BIGBLUE01 Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 Boy, that is funny...HA HA HA...easily the funniest post I have read in quite sometime... Palmer is a good QB. In two of the Bengals losses they scored 27 points and over 40 points. I doubt you can pin those on Palmer. Additionally, he was recovering from a fairly significant knee injury. Why should the Bengals be permitted to use their schedule as an excuse? The 2006 Bengals were a 500 team. Three of there losses came against non-playoff teams. Good teams win these games... When did the expectations get so low in NY? Is there an excuse that you guys won't use??? Youre good at dodging the point, I'll give ya that. Palmer was coming back from injury, and we HAD tons of injuries. Injuries schminjuries, we both had tough schedules, in tough div. and both finished 8-8. Nobodys permitting anyone to use that excuse, but he wants to know your view on Palmer and the Bengals. Answer the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadEgg Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 Youre good at dodging the point, I'll give ya that. Palmer was coming back from injury, and we HAD tons of injuries. Injuries schminjuries, we both had tough schedules, in tough div. and both finished 8-8. Nobodys permitting anyone to use that excuse, but he wants to know your view on Palmer and the Bengals. Answer the question. I said that the Bengals were a 500 team and that good teams would have won some of the games they lost. In sum, I don't think the 2006 Bengals were a very good team. Now answer my question? Is there any excuse that you guys won't use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 Youre good at dodging the point, I'll give ya that. Palmer was coming back from injury, and we HAD tons of injuries. Injuries schminjuries, we both had tough schedules, in tough div. and both finished 8-8. Nobodys permitting anyone to use that excuse, but he wants to know your view on Palmer and the Bengals. Answer the question. Court Jester, the Dog was wondering which part of the line "Palmer is a good QB" was confusing to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randoff Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 Speaking of the Bengals...they lost me 55 dollars on a futures bet. I had them winning the AFC Championship prior to the 2006 season. (I've got my money on a Saints/Ravens Superbowl. 18 to 1 that the Ravens wll win it all) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Court Jester, the Dog was wondering which part of the line "Palmer is a good QB" was confusing to you? IS..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 I said that the Bengals were a 500 team and that good teams would have won some of the games they lost. In sum, I don't think the 2006 Bengals were a very good team. Now answer my question? Is there any excuse that you guys won't use? Not sure, but Im sure theyre similiar to the ones you use. Now, answer the question randoff asked you. Whats the difference between us and the Bengals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadEgg Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Not sure, but Im sure theyre similiar to the ones you use. Now, answer the question randoff asked you. Whats the difference between us and the Bengals? I keep answering the question and you keep rephrasing it into something else. But I will respond to your new question: The Bengals have a better QB, better WRs, better RBs, better coaches...Get the picture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 I keep answering the question and you keep rephrasing it into something else. But I will respond to your new question: The Bengals have a better QB, better WRs, better RBs, better coaches...Get the picture? Actually, it was the poster with the Giant helmeted skull, that asked the question. My bad. Oh, and yeah, I get it. You're right, they are better than the Cowboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randoff Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 I keep answering the question and you keep rephrasing it into something else. But I will respond to your new question: The Bengals have a better QB, better WRs, better RBs, better coaches...Get the picture? Now you know I have to ask a question: If the Bengals have 'better' everything...why is it that they finished 8-8? AND missed the playoffs by LOSING to Pittsburgh??? (Steelers had nothing to gain and still won). Oh, I can give you that...the better recievers. 'Ocho Cinco' and TJ "House schmaZilly' (put him on the board CHAMPIONSHIP!) And Carson Palmer did better than Eli....but the 'better coaches' thing I gotta dispute ya on....(see below). 1. Marvin Lewis is something like 27-21 overall, Tom C is something like 93-83 overall as a head coach. Which one is better, you decide? 2. Coaching is closely related to the off field behavior of the team. Marvin Lewis (and the coaching staff for the Bengals) has problems with this Bengal team. Prime reason why Giddell has to get tough (besides Pacman's eff ups). Giants have ZERO issues off the field. If your so called statement of 'better coaches' should fly, shouldn't the Bengals be well behaved and not have so many 'lawbreakers' a la Chris Henry? (But Egg, I know it's cool to post 'bad lists' concerning Giants meetings, Eli's woes, Shockey's drops and Tiki's coach 'bashings'...but I guess you'd rather have BETTER coaching, 3 NFL suspensions and 8 felons on your team) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randoff Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 QUOTE(BadEgg @ Jul 13 2007, 12:49 PM) I said that the Bengals were a 500 team and that good teams would have won some of the games they lost. In sum, I don't think the 2006 Bengals were a very good team. Now answer my question? OR QUOTE(BadEgg @ Jul 13 2007, 06:46 PM) I keep answering the question and you keep rephrasing it into something else. But I will respond to your new question: The Bengals have a better QB, better WRs, better RBs, better coaches...Get the picture? Like I said...I cannot wrap my head around those two statements. Better everything....but the Bengals weren't a good team in '06? Who's to blame if the Bengals had 'better' players but still finished 8-8? That's what got me pissed when I lost my 55 bones! