membengal Posted October 2, 2007 Report Share Posted October 2, 2007 Especially after the 49ers debacle. The old folks here will remember that one. Like being kicked in the testes. With steel-toed boots.All this smelly start needs is a looming strike to add insult to injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cincyhokie Posted October 2, 2007 Report Share Posted October 2, 2007 Especially after the 49ers debacle. The old folks here will remember that one. Like being kicked in the testes. With steel-toed boots.All this smelly start needs is a looming strike to add insult to injury.I'm 31 and I remember that one. I was 11 years old and yelling at the TV "Just throw it through the back of the endzone and take a safety!!!!"1987 huh? I'll take that actually. A talented underachieving team that went to the Superbowl the next year. 1988 AFC Champs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalByTheBay Posted October 2, 2007 Report Share Posted October 2, 2007 Especially after the 49ers debacle. The old folks here will remember that one. Like being kicked in the testes. With steel-toed boots.All this smelly start needs is a looming strike to add insult to injury.Yeah, maybe. I don't have that feel for it just yet. I do, however, recall how there was an overwhelming excitement at 3-0 in 2006. That was probably overdone. I feel like the "window ledge" mentality right now is also overdone. I'm not saying the Bengals go 13-3 or anything, but a little perspective seems warranted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted October 2, 2007 Report Share Posted October 2, 2007 Especially after the 49ers debacle. The old folks here will remember that one. Like being kicked in the testes. With steel-toed boots.All this smelly start needs is a looming strike to add insult to injury.Yeah, maybe. I don't have that feel for it just yet. I do, however, recall how there was an overwhelming excitement at 3-0 in 2006. That was probably overdone. I feel like the "window ledge" mentality right now is also overdone. I'm not saying the Bengals go 13-3 or anything, but a little perspective seems warranted.Agreed. The season isn't over yet, even considering the injuries. Landon and Brooks ought to be alright after the bye. Henry and Perry should find their way back onto the team somehow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalByTheBay Posted October 2, 2007 Report Share Posted October 2, 2007 Especially after the 49ers debacle. The old folks here will remember that one. Like being kicked in the testes. With steel-toed boots.All this smelly start needs is a looming strike to add insult to injury.Yeah, maybe. I don't have that feel for it just yet. I do, however, recall how there was an overwhelming excitement at 3-0 in 2006. That was probably overdone. I feel like the "window ledge" mentality right now is also overdone. I'm not saying the Bengals go 13-3 or anything, but a little perspective seems warranted.Agreed. The season isn't over yet, even considering the injuries. Landon and Brooks ought to be alright after the bye. Henry and Perry should find their way back onto the team somehow.Right. And thanks to Pitt. stumbling against AZ, there is at least some prospect of the division race staying in sight. There are some positives, including the fact that the Rats (every writer's pre-season darling) are now 0-2 in the division. A couple of wins and another loss for Pitt against either Seattle or Denver and things are looking up. Obviously, one thing that we all agree needs to happen, however, is that the Bengals have to get right over the next couple of weeks and re-learn how to win a football game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBenBlows Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Im sooooooo tired of blaming injuries for our inconsistency. We have had them every year since Marv took over, we need to get a D cordinator that can do a better job. Imho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fattyjay Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 I think the injuries are a direct result of poor roster management which has lead to overuse of the starters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott91575 Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Especially after the 49ers debacle. The old folks here will remember that one. Like being kicked in the testes. With steel-toed boots.All this smelly start needs is a looming strike to add insult to injury.I'm 31 and I remember that one. I was 11 years old and yelling at the TV "Just throw it through the back of the endzone and take a safety!!!!"1987 huh? I'll take that actually. A talented underachieving team that went to the Superbowl the next year. 1988 AFC Champs.I was 12 years old for that game. That game and the 1995 UM/OSU game are the only games I remember being truly upset after a loss.Of course 1987 was a strike year. So tough to really compare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinneymulleT Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 I think the injuries are a direct result of poor roster management which has lead to overuse of the starters.Do you have any proof for this assertion or is it just divination? I think this is week 4, hardly enough time to over use a player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsbengalsbucks Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 I think the injuries are a direct result of poor roster management which has lead to overuse of the starters.I was thinking just the opposite, the injuries have lead to overuse of some of the starters this season. Which in turn has lead to more injuries, a vicious cycle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinneymulleT Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 I think the injuries are a direct result of poor roster management which has lead to overuse of the starters.I was thinking just the opposite, the injuries have lead to overuse of some of the starters this season. Which in turn has lead to more injuries, a vicious cycle.How can they be over-used in 1-2 games. Stupid. And were is the proof? Any stats showing increase number of plays? Maybe the last game, but the "starters" were injured in the preseason-1st