Introducing the Cro-Mags?

[derekshank]

Probably the most overrated group in the NFL.

Can't pass protect now that teams have them figured out, and you have to give it to the RB's 40 times a game to eek out 3.1 ypc.

All I hear is complaining about the offense on here, all year long, and on the radio, yet the o-line is praised? For what? Because most of them are dregs?

Of course if you give a great RB the ball 36-40 times a game, he could get 100+ yards in his sleep with all the 2 and 3 yard dinks and dunks. 40 x 3 = 120. Brilliant plan!

One TD against the Lions and the o-line is being praised?? HA!!! Unreal.

First of all, you can't point to one game with a 3.1 ypc and make that the end all. They are averaging 4.0 ypc on the season.

Secondly, do you care to back up your opinion that they are overrated with any actual stats?

Here are some actual O-Line stats for you.

2nd in the NFL in rushes of 10+ yards when running left.

10th in the NFL in rushes of 10+ yards when running right.

2nd in the NFL in rushing 1st downs when running left.

3rd in the NFL in rushing 1st downs when running right.

8th in the NFL in fewest sacks allowed.

8th in the NFL in fewest QB hits.

Say what you want about their play selection, and their stats being padded... but they are getting the job done at 4.0 yards/rush, and have the 2nd best TOP in the NFL. So, they are doing something right.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

Fiction. Mike Brown Hate Syndrome causes selective memory loss. 6th rounders? Try first rounders, as in 6th pick in the first round, spent on the offensive line.

No kidding? So what have we got from that 6th overall pick, anyway? By deciding that they planned to play hardball until September - and drafting a guy who had no apparent internal motivation to keep himself in any kind of shape - they ensured he wouldn't do crap this year. That leaves them with a situation in which they needed to get to 2010 before seeing an impact from Smith, meaning they entered this year (and really, last) needing 2-3 new linemen, and being forced to rely on guys who were rather unproven in that regard. Just like I said the first time.

Did you think I *forgot* about Smith? Some things - like discounting any impact this year from our #6 OT - I don't put in my posts because I assume that the general audience is sufficiently intelligent to figure out the obvious things. But I'm starting to realize that some people need the dots connected for them.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

My take is the Bengals correctly determined the key to any future success had to come from running the ball and playing good defense, and the article points out fairly well how the Bengals were able to cast off overpaid and overrated lineman like Levi and the dancing Bear and still get dramatic improvement in the running game using a scheme built around massive blockers who may be less talented, but play much harder.

First - and this is just guessing, fully admitted - is that this 'movement' (intentional or otherwise) was not Mikey's plan, simply because he's always had a thing for the passing game second only to Al Davis. I just don't see him changing his spots. I don't think it was intentional, and if it was, it wasn't his idea. Given who his father was, I don't see Mikey doing a heel turn for the running game.

And while I fully admit that defense+running=wins, it's not like you can simply grab a few fat guys, plug them in, and run effectively. Developing linemen from late-round picks is still a low-value proposition, if the odds are any indication. That's why I don't give Mike credit - it's too low-probability if it's your only option.

Best, the odds are remarkably high the Bengals can continue pulling these types of things off every year for as long as you care to think about.

The odds are high that they can continue to turn practice squadders into playoff-caliber starters with a success rate of over 50%? Have you been drinking?

But when defending Mikey, who am I debating? Is it someone willing to discuss the things we see right now OR am I forced to endure the ravings of someone who would rather pull the withered example of Ki-Jana Carter out of a hat?

Right now, I think Mike got lucky with some FA gambles that didn't backfire for once, and is also reaping the rewards of good coaching. Long term is how you evaluate a career, and 2 winning seasons in 20 is unlikely to be a coincidence. If things are different now than they've been for 20 years, why? Did Mikey read a 'Football Management for Dummies' book or something? I think it's as simple as desperation forcing them to hand the car keys to Paul Alexander, and also straight lucking into one of the better DCs in the NFL. That explains your running game and defense.

I'll say this - of all the dumb picks Mikey has made - and worse, general roster mismanagement - Ki-Jana doesn't even make the list. Dude got hurt. Crap happens. I only mention this because I abhor strawmen. I'm not blaming Mikey for a shredded ACL.

[COB]

because I assume that the general audience is sufficiently intelligent to figure out the obvious things. But I'm starting to realize that some people need the dots connected for them.

