+- 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: What exactly was the problem with play calling? (/thread-23957.html)
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Bilbo Saggins - 05-07-2020
I for one miss the halcyon days of the run, run, curl, punt routine. Man, that system was a thing of beauty. Running straight into the teeth of a loaded box, wearing out the LB who was sent on a run blitz to just the right gap, and capping it off with a short route just short of the sticks. Ahhh. Those were the good 'ol days.
Without looking at a lot of data, I can't offer a serious critique of the play calling aside from stating the obvious: it didn't work. Many of the short routes were sat on and long developing plays were blown up before they could develop. There didn't seem to be a lot of misdirection, pocket movement, or element of surprise in most games. The run game had some good moments, but lacked a steady "4 yards and a cloud of dust" quality on first downs. The TEs didn't seem to be utilized for much aside from being decoys.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - BengalChris - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 03:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: John Jerry, John Miller, and B W Webb were not "Marvin guys". Preston Brown was a "Marvin guy" and he got a three year extension last offseason.
It had nothing to do with Zac. It was the front office that agreed to open the pocketbook.
Not to anyone who followed the Bengals while Shula, Coslet, and LeBeau were head coaches.
I'm completely with Fred on this.
Brown, Gio and Hart were all re-signed under Taylor, as was Eifert, who wasn't really used in a season where there were injuries to the receiving corp, a puzzling lack of use of him. Then you add in Webb, Miller and Jerry they found in the reject pile. Hart is the only one to keep a starting job and he's quite upgradeable.
Mike Brown has notoriously spent very little in signing outside players in free agency even though it's been around for 29 years now. He's finally old and near the end. Possibly he doesn't want to go out as a loser. Possibly his children ganged up on him with Taylor cheering them on the background. Who knows what made Mike Brown change his tone on free agency. But I'm more of the belief that hiring Taylor was part of the change that had already been decided upon and that Taylor is a product of the change, rather than the cause of the change.
The change in the front office has been great. Whether or not Taylor is going to bring wins remains to be seen.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Sled21 - 05-08-2020
(05-07-2020, 06:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Wait, WTF???
Zac sat around on his ass for a whole month before even meeting with his coaches? THEY DID NOT EVEN GET TOGETHER BEFPORE THE COMBINE???
Jesus, no wonder we sucked so bad this year. If this is true then he is a much worse head coach then I ever imagined.
The DC was not hired until Feb. 21st. You know this, you're just being obstinate.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-08-2020
(05-08-2020, 02:23 PM)Sled21 Wrote: The DC was not hired until Feb. 21st. You know this, you're just being obstinate.
There is nothing "obstinate" about not changing my opinion that Zac should have gotten together with his staff before the combine. You simply have not given me one good reason why I should.
I have always seen stories about successful coaches being the first guy to arrive and the last to leave because they are working so hard to make the team better, but for some reason I am supposed to believe that Taylor could not learn anything about his team and players in the six weeks before free agency started.
If his DC was hired a week before the combine that was plenty of time to get the staff together. There was tons of information they should have gone over before the combine.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Sled21 - 05-09-2020
(05-08-2020, 03:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is nothing "obstinate" about not changing my opinion that Zac should have gotten together with his staff before the combine. You simply have not given me one good reason why I should.
I have always seen stories about successful coaches being the first guy to arrive and the last to leave because they are working so hard to make the team better, but for some reason I am supposed to believe that Taylor could not learn anything about his team and players in the six weeks before free agency started.
If his DC was hired a week before the combine that was plenty of time to get the staff together. There was tons of information they should have gone over before the combine.
Uh, because he was busy looking for a staff...… hard to meet with your co-ordinator when he hasn't been hired yet. You're just looking for things to nit pick.