game. This is WEEK 4. It is our 3rd stringers are getting hurt because our starters were already out. And the only real injuries to speak of are at linebacker. No dline injuries. No secondary injuries except jj who missed 1 game. The oline doesnt rotate so that is stupid to say about them too. CJ and TJ are not injured and are normally always on the field. Rudy is an everydown back and so would normally play alot with kw coming in on 3rd down. What, do you want carson to rotate with fitzpatrick? Ignorant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fattyjay Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 I think the injuries are a direct result of poor roster management which has lead to overuse of the starters.I was thinking just the opposite, the injuries have lead to overuse of some of the starters this season. Which in turn has lead to more injuries, a vicious cycle.How can they be over-used in 1-2 games. Stupid. And were is the proof? Any stats showing increase number of plays? Maybe the last game, but the "starters" were injured in the preseason-1st game. This is WEEK 4. It is our 3rd stringers are getting hurt because our starters were already out. And the only real injuries to speak of are at linebacker. No dline injuries. No secondary injuries except jj who missed 1 game. The oline doesnt rotate so that is stupid to say about them too. CJ and TJ are not injured and are normally always on the field. Rudy is an everydown back and so would normally play alot with kw coming in on 3rd down. What, do you want carson to rotate with fitzpatrick? Ignorant.Well it seems you have reinforced my position that certain players are always on the field. The poor roster management I was referring to is that we have six safeties on the roster and currently only three healthy LB's. The overuse comes into play when most of the players on special teams are pulling double duty. True, most teams have some starters on special teams, but not to the extent that the Bengals have had to use them. At some point don't you think that those who are pulling double duty are getting fatigued at the end of games and may be susceptible to mental breakdowns in coverage. Just a thought, but it seems fairly obvious that the trouble we have had on special teams has come late in games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinneymulleT Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 I think the injuries are a direct result of poor roster management which has lead to overuse of the starters.I was thinking just the opposite, the injuries have lead to overuse of some of the starters this season. Which in turn has lead to more injuries, a vicious cycle.How can they be over-used in 1-2 games. Stupid. And were is the proof? Any stats showing increase number of plays? Maybe the last game, but the "starters" were injured in the preseason-1st game. This is WEEK 4. It is our 3rd stringers are getting hurt because our starters were already out. And the only real injuries to speak of are at linebacker. No dline injuries. No secondary injuries except jj who missed 1 game. The oline doesnt rotate so that is stupid to say about them too. CJ and TJ are not injured and are normally always on the field. Rudy is an everydown back and so would normally play alot with kw coming in on 3rd down. What, do you want carson to rotate with fitzpatrick? Ignorant.Well it seems you have reinforced my position that certain players are always on the field. The poor roster management I was referring to is that we have six safeties on the roster and currently only three healthy LB's. The overuse comes into play when most of the players on special teams are pulling double duty. True, most teams have some starters on special teams, but not to the extent that the Bengals have had to use them. At some point don't you think that those who are pulling double duty are getting fatigued at the end of games and may be susceptible to mental breakdowns in coverage. Just a thought, but it seems fairly obvious that the trouble we have had on special teams has come late in games.Um, your premise is about poor roster management causing over playing of starters thus causing injury, not certain players are always on the field, causing a breakdown on special teams. Read your own post next time before you change your premise again. If we have not played but 4 games, and the injuries occured in or before the first game, then ispo facto they cannot be caused by over play because they have not been overplayed. And you gloss over the fact that almost the entire offense never rotates on any team, and the only injuries on d are at linebacker. And what d starters are on special teams and have been hurt? (landon is not a starter but a second stringer forced into a starting role by injury/suspension as are the others that play special teams). Once the roster is set in camp, when starters get hurt or are suspended most teams have no choice but to play those who have practiced at special teams or sign those who have not practiced and risk a greater "breakdown". Then the team would be forced to IR some players to make room which you may need if they can get healthy in a few weeks. And you cant pup if they practice. So pick your poison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschooler Posted October 5, 2007 Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 There`s a strike going on ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsbengalsbucks Posted October 5, 2007 Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 It is a fact that some players are playing many more plays, due to injury. The starters of a game, even if they were 3rd stringers at the start of the season are now playing thier role on ST's along with a majority of the snaps on Def/Off in some cases.Injuries have shaped the playing time of many Bengal players this season and it has affected the outcome of every game played so far.There is very little that can be done to help with this problem, untill some players get healthy this will continue to be the way the Bengals field a team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinneymulleT Posted October 5, 2007 Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 It is a fact that some players are playing