Game Thread: Bengals Vs. Browns

[DanBengalfan]

remember when Our big moves at QB were to bring in guys like Neil O'donnel and Jon Kitna.

yea, we did that.

....

my thinking is Dalton's agent will demand too much money and Dalton will secretly support it so he can leave the area. I'm sure he's sick of the rude fans he has to ban on twitter, lol. during the stalemate, the need for a potential replacement will be front and center and we will draft another Klingler/Smith disaster and Dalton will end up getting paid to due cleanup duty and he'll look good going against some shitty teams. eventually he'll sit out and demand to be traded and our shitty bust of a QB that we draft will show some slight improvement, but not enough to warrant not drafting another QB in 2/3 years. by then, Tebow will have showed some improvement in the CFL and be awarded CFL most valuable player, Mike Brown is the only person willing to take on the media storm afforded by him and Marvin Lewis finally quits so he doesn't have to answer questions about him. Our DC takes over and answers all Tebow questions with an an annoying "WHAT!?" in the style of Stone Cold Steve Austin, the Bengals return back to the mediocrity of getting into the playoffs and losing in the first round and most everyone is happy.

 

[futballiscool]

I am a big fan of Gruden. But that is not what I said. It was a reference to the report that futball posted from Dalton's rookie season when a source reported that Gruden wasn't sold on Dalton. I was making the point that hopefully others (Marvin and Brown) in the organization can also see what Gruden and likely some others see as well.

Just for clarification, the report didn't mention Gruden or any other person by name as the source. I do tend to think it was definatley someone from the coaching staff. Reading between the lines, I think they liked Dalton as a rookie but weren't sold on him as a franchise QB. I bet that still the case. He has to prove he's a franchise guy
Bengals organization has reservations about Andy Dalton | ProFootballTalk

 

[flamingrey]

Regardless...

Andy is going nowhere.

They aren't bringing someone in to "compete"

He's the QB for the future. Might as well hope he plays well.

Sure, you can hope he plays poorly and the Bengals still win, but if they keep winning, they will overlook a lot of fault with Andy and keep him anyway "because he wins".

I'm not saying I agree with that, but this is the Bengals, and it's still Mike Brown. Until proven otherwise, there is no way this team is making a change at QB, outside of a major injury.

And I'd like Brown to be given the opportunity to prove otherwise. So, no, I will hope the Bengals keep winning while Andy continues to prove he doesn't belong.

 

[flamingrey]

Just for clarification, the report didn't mention Gruden or any other person by name as the source. I do tend to think it was definatley someone from the coaching staff. Reading between the lines, I think they liked Dalton as a rookie but weren't sold on him as a franchise QB. I bet that still the case. He has to prove he's a franchise guy
Bengals organization has reservations about Andy Dalton | ProFootballTalk

I guess I assumed it was Gruden. In any case, hopefully they ALL figure it out. And given the sometimes tense exchanges between Gruden and Dalton I've seen a couple times this season, hopefully there is something brewing there.

 

[Cincyfan78]

And I'd like Brown to be given the opportunity to prove otherwise. So, no, I will hope the Bengals keep winning while Andy continues to prove he doesn't belong.

You realize that the chances of that happening are slim to none.

If you simply use the last 6 weeks as an example:

When "good" Andy is in the game, the Bengals are 3-0 (3 week stretch).

When "Bad" Andy is in the game, the Bengals are 1-2 (last 3 weeks).

By that logic (and I know this isn't perfect, just using these arbitrary numbers) the Bengals are more likely to lose 1/3 of their games when "Bad Andy" is in the game, where as when "Good Andy" is in the game, they are more likely to win those games.

So, you can continue to root for Andy to be poor, and that is well within your rights. But, to think you can root for him to be poor while the Bengals win games isn't really based much in reality. Which brings me back to an earlier point I made about you: I believe you would rather see the Bengals lose with Bad Andy than have them win with Good Andy.

Assuming what I mentioned above is true...that the Bengals simply can't win at all, or less than 50% of the time, with Bad Andy...which do you prefer? Do you want Good Andy and the Bengals to win, or do you want Bad Andy and the Bengals to lose, so they can get rid of him?

 

[NCBengal]

We are going nowhere with Andy at QB. We all know it and just pray for Good Andy every Sunday and that our defense remains stout. He had time yesterday to throw and just could not make the throws.

 

[flamingrey]

You realize that the chances of that happening are slim to none.

If you simply use the last 6 weeks as an example:

When "good" Andy is in the game, the Bengals are 3-0 (3 week stretch).

When "Bad" Andy is in the game, the Bengals are 1-2 (last 3 weeks).

By that logic (and I know this isn't perfect, just using these arbitrary numbers) the Bengals are more likely to lose 1/3 of their games when "Bad Andy" is in the game, where as when "Good Andy" is in the game, they are more likely to win those games.

