+- 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: Lewis hints at personnel changes (/thread-13351.html)
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - 740Bengal - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 01:27 AM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: Lewis is actually one of the best in the world at what he does. Top 40 or 50 in the world probably. He'd be a good coach to bring onto an ailing program that would see an 8-8 season as progress. He could have bounced around the league and been known as a great rehabilitator in another reality, one who fixes the most obvious of errors and builds a program to around the NFL average until he hits his ceiling. Unfortunately, he does not seem like he is capable of winning a super bowl as a HC.
Lol Good 1. He wouldn't be a top 50 high school coach in the state.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Deanlj69 - 11-07-2017
(11-06-2017, 09:55 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: In a lost season. You start evaluating. Like we should have done last year.
Jordan evans looked real this preseason. Vinney rey aint getting any better. Westerman looked good in the preaseason. How about activating him and actually playing him. Quit screwing with our last 2 first round picks and play them. Quit playing MJ at DE. Willis and Lawson should be getting all of those snaps. Time to put Sims on IR. Glasgow and Billings need the PT. Maybe use the spot on dielman you just drafted and see if he can play. Hopefully fat randy is healthy. Cut the extra K and activate the S STs weapon you traded up for.
All stuff we should do. We wont
Exactly what he said. Play the youth see what you got. Problem is Marvin is hoping for a mini run to end the year and then h3 and the homers can say if we add a lineman and if Eifert had been healthy. Etc
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - bengals67 - 11-07-2017
I bet there are at least 5 players on practice squads we could pick up who are better than our two starting OTs.
But both of them will continue to play until their contracts run out - like Bodine.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Wyche'sWarrior - 11-07-2017
(11-06-2017, 10:00 PM)McC Wrote: Stuck on stupid. I absolutely love it. I will have to steal it. With your permission.
You nailed it.
You never heard stuck on stupid?
That's been around since Moby Dick was a minnow.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Wyche'sWarrior - 11-07-2017
(11-06-2017, 10:41 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Shoot, I'll recruit Whyche's Warrior and I to be the first two. We're old, and might only last a play or two, but at least the team will get a quick score out of the deal.
LOL.....yeah, I could at least get a PF for a chop block to keep Andy from getting clobbered.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Nicomo Cosca - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 10:41 AM)Daddy-O Wrote: Are you out of your mind. QB play in the NFL is horrid right now and it's hurting the product offering. There are probably about 20 teams that would take Dalton in a heartbeat.
Name them. I'd say more like 5-10 max.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Wyche'sWarrior - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 11:20 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Bengals response - "We're 3-5, we can still make the playoffs! Don't give up on the season just yet!"
Seriously though, I don't think we start seeing some of these younger players to evaluate until the Bengals get at least three more losses.
We got Peerman back last season instead of giving WJIII valuable game experience. I wouldn't even give this staff the benefit of doubt doing what you're saying with even 5 more losses.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - PhilHos - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 04:15 AM)Housh Wrote: It kills me seeing ppl lobby for AJM.
It’s basically an unwritten admission that you don’t know football.
How could you possibly lobby for Dalton to be replaced but not say a word about the line?
I know, right?
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Shake n Blake - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 11:29 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: passing the buck to the players playing like shit??? that's their job to play football and they are sucking at it.
its not coach speak its just truth
Normally I agree with a lot of stuff you say, but coaches clearly have a lot of influence on how players look. Scheme is huge.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Wyche'sWarrior - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 12:26 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Name them. I'd say more like 5-10 max.
CLE
NYJ
SF
ARZ
JAX
MIA
DEN
LAC (Rivers is old)
HOU
IND
BALT (Flacco sucks)
BUFF (maybe)
CHI
You could argue that TB, TN, NYG, and LAR might do well with him, and also add him to replace aging guys in NE and NO in a year or two.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Nicomo Cosca - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 12:38 PM)Wyche Wrote: CLE
NYJ
SF
ARZ
JAX
MIA
DEN
LAC (Rivers is old)
HOU
IND
BALT (Flacco sucks)
BUFF (maybe)
CHI
You could argue that TB, TN, NYG, and LAR might do well with him, and also add him to replace aging guys in NE and NO in a year or two.
SF has Garoppolo so that's a no, Houston has Watson so you're talking a fill in and eventual backup position not a starter, no way TB, LAR, or TN would want Dalton over their much more talented younger QBs. NE trading away all their QBs not named Brady means they're convinced he's got at least a few more good years in the tank. Kind of doubt Buffalo would consider him much of an upgrade over Taylor at this point. So yeah I don't think it'd be anywhere close to 20 teams.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - t3r3e3 - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 12:38 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: CLE
NYJ
SF
ARZ
JAX
MIA
DEN
LAC (Rivers is old)
HOU
IND
BALT (Flacco sucks)
BUFF (maybe)
CHI
You could argue that TB, TN, NYG, and LAR might do well with him, and also add him to replace aging guys in NE and NO in a year or two.
The list depends on if you take into account injuries, trades etc. SF just signed Garoppolo so they’re out. Tampa has Winston so they’re out. Miami has Tannehill signed long term so they’re out. Luck isn’t going anywhere, so they’re out. Watson isn’t getting benched for Dalton, nor is Rivers. Chicago just invested a #2 overall pick and draft capital in Trubisky, so they’re out. Baltimore is debatable. I’d rather have Dalton. Buffalo is also debatable, because Taylor wins with a bottom 5 receiving cast, albeit now with Benjamin.
