Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Bengals vs Rams (Superbowl)


League_Champion
 Share

Recommended Posts

Rams by a TD, their DL is too much for the Bengals OL. 

 

Would be the first SB win for the Rams in LA, not their first SB win (STL Rams 1999) nor the teams first title in LA (LA Rams 1951) heck they even had a title back in 1945 as the Cleveland Rams. 

 

Of the historical firsts mentioned in the article, UNDERDOGS, first time two teams seeded 3 or lower meet in the Super Bowl. I think that many fans will enjoy that, while some others will lament the absence of the top (and better known) teams (and some of their star players).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, stevegrab said:

Rams by a TD, their DL is too much for the Bengals OL. 

 

Would be the first SB win for the Rams in LA, not their first SB win (STL Rams 1999) nor the teams first title in LA (LA Rams 1951) heck they even had a title back in 1945 as the Cleveland Rams. 

 

Of the historical firsts mentioned in the article, UNDERDOGS, first time two teams seeded 3 or lower meet in the Super Bowl. I think that many fans will enjoy that, while some others will lament the absence of the top (and better known) teams (and some of their star players).

 

That's kinda where I'm leaning right now to but the injuries and Matthew Stafford have me a little worried. The Rams had no business winning yesterday, that dropped INT was pathetic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LordOpie said:

I like rooting for the underdog when I don't care, but I am rooting for Stafford. Seems like a good dude and never had a chance in DET. My 13yo mentioned how bad DET is... guys like Barry Sanders and Calvin Johnson would rather retire while still able to play than continue playing for DET :( 

I also want to root for LAR because I like when teams risk it, go all-in, and succeed. Plus @tazinib1

 

I'm rooting for the Bengals no doubt. What a story that would be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

 

 

Does is kill you to watch the other Ohio team in the Superbowl?  Who'd of thought? 

 

No it doesn't kill me, they are more kindred spirits than hated rivals. Their fans are also not tools like many of the front runner teams. I'd be rooting for them if the 49ers made it, just don't care for that team. I grew up in LA, Rams were pretty good then (70-81), and they were our local team. So I'll be pulling for them, I also like Stafford and would like to see him get a ring after struggling for years on the Lions. Won't even bother me that OBJ is on the team and gets his ring. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, stevegrab said:

 

No it doesn't kill me, they are more kindred spirits than hated rivals. Their fans are also not tools like many of the front runner teams. I'd be rooting for them if the 49ers made it, just don't care for that team. I grew up in LA, Rams were pretty good then (70-81), and they were our local team. So I'll be pulling for them, I also like Stafford and would like to see him get a ring after struggling for years on the Lions. Won't even bother me that OBJ is on the team and gets his ring. 

 

 

 

Is it a rivalry there? Cincinnati doesn't seem like much of a football City. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, League_Champion said:

 

 The Rams had no business winning yesterday

Where do you come up with some of these 'takes?'

 

TOP 35:39 to 24:21

1st downs 25 to 16

3rd downs 11/18 to 3/9

Passing Yards 337 to 232

Rushing Yards 70 to 50

Turnovers 1 each.  

*San Fran 1 scoring drive in 2nd half

Edit to add; San Fran didn't actually get shut out in 2nd half. 

Edited by Bobby Brown
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Bobby Brown said:

Where do you come up with some of these 'takes?'

 

TOP 35:39 to 24:21

1st downs 25 to 16

3rd downs 11/18 to 3/9

Passing Yards 337 to 232

Rushing Yards 70 to 50

Turnovers 1 each.  

San Fran 0 points in the 2nd half.  

If he didn't drop that INT it's over, Niners win! 

Edited by League_Champion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

 

If he didn't drop that INT it's over, Bengals win! 

 

49ers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Big John said:

I thought Pittsburgh was Cleveland 's main rival. 

 

Steelers have always been the Browns main rival, until the original Browns moved to Baltimore. Now I'd say they've either taken over, or at least climbed up to a strong 2nd place. There is some in state rivalry with the Bengals, but nothing approaching the dislike we have for PIT/BAL. 

 

Bengal fans have suffered thru a lot over the decades, horrible ownership, some bad coaching and so on. So I can relate and don't really hate the idea of them winning. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Bobby Brown said:

Where do you come up with some of these 'takes?'

 

TOP 35:39 to 24:21

1st downs 25 to 16

3rd downs 11/18 to 3/9

Passing Yards 337 to 232

Rushing Yards 70 to 50

Turnovers 1 each.  

San Fran 0 points in the 2nd half.  

 

He is the king of hot takes, I suspect he listens to tons of sports talk radio, because he sounds just like them. 

 

Also don't forget 

Jimmy G 16 of 30  Stafford 31 of 45  (53 vs 69%)


But stats don't matter to LC, only "what he sees". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

 

 My point was that the dropped INT decided the game, and it did Steven.

No.

There was nearly 10 minutes left in the game when the drop happened, it happened on the Rams side of the field, and it was a 3 point game. The INT would not have guaranteed SF additional points by any means and Rams probably get at least two more drives in all likelihood.  

 

At that point in the game Rams were moving the ball more effectively than the 49ers.  

Edited by Bobby Brown
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

 

We aren't arguing who's better. My point was that the dropped INT decided the game, and it did Steven.

 

No your POINT was the Rams had no business wining, which was soundly refuted with FACTS. But we all know you can never admit to being wrong, just pivot the conversation to something else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stevegrab said:

 

No your POINT was the Rams had no business wining, which was soundly refuted with FACTS. But we all know you can never admit to being wrong, just pivot the conversation to something else. 

 

YES YOU IDIOT. They had NO business winning. That was an easy INT that would of sealed the game. Stafford basically gave them a gift. Of course the Rams are better, the better team doesn't always win, ask the Chiefs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

 

YES YOU IDIOT. They had NO business winning. That was an easy INT that would of sealed the game. Stafford basically gave them a gift. Of course the Rams are better, the better team doesn't always win, ask the Chiefs. 

 

Wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, League_Champion said:

 

Is that game over if he grabs that INT? Most definitely. I may be wrong but I believe that the Rams were out of timeouts by that point. 

 

A game is over because SF has the ball on their own 35 yard line with almost 10 minutes left, leading by 3?  Because the Rams have no timeouts?  Boy that is as big a stretch as I've ever heard. Especially considering the 49ers were no offensive juggernaut in the game, and had just had a 3.5 minute possession that ended with a punt. 

 

Really, this is your football genius shining thru?   COME ON MAN!   Are you talking about some other near interception? If so where and when, watch the video below and tell us. 

 

The near pick is around the 9 minute mark of this video.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXrR7xwvokU

 

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LordOpie said:

I like rooting for the underdog when I don't care, but I am rooting for Stafford. Seems like a good dude and never had a chance in DET. My 13yo mentioned how bad DET is... guys like Barry Sanders and Calvin Johnson would rather retire while still able to play than continue playing for DET :( 

I also want to root for LAR because I like when teams risk it, go all-in, and succeed. Plus @tazinib1

 

Aww shucks :kicksrock:

  • Like 1
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.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information