The Good, The Bad, and The Fugly; Preseason Game 2

[Nepa]

(8 hours ago)WeezyBengal Wrote: I'd say Burrow playing way too much, trying to make way too much happen for a preseason game is one of the fuglys. 

For the love of God, will someone save this man from himself? Grow some balls before you torpedo the season, ZT.

Burrow really needed the reps. He hadn't played a solid defense in 8 months, and it took him time to get adjusted. You could see that in his running around and losing about 15 yards on one play, when his brain didn't seem to comprehend that he should throw it away. And when Chase and Higgins went out, Burrow was misfiring badly until he got it figured out. 

It takes time to adjust to the speed of the game, which cannot be replicated in practice. Burrow had by far the worse game of the season last year in the first regular season game against New England, when he threw for only 164 yards and no TDs, and the Bengals scored 10 points. He needs the reps. And he knows he needs the reps. And this year the first game is at a divisional foe,  a place where he had his second worse game of the 2024 season. 

[BengalsBong]

(3 hours ago)Joelist Wrote: Looking at the film you see that a lot of the early defensive issues were of all things schematic, and mostly mental. not only did they play vanilla in terms of wrinkles but there was zero diagnosis and recognition going on - which is the disturbing part. You can play vanilla and still read plays and react correctly. Then of course DC on offense also opened up the playbook. and so you had ridiculous nonsense like us in a 4 man front with a cavernous gap in its center and only 2 linebackers....it would have been amazing NOT to get gashed on a run in that look. Sorry but they should have switched out of that stupid 4-2-5 look after one play. We have a large enough LB room to use 4-3-4 so use it.

Right around the middle of the second quarter the defense solidified. Part of it was Barrett Carter coming in a LB but also they went to a "heavier" look with some 4-3 in it. This took the easy runs away and forced passes - which got picked. So when we blast the defense remember they did not have a "Front 7" when the 1s were in - it was a "Front 6".

Been screaming this for years we need to play in a 4-3 to stop the run especially in the AFC north.

At least we picked up 2 linebackers and a FA backer in the off season.

Now if they can put the right 3 on the field in the right spots. I do not like Wilson in the middle give me a thumper not a cover guy in the middle of our defense.

[*Synric*]

(5 hours ago)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: I repeat what I wrote before, he looked awful when he came in, then looked better after that scoring drive.

His defender ran right by him on one play, I think it was a pass to Iosivas (may be wrong on that though).

So I went back and watched.

Rivers lost a rep early on a swim but recovered, overset but was able to work the defender to the center help, lost to an inside spin move which was probabaly his only clear loss, and he is thr guy that "gave up" the sack on Browning but it was a coverage sack because he looked good in his pass pro rep.


On the good side he one some one on ones with length hands and anchor. Kept his head on a swivel even having a really nice pick up on an inside twist.

[BengalsBong]

(7 hours ago)bfine32 Wrote: I thought that back WR had a good game. Surprised not mentioned.

Also, much better from Browning

Yeah. I gave Browning hell last week he responded with a much better game this week.

Even if his job is secure, he still needs to prepare and play hard to give us a good look at our 2nd and 3rd stringers.

Last week we had 2 quarters of the game wasted with bad QB play for evaluating.

[*bengalfan74*]

(3 hours ago)bengalfan47 Wrote: The thought of Lamar Jackson and Derrick Henry playing against this  defense is probably what teams like Bowling Green feel like when they have 
to play Ohio State. If this Keeps up the Ravens could not throw a pass and still put up 45.

I think after Washington's 2nd possession the announcers said they were averaging 19 yards a carry. Pathetic

[BengalsBong]

(5 hours ago)Synric Wrote: This is two games in a row Knight struggled with his run fits and just looked all around slow to react, timid, and sometimes just lost.

Most of the big runs this preseason have all been on the right side of the defense.

Seem like every big run play we gave up is the same area of the field.

[007BengalsFan]

(5 hours ago)Millhouse Wrote: At this point it seems the only hope is that Golden will be able to get something out of this D that Lou couldn't. If not, then in hindsight it looks like signing Tee instead of putting that money on the defense may not have been the best move for this season. Time will tell of course on that.

