Bengals defense ranked 12th YPG and YPP

[Walrus]

interestingly, http://blogs.nfl.com/2008/12/29/let-the-draft-debate-begin/ thinks we should go D this year...

It's not out of the question. I'd love to upgrade the strong side with Aaron Curry or get our own Rey-Rey in the middle. And with the D improving, now's the time to pour on the talent and really make it something special (hopefully).

Yes, the o-line is a mess. But I'm not dead set against delaying until round two. The Bengals have had some good results picking o-line in the second (Whitworth, Steinbach).

That's the only position we've had any (recent) success with in the second...

[cincy9275]

the bengals when from 21st to 12th after the chiefs game. so the 12th ranking is misleading. however they did improve with really no talent, this D is full of average or below players. so their success is the sign of a good coaching. zimmer and fitzgerald are 2 of the best moves M&M has ever made. it's too bad that M&M have not done the same in other areas.

[Kazkal]

Also, regarding the poor teams we played down the stretch...aren't those the very same teams that we typically make look like Super Bowl contenders? I'm happy that we did exactly what we were supposed to against poor offenses. It's nice for a change. That said, KC doesn't exactly have a terrible offense...

As for the draft, I'm not overly picky in the first round as long as we feel they're going to make an impact right away. OT, DT, LB, DE.

Wells would make me unhappy, and I'm not crazy about taking a receiver that high. Our DBs seem pretty set for the time being.

And we are the team that made derek anderson look like a probowler last year with what 5 or 6 td's? I'm proud to see our defense much improved and look forward to see what zimmer can do next year.

[kentjett]

the bengals when from 21st to 12th after the chiefs game. so the 12th ranking is misleading. however they did improve with really no talent, this D is full of average or below players. so their success is the sign of a good coaching. zimmer and fitzgerald are 2 of the best moves M&M has ever made. it's too bad that M&M have not done the same in other areas.

If u take away the Ravens 451 yards of total offense in week 13, our D would be ranked a lot higher. Our D has a lot of positions that were upgraded over last year. Our safety play is a lot better w/ Crocker than it was w/ Dexter. Brandon Johnson has outplayed any year of landon Johnson. Sims looks like the best DT we've had in the last ten years. Our overall talent is alot better on the defensive side of the ball. Williams was always hurt at safety and Justin Smith was always running around like an idiot. I don't miss either one of them.

[derekshank]

I'm just interested to see that better players doesn't always equal better production. A lot of people were excited about the defense with Odom and Rivers coming in and having Joseph, Hall, White, Ndukwe and Jackson in the secondary. Odom, Geathers, Rivers, Joseph, White, and Jackson were all gone, with Ndukwe not playing much down the stretch. Somehow the defense improved the more players it lost.

This could mean a couple different things. Perhaps the backups were hungry to get playing time and earn a paycheck down the road. Perhaps the starters who got hurt had an entitlement mentality and didn't much care about their performance because they weren't going to be benched in favor of scrubs from the street. Perhaps the back-ups were more disciplined in their assignments allowing Zimmer's defense to really do it's job. And perhaps the opposing offenses were really just that bad the last few games...

But no matter how you slice it - the defense that most people seem to be excited about is not the same defense that will be starting the season in '09. So I'm not that pumped just because I don't really know how to judge what we all saw. We didn't see the Bengals starting defense for the most part. We saw back-ups overachieving beyond what anyone thought... and that just doesn't mean much when judging the unit that will take the field in September of '09.

[bengalspride1219]

zimmers legit.

[BengalByTheBay]

This could mean a couple different things. Perhaps the backups were hungry to get playing time and earn a paycheck down the road. Perhaps the starters who got hurt had an entitlement mentality and didn't much care about their performance because they weren't going to be benched in favor of scrubs from the street. Perhaps the back-ups were more disciplined in their assignments allowing Zimmer's defense to really do it's job. And perhaps the opposing offenses were really just that bad the last few games...

....maybe the defense takes that long for the players to "get."

