And you would be wrong again. 6 teams make the playoffs in the whole AFC that is it. When you look around the AFC do you see many teams out there that you would consider better than the Bengals besides the teams that have wrapped up playoff spots? I know I sure don't. You know why you don't see that, its because all those other teams not only have lost to the good teams, but also lost to teams that they should have beaten. I mean I sure didn't hear people cut the Bengals in slack for winning only 4 games last year when they played the toughest schedule in the NFL. It was just about how terrible they were. So how is it that people can say a team sucks when they play the hardest schedule, but if they play an easier schedule still say they are not that good?

 

If the Bengals end up making the playoffs then they were a good team and no reason to think otherwise. Which by the way that horrible Bengals schedule you talk about is not as bad as you make it seem. After next week the Bengals could have possibly played 7 of their 16 games against playoff teams. Then another three games against taems at around .500 in Seattle, Arizona, and Tennesee. That is not a top 5 schedule, but lets not act like every game was an easy game. Especially considering some of the top teams in the league lost to these so called easy teams the Bengals have beaten. Yes the Bengals have failed to beat the top teams, but besides one game they have not looked horrible against those teams either. If they make the playoffs then they are one of the best 6 teams in the AFC, and did that while playing in arguably the toughest division in football. There is no way you can say they were not a good team. Your seriously as bad as Mal use to be. If a team is a top 6 team in a coference they are a good team. And it's not like you can find someone in the conference who didn't make it that you can make a good argument to say they were better.

 

Why do you have to state that I'm wrong when I give an opinion?

 

For fun name the top 5 Qb's they've faced:

 

Here is a fact for you that can't be denied by your opinion: They've faced Colt McCoy twice and Cleveland will try to replace him in the offseason. Kyle Orton who was cut by that team later in the year. Alex Smith who isn't good but they lost to him. Fitzpatrick who is average to possibly decent but Buffalo isn't good. Blain Gabbert: so far not at all good. Curtis Painter: we know that situation. Charley Whitehurst: not the starter. Hasselbeck: decent but Seattle let him walk to sign Tavaris Jackson. Ben and Flacco who they're 0-3 against. TJ Yates: 3rd string rookie that beat them on their home field. Kellen Clemens who they signed 10 days before that start and John Skelton: backup that they survived against at home b/c a wide open receiver fell down.

 

Another fact: Dalton hasn't gone above 200 yards since week 12 against Cleveland. If you don't think their schedule and the QB's they faced have anything to do with their record I have some ocean front property for you.

Hey! I said judge them by their record. I say they're pretty good.:thumb:

 

The funny thing is I like them and what they've done. I'm just not going to act like they haven't been extremely lucky to see the teams they have and the QB's they have for some of those teams.

I call them smart fans not fair weather fans. Why pad the pocket of an owner who isn't committed to winning and 80% of the time puts a terrible product on the field? I am still a fan and still watch on TV, he can collect my TV revenue but I won't be giving up any more of my money. I did it for way to long and finally realized it wasn't worth it.

I call them smart fans not fair weather fans.

 

:thumb:

And you would be wrong again. 6 teams make the playoffs in the whole AFC that is it. When you look around the AFC do you see many teams out there that you would consider better than the Bengals besides the teams that have wrapped up playoff spots? I know I sure don't. You know why you don't see that, its because all those other teams not only have lost to the good teams, but also lost to teams that they should have beaten. I mean I sure didn't hear people cut the Bengals in slack for winning only 4 games last year when they played the toughest schedule in the NFL. It was just about how terrible they were. So how is it that people can say a team sucks when they play the hardest schedule, but if they play an easier schedule still say they are not that good?

 

If the Bengals end up making the playoffs then they were a good team and no reason to think otherwise. Which by the way that horrible Bengals schedule you talk about is not as bad as you make it seem. After next week the Bengals could have possibly played 7 of their 16 games against playoff teams. Then another three games against taems at around .500 in Seattle, Arizona, and Tennesee. That is not a top 5 schedule, but lets not act like every game was an easy game. Especially considering some of the top teams in the league lost to these so called easy teams the Bengals have beaten. Yes the Bengals have failed to beat the top teams, but besides one game they have not looked horrible against those teams either. If they make the playoffs then they are one of the best 6 teams in the AFC, and did that while playing in arguably the toughest division in football. There is no way you can say they were not a good team. Your seriously as bad as Mal use to be. If a team is a top 6 team in a coference they are a good team. And it's not like you can find someone in the conference who didn't make it that you can make a good argument to say they were better.

