PDA

View Full Version : Mike Zimmer hired by Bengals



Matt700wlw
01-15-2008, 05:32 PM
Officially now


BENGALS HIRE MIKE ZIMMER

AS DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR



The Bengals today filled the team’s defensive coordinator position with the hiring of Mike Zimmer, who has been an NFL coordinator for the past eight seasons.

Zimmer was Dallas Cowboys defensive coordinator from 2000-06, including four years (2003-06) under head coach Bill Parcells. Zimmer moved to the Atlanta Falcons as coordinator in 2007. With the departure of Bobby Petrino as Falcons head coach, members of his staff were freed to pursue other opportunities.

“Mike has coordinated defenses at a high level in the NFL for a number of years,” said Bengals head coach Marvin Lewis, “and this is obviously a very important hire for me and for our organization. I’m excited about utilizing Mike’s ability to develop our young players and our defensive scheme.”

Zimmer, 51, is in his 15th season as an NFL coach in 2008. He joined the NFL with Dallas in 1994, and after six seasons working primarily as secondary coach, he was elevated to coordinator. He coached 15 years in the college ranks before joining the Cowboys, working at Missouri, Weber State and Washington State.

In Zimmer’s 13 years with Dallas, the Cowboys defense earned seven top 10 rankings in fewest yards allowed, and the team advanced to the postseason seven times. His 2003 defense led the NFL at 253.5 yards allowed per game as the team posted a 10-6 record. He earned a Super Bowl ring as an assistant with the 1995 Cowboys team that defeated Pittsburgh in Super Bowl XXX.

Zimmer was instrumental in the development of a number of defensive stars at Dallas, including S Roy Williams, CB Terence Newman and LB DeMarcus Ware. Williams has been named to his fifth Pro Bowl this season, while Newman and Ware are each in the Pro Bowl a second time.

guttle11
01-15-2008, 05:35 PM
3-4 guy?

Heath
01-15-2008, 05:45 PM
“Mike has coordinated defenses at a high level in the NFL for a number of years, and this is obviously a very important hire for me and for our organization. I’m excited about utilizing Mike’s ability to develop our young players and our defensive scheme.”



Looks like status-quo with the 3-4.

Wonder if much changes?

Bip Roberts
01-15-2008, 05:47 PM
I like it. Possible switch to the 3-4 should be interesting to follow even though they wont do it.

Better than hoping for a free agent and being let down again for once

Newport Red
01-15-2008, 09:18 PM
Print | Close Window

Last Updated: 8:43 pm | Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Bengals hire Zimmer
Former Falcons coordinator replaces Bresnahan
BY MARK CURNUTTE | MCURNUTTE@ENQUIRER.COM
The Bengals today have hired Mike Zimmer as their third defensive coordinator since Marvin Lewis was brought in as head coach in January 2003.

Zimmer replaces Chuck Bresnahan, who was fired Jan. 2 after three seasons as coordinator.

“Mike has coordinated defenses at a high level in the NFL for a number of years,” Lewis said in a statement released by the team.

“This is obviously a very important hire for me and for our organization. I’m excited about utilizing Mike’s ability to develop our young players and our defensive scheme.”

Zimmer declined all interview requests Tuesday night. He is scheduled to have a news conference at 11 a.m. at Paul Brown Stadium.

Zimmer has eight seasons of NFL experience as a defensive coordinator. He coordinated the Atlanta Falcons defense in 2007 under former head coach Bobby Petrino, who had resigned late in the season to become the head coach at Arkansas. He had left Dallas following the resignation of former Cowboys head coach Bill Parcells after the 2006 season. Zimmer, Dallas’ defensive coordinator since 2000, was retained as coordinator by Parcells.

With the Bengals, Zimmer, 51, will be expected to elevate the performance of a defense that is widely regarded as the reason Cincinnati has reached the playoffs just once in five seasons under Lewis.

In the past five seasons, starting with 2007, the Bengals defense has ranked 27th, 30th, 28th, 19th and 28th in total yards allowed per game in the 32-team NFL. Leslie Frazier was fired as defensive coordinator following the 2004 season, when the defense’s 19th rank would last as the best in five seasons under Lewis.

Lewis came to national prominence as coordinator of the dominant Baltimore Ravens Super Bowl-winning defense in 2000.

Zimmer was credited as coordinator in Dallas for moving its defense from a three-linebacker to four-linebacker scheme, a possibility this offseason with the Bengals. Still, Zimmer is said to prefer the 4-3 defensive setup.

Zimmer and Bengals offensive coordinator Bob Bratkowski were both on the Weber State staff from 1981-85.

During his time in Dallas, Zimmer established himself as one of the NFL's top defensive minds with a fundamentally sound and aggressive scheme. After joining the staff in 1994 as secondary coach, he was promoted to coordinator in 2000. Through the tumultuous Falcons 2007 season – starting with the NFL suspension of quarterback Michael Vick and crashing with Petrino’s resignation – Zimmer’s defense played hard and somewhat productively. Still, at the end of the season, the Falcons’ defensive rankings were comparably as poor as Cincinnati’s. Atlanta was ranked both 29th in points (25.9) and yards (355.5) allowed per game; the Bengals were 24th in points allowed (24.1) and 27th in yards (348.8).

The Bengals defense appears to be primed for an offseason makeover. Four starters can be unrestricted free agents beginning Feb. 29 – linebackers Landon Johnson and Dhani Jones, end Justin Smith and safety Madieu Williams. The Bengals are trying to re-sign all four players.

The Bengals also should regain the services of several linebackers injured in 2007, primarily Ahmad Brooks and Eric Henderson. The personnel could be there to make the switch to a four-linebacker scheme.

Zimmer was chosen ahead of several other candidates, mainly current Bengals defensive backs coach Kevin Coyle and consultant Donnie Henderson.

The Bengals were denied permission to interview Carolina Panthers defensive backs coach Tim Lewis. Former Baltimore Ravens defensive coordinator Rex Ryan was interviewed for head-coaching positions with the Ravens, Dolphins and Falcons.

Though dismissed by the Ravens Dec. 31 as part of a gutting of their staff, including former head coach Brian Billick, Ryan remained under the team’s thumb because he has one year remaining on his contract. The Ravens were not going to let Ryan leave to join the staff of an AFC North division rival.
Print | Close Window | Copyright 2008, Enquirer.com

LoganBuck
01-15-2008, 09:35 PM
Can he play Defensive Tackle?

GoReds33
01-15-2008, 09:37 PM
Great. So instead of starting with the great coaches and working down, it looks like we started in the middle. Here's to another season of mediocrity.:beerme:

Boss-Hog
01-15-2008, 09:50 PM
I don't have any problems with this hire - Rex Ryan is likely to be Atlanta's next head coach and even if he doesn't, it was highly unlikely Baltimore would let him go to a division rival, as the article states. Though it's completely unsurprising to me, what I do have a problem with is this:


The Bengals defense appears to be primed for an offseason makeover. Four starters can be unrestricted free agents beginning Feb. 29 – linebackers Landon Johnson and Dhani Jones, end Justin Smith and safety Madieu Williams. The Bengals are trying to re-sign all four players.

Mario-Rijo
01-15-2008, 09:55 PM
3-4 guy?

4-3 guy, alledgedly he was pretty much forced to switch to the 3-4 by Parcells. My guess is he stays with the 4-3, but look for fast LB's to be necc.

Cedric
01-15-2008, 09:58 PM
Doesn't matter one bit until the Bengals learn how to evaluate talent and how to build a team. We have watched the Patriots dominate the NFL for almost 8 years now and it's all built on such a simple premise. Protect the Qb at all costs and destroy the opposing Qb at all costs. I think Artrell Hawkins starting last year is about as perfect an example as you can get. Draft and develop the Defensive line and you will win in this league.

Cyclone792
01-15-2008, 10:02 PM
Doesn't matter one bit until the Bengals learn how to evaluate talent and how to build a team. We have watched the Patriots dominate the NFL for almost 8 years now and it's all built on such a simple premise. Protect the Qb at all costs and destroy the opposing Qb at all costs. I think Artrell Hawkins starting last year is about as perfect an example as you can get. Draft and develop the Defensive line and you will win in this league.

I'm with you 100 percent on all the above.

After all the football I've watched, I'm convinced that by far the most important part of the game is controlling the line of scrimmage, protecting your quarterback, and getting to the opponent's quarterback. Build a team with a solid offensive and defensive line, and you'll give yourself a helluva chance. Lack one or both, and you'll give yourself an awful chance.

Mario-Rijo
01-15-2008, 10:04 PM
I don't have any problems with this hire - Rex Ryan is likely to be Atlanta's next head coach and even if he doesn't, it was highly unlikely Baltimore would let him go to a division rival, as the article states. Though it's completely unsurprising to me, what I do have a problem with is this:


The Bengals defense appears to be primed for an offseason makeover. Four starters can be unrestricted free agents beginning Feb. 29 linebackers Landon Johnson and Dhani Jones, end Justin Smith and safety Madieu Williams. The Bengals are trying to re-sign all four players.

What part of it, the bolded? I'd like to keep all of them for the right money and roles but I wouldn't wanna pay what Justin and Landon probably want and Dhani and Madieu I can live with or without.

I'd probably re-sign Landon, tag Justin (to see if I could deal him for draftpicks/players/move up in the draft) and draft McFadden if I could get up that far if not stay put and draft Gholston/Ellis. The other 2 I would offer what's deemed fair depending on their roles. I really could care less about Jones coming back, Madieu I still like but not close to how I once did he may need a change of scenery.

Mario-Rijo
01-15-2008, 10:07 PM
I'm with you 100 percent on all the above.

After all the football I've watched, I'm convinced that by far the most important part of the game is controlling the line of scrimmage, protecting your quarterback, and getting to the opponent's quarterback. Build a team with a solid offensive and defensive line, and you'll give yourself a helluva chance. Lack one or both, and you'll give yourself an awful chance.


Oh that's the golden rule!!! And I'll take it one step further. Build your team from front (line of scrimmage) to back on both sides of the ball and from inside (C/DT) out.

CrackerJack
01-15-2008, 10:24 PM
Oh that's the golden rule!!! And I'll take it one step further. Build your team from front (line of scrimmage) to back on both sides of the ball and from inside (C/DT) out.

The Bengals' operate exactly the opposite of that - by paying/signing "skill" position players exclusively, outside of OT's and at times, DE's.

Signing Smith or even tagging him again (if they can) is stupid. They finished 28th in yards allowed last year, and are at the bottom ever year Smith's been here. That defense needs a make-over, keeping Smith would be taking a step backward. Move on already. Use that dough and go get a LB or DT.

You have Geathers signed to big bucks, Fanene, Rucker and hopefully Henderson - in addition to whomever else they get, who can provide a pass rush.

cincrazy
01-15-2008, 10:46 PM
The Bengals made running in place an art form

Bip Roberts
01-15-2008, 11:35 PM
They need a free agent LB more than anything given the market and the fact that i think they draft ellis from USC

Yachtzee
01-15-2008, 11:35 PM
I will reserve my judgment on Zimmer until I see the play on the field. Past accolades mean nothing when it comes to Bengals football.

I wouldn't mind resigning Dhani Jones if he's cheap, just because he provides some special teams depth and can do a good job filling in at LB. I really hope they save the money they pay Justin Smith and use it to sign a free agent who can make a better impact on this defense. Likewise I'm just not sold on Landon Johnson, but I'd be willing to keep him around if he's not too expensive. Williams is an underperformer, but is still young and could improve under the new defensive regime, so I would consider resigning him if he's not too expensive. That being said, I'd rather the Bengals go out and pay a proven performer to bolster the defense instead of overpaying the guys they have to keep them in the fold.

The classic excuse for resigning your own guys is that they know the system. With a new coordinator coming in, now might be a good time to cut bait on some of these guys and bring in some new blood.

Bip Roberts
01-15-2008, 11:38 PM
I think they need to keep Johnson and Williams but im betting both would rather gtfo

Williams is going to be a guy that goes to another team and blossoms into a very good player. Patriots will probably make a run at him

WMR
01-15-2008, 11:49 PM
Justin Smith should not be on this roster next season under any circumstances whatsoever, especially taking into account the contract that he will demand.

Bip Roberts
01-15-2008, 11:56 PM
Smith isnt as bad as people make him out to be but he for sure isnt worth the money hes going to get.

WMR
01-16-2008, 12:04 AM
Not sure what the cap hit would be, but no way is Geathers worth the money they are paying him.

75-80% of this roster should be jettisoned, as far as I'm concerned.

Mario-Rijo
01-16-2008, 12:12 AM
The Bengals' operate exactly the opposite of that - by paying/signing "skill" position players exclusively, outside of OT's and at times, DE's.

Signing Smith or even tagging him again (if they can) is stupid. They finished 28th in yards allowed last year, and are at the bottom ever year Smith's been here. That defense needs a make-over, keeping Smith would be taking a step backward. Move on already. Use that dough and go get a LB or DT.

You have Geathers signed to big bucks, Fanene, Rucker and hopefully Henderson - in addition to whomever else they get, who can provide a pass rush.

Yeah they do operate the opposite way because of there apparent strengths QB,WR,OT suggests you should be a throwing dominant offense. So their philosphy seems to be throw the ball and stop the pass, which is ok as well if you can execute.

The problem is when you are running an offense predicated on the idea of going downfield you must have a RB to complement it. Rudi and the offensive line (more specifically Ghiaciuc) didn't make defenses pay for playing 7 in the box and their secondaries playing back to prevent the big pass play. Which is why the offense looked better with Watson who could get beyond that front seven quick and exploit the areas vacated by the secondary. If Chris Henry had been playing from the start on we would have been playing in the postseason IMO. If this offense has all their pieces playing and add in a complete RB, you have an unstoppable offense. And one in which Carson isn't always pressured into making throws into coverage.

Defense sadly is a whole 'nother ball game! But the type of offense we run will always make the defense a tad more vulnerable due to it's nature of feast or famine. A big play/3 and out offense will keep the defense on the field more than it should. That's why I like a more balanced offense like the Aikman/Emmitt/Irvin Cowboys teams who could play it anyway they wanted to depending on the circumstances, but played it balanced mostly. Thoses defense were also balanced and quite good. Both offense and defense though had good lineplay, and neither side was rarely "tired".

Also look at the Patriots of today and the 9ers's of the '80's. Good line play is the staple of all great teams. And BTW both were actually pretty balanced offenses save for perhaps the '07/'08 Pats.


On Justin Smith I would let him go ultimately, but you can tag him again & you can remove the tag if need be. I would tag him in hopes I could get a team to trade for him. He's a very good player but with re-signing Geathers it makes me feel we cannot afford to re-sign him. He's a great complementary DE to a superb pass rusher type but unfortunately I don't know if Geathers isn't pretty much the same thing except in a different way. But I wouldn't be heart-broken if he came back (depending of course on the contract) if it meant it allowed us to draft an impact DT type like Sedrick Ellis. If we don't re-sign him it may mean we would have to draft Gholston or someone like him just to fill a position.

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 12:14 AM
Not sure what the cap hit would be, but no way is Geathers worth the money they are paying him.

75-80% of this roster should be jettisoned, as far as I'm concerned.

Gaethers is the best defensive player on the team and sadly its not even close. He was just out of position for most of the year because of the injured line backer core

Ellis seems like what most mock drafts has us grabbing him, i wouldnt mind it but he is small for NFL DT imo but once again size isnt the only thing to consider.

Cedric
01-16-2008, 12:20 AM
Gaethers is the best defensive player on the team and sadly its not even close. He was just out of position for most of the year because of the injured line backer core

Best player on the Bengals defense? Quite an honor!

Geathers was over hyped from day one. He's a one trick pony that takes way too many plays off. The Bengals don't have one player on their Dline that should be expected to start in the NFL. The lack of a playmaker in the Bengals front 4 is just pathetic. It's sad that the best thing an announcer can say about a 8 million dollar DE is that he is a "grinder".

That's the Bengals in a nutshell. Quit over paying and actually get a dominant DT/DE. I'm utterly amazed that this team continues to waste high draft picks on any position other than DL. You could have four Deion Sanders and it wouldn't make a difference with the lack of play makers on the front four. It's been over 15 years that the Bengals have had a truly good Dline. It's not surprising that they have continued to be the worst franchise in sports. It's like asking a baseball team to win with the worst pitching staff year to year. Oh god why did I have to be born in Cincy?

I can almost predict what the Bengals will do with certain players before they do it. And most often it's the exact opposite thing they should do. Geathers gets a huge contract based on garbage sacks.

Mario-Rijo
01-16-2008, 12:21 AM
Gaethers is the best defensive player on the team and sadly its not even close. He was just out of position for most of the year because of the injured line backer core

Ellis seems like what most mock drafts has us grabbing him, i wouldnt mind it but he is small for NFL DT imo but once again size isnt the only thing to consider.

Right, on the former!

On the latter....I agree as well, Ellis (at least currently) looks like a good fit even though I haven't really started to break it all down. His size/speed etc doesn't really matter if he has the ability to command double teams which inside usually means strength/quickness. I'll be interested in seeing what the #'s look like after the combine or his "pro day".

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 12:22 AM
How can you question a guys motivation and lack of heart when he moved positions to help the team with apparently no questions asked?

Mario-Rijo
01-16-2008, 12:23 AM
Best player on the Bengals defense? Quite an honor!

Geathers was over hyped from day one. He's a one trick pony that takes way too many plays off. The Bengals don't have one player on their Dline that should be expected to start in the NFL. The lack of a playmaker in the Bengals front 4 is just pathetic. It's sad that the best thing an announcer can say about a 8 million dollar DE is that he is a "grinder".

That's the Bengals in a nutshell. Quit over paying and actually get a dominant DT/DE. I'm utterly amazed that this team continues to waste high draft picks on any position other than DL. You could have four Deion Sanders and it wouldn't make a difference with the lack of play makers on the front four. It's been over 15 years that the Bengals have had a truly good Dline. It's not surprising that they have continued to be the worst franchise in sports. It's like asking a baseball team to win with the worst pitching staff year to year. Oh god why did I have to be born in Cincy?

I know you are serious but it's so sickening it made me laugh!!

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 12:24 AM
Right, on the former!

On the latter....I agree as well, Ellis (at least currently) looks like a good fit even though I haven't really started to break it all down. His size/speed etc doesn't really matter if he has the ability to command double teams which inside usually means strength/quickness. I'll be interested in seeing what the #'s look like after the combine or his "pro day".

Yea i dont think the size will be so much of a problem if his athleticism makes up for it. There is a balance you need no doubt though.

Mario-Rijo
01-16-2008, 12:26 AM
Yea i dont think the size will be so much of a problem if his athleticism makes up for it. There is a balance you need no doubt though.

Certainly the more the merrier!

Cedric
01-16-2008, 12:27 AM
How can you question a guys motivation and lack of heart when he moved positions to help the team with apparently no questions asked?

What is he supposed to do? This is the NFL. No guaranteed contracts and surely someone like Geathers doesn't have enough years/respect to say anything.

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 12:31 AM
What is he supposed to do? This is the NFL. No guaranteed contracts and surely someone like Geathers doesn't have enough years/respect to say anything.


I refuse to think they would ask a guy with no motivation and a guy who quits on plays and takes plays off to switch positions to fill a large void. It should be noted that the coaching staff thought he was good enough to make the move to begin with.

Cedric
01-16-2008, 12:37 AM
I refuse to think they would ask a guy with no motivation and a guy who quits on plays and takes plays off to switch positions to fill a large void. It should be noted that the coaching staff thought he was good enough to make the move to begin with.

Again you are talking about one of the worst coaching staffs in the NFL. Frankly I don't care about him taking plays off, he is still vastly over payed. He doesn't command any double teams or respect from opposing coordinators. I've never seen a player get mentioned less than him and make the money he makes. He got paid based on the Bengals FO and their idiocy. They love counting stats such as sacks and they don't have the vision/brains to see past glamour numbers. Geathers notched more than half his sacks that year against teams with terrible offenses/qb's and when the other team was throwing almost every down.

Does Robert Geathers change another teams game plan? Does Robert Geathers put fear into any team? Does Robert Geathers do anything that makes him irreplaceable? I say no to all and that's why he should be looked at as rotation filler only. Sadly the Bengals see Justin and Geathers as somehow a productive DE tandem. Laughable.

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 12:44 AM
He might be over payed but then again maybe he isnt. He didnt even get to play this year in his natural position. Talk to me in a season. Lets not fault him for being a team player and not crying about the position switch.

Let me ask you this, does anyone on the D put fear into any team? Maybe its the problem. Gaethers is fine but the talent level on the D has been poor for years and for him to even manage double digit sacks in a season playing with the talent on that side of the ball is a major accomplishment.

Cedric
01-16-2008, 12:48 AM
He might be over payed but then again maybe he isnt. He didnt even get to play this year in his natural position. Talk to me in a season. Lets not fault him for being a team player and not crying about the position switch.

Let me ask you this, does anyone on the D put fear into any team? Maybe its the problem. Gaethers is fine but the talent level on the D has been poor for years and for him to even manage double digit sacks in a season playing with the talent on that side of the ball is a major accomplishment.

I'm not faulting him. It's not his fault the Bengals overpaid for his services based on counting stats that were skewed by easily identifiable factors.

WMR
01-16-2008, 12:48 AM
Again you are talking about one of the worst coaching staffs in the NFL. Frankly I don't care about him taking plays off, he is still vastly over payed. He doesn't command any double teams or respect from opposing coordinators. I've never seen a player get mentioned less than him and make the money he makes. He got paid based on the Bengals FO and their idiocy. They love counting stats such as sacks and they don't have the vision/brains to see past glamour numbers. Geathers notched more than half his sacks that year against teams with terrible offenses/qb's and when the other team was throwing almost every down.

Does Robert Geathers change another teams game plan? Does Robert Geathers put fear into any team? Does Robert Geathers do anything that makes him irreplaceable? I say no to all and that's why he should be looked at as rotation filler only. Sadly the Bengals see Justin and Geathers as somehow a productive DE tandem. Laughable.

He's getting PAID like a player that does all those things you mention.

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 12:49 AM
I'm not faulting him. It's not his fault the Bengals overpaid for his services based on counting stats that were skewed by easily identifiable factors.

So no matter what the argument you are going to spin it? Glad i know this now so we can just let the thread die.

Cedric
01-16-2008, 01:08 AM
So no matter what the argument you are going to spin it? Glad i know this now so we can just let the thread die.

Spin what? The guy is overpaid and was evaluated as such by the Bengals. I've said the same damn thing since my first post.

The Bengals are terrible at every part of evaluating talent and building a TEAM. Robert Geathers is just a piece of the completely misaligned puzzle. It's not like that's news. Mike Brown and his family have no idea what they are doing.

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 01:17 AM
Gaethers isnt even overpaid

Cedric
01-16-2008, 01:25 AM
I consider 14 million with bonuses as over paid for his production. But I've derailed this thread enough. Let's just disagree on the great Robert Geathers.

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 01:27 AM
If you look at the DE salaries http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/playersbyposition.aspx?pos=124 id consider him being paid quite fairly.

Cedric
01-16-2008, 01:50 AM
The guy cashed 14 million dollars last year. He got paid around 4.5 million for each sack this year. That's reasonable I guess.

He isn't a play maker. His sacks were almost always coverage sacks or dependent on bad Qb/Oline play and game situation. He had 6 sacks in games against Oakland (most sacks allowed in NFL history 2006), Kansas City (Opening day and 7 sacks total against a team breaking in BOTH tackles), and Pittsburgh (2 sacks against Big Ben in which on both plays he held onto the ball way too long and was recovering from bad wreck.)

I remember each game and each sack from Robert Geathers. It isn't surprising to me that Mike Brown/Marvin Lewis failed to look deeper into the situation. It's also not surprising that the average NFL fan looked at 10.5 sacks and automatically considered Robert Geathers a great player worthy of 32 million on any contract. It's the same reason that teams in other sports over pay for players like Juan Pierre and Gary Mathews. Management in professional sports is still ran from a stone age perspective ,IMO. I don't remember ever watching the Bengals in an obvious passing down and thinking they will get pressure with their front four. They never do and that's the main objective for a DE. It's the main reason this team is always so pathetic on that side of the ball.

sonny
01-16-2008, 01:54 AM
I vote for Cedric to be the GM of the Cincinnati Bengals.

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 02:07 AM
I wish i wasnt such an average fan

Yachtzee
01-16-2008, 09:11 AM
Ellis seems like what most mock drafts has us grabbing him, i wouldnt mind it but he is small for NFL DT imo but once again size isnt the only thing to consider.

If Ellis is the person most mock drafts have the Bengals taking, it only means that he is likely the one the Bengals won't take. Especially since he isn't an RB or DB.

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 11:06 AM
If Ellis is the person most mock drafts have the Bengals taking, it only means that he is likely the one the Bengals won't take. Especially since he isn't an RB or DB.

:bowrofl: excellent point, to be fair though after like the top 10 picks its almost impossible to really predict anything remotely close

Boss-Hog
01-16-2008, 12:00 PM
Yes, the bolded part. Aside from Jones (who I'd only be interested in resigning if he was affordable), I don't understand the sense of urgency to resign any players who have made up the core of the same bottom five defense we've had since they've been here.


What part of it, the bolded? I'd like to keep all of them for the right money and roles but I wouldn't wanna pay what Justin and Landon probably want and Dhani and Madieu I can live with or without.

I'd probably re-sign Landon, tag Justin (to see if I could deal him for draftpicks/players/move up in the draft) and draft McFadden if I could get up that far if not stay put and draft Gholston/Ellis. The other 2 I would offer what's deemed fair depending on their roles. I really could care less about Jones coming back, Madieu I still like but not close to how I once did he may need a change of scenery.

CrackerJack
01-16-2008, 12:29 PM
Yes, the bolded part. Aside from Jones (who I'd only be interested in resigning if he was affordable), I don't understand the sense of urgency to resign any players who have made up the core of the same bottom five defense we've had since they've been here.


Because that forces the Bengals' to actually have to make an effort to proactively find new/better players, and they don't like to do that. Too much work.

And I don't like to buy their tickets or merchandise any longer...too much $ and effort. So I don't.

Roy Tucker
01-16-2008, 12:35 PM
I don't think Zimmer will make any difference. Players make coaches. Coaches don't make players.

Lebeau left Cinci, went back to Pittsburgh, and resumed being a defensive genius. Players. Bresnahan was genius at Oakland. Players. Leslie Frazier had a #10 defense. Players.

Get some players and most any competent defensive NFL coach will look good. The Bengals continue to think they have good defensive players. They don't.

WVRed
01-16-2008, 12:39 PM
If Ellis is the person most mock drafts have the Bengals taking, it only means that he is likely the one the Bengals won't take. Especially since he isn't an RB or DB.

They took Leon Hall last year and everybody was predicting the Bengals would take him.

If we are switching to a 3-4 defense, taking Ellis would be a mistake for the same reason the Dolphins shouldn't take Dorsey. 3-4 defenses usually require a Sam Adams type in the middle. Both of these guys would be great in a 4-3.

I am personally hoping for Keith Rivers.

dsmith421
01-16-2008, 12:45 PM
Get some players and most any competent defensive NFL coach will look good. The Bengals continue to think they have good defensive players. They don't.

Per Mike Brown, there's more than one way to skin a cat. The Patriots, Steelers, Colts, et al. attempt to succeed by signing good football players and surrounding them with the best coaching minds available. The Bengals take a different approach. No approach is more valid than the other, as the results attest. As Mike says, the Bengals are quite efficient and have done very well.

gonelong
01-16-2008, 12:57 PM
Per Mike Brown, there's more than one way to skin a cat. The Patriots, Steelers, Colts, et al. attempt to succeed by signing good football players and surrounding them with the best coaching minds available. The Bengals take a different approach. No approach is more valid than the other, as the results attest. As Mike says, the Bengals are quite efficient and have done very well.

That is it in a nutshell.

Mike Brown would have you believe that the process they have in place that hasn't yielded a playoff win in 17 years is just fine. They have had bad luck with injuries, things didn't work out how they expected, etc.

GL

CrackerJack
01-16-2008, 01:07 PM
That is it in a nutshell.

Mike Brown would have you believe that the process they have in place that hasn't yielded a playoff win in 17 years is just fine. They have had bad luck with injuries, things didn't work out how they expected, etc.

GL

Yep, and people keep coming in droves to see his wonderful product, so he is not incentivized to change anything.

Stop going to games and buying merchandise, and you'll see more changes like hiring a HC from outside the "Family."

Until then it'll be more of the same old, same old.

dsmith421
01-16-2008, 01:33 PM
Stop going to games and buying merchandise, and you'll see more changes like hiring a HC from outside the "Family."

Until then it'll be more of the same old, same old.

That's not going to do it either, unless you can somehow convince everyone in the city, including corporations who purchase the bulk of the boxes and club seats for entertainment purposes, to join in a boycott.

This is one of those situations that's never going to change until the Browns change their ways or sell the team.

Yachtzee
01-16-2008, 01:41 PM
That's not going to do it either, unless you can somehow convince everyone in the city, including corporations who purchase the bulk of the boxes and club seats for entertainment purposes, to join in a boycott.

This is one of those situations that's never going to change until the Browns change their ways or sell the team.

I think scenario #1 would likely result in the L.A. Bengals. Scenario #2 is your better bet. It may take a while, but I suspect that the way it will come down is that Mike Brown will pass on, leaving the team to the kids. Unless Mike is paying them huge salaries now, they may not have the wherewithal to continue operating the club without bringing in outside help. Maybe then a new investor will come in and demand some say in the football operations, breaking the hold of the Brown family over the team.

Otherwise our best hope is that Katie Blackburn has more of a drive to win football games than her dad.

bucksfan2
01-16-2008, 01:59 PM
They took Leon Hall last year and everybody was predicting the Bengals would take him.

If we are switching to a 3-4 defense, taking Ellis would be a mistake for the same reason the Dolphins shouldn't take Dorsey. 3-4 defenses usually require a Sam Adams type in the middle. Both of these guys would be great in a 4-3.

I am personally hoping for Keith Rivers.

Actually most had them taking a DB but I don't believe that it was Hall. I think it was Revis but Hall slipped to them and he was the #1 DB on their board.

wolfboy
01-16-2008, 02:06 PM
I think scenario #1 would likely result in the L.A. Bengals. Scenario #2 is your better bet. It may take a while, but I suspect that the way it will come down is that Mike Brown will pass on, leaving the team to the kids. Unless Mike is paying them huge salaries now, they may not have the wherewithal to continue operating the club without bringing in outside help. Maybe then a new investor will come in and demand some say in the football operations, breaking the hold of the Brown family over the team.

Otherwise our best hope is that Katie Blackburn has more of a drive to win football games than her dad.

:pray: I couldn't agree more with your assessment.

CrackerJack
01-16-2008, 02:21 PM
I think scenario #1 would likely result in the L.A. Bengals. Scenario #2 is your better bet. It may take a while, but I suspect that the way it will come down is that Mike Brown will pass on, leaving the team to the kids. Unless Mike is paying them huge salaries now, they may not have the wherewithal to continue operating the club without bringing in outside help. Maybe then a new investor will come in and demand some say in the football operations, breaking the hold of the Brown family over the team.

Otherwise our best hope is that Katie Blackburn has more of a drive to win football games than her dad.

The Bengals' are land-locked here with the stadium deal and can't move - he would simply lose money - it's why he hired Marvin - to appease what was at the time, a significant hit to his profits as the stadium was, literally, half full and the public outcry was unbearable for even him.

So, I say more of that, less #85 jersies and season ticket renewals. Then again I never understand what was so fun about going to an NFL game. You're basically just paying out the rear to be a TV prop in a sardine can and watch drunk necks fight each other over a stupid football game.

And yes I can only hope Katie/Troy/Paul Jr. care more about winning games than he does, when he departs.

Yachtzee
01-16-2008, 02:59 PM
The Bengals' are land-locked here with the stadium deal and can't move - he would simply lose money - it's why he hired Marvin - to appease what was at the time, a significant hit to his profits as the stadium was, literally, half full and the public outcry was unbearable for even him.

So, I say more of that, less #85 jersies and season ticket renewals. Then again I never understand what was so fun about going to an NFL game. You're basically just paying out the rear to be a TV prop in a sardine can and watch drunk necks fight each other over a stupid football game.

And yes I can only hope Katie/Troy/Paul Jr. care more about winning games than he does, when he departs.

Never say "can't" when it comes to leases and contracts. There is always a way out. I suspect there's some clause in the lease that allows the team to opt out if Hamilton County can't guarantee a certain attendance level.

traderumor
01-16-2008, 04:33 PM
Isn't Pete Brown still around too? Might as well drag him into all that is wrong with the Bengals because they hired a D coordinator that most probably know very little about, since most of the comments have been about Bengals' history than about this hire.

Boss-Hog
01-16-2008, 04:43 PM
3-4 defenses usually require a Sam Adams type in the middle.

I get your point, but I can't recall any 3-4 defenses that Sam Adams ever played on...or at least when he was still a productive player.

Yachtzee
01-16-2008, 05:03 PM
I get your point, but I can't recall any 3-4 defenses that Sam Adams ever played on...or at least when he was still a productive player.

Is all this 3-4 talk coming from within the Bengals organization at all? It seems like every year fans get all worked up about switching to the 3-4 like it's some panacea, and the Bengals never do it. I suspect the reason has to do with not having 4 starting LBs rather than who they might have to anchor the middle of the defensive line.

Boss-Hog
01-16-2008, 05:09 PM
Is all this 3-4 talk coming from within the Bengals organization at all? It seems like every year fans get all worked up about switching to the 3-4 like it's some panacea, and the Bengals never do it. I suspect the reason has to do with not having 4 starting LBs rather than who they might have to anchor the middle of the defensive line.
If Geoff Hobson is to be believed, it appears we'll be staying with the 4-3. Zimmer has always employed 4-3 defenses with the exception of when Parcells retained him in Dallas. You may find the following information interesting from the latest article on the Bengals' web site:

http://www.bengals.com/news/news.asp?story_id=6598


Lewis, who has known Zimmer since their assistant days in the Big Sky Conference at Idaho State and Weber State, respectively, said that Zimmer has agreed to work with the 4-3 foundation that is already in place.

"Neither one of us wants to reinvent the wheel," Lewis said, leaving open the possibility of a 3-4. "We don't want to have to go back and revisit some things. I think we've been through those points and we're looking forward now."

Zimmer, who has yet to study his new players in-depth, says it won't be entirely his playbook from seven seasons as the coordinator in Dallas and this past year in Atlanta.

I liked the hire fairly well once it became obvious that Rex Ryan was a pipe dream, but I'm in complete agreement with those that said it's the personnel that truly matters and we flat out don't have it on defense right now.

WMR
01-16-2008, 05:12 PM
"Neither one of us wants to reinvent the wheel," Lewis said, leaving open the possibility of a 3-4. "We don't want to have to go back and revisit some things. I think we've been through those points and we're looking forward now."

I agree that personnel is the most important aspect, but this comment out of Marvin is just retarded.

traderumor
01-16-2008, 05:32 PM
I agree that personnel is the most important aspect, but this comment out of Marvin is just retarded.Why?

Bip Roberts
01-16-2008, 05:33 PM
Zimmer said he wants to do both 3-4 and 4-3. Offseason hopes and dreams already building

WMR
01-16-2008, 05:37 PM
Why?

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but it seems to me Marvin should be revisiting just about anything and everything within the scope of this football team capable of being revisited.

blumj
01-16-2008, 05:39 PM
Is all this 3-4 talk coming from within the Bengals organization at all? It seems like every year fans get all worked up about switching to the 3-4 like it's some panacea, and the Bengals never do it. I suspect the reason has to do with not having 4 starting LBs rather than who they might have to anchor the middle of the defensive line.
It tends to be a pretty ugly transition for a lot of teams. Look at the Jets.

Mario-Rijo
01-16-2008, 07:37 PM
From watching the presser and one on one w/ Zimmer on Bengals.com he basically stated that whatever personnell he has to work with will decide what base defense to play, but that it looks to be a 4-3 base currently. He seems to be the proper guy for this particular job IMO. His expertise seems to fall into a category of teacher/motivator. Which is exactly what this defense needs.

As for having to have great personnell, that's usually the rule. But I submit that Zimmer turned around a defense in Dallas that at the time was pretty abysmal in that respect.

A quote from CNNSI.com writer Josh Elliott in his '01 'boys preview.


Even grimmer news for Cowboys fans: The offense will be expected to carry the team this fall. Last year the Dallas defense ranked last in the NFL against the run and had only 25 sacks. Three of that unit's best players -- tackles Chad Hennings and Leon Lett and end Alonzo Spellman -- are gone. The Cowboys' attempts to stop opponents this fall will be recognizable only to fans of NFL teams based in Ohio.

This was the starting unit he had to work with: (The 4th ranked overall defense in '01).

DE: Peppi Zellner
DT: Michael Myers
DT: Brandon Noble
DE: Greg Ellis

OLB: Darren Hambrick
MLB: Dat Nguyen
OLB: Dexter Coakley

CB: Izell Reese (an ok Safety playing CB)
FS: George Teague
SS: Darren Woodson
CB: Mario Edwards

And if you think that's bad you ought to see the back-ups!


This was the talk at the time about Zimmer.


After helping shape the Cowboys pass defense into one of the NFL's best in the second half of the 1990s, Mike Zimmer was handed the responsibility of coordinating the Cowboys defense on Feb. 1, 2000. During his nine seasons in Dallas, Zimmer has been a part of four NFC Eastern Division titles and the Cowboys Super Bowl XXX win over Pittsburgh. Five times in those nine seasons, the Dallas defense has finished the year ranked in the top 10 in total defense, and six times the club has ranked in the top 10 in pass defense. In three seasons directing the Dallas defense, Zimmer has earned respect and recognition from around the NFL as he oversaw the retooling of his unit into a younger, quicker, faster and better squad in a very short period of time.

Despite playing with the youngest secondary in the NFL in 2002, Zimmer's squad finished the year 18th in the NFL in total defense, 15th against the run and 19th against the pass. On a play-by-play basis, the Cowboys were sixth in the league in yards-per-play, third in rushing yards-per-attempt and 13th in passing yards-per-attempt. Only six teams allowed fewer touchdowns than the 32 given up by Dallas, and the 10 rushing touchdowns given up by Dallas was the fifth best total in the league. Five times during the year, the Dallas defense allowed 13 points-or-less. Setting the pace with young players, Zimmer had two rookies, safety Roy Williams and cornerback Derek Ross, tie for fourth in the NFC with five interceptions each.

In 2001, the Cowboys allowed 1,710 rushing yards, a figure that was 927 yards less than the club allowed during the 2000 season. That figure represented the largest turnaround in the NFL in 2001. The club's overall defense showed a 730-yard improvement when compared to the previous season, jumping the club from an overall NFL ranking of 19th in 2000 to fourth in 2001. The Dallas defense jumped from 31st against the run in 2000 to 13th, allowing an average of 106.9 yards-per-game on the ground. The Cowboys were third in the NFL (second in the NFC) in pass defense, giving up an average of 180.6 yards-per-game. The unit gave up fewer than 200 passing yards in seven of its last nine games, while allowing only one opposing quarterback to throw for more than 300 yards in 16 regular season games

http://www.dallascowboys.com/team_coach_mike_zimmer.cfm


Certainly it's just an exception to the rule but Zimmer did alot more with a lot less than he will have to work with here. Why you say, good technique and a can do attitude!

Screwball
01-16-2008, 08:15 PM
I know this makes 2 plugs in 2 threads, but I found this to be very pertinent to the discussion. From Josh Kirkendall at cincyjungle.com (www.cincyjungle.com) :



UPDATE: I asked Blogging the Boys senior blogger, Grizz, his thoughts on Zimmer. Good stuff.


Mike Zimmer was a very good defensive coordinator for the Dallas Cowboys for a number of years. Even in the dark days earlier in this decade when we had some pretty crappy teams, there were years were the defense was actually good. And Zimmer didn't lose his job in Dallas from lack of production out of his charges but he ran into a philosophical factor that hastened his departure.

Zimmer runs a 4-3 defense that usually played it safe in Dallas. He wasn't an attacking, blitz-machine coordinator like Jim Johnson in Philadelphia or other high-risk/high-reward coordinators. He believes in guys being in position and making the play. A lot of the time we just didn't have the horses to blitz effectively and cover-up the weaknesses in our secondary so he probably played it more cautious than he might have wanted. During his time here we used a fast, undersized defense - that's pre-Parcells. Our linebackers were some of the smallest in the league before Parcells arrived, but they could run sideline-to-sideline and they could tackle.

He has a fiery style in practice and will get on players when they aren't preforming. His departure was the result of Parcells wanting to implement the 3-4 defense and that turned out to be an issue. In the transition year when we played a lot of 3-4 mixed with some 4-3, Zimmer seemed to struggle with the 3-4 concepts and it was probably a poor match between him and Parcells, who obviously knew what he wanted out of the defense. After that, they parted ways.

Overall, I think Zimmer is a solid coordinator. He's not the flashiest guy in public and his defense is more meat-and-potatoes than sizzle. But I would expect that he'll improve your defense.

cincrazy
01-16-2008, 08:34 PM
I have a hard time believing this team can shift to a 3-4 when it has no good interior lineman to plug in the middle of a 3-4 line. Also, this team has a hard enough time finding 3 capable linebacker's to be on the field at one time, I can hardly imagine them being able to field 4 linebacker's at once.

traderumor
01-17-2008, 09:38 AM
After reading that blog article, assuming accuracy, it sounds like the same kind of passive D that Bresnahan was playing. "Get in position, make plays." The only possible bright spot I see is that Zimmer has apparently had success getting guys in position to make plays and then making them (which the Bengals have been notorious poor tacklers during the Marvin era). Perhaps he actually knows how to teach this type of D, whereas Bresnahan was trying the same method, but clearly did not know how.

Screwball
01-17-2008, 01:43 PM
After reading that blog article, assuming accuracy, it sounds like the same kind of passive D that Bresnahan was playing. "Get in position, make plays." The only possible bright spot I see is that Zimmer has apparently had success getting guys in position to make plays and then making them (which the Bengals have been notorious poor tacklers during the Marvin era). Perhaps he actually knows how to teach this type of D, whereas Bresnahan was trying the same method, but clearly did not know how.

Yeah that's the vibe I kinda got from it too. Although the blogger makes a very cogent point when he says,

A lot of the time we just didn't have the horses to blitz effectively and cover-up the weaknesses in our secondary so he probably played it more cautious than he might have wanted. That really describes the Bengals defense. When you don't have guys like Pollack, Thurman, Brooks - i.e. athletic beasts that can effectively get to the QB on a blitz - then bringing guys actually only hurts you. Caleb Miller, Dhani Jones, Anthony Schlegel, Madieu, etc. are all guys that are easily nullified by protection sets. The easiest way to give up an explosive play to the opposing offense is to have your blitz get picked up.

