Maualuga fined

[bradfritz21]

Originally Posted by bfine32

I was hoping the OP had misspelled fired in his title.

If he can keep playing like he did on Sunday, I'm fine with keeping him.

Originally Posted by keller

Think like a homer Bengals fan - it's a big circle jerk around here.

Like I said, it might make sense if Rey didn't have his best game of the season and didn't look like a good MIKE backer.

Most of us have been complaining about his play all year, so that kind of shoots your circle jerk comment in the ****.

[bfine32]

Originally Posted by Truck_1_0_1_

You don't even know what a nickle D is.

We used to leave the Burbs and go pick those up in Over the Rhine back in the day.

[BengaliJack]

Im just glad Rey is hitting SOMETHING else besides the cap. Nice job last week Rey, but don't go getting a big head, errr bigger head....but nice job.

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by keller

He should be fined for sucking.

So should you.

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by Storm

Who would that be?

I really hope you know the answer to this and are just trying to be smart.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

Originally Posted by OSUfan

I really hope you know the answer to this and are just trying to be smart.

No really, he doesn't know and enither do I.

Because its not an excuse. There is nobody.

If you meant BScott, Peerman's had his role this year, so he only would've had 8 carries or so a game, thus rendering the injury excuse, null.

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by Truck_1_0_1_

No really, he doesn't know and enither do I.

Because its not an excuse. There is nobody.

If you meant BScott, Peerman's had his role this year, so he only would've had 8 carries or so a game, thus rendering the injury excuse, null.

What a complete joke.

Peerman has never been looked at as having the same role as Scott. There is not even a comparison. Very possibly the lamest debate point I have till now witnessed. I certainly do not remember anyone on the coaching staff stating in 2011 that Peerman should be getting more carries.

Scott did not get time early because of the broken hand so try again.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

Originally Posted by OSUfan

What a complete joke.

Peerman has never been looked at as having the same role as Scott. There is not even a comparison. Very possibly the lamest debate point I have till now witnessed. I certainly do not remember anyone on the coaching staff stating in 2011 that Peerman should be getting more carries.

Scott did not get time early because of the broken hand so try again.

You missed my point.

You cryptically meant that that had BScott not been injured, he would've split carries.

You don't know that, and neither do I; Peerman is IN BScott's role right now, and has been for the past 4 games or so, so who's to say that an injury is the reason why Ellis is getting all the touches?

Not a terrible argument at all, lay off the hyperbole.

[Storm]

Originally Posted by Truck_1_0_1_

No really, he doesn't know and enither do I.

Because its not an excuse. There is nobody.

If you meant BScott, Peerman's had his role this year, so he only would've had 8 carries or so a game, thus rendering the injury excuse, null.

B Scott has been injured most of hiss career and when he wasn't he was a light contributor so not sure how anyone could think you could count on him anyway.


Plain and simple the Bengals rolled the dice on the running game, they hoped it was just a mistake by New England allowing BJGE to get away and they hoped B Scott would be something he has never been, reliable

[caddie]

Originally Posted by OSUfan

There was one helmet to helmet hit. The one he got flagged for was a horrendous call and not even remotely close to helmet to helmet.

Yeah I am eating crow I remember yelling about the flag after you said something. It was not helmet to helmet on the one he was fined for. However I think they are being babies and fining him since the forearm hit.

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by Truck_1_0_1_

You missed my point.

You cryptically meant that that had BScott not been injured, he would've split carries.

You don't know that, and neither do I; Peerman is IN BScott's role right now, and has been for the past 4 games or so, so who's to say that an injury is the reason why Ellis is getting all the touches?

Not a terrible argument at all, lay off the hyperbole.

To say neither of us know may be a black and white fact. To say that you believe Scott would not have more carries than Peerman has if he were healthy ......well I would say you are being less than honest to attempt to strengthen your point.

Scott has always had more carries than Peerman when he has been healthy and this is another black and white fact.

Another black and white fact the staff stating Scott should have more carries.

Another fact the staff stating it would be RBBC yet. Peerman never mentioned in the committee.