Browns - Bengals Game
-
Yes. They are the Bengals. And the Bengals have always been bi-polar. They are always capable of doing a crash and burn when it seems like they should be flying high. OK, sure, there is no logic to this reason.....just history.
This is a new era. The browns have a history of always sucking and I'm not holding that against them! I'm holding the present day suckage that they are currently partaking in against them.
27-6 Bengals win
Clowns Blow said:
This is a new era.
Is it? For your sake you better hope so. Nothing has been as reliable as the unreliability of the Bengals.
The browns have a history of always sucking
The Browns have 8 Championships. Only two teams in history (Packers/Bears) have more. So talk to us when you have attained even one.
and I'm not holding that against them! I'm holding the present day suckage that they are currently partaking in against them.
Since 1999? Yes, we Browns fans hold that against them as well. All that said, that does not mean the Browns can't win Sunday.
27-6 Bengals win
The Bengals should be the predicted winner, sure. Not by that much perhaps, but by some.
-
Ok that's one.
I'll give that, stats wise the Browns are out performing the bengals.(stats do lie)
But I need another one?
Yes. They are the Bengals. And the Bengals have always been bi-polar. They are always capable of doing a crash and burn when it seems like they should be flying high. OK, sure, there is no logic to this reason.....just history.
That's the only thing bothering me Gipp (can I call you Gipp?)Yes. They are the Bengals. And the Bengals have always been bi-polar. They are always capable of doing a crash and burn when it seems like they should be flying high. OK, sure, there is no logic to this reason.....just history.
History and old ghosts will be the only thing favoring you guys this Sun.
-
Clowns Blow said:
. The pass rush is just as good as last years top 3 ranked one, the secondary is much better now that Iloka has established himself as a legit starting safety, and Harrison's intensity has rubbed off on a linebacking crew that has been fantastic this far.
riddle me, the pack rams the ball down your throat for 186 rushing yards yet you boast about Harrison's intensity and your fantastic defense. were we watching the same game?
riddle me, the pack rams the ball down your throat for 186 rushing yards yet you boast about Harrison's intensity and your fantastic defense. were we watching the same game?
First off, who exactly do you think is going to take advantage of the bengals supposedly bad run defense? Willis McGahee? Laughable.
Second, that stat is inflated from two things. One was a run by franklin that accounted for about a third of that total. Second, the bengals focus on stopping the pass. They held the best quarterback in the nfl to his worst game in years, a QB rating of 64.5 and picked him off twice in a game for the first time in forever. You have Brian hoyer as your qb. What the hell could he possible do that Rodgers couldn't?
-
Clowns Blow said:
This is a new era.
Is it? For your sake you better hope so. Nothing has been as reliable as the unreliability of the Bengals.
The browns have a history of always sucking
The Browns have 8 Championships. Only two teams in history (Packers/Bears) have more. So talk to us when you have attained even one.
and I'm not holding that against them! I'm holding the present day suckage that they are currently partaking in against them.
Since 1999? Yes, we Browns fans hold that against them as well. All that said, that does not mean the Browns can't win Sunday.
27-6 Bengals win
The Bengals should be the predicted winner, sure. Not by that much perhaps, but by some.
Fair points. And by history I was talking about since 99. Obviously going much farther back you can talk about championships in the 40's, but that's about as irrelevant to this upcoming game as it gets.Clowns Blow said:
This is a new era.
Is it? For your sake you better hope so. Nothing has been as reliable as the unreliability of the Bengals.
The browns have a history of always sucking
The Browns have 8 Championships. Only two teams in history (Packers/Bears) have more. So talk to us when you have attained even one.
and I'm not holding that against them! I'm holding the present day suckage that they are currently partaking in against them.
Since 1999? Yes, we Browns fans hold that against them as well. All that said, that does not mean the Browns can't win Sunday.
27-6 Bengals win
The Bengals should be the predicted winner, sure. Not by that much perhaps, but by some.
