PDA

View Full Version : According to FOX Sports, the worst call in the NFL this season was...



macro
12-29-2006, 12:42 AM
...a call that will keep the Cincinnati Bengals out of the playoffs this season. I know it's misguided to isolate an entire season down to one play, but without that horrible call, the Bucs don't score and Cincinnati wins 13-7. They enter this weekend at 9-6 and with a playoff spot secured.

Then again, we can all name plenty of situations where the Bengals shot themselves in the foot, so the ultimate blame for the way the season has turned out lies with themselves.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6305088


1. Oct. 15, Bengals at Buccaneers

And the winner for worst call of the NFL season is ... Mike Carey's indefensible roughing-the-passer penalty on the Bengals' Justin Smith that cost Cincinnati its game at Tampa Bay. With the Bengals leading 13-7 and time winding down, Smith sacked Bucs QB Bruce Gradkowski and forced a fumble that was recovered by Robert Geathers. Ball game. Now obviously this couldn't be roughing the passer because Gradkowski still had the ball. Or could it? Carey ruled that Smith had not been appropriately gentle with the quarterback, awarded Tampa Bay the standard gift set 15 yards, automatic first down and the Bucs scored late to win, 14-13. The call led Cincinnati coach Marvin Lewis to lament, "I guess you have to cuddle him to the ground."
Indeed. Welcome to today's cuddly NFL.

paintmered
12-29-2006, 12:47 AM
It was perhaps the worst call I've ever seen (that Oregon/Oklahoma debacle is up there too).

But ultimately the blame for (likely) missing the playoffs rests on the shoulders of the Bengals. They contolled their own destiny and didn't get it done.

harangatang
12-29-2006, 01:06 AM
The problem I have with the assumption that Bengals would have been 9-6 is the mindset if they would have had if they would've won the game. They could've been more arrogant and lost more games or more confident and won more. Yet they could be at the same place they are now.

M2
12-29-2006, 01:07 AM
I went back and looked at the game log to make sure I understood the complaint here. Sure enough, the game was still 13-7 after the call.

Bad as the call may have been, the Bengals have no one to blame but themselves for that loss. All they had to do was keep the second-worst offense in the NFL out of the endzone to close out a game. If you can't do that then I don't see where you get to claim that you deserve to be in the playoffs.

guttle11
12-29-2006, 01:37 AM
I went back and looked at the game log to make sure I understood the complaint here. Sure enough, the game was still 13-7 after the call.

Bad as the call may have been, the Bengals have no one to blame but themselves for that loss. All they had to do was keep the second-worst offense in the NFL out of the endzone to close out a game. If you can't do that then I don't see where you get to claim that you deserve to be in the playoffs.

I don't think anyone would logically argue that point. The call did not make the Bengals play bad against Atlanta or make them blow the SD game. It didn't cause the bad snap on the EP last week.

The point is it was a bad call and it really sent a precedent for the way rest of the crews called roughing the passer.

RedsBaron
12-29-2006, 06:41 AM
While the Bengals will have no one to blame but themselves for the failure to make the playoffs, I wish I knew if the NFL took any disciplinary action against Mike Carey for his incompetent call.

MrCinatit
12-29-2006, 07:23 AM
If I recall right, the fact the Bengals only had 13 points was a pretty big embarassment - especially against a weak TB defense. Game should not have been that close.
While that play might be a rallying call for "why we didn't make it," we didn't make it because we did not deserve it. The team rolled over way too easily in the face of adversity.
The Bengals remind me too much of the Vikings from a few years ago. A lot of offensive talent, but terrible defensively. Then the off-field problems began taking over...
One can only hope these problems will be seriously addressed during the offseason.

RedFanAlways1966
12-29-2006, 09:18 AM
While the Bengals will have no one to blame but themselves for the failure to make the playoffs, I wish I knew if the NFL took any disciplinary action against Mike Carey for his incompetent call.

I have noticed that Mr. Carey has not done a Bengals since that horrible call. Do they set the crews before the season or do you think the NFL has purposely kept him away from the Bengals? I do not care to see him and his yellow flag again.

gonelong
12-29-2006, 10:28 AM
All they had to do was keep the second-worst offense in the NFL out of the endzone to close out a game. If you can't do that then I don't see where you get to claim that you deserve to be in the playoffs.

Which is exactly what they did ... the first time.

It was the "do-over" part that got them. Giving the other team possession of the ball, 20+ yards of field position, and a new set of downs once you have stopped them makes it a bit tougher to keep them out of the endzone.

GL

Dom Heffner
12-29-2006, 10:43 AM
Bad as the call may have been, the Bengals have no one to blame but themselves for that loss. All they had to do was keep the second-worst offense in the NFL out of the endzone to close out a game. If you can't do that then I don't see where you get to claim that you deserve to be in the playoffs.

See, they did keep the league's second worst offfense from scoring: They sacked the QB, caused the fumble, recovered said fumble and then had that play overturned by a lousy call.

A defensive team should not have to stop an offense over and over again due to officiating.

It's almost as if you are arguing that if a kicker booted a field goal through the uprights to win a game by one point, it would be that team's fault for losing when the official called it no good. They shouldn't have been losing the game to begin with, right? :)

This "shouldn't be in that position" argument works if the call is early in the game, but when it happens at the end, it's a completely different story.

If were going to talk about positions, why not say this: The Bengals put themselves in a position to win the game and the referee blew a call and caused them to lose the game?

