Defense growing pains

[Catmandude123]

Everyone is up in arms over the lack of defense the Bengals have had so far this year. If you have ever had a change of leadership at work you probably noticed it takes a little time to get everybody in sync with the new leadership. I will admit I know little about the coordinator I hope we give him more than four games to put his stamp on the D. We have played four very good offenses so far and while we didn't come close to shutting them down I hope they are getting tested under fire and with their field general returning they will start to dominate. We will have to keep improving on both sides to keep winning.

[Tiger Teeth]

(10-04-2018, 01:50 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Everyone is up in arms over the lack of defense the Bengals have had so far this year. If you have ever had a change of leadership at work you probably noticed it takes a little time to get everybody in sync with the new leadership. I will admit I know little about the coordinator I hope we give him more than four games to put his stamp on the D. We have played four very good offenses so far and while we didn't come close to shutting them down I hope they are getting tested under fire and with their field general returning they will start to dominate. We will have to keep improving on both sides to keep winning.

I think this is going to help solve some of the problems.  Just as long as he stays under control.

[*bengalfan74*]

I knew going in both sides of the ball would have some issues starting out. Lots of new faces, new coaches, new schemes. I just wasn't prepared for how bad our D has been at times. Typically a defense can come together faster than an offense, less complicated you just react.

Hopefully with Burfict back and four games under their belt they can iron out some of the issues.

[depthchart]

I'm at work with limited time.

Does anyone have Teryl Austin's 4 year Defensive rankings breakdown for the time he was at Detroit ?

He was Detroit's Defensive Coordinator from 2014-2017.

How his defenses ranked those 4 years in various categories should tell us a lot.

[thillan]

(10-04-2018, 02:16 PM)depthchart Wrote: I'm at work with limited time.

Does anyone have Teryl Austin's 4 year Defensive rankings breakdown for the time he was at Detroit ?

He was Detroit's Defensive Coordinator from 2014-2017.

How his defenses ranked those 4 years in various categories should tell us a lot.

Basically this:

2014 they did really well. 
2015 and 2016 they were not a good squad. In fact, looking at the numbers, they looked like a bottom 10 defense (from my observations).
2017 was OK, not as good as 2014. But, you will notice that in 2014 and 2017, they did really well in turnovers.

Overall, we brought him in to create turnovers.. but he doesn't exactly have the strongest pedigree even when he was hired. 

[*SHRacerX*]

(10-04-2018, 02:23 PM)thillan Wrote: Basically this:

2014 they did really well. 
2015 and 2016 they were not a good squad. In fact, looking at the numbers, they looked like a bottom 10 defense (from my observations).
2017 was OK, not as good as 2014. But, you will notice that in 2014 and 2017, they did really well in turnovers.

Overall, we brought him in to create turnovers.. but he doesn't exactly have the strongest pedigree even when he was hired. 

If so, that's dumb.  It is ok to emphasize their importance, and to be prepared to make a play on them but the overall scheme has to CREATE turnovers, not hope for them.  With no pressure and too big a cushion in the back side, there is no chance to force turnovers.  I heard something staggering about Atlanta:  It was something to the effect of "Teams that have over 36 points and don't have any turnovers are 400-4-2 and two of them are the Falcons this year".

Hoping for turnovers is not a strategy.  He needs to tighten up the back end and stop giving away the easy completions or the offense will have to score 35 or more every week.  

[sandwedge]

(10-04-2018, 01:50 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Everyone is up in arms over the lack of defense the Bengals have had so far this year. If you have ever had a change of leadership at work you probably noticed it takes a little time to get everybody in sync with the new leadership. I will admit I know little about the coordinator I hope we give him more than four games to put his stamp on the D. We have played four very good offenses so far and while we didn't come close to shutting them down I hope they are getting tested under fire and with their field general returning they will start to dominate. We will have to keep improving on both sides to keep winning.

They've been working under Austin since August, I'd have thought, or hoped, they'd be a little further along.

[sandwedge]

(10-04-2018, 02:31 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: If so, that's dumb.  It is ok to emphasize their importance, and to be prepared to make a play on them but the overall scheme has to CREATE turnovers, not hope for them.  With no pressure and too big a cushion in the back side, there is no chance to force turnovers.  I heard something staggering about Atlanta:  It was something to the effect of "Teams that have over 36 points and don't have any turnovers are 400-4-2 and two of them are the Falcons this year".

