(10-17-2019, 01:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You may not understand, but there is a good reason other NFL teams use high draft picks or spend huge amounts of money to get a good LT.

My inability to understand aside: Why do you say other teams? Haven't we used some high draft picks lately to get a LT and give up a bit to get Cordy Glenn

(10-17-2019, 02:19 PM)jason Wrote: Why do some defend our lack of running game behind the same line?

This is a super point, Jason. I remember back in the day when people were urging the Bengals to draft Trent Richardson because, “He’ll make that line look good!” I’m still befuddled by such lack of logic because it’s the offensive line which opens holes for a running back. If there’s no holes there will be no run game. It’s that simple.

The Bengals have no run game. It’s not the backs’ fault, either. The big guys up front aren’t doing their jobs. They sometimes pass block effectively purely by accident but their run blocking is consistently horrible.

(10-17-2019, 02:19 PM)jason Wrote: Why do some defend our lack of running game behind the same line?

We're coming off a year where Joe Mixon led the AFC in rushing and every game this year where he's gotten at least 15 carries he's went over 4 YPC. Lack of running game this year might not be because of the talent on the field. 

(10-17-2019, 08:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: We're coming off a year where Joe Mixon led the AFC in rushing and every game this year where he's gotten at least 15 carries he's went over 4 YPC. Lack of running game this year might not be because of the talent on the field. 

No doubt...it's partially scheme, playcalling, etc.

(10-17-2019, 01:43 PM)Nately120 Wrote: You mean the Texans weren't just trying to do the dumbest thing they could when they traded the farm for Tonsil?

And still Watson and Andy are both being sacked 1 out of 11 attempts this year, but for some reason Watson has a passer rating over 25 points higher. But you guys are right, we should probably look at upgrading that LT spot. 

(10-17-2019, 09:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: And still Watson and Andy are both being sacked 1 out of 11 attempts this year, but for some reason Watson has a passer rating over 25 points higher. But you guys are right, we should probably look at upgrading that LT spot. 

Well screw it then, put in Finley. That's easier than fixing the line at least. 

(10-17-2019, 09:17 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Well screw it then, put in Finley. That's easier than fixing the line at least. 

Nah, probably smarter to get another LT, LG, C, RG, RT and stick with the same mediocre 32 year old QB

(10-17-2019, 09:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nah, probably smarter to get another LT, LG, C, RG, RT and stick with the same mediocre 32 year old QB

Well we aren't fixing the line so we may as well let someone else suffer.  All joking aside if we dont extend Dalton I'll be somewhat shocked. 

(10-17-2019, 09:31 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Well we aren't fixing the line so we may as well let someone else suffer.  All joking aside if we dont extend Dalton I'll be somewhat shocked. 

We kept Bobby Hart and Preston Brown. Dalton is probably inline for a $30 million a year deal.

(10-17-2019, 09:17 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Well screw it then, put in Finley. That's easier than fixing the line at least. 

I don't know man, it seems so much easier to replace 5 guys that need to play as a cohesive unit, than it is to replace one guy that could avoid rushers better than the guy before. (no ninja necessary)

(10-17-2019, 09:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: And still Watson and Andy are both being sacked 1 out of 11 attempts this year, but for some reason Watson has a passer rating over 25 points higher. But you guys are right, we should probably look at upgrading that LT spot. 

Well no shit! Watson is younger and more mobile. 

This is the same deal as when Palmer was here. If you have a guy that isn't the most mobile, and likes to play from the pocket, then you invest in the line and make life easy on him, NOT what the Bungals did in BOTH instances.....let your line go to shit. You blamed Palmer then, you blame Dalton now, but the truth of the matter is the FO is dumber than a sack full of hammers....or just plain cheap.

The way Mike Brown values blockers, we need to be looking at Mike Vick 2.0.

(10-18-2019, 07:06 AM)WychesWarrior Wrote: Well no shit! Watson is younger and more mobile. 

This is the same deal as when Palmer was here. If you have a guy that isn't the most mobile, and likes to play from the pocket, then you invest in the line and make life easy on him, NOT what the Bungals did in BOTH instances.....let your line go to shit. You blamed Palmer then, you blame Dalton now, but the truth of the matter is the FO is dumber than a sack full of hammers....or just plain cheap.