If you are winning by 6 points and you sack the QB and recover his fumble with under 2 minutes to play, I'd say you were in a pretty good position wouldn't you?

Handofdeath
12-29-2006, 11:19 AM
If I'm Mike Brown I might seriously consider making a coaching change. He gave control of the franchise to Marvin Lewis and now they have a team full of undisciplined players who are constantly screwing up off the field. If you can't make good decisions off the field how can you make good ones on the field? If a game being won or lost hinges on the outcome of one play then maybe, just maybe you didn't play well enough to win.

westofyou
12-29-2006, 11:33 AM
If I'm Mike Brown I might seriously consider making a coaching change.

That approach has worked particularly well for Mr. Brown.

Handofdeath
12-29-2006, 11:54 AM
That approach has worked particularly well for Mr. Brown.

It might have worked in the past if he would actually have hired competent people not coordinators from unsuccessful football teams.

westofyou
12-29-2006, 11:56 AM
It might have worked in the past if he would actually have hired competent people not coordinators from unsuccessful football teams.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts.

Yachtzee
12-29-2006, 12:04 PM
If I'm Mike Brown I might seriously consider making a coaching change. He gave control of the franchise to Marvin Lewis and now they have a team full of undisciplined players who are constantly screwing up off the field. If you can't make good decisions off the field how can you make good ones on the field? If a game being won or lost hinges on the outcome of one play then maybe, just maybe you didn't play well enough to win.

And yet the Bengals of years past were such pillars of discipline? I'd prefer to wait and see if this year's off-the-field problems are just a case of "when it rains, it pours." Getting rid of a coach who has completely turned around the mindset of the franchise is not very wise, especially when the fanbase has more faith in the coach than it does the owner. :eek:

dsmith421
12-29-2006, 12:08 PM
If I'm Mike Brown I might seriously consider making a coaching change. He gave control of the franchise to Marvin Lewis and now they have a team full of undisciplined players who are constantly screwing up off the field. If you can't make good decisions off the field how can you make good ones on the field?


This is utterly ludicrous.

Who directly cost the Bengals the Denver game?

* Carson Palmer
* Chad Johnson
* Rudi Johnson
* Brad St. Louis
* Kyle Larson

All good citizens off the field, as far as any of us know.

This crap about arrests leading to the Bengals disappointing season is media narrative and nothing else. Their choke-job has nothing to do with Chris Henry shooting up a club or AJ Nicholson breaking into a dorm room. It has everything to do with the defense being poorly coached and ravaged by injuries and the offensive unit underachieving for the vast majority of the year.

People parroting this garbage just prolongs its lifespan in the media.

MWM
12-29-2006, 12:25 PM
It was perhaps the worst call I've ever seen (that Oregon/Oklahoma debacle is up there too).

But ultimately the blame for (likely) missing the playoffs rests on the shoulders of the Bengals. They contolled their own destiny and didn't get it done.

I agree with all of this. That is by far the worst call I've ver seen on any level in football, and maybe for any sport. But the Bengals still blew the big lead to San Diego without help from the refs. They botched an extra point that might have put them int he playoffs. They laid a big egg against Atlanta. While that game was a direct result of the refs, the rest of the games were all on them.

And M2's argument isn't fair here. Much like the worst teams in baseball still win over 50 times a year, even the worst offenses can score from time to time given enough opportunities. The Royals didn't go 0-162 last year and the Buccaneers have scored 204 points in 15 games. They've score an average of 13.6 points per game and they scored 14 against the Bengals.

It's different if that call was made in the first half, or even early in the 4th quarter. But the game is OVER without that call. The Bengals take the field and take a knee a couple of times and that's it. They wouldn't have had to run a single play. That completely changes any "they still had their chance" arguments.

And saying Mike Brown should get rid of Lewis is one of the dumbest things I've ver read.

Matt700wlw
12-29-2006, 12:52 PM
There were a lot of bad, or questionable calls this season all over the NFL.

Thems the breaks, I guess...

M2
12-29-2006, 01:03 PM
See, they did keep the league's second worst offfense from scoring: They sacked the QB, caused the fumble, recovered said fumble and then had that play overturned by a lousy call.

A defensive team should not have to stop an offense over and over again due to officiating.

True, but good ones do it all the same.


It's almost as if you are arguing that if a kicker booted a field goal through the uprights to win a game by one point, it would be that team's fault for losing when the official called it no good. They shouldn't have been losing the game to begin with, right? :)

I can't make heads or tails of that analogy so I'll just go with no, it's nothing like what I'm arguing here.


This "shouldn't be in that position" argument works if the call is early in the game, but when it happens at the end, it's a completely different story.

I never said anything like "shouldn't be in that position." Teams are constantly in that position. I looked it up, the Bengals are 2-5 in games decided by seven points or less. The New England Patriots are 5-2. Contenders win those games. Pretenders lose them. I think you'll find that's a pretty consistent dividing line between the better and lesser teams in the league and you can be sure many of those better teams faced their share of bad calls along the way. They just happen to turn those calls into moot points.


If were going to talk about positions, why not say this: The Bengals put themselves in a position to win the game and the referee blew a call and caused them to lose the game?

No, the referee blew a call and two-plus minutes later the Bengals lost the game. I'd have some sympathy if this was a situation where a field goal decided a game and the ref's call put the other team into easy field goal territory, but it isn't.


If you are winning by 6 points and you sack the QB and recover his fumble with under 2 minutes to play, I'd say you were in a pretty good position wouldn't you?