-
It seems to me that that last minute comeback to win the game Sunday in only the second start of his NFL career was decidedly Sipe-ish....Kardiac Kid-ish. That is why I brought it up. Wouldn't that be fair to say?
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile. Especially against 0-2 teams with no film on him.
Clowns Blow said:
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile. Especially against 0-2 teams with no film on him.
Well, that blind squirrel is batting .500 in nut finding given that he is 1-1 in his career starts. And FYI, his only other career start was last year for the Cardinals where he went 19-34 for 225 yards with 1 TD and 1 Ints. in a 27-13 loss to the San Francisco 49ers....yea, the team that went to the Super Bowl.
-
Clowns Blow said:
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile. Especially against 0-2 teams with no film on him.
Well, that blind squirrel is batting .500 in nut finding given that he is 1-1 in his career starts. And FYI, his only other career start was last year for the Cardinals where he went 19-34 for 225 yards with 1 TD and 1 Ints. in a 27-13 loss to the San Francisco 49ers....yea, the team that went to the Super Bowl.
So he barely beat an 0-2 team with a god awful defense and lost by double digits to a playoff team when he had way more offensive talent around him than he does now. Don't get your point exactly.Well, that blind squirrel is batting .500 in nut finding given that he is 1-1 in his career starts. And FYI, his only other career start was last year for the Cardinals where he went 19-34 for 225 yards with 1 TD and 1 Ints. in a 27-13 loss to the San Francisco 49ers....yea, the team that went to the Super Bowl.
-
Fair points. And by history I was talking about since 99. Obviously going much farther back you can talk about championships in the 40's, but that's about as irrelevant to this upcoming game as it gets.Clowns Blow said:
This is a new era.
Is it? For your sake you better hope so. Nothing has been as reliable as the unreliability of the Bengals.
The browns have a history of always sucking
The Browns have 8 Championships. Only two teams in history (Packers/Bears) have more. So talk to us when you have attained even one.
and I'm not holding that against them! I'm holding the present day suckage that they are currently partaking in against them.
Since 1999? Yes, we Browns fans hold that against them as well. All that said, that does not mean the Browns can't win Sunday.
27-6 Bengals win
The Bengals should be the predicted winner, sure. Not by that much perhaps, but by some.
Clowns Blow said:
Fair points. And by history I was talking about since 99. Obviously going much farther back you can talk about championships in the 40's, but that's about as irrelevant to this upcoming game as it gets.
Well, you are the one that brought up history. And honestly, there is no history relevent to this game, is there?
I mean, the most recent history of the Browns and Bengals playing a game in Cleveland had the Browns winning last year.
If you think that history is relevent then you must concede that the Browns are likely to win again....but I doubt you want to do that.
Fair to say?
-
Someone give me 2 legit reasons this team beats Cincy Sun?
Someone give me 2 legit reasons this team beats Cincy Sun?
Yeah the Browns score more points and the Bengals score less.
-
Someone give me 2 legit reasons this team beats Cincy Sun?
Yeah the Browns score more points and the Bengals score less.
-
We will see this Sunday won't we assclown.
You lost to the Browns in Cleveland last year and this years defense is much better than last years team.
Unfortunately for you, the bengals are finally over the hump. Gio Bernard and Tyler Eifert have made the offense infinitely more dynamic and explosive. The Browns don't have the secondary to contain all of the options the Bengals have, especially since Haden struggles against Green. The pass rush is just as good as last years top 3 ranked one, the secondary is much better now that Iloka has established himself as a legit starting safety, and Harrison's intensity has rubbed off on a linebacking crew that has been fantastic this far. Last year the bengals would have crumpled after going down 16 to an elite team like GB. Obviously this years team is much different.
Clowns Blow said:
Unfortunately for you, the bengals are finally over the hump. Gio Bernard and Tyler Eifert have made the offense infinitely more dynamic and explosive. The Browns don't have the secondary to contain all of the options the Bengals have, especially since Haden struggles against Green. The pass rush is just as good as last years top 3 ranked one, the secondary is much better now that Iloka has established himself as a legit starting safety, and Harrison's intensity has rubbed off on a linebacking crew that has been fantastic this far. Last year the bengals would have crumpled after going down 16 to an elite team like GB. Obviously this years team is much different.