many more plays, due to injury. The starters of a game, even if they were 3rd stringers at the start of the season are now playing thier role on ST's along with a majority of the snaps on Def/Off in some cases.Injuries have shaped the playing time of many Bengal players this season and it has affected the outcome of every game played so far.There is very little that can be done to help with this problem, untill some players get healthy this will continue to be the way the Bengals field a team.Since you either are or appear to feign ignorance and cant read what was written, I will repeat that his premise is "poor roster management" and "playing starters" and that marvin or mike brown is to blame for such. When your "starters" or 1st stringers cant play because of injury, what can you do? You can bring in someone else in which case you must make room on the roster. If this is done your "injured starters" cannot return this season and that would be stupid if you expect them to return in a couple of games. Or you can allow the players who are not starters and are special teams players/subs to play both for a couple of games until your "starters" return. Simple simon. I guess in your world you consider a bunch of guys who were not on the team when we broke camp to be starters, and you want everyone who is hurt to be put on IR so we can sign a bunch of special teams players so that our 3-4 stringers can get some rest during the game? Pure genius . Why didnt marvin think of that. He should be fired! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted October 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 There`s a strike going on ?No, oldschooler, that's why I mentioned all this toxic start needed to be like 1987 was a looming strike. But I know you remember those first few games. Bad luck, injuries, the Wyche debacle in the 49er game. It was all a nightmare. Then, you toss in the strike, and it went to ridiculous.That was my musing with this thread.Hopefully, unlike 1987, when the strike finished putting a bullet in the head of the season, there will be a rebound. But I've seen this kind of start before from a Bengals team that was supposed to be decent, and it was that year... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted October 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Bump.It's crazy how deja vu this is.Legitimate expectations, torpedoed for a variety of reasons: bad coaching, injuries, poor play, official who bend the team over and f**k it for all they're worth. It's a replay for me. For all you young'uns, that's the closest parallel I can come up with.All that's missing, as I said at the start of this thread, is a looming strike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Curnutte is going for a more recent comparision...After the game, Bengals head coach Marvin Lewis said, "What I told our football team in there just now, I thought for the first time this football season we played like a football team in the second half of this game. And though we didn't come out and win this football game today, I thought we made some progress and some signs of a football team, not a bunch of individual guys."Is it me, or does that sound a lot like Dick LeBeau trying to plug emotional holes as his 2002 team spriralized down to a 2-14 record?No, Mark, sad to say IMHO it's not just you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damiancasey Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 I remember watching both superbowls on TV when I was a kid. I still hate the 49ers and Joe Montana because of those two games... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted November 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 1987.Hopefully there will be some kind of re-commitment this off-season to the program and a bounce-back like happened in 1988. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walrus Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 1987.Hopefully there will be some kind of re-commitment this off-season to the program and a bounce-back like happened in 1988....and not, as Hobson brings up in his latest QA, a stronger similarity to 1997-1998. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 I'm sticking with 2002. The parallels are pretty strong.Coming off LeBeau's disasterous 2-14 season, the offense had three key needs: a franchise QB, an o-line upgrade, and a No. 3 wideout to compliment Chad and TJ.Going into this offseason, the offense has three key needs: a franchise RB, an o-line upgrade, and...yes, still...WR, thanks to Chad's antics, TJ's contract status, Henry being one misstep away from a ban, and Chatman's status as an always-injured turd.After 2002, it was clear the D needed to be blown up -- and it was. In the 2003 and 2004 offseasons, almost the entire D was let go or sent packing. Only a handful of guys, most notably Brian Simmons and Justin Smith, were retained.Already this year, it's clear the D needs to be blown up. Beyond Geathers, Peko, JJoe and Hall, there isn't much I'd shed a tear over losing. Based on that, are there reasons for hope in 2008? I think so. For one thing, finding a good RB is a lot easier than finding a franchise QB. We may even have one in house already, tho I remain leery of depending on Perry and Irons. Certainly we can expect an immediate impact to RB, versus having to wait multiple years to develop a QB. In short, I think that getting the offense back toward its 2005 form isn't a daunting challenge.On defense, if the Bengals duplicate their post-2002 strategy, I think they stand a chance of bouncing back. That year, they team dumped a bunch of bums and dove deeply into free agency, bringing in Hardy, Thornton, James, Clemons and Powell. Of that group, only Hardy was a waste, with all the others playing key roles in pushing the D out of the basement in 2003.The wild card I see on D is coaching. If Chucky stays, no amount of FAs or draft pciks is going to save this team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cincy9275 Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 this year seems like the past 16 to me just a bad team with a cheap owner. who only sell false hopes to fill his stadium!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.