"post season" defense or "regular season" defense

[fredtoast]

One of the fascinating things about the way our defense played in the postseason is that we saw the exact same thing in 1989.  A lot of younger fans have probably watched a tape of the '89 Super Bowl and were highly impressed with the way our defense, despite losing its best player (Krumrie) early in the game, held that high-powered Forty-Niner offense to just 6 points going into the 4th quarter.  It was just a continuance of post season defensive brilliance.  In the playoffs the Bengal defense had held Seattle and Buffalo to only 237.5 yds and 11.5 points per game.  But during that regular season that same defense had ranked 16th (out of only 28 teams) in points allowed and 15th in yards.

That '88 defense had some talented players.  Krumrie was not just Pro Bowl, he was All Pro at NT.  SS David Fulcher was a 3 time Pro Bowl selection and All-Pro in '89.  CB Eric Thomas had a career high 7 ints and also went to the Pro Bowl in '88.  Reggie Williams was a very good player who never got and Pro Bowl recognition, but he started 196 NFL games and did everything well.  DE Jim Skow had a "one hit wonder" season in '88 with 9.5 sacks (more than double his next best season of 4.5).  But for the most part it was just a bunch of decent players.  Their biggest asset may have been DC Dick LeBeau.  They were also incredibly healthy with no games missed by any of their starters.

The next year they upgraded the defense at two positions.  The #5 pick from the '88 draft, CB Ricky Dixon, replaced Solomon Wilcots.  Wilcots started all 16 games for the Bengals in '88, but only had 11 more starts in the other 5 years of his career.  The #17 pick of the '87 draft, DE Jason Buck, replaced Skip McClendon.  Buck was not a great player, but his 6 sacks in '89, were almost as many as McClendon had in his entire 7 year career (8).

The '89 defense started out playing great.  Through the first 5 games of the season they were #2 in points allowed and #5 in yards.  At 4-1 the Bengals had the best record in the AFC..  But over the last 11 games the defense fell to 15th in points allowed and 18th in yards.  The team finished 4-7 and missed the playoffs.  The defense was again very health with DE Jim Skow being the only starter to miss a game and it was only the last 5 of the season.

So I have rambled on here a bit to make this point.  We just saw our defense play very well in the playoffs.  There is a cognitive function called "recency bias".  It is a memory bias that gives greater importance to what we have experienced most recently.

When making decisions on what we should do this offseason be careful not to put too much importance on what you saw in just the last few games.

[casear2727]

(03-12-2022, 02:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: One of the fascinating things about the way our defense played in the postseason is that we saw the exact same thing in 1989.  A lot of younger fans have probably watched a tape of the '89 Super Bowl and were highly impressed with the way our defense, despite losing its best player (Krumrie) early in the game, held that high-powered Forty-Niner offense to just 6 points going into the 4th quarter.  It was just a continuance of post season defensive brilliance.  In the playoffs the Bengal defense had held Seattle and Buffalo to only 237.5 yds and 11.5 points per game.  But during that regular season that same defense had ranked 16th (out of only 28 teams) in points allowed and 15th in yards.

That '88 defense had some talented players.  Krumrie was not just Pro Bowl, he was All Pro at NT.  SS David Fulcher was a 3 time Pro Bowl selection and All-Pro in '89.  CB Eric Thomas had a career high 7 ints and also went to the Pro Bowl in '88.  Reggie Kelly was a very good player who never got and Pro Bowl recognition, but he started 196 NFL games and did everything well.  DE Jim Skow had a "one hit wonder" season in '88 with 9.5 sacks (more than double his next best season of 4.5).  But for the most part it was just a bunch of decent players.  Their biggest asset may have been DC Dick LeBeau.  They were also incredibly healthy with no games missed by any of their starters.

The next year they upgraded the defense at two positions.  The #5 pick from the '88 draft, CB Ricky Dixon, replaced Solomon Wilcots.  Wilcots started all 16 games for the Bengals in '88, but only had 11 more starts in the other 5 years of his career.  The #17 pick of the '87 draft, DE Jason Buck, replaced Skip McClendon.  Buck was not a great player, but his 6 sacks in '89, were almost as many as McClendon had in his entire 7 year career (8).

The '89 defense started out playing great.  Through the first 5 games of the season they were #2 in points allowed and #5 in yards.  At 4-1 the Bengals had the best record in the AFC..  But over the last 11 games the defense fell to 15th in points allowed and 18th in yards.  The team finished 4-7 and missed the playoffs.  The defense was again very health with DE Jim Skow being the only starter to miss a game and it was only the last 5 of the season.

