Are there any optimists left?

[*rfaulk34*]

(11-09-2019, 01:47 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I basically said I don't think he'll be a star (top 15 WR). I don't think that's negative.

I think Tate could be a really good #3 WR. And maybe he becomes a quality #2.

That's excellent for a late round pick.

I just don't see him becoming a star WR.

re: Who would hire Zac? I think you'd see teams hire him as a QB Coach. I doubt any team would hire him as an OC or HC.

Yeah, a #3 or #4 is how i would view him. A #2 on a bad team, potentially. "Separation" is a term that's thrown around a lot and i don't think it's as big a deal now as it was in years past with the amount of zone schemes that are in the NFL now. 

The Zac thing may be more legit than i had assumed (without really looking at lists of 'potential HC candidates before this year) but knowing how NFL teams like to pick successful staffs clean and seeing Goff's rise does make it more likely that others would have signed him as well. 

[grampahol]

(11-02-2019, 05:04 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Indeed. And the reasons for the poor running game could be debated.

We have Hart/Redmond/Hopkins/Price starting now...who were all starters for chunks last year and Mixon led the AFC in rushing. Yes...Glenn is out, but he was a poor run blocker.

Something doesn't add up.

You know my fall back position. They made a conscious decision at some point to go ahead and tank the season and go for top draft picks. I don't think it was decided before the season, but somewhere along the line the decision was made and hopefully Finley doesn't throw a wrench in it and go and win 8 games or whatever. 
I hope Finley turns out to be very good, but not so good this year to win games, just good enough to show he CAN win games with a great offensive line in front of him....assuming the Bengals are even remotely capable of obtaining that offensive line. Kind of like playing a game where you hold all the cards towards the end then overwhelm your opponent when they feel confident with their remaining shit cards.  No wait..This is the Bengals. They could loose at go fish with a big mirror right behind their opponent. 

[THE PISTONS]

(11-09-2019, 02:16 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yeah, a #3 or #4 is how i would view him. A #2 on a bad team, potentially. "Separation" is a term that's thrown around a lot and i don't think it's as big a deal now as it was in years past with the amount of zone schemes that are in the NFL now. 

The Zac thing may be more legit than i had assumed (without really looking at lists of 'potential HC candidates before this year) but knowing how NFL teams like to pick successful staffs clean and seeing Goff's rise does make it more likely that others would have signed him as well. 

The thing is, Zac was an Assistant WR Coach with the Rams the year Goff took off. Then last year, he was QB Coach.

As a HC though, I think having that dynamic offensive mind is more required...unless you hire that in a coordinator (which teams do.)

Tate...IF he played on the Saints or in some other schemes...wouldn't need speed. Boldin and Hines Ward weren't the fastest guy. You gotta just know how to get open, but being in a good scheme helps too.

Your point on a #2 on a bad team is one of my points. When you throw it 50 times...someone is going to put up some stats. Winning teams don't do that.

I do like Tate though and I'm glad that he's getting playing time.

[grampahol]

I think Zac is great at talking the talk, redecorating and selling people on things, but actually coaching? I'm not so convinced..

[THE PISTONS]

(11-09-2019, 08:46 PM)grampahol Wrote: I think Zac is great at talking the talk, redecorating and selling people on things, but actually coaching? I'm not so convinced..

Indeed. And leave it to the Bengals to fall for it.

[TJHoushmandzadeh's Shiny Shoes]

(11-09-2019, 08:46 PM)grampahol Wrote: I think Zac is great at talking the talk, redecorating and selling people on things, but actually coaching? I'm not so convinced..

Does the Head Coach actually have to coach? Isn't the role more about talking the talk, redecorating and selling people on things? It's more management than coaching. The actual coaching gets delegated and whilst Zac actually has play calling duties for now who expects him to still be play-calling next season?

What a manager Head Coach has to do though is get the right hires in. Despite talking the talk and selling people things Zac didn't appear to land his targets.

[Luvnit2]

(11-09-2019, 08:34 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: The thing is, Zac was an Assistant WR Coach with the Rams the year Goff took off. Then last year, he was QB Coach.

As a HC though, I think having that dynamic offensive mind is more required...unless you hire that in a coordinator (which teams do.)

Tate...IF he played on the Saints or in some other schemes...wouldn't need speed. Boldin and Hines Ward weren't the fastest guy. You gotta just know how to get open, but being in a good scheme helps too.

Your point on a #2 on a bad team is one of my points. When you throw it 50 times...someone is going to put up some stats. Winning teams don't do that.

I do like Tate though and I'm glad that he's getting playing time.

Goff looks to me like he has digressed in 2019? No Zac maybe???

[TJHoushmandzadeh's Shiny Shoes]

Apparently this has to date been the second toughest strength of schedule in franchise history. After Sunday we may only face one further team with a winning record.

[THE PISTONS]

(11-11-2019, 12:02 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Goff looks to me like he has digressed in 2019? No Zac maybe???

Zac was only his QB Coach for 1 year.

I saw somewhere posted his numbers for the past 16 games. Not good. So his regression started last year.

Honestly...I think the league has figured out their offense. And teams are pressuring him.

[Catmandude123]

(11-12-2019, 02:06 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Zac was only his QB Coach for 1 year.

I saw somewhere posted his numbers for the past 16 games. Not good. So his regression started last year.

Honestly...I think the league has figured out their offense. And teams are pressuring him.

When you sign a tackle and Running back and QB to some of the highest contracts in the league that leaves less to pay the supporting cast.

