reading between the lines

[kingwilly]

Take a look at this, if you have not already:

http://www.bengals.com/news/news.asp?story_id=6350

To start, we have Bryan Robinson quoted as saying:

"We look at the tape and we understand that we're doing exactly what we're asked to do. But we can do better. We can do more. We understand that. Especially this game."

huh? if you are doing exactly what you are being asked, then does that mean the coaches are asking them to suck? or is he saying they are doing what is asked and it is not working, as in, the scheme DOES NOT WORK with the personell they have...

[teenbengal14]

Bresnahan needs fired pretty quick, for this team to be any good at all.

[skyline]

Are you actually going to tell me that people always say exactly what they mean? Especially when asked during an impromptu interview?

My guess is that Robinson is simply saying they understand exactly what they're supposed to do, but they aren't doing those things well enough.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Bresnahan needs fired pretty quick, for this team to be any good at all.

Are you actually going to tell me that people always say exactly what they mean? Especially when asked during an impromptu interview?

My guess is that Robinson is simply saying they understand exactly what they're supposed to do, but they aren't doing those things well enough.

Okay...let me pose this question.

If Chuck Bresnahans defense keeps under performing as they have except against the Ravens, does he then deserve a pink slip?

[HairOnFire]

My guess is that Robinson is simply saying they understand exactly what they're supposed to do, but they aren't doing those things well enough.

That's the way I read it. In fact, I'd say it's a conclusion that has been unanimously reached by every coach and player who has bothered to comment.

In short, the players are admitting they're at fault. What you do about that is open for debate but I'm guessing the same players would ignore a new coaching staff just as badly as they're ignoring this one.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

Talent issue is what I infer from that comment.

I mean we are talking about Bryan Robinson - a guy who would have trouble making most other starting lineups or rosters, but is basically a (rotational) starter here, and it has nothing to do with injuries or "bad luck."

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

That's the way I read it. In fact, I'd say it's a conclusion that has been unanimously reached by every coach and player who has bothered to comment.

In short, the players are admitting they're at fault. What you do about that is open for debate but I'm guessing the same players would ignore a new coaching staff just as badly as they're ignoring this one.

Another way of reading it would be, we stuck to our assignments and it still didn't work, so......

And am I misinterpreting you, or did you do an about face on the whole 'the schemes aren't working' thing? Short answer: players, schemes, or both? How much fault to each?

I'm about 50/50 myself, but considering we have 0 LBs and that's still only half the problem, that says something.

[HoosierCat]

Obviously, talent is an issue, especially on defense. The interior of the d-line is sub-par; the ends are pasaable but (at least so far) look hideously overpaid; the LB corps is a joke; and the secondary is filled with underachievers (JJoe, Madieu), raw rooks (Hall, Nduke) and disgruntled players (O'Neal).

On offense, we have no real threat at No. 3 WR or TE; our No 1 back appears to have hit a wall; our two bookend tackles are falling apart and the whole line can't run block.

A big part of the problem has been depth. Once you get beyond the starters, all too often the talent level plummets dramatically to rooks or waiver wire pickups. And the performance of what vet backup help we have has been mixed: Kenny Watson has come on somewhat; Caleb Miller is junk; Whit picked up where he left off last year; the Dancing Bear has disappointed.

Scheme-wise, it seems to me that too much of the defensive game plan revolves around having a stud LB -- Pollack, Odell, Brooks -- and when the lose that, Plan B consists of turtling up in a soft zone and hoping the offense can score a million points. On the offense, the "scheme" issue is simply that the team is built for quick downfield strikes. We've heard a lot over the last two weeks about "managing the game" and "controlling the clock" on offense, but that just isn't what this O is designed to do. That's not necessarily a weakness but it means it's very hard to give the D much of a break.

[jjakq27]

Take a look at this, if you have not already:

http://www.bengals.com/news/news.asp?story_id=6350

To start, we have Bryan Robinson quoted as saying:

"We look at the tape and we understand that we're doing exactly what we're asked to do. But we can do better. We can do more. We understand that. Especially this game."

huh? if you are doing exactly what you are being asked, then does that mean the coaches are asking them to suck? or is he saying they are doing what is asked and it is not working, as in, the scheme DOES NOT WORK with the personell they have...

Sounds like one of Dick LeBeau's press conferences from a few years back.

I saw where Donnie Henderson has been seen at a few Bengals practices lately. Next DC for the Bengals??

[HairOnFire]

And am I misinterpreting you, or did you do an about face on the whole 'the schemes aren't working' thing? Short answer: players, schemes, or both? How much fault to each?

I'm about 50/50 myself, but considering we have 0 LBs and that's still only half the problem, that says something.

I wouldn't know how to come up with a percentage figure other than to perform a human version of cow bingo, something I'm not prepared to do right now. But obviously it's a combination of things, with the issues at LB only being part of the problem. Just as in the Seattle game I felt the Bengal defense was doing enough to survive....thriving is out of the question....until Madieu let Tony Gonzalez blow right by him.