Dalton & McCarron are in a very awkward situation

[Essex Johnson]

(01-06-2016, 05:30 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: This is what happens when people associate winning and losing with the QB.  IF McCarran is the QB this Saturday and the BENGALS win the game, then it tells me one thing:

This team is built so well from 1-53 that they can absorb the loss of their starting QB that was playing at a Pro-Bowl level and still win.  

Wins and losses are a TEAM stat, nothing can convince me otherwise.

So if that is true, we can;t judge Dalton on playoff losses.. we have to judge him with the rest of the team.. so 5 playoff appearances in a row tells me this is a good team but not a great team with lack of success in playoffs. so Dalton would be considered a good QB not a great QB.. correct?

[Essex Johnson]

(01-06-2016, 06:48 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: This thread is exactly how some fans (mostly folks clamoring for a non-Dalton QB) will view things, but the Bengals view Dalton as the franchise...for good reason.

On one hand, you have a QB who has been at the helm for 50 wins in 5 seasons, the best run in the team's 48 year history. He's set franchise season records for yards, TDs and passer rating. He's coming off his best season where he was considered an MVP candidate up to the point he went down.

On the other hand, you have a 5th rounder who was drafted purely to be a backup. 3 starts under his belt. He's minimized turnovers and manages games well, but the offense has clearly taken a hit with him in.

The only reason we have these discussions is Dalton's performance in playoffs and prime time. For that, I'll just say this:

Marvin with Dalton: 4-9 in prime time, 0-4 in the playoffs.
Marvin with other QBs: 4-10 in prime time, 0-2 in the playoffs.

Dalton had a fantastic game against the Cards this year. The defense gave up 28 points in the 3rd quarter. Was Dalton to blame for that L? Fact is, the prime time/playoff problems go way back, and were viewed as a Marvin problem until recently. I look back on 13 years with Marv and I struggle to think of any players that consistently showed up - at all - in the bright lights. Carson? Nope. Chad? Transparent. AJ? Covered. Gio? Nowhere to be found. Geno Atkins? Just a guy.

Dalton is just another in a long line of players who disappeared. If Marv ever figures out a way to get this team prepared, I have no doubt that Andy can get the playoff monkey off his back.

When did prime time ever become a stat in wins and losses.. this drives me crazy... it matters shit if you win at 1,4 or 8 oclock

I understand playoff performance since you are at least in the playoffs and there is more of a focus on win you keep going and lose you are done.  at same time we should count games that actually lead to making the playoffs or being knocked out of them in regular season with higher importance if you are just going to look at prime-time games

[Junglejuice]

(01-06-2016, 10:59 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: If we beat the Steelers (I'm not seeing it personally, but statistically, it is possible) with McCarron as the starter and Andy Dalton is good to go for New England, you play Dalton.

This is an imaginary discussion among the fans that is not occurring between the coaches of this team.

If Dalton plays against New England and it is obvious his thumb/grip/throwing motion/rust is a detriment to the team, you put McCarron back in.

Starters are not required by rule to play the entire game unless injured. If Dalton shows that he came back too quickly, you simply sit him down and play McCarron.

But if he's healthy and effective, you play him.

I don't understand the argument of people who would play McCarron without giving Dalton even a chance in the next game.

Dalton was the MVP candidate, not McCarron.

This.........

I cannot believe some members of the fan base are so short sighted.

McCarron is essentially a rookie playing on a stacked team.
Sure he is a quality back-up and looking good enough to start for somebody in the NFL but at the same time the sample size is just too small.
RG3 and CK were both touted as the next coming of football gods.
One took 1 year to flame out and the other took 2 years for DC to catch up to them and figure them out.
Next year who knows where either will be.
Dalton has given this team and fans almost 5 years of steady to great football.
And he is getting better.

WTF would you entertain trading him to start an unknown???
this train of thought is simply mind boggling.

It is almost impossible to find average QBs in the league nowadays and people want to trade away a great one?
MIND BLOWN.