Bernard is a good player I saw a lot of him at UNC, he can play. Eifert is OK, he hasn't done crap so far this year. Cameron is better than any TE the Bengals have. We are undermanned in several areas for sure, but that doesn't mean this will be a cake walk either.
-
Clowns Blow said:
Fair points. And by history I was talking about since 99. Obviously going much farther back you can talk about championships in the 40's, but that's about as irrelevant to this upcoming game as it gets.
Well, you are the one that brought up history. And honestly, there is no history relevent to this game, is there?
I mean, the most recent history of the Browns and Bengals playing a game in Cleveland had the Browns winning last year.
If you think that history is relevent then you must concede that the Browns are likely to win again....but I doubt you want to do that.
Fair to say?
Untrue. You were the one who first said the Bengals have "always been" bipolar. I stated that the browns have sucked ever since they came back. And you and me both know the very likely outcome of this game is a browns loss. Fair to say?Well, you are the one that brought up history. And honestly, there is no history relevent to this game, is there?
I mean, the most recent history of the Browns and Bengals playing a game in Cleveland had the Browns winning last year.
If you think that history is relevent then you must concede that the Browns are likely to win again....but I doubt you want to do that.
Fair to say?
-
So he barely beat an 0-2 team with a god awful defense and lost by double digits to a playoff team when he had way more offensive talent around him than he does now. Don't get your point exactly.Well, that blind squirrel is batting .500 in nut finding given that he is 1-1 in his career starts. And FYI, his only other career start was last year for the Cardinals where he went 19-34 for 225 yards with 1 TD and 1 Ints. in a 27-13 loss to the San Francisco 49ers....yea, the team that went to the Super Bowl.
Clowns Blow said:
So he barely beat an 0-2 team with a god awful defense and lost by double digits to a playoff team when he had way more offensive talent around him than he does now. Don't get your point exactly.
The point is: he is capable of winning a game.
The Vikings were a playoff team last year too. So, in reality he is 1-1 against playoff teams.
And in you last statement you cut your own argument: If Hoyer had a lot more talent around him in AZ (an argument I don't necessarily buy), then more kudos to him for taking a team to a victory with little talent surrounding him.
And I am sorry, but the argument about playing a team with a bad defense doesn't wash much. You just barely beat the Packers whose defense is equally poorly rated as the Vikings is.
-
Clowns Blow said:
Unfortunately for you, the bengals are finally over the hump. Gio Bernard and Tyler Eifert have made the offense infinitely more dynamic and explosive. The Browns don't have the secondary to contain all of the options the Bengals have, especially since Haden struggles against Green. The pass rush is just as good as last years top 3 ranked one, the secondary is much better now that Iloka has established himself as a legit starting safety, and Harrison's intensity has rubbed off on a linebacking crew that has been fantastic this far. Last year the bengals would have crumpled after going down 16 to an elite team like GB. Obviously this years team is much different.
Bernard is a good player I saw a lot of him at UNC, he can play. Eifert is OK, he hasn't done crap so far this year. Cameron is better than any TE the Bengals have. We are undermanned in several areas for sure, but that doesn't mean this will be a cake walk either.
Hahahahahaha just because he's had a couple good games and is the only person who can catch the ball on your team doesn't mean he's the next Jimmy Graham. Eifert hasn't put up huge stats because of all the weapons we have, but he's done very well when given opportunities. Had a 60+ yard catch against Pitt and was very good against the bears. Gresham is prone to the occasional fuck up, but is way more talented than Cameron in nearly every facet.Bernard is a good player I saw a lot of him at UNC, he can play. Eifert is OK, he hasn't done crap so far this year. Cameron is better than any TE the Bengals have. We are undermanned in several areas for sure, but that doesn't mean this will be a cake walk either.
