Now the Entire Country Sees It!

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(11-08-2024, 10:54 AM)Timanky12 Wrote: Bengals never get those calls in the waning moments of the game. Only Mahomes gets those calls.

Which is a shame....and like I said, lends credence to the conspiracy theories. I just can't believe a flag happy crew like that lets THREE separate penalties on one play slide. The Bengals D played bad enough to lose in the second half, but man, they deserved a fair crack at the win.

[Sled21]

(11-08-2024, 10:28 AM)Wyche Wrote: It was you, lol, not some. You are looking prophetic, and I'll give you that. 


OP: Whitworth, Fitz, and Sherman ALL agreed that it was the correct call to go for two. I'll take their word over some YouTube "experts". We bashed him for being too conservative against Baltimore game 1, now we're bashing him for being too aggressive? 

Seems to be a theme there, right?

[Sled21]

(11-08-2024, 10:35 AM)Wyche Wrote: I liked the play, it was open too....two no call DPIs negated it. Throw in the facemask on a QB for good measure. There was one instance they went for it on fourth down I didn't agree with. I didn't like Joe not taking the underneath that was open on two straight bombs. Otherwise, I thought the game plan, play calls, decisions were good on offense....Chase Brown not double skinning the ball notwithstanding. I thought Lou had a good game plan, and good calls for the most part. He got sabotaged by piss poor execution. I blame this loss more on personnel than anything....and that's a front office problem. 

If you watch the last play, there were two hands to the face no calls on the D-line, a facemask no call on Burrow, and a clearly obvious DPI against Gesicki. Sorry, but refs don't miss 4 penalties on one play unless they are doing it on purpose. Even the announcers put them on blast. Referees are betting on games..... prove me wrong.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(11-08-2024, 11:06 AM)Sled21 Wrote: If you watch the last play, there were two hands to the face no calls on the D-line, a facemask no call on Burrow, and a clearly obvious DPI against Gesicki. Sorry, but refs don't miss 4 penalties on one play unless they are doing it on purpose. Even the announcers put them on blast. Referees are betting on games..... prove me wrong.

I would not be surprised. It happened in the NBA. 

I didn't see the hands to the face, Gesicki was mauled, and I think Hudson was hit before the ball got there too.

[THE PISTONS]

(11-08-2024, 11:03 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Seems to be a theme there, right?

As does failure with the Bengals. And finding a way to lose.

Yes - They lose conservatively and they lose aggressively.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(11-08-2024, 11:03 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Seems to be a theme there, right?

Zac Taylor is the new Andy Dalton.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(11-08-2024, 10:13 AM)jj22 Wrote: They don't trust Money, and it's changed their approach. "some" saw/feared this coming week 3.  

That’s not why they went for it.

[No-huddle Joe]

(11-08-2024, 11:11 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: That’s not why they went for it.

I assume JJ22 meant when we had it 4th and 2 at the 38-40 yard line earlier, not the 2 point conversion?  Maybe I am wrong.....

[*bfine32*]

(11-08-2024, 10:09 AM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: You should read the comments following YouTube videos about last night’s embarrassing debacle.  People who don’t normally follow the Bengals are weighing in and it’s ugly.  Commenters are smacking on Zac Taylor hard for his abysmal play calling and for his horrible decisions to go for it instead of taking a certain field goal or extra point.

Yep, anyone who supported the "prevent Offense" thread after a WIN should be happy with the play calling last night.

I was one of the few that applauded the conservative play calling. I would have preferred if he was more conservative last night. 

But you know what they say "You can't please some people any of the time."

BTW no FG is certain with Maybe Mac this year 

[jj22]

(11-08-2024, 11:11 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: That’s not why they went for it.

How do you figure that isn't why when they continued to go for it on 4th down from what used to be FG range? When they had the lead? 

[jj22]

(11-08-2024, 11:17 AM)No-huddle Joe Wrote: I assume JJ22 meant when we had it 4th and 2 at the 38-40 yard line earlier, not the 2 point conversion?  Maybe I am wrong.....

You are right. I am talking about the 4th and 2's with the lead. They used to always trot Money out there for those kicks.  And 3 more points would have won it. 

