(10-19-2016, 09:45 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I think LaFell could be doing even better if the Bengals stopped with the stupid 2 receiver sets and spread out the opposition and attacked them.  

They have two big TEs, too, right?  Why not have Kroft and Uzomah on the field with AJ and Lafell?  Single back set.  (Gio, please...and maybe some Rex...because they are adept receivers as well).  Have one of the TEs stay in to block, and send the other out in a pattern.  Gio/Rex available to chip on pass plays, and be outlet receivers.

It just amazes me the conservative nature of this team.  Never change during a game, never attack the opposition...and I have completely given up on uptempo...which Dalton reportedly loved under Hue.  

Groan...

(10-19-2016, 10:20 AM)Wyche Wrote: It just might be crazy enough to work.  In all seriousness, Dalton seems to be a rhythm QB....gets in a zone if you will.  What better way to achieve that, than the no huddle?  Plus, it gasses the defense.  If Andy is good at it, and it seems to me that he is, why not run more of it?

(10-18-2016, 09:38 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: I want to congratulate Brandon LaFell for his terrific touchdown catch against his old team in their house.  That had to be emotionally satisfying for him.  He's really coming into his own as a Bengal and Andy Dalton can rely on him to make crucial receptions now.  I think Brandon has earned his stripes.

(10-19-2016, 12:53 PM)3wt Wrote: I like the 2 TE idea as well.   And I know he's not as explosive, but I'd use Hewitt and Kroft.  Kroft has reliable hands and decent speed and both he and Kroft are good blockers.  Hewitt knows where to get open as well.  So you have a flexible offense.  Combine that with the no huddle and go to town.  If the O Line ever jells it could be a good dynamic offense.

Look at what happened when the Patriots went to the 2 TE offense in the 2nd half...

(10-19-2016, 12:57 PM)3wt Wrote: Yeah it's not crazy.  I'm not dissing Zamp, but one of Andy's strengths is his ability to diagnose at the LOS and call his own plays.

We start to get moving and we sub players, send in a play and disrupt the flow of the offense.   Let Andy call the game from the line with a 2 TE set (with no stupid trick plays) and wear the defense down.

(10-19-2016, 01:15 AM)jeremydc Wrote: We tend to  pick up vet #2s that rarely produce as we think. Cole/Owens/Bryant come to mind. I'm glad we have  Lafell but he's more of a #3.  But then again, we wanted Tate out. Look how that worked out so far. I guess the grass isn't always greener.

(10-19-2016, 10:04 AM)Wyche Wrote: That was the only time we had ANY success in Big D....the no huddle.  Just let KZ hold the clipboard from here on out, Dalton call the game.  It's woefully obvious he's in over his head.

(10-19-2016, 05:05 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Owens put up some pretty stellar numbers for a #2 WR here.  Comparing him to crap Coles and a guy who didn't even suit up is revisionism at its finest.



I'm afraid to say that Zampese reminds me of Bratkowski in this regard.  My memory may not be 100% accurate, but I seem to recall our playoff years with Palmer (05 and 09) involving a lot of "Bratkowski-eliminating" no-huddle and 2 minute heroics.

(10-19-2016, 12:57 PM)3wt Wrote: Yeah it's not crazy.  I'm not dissing Zamp, but one of Andy's strengths is his ability to diagnose at the LOS and call his own plays.

We start to get moving and we sub players, send in a play and disrupt the flow of the offense.   Let Andy call the game from the line with a 2 TE set (with no stupid trick plays) and wear the defense down.

(10-20-2016, 03:02 AM)bengalsturntup926 Wrote: I'm all for no huddle, we brought it to the nfl it would only be fitting if we won the Superbowl with it. Because you know they didn't let us actually use it in our last Superbowl.