By implication, Warner has to believe that the Bengals are the superior team, therefore they will win the game. This means, at the top he must believe that Burrow is a better QB and team leader than Matthew Stafford is. He has to also think that the Bengals have better players on offense and defense, if, of course, they are the better team. Warner has to believe that they are otherwise it would not be logical to say they will win. The Bengals skill players, in Warner's mind are superior to Kupp, Beckham, Jefferson, Akers, Michel etc. Logically, he must also think that the Bengals offensive line is better than the Rams. The Bengals defense also has to be better than the Rams, if indeed, the Bengals will win this Superbowl. He has to, in his mind, think that the DL, LB's, CB's and safeties on the Bengals defense are superior players to Donald, Miller, Floyd, Ramsey, et al. Otherwise, what is his opinion based on? He has to also think that the Bengals are the better coached team. Again, he has to think all these things are true to justify his statement logically. Does he really believe that the Bengals are the overall better team? I don't have any idea, but since he said they would upset the Rams, he, by implication has to.
Me, I'm not so sure.
Could the Bengals win? Absolutely. That's why we have the adages, "any given Sunday" and "that's why they play the game" the Bengals could certainly win. But for Warner to say they will can only imply that he thinks they are overall the better team. At least that's my take.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2022 12:31PM by GlacieRam.
