TJJackson Posted April 14, 2006 Report Share Posted April 14, 2006 http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art.../604140341/1066I don't see how they could be much worse.....well, actually.....the interceptions will probably not come like last year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted April 14, 2006 Report Share Posted April 14, 2006 I doubt we'll get 44 takeaways again, but we should still produce very good amount. Odell's right, it'll be a better defense. With players returning from injuries, free agents signings, rookies having a year under their belts, and the draft, pretty much every position on defense will have been upgraded somehow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsbengalsbucks Posted April 14, 2006 Report Share Posted April 14, 2006 That's good to hear, but better than last year really wouldnt be that tough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Folz Posted April 14, 2006 Report Share Posted April 14, 2006 we aren't playing anyone from the NFC north so the take aways will definetly go down. That division sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted April 14, 2006 Report Share Posted April 14, 2006 we aren't playing anyone from the NFC north so the take aways will definetly go down. That division sucks.even if we only int brett favre,orton and culpeppar twice we'd still be in like 2nd place on int Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cincy9275 Posted April 14, 2006 Report Share Posted April 14, 2006 i liked what Carson said also in that he has faith that krenzel and johnson are very capable of running the ship if he is not ready Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShulaSteakhouse Posted April 14, 2006 Report Share Posted April 14, 2006 When you're ranked 28th on defense - despite all those TO's to boot - you have nowhere to go but up.Carson's just being a team guy/professional - we all know Krenzel and Johnson stink ultimately. Really, they are terrible NFL QB's, let's be honest with ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted April 15, 2006 Report Share Posted April 15, 2006 I won't predict another 44 turnovers but even if the number of interceptions fall this is a defense built to produce turnovers. Remember the previous season the Bengals produced a staggering number of forced fumbles and had they managed to fall on their share they might have won enough games to reach the playoffs a year sooner. If they ever manage to put it all together...who-dey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwillycuse Posted April 15, 2006 Report Share Posted April 15, 2006 Definitely better. I cant see any part of the D where we got worse. Rooks have more experience. A fat leader in the middle. Madieu back. OOh I cant wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 I'm actually hoping for things to much improved this year for the defense:Another year with Bres and the additions and Madman coming back plus whatever we do in the draft could lead to good things. Maybe Marvin can finally put it all together for our D this year... God, lets hope so !!!WHODEY !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiLBurn Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 When you're ranked 28th on defense - despite all those TO's to boot - you have nowhere to go but up.Carson's just being a team guy/professional - we all know Krenzel and Johnson stink ultimately. Really, they are terrible NFL QB's, let's be honest with ourselves.Everyone here seems to dislike Krenzel for some reason. I don't think he has given a whole lot of reasons to not like him as a BACKUP QB. I am not a diehard Ohio State fan myself but I have watched enough college football to see that he doesn't lose games for you like Kitna is famous for doing. Give the guy a chance and you might be surprised with the results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futurebengal08 Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 When you're ranked 28th on defense - despite all those TO's to boot - you have nowhere to go but up.Carson's just being a team guy/professional - we all know Krenzel and Johnson stink ultimately. Really, they are terrible NFL QB's, let's be honest with ourselves.Everyone here seems to dislike Krenzel for some reason. I don't think he has given a whole lot of reasons to not like him as a BACKUP QB. I am not a diehard Ohio State fan myself but I have watched enough college football to see that he doesn't lose games for you like Kitna is famous for doing. Give the guy a chance and you might be surprised with the results.Yeah, I don't understand the knock on Krenzel either. He's done nothing to elicit unfriendliness i guess. He's never kicked MY dog. and he was part of a team that won a national championship for Ohio State. The proof that he is a decent quarterback in the NFL...his performance last year with the Bears, getting i think 3 or 4 wins in their somewhat abysmal season when no quarterback could win for them. I also saw him at training camp last year, and he has a good enough arm. I wouldn't be completely hopeless if he had to hold down the fort for the first couple of games this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 I'm bigtime OSU biased due to Krentzel winning the Nat. Champ., but his winning games at Chicago was due to the defense not his play.I will say at least he didn't lose the game and maybe he could do the same for us, but until our defense is tougher, he is an unknown..I hope like hell they give Krentzel the chance and our defense DOES come around, but it's a crap shoot anyway around...WHODEY !