact score (multiple times) against a top AFCN defense while he was not even close to being 100%. Period.

Joe just doesn't like to lose, let alone to a Division rival. He was hurt of course, but he willed the team to a near win in that one.

Too bad it gave me a ton of hope and he was still really hurt for at least 3 more games after wards before finally looking healthy 
against the 49ers. Burrow did have a great bomb I think against the Cardinals, maybe that was when he was really starting to 
come back to 100%.

I do remember something about Joe reaggravating the calf against the Ravens though. 

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-05-2023, 01:18 PM)NotBigzo Wrote: Burrow wasn't dealing with a calf injury on TNF.

Are you guys trying to rewrite history? 

I didn't notice the hobbled part at first, it was corrected by another poster and addressed later in the thread. Please pay attention.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-05-2023, 11:22 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Joe just doesn't like to lose, let alone to a Division rival. He was hurt of course, but he willed the team to a near win in that one.

Too bad it gave me a ton of hope and he was still really hurt for at least 3 more games after wards before finally looking healthy 
against the 49ers. Burrow did have a great bomb I think against the Cardinals, maybe that was when he was really starting to 
come back to 100%.

I do remember something about Joe reaggravating the calf against the Ravens though. 

Apparently, some people don't understand that you can not be at 100%, and still reaggrevate the original injury and thus have a setback. Burrow was maybe 65-75% during that first Baltimore game. He came out of it worse. It's like some don't remember the history of trainers working his calf between series the first few weeks. 

[*SHRacerX*]

(12-05-2023, 07:09 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: That is the crazy part, so much went wrong and we still won against a top team in their house on Monday Night Football.

Yep, and I don't want to hear it was because horsehead got injured.  He played 85% of the game.  

[*SHRacerX*]

(12-05-2023, 07:24 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: That's what I wonder??

I'm elated that Browning had a great game, and happy for the team. But I can't help but wonder, was this just a guy having his day in the sun? Or did he cross the bridge and now can be a reliable backup that can win a game here and there? Or even more?

At least now there's a reason to watch the games.

I think the kid showed he is more than capable and extremely accurate.  I think two of his incompletes were throw aways, two were drops, and one was tipped.  I believe the attention is on ZT and BC.  They need to keep being less predictable and having moving pockets to play to his strengths and prevent the opponent from teeing off to one spot every damn snap.  I also like how they have been using Sample in the backfield more as a blocker.  He had a damn good game.  

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(12-06-2023, 12:40 AM)Wyche Wrote: Apparently, some people don't understand that you can not be at 100%, and still reaggrevate the original injury and thus have a setback. Burrow was maybe 65-75% during that first Baltimore game. He came out of it worse. It's like some don't remember the history of trainers working his calf between series the first few weeks. 

I guess so and no one knows if Browning would of been better either. Hind sight is 20/20.

(12-06-2023, 06:02 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Yep, and I don't want to hear it was because horsehead got injured.  He played 85% of the game.  

Me neither, horsehead lol 

Coachmcniel was trying to allude that Kirk going down and horsehead late going down was the reason we won the game.

To that I say BS, the backup QB played good as well.

(12-06-2023, 06:05 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: I think the kid showed he is more than capable and extremely accurate.  I think two of his incompletes were throw aways, two were drops, and one was tipped.  I believe the attention is on ZT and BC.  They need to keep being less predictable and having moving pockets to play to his strengths and prevent the opponent from teeing off to one spot every damn snap.  I also like how they have been using Sample in the backfield more as a blocker.  He had a damn good game.  

Yes, Browning could of had a perfect game, the only bad pass I saw him throw, Chase saved him and it was complete.

Drew Sample has been playing very good lately. Probably the best of his career. Blocking very well and even catching some passes
and a couple TD's. So true on Zac and Brian, keep being unpredictable and having Browning under Center at least half the time and
we could win more than just a couple games. Especially if the Defense gets better at tackling.

[Sled21]

Horsehead being on or off the field has absolutely nothing to do with Browning torching them for 350+ and 31 points and an 86.5% completion rating.

[SunsetBengal]

The Browning led offense has the team averaging 32.5 points/game this past two weeks. Not too shabby!

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-11-2023, 11:20 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The Browning led offense has the team averaging 32.5 points/game this past two weeks.  Not too shabby!  

That's two good games he's stacked back to back. Not too shabby at all.

[motoarch]

Guys a killer.

I wasn't very high on playoff shot but now i can see this team beating KC on the way to a playoff birth.

I honestly think this team can beat anyone in the league.

Taylor has been much smarter game planning around Browning and the team is responding.

[Frank Booth]

(12-11-2023, 12:21 PM)motoarch Wrote: Guys a killer.

I wasn't very high on playoff shot but now i can see this team beating KC on the way to a playoff birth.

I honestly think this team can beat anyone in the league.

Taylor has been much smarter game planning around Browning and the team is responding.

Bengals have to go 3-1 in order to make the playoffs. Vikings game seems like a W

Those other 3? Woof. Those are rough games for a back up

[Sled21]

(12-11-2023, 12:35 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: Bengals have to go 3-1 in order to make the playoffs. Vikings game seems like a W

Those other 3? Woof. Those are rough games for a back up

I don't even care at this point, this team is just fun to watch. Of course I want them to win out, but I'm not going to whine if we miss the playoffs.

[Bengalbug]

(12-11-2023, 12:35 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: Bengals have to go 3-1 in order to make the playoffs. Vikings game seems like a W

Those other 3? Woof. Those are rough games for a back up

Zappe (backup) just beat Pitt, in Pitt… with a much worse roster (patriots).

Don’t be shocked if the bengals are slight favorites ahead of that game.

[TecmoBengals]

(12-11-2023, 12:38 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I don't even care at this point, this team is just fun to watch. Of course I want them to win out, but I'm not going to whine if we miss the playoffs.

I share your sentiment. The team is fun to watch right now and I'm happy to see them competing. Sure, I'd like a high draft pick but I'd much rather see Zac rack up the wins as a coach and continue to build upon his organizational success.