Bottomline is that if you want to continue to win after this year the money is on Dalton.
If anyone needs to be traded you maximize what you can get for AJM from a QB starved losing team.

[Shake n Blake]

(01-06-2016, 06:56 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: When did prime time ever become a stat in wins and losses.. this drives me crazy... it matters shit if you win at 1,4 or 8 oclock

I understand playoff performance since you are at least in the playoffs and there is more of a focus on win you keep going and lose you are done.  at same time we should count games that actually lead to making the playoffs or being knocked out of them in regular season with higher importance if you are just going to look at prime-time games

Prime time games are as close to a playoff atmosphere as it gets. Stadiums are amped, the entire nation is watching, plus the level of competition is usually higher. You're usually facing playoff teams or divisional opponents in prime time. Plus it eliminates subjectivity. Not everyone is going to agree on what constitutes a "big game". 

[Beaker]

(01-06-2016, 03:45 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Since we know McCarron is the starter this week this brings up a problem.

 It will also beg the question of whether we continue to keep McCarron as the starter or bring back Dalton...... Which is where the dilemmas begin.

 No problem exists. As soon as Dalton is healthy, McCarron grabs his clipboard and watches. Case closed.

[Essex Johnson]

(01-06-2016, 07:20 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Prime time games are as close to a playoff atmosphere as it gets. Stadiums are amped, the entire nation is watching, plus the level of competition is usually higher. You're usually facing playoff teams or divisional opponents in prime time. Plus it eliminates subjectivity. Not everyone is going to agree on what constitutes a "big game". 

Most prime time games are scheduled from the year before and to be honest there are so many , it really is not that big any more with hype etc... unless you really have two marque teams which is rare.. Also division games it does not matter what time you play them, they are big in nature anyway. As for attendance it has been recorded especially thursday night and sunday night games have had subpar attendance in most of the games compared to a Sunday day game.  

I put more emphasis on a critical game in the season than just a random prime time game.. 

[TSwigZ]

1972 Dolphins

[Shake n Blake]

(01-06-2016, 09:18 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: 1. Most prime time games are scheduled from the year before and to be honest there are so many , it really is not that big any more with hype etc... unless you really have two marque teams which is rare.. 2. Also division games it does not matter what time you play them, they are big in nature anyway. 3. As for attendance it has been recorded especially thursday night and sunday night games have had subpar attendance in most of the games compared to a Sunday day game.  

I put more emphasis on a critical game in the season than just a random prime time game.. 

1. Over the last 2 years, we've played 8 prime time games. 6 of those teams made the playoffs the year we played them. Both games against non-playoff teams were against the Browns, a divisional opponent. So all 8 prime time games would've been deemed "big games" by most.

2. The argument isn't that divisional games only matter when they're in prime time. The argument is that prime time games are usually big. You say yourself that division games are always big in nature, so that only helps my argument that prime time games are usually big games.

3. This part matters the least, honestly, but prime time crowds are usually more amped than 1 pm crowds. I said nothing about attendance.

[Essex Johnson]

here are four crucial games over the last 4 years that the Bengals won that to me mean more than winning in prime time and if they did not win these game possible they don't even get to the playoffs.

2012: Last game of year.. they defeat Steelers in a play in game to the playoffs .
2013 Both teams Bengals and Steelers start out 0-1, crucial early matchup ( actually prime time game) going 0-2 usually means no playoffs, Bengals defeat Steelers and go on to playoffs that year, Steelers do not
2014 Bengals beat Denver in primetime to secure playoff spot
2015 November win against Steelers, they still had some hope for division,, that win in Pittsburgh pretty much closed the door on them.

As for your point about attendance.. if less people are at the game,, it is less amped up.....

[Shake n Blake]

(01-06-2016, 10:59 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: here are four crucial games over the last 4 years  that the Bengals won that to me mean more than winning in prime time and if they did not win these game possible they don't even get to the playoffs.

