Look when they say a team wins XYZ% of the time it takes all the players etc into effect
Every time the Chiefs Play the Bungels over the last 3 meetings I get it, we didn't come out on top but it does not mean they are the better team, it just means they won that game.
Example, based on the Chiefs having a much better QB ( I get Burrow is ok but he has always had great WR, their number #3 is our number #1) and our Oline better, better defense, better TE, we are a far superior team.
Look I think we win 65% of the time on all of those last three meetings, but that means the other team wins 35% of the time, they rolled the dice and rolled a 1-35, it is what it is, their are upsets that happen all the time in football and underdogs winning when they had no business doing so.
The Ravens beat the Donkeys who are absolutely awful by 1 point 10 to 9. I mean this is like a loss losing to the Broncos by so little. These kind of things happen, I think the Bengals just miss the playoffs or barely sneak in and get bounced in the first round. But they are a quality team, we just got the 1-35 roll, it happens, its football, we are much better, we are going to be hosting the AFC championship game again, etc etc.
I wished we rolled the 36-100 on the dice but it didn't happen, its all good, in the remaining games we should be 90% or higher percentage winners, our odds of going all the way are really high. Proud of the guys today, Kelce does not fumble its over today, stuff just happens. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Gary Cooper:
Kind of like, Mahomes' son will call Joe Burrow, Daddy?
Yep, exactly those types of posts.
Tom Brady and Joe Burrow are Mahomes' dad. Mahomes is Carr, Herbert, and Allen's dad. Eli Manning is Tom Brady's dad. The Chiefs broke the Bills. The Bucs broke the Chiefs.
That is bottom-of-the-barrel shit talking.
Originally Posted by tredadda:
We have a meme somewhere in a thread with Mahomes sitting there with three babies on his lap with the faces of Carr, Herbert, and Wilson. It’s childish but I guarantee if KC was 3-0 against Cincinnati something like that would exist.
Yeah.. I literally just said many here would do exactly that.
Why tf are you still talking to me?!?
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
you should be begging for my clay level shit
i have images of great white hunter andy reid standing over a dead tiger in the jungle, elephant gun slung over his fat belly....mahomes and kelce in camo stretching out a tiger skin...and last but not least...mahomes chilling in his house with a tiger rug....we will see them all in january
I would literally never beg of anything from you except a gif. That's all you're useful for.
Post-game win graphics are pretty cool, though. That 'fallen kingdom' one you sent of the Bengals was pretty cool. [Reply]
So I get all of your lambasting of me when I say you know we are better but its true.
Look my argument is that we play them 100 times and we win 65 and I think thats the case, I think we are 15 games over 50 (out of 100) with wins. They were all very close and no blow outs. So the argument back has been by most (not all) that they beat us three times in a row so that's it, we are not as good etc.
Here is a different argument.
The Browns Suck, they had one ok year a few years back but lets be real, the Browns suck, they are a perennial under 500 squad that just stinks. They run the ball well and play decent defense but don't do much else well and certainly not well enough to be called a good team, not great, just good, the best I could or would rate them as a "C-" team.
The Browns have "Owned" the Bungels for the last two seasons, this year they "destroyed", not beat but "destroyed" the Bungels, the Browns, lead by "Smoked Brissett" beat the Bengals. Let that sink in for a second...... The Browns who are NOT a good team, led by a career backup DESTROYED the Bengals. In 2021 they beat the Bengals 2X with Baker Mayfield, but wait they didn't just beat them with Baker, they destroyed them 41-16, this is WITH Joe Burrow, they just dismanteled them, made them look like a college team, it wasn't even close boys. Then the Browns beat them 21-16 with Case Keanum .
I just wanted to point out the obvious here, are the Bengals better than the Browns? If so you tell me how many times they beat them if they play them 100 times? 60, 70 times? Well they have been beat 4 times in a row so what is the difference.
If our argument is that the Bengals are better than the Chiefs then The Browns are better than the Bengals.
Luck plays a role, you all know it, one flip of the ball here or there and we wiin comfortably.
The only way I buy the argument that the Bengals are better than the Chiefs are if you admit the Browns are not better than the Bengals but WAY better than the Bengals. if you believe one thing then you have to believe the other. [Reply]
Originally Posted by synthesis2:
So I get all of your lambasting of me when I say you know we are better but its true.
Look my argument is that we play them 100 times and we win 65 and I think thats the case, I think we are 15 games over 50 (out of 100) with wins. They were all very close and no blow outs. So the argument back has been by most (not all) that they beat us three times in a row so that's it, we are not as good etc.
Here is a different argument.
The Browns Suck, they had one ok year a few years back but lets be real, the Browns suck, they are a perennial under 500 squad that just stinks. They run the ball well and play decent defense but don't do much else well and certainly not well enough to be called a good team, not great, just good, the best I could or would rate them as a "C-" team.