 

I'll take a crack at it....

 

The Bengals are an average to slightly above average football team. They've done exactly what should be expected of any football team. Beaten the teams they're better than, and lose to those that are superior (for the most part). Anyone who doesn't think they've benefited from a very easy schedule is simply incapable of logically debating the Bengals.

 

Regardless of whether or not they make the playoffs, I wouldn't necessarily say they're one of the "good" teams in the league.

 

If they were to be compared to every other team in the AFC, I'd see it breaking down like this:

 

New England - better

New York Jets - better

Buffalo - worse

Miami - worse

Pittsburgh - better

Baltimore - better

Cleveland - worse

Houston - better

Tennessee - worse

Indianapolis - worse

Jacksonville - worse

Denver - better

Oakland - worse

Kansas City - worse

San Diego - better

 

That's 7 teams that IMO are better than the Bengals and 8 teams worse. As myself and SSC have been saying, they're right in the middle of the pack. To say they aren't benefiting from an easy schedule just isn't true, and that's not a knock on the Bengals, it's simply a fact.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/16625802/bengals-problem-isnt-shortage-of-fans-its-the-owner

 

CINCINNATI -- The Bengals were giving away tickets this week, but not because they're generous. Believe me, it wasn't that.

 

They gave away tickets to Sunday's finale against Baltimore -- among the most important regular-season games in franchise history -- because they couldn't sell them. Because people around here didn't want to go. The announced attendance at Paul Brown Stadium this season has hovered around 42,000, less than two-thirds capacity, but that's tickets sold, not fannies in seats. Thousands of paying customers have been staying away each week, and not to watch it on television. Every game but one has been blacked out locally, the exception being Pittsburgh's visit Nov. 13, when Steelers fans filled the place.

 

This week, with a playoff spot at stake, the Bengals tried to keep Baltimore's fans away by offering a giveaway promotion to season-ticket holders: Buy one, get one free. And it worked, I guess. A sellout for Sunday has beeen announced.

 

In other towns, though, I imagine they're laughing at us in Cincinnati.

 

In other towns, they don't know. They can't. In other towns, they don't have Mike Brown playing puppet-master to their NFL team, their city, their reputation, their heart.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/16625802/bengals-problem-isnt-shortage-of-fans-its-the-owner

 

CINCINNATI -- The Bengals were giving away tickets this week, but not because they're generous. Believe me, it wasn't that.

 

They gave away tickets to Sunday's finale against Baltimore -- among the most important regular-season games in franchise history -- because they couldn't sell them. Because people around here didn't want to go. The announced attendance at Paul Brown Stadium this season has hovered around 42,000, less than two-thirds capacity, but that's tickets sold, not fannies in seats. Thousands of paying customers have been staying away each week, and not to watch it on television. Every game but one has been blacked out locally, the exception being Pittsburgh's visit Nov. 13, when Steelers fans filled the place.

 

This week, with a playoff spot at stake, the Bengals tried to keep Baltimore's fans away by offering a giveaway promotion to season-ticket holders: Buy one, get one free. And it worked, I guess. A sellout for Sunday has beeen announced.

 

In other towns, though, I imagine they're laughing at us in Cincinnati.

 

In other towns, they don't know. They can't. In other towns, they don't have Mike Brown playing puppet-master to their NFL team, their city, their reputation, their heart.

 

I was gonna post this as well. I couldn't have said it any better, Doyel hit the nail on the head.

Thank you Doyel, just crushed it. I feel like it was so good it deserves it's own thread but we all have had that conversation before.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/16625802/bengals-problem-isnt-shortage-of-fans-its-the-owner

 

CINCINNATI -- The Bengals were giving away tickets this week, but not because they're generous. Believe me, it wasn't that.

 

They gave away tickets to Sunday's finale against Baltimore -- among the most important regular-season games in franchise history -- because they couldn't sell them. Because people around here didn't want to go. The announced attendance at Paul Brown Stadium this season has hovered around 42,000, less than two-thirds capacity, but that's tickets sold, not fannies in seats. Thousands of paying customers have been staying away each week, and not to watch it on television. Every game but one has been blacked out locally, the exception being Pittsburgh's visit Nov. 13, when Steelers fans filled the place.

