Little Lou Who Is Consistent

[jfkbengals]

I'd be all for bringing Phillips in, but what can he really do mid-season?

He might be able to install a few new plays here or there, but he will need to continue to utilize the same playbook and personnel.

For the few things he can manage to install, he runs a 34 front. We can handle a few plays of it here and there, but our personnel (particularly at LB) aren't geared towards it as a primary defense. So we will be hoping he can try to turn chicken shit to chicken salad using all of the same ingredients.

[Big Boss]

I want a defensive coordinator with fire in his gut. We haven't had it since Zimmer and it's shown.

[BoomerFan]

I get that it may be hard to lure top coaching prospects here but what about college coaches? You don't need a top of the line guy like Urban Meyer, you need someone who is smart and has new ideas. Becoming an NFL defensive coordinator is a path to becoming a head coach if you are any good.

[Bengalholic]

(09-28-2020, 03:32 AM)J24 Wrote: Yes thats exactly how it works when you want to give a reasonable analysis of the situation. There is a difference between Wentz getting a 20 yard run because someone misses a sack. Then when a running back destroys a defense on a run up the B gap. There is absolutely a hundred percent a difference. 

You keep leaving out certain details...like in addition to the yards Wentz ran for, Sanders had almost 100 at 5.3 ypc or the Eagles converting 10/21 on 3rd down. Leaving these things out helps make the defense look better, but these things matter.

[BengalFanInNJ]

(09-28-2020, 12:29 AM)J24 Wrote: Let's get real
1.) The Defense has played well enough to win two of the first three games this season. Today they had 3 sacks, 2 INTs, 6 TFLs, held the eagle's under 5 yards a pass attempt, and a QB rating of 63. The Chargers were held to under 20 points and that's with holding them to 3 points off two Turnovers.
2.) Over the past 10 games dating back to last year's Raiders game the Defense has played well in all but two of them(Dolphins game and this year's Browns Game). It's not like this unit hasn't shown significant improvement since the first half of 2019.
3.) They haven't played a game with their best player in Geno Atkins.

Outside of the Browns Game the Defense has played well. The real blame should go to the Offensive Line who can't block anyone in either the run game or Passing Game.

They never made the big stop when they had too. The Ward TD in the last minute of the half and then the tying TD given up with 30 seconds left. Not a sign of a good defense. Sure, there were flashes against the Chargers but let's be honest; the Chargers and Eagles offenses aren't exactly juggernauts. The Browns offense is good and they crushed the Bengals defense. That game was not as close as the score. Every time the Bengals get back to within one score, Browns jammed it down their necks and scored again. 

I think there is SOME talent on this defense and appreciate the efforts bringing in the players they did (Reader, Bell, Waynes, Bynes, Alexander). But the ROI has not been there yet. 

[KillerGoose]

(09-28-2020, 03:03 AM)J24 Wrote: 1.) Outside of a few broken plays by Wentz the Run Defense wasn't bad.  Outside of Wentz the other guys that carried the ball had 27 Carries for 117 yards at 4.3 yards a carry. Not great but not omg bad either.

2.) They gave up zero sacks last week to the Rams who have Aaron freaking Donald.  So there line did improve from week 1 to 2.

3.)You wouldnt give the Bengals the benefit on injuries so stop giving other teams the benefit with injuries. They can only play who is in front of them.

4.) If they played well enough to win then the coach shouldn't be on the hotseat like the OP suggests. 

5.) Lamar Jackson scares the shit out of every Defense no matter how good they are.

You keep trying to take plays away and it just doesn’t work like that. Those plays happened and they need to be a part of the analysis. This isn’t some fantasy land, this defense has given up over 150 yards on the ground in three consecutive weeks. That is awful.

Yes, they double-teamed Donald and forced the rest of their line to beat them and they didn’t. I am happy with the pass rush that I saw, I’m not going to take that away from them but I am also not going to think that we have a great pass rush because we beat up on a weaker offensive line.

I have fully acknowledged that it doesn’t help have PS players on the line and it actively makes our defense worse but here is the thing - Geno isn’t going to fix the problem. I’m also not going to be as quick to give a team the “benefit of injuries” when they have been bad for three-plus years now and the defense has been absolutely awful. This defense stinks, specifically the run defense and Lou is at the head of it. He needs to be replaced.

[Wes Mantooth]

(09-28-2020, 03:32 AM)J24 Wrote: Yes thats exactly how it works when you want to give a reasonable analysis of the situation. There is a difference between Wentz getting a 20 yard run because someone misses a sack. Then when a running back destroys a defense on a run up the B gap. There is absolutely a hundred percent a difference. 

What I'm going to tell you might shock you...