Realistically what is Golden going to be able to get that Lou couldnt?  Lou wasnt the problem.  The people that kept blaming Lou, Im wondering if they actually watched any games.  Lou lost Reader who was replaced with Sheldon Rankins and Rankins had all the health issues and was a nonfactor on defense.  The Bengals drafted two rookies counting on the fact they would be immediate contributors which is problematic to begin with and then both started the season injured which left Lou counting on people like Lawrence Guy.  That's a recipe for disaster and last year it was.


People blame Lou for not playing younger guys like Battle or Murphy over vets when it should be crystal clear why these guys didnt see more playing time.  "The scheme was too hard for them" to learn excuse.  Maybe, the problem was and is those guys just are not talented enough to run it.  "When Lou dumbed down the scheme they did better."  Maybe the reason they did better is because they played weaker teams at the end of the year.  We are playing a dumbed down defensive scheme in preseason and they are getting embarrassed but look who they have played, two of the better teams expected to make deep playoff runs.  I bet this defense looks much improved Saturday when they play the Colts, not because the defense is improving but because they are playing a lesser team.  Same as last year.

I cant believe anybody would look at the defense last year and think all we needed to do was change coaches.  The problem wasnt the coaching, it was and still is the lack of overall talent the defense has.  I do think the defense this year will end up doing better because the Bengals have added a little bit of talent to it.  Unfortunately the talent level is still subpar and I think you will see subpar play overall.  Lou wasnt the main problem last year and Golden is not the problem this year. 

[Joelist]

(2 hours ago)BengalsBong Wrote: Been screaming this for years we need to play in a 4-3 to stop the run especially in the AFC north.

At least we picked up 2 linebackers and a FA backer in the off season.

Now if they can put the right 3 on the field in the right spots. I do not like Wilson in the middle give me a thumper not a cover guy in the middle of our defense.

Right now the best trio is likely Knight in the center flanked by Burks and Carter. 

[Whatever]

(2 hours ago)BengalsBong Wrote: Been screaming this for years we need to play in a 4-3 to stop the run especially in the AFC north.

At least we picked up 2 linebackers and a FA backer in the off season.

Now if they can put the right 3 on the field in the right spots. I do not like Wilson in the middle give me a thumper not a cover guy in the middle of our defense.

Offensive personnel dictates defensive personnel, though.  With the bulk of the league running 11 base, your defense has to be nickel base to matchup.  Could run more 4-3 against teams that run more 12 like Baltimore, but you have to match personnel.

[Millhouse]

(1 hour ago)007BengalsFan Wrote: Realistically what is Golden going to be able to get that Lou couldnt?  Lou wasnt the problem.  The people that kept blaming Lou, Im wondering if they actually watched any games.  Lou lost Reader who was replaced with Sheldon Rankins and Rankins had all the health issues and was a nonfactor on defense.  The Bengals drafted two rookies counting on the fact they would be immediate contributors which is problematic to begin with and then both started the season injured which left Lou counting on people like Lawrence Guy.  That's a recipe for disaster and last year it was.


People blame Lou for not playing younger guys like Battle or Murphy over vets when it should be crystal clear why these guys didnt see more playing time.  "The scheme was too hard for them" to learn excuse.  Maybe, the problem was and is those guys just are not talented enough to run it.  "When Lou dumbed down the scheme they did better."  Maybe the reason they did better is because they played weaker teams at the end of the year.  We are playing a dumbed down defensive scheme in preseason and they are getting embarrassed but look who they have played, two of the better teams expected to make deep playoff runs.  I bet this defense looks much improved Saturday when they play the Colts, not because the defense is improving but because they are playing a lesser team.  Same as last year.

I cant believe anybody would look at the defense last year and think all we needed to do was change coaches.  The problem wasnt the coaching, it was and still is the lack of overall talent the defense has.  I do think the defense this year will end up doing better because the Bengals have added a little bit of talent to it.  Unfortunately the talent level is still subpar and I think you will see subpar play overall.  Lou wasnt the main problem last year and Golden is not the problem this year. 

No argument here. It didn't take long for Lou to get hired as a DC which is testament to how good a coach he is. Maybe Golden though can see something he didn't, or get them to play with better chemistry, hell I dont know. In my older years (40+) I am trying to be less negative with my beloved Bungles, at least before season begins, but I get what you are saying and overall agree.

[*bfine32*]

(5 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote: No one asked him to hold his hand. He should have been taken off the field.

Because we know if it were made known that JB wanted more snaps, Zac overrode that decision, and then JB looks bad in week 1; NO ONE would blame Zac for not letting him do what he wanted to do. 