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futurebengal08 Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 I'm bigtime OSU biased due to Krentzel winning the Nat. Champ., but his winning games at Chicago was due to the defense not his play.I will say at least he didn't lose the game and maybe he could do the same for us, but until our defense is tougher, he is an unknown..I hope like hell they give Krentzel the chance and our defense DOES come around, but it's a crap shoot anyway around...WHODEY !!!Yeah, OK, I'm a huge OSU fan too...i actually went to a columbus crew (soccer) game today and went back to the campus for a little while...fun stuff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiLBurn Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 OK... this should make it simple.Would you rather have Akili Smith, Jon Kitna or Craig Krenzel in the game. 4th quarter down by 6. 3 minutes on the clock. Ball at our 20 yard line.If you even had to think about this question, it becomes quite obvious that Krenzel is not the worst option as the BACKUP QB. Kitna got paid way more money than he was worth by Detroit and I would play Krenzel over Smith in a heartbeat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futurebengal08 Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 OK... this should make it simple.Would you rather have Akili Smith, Jon Kitna or Craig Krenzel in the game. 4th quarter down by 6. 3 minutes on the clock. Ball at our 20 yard line.If you even had to think about this question, it becomes quite obvious that Krenzel is not the worst option as the BACKUP QB. Kitna got paid way more money than he was worth by Detroit and I would play Krenzel over Smith in a heartbeat.Agreed...completely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 I won't predict another 44 turnovers but even if the number of interceptions fall this is a defense built to produce turnovers.Is it possible to trade in that 28th ranked with a high turnover ratio defensive unit for a Top Ten ranked, low rushing yardage allowed model? I'll even settle for one with a greatly reduced turnover ratio as long as it can give me some regular "3 and out" satisfaction! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 It's really hard to have a top 10 defense in yards when you have a high-powered offense. It is really rare, because other teams are getting a lot of yards and taking more risks in order to put points on the board to stay in the game.For this reason, I expect to continue getting turnovers, because teams are forced to put the ball in the air more than they like to. We might not get 44, but I still expect to be in the top 5 in this area. You don't get 44 on luck... and the one thing you can say about our defense is that it is opportunistic.A few more 3-and-outs sure would be nice though... but what I really want to see is an improvement on the 21.9 points/game we allowed. The last few games of the season were flat out ridiculous in that area. If we give up some yards through the air because we're up by 21... fine, but you have to keep them out of the endzone! That's why we need a pass rush. Hopefully getting Adams and having Pollack starting-playing like he did in the last Steelers game will give us that. Combine that with a safety tandem that is infinitely better and we might just be okay. Bring on a couple more impact players through the draft, and I'll be feeling pretty optimistic (even though I felt that way last year too). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GapControl Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 It's really hard to have a top 10 defense in yards when you have a high-powered offense. It is really rare, because other teams are getting a lot of yards and taking more risks in order to put points on the board to stay in the game.I am not sure if one can say it is "really rare" to to have a top defense and a high-powered offense. We should examine recent championship-caliber teams who forced opponents into playing from behind. I am thinking of several examples. AFC side: Buffalo Bills during their 4 year SB run, Elway`s Broncos during their back to back SB runs. NFC side: SF 49ers with Young and a nasty defense, Dallas Cowboys SB years, and Minnesota Vikings NFC Championship runs. The mirage in your thinking must be the recent lop-sided championship teams such as the Rams (no defense), Steelers (little offense), and Ravens (1950s style offense). If you consider these teams opponents the Titans, Packers, Giants, Patriots, each can be considered to have had an explosive capability on offense. Mcnair/George, Collins/Barber, Brady/Dillon, Farve/Farve (hehehe). It seems to me the opposite is true that championship teams are rare but normally present significant defensive and offensive firepower. Atleast since the late `80s. Definitely since the early `90s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 I won't predict another 44 turnovers but even if the number of interceptions fall this is a defense built to produce turnovers.Is it possible to trade in that 28th ranked with a high turnover ratio defensive unit for a Top Ten ranked, low rushing yardage allowed model? I'll even settle for one with a greatly reduced turnover ratio as long as it can give me some regular "3 and out" satisfaction! I hear what you're saying, but I'll argue that the Bengal defense is built to produce turnovers...and hopefully a day will come when it also makes it's bones by preventing points. But I don't see a unit that is built from the ground up to prevent an offense from gaining yards. By design they're too small at too many positions to be compared to defenses that fight tooth and claw for every inch, every foot, and every yard. Granted, they do fight for every inch in theory, but for the most part I see a defense that is far more interested in producing turnovers than trying to stuff every 3rd and 3 opportunity it faces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsbengalsbucks Posted April 16, 2006 Report Share Posted April 16, 2006 I think you are correct HOF, the more TO's the more chances the O has to put away the game.BUT, it sure would be nice to stop a few more third and shorts, I hate watching the D look good for 2 downs and than give the other team a fresh set on third. 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.