So I have rambled on here a bit to make this point.  We just saw our defense play very well in the playoffs.  There is a cognitive function called "recency bias".  It is a memory bias that gives greater importance to what we have experienced most recently.

When making decisions on what we should do this offseason be careful not to put too much importance on what you saw in just the last few games.

Very good post in my opinion.  I surely do hope that our improvement during the season into the playoffs was more of the new guys on D becoming more accustomed and comfortable with Lou's schemes.  Assuming we fill the void at DT and CB I dont expect any major regression.

.

[Clark W Griswold]

I agree that they could still get better on defense and hopefully the line will still play well without Ogunjobi and/or Hill because one is almost certain my going to leave in FA.

Also I think you got Reggie Williams last name mixed up with a former Bengals tight ends last name.

[puddycat]

One of my great joys this postseason was to see our defense ratchet up their play-style. We all saw the refs swallow their whistles (most of the time) in the playoffs. I remember our series of one-and-done playoff appearances in which our defenses played soft, at least by playoff standards.

[Interceptor]

The defense that showed up against KC twice.

[fredtoast]

(03-12-2022, 07:34 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: Also I think you got Reggie Williams last name mixed up with a former Bengals tight ends last name.

It was probably "Joe Kelly" instead of "Reggie Kelly".  Joe was another starting LB on that '88 defense.  He was a first round pick, but he was a Keith Rivers type of first round pick.  Nothing Special

But anyone who doesn't know who Reggie Williams is should find that 88 Super Bowl and watch it.  It seemed like Reggie made a bunch of plays in that game. 

[reuben.ahmed]

Wish the offense stepped it up in the playoffs too, but the quality of teams we faced in the playoffs got progressively tougher. That will be a lesson learned is that whatever we did in the regular season, we need to exceed that in the playoffs to stand a chance.

[Interceptor]

(03-13-2022, 07:58 AM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: Wish the offense stepped it up in the playoffs too, but the quality of teams we faced in the playoffs got progressively tougher. That will be a lesson learned is that whatever we did in the regular season, we need to exceed that in the playoffs to stand a chance.

They did the best they could with what little they got up front.

[casear2727]

(03-13-2022, 10:24 AM)Interceptor Wrote: They did the best they could with what little they got up front.

Yep, Burrow was taking on pass rushers like....

[Tony]

(03-13-2022, 12:40 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It was probably "Joe Kelly" instead of "Reggie Kelly".  Joe was another starting LB on that '88 defense.  He was a first round pick, but he was a Keith Rivers type of first round pick.  Nothing Special

But anyone who doesn't know who Reggie Williams is should find that 88 Super Bowl and watch it.  It seemed like Reggie made a bunch of plays in that game. 

Fulcher was the one who kept them in it...

[fredtoast]

(03-13-2022, 02:46 PM)Tony Wrote: Fulcher was the one who kept them in it...

Yes.  He played a great game also.

[fredtoast]

Another striking similarity in our postseason this year and in '88 is the amount of turnovers.

2021 Bengals defense was 17th in the league in forced turnovers with just 21 in 17 games. Then in the postseason they force multiple turnovers in every game with a total of 9 in just 4 games. The '88 defense had a lot of postseason success based on forcing 8 turnovers in just 3 games.

[Dr.Z]

The defense was much better this season, as it should've been. Getting Reader back alone accounted for a lot, along with the influx of other talent via FA and LB development. During the season, Eli Apple easily seemed like the weak link, and now with the season over he still does, despite not getting quite as exposed later in the season as early on. I'd also often and throughout the season find myself jealous of the opposing quarterback having all of that time as opposed to ours. But no doubt that despite the impressive play of the playoff version of the defense, it could use some fine tuning.

* I never thought of the parallels mentioned, but I see what the op means. Thinking back to Fulcher, I was very young, but remember the secondary being referred to "Fulcher's Vulchers." haha.

[reuben.ahmed]

(03-13-2022, 10:24 AM)Interceptor Wrote: They did the best they could with what little they got up front.

Maybe, but I think the point still stands, we have to step up in the postseason to win it all. Defense did, offense wasn't able to. Think Joe Flacco's run, or basically any star NBA player. Even though the competition is tougher, their stats are going up.