I'd say a truly good team would shake off that kind of call and make the necessary stops to win itself a football game. I'd say a lesser team folds when it gets a bad call. I'd say Bengals fans who blame the official for that loss have directed their anger at the wrong target. The Bucs weren't even in the red zone after that call. A good defense, something I take it the Bengals lack, regroups and keeps a bad offense like Tampa Bay's out of the end zone.

LoganBuck
12-29-2006, 01:14 PM
Roughing the passer, was over called in both college and the NFL this year. Especially early in the seasons. One play that springs to mind is the OSU/Texas game and the sack of Colt McCoy before the end of the first half that was ruled roughing. It was possibly a worse call than the Justin Smith call, except it didn't cost OSU the game. Several other times early on it was called, yet unexplicably Carson Palmer, one of the reasons that it was called tighter this year, got ear holed more times than I care to remember without flags being thrown, especially for being hit late. Michigan fans will debate this, but about the only time late in the season I saw it called where it deserved to be called, was on the hit on Troy Smith along the sidelines, where Shawn Crable led with his helmet, while Troy was already out of bounds. Otherwise, they really let off on that penalty.

gonelong
12-29-2006, 01:27 PM
I'd say a truly good team would shake off that kind of call and make the necessary stops to win itself a football game.

The problem for the Bengals there is that the "team" doesn't get a chance to overcome that kind of call, only the weakest part of team (the defense) gets a chance to overcome it.

I think the majority of Bengals fans understand this isn't a championship caliber team. However, they are building towards that possibility and I'd like to see them get some experience in the playoffs.


I'd say a lesser team folds when it gets a bad call. I'd say Bengals fans who blame the official for that loss have directed their anger at the wrong target.

If the correct call is made, the Bengals win the game. I think the official is the correct target for the majority of the blame here. The Bengals defense shoulders a small portion of the reponsibility since they had a chance to win the game a 2nd time, and could not.


The Bucs weren't even in the red zone after that call. A good defense, something I take it the Bengals lack, regroups and keeps a bad offense like Tampa Bay's out of the end zone.

I don't think anybody is arguing that the Bengals have a good defense. I think is pretty much commonly accepted that they do not. However, that doesn't automatically make them a bad team and undeserving of a playoff spot.

IMO it doesn't hurt the Bengals all that much this season, but it hurts them for the future by the fact that they have a roster full of players with one less year of playoff experience.

GL

M2
12-29-2006, 01:45 PM
The Bengals defense shoulders a small portion of the reponsibility since they had a chance to win the game a 2nd time, and could not.

I'd say that's the larger portion of the responsibility.


I don't think anybody is arguing that the Bengals have a good defense. I think is pretty much commonly accepted that they do not. However, that doesn't automatically make them a bad team and undeserving of a playoff spot.

True enough. What it really makes them is a flawed team that's on the playoff cusp. I noticed the Jets are 5-3 in close games. Indianapolis is 7-3. Denver is 3-2. If you want to make it to the playoffs, you've got to close out games, sometimes you've even got to close them out twice (or even thrice) if the officials botch a call.

I'll take it a step farther. If the playoff door opens for the Bengals this weekend, it's entirely possible they'll have to close out a close game to earn entrance into the next round. Football's a real "What have I done for me lately?" kind of sport.

For teams like the Bengals, football games and football seasons often come down to a few defining moments. It sounds like the defining moment for the Bengals is that they couldn't stop a bad offense twice. They shouldn't have had to do it, but they needed to all the same.

Caveat Emperor
12-29-2006, 01:53 PM
I've been a Bucs fan for my entire life -- and closely followed the team since I was 10. I've got 15 years of Bucs football under my belt, and I feel confident in saying that this is one of the worst offenses I've ever seen them field.

I said it at the time, and I'll say it again -- the Bengals couldn't keep the Buccaneers out of the end zone on that last drive and they have absolutely no one to blame but themselves. Hell, they were even gifted a tripping penalty at the end of that drive that should've put Tampa out for the count.

It was an awful call, but it should've taken 10 awful calls to give Tampa enough to win that game.

Dom Heffner
12-29-2006, 04:05 PM
True, but good ones do it all the same.

Are there stats for this? Is there a stat where it shows that good teams overcome game changing lousy calls with under 2 minutes left?

If you are making a case that only good teams overcome bad calls with under 2 minutes to play deep in their own territory, then I'd love to see the stats that support this.


I looked it up, the Bengals are 2-5 in games decided by seven points or less. The New England Patriots are 5-2. Contenders win those games. Pretenders lose them. I think you'll find that's a pretty consistent dividing line between the better and lesser teams in the league and you can be sure many of those better teams faced their share of bad calls along the way. They just happen to turn those calls into moot points.

I can't make sense of this analogy. Winning or losing a game by less than 7 points has nothing to do with what we are talking about here.

How many of those games does New England win if you give the team they are facing an extra set of downs deep in their own territory?

And how many calls like that did New England truly overcome? Where are all the examples of great champions overcoming calls that bad late in a game?

I guess New England is so good they could just overcome those calls play after play. That happens to them all the time.


No, the referee blew a call and two-plus minutes later the Bengals lost the game. I'd have some sympathy if this was a situation where a field goal decided a game and the ref's call put the other team into easy field goal territory, but it isn't.

Yes, the referee blew the call that would have given the Bengals possession and all they had to do was run out the clock.

