Posted November 5, 200717 yr comment_586795 Do you think the proper changes would be made if we are .500 or above?
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586800 [quote name='TheBeaverHunter' post='586795' date='Nov 5 2007, 02:29 PM']Do you think the proper changes would be made if we are .500 or above?[/quote] If we transposed the numbers in our record, yes
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586802 10-6... i think marvin is smart enough to know what changes need to be made.. it seems the DC job is already to be placed in someone elses hands... some new specialsty coaches and added training staff should pretty much shore up the deficiencies.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586807 Win out. Hoping to lose out is BS and will hurt us down the line with FAs. Hell, if we are going to wave a magic wand, make everyone healthy for 1 game and find out who can actually play. For example: carries, yards, average, long, tds 30 296 9.2 64 3 73 337 4.6 30 0 the first is first round pick adrian peterson yesterday the second is first round pick chris perry's lifetime stats (4 years) 4.6 is pretty dang good but 337 yards in 4 years is just killing us. It would be nice to know who can and can not play.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586817 Win out. But I dont want to go 7-9, 8-8 etc and have another mediocre draft position. If we cant win out (pretty much impossible) then I want a shot at a bona fide blue chip (almost) cant miss prospect. A man-among-boys DE, or a big time LBer. Our pass rush is a horrid nightmare. Wait, do we have a pass rush??
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586824 Dumb question. 10-6 should be playoffs. 2-14 is just a potential pick that could be Calvin Johnson or could be Mike Williams. What I definitely don't want is 7-9 or 8-8.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586828 I don't mean for this to sound harsh, but this is a dumbass poll... 10-6 would give you a damn good shot at playoffs - always has in the past. That said, the likelihood of that happening are slim and none and slim just left town. I'm like a bunch of others here - I don't want to see 8-8 or 7-9. I either want to get 9-7 or better, or tank it pretty good where changes are going to have to happen just to keep the masses happy.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586831 [quote name='Vol_Bengal' post='586828' date='Nov 5 2007, 04:04 PM']I don't mean for this to sound harsh, but this is a dumbass poll... 10-6 would give you a damn good shot at playoffs - always has in the past. That said, the likelihood of that happening are slim and none and slim just left town. I'm like a bunch of others here - I don't want to see 8-8 or 7-9. I either want to get 9-7 or better, or tank it pretty good where changes are going to have to happen just to keep the masses happy.[/quote] if I'm not mistaken, its still true that no team with a 10-6 record or better HASN'T made the playoffs.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586832 Full speed ahead. We can still win this thing. Sincerely, The 5th Panzer Army Ardennes Forest December 1944
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586835 I would rather go 8-8 and still be a semi respectable team after finishing the year 6-2 and have a mid draft pick then lose out and get a top 3 draft pick but be an embarrasment.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586836 [quote name='Bengals1181' post='586831' date='Nov 5 2007, 04:05 PM']if I'm not mistaken, its still true that no team with a 10-6 record or better HASN'T made the playoffs.[/quote] [url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings?season=2005&breakdown=3&split=0"]http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings?se...n=3&split=0[/url] 2005 KC was 10-6 and missed the playoffs. Wild card teams were 12-4 and 11-5...
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586837 [quote name='Bengals1181' post='586831' date='Nov 5 2007, 04:05 PM']if I'm not mistaken, its still true that no team with a 10-6 record or better HASN'T made the playoffs.[/quote] It happened once I believe.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586840 [quote name='MrOrange1219' post='586836' date='Nov 5 2007, 04:09 PM'][url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings?season=2005&breakdown=3&split=0"][url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings?se...n=3&split=0"]http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings?se...n=3&split=0[/url][/url] 2005 KC was 10-6 and missed the playoffs. Wild card teams were 12-4 and 11-5...[/quote] color me mistaken.
November 5, 200717 yr Author comment_586841 I don't think 10-6 will get us in the playoffs this year. In all honesty I would put everything I own saying no way in hell do we win out. This team is too bad to win out and lacks the coaching to do so.