Hoping for turnovers is not a strategy.  He needs to tighten up the back end and stop giving away the easy completions or the offense will have to score 35 or more every week.  

Turnovers are great, but I think getting back to the bench after making stops on 3rd down is more important. My point is this, so I intercept the ball 15 times in the season, yet I allow a team to score over 30 points a game, which is better?  Making stops or interceptions...

[thillan]

(10-04-2018, 02:31 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: If so, that's dumb.  It is ok to emphasize their importance, and to be prepared to make a play on them but the overall scheme has to CREATE turnovers, not hope for them.  With no pressure and too big a cushion in the back side, there is no chance to force turnovers.  I heard something staggering about Atlanta:  It was something to the effect of "Teams that have over 36 points and don't have any turnovers are 400-4-2 and two of them are the Falcons this year".

Hoping for turnovers is not a strategy.  He needs to tighten up the back end and stop giving away the easy completions or the offense will have to score 35 or more every week.  

Totally agree with you, but sadly it is true. 

One thing to note for me: In the two games where we've truly had a chance to get turnovers, we have done it. Carolina played old school football, and CMC is great with the ball in his hands. We still almost had 2, but Hubbard sadly got the short end of the stick twice (which sucks!)

And Matt Ryan, on top of usually not turning it over too much, is lights out this year. If you go back and watch the game, our coverage defense actually wasn't THAT bad. Yes it was bad, but some of those receivers looked open because Matt Ryan just made some great throws that dropped perfectly to where Matt wanted it. Sometimes while pressured! I came into the game saying Jesse Bates needed a good game, and he played OK, but Ryan really got him good with maneuvering him with his eyes. Not much he could do.

That's just what I've been seeing. So I know the last two weeks look bad, but honestly my biggest worries on defense aren't as large as others see it. 

Run defense: This is my biggest worry, because even though the NFL is all about passing, if you allow runs you are SCREWED. Burfict HAS to make a really good impact on this, seriously. 

Dre Kirk is my other concern. Calvin Ridley is a monster and wasn't an easy matchup by any means, but I feel his play has been declining since the start of the season honestly. WJ3 is being asked to do what he isn't best at, but man Dre is a serious liability to me right now. I wasn't as concerned two weeks ago.. now I am. By the way, there were 2 plays where Matt Ryan missed the throw, where Dre got BURNED. Just wasn't noticeable because the throw was off target. 

So in short, I think the run defense gets shored up, and middle of the field gets a little tougher to defend. But I don't think Dre is going to perform up to expectations (which weren't even that high). I'm worried he's going to cost us a game or two.

[sandwedge]

(10-04-2018, 02:48 PM)thillan Wrote: Totally agree with you, but sadly it is true. 

One thing to note for me: In the two games where we've truly had a chance to get turnovers, we have done it. Carolina played old school football, and CMC is great with the ball in his hands. We still almost had 2, but Hubbard sadly got the short end of the stick twice (which sucks!)

And Matt Ryan, on top of usually not turning it over too much, is lights out this year. If you go back and watch the game, our coverage defense actually wasn't THAT bad. Yes it was bad, but some of those receivers looked open because Matt Ryan just made some great throws that dropped perfectly to where Matt wanted it. Sometimes while pressured! I came into the game saying Jesse Bates needed a good game, and he played OK, but Ryan really got him good with maneuvering him with his eyes. Not much he could do.

That's just what I've been seeing. So I know the last two weeks look bad, but honestly my biggest worries on defense aren't as large as others see it. 

Run defense: This is my biggest worry, because even though the NFL is all about passing, if you allow runs you are SCREWED. Burfict HAS to make a really good impact on this, seriously. 

Dre Kirk is my other concern. Calvin Ridley is a monster and wasn't an easy matchup by any means, but I feel his play has been declining since the start of the season honestly. WJ3 is being asked to do what he isn't best at, but man Dre is a serious liability to me right now. I wasn't as concerned two weeks ago.. now I am. By the way, there were 2 plays where Matt Ryan missed the throw, where Dre got BURNED. Just wasn't noticeable because the throw was off target. 

So in short, I think the run defense gets shored up, and middle of the field gets a little tougher to defend. But I don't think Dre is going to perform up to expectations (which weren't even that high). I'm worried he's going to cost us a game or two.

That double move or stutter step Ridley put on Dre, made Dre look very bad.

