Jump to content

GDT: Week whatever


LETSGOBROWNIES

Who wins?  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. Who wins on Sunday?

    • Browns
    • Bungles (did ya see what I did there? hardy har har)
      0
    • Carp
    • Horny
      0
    • Kiwi
      0
    • Any other Australian
    • People with plans on Sunday


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

I don't think they are historically bad, at least not with Dalton in there. They smoked the Jets last week.

Dalton led team was 0-8 on the season before that perfect storm Jets game. Now, 1-8.

Historically bad in the sense that they'd likely win 1-3 games on the year. That's a bad team even with Dalton man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mind Character said:

Dalton led team was 0-8 on the season before that perfect storm Jets game. Now, 1-8.

Historically bad in the sense that they'd likely win 1-3 games on the year. That's a bad team even with Dalton man.

Most of their losses have been by 1 score, to be historically bad, by definition, doesn't mean just any team that wins 3 or less games. Just like not all 12 win teams are historically good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, brownie man said:

The crazy thing is 

once Cinci drafts Burrow

they will have the best QB in our division going forward. 

he’s better than Baker we all better get ready 

Don't forget when Tua falls to the 2nd to the Steelers because of the hip injury and sits out a year and half gathering mystical powers to dominate upon his return.

Burrow is all the leadership and "moxie" Baker was said to have except Burrow puts in the time in the off-season, has significantly less arm talent, and doesn't give a damn about tweeting or celebrity.

Jackson, Tua, Baker, and Duck shall lead the division into the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mind Character said:

Dalton led team was 0-8 on the season before that perfect storm Jets game. Now, 1-8.

Historically bad in the sense that they'd likely win 1-3 games on the year. That's a bad team even with Dalton man.

When you say a team is "historically bad" I expect them to be, you know, historically bad. Not just generally bad. Lots of teams go 1-15, 2-14 or 3-13 and aren't "historically bad". The 2008 Lions were historically bad. The 2017 Browns were historically bad. This Bengals team isn't on that level, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thomas5737 said:

Most of their losses have been by 1 score, to be historically bad, by definition, doesn't mean just any team that wins 3 or less games. Just like not all 12 win teams are historically good.

Most of those scores were late garbage points.

Indeed. I agree. In this case, I meant historically bad by record. BUT this is a bad bengals team. There's no way to suggest otherwise. They may not be a historically terrible team but this is a bad bad team man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...