[THE PISTONS]

There are still optimists on Twitter:

Lots of like-minded fans on this one. Hate to see anyone go, but this definitely is a different process than we've seen in the past. https://t.co/bs6Phw9ych

— Captain Obvious (@BengalsCaptain) November 12, 2019

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[THE PISTONS]

Benching franchise QB to see what they’ve got in the rookie ahead of the draft. Starting rookie LB ahead of vet. Now waiving vet LB. these are all actions of a new thinking #Bengals organisation. And I’ll take some positivity from that at the very least

— Peter Dadswell (@Dadders) November 12, 2019

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[*jason*]

(11-12-2019, 08:48 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote:

Benching franchise QB to see what they’ve got in the rookie ahead of the draft. Starting rookie LB ahead of vet. Now waiving vet LB. these are all actions of a new thinking #Bengals organisation. And I’ll take some positivity from that at the very least

— Peter Dadswell (@Dadders) November 12, 2019

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Hmm... Ok.

But to me, it looks like they burned to bridge with Dalton to see what the have in Finley. Spoiler alert; you've got a serviceable back up. So now they have to roll out this backup next year, or gamble at the the top of the draft on a QB who will join a team with a ton of holes to fill... You know... Like MLB for instance.

Good luck...

[THE PISTONS]

(11-12-2019, 09:16 PM)jason Wrote: Hmm... Ok.

But to me, it looks like they burned to bridge with Dalton to see what the have in Finley. Spoiler alert; you've got a serviceable back up. So now they have to roll out this backup next year, or gamble at the the top of the draft on a QB who will join a team with a ton of holes to fill... You know... Like MLB for instance.

Good luck...

#NewDay!

Puzzling how Brown led the league in Tackles 2 years ago to being terrible here.

[*jason*]

(11-12-2019, 03:04 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: When you sign a tackle and Running back and QB to some of the highest contracts in the league that leaves less to pay the supporting cast.

Yes... That is true. Also when you sign a QB to a team friendly deal you save money to sign other players; right? But when you sign a QB to a team friendly deal then let a top LT and decent RG walk, let two complementary WRs go, and don't adequately replace them, and don't make any solid free agent signings, it looks like ownership is pocketing those savings while creating a fall guy...

[Catmandude123]

(11-12-2019, 09:24 PM)jason Wrote: Yes... That is true. Also when you sign a QB to a team friendly deal you save money to sign other players; right? But when you sign a QB to a team friendly deal then let a top LT and decent RG walk, let two complementary WRs go, and don't adequately replace them, and don't make any solid free agent signings, it looks like ownership is pocketing those savings while creating a fall guy...

I was referring to the rams. We all know the Bengals shoot them selves in the foot on a regular basis.

[*jason*]

(11-12-2019, 09:51 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: I was referring to the rams. We all know the Bengals shoot them selves in the foot on a regular basis.

I know... But that applies to everyone; not just the Rams. The Seahawks were Super Bowl contenders because they had Russell Wilson on the cheap. Once they had to pay him, they couldn't keep everyone else. Sure they're starting to come around again because Wilson has developed into a top 3 QB... They ain't what they were though. Tom Brady took a lot of team friendly deals.

The Bengals had their QB on the relative cheap. They let the team deteriorate around itself.

I think the Rams are struggling because Todd Gurley's falling off. Goff started slipping right around this time last year, and it coincided with Gurley's drop in production.

[THE PISTONS]

(11-12-2019, 11:47 PM)jason Wrote: I know... But that applies to everyone; not just the Rams. The Seahawks were Super Bowl contenders because they had Russell Wilson on the cheap. Once they had to pay him, they couldn't keep everyone else. Sure they're starting to come around again because Wilson has developed into a top 3 QB... They ain't what they were though. Tom Brady took a lot of team friendly deals.

The Bengals had their QB on the relative cheap. They let the team deteriorate around itself.

I think the Rams are struggling because Todd Gurley's falling off. Goff started slipping right around this time last year, and it coincided with Gurley's drop in production.

We should have kept Zeitler. But, at this stage of the game...we're more than 1-2-3-4-5 guys away.

Bad drafts did us in. Repeated.

[*jason*]

(11-13-2019, 12:33 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We should have kept Zeitler. But, at this stage of the game...we're more than 1-2-3-4-5 guys away.

Bad drafts did us in. Repeated.

A lil off topic, but to your point... I had the Stephen A Smith show on at work the other day. The fill in host was the voice of the Jets broadcaster. He was talking about how the Jets had $100,000,000 in cap space last year because they literally had no one to re-sign. In the last 7 years they only have 2 or 3 of their 1st round picks still on their roster (Darnold and Williams... I think that's all) 2015 was our killer draft. The Jets have had multiple drafts like that. Entire draft classes no longer with the team or in the league. In 40 years they've had the 2 AFC championship game runs, and that's it.

It doesn't make it better, but we're not alone.

[Catmandude123]

(11-12-2019, 11:47 PM)jason Wrote: I know... But that applies to everyone; not just the Rams. The Seahawks were Super Bowl contenders because they had Russell Wilson on the cheap. Once they had to pay him, they couldn't keep everyone else. Sure they're starting to come around again because Wilson has developed into a top 3 QB... They ain't what they were though. Tom Brady took a lot of team friendly deals.

The Bengals had their QB on the relative cheap. They let the team deteriorate around itself.

I think the Rams are struggling because Todd Gurley's falling off. Goff started slipping right around this time last year, and it coincided with Gurley's drop in production.

When Dalton signed His contract in 2014(6yrs/96 million) he was paid more than, Brady, BEN, Rivers and just below Palmer and ELI. I believe he was paid adequately for what his skill set was but also agree that he was a team player by not going off on the FO for absolutely disregarding FA when it was obvious what needed to happen.