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Now you know I have to ask a question: If the Bengals have 'better' everything...why is it that they finished 8-8? AND missed the playoffs by LOSING to Pittsburgh??? (Steelers had nothing to gain and still won). Oh, I can give you that...the better recievers. 'Ocho Cinco' and TJ "House schmaZilly' (put him on the board CHAMPIONSHIP!) And Carson Palmer did better than Eli....but the 'better coaches' thing I gotta dispute ya on....(see below). 1. Marvin Lewis is something like 27-21 overall, Tom C is something like 93-83 overall as a head coach. Which one is better, you decide? 2. Coaching is closely related to the off field behavior of the team. Marvin Lewis (and the coaching staff for the Bengals) has problems with this Bengal team. Prime reason why Giddell has to get tough (besides Pacman's eff ups). Giants have ZERO issues off the field. If your so called statement of 'better coaches' should fly, shouldn't the Bengals be well behaved and not have so many 'lawbreakers' a la Chris Henry? (But Egg, I know it's cool to post 'bad lists' concerning Giants meetings, Eli's woes, Shockey's drops and Tiki's coach 'bashings'...but I guess you'd rather have BETTER coaching, 3 NFL suspensions and 8 felons on your team) it is possible, in the Dog's mind, that a team can be better then another, and still have the same record...8-8 may have gotten them in the playoffs in the NFC (the Dog seems to remember the same mediocre record getting another team in the playoffs in the NFC last year)... In addition to off field problems, coaching motivates players to want to take a team appraoch - the Giants were littered with individual egos dictating everything...to say that they have the Bengals off season problems would be silly, but to say that they are without issue? By the way, as an aside, the Dog actually knew a man who was an aquantance of Bill Parcells - they were discussing the challenge of coaching in the NFL (This was by the way back when Parcells was with the Giants), and Parcells shared that he thought that high school coaches had it more difficult, because he only had to worry about the x's and o's, and winning, and not teaching kids to be men in addition...he then went on to say that 90% of the players in the NFL are using drugs, drinking heavily, cheating, and/or abusing their spouses...the point being, every team has it's issues, not just the ones that are too stupid to get caught...and the Dog wonders, is it possible for a coach to pull the reigns in on players when they are in the offseason or outside of the facility? That is like blaming a teacher for a kid that goes home and beats up his siblings...Just the Dog's thought anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 it is possible, in the Dog's mind, that a team can be better then another, and still have the same record...8-8 may have gotten them in the playoffs in the NFC (the Dog seems to remember the same mediocre record getting another team in the playoffs in the NFC last year)... In addition to off field problems, coaching motivates players to want to take a team appraoch - the Giants were littered with individual egos dictating everything...to say that they have the Bengals off season problems would be silly, but to say that they are without issue? By the way, as an aside, the Dog actually knew a man who was an aquantance of Bill Parcells - they were discussing the challenge of coaching in the NFL (This was by the way back when Parcells was with the Giants), and Parcells shared that he thought that high school coaches had it more difficult, because he only had to worry about the x's and o's, and winning, and not teaching kids to be men in addition...he then went on to say that 90% of the players in the NFL are using drugs, drinking heavily, cheating, and/or abusing their spouses...the point being, every team has it's issues, not just the ones that are too stupid to get caught...and the Dog wonders, is it possible for a coach to pull the reigns in on players when they are in the offseason or outside of the facility? That is like blaming a teacher for a kid that goes home and beats up his siblings...Just the Dog's thought anyway... Well, at least you admit it. How were the Giants littered with big egos? And what did they dictate? I'll give you an example of an attitude dictating a team....T.O. Remember the Philly debacle? If your talking Shock and Plax, thats a far cry from LITTERED. And I think the 90% drinkin & druggin etc. is, as you say, silly. Thats absurd. Its probably more than we think, but not 90%. And the coach, whether its high school or the pros, has a big influence on the players actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Well, at least you admit it. How were the Giants littered with big egos? And what did they dictate? I'll give you an example of an attitude dictating a team....T.O. Remember the Philly debacle? If your talking Shock and Plax, thats a far cry from LITTERED. And I think the 90% drinkin & druggin etc. is, as you say, silly. Thats absurd. Its probably more than we think, but not 90%. And the coach, whether its high school or the pros, has a big influence on the players actions. perhaps you are right court jester - shockey had no ego...burress had no ego...barber had no ego...coughlin has no ego...the Dog has to wonder if you even watch giants football.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 perhaps you are right court jester - shockey had no ego...burress had no ego...barber had no ego...coughlin has no ego...the Dog has to wonder if you even watch giants football.... Did you ride the short bus to school??? Lets try this again..... AND WHAT DID THIER EGOS DICTATE?? T.O. imploded a team and its entire chemsitry. What did thier egos do? And dont say an 8-8 record, that was due to massive injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Did you ride the short bus to school??? Lets try this again..... AND WHAT DID THIER EGOS DICTATE?? T.O. imploded a team and its entire chemsitry. What did thier egos do? And dont say an 8-8 record, that was due to massive injury. The Dog was taking it one step at a time, so as to go at a pace you understand...first, they had big egos...second, egos that keep a player from coming to off season workouts impacts the team (FYI, both mike shanahan and mike holmgren have both stated that the years that there respective teams won the super bowl, they had 100% attendance at offf season workouts...)