Palmer in the no-huddle vs. ball control offense

[HairOnFire]

OK, I get where two TDs is 14 pts but do you really want to take me to task on that? For all intents and purposes we were down by two TDs.

Why not? Isn't that exactly the same type of hair splitting crap you're trying to pull on me? Besides, the fact remains that the Bengals abandoned the run long before that point, and the score never became so lopsided that they had to abandon the run completely. So both of your claims have been proven wrong....which is fairly typical for you.

I was well aware of the score and you were not.

You claimed they were down by two TD's and then quickly admitted they weren't. So suck it again, Skunkboy, because a 13 point deficit can be eliminated with a single TD and two FG's, not two TD's. And yeah, they were well on their way to pulling off that very trick until Ocho's penalty knocked them out of range.

Suck it.

If you really think they quickly narrowed the gap to 3 pts then you'd have to credit the passing game because a power running game could not have scored 10 pts as quickly as they did.

And once again you can suck it, Skunkboy, because the Bengals ran more on those drives, their 8th and 9th of the game, than they had on any drive after their very first.

Time was of the essence. They had to run the no huddle because as it turns out they were down 13 pts with only 3 possessions left.

I could care less if they were in the no huddle at that point because there's no reason you can't run the football out of the no huddle. Which is something I'm guessing you just figured out.

In closing, it is a little bit like you just said. Because how am I supposed to debate you when ALL of your facts are wrong?

[cincyhokie]

I feel honored that this thread has been hijacked and twisted around for 7 solid pages...no thanks to me either.

I'll say this: Teams never abandon the pass to go to the run. The abandon the run to go to the pass. To see if the passing game isn't working there's much more to analyze. Receivers, QB, drops, etc. The problem is that by the time you've figured out the pass game isn't working, you're already down by more than is comfortable...so you have to keep passing. If the passing game fails, one can say "they didn't run it enough." When the run game WORKS you know it because you usually win the game.

Would the run game have worked if the Bengals would have stuck with it? Maybe. It wasn't working when they were running in the first half. It only began to be effective when they softened the Browns with the no-huddle.

One of my points, and now last one, in this thread is not to run more or pass more, it's to increase the tempo of the offense. I couldn't care less how we score. I just would like to see them score first and get ahead of the other teams earlier to open up their options running and passing.

I'm just afraid they'll be alot more lawn mowing this year on Sunday than last.

[HairOnFire]

It wasn't that I saw yet another CHFF article today about the importance of the pass over the run that surprised me, but rather that they found a great picture of Hair to go with it.

The guy in your picture is a blogger rather appropriately named BeerRun. I hear he was fired from StripeHype a few months ago for blogging while drunk. Frankly, I'm suprised anyone bothered to notice. Regardless, I hear he now writes for CincyJungle.com when he isn't in rehab.

BTW, maybe it's just me but the name BeerRun seems like a subtle cry for help.

[HairOnFire]

To see if the passing game isn't working there's much more to analyze. Receivers, QB, drops, etc. The problem is that by the time you've figured out the pass game isn't working, you're already down by more than is comfortable...so you have to keep passing.

Well now you're just embarrassing yourself by claiming that the team can't stop passing even if it isn't working. Besides, there's a fairly easy trick that allows teams to cut through all of the data to see if their passing game is truly working. It's called looking at the scoreboard. And on that point I'm guessing the Bengals had well over 200 yards passing yards by halftime....and just 10 points to show for it. Might as well play ball control under those circumstances. Besides, it's not like the Bengals haven't got 3 other games of dropped and missed passes to look at. In fact, the Carolina game alone should be enough proof for anyone....if they can stomach watching the film.

Would the run game have worked if the Bengals would have stuck with it? Maybe. It wasn't working when they were running in the first half.

After the first drive, which stalled out on an incomplete pass on 3rd and 2, they only ran four more times in the half. As for the total 1st half rush attempts....they gained 24 yards on 8 carries. By comparison, Payton Hillis ground the Bengals into tiny dust particles by averaging a flat 3 yard per carry on his first 26 carries. He then bumped his average up with a 24 yard back breaker on his final carry.

