View Full Version : Cincinnati has outscored us by almost a TD over the past 7 weeks!
The Bengals have put up an average point total of 26.3 points-per-game over the past 7 weeks and against some very good defensive teams as well, certainly better than the teams that we have faced.
Meanwhile, during that same span, we have scored only 19.7 PPG.
Could be a good game in week 17!
Patrick76777
12-14-2002, 12:58 PM
Could be, but I have a feeling that it'll be one of those games where everything just clicks. Like that game against Sea a few years back.
TacklingDummy
12-14-2002, 01:23 PM
LMAO, did my bringing up the Bengals in the "Coach Security" thread make you think of this?
What about the Seahawks? They have scored 39,24, and 20 points their last 3 games, 27.6 PPG.
Yeah, what about the Seahawks?
They're not on our schedule. They're also not 1-10.
No, I thought of this all by myself since just about everyone seems to think and believe that the Cincy game is a guaranteed victory except for a few people. Not just this thread today, but one from a week or two ago and several others as well. I was just curious as to how we matched up since they've been on the upswing and we've been on the downswing and do not appear to be improving and they do.
In any case, their 1-5 their last 6 and we're 1-4 our last 5 and they happen to be scoring more points by about a TD/game than we are. I just thought that in conjunction with our rush D and Dillon, that it may not be the gimme that everyone thinks it will. Again, if we can't beat S.D., we sure as heck aren't going to beat G.B. at Lambeau so we'd be on a 1-6 skid heading into that game.
If we can't win on Sunday then I'm gonna be highly concerned over next season. Especially if Gilbride is not fired. He's the O.C. and the first one that we should be looking at if the offense fails this miserably! If we were going to struggle, then that should have happened early on. Later on this season we were supposed to have gelled and developed team chemistry and already figured out our problems by now. We are not playing difficult defensive teams, yet we're behaving like one of the league's bottom third teams offensively.
This should concern us all but hardly anyone seems to recognize it. Even if we do win, if we win on the merits of D, say 20-17 or so, then that should still raise some eyebrows. There is no excuse in the world for this team not being able to put up a good 30 points against teams that are below average in this league defensively speaking. Yet that is far from happening.
TD, you're welcome to go back and answer those questions too!
Don't feel left out! By all means, take the bull by the horns son! :D
TacklingDummy
12-14-2002, 02:12 PM
Thanks Wingman. I can't answer many of your questions because there is no right answer for them.
And personally I think we are gonna lose against the Bengals.
Well TD, make them subjective then.
Do you, TD, think that 13 points v. the Jets was a good offensive performance?
Y or N
Keep in mind, this question pertains to you exclusively. So you have quite a bit of leeway here.
Do you think that our 16 point offensive performance in the K.C. game was a good, solid offensive performance deserving a win apart from what the defense did?
Again, lots of leeway!
Do you think that our offense did all that it could in our loss to N.E. was a good solid offensive performance that gave our D all the help it needed in putting up only 17 points while setting up the Pats at our 6 to put their lead at 17. I mean, afterall, the D gets credited for "putting us behind." So do you think that was reasonable for the O to do and still expect a win? Also, don't forget that 17 of the Pats' 27 points came off of our TOs.
See, it's easier than you think. So be a man and answer those questions. You're starting to sound like Clinton here! :D
Come on, be a man, step up to the plate and answer them seriously.
As a point of reference however, please do consider that 13 or 16 points rarely win games in the NFL. ;)
TD...! Yo TD...!
You still around...?
:D
WCoastFin
12-14-2002, 04:57 PM
Something tells me that the Bengals might even win that game.
TacklingDummy
12-14-2002, 07:34 PM
"Do you think that our offense did all that it could in our loss to N.E. was a good solid offensive performance that gave our D all the help it needed in putting up only 17 points"
Nope. Having 5 turnovers they were lucky to score 17. Being down 20-0 didn't help either. Whatever game plan the Bills offense had went out the window. You have to take chances to get back in the ball game. Taking chances can lead to turnovers, which it did.
"Do you think that our 16 point offensive performance in the K.C. game was a good, solid offensive performance deserving a win apart from what the defense did?"
Yes and no. The offense moved the ball well until it got to the Red Zone. The Red Zone offense sucked.
"Do you, TD, think that 13 points v. the Jets was a good offensive performance?"
Nope. But it was even a worse Defensive performance. Sometimes you have to rely of the defense to win games and sometimes you have to rely on the offense.
Originally posted by TacklingDummy
"Do you think that our offense did all that it could in our loss to N.E. was a good solid offensive performance that gave our D all the help it needed in putting up only 17 points"
Nope. Having 5 turnovers they were lucky to score 17. Being down 20-0 didn't help either. Whatever game plan the Bills offense had went out the window. You have to take chances to get back in the ball game. Taking chances can lead to turnovers, which it did.
"Do you think that our 16 point offensive performance in the K.C. game was a good, solid offensive performance deserving a win apart from what the defense did?"
Yes and no. The offense moved the ball well until it got to the Red Zone. The Red Zone offense sucked.
"Do you, TD, think that 13 points v. the Jets was a good offensive performance?"
Nope. But it was even a worse Defensive performance. Sometimes you have to rely of the defense to win games and sometimes you have to rely on the offense.
You crack me up totally TD. Are you blind or just not reading everything?
"Nope. Having 5 turnovers they were lucky to score 17. Being down 20-0 didn't help either."
And the reason we were down by 20 was b/c the D threw an interception to Seymour at the 6 yard line practically handing the Pats a TD to make it 17-0??? Besides, it was early in the 2nd Q. You never completely abandon the rushing game that early in the game unless you're down by 30-some points. Meanwhile, throwing more certainly didn't help keep the ball out of the hands of the Pats O now, did it??
Helloooo!!! Anyone home!!!
"Yes and no. The offense moved the ball well until it got to the Red Zone. The Red Zone offense sucked."
And therefore,.... logically, what? It was the D that let us lose?
"Nope. But it was even a worse Defensive performance. Sometimes you have to rely of the defense to win games and sometimes you have to rely on the offense."
No. On this year's team we don't rely on the defense to win games. Nevertheless, they've stepped up on occasion such as in the K.C. game and in the first Miami game in which we would not have won had we not held the Phins to only 10 points and the fact that the D put up one of only 2 TDs, I'd sure say they won it for us, no? I mean the D put up as many points in TDs as the O did! If they had played like they usually did, then we would have lost that game too. That was the best defensive performance of the season.
You totally crack me up! You just can't admit that our O is playing poorly, can you?
Unbelieveable...
It's OK to criticize your own team. Really, it is!
:rolleyes:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.