Cincinnati Bengals

Go Back   Cincinnati Bengals Message Boards - Forums > Cincinnati Bengals Football Discussion > Jungle Noise

Jungle Noise Bengals Football Discussion for BENGALS FANS ONLY. Visiting team fans please keep your postings in one of our other forums.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #176  
Old 01-28-2013, 07:02 PM
Anderson_fan1988's Avatar
Anderson_fan1988 Anderson_fan1988 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Centerville, OH
Posts: 304
Rep Points: 440
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
I was a leader also especially after the season 2010 and I was drowned out by the ridiculous posts from some members in that they would rather be horrible then have the diva's on upcoming 2011 season.

Think about that last statement boys and girls. Some of these fans rather be worse then the Browns and finish last again in 2011 then have a couple of divas. Now, I bet some of these same "fans" are the same fools who are complaining about our WR corps and Gruden and Marvin, etc.

You can't have it both ways. It takes years to develop a good WR corps. The last time we had a good WR corps was with Chad, TJ and Chris Henry.

Some members think 3-4 good receivers are a dime a dozen. They are not, look at the Browns. They don't even have 1 good WR.

It might take years before we get a legitimate #2 WR, by then we may lose #1 WR.
__________________
I'm Garrus Vakarian, and this is my favorite team in the NFL
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 01-28-2013, 09:24 PM
BigPapaKain's Avatar
BigPapaKain BigPapaKain is online now
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Posts: 5,534
Rep Points: 8927
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
I was a leader also especially after the season 2010 and I was drowned out by the ridiculous posts from some members in that they would rather be horrible then have the diva's on upcoming 2011 season.

Think about that last statement boys and girls. Some of these fans rather be worse then the Browns and finish last again in 2011 then have a couple of divas. Now, I bet some of these same "fans" are the same fools who are complaining about our WR corps and Gruden and Marvin, etc.

You can't have it both ways. It takes years to develop a good WR corps. The last time we had a good WR corps was with Chad, TJ and Chris Henry.

Some members think 3-4 good receivers are a dime a dozen. They are not, look at the Browns. They don't even have 1 good WR.

It might take years before we get a legitimate #2 WR, by then we may lose #1 WR.
Having the diva receivers sure as hell didn't help in 2010 - you think keeping them on would've been good for the team? C'mon, man.
__________________
Vi veri universum vivus vici - By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 01-28-2013, 09:25 PM
Joelist's Avatar
Joelist Joelist is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Justice, IL
Posts: 4,193
Rep Points: 5734
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
I was a leader also especially after the season 2010 and I was drowned out by the ridiculous posts from some members in that they would rather be horrible then have the diva's on upcoming 2011 season.

Think about that last statement boys and girls. Some of these fans rather be worse then the Browns and finish last again in 2011 then have a couple of divas. Now, I bet some of these same "fans" are the same fools who are complaining about our WR corps and Gruden and Marvin, etc.

You can't have it both ways. It takes years to develop a good WR corps. The last time we had a good WR corps was with Chad, TJ and Chris Henry.

Some members think 3-4 good receivers are a dime a dozen. They are not, look at the Browns. They don't even have 1 good WR.

It might take years before we get a legitimate #2 WR, by then we may lose #1 WR.
Which is why we should be going to Free Agency and landing a proven, veteran possession receiver to stick in that #2 slot while we try to develop players. They aren't THAT hard to land and the money is not crazy.
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 01-28-2013, 09:32 PM
BigPapaKain's Avatar
BigPapaKain BigPapaKain is online now
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Posts: 5,534
Rep Points: 8927
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joelist View Post
Which is why we should be going to Free Agency and landing a proven, veteran possession receiver to stick in that #2 slot while we try to develop players. They aren't THAT hard to land and the money is not crazy.


Especially this year.
__________________
Vi veri universum vivus vici - By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 01-28-2013, 10:09 PM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
I was a leader also especially after the season 2010 and I was drowned out by the ridiculous posts from some members in that they would rather be horrible then have the diva's on upcoming 2011 season.

