How Are The Steelers Ranked Ahead of Us?

[mroudfly]

(05-24-2016, 11:36 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The Steelers won and advanced in the playoffs. They also won 2 of their 3 games against the Bengals. They clearly contended quite well.

They were clearly the better team for being able to take 2 of 3 and advance further. This is why they're ranked higher.

The two times Pitt beat the Bengals they were going against QB2. The one time they went against the Bengals with QB1 they lost. Those 2 games they were better, because the competition dropped as a backup started.

The Bengals won the division last year. Overall, they were the better team when they had their parts. Saying that the Steelers were better than the Bengals with AJM at the helm, of course they were. With Andy Dalton at the helm, absolutely not.

[StrictlyBiz]

(05-25-2016, 12:19 AM)mroudfly Wrote: The two times Pitt beat the Bengals they were going against QB2. The one time they went against the Bengals with QB1 they lost. Those 2 games they were better, because the competition dropped as a backup started.

The Bengals won the division last year. Overall, they were the better team when they had their parts. Saying that the Steelers were better than the Bengals with AJM at the helm, of course they were. With Andy Dalton at the helm, absolutely not.

Except that QB2 played better than QB1 in his two games. Averaged more points, more yards, and a higher QB rating. 

And if we're playing the excuse game, the first meetings was Bens first game back after missing 4 starts with a knee injury. Clearly rusty that game it was one of his worst of the season. 

[mroudfly]

(05-25-2016, 04:43 AM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: Except that QB2 played better than QB1 in his two games. Averaged more points, more yards, and a higher QB rating. 

And if we're playing the excuse game, the first meetings was Bens first game back after missing 4 starts with a knee injury. Clearly rusty that game it was one of his worst of the season. 

The starting QB of an NFL team not playing is pretty critical, wouldn't you say? I don't think you want Michael Vick/Landry Jones playing right? And yes, Andy played his worst game of the year against the Steelers, and Ben played horrible too. In the end the Bengals still won...Not sure if you are trying to say the AJM is better than AD? While AD's game seemed somewhat fluky that day, Ben wasn't the same last year as he has been...16 int. (high for him), and at least a quarter of those against the Bengals. He's getting slower and has always been injury prone. Is he a first ballot HOFer? I think so. But age catches up, and the Steelers can no long PLAN on relying on Big Ben. He showed last year that he can make some absolutely horrific decisions, and isn't as mobile as he used to be.

I do think your defense will be much improved next year with Cam developing into a star, and some of the younger talent filling in roles, but I just cannot see the Steelers offense matching what it did in say 2014. Maybe they don't need it with the development in the defense and a very solid front 7, but your secondary still doesn't scare anyone in the slightest, and it is a passing first league.

Regardless of "who was better last year" argument, I'm pretty excited to watch the Bengals/Pitt matchups this year (hopefully both with healthy teams), and even the Ravens popping their head in to see what is going on up top.

[BmorePat87]

(05-25-2016, 12:19 AM)mroudfly Wrote: The two times Pitt beat the Bengals they were going against QB2. The one time they went against the Bengals with QB1 they lost. Those 2 games they were better, because the competition dropped as a backup started.

The Bengals won the division last year. Overall, they were the better team when they had their parts. Saying that the Steelers were better than the Bengals with AJM at the helm, of course they were. With Andy Dalton at the helm, absolutely not.

1. McCarron played better in both games than Dalton played in his one game.
2. Bengals fans reject the argument that the Ravens had half their offensive starters on the IR as an excuse for their poor play, so I am rejecting this argument. 

[Essex Johnson]

(05-25-2016, 11:33 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: 1. McCarron played better in both games than Dalton played in his one game.
2. Bengals fans reject the argument that the Ravens had half their offensive starters on the IR as an excuse for their poor play, so I am rejecting this argument. 

the problem with your #2 is the Ravens had most of their starters in the first three games and went 0-3... so they sucked out of the gate.

