Jump to content

Sport

Members
  • Posts

    27,125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    128

Everything posted by Sport

  1. Yeah that was pretty in-depth with lots of great footage. We're all used to the tiger striped helmets now, but in 1981 those were RADICAL. Sounds like we're going to get a hybrid of the 80's and current uniforms, which isn't exactly what I'd do if I was King of the Bengals, but I think it will look pretty good. Good thing they got "Bengals Jim" rather me because I wouldn't have shilled for the 2004 uniforms like he did. I would've torn them to pieces!
  2. We will know on Monday. That should help make work more interesting.
  3. Too many beers to count, but one that I actually, but only tried because of their branding is Warped Wing's Gamma Bomb and Ermal's
  4. Why doesn't he just do this all the time? He looks like Mario Lemieux here.
  5. Just when I thought I couldn't hate Jeff Carter any more than I already did he becomes a member of the NHL's St Louis Cardinals. Blue Jackets traded David Savard to Tampa and Nick Foligno to Toronto. Got some first round picks and some later round picks back. An era is officially over, the rebuild is officially on. This stinks.
  6. This is beyond cyclical so I'll finish by saying his numbers are there, his comps are there, he did more than guys before/during/after his era who are in the Hall of Fame. That's objective. The reasons against his case are superficial and/or external factors outside of his control. Fin.
  7. That doesn't change the fact that he was better than guys who actually are in the Hall of Fame so it's not unreasonable to say he should be too.
  8. There's dozens of guys in the Hall of Fame you wouldn't recognize by name or if you saw them on the street. That's hardly been a prerequisite for induction. I'll just post the reasons he might not be famous again. 1. If he'd been rightly inducted you would've heard of him more. He's the only guy in his tier in his era not in the Hall of Fame so he's left off a lot of discussions. 2. He never won a Super Bowl, which again is not a prerequisite for the Hall of Fame, but you don't get famous when you lose a super bowl. 3. He was a quiet nerd who played in a small market for a team that doesn't get a lot of national love. If he played in, IDK, Philadelphia, just to pick a random city at random totally randomly. If he'd played in Philadelphia the only city in the world he'd probably more heralded. 4. I'll say it one more time - the Bengals have historically done a terrible job of celebrating their past great players, which means their names come across HoF voters minds less often than other teams. Multiple great players from the franchise's good teams have said things like "they've never invited me back", or "yeah I'd love to have reunions with my old teammates, but the team isn't interested in us." Only recently did they do stuff for the 88 Super Bowl team and the 50th anniversary. And the stuff they did looked and felt like bare minimum no effort and kind of embarrassingly low-budg. That's why the announcement for this ring of honor is nice to hear and it's a sign that the team's under new management, which has to be an improvement from the guy who led things the last 30 years. If guys wanna be :censored:ing meatballs and play Hall of Fame cop that's their prerogative, but he has a better case than comparable QBs in his actual era who are actually in the HoF. That's all I'm saying. That's not the justification for his hall of fame case. You realize the Bengals existed before 1991, right?
  9. Being from Cincinnati just allowed me to hear about him. Actually looking into his stats is where I think he should be in the hall of fame. Any "several better" who aren't in are modern QBs who played in a heavy passing era and/or just recently retired and will eventually get in themselves. He's the best QB currently not in and he's better stats wise than guys who already are. I didn't see him play so all I'm going off of are his stats and his comps who are in the Hall of Fame, which more than make his case, but... you didn't have any interest in those valid points so you kept bringing up this one thing out of context stripped of the rest of the argument. Let me put it in other words - if you're going to put a guy in the hall of fame, which is ostensibly a museum about the history of football, he needs a story. He can't just be a guy who was kinda good, especially if he doesn't have a ring. Ken Anderson has that story. I don't need any first hand experience with that because I've read about Bill Walsh, we've all watched NFL Films, and the invention of the modern offense points back to Ken Anderson who ran it first.
  10. https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2021/04/09/sources-fc-cincinnati-trade-frankie-amaya-new-york-red-bulls/7119698002/ FC Cincinnati traded Frankie Amaya to the Red Bulls. He was their first ever MLS draft pick, but never really clicked playing on a couple bad teams and last season was weird as hell for everyone. I never got the sense he felt comfortable here. Also, Anthony Precourt is up to his old tricks. Good luck, Austin.
