It would certainly be a big win, that's for sure. And I would absolutely love to see Ward eat grass all day long. Same thing for Big Jen.Originally Posted by George Foster
It would certainly be a big win, that's for sure. And I would absolutely love to see Ward eat grass all day long. Same thing for Big Jen.
Are you forgetting the two playoff wins in 1988 that sent them to Super Bowl 23? They also won a first-round playoff game against the Oilers following the 1990 season, their third win over a tough Oiler team that season, and second in consecutive weeks. The actually blew the Oilers out on back-to-back weekends, which was something I wasn't sure they were capable of. They lost in LA against the Raiders the next week in the game that, for all intents and purposes, ended Bo Jackson's NFL career.
As for the tie-breaker, the first one is actually head-to-head record. So if the Bengals lose, they will have split with Pittsburgh, and then division record would be the second tie-breaker. The one after that is either conference record or record against common opponents, I forget which.
The bottom line is, given the schedules the two teams have remaining, this game is more important for the Bengals than it is for the Stealers. As has been mentioned, Pittsburgh's schedule is pretty soft, so if they win and take a one-game lead, it will be tough for the Bengals to overtake them.
If the Bengals do win, they would have what amounts to a two-game lead with seven games to play. They would have a one-game lead in the standings and also the head-to-head tie-breaker in the event of a tie in the standings.
Help stamp out, eliminate, and do away with redundancy.
Orton is ok if you don't ask for too much. But Denver only had 27 yards rushing vs Pitt and if you include the loss vs the Ravens the week before the Broncos had a combined total of only 93 yards rushing in two games. Give Orton a running game and he has a shot but without one you need a Manning, Brady, Brees, etc.
Btw, thanks Macro. I thought head to head was the 1st tiebreaker.
Last edited by redsfandan; 11-10-2009 at 08:48 AM.
If you're a Bengals fan, I'd be more worried about playing the following week in Oakland than this Sunday's game vs Pittsburgh.
Why?
Oakland is terrible. Even after flying out to the west coast, the Bengals should win that game if they are (cue Dennis Green) "who we thought they were".
Yeah, but after playing your most hated division rival, and you come back and fly all the way out west and try to win in the part of the country that you've had trouble winning at. It's a classic let-down game. Oakland isn't very good, but they're not as terrible as one might think.
Not to mention, the Bengals proved after their last "big" win @ BMore that they're not consistently beating teams they should beat.
None of the players on this team have any history with the Bengals of West Coast blahs. When the Bengals have lost on the West Coast, it has generally not been an upset. But again, these histories that fans talk about have nothing to do with the current team. Oakland could be a tough game because it is an NFL road game, but these psychological issues you point to are nothing more than conjecture on your part.
As for the game following Baltimore, the Texans are not a slouch. They nearly kept it going last week, losing by a FG at Indy. I wonder if we are watching the same league that you are analyzing, because the facts are barely recognizable in your opinions.
I still think last weekends win was the biggest of the season. It moves the Bengals to 4-0 in the division, at least 1 game ahead of the Steelers in the division. I don't see the Steelers sweeping the Ravens. The Bengals should finish 5-1 in the division at worst. They also get the Steelers coming off a shot week because of the Monday Night Game.
The difference with the Bengals team as opposed to the ones in the past is the defense. They have the ability to stop you, have the players to hit you in the mouth, they have 2 shut down corners. The thing with defense is that defense travels.
I also don't remember if Rudi ran as hard as Benson does. I can't remember a RB running as hard as Benson since Dillon in his early days. I don't like the match up as much against the Steelers as I did the Ravens. But then again the Bengals have a good shot at winning this game. Hopefully Vegas makes them about a 10 point dog.
Good point. There was one play near the goal line where Benson ran over Ed Reed. Benson hits defenders hard, which is great to see.
The Bengals have had an incredibly hard schedule. Name me any other team that's played more .500 or better teams this year. They still have 3 more against .500 or better and the AFC North is definitely the hardest division in football. That's a lot of tough games.
Head to head is the first tie breaker. Where's the confusion?
Someone had said earlier that division record was the first tie-breaker, so I think Dan was just saying that he had believed that it was instead head-to-head, and that my post confirmed that for him.
Help stamp out, eliminate, and do away with redundancy.
He's Kitna-esque. Just like Kitna in the playoff game vs. the Steelers (and any and all other games) they knew they could condense the field because of his lack of strong downfield arm. Once they do that you have to be razor sharp on your reads and accuracy. Even harder to do with any kind of blitz in your face.
And you must have missed the 1st half where he was slobbering all over the Broncos just like 3/4 of the ESPN panel. I was laughing at the fact the ESPN crew is supposed to have some degree of intelligence/insight yet only Keyshawn, Chris Carter and Ditka picked the Steelers and Carter acted a bit unsure about it. I was like really? I fully expected this to happen. What they don't know is if Carson and company hadn't been trying to get their feet under them we'd have blown Denver's doors off too which means Denver is who I thought they were, nobody.
Last edited by Mario-Rijo; 11-10-2009 at 01:45 PM.
"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."
--Woody Hayes
Its head to head then division
I think this team is a LOCK playoff team. However, in terms of how far we go in the playoffs, I have two big concerns right now:
1. Benson. The second leading ball carrier this season is Bernard Scott with 17. 17 carries!!!! That's simply horrific. That has to change. If Benson keeps up at this current pace, he might be shot by the end of the year. They have to find a way to spell the guy.
2. Defensive end. I don't know if we can get enough of a rush on opposing ELITE QB's (Manning, Brady, Big Ben, etc.) The defense is unquestionably very good. But the loss of Odom was huge. Fanene and Geathers are solid, along with Rucker, but that's clearly the weakness of the defense right now. They have been great against the run, but none of those guys can really get to the QB consistently, especially against top offensive linemen. We have to find a way to get to the QB without blitzing. I would love to see Michael Johnson step up the second half of the year and contribute a flurry of sacks.
This team is really, really good. Hardly a weakness in sight (I would label tight end as one). Whether it's Super Bowl good or not... remains to be seen. But this year, in contrast to 2005, I feel it's a possibility. The 2005 team wasn't tough, and it wasn't mature. This team is both.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote