(02-20-2022, 02:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is less than a sack per game.  Not really that huge.

You're telling me you don't think it would have been huge if Burrow was sacked 13-14 times less during the regular season? That's like if you could remove and entire Trey Hendrickson season worth of punishment off Burrow.

37-38 sacks vs 51

I call that huge.

(02-20-2022, 12:03 PM)Synric Wrote: Riley Rieff missed 1 game in 2020 and that was due to Covid. He missed 1 game in 2019 sitting week 17 for the playoffs. He missed 1 game in 2017.

Riley Reiff has a relatively healthy career. Saying the guy has been hurt every year is just completely false.

You left out missing 3 games in 2018 due to injury and 2 games in 2016 due to injury and 5 games last season.

(02-20-2022, 03:00 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You're telling me you don't think it would have been huge if Burrow was sacked 13-14 times less during the regular season? That's like if you could remove and entire Trey Hendrickson season worth of punishment off Burrow.

37-38 sacks vs 51

I call that huge.

Lol. Spot on. Of course 14-15 less sacks is a massive difference over a season

We have some hilarious fans on here

(02-20-2022, 03:00 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You're telling me you don't think it would have been huge if Burrow was sacked 13-14 times less during the regular season? That's like if you could remove and entire Trey Hendrickson season worth of punishment off Burrow.

37-38 sacks vs 51

I call that huge.

Plus we all know its not just about sacks, hurries and hits have massive impact too. Granted, Burrow is exceptional in those situations. Still the last thing you want is to pile up hits and sacks on a guy whose body already has been beat up.

How do the Playoff oline stats compare to the regular season?

My guess is way worse.

(02-20-2022, 03:39 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: How do the Playoff oline stats compare to the regular season?

My guess is way worse.

I would not say not a great difference with regards to yards but scoring 15% drop and the big difference was red zone td conversion, we had around 60% in regular season but fell to i believe below 40% in playoffs

(02-20-2022, 03:00 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You're telling me you don't think it would have been huge if Burrow was sacked 13-14 times less during the regular season? That's like if you could remove and entire Trey Hendrickson season worth of punishment off Burrow.

37-38 sacks vs 51

I call that huge.

This is literally like deja vu...

Last season ends after Burrow is injured. All the fans "We need to fix the line"

Then weeks pass. Half the fans "The line isn't that bad, the new coach will fix it, just need 1 or 2 guys."

This season, all the sacks happen. Lose the Super Bowl due to O-line, and Burrow gets his other knee tweeked. Fans after the game "Fix the line."

Now, just one week later and "Well we just need 1 guy, or 2 guys."


If you don't learn from the past, you are destined to repeat it.

(02-20-2022, 03:00 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You're telling me you don't think it would have been huge if Burrow was sacked 13-14 times less during the regular season? That's like if you could remove and entire Trey Hendrickson season worth of punishment off Burrow.

37-38 sacks vs 51

I call that huge.

You can call it "huge" all you want, but that does not mean it is.

I do not see any real correlation between sack umbers and injuries.  Lots of QBs have been sacked a lot more times than Burrow without getting injured and on the other hand Carson Palmer got his knee shredded behind a line that set the team record for fewest sacks.

And 14 sacks out of over 1000 offensive plays is probably not going to make a "huge" difference in winning % either.  It is not even going to effect every game because it is less than a sack per game.

(02-20-2022, 04:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You can call it "huge" all you want, but that does not mean it is.

I do not see any real correlation between sack umbers and injuries.  Lots of QBs have been sacked a lot more times than Burrow without getting injured and on the other hand Carson Palmer got his knee shredded behind a line that set the team record for fewest sacks.

And 14 sacks out of over 1000 offensive plays is probably not going to make a "huge" difference in winning % either.  It is not even going to effect every game because it is less than a sack per game.

If you do not think a 25-30% reduction in sacks is a huge, you have no business commenting on NFL football

Honestly, Mixon averaged what 4.8 ypc in the Super Bowl. Most sacks came in the 2nd half. We had the lead.

The best way to prevent sacks would have been to RUN A LOT more.

Instead we go into shotgun with empty backfield which let's them pass rush us.

(02-20-2022, 03:48 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: This is literally like deja vu...

Last season ends after Burrow is injured. All the fans "We need to fix the line"

Then weeks pass. Half the fans "The line isn't that bad, the new coach will fix it, just need 1 or 2 guys."

This season, all the sacks happen. Lose the Super Bowl due to O-line, and Burrow gets his other knee tweeked. Fans after the game "Fix the line."

Now, just one week later and "Well we just need 1 guy, or 2 guys."


If you don't learn from the past, you are destined to repeat it.

Yes. They've been trying to fix the line for 5 years.

I think they'll being in some additions. I'm not convinced it will fix it.

(02-20-2022, 10:06 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: While I completely agree with the overall sentiment, it is crucial to understand that there were no fewer than four guys that they though could have held down the other guard position from Spain:  Adeniji, 2nd round pick Carman, D'Ante Smith.  Heck, they were even saying how improved Mike Jordan was early in preseason, but I think now that was a tactic.  

Regardless, I just hate the "they didn't do anything"....to more of a "they weren't successful with their approach".  


I mean, look back at Ogbuehi, Fisher, Glenn, Price, and Williams.  All but Fisher were first round (Glenn was a first round swap of picks) and only Williams has proven to be a solid player.  Reiff was a solid addition before injury as well.

I would hope they would get a FA for the RT and the RG spot and if that costs them a large chunk of their FA dollars, so be it.  Bates to me is an automatic yes.  