I'm just afraid they'll be alot more lawn mowing this year on Sunday than last.

Isn't it ironic how Hoosier bailed on the game before the 4th quarter started? You might think a guy who spends all of his waking hours pimping the passing game could put off mowing the lawn until after the Bengals stop filling the afternoon sky with footballs.

[cincyhokie]

Well now you're just embarrassing yourself by claiming that the team can't stop passing even if it isn't working. Besides, there's a fairly easy trick that allows teams to cut through all of the data to see if their passing game is truly working. It's called looking at the scoreboard. And on that point I'm guessing the Bengals had well over 200 yards passing yards by halftime....and just 10 points to show for it. Might as well play ball control under those circumstances. Besides, it's not like the Bengals haven't got 3 other games of dropped and missed passes to look at. In fact, the Carolina game alone should be enough proof for anyone....if they can stomach watching the film.

So most teams when they're down or down by mulitple scores they run the ball?

Of course there are exceptions. If the team is winning they can choose to go back to the run or do whatever they want. Luckily for the Bengals their defense was working against the inept Carolina offense. Back to my point in my last post. If you get ahead and score first you have more options.

Again, I'm not a proponent of passing over running or vise versa. I would, however, like to see the Bengals use their different looks to get the lead more often. Hell, with the lead I want them to run the ball. It's just not going to happen all the time, especially not against the Colts or Saints.

There are no absolutes in any phase of the game if you take a large enough sample size. That's not an argument for either side, that's fact.

[HairOnFire]

Of course there are exceptions. If the team is winning they can choose to go back to the run or do whatever they want. Luckily for the Bengals their defense was working against the inept Carolina offense.

Exactly. But that said, nobody who watched the Bengals passing game against Carolina would ever claim it was working, just as they wouldn't say it worked very well against the Ravens, and just as they wouldn't say it worked while it still mattered against New England. So how suprising is it to see the Bengals throw for over 200 yards in the first half against Cleveland yet score only 10 points? Or for that matter, score only 20 points after throwing for nearly 400 yards in the game?

The sad truth of the matter is the Bengals passing game is only working in a few statistical categories. In the real world, as Cedric Benson reluctantly admitted, the Bengals passing game doesn't scare opposing teams nearly enough to make opposing teams gameplan against it. Rather, those teams want the Bengals to throw the ball for exactly the same reasons the Bengals wanted the Carolina Panthers and their rookie QB to throw the ball. Specifically, the Bengals simply aren't good enough to win football games that way. At least not yet.

Again, I'm not a proponent of passing over running or vise versa. I would, however, like to see the Bengals use their different looks to get the lead more often. Hell, with the lead I want them to run the ball. It's just not going to happen all the time, especially not against the Colts or Saints.

I repeat, they weren't playing Indy or New Orleans. They were playing a Cleveland team using a backup QB and a power back who averaged a flat 3 yards per carry until his last rush.

[cincyhokie]

Of course there are exceptions. If the team is winning they can choose to go back to the run or do whatever they want. Luckily for the Bengals their defense was working against the inept Carolina offense.

Exactly. But that said, nobody who watched the Bengals passing game against Carolina would ever claim it was working, just as they wouldn't say it worked very well against the Ravens, and just as they wouldn't say it worked while it still mattered against New England. So how suprising is it to see the Bengals throw for over 200 yards in the first half against Cleveland yet score only 10 points? Or for that matter, score only 20 points after throwing for nearly 400 yards in the game?

The sad truth of the matter is the Bengals passing game is only working in a few statistical categories. In the real world, as Cedric Benson reluctantly admitted, the Bengals passing game doesn't scare opposing teams nearly enough to make opposing teams gameplan against it. Rather, those teams want the Bengals to throw the ball for exactly the same reasons the Bengals wanted the Carolina Panthers and their rookie QB to throw the ball. Specifically, the Bengals simply aren't good enough to win football games that way. At least not yet.