Think about that last statement boys and girls. Some of these fans rather be worse then the Browns and finish last again in 2011 then have a couple of divas. Now, I bet some of these same "fans" are the same fools who are complaining about our WR corps and Gruden and Marvin, etc.

You can't have it both ways. It takes years to develop a good WR corps. The last time we had a good WR corps was with Chad, TJ and Chris Henry.

Some members think 3-4 good receivers are a dime a dozen. They are not, look at the Browns. They don't even have 1 good WR.

It might take years before we get a legitimate #2 WR, by then we may lose #1 WR.
I think pretty much everybody was on board for a FA to replace Simpson. As for the 2010 divas, them dudes weren't any good. Chad was garbage and TO mediocre by that point. Simpson had looked pretty good once he finally got on the field, and Shipley had been solid and most everyone I can remember was stoked to get AJ. I started wanting/predicting we'd draft Green before 2010 season was even over.

Caldwell was always terrible.

I must have missed the people who wanted to get rid of starters who weren't getting it done and replace them with back ups who couldn't beat those bums out. I've either forgotten or paid such posts no mind to begin with cuz that's just crazy. I didn't like that we failed to sign a FA to replace Simpson at all.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.
Reply With Quote
  #181  
Old 01-28-2013, 10:37 PM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPapaKain View Post
Having the diva receivers sure as hell didn't help in 2010 - you think keeping them on would've been good for the team? C'mon, man.
I knew it, I knew it, I knew it.

You need to read post

http://boards.bengals.com/showpost.p...&postcount=172

The second paragraph. It's not long it is three short sentences.
Read the last paragraph as well.

P.S. Simpson/Caldwell were garbage in 2011.

Our offense was Shipley, Green, Dalton, Benson and Gresham with a touch of Leonard.
__________________

Last edited by BengalYankee; 01-28-2013 at 10:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 01-28-2013, 11:02 PM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
I think pretty much everybody was on board for a FA to replace Simpson. As for the 2010 divas, them dudes weren't any good. Chad was garbage and TO mediocre by that point. Simpson had looked pretty good once he finally got on the field, and Shipley had been solid and most everyone I can remember was stoked to get AJ. I started wanting/predicting we'd draft Green before 2010 season was even over.

Caldwell was always terrible.

I must have missed the people who wanted to get rid of starters who weren't getting it done and replace them with back ups who couldn't beat those bums out. I've either forgotten or paid such posts no mind to begin with cuz that's just crazy. I didn't like that we failed to sign a FA to replace Simpson at all.
Maybe Chad was garbage, but he was better then Caldwell. He would have at least received double team something that would have helped out AJ.

As for Owens, Owens was on his way to becoming an All Pro that year with his production.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorysta...ualified=false


Mediocre huh, that is silly.

He was the ONLY Bengal to make the NFL top 100 players of the year. So what does that mean about the rest of the squad worse then Mediocre???

Other then AJ Green, no other WR of the Bangals have come close to his production.

A matter of fact you can combine all the WR's other then Green for 2011 and for 2012 and they still don't match what TO did in 2010. Seriously man, before you write think about it.

And what you wrote is still addressing about replacing the "divas" with better WR's. I have no allegiance to Chad and Owens, I have an allegiance to the team and the team needed to replace them with better WR's if they were going to replace them at all.

You see what the 49ers coach did he replaced his QB with another QB. The Ravens replaced their OC with another OC. Neither did so at the end of the year, but during the season. If Simpson/Caldwell were better then the "divas" then you replace them ASAP. But it was obvious that Simpson/Caldwell were NOT beter then the "divas" otherwise they would have been starters.

Again, I am going to repeat this for the hard of reading, but someone will respond with a foolish response.

I am NOT saying we should have not replaced the "divas'. However, if you are going to replace #1 and #2, you DON"T replace them with #3 and #4. You do what you can do to get better.

You don't replace Dalton with Gradkowski, you get a better QB!! PERIOD!!!!!
__________________

Last edited by BengalYankee; 01-28-2013 at 11:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 01-28-2013, 11:11 PM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
Maybe Chad was garbage, but he was better then Caldwell. He would have at least received double team something that would have helped out AJ.

