01-24-2023, 02:21 PM
(01-24-2023, 09:34 AM)Sled21 Wrote: That's a two headed snake. If we had played the starting linemen in the pre-season and lost say Ted Karras for the season due to injury in a meaningless game, we'd all be complaining about why we were playing starters in the pre-season. The coaches and the players ALL say they get better work with the reps they get in practice than they do in PS games anyway. I think it is an unnecessary risk.
Of course it would of been a gamble to play the OL in the PS. But I would of done it looking back so we would of had the 1 seed.
It would obvious early in the season our OL weren't on the same page. I think we would of been winning those first 2 games with a
little more time of the OL playing together in front of Mixon and Perine. We all know about Burrow and his appendectomy, nothing we
could do about that, but playing the OL more could of been done and it would of helped as long as no one got injured.
It is a gamble I know.
(01-24-2023, 10:52 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Agree, We were several games into the season before Oline got it together. That could have been quicker with some preseason time I do believe.
And I know the injury argument. But I still feel the 1st team needs a good bit of preseason snaps to polish off the rust.
(01-24-2023, 11:37 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: No.
Burrow got sacked 13 times and 20 qb hits in the first two weeks, and the Bengals had to dig themselves out of an 0-2 hole because of that.
They play in the preseason and the Bengals are the #1 seed, Burrow probably has 8 less sacks on the season, and Burrow is also MVP.
EDIT: Tom Brady is 47-19 in Sept.
Burrow could of got hurt playing behind a unprepared OL if we want to argue points here.
I would rather gamble with the OL than our franchise.