Again, I'm not a proponent of passing over running or vise versa. I would, however, like to see the Bengals use their different looks to get the lead more often. Hell, with the lead I want them to run the ball. It's just not going to happen all the time, especially not against the Colts or Saints.

I repeat, they weren't playing Indy or New Orleans. They were playing a Cleveland team using a backup QB and a power back who averaged a flat 3 yards per carry until his last rush.

I'm frustrated with Brat's playcalling in the redzone. I'm sure others are too.

That Cleveland team has improved. They're pretty good against the run.

As far as Hillis goes, he was moving the ball against the Bengals. Actually it was the Browns O-line that was blowing the D-line off the ball. That's the defense though. Hillis ran for 144 against the Ravens. Let's face it, the Browns are a better team this year than they were last year.

I know that the Bengals weren't playing the Colts or Saints, but when they do, they're going to have to be able to pass to score. That might change. However, with the way the defense is playing now and getting no pressure Manning and Brees will put the Bengals in a hole fast.

[HoosierCat]

Isn't it ironic how Hoosier bailed on the game before the 4th quarter started?

It's even more ironic coming from you, who doesn't even show up on game day at all.

[HairOnFire]

Isn't it ironic how Hoosier bailed on the game before the 4th quarter started?

It's even more ironic coming from you, who doesn't even show up on game day at all.

That's because I spend all of my Sundays watching the games instead of crawling into the bottle as you've been known to do.

BTW, can I assume you're as drunk when you mow your lawn as when you post?

[HoosierCat]

Isn't it ironic how Hoosier bailed on the game before the 4th quarter started?

It's even more ironic coming from you, who doesn't even show up on game day at all.

That's because I spend all of my Sundays watching the games instead of crawling into the bottle as you've been known to do.

BTW, can I assume you're as drunk when you mow your lawn as when you post?

Wow. You really have nothing left, do you?

[HairOnFire]

I'm frustrated with Brat's playcalling in the redzone. I'm sure others are too.

I'm sure everyones frustrated with his playcalling in the Redzone. It's been inept. But I'm just as frustrated with his playcalling between the 20's, on 3rd down, or in any other category you care to mention.

As far as Hillis goes, he was moving the ball against the Bengals. Actually it was the Browns O-line that was blowing the D-line off the ball.

No argument. I only mentioned his flat 3.0 ypc average on all but one of his carries as proof that a RB can grind a team into bits even when his average gain is modest. The key to success is sticking with the running game often enough until you've physically broken the other teams will. Hillis and the Browns did that. The Bengals didn't.

Let's face it, the Browns are a better team this year than they were last year.

And so are the Bengals on paper. But put them on grass and they're worse....precisely because they've decided to play like pu**ies.

I know that the Bengals weren't playing the Colts or Saints, but when they do, they're going to have to be able to pass to score.

It won't matter a bit if they don't take care of business against the teams they should beat....which they didn't do against Cleveland.

[volcom69]

I'm frustrated with Brat's playcalling in the redzone. I'm sure others are too.

I'm sure everyones frustrated with his playcalling in the Redzone. It's been inept. But I'm just as frustrated with his playcalling between the 20's, on 3rd down, or in any other category you care to mention.

As far as Hillis goes, he was moving the ball against the Bengals. Actually it was the Browns O-line that was blowing the D-line off the ball.

No argument. I only mentioned his flat 3.0 ypc average on all but one of his carries as proof that a RB can grind a team into bits even when his average gain is modest. The key to success is sticking with the running game often enough until you've physically broken the other teams will. Hillis and the Browns did that. The Bengals didn't.

Let's face it, the Browns are a better team this year than they were last year.

And so are the Bengals on paper. But put them on grass and they're worse....precisely because they've decided to play like pu**ies.

I know that the Bengals weren't playing the Colts or Saints, but when they do, they're going to have to be able to pass to score.