2012:  Last game of year.. they defeat Steelers in a play in game to the playoffs .  
2013   Both teams Bengals and Steelers start out 0-1, crucial early matchup ( actually prime time game) going 0-2 usually means no playoffs, Bengals defeat Steelers and go on to playoffs that year, Steelers do not
2014   Bengals beat Denver in primetime to secure playoff spot
2015  November win against Steelers, they still had some hope for division,, that win in Pittsburgh pretty much closed the door on them.

As for your point about attendance.. if less people are at the game,, it is less amped up.....

I've never said that the Bengals never play important games that aren't prime time. You wondered why prime time games are tracked and I've tried to tell you why. You still haven't responded to any of my points, so I'm done responding to yours. All 8 of our prime time games over the last 2 years were "big". If I went back more years, I'm sure I'd find more.

And again...it's easy to track prime time games, but what constitutes a "big game" varies from person to person. If you want to compile the Bengals' results in all big games, fine. I'd love to see it. But I can see why the media doesn't track that stuff. It's too subjective. It's really easy to keep track of a prime time record though.

[88Bengals]

Bottom line is Dalton is the starter...so they should start him as soon as they feel comfortable. They are gonna have to live by the sword die by the sword with Dalton

[wolfkaosaun]

I wonder if 49ers fans would rather have Smith than Kaepernick right now.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-07-2016, 12:37 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: I wonder if 49ers fans would rather have Smith than Kaepernick right now.

 I think you know the answer to that one.....

[wolfkaosaun]

(01-07-2016, 12:43 AM)Wyche Wrote:  I think you know the answer to that one.....

Gotta put that into perspective. Kaepernick came in and did extremely well. Much better than McCarron has done.

49ers were in a similar spot. Although Kaepernick was doing EXTREMELY well, they chose to stick with him rather than Smith.

[*Nately120*]

(01-07-2016, 12:37 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: I wonder if 49ers fans would rather have Smith than Kaepernick right now.

Right now?  Yes.  But you have to wonder how Alex Smith would have handled Harbaugh leaving and being replaced by an instant lame-duck one year coach while half the team retired out of nowhere.  I'm not defending Krapernick, but we've seen Alex Smith play lots of QB for the 49ers and he was as much a beneficiary of the Harbaugh effect as Krapernick was.

[ShowMeUrTDs]

OP is getting blasted......I will say it was a well thought out post. I agree with most as soon as Dalton is ready, he is the QB his performance in the season got them to the dance. 5 seasons of learning the offense and reading defenses give him experience McCarron just don't have.

With that said I agree with you too, I think the biggest pressure comes against Marvin Lewis and management they have been there so many times with no success in 25 years if a QB gets you over the hump and beats the Stoolers that Marvin has only beat twice in the last 14 times in Cincinnati, now you have a tough decision.

There is something to be said about the bright lights of a playoff game and how Dalton has performed in each one, he was often sailing passes high, and had that deer in the headlights look on his face. The Bengals knew this when they structured his new contract, that's why all his bonuses are based on winning a playoff game getting to the Divisional round, another for the AFC Championship, and a final bonus kicker for the Super Bowl. The Bengals also left an out clause after two years because they knew he was a good QB in the season, but I believe were unsure about his ability to win big games. The contract alone proves it. So, playoff wins were that important to the Bengals organization in structuring Dalton's contract, it could become real interesting what happens if McCarron wins one or more, or like you say if he win's one and Andy comes back then loses the next.

Dalton played light's out this year and elevated his game, the only question that remains is will that translate into the postseason, until its proven, he is still unproven.

Of course all this don't matter unless they win that first one and Marvin's teams have never been able to do it regardless who has been at QB, who has been his coordinators, and many different players. . . .

[wolfkaosaun]

(01-07-2016, 02:50 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Right now?  Yes.  But you have to wonder how Alex Smith would have handled Harbaugh leaving and being replaced by an instant lame-duck one year coach while half the team retired out of nowhere.  I'm not defending Krapernick, but we've seen Alex Smith play lots of QB for the 49ers and he was as much a beneficiary of the Harbaugh effect as Krapernick was.

