He’s had 2 bad teams in 14 years and won 10 games or more 6 times. I’ll take that, and it’s not like Tennessee has had much success with free agents or retaining its players over the years. In Chicago I think he’d take a big step up, and not having to face Manning twice a year would help.
Whose fault is it that they can’t sign decent free agents? Fisher has as much input into personnel decisions as any coach who isn’t also the GM.
He’d have three bad teams in 14 years if Bud Adams hadn’t made him bench Collins for Young, and he’s only had one good team in the last 5 seasons.
Lovie hasn’t had any truly bad seasons - unless you count 2004, when Grossman was out all year - and has won ten games twice. Plus, he’s been to a Super Bowl.
Whoever coaches the Bears is going to have to see Aaron Rodgers twice a year, and he’s better right now than Manning was in Year 5 (Manning threw for 4,200 yards, 23 scores and 19 picks in 2002) and he’s not even really in Year 5.
If you think Aaron Rodgers deserves to be mentioned in the same sentence with Peyton Manning, you are truly delusional. Rodgers has a career win-loss record of 13-14. You might want to wait until he gets above .500 or makes the playoffs before you out him in the Hall of Fame. I honestly don’t think he’s scaring anybody in the division yet. All you have to do is put a little heat on him and he crumples up in a fetal position 6 or 8 times a game.
The owner is cheap and Tennessee is a small market without much in the way of attraction for NFL prospects. There are a handful of NFL teams that can’t lure top flight free agents because all things being equal players would rather be in a big city or a warm climate. Fisher can’t do anything to change this.
And yes, Lovie’s numbers look ok on paper. But watching him closely over the last 5 years…the guy is a disaster, and I was saying even when they were 13-3.
Dio, your continuing inability to read is a bit worrying? I said he had better statistics in his 5th season than Manning. I didn’t say anything about the Hall of Fame - and ranking quarterbacks by win/loss record doesn’t make any sense, by the way.
Dan Rooney is cheap, and who wants to live in Pittsburgh? Anyway, Bud Adams isn’t cheap. The Titans were maxed out under the salary cap for like four years.
Just popped in to inform you NFCNorth fellas that after the Bengals mop the floor with the lowly Lions, we’re going to flummox Fah-vrey and vanquish the Vikings.
Watch out for that Bengals D!
Man, its been since 1988 that a Bengals fan could say that!
'Twould do my Viking-hating heart good to see that. Now, I’m not holding my breath or anything…
We have the #1 ranked scoring defense in the NFL and swept our division, largely due to our defense and our rushing game. Still waiting to see our passing game replicate its performances against Chicago and GB though.
I think with our talented DB’s that it will be an interesting matchup against Favre and his wideouts, and likewise the Minny defense against our run game.
I would trade smack talk back, but it’s just so cute to see a Bengals fan do it I can’t really bring myself to do it back.
I am reminded of the… 2003 (?) Bengals going up against an undefeated (and at the time, seemingly unstoppable) Kansas City juggernaut and beating them. On the road, IIRC. Don’t sleep on the Bengals.
Remember, you’re talking to a Vikings fan. Go slowly, use small words, and don’t even bother trying logic.
I figure the Bengals are the toughest game the Vikings have left, but I also figure the Bengals aren’t even as good as the 8-8 non-playoff-qualifying 2003 Bengals.
How do you figure? They swept their division, and Pittsburgh and Baltimore are both playoff-caliber teams. Their only bad losses are to an underrated Houston team and against cover-your-eyes lucky Denver.
They’re 2-3 outside the division. I don’t think they’ll fare well from here on out.
2003 Bengals at least had Corey Dillon in an outstanding season. Who do they have now that is supposed to scare me?
And Baltimore and Pittsburgh may be “playoff caliber teams,” but first round caliber. Neither is gong deep.
Pittsburgh had a lot of fluke plays and bad calls go their way, or they would have lost to the Vikings. As it is, they needed every single fluke play and bad call they got.
Cute? The Vikings aren’t exactly one of the traditionally elite teams in the last 20 years either. Better than the Bengals historically? Sure. But that isn’t saying much, ans doesn’t have much relevance to the two teams this season.
That game was at home, but yeah, the Chiefs were 9-0 going into that game.
Huh? We are a much better team than the 2003 team. We actually have a defense.
And Oakland two weeks ago. That was the ugliest one to me. At least the Texans have respectable offensive stats and playmakers so you don’t feel as bad losing to them. Heck, they took Indy on strong too.
For all I know the Bengals are better this year. But I think it’s funny that someone claims we can’t look past the Bengals because they were 8-8 six years ago. That’s like me satirizing a Bengals fans.
I forgot about Oakland, but they seem to beat good teams almost regularly. They knocked the (admittedly collapsing) Bucs out of the playoffs last season, and beat the Jets when they were still good.
Well, the Bengals were 4-11-1 last season, and are 8-3 now. The NFL anymore has become a league where almost any team with reasonable talent and decent coaching can turn around a bad season one year and then make the playoffs the next.
Oakland has some formidable players on defense. They beat Philly at home, too, in an ugly game. Oakland’s offense sucks, but of course they bench Russell in favor of Gradkowski just in time for the Bengals game, giving them a spark at home.
I agree with that, but typically people don’t allude to games from six years ago when they’re predicting what will happen this season.
Any given Sunday and all that. Bengals could beat the Vikings. Like I said, it’s probably the toughest game left on the Vikings schedule and the Bengals do have the #1 defense when measured by points allowed. Also, the Vikings are in a position where any one game doesn’t mean that much, especially non-conference games. They could have the division locked up and a magic number of one or two for the first round bye, and the HFA might seem kind of unattainable with the ass the Saints are kicking. So yes, I can see the Vikings losing this one. The Arizona game is more important, but I can see them winning that then losing to the Bengals, beating the Bears and Panthers, and letting the Giants beat a bunch of second stringers.
The game is definitely more important to the Bengals than the Vikes. We’re still trying to stave off a late run by the Steelers or Ravens to win the division, and right now the Bengals are the #2 seed in the AFC. There’s not going to be any catching the Colts I don’t think, but securing home field advantage would be nice (even if the Bengals are better this season on the road than at home so far).
I think it will be a really good game. Both teams have good defenses, good quarterbacks, wideouts and running backs.