|
| Author |
Message |
Clockwork Orange
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 4
|
Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:20 pm Post subject: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
Any questions?
--
Cheers,
--Jeff
Let's Go Orange!
Archived from group: alt>sports>football>pro>cinci-bengals |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bp
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:22 pm Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
"Clockwork Orange" wrote in message @67.19.196.138...
> Any questions?
I would say that debate has been resoundingly closed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Neo Kelly 12
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 8:18 am Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
palmers the way to go. jon kicknuts is 2nd string at best
Neo Kelly #12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Brian Aubel
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 8:26 am Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
"Clockwork Orange" wrote in message@67.19.196.138...
> Any questions?
>
> --
> Cheers,
> --Jeff
> Let's Go Orange!
Predictable play by Kitna. He's effectively ice cold, not helping going
against the # 2 or #3 defense in the NFL. We know from experience that at
best he needs 3 or 4 full time games to get with the program.
If the season were 18 games long and he got the next three starts, he'd
probably be effective again.
Too bad the season will end two weeks short of that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bp
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:42 am Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
"Brian Aubel" wrote in
message $D%.217523@attbi_s51...
>
> "Clockwork Orange" wrote in message
> @67.19.196.138...
>> Any questions?
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> --Jeff
>> Let's Go Orange!
>
> Predictable play by Kitna. He's effectively ice cold, not helping going
> against the # 2 or #3 defense in the NFL. We know from experience that at
> best he needs 3 or 4 full time games to get with the program.
>
> If the season were 18 games long and he got the next three starts, he'd
> probably be effective again.
>
> Too bad the season will end two weeks short of that.
13 games of Palmer had erased last years memories of balls batted at the
line of scrimmage and fumbles that were almost slapstick in nature. Those
memories came flooding back today.
I hate to be hard on Kitna because I think he's a class act who's handled
himself as a true professional as a Bengal, as well as being key in Palmer's
development when he could have been a major hindrance. I think he's over
the top with the public displays of religion, but to each his own on that
topic.
That being said, he was painful to watch today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Michael Lawson
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 7
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:15 pm Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
"bp" wrote in message@individual.net...
>
> "Brian Aubel" wrote
in
> message $D%.217523@attbi_s51...
> >
> > "Clockwork Orange" wrote in message
> > @67.19.196.138...
> >> Any questions?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Cheers,
> >> --Jeff
> >> Let's Go Orange!
> >
> > Predictable play by Kitna. He's effectively ice cold, not helping
going
> > against the # 2 or #3 defense in the NFL. We know from experience
that at
> > best he needs 3 or 4 full time games to get with the program.
> >
> > If the season were 18 games long and he got the next three starts,
he'd
> > probably be effective again.
> >
> > Too bad the season will end two weeks short of that.
>
> 13 games of Palmer had erased last years memories of balls batted at
the
> line of scrimmage and fumbles that were almost slapstick in nature.
Those
> memories came flooding back today.
>
> I hate to be hard on Kitna because I think he's a class act who's
handled
> himself as a true professional as a Bengal, as well as being key in
Palmer's
> development when he could have been a major hindrance. I think he's
over
> the top with the public displays of religion, but to each his own on
that
> topic.
>
> That being said, he was painful to watch today.
On that first series, when he missed an open TJ on a
hook route, I knew we were in for a long day.
--Mike L. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Locutus
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 3
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:45 pm Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
"Clockwork Orange" wrote in message @67.19.196.138...
> Any questions?
>
> --
> Cheers,
> --Jeff
> Let's Go Orange!
Yeah I have a few questions,
How well did you expect Kitna to play when he has played one quarter in
about a year? Is it his fault a punt was blocked and Smith can't pick up a
fumble when it is right there in front of him? Maybe Fauntenot should wait
until Kitna has the ball in his hands before he lets go of it? Or maybe when
Stewart actually manages to catch a ball, he could hold onto it through a
minor hit? I could go on all day.... This was a bad game from many aspects,
not limited to Kitna's play. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ray
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:43 pm Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
Locutus wrote:
>
> "Clockwork Orange" wrote in message
> @67.19.196.138...
> > Any questions?
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > --Jeff
> > Let's Go Orange!
>
> Yeah I have a few questions,
>
> How well did you expect Kitna to play when he has played one quarter in
> about a year? Is it his fault a punt was blocked and Smith can't pick up a
> fumble when it is right there in front of him? Maybe Fauntenot should wait
> until Kitna has the ball in his hands before he lets go of it? Or maybe when
> Stewart actually manages to catch a ball, he could hold onto it through a
> minor hit? I could go on all day.... This was a bad game from many aspects,
> not limited to Kitna's play.
