Bengals FA Plan - What was it, was it good?

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-29-2021, 05:12 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: dislike playing a lot of zone defense though  if the pass rush cant get home  zone usually gets torn apart. (and our passrush hasnt been getting home)

Agree, but that is why bringing in Hendrickson, Ogunjobi and Hilton were good moves.

Have to play both Zone and Man though, not just one or the other like WJ3 who could only play man.

[TJ528]

(03-29-2021, 03:21 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: IMO I don’t think we had a chance of keeping Lawson even if we wanted to. He saw the way we handled one of his mentors and franchise greats at his position, why would he come back here if he could make the same money elsewhere?

As for WJ3, I don’t think he fit the scheme. Now, becoming dedicated to a scheme of a coach who will most likely be gone halfway thru the season is dumb, but if they are committed, Jackson didn’t fit the zone heavy coverage.

One thing I liked about the free agency was the goal of improved depth on the secondary. It’s something we desperately need, but it certainly wasn’t priority 1 or even priority 2. It’s a bit of a head scratcher but I get what they were going for. No more Webb or Sims running out there will be nice.

Should’ve put some more money into the OL and possibly another edge rusher (still time for that). Too many holes to fill in one offseason, but they kept the ship afloat so to speak while addressing defensive depth.

Personally, i think they've done okay.  There is no way in hell their fixing every hole this team has in free agency.  This team has missed on too many draft picks in the past 6 years and stuck with the veterans way too long.  

If they don't add anyone else to this team with the exception of the draft picks and maybe a few free agent pick ups for depth then I'd give them a C- for a grade.  Maybe a D because I only think they upgrades in the secondary personally. 

My question is this team a 5-12 teams or a 9-8 team?  I'm guessing probably closer to 5-12 because they're only 9-8 IF this team stays healthy.  If we lose players to injury they dont have enough depth to over it and I see 4-13 or 5-12. 

I'm hoping for 9-8 because that means we don't have to go through a coaching change again.  However, if this team finished 4-13 or 5-12 then I do think Zac Taylor and his staff will be fired and a new staff brought in and start over again. 

[Joelist]

Let's remember players all over the league are doing 1 year deals - they are "betting on themselves" with prove it deals in a year where the cap went down and they know because of the TV deals the cap is going to shoot way up next year.

As to the Free Agency FOR US my long post I think covers it from my view. I'd say we've done pretty good especially when you consider the players who have come and gone in terms of the schemes we play. I hate zone defense maybe more than anyone on this board but I will say that IF you are dead set on using it THEN bring in players who are good at executing it. And that is what they did.

[TJ528]

(03-29-2021, 05:46 PM)Joelist Wrote: Let's remember players all over the league are doing 1 year deals - they are "betting on themselves" with prove it deals in a year where the cap went down and they know because of the TV deals the cap is going to shoot way up next year.

As to the Free Agency FOR US my long post I think covers it from my view. I'd say we've done pretty good especially when you consider the players who have come and gone in terms of the schemes we play. I hate zone defense maybe more than anyone on this board but I will say that IF you are dead set on using it THEN bring in players who are good at executing it. And that is what they did.

Now the issue is to see if Lou can actually coach a Zone Defense lol 

[*ochocincos*]

(03-29-2021, 05:47 PM)TJ528 Wrote: Now the issue is to see if Lou can actually coach a Zone Defense lol 

Fixed it for you.

[fredtoast]

I understand that some DBs can play could coverage but have problems pressing the receivers at the LOS. So I can see why a "zone DB" might have problems in press man coverage. But I can't think of a single skill set involving coverage that would cause a "man-to-man DB" to struggle in zone.

So what skill would a good "man-to-man CB" be lacking that would cause him to struggle in a zone scheme?

[Joelist]

CBs that can play Man but not Zone and vice versa are facts of life in the NFL. And it makes sense in that Man calls for a player to pick up and stick to a particular player all the way through the play while zone has a player covering a defined area of the field and reacting to events in and around it.

[*jason*]

(03-29-2021, 05:56 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Fixed it for you.

That question has long been answered....

[*Synric*]

(03-29-2021, 06:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I understand that some DBs can play could coverage but have problems pressing the receivers at the LOS.  So I can see why a "zone DB" might have problems in press man coverage.  But I can't think of a single skill set involving coverage that would cause a "man-to-man DB" to struggle in zone.