Maybe the Bengals should just give all the teams they play an extra set of downs to score a touchdown in that situation and if they are truly great, they'll win them all.

Great teams do that all the time.

traderumor
12-29-2006, 07:59 PM
If I'm Mike Brown I might seriously consider making a coaching change. He gave control of the franchise to Marvin Lewis and now they have a team full of undisciplined players who are constantly screwing up off the field. If you can't make good decisions off the field how can you make good ones on the field? If a game being won or lost hinges on the outcome of one play then maybe, just maybe you didn't play well enough to win.Heck of a forest you're missing.

M2
12-29-2006, 08:06 PM
Are there stats for this? Is there a stat where it shows that good teams overcome game changing lousy calls with under 2 minutes left?

If you are making a case that only good teams overcome bad calls with under 2 minutes to play deep in their own territory, then I'd love to see the stats that support this.

You've watched the Bengals for too long. Hey, bad teams could stop a bad offense from marching 25 yards to the end zone at the end of a game too (especially with a tripping penalty against the offense thrown into the mix). Feel free to compile the stats yourself, but I don't think I'm out on much of a limb noting that good teams tend to win the preponderance of close games they get into, something that naturally includes stopping the other team late in the game.


I can't make sense of this analogy. Winning or losing a game by less than 7 points has nothing to do with what we are talking about here.

How many of those games does New England win if you give the team they are facing an extra set of downs deep in their own territory?

It wasn't an analogy. Losing or winning by 7 means that each time the team that's behind gets the ball, it's a touchdown away from taking the lead or tying up the contest. It means that it's a close game and your defense will need to make sure that slim lead doesn't evaporate.

I ran this scenario by a Pats fan friend of mine. His answer was that it would be unthinkable that the Pats would surrender a touchdown to Tampa Bay in that situation. Literally his answer was that it was the kind of thing the Patriots used to allow all the time before the club's recent six-year run and that if it happened now, people would be mortified, like being visited by the ghost of ineptitude past.


And how many calls like that did New England truly overcome? Where are all the examples of great champions overcoming calls that bad late in a game?

I guess New England is so good they could just overcome those calls play after play. That happens to them all the time.

No idea about the Pats in specific, I don't follow them. Frankly, it's not the kind of thing anyone bothers to remember unless the team goes on to blow the game after the call. Fans of teams that manage to close out games don't sweat bad calls. I know I didn't when I was a Redskins back in their heyday.


Yes, the referee blew the call that would have given the Bengals possession and all they had to do was run out the clock.

And all they had to do was stop a bad offense from going 1/4 of the field even with the call.


Maybe the Bengals should just give all the teams they play an extra set of downs to score a touchdown in that situation and if they are truly great, they'll win them all.

Great teams do that all the time.

Maybe the Bengals should be a better team and then a call that didn't put points on the scoreboard or the opposition on the doorstep of the end zone wouldn't have them on the verge of watching the playoffs from home.

Though, just to twist the knife in a bit, aren't the two biggest games in Bengals history famous for the 49ers first stopping the Bengals on the doorstep of the end zone and then for the Bengals not being able to stop the 49ers to secure a Super Bowl win? As such, I can see why the concept of what it takes to close out a game might elude you. :devil:

Hap
12-29-2006, 09:34 PM
Maybe we'll get some make up calls in the Chiefs-Jags and the Broncos-49ers and the Jets-Raiders games to give us a slim chance.

Dom Heffner
12-30-2006, 12:33 PM
I ran this scenario by a Pats fan friend of mine. His answer was that it would be unthinkable that the Pats would surrender a touchdown to Tampa Bay in that situation. Literally his answer was that it was the kind of thing the Patriots used to allow all the time before the club's recent six-year run and that if it happened now, people would be mortified, like being visited by the ghost of ineptitude past.

I guess your friend would be fine, then, with giving the other team 5 and 6 downs instead of 4 to get in the end zone, since New England overcomes everything. Since they are a "great team" they can overcome everything, including rule changes.

You keep saying the Bengals should have stopped the Bucs, and well, they did.

I didn't realize you were now required to do it more than once, or you aren't a good football team.


Though, just to twist the knife in a bit, aren't the two biggest games in Bengals history famous for the 49ers first stopping the Bengals on the doorstep of the end zone and then for the Bengals not being able to stop the 49ers to secure a Super Bowl win? As such, I can see why the concept of what it takes to close out a game might elude you.

See- the Bengals never stopped the 49ers. They did stop the Bucs, though.

And here we go with those historical stats: These Bengals have absolutely nothing to do with the Bengals of the 1980s. They don't even have the same uniforms. It's a random assortment of players, none who have any affiliation with the other teams of the past. I guess the Bengals are going to lose this weekend for the sole reason they historically suck, rather than just sucking now. :)


Maybe the Bengals should be a better team and then a call that didn't put points on the scoreboard or the opposition on the doorstep of the end zone wouldn't have them on the verge of watching the playoffs from home.

The Bengals were the better team that day, they got screwed by a bad call.

They put themselves in a position to win by sacking the quarterback and causing the fumble. Is that not good enough? Tell us, M2, how many times do you have to win a game to win it? I thought the Bengals were playing the Buccaneers and not the little nerds with the black and white uniforms?

