Bengals OL drills getting slammed on twitter...

[tms]

(08-16-2022, 12:04 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Jonah was a High Draft pick that was just Healthy last year.  Spain and Reiff are Vets...

Pollack did do better with the run game but his OLers drafted and trained under him havent shown much...   And hes in the convo for the draft picks

Well it doesnt show much on Pollack as 4 of the 5 guys we already know can play on a High level...  so that has little to do with him

Never saw the Hype of Pollack and still dont

I would agree with that. Also be remiss not to recall that many fans' expectation for Pollack was that he could turn water into wine. Not saying that that's fair, just that that's what was said. In fact, I remember hearing that argument in the Sewell vs Chase debate- that we didn't need Sewell/Slater that badly because we "didn't have Frank last year, Turner was a bust, Frank's a glass-eater, it's not that our guys are bad but that they haven't been properly coached," etc. Totally overlooking how he was let go by the Jets- who didn't think twice about it since they were having line problems of their own. Fast forward 12 months and we literally led the league in sacks. Fast forward another six and here we are still worried about Burrow's health. Not to mention we added three FA starters because his program was working so... well.

I would temper some of the criticism by conceding it's still preseason and we haven't seen our starting unit yet. But if a coach can "only work with what he's got," we should remember that lesson for next time. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(08-16-2022, 12:04 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Jonah was a High Draft pick that was just Healthy last year.  Spain and Reiff are Vets...

Pollack did do better with the run game but his OLers drafted and trained under him havent shown much...   And hes in the convo for the draft picks

Well it doesnt show much on Pollack as 4 of the 5 guys we already know can play on a High level...  so that has little to do with him

Never saw the Hype of Pollack and still dont

You can literally look at any of the best lines and say “high draft picks” and “but they’re vets.” The OL coach still has to get them to play together as a unit.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(08-16-2022, 12:29 PM)tms Wrote: Fast forward 12 months and we literally led the league in sacks.

No we didn’t. The Bears and Ravens both gave up more.

[Whatever]

(08-16-2022, 08:28 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The claim that they never attempted to throw deep was an obvious exaggeration. We all saw Joe at least attempt a few deep passes in 2020 but it was not nearly as much as 2021 because he could not get enough time.

There is no data to support that it was because "he could not get enough time", either.  His Time to Throw per Next Gen Stats only increased slightly (2.65 seconds to 2.69 seconds) and his Pocket Time per Profootball Reference was the exact same at 2.3 seconds.

In '20, Burrow simply didn't have any viable deep threats.  Boyd has only 8 40+ yard receptions in 6 years.  Higgins has only 4 40+ yard receptions in 2 years in the league.  AJ was a deep threat earlier in his career, but injuries and age slowed him down, with only 3 40+ yard receptions over the last three years he's actually played.  Chase had 8 in '21, equalling Boyd's career total in only one year and doubling what Tee did his first two years.  They could very well have thrown deep more in '21, but it was much more likely because they finally had a WR that could win deep.  There's nothing that really supports that it was because Joe didn't have enough time, unless the argument is he needed more time in '20 to allow his slow receivers to get down field.

[Whatever]

(08-16-2022, 12:29 PM)tms Wrote: I would agree with that. Also be remiss not to recall that many fans' expectation for Pollack was that he could turn water into wine. Not saying that that's fair, just that that's what was said. In fact, I remember hearing that argument in the Sewell vs Chase debate- that we didn't need Sewell/Slater that badly because we "didn't have Frank last year, Turner was a bust, Frank's a glass-eater, it's not that our guys are bad but that they haven't been properly coached," etc. Totally overlooking how he was let go by the Jets- who didn't think twice about it since they were having line problems of their own. Fast forward 12 months and we literally led the league in sacks. Fast forward another six and here we are still worried about Burrow's health. Not to mention we added three FA starters because his program was working so... well.

I would temper some of the criticism by conceding it's still preseason and we haven't seen our starting unit yet. But if a coach can "only work with what he's got," we should remember that lesson for next time. 