[mroudfly]

(05-25-2016, 11:33 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: 1. McCarron played better in both games than Dalton played in his one game.
2. Bengals fans reject the argument that the Ravens had half their offensive starters on the IR as an excuse for their poor play, so I am rejecting this argument. 

Not sure if you are referring to me, but I've never rejected that argument. The Ravens struggled last year due to injuries on BOTH sides of the ball...Part of the reason I've stated they will be in contention this year with everyone healthy if you've read any of my posts...

[BFritz21]

(05-25-2016, 11:33 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: 1. McCarron played better in both games than Dalton played in his one game.
2. Bengals fans reject the argument that the Ravens had half their offensive starters on the IR as an excuse for their poor play, so I am rejecting this argument. 

Except McCarron didn't win.  Who cares how well he plays if he can't win?  Dalton is the team leader and his play was different than McCarron's.  Maybe the Steelers let him put up stats because they knew he couldn't do enough to beat them.

As Essex said, 0-3 to start, so not like they were lighting the world on fire.

[BmorePat87]

(05-25-2016, 04:43 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: the problem with your #2 is the Ravens had most of their starters in the first three games and went 0-3... so they sucked out of the gate.

The defense was garbage for the first half of the reason. That's how you lose on the road even when scoring 33 points.

[Essex Johnson]

(05-26-2016, 08:53 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The defense was garbage for the first half of the reason. That's how you lose on the road even when scoring 33 points.

your point was injuries did the Ravens in.. now it was their Defense that did them in, they started 0-3 and never recovered that is the bottom line.  Injuries made the season terrible but it was not injuries that put them in the position of 0-3 that they never were able to recover from.  A bad defense is 1/2 of the equation.  Most teams that start out 0-3 typically do not have a very good year.

[Garrus]

(05-25-2016, 11:33 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: 1. McCarron played better in both games than Dalton played in his one game.
2. Bengals fans reject the argument that the Ravens had half their offensive starters on the IR as an excuse for their poor play, so I am rejecting this argument. 

That is completely untrue. Dalton had no time to throw in the first game, and still got it done. Mccarron had time to throw both games, and played like dog crap and didn't get it done.

[BmorePat87]

(05-26-2016, 09:15 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: your point was injuries did the Ravens in.. now it was their Defense that did them in, they started 0-3 and never recovered that is the bottom line.  Injuries made the season terrible but it was not injuries that put them in the position of 0-3 that they never were able to recover from.  A bad defense is 1/2 of the equation.  Most teams that start out 0-3 typically do not have a very good year.

You're saying that the Bengals lost because of the fact that they did not have their QB. I mentioned the fact that the Ravens didn't have their QB, 4 of their top 5 receivers, their RB, their TE, and half their line. I'll never blame their season on that, the D was playing god awful for the first half of the season (and then was the best pass D after all the offensive injuries... imagine that). I bring it up because Bengals fans have said it's not an excuse. 

You can't say losing a QB is the reason you lose for your team and then say that it's not the reason another team lost games, especially when it was a SB MVP QB and many more offensive starters.

[BmorePat87]

(05-26-2016, 09:16 AM)Garrus Wrote: That is completely untrue. Dalton had no time to throw in the first game, and still got it done. Mccarron had time to throw both games, and played like dog crap and didn't get it done.

By all metrics that evaluate individual performance, McCarron played better.

The Bengals won in spite of Dalton in that 16-10 game because... the Defense held the Steelers to 10 points. 

[Essex Johnson]

(05-26-2016, 10:13 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You're saying that the Bengals lost because of the fact that they did not have their QB. I mentioned the fact that the Ravens didn't have their QB, 4 of their top 5 receivers, their RB, their TE, and half their line. I'll never blame their season on that, the D was playing god awful for the first half of the season (and then was the best pass D after all the offensive injuries... imagine that). I bring it up because Bengals fans have said it's not an excuse. 

You can't say losing a QB is the reason you lose for your team and then say that it's not the reason another team lost games, especially when it was a SB MVP QB and many more offensive starters.

