(11-28-2023, 11:46 AM)740Bengal Wrote: They are two types of fans, and this is how that correlates to Zac Taylor.

1. Casual fan who just watches the game and cheers for big plays, follows on phone while wife drags him to the mall or to eat at Applebees after church and thinks Zac is good because the Bengals have been winning games.

2. The true Football people who dissect the game as they watch, watch the offensive line every play, look at play design etc, who understand Zac Taylor is low-tier at play calling at best, but won't give up play calling because he thinks he is some kind of guru...WHEN LITERALLY NOTHING ON HIS RESUME should give him any indication that he knows what the hell he is doing play call wise.

3. Example... do you see Joe Goodberry coming to the rescue of Zac Taylor? No because he is a football guy, not an Applebees/Mall Guy... if you think Zac Taylor is competent you are a casual.

4. If you fall into category 2 you probably laid the points with Minnesota last night.

Your boy

Lots has been made of Zac Taylor's 4-20 record without Joe Burrow, but this is a QB driven game.

Here are the PFF grades from Andy Dalton, Ryan Finley, Brandon Allen and Jake Browning in those 24 starts.

When the QB has over a 65 grade, the Zac Taylor is 4-4 with a 1-point loss… pic.twitter.com/tprlIMj84W

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) November 28, 2023

(11-28-2023, 11:36 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Your boy

Lots has been made of Zac Taylor's 4-20 record without Joe Burrow, but this is a QB driven game.

Here are the PFF grades from Andy Dalton, Ryan Finley, Brandon Allen and Jake Browning in those 24 starts.

When the QB has over a 65 grade, the Zac Taylor is 4-4 with a 1-point loss… pic.twitter.com/tprlIMj84W

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) November 28, 2023

Damn, he's going hard against Taylor. What that sounds like is that his scheme puts QBs in bad positions. If the QB that you have is just that bad then you have to scheme easy throws and focus on the run game.

(11-28-2023, 11:36 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Your boy

Lots has been made of Zac Taylor's 4-20 record without Joe Burrow, but this is a QB driven game.

Here are the PFF grades from Andy Dalton, Ryan Finley, Brandon Allen and Jake Browning in those 24 starts.

When the QB has over a 65 grade, the Zac Taylor is 4-4 with a 1-point loss… pic.twitter.com/tprlIMj84W

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) November 28, 2023

I really like Goodberry. I've seen he's had some tweets defending the team and Taylor. But I do think he misses on this one a little bit. Zac for the most part refuses to make the run game a point of emphasis and puts the entirety of the offense on the QBs shoulders. Taylor has had a history of terrible situational football since he's been here and it has led to losses and unfortunately doesn't show up on stat sheets. 

(11-28-2023, 11:36 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Your boy

Lots has been made of Zac Taylor's 4-20 record without Joe Burrow, but this is a QB driven game.

Here are the PFF grades from Andy Dalton, Ryan Finley, Brandon Allen and Jake Browning in those 24 starts.

When the QB has over a 65 grade, the Zac Taylor is 4-4 with a 1-point loss… pic.twitter.com/tprlIMj84W

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) November 28, 2023

So the QBs seriously sucked or the scheme was so bad that average to below-average QBs were not good enough to overcome it?  

(11-29-2023, 12:05 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Damn, he's going hard against Taylor. What that sounds like is that his scheme puts QBs in bad positions. If the QB that you have is just that bad then you have to scheme easy throws and focus on the run game.

Opposite if you follow the twitter feed. I think he talking right at you lol

(11-28-2023, 11:46 AM)740Bengal Wrote: They are two types of fans, and this is how that correlates to Zac Taylor.

1. Casual fan who just watches the game and cheers for big plays, follows on phone while wife drags him to the mall or to eat at Applebees after church and thinks Zac is good because the Bengals have been winning games.

2. The true Football people who dissect the game as they watch, watch the offensive line every play, look at play design etc, who understand Zac Taylor is low-tier at play calling at best, but won't give up play calling because he thinks he is some kind of guru...WHEN LITERALLY NOTHING ON HIS RESUME should give him any indication that he knows what the hell he is doing play call wise.

3. Example...do you see Joe Goodberry coming to the rescue of Zac Taylor? No because he is a football guy, not an Applebees/Mall Guy... if you think Zac Taylor is competent you are a casual.

