Jump to content

Cold Hard Football Predictions


oftt4

Recommended Posts

[url="http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=1582"]http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=1582[/url]

To sum up....

BALTIMORE RAVENS
COLD, HARD PREDICTION: 11-5, 1st in AFC North

pissburgh STEELERS
Cold, Hard Prediction: 10-6, second in AFC North

CLEVELAND BROWNS
COLD, HARD PREDICTION: 7-9 , third in the AFC North

CINCINNATI BENGALS
COLD, HARD PREDICTION: 4-12, fourth in the AFC North

Discuss.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='540017' date='Sep 4 2007, 01:44 PM']So what did you go searching for which site gave us the worst predictions?
Absoultely [b]NO WAY[/b] do we go 4-12. What a joke.[/quote]


I read CHFF almost daily...and there was a link to this on the front page today. I thought you'd like it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I simply cannot take anyone seriously that is going to place the Browns ahead of any team in our division, let alone the bengals. And 4-12? With our offense? Really?
I can see maybe 7-9 or 8-8 again if a bunch of injuries occur, particularly to any of our olinemen, Rudi or even Palmer, and I'll concede that our defense is yet again a question mark heading into this season, but 4-12? REALLY?
That's absurd. This team is light years ahead of Bengals teams of old in terms of talent to finish with a 2001 Bengals record.
NO WAY.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] :lmao:

oftt.... if CHFF is where you get your football information its no wonder you think Ben is the best thing since sliced bread and the Steelers will do well this year! Whoever wrote out those predictions was high on crack or was dropped on his head one too many times as a child.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Brew Crew Grrl' post='540035' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:17 PM']:lol: [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] :lmao:

oftt.... if CHFF is where you get your football information its no wonder you think Ben is the best thing since sliced bread and the Steelers will do well this year! Whoever wrote out those predictions was high on crack or was dropped on his head one too many times as a child.[/quote]

I dont know what you mean by "football information" but that site has some very interesting articles. And most of the time it is really hard to make arguments against what they write (as long as you can put away your homerism).

They have had several articles about Ben, most of them were pretty good. Like this one...

[url="http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=1562"]http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=1562[/url]

Now, you cant argue the facts in that article, but every last one of you here will just respond with "He sucks" or "He only throws 5 times a game" or "He was carried by defense and a good running game"....but the facts just dont support your argument. You are jealous of his success and can only respond with, "Well our QB throws more". Well, good for him...I'll take wins over stats any day.

And what is so crazy about thinking the Steelers will do well this year? They have a history of winning and have basically the same team that won the superbowl 2 years ago. I think it sounds a little crazier to think that the Bengals will do well this year when they have 1 winning season and 0 playoff victories in the last 16 years, and have done almost nothing to improve the D that was so bad last year. Now I dont think Cinci will go 4-12....but I dont think they will win more than 8 games this season.


Here is another link for ya,
[url="http://www.profootballtalk.com/August29FantasyTenPack.htm"]http://www.profootballtalk.com/August29FantasyTenPack.htm[/url]

2. The Bengals Will Be In More Trouble Than You Think.

Conventional thinking is to assume that the Bengals again will be among the most productive offenses in the league, with Carson Palmer, Chad Johnson, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, and Rudi Johnson all being among the best players at their positions.

That probably will happen, but consider that the Bengals also have been without their two starting tackles for much of the preseason, have almost no reliable depth at running back, and are missing valuable No. 3 receiver Chris Henry for half of the season.

Taken individually, none of those developments might be a concern. Yet how many teams make it through a season without injury problems at quarterback, running back, or wide receiver? Very few. The Bengals' depth is horrendous and that will bite them at some point. No, you will not pass on any of the big four stars in the right spot. Just don't jump up extra high to grab them.

And, speaking of the Bengals, why do people keep stumbling over themselves to draft Johnson as the first wide receiver? Except for a five-game stretch, he was not the best receiver on his own team last year; Houshmandzadeh finished with more catches and more TDs. You're better off waiting three rounds after Johnson goes to take Houshmandzadeh.



