Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Super Bowl Connections

  1. #11
    For the record, as happy as I am for Philly to win that, it was also kinda depressing because the way they won, and the way Pederson coached them in going for it, is absolutely something Marvin is incapable of doing. The decision to go for it on 4th and 1 from midfield with six minutes left down one with all timeouts left? Literally, Marvin would never consider going for that. It's not in his DNA.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Enon Bengal View Post
    me too...
    It still makes zero sense. I remain befuddled by the extreme short-sightedness of it.

  3. #13
    Meh, I'm not that upset about Elliott... he lost the camp competition, and reportedly it wasn't close. I don't blame the staff for that.

    As it was, Bullock had a heck of a year. Yes, he missed the one potential game winner but he was 90% on FGs for the year, and one was blocked IIRC. He was very solid. Elliott - yes, younger guy with a bigger leg, but I don't consider losing him to be significant (at least, not yet) and the Bengals have much bigger problems.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by texbengal View Post
    Meh, I'm not that upset about Elliott... he lost the camp competition, and reportedly it wasn't close. I don't blame the staff for that.

    As it was, Bullock had a heck of a year. Yes, he missed the one potential game winner but he was 90% on FGs for the year, and one was blocked IIRC. He was very solid. Elliott - yes, younger guy with a bigger leg, but I don't consider losing him to be significant (at least, not yet) and the Bengals have much bigger problems.
    For ****SSAKE, it should NEVER have come to that. Mother of all ****s, if you draft a guy like they drafted him, the job is his. What is so goddamn hard about admitting that? Just because the bengals have other problems doesn't mean they have to **** up the kicking decisions too.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by membengal View Post
    For ****SSAKE, it should NEVER have come to that. Mother of all ****s, if you draft a guy like they drafted him, the job is his. What is so goddamn hard about admitting that? Just because the bengals have other problems doesn't mean they have to **** up the kicking decisions too.
    Agree to disagree. At least based on this year, I don't think it was a mistake. Going in to the season, I admit that I wasn't a Bullock fan, but I can't say now that the season is over that it wasn't a good decision. It worked out. Granted, the Eagles were better offensively, so they had more chances but he was 26/31 vs. 18/20. He missed 3 XPs (39/42) and Bullock missed 2 (31/33). About even, percentage-wise (Bullock slightly higher).

    It's not like they hated Elliott... they brought him back to the PS, and he got claimed. Based on how well Bullock kicked this year - if Elliott had stayed on the PS - do you think Elliott would have been brought up to replace him? I don't. It's not like Bullock is 50-something. He's 28.

    Knowing how loath the Bengals are to cut draft picks, for them to do that, you don't think they agonized over it? They made a call - and at least stats-wise, Bullock WAS better. I guess I don't see why that makes Elliott better. Granted it's a year, but it's all that we have to go on.

  6. #16
    I think if they knew they were going to be a 7-9 team they would have stuck with him. But they thought they were a playoff contender so they believed they had to keep the lower risk guy. It sucks now, but I don’t blame them.

  7. #17
    He kicked just fine for a super bowl winner. It was a dumb, short-sighted, signature brain dead move, especially for a guy with a howitzer for a leg especially when you have a coach who approaches games conservatively and could use a legit weapon from 50+ yards. It remains dumb as ****.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •