Week 2 2021: Bengals at Bears Game Thread

[HoosierCat]

32 minutes ago, ShulaSteakhouse said:

 

You can enter the game like this to get to your seat

 

Suddenly I feel the need for some AC/DC…

 

[TJJackson]

while I do absolutely love Chase, i have to say that this game once again told the tale I tell anyone who will listen

GIMME A LINEMAN!!!!!!

Burrows is I am told on pace to take the record for most sacks on a qb ever

ever

If I had the power to force a trade right now between the Bengals and the Chargers, I would absolutely trade Chase for Slater straight up

Mind you, I do really love Chase both as a player and as a human being as I say this.....I really do. 

[HoosierCat]

26 minutes ago, TJJackson said:

while I do absolutely love Chase, i have to say that this game once again told the tale I tell anyone who will listen

GIMME A LINEMAN!!!!!!

Burrows is I am told on pace to take the record for most sacks on a qb ever

ever

If I had the power to force a trade right now between the Bengals and the Chargers, I would absolutely trade Chase for Slater straight up

Mind you, I do really love Chase both as a player and as a human being as I say this.....I really do. 

It probably wouldn’t have helped much. The problem was the game plan, which called for a sheet load of empty sets. Those are 100% guaranteed to get  pressure on the QB. Only way it works is if your OL can play perfectly, and even then you’re still going to get pressure. It’s just the numbers. Needless to say the OL is not up to that. Forget talent, just communication problems led to sacks.

The whole point of building a stud WR corps is to let you keep TE and/or RB in to provide extra protection. I don’t understand the game plan today at all.
 

[AMPHAR]

1 hour ago, HoosierCat said:

It probably wouldn’t have helped much. The problem was the game plan, which called for a sheet load of empty sets. Those are 100% guaranteed to get  pressure on the QB. Only way it works is if your OL can play perfectly, and even then you’re still going to get pressure. It’s just the numbers. Needless to say the OL is not up to that. Forget talent, just communication problems led to sacks.

The whole point of building a stud WR corps is to let you keep TE and/or RB in to provide extra protection. I don’t understand the game plan today at all.
 

Burrow is being dumped once in every 6/7 attempts.   They are bottom half in pass attempts and top 3 in sacks allowed.

People can hem and haw over game plan but lack of pass protection is a problem for any team and especially a team that has a QB 2 games into major knee recovery.

He got sacked with ultra conservative game plan vs. Vikings.  I'll have to wait for the game review to recall how he got sacked today.

Either way game plan/play call can't be the first thing you think of today with as poor QB play that probably stems from the fact that they can't protect him.

The botched pick play screams get the ball out.  So does the 2nd Int. 

It was well documented in TC he wasn't that confident early on.  Probably not helping getting sacked every 6th attempt. 

[Stripes]

Looks like the entire division is 1-1.

[membengal]

Not all 1-1s are equal. The Ravens are still in a different universe from us. I can't imagine ZT ever coaching a game like that. Or us having the overall talent to play a game like that. 

[AMPHAR]

Very weird 2nd half for sure; Facts about the offense: 

Bengals 2nd half every drive was producing point or a TO.

1. First Drive - ended in a FG.  Burrow sacked twice.  Hit once out of bounds drew a flag.   Hit late once not called.   Burrow/Higgins failed to connect on deep throw.

2. 2nd Drive - Fumble after 1 play.   Higgins 14 yards with room to run at 50 give it up.

3. 3rd drive - makes into Chicago land at 48.  Burrow hit a 22 yard gain to Boyd previous.   INT PICK 6.

4. 4th drive - 2 plays.  1st pass INT. Not sure what Burrow was doing here but he screwed the pooch twice in a row and if it weren't for a defense the game is over here.

5. 5th drive 1 play.  Int.  Too much pressure again.  

6. 6th drive - 6 plays.  42 yards to Chase TD.   Burrow and Chase failed to hook up earlier in the drive on a deep pass.  Burrow threw out of bounds.

7. 7th drive - 1 play Higgins TD.

 

[HoosierCat]

11 hours ago, AMPHAR said:

Either way game plan/play call can't be the first thing you think of today

Of course it can. It's where everything starts. If players aren't put in a position to succeed, they almost certainly won't. Exactly how putting Burrow in  bunch of empty sets a week after the line couldn't protect him reliably even with RB/TE help is setting him up for success eludes me. But hey, I'm not paid the big bucks like Zac, so what do I know?