[Sled21]

(1 hour ago)bfine32 Wrote: Because we know if it were made known that JB wanted more snaps, Zac overrode that decision, and then JB looks bad in week 1; NO ONE would blame Zac for not letting him do what he wanted to do. 

Somebody is going to blame Zac for something no matter what he does. It's all opinion, but I think playing him in pre-season, especially behind a beat-up o-line is pure stupidity. Especially when he is going to try to extend plays instead of throwing the ball away. That sack last night could have been the entire season lost. Then everybody would be saying, "Why was he even out there?"
:

[Bilbo Saggins]

(6 hours ago)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yep. There had to be a reason he did that.

It's interesting, if fans don't like a player, they'll look at 1 or 2 plays. Same if they like a guy. When in reality, you have to look at the play overall.

Not saying Patrick is good. But, he's not totally inept either.

I'm of the mind that he is what the Saints assessed him as: a very good backup guard/center. A backup. Not a starter. Why on God's green earth anyone would want to take a guy like Patrick, who has played for three other teams, and try to pencil him in as something more that what the other three teams could get out of him is beyond me. He's 32. No spring chicken. Three other teams did not view him as a long term starter. It just seems so goofy. Am I missing something?

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

The good was Burrow got out of there without getting injured and he played much better as the game went on. Mims and Fairchild
looked great on the OL, Burrow got some work with the backup weapons and it looked pretty good. He can't take sacks like that though,
he just needs to throw the ball away. Joe said as much in his interview. Chase Brown looked decent again, same with Tahj Brooks who
had some nice blitz pickups. Hudson was damn good again. Mitch Tinsley was the player of the game, think he should make the team as
Burrow said so.

The bad was the run Defense early and it was fugly bad. We will see how Golden gets this fixed, the DL and LB's just aren't plugging holes
and there is no excuse for it as most of these guys have been good run stoppers for years.

[*bfine32*]

(1 hour ago)Sled21 Wrote: Somebody is going to blame Zac for something no matter what he does. It's all opinion, but I think playing him in pre-season, especially behind a beat-up o-line is pure stupidity. Especially when he is going to try to extend plays instead of throwing the ball away. That sack last night could have been the entire season lost. Then everybody would be saying, "Why was he even out there?"
:

Of course, and I'd be talking to them with a similar rationale, that would go ignored.

If we pulled him after the 2nd series, he would have gone out on a bad note. IDT JB was going to let that happen, and went out there and took us down the field. At least Zac said, "I'm keeping the starting olinemen on the field". JB put himself in danger. 

[BengalsBong]

(1 hour ago)Joelist Wrote: Right now the best trio is likely Knight in the center flanked by Burks and Carter. 

I like Knight in the center and Carter on the field he can cover good as well as tackle.

Burks has had a few decent tackles need to look at him more closely.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(27 minutes ago)bfine32 Wrote: Of course, and I'd be talking to them with a similar rationale, that would go ignored.

If we pulled him after the 2nd series, he would have gone out on a bad note. IDT JB was going to let that happen, and went out there and took us down the field. At least Zac said, "I'm keeping the starting olinemen on the field". JB put himself in danger. 

True, I think that Burrow is a bit crazy and risks himself at times when he shouldn't but at least he went out on a great note with that bad ass 
pass to Chuck. I don't see Burrow and this Offense being as rusty against the Stains as they were against the Pats last year for this very reason.

[coachmcneil71]

(27 minutes ago)bfine32 Wrote: Of course, and I'd be talking to them with a similar rationale, that would go ignored.

If we pulled him after the 2nd series, he would have gone out on a bad note. IDT JB was going to let that happen, and went out there and took us down the field. At least Zac said, "I'm keeping the starting olinemen on the field". JB put himself in danger. 

He even mentioned that in his sideline interview. He said, "I, took a stupid sack", or something similar to that. 

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(24 minutes ago)BengalsBong Wrote: I like Knight in the center and Carter on the field he can cover good as well as tackle.

Burks has had a few decent tackles need to look at him more closely.

Both Carter and Burks looked good which made me happy after the terrible play by our starting LB's. At least we have options at LB if Logan 
and Knight continue to struggle. Shaka Heyward was good once again as well. I like this guy.

[3wt]

(5 hours ago)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Could have doubled up on the Georgia guards and been set for Burrow’s prime.

Uggggghhh.  I know.   Water under the bridge.  Soooooo much water