At any rate, I sure hope Zimmer brings some sort of How to Tackle for Dummies book with him. The Bengals' tackling, from an angle of pursuit and technique standpoint, looked worse to me than when I watched St. X. I'm not exaggerating either.

Bip Roberts
01-17-2008, 01:49 PM
All zimmer needs to do is make a disciplined D and we should be fine.

He needs some veteran leadership on that side of the ball besides the cry babies like Delta of course still though.

BuckeyeRedleg
01-17-2008, 02:41 PM
With the addition of Brooks and others (Pollack?, Thurmond?) and the continued maturity of the secondary, as long as the Bengals draft defense (front 7) with their first two picks, my opinion is that Zimmer will be looking like a genius/savior in 2008.

I'm thinking the O continues to be top 10 and the D moves up into the 15-20 range. Definitely a recipe for 11-5 and maybe a little better with some long overdue luck.

I think in the long run, 2007 will be looked at as a good thing. The team needed a gut check and now we know who should stay and who should go. Let's move on.

Yachtzee
01-17-2008, 02:46 PM
With the addition of Brooks and others (Pollack?, Thurmond?) and the continued maturity of the secondary, as long as the Bengals draft defense (front 7) with their first two picks, my opinion is that Zimmer will be looking like a genius/savior in 2008.

I'm thinking the O continues to be top 10 and the D moves up into the 15-20 range. Definitely a recipe for 11-5 and maybe a little better with some long overdue luck.

I think in the long run, 2007 will be looked at as a good thing. The team needed a gut check and now we know who should stay and who should go. Let's move on.

I think the Bengals should pretty much go on the assumption that Pollack and Thurman will never play for them again. If one of them makes it back, it's a bonus. Just don't neglect to pick up some help at LB just because you think one of these guys might be able to join the team next year.

TC81190
01-17-2008, 02:46 PM
I think the Bengals should pretty much go on the assumption that Pollack and Thurman will never play for them again. If one of them makes it back, it's a bonus. Just don't neglect to pick up some help at LB just because you think one of these guys might be able to join the team next year.

Spot on.

Roy Tucker
01-17-2008, 03:18 PM
At any rate, I sure hope Zimmer brings some sort of How to Tackle for Dummies book with him. The Bengals' tackling, from an angle of pursuit and technique standpoint, looked worse to me than when I watched St. X. I'm not exaggerating either.

Heard this on the news last night and it's quoted in the bengals.com article on Zimmer. Hope its true...



"He's a stickler for the technique of things and I think that's important. You have to build that from the ground up," Lewis said. "It comes down to a simple thing and that's ultimately what we're looking to fix and change. To get our guys to consistently play well together technically sound and do it right."

Mike Zimmer sounds like a coach's son.

"I'm big on technique," he said. "I want to make sure guys do the things we're asking to do to do it right. Play hard all the time. Hands in the right place. Feet in the right place. I think in pro football a lot guys get to the point where they worry so much about who you're playing or the scheme, your technique goes bad. Especially late in the year. Typically I'm a little bit of a hollerer and screamer."

Screwball
01-17-2008, 04:29 PM
Heard this on the news last night and it's quoted in the bengals.com article on Zimmer. Hope its true...

I didn't see that, thanks for posting.

From what I can tell, this seems to be a pretty good hire by the Bengals. Let's just hope for a solid defensive draft, and a little more luck with LBers and injuries, and <gasp!> things just might be looking up for the Black and Orange.

WMR
01-17-2008, 05:53 PM
I think at least 5 of the 7 picks should be on the defensive side of the ball. Perhaps a couple O-linemen.

Cedric
01-17-2008, 08:32 PM
I think at least 5 of the 7 picks should be on the defensive side of the ball. Perhaps a couple O-linemen.

I don't trust any of the picks. Basically it's another point in time where I have no confidence/hope for the Bengals. If they somehow make up for three years of bad decisions I will love it. Just not counting on it.

WMR
01-17-2008, 08:36 PM
I agree with you, Cedric.

Bip Roberts
01-17-2008, 08:57 PM
3 years of bad picks? That could be seen as a little harsh considering pretty much all the good picks ended up getting injured.

Screwball
01-18-2008, 12:55 AM
I think at least 5 of the 7 picks should be on the defensive side of the ball. Perhaps a couple O-linemen.

I think we're actually getting a couple extra picks due to FA losses. One positive to losing Steinbach is that he should easily net us a supplemental 3rd round pick by himself. Factor in any production from Kaesvaharn (sp?), Tony Stewart and any other FAs that left last offseason, and we might be looking at 9 or 10 total.

Perhaps we can package a few of them and move up in the draft? I think it'd be easier to get that dominant NT or pass rushing end drafting somewhere from the top 5 as opposed to 9th overall.

At any rate, this could potentially be a huge draft for the Bengals. A creative move or three - or drafting wisely from their current position - could really help them close the gap between their offense's talent and the defense's.

WVRed
01-18-2008, 09:24 AM
If I had to do a mock of the Bengals entire draft(how I want it):

1:Keith Rivers(LB-USC)
2:Frank Okam(DT-Texas)
3:Curtis Lofton(LB-Oklahoma)
4:Jason Jones(DE-Eastern Michigan)
5:Craig Stelz(SS-LSU)
6:Jacob Tamme(TE-Kentucky)
7: Darius Reynaud(WR-West Virginia)*kickoffs

Bip Roberts
01-18-2008, 11:04 AM
All I know is they better draft a LB, DE, or a DT in the 1st round or im going to cry

Cedric
01-22-2008, 09:47 PM
3 years of bad picks? That could be seen as a little harsh considering pretty much all the good picks ended up getting injured.

Actually his whole draft history has been bad. I wrote a long thread a LONG while back. Maybe I can pull it out and see where you disagree or agree.

Bip Roberts
01-22-2008, 10:20 PM
Actually his whole draft history has been bad. I wrote a long thread a LONG while back. Maybe I can pull it out and see where you disagree or agree.

Should compare it to other NFL teams

sonny
01-23-2008, 03:23 AM
Should compare it to other NFL teams

The Steelers come to mind. Athough it's more of a product of a great, tight run organization. Everybody who gets drafted (or FA pickups) has a certain amount of talent. It's really up to the organization to pick the guys who "get it" and maximize that talent.

Bengals have a pretty sad history in this area.

BuckeyeRedleg
01-23-2008, 05:52 PM
A pretty interesting post on one of the Bengal boards asks posters to pick the 7 defensive players you keep around for 2008.

My list (in no particular order):

Joseph
Hall
Geathers
Peko
Brooks
Ndukwe
White

As for the upcoming draft and FA period, they appear to be set in the secondary with the only decisions being whether to re-sign M. Williams or cut O'Neal and D. Jackson. Personally, I'd like to see M. Williams back (over D. Jackson) as he is younger and would provide nice depth with the youngsters White and Ndukwe. I think O'Neal is probably done and Hall and Joseph from a pretty nice tandem of CB's for the future.

The front 7 is a major priority and I think if they don't address it in FA, they better take all first day picks here. Peko is a good foundation inside and the DT from USC would be a great compliment. On the outside, assuming J. Smith is gone, Gholston would be nice, but I'd rather they concentrate DT in the first round. I think Geathers is solid and Fanene should be re-signed. Hopefully Rucker steps up in 2008, but you have to address the DE position early in the draft. I wouldnt mind seeing DT/DE in the first two rounds. If Gholston is the best player available with the pick in the 1st, take him and get yourself the best DT in the 2nd.

As for LB's. I think they should re-sign Landon Johnson and Jeanty. If Brooks can stay healthy he will be a big upgrade. I think if the line can go from a weakness to a strength, the LB's can follow. Obviously if you can get a top LB in FA or day one of the draft, you pull the trigger.

All in all I really feel the D will be much improved in 2008 (as it couldn't get much worse). I wouldn't be surprised to see it move up to middle of the pack and with the offense in place and a little luck (they're due), that may be good enough to win 10-12 games.

Cedric
01-23-2008, 06:08 PM
A pretty interesting post on one of the Bengal boards asks posters to pick the 7 defensive players you keep around for 2008.

My list (in no particular order):

Joseph
Hall
Geathers
Peko
Brooks
Ndukwe
White

As for the upcoming draft and FA period, they appear to be set in the secondary with the only decisions being whether to re-sign M. Williams or cut O'Neal and D. Jackson. Personally, I'd like to see M. Williams back (over D. Jackson) as he is younger and would provide nice depth with the youngsters White and Ndukwe. I think O'Neal is probably done and Hall and Joseph from a pretty nice tandem of CB's for the future.

The front 7 is a major priority and I think if they don't address it in FA, they better take all first day picks here. Peko is a good foundation inside and the DT from USC would be a great compliment. On the outside, assuming J. Smith is gone, Gholston would be nice, but I'd rather they concentrate DT in the first round. I think Geathers is solid and Fanene should be re-signed. Hopefully Rucker steps up in 2008, but you have to address the DE position early in the draft. I wouldnt mind seeing DT/DE in the first two rounds. If Gholston is the best player available with the pick in the 1st, take him and get yourself the best DT in the 2nd.

As for LB's. I think they should re-sign Landon Johnson and Jeanty. If Brooks can stay healthy he will be a big upgrade. I think if the line can go from a weakness to a strength, the LB's can follow. Obviously if you can get a top LB in FA or day one of the draft, you pull the trigger.

All in all I really feel the D will be much improved in 2008 (as it couldn't get much worse). I wouldn't be surprised to see it move up to middle of the pack and with the offense in place and a little luck (they're due), that may be good enough to win 10-12 games.


Ndukwe and White would be the worst tandem in the NFL. Possibly in NFL history, no hyperbole. White has zero instincts and Ndukwe is just too slow and soft.

The Bengals should focus entirely on the middle of their defense and somehow getting a playmaker on the outside. It's a big task and something I don't expect Marvin to get right, or even figure out. I have little faith in this staff.

Answering the original question though:

Madieu
Brooks
Joseph
Johnson
Fanene

Then whoever else you can scrap together. Leon Hall is just abysmall but with his contract we are stuck. I was hoping he could be covered up with mostly cover 1/2 packages but that isn't Mike Zimmers style. He plays aggresive bump and run and that will lead to the demise of Leon Hall. It's not going to be pretty.

BuckeyeRedleg
01-23-2008, 06:26 PM
Ndukwe and White would be the worst tandem in the NFL. Possibly in NFL history, no hyperbole. White has zero instincts and Ndukwe is just too slow and soft.