My stupidity isn't the issue here.

/Long pause as I spellcheck every word in the previous sentence/

I guess I just assumed you meant Mike Brown's plan was to rely on 6th rounders and scrap-heap FA. I based that assumption because your post said:

We're going to rely on our ability to find 6th rounders and scrap-heap FA...

I didn't really think you forgot about Andre Smith, I just thought you were ignoring his selection because it kind of put the lie to your above-recited "plan".

I'm off to read the encyclopedia. Hopefully doing so will enable me to discern all the subtle subtext that you have so brilliantly woven into all your Bengalszone posts.

[COB]

First - and this is just guessing, fully admitted - is that this 'movement' (intentional or otherwise) was not Mikey's plan, simply because he's always had a thing for the passing game second only to Al Davis. I just don't see him changing his spots. I don't think it was intentional, and if it was, it wasn't his idea. Given who his father was, I don't see Mikey doing a heel turn for the running game.

Was the move to the run intentional? Yes. Marvin announced he was going to do it before he did it. Does anyone else remember Marvin saying they were going to become a running team? He wasn't talking about the next game, he made it clear he was talking about a complete shift in philosophy.

[HairOnFire]

First - and this is just guessing, fully admitted - is that this 'movement' (intentional or otherwise) was not Mikey's plan, simply because he's always had a thing for the passing game second only to Al Davis.

Ahhh yes, the ever so brilliant "Bastard Sons of Paul Brown" rant. I know it well. In fact, I wrote it. But few remember the part where I remind the gentle reader of Paul Brown's long history of dominant running games built around big running backs. To be fair, the modern passing game is Paul Browns greatest legacy, but it isn't his only one.

I just don't see him changing his spots.

But he hasn't changed his spots completely. Because this team is still drafting and stashing skill position players who won't play until a starter dies.

I don't think it was intentional, and if it was, it wasn't his idea.

Of course it was intentional. Prior to the season the Bengals openly made running the ball this seasons biggest priority, and Bratkowski was later quoted about how the TE position was the key to changes in the Bengals playbook. So how else would you explain the sudden appearance of multiple TE sets, many featuring 340 pound tackles reporting as TE's. As for whose idea it was, I'll give Marvin the Lions share of credit because he's the head coach. Then Alexander, because he made it work. And then Brat, for embracing the grind rather than listen to the Joe Pongs of the world. And finally we get to Mikey, the guy who listened to his coaches and gave them the tools they asked for. Props.

Developing linemen from late-round picks is still a low-value proposition, if the odds are any indication. That's why I don't give Mike credit - it's too low-probability if it's your only option.

But it wasn't his only option. He could have stuck to the previous plan. Yet you give him no credit for changing. Nor do you give him credit for surpassing your expectations.

Long term is how you evaluate a career, and 2 winning seasons in 20 is unlikely to be a coincidence. If things are different now than they've been for 20 years, why?

Marvin.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

[quote name='HairOnFire' date='10 December 2009 - 05:35 PM' timestamp='1260480929' post='306741'

Long term is how you evaluate a career, and 2 winning seasons in 20 is unlikely to be a coincidence. If things are different now than they've been for 20 years, why?

Marvin.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

I guess I just assumed you meant Mike Brown's plan was to rely on 6th rounders and scrap-heap FA. I based that assumption because your post said:

We're going to rely on our ability to find 6th rounders and scrap-heap FA...

I didn't really think you forgot about Andre Smith, I just thought you were ignoring his selection because it kind of put the lie to your above-recited "plan".

Nope, I'm downplaying his selection because:

1) he's only 1 guy, not 3, despite photographic evidence from the combine that might suggest otherwise. They needed to replace more than just one Tackle.

2) he ain't playing (well, sparingly now), and we knew when the holdout reached September (and his weight ballooned) that he wouldn't be making any real impact this year. And the Bengals knew when they drafted him (or should have) that the holdout would reach September because they're the ones that drove it there.

So as far as planning for 2009 is concerned, Andre didn't exist. My original point is that they've been rolling the dice with the OL. Last year came up snake eyes, this year didn't. My claim is that a craps gambler is just as bad when he wins as when he loses.

[HairOnFire]

I give credit to the coaches. If you want to give Mike credit in 2003 for realizing he needed a coach from out of the organization who had some gravel in his gut and some spit in his eye - and getting him - I'll agree with that.