-
Hahahahahaha just because he's had a couple good games and is the only person who can catch the ball on your team doesn't mean he's the next Jimmy Graham. Eifert hasn't put up huge stats because of all the weapons we have, but he's done very well when given opportunities. Had a 60+ yard catch against Pitt and was very good against the bears. Gresham is prone to the occasional fuck up, but is way more talented than Cameron in nearly every facet.Bernard is a good player I saw a lot of him at UNC, he can play. Eifert is OK, he hasn't done crap so far this year. Cameron is better than any TE the Bengals have. We are undermanned in several areas for sure, but that doesn't mean this will be a cake walk either.
Clowns Blow said:
Hahahahahaha just because he's had a couple good games and is the only person who can catch the ball on your team doesn't mean he's the next Jimmy Graham. Eifert hasn't put up huge stats because of all the weapons we have, but he's done very well when given opportunities. Had a 60+ yard catch against Pitt and was very good against the bears. Gresham is prone to the occasional fuck up, but is way more talented than Cameron in nearly every facet.
So according to you the should not be played. The Giants were supposed to beat Carolina too...hmmmm. I like our chances this week with a new coaching staff and all.
-
Untrue. You were the one who first said the Bengals have "always been" bipolar. I stated that the browns have sucked ever since they came back. And you and me both know the very likely outcome of this game is a browns loss. Fair to say?Well, you are the one that brought up history. And honestly, there is no history relevent to this game, is there?
I mean, the most recent history of the Browns and Bengals playing a game in Cleveland had the Browns winning last year.
If you think that history is relevent then you must concede that the Browns are likely to win again....but I doubt you want to do that.
Fair to say?
Clowns Blow said:
Untrue. You were the one who first said the Bengals have "always been" bipolar. I stated that the browns have sucked ever since they came back. And you and me both know the very likely outcome of this game is a browns loss. Fair to say?
Chicken, egg.
The Bengals have been "bi-polar" throughout history. If they do have a winning season this year it will only be the second time in their history that they will have had 3 winning years in a row. The last being in 1975-1977.
And, yes, the Bengals I believe should be favored to win (haven't seen a line). Whether that is a "very" likely outcome, I don't know. Perhaps a somewhat likely outcome.
-
Clowns Blow said:
So he barely beat an 0-2 team with a god awful defense and lost by double digits to a playoff team when he had way more offensive talent around him than he does now. Don't get your point exactly.
The point is: he is capable of winning a game.
The Vikings were a playoff team last year too. So, in reality he is 1-1 against playoff teams.
And in you last statement you cut your own argument: If Hoyer had a lot more talent around him in AZ (an argument I don't necessarily buy), then more kudos to him for taking a team to a victory with little talent surrounding him.
And I am sorry, but the argument about playing a team with a bad defense doesn't wash much. You just barely beat the Packers whose defense is equally poorly rated as the Vikings is.
So he can win without talent around him but can't do it with it? Again, that point doesn't make sense.The point is: he is capable of winning a game.
The Vikings were a playoff team last year too. So, in reality he is 1-1 against playoff teams.
And in you last statement you cut your own argument: If Hoyer had a lot more talent around him in AZ (an argument I don't necessarily buy), then more kudos to him for taking a team to a victory with little talent surrounding him.
And I am sorry, but the argument about playing a team with a bad defense doesn't wash much. You just barely beat the Packers whose defense is equally poorly rated as the Vikings is.
And the packers defense having the bad statistical rankings is the product of playing 3 good (or usually good in the 49ers case) offensive teams. The Vikings just gave up more points to the browns than they had scored in their previous two games combined. Comparing our victory over the Packers to yours over the Vikings is laughable.
-
Clowns Blow said:
Untrue. You were the one who first said the Bengals have "always been" bipolar. I stated that the browns have sucked ever since they came back. And you and me both know the very likely outcome of this game is a browns loss. Fair to say?
Chicken, egg.
The Bengals have been "bi-polar" throughout history. If they do have a winning season this year it will only be the second time in their history that they will have had 3 winning years in a row. The last being in 1975-1977.