I think any OL coach needs talent to work with.  The problem I have with Pollack is the guy is a terrible talent evaluator.  He's had a 1st, a 2nd, 2 4th's, a 6th, and a 7th round pick and has yet to even hit on someone you could call a quality backup.  And even worse, the guy seems to slam his fist on the table every year for more picks to be dumped into the OL.  

[Nicomo Cosca]

(08-16-2022, 12:56 PM)Whatever Wrote: I think any OL coach needs talent to work with.  The problem I have with Pollack is the guy is a terrible talent evaluator.  He's had a 1st, a 2nd, 2 4th's, a 6th, and a 7th round pick and has yet to even hit on someone you could call a quality backup.  And even worse, the guy seems to slam his fist on the table every year for more picks to be dumped into the OL.  

I think both D’Ante Smith and Volson can be quality backups at the very least. Smith just can’t stay healthy. But in the limited action we have seen him he’s looked decent. Same with Volson so far.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-16-2022, 09:58 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: You mentioned trying to find the numbers earlier, so here is deep passing data for the two seasons. I am not sure what "officially" counts as deep pass, but I am filtering for pass attempts >= 25 yards. 

Burrow only - 26 attempts (2020) or one deep pass per 15 dropbacks, 56 attempts (2021) or one deep pass per 11 dropbacks

Burrow & backups - 41 attempts (2020) or one deep pass per 13 attempts, 57 attempts (2021) or one deep pass per 12 dropbacks

PFF counts "deep passes" as a ball that travels 20+ yds in the air.

In 2020, Burrow attempted 48 such passes.
In 2021, Burrow attempted 68 such passes. 

[tms]

(08-16-2022, 12:56 PM)Whatever Wrote: I think any OL coach needs talent to work with.  The problem I have with Pollack is the guy is a terrible talent evaluator.  He's had a 1st, a 2nd, 2 4th's, a 6th, and a 7th round pick and has yet to even hit on someone you could call a quality backup.  And even worse, the guy seems to slam his fist on the table every year for more picks to be dumped into the OL.  

Yeah, I'm okay with stocking and re-stocking through the draft (granted, I'm biased since I'm a massive draft hound! lol). But you're right in that they haven't hit on anyone. And if they're going to take flyers on guys, they need building blocks in place to guide them- which they haven't had. In that sense they are wasting picks. Hopefully LC, TK and AC will provide that "nucleus" this year to facilitate the younger dudes' development. 

It's one of the reasons why I thought Carman was a silly pick, irrespective of his talent or Pollack. You can't make any picks in a vacuum; perception is reality in this league. Any draft hound will tell you it’s one of the most overlooked reasons for why you should think twice… three times… ten times before reaching. It’s not just about picking the “right” guy, it’s also about protecting your asset. Sometimes reaching works out (like Cole Strange in Foxboro- he seems to be doing okay). But most of the time you’re forcing the kid to swim upstream from Day 1. Which is especially risky when you’re dealing with a disaster zone like the Bengals’ OL. You have less margin for error in that context, and you're further impinging on his chance to succeed. That’s not on the fans or Carman imo; that’s on the team for being short-sighted and lacking self-awareness. Whether you’re running a business or a football team, it reflects poor management. Some players (even the “right” players) need to be given a soft landing… for their sake and ultimately your own.

I thought the Bengals trading back from 39 to 46 was a good move in that regard, even if I wasn’t a Carman fan. But now that we see Tyler Shelvin and D’Ante Smith (the two guys who came out of that deal) spinning their wheels, the optics are bad around Carman again. This was inevitable. He came with a lot of risk by being picked where he was, which the team may not to have done enough to mitigate. It's the same idea with guys like Prince and Adeniji. Maybe they weren't the right players in the first place, but the Bengals haven’t done them any favors either.

Damn, I wrote a lot about this lol. My bad. 