What's funny is that you keep bringing up the Patriots who are notoriously on the winning end of controversial calls, like in their victory over Jacksonville this year:

http://www.provencehome.org/refsuck/pages/annualawards.html

With under two minutes remaining and the Pats leading 24-21, Jacksonville QB David Garrard is hit while scrambling. The ball rolled forward and was recovered by the Patriots. The play was reviewed automatically by officials, who upheld the original call of fumble despite the fact that replay clearly shows Garrards arm was coming forward as he was hit. According to the NFL rulebook "When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional movement forward of his hand starts a forward pass. If a Team B player contacts the passer or the ball after forward movement begins, and the ball leaves the passer's hand, a forward pass is ruled, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground or a player."

What a great team. I guess when you had an extra player (the officials) all is possible. Those Jaguars stink, I tell ya, and New England is awesome.

Or how about this gem:

New England vs. Indianapolis

With the Colts up 17-14 and the Pats driving late in the first half, Patriot QB Tom Brady was stuffed on a 4th and 1 quarterback sneak near mid-field. Despite the fact that the live broadcast and television replay clearly showed Brady short of the first down, officials rushed in to signal first down without even a measurement. How it is even remotely possible the officials could give Brady a first down without measuring is incomprehensible. Even better, despite an official replay, the original call stood. "Astonishing", exclaimed announcer Al Michaels.

Or maybe here:

New England vs. Minnesota

Far too often, officials refuse to admit a mistake despite clear cut, irrefutable visual evidence. For example, Patriots leading 24-7 midway thru the 3rd quarter, the Vikings are driving. Minnesota QB Brad Johnson connects with Tight End Jermaine Wiggins for a first down inside the Patriot 35-yard line. On the catch, Wiggins has full posession, takes three full steps, and turns to head downfield. As Wiggins is going down, the ball is stripped by the defense and rolls out of bounds. The correct call SHOULD have been first down at the spot where the ball rolled out of bounds. However, in the fantasy land where some NFL officials reside, the pass is ruled incomplete. Minnesota challenges, yet Referee Larry Nemmers upholds the original call. Minnesota's 4th down pass falls incomplete, and for all intents and purposes, the game is over.

I don't know, bro. To hear a New England fan call the Patriots great when they are more often than not the beneficiary of questionable officiating falls on deaf ears.

All those teams who got screwed should have played better, I guess.

Caveat Emperor
12-30-2006, 02:37 PM
You keep saying the Bengals should have stopped the Bucs, and well, they did.

I didn't realize you were now required to do it more than once, or you aren't a good football team.

No offense, but this line of thinking is just idiotic.

The NFL is riddled with situations where a team on defnese dose *everything* right, and still gets screwed by some happening. It can be the officials making a bad call, as was the case in Tampa. It can some divine-intervention play by the offense where the ball is batted down by the DB, is tipped by the wideout, and ends up being caught by the tight end for a first down. Or it can be the officials making the RIGHT call that is seldom quoted, but screws you -- such as when the "tuck" rule was invoked and the Raiders got the shaft in the playoffs.

You can curse at the officials, god, or the rulebook -- but the end result is always the same: you've got to pick yourself up and go back to work. Good teams do have to make stops over and over again. That's what makes them good teams -- the consistency to be able to overcome situations like that. Mediocre teams will pitch 4 good downs and then get burned on the next 4 when something flukey happens to give their opponent a second chance.

And, unfortunately, I think you're getting wrapped up with the trees here -- why in the hell were the Bengals even in a situation against the Bucs where one bad call could beat them? They should've run that team out of the stadium and won walking away.

Dom Heffner
12-30-2006, 03:09 PM
No offense, but this line of thinking is just idiotic.

Yeah, your blame the victim defense is so intellectually superior to my silly assertions. I blame the official - who the league apologized for- and you blame the Bengals.

It's all the Bengal's fault. Rape victims shouldn't wear short dresses, poor people should work harder, we should all be prepared for the unforeseen.

Right. It's our fault, not the guy whose fault it was.

I guess if the Bengals were down by two, kicked a clearly good field goal and the referee called it no good, then the Bengals shouldn't have been in that position anyway. They should have been ahead in the first place.

Your line of thinking is awe inspiring to my idiotic reasoning.

I would agree with you if the call was not a game ending one, but it was.

M2
12-30-2006, 10:39 PM
To hear a New England fan call the Patriots great when they are more often than not the beneficiary of questionable officiating falls on deaf ears.

I could care less about the Patriots. Haven't watched a single game of theirs all year. Never been a Pats fan. Never going to be a Pats fan. Though from what I gather the Bengals would do well to emulate them.


You can curse at the officials, god, or the rulebook -- but the end result is always the same: you've got to pick yourself up and go back to work. Good teams do have to make stops over and over again. That's what makes them good teams -- the consistency to be able to overcome situations like that. Mediocre teams will pitch 4 good downs and then get burned on the next 4 when something flukey happens to give their opponent a second chance.

Exactly. I've got no rooting interest here, but I can tell you that back when I cared about football, if the Redskins had let the Bucs travel those last 25 yards into the end zone, I'd have been furious at the Redskins, not the officials.

All I'm hearing is the rationale that the Bengals are such a tenuous enterprise that one bad call can pretty much undo them. Folks can complain till they're blue in the face over the call, but the larger problem is that the team pulled an el foldo after the call. If the Bengals stop the Bucs, like a good team should have, then no one cares about the call.

If the Bengals, like you, slipped into the trap of thinking they'd done enough to win when clearly they hadn't (fair or not, Tampa Bay had the ball on the Bengals' 25 yard line and needed a touchdown to win), then that's a football team in need of a "you play all sixty minutes like it's life and death" refresher course. My guess is the Bengals got read the riot act after that game just like every team from the NFL to Pop Warner would have in similar circumstances.