...big egos take shots at coaching staffs, QBs when they don't throw the ball well...and, let's add for fun - while everyone celebrated the Burress signing, there was the fans ofthe steelers and the organiziation of the steelers that were celebrating his departure and his attitude...the dog wonders how that steeeler team has done in recent years...? And enough with the injuries - part of the ganme court jester...the patriots won a super bowl with a wide receiver playing nickel back...they didn't whine about it, they just won...boo hoo, court jester...my team has boo boos...we can't win like that!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 The Dog was taking it one step at a time, so as to go at a pace you understand...first, they had big egos...second, egos that keep a player from coming to off season workouts impacts the team (FYI, both mike shanahan and mike holmgren have both stated that the years that there respective teams won the super bowl, they had 100% attendance at offf season workouts...)...big egos take shots at coaching staffs, QBs when they don't throw the ball well...and, let's add for fun - while everyone celebrated the Burress signing, there was the fans ofthe steelers and the organiziation of the steelers that were celebrating his departure and his attitude...the dog wonders how that steeeler team has done in recent years...? And enough with the injuries - part of the ganme court jester...the patriots won a super bowl with a wide receiver playing nickel back...they didn't whine about it, they just won...boo hoo, court jester...my team has boo boos...we can't win like that!! Who are you talking about, Plax? He came, read the papers. Shock, he always trains in Miami and his #'s are good enough to prove its working. And QB's when they dont throw the ball well......WHa????? Stay with me Tinkerbell, dont fade out. Were talkin ego's here. What does a QB throwin the ball have to do with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randoff Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 it is possible, in the Dog's mind, that a team can be better then another, and still have the same record...8-8 may have gotten them in the playoffs in the NFC (the Dog seems to remember the same mediocre record getting another team in the playoffs in the NFC last year)... In addition to off field problems, coaching motivates players to want to take a team appraoch - the Giants were littered with individual egos dictating everything...to say that they have the Bengals off season problems would be silly, but to say that they are without issue? By the way, as an aside, the Dog actually knew a man who was an aquantance of Bill Parcells - they were discussing the challenge of coaching in the NFL (This was by the way back when Parcells was with the Giants), and Parcells shared that he thought that high school coaches had it more difficult, because he only had to worry about the x's and o's, and winning, and not teaching kids to be men in addition...he then went on to say that 90% of the players in the NFL are using drugs, drinking heavily, cheating, and/or abusing their spouses...the point being, every team has it's issues, not just the ones that are too stupid to get caught...and the Dog wonders, is it possible for a coach to pull the reigns in on players when they are in the offseason or outside of the facility? That is like blaming a teacher for a kid that goes home and beats up his siblings...Just the Dog's thought anyway... What the Doff was comparing was the team with 'better everything'....better coaches, better RBs, better WR's...etc. Granted the Bengals and the Giants finished 8-8 last season. The Doff merely wanted to ask again "Were the Bengals actually better than the Giants in '06?" In the Doffs non biased opinion and imagining if the Doff Meister was neither a fan of the Giants OR the Bengals. The way the Doff sees it is that Cincy lost the last season game albiet to a 'rival' BUT Pittsburgh had no incentive to win. Giants struggled all of last year but managed to win in a must win 17th game vs Washington. Perhaps the label of 'better everything' should be changed to 'almost better than the Giants (on paper)?" Now with those 'character issues' displayed by the Bengals....the Doff wonders if the scouting staff of the Bengals is "better"? Hmmmmn?? Care to discuss there Lord Dog? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 Boy, that is funny...HA HA HA...easily the funniest post I have read in quite sometime... Palmer is a good QB. In two of the Bengals losses they scored 27 points and over 40 points. I doubt you can pin those on Palmer. Additionally, he was recovering from a fairly significant knee injury. Why should the Bengals be permitted to use their schedule as an excuse? The 2006 Bengals were a 500 team. Three of there losses came against non-playoff teams. Good teams win these games... When did the expectations get so low in NY? Is there an excuse that you guys won't use??? Almost as funny as saying strength of schedule doesn't matter. Tough schedule or not, we still ended up right there with the cowgirls. One and done. The big difference here is we were 4-2 in the division, whilst the girls were 2-4. It's not an excuse, it's a fact of the game and it does matter. The '06 Bengals were a good team with a bad defense. Very similar to the Giants, a good team with the starting defense on IR. And somehow we still come out looking better than the girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 Almost as funny as saying strength of schedule doesn't matter. Tough schedule or not, we still ended up right there with the cowgirls. One and done. The big difference here is we were 4-2 in the division, whilst the girls were 2-4. It's not an excuse, it's a fact of the game and it does matter. The '06 Bengals were a good team with a bad defense. Very similar to the Giants, a good team with the starting defense on IR. And somehow we still come out looking better than the girls. This stat speaks volumes. Funny, egg/hotdog never mentiones that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now