Well, that's just the thing. I gave Mikey huge props for hiring Marvin in 2003, and have since steadfastly refused to lump the Lewis era with those that came before. As a result I never find myself crafting pointless rants based upon 20 years of history that can't be changed.

Can you say as much?

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

Well, that's just the thing. I gave Mikey huge props for hiring Marvin in 2003, and have since steadfastly refused to lump the Lewis era with those that came before.

Can you say as much?

I do not lump the Lewis era in with the others. In fact, 2003 - when Marvin was hired - was the first time I had absolultely any hope for the team for at least 5-6 years, maybe 10. It was huge.

Unfortunately Mike didn't give Marvin as much personnel input as I'd like. While hiring Marvin was a major change, it didn't significantly alter the personnel evaluation process that is largely the same as it's been the last 20 years. As such, rejected the notion in this thread that St. Michael the Brilliant has some master plan that guarantees alchemical transmutation of UFAs into Pro Bowlers. So my original point in *this* thread is that there may have been a touch more madness than method involved in this year's fortunes. Either way, 9-3 is 9-3, but my fear is that his good fortune this year may embolden him to make some really dumb decisions.

As a result I never find myself crafting pointless rants based upon 20 years of history that can't be changed.

I am glad to know that your stance on the matter allows you to craft pointless rants on different topics instead.

[HoosierCat]

That said, you've got to be a slack-jawed mouth breathing moron to seriously believe THIS team was built without Mikey's input, or in the example currently being discussed, that this teams O-Line was constructed in a manner that Brown didn't sign off on.

And I said that where? Yup, Mikey actually listened to the people he hired. But they, not he, are responsible for the product on the field, right?

But there's the rub, because you don't get to pick and choose which moves Mike signed off on.

And you don't get to give Mikey credit for coaching up practice squad players, either.

[HairOnFire]

I do not lump the Lewis era in with the others.

You just did. Or wasn't that you trotting out the tired old one winning season in 20 rant? Granted, your rant has been updated to two winning season out of 20, but it hardly matters since the whole point of the rant is to forever link the here and now with a miserable past.

[Kazkal]

Only 2 coaches I feel may deserve some Heat is

Shepard (God I miss Hue)

Brat (Does Hues Contract expire this year? Need him as OC & Zim as DC next year)

PS,Only knock on Mike Brown this year is Zimmer still isn't extended >_<

[HairOnFire]

While hiring Marvin was a major change, it didn't significantly alter the personnel evaluation process that is largely the same as it's been the last 20 years.

Sure it did. Because when you change the people making the decisions you get different results. And along those same lines, David Shula has been flipping steaks for most of the 20 years you keep mentioning.

As such, rejected the notion in this thread that St. Michael the Brilliant has some master plan that guarantees alchemical transmutation of UFAs into Pro Bowlers.

Well, you're the only guy saying crap like that...so what does it prove when you immediately slap it down? All the article mentions is a change in offensive thrust, from passing to running, and how an elite running game can be constructed using a simplified scheme and less talented players. Nowhere does the article mention Pro Bowl blockers, a state-of-the-art passing game, or a shower of points. Instead, it points to the changes that were made, the sparkling 9-3 record, the playoff berth that awaits, and the mostly unknown players who are responsible. And several of those unknown players were developed while serving on the Bengals practice squad. And by several I mean more than enough to dispell any notion of it all being a fluke occurance.

Either way, 9-3 is 9-3, but my fear is that his good fortune this year may embolden him to make some really dumb decisions.

So what you're saying boils down to this. It's all luck and luck always changes.

[HairOnFire]

Yup, Mikey actually listened to the people he hired. But they, not he, are responsible for the product on the field, right?

Mostly. But as much as it pains you to say the words Mike Brown is indeed this teams acting GM, and he built this team in exactly the same manner, using input from his coaches, as any other GM in the NFL. And that means he's involved in everything from determining which free agents to pursue, which players to draft, which players to cut, which players to develope on the practice squad, which trades to make, and which players should be active or inactive on any given week.

Hoosier, you watched him make many of those types of decisions on Hard Knocks, right? So why do you insist on pretending the man is hidden away in some back office playing with blocks and toy trucks?