[AMPHAR]

22 minutes ago, HoosierCat said:

Of course it can. It's where everything starts. If players aren't put in a position to succeed, they almost certainly won't. Exactly how putting Burrow in  bunch of empty sets a week after the line couldn't protect him reliably even with RB/TE help is setting him up for success eludes me. But hey, I'm not paid the big bucks like Zac, so what do I know?

Dude they scored or turned the ball over on every 2nd half possession.  What magic play call do you want to see exactly? 

[AMPHAR]

23 minutes ago, HoosierCat said:

Of course it can. It's where everything starts. If players aren't put in a position to succeed, they almost certainly won't. Exactly how putting Burrow in  bunch of empty sets a week after the line couldn't protect him reliably even with RB/TE help is setting him up for success eludes me. But hey, I'm not paid the big bucks like Zac, so what do I know?

Higgins had the ball in his hands twice in 2nd half and failed to make the play. 
 

Does that count as being put in the position to succeed? 
 

An empty set pick play in the first half gave Burrow a wide open Boyd.  He threw in the back of the coverage guy. 
 

Seems like a chance for success to me. 

[Stripes]

Some of the empty-set throws were pre-snap reads, suggesting Burrow had decided where to throw the ball before he'd even taken the snap. In a situation like that, Boyd or anyone could theoretically streak wide open and it's irrelevant, because Burrow has already elected to throw to Mixon (i.e. into the back of the defender blanketing Mixon). The same thing happened at least twice with a blanketed Higgins.

Is that Burrow's fault? Probably to some extent. I can't imagine that's happening though without it being a deliberate element of the game plan and the play call.

[ArmyBengal]

Ok, i'm going to give this a shot, but my take is strictly based off of what I watched in the game yesterday.
Like I said before, I'm pretty out of touch with the team at this point, although i've been looking into it more.

I see the arguments about play calling and don't really know what to say about what the coaches did or didn't do in planning.
However, it "appeared" to me that the team didn't not play to it's offensive strength in pushing the ball downfield.
There could be many reasons why, (o-line play, lack of RB blocking, QB audibles, etc) but it seemed conservative.
The whole offense looked boring to me and then top that off, no one playing real well either.
Burrow sucked, Mixon sucked, the o-line sucks, the WR's dropping or fumbling balls, just nothing went right.

I like the look of this defense, but Waynes being out again hurts. There is a reason Apple has moved around.  He blows.
Phillips must equate to suck in the coaches eyes if Apple starts ahead of him. Awuzie and Hilton? Didn't know they were on the team.  Meh...
I love Bell and Bates at the safety positions.  The Bengals not extending Bates is unforgivable at this point. Dude is everywhere game in, game out.
The d-line looks pretty solid or at least better than years past.  I see the Bengals still could care less about linebackers as a position group.

This was a winnable game considering how poor the Bears offense is and they didn't execute well, regardless of how poor the plan may have been.
They won't get many more opportunities this season comparable to the Bears when looking at the schedule.  What maybe a couple more?
You can't lose games like this and in this manner, and still expect to remain in the hunt.

Oh, i'm done with Zac Taylor already.  I don't think he has it in him to be a head coach at this level.  OC? Sure...
If there hasn't been discussion, allow me to open up camp Bieniemy.  That's where i'm placing my "want" flag for 2022.

[AMPHAR]

1 hour ago, Stripes said:

Some of the empty-set throws were pre-snap reads, suggesting Burrow had decided where to throw the ball before he'd even taken the snap. In a situation like that, Boyd or anyone could theoretically streak wide open and it's irrelevant, because Burrow has already elected to throw to Mixon (i.e. into the back of the defender blanketing Mixon). The same thing happened at least twice with a blanketed Higgins.

Is that Burrow's fault? Probably to some extent. I can't imagine that's happening though without it being a deliberate element of the game plan and the play call.

All I know is Boyd was standing by himself wide ass open.   Burrow threw it into the guy's back.

I also know scheme got Higgins wide ass open and after securing the catch he gave up an opportunity to gain a bunch more via a fumble. 

Boyd got some open looks and capitalized.   

They scored on every drive in the 2nd half in which they didn't turn the ball over.

Its weird how a bad game plan or bad play calling can be so extreme.  

4th and 1 play.  Ref decided to keep his flag in his pocket.  Higgins ran a route that got the DB in a bad situation and the ref bailed the DB out.

The overall point is the extreme nature of the results is at odds of the theory that play calling or game plan is bad.   If that's the case then they wouldn't have these opportunities for success at all.   The difference is making the play.   There were a few plays left on the field in a 3 point loss.

 

 

[HoosierCat]

2 hours ago, AMPHAR said:

They scored on every drive in the 2nd half in which they didn't turn the ball over.

Its weird how a bad game plan or bad play calling can be so extreme.  

The thing is, it wasn't actually that extreme. "They scored on every drive in the 2nd half in which they didn't turn the ball over" is highly misleading. First, it ignores that there was a whole 30 minutes of football before that in which a lethargic, vanilla Bengals offense struggled mightily (and failed all three times it had the ball) to score, or even move the ball very far. Then there was the entire third quarter, half of which consisted of a single (again, lethargic, vanilla) Bengals drive of 42 yards in 11 plays that ended in a FG (and even that was arguably due to a Chicago roughing call, absent which the drive would have ended with a punt after gaining 7 yards).

Except for 1 play on which Higgins promptly fumbles, the Bengals wouldn't get the ball back until early in the fourth. At this point they're only down 10-3, so they stay with the lethargic, vanilla offense. Four Mixon runs and one completed Burrow pass later, Joe tosses the pick 6. At that point, with a little under 11 minutes left in the game, the game plan goes into the trash bin and Burrow starts throwing. The remaining plays consist of 10 passes and just two carries by Mixon (versus 20 passes and 18 runs in the prior 49 minutes of the game).

You want to blame the loss on Burrow or the line or Higgins, be my guest. But imo it all starts with a dead-end game plan that had resulted in 3 points through three quarters of the game, and once chucked saw the team score 14 points in the last six and a half minutes.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

Brutal o-line grades.  I can't even believe we're looking at this again already.  If I'm Burrow I'm doing a Palmer with the old fart if he doesn't find some guys to protect him this off-season.  Enough is enough with this nonsene after 4-5 years.  Jesus.

 

Quote

• Jonah Williams: 45.2

• Quinton Spain: 48.5

• Trey Hopkins: 64.8

• Xavier Sua-Filo: 41.7

• Riley Reiff: 58.4

 

[AMPHAR]

1 hour ago, HoosierCat said:

The thing is, it wasn't actually that extreme. "They scored on every drive in the 2nd half in which they didn't turn the ball over" is highly misleading. First, it ignores that there was a whole 30 minutes of football before that in which a lethargic, vanilla Bengals offense struggled mightily (and failed all three times it had the ball) to score, or even move the ball very far. Then there was the entire third quarter, half of which consisted of a single (again, lethargic, vanilla) Bengals drive of 42 yards in 11 plays that ended in a FG (and even that was arguably due to a Chicago roughing call, absent which the drive would have ended with a punt after gaining 7 yards).

Except for 1 play on which Higgins promptly fumbles, the Bengals wouldn't get the ball back until early in the fourth. At this point they're only down 10-3, so they stay with the lethargic, vanilla offense. Four Mixon runs and one completed Burrow pass later, Joe tosses the pick 6. At that point, with a little under 11 minutes left in the game, the game plan goes into the trash bin and Burrow starts throwing. The remaining plays consist of 10 passes and just two carries by Mixon (versus 20 passes and 18 runs in the prior 49 minutes of the game).

You want to blame the loss on Burrow or the line or Higgins, be my guest. But imo it all starts with a dead-end game plan that had resulted in 3 points through three quarters of the game, and once chucked saw the team score 14 points in the last six and a half minutes.

They only scored 3 points in the 3rd quarter because Higgins dropped a deep pass and Burrow was sacked twice.  One of which was WR error not running a screen.  I believe that was the K. Mack sack.

Then Higgins fumbled at mid field.

Those were critical errors because the Bengals were bogged down in the first half with poor filed position (Drive starts 9, 32, 7 and 8)  The 2nd half they got better starting drive spots and then promptly squandered it away.