 

This week, with a playoff spot at stake, the Bengals tried to keep Baltimore's fans away by offering a giveaway promotion to season-ticket holders: Buy one, get one free. And it worked, I guess. A sellout for Sunday has beeen announced.

 

In other towns, though, I imagine they're laughing at us in Cincinnati.

 

In other towns, they don't know. They can't. In other towns, they don't have Mike Brown playing puppet-master to their NFL team, their city, their reputation, their heart.

 

Hmm you think he nailed it, however don't you think it also goes against what you all like to say? Which is Mike Brown doesn't care about winning, that he just wants to make money? If this is true, then why would he care if the Raven fans bought tickets for the game? I mean that is still making money for him. They don't travel as well as Pittsburgh fans, but probably a good amount would have been here to get it close to a sell out. This article actually goes against everything people like to say especially the bolded part.

 

I have not been a fan of how Mike Brown has ran this franchise either. However it is kind of funny when you all try to find something to show how he still is not doing something good for the fans, and is for himself. For once this was not about the money. He could have made money with the Raven fans buying the tickets. Instead he has helped make is true home field for the Bengals by doing this deal for Bengal fans, and having to pay something like 33% of each ticket sold to go for the tickets that were suppose to be available for the visiting fans. Mike Brown has done a lot of things just about him and making money, however this is one case when he has not.

Why do you have to state that I'm wrong when I give an opinion?

 

For fun name the top 5 Qb's they've faced:

 

Here is a fact for you that can't be denied by your opinion: They've faced Colt McCoy twice and Cleveland will try to replace him in the offseason. Kyle Orton who was cut by that team later in the year. Alex Smith who isn't good but they lost to him. Fitzpatrick who is average to possibly decent but Buffalo isn't good. Blain Gabbert: so far not at all good. Curtis Painter: we know that situation. Charley Whitehurst: not the starter. Hasselbeck: decent but Seattle let him walk to sign Tavaris Jackson. Ben and Flacco who they're 0-3 against. TJ Yates: 3rd string rookie that beat them on their home field. Kellen Clemens who they signed 10 days before that start and John Skelton: backup that they survived against at home b/c a wide open receiver fell down.

 

Another fact: Dalton hasn't gone above 200 yards since week 12 against Cleveland. If you don't think their schedule and the QB's they faced have anything to do with their record I have some ocean front property for you.

 

Using your logic than basically every team in the AFC this year is overrated. New England lost a game to that average QB in Buffalo, and New England and Jets get to play that average QB and a backup for Dolphins twice a year. Every team in the AFC South is overrated, included the Texans even before the injuries because they played the Jags with a rookie QB twice a year, Colts with a backup, and Tennessee with Hassellback who you already talked about. Pitt and Baltimore played the same schedule as the Bengals, and you could include having to play another rookie twice a year in Dalton. Then the AFC West. Since we are talking about backup QB's, a team with a backup QB won 6 straight in Denver with Tebow. A team in the Chiefs who are playing with a backup QB, and beaten the Packers. A team in the Chargers who have lost to a backup in Denver, and a QB who was sitting on his couch for the first 6 weeks of the season.

 

Your whole argument about the QB's they have played is off base, considering basically every team in the AFC this year has been going against bad QB's as you say in the AFC. The only difference is the Bengals still were able to beat those teams, while the other teams lost to them. Not to mention the Bengals have been able to do this with a rookie QB of their own, using your arguments teams should have been able to beat the Bengals then. Want to give it another shot?

Hmm you think he nailed it, however don't you think it also goes against what you all like to say? Which is Mike Brown doesn't care about winning, that he just wants to make money? If this is true, then why would he care if the Raven fans bought tickets for the game? I mean that is still making money for him. They don't travel as well as Pittsburgh fans, but probably a good amount would have been here to get it close to a sell out. This article actually goes against everything people like to say especially the bolded part.

 

Out of everything you take that out of the article. Like I said before we have all talked about this before I know how you feel and you know how I feel. He didn't offer that just to keep Baltimore fans out of the stadium. He did so the game would sell out. He will make up the lost money in concessions and TV revenue.

I'll take a crack at it....