The Bengals should focus entirely on the middle of their defense and somehow getting a playmaker on the outside. It's a big task and something I don't expect Marvin to get right, or even figure out. I have little faith in this staff.

Answering the original question though:

Madieu
Brooks
Joseph
Johnson
Fanene

Then whoever else you can scrap together. Leon Hall is just abysmall but with his contract we are stuck. I was hoping he could be covered up with mostly cover 1/2 packages but that isn't Mike Zimmers style. He plays aggresive bump and run and that will lead to the demise of Leon Hall. It's not going to be pretty.

Ok, now you have depressed me. :)

I agree Hall may be in over his head, but he did show a bit of promise, didn't he? As for Ndukwe and White, that's why I suggested re-signing Williams. To ease the transition of these two. You weren't impressed at all with Ndukwe? The point was that I think we have the right people in place already for the secondary. I respect your opinion on the Bengals and I agree that Marvin is in over his head as a HC. I just think our secondary is better than you think it is. I hope I'm right, because there are too many holes up front to have to worry about the back four as well.

Cedric
01-23-2008, 08:49 PM
Ok, now you have depressed me. :)

I agree Hall may be in over his head, but he did show a bit of promise, didn't he? As for Ndukwe and White, that's why I suggested re-signing Williams. To ease the transition of these two. You weren't impressed at all with Ndukwe? The point was that I think we have the right people in place already for the secondary. I respect your opinion on the Bengals and I agree that Marvin is in over his head as a HC. I just think our secondary is better than you think it is. I hope I'm right, because there are too many holes up front to have to worry about the back four as well.

I don't see the secondary as a bright spot. The good teams will spread out Ndukwe and Marvin White and the Bengals will be in DEEP trouble. The spread offense is becoming more and more popular in the NFL and Marvin hasn't learned. He loves in the box safeties like Dexter Jackson, White, and Kim Herring. Those type of safeties only work if you have dominant CB's and a ball hawking free safety, of course the Bengals don't. Ndukwe and White will get exploited early and often by teams in man to man coverage.

I was completely unimpressed with Leon Hall this season also. I understand he was a rookie and had a decent number of picks. Ball skills are important but most of Halls picks were on Qb mistakes and/or tipped balls. 5 int's is a small sample size and people shouldn't get too giddy over that number. I've watched a couple of games this week on DVR and Leon Hall is never in position to make a play on the ball. He just isn't quick/fast enough to sustain in a non zone/cover 2 defense.

My hope is that Marvin Lewis finally helps form an identity for this defense. Right now the Bengals are in extreme limbo. Are they a bend but don't break cover 2 team? Or are they an aggressive man to man defense? The problem is the Bengals can't be overly aggresive because of safety problems and the lack of a front four pass rush. Basically it comes down to what football always comes down to. Can you control the offensive and defensive LOS? Until the Bengals get playmakers on the defensive line they will not win consistently. No questions asked. Try and remember the last team to win the super bowl without a great front 3/4? You can't. It's the key to winning football. I watched the San Diego vs Patriots game again yesterday and saw how the Chargers transformed Joe Montana into another ho hum QB. There isn't any player in the game that can deal with pressure in his face for 50 snaps and control the game. It's way past time the Bengals quit the Duane Clemons, Bryan Robinson, and Justin Smith edge rushers and get players with a burst. The Colts have proven that you don't need bulk to stop opposing offenses.

Bip Roberts
01-23-2008, 09:55 PM
Reading Cedrics post makes me wonder how the Bengals have ever won a game since marvin took over

cincrazy
01-23-2008, 10:46 PM
I don't trust any of the picks. Basically it's another point in time where I have no confidence/hope for the Bengals. If they somehow make up for three years of bad decisions I will love it. Just not counting on it.

Cedric, I have one thing to disagree with here: It's been more like 20 years of bad decisions, with a few lucky hits scattered around :)

Cedric
01-23-2008, 11:16 PM
Reading Cedrics post makes me wonder how the Bengals have ever won a game since marvin took over

How about a wonderful Oline built before him along with Tj, Chad, and the obvious choice of Carson Palmer.

Don't forget that the only year Marvin made the playoffs we played 4 NFC north teams. 4 of the worst offensive teams I have seen came from that division that year. Minnesota and the Culpepper train wreck. Chicago and Kyle Orton was worse than a train wreck. Detroit, 'nuf said. And finally a terrible Green Bay Packers team.

The Bengals took care of business that year against very weak teams. Congrats to Marvin, now what has he done since? He hasn't done anything but wreck the only good portion of the team.

If you disagree with my views on the Bengals I can live with that just fine. I don't see anyway to argue about the Marvin era drafts and teams.

Bip Roberts
01-23-2008, 11:17 PM
Yea there is no reason to argue with you about it because no matter whats get proved wrong you will come up with more stuff to complain about and its a big waste of my time.

Cedric
01-24-2008, 01:01 AM
Yea there is no reason to argue with you about it because no matter whats get proved wrong you will come up with more stuff to complain about and its a big waste of my time.

Honestly I've never seen you make any points that debate mine. I just see you attacking my position outright without any opinion on the actual data we have from Marvin. I'm not against saying I'm wrong, far from it. But I'm not gonna just say I'm wrong because you think otherwise without pointing anything out.

The guy has been a failure in developing a team. The team is severely lacking in talent and the only talent we do have is either before Marvin or Carson Palmer. He doesn't have much to stand on at this point. He continues to throw coordinators and coaches under the bus when those same men have accomplished just as much or more than him. Leslie Frazier is getting ready to get an NFL head coaching job and he was considered a bad coach by Marvin after their years together.

Marvin Lewis has been arrogant and uncompromising since day one. With that attitude and behavior you better come up with results.

traderumor
01-24-2008, 07:38 AM
Honestly I've never seen you make any points that debate mine. I just see you attacking my position outright without any opinion on the actual data we have from Marvin. I'm not against saying I'm wrong, far from it. But I'm not gonna just say I'm wrong because you think otherwise without pointing anything out.

The guy has been a failure in developing a team. The team is severely lacking in talent and the only talent we do have is either before Marvin or Carson Palmer. He doesn't have much to stand on at this point. He continues to throw coordinators and coaches under the bus when those same men have accomplished just as much or more than him. Leslie Frazier is getting ready to get an NFL head coaching job and he was considered a bad coach by Marvin after their years together.

Marvin Lewis has been arrogant and uncompromising since day one. With that attitude and behavior you better come up with results.
I think it would be more accurate to say that his first go round has produced a competitive NFL football team who has had some wounds, some legitimate football injuries, some self-inflicted wounds by taking chances on troublemakers, keep the team from being a playoff contender this year. The rest of his term thus far has had them in contention for a playoff spot each year.

Arrogant and uncompromising? It was clear from the last draft that the two "taking chances" drafts were a thing of the past, which is one of your charges of arrogance. That is one example to chew on.

I would say the same charge could be levied on you with your hypercriticism of someone who has taken a lowlife of the NFL to at least winning as many games as they lose consistently. That is an accomplishment. I think the franchise has reached the point where the current collection of talent needs a few standout defensive players instead of a collection of average at best defenders at all positions. That much is clear.

Leslie Frazier was not fired for being a bad coach, he was fired for not getting results. Why is him being a candidate for a head coach's job a testimony to his firing? Were his defenses good? No? Was it entirely his fault? No, but no one was sad to see Bresnihan get canned, and it is because the D has been bad.

Anyhow, ced, you sound like little more than an angry fan with a one-sided opinion constantly taking shots at the leadership, sort of like the factory worker who knows every which way to make the company better if he was in charge, but everyone knows better.

This is a big offseason for Marvin, from what I can see his coaching changes have solid credentials, hopefully the new D coaches do influence corralling some stars on D, either through the draft or free agency. The team has reached a crossroads, and if he is indeed "arrogant and uncompromising" (normal leadership qualities, BTW, can be positive rather than always the negative connotation you have used), then the team will flounder from here. From what I've seen of Marvin, he'll make the personal adjustments necessary to get the team to playoff contender status next season.

bucksfan2
01-24-2008, 08:20 AM
I enjoy talking about Bengal football but unfortuantly I don't enjoy talking in the manner Cedric does. I don't mean to call you out Cedric because there are a lot of Bengal fans out there that possess the same attitude that you do. I just don't get it. They way you talk about the bengals you would think they are the worst team in football and that they would have been luck to win more games than the Dolphins this year.

dsmith421
01-24-2008, 08:33 AM
I enjoy talking about Bengal football but unfortuantly I don't enjoy talking in the manner Cedric does. I don't mean to call you out Cedric because there are a lot of Bengal fans out there that possess the same attitude that you do. I just don't get it. They way you talk about the bengals you would think they are the worst team in football and that they would have been luck to win more games than the Dolphins this year.

One winning season in 18 years will do that to you. Especially when your owner/GM is a complete embarrassment and no one in the organization seems to have the first clue how to communicate effectively with the media and, by extension, the fans.

Yachtzee
01-24-2008, 08:56 AM
Honestly I've never seen you make any points that debate mine. I just see you attacking my position outright without any opinion on the actual data we have from Marvin. I'm not against saying I'm wrong, far from it. But I'm not gonna just say I'm wrong because you think otherwise without pointing anything out.

The guy has been a failure in developing a team. The team is severely lacking in talent and the only talent we do have is either before Marvin or Carson Palmer. He doesn't have much to stand on at this point. He continues to throw coordinators and coaches under the bus when those same men have accomplished just as much or more than him. Leslie Frazier is getting ready to get an NFL head coaching job and he was considered a bad coach by Marvin after their years together.

Marvin Lewis has been arrogant and uncompromising since day one. With that attitude and behavior you better come up with results.

I don't think he really threw Leslie Frazier under the bus. I think Frazier just had a different philosophy than Lewis and it resulted in conflict on the defensive side of the ball and a lack of execution on the part of the players (what else is new when it comes to defense). Lewis likes a D where players take care of their assignment first before they think about taking risks. From what I gather, Frazier prefers to run a defense where DBs are greater risk takers, which results in more turnovers, but also results in giving up big plays. To be effective, you really need to have really great DBs who can succeed at taking risks. The Bengals didn't have the horses on D for that kind of defense and Frazier didn't change his philosophy. The end result was that the Bengals got burned on D a lot and that risk-taking really didn't bring results until after Frazier was gone. So Frazier probably got fired more for his philosophical difference with Lewis rather than because Lewis thought he was a bad coach.

Based on his comments on his way out, I think Bresnahan probably got fired because his feeling was that the way to improve the defense was to spend more money on defense. The thing is, he has been with the Bengals for a while and had say on who the Bengals keep and who they let go. He probably factored into the decision of putting the franchise tag on Smith, which pretty much prevented the Bengals from making any decent moves in the free agent market. I don't think anyone expected him to put a #1 defense out there with the talent he had, but you should at least expect him to put out a defense that ranks in the middle of the pack. They might have won a few more games if the D had played as a middle of the pack D.