The rest I agree with you, so looking at 4-5 teams no questions asked.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - ochocincos - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 12:29 PM)Wyche Wrote: We got Peerman back last season instead of giving WJIII valuable game experience. I wouldn't even give this staff the benefit of doubt doing what you're saying with even 5 more losses.
The Bengals openly said that the ONLY reason Peerman was activated over WJ3 was due to the injury of Gio Bernard right before that. Without Peerman, the Bengals would have only had Hill and Burkhead for RB depth, which the Bengals wanted to at least have three.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Wyche'sWarrior - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 12:49 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: SF has Garoppolo so that's a no, Houston has Watson so you're talking a fill in and eventual backup position not a starter, no way TB, LAR, or TN would want Dalton over their much more talented younger QBs. NE trading away all their QBs not named Brady means they're convinced he's got at least a few more good years in the tank. Kind of doubt Buffalo would consider him much of an upgrade over Taylor at this point. So yeah I don't think it'd be anywhere close to 20 teams.
While I certainly don't agree with that poster's assertion that it's 20 teams, I don't agree with 5-10 max either, hence my post quoting you.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Wyche'sWarrior - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 12:51 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The Bengals openly said that the ONLY reason Peerman was activated over WJ3 was due to the injury of Gio Bernard right before that. Without Peerman, the Bengals would have only had Hill and Burkhead for RB depth, which the Bengals wanted to at least have three.
Didn't we have a guy on the practice squad that could have been called up at RB in case of emergency? We may as well trotted me out there at RB if Peerman was only option....not much difference. I still see it as a dumb decision, the season was tanked at that point anyway, whether the Bungals wanted to admit it, or not.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Wyche'sWarrior - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 12:49 PM)t3r3e3 Wrote: The list depends on if you take into account injuries, trades etc. SF just signed Garoppolo so they’re out. Tampa has Winston so they’re out. Miami has Tannehill signed long term so they’re out. Luck isn’t going anywhere, so they’re out. Watson isn’t getting benched for Dalton, nor is Rivers. Chicago just invested a #2 overall pick and draft capital in Trubisky, so they’re out. Baltimore is debatable. I’d rather have Dalton. Buffalo is also debatable, because Taylor wins with a bottom 5 receiving cast, albeit now with Benjamin.
The rest I agree with you, so looking at 4-5 teams no questions asked.
I agree with that. With Garoppolo, I feel they're evaluating him, if he tanks, they'd be open to 14. Winston is struggling, I know Watson isn't getting benched, but RIGHT NOW, the Texans would love to have him. I would wager Miami would dump Tannehill, maybe not.....about the same player, really. Luck is out, so again, the post that was quoted was right now, and honestly, Dalton has outperformed Luck in just about every statistical category out there, that's debatable. Chicago, they rolled into the season with Glennon, Trubisky has some work to do....actually a lot. I'd wager they would love to have him learning another year or two behind 14. Buffalo does not ask much of Taylor, and they have a good line and Shady McCoy. I think he could have some good seasons there. Dude is a 16-11 kinda QB in this league. Even those don't fall off trees. Decent FA linemen do though.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - Circleville Guy - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 04:15 AM)Housh Wrote: It kills me seeing ppl lobby for AJM.These are the same experts that saw this line but predicted 10-12 wins.... now they blame it all on Andy. Lol
It’s basically an unwritten admission that you don’t know football.
How could you possibly lobby for Dalton to be replaced but not say a word about the line?
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - ochocincos - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 01:05 PM)Wyche Wrote: Didn't we have a guy on the practice squad that could have been called up at RB in case of emergency? We may as well trotted me out there at RB if Peerman was only option....not much difference. I still see it as a dumb decision, the season was tanked at that point anyway, whether the Bungals wanted to admit it, or not.
If you bring up a guy from PS, you have to cut another person or not activate Peerman or WJ3.
And the Bengals were 3-6-1 at the time of when Peerman was activated (Nov 26). Technically, the Bengals were not out of it, as they did have the possibility of winning out and going 9-6-1.
Also at that time, the Steelers were 6-5, so 3.5 games behind with six games remaining.
The Ravens were 5-5, so the Bengals were just 1.5 games behind them.
Realistically, did they have a chance? Not really, but the Bengals have never been willing to give up on a season and play the young guys for development purposes until they were statistically eliminated from playoff contention.
We didn't really see the Bengals even give the young guys a chance last year until that last game or two.
I expect more of the same this year. Given they are 3-5 right now, I don't expect them to give up on the season until December, which means three more games at minimum.
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - McC - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 11:29 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: passing the buck to the players playing like shit??? that's their job to play football and they are sucking at it.
its not coach speak its just truth
Coaching--putting players in a position to win. Is that being done? No. We play chicken shit football on both sides of the ball. Our schemes are joke. Is that on the players?
RE: Lewis hints at personnel changes - McC - 11-07-2017
(11-07-2017, 12:23 PM)Wyche Wrote: You never heard stuck on stupid?Apparently, I'm stuck on it.
That's been around since Moby Dick was a minnow.