[fredtoast]

(08-16-2022, 01:50 PM)tms Wrote: It's one of the reasons why I thought Carman was a silly pick, irrespective of his talent or Pollack. You can't make any picks in a vacuum; perception is reality in this league. Any draft hound will tell you it’s one of the most overlooked reasons for why you should think twice… three times… ten times before reaching. It’s not just about picking the “right” guy, it’s also about protecting your asset. Sometimes reaching works out (like Cole Strange in Foxboro- he seems to be doing okay). But most of the time you’re forcing the kid to swim upstream from Day 1. Which is especially risky when you’re dealing with a disaster zone like the Bengals’ OL. You have less margin for error in that context, and you're further impinging on his chance to succeed. That’s not on the fans or Carman imo; that’s on the team for being short-sighted and lacking self-awareness. Whether you’re running a business or a football team, it reflects poor management. Some players (even the “right” players) need to be given a soft landing… for their sake and ultimately your own.

I have no idea what this means but Carman was not really a reach.  He was rated as a 2nd round pick.

It cracks me up when a player is taken much later than the "experts" predict everyone says the experts were wrong and the NFL teams were correct, but when a player is taken earlier than the "experts" predict then everyone says the "experts" were correct and the team "reached".

[pdub2005]

(08-15-2022, 07:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He was also struggling with not being very good issues. 

I think thats a chronic issue. Not sure there is a cure.

[GodFather]

We dropped the ball big time back when Bill Callahan left Washington and we could've picked him up but instead chose to keep that turd of an OL coach Jim Turner another year and Bill went to Cleveland

Seriously we dropped the ball on that great opportunity.

[PDub80]

(08-16-2022, 04:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have no idea what this means but Carman was not really a reach.  He was rated as a 2nd round pick.

It cracks me up when a player is taken much later than the "experts" predict everyone says the experts were wrong and the NFL teams were correct, but when a player is taken earlier than the "experts" predict then everyone says the "experts" were correct and the team "reached".

Andrew Billings, anyone?

[Essex Johnson]

(08-16-2022, 12:29 PM)tms Wrote: I would agree with that. Also be remiss not to recall that many fans' expectation for Pollack was that he could turn water into wine. Not saying that that's fair, just that that's what was said. In fact, I remember hearing that argument in the Sewell vs Chase debate- that we didn't need Sewell/Slater that badly because we "didn't have Frank last year, Turner was a bust, Frank's a glass-eater, it's not that our guys are bad but that they haven't been properly coached," etc. Totally overlooking how he was let go by the Jets- who didn't think twice about it since they were having line problems of their own. Fast forward 12 months and we literally led the league in sacks. Fast forward another six and here we are still worried about Burrow's health. Not to mention we added three FA starters because his program was working so... well.

I would temper some of the criticism by conceding it's still preseason and we haven't seen our starting unit yet. But if a coach can "only work with what he's got," we should remember that lesson for next time. 

Well Pollack had success at Dallas but over the last 4 years his Olines have avg 49 sacks  with bengals and jets, and correct jets moved on from him. Yes both bengals and jets had young lines but many on here were critical of Zac with a terrible start of win lose in 1st 2 years but some want to just excuse a position coach that has had 4 subpar years in a row. Let's hope that changes this yr.

[bengals1969]

Pollack coached a injury riddled, subpar OL to the Super Bowl, beating quality teams with excellent defenses. His unit held together in the SB long enough to come within a second or two of winning.

That’s all you need to know he’s a excellent coach.

[Frank Booth]

(08-16-2022, 08:43 PM)bengals1969 Wrote: Pollack coached a injury riddled, subpar OL to the Super Bowl, beating quality teams with excellent defenses. His unit held together in the SB long enough to come within a second or two of winning.

That’s all you need to know he’s a excellent coach.

ha

no. Burrow and the defense did their part. Pollack gets ZERO credit for that Titans game

[bengals1969]

(08-16-2022, 08:45 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: ha

no. Burrow and the defense did their part. Pollack gets ZERO credit for that Titans game

The SB OL other than Jonah was way below average NFL standards. The Rams have one of the best defensive fronts in the game.
A bad OL plus bad OL coach doesn’t get 13 wins, it gets a January vacation.
The fact the Bengals came within a second or two of Burrow connecting with Chase for the SB win had to be credited to some extent to what Pollack did with that terrible OL.