4. If you fall into category 2 you probably laid the points with Minnesota last night.

I mean, PFF almost hired me in 2013, back when they were more legit (and I pulled MYSELF out of the running as I couldn't manage it, not because I didn't make it), but no, I guess I'm not #2 after all because someone declares on a messageboard that there are 2 AND ONLY 2 types of fans of this team

What a bunch of bullshitty-nonsense

(11-29-2023, 12:51 AM)casear2727 Wrote: So the QBs seriously sucked or the scheme was so bad that average to below-average QBs were not good enough to overcome it?  

I know the starting receivers in 2019 were John Ross, Auden Tate, and Tyler Boyd for most of the year. That's how they ended up with the #1 overall pick lol.

(11-29-2023, 12:05 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Damn, he's going hard against Taylor. What that sounds like is that his scheme puts QBs in bad positions. If the QB that you have is just that bad then you have to scheme easy throws and focus on the run game.

The way people spin things is hilarious...

No, he is NOT going hard against Zac, as per a follow-up:

https://x.com/JoeGoodberry/status/1729629387102814391?s=20

Agreed, but these aren't even good backups. How did they get Brandon Allen to score a 91 and put up 35 on the Texans?
How did they get Finley to beat the Steelers in prime time?
Scheme

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) November 28, 2023

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

(11-29-2023, 12:51 AM)casear2727 Wrote: So the QBs seriously sucked or the scheme was so bad that average to below-average QBs were not good enough to overcome it?  

The former, is what he's hinting at (see above)

(11-29-2023, 10:42 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: The way people spin things is hilarious...

No, he is NOT going hard against Zac, as per a follow-up:

https://x.com/JoeGoodberry/status/1729629387102814391?s=20

Agreed, but these aren't even good backups. How did they get Brandon Allen to score a 91 and put up 35 on the Texans?
How did they get Finley to beat the Steelers in prime time?
Scheme

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) November 28, 2023

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


The former, is what he's hinting at (see above)

So he's saying that they had a good scheme in 2 games and the rest were bad schemes? He said that he agrees with that guys statement of a poor scheme and shows how there's only two examples where the scheme helped the QB

(11-29-2023, 12:38 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: So he's saying that they had a good scheme in 2 games and the rest were bad schemes? He said that he agrees with that guys statement of a poor scheme and shows how there's only two examples where the scheme helped the QB

Your out of your league versus Truck

(11-29-2023, 12:38 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: So he's saying that they had a good scheme in 2 games and the rest were bad schemes? He said that he agrees with that guys statement of a poor scheme and shows how there's only two examples where the scheme helped the QB

No. He's saying that the backups were poor quality backups but they still found ways to make them productive. He's insinuating that they had a solid "scheme" in place to do so. There is a lot of nuance in these conversations that we as fans tend to miss. It's not fun to hear, but most of us on here have absolutely no damn idea what we are talking about. If someone put a gun to your head right now and tasked you with suggesting a good gameplan or "scheme" you are probably getting shot. And the same goes for me, don't take that as me calling you an idiot. 

A coach can put together a solid gameplan and call the right plays and if the players aren't up to par, particularly the QB, it isn't going to matter. Case in point, Brandon Allen. Folks hated him and thought he was awful. Over the offseason, many people were pining for Cooper Rush because he went 4-1 in his five starts last year. If a QB has a poor game, it's not always on the playcaller(s), especially if that player is a backup QB. 

Brandon Allen posted a better passer rating in 2020 than Rush did last year. Cooper just had a better team around him, so they won. Another example is from this past weekend. Zac and company called a play that ended up working well with Yoshi running wide open down the field. Automatic touchdown, but Browning just didn't see him. 

I don't put that much stock into Zac's record without Burrow. The dropoff in a top three guy to players like Finley, Browning and Allen is incredibly vast. You pair with that with awful offensive line play and it isn't that surprising. However, to be clear, I am also not singing Zac's praises. I just don't think any assessment of him is black and white.

(11-29-2023, 12:38 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: So he's saying that they had a good scheme in 2 games and the rest were bad schemes? He said that he agrees with that guys statement of a poor scheme and shows how there's only two examples where the scheme helped the QB

I think there is a major point going over your head. Why would NFL teams pay QBs so much money if all that matters is the coach's scheme?

There's a saying: "To make an omlette, you gotta break a few eggs" to many around here focus on the broken eggs

(11-28-2023, 11:46 AM)740Bengal Wrote: They are two types of fans, and this is how that correlates to Zac Taylor.