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

Sure it did. Because when you change the people making the decisions you get different results. And along those same lines, David Shula has been flipping steaks for most of the 20 years you keep mentioning.

When did Shula have personnel decision authority? Better yet, when did Marvin get it? Same guy's making the personnel decisions. Unless you mean Katie "It's a lot of money, Alvin" Blackburn.

And several of those unknown players were developed while serving on the Bengals practice squad. And by several I mean more than enough to dispell any notion of it all being a fluke occurance.

Getting 3 linemen in one year out of the practice squad is a fluke, yes. I'm not saying the practice squad isn't effective at developing players. I am saying that relying on a line comprised 60% of unproven practice squadders is not the best Plan A. I'm pretty sure I don't recall you, before the season, prognosticating greatness for our O-line. I figured it could go either way.

But it still gets back to where to place the credit, and I don't see Coach Brown down there with a whistle in his mouth, do you?

[HoosierCat]

Hoosier, you watched him make many of those types of decisions on Hard Knocks, right? So why do you insist on pretending the man is hidden away in some back office playing with blocks and toy trucks?

And when have I ever pretended such things? I'll happily give Mikey credit for signing the checks of guys like Cook and Livings over the past few years while they were on the PS. But that money didn't turn them into NFL players, coaching did. And I'll gladly give Mikey credit for signing the checks of those coaches, but it was their work and the hard work of their players that has the team where it is today.

As the cliche goes, it is what it is. I have no special complaint with Mikey this season. He and the whole Bengals front office have done a good job. But if you ask me why Kyle Cook and Nate Livings and Dennis Roland have done a good job, I'm going to point to the offensive line coaches long before I point to the front office.

[Kazkal]

Getting 3 linemen in one year out of the practice squad is a fluke, yes. I'm not saying the practice squad isn't effective at developing players.

Well if they were from other teams but all 3 guys have been with us for several years being developed.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

Hoosier, you watched him make many of those types of decisions on Hard Knocks, right? So why do you insist on pretending the man is hidden away in some back office playing with blocks and toy trucks?

I also recall from Hard Knocks the incredulous looks on the faces of the coaches when Mikey would suggest moving a punter to DE or something similar. Body language by he coaches in those meetings says a lot.

[Stripes]

Hoosier, you watched him make many of those types of decisions on Hard Knocks, right? So why do you insist on pretending the man is hidden away in some back office playing with blocks and toy trucks?

I also recall from Hard Knocks the incredulous looks on the faces of the coaches when Mikey would suggest moving a punter to DE or something similar. Body language by he coaches in those meetings says a lot.

I remember that, but it was actually a whimsical thought to possibly move a linebacker to tight end (is that so bad, considering two were injured and there's at least one guy in the league that made that move successfully in Mike Vrabel?). Yeah, the coaches weren't thrilled with idea, but Mikey didn't smash his squishy hammer into the desk and spit up on his bib in defiance. They moved foward with the meeting.

[HairOnFire]

When did Shula have personnel decision authority? Better yet, when did Marvin get it?

By all accounts, both men were given the authority to make MOST personnel decisions the moment they were hired. And Marvin has commented often about how closely he works with Brown, describing their working relationship as a partnership.

I am saying that relying on a line comprised 60% of unproven practice squadders is not the best Plan A.

Really? Was there a rejected plan that would have resulted in a better record than the current 9-3? And if true, did that rejected plan feature a line that could neither run or pass block at a high level despite being built around a pair of bookend tackles, one a past 1st round draft pick and the other designated the teams franchise player?

I'm pretty sure I don't recall you, before the season, prognosticating greatness for our O-line.

Well, your recall should remind you how I didn't prognosticate anything in regards to the O-line...precisely because I had never seen most of the newcomers play a single down. But there's the rub, because Bengal coaches had seen those players play and they made those players starters in a revamped scheme designed around the new O-Lines strengths and weaknesses. And from day one the coaching staff made running the ball, behind THIS offensive line, the biggest offensive priority. So rather than being a product of blind luck, as you keep implying, I'd say the Bengals O-line success is by design. And best, as the article makes abundantly clear, that success was achieved through unconventional methods.

So I offer props. In fact, I offer props all around.

[HairOnFire]

As the cliche goes, it is what it is.

C'mon now, you're better than that.

I have no special complaint with Mikey this season. He and the whole Bengals front office have done a good job.

