Stripes Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 Secondly... the reason we need a Grady Jackson has nothing to do with run stopping. We had 3 bad games all year. The first game against the Steelers where they just wore us out after being on defense the whole game... the game against Jacksonville, which was not the D-Line's fault... and the KC game where our starters didn't play. If you take away those games, our average for rushing yards/game is actually in the top 10.We need a good DT to take up blockers so we can get a pass rush. Geathers and Smith were useless, because they both had multiple blockers on them all season. Effective DE's always have decent DT's taking up blockers. The only way this defense wil limprove is to get a pass rush, so that WR's don't have all day to get open. I'd agree that our run stopping woes have become overstated for the most part. We did seem to fare pretty well down the stretch in that category against some stiff competition. Still, the run defense is by no means a good one, and still represents a huge hole to be filled this offseason, through free agency or the draft. We were in the bottom third of the league (at least I think) in yards per carry given up, and that to me is the bigger statistic to look at. I'd also agree that upgrading the pass rush is more important, but both problems can be solved by upgrading one position as you said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ox Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 Firstly... what the hell are Zone Dollars?They're for the casino baby!!Bengalszone Casino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted March 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Wow your embracing your obesity. Guy get some respect for yourself and oput the food down. Heres one try cooking. Wow you dont get fat if your not eating at restraunts everyday(all you can eat) The foods even better. You would get stared at here. Because everywhere else they cook , and we dont have the too fat to fly comercials. You would be insulted in Spainish culture till you lost weight. What we have here is anrexia killing everybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Secondly... the reason we need a Grady Jackson has nothing to do with run stopping. We had 3 bad games all year. The first game against the Steelers where they just wore us out after being on defense the whole game... the game against Jacksonville, which was not the D-Line's fault... and the KC game where our starters didn't play. If you take away those games, our average for rushing yards/game is actually in the top 10.We need a good DT to take up blockers so we can get a pass rush. Geathers and Smith were useless, because they both had multiple blockers on them all season. Effective DE's always have decent DT's taking up blockers. The only way this defense wil limprove is to get a pass rush, so that WR's don't have all day to get open. I'd agree that our run stopping woes have become overstated for the most part. We did seem to fare pretty well down the stretch in that category against some stiff competition. Still, the run defense is by no means a good one, and still represents a huge hole to be filled this offseason, through free agency or the draft. We were in the bottom third of the league (at least I think) in yards per carry given up, and that to me is the bigger statistic to look at. I'd also agree that upgrading the pass rush is more important, but both problems can be solved by upgrading one position as you said.That's a pretty common misconception actually. YPC is actually not all that important of a stat. The stat you want to look at is carries/game. If a team is succeeding with the run, they will continue to run. Even if they are down by 21 points, if they know they can get 5 yards/carry, they will just keep stuffing the ball down the opponents throat.YPC is less important, because whne you run fewer times... if you get off a 15 or 20 yard run, it has a much larger impact on the YPC average than if you've been running the ball a lot. The Bengals defense was in pass protection packages most of the time toward the end of the season... so other teams could get offa few big runs here and there... bu they didn't run the ball much as much as most people think, because they weren't consistently successful (as I said wearlier with the exception of the first Steelers game, the Jax game, and the KC game).Now, we weren't exactly a top 5 defense in either stat... as you pointed out... but as you also agreed with me, the run defense problem has been overstated. I guess the main point I'm making is that the big reason to get a DT is not to fix the run defense as much as to fix the pass rush. But when it comes right down to it... a quality DT will probably improve both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengalbob Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Secondly... the reason we need a Grady Jackson has nothing to do with run stopping. We had 3 bad games all year. The first game against the Steelers where they just wore us out after being on defense the whole game... the game against Jacksonville, which was not the D-Line's fault... and the KC game where our starters didn't play. If you take away those games, our average for rushing yards/game is actually in the top 10.We need a good DT to take up blockers so we can get a pass rush. Geathers and Smith were useless, because they both had multiple blockers on them all season. Effective DE's always have decent DT's taking up blockers. The only way this defense wil limprove is to get a pass rush, so that WR's don't have all day to get open. I'd agree that our run stopping woes have become overstated for the most part. We did seem to fare pretty well down the stretch in that category against some stiff competition. Still, the run defense is by no means a good one, and still represents a huge hole to be filled this offseason, through free agency or the draft. We were in the bottom third of the league (at least I think) in yards per carry given up, and that to me is the bigger statistic to look at. I'd also agree that upgrading the pass rush is more important, but both problems can be solved by upgrading one position as you said.That's a pretty common misconception actually. YPC is actually not all that important of a stat. The stat you want to look at is carries/game. If a team is succeeding with the run, they will continue to run. Even if they are down by 21 points, if they know they can get 5 yards/carry, they will just keep stuffing the ball down the opponents throat.YPC is less important, because whne you run fewer times... if you get off a 15 or 20 yard run, it has a much larger impact on the YPC average than if you've been running the ball a lot. The Bengals defense was in pass protection packages most of the time toward the end of the season... so other teams could get offa few big runs here and there... bu they didn't run the ball much as much as most people think, because they weren't consistently successful (as I said wearlier with the exception of the first Steelers game, the Jax game, and the KC game).Now, we weren't exactly a top 5 defense in either stat... as you pointed out... but as you also agreed with me, the run defense problem has been overstated. I guess the main point I'm making is that the big reason to get a DT is not to fix the run defense as much as to fix the pass rush. But when it comes right down to it... a quality DT will probably improve both.Too true! I hate it when people focus in on YPC and loose sight of the bigger picture. A good example of what you're saying is the Vikings game last year. The Vikes had 5.5YPC, but only rushed it 14 times and lost by 29. Also, like you said, the first Steelers game was a disaster for us. 4.7YPC and 47 rushes. Clearly the Steelers found some consistancy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoTbOy Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 There will be no 3-4 IMO unless LArrington signs, and then it will be used in certain situations...da Bengals will not switch to a base 3-4 all the time...this is not clear as water, this looks like lake Ontario here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted March 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Juts so we can remeber who said what! part one of the 3-4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJJackson Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Dude, cut down on the crackEven if we sign Arrington next, the Bengals will still play 4-3 primarily for this upcoming year.Now I can't deny Marvin is quoted as saying he is mulling the 4-3. That's fine, as I am sure he is mulling the possibility of drafting Reggie Bush too. He can mull all he wants on any topic, no matter how unlikely it is that he acts upon it. Some things are less likely than others, and this is one case of "far less likely" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted March 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Read your own posts we are not signing any of these guys, You wrote them ow eatem! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Graddy and Arrington will make a marvin lewis D. I can see it. You just need s guy like goose was with baltimore. The Bengals are just hard balling them both. Mark my words we will sign them both. ow eatem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJJackson Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Say what?Anyone got a translation from the spanglish? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybren Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Juts so we can remeber who said what! part one of the 3-4It takes more than a big DT and an extra LB to make a 3-4 defense. Especially when said DT is 33 years old. We would need Shaun Smith or somebody like him to play a bigger role and we would need much more depth in LB's. I'll eat my words when Marvin drafts a fat DT and at least 2 LB's. And says the words "we're switching to 3-4". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dadraftnick Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 You want a 3-4 not me.We had a 3-4 a couple of years ago and the D sucked then, and it was run by the originator of the Zone Blitz.You also have to change personel and just because a guy is a good LB in the 4-3 does not mean he will be in a 3-4 and the some goes for the DL.We had a 3-4 D in the 80's and it was always the weekness of the team.It seemed that it was alway giving up big plays.The only guys the make it work well are the stillers and thats because Lebeau has a half of a brain and Bill Coward has the other half a brain.Cowher and Lebeau have never been as successful by themselves as they have been togather. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted March 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 I love it! you guys dont play chess do you? You need to be three moves ahead not just so stupid that you only see the present! However we must realize that chumps are less intelegent than the rest, Dumber than the average bear eh boo boo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiLBurn Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 I love it! you guys dont play chess do you? You need to be three moves ahead not just so stupid that you only see the present! However we must realize that chumps are less intelegent than the rest, Dumber than the average bear eh boo boo!I dunno... This just strikes me as funny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybren Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 I love it! you guys dont play chess do you? You need to be three moves ahead not just so stupid that you only see the present! However we must realize that chumps are less intelegent than the rest, Dumber than the average bear eh boo boo!Oh, so the Bengals aren't switching to 3-4 this year? That's what you mean by "three moves ahead" and seeing more than just "the present"? So you would agree with the rest of us, that it would take more "moves" than signing Sam Adams to convert a team to 3-4? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted March 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Kilburn add to the ignorangce your there! Keep it up, CHUMPS LOL now its time to laugh at you chumps! Enjoy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Next_Big_Thing Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 I love it! you guys dont play chess do you? You need to be three moves ahead not just so stupid that you only see the present! However we must realize that chumps are less intelegent than the rest, Dumber than the average bear eh boo boo!I dunno... This just strikes me as funny I don't know what's funnier, the image of Spain trying to play chess stoned out of his gourd, while the other guy has already left the building, or the fact that someone is saying that chumps are less intelligent than the rest, and calling people stupid while being unable to spell the word intelligent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted March 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Dude that is going to be so fun to qoute! TDB might have to explain it to me , but your so hit chump! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiLBurn Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Spain, I'm not saying that we can't go 3-4. Our LB's (outside of Pollack, Thurman, Simmons and maybe Navies) are a little on the small side to make it the base package though. Good site for detailed information on 3-4 and 4-3 defensive alignments and personell requirements (Thanks Lost) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybren Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Spain's 3-4.This is what I do with my day off?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted March 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Go to bengals.com and here how our linebackers can fit it perfectly! Chumps, keeep digging your own grave! --you guys work at Mcdonalds right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybren Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 So Spain, do you think Marvin will pay Simmons $2 million to back-up LaVar, or will he pay LaVar $4-5 million to back up Simmons? And what about the rest of the depth? If you start Pollack-Thurman-Johnson-Arrington, your back-ups are Navies, Wilkins, Miller and Simmons. Is that going to be enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted March 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Simmons goes inside(i think) However Marvin said, Where would Beichick play water boy? The reporter said MLB , Marvin just laughed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybren Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Don't dodge the second question, Spain. What happens when more than 1 LB gets hurt? Who's your #6 LB behind Pollack, Thurman, Simmons, Arrington, and Johnson? You think we can go to the Super Bowl starting Marcus Wilkins or Hannibal Navies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.