+- 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: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is (/thread-1279.html)
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - kevin - 08-04-2015
2012 was a great year of O Line coaching and adjustments. Injuries to the starting guards. Injuries to the starting center. Injury to the back-up center. The team started 3-5 and most teams would not have recovered from most of the O-Line injured....but the Bengals adjusted and adapted and won 7 of the last 8 games, losing only to Dallas in a close one that Romo pulled off a nice 2 minute drill. Bengals went from 3-5 to the play-offs and the win at Pittsburg before Christmas was great.....
We should have a good O Line and a good D Line and I look for the Bengals to be able to block and tackle and man up in the trenches and win in the trenches and for this reason, I think our trenches on both sides get us back to the play-offs.
Still, I think this jazz that a good coach wins with no talent is bull. You draft talent. You need talent. All draft picks need coached up, this ain't college. All draft picks need coached up. The O Line after Munoz and Montoya in the early 90's was horse meat and void of any talent. Klingler and KiJana got their heads taken off as soon as the ball was snapped. The O Line fell apart in 2008 and Carson got his nose broke, his jaw cracked in preseason and his arm ripped off in regular season. Fitz replacing him had to run for his life as soon as the ball was snapped. The Bengals early 90's and the Bengals 2008 were some of the worst O Line's that ever walked on an NFL field........I don't blame the O Line coach....you can't make chicken salad out of chicken shot......you can't make T Bone Steak out of horse crop. ......and don't tell me a good coach should, that also is bull, but this O-Line coach pretty much did in 2012 adjusting to players lost for the season to injuries. Winning 7 of the last 8 was a great O Line adjusting to those injuries.
The good news is, this isn't the early 90's or 2008 and the Bengals are more loaded with talent in the trenches going into 2015. The Bengals should be able to match up with anybody in the trenches, where game are really won.....For all the slide rule stats, I'll just say that you don't go to 4 straight play-offs in the very tough AFC North without somebody doing something right in the trenches the last 4 years, on both sides of the ball.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - StLucieBengal - 08-04-2015
You know I am not entirely comfortable being in agreement with Fred. But the amount of anti Paul Alexander posts on this thread is just over the top. If you don't like mike brown that's fine. But if Marvin didn't think Alexander was a good choice he would be gone. Like he has gotten rid of several coaches.
Not being a fan of the way Mike Brown has ran the team during his tenure is one thing. But how is that relevant to how Alexander coaches the OL?
The constant excuses made to make him out to be a bad coach is just crazy. This is easily one of the most well respected OL coaches in football.
If your hatred for Mike Brown is so large that you bash anything associated then you should go back to listening to trumpy on sports talk trash the team.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - magikod - 08-04-2015
(08-02-2015, 09:54 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I'm pretty high on Bodine. I thought he did pretty well at the point of attack and most of his struggles were from inexperience, not a lack of strength and grit. I'm hoping he makes big strides this year.
I hope you are correct.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Shake n Blake - 08-04-2015
(08-04-2015, 04:58 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: I'm not the biggest PA fan, but the Asst. HC title came from Marvin. I believe Paul was considering moving on after the 02 season. Marvin talked to him and convinced Mike to give him the title to keep him here.
Ah. I was off by a year. I was thinking that happened while Lebeau was HC in 2002. Good catch.
(08-04-2015, 05:14 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: Well, show me one O-line coach that produces a great O-line without an abundance of talent.
The bottom line is that nearly every one of the top offensive lines in the league is comprised of a couple first rounders and some mid round picks. That's just the way it works.
This is what Fred would call the dreaded straw man. No one said he should've produced a great o-line without talent. If Paul were as great as some of you think though, he should've been able to slap something semi-decent together.
Honestly, the only time our line was a wreck was 2008. We had plenty of talent in '06-07. By 2009, we had Whit, Mathis, Cook and Collins to go along with Bobbie. That was enough talent. We've only added more since then, with Andre (who missed most of '09), Zeitler and Boling.
Despite having solid pieces, the run game had an average rank of 27th in ypc (over an 8 year span) and we had a few different years where the sack numbers were high (although we've mostly been ok there). This continued up til last year. Now I doubt anyone thinks we've been lacking talent since the "re-boot".
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - BengalsRocker - 08-04-2015
The fact that Whitworth, Andre, and Zeitler were talented guys from day one should not be held against Alexander.
IMO the Center position on this team has long been neglected and "let's just roll with him" mentality. Was that PA's doing... or Marv/Brown?
Rotating centers was about the most mind-boggling thing. Why would you do that to your "anchor"? Again... who decided that move?