And there it is. Nothing more needs to be said, but of course will be said because so many Bengal fans actually relish and embrace the negativity that surrounds this football team. In fact, many of them can't imagine what it might be like to be a fan who doesn't hate the home team. So whenever success comes they immediately turn their back on it by trotting out the blind pig rant. Or perhaps they wax poetic about how Mikey stole candy from babies. But no matter which whining rant they prefer ALL of them are quick to point out how miserable they've been for 20 years, thereby proving how willing they are to remain miserable for another 20 years.

But if you ask me why Kyle Cook and Nate Livings and Dennis Roland have done a good job, I'm going to point to the offensive line coaches long before I point to the front office.

Didn't I just say the very same things? Hell, I think I put Mikey fourth in line for accolades. But how is that any different than how GM's are judged outside of River City? No, the only thing different in our example is how many Bengal fans assume Mike Brown spends his day in a corner office making imaginary phone calls on those rare occasions when he isn't talking to the ghost of his father.

[HairOnFire]

I also recall from Hard Knocks the incredulous looks on the faces of the coaches when Mikey would suggest moving a punter to DE or something similar. Body language by he coaches in those meetings says a lot.

It sure did. In fact, what those incredulous looks made abundantly clear was how everyone in the room understood who was in charge. What wasn't shown, but later became obvious, was how that person in charge didn't act on his unpopular idea precisely because his coaches didn't support the decision.

And that's proof of a healthy working partnership between a GM and his coaching staff, isn't it?

[derekshank]

I'm pretty sure I don't recall you, before the season, prognosticating greatness for our O-line.

Well, your recall should remind you how I didn't prognosticate anything in regards to the O-line...precisely because I had never seen most of the newcomers play a single down. But there's the rub, because Bengal coaches had seen those players play and they made those players starters in a revamped scheme designed around the new O-Lines strengths and weaknesses. And from day one the coaching staff made running the ball, behind THIS offensive line, the biggest offensive priority. So rather than being a product of blind luck, as you keep implying, I'd say the Bengals O-line success is by design. And best, as the article makes abundantly clear, that success was achieved through unconventional methods.

So I offer props. In fact, I offer props all around.

I agree Hair. There wasn't much for us as fans to go on with these guys... but it's clear the coaches knew they had something.

Cook was projected to be the starter last year, but unfortunately was forced to IR. They drafted a RT with the 6th overall pick, so being forced to rely on Collins and Roland wasn't plan A... but it's worked out okay, especially with the jumbo set. And moving Whitworth over to the spot he played in college and plugging Mathis and Livings into the LG spot after having a couple years with them to develop the techniques they wanted to focus on.

The coaching staff had plenty of time with these guys to judge whether they were ready. And giventhat they didn't spend so much as a 7th round pick on a back-up for these spots, I'm left to assume they were confident in their ability to do the job. And guess what... they were right.

I don't buy the "blind squirrel" theory. Had the coaching staff had no faith in Cook and Mathis, I imagine the draft and free agent moves would have been different. But I believe Mike Brown listened to his coaches when the said "These PS guys are solid."

Every GM has to work with the coaching staff. The ones who don't are mired in mediocrity... as the Bengals were for so long. So I give Brown some props for actually hiring coaches whom he trusts enough to listen to when they speak. That's the impression I got from Hard Knocks, and the assumption I make when I see how things have changed.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

because Bengal coaches had seen those players play and they made those players starters in a revamped scheme designed around the new O-Lines strengths and weaknesses.

Bearing in mind, those are the people I'm crediting.

To give management credit for foresight in that regard, they needed to be confident the line was solid when they had other opportunities to fix the line and didn't. That's my point - by not getting any significant FA (and forcing the Smith holdout) they were holding pat on the line for 2009. Sitting in February 2009, would you as a GM have decided that you were certain the O-line could carry us to the playoffs and elected to pass on fixing it for '09 (again, the holdout made Smith a 2010 pick)? To give Mike credit for 9-3, that's the question you have to answer in the affirmative. I think it's a huge gamble, but to his credit, it did pay off. I just can't see how they showed enough in '08 to be *that* sure of their talent not to at least hedge my bets.

So I offer props. In fact, I offer props all around.

Fair enough. I'll readily concede that this was a good year for Mike.

I hereby declare we need another horse to beat into glue. How 'bout them Steelers?