I like when the Cincinnati Bengals win football Games

[sandwedge]

(12-27-2020, 11:33 PM)GodFather Wrote: I agree 100%. Nothing pisses me off more than one fan telling another he’s not a fan or go find another team because their opinions aren’t aligned. 

Except no one even said that. You made that up. I just asked, why do people add, "I hope I am wrong"?

[sandwedge]

(12-27-2020, 11:31 PM)GodFather Wrote: I do when it’s meaningless and holds the team back from drafting one of the best OT prospects to come out of the draft in years. Yes, you don’t know what kind of player Sewell will be in the NFL but chances are they will be very good. 

I also see these two wins as excuses for the front office. It’s such a broken record we’ve seen year in and out with different coaching. The decision making in the front office is so mom-n-pop it’s ridiculous and they’ve just been handed a platter of excuses to keep the star for 2021. 

But I understand why you don’t think it’s a bad thing, I just think ahead and big picture in my mind, right or wrong.

So the FO calls down to the field and tells the team to start winning? Yeah, that makes sense......

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-27-2020, 07:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'm happy again today. I'll be happier next week when we not the Ravens out of the playoffs.

Looks like we've found our backup QB, looks like the oline is starting to gel, looks like Tee Higgins is a budding star, looks like Zac is figuring out we don't have to throw 60 times a game...

They were playing from behind a lot earlier, but yeah, he still could've ran more. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-28-2020, 01:16 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: They were playing from behind a lot earlier, but yeah, he still could've ran more. 

The game Burrow got hurt, we were actually ahead at halftime, yet Taylor had him on pace to throw 60x. Against arguably the best DL in the league. Just flat out ridiculous.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-28-2020, 01:44 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The game Burrow got hurt, we were actually ahead at halftime, yet Taylor had him on pace to throw 60x. Against arguably the best DL in the league. Just flat out ridiculous.

Yes, that was a head scratcher, but most all teams are throwing it a lot these days. Wasn't that game a kind of back and forth affair? No one is chastising Arians for continuing to drop back early in Detroit even though they were up 4 scores. If Cincy was winning games, I doubt anyone says anything either. It hasn't been too many games ago that Pig Pen threw the ball 53 times.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-28-2020, 01:53 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: Yes, that was a head scratcher, but most all teams are throwing it a lot these days. Wasn't that game a kind of back and forth affair? No one is chastising Arians for continuing to drop back early in Detroit even though they were up 4 scores. If Cincy was winning games, I doubt anyone says anything either. It hasn't been too many games ago that Pig Pen threw the ball 53 times.

TB12 and Ben have far better protection though. Pitt has only given up 13 sacks. Tampa 21. Us? 48...

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-28-2020, 02:05 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: TB12 and Ben have far better protection though. Pitt has only given up 13 sacks. Tampa 21. Us? 48...

Eye opener on Pitt...13, wow.  Look, I'm not gonna take up for Zac, and certainly not Turner, but Burrow took several that he shouldn't have trying to make plays. He improved on that as the season went on. Finley and Allen? Same. Is the line on par with Pitt, hell no, but they might be closer to 30 or so instead of the ridiculous 48 that the number is with better awareness from the QB. I don't find it a coincidence that all 3 QBs are getting sacked less the more they play. Hell, at Washington, it was like Finley was just ducking and waiting to get hit, lol.

So, bad line play is a big part here, but QBs not helping them early on is a part too.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-28-2020, 02:18 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: Eye opener on Pitt...13, wow.  Look, I'm not gonna take up for Zac, and certainly not Turner, but Burrow took several that he shouldn't have trying to make plays. He improved on that as the season went on. Finley and Allen? Same. Is the line on par with Pitt, hell no, but they might be closer to 30 or so instead of the ridiculous 48 that the number is with better awareness from the QB. I don't find it a coincidence that all 3 QBs are getting sacked less the more they play. Hell, at Washington, it was like Finley was just ducking and waiting to get hit, lol.

So, bad line play is a big part here, but QBs not helping them early on is a part too.

Burrow took some sacks trying to make plays, but he also avoided a bunch with his allusiveness. Remember the Titans game where he evaded like about 4-5 guys? Lol

I’d say with him it somewhat evens out. This OL really was straight trash most of the year.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-28-2020, 03:06 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Burrow took some sacks trying to make plays, but he also avoided a bunch with his allusiveness. Remember the Titans game where he evaded like about 4-5 guys? Lol

I’d say with him it somewhat evens out. This OL really was straight trash most of the year.

Good point on alluding some, so you may be right, it might even out. We agree, they're bad up front, and started off worse than they are now. Yikes!

I remember the Titans play for sure, that was awesome. I remember him hitting someone on the sideline on a busted play early on too. Chargers game, maybe?

[Bengalholic]

(12-28-2020, 10:07 AM)sandwedge Wrote: Except no one even said that. You made that up. I just asked, why do people add, "I hope I am wrong"?

Have you ever had a feeling/opinion on something, and hoped you were wrong about it? 

[StoneTheCrow]

Same. You only get to witness so many wins in a lifetime.

[Essex Johnson]

(12-28-2020, 01:44 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The game Burrow got hurt, we were actually ahead at halftime, yet Taylor had him on pace to throw 60x. Against arguably the best DL in the league. Just flat out ridiculous.

