What's more important to the Bengals.....

[bengalguy71]

(07-10-2018, 02:44 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: ......  If your Mike Brown ...........

you get out and stay out of the way and let the football minds run the show!

[Hoofhearted]

(07-10-2018, 02:44 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Our offensive line or our defensive line?  If your Mike Brown, should you invest more money into protecting the most important figure, QB, or do you put your money on the people that are out to hurt the other team's QB, the DL? 

If all things are equal (meaning both are average groups, and you can pick one to upgrade to above average), I would probably choose o-line simply because we most likely cannot win without keeping our QB safe and running the ball effectively. 

But overall as a unit, I would rather have a better D than O. 

[*ochocincos*]

I invest more into the OL because they do not rotate throughout the game (usually). Having a dominant OL is the most important thing to be successful in the NFL IMO.

[2MinutesHate]

(07-10-2018, 04:04 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Don't know if we Skimped but the guys they had did pan out....   OL coach going to bat for these guys didn't help get them replaced either.

I agree.  Had OG and Fisher played even average and Bodine been eliminated sooner, I think the last two seasons would've been much different.  Heck, I think even the young WR's have suffered because I never seem to see Dalton even going through more than one read.  Probably because there just isn't any time to.  Consequently, they never get a chance to shine unless their number is specifically called.

Personally, I think we have a real good team except for the OL.  If they improve to at least average, the Steelers are going to get their asses whupped this year.   :andy:

[BengalD]

(07-10-2018, 02:44 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Our offensive line or our defensive line?  If your Mike Brown, should you invest more money into protecting the most important figure, QB, or do you put your money on the people that are out to hurt the other team's QB, the DL? 

So I guess I would have to answer the question by thinking about who has won more super bowls.  And while there have been defensive juggernauts (ravens and tampa come to mind), it seems like there have been more offensive power houses (New England, Green Bay, St Louis, New Orleans, SF - back in the day, Dallas).  Heck Cincy's two SB teams were pretty much offensive teams with solid D.

[*jason*]

(07-11-2018, 10:34 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: They absolutely did, but like I told Millhouse when he brought up that Denver defense (that beat the Panthers), that defense had a lot more than a great line,  it had Pro Bowl talent at all three levels.  Seattle had the legion of boom.  But, yes, their defense won that game, clearly.

The Bengals defense was reeeaallly good that year too if I remember correctly. MJ was still MJ, Gilberry was a solid pass rusher, Carlos and Geno were Carlos and Geno... Burfict played a full season. Leon, Newman, and Pacman were great... Reggie Nelson did Reggie Nelson stuff. James Harrison and Margus Hunt ran around a bit....

Too bad those world beater Chargers came to town, and ended it.

[bengalguy71]

(07-11-2018, 10:53 AM)Hoofhearted Wrote: If all things are equal (meaning both are average groups, and you can pick one to upgrade to above average), I would probably choose o-line simply because we most likely cannot win without keeping our QB safe and running the ball effectively. 

But overall as a unit, I would rather have a better D than O. 

The 2000 Ravens would agree with that.

[BURROWorBUST]

Finishing among the bottom 5 teams in YPC over the past 15+ years since Marvin has been our HC and Paul Alexander as our OLine coach goes along way toward explaining our record in the playoffs. 2005 was the last year that we were decent on the OLine, and Rudi Johnson tore up the league. We could have and probably would have won the Super Bowl that year had Palmer not gotten hurt in the playoff game. We have to be able to run the ball. We typically can't. Why? My theory is that Piano Man's scheme was designed for pass-protection. They tried running out of that scheme and it just never worked. Part of it was personnel, but alot of it was scheme. Glad we're investing in a new Oline coach and better Olinemen.

The trick is to keep a steady stream of talent coming in through the draft. That helps keep salaries down, but eventually you have to pay your top performers. Be selective. ONLY keep (pay) the best. Replace the rest with younger talent. For that, you need to scout well. Another Bengals' weakness (Ced O & Fisher).

Same logic applies to Dline.