 

The Bengals are an average to slightly above average football team. They've done exactly what should be expected of any football team. Beaten the teams they're better than, and lose to those that are superior (for the most part). Anyone who doesn't think they've benefited from a very easy schedule is simply incapable of logically debating the Bengals.

 

Regardless of whether or not they make the playoffs, I wouldn't necessarily say they're one of the "good" teams in the league.

 

If they were to be compared to every other team in the AFC, I'd see it breaking down like this:

 

New England - better

New York Jets - better

Buffalo - worse

Miami - worse

Pittsburgh - better

Baltimore - better

Cleveland - worse

Houston - better

Tennessee - worse

Indianapolis - worse

Jacksonville - worse

Denver - better

Oakland - worse

Kansas City - worse

San Diego - better

 

That's 7 teams that IMO are better than the Bengals and 8 teams worse. As myself and SSC have been saying, they're right in the middle of the pack. To say they aren't benefiting from an easy schedule just isn't true, and that's not a knock on the Bengals, it's simply a fact.

 

Thank you I been waiting for you to chime in, and you said exactly what I figured you would say. However I want to hear your argument why you consider the Jets and Chargers better? Were the Jets suppose to be better than the Bengals? Yes! Were 31 other teams suppose to be better than the Bengals before the season? Yes! However is that how it ended up. As SSC liked to point out, the Jets and Chargers have played a lot of teams with not good QB's either. The Bills twice a year, and Dolphins with a backup QB twice a year. Teams with I believe 5 wins each? They also played the AFC West who has no real strong team and could have only one team with a above .500 record, and the NFC East as we have seen doesn't either and will have only one team with an above .500 record. Yet they already have 7 losses, and could possibly have 8 before the year is over. The Chargers mean while alraedy have 8 losses, and could have 9 by the time the year is over. They even lost to a man who was sitting on his couch for the first 6 weeks, and beat them in just his second start with the team. Not to mention even as bad as the Bengals were last year, they still were able to beat the Chargers. The Bengals have gotten better, I don't think the same can be said about the Chargers. Their is a difference between perception and reality, and yes those two teams were suppose to be better this year. However this simply have not been that good of teams that year, and you will have a very hard time making an argument for why they have been better, especially based on how they have played this year. So if you take them two out, there are only 5 teams in the AFC who were better. Meaning the Bengals were 6th, and that also means playoffs. If your a playoff team, you are a good team plain and simple. Because anybody who makes the playoffs has a shot and starts anew.

Out of everything you take that out of the article. Like I said before we have all talked about this before I know how you feel and you know how I feel. He didn't offer that just to keep Baltimore fans out of the stadium. He did so the game would sell out. He will make up the lost money in concessions and TV revenue.

 

Yeah it is what I could take from the article. I mean if your going to post the one article you can find on why it was not a good thing for him to do, I am going to find where he was wrong in that article. Most people have given him credit for him, but no one ever mentions that. Yes the man has made more wrong decisions than right since he has been the owner, and basically everything has been about him making money. People talked about how Mike Brown doesn't do things for the fans to try to help sell out the stadium. He actually does it here, and yet people still complain. He actually did something right here, it is helping fans out by getting in cheaper, and most importantly hopefully helping the team out by creating more of a homefield advantage for them. There are many things to put Mike Brown down on, however this is one thing that no one should put him down on. He actually did something for the fans, and to help better the teams chances of winning.

Yeah it is what I could take from the article. I mean if your going to post the one article you can find on why it was not a good thing for him to do, I am going to find where he was wrong in that article. Most people have given him credit for him, but no one ever mentions that. Yes the man has made more wrong decisions than right since he has been the owner, and basically everything has been about him making money. People talked about how Mike Brown doesn't do things for the fans to try to help sell out the stadium. He actually does it here, and yet people still complain. He actually did something right here, it is helping fans out by getting in cheaper, and most importantly hopefully helping the team out by creating more of a homefield advantage for them. There are many things to put Mike Brown down on, however this is one thing that no one should put him down on. He actually did something for the fans, and to help better the teams chances of winning.

 

No he didn't. He is going to make more money this way simple as that. He wouldn't have do it if he wasn't.

If the Bengals win and make the playoffs. That will be three teams in the same division making a six team playoff. Nothing really else to be said...