You seem to avoid your point,, you stated that the Ravens season was bad because of injuries.. I stated that they were 0-3 before main injuries.. and when you look at QB play,, Dalton was way superior to Flacco healthy they actually improved without Flaco.. since they were 3-7 with him at QB and 2-4 without... 

My point all along has been that the Bengals were superior during the regular season with Dalton...10-2 with him, 2-3, 1-0 as starter against the Steelers, 0-2 without him, yet one play away from winning the playoff game.  

When I add everything up I still see the Bengals had the better season and would put them on paper ahead of Steelers but really very little difference overall between the two teams coming into the season, though with Eifert maybe out in being of year, I would give the Steelers the edge now coming into the season if he is expected out for the first few games. 

[Garrus]

(05-26-2016, 10:58 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: By all metrics that evaluate individual performance, McCarron played better.

The Bengals won in spite of Dalton in that 16-10 game because... the Defense held the Steelers to 10 points. 

I can see why you would see that, looking at the stats, but watching the actual game, Bodine got his ass whipped the whole game the first go around with Dalton. He was consistently having to abandon the pocket, hence his mediocre game. Mccarron wasn't pressured nearly as often in his games, but still played poorly which was expected. I guess I don't really care either way, but Dalton is far better than Mccarron, and it's not close.

[XenoMorph]

(05-26-2016, 10:13 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You're saying that the Bengals lost because of the fact that they did not have their QB. I mentioned the fact that the Ravens didn't have their QB, 4 of their top 5 receivers, their RB, their TE, and half their line. I'll never blame their season on that, the D was playing god awful for the first half of the season (and then was the best pass D after all the offensive injuries... imagine that). I bring it up because Bengals fans have said it's not an excuse. 

You can't say losing a QB is the reason you lose for your team and then say that it's not the reason another team lost games, especially when it was a SB MVP QB and many more offensive starters.

we all knew your season was over before it started anyways..

McCarron was not better in either game vs the steelers.

[BmorePat87]

(05-26-2016, 11:07 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: You seem to avoid your point,, you stated that the Ravens season was bad because of injuries.. I stated that they were 0-3 before main injuries.. and when you look at QB play,, Dalton was way superior to Flacco healthy they actually improved without Flaco.. since they were 3-7 with him at QB and 2-4 without... 

My point all along has been that the Bengals were superior during the regular season with Dalton...10-2 with him, 2-3, 1-0 as starter against the Steelers, 0-2 without him, yet one play away from winning the playoff game.  

When I add everything up I still see the Bengals had the better season and would put them on paper ahead of Steelers but really very little difference overall between the two teams coming into the season, though with Eifert maybe out in being of year, I would give the Steelers the edge now coming into the season if he is expected out for the first few games. 

No, I'm saying a fanbase needs to stop using injuries as an excuse if they tell other fanbases not to use injuries.

This thread has nothing to do with the Ravens. It's why are the Steelers ranked ahead of the Bengals. The argument then was presented that the Bengals lost two games against them because of Dalton being injured. 

[BFritz21]

(05-26-2016, 02:15 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No, I'm saying a fanbase needs to stop using injuries as an excuse if they tell other fanbases not to use injuries.

This thread has nothing to do with the Ravens. It's why are the Steelers ranked ahead of the Bengals. The argument then was presented that the Bengals lost two games against them because of Dalton being injured. 

Incorrect, they're better because they only lost once with a backup QB and won one with said backup QB, the Steelers are just cheaters, so take away the cheating and the Bengals are better even with a backup QB.

[BmorePat87]

No, they lost. The Steelers didn't cheat. You sound like a child when you repeat that.

[bengalguy71]

(05-25-2016, 11:33 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: 1. McCarron played better in both games than Dalton played in his one game.
2. Bengals fans reject the argument that the Ravens had half their offensive starters on the IR as an excuse for their poor play, so I am rejecting this argument. 

I see you are still talking to people in here like you do your students!! 

[BigPapaKain]

(05-26-2016, 02:50 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No, they lost. The Steelers didn't cheat. You sound like a child when you repeat that.

You're really gonna crinkle his tin foil spouting off things like 'facts' and 'observations based in reality' like that.