Sounds like your offense might not be as unstoppable as you may think....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540042' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:36 PM']Sounds like your offense might not be as unstoppable as you may think....[/quote]

Fantasy football != real football.

And the information there is outdated: Levi Jones played in the last two preseason games and Willie Anderson is planning to start week 1.

The most idiotic thing is they pick the Bengals to go 4-12 based on the fact that they are probably going to lose guys to injury. [b]Which is what happened to the team last year[/b], and we went 8-8.

Maybe the same thing happens and we're mediocre again, but as long as Carson Palmer is healthy the Bengals will not have a losing season.

By the way, that article that talks about Ben's 87.5 rating being the ninth-best in NFL history? Carson Palmer's 91.5 is [b]5th best.[/b]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TheChosenOne' post='540046' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:38 PM']Fantasy football != real football.

And the information there is outdated: Levi Jones played in the last two preseason games and Willie Anderson is planning to start week 1.

The most idiotic thing is they pick the Bengals to go 4-12 based on the fact that they are probably going to lose guys to injury. [b]Which is what happened to the team last year[/b], and we went 8-8.

Maybe the same thing happens and we're mediocre again, but as long as Carson Palmer is healthy the Bengals will not have a losing season.[/quote]

CHFF doesnt use the possibility of injury as a reason, that was a different article, they use the following...

"The Bengals are a heck of a fantasy football team but a middling real football team. Their defense was quite poor by any measure a year ago, and they’ll be facing a tough slate of offenses this year – the NFC West, plus the tough North teams. They made no move to improve anything, and their hope of getting LBs David Pollack and Odell Thurman back came up snake eyes. So it’s all on the offense – which lost two starting linemen and has both starting tackles nursing injuries. Add the absence of WR Chris Henry (9 TDs) for eight games and a season-ending injury to No. 2 pick RB Kenny Irons, and this is a thin, one-sided team going the wrong way."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540054' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:44 PM']CHFF doesnt use the possibility of injury as a reason, that was a different article, they use the following...

"The Bengals are a heck of a fantasy football team but a middling real football team. Their defense was quite poor by any measure a year ago, and they’ll be facing a tough slate of offenses this year – the NFC West, plus the tough North teams. They made no move to improve anything, and their hope of getting LBs David Pollack and Odell Thurman back came up snake eyes. So it’s all on the offense – [b]which lost two starting linemen and has both starting tackles nursing injuries. Add the absence of WR Chris Henry (9 TDs) for eight games and a season-ending injury to No. 2 pick RB Kenny Irons[/b], and this is a [b]thin[/b], one-sided team going the wrong way."[/quote]

All injury/depth-related.

I don't buy their "tough slate of offenses" garbage either. NFC West teams have good offenses but mostly crappy defenses. I like the Bengals chances in a shootout against the vast majority of teams in the NFL. As for the AFC North, the only offense that would scare me, though I hate to say it, is the Stealers'.

I think the main thrust of what I'm saying though, is all of this is a good argument for the Bengals to go 8-8 or maybe 7-9. And I can't even debate the defensive stuff, because I'm not very confident in this defense myself. But it completely fails as an argument for the Bengals to go 4-12. Football teams that have top 10 scoring offenses don't end up picking in the top 3. It doesn't happen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can show ya some websites too!
[url="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/specials/preview/2007/scouting.report/"]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/...couting.report/[/url]

AFC North
1 BENGALS 10-6
2 RAVENS 10-6*
3 STEELERS 8-8
4 BROWNS 5-11

Besides we had injuries to the O-Line, no real backup RB, no Chris Henry, no defense last year and still came up 8-8!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540054' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:44 PM']CHFF doesnt use the possibility of injury as a reason, that was a different article, they use the following...

"The Bengals are a heck of a fantasy football team but a middling real football team. Their defense was quite poor by any measure a year ago, and they’ll be facing a tough slate of offenses this year – the NFC West, plus the tough North teams. They made no move to improve anything, and their hope of getting LBs David Pollack and Odell Thurman back came up snake eyes. So it’s all on the offense – which lost two starting linemen and has both starting tackles nursing injuries. Add the absence of WR Chris Henry (9 TDs) for eight games and a season-ending injury to No. 2 pick RB Kenny Irons, and this is a thin, one-sided team going the wrong way."[/quote]


Dated info on our OT's, missing info on our LBs (No mention of guys already on the roster who have moved into a starting spot. IE: Ahmad Books or guys signed late. IE: Lamar Marshal.)