Finally trailing 3-10.  Burrow completed a chunk play of 22 yards.  Moved it out to mid field once again and then threw a pick 6.

I could be mistaken but you can't continue to run plays IF the other team takes the ball away from you, right?   Kinda hard to determine its vanilla offense WHEN the QB throws a PICK 6. 

These are the most critical errors when the game was in reach.   If you are searching for the reasons they lost these can't be ignored. 

[volcom69]

1 hour ago, ShulaSteakhouse said:

Brutal o-line grades.  I can't even believe we're looking at this again already.  If I'm Burrow I'm doing a Palmer with the old fart if he doesn't find some guys to protect him this off-season.  Enough is enough with this nonsene after 4-5 years.  Jesus.

 

 

Maybe they can look for a real coach while there looking for a o-line??? Maybe an actual GM or somebody who knows how to build a football team? I mean they have only been looking for a good o-line since 2005, and still have yet to find one. 

[HoosierCat]

43 minutes ago, AMPHAR said:

They only scored 3 points in the 3rd quarter because Higgins dropped a deep pass and Burrow was sacked twice.  One of which was WR error not running a screen.  I believe that was the K. Mack sack.

Then Higgins fumbled at mid field.

Those were critical errors because the Bengals were bogged down in the first half with poor filed position (Drive starts 9, 32, 7 and 8)  The 2nd half they got better starting drive spots and then promptly squandered it away.

Finally trailing 3-10.  Burrow completed a chunk play of 22 yards.  Moved it out to mid field once again and then threw a pick 6.

I could be mistaken but you can't continue to run plays IF the other team takes the ball away from you, right?   Kinda hard to determine its vanilla offense WHEN the QB throws a PICK 6. 

These are the most critical errors when the game was in reach.   If you are searching for the reasons they lost these can't be ignored. 

A couple points here. One, it’s not just 3 points in the third quarter, it’s 3 points in the first three quarters. Of course there were mistakes, but you don’t manage that level of bad unless your basic approach is flawed. Which it was.

Second, yup, it was vanilla before the pick six. That was on the sixth play of the drive. The first five were Mixon run on first, Mixon run on second, Burrow pass on third, Mixon run on first, Mixon run on second, Burrow pass on third (intercepted). Same thing we had seen all game, still stubbornly going in the fourth quarter. After that they finally let Joe cook, unfortunately he was good and bad in equal measure and in the end there wasn’t enough time because they spent 75%+ of the game pretending to be the 1998 squad.

[HoosierCat]

It’s probably worth dropping this in here from Hobs as it points to some of the game planning issues.

https://www.bengals.com/news/burrow-and-his-offense-file-away-lessons-from-soldier-field

in particular there’s this:

Quote

In order to counter that, [the Bears’ pass rush] Taylor switched up things from last week. A week after he put Burrow under center 53 percent of the time against the Vikings, he put him in the shotgun 74 percent of the time with the emphasis on the spread look and empty backfield.

"We wanted to get the ball out quick in empty. They got a great front, one of the better fronts you'll see in this game. They've done a great job there. We thought we had some good matchups elsewhere," Taylor said.

So the game plan wasn't geared for the Bengals to go deep all that often. Burrow completed only two balls longer than 20 yards and he was 17 of 30 with his receivers having trouble getting away from the coverage on the quick throws as the Bears got their hands on eight passes.

I leave it up to the reader to decide if we drafted Burrow, Chase, Higgins and Boyd to run a short passing, ball control offense. Ok, all snark aside, there are also comments from both Burrow and Chase suggesting they weren’t happy with this and thought there were opportunities to go deep early in the game but that wasn’t the plan. And if you want to counter that they had their own bad plays in the game and ought to stfu, that’s fair. But this is the way rifts get started between coaches and players. 

[Wraith]

So I researched that football game to try and figure out what happened particularly in the 3rd qtr.  Here is what I came up with.

The Bears base defense was a 4-3 with a two deep safety, a very risky alignment.  Basically you are saying we trust our front 4 can get pressure on the passer without alot of blitzing and our LBers are good enough to fill in the gaps and to keep the edges because you are getting no safety help.  It frustrated Burrow because it took away the middle to deep middle and the later it got in the game the more frustrated Burrow which boiled over in the late 3rd.

