Bengals sign Owens

[ram29jackson]

They have 13 winning seasons in 42 seasons of football...

and the majority of those 13 have been over the last 27 years.
obviously the Wyche years were the best. But you don't get to a Superbowl twice without being better than decent for a longer than short term, time period.

and more importantly to Cincy, they've had more success than Cleveland over the last 40 years haha

[FirstTimer]

and the majority of those 13 have been over the last 27 years.
obviously the Wyche years were the best. But you don't get to a Superbowl twice without being better than decent for a longer than short term, time period.

and more importantly to Cincy, they've had more success than Cleveland over the last 40 years haha

Incorrect. In the last 27 years the Bengals have 6 winning seasons. 6 =/= to >50% than 13. They had more winning seasons from 68-81(7) than they have had from 82-Present(6).

[ram29jackson]

Incorrect. In the last 27 years the Bengals have 6 winning seasons. 6 =/= to >50% than 13. They had more winning seasons from 68-81(7) than they have had from 82-Present(6).

oh, really, who cares? you are quite the obsessive loser.

here's the deal buckwheat, I dont give a flying fuck about the ultimate true winning percentage they've had, whether I'm 30 or 50 % off or what ever.

2 Super Bowls means you know how to nurture a winning philosophy at some point. They've been 1 step away from ultimate success ,twice. Therefore, they have been a quality franchise in the past and may well get there again.
But it wont happen this year.

[BigBucs]

It doesn't matter if you have two mentally retarded handicapped midgets playing corner. If your defense is ranked at the top of the league in every single category then you have a good defense. This debate started because I said the Bengals play in one of the toughest defensive divisions in football. The Bengals, Steelers, and Ravens ranked in the top 10 in nearly every defensive category last season.

I know the Ravens corners aren't that good, but it doesn't matter, because their front 7 is that good. Not to mention they have Ed Reed back there (when he's healthy).

The Ravens are tough to pass the ball against, period. End of discussion.

WTF is this? A Jedi mindtrick? Isnt this what I have been saying all along. You just went 180 on my ass like I wear a helmet. :yell: Then he adds

The Ravens are tough to pass the ball against, period. End of discussion.

as if that gave his post some kind of credence.:lolwut:

[Fox1994]

WTF is this? A Jedi mindtrick? Isnt this what I have been saying all along. You just went 180 on my ass like I wear a helmet. :yell: Then he adds



as if that gave his post some kind of credence.:lolwut:

Well, that's his point. That's how it gives his post credence. He wasn't debating that the Ravens have stupendous corners, he was stating that they're difficult to pass on. That was all he said.

[BigBucs]

Well, that's his point. That's how it gives his post credence. He wasn't debating that the Ravens have stupendous corners, he was stating that they're difficult to pass on. That was all he said.

But he specifically picked out my post as if I was saying otherwise. :pcslap:

[FirstTimer]

oh, really, who cares? you are quite the obsessive loser.

Sorry my 3rd grade math skillz rock.

here's the deal buckwheat, I dont give a flying fuck about the ultimate true winning percentage they've had, whether I'm 30 or 50 % off or what ever.

You're acting awfully butt hurt.

2 Super Bowls means you know how to nurture a winning philosophy at some point.

Yes, two Super Bowls 7 years apart with a whopping two winning seasons in between is beyond a shadow of a doubt a "nurtured winning philosophy"

[ram29jackson]

1-

Sorry my 3rd grade math skillz rock.
2-You're acting awfully butt hurt.

3-Yes, two Super Bowls 7 years apart with a whopping two winning seasons in between is beyond a shadow of a doubt a "nurtured winning philosophy"

1-along with your 3rd grade intellect and 3rd grade Psyche

2-No buckwheat, just telling it like it is to an obsessive loser.

3-ultimately, yes, it is. Sports is a short term accomplishment and 2 SB's /4 out 7 winning seasons are hard to come by.
you are over analyzing unimportant details that dont disprove anything I have said. You, like fox will now be ignored

[Fox1994]

But he specifically picked out my post as if I was saying otherwise. :pcslap:

:obama: I guess.

[Juggernaut]

can anyone tl;dr for me?

I want to be caught up.

[citizenerased]

1-




1-along with your 3rd grade intellect and 3rd grade Psyche

2-No buckwheat, just telling it like it is to an obsessive loser.

3-ultimately, yes, it is. Sports is a short term accomplishment and 2 SB's /4 out 7 winning seasons are hard to come by.
you are over analyzing unimportant details that dont disprove anything I have said. You, like fox will now be ignored

Yeah, what relevance does a winning % have when deciding if an organisation can be classed as a winner or not?

So you saying sports is a short term accomplishment, but your trying to argue that 2 superbowl appearances back when the Berlin Wall was still a major geographical feature means that the Bengals have a winning mentality today?

Why are you so bitter? Is it the 8 years you spent in high school or that your getting punked by 15 year olds on the internet

[Fox1994]

can anyone tl;dr for me?

I want to be caught up.

1 - T.O. gets signed by Cincinnati Bengals

2 - Guys on here decide that that makes them a terrific offense, at least on paper.

3 - Other guys on here say that all of their receivers are past their primes and are no longer relevant and won't necessarily produce a good offense.

...

4 - The strength of AFC North defenses are mentioned...

5 - Some Baltimore fan says his cornerbacks are bad.

6 - TBU mentions how great Baltimore is against the pass.

7 - Debate about whether or not Bmore's front seven is why they're so great against the pass starts.

8 - People continue to argue aimlessly.

---

Did that make sense?

[Chadman]

After watching a few vids of T.O running, unsurprisingly, he has lost some of his explosiveness that he had last year.

[Fox1994]

After watching a few vids of T.O running, unsurprisingly, he has lost some of his explosiveness that he had last year.

The dude's getting old. He hit his ceiling a minute ago. It's not debatable that he's on the decline. The debate is whether or not he has anything in the tank for a dark horse run at the Super Bowl. That's why he's still playing, and that's why Cinci picked him up.

[FirstTimer]

1-




1-along with your 3rd grade intellect and 3rd grade Psyche

2-No buckwheat, just telling it like it is to an obsessive loser.

3-ultimately, yes, it is. Sports is a short term accomplishment and 2 SB's /4 out 7 winning seasons are hard to come by.
you are over analyzing unimportant details that dont disprove anything I have said. You, like fox will now be ignored

Yeah because clearly I've come across as the immature one in this thread..........

Obsessive loser? So I'm an obsessive loser because you can't do basic arithmetic?

Math fail. 81-88 is 8 seasons. They had 4 winning seasons in that time period. Their winning % was .549 over that time span. Strike up the band!

I also like how you rep the "Wyche Era" in Cincy when he had a losing record during his time there. If that's the in your words the "the best" era of Bengals football then it's not saying much.

Yeah, what relevance does a winning % have when deciding if an organisation can be classed as a winner or not?

So you saying sports is a short term accomplishment, but your trying to argue that 2 superbowl appearances back when the Berlin Wall was still a major geographical feature means that the Bengals have a winning mentality today?

Why are you so bitter? Is it the 8 years you spent in high school or that your getting punked by 15 year olds on the internet

I love the irony of jackson trying to come off as a sports aficianado of some kind, spouts off at the mouth as if he knows what he's talking about then when facts and statistics smack him down we are the "obsessive losers". I'm not sure who the bigger loser is, the guy who likes to act like he knows about the 80's Bengals or the guy who actually does.