  11. I'm 33 and this is not slang that the kids are saying. It was lame behavior and it was boner behavior - ergo it was a lame boner thing to do. That's the best way to describe it. I'm ready to end it as I've thoroughly made the case multiple times.
  12. Supposedly there's a Joe Burrow Funko pop that's coming out and it says he's going to be in the "away" uniform so if that leaks we'll know what the white jersey and the pants look like. There's your uniform information you guys are looking for.
  13. I kind of did say the last point, but I backed it up with facts and reason. Also I never said that's the only reason Joe Montana was great. I NEVER said Ken Anderson would've won 4 Super Bowls with the 49ers like someone claimed. I NEVER said Ken Anderson was better than Joe Montana. One point was pulled and argued out of context, which is just a lame boner thing to do. Full stop.
  14. There's 4 reasons for that by my count: 1. If he'd been rightly inducted you would've heard of him more. He's the only guy in his tier in his era not in the Hall of Fame so he's left off a lot of discussions 2. He never won a Super Bowl, which again is not a prerequisite for the Hall of Fame, but you don't get famous when you lose a super bowl. 3. He was a quiet nerd who played in a small market for a team that doesn't get a lot of national love. If he played in, IDK, Philadelphia, just to pick a random city at random totally randomly. If he'd played in Philadelphia the only city in the world he'd probably more heralded. 4. I'll say it one more time - the Bengals have historically done a terrible job of celebrating their past great players, which means their names come across HoF voters minds less often than other teams. Multiple great players from the franchise's good teams have said things like "they've never invited me back", or "yeah I'd love to have reunions with my old teammates, but the team isn't interested in us." Only recently did they do stuff for the 88 Super Bowl team and the 50th anniversary. And the stuff they did looked and felt like bare minimum no effort and kind of embarrassingly low-budg. That's why the announcement for this ring of honor is nice to hear and it's a sign that the team's under new management, which has to be an improvement from the guy who led things the last 30 years. If guys wanna be :censored:ing meatballs and play Hall of Fame cop that's their prerogative, but he has a better case than comparable QBs in his actual era who are actually in the HoF. That's all I'm saying.
  15. Because it's football and some teams don't take numbers out of circulation, probably a lot? Anthony Munoz's number hasn't been re-issued and he's actually in the hall of fame so clearly that's the franchise's standard operating procedure. If justice had been served presumably Ken Anderson's would've been taken out of circulation as well. But what started this whole thing is the Bengals finally created a ring of honor like every other team has. Remains to be seen how they'll handle the numbers, but Anderson is likely in the first class. If they decide to retire every number in the ring of honor then they won't issue it anymore. I don't think it says anything about his accomplishments that they let Andy Dalton wear it for ten years. If you ignore every other valid point only to remove one item and argue it out of context in bad-faith, then my response will be to repost the entire thing again for the effect. I don't expect anyone to actually read it again.
  16. At no point did I make such a claim. That's not even close to the point I was making. Literally or figuratively. I won't edit the transcript. You can go back and read it and tell me where I said that. That's LITERALLLY got nothing to do with it. I'm saying that Ken Anderson has a spot in NFL history because of his work in the offense that ultimately led to the 49ers of the 80's. There's an historical thru-line. Find the lie.
  17. Go find where I said that. I literally did not say that ever. Do you know what the word "literally" means?
  18. 100%? He still had to play the part, just as Joe Montana had to play the part. Just put Ken Anderson in. It literally hurts nobody. Which brings us back to the Bengals and the poor job they've done promoting their past greats to hall of fame voters. He has the fifth most interceptions in NFL history, he's tied with Charles Woodson. He had 8 in his 13th season in the league. There's no argument against him other than he fell through the cracks.
  19. I need to go to sleep. All I was saying is he has a spot in NFL history. He proved the offense everyone still uses can work. That offense became the motor for the dynasty of the 80's. Find the lie. Ickey Woods probably won't get into the Bengals ring of honor because his career was too short. Ken Anderson has a good shot at an eventual veterans committee admittance to the actual Hall of Fame because, yes, he has the stats. Ken Riley, god rest his soul and the fifth most interceptions in NFL history should get in too.