Go find me somthing worth my time if you want to be serious about this. This stuff is a joke.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TheChosenOne' post='540046' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:38 PM']By the way, that article that talks about Ben's 87.5 rating being the ninth-best in NFL history? Carson Palmer's 91.5 is [b]5th best.[/b][/quote]

By the way, that same article says that passer rating is vastly overrated...illustrated by the fact that 15 of the top 20 QB's with the highest passer ratings in history are playing RIGHT NOW. Do you really think that 75% of the best QB's of all time are currently playing in the NFL? Surely you cant believe that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540060' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:51 PM']By the way, that same article says that passer rating is vastly overrated...illustrated by the fact that 15 of the top 20 QB's with the highest passer ratings in history are playing RIGHT NOW. Do you really think that 75% of the best QB's of all time are currently playing in the NFL? Surely you cant believe that.[/quote]

No, you misunderstood their point.

[quote]For proof of passer rating's futility as a comparative measure of quarterbacks [b]throughout history[/b][/quote]

Passer rating is overrated as a comparison between quarterbacks [b]throughout history[/b]. It works perfectly fine for comparison between quarterbacks in this era. There's no doubt it has its flaws, but unless you want to get into Football Outsiders' stuff, it is the best single stat we have.

Winning percentage is laughable and yards per attempt is greviously flawed, for reasons best demonstrated by your boy Toothless.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='540059' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:50 PM']Dated info on out OT's, missing info on our LBs ([b]No mention of guys already on the roster who have moved into a starting spot. IE: Ahmad Books [/b]or guys signed late. IE: Lamar Marshal.)

Go find me somthing worth my time if you want to be serious about this. This stuff is a joke.[/quote]

So you are saying that starting 2nd stringers because your first stringers are hurt or suspended makes all of those concerns go away? They were second string for a reason.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TheChosenOne' post='540061' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:54 PM']No, you misunderstood their point.
Passer rating is overrated as a comparison between quarterbacks [b]throughout history[/b]. It works perfectly fine for comparison between quarterbacks in this era. There's no doubt it has its flaws, but unless you want to get into Football Outsiders' stats, which still need work, it is the best stat we have.[/quote]

I am misunderstanding nothing, but you seem to be. A quote from CHFF:

"However, in terms of usefulness over at least the last three years, passer rating fell just shy of a woefully underused passing stat: yards per attempt. In fact, one could argue to dismiss the passer rating system and simply replace it with yards per attempt to measure a quarterback's effectiveness."

The best stat for QB's at this point is YPA, or more specifically AYPA (from the Hidden Game of Football, a little different than what CHFF uses...but more accurate)...it equates to winning about 70-75% of the time (passer rating is in the 50's). You can find out a little about it at profootballreference.com...or I suggest reading the book, it was interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540062' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:55 PM']So you are saying that starting 2nd stringers because your first stringers are hurt or suspended makes all of those concerns go away? They were second string for a reason.[/quote]
Brooks was a second stringer because HE WAS A ROOKIE LAST YEAR!!! You don't throw all rookies into the fire and see if they don't fall apart. Some of them sit back and learn their craft before getting the chance to start.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540063' date='Sep 4 2007, 03:01 PM']I am misunderstanding nothing, but you seem to be. A quote from CHFF:

"However, in terms of usefulness over at least the last three years, passer rating fell just shy of a woefully underused passing stat: yards per attempt. In fact, one could argue to dismiss the passer rating system and simply replace it with yards per attempt to measure a quarterback's effectiveness."

The best stat for QB's at this point is YPA, or more specifically AYPA (from the Hidden Game of Football, a little different than what CHFF uses...but more accurate)...it equates to winning about 70-75% of the time (passer rating is in the 50's). You can find out a little about it at profootballreference.com...or I suggest reading the book, it was interesting.[/quote]

Here's your boy Ben's stats from 2004, 2005, 2006. (Sorry about the table looking bad.)