It won't matter a bit if they don't take care of business against the teams they should beat....which they didn't do against Cleveland.

I think you nailed it Hair when you say they are playing like pu**ies. What happened to this team from last year playing a very physical type of football. Its like they took there toughness away!

This team is very talented they have all the talent in the world, and its up to the coaches to bring it out of them, with there strenghts. So far the coaches here have yet to do that, and thats what is making me think the coaches are just not good enough. Esp. when you bring back the same team as last year, and the same team is falling apart. Marvin better pick this team up quick!

[HairOnFire]

Wow. You really have nothing left, do you?

What's your complaint? Didn't I grant you alcoholic amnesty? And haven't I kept my promise to ignore you unless provoked? In fact, isn't it obvious that I've already replaced you by using the Hokie/Sea Ray combo?

Am I the one posting photos of dips**ts who I then claim are you? Nope. And do I offer free advice about which medications you can consume to relax? No sir. In fact, all I've ever done is laugh and repond in kind to the things you do first.

So quit your bitching and crying and do what you do best by providing a link to a YouTube video of something.

[HoosierCat]

Wow. You really have nothing left, do you?

What's your complaint?

Oh, no complaints. I'm not the one going on and on like the derelict old barfly down at the other end of the room who's got One Theory Of Everything and will show you his crabbed 5,000 page notebook explaining it if you happen to walk past him going to the john. Please, carry on.

And barkeep: another round.

[HairOnFire]

I think you nailed it Hair when you say they are playing like pu**ies. What happened to this team from last year playing a very physical type of football. Its like they took there toughness away!

You simply can't be the bully by throwing the ball. You just can't. You might win by throwing the ball, and you might occasionally win big. And you might make the other guy look flat out stupid from time to time. But you're never going to impose you will on a team by throwing the football. Worse, when you rely on throwing the football, and you're not an elite bunch, you're far more vulnerable to blowouts and slow starts.

We can argue about this until our fingers bleed but IMHO at least one thing about this team is obvious to anyone who isn't blind or blind drunk. That being, this team has lost it's collective nuts, and they need to find them quickly.

[HairOnFire]

Oh, no complaints. I'm not the one going on and on like the derelict old barfly down at the other end of the room who's got One Theory Of Everything and will show you his crabbed 5,000 page notebook explaining it if you happen to walk past him going to the john.

Actually, you're the guy whose not saying anything about anything while others discuss playcalling, formations, and changes in team identity.

So how about making yourself useful with a link to a Bang cartoon?

[Stripes]

That being, this team has lost it's collective nuts.

I'm willing to agree with that. I simply think that the lost testicles were once attached to the underbutts of the offensive lineman rather than Marvin or Bratkowski (granted, Brat has been a special variety of ridiculous at points this year in ways unrelated to bravery).

[Sea Ray]

That's because I spend all of my Sundays watching the games instead of crawling into the bottle as you've been known to do.

BTW, can I assume you're as drunk when you mow your lawn as when you post?

You have issues keeping score. You have to be reminded that they trailed by 13 and not ten. Some people have issues with the bottle; some with medical marijuana...

Just sayin'

[HairOnFire]

You have issues keeping score.

You've already admitted you were wrong, Skunkboy. So suck it and move on.

[HairOnFire]

Some people have issues with the bottle; some with medical marijuana...

And some of you are just born stupid.

[Sea Ray]

You have issues keeping score.

You've already admitted you were wrong, Skunkboy. So suck it and move on.

I knew all along they were down by 13 in the 2nd half. You had to be reminded.

Skunkboy is below you. You're a lot of things but you're not generally a copycat. Your stuff is usually more original. But thanks for the namecalling. It's an honor to be called names. It's more proof that I've won.

As always I'll let you get the last word, so have at it.

In the meantime let's hope the Bengals do pound Cedric and take control of the line of scrimmage this weekend. And after that, I'd like to see a playaction bomb to TO for 6.