[derekshank]

This could mean a couple different things. Perhaps the backups were hungry to get playing time and earn a paycheck down the road. Perhaps the starters who got hurt had an entitlement mentality and didn't much care about their performance because they weren't going to be benched in favor of scrubs from the street. Perhaps the back-ups were more disciplined in their assignments allowing Zimmer's defense to really do it's job. And perhaps the opposing offenses were really just that bad the last few games...

....maybe the defense takes that long for the players to "get."

Sure... but I doubt it. People coming off the street that weren't with the Bengals at the beginning of the season were doing a lot of the work.

Besides, my point above wasn't really to come up with why the defense got better. More to point out that it didn't matter that much.

The only similarity between the improved defense at the end of '08 and the defense that will be starting '09 will be the color of the jerseys, because different players will be wearing them.

[HairOnFire]

Don't forget Crocker was with Zimmer for one horrible season in Atlanta. While that did nothing for Crocker's reputation the year of experience proved invaluable and actually resulted in a street FA having more experience in the scheme than any of the Bengals incumbents.

Furthermore, there are numerous examples of rookie players stepping into the Bengals defense and playing well so I doubt the defensive scheme is as complicated as a Swiss watch, a Rube Goldberg mousetrap, or ironically.....the Bengals offensive scheme. In fact, Keith Rivers remarked several times about how closely Zimmer's defensive scheme mirrored the scheme he played in college...including the terminology.

[BengalByTheBay]

This could mean a couple different things. Perhaps the backups were hungry to get playing time and earn a paycheck down the road. Perhaps the starters who got hurt had an entitlement mentality and didn't much care about their performance because they weren't going to be benched in favor of scrubs from the street. Perhaps the back-ups were more disciplined in their assignments allowing Zimmer's defense to really do it's job. And perhaps the opposing offenses were really just that bad the last few games...

....maybe the defense takes that long for the players to "get."

Sure... but I doubt it. People coming off the street that weren't with the Bengals at the beginning of the season were doing a lot of the work.

Besides, my point above wasn't really to come up with why the defense got better. More to point out that it didn't matter that much.

The only similarity between the improved defense at the end of '08 and the defense that will be starting '09 will be the color of the jerseys, because different players will be wearing them.

The people coming off the street were Jamar Fletcher and Crocker. Perhaps your example works with Fletcher (about whom I haven't heard many raves), but Crocker was on Zimmer's Atlanta defense and already had time in it. Most of the productive defensive players at the end of the year, like Peko and Sims had been around since training camp.

I was just adding another possibility to your list, one that seems at least as likely as the ones you listed. As to your point that it doesn't matter that the defense got better because starters should be back next season, I guess my response is ... maybe. However, isn't it also possible that Crocker will remain a starter and that having players like Rivers, Joseph, Geathers and Odom at full strength may act to improve the defense with players that played well at the end of the season giving the Bengals some decent depth that has been a huge problem for the past two seasons? I guess your premise that better players back in starter roles may take the defense backwards is possible, I just see the better play as a hopeful sign. And before you go with the "no carryover" argument, I don't necessarily disagree that winning a couple of games at the end of the season means much the next season. Rather, I'm just looking at the overall level of play as being a net positive that resulted, in no small part, from the fact that the Bengals were finally able to run the ball a little.

[derekshank]

I guess your premise that better players back in starter roles may take the defense backwards is possible, I just see the better play as a hopeful sign.

I wouldn't go so far to as to say that better players will cause the defense to take a step backwards. My point is that, there isn't much to take away from the better play. We don't really know anything. It would be like infusing a defense with rookies and free agents that weren't with the team the previous year. On paper it looks a lot better... but it doesn't always work out that way.

My only point is that the better play of the defense, regardless of the reason for it, was with players that likely won't be starting next year. So I'm not ready to jump and say that the defense we've been waiting for is finally here, because I don't really know anything new about the players the Bengals are counting on.

[HoosierCat]

FWIW, I think a good deal of the improvement on the D can be chalked up to not having a bunch of players with agendas. Justin and his tag were gone, O'Neal and his attitude was gone, the question marks over whether Pollack and/or Odell were coming back were gone...in short it was a unit focused on the field. Add in some solid new coaching by Zimmer and FitzGerald, and you're going to get improvement no matter how players shuffle around. For the record, I think this D is closer to 20th than 12th, but that's still a sizeable step up.