I think Bresnahan's biggest failure (and Hunley's too, probably) was that he failed to instill discipline on the field on D. There was a lot of freelancing on defense and it resulted in yet another year where the Bengals' D was one of the league's worst. That and the talent in the D front 7 needs an upgrade. I think Bres might have gotten a pass if they didn't have all the on-the-field discipline problems.

Bip Roberts
01-24-2008, 10:11 AM
Honestly I've never seen you make any points that debate mine. I just see you attacking my position outright without any opinion on the actual data we have from Marvin. I'm not against saying I'm wrong, far from it. But I'm not gonna just say I'm wrong because you think otherwise without pointing anything out.

The guy has been a failure in developing a team. The team is severely lacking in talent and the only talent we do have is either before Marvin or Carson Palmer. He doesn't have much to stand on at this point. He continues to throw coordinators and coaches under the bus when those same men have accomplished just as much or more than him. Leslie Frazier is getting ready to get an NFL head coaching job and he was considered a bad coach by Marvin after their years together.

Marvin Lewis has been arrogant and uncompromising since day one. With that attitude and behavior you better come up with results.

How can anyone rebut your points when all they are is your opinions.

Cedric
01-24-2008, 04:36 PM
One winning season in 18 years will do that to you. Especially when your owner/GM is a complete embarrassment and no one in the organization seems to have the first clue how to communicate effectively with the media and, by extension, the fans.

I'd say that about nails it. It's the worst run organization in professional sports. Is it really shocking that I don't agree with the way it's being run? It's not like I'm *****ing about the Yankees here.

Cedric
01-24-2008, 04:38 PM
I enjoy talking about Bengal football but unfortuantly I don't enjoy talking in the manner Cedric does. I don't mean to call you out Cedric because there are a lot of Bengal fans out there that possess the same attitude that you do. I just don't get it. They way you talk about the bengals you would think they are the worst team in football and that they would have been luck to win more games than the Dolphins this year.

I don't want to discourage discussion of my opinion, far from it. I'm just giving my opinions on the state of the franchise. If you don't enjoy my opinions I can respect that also. And the Bengals could only wish to have the Dolphins franchise. I would travel to Florida myself to pick up Bill :)

traderumor
01-24-2008, 08:25 PM
I'd say that about nails it. It's the worst run organization in professional sports. Do you really expect folks to listen to the complaining when the opinions contain such gross exaggerations?

Cedric
01-25-2008, 12:25 AM
Do you really expect folks to listen to the complaining when the opinions contain such gross exaggerations?

In the main two sports name me an organization that has the Bengals 15 year track record? A gross exaggeration would be saying the Bengals organization is competent. This is 2008 and the Bengals have a scouting department that is basically seven people. It's a mom and pop organization that has failed in every aspect. Talent is obviously the main component to winning games. How can you expect to win with any regularity when you completely neglect the one source that finds you talent?

In college and the NFL the hardest position to predict success is offensive and defensive lineman. With the Bengals scouting department it's no surprise the flameout rate of the Dline and Oline draft picks. Basically over the last 15 years the Bengals haven't had an above average defensive line one time. Most teams build great offensive lines with later picks in the draft because of the high risk of drafting the position. The Bengals got lucky once in creating a good offensive line. It didn't surprise me that they failed in keeping that together with how poor they scout and draft.

I could have made this post a lot shorter and asked you to name me a worse organization from the top down. I'd be honestly surprised if there was enough of a list to call my opinion a "gross exaggeration".

traderumor
01-25-2008, 09:19 AM
In the main two sports name me an organization that has the Bengals 15 year track record? A gross exaggeration would be saying the Bengals organization is competent. This is 2008 and the Bengals have a scouting department that is basically seven people. It's a mom and pop organization that has failed in every aspect. Talent is obviously the main component to winning games. How can you expect to win with any regularity when you completely neglect the one source that finds you talent?

In college and the NFL the hardest position to predict success is offensive and defensive lineman. With the Bengals scouting department it's no surprise the flameout rate of the Dline and Oline draft picks. Basically over the last 15 years the Bengals haven't had an above average defensive line one time. Most teams build great offensive lines with later picks in the draft because of the high risk of drafting the position. The Bengals got lucky once in creating a good offensive line. It didn't surprise me that they failed in keeping that together with how poor they scout and draft.

I could have made this post a lot shorter and asked you to name me a worse organization from the top down. I'd be honestly surprised if there was enough of a list to call my opinion a "gross exaggeration".The Bengals just made the playoffs in 2005. Arizona Cardinals, Pittsburgh Pirates, Tampa Bay Devil Rays, Baltimore Orioles, Detroit Lions, Miami Dolphins (notwithstanding Parcells hire, but as you already hinted, they suddenly have your vote of approval, I'm sure fans are lined up for season tickets knowing that).

And those are just off the top of my head. I would at least think you would back off and say you were exaggerating to make a point, but the Bengals recent track record is contrary to your opinion.

And the timeframe isn't 15 years to make the statement you did, it is 5 years. I know you think Marvin is a buffoon, but I take that for what its worth having read many, many of your posts on the Bengals.

Yachtzee
01-25-2008, 10:54 AM
The Bengals just made the playoffs in 2005. Arizona Cardinals, Pittsburgh Pirates, Tampa Bay Devil Rays, Baltimore Orioles, Detroit Lions, Miami Dolphins (notwithstanding Parcells hire, but as you already hinted, they suddenly have your vote of approval, I'm sure fans are lined up for season tickets knowing that).

And those are just off the top of my head. I would at least think you would back off and say you were exaggerating to make a point, but the Bengals recent track record is contrary to your opinion.

And the timeframe isn't 15 years to make the statement you did, it is 5 years. I know you think Marvin is a buffoon, but I take that for what its worth having read many, many of your posts on the Bengals.

People often forget about the Cardinals when talking about the worst organizations in sports. I don't get it. The Bidwill family has a horrible track record for running a team which has stunk in three different cities. The Arizona Cardinals are far and away the worst run football team in the history of the NFL. They haven't been in the playoffs since 1998 and before that it was 1982. They won 1 NFL championship in 1947 and are so lame they claim the 1925 championship as theirs, even though they were named champions only because the Pottsville Maroons had the title taken away from them in a controversial move by the league. The Saints have a terrible history as well, going 20 years before a playoff appearance. The Buccanneers had 15 years of losing seasons and was the only team to have a season with no wins. Yet the Bengals get dogged for having the worst organization in football. I guess the stripes on the helmet make the Bengals an easier target.

In baseball, I would say the Cubs are known for their bad track record in the World Series, but the Phillies easily have been the worst run franchise over the history of baseball and possibly the history of sport. They've lost over 10,000 in their history, took almost 100 years to win their first championship and would have to win 1176 straight games to reach .500 for the history of the team. The only other team that comes close to 10,000 losses is Atlanta, if you count their franchise extending back to the Boston team starting the National League in 1876.

I think Cedric has many valid observations about the Bengals if you look past the "worst organization" hyperbole. I think people too often overrate some of the players the Bengals have picked up on defense and seem to believe that if certain players weren't injured or suspended, the defense would be great. I agree that the Bengals drafts haven't been as good as people would have you believe, which is killer for a team that seems to want to build through the draft. Drafting Chris Perry and Kenny Irons so high were tremendously bad picks because the Bengals had great depth at RB both times and drafting these guys probably set this team back on defense.

I think the Bengals' biggest problem in the draft is the whole philosophy of picking best player available at their spot. Instead, the Bengals should be identifying the player that best helps their team and doing what they can to draft that player. If it involves a trade to move up to get him, they need to do that. If they can't get that guy and the next one on their list would be a reach at their spot, they need to trade down to get more picks. But the Bengals seem to abhor trading up for picks and generally avoid trading picks in general, so they either reach for guys when the ones they want are gone or they draft a player at a position where they already have significant depth.

Bip Roberts
01-25-2008, 11:02 AM
Great depth at RB both times? Arent we sitting here right now discussing who our RB is going to be?

Yachtzee
01-25-2008, 11:22 AM
Great depth at RB both times? Arent we sitting here right now discussing who our RB is going to be?

Oh no. We only have four RBs on the roster. What are we ever going to do? Issues with the running game have more to do with the offensive line than the RBs.

Bip Roberts
01-25-2008, 11:29 AM
Oh no. We only have four RBs on the roster. What are we ever going to do? Issues with the running game have more to do with the offensive line than the RBs.

We have 5 actually but 4 ended the season with injuries and 1 is a life long back up.

traderumor
01-25-2008, 12:07 PM
Honestly, it isn't what side side of the ball the first round pick is on. I would just like to see the first day be defensively skewed.


I think the Bengals' biggest problem in the draft is the whole philosophy of picking best player available at their spot. Instead, the Bengals should be identifying the player that best helps their team and doing what they can to draft that player. If it involves a trade to move up to get him, they need to do that. If they can't get that guy and the next one on their list would be a reach at their spot, they need to trade down to get more picks. But the Bengals seem to abhor trading up for picks and generally avoid trading picks in general, so they either reach for guys when the ones they want are gone or they draft a player at a position where they already have significant depth.

Yachtzee
01-25-2008, 12:55 PM
Honestly, it isn't what side side of the ball the first round pick is on. I would just like to see the first day be defensively skewed.

Oh, I agree. I just get the feeling that the Bengals will settle for guys who fall to their spot rather than moving proactively to get the guys who best fit their needs. As much grief as I gave the Browns and their fans in the past, in the previous off-season the Browns showed how a team can take an underperforming unit (their offensive line) and vastly improve it with a few key signings and drafting the right player. Not only were they able to do that, but they also moved proactively to acquire their QB of the future. If the Bengals were to get creative, I think they could easily acquire 3 or 4 players that could turn the defense into a top 10 unit. They might even do that and still shore up the offense with a key acquisition at the OL/TE position.

I don't think it will take much to turn the Bengals into a playoff calibre team, but it will take some creative thinking. Unfortunately, the Bengals' FO seems to avoid proactive moves under the misguided philosophy that they don't want to "mortgage the future."

BuckeyeRedleg
01-25-2008, 01:04 PM
Oh, I agree. I just get the feeling that the Bengals will settle for guys who fall to their spot rather than moving proactively to get the guys who best fit their needs. As much grief as I gave the Browns and their fans in the past, in the previous off-season the Browns showed how a team can take an underperforming unit (their offensive line) and vastly improve it with a few key signings and drafting the right player. Not only were they able to do that, but they also moved proactively to acquire their QB of the future. If the Bengals were to get creative, I think they could easily acquire 3 or 4 players that could turn the defense into a top 10 unit. They might even do that and still shore up the offense with a key acquisition at the OL/TE position.

I don't think it will take much to turn the Bengals into a playoff calibre team, but it will take some creative thinking. Unfortunately, the Bengals' FO seems to avoid proactive moves under the misguided philosophy that they don't want to "mortgage the future."