The way Mike Brown values blockers, we need to be looking at Mike Vick 2.0.

...and even that won’t fix our abysmal rushing game. Everyone else is pointing fingers at Andy Dalton and cheerleading for Ryan Finley but I’m more concerned about Joe Mixon and Giovani Bernard. Those guys are getting stuffed like a Thanksgiving turkey for no gain. The pass blocking is bad but the run blocking is even worse.

(10-18-2019, 09:04 AM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: ...and even that won’t fix our abysmal rushing game.  Everyone else is pointing fingers at Andy Dalton and cheerleading for Ryan Finley but I’m more concerned about Joe Mixon and Giovani Bernard.  Those guys are getting stuffed like a Thanksgiving turkey for no gain.  The pass blocking is bad but the run blocking is even worse.

It's a mess FiK....a bonafide cluster of epic proportions.  We're basically running out a preseason oline. I see people saying other lines suck, and that is true, but at least a lot of them are playing most of the guys they planned on starting. That's not the case here. Our line was bad to start with, now we're rolling out guys that are 3rd string and worse. There's really not much that can be done at this point, aside from running unbalanced sets and going jumbo a lot.

(10-17-2019, 09:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: And still Watson and Andy are both being sacked 1 out of 11 attempts this year, but for some reason Watson has a passer rating over 25 points higher. But you guys are right, we should probably look at upgrading that LT spot. 

Using Watson to prove a point about pass protection is like using Tom Brady to prove we should get our next QB with a 6th round pick.

Last year in the playoffs the Colts got 14 pressures against Watson and he ended up with a 69 passer rating and only 7 point on the scoreboard.  But I guess the Texans were stupid to try and upgrade the O-line because they don't realize that pass blocking has no effect on a QBs production.

(10-17-2019, 08:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: My inability to understand aside: Why do you say other teams? Haven't we used some high draft picks lately to get a LT and give up a bit to get Cordy Glenn

Because if I said the Bengals did it you would just say the Bengals are stupid.

(10-18-2019, 01:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Because if I said the Bengals did it you would just say the Bengals are stupid.

Nah, if you said the Bengals did it; you'd be right for a change. Luckily, your record is still in tact. 

(10-18-2019, 12:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Using Watson to prove a point about pass protection is like using Tom Brady to prove we should get our next QB with a 6th round pick.

Last year in the playoffs the Colts got 14 pressures against Watson and he ended up with a 69 passer rating and only 7 point on the scoreboard.  But I guess the Texans were stupid to try and upgrade the O-line because they don't realize that pass blocking has no effect on a QBs production.

Just stop it. You were the exact same person that told me Watson got sacked because of Watson and not because of his oline. 

FWIW, a 69 would be a career high for Andy in the playoffs.......think about it. 

(10-18-2019, 06:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Just stop it. You were the exact same person that told me Watson got sacked because of Watson and not because of his oline. 

FWIW, a 69 would be a career high for Andy in the playoffs.......think about it. 

You need to stop trying to claim that Watson proves a bad O-line does not effect a QB.  He could not do anything in that playoff game because of the pressure he was facing.  

(10-18-2019, 06:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You need to stop trying to claim that Watson proves a bad O-line does not effect a QB.  He could not do anything in that playoff game because of the pressure he was facing.  

Oh, so he had a different oline in the playoffs than he did all season when he took 65 sacks. Dude faced pressure all year, just like he's doing this year. But you point to one game in a season where he was sacked 65 times and had a passer rating of over 103. 2funny. 

I just find it 2funny when simpletons say "No QB could do well behind this line". 

(10-18-2019, 09:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh, so he had a different oline in the playoffs than he did all season when he took 65 sacks. Dude faced pressure all year, just like he's doing this year. But you point to one game in a season where he was sacked 65 times and had a passer rating of over 103. 2funny. 

I just find it 2funny when simpletons say "No QB could do well behind this line". 

 
Like I said before, using Watson to try and prove that an o-line does not effect the QB is like saying we should look for our future QB in the 6th round because of Tom Brady.

I find it 2funny when simpletons say "We can find the best QB ever in the sixth round".

You can't prove a point with an exception to the rule.  We would have as much luck fining a QB who could flourish behind our current line as we would finding a Hall of Fame QB in the sixth round.