Yeah it was a total team defeat. But the Bills had a few things going
for them we completely stuffed. Rudi with 130 rushing yards? Against
those cows? Smack right in the mouth right up the middle. The Bills
Oline is huge. Man they must sweat lard. And we punched out their
rushing game.
Our passing game and special teams? Hmm maybe we should talk about that
later. Much, much later.
I wasn't all that impressed with the Bills even though by the final
score we got our asses handed to us. They fumble the ball 5 times? I
don't know about them being a too hot to handle team. Good enough to
mash us.
Wait'll next year.
Ray |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dw
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 3:21 am Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
Locutus wrote:
> "Clockwork Orange" wrote in message
> @67.19.196.138...
>
>>Any questions?
>>
>>--
>>Cheers,
>>--Jeff
>>Let's Go Orange!
>
>
> Yeah I have a few questions,
>
> How well did you expect Kitna to play when he has played one quarter in
> about a year?
I expected Kitna to play like a highly paid backup NFL QB who by his own
admission "prepares each week as if he is going to start" is expected to
play. Did I expect him to put the team on his back and carry them to
victory? No. So this is his first game of the year. Who cares? Did all
of the QBs who played poorly in week 1 of the season say they were rusty?
> Is it his fault a punt was blocked and Smith can't pick up a
> fumble when it is right there in front of him?
It's been a long time since I yelled at the TV as loud as I did on that
play. Only the Bengals can have a guy ready to pick up a fumble with a
guaranteed return of at least 40 yards before anyone would catch him,
only to have his own team mate swat the ball away from him. Like
watching the Keystone cops. Don't these guys know there is a reason they
all wear the same color?
> Maybe Fauntenot should wait
> until Kitna has the ball in his hands before he lets go of it? Or maybe when
> Stewart actually manages to catch a ball, he could hold onto it through a
> minor hit? I could go on all day.... This was a bad game from many aspects,
> not limited to Kitna's play.
I don't blame Kitna on the fumbled exchange. Watch the replay and you'll
see that Fontenot snapped the ball directly into his own crotch. It
never made it close to Kitna's hands. Your other points are all well
taken. There was plenty of ineptness to go around.
The long and the short of it is that if Kitna can't come in and be
productive unless he plays all year, then he obviously is not cut out to
be a backup.
I also would have felt better if Kitna would have just said he had a bad
game. All I heard in the post game interview was excuses. At least he
didn't say they lost because God didn't want them to win. (Why is it
that players thank God when they win but don't blame Him when they lose?)
dw. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Locutus
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:05 am Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
"dw" wrote in message $FE.2742@fe37.usenetserver.com...
> Locutus wrote:
>> "Clockwork Orange" wrote in message
>> @67.19.196.138...
>>
>>>Any questions?
>>>
>>>--
>>>Cheers,
>>>--Jeff
>>>Let's Go Orange!
>>
>>
>> Yeah I have a few questions,
>>
>> How well did you expect Kitna to play when he has played one quarter in
>> about a year?
>
> I expected Kitna to play like a highly paid backup NFL QB who by his own
> admission "prepares each week as if he is going to start" is expected to
> play. Did I expect him to put the team on his back and carry them to
> victory? No. So this is his first game of the year. Who cares? Did all of
> the QBs who played poorly in week 1 of the season say they were rusty?
>
Well, on week 1 the opponent is just as rusty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
T. Copeland
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 7:29 pm Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:21:32 -0500, while I was searching for cheap
Viagra, I saw thatdw wrote:
>It's been a long time since I yelled at the TV as loud as I did on that
>play. Only the Bengals can have a guy ready to pick up a fumble with a
>guaranteed return of at least 40 yards before anyone would catch him,
Been eons since I played organized football, but don't they teach the
uhm..."unskilled" players to just fall and cover the damn thing? We
saw the risk of trying to make a return out of a fumble recovery by a
lineman unfortunately...that was big, IMO.
T. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Chaos
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 8
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 2:40 am Post subject: Re: So, all you wankers who wanted Kitna back |
|
|
| Been eons since I played organized football, but don't they teach the
| uhm..."unskilled" players to just fall and cover the damn thing? We
| saw the risk of trying to make a return out of a fumble recovery by a
| lineman unfortunately...that was big, IMO.
Yep... Bengals defense has caused 36 fumbles this year... but I think only
recovered 14. These players really need to take that next step in Marvin's
defense. They are ball-hawking, but it only counts when you give it back to
your offense, not theirs.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|