The Browns have "Owned" the Bungels for the last two seasons, this year they "destroyed", not beat but "destroyed" the Bungels, the Browns, lead by "Smoked Brissett" beat the Bengals. Let that sink in for a second...... The Browns who are NOT a good team, led by a career backup DESTROYED the Bengals. In 2021 they beat the Bengals 2X with Baker Mayfield, but wait they didn't just beat them with Baker, they destroyed them 41-16, this is WITH Joe Burrow, they just dismanteled them, made them look like a college team, it wasn't even close boys. Then the Browns beat them 21-16 with Case Keanum .
I just wanted to point out the obvious here, are the Bengals better than the Browns? If so you tell me how many times they beat them if they play them 100 times? 60, 70 times? Well they have been beat 4 times in a row so what is the difference.
If our argument is that the Bengals are better than the Chiefs then The Browns are better than the Bengals.
Luck plays a role, you all know it, one flip of the ball here or there and we wiin comfortably.
The only way I buy the argument that the Bengals are better than the Chiefs are if you admit the Browns are not better than the Bengals but WAY better than the Bengals. if you believe one thing then you have to believe the other.
The Bengals have been great against the Chiefs and pretty average against the rest of the league. Like most teams in the NFL, it's their Super Bowl. They have a worse record than KC vs a much weaker schedule. So no, I'm not ready to crown them anything. They got lucky vs the Titans and Chiefs in the playoffs and were lucky again on Sunday.
The only thing I'm willing to concede is that their offense can shred KC's defense. But it's not like that's a huge surprise to anyone. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
OP and anyone trying to argue this point-
It's a loser mentality. It's childish, it's futile, and it's silly.
They've beaten us 3 times in 2022. You can feel whatever you want, but you cannot claim to be superior when they've beaten us three times in a row in a calendar year.
Give props where they are due, look forward to a rematch, and hope we play better.
Grow up and move on.
Agreed. Sometimes you have to take your medicine. Accepting reality can be a good thing. It can make you work harder and become less complacent. Im sure the guys will be up for the challenge even more the next time we play them.
I hope Reid looks in the mirror about some of the decisions made as well that would have given us a better chance to win the game. Thr better the opposing teams offense is, the worse your defense is performing...the more aggressive you need to play on offense.
All in all, its not like they are blowing us out. Close games. A few changes and we can whoop those guys. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Agreed. Sometimes you have to take your medicine. Accepting reality can be a good thing. It can make you work harder and become less complacent. Im sure the guys will be up for the challenge even more the next time we play them.
I hope Reid looks in the mirror about some of the decisions made as well that would have given us a better chance to win the game. Thr better the opposing teams offense is, the worse your defense is performing...the more aggressive you need to play on offense.
All in all, its not like they are blowing us out. Close games. A few changes and we can whoop those guys.
Agreed but it’s my point we ARE the better team just look at what we have done over the past few years . We win 6.5 out of 10 times but just haven’t rolled the dice correct yet
Just like the Bungels haven’t rolled the dice yet on the brows , virtually same senerio except the browns suck [Reply]
Originally Posted by synthesis2:
Agreed but it’s my point we ARE the better team just look at what we have done over the past few years . We win 6.5 out of 10 times but just haven’t rolled the dice correct yet
Just like the Bungels haven’t rolled the dice yet on the brows , virtually same senerio except the browns suck
You keep trotting out this "Chiefs win 6.5 out of ten" stat like it's some kind of fact.
I think you need to understand that there is zero basis for this assumption. In fact, the sample size we have says this is wishful thinking.
I think you need to consider the fact that there are institutional advantages The Bengals currently enjoy, and The Bills currently enjoy that make the margin of error razor thin for KC right now.
Neither of those teams are paying their elite QB yet-the only two guys in football that have shown they can go toe to toe with Mahomes for four quarters. The Bengals picked first for YEARS in the draft, and so they have Jamarr Chase's to go along with their Burrow.
But the bill is about to come due. It's why Buffalo went all in with Von Miller-they know this is their best shot before the Allen money kicks in.
And Cinci's last best shot will be next year, before they have to pay Burrow, and the year after that, Chase.
Right now, the ground is slanted AGAINST KC when we play these teams.
Right now, these games come down to a handful of plays. A couple of mistakes either way, and it decides the game.