And we had zero sacks in that game with Burrow in and we were ahead with him throwing so sounds like a good game plan..and in other 8 games he had thrown more passes than when he got hurt so it is ridiculous to think He was going to get hurt with a major injury. In that game.
  .There are  QBs in the league with statistically worse lines than us that have remained healthy..Many on this board including you I believe  knowing our line advocated for Burrow to start and not sit at start of season.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-28-2020, 07:16 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: And we had zero sacks in that game with Burrow in and we were ahead with him throwing so sounds like a good game plan..and in other 8 games he had thrown more passes than when he got hurt so it is ridiculous to think He was going to get hurt with a major injury. In that game.
  .There are  QBs in the league with statistically worse lines than us that have remained healthy..Many on this board including you I believe  knowing our line advocated for Burrow to start and not sit at start of season.

Sacks don’t tell the whole story. He was being hit a ridiculous amount as well.

And ofc I advocated for him to start, but certainly not for him to be on pace for a record number of attempts as a rookie. Especially behind such a bad OL. An offensive genius like ZT should have focused more on balancing out the offense, instead of asking his rookie QB to throw it 40-60x a game.

[*ochocincos*]

(12-25-2020, 12:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I don't look at it as a bad thing in any aspect.

The ONLY downside is that it affects draft position.
And the fans feel more comfortable in getting good players the earlier the Bengals draft because they've struggled so much with developing talent.

Perhaps the NFL needs to implement a draft lottery system where a worse record only increases the probability of the highest pick, not guarantees it. For NBA, the team with the worst record is guaranteed a Top 5 pick, but not guaranteed the 1st overall.

This may give more incentive to win games and less frustration by the fan base when the team wins games late in the season after already being eliminated from playoffs.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-28-2020, 07:27 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The ONLY downside is that it affects draft position.
And the fans feel more comfortable in getting good players the earlier the Bengals draft because they've struggled so much with developing talent.

Perhaps the NFL needs to implement a draft lottery system where a worse record only increases the probability of the highest pick, not guarantees it. For NBA, the team with the worst record is guaranteed a Top 5 pick, but not guaranteed the 1st overall.

This may give more incentive to win games and less frustration by the fan base when the team wins games late in the season after already being eliminated from playoffs.

I do like the way the NHL draft lottery works. But then again my team has won it twice in the past few years without being dead last in the league. Lol

[*bfine32*]

(12-28-2020, 07:27 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The ONLY downside is that it affects draft position.
And the fans feel more comfortable in getting good players the earlier the Bengals draft because they've struggled so much with developing talent.

Perhaps the NFL needs to implement a draft lottery system where a worse record only increases the probability of the highest pick, not guarantees it. For NBA, the team with the worst record is guaranteed a Top 5 pick, but not guaranteed the 1st overall.

This may give more incentive to win games and less frustration by the fan base when the team wins games late in the season after already being eliminated from playoffs.

If we did this, then mysteriously the Steeler's ping pong ball would always come up with the first pick. 

But I do like the idea. 

[masterpanthera_t]

(12-28-2020, 07:27 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The ONLY downside is that it affects draft position.
And the fans feel more comfortable in getting good players the earlier the Bengals draft because they've struggled so much with developing talent.

Perhaps the NFL needs to implement a draft lottery system where a worse record only increases the probability of the highest pick, not guarantees it. For NBA, the team with the worst record is guaranteed a Top 5 pick, but not guaranteed the 1st overall.

This may give more incentive to win games and less frustration by the fan base when the team wins games late in the season after already being eliminated from playoffs.

I see the point,  but ultimately,  I don't know if a few spots here and there make as much of an impact as we think. 

I think the problem with the Bengals' drafting is mainly due to their poor FO structure and low number of scouts. That's one reason why even some of the higher picks have been misses. 

This is just an example,  and not a be all and end all, but the Steelers took Polamalu at 16, and the ravens took Ed Reed at 22, I believe. Both are HOFs. But we have certain concepts like 16 might be too early for a safety, etc. percolating in some NFL circles,  and I'm sure the Bengals are not outside of that thinking. Even if they were in the position to do so,  I feel the Bengals would have passed.  I think overall the steelers and ravens draft better than the Bengals simply because their scouting is better, as a general rule.  They seem to do better when when they're drafting at a higher position. Again,  as a general rule. Not saying they don't have busts,  but they seem to get higher value out of more of their picks than the Bengals. Whether it's hitting homeruns like Ogden, Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Suggs,  Polamalu, Lamar, Roethlisberger , TJ Watt etc., to getting value out of lower round picks like Antonio brown, James harrison and others. 

We can point to guys like Metcalf being drafted by Seattle too. I'm sure there are tons of examples like these if we go back and look at the first four rounds of the past five years or so.

If we fix this part of the organization,  there's no doubt we can compete with these teams for championships in my mind.  Hire a great GM and empower that person. If your first try didn't get you the right person,  try again using sound principles.  Eventually you'll get the right one. Heck, poach one of their highly regarded personnel people if you have to. Then let that person hire scouts.  Then we'll have less misses in the draft and build a better roster on average. Missing out a few slots of draft position won't and shouldn't make a big difference. 

But we all know ultimately what's held the organization back for the last thirty years is lack of innovative thinking and an honest appraisal of weaknesses within,  so that's that,  I guess. 

EDIT:
Also in the NBA, one superstar can have an enormous impact on an organization. Those guys generally aren't found outside the top 10 of a draft and most likely not outside of the top 5. There are exceptions sure, but really very rare. Also the NBA draft is only two rounds. In the NFL, considering the number of rounds and positions, a few spots lower in the draft doesn't affect you as much if your talent evaluation is very good. You can identify good players in the mid rounds and get them fairly easily no matter your draft spot.