Yes, they've spent draft picks on the line. They've just never attacked it with any true seriousness in free agency.

Our biggest signings/trades were Cordy Glenn and Riley Reiff. Neither of those guys were all that impressive additions, tbh...and that's the best we did in 6 years. Lots of bargain bin stuff aside from that.

(02-20-2022, 04:59 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Honestly, Mixon averaged what 4.8 ypc in the Super Bowl. Most sacks came in the 2nd half. We had the lead.

The best way to prevent sacks would have been to RUN A LOT more.

Instead we go into shotgun with empty backfield which let's them pass rush us.

It’s almost like Zac was afraid of hearing about taking the ball out of Burrow’s hands again. But in that situation it was exactly what he should have done. Burrow wasn't playing his best (and we couldn’t protect him), Mixon was running well, and like you said - we had the lead.

(02-20-2022, 12:03 PM)Synric Wrote: Riley Rieff missed 1 game in 2020 and that was due to Covid. He missed 1 game in 2019 sitting week 17 for the playoffs. He missed 1 game in 2017.

Riley Reiff has a relatively healthy career. Saying the guy has been hurt every year is just completely false.

Didn't know his 1 game in 2020 was from COVID. I officially retract my 2020 claim then.

In 2019 he still missed 10% of the snaps in games he did play. 28% played in Week 6 and 48% in Week 12 from a persistent ankle issue.
In 2018 he was hurt with an foot injury.
In 2017 he was hurt with an ankle injury.
In 2016 he was hurt with an ankle injury (plus another game missed from illness).

So with 2021's ankle injury, that means he's now had 4 of his last 6 seasons plagued with ankle problems, plus a 5th with a foot problem. That's still not good for a 33-year-old 310lb man.

84% of series that have a sack ended up in the drive being killed

16% are able to sustain their drive and get a new set of downs after a sack

They even put a pt value to a sack - It saves the sacking team 1.75 pts each time they can get one.

So, 13 sacks against the bengals O line would be basically 23 pts the bengals wont score.

And there are actual posters here who are saying that isnt much of a difference. lol

(02-20-2022, 04:40 PM)CincyDog Wrote: If you do not think a 25-30% reduction in sacks is a huge, you have no business commenting on NFL football

Not worth the effort.. Obviously there is a huge difference in a sack per game. In addition to the recordable stats of sacks, it likely means less pressure and more rush yards. Take away one negative play per game, may lead to more first downs and sustained drives, leading to more scoring opportunities.

It’s clear as day the line is bad, and “even” only one sack per game would make a huge difference. Burrow would go from succeeding as the most sacked qb, and probably succeeding better as a bottom 3rd sacked qb. I’m hoping they can somehow get this offensive line to top 50%

(02-20-2022, 05:03 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yes. They've been trying to fix the line for 5 years.

I think they'll being in some additions. I'm not convinced it will fix it.

(02-20-2022, 05:12 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Yes, they've spent draft picks on the line. They've just never attacked it with any true seriousness in free agency.

Our biggest signings/trades were Cordy Glenn and Riley Reiff. Neither of those guys were all that impressive additions, tbh...and that's the best we did in 6 years. Lots of bargain bin stuff aside from that.

That’s right. The Front Office and coaches have TRIED to fix the offensive line since 2016 via the draft and via trade but they have FAILED MISERABLY. It matters not who the quarterback is; Andy Dalton, Ryan Finley, Brandon Allen, and Joe Burrow have all been slammed into the turf far too many times, hit too many times, and hurried in the pocket too many times.

Like the defense, the offensive line will only be fixed by a focus on free agency FIRST. The Bengals don’t need linemen fresh out of university. They need experienced linemen with an established body of work.

Let’s do it right this time.

(02-21-2022, 10:09 AM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: That’s right. The Front Office and coaches have TRIED to fix the offensive line since 2016 via the draft and via trade but they have FAILED MISERABLY.  It matters not who the quarterback is; Andy Dalton, Ryan Finley, Brandon Allen, and Joe Burrow have all been slammed into the turf far too many times, hit too many times, and hurried in the pocket too many times.

Like the defense, the offensive line will only be fixed by a focus on free agency FIRST.  The Bengals don’t need linemen fresh out of university.  They need experienced linemen with an established body of work.

Let’s do it right this time.

And literally, for the last several years...this board has assumed that the line would be fixed in the offseason. And maybe it will be.

But, A LOT of teams need line help. And there just aren't a bunch of great lineman out there.

There are I'd say 3 Tackles that would be major upgrades and maybe 4-5 Guards. That's not a lot, when like 10-12 teams need major line help.

(02-21-2022, 10:40 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: And literally, for the last several years...this board has assumed that the line would be fixed in the offseason. And maybe it will be.

But, A LOT of teams need line help. And there just aren't a bunch of great lineman out there.

There are I'd say 3 Tackles that would be major upgrades and maybe 4-5 Guards. That's not a lot, when like 10-12 teams need major line help.

and the contracts are going to be outrageous. Just think Thuney got like 80mil. Are we asking MB to pay that to guards? We (fans) sided with MB on that one, but it's only going to get more expensive with the high demand for Oline help.

(02-21-2022, 10:44 AM)jj22 Wrote: and the contracts are going to be outrageous. Just think Thuney got like 80mil. Are we asking MB to pay that to guards? We (fans) sided with MB on that one, but it's only going to get more expensive with the high demand for Oline help.

Well the cap went up too...so yes salaries will. And teams like the Dolphins and Jaguars have a ton of cap space and a lot of needs.

Some team like that would likely make a play for Bates if we don't tag him.