Injuries Vs. Wins (Our Injuries are Overstated)

[Wes Mantooth]

(01-06-2021, 08:54 PM)SuperBowlBound! Wrote: You are right. 

Why pay high priced FA's or worry about getting first round talent when all you need is good coaches. 

[*bfine32*]

(01-06-2021, 08:51 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Look at what Mike Zimmer produced here from 2009-2013.  He took a defense that wasn't exactly filled with high round talent, nor high priced free agents, and turned them into one of the better defenses in the league.

Coaching matters.  Scheme matters.  Playcalling matters.  Development, rotation, relationships, ect. etc. etc.

Of course coaching matters. It's why dude listed it in the OP. but it's not everything and in my opinion and that of the writer of the OP players were a bigger weakness in our dline than coaching. 

[*ochocincos*]

(01-06-2021, 07:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: How so? If you look at the article you'll see we were in the top half of teams that blitzed the QB; that's coaching. When those blitzers don't get there that's players.

Now if the coaches drafted the players then you'd have a point; but they don't, they must use what they have. 

We all know the coaches are more involved in what players are drafted compared to most teams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wes Mantooth]

(01-06-2021, 08:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course coaching matters. It's why dude listed it in the OP. but it's not everything and in my opinion and that of the writer of the OP players were a bigger weakness in our dline than coaching. 

If you know coaching matters then why do you feel the need to have a snarky reply to another poster where you wonder why Myles Garrett gets drafted #1, or Von Miller makes 14 mil a year, if all teams can do is rely on coaching?

[*bfine32*]

(01-06-2021, 09:10 PM)ochocincos Wrote: We all know the coaches are more involved in what players are drafted compared to most teams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I'll go out on a limb and say our Defensive Coaches wanted Chase Young at #1OA, but Tobin and Mikey most likely had final say. No matter how we spin it; our coaches are not shot callers. Our dline was devoid of talent. Especially with Dunlap quitting, Geno hurting, and Reeder IR'd

[*bfine32*]

(01-06-2021, 09:17 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: If you know coaching matters then why do you feel the need to have a snarky reply to another poster where you wonder why Myles Garrett gets drafted #1, or Von Miller makes 14 mil a year, if all teams can do is rely on coaching?

uuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...because he said coaching was more important than players when it comes to getting after the QB. 

[SuperBowlBound!]

(01-06-2021, 05:41 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: The injury excuse would be a lot more valid if we were winning prior to the majority of those players going down.

We were 2-6-1 with Joe Burrow and Jonah Williams both playing.

We were 1-4-1 with Joe Burrow, Jonah Willaims, and Joe Mixon all playing.

We were 1-3-1 with Joe Burrow, Jonah Williams, Joe Mixon, and DJ Reader all playing.

I know I'm not the first to bring this up, and I'm not trying to beat a dead horse.  But this is something people continually choose to ignore.

You can't say, "well were bad because we were without Joe Burrow" when we were bad with Joe Burrow.  And that goes for everyone else I just listed above.

It's not like we were seeing a significant difference in success (W/L's) with guys that was immediately altered when they went down.

Do injuries matter?  Sure.  Would we have been better had they not incurred?  Probably.  But it's not like this is some 10 win team if Burrow and Mixon, and whoever manage to stay healthy.  

And let's be honest, if it takes your entire starting lineup to remain fully healthy and intact for you to succeed, then that's just further proof you team isn't very good.  That amount of luck doesn't exist in this league.  Every team can play the "what if?" game.

This team wasn't a good football team.  Period.  Those who immediately run to the injury excuse (like they did last year, and the year before that, and the year before that) are only looking for reasons to rationalize something they don't want to admit.  That we stink.

The article pointed out where the Bengals are in a rebuild. The Bengals went into the season as a team in the middle of a rebuild. Any team rebuilding does not have depth. Add in ML last season and not only look at the lack of starting talent but they really had no depth at all. 
Their best LB was either Preston Brown or Nick vigil or dare I say Hardy Nickerson. They had Kilpatrick running around like an idiot. It was quite embarrassing. 


