for the luv of GOD, a legit TE please !

[lone bengal]

Irv Smith has been bad but big picture I think the play calling is the biggest issue. Seems like we need good players at every position for this offense to function under Zac Taylor. Stud QB , 3 good WR’s , 3 big free agent lineman and Williams on the tag what would this offense look like under mike mcdaniels , Andy Reid or Kyle shanahan ? There are teams with way less talent that score more than us on a weekly basis. This isn’t just Burrow’s calf we’ve questioned creativity on offense since Zac’s been head coach and the line has been addressed.

[Bengalitis]

the offensive coaching staff needs a shake up, just like they did with the team... fire a couple.. start with Callahan. (preferably Zac, but that won't happen). The team is stuck with Bratkowski football, unmotivated and predictable. Time to bring an innovative OC.

[*ochocincos*]

(10-18-2023, 09:53 AM)Bengalitis Wrote: the offensive coaching staff needs a shake up, just like they did with the team... fire a couple.. start with Callahan. (preferably Zac, but that won't happen). The team is stuck with Bratkowski football, unmotivated and predictable. Time to bring an innovative OC.

I think Hue Jackson is still available 

In all seriousness though, Hue was able to operate an effective running game, and he was about the only offensive playcaller who has had success with the running game in the past decade. He also was able to orchestrate an effective passing offense, especially given he didn't have the QB and WRs like the Bengals have today.

[SunsetBengal]

(10-18-2023, 10:22 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I think Hue Jackson is still available 

In all seriousness though, Hue was able to operate an effective running game, and he was about the only offensive playcaller who has had success with the running game in the past decade. He also was able to orchestrate an effective passing offense, especially given he didn't have the QB and WRs like the Bengals have today.

They could bring in both Jackson and Jay Gruden to retool the offense, but it wouldn't be worth a drop in the bucket unless Zac Taylor agreed to give up play calling and they could convince Joe B to buy into the idea that deviating from what he likes (spread, empty formations) will result in greater overall production.

[Millhouse]

My take is that not having a tight end threat while having just Mixon as the running back is not a good combination to have for the offense they want to run.

I do think they will make the playoffs, but beyond that I see the chances less this time around to make the Super Bowl let alone win it. But who knows maybe they will. Maybe the coaching does a 180 and become offensive geniuses over the next four months, and figure out how to be consistent for four quarters each game with the current roster.

[*PhilHos*]

(10-18-2023, 10:28 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They could bring in both Jackson and Jay Gruden to retool the offense, but it wouldn't be worth a drop in the bucket unless Zac Taylor agreed to give up play calling 

Hell, just start small: have only ONE guy call the plays and not do this playcalling by committee approach they supposedly do. If the O still disappoints, THEN get a new playcaller.

[KillerGoose]

(10-18-2023, 10:28 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They could bring in both Jackson and Jay Gruden to retool the offense, but it wouldn't be worth a drop in the bucket unless Zac Taylor agreed to give up play calling and they could convince Joe B to buy into the idea that deviating from what he likes (spread, empty formations) will result in greater overall production.

Gruden is already on a staff - the Rams staff. Jackson hasn't been in the NFL for over five years now and has been coaching at the FCS level with little success. That ship has long sailed. His time here is fast coming up on 10 years ago. 

[*ochocincos*]

(10-18-2023, 10:28 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They could bring in both Jackson and Jay Gruden to retool the offense, but it wouldn't be worth a drop in the bucket unless Zac Taylor agreed to give up play calling and they could convince Joe B to buy into the idea that deviating from what he likes (spread, empty formations) will result in greater overall production.

He likes it because it worked great in college, especially with elite WR talents in JJ and JC.
It's interesting because traditionally, NFL teams would just say, "Nah, we're not doing this spread college offense stuff. You need to adapt."
Taylor is someone who was willing to try it, and they are having success with it...when everyone is healthy at least.

[SunsetBengal]

(10-18-2023, 11:14 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: Gruden is already on a staff - the Rams staff. Jackson hasn't been in the NFL for over five years now and has been coaching at the FCS level with little success. That ship has long sailed. His time here is fast coming up on 10 years ago. 

The point that I was making is that it wouldn't matter who they brought in, even if they had the most innovative offensive mind to date, so long as the HC holds onto play calling duties and the QB remains staunch about running out of only certain formations.

[SunsetBengal]

(10-18-2023, 11:24 AM)ochocincos Wrote: He likes it because it worked great in college, especially with elite WR talents in JJ and JC.
It's interesting because traditionally, NFL teams would just say, "Nah, we're not doing this spread college offense stuff. You need to adapt."
Taylor is someone who was willing to try it, and they are having success with it...when everyone is healthy at least.