As for Owens, Owens was on his way to becoming an All Pro that year with his production.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorysta...ualified=false


Mediocre huh, that is silly.

He was the ONLY Bengal to make the NFL top 100 players of the year. So what does that mean about the rest of the squad worse then Mediocre???

And what you wrote is still addressing about replacing the "divas" with better WR's. I have no allegiance to Chad and Owens, I have an allegiance to the team and the team needed to replace them with better WR's if they were going to replace them at all.

You see what the 49ers coach did he replaced his QB with another QB. The Ravens replaced their OC with another OC. Neither did so at the end of the year, but during the season. If Simpson/Caldwell were better then the "divas" then you replace them ASAP. But it was obvious that Simpson/Caldwell were NOT beter then the "divas" otherwise they would have been starters.

Again, I am going to repeat this for the hard of reading, but someone will respond with a foolish response.

I am NOT saying we should have not replaced the "divas'. However, if you are going to replace #1 and #2, you DON"T replace them with #3 and #4. You do what you can do to get better.

You don't replace Dalton with Gradkowski, you get a better QB!! PERIOD!!!!!
Meh, we've argued Owens before. You stick to the numbers but I can't help but recall that his routes were lazy and he refused to adjust or fight for the ball, his effort was pathetic and he left Palmer hanging time and again. But he was a starting receiver on a bad team that had to throw it a lot so yea, he got like 900 yards in 14 games....Not really impressive tbph......

He was here one year, and his effort and performance that season was not at all like the type of effort and performance that landed him on that all time team, period. Just cuz a dude gets named to a team doesn't mean that no matter how bad he plays for the rest of his days, we have to pretend he played well. I watched every game of his in stripes, mediocre is being kind.

Besides that, I already explained how I agree that you shouldn't replace starters who stink with said stinky starters backup.

Also....ALL PRO is the biggest reach ever dude.......TO was nowhere near one of the top two receivers in the league that year. It would be a reach to say he should have been a Pro Bowl replacement let alone imply he was pace to be considered "All Pro". Lulz.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.

Last edited by savagehenry54; 01-28-2013 at 11:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 01-28-2013, 11:22 PM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
Meh, we've argued Owens before. You stick to the numbers but I can't help but recall that his routes were lazy and he refused to adjust or fight for the ball, his effort was pathetic and he left Palmer hanging time and again. But he was a starting receiver on a bad team that had to throw it a lot so yea, he got like 900 yards in 14 games....Not really impressive tbph......

He was here one year, and his effort and performance that season was not at all like the type of effort and performance that landed him on that all time team, period. Just cuz a dude gets named to a team doesn't mean that no matter how bad he plays for the rest of his days, we have to pretend he played well. I watched every game of his in stripes, mediocre is being kind.

Besides that, I already explained how I agree that you shouldn't replace starters who stink with said stinky starters backup.
You responded before I added this tidbit for you.

A matter of fact you can combine all the WR's other then Green for 2011 and for 2012 and they still don't match what TO did in 2010.


It is not about him, but what replaced him, which if you read the highlighted line above again and again, maybe you will understand what I am trying to say.

AJ and Dalton needed help and to DATE, we don't have someone to complement AJ. Do you understand that????

The WR's we had since Coles, Antonio Bryant, Caldwell, Simpson, etc are no more different then the Republican's Presidential Candidate of the month GARBAGE....

Ron Paul
Newt Gingrich
Rick Santorum
Buddy Roemer
Rick Perry
Michele Bachmann
Herman Cain
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 01-28-2013, 11:25 PM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
Also....ALL PRO is the biggest reach ever dude.......TO was nowhere near one of the top two receivers in the league that year. It would be a reach to say he should have been a Pro Bowl replacement let alone imply he was pace to be considered "All Pro". Lulz.

More misrepresentation by you, I am surprised. ALL Pro have 5-6 receivers on the team not two
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 01-28-2013, 11:37 PM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
You responded before I added this tidbit for you.

A matter of fact you can combine all the WR's other then Green for 2011 and for 2012 and they still don't match what TO did in 2010.


