Robert Griffin likely to start against us

[*Awful Llama*]

(12-06-2016, 02:29 PM)grampahol Wrote: I guess this means it's fun and games time with conspiracy theories and hey, it's fun to find reasons for being horrible outside of just being horrible .  

Fun and games, man, fun and games.

[*Nately120*]

(12-06-2016, 05:35 AM)bengalsturntup926 Wrote: I've heard a rumor that the Bengals season was fixed, and we for sure are losing to the browns.  I'm a believer in this stuff that the league is fixed. I did guess last year Manning was going out on top. This year, I think they want the steelers in the Superbowl. If we lose to the browns, I'm calling it fixed.

If they wanted the Steelers in the Super Bowl why did they let the Ravens beat us 2 weeks ago?  The Steelers are going to want to win the AFC North and the Ravens are the threat to stop them from doing that.  They really could have thrown a lot more flags in our favor if they wanted the Ravens to get a loss to set up the Steelers a bit better.

[bengalsturntup926]

(12-06-2016, 10:52 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If they wanted the Steelers in the Super Bowl why did they let the Ravens beat us 2 weeks ago?  The Steelers are going to want to win the AFC North and the Ravens are the threat to stop them from doing that.  They really could have thrown a lot more flags in our favor if they wanted the Ravens to get a loss to set up the Steelers a bit better.

Maybe because the ravens had a down year last year so they got to give them some hope this year. Just to come a little short. 

[John Shaft]

(12-06-2016, 05:35 AM)bengalsturntup926 Wrote: I've heard a rumor that the Bengals season was fixed, and we for sure are losing to the browns.  I'm a believer in this stuff that the league is fixed. I did guess last year Manning was going out on top. This year, I think they want the steelers in the Superbowl. If we lose to the browns, I'm calling it fixed.

True. This has been going on every since Bart Starr  knocked out Ray Mancini for the NFC title in Manila.

[*SHRacerX*]

(12-06-2016, 05:35 AM)bengalsturntup926 Wrote: I've heard a rumor that the Bengals season was fixed, and we for sure are losing to the browns.  I'm a believer in this stuff that the league is fixed. I did guess last year Manning was going out on top. This year, I think they want the steelers in the Superbowl. If we lose to the browns, I'm calling it fixed.

The league has an erection the size of the Eiffel Tower over a potential Raiders and Cowboys Super Bowl.  

[740Bengal]

If RGIII starts against us, then playing the Bengals defense on fantasy. Lock of the week.

[*ochocincos*]

(12-06-2016, 10:52 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If they wanted the Steelers in the Super Bowl why did they let the Ravens beat us 2 weeks ago?  The Steelers are going to want to win the AFC North and the Ravens are the threat to stop them from doing that.  They really could have thrown a lot more flags in our favor if they wanted the Ravens to get a loss to set up the Steelers a bit better.

They care more about making the Bengals "pay" now that they are the "villains", not necessarily giving the Steelers the Super Bowl.

[Shake n Blake]

(12-07-2016, 10:52 AM)740Bengal Wrote: If RGIII starts against us, then playing the Bengals defense on fantasy. Lock of the week.

RGIII has been very good at protecting the football through his career, and last time he played the Bengals, he lit up our D for like 300 yards and multiple scores...and this was when our D was elite.

You could be right, but I'm not sure what your evidence is, when RGIII has roasted us before and he doesn't turn the ball over much (which is needed for a big fantasy day for DST).

[NKYRob]

(12-07-2016, 01:01 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: RGIII has been very good at protecting the football through his career, and last time he played the Bengals, he lit up our D for like 300 yards and multiple scores...and this was when our D was elite.

You could be right, but I'm not sure what your evidence is, when RGIII has roasted us before and he doesn't turn the ball over much (which is needed for a big fantasy day for DST).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the only matchup he had against us was in the 2012 season.  In that game he threw for 221 yards, 1 TD, and no picks.  He also rushed for 74 yards and 1 TD, got sacked 5 times, and fumbled 3 times (one lost).  

[Shake n Blake]

(12-07-2016, 02:28 PM)NKYRob Wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the only matchup he had against us was in the 2012 season.  In that game he threw for 221 yards, 1 TD, and no picks.  He also rushed for 74 yards and 1 TD, got sacked 5 times, and fumbled 3 times (one lost).  

You're only confirming what I said. He accounted for 295 yards by himself (I said 300) and 2 TDs with 1 TO. He led his offense to 31 points. That's not a good day for a fantasy DST. 