[3wt]

(07-11-2018, 02:45 PM)Shady Wrote: Finishing among the bottom 5 teams in YPC over the past 15+ years since Marvin has been our HC and Paul Alexander as our OLine coach goes along way toward explaining our record in the playoffs. 2005 was the last year that we were decent on the OLine, and Rudi Johnson tore up the league. We could have and probably would have won the Super Bowl that year had Palmer not gotten hurt in the playoff game. We have to be able to run the ball. We typically can't. Why? My theory is that Piano Man's scheme was designed for pass-protection. They tried running out of that scheme and it just never worked. Part of it was personnel, but alot of it was scheme. Glad we're investing in a new Oline coach and better Olinemen.

The trick is to keep a steady stream of talent coming in through the draft. That helps keep salaries down, but eventually you have to pay your top performers. Be selective. ONLY keep (pay) the best. Replace the rest with younger talent. For that, you need to scout well. Another Bengals' weakness (Ced O & Fisher).

Same logic applies to Dline.

I'd love to know what everyone else in the room (including the few scouts we do have) thought of Og and Fish.  It just seemed like a one man show all the way.

They were universally noted to have significant concerns about the very weakness they have demonstrated here.  Even our pedestrian board members (relative to legit NFL coaches and scouts) had big concerns about those guys.

I can't think of many of our board who weren't livid with those first two picks.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(07-11-2018, 02:45 PM)Shady Wrote: Finishing among the bottom 5 teams in YPC over the past 15+ years since Marvin has been our HC and Paul Alexander as our OLine coach goes along way toward explaining our record in the playoffs. 2005 was the last year that we were decent on the OLine, and Rudi Johnson tore up the league. We could have and probably would have won the Super Bowl that year had Palmer not gotten hurt in the playoff game. We have to be able to run the ball. We typically can't. Why? My theory is that Piano Man's scheme was designed for pass-protection. They tried running out of that scheme and it just never worked. Part of it was personnel, but alot of it was scheme. Glad we're investing in a new Oline coach and better Olinemen.

The trick is to keep a steady stream of talent coming in through the draft. That helps keep salaries down, but eventually you have to pay your top performers. Be selective. ONLY keep (pay) the best. Replace the rest with younger talent. For that, you need to scout well. Another Bengals' weakness (Ced O & Fisher).

Same logic applies to Dline.

True dat Shady and bringing in the guy that coached the best run blocking O-line in football sure don't hurt.

[Steve]

(07-10-2018, 04:02 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: In my opinion the football books first chapter is offensive line. How many games have the Bengals lost over the last several seasons that they could have won if they could simply convert a 3rd down and two on the ground ? Keep a drive going and run out the clock.

Hell every position and position group is important. But I feel the Bengals skimping on the interior O-line has hurt and hurt bad.

I agree....
seems like a weak O-line/run game has hurt this team every single season....
it's a constant thorn in our paw.............

[Steve]

(07-11-2018, 10:54 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I invest more into the OL because they do not rotate throughout the game (usually). Having a dominant OL is the most important thing to be successful in the NFL IMO.

I agree...
 O-line is #1 concern....
D-line is #2...

try to keep your offense on the field....control the clock...& keep your D fresh....
if a team does this they should win the game....
solid formula....
football 101

[BURROWorBUST]

(07-13-2018, 02:42 PM)3wt Wrote: I'd love to know what everyone else in the room (including the few scouts we do have) thought of Og and Fish.  It just seemed like a one man show all the way.

They were universally noted to have significant concerns about the very weakness they have demonstrated here.  Even our pedestrian board members (relative to legit NFL coaches and scouts) had big concerns about those guys.

I can't think of many of our board who weren't livid with those first two picks.

Yeah, I was no exception. I think I tried to make myself like them. I mean, we never WANT to see anyone fail with our team. After a point though, you kind of get a little cynical about them. If Ced can improve under Pollack and start RT, I'm fine with that. Fisher seemed a little better than bad, so maybe there's some potential there for Pollack to bring out. 

I hate to put too much on one man's shoulders, but this season could be VERY SPECIAL if Pollack can get this OLine pulled together. 

[Housh]

To the Bengals i think it’s pretty clear we value the defensive line


But league wide i wouldn’t be able to give you an answer. The Seahawks have a great running QB so they were able to pour talent into the d line and have success. The Broncos when they won had a super offensive line that kept Peyton upright and won a ring. When the Steelers win they usually win behind an amazing oline

Just depends on the rest of your roster