The problem, as it appears to me anyway, is that defenses adapt to easily to whatever has success.  The key to long term success, in my point of view, is to be fluid and dynamic with the offense and be able to execute as both ball control and with the big play.

[KillerGoose]

(10-18-2023, 11:25 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The point that I was making is that it wouldn't matter who they brought in, even if they had the most innovative offensive mind to date, so long as the HC holds onto play calling duties and the QB remains staunch about running out of only certain formations.

I see that now. Sorry, I misread your post somehow. Going over it again, it is very clear what you were saying lol

[Millhouse]

(10-18-2023, 11:29 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The problem, as it appears to me anyway, is that defenses adapt to easily to whatever has success.  The key to long term success, in my point of view, is to be fluid and dynamic with the offense and be able to execute as both ball control and with the big play.

I agree, and this was basically what I should have said when I was arguing against the offense being in shotgun 99% of the time which I am not a fan of overall. I prefer an offense that shows multiple looks presnap to keep the defense guessing so to speak, especially on those big 3rd and shorts. But that's just the old school baller in me.

[Nepa]

(10-16-2023, 09:10 PM)Housh Wrote: Honestly Joe has TE blindness anyway so i can’t really support signing any TE for more than 5M


Now if we get a Kyle Pitts  or something that’s different but i am not punching the air when i see Irv only targeted once or twice


Part of me thinks he simply can’t be getting open if Burrow can’t find him

Plus Gronk is 6'6" and Kelce is 6'5" and Kyle Pitts is 6'6"  while Irv Smith is only 6'2", or two inches shorter than Higgins. TEs are usually among the taller targets on a team, with an average height of 6'4" (the height of Hurst). Irv Smith is not a tall target for Burrow. Get a tall target for Burrow and he would be hard to stop on third downs.

[M.W.]

(10-16-2023, 07:37 PM)Chezaugie Wrote: I would prefer a solid NFL RB. Mixon has been horrible the last few years. Yeah, I know people will come to his corner and shout, "the OL sucks!" but the OL got to two AFC Championships and a Super Bowl. Stats don't lie. Bengals need to draft a quality RB next year. This RB group is puppy food.

I have never seen any worse run blocking than our current OL gets.  It is really bad.  Watch other teams create lanes for the RB and think about how often Joe gets that.  At current state, we would need a dump truck in the back filed to get consistent running yardage.  Also it helps running backs to get some consistent carries to get going to according to some pundits. 

[Tomkat]

(10-17-2023, 07:19 AM)Synric Wrote: Never understood the whole "Bengals don't use TEs" it's false. 

Yes it is.  Go back and watch highlights from the 2021 Super Bowl season... there are a LOT of CJ Uzomah highlights.

[Frank Booth]

I'd rather have a running game. There's already a bunch of capable receivers

[Joelist]

Until Burrow gets the accuracy issues out of his system it isn't going to matter much who lines up at TE1.

[Bengalitis]

Put yourself in the shoes of an opposing Defensive Coordinator when you prep to play the Bengals.. TEs is definitely not a concern now that Uzo and Hurst are gone... Wilcox? Sample? pfff.... Even the defense oriented Squeelers knew a good reliable catching TE was all they needed to beat the usually more talented and favored Bengals.

[Bengalitis]

My avatar has Hurst, now that's a TE keeper. Wilcox doing that.... I doubt it.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-17-2023, 09:28 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Always was beyond comical. Guy in his age 29 season, undrafted, 4 different teams in 6 years, less than 20 career catches. Was never going to really be a thing.

The biggest reason it is a problem to the offense is because they are going to play a TE regardless of if they have a good TE or not on the roster, so having a shit TE out there is nearly the same as playing 10-on-11 when the defense has to worry about coverage. Then you factor in the shitty run game, so they can play light boxes against the run. Now all of a sudden they don't really have to worry about the RB on the field or the TE on the field and it's just 3 WRs that are the problem with 1 of them being incapable of playing football suddenly against everyone besides the Ravens. It vastly limits the worries of a defense, which is not good.

Having at least a decent TE is much the same as having at least NFL caliber backups at WR 4-6. If a player is going to see the field, they need at least a certain talent level, or you're really just hurting yourself because you're using one of your 11 players on the field to play a player that the opposing team doesn't really have to account for. It's too large of a disadvantage.

Well comparing him to Irv I’d say he has outperformed him. I don’t think anyone is saying he’s going to be a top TE. People are just talking about the current roster.

The rest of your post is spot on.