(01-02-2016, 08:54 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: Let me start this by saying I'm not a Paulie G or Zimmer guy, I'm a play good defense guy. And honestly in the end this defense has been good with both. 

My problem with this years defense is yards allowed. Yes 11th is above average but I want to see it be better. Being first in points allowed is all fine and good but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that stat isn't helped along by penalties and miscues by opposing offenses. I have seen far too many sustained drives this season, especially in big situations. Top, elite defenses get teams off the field and make quick work doing it.  This not only helps total yards stats but also gives your offense more chances to score. 

In the end I'm pretty happy with how this defense is playing, but with the talent on this defense I would like to see that total yards rank closer to the top 5 in the league. 
But maybe this post is meant for another thread altogether, because it's splitting HAIRS

Same here. I just think both have done fine jobs. 

IMO, people put too much stock into total yardage rankings. I look at many categories (sacks, turnovers, pass efficiency, points allowed) and we're top notch in all of those areas. Total yardage can often be skewed. For instance, a team that is often in blow outs will give up more yardage when teams start playing catch up and airing it out.

Right now the Bengals are 20th in pass yards allowed. Does that mean we have a bad pass defense? Considering that we have 41 sacks (4th), 19 INTs (3rd), and surrender a measly 80.7 passer rating (6th), it seems like passing against our defense isn't a good idea. Yet teams keep doing it because they're often behind against us. I think that inflates the total yardage number some.

That said, this defense isn't perfect. They have the 9th most defensive penalties in the league (that could contribute to sustained drives). They rank 10th in 3rd down %, which isn't bad but I'd like to see better. Despite being 7th in rush yardage, they're 25th in opponent's yards per rush. What this tells me is that some of these blowout wins have protected our defense from getting gashed by the run (again, when behind, teams pass).

You'd best believe that whatever team we face in the playoffs will be testing out our run defense early and often. If the game stays close, expect plenty of running and play action. We've been killed like that before in the playoffs.

(01-02-2016, 09:56 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Same here. I just think both have done fine jobs. 

IMO, people put too much stock into total yardage rankings. I look at many categories (sacks, turnovers, pass efficiency, points allowed) and we're top notch in all of those areas. Total yardage can often be skewed. For instance, a team that is often in blow outs will give up more yardage when teams start playing catch up and airing it out.

Right now the Bengals are 20th in pass yards allowed. Does that mean we have a bad pass defense? Considering that we have 41 sacks (4th), 19 INTs (3rd), and surrender a measly 80.7 passer rating (6th), it seems like passing against our defense isn't a good idea. Yet teams keep doing it because they're often behind against us. I think that inflates the total yardage number some.

That said, this defense isn't perfect. They have the 9th most defensive penalties in the league (that could contribute to sustained drives). They rank 10th in 3rd down %, which isn't bad but I'd like to see better. Despite being 7th in rush yardage, they're 25th in opponent's yards per rush. What this tells me is that some of these blowout wins have protected our defense from getting gashed by the run (again, when behind, teams pass).

You'd best believe that whatever team we face in the playoffs will be testing out our run defense early and often. If the game stays close, expect plenty of running and play action. We've been killed like that before in the playoffs.

I agree totally. Yards per game are empty calories. Points per game mean a lot.

Plus situational football might dictate more yards per game due to having huge leads and just running the clock out. This in the fantasy world is known as "junk time stat padding". In the real world, it's worthless.

(01-02-2016, 10:01 PM)TexasorBusted Wrote: I agree totally. Yards per game are empty calories. Points per game mean a lot.

Plus situational football might dictate more yards per game due to having huge leads and just running the clock out. This in the fantasy world is known as "junk time stat padding". In the real world, it's worthless.

Most of the time I would agree with you when it comes to this .but this team has been different this year. While maybe some of the yards against have come because of that, the close games (most of the losses)  have proven, especially late in the games, to be a problem when it comes to getting teams off of the field. Just far too many long drive at the end of games for my taste. Drives like that strongly contribute to us being ranked 11 and not closer to a top 5, completely dominating in every facet defense.