It is not about him, but what replaced him, which if you read the highlighted line above again and again, maybe you will understand what I am trying to say.

AJ and Dalton needed help and to DATE, we don't have someone to complement AJ. Do you understand that????

The WR's we had since Coles, Antonio Bryant, Caldwell, Simpson, etc are no more different then the Republican's Presidential Candidate of the month GARBAGE....

Ron Paul
Newt Gingrich
Rick Santorum
Buddy Roemer
Rick Perry
Michele Bachmann
Herman Cain
You must not be counting this guy's numbers, even though you mentioned him......

http://www.nfl.com/player/jeromesimpson/318/profile

Besides Simpson's 725 yards in 2011, Hawkins went for almost 600 this past season and Tate/Binns/Sanu/Jones all combined for roughly 700 to 800 yards or so.

Which is all to say that your extremely BOLD proclamation is patently false.

And besides, yet again......

Quote:
I think pretty much everybody was on board for a FA to replace Simpson. As for the 2010 divas, them dudes weren't any good. Chad was garbage and TO mediocre by that point. Simpson had looked pretty good once he finally got on the field, and Shipley had been solid and most everyone I can remember was stoked to get AJ. I started wanting/predicting we'd draft Green before 2010 season was even over.

Caldwell was always terrible.

I must have missed the people who wanted to get rid of starters who weren't getting it done and replace them with back ups who couldn't beat those bums out. I've either forgotten or paid such posts no mind to begin with cuz that's just crazy. I didn't like that we failed to sign a FA to replace Simpson at all.
As you can see I was pretty much agreeing with your sentiment, I just don't remember all these people you do that you claim were clamoring for Caldwell and Simpson to be our starters. Simpson, yea, but most of us also wanted and loved that we drafted AJ cuz we recognized the need.

Just like we recognized the need to replace Simpson last year. There was a ton of discussion about "Let's get Meachem" or this guy or that, I can't remember who all the FA WRs were last year but there was plenty of talk about which we should go get.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.
Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 01-28-2013, 11:41 PM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
You must not be counting this guy's numbers, even though you mentioned him......

http://www.nfl.com/player/jeromesimpson/318/profile

Besides Simpson's 725 yards in 2011, Hawkins went for almost 600 this past season and Tate/Binns/Sanu/Jones all combined for roughly 700 to 800 yards or so.

Which is all to say that your extremely BOLD proclamation is patently false.

And besides, yet again......



As you can see I was pretty much agreeing with your sentiment, I just don't remember all these people you do that you claim were clamoring for Caldwell and Simpson to be our starters. Simpson, yea, but most of us also wanted and loved that we drafted AJ cuz we recognized the need.

Just like we recognized the need to replace Simpson last year. There was a ton of discussion about "Let's get Meachem" or this guy or that, I can't remember who all the FA WRs were last year but there was plenty of talk about which we should go get.

I was referring to TD's!!!!!!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 01-28-2013, 11:43 PM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
More misrepresentation by you, I am surprised. ALL Pro have 5-6 receivers on the team not two
First team All Pro means the best two receivers in the league. That's the difference between a Pro Bowler and an All Pro.

All Pro = All League

Pro Bowl = All Conference

By either standard, TO could not credibly be considered for either honor in 2010. He was statistically about ninth in conference and 18th in the league that year in receptions and yards. If the Bengals had been a winning team that year, then perhaps he makes the pro bowl on name recognition but All Pro was absolutely out of the question.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.
Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 01-28-2013, 11:50 PM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
I was referring to TD's!!!!!!
Bengals receivers other than AJ have scored a total 17 TDs the last two years compared to TO's 9 in 2010, so even after revising that claim to just "TDs", it's still entirely inaccurate.

That said, you'll not find a bigger proponent of the idea that Dalton and Green need help than me.

As I've said, the only general premise I was disagreeing with you on was that a lot of people were cool with getting rid of guys and not attempting to replace them with better talent as opposed to lesser talent already on the roster.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.
Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 01-29-2013, 12:18 AM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
Bengals receivers other than AJ have scored a total 17 TDs the last two years compared to TO's 9 in 2010, so even after revising that claim to just "TDs", it's still entirely inaccurate.