[code] G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int
2006 pissburgh Steelers 15 15 280 469 59.7 3513 7.5 18 23
2005 pissburgh Steelers 12 12 168 268 62.7 2385 8.9 17 9
2004 pissburgh Steelers 14 13 196 295 66.4 2621 8.9 17 11[/code]

Why do you think his yards per attempt in 2006 was so much lower than in 2004 and 2005? Was it just because he wasn't playing as well/injured, or what?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Brew Crew Grrl' post='540064' date='Sep 4 2007, 03:01 PM']Brooks was a second stringer because HE WAS A ROOKIE LAST YEAR!!! You don't throw all rookies into the fire and see if they don't fall apart. Some of them sit back and learn their craft before getting the chance to start.[/quote]

I dont disagree with what you are saying, but there is no guarantee that he is going to transform your D in any positive way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540062' date='Sep 4 2007, 02:55 PM']So you are saying that starting 2nd stringers because your first stringers are hurt or suspended makes all of those concerns go away? They were second string for a reason.[/quote]


You = Uninformed


Ahmad Brooks was taken in the supplemental draft last year, he didnt start last year because he wasnt ready from a physical standpoint or a maturity standpoint. All of that has changed, he is in shape and been one of the most serious guys in terms of offseason tape study (by the way is ben still sleeping in the tape room?).

Now, do I expect him to come in on fire and be a probowl type player right away? Of course not. If you watched (and I can tell you didnt) the games during the preseason, you can see where he is still thinking and hesitant, but you can also see where he made plays or has been disruptive enough to allow others to make plays. He isnt "a backup" (he won the butkus award as a sophmore at virginia), and would have been a 1st round pick this year if he didnt have to come out early due to getting booted off the UVA team for reasons undisclosed.


Lemar Marhsal will be a backup to start with, but only because he came in late and will need to learn the playbook. However he was a starter for the redskins last year and in '05 (when the redskins had one of the best D's in the league). Last year he was hampered by injuries, but in '05 he started all 16 games, recording 98 tackles and 2 sacks, as well as 4 interceptions, 2 forced fumbles, and one defensive touchdown.

The question about him in my mind is if he will be able to return to '05 form or if his injures are still a problem.



But dont tell me either of them are backups.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540069' date='Sep 4 2007, 03:09 PM']I dont disagree with what you are saying, but there is no guarantee that he is going to transform your D in any positive way.[/quote]


And there is no guarntee your new coach will come in and do well either.


Thats why you play the games.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TheChosenOne' post='540068' date='Sep 4 2007, 03:07 PM']Here's your boy Ben's stats from 2004, 2005, 2006. (Sorry about the table looking bad.)

[code] G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int
2006 pissburgh Steelers 15 15 280 469 59.7 3513 7.5 18 23
2005 pissburgh Steelers 12 12 168 268 62.7 2385 8.9 17 9
2004 pissburgh Steelers 14 13 196 295 66.4 2621 8.9 17 11[/code]

Why do you think his yards per attempt in 2006 was so much lower than in 2004 and 2005? Was it just because he wasn't playing as well, or what?[/quote]


Do you remember that little thing about him getting in a motorcycle accident? or how about the appendectomy? maybe the concussion? No? You dont remember any of that? Huh...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540077' date='Sep 4 2007, 03:17 PM']Do you remember that little thing about him getting in a motorcycle accident? or how about the appendectomy? maybe the concussion? No? You dont remember any of that? Huh...[/quote]

Sorry, I realized that may not have looked how I intended it to look. I wasn't trying to say the lowered performance wasn't partially because of the injuries.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oftt4' post='540077' date='Sep 4 2007, 03:17 PM']Do you remember that little thing about him getting in a motorcycle accident? or how about the appendectomy? maybe the concussion? No? You dont remember any of that? Huh...[/quote]


And what guarntee to you have that he will ever be the same because of that? (you see I can play that game too)

I do remember his passing attempts going up last year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...