Barbarian Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Without Warrick this team has struggled to reach the end zone all year, tho I was encouraged by the increased focus on the short passing game utilizing the TEs and RBs last week.What's this big obsession with Warrick??? Like he was SUCH AN OFFENSIVE TOUCHDOWN MAKING MACHINE when he was in there or something????? Give me a break. Warrick isn't all that. He's borderline bustola. So don't give me this crap that the Bungles are struggling to make the end zone JUST BECAUSE WARRICK ISN'T IN THERE.WITH OR WITHOUT WARRICK, the Bungles still struggle to get into the end zone--and Shayne Graham is STILL the MVP of the Bungles for the year.Yeah, it's pathetic--but it's the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted November 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Barbarian:What's this big obsession with Warrick??? Like he was SUCH AN OFFENSIVE TOUCHDOWN MAKING MACHINE when he was in there or something????? Give me a break. Warrick isn't all that. He's borderline bustola. So don't give me this crap that the Bungles are struggling to make the end zone JUST BECAUSE WARRICK ISN'T IN THERE.Let's review. Peter Warrick through the 1st 8 games last year: 517 yards (425 receiving) and 4 TDs.Our new No. 2 guy, TJ, through 8 games: 333 yards (322 receiving) and 0 TDs.So, uh, yeah, I gotta give it to Warrick in the (and I quote) TOUCHDOWN MAKING MACHINE department.WITH OR WITHOUT WARRICK, the Bungles still struggle to get into the end zoneOnce again, the point soars underneath thy loincloth, Conan. In one of those odd coincidences -- or maybe not a coincidence -- the Bengals through 8 games this year have scored 152 points. The Bengals through 8 games last year had scored...152 points. And they've done that without a receiver (Warrick) who through the 1st 8 games last year was averaging 9.4 yards a catch! Imagine what they might have done with that guy on the field! Heck, in the 2 games they had Warrick at any semblance of healthy they went 1-1; without him they are 2-4.If you don't think Warrick being out has been a dominant factor in the team's struggles then -- no insult intended, Conan -- but you haven't been paying attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jditty47 Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Without Warrick this team has struggled to reach the end zone all year, tho I was encouraged by the increased focus on the short passing game utilizing the TEs and RBs last week.What's this big obsession with Warrick??? Like he was SUCH AN OFFENSIVE TOUCHDOWN MAKING MACHINE when he was in there or something????? Give me a break. Warrick isn't all that. He's borderline bustola. So don't give me this crap that the Bungles are struggling to make the end zone JUST BECAUSE WARRICK ISN'T IN THERE.WITH OR WITHOUT WARRICK, the Bungles still struggle to get into the end zone--and Shayne Graham is STILL the MVP of the Bungles for the year.Yeah, it's pathetic--but it's the truth. this year we are ranked dead last in redzone scoring, last year we were ranked 6th. get ur facts straight barb, we miss warrick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyline Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Without Warrick this team has struggled to reach the end zone all year, tho I was encouraged by the increased focus on the short passing game utilizing the TEs and RBs last week.What's this big obsession with Warrick??? Like he was SUCH AN OFFENSIVE TOUCHDOWN MAKING MACHINE when he was in there or something????? Give me a break. Warrick isn't all that. He's borderline bustola. So don't give me this crap that the Bungles are struggling to make the end zone JUST BECAUSE WARRICK ISN'T IN THERE.WITH OR WITHOUT WARRICK, the Bungles still struggle to get into the end zone--and Shayne Graham is STILL the MVP of the Bungles for the year.Yeah, it's pathetic--but it's the truth. this year we are ranked dead last in redzone scoring, last year we were ranked 6th. get ur facts straight barb, we miss warrick. I think we could easily overcome the whole Warrick thing if our TEs took a larger role in the passing game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jditty47 Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 young QB, they have to stay in for pass protection alot more. teams are coming at us alot in the redzone and we have no one that can get open like warrick could and we dont have a huge threat out of the backfield cuz of perry's injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobcat Bengal Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 (see post below) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobcat Bengal Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 LOLWho are we to complain because we didn't blow out the team by a larger margin?Damn, yall muthaf**kas are trippin'. This ain't f**king Steve Spurrier run n