Jump to content

Is 10 points too much against the Browns?

theguru

By theguru
in National Football League (NFL)

 Share

Recommended Posts

ggclfan

ggclfan

Posted
Posted
Anyone that takes the Browns and the points in this one would probably choose a Kim Davis centerfold over Sandra Bullock.

Only YOU could work Kim Davis into a thread about the spread in Bengals/Browns game:lol2: She definitely has rented a permanent place in your head...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

ggclfan

ggclfan

Posted
Posted

Thursday night game...anything can happen. I think the Bengals are very focused though after what happened last year. I think they win...10 points is a lot in an NFL game though - if I have to bet, I lay the points but I would stay away from this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GreyFox

GreyFox

Posted
Posted

Here is the issue with the Bengals. Yes they are 7-0, but they have yet to have a game where they look like a 7-0 team. I believe their last 4 games all came down to the last possession or close to it. They have not dominated in any game that I can remember from game 2 or 3 on.

 

They should win this game by a lot more than 10 points, but I can't seem to want to place money on that.

 

 

 

 

and I think Kim Davis is hot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
futurecoach

futurecoach

Posted
Posted
Here is the issue with the Bengals. Yes they are 7-0, but they have yet to have a game where they look like a 7-0 team. I believe their last 4 games all came down to the last possession or close to it. They have not dominated in any game that I can remember from game 2 or 3 on.

 

They should win this game by a lot more than 10 points, but I can't seem to want to place money on that.

 

 

 

 

and I think Kim Davis is hot

 

What is the criteria that needs to be met to make a team look like a 7 and 0 team? I thought the main criteria that needed to be met to be a 7 and 0 team is to win all of the games you have played at home and on the road so far? Not to mention 4 wins on the road already.

 

Have they looked dominant like the Pats, nope. However it seems like they have met the criteria to me about what a 7 and 0 team should look like. Plus with room to still get even better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ColonelCrazy

ColonelCrazy

Posted
Posted

The Bengals have road wins at Oakland, at Baltimore, at Buffalo and at Pittsburgh. I don't care how they've looked, that is downright impressive.

 

The Bengals have 9 games left & 5 of them are at home. The next two home games are against bad teams: Browns & Texans.

 

There is a very good chance the Bengals are 9-0 headed into a Sunday Night Showdown with Arizona. If that happens, and the Bengals lose, the same people will come out of the woodwork saying they haven't beaten anybody yet & it's the same old Bengals.

 

Sit back & enjoy the ride, fellas. Seasons like this don't come around too often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GreyFox

GreyFox

Posted
Posted
What is the criteria that needs to be met to make a team look like a 7 and 0 team? I thought the main criteria that needed to be met to be a 7 and 0 team is to win all of the games you have played at home and on the road so far? Not to mention 4 wins on the road already.

 

Have they looked dominant like the Pats, nope. However it seems like they have met the criteria to me about what a 7 and 0 team should look like. Plus with room to still get even better.

 

Read my post again.

 

They are 7-0. I said the last 4 games being decided on just about the last drive of the game etc is the reason I wouldn't take the points in this game even though they should win by more than 10 but they haven't looked dominate in the last 4 games. I guess I'm also not allowed to have an opinion of what I think dominate means. Sorry if according to you and mentschs definition of dominate apparently means winning on the last play of the game against teams you should be beating by more, but my definition of dominate is winning by 2 or more scores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
futurecoach

futurecoach

Posted
Posted
Read my post again.

 

They are 7-0. I said the last 4 games being decided on just about the last drive of the game etc is the reason I wouldn't take the points in this game even though they should win by more than 10 but they haven't looked dominate in the last 4 games. I guess I'm also not allowed to have an opinion of what I think dominate means. Sorry if according to you and mentschs definition of dominate apparently means winning on the last play of the game against teams you should be beating by more, but my definition of dominate is winning by 2 or more scores.

 

You might want to read again. Where did I say your definition of dominant was wrong? Shoot I even said the Bengals haven't looked dominant like the Pats. But that is classic you reading or seeing what you want to believe.

 

I simply asked what your criteria is for a team to look like a 7 and 0 team, since you say the Bengals don't look like a 7 and 0 team. So I guess your criteria is for a team to look dominant each game for a team to look like a true 7 and 0 team. When Imo a team looks like a 7 and 0 team when they win, because in the NFL winning is all that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GreyFox

GreyFox

Posted
Posted
You might want to read again. Where did I say your definition of dominant was wrong? Shoot I even said the Bengals haven't looked dominant like the Pats. But that is classic you reading or seeing what you want to believe.

 

I simply asked what your criteria is for a team to look like a 7 and 0 team, since you say the Bengals don't look like a 7 and 0 team. So I guess your criteria is for a team to look dominant each game for a team to look like a true 7 and 0 team. When Imo a team looks like a 7 and 0 team when they win, because in the NFL winning is all that matters.

My criteria of a 7-0

Team is to have 7 wins and 0

Losses. Duh!

What do you think 7-0 means?

 

Because you need hand holding in every post let me explain something to you. When I said what Insaid, it meant when I think of a 7-0 team I don't think of a team that is only winning games in the last play or drives of a game. I think of them as having some dominating performances along the way and this team hasn't in the last 4 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
futurecoach

futurecoach

Posted
Posted
My criteria of a 7-0

Team is to have 7 wins and 0

Losses. Duh!

 

 

I said they don't look like a dominate 7-0 team.

 

so if my opinion bothers you so much then simply don't bother replying to my post.

 

Sorry but you didn't use the word dominate in your post that I initially quoted. You said they simply don't look like a 7 and 0 team. And well you got on me yesterday for infering that you was saying Dalton sucked many times, when you only did twice. So I figure I wouldn't try to infer what you actually meant, and just go by what you actuallu said. Which was they don't look like a 7 and 0 team. Which is why I asked what is your criteria then for a team to look like a 7 and 0 team.

 

So my apology for misunderstanding what what you meant. I agree with you if your saying they definitely look the part of a 7 and 0 team but just haven't looked as dominant as the Pats in doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GreyFox

GreyFox

Posted
Posted
Here is the issue with the Bengals. Yes they are 7-0, but they have yet to have a game where they look like a 7-0 team. I believe their last 4 games all came down to the last possession or close to it. They have not dominated in any game that I can remember from game 2 or 3 on.

 

They should win this game by a lot more than 10 points, but I can't seem to want to place money on that.

 

 

 

 

and I think Kim Davis is hot

Again FC you should take time to read before replying to any of my posts.

 

So you see FC, I did use the word dominated in the original post you quoted.

 

So now you say you agree with me in that they haven't been winning Ina dominate fashion like the Pats for instance have been. The problem I have with you is when you don't read the post and make replies which, just like you did last night make me look like an idiot by saying things that weren't said by me etc in the fashion that you lead people on to believe. That is why I get po'ed at you in the post you make because they are half truths and half lies that make me look like I actually said everything you claimed. That is why I'd rather you not reply to any of my posts because you continue to misquote and misinterpret everything and when you post after the fact and mention me everyone thinks what you are saying is the gospel about me and I have to waste way too much time in you pointing out where you are wrong g again and again. So do me a favor buddy, don't reply to any of my posts because you always end up exaggerating as well as lie. It gets old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.

  I accept