When you're looking at rushing statistics around the league, most games will have a big run or a broken play here or there.

So, if you simply start removing what you consider an anomaly or a breakdown, that you don't think reflects the actual quality of play, then you have to consider this for each and every team, for each and every game.

Let me see if I can explain this in a little more detail.  Your stance, which seems to be a broken record, is that even though we gave up 175 yards, it really should have been a lot less (Maybe 125?) because of a broken play and a couple of anomalies.

Ok, so we're now at 125.  That's what you think best reflects our actual performance as a run D.  And when you look around the league you're thinking 125 isn't all that bad.  Defintely not terrible.

Except you're comparing that 125 against rushing totals that haven't had their broken plays or anomalies removed.  You're only doing this for the team you root for.

So once you go through all the teams and all the games, and applying your special level of analytics then you'll find that we're still near the bottom.  It was still a very, very bad day for the run defense.

Now, of course, none of this really needs to be this complicated.  The stats are the stats.  The plays that happened actually happened.  You don't get to pluck out certain plays, and pick and choose what you think is deserving of critique.  We gave up 175 on the ground yesterday.  175 stinks.  End of story.

[Bengalholic]

(09-28-2020, 12:28 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: What I'm going to tell you might shock you...

When you're looking at rushing statistics around the league, most games will have a big run or a broken play here or there.

So, if you simply start removing what you consider an anomaly or a breakdown, that you don't think reflects the actual quality of play, then you have to consider this for each and every team, for each and every game.

Let me see if I can explain this in a little more detail.  Your stance, which seems to be a broken record, is that even though we gave up 175 yards, it really should have been a lot less (Maybe 125?) because of a broken play and a couple of anomalies.

Ok, so we're now at 125.  That's what you think best reflects our actual performance as a run D.  And when you look around the league you're thinking 125 isn't all that bad.  Defintely not terrible.

Except you're comparing that 125 against rushing totals that haven't had their broken plays or anomalies removed.  You're only doing this for the team you root for.

So once you go through all the teams and all the games, and applying your special level of analytics then you'll find that we're still near the bottom.  It was still a very, very bad day for the run defense.

Now, of course, none of this really needs to be this complicated.  The stats are the stats.  The plays that happened actually happened.  You don't get to pluck out certain plays, and pick and choose what you think is deserving of critique.  We gave up 175 on the ground yesterday.  175 stinks.  End of story.

Yup, and under Lou they are allowing 135 or more rushing yards per game 63% of the time, 150+ 52% and 175+ 42%. There's just no way to massage those numbers and make them look anything but what they are...bad.

Like I said before, this problem isn't new to Lou...it's been going on for awhile, but it's actually getting worse under him.

[Wes Mantooth]

(09-28-2020, 02:11 AM)J24 Wrote: 1.) Should a offense in today's NFL be able to score more than 16 points in a game?
2.) If the offense scores at least one TD off the two turnovers that the Defense gave them; Do the Bengals beat the Eagles?
If the both of those answers are yes than is the Defense really to blame for the results for either the Eagles game or the Chargers game? Also is it fair to fire someone that's unit has done enough to win 2 out of the first three games? Especially when he has done it without his best player on the field?

No they are not completely blameless but they are no where close to being the main problem on this team. For example when the Defense forces two turnovers(one near midfield and the other in the opponents side of the field) and the offense scores only 3 points off them then the offense deserves more blame for the failures of the team then said Defense.
Here is the the truth about this season; 1.) We should be two and one right now but we have failed to finish off the Chargers and Eagles.. 2.) Even though we are 0-2-1 there have been a lot more positives from this team then there have been Negatives. We are one or two plays from being two and one right now. I think we should be more patient with this team than most on the board are giving them

We just gave up 23 points to the Eagles, who had posted point totals of 17, and 19 the two weeks prior.

The 17 total is what the Eagles put up against Washington.  Washington has proceed to give up 30 and 34 since then, to the Cardinals and the Browns. (Not a great D)

The 19 total is what the Eagles put against the Rams.  The Rams just gave up 35 to the Bills.

So we just gave up a season high to the Eagles.  But I'm sure this can be explained away.  ("We didn't give up that much more... The Rams are stacked on D...Chase Young..." Yada, yada, yada)

But consider this...

Players the Eagles played without that they had in their previous two games:

WR 1 - Desean Jackson (left game in first half, only played 28 snaps)
WR 2 - Jalen Reagor (1st round pick, out for game)
TE - Dallas Goedert (Leading team in receiving yards in 2020. Left game in first half)

Going into our machup, these were they 3 leading receiving options in terms of yards.

So not only did we give the most points to a very crappy Eagles team, we did it when they we're down 3 of their 4 best targets, that they had in their two other games.