 

[AMPHAR]

2 hours ago, HoosierCat said:

A couple points here. One, it’s not just 3 points in the third quarter, it’s 3 points in the first three quarters. Of course there were mistakes, but you don’t manage that level of bad unless your basic approach is flawed. Which it was.

Second, yup, it was vanilla before the pick six. That was on the sixth play of the drive. The first five were Mixon run on first, Mixon run on second, Burrow pass on third, Mixon run on first, Mixon run on second, Burrow pass on third (intercepted). Same thing we had seen all game, still stubbornly going in the fourth quarter. After that they finally let Joe cook, unfortunately he was good and bad in equal measure and in the end there wasn’t enough time because they spent 75%+ of the game pretending to be the 1998 squad.

What do you think winning percentage in the NFL is being negative 3 in TO margin? 
 

 

[AMPHAR]

1 hour ago, Wraith said:

So I researched that football game to try and figure out what happened particularly in the 3rd qtr.  Here is what I came up with.

The Bears base defense was a 4-3 with a two deep safety, a very risky alignment.  Basically you are saying we trust our front 4 can get pressure on the passer without alot of blitzing and our LBers are good enough to fill in the gaps and to keep the edges because you are getting no safety help.  It frustrated Burrow because it took away the middle to deep middle and the later it got in the game the more frustrated Burrow which boiled over in the late 3rd.

 

I believe the broadcast had a screen shot of this and referred to umbrella coverage. 

[AMPHAR]

2 hours ago, HoosierCat said:

It’s probably worth dropping this in here from Hobs as it points to some of the game planning issues.

https://www.bengals.com/news/burrow-and-his-offense-file-away-lessons-from-soldier-field

in particular there’s this:

I leave it up to the reader to decide if we drafted Burrow, Chase, Higgins and Boyd to run a short passing, ball control offense. Ok, all snark aside, there are also comments from both Burrow and Chase suggesting they weren’t happy with this and thought there were opportunities to go deep early in the game but that wasn’t the plan. And if you want to counter that they had their own bad plays in the game and ought to stfu, that’s fair. But this is the way rifts get started between coaches and players. 

When turning the ball over 4 times or more, teams combined to go 0-28; over the past three seasons combined, teams with 4 turnovers or more are 6-90 (.063).

From a 2017 study. 
 

Someone needs to tell NFL coaches they need to throw the ball deep in order reverse this trend, lol. 
 

 

[AMPHAR]

Over the past five regular seasons, teams that have won the turnover battle have won their games 76.8 percent of the time and covered the spread 76 percent. 

[AMPHAR]

This past year, teams that won the turnover battle posted an incredible 166-40 (.806) record – the third out of the past four years that the league-wide winning percentage was above .800 for teams that turned the ball over fewer times than their opponents.
A fumble recovery or an interception by the defense does not just represent an extra possession for your ballclub; it is one less opportunity your opponent has to score.
“To win in the NFL is very simple,” says Baltimore Ravens linebacker RAY LEWIS, who has caused his fair share of turnovers. “If you don’t turn the ball over, you win.”
There is no statistic to explain the shift in momentum after a turnover. It’s huge. If a team squanders opportunity after opportunity – especially down towards the red zone – it can eat away at the confidence of the offense and demoralize the defense, which is left with the responsibility of trying to stop an invigorated opponent.
“Turnover differential is the number one factor in winning games,” says former Cowboys and Dolphins head coach JIMMY JOHNSON.
Though coaches at every level stress the importance of turnovers on a daily basis, it’s just too important not to emphasize. “You have to work on it and talk about it and sell it and players have to get it done,” says Kansas City Chiefs head coach DICK
  VERMEIL. “But it’s a difference maker in this league.”
Records of teams that won the turnover battle in the past 10 seasons:
 YEAR W
1994 134
1995 150
1996 153
1997 149
1998 150
L T
42  0
40  0
40  0
40  2
44  0
WIN PCT. YEAR
.761 1999 .789 2000 .793 2001 .785 2002 .773 2003
W L
157 46 171 41 142 56 174 38 166 40
T WIN PCT.
0 .773 0 .807
0 .717
1 .819
0 .806 3 .784