The 2020 Bengals would not be successful if they had multiple injuries to key areas.
Not only did that happen but they also had players they were depending on play like journeyman players.
3 out of 4 of are best players, AJ Green, Atkins and Dunlap played like journeyman players this year.
Losing Reader that early and not even having Trae Waynes was really big.

Bad enough not having a preseason to build consistency. Having new players week in and week out mad the job impossible.

Like many on this board I am a lifetime Bengals fan.  I have watched some of our best teams get embarrassed in Prime time especially against the Steelers. I am still in awe that ZT took a team with no off line and no defensive line, rookie linebackers, no starting QB and losing Tyler Boyd early to an injury was able to have Ryan Finley take down the Steelers. 

I lknow most on this board do not want to believe Joe Burrow support for ZT. I believe it. I see it in Tee Higgins and Tyler Boyds play as well as the play of the guys that will be here next year.

2021 will be a prove it year for ZT but I believe he will have us not only competitive but a team with a winning record.

[MileHighGrowler]

I'm not sure the camp that disapproves of Taylor puts 100% of the blame on him. In fact, according to the thread about that very topic, I think most of us put the blame on players and coaches. But there are facts that support the notion that coaches can cause improvement to a roster, and that good coaches can find a way to adjust as they go.

So yes, the injuries were rough. Yes, the roster has holes. But the coaches didn't do a thing this year to overcome any of that. The Bengals weren't getting blown out every game all season. But they couldn't overcome. So coaches are still to blame, in addition to the players.

I don't understand why anyone would defend this coaching staff to the point that they take all blame off of them. I don't understand why anyone looks at the body of work of two full seasons and thinks they can turn it around next year. I get wanting the best (I sure as hell do), and hoping for the best (I sure as hell do), but that doesn't mean I have to put any faith in Zac and Co (I sure as hell don't).

[Wes Mantooth]

(01-06-2021, 09:31 PM)SuperBowlBound! Wrote: 1.) The article pointed out where the Bengals are in a rebuild. The Bengals went into the season as a team in the middle of a rebuild. Any team rebuilding does not have depth.

2.) Add in ML last season and not only look at the lack of starting talent but they really had no depth at all. 
Their best LB was either Preston Brown or Nick vigil or dare I say Hardy Nickerson. They had Kilpatrick running around like an idiot. It was quite embarrassing. 

1.) No offense, but I'm not sure you understand how "rebuilds" work at this level.  You can overhaul a team in a single offseason.  I'll grant you it can take one year to install your system and get your players up to peak performance.  But the idea that a rebuild takes until year 3 to see results is frankly absurd. 

This isn't college football.  Zac Taylor had two drafts, one with a #11 starting position, and the other with the #1 starting position.  He had two free agency periods.  And he continuity in his staff, and plenty of time to impliment his system.  The "rebuild" should have changed over to "rising" by year 2.

I could be wrong, but I'm guessing you'd be someone that will be in favor of Zac getting a year 4 if he manages 8 wins next season (am I wrong?).  If that's the case, then we're into a 4 year rebuild.  When it does it stop?

2.) It's funny that Marvin had a "lack of a starting talent" and "no depth at all", but he still managed to win 6 games.  Are you saying the current team has even less starting talent, and even less depth?  Because that's a big problem if Zac has managed to worsen a situation you described as so bleak.

[SuperBowlBound!]

(01-06-2021, 07:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So you think Ryan Tannehill just ate some magic beans or something when he went from Miami to Tennessee?

Players are like race cars and coaches are like drivers.  Even the fastest car will lose a race if it has a poor driver.

It is called having run game. That is also what saved Baker Mayfield in Cleveland.

Our offensive line is not there yet.

[SuperBowlBound!]