November 5, 200717 yr Author comment_586842 [quote name='Vol_Bengal' post='586828' date='Nov 5 2007, 05:04 PM']I don't mean for this to sound harsh, but this is a dumbass poll... 10-6 would give you a damn good shot at playoffs - always has in the past. That said, the likelihood of that happening are slim and none and slim just left town. I'm like a bunch of others here - I don't want to see 8-8 or 7-9. [b]I either want to get 9-7 or better, or tank it pretty good where changes are going to have to happen just to keep the masses happy.[/b][/quote] That is what this poll is asking.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586844 [quote name='TheBeaverHunter' post='586842' date='Nov 5 2007, 04:14 PM']That is what this poll is asking.[/quote] it may be what your first post is implying, but its not what the poll is asking.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586853 10-6 could get a playoff spot given how the colts and pats are beating freaking everybody in our conference.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586855 [quote name='Bengals1181' post='586840' date='Nov 5 2007, 04:12 PM']color me mistaken.[/quote] I'm not saying that 10-6 would guarantee playoffs but I'd take my chances on it. [quote name='TheBeaverHunter' post='586841' date='Nov 5 2007, 04:13 PM']I don't think 10-6 will get us in the playoffs this year. In all honesty I would put everything I own saying no way in hell do we win out. This team is too bad to win out and lacks the coaching to do so.[/quote] I agree. But the poll asks which would you rather have 2-14 or 10-6. Of those two options which would you choose? I said 10-6 as you'd have a decent, not guaranteed, but decent shot at playoffs. What I think will happen is more like 7-9 or 8-8 and we'll pick in the 12-14 range. But, that wasn't what the poll asked...
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586861 [quote name='Vol_Bengal' post='586855' date='Nov 5 2007, 05:24 PM']I'm not saying that 10-6 would guarantee playoffs but I'd take my chances on it. I agree. But the poll asks which would you rather have 2-14 or 10-6. Of those two options which would you choose? I said 10-6 as you'd have a decent, not guaranteed, but decent shot at playoffs. What I think will happen is more like 7-9 or 8-8 and we'll pick in the 12-14 range. But, that wasn't what the poll asked...[/quote] ^^^^^ what he said...... Also, I am honestly not worried about draft position. I want to see continued improvement from what I believe is our core in terms of defense. I want to see Brooks back on the field, I want to see Geathers to get back to DE and exceed what he did last year. I want to see Peko to continue to develop and Jeanty as well. JonJo and Halll continue to make progress. And then see what we have with Frostee, Fanane, Landon, and Madieu to determine whether they are part of the future or not. If we win and see improvement in the core, and can make key decisions on others who are UFA's or RFA's, that is more important to me than draft position.
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586871 [quote name='TheBeaverHunter' post='586795' date='Nov 5 2007, 03:29 PM']Do you think the proper changes would be made if we are .500 or above?[/quote] If we win out I would seriously question making any major changes. However niether will happen
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586891 If 10-6 were to get us in the playoffs then yes I would rather be 10-6 if not then I would much rather be 2-14...Have possibly the #1 overall pick..I see us finishing 6-10 though..
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586892 [quote name='GoBengals' post='586802' date='Nov 5 2007, 03:35 PM']10-6... i think marvin is smart enough to know what changes need to be made.. [b]it seems the DC job is already to be placed in someone elses hands... [/b]some new specialsty coaches and added training staff should pretty much shore up the deficiencies.[/quote] Who?
November 5, 200717 yr comment_586913 [quote name='Sigfox09' post='586892' date='Nov 5 2007, 06:05 PM']Who?[/quote] I think that Donnie Henderson has been seen frequently at the PBS headquarters has drawn a little attention. Does it mean it is a done deal, much like Bres showing up before Frazier was tossed - who knows [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/39.gif[/img] But it is certainly not out of the realm of possibility or for that matter speculation.......
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.