[tms]

(08-16-2022, 05:06 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Well Pollack had success at Dallas but over the last 4 years his Olines have avg 49 sacks  with bengals and jets, and correct jets moved on from him. Yes both bengals and jets had young lines but many on here were critical of Zac with a terrible start of win lose in 1st 2 years but some want to just excuse a position coach that has had 4 subpar years in a row. Let's hope that changes this yr.

Yeah, don't get me wrong. I like Frank Pollack. I'm glad he's here over Turner. But I think when you're at the bottom, the problems are complex and coaches are a smaller part of the solution than the players themselves. You want to get the right game out of your prospects- for which you can use the coaches- but sometimes you need to invest in proven commodities who can help you on the field. After all, players set the best example for each other, and the Bengals haven't been as willing (or able) to do that. Thuney, Villanueva, Bulaga, Brown, Armstead, etc. were never approached sincerely- forget about Trent Williams lol- neither through free agency nor trade. There was a lot of "we think we know better" (e.g. Carman at 46) or "we can get it cheaper" (e.g. Reiff, XSF, Spain) going on.

I'm glad they took a shot this year, though. They desperately need to lay a foundation; it seems they finally realize they can't build on sand anymore. Good on them.

[KillerGoose]

(08-17-2022, 12:03 AM)bengals1969 Wrote: The SB OL other than Jonah was way below average NFL standards. The Rams have one of the best defensive fronts in the game.
A bad OL plus bad OL coach doesn’t get 13 wins, it gets a January vacation.
The fact the Bengals came within a second or two of Burrow connecting with Chase for the SB win had to be credited to some extent to what Pollack did with that terrible OL.

I disagree. The offensive line played poorly throughout the season in both facets of the game. The Rams have one of the best defensive fronts in the game, and that defensive front won them a Super Bowl as they dominated Cincinnati's offensive line. The fact that Cincinnati still made the Super Bowl doesn't give Pollack credit for anything, it is an example that there is an exception to the rule.

Instead of "If you have a bad offensive line, you will not have success" the rule should be "If you have a bad offensive line, you are unlikely to have success". The Bengals beat the odds and got there despite poor pass protection and an abysmal running game. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(08-17-2022, 11:37 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: I disagree. The offensive line played poorly throughout the season in both facets of the game. The Rams have one of the best defensive fronts in the game, and that defensive front won them a Super Bowl as they dominated Cincinnati's offensive line. The fact that Cincinnati still made the Super Bowl doesn't give Pollack credit for anything, it is an example that there is an exception to the rule.

Instead of "If you have a bad offensive line, you will not have success" the rule should be "If you have a bad offensive line, you are unlikely to have success". The Bengals beat the odds and got there despite poor pass protection and an abysmal running game. 

The running game wasn’t abysmal though. Mixon went to his 1st Pro Bowl last season, and he averaged 4.8 yards per carry in the Super Bowl. Honestly, Taylor should have kept feeding Mixon more. We probably would have won.

[KillerGoose]

(08-17-2022, 11:47 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The running game wasn’t abysmal though. Mixon went to his 1st Pro Bowl last season, and he averaged 4.8 yards per carry in the Super Bowl. Honestly, Taylor should have kept feeding Mixon more. We probably would have won.

Abysmal may be a bit too strong, but if you're argument is that they were good, adequate or anything other than ineffective, I disagree. To be clear, I am referring to the season as a whole, not just the Super Bowl. Mixon went to the Pro Bowl based off of his volume numbers. He ran the ball a lot, so he had a lot of yards. He wasn't particularly good at it, though, averaging just under 4.1 yards per carry, which was below average even for high volume backs. 

Here are some of the metrics that Cincinnati logged...

• 29th in short yardage conversion
• 24th in yards per attempt
• 22nd in EPA per attempt
• 19th in Rush/TD ratio
  

Now, props where props are due, they did rush well in the redzone. They are either between 12th-15th in the redzone metrics I am looking at, but my main argument is that the running game was not good and Mixon going to a Pro Bowl isn't evidence otherwise. As an example, I don't think you would argue much for the Steelers run game being anything other than bad, but Najee went to the Pro Bowl as well. It's just volume and a recognizable name.