That said, you'll not find a bigger proponent of the idea that Dalton and Green need help than me.

As I've said, the only general premise I was disagreeing with you on was that a lot of people were cool with getting rid of guys and not attempting to replace them with better talent as opposed to lesser talent already on the roster.

You are misrepresenting again. First of all I did not state 2011 and 1012 in total. That would be riduculous. For each year you can combine the WR's and in both years separately they don't tally up to what TO has done.

Seriously, I did not state these facts without looking them up first. Who do you think I am Fred Toast?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #191  
Old 01-29-2013, 12:24 AM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
First team All Pro means the best two receivers in the league. That's the difference between a Pro Bowler and an All Pro.

All Pro = All League

Pro Bowl = All Conference

By either standard, TO could not credibly be considered for either honor in 2010. He was statistically about ninth in conference and 18th in the league that year in receptions and yards. If the Bengals had been a winning team that year, then perhaps he makes the pro bowl on name recognition but All Pro was absolutely out of the question.

He was generally 8th-9th in most stats per conference and with the amount of WR's bowing out each year of a game that has 5-6 WR's per conference is not out of the question.

But I really don't care about TO, or Chad. I care about the Bengals!!!!

You can't lie to me and say that Simpson or Caldwell can come anywhere near the Pro-Bowl.

I repeat this not about TO or Chad, it is about who came in to replace them. GARBAGE!!!!!!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Old 01-29-2013, 12:33 AM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
You are misrepresenting again. First of all I did not state 2011 and 1012 in total. That would be riduculous. For each year you can combine the WR's and in both years separately they don't tally up to what TO has done.

Seriously, I did not state these facts without looking them up first. Who do you think I am Fred Toast?
Aw geez, I haven't "misrepresented" anything.

You say TO is on pace for All Pro.....you didn't qualify that statement as referring to 3rd or 4th team All Pro so of course most anyone is going to take that as meaning All Pro as in first team All Pro.

Quote:
As for Owens, Owens was on his way to becoming an All Pro that year with his production.
.....You even threw in a link to a stat table that showed his AFC rank as opposed to his NFL rank that year, so I figured you were either confusing Pro Bowl with All Pro or just blowing smoke.

Quote:
A matter of fact you can combine all the WR's other then Green for 2011 and for 2012 and they still don't match what TO did in 2010.
There is no mention of TDs there as you later amended it. The way it stands, it certainly looks like you're implying that the sum of Bengals receivers stats combined for both years fall short of TOs 2010 campaign.

So if what you really meant to say was that......."Not in 2011 or 2012, did the Bengals receivers other than AJ score as many TDs as TO did in 2010", then okay, that's a factual statement.

However, as you can see, what you actually said and what you apparently meant to say are two totally different things.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 01-29-2013, 12:35 AM
Shake n Blake's Avatar
Shake n Blake Shake n Blake is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Homers gonna home
Posts: 12,226
Rep Points: 23922
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by Millz View Post
So yeah, in the 2012 offseason, Bengals did very little to upgrade the receivers in which I was very much against last off-season as I was a leader of the "We need a legit #2 WR" bandwagon.
Same here. I was almost positive #2 WR was going to be a problem last year, and sure enough, it was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
Again, for the hard of reading. I am not saying we should have kept the "divas" at all cost. We should have replaced them with equal or better WR's. We replaced one of them with a much better WR in AJ Green, but the vacant sign on WR #2 has been lit for two years now.


#2 has pretty much been a problem for 4 seasons now (since we let Housh walk). I was a fan of TO, but he was obviously a band-aid. If you remember the 2010 offseason, Brandon Marshall, Anquan Boldin, Antonio Bryant and TO were the 4 big names available. I badly wanted us to trade for Boldin. Unfortunately, we went after Bryant instead. Can you imagine how awesome this offense would've been these last couple years with AJ and Boldin?
__________________
From 2006-2013, this team has never finished higher than 20th in yards per carry. They've had an average rank of 27th during those 8 seasons.