(01-02-2016, 10:19 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: Most of the time I would agree with you when it comes to this .but this team has been different this year. While maybe some of the yards against have come because of that, the close games (most of the losses)  have proven, especially late in the games, to be a problem when it comes to getting teams off of the field. Just far too many long drive at the end of games for my taste. Drives like that strongly contribute to us being ranked 11 and not closer to a top 5, completely dominating in every facet defense.

Maybe the defense is a little exposed against good teams?

Against 8 non-playoff teams:
- 14.8 ppg
- 314.4 total yards allowed (would rank 3rd in the NFL)

Against 7 playoff teams (counting the Steelers):
- 20.7 ppg
- 371.0 total yards allowed (would rank 23rd in the NFL)

(01-02-2016, 10:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Maybe the defense is a little exposed against good teams?

Against 8 non-playoff teams:
- 14.8 ppg
- 314.4 total yards allowed (would rank 3rd in the NFL)

Against 7 playoff teams (counting the Steelers):
- 20.7 ppg
- 371.0 total yards allowed (would rank 23rd in the NFL)

^^This validates my argument that a Marvin Lewis team needs to "out-talent" teams to win in this league. Good stats, btw.

(01-02-2016, 09:29 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That's what he did when he hired Andy Reid

Pretty sure every coach on those '90s Packers teams were well known. Playoff wins and SBs and all. 

(01-02-2016, 10:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Maybe the defense is a little exposed against good teams?

Against 8 non-playoff teams:
- 14.8 ppg
- 314.4 total yards allowed (would rank 3rd in the NFL)

Against 7 playoff teams (counting the Steelers):
- 20.7 ppg
- 371.0 total yards allowed (would rank 23rd in the NFL)

This....... Is alarming. 

(01-02-2016, 10:51 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Pretty sure every coach on those '90s Packers teams were well known. Playoff wins and SBs and all. 

andy reid was a surprise hire he never was a coordinator.

(01-02-2016, 11:58 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I don't really see his name anywhere and that tweet even says "not being mentioned". If you're Jeff Lurie, after the Chip Kelly fiasco, are you hiring someone that basically no one even knows?

(01-02-2016, 04:34 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: FTR, Paul Guenther will get zero consideration for any open NFL coaching job this year.

(01-02-2016, 09:29 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That's what he did when he hired Andy Reid

(01-02-2016, 10:51 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Pretty sure every coach on those '90s Packers teams were well known. Playoff wins and SBs and all. 

(01-02-2016, 11:29 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: andy reid was a surprise hire he never was a coordinator.

What is your point here? That Pauly G is the next Andy Reid and he's going to take them to 4 straight conference championships and 1 super bowl?

(01-02-2016, 11:39 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: What is your point here? That Pauly G is the next Andy Reid and he's going to take them to 4 straight conference championships and 1 super bowl?

Little surprised that you actually think he will get zero consideration.

(01-03-2016, 02:04 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Little surprised that you actually think he will get zero consideration.

It might be a little early for him to get a HC gig (I have a feeling teams may want to see 1 more season from him), but I think he'll get consideration at some point. The fact that Zim and Jay have their teams in the playoffs is only going to increase interest in our current coordinators. Monkey see, monkey do.

(01-03-2016, 02:04 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Little surprised that you actually think he will get zero consideration.

He hasn't really done anything that's "his" to be considered. He kind of got the D-Coord job by default. Not bashing the dude. He just needs more pub for things he's done.

(01-03-2016, 02:07 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: It might be a little early for him to get a HC gig (I have a feeling teams may want to see 1 more season from him), but I think he'll get consideration at some point. The fact that Zim and Jay have their teams in the playoffs is only going to increase interest in our current coordinators. Monkey see, monkey do.

Yup. 

The more the Bengals continue to win, the more coaches are going to be poached. I'd wager that most view what Paul G has done, is take the same guys Zim had and just continue doing what they've been doing.