[Marlon23]

(12-05-2016, 04:09 PM)yellowxdiscipline Wrote: Trap game.

Instead of a Trap more like A Wall, that we will be slamming into.  

[lone bengal]

I would just start that QB Holgan if I were the Browns and run the QB option. He ran for like 100 yards vs. us the 1st time took the coaching staff a whole half to figure out how to stop it, worth another shot.

[*Nately120*]

(12-07-2016, 12:50 PM)ochocincos Wrote: They care more about making the Bengals "pay" now that they are the "villains", not necessarily giving the Steelers the Super Bowl.

I don't see the profit in making the Bengals "pay."  I'm more likely to believe they want to see the Patriots and Steelers play in the AFC title game to pull in massive ratings while the Packers and Seahawks play in the NFC so they can talk about the final 4 dynasty franchises squaring off and so on and so forth.

Look, it's naive to think there are no ulterior motives at work within the NFL but the reason people do sleazy stuff is because of money.  There is no money in "making the Bengals look bad."  Hell, the Bengals becoming a huge villainous franchise ala the old school Raiders or the Philadelphia Flyers/Detriot Pistons etc could actually be profitable for the Bengals.

So unless the NFL is going out of their way to build brand equity for Mike Brown I think we can list this theory under "Unlikely."

[yellowxdiscipline]

(12-07-2016, 02:52 PM)lone bengal Wrote: I would just start that QB Holgan if I were the Browns and run the QB option. He ran for like 100 yards vs. us the 1st time took the coaching staff a whole half to figure out how to stop it, worth another shot.

Starting RG3 is smart. See if he's worth bringing back next season. I mean they did pay the guy and didn't get to see anything this year. Let him play the last few games, and it he stinks then don't bring him back. If he looks promising maybe bring him back and try to build around him through free agency and the draft. But its the Browns, so most likely RG3 will play well and they'll draft a QB with the 1st overall pick.

[*ochocincos*]

(12-07-2016, 05:58 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I don't see the profit in making the Bengals "pay."  I'm more likely to believe they want to see the Patriots and Steelers play in the AFC title game to pull in massive ratings while the Packers and Seahawks play in the NFC so they can talk about the final 4 dynasty franchises squaring off and so on and so forth.

Look, it's naive to think there are no ulterior motives at work within the NFL but the reason people do sleazy stuff is because of money.  There is no money in "making the Bengals look bad."  Hell, the Bengals becoming a huge villainous franchise ala the old school Raiders or the Philadelphia Flyers/Detriot Pistons etc could actually be profitable for the Bengals.

So unless the NFL is going out of their way to build brand equity for Mike Brown I think we can list this theory under "Unlikely."

Our thinking is actually aligned, as I think you interpreted my post in the wrong way.

What I mean is that the NFL doesn't necessarily want the Steelers to win the Super Bowl, as they would be happy to see the Cowboys, Giants, Patriots, Seahawks, or whichever other "popular" team also win it.

I really believe that the Bengals are not a popular team to a majority of NFL fans and their actions in last year's playoff game really gave those fans a horrid picture of the Bengals. Now, those fans want nothing more than to see that team not in the playoffs and the "good guys" (aka the popular teams) in the playoffs instead. By having this, the NFL would have more viewership and money coming in.

[fredtoast]

The Browns QB situation.......from "revolving door" to "Griffin door".

[*Nately120*]

(12-08-2016, 10:17 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Our thinking is actually aligned, as I think you interpreted my post in the wrong way.

What I mean is that the NFL doesn't necessarily want the Steelers to win the Super Bowl, as they would be happy to see the Cowboys, Giants, Patriots, Seahawks, or whichever other "popular" team also win it.

I really believe that the Bengals are not a popular team to a majority of NFL fans and their actions in last year's playoff game really gave those fans a horrid picture of the Bengals. Now, those fans want nothing more than to see that team not in the playoffs and the "good guys" (aka the popular teams) in the playoffs instead. By having this, the NFL would have more viewership and money coming in.

Yeah, but the Seahawks and Patriots were only popular when they started to win.  Hell, I'd wager most Seahawks die hards don't even remember the team being in the AFC, and I've never seen a Tony Eason fan in my life.  

Honestly, I would think the "good" and "popular" teams would want to see the Bengals in the playoffs because we've been a veritable first round bye for 6 of the past 7 years.