(01-06-2021, 09:34 PM)MileHighGrowler Wrote: I'm not sure the camp that disapproves of Taylor puts 100% of the blame on him.  In fact, according to the thread about that very topic, I think most of us put the blame on players and coaches.  But there are facts that support the notion that coaches can cause improvement to a roster, and that good coaches can find a way to adjust as they go.  

So yes, the injuries were rough.  Yes, the roster has holes.  But the coaches didn't do a thing this year to overcome any of that.  The Bengals weren't getting blown out every game all season.  But they couldn't overcome.  So coaches are still to blame, in addition to the players.  

I don't understand why anyone would defend this coaching staff to the point that they take all blame off of them.  I don't understand why anyone looks at the body of work of two full seasons and thinks they can turn it around next year.  I get wanting the best (I sure as hell do), and hoping for the best (I sure as hell do), but that doesn't mean I have to put any faith in Zac and Co (I sure as hell don't).

Maybe I am just not explaining myself correctly.

I am not defending ZT as much as I am for giving him the time to do his job.

I have no problem giving him a 3rd year. I am not sure who every body on this board thinks we are going to get.

[MileHighGrowler]

(01-06-2021, 10:26 PM)SuperBowlBound! Wrote: Maybe I am just not explaining myself correctly.

I am not defending ZT as much as I am for giving him the time to do his job.

I have no problem giving him a 3rd year. I am not sure who every body on this board thinks we are going to get.

But how much time is that?  How many years does it take to turn it around?  I know that some hate the comparison of a team like the Browns, but you CAN turn it around quickly.  There are multiple examples of teams who have.  So how many years does it take before you're tired of Zac?  

On your other point about who the Bengals could get...  Geez, there are several directions they could go.  A team with Burrow, great draft position (again), cap space and the openness to spend in FA (as shown last year) seems pretty desirable.  Even if the 4th team in order of appeal, that's still a whole lot of availability for an upgrade.  

[SuperBowlBound!]

(01-06-2021, 09:44 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: 1.) No offense, but I'm not sure you understand how "rebuilds" work at this level.  You can overhaul a team in a single offseason.  I'll grant you it can take one year to install your system and get your players up to peak performance.  But the idea that a rebuild takes until year 3 to see results is frankly absurd. 

This isn't college football.  Zac Taylor had two drafts, one with a #11 starting position, and the other with the #1 starting position.  He had two free agency periods.  And he continuity in his staff, and plenty of time to impliment his system.  The "rebuild" should have changed over to "rising" by year 2.

I could be wrong, but I'm guessing you'd be someone that will be in favor of Zac getting a year 4 if he manages 8 wins next season (am I wrong?).  If that's the case, then we're into a 4 year rebuild.  When it does it stop?

2.) It's funny that Marvin had a "lack of a starting talent" and "no depth at all", but he still managed to win 6 games.  Are you saying the current team has even less starting talent, and even less depth?  Because that's a big problem if Zac has managed to worsen a situation you described as so bleak.

No Offense at all.

Like I said in my other post. Since when is a rebuild in NFL football take 1 year and your in the playoffs.
I think barring significant injuries and declining stay skills that I have pointed out would have been on the rise.

I am happy to give ZT a 4th year if I see major improvements in this team. 

I don't know if I can put a win total to it but I think I will know it when I see it.

Who exactly do you think is going to come in here and take this team over and bring us to the payoffs?

[SuperBowlBound!]

(01-06-2021, 10:30 PM)MileHighGrowler Wrote: But how much time is that?  How many years does it take to turn it around?  I know that some hate the comparison of a team like the Browns, but you CAN turn it around quickly.  There are multiple examples of teams who have.  So how many years does it take before you're tired of Zac?  

On your other point about who the Bengals could get...  Geez, there are several directions they could go.  A team with Burrow, great draft position (again), cap space and the openness to spend in FA (as shown last year) seems pretty desirable.  Even if the 4th team in order of appeal, that's still a whole lot of availability for an upgrade.  

If there are plenty of directions they could go please let me know a few of them

I am not sure people are beating down the door to have Mike Brown as your owner.