Caveat Emperor
12-31-2006, 03:48 AM
I would agree with you if the call was not a game ending one, but it was.

So I guess the remaining 25 yards, 4th down TD pass, and 1 minute of offense that gave the Bengals a 62 yard FG attempt didn't happpen then?

RedFanAlways1966
12-31-2006, 09:54 AM
So I guess the remaining 25 yards, 4th down TD pass, and 1 minute of offense that gave the Bengals a 62 yard FG attempt didn't happpen then?

Was there a fumble by the Tampa Bay QB on the ridiculous roughing call? Did the Bengals recover the fumble around the 50-yard-line (there was not a whistle blown until the Bengals recovered)? Didn't Tampa Bay have only 1 timeout left when this happened?

Yep... I'd have to say that fumble was pretty much the end for Tampa Bay. Except Mike Carey decided to give them a 2nd chance with a horrific roughing the passer call. It all worked out good for Tampa Bay... the charity I mean. Sure the Bengals still had a chance to stop them. However, that chance should not have happened and the game should have been over if not for a terrible call. Regadless of the Bengals less than spectacular offense that day. Regardless of the defense that allowed the charity-given Bucs offense to score on their last drive. Regardless of the last futile attempt by the Bengals. If not for that horrible call the Bengals win that game.

ochre
12-31-2006, 11:36 AM
If you don't follow the Bengals closely, you can't really understand the apathy bengals' fans have for refs and their game-breaking bad calls. Sure the Bengals have been pretty bad for a while, but they are regularly impacted at crucial points in games by very bad officiating. I don't have a list at hand, but I know, from watch way too many Bengals games, that it is so. It's easy enough to sit back on a high horse and say "it's just the Bengals still sucking", but that really doesn't mean that it isn't happening (bad officiating). As to why, I can't say. Maybe there's an agenda, maybe it's happenstance. With the regularity and consistency I've seen it occur, I generally think it's more than random.

Of course, I don't follow most of the other teams as closely, so maybe it happens as often in other places. When 3-4 games a year are directly affected by late in the game, crucial moment, bad calls I get a bit worked up.

duh_vinci
12-31-2006, 12:39 PM
M2, you haven't been a Bengals fan, so you have no idea. I echo Ochre and Redsfan's posts. Certainly, the Bengals did not get it done when they needed to. No argument there. But when you have TWO teams to contend against any given Sunday it is disgraceful. The zebras have sucked not just this year and not just in Bengal games. It's pretty bad, and they need to address it by making the ref's FULL time and holding them accountable.

my 2 cents.

And yes, I am a Bengal homer. We aren't out just yet!

Chip R
12-31-2006, 12:55 PM
M2, you haven't been a Bengals fan, so you have no idea. I echo Ochre and Redsfan's posts. Certainly, the Bengals did not get it done when they needed to. No argument there. But when you have TWO teams to contend against any given Sunday it is disgraceful. The zebras have sucked not just this year and not just in Bengal games. It's pretty bad, and they need to address it by making the ref's FULL time and holding them accountable.

my 2 cents.

And yes, I am a Bengal homer. We aren't out just yet!


Yep, if it weren't for the officials, the Bengals would be undefeated. :rolleyes:

westofyou
12-31-2006, 01:15 PM
If you don't follow the Bengals closely, you can't really understand the apathy bengals' fans have for refs and their game-breaking bad calls.

I've been more apathetic over the Bengals pass defense for the last 30 years myself, it's the equivalent to the Reds and pitching.

WMR
12-31-2006, 01:30 PM
Of course the Bengals still should have won that game CE, but the point is that the referee's call was absolutely indefensible and changed the game as it actually existed on the field, not what it "could have been had the Bengals seized 'other opportunities'."

Dom Heffner
12-31-2006, 01:38 PM
not what it "could have been had the Bengals seized 'other opportunities'."


Yes- the Bengals overcame the missed opportunities (a sign of a good team, right?) and the refs stole it from them.

I"m not saying this game kept them out of the playoffs by itself, but the game was changed by the ref's call.

duh_vinci
12-31-2006, 04:52 PM
Yep, if it weren't for the officials, the Bengals would be undefeated. :rolleyes:

Way to not read my post. But thanks for the feedback.

Caveat Emperor
12-31-2006, 06:01 PM
Of course the Bengals still should have won that game CE, but the point is that the referee's call was absolutely indefensible and changed the game as it actually existed on the field, not what it "could have been had the Bengals seized 'other opportunities'."

Of course it changed the game -- that's why people refer to certain plays as "game changing" plays and certain calls as "game changing" calls. But -- surprise -- plenty of teams are victimized by calls and plays that seem "game changing" at the time, yet still play hard and find a way to win.

The mark of a good football team is to power through the bad calls and bad plays to win, not be so mercurial that they get derailed when something goes wrong and being unable to right the ship. In fact, I think that if most Bengals fans looked dispassionately at this season, the Tampa Bay game was a microcosm for the rest of the year -- not because of some great refereeing conspiracy screwjob, but in the fact that the team lacked the poise and character to finish a game out when things didn't go exactly their way.

Or, continue to believe that the Bengals were the only team in the NFL to get victimized by poor officiating and that the guys in stripes were responsible even slightly for them not making the playoffs.

