(12-23-2016, 06:10 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Yep,

I would so love to know, as one of dozens of examples, who was responsible for calling 4 running plays in a row right before halftime in the last Steelers game in the red zone. It was like they were playing to kick the FG !

Were Eifert, Lafell, Boyd, and Core all unable to play ? Why try and hammer home a TD from the 23 with rushing plays against the 4th best run defense in the NFL ?

We put it in the endzone there and we're up 24-6, could of made all the difference in the world. But no, let's play Marv ball and use the prevent offense.

Yep, after Burkhead ripped off that nice run to get them close, should have been shots to the end zone.

Do I think the abysmal o-line play hindered Zampese? Sure...but I'd be lying if I said I was looking forward to another year of his offense. I'd prefer a new OC, but if I had to choose 1 offensive coach to be fired, it'd be Paul Alexander, hands down.

Sounds like Zampese is being set up to take the fall and pacify fans calling for Marvin's head. It won't

(12-23-2016, 06:57 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Do I think the abysmal o-line play hindered Zampese? Sure...but I'd be lying if I said I was looking forward to another year of his offense. I'd prefer a new OC, but if I had to choose 1 offensive coach to be fired, it'd be Paul Alexander, hands down.

Agree !

I don't think there's any doubt the horrid O-line made it tough on Zampese. But the horrid line didn't call 4 running plays in a row in the redzone either.

If they would fire PA though I'd jump for joy.

(12-23-2016, 06:57 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Do I think the abysmal o-line play hindered Zampese? Sure...but I'd be lying if I said I was looking forward to another year of his offense. I'd prefer a new OC, but if I had to choose 1 offensive coach to be fired, it'd be Paul Alexander, hands down.

Compared to what we had gotten accustomed to, with the offense under Gruden and then Jackson, this season the offense just sort of had a Bratkowski like feel to it.  Maybe it's just my imagination, but the Bengals have seemed awfully predictable in their play calling. 

(12-23-2016, 07:01 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Agree !

I don't think there's any doubt the horrid O-line made it tough on Zampese. But the horrid line didn't call 4 running plays in a row in the redzone either.

If they would fire PA though I'd jump for joy.

This is ridiculous.  If we had thrown the ball after 3 runs gained 23 yards (7.7 avg) then you would be crying about how Zampese did not stick with what was working.  Why the hell would you complain about running the ball on 2nd and 3 when the 3 previous runs averaged 7.7 yards?  And if passing was the obvios call then why did the pass fail on 3rd down?

This is the way it always goes with criticizing an OC.  If what he calls does not work then it is stupid.  Doesn't matter what he called.  Only thing that matters is that it did not work.

(12-23-2016, 07:26 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is ridiculous.  If we had thrown the ball after 3 runs gained 23 yards (7.7 avg) then you would be crying about how Zampese did not stick with what was working.  Why the hell would you complain about running the ball on 2nd and 3 when the 3 previous runs averaged 7.7 yards?  And if passing was the obvios call then why did the pass fail on 3rd down?

This is the way it always goes with criticizing an OC.  If what he calls does not work then it is stupid.  Doesn't matter what he called.  Only thing that matters is that it did not work.

I'm not going to nitpick a specific series, but there's no denying the RZ offense has struggled this year. I don't have exact stats in front of me, but I think I read a couple weeks ago that Andy had like 2 RZ TDs all year? Either way, it's been pretty rough.

(12-23-2016, 07:26 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is ridiculous.  If we had thrown the ball after 3 runs gained 23 yards (7.7 avg) then you would be crying about how Zampese did not stick with what was working.  Why the hell would you complain about running the ball on 2nd and 3 when the 3 previous runs averaged 7.7 yards?  And if passing was the obvios call then why did the pass fail on 3rd down?

This is the way it always goes with criticizing an OC.  If what he calls does not work then it is stupid.  Doesn't matter what he called.  Only thing that matters is that it did not work.

Because 2nd down was the down to go for the throat, all the momentum going their way.  3rd down, yeah the pass was pretty predictable..  And that is the problem with Zampeze and the 2016 offense, way to predictable in situations.

Best thing about being a Bengals fan: people give you a pass for being drunk and depressed.

(12-23-2016, 08:00 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because 2nd down was the down to go for the throat, all the momentum going their way.  3rd down, yeah the pass was pretty predictable..  And that is the problem with Zampeze and the 2016 offense, way to predictable in situations.

Don't try and convince Fred that our play calling in the red zone hasn't been excellent. The numbers bear him out, well, errrr, ummmm, but, errrr, 

Seriously, way to often we've been vanilla, predictable, to conservative, etc. in the red zone. And overall we are as well ! 

Marvin doesn't know the meaning of keeping foot on the gas. And I'd bet he plays a large part in the vanilla offense at all times.

(12-23-2016, 07:26 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is ridiculous.  If we had thrown the ball after 3 runs gained 23 yards (7.7 avg) then you would be crying about how Zampese did not stick with what was working.  Why the hell would you complain about running the ball on 2nd and 3 when the 3 previous runs averaged 7.7 yards?  And if passing was the obvios call then why did the pass fail on 3rd down?