And, yes, the Bengals I believe should be favored to win (haven't seen a line). Whether that is a "very" likely outcome, I don't know. Perhaps a somewhat likely outcome.
Luckily for the Bengals there is always opportunity to create new history. I have a very good feeling about the Dalton-Green era. They have already done many things that history said they couldn't.Chicken, egg.
The Bengals have been "bi-polar" throughout history. If they do have a winning season this year it will only be the second time in their history that they will have had 3 winning years in a row. The last being in 1975-1977.
And, yes, the Bengals I believe should be favored to win (haven't seen a line). Whether that is a "very" likely outcome, I don't know. Perhaps a somewhat likely outcome.
-
Hahahahahaha just because he's had a couple good games and is the only person who can catch the ball on your team doesn't mean he's the next Jimmy Graham. Eifert hasn't put up huge stats because of all the weapons we have, but he's done very well when given opportunities. Had a 60+ yard catch against Pitt and was very good against the bears. Gresham is prone to the occasional fuck up, but is way more talented than Cameron in nearly every facet.Bernard is a good player I saw a lot of him at UNC, he can play. Eifert is OK, he hasn't done crap so far this year. Cameron is better than any TE the Bengals have. We are undermanned in several areas for sure, but that doesn't mean this will be a cake walk either.
Clowns Blow said:
Hahahahahaha just because he's had a couple good games and is the only person who can catch the ball on your team doesn't mean he's the next Jimmy Graham. Eifert hasn't put up huge stats because of all the weapons we have, but he's done very well when given opportunities. Had a 60+ yard catch against Pitt and was very good against the bears. Gresham is prone to the occasional fuck up, but is way more talented than Cameron in nearly every facet.
Yeah Gresham is so good you had to draft Eifert. You freaking moved him to a FB because he screws up all the time. Cameron is better than any TE on the Bengals. Eifert may be better down the road, but not this year. Yeah he did so well with those 7 yards against the vaunted Packers defense, give me a break.
-
Luckily for the Bengals there is always opportunity to create new history. I have a very good feeling about the Dalton-Green era. They have already done many things that history said they couldn't.Chicken, egg.
The Bengals have been "bi-polar" throughout history. If they do have a winning season this year it will only be the second time in their history that they will have had 3 winning years in a row. The last being in 1975-1977.
And, yes, the Bengals I believe should be favored to win (haven't seen a line). Whether that is a "very" likely outcome, I don't know. Perhaps a somewhat likely outcome.
Clowns Blow said:
Luckily for the Bengals there is always opportunity to create new history. I have a very good feeling about the Dalton-Green era. They have already done many things that history said they couldn't.
Let me scoop you in on something Dalton isn't an elite QB, you will never go to the SB with him. We should know we have seen a lot of suck around here and I can tell you while Dalton is decent, he isn't great.
-
Clowns Blow said:
Hahahahahaha just because he's had a couple good games and is the only person who can catch the ball on your team doesn't mean he's the next Jimmy Graham. Eifert hasn't put up huge stats because of all the weapons we have, but he's done very well when given opportunities. Had a 60+ yard catch against Pitt and was very good against the bears. Gresham is prone to the occasional fuck up, but is way more talented than Cameron in nearly every facet.
Yeah Gresham is so good you had to draft Eifert. You freaking moved him to a FB because he screws up all the time. Cameron is better than any TE on the Bengals. Eifert may be better down the road, but not this year. Yeah he did so well with those 7 yards against the vaunted Packers defense, give me a break.
That was Orson Charles they moved to FB dipshit. They drafter Eifert to run the two TE formation as a base offense and because he was the BPA. Good teams draft BPA, bad ones draft Brandon Weeden in the 1st. And stats don't say everything. You're one of those guys who probably thinks Larry Fitz isn't elite any more right?Yeah Gresham is so good you had to draft Eifert. You freaking moved him to a FB because he screws up all the time. Cameron is better than any TE on the Bengals. Eifert may be better down the road, but not this year. Yeah he did so well with those 7 yards against the vaunted Packers defense, give me a break.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login