I just can't quit hating Peter King

[walzav29]

I know it's only a writer and blah, blah, blah. Here is what this slob wrote today.

"Records of teams Bengals have beaten: 2-5, 2-5, 4-3, 1-6, 2-6, 1-6. Records of teams they play the rest of the way: 2-5, 7-0, 2-5, 5-2, 2-5, 3-4, 3-5, 4-3. In other words, print the playoff tickets, though it's entirely possible they could make the postseason without beating a team that finishes 2005 over .500. "

Here are the Steelers opponents record. 2-6, 1-6, 4-4, 2-5, and 6-2. The 6-2 win shouldn't count because of how horrible the Bengals are. Here's another one. Everyones darling the unstoppable Colts opponents.

2-5,4-3,2-5,2-6,2-5,4-4,1-6.

My goal is for Peter King to somehow get embarassed. The Bengals beating the world class Colts. What a jerk. There are plenty of team that aren't taking care of business against teams they should beat. The Bengals are. Screw him.

[Spain]

dude sucks camel goo

[AMC]

Just ask TB how they feel about losing to SF, and THEN Peter King can rip us....

Beating ANYONE in the NFL is hard!

What a crock from King....

[walzav29]

The most irritating part is that he doesn't set down his gallon buckets of chili or his IV if Starbucks to check the opponents of other teams with elite records.

[The Big Orange]

Wally, when I read the thread title it sounded as if Hating the Idiot King was a bad thing...it's not, my friend. Fuel the hate...let it burn...let it consume your soul.

As a man who's heart is filled with love, I get my weekly dosage of Vitamin H strait from the Idiot King. It's his lot in life...to be hated by many and loved only by the Idiots whom he kings over...it's like a Cain scar in the football world (if you want to get Biblical)

[ShulaSteakhouse]

The schedule B.S. is just that, BS.

The fact the Bengals' have been .500 over the last month and haven't looked very impressive doing it, is a legitimate cause for concern.

They need an impressive victory or two soon for a variety of reasons.

[kingwilly]

Peter is an enormous know-nothing. Here's a guy who really needs to have an editor who knows footbal go over his articles to find the really poor, knee-jerk analysis. He fgails to mention Palmers progress, Bres's first year D leading in takeaways and INT's, or that Tab Perry has taken a spot among the most consistent KR in the game. Hoing in on our opponents recors is about as arbitrary as can be.

Like has been said, TB, Indy, Pitt all have has patsy-cake schedules.

The flip-side is that teams who actually have the hard schedules, he really does not give them credit for that. Like SD, PHI, JAX, DAL.

Give him some white base and a red nose and he can magically transform into Kingo the CLown.

[DontPushMe]

I think the Bears will finish with a winning record, beating them pretty one sidedly on the road is nothing to sleep on.

[HairOnFire]

I think Peter King is just mad that the Bengals added an ugly chapter to the legend that was Brett Favre.

[Ox]

AGAIN, why must we APOLOGIZE for the damn'd schedule? I swear it blows my mind.

[andybren]

It's hard to tell exactly what King's point was, but consider this...the NFL deliberately skews schedules so that first place teams play tougher opponents. So if King is unhappy with the Steelers' and Colts' schedules, which the NFL attempted to make more challenging, what exactly is his solution? Should the whole season be one big, single elimination tournament?

And if the NFL can't get the schedules right for their 'premier' teams, then how can he have a problem when a lower tier team like the Bengals exceeds expecations?

Rhetorical questions, I know. But still.

[HoosierCat]

Well, King is absolutely right that the Bengals might make the playoffs without beating a team with a winning record.

But in a point that I've been making for months now...beating bad teams -- something the Bengals have in recent history stunk at -- is precisely how you get to the playoffs and even the Super Bowl.

Take, for example, the much ballyhooed 2000 Super Bowl Champion Ravens. Of their 12 regular season victories, 9 came against losing teams, and 2 of their 3 victories vs. winning teams were against 9-7 squads (the 2000 Steelers and Jets). 7 of their wins came against teams with a combined 15 wins! (4-12 Bengals x2, 3-13 Cleveland x2, 5-11 Dallas, 3-13 Cards, and 1-15 SD.) Only 1 win came against a "real" team, the 13-3 Titans.

By contrast, all 4 of their losses were delivered by .500+ teams: the 8-8 Skins, 9-7 Steelers, 11-5 Fins, and 13-3 Titans.

So, should we take away the Lombardi since "they didn't beat anyone" in the regualar season?

[bengalboomer7]

Yes, we should take it away....just for different reasons