[cincyhokie]

And some of you are just born not having the same opinion as I do. And it makes me mad.

If everyone agreed the world would be a boring place.

[HairOnFire]

I knew all along they were down by 13 in the 2nd half. You had to be reminded.

You said they were down by 2 TD's. They weren't. You had to be reminded.

Skunkboy is below you.

Well, who started the skunk stuff? It was you, right?

You're a lot of things but you're not generally a copycat. Your stuff is usually more original.

Flattery won't help you. Instead, you need to stop making stupid claims that I can easily disprove. Do that much, and only that, and you'll quickly find yourself having no problems with me whatsoever.

In this example you made two stupid claims about the game, actually three if we count the dustup over the score, and then you laid down a line of crap about how my facts were wrong. Plus, when RedsBengalsBucks stroked your ego you responded like the douchbag you are by immediately spewing the skunk stuff instead of waiting to see if I could tear apart your stupid claims about the score preventing the Bengals from running the ball. And as it turned out I could indeed tear that s**t up....leaving you to fight over the crumbs and cry about how you were treated. (sniff)

But thanks for the namecalling. It's an honor to be called names. It's more proof that I've won.

You made two claims and both were proven wrong. In fact, both were proven to be completely braindead and stupid. So as far as I'm concerned the only thing you won was a kiss on the butt from RedsBengalsBucks and a fictional cigar from Hoosier. And I simply have no interest in either of those things. So enjoy your winnings....such as they are.

As always I'll let you get the last word, so have at it.

You're not letting me have anything. The sad truth of the matter is once you get past the insults and distractions all we're left with is the now discredited claims about the game that you made. And it's those types of hollow empty-headed analysis that makes you look stupid. So maybe you should check yourself the next time before you try to check me, ehh?

In the meantime let's hope the Bengals do pound Cedric and take control of the line of scrimmage this weekend.

Of course you do. Because everytime the Bengal ship needs righted the first thing the passengers demand is a return to the running game. Then after a week or two they get bored with winning and start begging for more passing.

Enjoy your weekend.

[HairOnFire]

I think the Bengals had to pass the ball against the Browns because the Browns are a much better team. And the reason they're better isn't because they're more talented because they clearly aren't. The Bengals probably waste more talent than Cleveland has on it's roster. But Cleveland's coaching staff proved they understand the importance of the running game, controlling the clock, and being more physical, and history teaches us that the team that does those things best almost always wins. So despite being a winless team Cleveland was obviously better than us. And everyone knows when the other guy is better you've got to throw the ball. What some of us don't seem to realize is when the passing game can't score you've got to adjust by throwing it even more. Besides, I started Carson Palmer on my fantasy team last week, and I'm pretty happy with how things turned out.

It's funny how I agree with much of the above, but still can't agree with the remarkably silly conclusion Hokie makes. But I remind myself that if everyone agreed with each other the world would indeed be a very boring place.

Have a nice weekend, Hokie.

[cincyhokie]

I think the Bengals had to pass the ball against the Browns because the Browns are a much better team. And the reason they're better isn't because they're more talented because they clearly aren't. The Bengals probably waste more talent than Cleveland has on it's roster. But Cleveland's coaching staff proved they understand the importance of the running game, controlling the clock, and being more physical, and history teaches us that the team that does those things best almost always wins. So despite being a winless team Cleveland was obviously better than us. And everyone knows when the other guy is better you've got to throw the ball. What some of us don't seem to realize is when the passing game can't score you've got to adjust by throwing it even more. Besides, I started Carson Palmer on my fantasy team last week, and I'm pretty happy with how things turned out.

It's funny how I agree with much of the above, but still can't agree with the remarkably silly conclusion Hokie makes. But I remind myself that if everyone agreed with each other the world would indeed be a very boring place.

Have a nice weekend, Hokie.

Unless I missed something, I didn't write that. I would never draft Palmer on my fantasy team. Never.

You have a good weekend too, man! Let's get a win tomorrow.