O Line Wins Super Bowl Again

[kevin]

Hurst had blocking, Mahomes didn't.  You look at all NFL Championships including Super Bowls, and the team with the best O Line Blocking wins.  If you really watch the highlight films of these games.  Hurst had time in the pocket, Mahomes didn't.   Oh, and what Philly does on short yardage is the best thing since Bears would use huge DT Fridge Perry to run up the gut on short yardage.  Philly has too many 300 pounders on short yardage to keep from getting a one yard push.  The unsung hero's over every Championship is the better Blockers in the game.  There were times Mike Brown thought he could go cheap at O Line and those teams were lucky to win 3 or 4 games.  You do not blame the QB or the RB if you have no Blocking.  Lombardi Packers had Blocking, so did 1968 Jets, 1969 Chiefs,  The early 70's Dolphins, the 70's Steelers,  the 80's Raiders, the 80's Washington Hogs and on and on.  Blocking was the difference again as Philly won. ....and it is why Mike Brown often saying, " Why should I pay a guard " , is why this team had so many 3 or 4 win seasons under Mike Brown.  Knute Rockne said it best, that fans love QB's, running backs and receivers, but you Win with Blocking and Tackling.  Two areas the Bengals need to improve in if they have any dreams of going back to Super Bowl.  Not paying Montoya or later Whitworth were blunders and Whitworth road graded the Rams to victory of Bengals, Burrow might have won if he had Whitworth that game.  Philly proved it again, that Blocking wins in The NFL. 

[SunsetBengal]

OL, maybe? However from my point of view, the story of the game was all about the Philly defense. Barkley was limited to 57 rushing yards, if the Philly OL was dominating, he should have had triple that.

[Millhouse]

(Yesterday, 08:52 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: OL, maybe? However from my point of view, the story of the game was all about the Philly defense. Barkley was limited to 57 rushing yards, if the Philly OL was dominating, he should have had triple that.

Yup same here. Philly blitzed 0% as their d-line just dominated with their backers and backs being great in coverage giving them extra time to rattle Mahomes.

But Hurts came thru big time. He made big throws and big runs for big first downs, and that deep ball for a TD. 

It was an all-around beat down led by that defense .

[HarleyDog]

(Yesterday, 10:32 AM)Millhouse Wrote: It was an all-around beat down led by that defense .

And it was BEAUTIFUL. FKC!

[masonbengals fan]

Philly's defense led the way. Just a dominating performance from those guys. That front 4 is something else.

[*bengalfan74*]

(Yesterday, 08:52 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: OL, maybe? However from my point of view, the story of the game was all about the Philly defense. Barkley was limited to 57 rushing yards, if the Philly OL was dominating, he should have had triple that.

(Yesterday, 10:32 AM)Millhouse Wrote: Yup same here. Philly blitzed 0% as their d-line just dominated with their backers and backs being great in coverage giving them extra time to rattle Mahomes.

But Hurts came thru big time. He made big throws and big runs for big first downs, and that deep ball for a TD. 

It was an all-around beat down led by that defense .

Right

I get what Kevin is saying but it's way more the Eagles Dline won the game than their Oline did. Mahomes was rattled - bad from the pressure, hearing the footsteps. 

That was the determining factor, dominant Dline. And KC's Oline being so bad.

[CKwi88]

I think it's more of how the O-Line lost KC the game rather than the Eagles O-Line won the game.

[Mickeypoo]

I was laughing when they said Mahomes with a record high 5 sacks. I was like Burrow gets sacked 5 times a game. Shows how good Burrow is.