[wildcatnku24]

(01-06-2021, 09:34 PM)MileHighGrowler Wrote: I'm not sure the camp that disapproves of Taylor puts 100% of the blame on him.  In fact, according to the thread about that very topic, I think most of us put the blame on players and coaches.  But there are facts that support the notion that coaches can cause improvement to a roster, and that good coaches can find a way to adjust as they go.  

So yes, the injuries were rough.  Yes, the roster has holes.  But the coaches didn't do a thing this year to overcome any of that.  The Bengals weren't getting blown out every game all season.  But they couldn't overcome.  So coaches are still to blame, in addition to the players.  

I don't understand why anyone would defend this coaching staff to the point that they take all blame off of them.  I don't understand why anyone looks at the body of work of two full seasons and thinks they can turn it around next year.  I get wanting the best (I sure as hell do), and hoping for the best (I sure as hell do), but that doesn't mean I have to put any faith in Zac and Co (I sure as hell don't).

But the coaches were constantly plucking people off waivers, practice squad, getting people on the team, etc.   Honestly I saw more moves this year as far as shuffling players around and trying different things than any season I can recall off the top of my head.

If I’ve indicated as such, then it was not my intent, as I do not think that Zac is without any blame.  That’d be ridiculous, and while I obviously am a ZT supporter, I do know he has/is making mistakes along the way.  I mentally signed up for that when he got hired, as I expected some growing pains with a newbie coach.  I think it can be turned around next year for two specific reasons:

1) We have had so many close games where it could’ve gone either way.
2) Injuries definitely shouldn’t be as bad, meaning that we should have most of our expected starters.
     2b side note to ensure I don’t get flamed - I know it’s football, been a fan a long time.  A player out here and there happens.  I expect that and that’s not what I’m referring to as #2. 

[wildcatnku24]

(01-06-2021, 10:26 PM)SuperBowlBound! Wrote: Maybe I am just not explaining myself correctly.

I am not defending ZT as much as I am for giving him the time to do his job.

I have no problem giving him a 3rd year. I am not sure who every body on this board thinks we are going to get.

I swear this guy isn’t an alt account of mine, but I can’t say for sure whether or not he/she can read my thoughts.....

I feel the exact same way SBB!!!  REP!

[Nicomo Cosca]

(01-06-2021, 10:22 PM)SuperBowlBound! Wrote: It is called having run game. That is also what saved Baker Mayfield in Cleveland.

Our offensive line is not there yet.

Bill Callahan>>>>>>>>Jim Turner

[MileHighGrowler]

(01-06-2021, 10:35 PM)SuperBowlBound! Wrote: If there are plenty of directions they could go please let me know a few of them

I am not sure people are beating down the door to have Mike Brown as your owner.

If you're asking me to list candidates that would accept the job, that's impossible because we cannot know who the org would have gone after this year and who would have taken the job. That said, there is no way no one would want to come to Cincinnati to coach the Bengals right now. MB is a PITA for sure, but it's not like he doesn't bend. They increased the size of the coaching staff last year and spent money in FA, both of which are things a lot of people thought the org would never do. HC gigs are limited, and the Bengals actually have quite a bit going for them right now as far as a future.

(01-06-2021, 10:43 PM)wildcatnku24 Wrote: But the coaches were constantly plucking people off waivers, practice squad, getting people on the team, etc.   Honestly I saw more moves this year as far as shuffling players around and trying different things than any season I can recall off the top of my head.

If I’ve indicated as such, then it was not my intent, as I do not think that Zac is without any blame.  That’d be ridiculous, and while I obviously am a ZT supporter, I do know he has/is making mistakes along the way.  I mentally signed up for that when he got hired, as I expected some growing pains with a newbie coach.  I think it can be turned around next year for two specific reasons:

1) We have had so many close games where it could’ve gone either way.
2) Injuries definitely shouldn’t be as bad, meaning that we should have most of our expected starters.
     2b side note to ensure I don’t get flamed - I know it’s football, been a fan a long time.  A player out here and there happens.  I expect that and that’s not what I’m referring to as #2. 