1. Casual fan who just watches the game and cheers for big plays, follows on phone while wife drags him to the mall or to eat at Applebees after church and thinks Zac is good because the Bengals have been winning games.

2. The true Football people who dissect the game as they watch, watch the offensive line every play, look at play design etc, who understand Zac Taylor is low-tier at play calling at best, but won't give up play calling because he thinks he is some kind of guru...WHEN LITERALLY NOTHING ON HIS RESUME should give him any indication that he knows what the hell he is doing play call wise.  

3. Example...do you see Joe Goodberry coming to the rescue of Zac Taylor? No because he is a football guy, not an Applebees/Mall Guy... if you think Zac Taylor is competent you are a casual.

4. If you fall into category 2 you probably laid the points with Minnesota last night.

There's a 3rd type of fan. The type that eats, breathes, and lives football his entire life, goes to a HS State Championship Game and loses, only to go on and win an NCAA Championship and the Heisman. The type who not only plays on Sunday, but is mentioned with the best to ever play the game. Here's what that type has to say.....

Quote:I think we have one of the best front offices in the league and Zac in my opinion is the best head coach in the league and that gives me a lot of confidence."

Of course, this is where type 2 calls type 3 a liar.....

(11-29-2023, 12:51 AM)casear2727 Wrote: So the QBs seriously sucked or the scheme was so bad that average to below-average QBs were not good enough to overcome it?  

I would say emphatically yes.

The offensive playcalling, as it stands in its current form, is extremely dependent on upper-tier (if not elite) QB performance to execute it well.

You need a QB who is extremely accurate and can make some of the deep passes.
The offense runs a heavy majority in shotgun and the OL is not good enough to either open up good enough holes in the run game nor protect the QB for 5+ seconds.

If the QB isn't good, it's going to be a lot of very short passing and trying to run with a not-great OL/scheme, allowing the defense to stay closer to the LOS and sit on the short routes.

Taylor hasn't shown yet that he can adjust the style enough to scheme open receivers quickly and create gaps in the run game for RBs to be effective such that you don't have to depend so much on the QB being spectacular.

(11-29-2023, 03:32 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: No. He's saying that the backups were poor quality backups but they still found ways to make them productive. He's insinuating that they had a solid "scheme" in place to do so. There is a lot of nuance in these conversations that we as fans tend to miss. It's not fun to hear, but most of us on here have absolutely no damn idea what we are talking about. If someone put a gun to your head right now and tasked you with suggesting a good gameplan or "scheme" you are probably getting shot. And the same goes for me, don't take that as me calling you an idiot. 

A coach can put together a solid gameplan and call the right plays and if the players aren't up to par, particularly the QB, it isn't going to matter. Case in point, Brandon Allen. Folks hated him and thought he was awful. Over the offseason, many people were pining for Cooper Rush because he went 4-1 in his five starts last year. If a QB has a poor game, it's not always on the playcaller(s), especially if that player is a backup QB. 

Brandon Allen posted a better passer rating in 2020 than Rush did last year. Cooper just had a better team around him, so they won. Another example is from this past weekend. Zac and company called a play that ended up working well with Yoshi running wide open down the field. Automatic touchdown, but Browning just didn't see him. 

I don't put that much stock into Zac's record without Burrow. The dropoff in a top three guy to players like Finley, Browning and Allen is incredibly vast. You pair with that with awful offensive line play and it isn't that surprising. However, to be clear, I am also not singing Zac's praises. I just don't think any assessment of him is black and white.

Summed up perfectly. 

(11-29-2023, 03:48 PM)Sled21 Wrote: There's a 3rd type of fan. The type that eats, breathes, and lives football his entire life, goes to a HS State Championship Game and loses, only to go on and win an NCAA Championship and the Heisman. The type who not only plays on Sunday, but is mentioned with the best to ever play the game. Here's what that type has to say.....


Of course, this is where type 2 calls type 3 a liar.....

I like that Burrow said that, but at the same time I don't necessarily completely believe him lol

I do think Zac can still learn from his mistakes though and I don't think he has a big ego, if the play calling is the problem I hope 
that Zac has the humility to take one for the team and let the FO bring in a top Offensive mind along with a top OL coach to really
help Burrow and the Offense make that jump to where we all want them to be.

Execution I still think is the biggest problem with this Offense along with everyone not being on the same page more than play 
calling myself. If Browning hits the wide open Iosivas running across the field that is a great play call. Same as if the OL and the 
TE's are on the same page in blocking and Mixon actually hits the right holes and makes defenders miss tackles etc.