But you also have to look at how he did in Kansas City with the types of receivers he had as well. He's had little to nothing and now ever since he got a legit wide receiver, he's been doing so much better.

Kaepernick regressed tremendously this year. And he wasn't all that great last year either. He sadly didn't improve.

Honestly, if they kept Smith, they probably would have made the playoffs last year too.

[BengalChris]

(01-07-2016, 03:35 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: But you also have to look at how he did in Kansas City with the types of receivers he had as well. He's had little to nothing and now ever since he got a legit wide receiver, he's been doing so much better.

Kaepernick regressed tremendously this year. And he wasn't all that great last year either. He sadly didn't improve.

Honestly, if they kept Smith, they probably would have made the playoffs last year too.

Yeah, Kaepnernick was a product of the pistol offense he ran in college and the Michigan guy adopted it for Kaepnernick in the NFL. But NFL defenses know exactly what to do about that offense now and that was the end of Kaepernick. Don't see him ever doing much again. Just as I don't expect to ever see RGIII do much either.

Teams seem to have forgotten that NFL offenses developed into what they are based on what's the hardest to defend and they evolve. The pistol or the read-option can be incorporated into an NFL offense, but they can't be the basis of the offense. You still gotta play from under center and throw from the pocket on 3 and 5 step drops. If you can't do that you're going to be exploited.

The AJM/Dalton situation is much different. AJM came from a team that plays NFL style football. But he's going to have to win on Saturday and that's not enough for him to push Dalton out the door. I believe he'll have to get us to the SB for the team to consider that he has more upside than Dalton and the way it looks, Dalton will be back before then.

[Matt_Crimson]

(01-06-2016, 03:23 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: These kind of "dilemma" threads make me laugh.

I might have enough fingers on my hand to count the number of times McCarron had a receiver open and failed to let it go, in some cases, leading to a sack. He has less experience reading a defense, he's been sacked more on average (due to all the inexperience) and the guys he's in for right now was having an MVP type season.

How can anyone doubt that Dalton is back the very second he's physically able?

If/when this team wins with McCarron in, it's because he didn't turn the ball over and the team played well around him.

He could develop into a solid NFL QB with time but, right now, Dalton is head and shoulders better and gives the team the best chance to win when the QB has to make throws to win the game.

I think it's a valid thread.

There's three things we have to think about regarding the "starting Dalton if McCarron beats the Steelers" issue. Dalton hasn't practiced for almost four weeks. Dalton hasn't played for almost four weeks. Dalton had an injury involving his throwing hand. If McCarron convincingly beats the Steelers, should we really start Dalton the next game? If McCarron is already going into the Patriots game hot or even just looking good, I say we start him regardless of how good Dalton was during the regular season.

Fans, players and coaches are always talking about how the playoffs are a "new season" and how it's a "different atmosphere". Yet the way people are talking around here, you'd think we're still in the regular season, that the playoffs aren't different and that Dalton isn't coming off a 3 and a half week injury because his job is up against McCarron and "That just shouldn't be because Dalton had an MVP like season". Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Dalton didn't play well during the regular season, but I feel like a lot of people are having tunnel vision about Dalton.

There's also the fact that the coaches have adjusted the offense a bit to fit McCarron since he's come into the game. If we start Dalton against the Patriots are the coaches going to go back to their Dalton playbook? If Dalton ends up not playing well and they have to put McCarron in at some point during the game, is McCarron and the offense going to have enough time to adjust?

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-07-2016, 02:44 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Gotta put that into perspective. Kaepernick came in and did extremely well. Much better than McCarron has done.

49ers were in a similar spot. Although Kaepernick was doing EXTREMELY well, they chose to stick with him rather than Smith.

Yeah, but with the benefit of hindsight, we know how they feel now!