So what skill would a good "man-to-man CB" be lacking that would cause him to struggle in a zone scheme?

Vision and short area quickness are a couple. 

[GreenCornBengal]

(03-29-2021, 06:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I understand that some DBs can play could coverage but have problems pressing the receivers at the LOS. So I can see why a "zone DB" might have problems in press man coverage. But I can't think of a single skill set involving coverage that would cause a "man-to-man DB" to struggle in zone.

So what skill would a good "man-to-man CB" be lacking that would cause him to struggle in a zone scheme?

I’m guessing it’s scheme awareness and leverage on the field. A good press corner can have his man blanketed but leave a large area of the field open as a consequence. Depending on how the offense is attacking the defense, their strength in man to man becomes a weakness for the entire defense.

[fredtoast]

(03-29-2021, 06:53 PM)Synric Wrote: Vision and short area quickness are a couple. 

You can't be a good "man-to-man" DB without vision and short area quickness.

[TJ528]

(03-29-2021, 06:50 PM)jason Wrote: That question has long been answered....

well if the 24th and 27th ranked defenses the past 2 yrs tell us anything its that the defense even with added pieces will still probably be in the 20-25 ranked area

[*Synric*]

(03-29-2021, 07:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You can't be a good "man-to-man" DB without vision and short area quickness.

A good Man Corner only has to read the WR, understand his leverage and where his help is in zone you are reading the entire side of the field and the QB Vision is a must for a great zone defender.

In Man you're using your body to slow up the WR and throw off the timing of the route. In zone your exploding out of your backpedal to break on a route.


What you're talking about is a GREAT corner that has most but not all of the attributes. Vision, field awareness, short area quickness make a great zone corner.

[fredtoast]

(03-29-2021, 07:16 PM)Synric Wrote: In Man you're using your body to slow up the WR and throw off the timing of the route. In zone your exploding out of your backpedal to break on a route.

Unless you are playing press coverage tight on the LOS you also have to explode out of your backpedal in man coverage.


I guess a zone DB has to be able to read the field better, but that is just a learned skill.  And anyone playing man coverage already has to have a good deal of field awareness to deal with picks, rubs, and knowing if he has deep help or not (which often depends on other receivers routes)

[Isaac Curtis: The Real #85]

Good discussion.

As far as I can tell, the FA plan was:

1) To focus on the defense because it is a deep draft at OL and WR but not so much at CB/DE. No real defenders worthy of being taken at #5.

2) We knew we had a lot of holes to fill, and so did not want to break the bank for one guy. Especially an OG (Thuney/Zeitler).

3) We knew there was not a ton of cap space. We had more than most teams. If teams went big for one guy, it may necessitate a release. And another quality guy we get to make a run at.

4) Don't commit of lot of money long term. This could be it for ZT & Lou. We coud be retooling again. Plus, the cap will explode next year. A lot of guys may want/be forced to sign for cheap this year (lack of cap space) but be willing to make it up on longer deals next.

5) Leave some $$ in the hamper to rollover for next year (+Bates extension), and in case of emergency signings are needed, or guys that get cut after draft or in TC.

6) In sum, try to sign numerous good (but not great) players, mostly on D, on short term deals, deals we can get out of after 1 year, or multi-year deals at below what that player would get in a normal year.

We made discounted plays for Thuney & Zeitler. A serious 1 yr push for Golladay that almost worked. Got Reiff & Ogunjobi on good value deals for 1 year. Hilton & Awuzie on good multi-year value deals. Hendrickson has a 1 year escape hatch. Apple is a 1 year reclaimation project. IDK on Allen, but imagine it is pretty modest. All our own guys were re-signed on modest 1 years save for Perine (I think), which was very modest 2 year deal.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-29-2021, 07:16 PM)Synric Wrote: A good Man Corner only has to read the WR, understand his leverage and where his help is in zone you are reading the entire side of the field and the QB Vision is a must for a great zone defender.

In Man you're using your body to slow up the WR and throw off the timing of the route. In zone your exploding out of your backpedal to break on a route.


What you're talking about is a GREAT corner that has most but not all of the attributes. Vision, field awareness, short area quickness make a great zone corner.

This is a great post.