It's just the reality, and all of the hand wringing and finger pointing is nonsense. [Reply]
All I will say is San Fran have owned the Rams almost as much as we have owned the AFC West..even last year they beat the Rams twice in the regular season but what happened in the NFC title game? Rams won. The ball won't continue to bounce Cinci's way in these games..and whilst they could have Mixon back for a potential rematch.. we could have FIVE guys in Thuney, Williams, Hardman, Toney and maybe Gordon once he's settled. Hell even Niang might be starting too by Janauary so I'm not concerned about Cinci tbh as we can throw different things at them next time. The trend in the three games though is clear..they can't stop our run game but Pat hasn't thrown for 300 yards in any of the games..that must change [Reply]
Again this still does not explain how the Browns beat the Cincinnati Bengals The last four meetings and they did so with Joe Burrow as quarterback and with rummies as quarterback for them most of the medians they beat them by a wide margin I bet if you looked at the stats you would see that the Browns were major underdogs and probably only had a 20% chance of winning yet they won. The NFL is a game where anybody can win any week in most cases and if you look at history you’ll see that the Chiefs are just a better team than Bengals we don’t have as many mess ups and we tend to win most games and we also don’t get blown out by wide margins like the bangles do. End of the day because of our team QB and head coach we should win 65 times out of 100 like the bengals should win 65 out of 100 against the lowly browns but have not [Reply]
"Better" is a relative and a "in the eye of the beholder" term here.
Do we have a better record? Yes. Does that make us the better team? If you are a Parcells' theory guy, yes.
Are we better head to head? Not even close. 0-3. Your however many out of 10 logic will be put to the test over the next 12-15 years as I am guessing the Mahomes led Chiefs will play the Burrow lead Bengals at least 7 more times during their respective careers. But so far, we cannot beat them. Carl Everett, the baseball player, gave a great quote after he broke up a no hitter in the 9th inning once. He said "I've never seen a no hitter, so I don't believe in them. I don't believe in things I've never seen". Well, until proven otherwise, the Chiefs (this version) cannot and have not beaten the Bengals.
Are we a better team historically? Us 2 Super Bowls, them 0 Super Bowls.
Guess we'll see how it plays out next time we play them down the line. But for me, I'd just as soon have someone else take them out first this year in the playoffs. We can try again next year or something. [Reply]
Ok again forget the chiefs for a second let’s just talk browns vs bungels, they have played the last four meetings to a 0-4 record for the Bungels . The browns suck , bad and they have lost to really bad QB , so if your saying the Bungels are better than the chiefs then you have to say the browns are a much better team than the bengals correct ? [Reply]
Originally Posted by synthesis2:
Again this still does not explain how the Browns beat the Cincinnati Bengals The last four meetings and they did so with Joe Burrow as quarterback and with rummies as quarterback for them most of the medians they beat them by a wide margin I bet if you looked at the stats you would see that the Browns were major underdogs and probably only had a 20% chance of winning yet they won. The NFL is a game where anybody can win any week in most cases and if you look at history you’ll see that the Chiefs are just a better team than Bengals we don’t have as many mess ups and we tend to win most games and we also don’t get blown out by wide margins like the bangles do. End of the day because of our team QB and head coach we should win 65 times out of 100 like the bengals should win 65 out of 100 against the lowly browns but have not
Well, let's see how the teams are built. Strengths versus weaknesses.
Browns have a defensive line led by Miles fucking Garrett. Premier pass rusher. One way to keep Burrow from beating you with his pinpoint precision and steller WR group is to put him on his back.
Also, Nick Chubb and Kareem Hunt. Another way is to limit Burrow's possessions (kind of like the Bengals did to us), and you can do that by running the ball down their throats. Kind of like everyone tries to do to us.
So individual matchups and the way a team is buit are factors. Add to that the Browns have talent, as they've picked top of the draft for years too, minus the couple of good Mayfield seasons. And make no mistake-he was quite good for a couple of years there, and they were a play-off team.
This is partly why Tennessee always plays us TOUGH. They're built in such a way that makes them a tough out for us. Strengths vs. weaknesses.
Does that mean Cleveland is better? Well, they match up better against Cinci than against some other teams, they play each other twice a year, and they know each other well. Strengths vs. weaknesses.
That's not quite the same thing as us against Cinci, though. For us, against the rest of the league, Mahomes is head and shoulders better than anything they have at QB. Only Buffalo and Cinci have proven they can match that trump card.
And as I've said, they haven't had to pay their superstar QB's yet. So they have an institutional advantage. Higher draft picks, but equally elite QB play. [Reply]
Originally Posted by synthesis2:
Agreed but it’s my point we ARE the better team just look at what we have done over the past few years . We win 6.5 out of 10 times but just haven’t rolled the dice correct yet
Just like the Bungels haven’t rolled the dice yet on the brows , virtually same senerio except the browns suck
yeah, well, it would be really dumb for the Bengals to claim they'd beat the Browns 6.5 times out of 10 too is my point.
You don't get to claim that when you've lost multiple games in a row. [Reply]