Your call, Bengals fans.

Dom Heffner
12-31-2006, 06:06 PM
I'm not talking about the rest of the season, other teams, conspiracy theories, the Bengals playoff hopes, or what makes teams good or great.

I'm saying that when the officials change a game ending call, it costs you the game.

You can either choose to accept that, or continue to talk about all that other stuff.

WMR
12-31-2006, 06:09 PM
Of course it changed the game -- that's why people refer to certain plays as "game changing" plays and certain calls as "game changing" calls. But -- surprise -- plenty of teams are victimized by calls and plays that seem "game changing" at the time, yet still play hard and find a way to win.

The mark of a good football team is to power through the bad calls and bad plays to win, not be so mercurial that they get derailed when something goes wrong and being unable to right the ship. In fact, I think that if most Bengals fans looked dispassionately at this season, the Tampa Bay game was a microcosm for the rest of the year -- not because of some great refereeing conspiracy screwjob, but in the fact that the team lacked the poise and character to finish a game out when things didn't go exactly their way.

Or, continue to believe that the Bengals were the only team in the NFL to get victimized by poor officiating and that the guys in stripes were responsible even slightly for them not making the playoffs.

Your call, Bengals fans.

Who said the Bengals were a good football team?

FOX SPORTS made this comment, are they Bengals fans?

FOX SPORTS SAID, and I agree, that no other official's decision this season had such a direct impact on the outcome of a game.

Dom Heffner
12-31-2006, 06:12 PM
I guess the Tampa Bay Buccanneers are a great football team because they found a way to win that game.

Caveat Emperor
12-31-2006, 06:12 PM
I'm saying that when the officials change a game ending call, it costs you the game.

You can either choose to accept that, or continue to talk about all that other stuff.

And I'm saying that for a team as talented as the Bengals are reported to be against a team as bad as I know the Bucs are, that call in Tampa wasn't a game-ending call. It's convenient to think that, but it simply isn't true.

Was it a factor in the game? Sure. But it still left both teams with a chance to play to win the game.

BTW -- I'm certain nobody complained loudly at Paul Brown when James Farrior was flagged for driving Palmer into the turf and the ref made the same judgment call to give the 15 yards to Cincinnati.

Dom Heffner
12-31-2006, 06:18 PM
that call in Tampa wasn't a game-ending call.

You are entitiled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

The Bengals sacked the QB, caused the fumble, recovered said fumble, and the game was over until the referee made a blatantly incorrect call for which the league officially apologized for.

Why don't you gice us an example of another team this year overcoming a game ending play like that? Just one, bro.

If there are all these great teams overcoming lousy calls, show me where one like this was overcome.

Caveat Emperor
12-31-2006, 06:43 PM
You are entitiled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

Last I checked, both teams continued to run plays after the call. Bengals even got the ball again afterwards with a chance to get into field goal range.

And, as for teams overcoming, look no further than these Pittsburgh Steelers, who got absolutely hosed on a call against the Colts last year when Polemalu's INT was overturned because he hadn't been touched down before he knocked the ball out of his own hands.

They still managed to win the game, because they're well coached, talented and showed poise in the face of adversity.

Whatever -- I'm not going to convince you of anything, you're not going to convince me of anything. There's no point in continuing this.

Chip R
12-31-2006, 07:10 PM
Way to not read my post. But thanks for the feedback.


But when you have TWO teams to contend against any given Sunday it is disgraceful. The zebras have sucked not just this year and not just in Bengal games. It's pretty bad, and they need to address it by making the ref's FULL time and holding them accountable.

I read just fine. Two teams? I guess the refs that worked the 8 games the Bengals won didn't get the memo on how to screw them over or weren't in on the NFL conspiracy meetings on how to make the Bengals lose. Some teams can overcome misfortune. The Bengals aren't one of them. One thing goes wrong with them and they wither up and die.

M2
12-31-2006, 11:48 PM
I'm saying that when the officials change a game ending call, it costs you the game.

No, it only cost the Bengals the game in this instance because they play bullfighter defense.

BTW, seems like the exact same bugaboo, not being able to stop another team when it counts, reared its head twice today. Pittsburgh sliced right through the Bengals' defense for a late game tying field goal and then needed only one possession in overtime to knock the Bengals out of the playoffs.

Just remember where you heard this: "If the playoff door opens for the Bengals this weekend, it's entirely possible they'll have to close out a close game to earn entrance into the next round."

Bad as that call against the Bucs may have been, all it did was expose a fairly massive flaw with the Bengals.

Redhook
01-01-2007, 12:29 AM
After reading this thread and watching every Bengals game this season I have come to some conclusions:

1) That ref absolutely cost the Bengals the game vs. T.B. There's no if's, and's, or but's about it. The game was over if he had made the right call. Over. And, in the NFL, it's not all that hard to drive 25 yards for a touchdown with just under 2 minutes left.

2) Even if the correct call was made, who knows what would've happened to this team. I have no idea if they'd be in the playoffs right now. What I do know is they are an extremely soft team. They have no idea, whatsoever, how to handle any type of adversity and have to be one of the most disappointing teams I've ever watched.

3) The Bengals are a bunch of characters, but have no character. This team is very individualistic and lacks most of the intangibles that it takes to be a championship football team.

4) I truely believe Marvin's lack of clock management at the end of this game was the icing on the cake, in my mind, that he is a really bad coach. His coaching in the last 2 minutes lost this game. It's hard to fathom what he was actually thinking during that time frame. I'm not saying he should be fired, at least not yet, but how in the world does an NFL coach screw up so many things in the last 2 minutes of a game with the season on the line? Mind-boggling.

