+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Josh Shaw (/thread-8153.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Josh Shaw - JumboTron - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 12:24 PM)Au165 Wrote: You mean the same Tannehill who threw for 387 and 2 TD's while rushing for 25 yards against NE? Now remember NE has given much of the credit for their success this season to their defense. I'm not saying Tannehill is good, but for some reason the one bad game against Denver has some how trumped keeping the Steelers in check and shutting down a pretty good Dolphins offense.
Cherry picking stats and games to prove points is never a good way to go. Anyone can do it to prove whatever their point is. Fact is defense has played well enough to win every game we have played in so far, the offense in different phases it seems base don the opponent has not.
Outside of giving up the game winner vs. Denver and what ended up being the game winning score against Pittsburgh. The back-end plays well except when they don't.
LOL, you have the audacity to state the D played well enough to win against the Broncos? Lord...
RE: Josh Shaw - Brownshoe - 10-06-2016
I would say the biggest weakness on our defense this year has been penalties. Some fair.... Some not so fair (well, more than some). The defense would have only allowed like 10 points against Denver, but penalties kept their drives alive, and they knew they were playing with house money so they started going for the big plays just because they knew we would give them the first with the penalties.
RE: Josh Shaw - Au165 - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 12:27 PM)JumboTron Wrote: Outside of giving up the game winner vs. Denver and what ended up being the game winning score against Pittsburgh. The back-end plays well except when they don't.
Like I said, you can pick and choose stats each time. In both games our offense had less than a 50% 3rd down conversion rate with it at 25% against Pitt. I'd argue if our offense could actually stay on the field then the defense easily did enough to win those games. Also note the 2 turnovers in the Denver game didn't help the defense. It also must be noted that the penalties are probably the biggest weakness of the defense.
As I said stats can be spun however you want. Funny you disregard that your Tannehill statement was you talking out of your ass.
RE: Josh Shaw - JumboTron - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 12:33 PM)Au165 Wrote: Like I said, you can pick and choose stats each time. In both games our offense had less than a 50% 3rd down conversion rate with it at 25% against Pitt. I'd argue if our offense could actually stay on the field then the defense easily did enough to win those games. Also note the 2 turnovers in the Denver game didn't help the defense. It also must be noted that the penalties are probably the biggest weakness of the defense.
As I said stats can be spun however you want. Funny you disregard that your Tannehill statement was you talking out of your ass.
What do penalties have to do with surrendering over 300 yards passing to a first year starting QB, on the road for the first time, to go along with two WR's going for over 100 yards receiving? Just admit, at least for the Denver game, that our D did not play well enough to win. I mean, even you had to cringe when you wrote that and hit submit.
Tannehill had a nice game vs NE. Excellent. Dude still sucks.
RE: Josh Shaw - Brownshoe - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 12:40 PM)JumboTron Wrote: What do penalties have to do with surrendering over 300 yards passing to a first year starting QB, on the road for the first time, to go along with two WR's going for over 100 yards receiving? Just admit, at least for the Denver game, that our D did not play well enough to win. I mean, even you had to cringe when you wrote that and hit submit.
Tannehill had a nice game vs NE. Excellent. Dude still sucks.
Because most of their scoring drives and big plays came from drives that should have ended but didn't because of penalties.
RE: Josh Shaw - Au165 - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 12:40 PM)JumboTron Wrote: What do penalties have to do with surrendering over 300 yards passing to a first year starting QB, on the road for the first time, to go along with two WR's going for over 100 yards receiving? Just admit, at least for the Denver game, that our D did not play well enough to win. I mean, even you had to cringe when you wrote that and hit submit.
Tannehill had a nice game vs NE. Excellent. Dude still sucks.
No cringing here, because I look at the totality of things. On two of the touchdown drives Denver started on the Cincinnati 46 and Denver 45. The defense is good enough to win against anyone, up to this point the offense has not been.
Tannehill is 12th in the NFL in passing yards, he makes some bad decisions but he puts up numbers.
RE: Josh Shaw - JumboTron - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 12:43 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Because most of their scoring drives and big plays came from drives that should have ended but didn't because of penalties.
Is that a fact? Honest question.
RE: Josh Shaw - JumboTron - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 12:46 PM)Au165 Wrote: No cringing here, because I look at the totality of things. On two of the touchdown drives Denver started on the Cincinnati 46 and Denver 45. The defense is good enough to win against anyone, up to this point the offense has not been.
Tannehill is 12th in the NFL in passing yards, he makes some bad decisions but he puts up numbers.
I do agree with that. To me, it just looks like the secondary needs to play better and hopefully the MIA game was the shot-in-the-arm that they needed (the entire defense really) in terms of confidence and getting their swag back especially after soul-crushing losses to Pit and Denver.
Offense, particularly in the redzone? Woof, they need to get it together.
RE: Josh Shaw - Brownshoe - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 12:47 PM)JumboTron Wrote: Is that a fact? Honest question.
Yes.
RE: Josh Shaw - jj22 - 10-06-2016
I think the Defense has been OK. I'm still concerned about their two minute drill (end of half defense). Guenther who I'm still okay with just hasn't been able to get that fixed.
RE: Josh Shaw - Socal Bengals fan - 10-06-2016
I love Shaw. Looks like a good player. Now only we can trade Shawn Williams for a 12 pack.
RE: Josh Shaw - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 10:20 AM)NKYRob Wrote:#Bengals CB Josh Shaw has allowed a passer rating of 8.3 when lined up in the slot, best of any NFL cornerback. pic.twitter.com/8rJHp5M83R
— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) October 6, 2016
The above tweet says it all. I know a lot of people were clamoring for the Bengals to resign Leon Hall, but Shaw has been a bright spot in the secondary. Now if we could get Shawn Williams on the same page...
Love Shaw and he had another solid game last week against the Phins. Dude was a total steal and will be starting soon.
He is just too damn good and our other corners have been getting dinged up, he might just get a start outside and keep it.
Best pick we have had in awhile. Big, physical corner with great hips and smarts for the game. Shaw has no flaws.
RE: Josh Shaw - lostpoet2 - 10-06-2016
Shaw has been balling out, but apparently the coaches will always play him behind the first round corners.
RE: Josh Shaw - bfine32 - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 02:28 PM)Socal Bengals fan Wrote: I love Shaw. Looks like a good player. Now only we can trade Shawn Williams for a 12 pack.
This is because Shaw was drafted in the 4th RD where we draft well; Shawn was taken in the 3rd, where we do poorly.
Every year I want us to trade our 3rd rounder for a couple 4ths
RE: Josh Shaw - SunsetBengal - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 11:21 AM)JumboTron Wrote: Why would an opposing team be worried about rushing TD's when they can be much more effective targeting a weak secondary? Thank God we have the likes of Geno and Dunlap because without pressure it can get ugly back there.
Because, for the 1st time in the Marvin Lewis era, we seem to have a complete set of LBs. Teams have not much other choice than to go to the air.
RE: Josh Shaw - Derrick - 10-06-2016
(10-06-2016, 11:48 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Because passing TDs aren't all on the secondary. If you have no pass rush (like we have been lacking) then it's easier for receivers to get open and get TDs. The fact that we haven't given up much yardage means that the secondary has been locking down the other team. Football 101 guys.IMO the LBers aren't very good in coverage. No statistics just opinion.