gun yall....whatever happened to glad to get the W?s**t, Bill Parcells sure as hell thinks we smashed on the Cowboys, and YALL got the nerve to complain?get the f**k outta here with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarian Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Without Warrick this team has struggled to reach the end zone all year, tho I was encouraged by the increased focus on the short passing game utilizing the TEs and RBs last week.What's this big obsession with Warrick??? Like he was SUCH AN OFFENSIVE TOUCHDOWN MAKING MACHINE when he was in there or something????? Give me a break. Warrick isn't all that. He's borderline bustola. So don't give me this crap that the Bungles are struggling to make the end zone JUST BECAUSE WARRICK ISN'T IN THERE.WITH OR WITHOUT WARRICK, the Bungles still struggle to get into the end zone--and Shayne Graham is STILL the MVP of the Bungles for the year.Yeah, it's pathetic--but it's the truth. this year we are ranked dead last in redzone scoring, last year we were ranked 6th. get ur facts straight barb, we miss warrick. I think we could easily overcome the whole Warrick thing if our TEs took a larger role in the passing game. Agreed totally. Especially in the Red Zone!!! That's Tight End Area, BIG TIME. Maybe Matt Schobel got his head to come out of his ass with a big POP!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jditty47 Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 oh its just the TE's? we had hardly any TE play last year if u remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarian Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 oh its just the TE's? we had hardly any TE play last year if u remember. Exactly. That's why the Bungles were 8-8. They really DIDN'T have any kind of shot to make the playoffs. The killer was the Arizona game.Have a TE--and the Bungles probably would have been in the red zone more. I don't even think Drunkowski has ANY KIND of concept of what the red zone is--or how to call plays in the area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted November 12, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 oh its just the TE's? we had hardly any TE play last year if u remember.Exactly. That's why the Bungles were 8-8. They really DIDN'T have any kind of shot to make the playoffs. The killer was the Arizona game.Have a TE--and the Bungles probably would have been in the red zone more. I don't even think Drunkowski has ANY KIND of concept of what the red zone is--or how to call plays in the area. They had a TE last year. His name was Peter Warrick. Ask him, he's complained before about his slot role making him a glorified TE. As for the Bengals non-use of the TE position -- aside from as an additional offensive lineman and blocker -- that predates Bratkowski's tenure. And I agree that's a problem. Solving it, however, is likely to require use of a high draft pick -- like, the 1st round -- which will have everyone screaming again, where's our stud DT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarian Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 oh its just the TE's? we had hardly any TE play last year if u remember.Exactly. That's why the Bungles were 8-8. They really DIDN'T have any kind of shot to make the playoffs. The killer was the Arizona game.Have a TE--and the Bungles probably would have been in the red zone more. I don't even think Drunkowski has ANY KIND of concept of what the red zone is--or how to call plays in the area. They had a TE last year. His name was Peter Warrick. Ask him, he's complained before about his slot role making him a glorified TE. As for the Bengals non-use of the TE position -- aside from as an additional offensive lineman and blocker -- that predates Bratkowski's tenure. And I agree that's a problem. Solving it, however, is likely to require use of a high draft pick -- like, the 1st round -- which will have everyone screaming again, where's our stud DT? I think the DT has to come from Free Agency. That would solve the weak draft this year for a rookie FATASS.The Bungles need some experience at those 2 positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalNation1281 Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Barb, too much talk about the fatasses. All I hear from you anymore is fatass, fatass, fatass...why can't we just get a DT who isn't a fatass? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarian Posted November 15, 2004 Report Share Posted November 15, 2004 Barb, too much talk about the fatasses. All I hear from you anymore is fatass, fatass, fatass...why can't we just get a DT who isn't a fatass? That's the whole problem--or haven't you been paying attention???? The Bungles DON'T have a fatass. AKA roadblock. AKA run-stuffer.Bungle Nation, I have to ask--is that s**t pretty good to smoke??? 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.