So, you can continue to root for Andy to be poor, and that is well within your rights. But, to think you can root for him to be poor while the Bengals win games isn't really based much in reality. Which brings me back to an earlier point I made about you: I believe you would rather see the Bengals lose with Bad Andy than have them win with Good Andy.

Assuming what I mentioned above is true...that the Bengals simply can't win at all, or less than 50% of the time, with Bad Andy...which do you prefer? Do you want Good Andy and the Bengals to win, or do you want Bad Andy and the Bengals to lose, so they can get rid of him?

No, Andy has been downright awful the last few weeks. That is different than Andy clearly not playing well (and being a hindrance) and the Bengals still winning. THAT scenario has happened many times. IIRC, Green Bay was an example of this game. Same as New England.

Throwing pick 6's and throwing ugly picks on our side of the field is a losing proposition. The front office would have to be full of idiots to need that much to see that Dalton isn't the answer.

Oh and btw, there is no way you can correlate what I said to me wanting the Bengals to lose. Unless of course you can't follow a simple train of thought.

 

[Cincyfan78]

No, Andy has been downright awful the last few weeks. That is different than Andy clearly not playing well (and being a hindrance) and the Bengals still winning. THAT scenario has happened many times. IIRC, Green Bay was an example of this game. Same as New England.

Throwing pick 6's and throwing ugly picks on our side of the field is a losing proposition. The front office would have to be full of idiots to need that much to see that Dalton isn't the answer.

Oh and btw, there is no way you can correlate what I said to me wanting the Bengals to lose. Unless of course you can't follow a simple train of thought.

You said...you want Andy to play poorly, and the Bengals to win.

I outlined why that wasn't realistic.

So, I broke it down and simply asked you what your preference is.

If you had to choose between Andy playing well and the Bengals winning

Or

Andy playing poorly and the Bengals losing...


Which is it?

 

[cincygrad]

No, Andy has been downright awful the last few weeks. That is different than Andy clearly not playing well (and being a hindrance) and the Bengals still winning. THAT scenario has happened many times. IIRC, Green Bay was an example of this game. Same as New England.

Throwing pick 6's and throwing ugly picks on our side of the field is a losing proposition. The front office would have to be full of idiots to need that much to see that Dalton isn't the answer.

Oh and btw, there is no way you can correlate what I said to me wanting the Bengals to lose. Unless of course you can't follow a simple train of thought.

There's always a douche dagger.... It's like your trademark.

 

[Cincyfan78]

There's always a douche dagger.... It's like your trademark.

Yeah, it makes him feel better about himself to always try and put other posters down. Internet tough guy thing, and all.

I also love the trademark, complete avoidance of the question at hand, too.

 

[DanBengalfan]

 

[Cincyfan78]

I like peas.

 

[flamingrey]

Yeah, it makes him feel better about himself to always try and put other posters down. Internet tough guy thing, and all.

I also love the trademark, complete avoidance of the question at hand, too.

Please point to the "question" or any comment that I avoided.

 

[flamingrey]

There's always a douche dagger.... It's like your trademark.

That's what happens when people make silly and unsubstantiated accusations. And then also try to make it seem like it's based on some sort of evidence.

 

[Cincyfan78]

You realize that the chances of that happening are slim to none.

If you simply use the last 6 weeks as an example:

When "good" Andy is in the game, the Bengals are 3-0 (3 week stretch).

When "Bad" Andy is in the game, the Bengals are 1-2 (last 3 weeks).

By that logic (and I know this isn't perfect, just using these arbitrary numbers) the Bengals are more likely to lose 1/3 of their games when "Bad Andy" is in the game, where as when "Good Andy" is in the game, they are more likely to win those games.

So, you can continue to root for Andy to be poor, and that is well within your rights. But, to think you can root for him to be poor while the Bengals win games isn't really based much in reality. Which brings me back to an earlier point I made about you: I believe you would rather see the Bengals lose with Bad Andy than have them win with Good Andy.

Assuming what I mentioned above is true...that the Bengals simply can't win at all, or less than 50% of the time, with Bad Andy...which do you prefer? Do you want Good Andy and the Bengals to win, or do you want Bad Andy and the Bengals to lose, so they can get rid of him?

THIS question...

 

[Cincyfan78]

That's what happens when people make silly and unsubstantiated accusations. And then also try to make it seem like it's based on some sort of evidence.

Nope.

It's what happens when you're a douche bag...but, I digress since the rest of this board already knows that fact.

 

[kramer1]

Just put him on ignore FFS....

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Nope.

It's what happens when you're a douche bag...but, I digress since the rest of this board already knows that fact.

I already stopped talking to him in this thread. He is like a politician. He can talk a good game, but never answers what is asked, and then goes about his answer in a such a round about way, you are standing their slack jawed and scratching your head wondering...wtf did he just say? He is kinda like George Bush Jr.

 

[DanBengalfan]

it's a hobby.

 

[DanBengalfan]

Steelers vs Browns : advantage home team... Browns

Jets vs Ravens : not going to waste any breath rooting for the Jets, they suck. Ravens should kill them.