During those 8 seasons, we've had several starting RBs, different starters on the o-line, different TEs and FBs and 2 different RB coaches. Only our o-line coach remained the same.
Reply With Quote
  #194  
Old 01-29-2013, 12:38 AM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
He was generally 8th-9th in most stats per conference and with the amount of WR's bowing out each year of a game that has 5-6 WR's per conference is not out of the question.

But I really don't care about TO, or Chad. I care about the Bengals!!!!

You can't lie to me and say that Simpson or Caldwell can come anywhere near the Pro-Bowl.

I repeat this not about TO or Chad, it is about who came in to replace them. GARBAGE!!!!!!
Simpson hasn't worked out in Minnesota so far but last year, he played pretty well here and again, as I said in my initial reply to you in this thread, no one to my recollection wanted Caldwell to be a starter. Simpson, yea, along with AJ, who everybody wanted and was happy to see us draft.

AJ and Simpson are the starters the majority of fans wanted to see replace the "divas". And when we jettisoned the pothead, everybody wanted to sign a FA to replace him, we didn't just want a third and fifth rounder, that's what we got, but it's not what most wanted.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.
Reply With Quote
  #195  
Old 01-29-2013, 12:49 AM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
Aw geez, I haven't "misrepresented" anything.

You say TO is on pace for All Pro.....you didn't qualify that statement as referring to 3rd or 4th team All Pro so of course most anyone is going to take that as meaning All Pro as in first team All Pro.



.....You even threw in a link to a stat table that showed his AFC rank as opposed to his NFL rank that year, so I figured you were either confusing Pro Bowl with All Pro or just blowing smoke.



There is no mention of TDs there as you later amended it. The way it stands, it certainly looks like you're implying that the sum of Bengals receivers stats combined for both years fall short of TOs 2010 campaign.

So if what you really meant to say was that......."Not in 2011 or 2012, did the Bengals receivers other than AJ score as many TDs as TO did in 2010", then okay, that's a factual statement.

However, as you can see, what you actually said and what you apparently meant to say are two totally different things.

LOL, I never considered TO a first or second. I said he was on target to be an All Pro, which means a player on the Pro Bowl squad.


I did not amend anything. Again before I made my statement I looked it up. If you think I meant both years collectively and I would still post it then you are crazy. I don't post it so that others can tear me apart later.


So, If I confused you, I am sorry.

Per year, no WR other then Green has more TD's on the Bengals since 2010 by Terrell Owens.

Per year, no WR other then Green has more yardage on the Bengals since 2010 by Terrell Owens

Per year, you can combine the TD receptions of all the WR's other then Green, since 2010

That said, I had no problem replacing TO with a WR better or equal to Owens.

You don't replace Dalton with Gradkowski, you get someone better then or equal to Dalton. You don't promote Gradkowski to be your starting QB. The same with most other positions on the team.
__________________

Last edited by BengalYankee; 01-29-2013 at 01:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #196  
Old 01-29-2013, 01:08 AM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
LOL, I never considered TO a first or second. I said he was on target to be an All Pro, which means a player on the Pro Bowl squad.


I did not amend anything. Again before I made my statement I looked it up. If you think I meant both years collectively and I would still post it then you are crazy. I don't post it so that others can tear me apart later.


So, If I confused you, I am sorry.

Per year, no WR other then Green has more TD's on the Bengals since 2010 by Terrell Owens.

Per year, no WR other then Green has more yardage on the Bengals since 2010 by Terrell Owens

Per year, you can combine the TD receptions of all the WR's other then Green, since 2010

That said, I had no problem replacing TO with a WR better or equal to Owens othen Green.

You don't replace Dalton with Gradkowski, you get someone better then or equal to Dalton. You don't promote Gradkowski to be your starting QB. The same with most other positions on the team.
Meh, like I said, what you meant and what you said were two different things.

And you absolutely amended the statement. When I first pointed out how inaccurate it was, you came back with simply "I was referring to TDs", which was still wrong.

Then you said you didn't mean 2010 and 2011 combined.