But if ZT was the leader some claim him to be, and they were in close games, why couldn't he get them over the hump to win them? Why did their halftime adjustments suck? Why in the shuffle with players could they not land on a consistent approach to win? And this is my argument against ZT. I don't think he has shown legitimate progress. If he was "learning on the job" I'd have expected to see some real progress from year 1 to year 2, and progress over the course of each season. And I didn't. And that's what I don't have any hope in his ability as a HC.

Also, remember that the "learning curve" of a HC shouldn't be the learning curve of an OC. And he's not been good in that role in the past, either, having had more than one previous opportunity at it.

[Shake n Blake]

Our injuries are always overstated after losing seasons. Burrow had a terrible record as starter this year. The injuries are pure excuse fodder.

[*SHRacerX*]

(01-05-2021, 03:59 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I just came across this on Twitter, and I thought it was interesting.  Here is chart that shows the total amount of games missed (left to right) and the win total (up and down).



I can't exactly make out who had more injuries between us and teams like Tampa and Buffalo, as they're too close on the graph.  But I think we can all agree they're comparable in number.

Here are the teams who had less total injuries than us: Atlanta, Miami, Los Angeles, Indy, Arizona, Houston, Pittsburgh.

Here are the teams who had a comparable amount of injuries: Cincinnati, Buffalo, and Tampa.

That leaves the remaining 22 teams with more games missed due to injury than us. 

I've seen quite a few people compare our situation to San Fran.  You might want to rethink that (look at them on graph).  They had over 300 missed games due to injury whereas we had around 125.

I've long held the belief that our injury situation is completely overstated by some who look for reasons to defend our lack of success.  This seems to illustrate my point rather well.

I saw this as well, but from what I can tell there is no delineation among WHO was injured.  Was it a special teams guy?  Or was it your #1 DT, TE, CB, RB, LT, and QB?  I am not trying to excuse the losses, but there was NO WAY the Bengals were going to compete with Baltimore with both Alexander and WJIII out.  For a defense that leans so heavily on their CBs with little to no pressure from an injured and underperforming defensive line, any backup CB would be toasted.  In the blowout losses to pitt and balt...that is exactly what happened.  

I am a little surprised how much ZT blamed injuries in recent press conferences.  I hate to admit it, but look at how pitt played the Browns with a lot of starters out.  That is coaching and, more than that, it is year-long preparation of ALL players so that when the time comes they would be ready to step in.  Once a Bengal starter is out, it is almost like they wave the white flag.

SF was similar only in that they had a ton of key front line starters out (CB, QB, etc) and they also played in a very tough division.  They did, however, have more guys on IR and more time missed from starters than any other team.  

I realize that Miami had slightly fewer injuries than the Bengals and everyone seems to be in love with their coach, roster, etc.  Sure, I would be thrilled if the Bengals won 10 games this past season but Miami won ONE game this year against a playoff team:  week 8, coming off a bye, where the LA Rams had to travel to Miami and play at 1pm.  The Rams were coming off a short week, having played on MNF the week prior, and then traveling cross country to play Miami.  Statistics show that when a team goes on the road on a short week, the lost straight up nearly 75% of the time, let alone crossing three time zones and playing at essentially 10 am their time.  That was EASY money as the Rams were favored in that game.  

As Nicomo and I have been bantering about on another thread, Miami is still in a great position moving forward with a lot of picks in this draft, but they are not light years beyond the Bengals.  If they played in the AFC North and weren't playing a last place schedule from 2019, they may very well had been 4-11-1 also.  

Still, a very interesting graph.  I just thought I would try to add some context to those injury hours.   For the REAL BIG NERDS out there, it would be interesting for someone (hell not me...) to calculate the "dropoff" in PFF ranking from starter to injured player for all those hours.  That would really help to indicate your quality depth (or lack thereof).