Yachtzee
01-01-2007, 01:03 AM
1) That ref absolutely cost the Bengals the game vs. T.B. There's no if's, and's, or but's about it. The game was over if he had made the right call. Over. And, in the NFL, it's not all that hard to drive 25 yards for a touchdown with just under 2 minutes left.


I agree with this statement. It's one thing to give a team another bite at the apple, but to give them another bite + 15 yards, it's pretty hard to defend against that. I think that if the call had been made earlier, the Bengals would have had the opportunity to adjust. The problem was that calling that penalty on the last drive made it confusing as far as what one could do to tackle the QB without getting a penalty.


2) Even if the correct call was made, who knows what would've happened to this team. I have no idea if they'd be in the playoffs right now. What I do know is they are an extremely soft team. They have no idea, whatsoever, how to handle any type of adversity and have to be one of the most disappointing teams I've ever watched.

Also true. This team had the tendency to play well for a half, then get complacent to sit back, defend against the big play, and let the opposing QB pick them apart. A championship-caliber team plays the same with the lead and when behind, always executing. Winning in Tampa may have only resulted in them getting complacent and losing to someone else.


3) The Bengals are a bunch of characters, but have no character. This team is very individualistic and lacks most of the intangibles that it takes to be a championship football team.

I think there's some truth to that statement. From what I've seen in the media, it almost seems like there are at least two cliques on this team, the Carson/Willie clique and those not in it. Comments after the game from those two indicate that "selfish" players were responsible for the losing. Willie and Carson are on the same page. Who are the guys not on board with the team concept?


4) I truely believe Marvin's lack of clock management at the end of this game was the icing on the cake, in my mind, that he is a really bad coach. His coaching in the last 2 minutes lost this game. It's hard to fathom what he was actually thinking during that time frame. I'm not saying he should be fired, at least not yet, but how in the world does an NFL coach screw up so many things in the last 2 minutes of a game with the season on the line? Mind-boggling.

Well, the clock management in this game and others leaves a lot to be desired, but we have no idea what was going on down on the field. Were there shenanigans being pulled by some of these "selfish" players that required burning a time-out? Burning one to ice the kicker seems pretty standard. Marvin has used it earlier in the season as had Cowher. Now it may be the equivalent of calling for a bunt with a runner on second, but it's still in the standard coach's "play book." There were a few times that required burning a timeout because guys just didn't have their head in the game (avoiding a penalty for 12 men on the field?). Players have to have their head in the game. Still, having to call a timeout after a spike was just dumb. Either spike to to stop the clock or call timeout, but not both. They lost both the down and the timeout on that one.

WMR
01-01-2007, 03:05 AM
C'mon Yachtzee, even Pee Wee coaches know that you don't burn one of your 2 remaining timeouts to try and ice a kicker when the kick is basically a gimme and you're going to get the ball back with the score tied and over a minute to play.

duh_vinci
01-01-2007, 09:09 AM
I read just fine. Two teams? I guess the refs that worked the 8 games the Bengals won didn't get the memo on how to screw them over or weren't in on the NFL conspiracy meetings on how to make the Bengals lose. Some teams can overcome misfortune. The Bengals aren't one of them. One thing goes wrong with them and they wither up and die.

I was not trying to say that the Bengals lost the game because of the refs.

Perhaps we aren't too far off in our thinking. I was trying to say that the league needs to look at the quality of officiating and see if there isn't something that can be done to augment it.

That's all.

Redhook
01-01-2007, 09:37 AM
Burning one to ice the kicker seems pretty standard.

It does, but not in this scenario with over a minute left, knowing that they'll get the ball back having to approximately 45 yards to have a chance to win it. Wasting that timeout cost them the game, IMO. They didn't deserve to win the way they played, but still, they probably would have won if they had that extra timeout. There's no excuse for trying to ice the kicker with over a minute left.


Still, having to call a timeout after a spike was just dumb. Either spike to to stop the clock or call timeout, but not both. They lost both the down and the timeout on that one.

I agree, I put that debacle on Marvin. I could see that happening in a junior high game or even high school, but for that to happen in an NFL game, WITH THE SEASON ON THE LINE, is inexusable. Not everything is Marvin's fault, but he really needs to be held accountable for his pitiful use of clock management late in this game.

Tony Cloninger
01-14-2007, 10:42 AM
I know i am really late to respond to this thread......lost password and all....

BUT being a bengal fan since 1974........ this is par for the course with this team.

Always something missing.......always too young, immature.

By thje time they put it together and make a run...it lasts 1 year and then they go into the tank for 3-5 years (1978-1980) (1983-1985, 1987)....and of course the horrific run of the 90's.

Why this team...and even some of those 80's teams....seem to lack character to win a big game....or sustain a good run sometimes mystifies me but most times i attribute it to...the way the Brown's run things.
The "we tried our best so it's okay" attitude that Mike Brown has.... always seems to seep it's way into the Bengal way of playing.
This is the guy who was quoted (and never denied) as saying "It would cost more to have a Super Bowl winner" than a team who competed but mainly never really went anywhere."

Heck...i still have not gotten over Paul Brown letting Bill Walsh leave after 1975. So i really have a hard time dealing with his son who has none of his father's football acumen BUT all of his tightness and inability to change his methods.