And now you've revised it even further and are saying that no individual receiver other than AJ in 2011 or 2012 scored as many TDs or had as many yards.


Why would anyone read this......
Quote:
A matter of fact you can combine all the WR's other then Green for 2011 and for 2012 and they still don't match what TO did in 2010.

And then think that this is what you meant?.......
Quote:
Per year, no WR other then Green has more TD's on the Bengals since 2010 by Terrell Owens.

Per year, no WR other then Green has more yardage on the Bengals since 2010 by Terrell Owens

Per year, you can combine the TD receptions of all the WR's other then Green, since 2010
At any rate, I wanted a FA signed to replace Simpson too.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.
Reply With Quote
  #197  
Old 01-29-2013, 02:12 AM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
Meh, like I said, what you meant and what you said were two different things.

And you absolutely amended the statement. When I first pointed out how inaccurate it was, you came back with simply "I was referring to TDs", which was still wrong.

Then you said you didn't mean 2010 and 2011 combined.

And now you've revised it even further and are saying that no individual receiver other than AJ in 2011 or 2012 scored as many TDs or had as many yards.


Why would anyone read this......



And then think that this is what you meant?.......


At any rate, I wanted a FA signed to replace Simpson too.

Meh, it's useless. I told you I did not amend a darn thing. You go on and believe what you want to believe. Before I made my statements I looked them up and then I posted what I found.

Clearly, I did not mean collectively as in both years. I wrote and I meant per year the WR's have not done.

Thank Goodness for archived threads. Here I CLEARLY wrote that Simpson/Caldwell did not have a better year then TO and this thread was written last year.




http://boards.bengals.com/showpost.p...9&postcount=37
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #198  
Old 01-29-2013, 02:23 AM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 13,978
Rep Points: 35415
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by BengalYankee View Post
Meh, it's useless. I told you I did not amend a darn thing. You go on and believe what you want to believe. Before I made my statements I looked them up and then I posted what I found.

Clearly, I did not mean collectively as in both years. I wrote and I meant per year the WR's have not done.

Thank Goodness for archived threads. Here I CLEARLY wrote that Simpson/Caldwell did not have a better year then TO and this thread was written last year.




http://boards.bengals.com/showpost.p...9&postcount=37
It's all good man. I'm not trying to bust your chops here but it seems like you expect me to infer something from what you initially said that just isn't there to be inferred. I understand that it's a point you had probably made before in other discussions so you probably hurriedly worded it the way you did. It's no biggie man.
__________________
Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak started in 1991 and now its over. The Bengals streak of not winning a playoff game started in 91 too. So now I'm just waiting on the other shoe to drop.
Reply With Quote
  #199  
Old 01-29-2013, 02:46 AM
BengalYankee's Avatar
BengalYankee BengalYankee is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 10,771
Rep Points: 16832
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Quote:
Originally Posted by savagehenry54 View Post
It's all good man. I'm not trying to bust your chops here but it seems like you expect me to infer something from what you initially said that just isn't there to be inferred. I understand that it's a point you had probably made before in other discussions so you probably hurriedly worded it the way you did. It's no biggie man.

I think we are both in agreement our Bengals need a good #2 and possibly a good #3 WR. The difference is I never trusted Simpson/Caldwell at all. We only gave the TOcho experiment one year. Unfortunately, the whole team collasped from the FO and the medical staff being burnt with Antonio Bryant, to Cedric Benson's fumbalitis, our defense stinking, Palmer's interceptions, our inept coaching staff, Shipley's dropped ball at the goal line vs the Steelers, etc.

I am hopeful that Sanu and our WR's return better next year.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #200  
Old 01-29-2013, 01:08 PM
THE PISTONS's Avatar
THE PISTONS THE PISTONS is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 9,711
Rep Points: 8571
Default Re: Realistic view of the receiving corp

Part of me thinks the Bengals thought Shipley might have recovered and been the #2 WR. As a rookie his numbers were up there with Dez Bryants.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2012 Cincinnati Bengals. All rights reserved. Do not duplicate in any form without permission of the Cincinnati Bengals.