But putting players in positions to succeed has to be on the coach, putting Hudson or Irv Smith to block over Sample is a mistake.

Use Hudson as a pass catcher and Sample as a blocker and you are putting them where they thrive. Little things like this.

(11-29-2023, 04:00 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I would say emphatically yes.

The offensive playcalling, as it stands in its current form, is extremely dependent on upper-tier (if not elite) QB performance to execute it well.

You need a QB who is extremely accurate and can make some of the deep passes.
The offense runs a heavy majority in shotgun and the OL is not good enough to either open up good enough holes in the run game nor protect the QB for 5+ seconds.

If the QB isn't good, it's going to be a lot of very short passing and trying to run with a not-great OL/scheme, allowing the defense to stay closer to the LOS and sit on the short routes.

Taylor hasn't shown yet that he can adjust the style enough to scheme open receivers quickly and create gaps in the run game for RBs to be effective such that you don't have to depend so much on the QB being spectacular.

Taylor and Burrow need to sit down in the Offseason and go over what Burrow wants along with what would help Burrow and the
Offense out the most. Take some pressure off of Burrow by getting a running game and scheme it so we don't ONLY have to win 
with him always throwing the ball out of Shotgun. Most of us know that Burrow loves the Shotgun and the empty sets a ton, but so 
does every Defense in the league and it is predictable, makes the OL have to work harder and hurts the running game.

We will see what they do, I think they all will adjust to take this Offense to the next level.

(11-29-2023, 04:00 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I would say emphatically yes.

The offensive playcalling, as it stands in its current form, is extremely dependent on upper-tier (if not elite) QB performance to execute it well.

You need a QB who is extremely accurate and can make some of the deep passes.
The offense runs a heavy majority in shotgun and the OL is not good enough to either open up good enough holes in the run game nor protect the QB for 5+ seconds.

If the QB isn't good, it's going to be a lot of very short passing and trying to run with a not-great OL/scheme, allowing the defense to stay closer to the LOS and sit on the short routes.

Taylor hasn't shown yet that he can adjust the style enough to scheme open receivers quickly and create gaps in the run game for RBs to be effective such that you don't have to depend so much on the QB being spectacular.

I saw at least three potential TD plays wide open that the QB missed on Sunday. Those three didn't need elite QB play, they just needed ADEQUATE QB play. 

(11-29-2023, 04:24 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I like that Burrow said that, but at the same time I don't necessarily completely believe him lol

I do think Zac can still learn from his mistakes though and I don't think he has a big ego, if the play calling is the problem I hope 
that Zac has the humility to take one for the team and let the FO bring in a top Offensive mind along with a top OL coach to really
help Burrow and the Offense make that jump to where we all want them to be.

Execution I still think is the biggest problem with this Offense along with everyone not being on the same page more than play 
calling myself. If Browning hits the wide open Iosivas running across the field that is a great play call. Same as if the OL and the 
TE's are on the same page in blocking and Mixon actually hits the right holes and makes defenders miss tackles etc.

But putting players in positions to succeed has to be on the coach, putting Hudson or Irv Smith to block over Sample is a mistake.

Use Hudson as a pass catcher and Sample as a blocker and you are putting them where they thrive. Little things like this.


Taylor and Burrow need to sit down in the Offseason and go over what Burrow wants along with what would help Burrow and the
Offense out the most. Take some pressure off of Burrow by getting a running game and scheme it so we don't ONLY have to win 
with him always throwing the ball out of Shotgun. Most of us know that Burrow loves the Shotgun and the empty sets a ton, but so 
does every Defense in the league and it is predictable, makes the OL have to work harder and hurts the running game.

We will see what they do, I think they all will adjust to take this Offense to the next level.

No offense, but what Burrow wants is going to be what works well while he's in there.
If he's out for any time, that offense will struggle if they keep just focusing on what he wants.

They need to come up with a plan to try to be successful without him but be Top 5-10 offense with him.

(11-29-2023, 04:25 PM)Wyche Wrote: I saw at least three potential TD plays wide open that the QB missed on Sunday. Those three didn't need elite QB play, they just needed ADEQUATE QB play. 

If that's the case, this staff still chose to go with Browning over a different backup QB, which is also on them.
They could have gone with Siemian or brought in a different veteran QB other than Browning.

I'm hoping this is mainly growing pains for Browning and he will come along as he plays more games, but he may be who he is.