Agree.

Screwball
01-25-2008, 01:11 PM
Oh, I agree. I just get the feeling that the Bengals will settle for guys who fall to their spot rather than moving proactively to get the guys who best fit their needs. As much grief as I gave the Browns and their fans in the past, in the previous off-season the Browns showed how a team can take an underperforming unit (their offensive line) and vastly improve it with a few key signings and drafting the right player. Not only were they able to do that, but they also moved proactively to acquire their QB of the future. If the Bengals were to get creative, I think they could easily acquire 3 or 4 players that could turn the defense into a top 10 unit. They might even do that and still shore up the offense with a key acquisition at the OL/TE position.

I don't think it will take much to turn the Bengals into a playoff calibre team, but it will take some creative thinking. Unfortunately, the Bengals' FO seems to avoid proactive moves under the misguided philosophy that they don't want to "mortgage the future."

Very well put. The Bengals have an opportunity to really make a statement this offseason. They've already hired a couple quality guys in Mike Zimmer and Jeff FitzGerald, now let's see if they can upgrade the talent on the field. Yes, it'll take some bold action which the Bengals have shied away from in the past, but if the Reds can throw down $46 mill on a stud FA closer, perhaps the Bengals can shift their paradigm as well.

traderumor
01-25-2008, 02:57 PM
Oh, I agree. I just get the feeling that the Bengals will settle for guys who fall to their spot rather than moving proactively to get the guys who best fit their needs. As much grief as I gave the Browns and their fans in the past, in the previous off-season the Browns showed how a team can take an underperforming unit (their offensive line) and vastly improve it with a few key signings and drafting the right player. Not only were they able to do that, but they also moved proactively to acquire their QB of the future. If the Bengals were to get creative, I think they could easily acquire 3 or 4 players that could turn the defense into a top 10 unit. They might even do that and still shore up the offense with a key acquisition at the OL/TE position.

I don't think it will take much to turn the Bengals into a playoff calibre team, but it will take some creative thinking. Unfortunately, the Bengals' FO seems to avoid proactive moves under the misguided philosophy that they don't want to "mortgage the future."Perhaps Mikey is still feeling burnt when he traded up to draft KiJana Carter.

RedsManRick
01-25-2008, 04:53 PM
Perhaps Mikey is still feeling burnt when he traded up to draft KiJana Carter.

The drafting of KiJana was a highlight of my childhood. A Bengal fan stranded in Happy Valley and who saw the 80 yard Rose Bowl run right through the Oregon defense in person, for a moment in time all was right with the world. And now I have an awesome #32 Carter Bengals jersey to rock out whenever I'm feeling nostalgic... or a twinge in my knee.

Cedric
01-25-2008, 08:20 PM
I know you think Marvin is a buffoon, but I take that for what its worth having read many, many of your posts on the Bengals.

Classy as always! I'm sorry you have a different opinion than me. The only thing you have ever done about my Bengals post are whine and mock. If you don't want to actually respond than I suggest you quit the personal jabs and quit reading. I'm pretty sure that you don't wanna debate the game of football with me and you are just settling in with the personal attacks, your usual MO. But if you are willing to counterpoint me then I suggest you actually have responses to back your assertion that I don't know the game. The only way you are going to show me up in a debate about the game of football is if I'm dead and you suddenly get promoted to assistant head coach in New England. Until then I wouldn't be so condescending about a game you have at most a rudimentary knowledge of.

Bip Roberts
01-25-2008, 08:51 PM
I wish I was smarter than every coach, GM, and scout in the NFL.

traderumor
01-25-2008, 11:21 PM
Classy as always! I'm sorry you have a different opinion than me. The only thing you have ever done about my Bengals post are whine and mock. If you don't want to actually respond than I suggest you quit the personal jabs and quit reading. I'm pretty sure that you don't wanna debate the game of football with me and you are just settling in with the personal attacks, your usual MO. But if you are willing to counterpoint me then I suggest you actually have responses to back your assertion that I don't know the game. The only way you are going to show me up in a debate about the game of football is if I'm dead and you suddenly get promoted to assistant head coach in New England. Until then I wouldn't be so condescending about a game you have at most a rudimentary knowledge of.

You quoted a small part of a response I made to one of your exaggerations, gave you an answer right off the top of my rudimentary head, and you apparently had nothing with which to respond. No personal attack there, just a quick list of organizations that are horribly run and that the Bengals can currently say they no longer fit the mold. While that is faint praise indeed, it is amazing that you posted the above and have the nerve to call me condescending. I have not questioned your overall knowledge of the game, all I know is that when you post about the Bengals, it is full of vitriol and hate for the organization, and apparently obsessively so.

Cedric
01-26-2008, 01:58 AM
You quoted a small part of a response I made to one of your exaggerations, gave you an answer right off the top of my rudimentary head, and you apparently had nothing with which to respond. No personal attack there, just a quick list of organizations that are horribly run and that the Bengals can currently say they no longer fit the mold. While that is faint praise indeed, it is amazing that you posted the above and have the nerve to call me condescending. I have not questioned your overall knowledge of the game, all I know is that when you post about the Bengals, it is full of vitriol and hate for the organization, and apparently obsessively so.

Yeah, I have Mike Browns adress and I protest the Bengals by having season tickets.

What is there not to dislike about the way this organization has been run since Mike Brown completely took over? I don't understand how my opinions on other threads make me "obsessive" or full of hate. I certainly don't hate Mike Brown for being so inept. I just dislike the way he runs his organization and I post about it.

I'm honestly surprised that you find it so shocking that someone would argue the Bengals have in recent memory been an absolutely terribly ran franchise. My view isn't that they are badly run, I think they are the worst ran organization right above/below the Cardinals and the Clippers. That's not something you've heard once and certainly doesn't seem like a gross exaggeration to me. I think SI did a whole research article on pro organizations and the Bengals ranked in the bottom three. I'm not sure on that. If someone as respected as SI does an article like that I don't see how my point would be a gross exaggeration.

Cedric
01-26-2008, 02:03 AM
I wish I was smarter than every coach, GM, and scout in the NFL.

Now that's what I'm talking about. I was waiting for you to start making up stuff again. Unless every coach, GM, and scout in the NFL are employed by the Bengals I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Is it really much of a stretch to conclude that there are countless people in America that could possibly do a better job than Mike Brown as a GM? I feel like I'm bizarro world having to defend myself against my perceived ineptitude of the Bengals organization. You do realize that many before me have argued the Bengals are the worst run pro sports team? You might disagree with me and that's fine.

Bip Roberts
01-26-2008, 02:16 AM
I just said I wish I was smarter. General comment.

Cedric
01-26-2008, 02:29 AM
The Bengals just made the playoffs in 2005. Arizona Cardinals, Pittsburgh Pirates, Tampa Bay Devil Rays, Baltimore Orioles, Detroit Lions, Miami Dolphins (notwithstanding Parcells hire, but as you already hinted, they suddenly have your vote of approval, I'm sure fans are lined up for season tickets knowing that).

And those are just off the top of my head. I would at least think you would back off and say you were exaggerating to make a point, but the Bengals recent track record is contrary to your opinion.

And the timeframe isn't 15 years to make the statement you did, it is 5 years. I know you think Marvin is a buffoon, but I take that for what its worth having read many, many of your posts on the Bengals.

I'll reply now at your service. You are right that people probably are waiting in line for season tickets in Miami. That Parcells guy has a decent reputation of building a football team.

And you are making a claim that a ONE year playoff run proves that the Bengals are a better run organization than the other teams you listed? If that's the only thing you look at in comparing teams than I guess you win. That is your basis for proving the Bengals are not a terrible organization?

The Cardinals got lucky and made the playoffs once in 1998 and beat the Cowboys in the playoffs. By your theory you would then automatically rank Arizona as a better run organization than the Dallas Cowboys because of one post season appearance and win. That is a shortsighted view and I would presume you would be in about the 1&#37; fan population that felt Arizona was a better run organization than Dallas. Arizona also has one more playoff win than Dallas since 1995. By your opinion they are factually a better run organization than Dallas. I think I would be looking for something else to gauge an organization than statistical outliers like that. And I definitely would look for something different in the NFL where 16 games and schedule makes it MUCH easier for a team to compete for playoff appearances. Again by your theory the Bengals are a better run organization than the Oakland A's. They haven't made the playoffs since the Bengals did in 05. I could come up with a list of teams in pro sports that haven't made the playoffs in the last five years and compare it to the Bengals. I think you would have a hard time arguing the Bengals automatically are a better run organization than all those others because they had one season of success.

Comparing baseball post season appearances to NFL appearances is also apples to oranges for too many reasons to state here. I already bore you and most others surely :)

Your formula for proving an organization is better than another is your call. There is obviously no subjective data that could 100% prove of our view on the subject, but again I'd look for something else than post season. I wrote on the Bengals ineptitude in free agency, drafting, coaching hires, and the size of their scouting department. I could also use your post season formula and I seriously doubt that would crush my view that the Bengals are the worst ran organization.

You seem to have a problem more with my attitude towards the Bengals and not my opinion that they are ran poorly. I suppose you think they aren't ran well also because on the baseball side you are about as smart as it comes. I have a sneaking suspicion that my bitterness towards Mike Brown has made you refuse to respect my opinions. I understand that and maybe I should tone down the attitude when I make my points about the franchise. Delivery of opinions is listened to more if someone comes across as truly unbiased or open minded. You should know from my posting on the baseball side of the board that I'm generally very positive on the way the Reds are being ran. I don't think it's an understatement to say the Reds have been a bad team lately and if I was just bitter blindly I would trash them at all times, I don't do that.

traderumor
01-26-2008, 06:14 PM
Yeah, I have Mike Browns adress and I protest the Bengals by having season tickets.

What is there not to dislike about the way this organization has been run since Mike Brown completely took over? I don't understand how my opinions on other threads make me "obsessive" or full of hate. I certainly don't hate Mike Brown for being so inept. I just dislike the way he runs his organization and I post about it.

I'm honestly surprised that you find it so shocking that someone would argue the Bengals have in recent memory been an absolutely terribly ran franchise. My view isn't that they are badly run, I think they are the worst ran organization right above/below the Cardinals and the Clippers. That's not something you've heard once and certainly doesn't seem like a gross exaggeration to me. I think SI did a whole research article on pro organizations and the Bengals ranked in the bottom three. I'm not sure on that. If someone as respected as SI does an article like that I don't see how my point would be a gross exaggeration.You said "the worst run organization." You clearly use hyperbole then back off when someone gives you a few simple examples. You got the floor all to yourself as far as I'm concerned, I really have nothing to possibly contribute for someone who has the depth of knowledge that you do about all things NFL, but I suggest your know-it-all style would fit much better on the typical NFL board than on this little offshoot.