[THE PISTONS]

(11-08-2024, 11:38 AM)jj22 Wrote: You are right. I am talking about the 4th and 2's with the lead. They used to always trot Money out there for those kicks.  And 3 more points would have won it. 

IF he made it.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(11-08-2024, 11:37 AM)jj22 Wrote: How do you figure that isn't why when they continued to go for it on 4th down from what used to be FG range? When they had the lead? 

It was about who they were playing. FG’s don’t beat the Ravens unless you actually have a defense. They put up 38 points the first matchup and still lost.

They let McPherson kick 2 FG’s just last week. The change of approach was about the opponent, not lack of faith in the kicker.

[THE PISTONS]

(11-08-2024, 12:15 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: It was about who they were playing. FG’s don’t beat the Ravens unless you actually have a defense. They put up 38 points the first matchup and still lost.

They let McPherson kick 2 FG’s just last week. The change of approach was about the opponent, not lack of faith in the kicker.

The puzzling thing is our defense looked competent until the Brown fumble. Then, literally nothing they did worked.

[Clark W Griswold]

With plenty of blame to go around - not tackling on the long TD, throwing deep on 3rd and 4th down, going for 2, not kicking the FG, Browns fumble, refs no calls at the end - none of it matters because one thing I know is that the Bengals would have lost regardless. I get no joy from this franchise and they will always come up short. Sometimes you can’t explain how/why but they will somehow always come up short. Its inevitable…

[lacesout87]

(11-08-2024, 10:27 AM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: The other thing which frosted my flakes last night is when our new running back, Khalil Herbert, fumbled the ball on his first snap as a Bengal.  He was immediately brought to the sideline and benched the rest of the game.  That was idiotic. Herbert should have been given the very next ball as a way to build up his confidence.

What I find annoying is that these are professionals getting paid millions of dollars to play a game they've played since they were little kids - why do we need to build up their confidence? Don't fumble the g*ddamn ball and you don't get benched. 

[Soonerpeace]

(11-08-2024, 10:30 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: The way our defense was playing...giving up TD drives 4 drives in a row...you go for 2.

That said, you call a better play.

No way Tanner was option 1

[*rfaulk34*]

(11-08-2024, 10:38 AM)ERIC1 Wrote: we had what  3rd and 2?...you get the two yards...I have defended Zac Taylor..no more..and as brilliant as Burrow seems ..many of his throws are off and he does not show awareness as he used to.

Someone is definitely not showing awareness right now...


Yes, he missed at least 3 throws that could have been big. Newsflash: QBs all around the league do that every week. Almost 500yds and 4TDs, zero picks. Give the guy a bit of a break. You should be blasting on this defense right now. 

PS. I was all for going for 2 at the end. Would have preferred a better play--you should always have a couple plays you hold back for that situation that include your best couple players, not Tanner Hudson--but i have no issue at all with going for the dub. 

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(11-08-2024, 01:05 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Someone is definitely not showing awareness right now...


Yes, he missed at least 3 throws that could have been big. Newsflash: QBs all around the league do that every week. Almost 500yds and 4TDs, zero picks. Give the guy a bit of a break. You should be blasting on this defense right now. 

PS. I was all for going for 2 at the end. Would have preferred a better play--you should always have a couple plays you hold back for that situation that include your best couple players, not Tanner Hudson--but i have no issue at all with going for the dub. 

The only thing I didn't like from Joe were the two deep shots on 3rd/4th and 2. One he even checked to. Even then, he had Gesicki WIDE OPEN beyond the sticks for the first, and another check down that would likely have gotten the first. A lot of people complain about the short passes, but I think they weren't around when the 49er dynasty was doing those left and right as an extension of the run game. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(11-08-2024, 12:51 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: No way Tanner was option 1

But he was.

“He was on the back side,” Burrow said of Chase. “I didn't get to him. I took my first read.”

Why the #Bengals went for 2, and why the pass went to Tanner Hudson instead of Ja'Marr Chase. https://t.co/3UY2yOuFFM

— Jay Morrison (@ByJayMorrison) November 8, 2024