This is the way it always goes with criticizing an OC.  If what he calls does not work then it is stupid.  Doesn't matter what he called.  Only thing that matters is that it did not work.

Yeah, I was going to point this out.  On topic, I think Zampese is about as good an OC as one would expect a stretch of an internal hire to be.  With that being said, if you don't get into the endzone running the ball then clearly you would have made it in if you passed it, and vise versa.  


As down as I am on Marv and Zampese, I can't convince myself that passing the ball after gashing them with the run to get there would NOT have been met with uproarious jeers.

(12-23-2016, 08:00 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because 2nd down was the down to go for the throat, all the momentum going their way.  3rd down, yeah the pass was pretty predictable..  And that is the problem with Zampeze and the 2016 offense, way to predictable in situations.

So where is all the outrage about running on THIRD down from the 4 yard line the time just before that when we had the ball?  That was WAY too conservative, right?

Oh wait, nevermind, running the ball on third down worked.  Hill scored a TD.  So that makes that a GREAT call, right?


It is so easy to be right every time when you have the benefit of hindsight.  Wonder why the bengal coaches don't use that to call all their plays? 

(12-24-2016, 11:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is so easy to be right every time when you have the benefit of hindsight.  Wonder why the bengal coaches don't use that to call all their plays.

I'm now picturing a story/movie where a Bengals fan uses a time machine to go back and tell Mike Brown about all the players/coaches who ended up being great, but Mike Brown refuses to listen and we still end up with Marvin, Zampese, Dave Shula, Akili Smith etc.

(12-24-2016, 11:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So where is all the outrage about running on THIRD down from the 4 yard line the time just before that when we had the ball?  That was WAY too conservative, right?

Oh wait, nevermind, running the ball on third down worked.  Hill scored a TD.  So that makes that a GREAT call, right?


It is so easy to be right every time when you have the benefit of hindsight.  Wonder why the bengal coaches don't use that to call all their plays? 

The difference is in the timing, stage of the game, and situational awareness.  When Hill scored, the Steelers were expecting the Bengals to pass the ball.  In the latter drive, the Steelers were fully expecting the Bengals to run the ball, had made some adjustments, and were fully prepared to stop it.

They're not going to fire Zampese after one season.

Surprised Dehner said that. He should know better.

(12-24-2016, 11:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is so easy to be right every time when you have the benefit of hindsight.  Wonder why the bengal coaches don't use that to call all their plays? 

Because they'd find a way to **** that up too. 

(12-24-2016, 12:54 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The difference is in the timing, stage of the game, and situational awareness.  When Hill scored, the Steelers were expecting the Bengals to pass the ball.  In the latter drive, the Steelers were fully expecting the Bengals to run the ball, had made some adjustments, and were fully prepared to stop it.

If 70,000 or so posts do anything, they prove that Fred either doesn't understand context or just ignores it. 

(12-22-2016, 09:30 PM)samhain Wrote: I was listening to Paul Dehner's weekly appearance on Mo's afternoon show yesterday on the way to work.  They were discussing the offense's disappearances late in games and their inability to dial up effective plays when needed.  

Basically, both seemed to blame the coordinator for the offense's problems given the relative consistency at key offensive positions ( which is a point that could be debated, no doubt).  Mo asked Dehner if he felt that Zampese had a long leash with the organization, and he got a relatively surprising answer: NO.  

Dehner and the other reporters that are around this team regularly are not generally prone to hyperbole.  They are very familiar with how the team is run.  They know better than to speculate on major personnel changes.  Very telling IMO if his intuition is correct.

In short, he pointed to the fact that Zampese has been here for 3 OCs and 2 changes at the spot.  Marvin and co passed on him not once but twice.  Perhaps this season has confirmed a feeling that he's not OC material?  

Part of me thinks that the crappy OL play and losses at the receiver positions left Zampese snakebite before the season began.  They have however, shown flashes of effectiveness for large parts of games recently.  It seems that when a defense makes adjustments, that they don't have an answer, as was the case this past weekend.  

So what is it?  Personnel or an OC out of his depth?

I could see Zampese being the fall guy.

(12-24-2016, 12:54 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote:  In the latter drive, the Steelers were fully expecting the Bengals to run the ball, had made some adjustments, and were fully prepared to stop it.

Wrong.

Burkhead had just gouged them for 23 yards on 3 straight runs.  The Steelers had made no effective adjustments.

And how were the Steelers capable of stopping the third down pass that followed Burkheads 2nd down run?

(12-26-2016, 04:58 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Wrong.

Burkhead had just gouged them for 23 yards on 3 straight runs.  The Steelers had made no effective adjustments.

And how were the Steelers capable of stopping the third down pass that followed Burkheads 2nd down run?

3 straight runs with plenty of field to defend..

Seemed like when they got closer to the goal line, it became easier for the LBs to play both run or pass.  Either way, it was situationally obvious that the Bengals had milked the run for all that it was worth, and that that pass was coming on 3rd down.  They sent the heat, Andy dumped it underneath, play was blown up.