  20. I've made my argument and the history's all there for you to read. His era's comps are almost exclusively in the Hall of Fame, he's got better stats than a lot of them, and he was the prototype west coast QB before it was even called that. I've made my point, but if you wanna keep being a tit about Ken Anderson and the Hall of Fame that's up to you. It was couched in sound reason, which you keep ignoring. I'll post it a third time so you can read it again. His case is his numbers are comparable or better than a lot of guys who are already in the hall of fame and he played most of his career in a defensive era and still has high completion percentages, yards, and yards per attempt. He won an MVP, Four times best passer rating, one of the best completion percentage of the era. He has objectively better stats than many QBs in the hall of fame including Terry Bradshaw. He has basically the same number of passing yards as Troy Aikman with fewer attempts. If Dan Fouts is the bar he's right there with Dan Fouts, who never won an MVP or played in a Super Bowl himself. If Ken Stabler's the bar he's way better than Ken Stabler. From the perspective of the story of football, you can't tell it without him - He was the guinea pig for the West Coast offense before it was called that. His numbers appear modern, but he played in the 70's when it was legal for DBs to murder wide receivers. There's no Joe Montana if Ken Anderson doesn't do it for ten years first. The reasons he's not in is the "FAME" part of Hall of Fame, which brings us back to how the Bengals don't celebrate their past great players, and that he didn't win a Super Bowl, which isn't a prerequisite to the Hall. He's got a really good Hall-of-Fame case and isn't even that hard to make.
  21. Ken Anderson proved Bill Walsh's offense could work in the NFL. Bill Walsh doesn't get a head coaching gig without him so yes in a way he did. It was actually a close game, but Joe Montana's career after that doesn't diminish Ken Anderson's stats.
  22. That's a nice false equivalency.
  23. Joe Montana isn't JOE MONTANA without Ken Anderson leading the way so yeah I said what I said. It was also couched in sound reason, which you cut out. I'll repost so you can read it again. His case is his numbers are comparable or better than a lot of guys who are already in the hall of fame and he played most of his career in a defensive era and still has high completion percentages, yards, and yards per attempt. He won an MVP, Four times best passer rating, one of the best completion percentage of the era. He has objectively better stats than many QBs in the hall of fame including Terry Bradshaw. He has basically the same number of passing yards as Troy Aikman with fewer attempts. If Dan Fouts is the bar he's right there with Dan Fouts, who never won an MVP or played in a Super Bowl himself. If Ken Stabler's the bar he's way better than Ken Stabler. From the perspective of the story of football, you can't tell it without him - He was the guinea pig for the West Coast offense before it was called that. His numbers appear modern, but he played in the 70's when it was legal for DBs to murder wide receivers. There's no Joe Montana if Ken Anderson doesn't do it for ten years first. The reasons he's not in is the "FAME" part of Hall of Fame, which brings us back to how the Bengals don't celebrate their past great players, and that he didn't win a Super Bowl, which isn't a prerequisite to the Hall. He's got a really good Hall-of-Fame case and isn't even that hard to make.
  24. He has 1100 fewer pass attempts than Fouts. Whenever this comes up people always act like I invented the Ken Anderson for the Hall of Fame argument. Profootballreference has his him right below Fouts in their Approximate Value rankings so yeah, he's right there. He's above actual Hall of Famers on that list despite playing mostly in a defensive era. He's got the numbers and he's the highest QB on the list not in the Hall of Fame. The case isn't insane. Not my fault you don't know football. The most basic members in our society always pick the lowest hanging fruit. It's not their fault. GOAT
  25. His case is his numbers are comparable or better than a lot of guys who are already in the hall of fame and he played most of his career in a defensive era and still has high completion percentages, yards, and yards per attempt. He won an MVP, Four times best passer rating, one of the best completion percentage of the era. He has objectively better stats than many QBs in the hall of fame including Terry Bradshaw. He has basically the same number of passing yards as Troy Aikman with fewer attempts. If Dan Fouts is the bar he's right there with Dan Fouts, who never won an MVP or played in a Super Bowl himself. If Ken Stabler's the bar he's way better than Ken Stabler. From the perspective of the story of football, you can't tell it without him - He was the guinea pig for the West Coast offense before it was called that. His numbers appear modern, but he played in the 70's when it was legal for DBs to murder wide receivers. There's no Joe Montana if Ken Anderson doesn't do it for ten years first. The reasons he's not in is the "FAME" part of Hall of Fame, which brings us back to how the Bengals don't celebrate their past great players, and that he didn't win a Super Bowl, which isn't a prerequisite to the Hall. He's got a really good Hall-of-Fame case and isn't even that hard to make.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.