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Wyche'sWarrior - 08-04-2015
(08-04-2015, 10:03 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: The fact that Whitworth, Andre, and Zeitler were talented guys from day one should not be held against Alexander.
IMO the Center position on this team has long been neglected and "let's just roll with him" mentality. Was that PA's doing... or Marv/Brown?
Rotating centers was about the most mind-boggling thing. Why would you do that to your "anchor"? Again... who decided that move?
It depends.....apparently, if it's a good move, it's Piano Man, if it's bad.....there's a litany of excuses and scapegoats......
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - fredtoast - 08-04-2015
(08-04-2015, 11:45 PM)Wyche Wrote: It depends.....apparently, if it's a good move, it's Piano Man, if it's bad.....there's a litany of excuses and scapegoats......
Interesting fact about Paul Alexander. He is the one position coach we have who does not need any excuses because he has never had a high draft pick that flopped.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Wyche'sWarrior - 08-05-2015
(08-04-2015, 11:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Interesting fact about Paul Alexander. He is the one position coach we have who does not need any excuses because he has never had a high draft pick that flopped.
Meh.....couple third rounders, Melvin Tuten and Ken Blackman.......most of the time, top round o lineman are can't miss type of players, Tony Mandarich not withstanding.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - StLucieBengal - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 12:21 AM)Wyche Wrote: Meh.....couple third rounders, Melvin Tuten and Ken Blackman.......most of the time, top round o lineman are can't miss type of players, Tony Mandarich not withstanding.
He made a solid starter out of Ken Blackman. Melvin Tuten was a project when drafted.
And highly drafted OL bust all the time.
All the picks taken the year got Smith were busts. And Smith was our top guy and we were panned for taking him at the time. Alexander made him into one of the top RT in the league.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Wyche'sWarrior - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 12:33 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He made a solid starter out of Ken Blackman. Melvin Tuten was a project when drafted.
And highly drafted OL bust all the time.
All the picks taken the year got Smith were busts. And Smith was our top guy and we were panned for taking him at the time. Alexander made him into one of the top RT in the league.
Why did no one offer that top RT in the league any coin then?
Agree to disagree I guess. All stats and arguments aside, the man was on a staff that posted one of the worst decades in all of professional sports. He's been here the entire playoff drought......only in Mike Clown's bizarro world do you still have a job after all of that.
We coulda had Munchack........
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - StLucieBengal - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 12:40 AM)Wyche Wrote: Why did no one offer that top RT in the league any coin then?
Agree to disagree I guess. All stats and arguments aside, the man was on a staff that posted one of the worst decades in all of professional sports. He's been here the entire playoff drought......only in Mike Clown's bizarro world do you still have a job after all of that.
We coulda had Munchack........
He is almost exclusively a RT and in free agency teams pony up for LT. Most don't like to give LT money unless they can play LT. Perfect example is Anthony Collins getting a big deal.
Could have had Munchak for what? An OL coach? Why would we take a step back? And why do you think Munchak is better?
Yes he has been here a long time. But did you ever consider that he was one of the few bright spots on the staff? And that's why Marvin rewarded him with the AHC title. I believe that year San Francisco and a couple others were after him.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - StLucieBengal - 08-05-2015
Btw he actually made Nate Livings someone who got a pretty good sized deal in free agency.
Stacey Andrews was a mess after he left Alexander.
As was Anthony Collins, who he somehow made into a highly sought after FA.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Wyche'sWarrior - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 01:10 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He is almost exclusively a RT and in free agency teams pony up for LT. Most don't like to give LT money unless they can play LT. Perfect example is Anthony Collins getting a big deal.
Could have had Munchak for what? An OL coach? Why would we take a step back? And why do you think Munchak is better?
Yes he has been here a long time. But did you ever consider that he was one of the few bright spots on the staff? And that's why Marvin rewarded him with the AHC title. I believe that year San Francisco and a couple others were after him.
Smith got no offers for good RT money.....zilch. The Buccaneers are not very good at this NFL thing at the moment.....and back to Ken Blackman, more like warm body to fill a hole.....should've gotten more than that out of a third rounder....
Yes, obviously. For one, he is a better coach, did you see Pittsburgh dominate us on the ground at our house.....cramming it down our throats at will? What about that record breaking year CJ had behind his line? How good did Eddie George look? Has Piano Man ever been sniffed for a HC gig? Has he been a first round draft pick and gone into the HOF as an offensive lineman? Yeah, you might say I trust ol' Mike's knowledge a little more......
There are no bright spots when you're that bad, he's a Son of Paul man, through and through.....I've never read of anyone being "after him".....and Mediocre Marv is not exactly a ringing endorsement in my book.....