[McC]

This doesn't look as much like growing pains to me as it does just a bad plan overall. Never been a fan of letting the other guy bowl you over and hoping he doesn't go ahead and kill you.

If Lazor was employing such a passive scheme, we'd be 0-4.

Also not a fan of standing pat with a plan that is clearly not working.

[impactplaya]

its a very bad plan indeed.
great defenses make great qbs look very average.
case in point.Zimmer made Brady look like Gus Ferrotte a few years back in the rain.
Austin is playing soft zones and giving Ryan, Luck bigger windows to throw into.
show me off coverage and I will show you a qb that has a 65 or better completion rate.
this secondary needs to be playing
man free...straight man or combo coverages.
if your up by 14 and its under 3 minutes yeah Im in a zone allowing them to eat up clock.
but Austin is worse than Bresnahan.
at least with Chuck we got TOs with Deltha and Tory.
oh memo to Teryl..our CBs have ZERO ints in 3 games.
Denzel Ward has more than.our starters WJ and DK.
you preach turnovers.
all we are getting is DOUGHNUTS.

[Catmandude123]

(10-04-2018, 02:38 PM)sandwedge Wrote: They've been working under Austin since August, I'd have thought, or hoped, they'd be a little further along.

Really? you actually think practice and preseason games are the same as the regular season? Their purpose is to evaluate talent not to define a defense. Most of the time starters aren't even in the games. You don't try to play full bore in meaningless games. Give the d achance they will come around.

[*SHRacerX*]

(10-04-2018, 02:43 PM)sandwedge Wrote: Turnovers are great, but I think getting back to the bench after making stops on 3rd down is more important. My point is this, so I intercept the ball 15 times in the season, yet I allow a team to score over 30 points a game, which is better?  Making stops or interceptions...

Absolutely.  And I just am not seeing the help from the secondary.  It is too damn easy to take the underneath route and get the ball out early.  It all works together.  Pass rush helps secondary and vice versa, but right now neither is producing.  Pass rush shows flashes.  Secondary hasn't really been good all year.  The first half of the Ravens game they looked solid but too loose in the second half and nearly blew a huge lead.  

[sandwedge]

(10-04-2018, 07:00 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Really? you actually think practice and preseason games are the same as the regular season? Their purpose is to evaluate talent not to define a defense. Most of the time starters aren't even in the games. You don't try to play full bore in meaningless games. Give the d achance they will come around.

Yes, really! You're telling me they don't work on defensive or offensive schemes and communications during TC or preseason? So when preseason is done and it's week 1, they decide to put in plays? 

[grampahol]

I can remember a time when guys who went for the interception every time were viewed as a liability because in most cases the receiver is already behind the defender making for easy completions and tds.. 

[Catmandude123]

(10-05-2018, 11:23 AM)sandwedge Wrote: Yes, really! You're telling me they don't work on defensive or offensive schemes and communications during TC or preseason? So when preseason is done and it's week 1, they decide to put in plays? 

The d works against second teamers and know they won't be allowed to hit like real games. Anyone who pays to see these glorified practices has more money than sense. If you think the preseason defines a team you are wrong. Week to week play against a good opponent is what make you better. I think the defense has played some pretty good offenses and IMO this will make them better game by game.

[corpjet]

(10-04-2018, 02:49 PM)sandwedge Wrote: That double move or stutter step Ridley put on Dre, made Dre look very bad.

And Bates missed with rolling over to that side deep, both players looked bad on that play.

[*SHRacerX*]

(10-04-2018, 01:50 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Everyone is up in arms over the lack of defense the Bengals have had so far this year. If you have ever had a change of leadership at work you probably noticed it takes a little time to get everybody in sync with the new leadership. I will admit I know little about the coordinator I hope we give him more than four games to put his stamp on the D. We have played four very good offenses so far and while we didn't come close to shutting them down I hope they are getting tested under fire and with their field general returning they will start to dominate. We will have to keep improving on both sides to keep winning.

I hope you are right, but hope is not a strategy.

Austin has had the entire offseason to instill his defense.  He seems hesitant to change his plan despite getting torched underneath time and time again.  It is like Chuck Breshnahan 2.0.

This defense hasn't even been close to average.  They have been pathetic.  

Do I think it can be fixed?  Absolutely.  Will they look to improve with changes in scheme if they are winning?  I don't know.  They could just as easy be 1-3.  They need to tighten up the underneath coverage and make opposing QBs hold the ball.