At Least We Figured One Thing Out

[Hammerstripes]

Momentum doesn't mean squat.

Baltimore 1-4 in December
San Francisco 2-3 in December

[McC]

Originally Posted by Hammerstripes

Momentum doesn't mean squat.

Baltimore 1-4 in December
San Francisco 2-3 in December

The argument will still be revisited next year.

[MrRager]

Exactly. So when given an opportunity to rest your starters.... DO IT

[Hammerstripes]

I really think that a big reason that we beat the Steelers in Pittsburgh was because of the extra time to prepare.

[Shake n Blake]

I still agree with Marv's decision to play our starters against the Ravens. The offense needed the extra work. Unfortunately, it didn't help the passing game at all.

[BengalsBong]

Originally Posted by Shake n Blake

I still agree with Marv's decision to play our starters against the Ravens. The offense needed the extra work. Unfortunately, it didn't help the passing game at all.

This

[wolfkaosaun]

Originally Posted by Hammerstripes

Momentum doesn't mean squat.

Baltimore 1-4 in December
San Francisco 2-3 in December

Giants were 3-2 in December when they won their Super Bowl. Winning their last 2.

Packers were 3-2 their season they won the Super Bowl.

Saints were 2-3. Losing their last 3.

Steelers were 3-1.

Giants went 3-2.

And the Colts went 2-3.

So 4 out of the 6 years, the Super Bowl winner has had a winning record in December. Now it's going to be 4 out of 7. But don't forget, teams do rest their starters so that results in losses as well.

Sometimes it pans out, sometimes it doesn't. I'm not mad at Marvin for playing starters in the Baltimore game. They needed it honestly.

[Monster]

We have lost with and without momentum going into the playoffs. I don't see why we are discussing it.

[bengalfan74]

This is one thing that I agree with Marvin on, we needed to play our starters, in our particular case.

As it turned out it didn't help ! I'd say it's a safe bet had we rested them it wouldn't have mattered either.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by wolfkaosaun

Giants were 3-2 in December when they won their Super Bowl. Winning their last 2.

Packers were 3-2 their season they won the Super Bowl.

Saints were 2-3. Losing their last 3.

Steelers were 3-1.

Giants went 3-2.

And the Colts went 2-3.

So 4 out of the 6 years, the Super Bowl winner has had a winning record in December. Now it's going to be 4 out of 7. But don't forget, teams do rest their starters so that results in losses as well.

Sometimes it pans out, sometimes it doesn't. I'm not mad at Marvin for playing starters in the Baltimore game. They needed it honestly.

Winning records in December and having momentum are completely different. Teams with momentum were teams like Denver, Seattle, Washington and even Cincy.

It's hard to find teams with losing records in December in the playoffs, because generally, these teams don't make the playoffs.

I made a thread earlier where I stated momentum meant squat. I pointed out that some teams in the history of the NFL lost on purpose to either get a better opponent in the playoffs or by denying another team from entering the playoffs.

http://boards.bengals.com/showthread.php?t=107046

I put a challenge out there and no one was able to provide an answer. I will put it out again.

Please don't be a tool and change the parameters of my question!!! Thanks in advance.


Name me a team that in the last week of the season which was already locked in a seeding of the playoffs and had their regular STARTERS, knock off a team that was gunning for the playoffs?

For you guys who have a hard time of reading.

Knock off a team means actually BEAT, a team that was striving to be in the playoffs.

Gunning for the playoffs means a team that had to win their last game to make the playoffs.

Gunning for the playoffs does NOT mean the 2007 Giants who were already in the playoffs when they LOST to the Patriots week 17.

I know of one team in the history of the NFL that lost out of getting to the playoffs to a team that had nothing to lose.

I know of several teams that rolled over and played dead the last week of the regular season for seeding purposes or to deny another team of making the playoffs.

2005 Patriots, 1988 49ers, 2005 Bengals, 2009 Bengals*, etc.


* I bet the game that the Jets beat the Bengals 37-0 on the Sunday night game of the week was a game in which the commissioner thought about when he changed the last week of the regular schedule to teams of their own division, which I hate. Teams still don't compete if they have nothing to gain. See Ravens at Bengals week 17 for example.

[Natikid873]

Originally Posted by Monster

We have lost with and without momentum going into the playoffs. I don't see why we are discussing it.

and then I was like

[CINwillWIN]

Still felt good winning 4 in December...as a fan.

[ExtraNirvana]

Our whole team had a lot of momentum up until Philly then the offesnse stalled majorly. The defense imo maintained momentum until the end.

Dalton got the snot knocked out of him from the Philadelphia game onward. So goes the line so goes the offense.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by ExtraNirvana

Our whole team had a lot of momentum up until Philly then the offesnse stalled majorly. The defense imo maintained momentum until the end.

Dalton got the snot knocked out of him from the Philadelphia game onward. So goes the line so goes the offense.

We lost the ̶w̶e̶e̶k̶ ̶b̶e̶f̶o̶r̶e̶ , no make that 4 days before to Dallas.

[ExtraNirvana]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

We lost the ̶w̶e̶e̶k̶ ̶b̶e̶f̶o̶r̶e̶ , no make that 4 days before to Dallas.

Okay we had a lot of momentum until the last quarter of the Dallas game.

Now my point is valid again.

[degolfisfun]

Originally Posted by Hammerstripes

Momentum doesn't mean squat.

Baltimore 1-4 in December
San Francisco 2-3 in December

Kudos to you. Maybe you are another one who didn't drink the darn kool aid. The Ravens win didn't matter crap. The only "momentum" that meant anything was the Bengals (Dalton) inability to adjust to pass rush pressure and the Bengals lack of offense. Those teams we played at the end of the year - Ravens, Cowboys and Eagles in particular - had bad defenses and we couldn't do didly. Duh. The Eagles figured it out first and I think from then on it was 150 yards/game passing and 3-4 sacks/game. More than 4-5 guys rushing meant Andy had to backoff his planned throw and utilize his checkdowns. He wasn't able to do it quick enough and often made either quick, "excited" throws or took a sack. If that "momentum" - about 4-5 games worth - could have been reversed, we might have made a trip to Denver or maybe even still be playing. That is what the Ravens game should have been utilized for - OFFENSE! I would have rather lost 40-35, than won and only scored the same few points on offense.

I think he'll get it figured out with time and experience. But darn, who knows if we'll stay healthy and get to the playoffs next time around. I don't think it is a certainty and that is what makes it disturbing.

[junglester]

The question for the Bengals has always been the inability to put teams away in the 4th quarter. Regardless of wins and losses.