(08-05-2015, 01:15 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Btw he actually made Nate Livings someone who got a pretty good sized deal in free agency.
Stacey Andrews was a mess after he left Alexander.
As was Anthony Collins, who he somehow made into a highly sought after FA.
Nate "Ole` " Livings was straight doo doo. He's part of the reason we had to run an unbalanced line so often to pick up 3 frickin yards. He. Sucked. The Cowboys overpaid by a mile because of the market for guards that year and their desperation. Grubbs and Nicks set the bar really high and it trickled down from there. Livings was garbage......he was garbage here.
Stacey Andrews blew out his knee and had a pulmonary embolism.....but nice try.
Anthony Collins was made to look better because of all of the talent around him.....he wasn't "disguised" in Tampa.....plus, no one around here gives any credit to Andy Dalton and his quick release. As someone mentioned earlier, in 2012, when the line was asked to protect longer in order to allow Andy to ad lib, they gave up 46 sacks. When Andy is among the league leaders in getting the ball out early, they're "a great o line", even though we're among the bottom feeders in yards per carry almost annually. That's pretty telling to me......
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Shake n Blake - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 12:33 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He made a solid starter out of Ken Blackman. Melvin Tuten was a project when drafted.
And highly drafted OL bust all the time.
All the picks taken the year got Smith were busts. And Smith was our top guy and we were panned for taking him at the time. Alexander made him into one of the top RT in the league.
Eugene Monroe has 25 more starts than Andre. Oher has 32 more starts than Andre. So I don't see how these 2 were busts and Andre is "one of the league's top tackle's".
I'd say when Andre is healthy, he's in the top half of of the league as far as RT's go, but he's been pretty inconsistent as far as playing like a top tackle. Munoz literally laughed at the idea of Andre being a top tackle. Andre himself just said he's "tired of being mediocre". The Bengals just drafted a pair of tackles. Andre didn't get a sniff on the FA market.
There's plenty of evidence that Andre isn't as great as some think.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Wyche'sWarrior - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 01:30 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Eugene Monroe has 25 more starts than Andre. Oher has 32 more starts than Andre. So I don't see how these 2 were busts and Andre is "one of the league's top tackle's".
I'd say when Andre is healthy, he's in the top half of of the league as far as RT's go, but he's been pretty inconsistent as far as playing like a top tackle. Munoz literally laughed at the idea of Andre being a top tackle. Andre himself just said he's "tired of being mediocre". The Bengals just drafted a pair of tackles. Andre didn't get a sniff on the FA market.
There's plenty of evidence that Andre isn't as great as some think.
I read that article about Andre being tired of being mediocre too. You'd think such a wizard of an o line coach could elevate a first round pick above mediocre...... :snark:
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - RoyleRedlegs - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 03:26 PM)Wyche Wrote: I read that article about Andre being tired of being mediocre too. You'd think such a wizard of an o line coach could elevate a first round pick above mediocre...... :snark:
Andre's issues have been injury and attitude. 2 things you can't necessarily "coach away"
Also, do you see the hypocrisy in diminishing the value of the deals Livings, Collins and others got after Cincinnati, while saying he's a bad coach because Andre got no offers....
FYI, I think both arguments using those deals are silly
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - RoyleRedlegs - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 03:26 PM)Wyche Wrote: I read that article about Andre being tired of being mediocre too. You'd think such a wizard of an o line coach could elevate a first round pick above mediocre...... :snark:
Chance Warmack was mediocre under Munchak as a "can't miss prospect"
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - RoyleRedlegs - 08-05-2015
Paul Alexander is a good coach. He is not all time great. He is not the awful albatross people here claim.
Using contracts in either direction are stupid arguments as so much more can factor in.
Good coaches have bad players all the time, why? Because there are certain things you cannot coach and despite what movies and TV shows say, you cannot coach someone into loving the sport and caring for it. That has to come from the player.
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Wyche'sWarrior - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 03:30 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Andre's issues have been injury and attitude. 2 things you can't necessarily "coach away"
Also, do you see the hypocrisy in diminishing the value of the deals Livings, Collins and others got after Cincinnati, while saying he's a bad coach because Andre got no offers....
FYI, I think both arguments using those deals are silly
......I do see the hypocrisy there, and used it as a tool against the ridiculous notion presented that Collins and Livings were great cause they got paid.....so, what's good for the goose......
RE: More proof of how good Paul Alexander is - Wyche'sWarrior - 08-05-2015
(08-05-2015, 03:35 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Chance Warmack was mediocre under Munchak as a "can't miss prospect"
I'll take Munchak ANY day, and twice on Sunday......naw, three times on Sunday over Katie Blackburn's Godfather.