Contrast that with the O. There we got Stacy Franchise, Trade Me Levi, Trade Me Chad, Don't Tag Me TJ and Chris "Mikey loves me so screw you Marvin" Henry. And when did the O start to shape up? Well, at the end of the year, when most of those guys were either hurt or not playing.

There's a reason Marvin keeps harping on character...

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

Furthermore, there are numerous examples of rookie players stepping into the Bengals defense and playing well so I doubt the defensive scheme is as complicated as a Swiss watch, a Rube Goldberg mousetrap, or ironically.....the Bengals offensive scheme. In fact, Keith Rivers remarked several times about how closely Zimmer's defensive scheme mirrored the scheme he played in college...including the terminology.

Though in fairness, USC is basically a pro team. For what it's worth, I don't want a defense to be too simple or even the dumbest of QBs will have it read with 10 seconds left on the play clock. See Bresnehan, Chuckie.

So what do you make of Crocker's appearance as a player this year? Do you take that to mean that the rest of the players will be flying around blowing plays up next year like Crocker did this year? Or do you think that Crocker has simply become a better player by having played for Zimmer? Or is it just a fluke?

[HairOnFire]

Though in fairness, USC is basically a pro team.

True to a point. They're one of the rare college teams that use NFL schemes on offense and defense which gives them a distinct advantage when facing most college teams. The danger, and I admit it's real, is players within that system play with a competitive advantage other prospects don't have and as a result some USC prospects may enter the NFL with greater reputations than deserved. That said, USC does cherry pick from the ranks of the very best high school prospects in the nation, those prospects receive years of experience working in pro style schemes, and they eventually enter the NFL very familiar with pro concepts. So for some to argue USC players might be highly ranked only because they're surrounded by other equally talented prospects is laughable.

So what do you make of Crocker's appearance as a player this year? Do you take that to mean that the rest of the players will be flying around blowing plays up next year like Crocker did this year? Or do you think that Crocker has simply become a better player by having played for Zimmer? Or is it just a fluke?

To be honest I don't know that much about Crocker and I admit I'm curious about the reasons he's bounced around so much. But I will say this much. I never understood why the Browns gave up on him. Furthermore, his fine play seemed to be a result of being in the right place time and time again rather than a series of spectacular highlite type plays that are unlikely to be repeated.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

True to a point. They're one of the rare college teams that use NFL schemes on offense and defense which gives them a distinct advantage when facing most college teams.

Right, so that's why I'm thinking that, just because Keith Rivers recognizes your schemes from college, that's not as bad as it sounds.

So for some to argue USC players might be highly ranked only because they're surrounded by other equally talented prospects is laughable.

Well...you certainly can't make that argument for *all* the players because it wouldn't make logical sense. But you always have to pay attention to make sure that a guy didn't just look good because another guy took the double teams. I call it the Alvin Harper effect.

To be honest I don't know that much about Crocker and I admit I'm curious about the reasons he's bounced around so much. But I will say this much. I never understood why the Browns gave up on him. Furthermore, his fine play seemed to be a result of being in the right place time and time again rather than a series of spectacular highlite type plays that are unlikely to be repeated.

Yeah, he seemed to play with a good motor without being out of position much, which was refreshing to see after years of Justin Smith. Some people knock him because he bounced around, but he looked very good to my untrained eye. Besides, good teams need to find diamonds in the rough to round out their teams, something I think the Bengals have been historically not so good at - though I expect the credit is Zimmer's.

I think the Bengals really do have some players. If they can keep Brandon Johnson at LB and Crocker at S, then their safeties and linebackers look pretty danged good. CB should be OK, as I'm giving Joseph and Hall the benefit of the doubt since they have to cover so long. We still need a plugger in the middle to replace Thornton - I think if they can get a big guy in there to occupy two linemen (defensive holding? what?), then somebody should be able to get to the QB. If they get some help on D-line, things could look good next year.

Assuming somebody scores some points.