The Bengals best defensive player played one game this year. People forget that. They aren't that far from having an adequate enough defense. I wouldn't predict records before free agency and the draft.Originally Posted by Chip R
The Bengals best defensive player played one game this year. People forget that. They aren't that far from having an adequate enough defense. I wouldn't predict records before free agency and the draft.
This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.
Cedric...i have to disagree..... MW is a good player...might become an All-Pro but he is not going to make this defense any better without another safety to help.....another CB to start and 1 more to help in nickel.
1 pass rushing DE that is consistent and someone to replace a wearing down Brian Simmons.
They need at least 3 to 5 more players for this defense to be good.
At least 3 to be average and not scare you when your team has a lead.
I'm not sure LeBeau has ever 'developed' a defense.He's done pretty well with some that he has inherited though. Seems to be a good in game adjustment/gameplanner though.
4009
I'm saying you take the best player out of any defense and it's hard to replace. I'm not at all saying they don't need work. It can be fixed this off season.
This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.
The reason they beat the Bengals in playoffs comes down to the Bengals second offensive play of the game...
Refresh my memory. What was the score at halftime?
Then they need a big time draft..... a 1974 PITT Steelers or 1986 SF 49'ers type draft. Where they get 4-6 starters who are Pro-Bowl types.
Do not expect any big time FA signing at all. Not with 4 OL up for contracts after 2006. That is just as important.......... i remember the Klinger days of relying on patchwork OL and the magic of their OL coach, Jim McNally i think was his name. They thought he could turn 6th-7th and Undrafted rookie FA into Max Montoya's or Joe Walters.
Chip...... if Mario Soto was pitching game 7 of a championship series and he was hurt on a line drive off the first pitch of the game....and in comes Bob Owchinko.....or Tim Birstas to pitch, what would the odds be of the Reds winning that game in the end?
Jon Kitna= Dieter Brock type arm strength. He was going to get exposed in the end. The Bengals needed firepower from their QB to keep up with their inept defense. No sure thing they would have won with Palmer but odds were a lot better for sure.
Odds would not be as good. But they actually managed to lead the Steelers at the half so they must have been doing something right despite Kitna, yes? And if you believe that Kitna was the problem, then you better be praying every night that Palmer comes back by the first game next year or else the Bengals are doomed since they can't win without Palmer.
Tony, you said it yourself. The defense was not good enough to stop PIT. A team with a good defense could have had a Kitna at QB and had a better chance of beating PIT. They may not have won but the defense was the biggest factor why they lost that game. Palmer might have helped but he might have played like he did in the first game they played this year.
Before you bury Kitna, remember this: In succession Pittsburgh the league's second-highest scoring team, Indianapolis, averaging 27.4 points, to 18 points; the league's seventh-highest scoring team, Denver, averaging 24.7 points, to 17 points; the league's highest-scoring team, Seattle, averaging 28.2 points, to 10 points. And it was just Kitna's fault?
It's a lot easier to make halftime adjustments against Jon Kitna than it is against Carson Palmer.
Making Kitna beat you is a lot easier than making Carson beat you.
Of course, I still don't know why they abandoned the run.....
Come on, Chip. You're basically saying great players make no difference. Who the hell knows if the Bengals would have won had Palmer not been hurt. I'm not suggesting they would have, but there's no doubt it would have been a different game altogether. There's no more validity to the notion that they still would have lost thatn there is to they would have won. But you're saying that beause Kitna played adequately in the first half, that somehow invalidates any notion that Palmer would have made a difference. The guy is one of the best players in the NFL. They make a difference, a HUGE difference (see the Steelers without Big be this year).
Kitan is not very good. Just because he played OK for a couple of quarters doesn't mean he's good, because he's not. Palmer would have made a difference, period. Whether that would have been enough, I don't know nor does anyone else. It's pure speculation. Your case isn't any better than those saying the Bengals would have won. Both are equally speculative.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
You're right, my view is speculative (saying Carson's injury is why they lost), but I truely believe it...I felt something that day, something special...the same thing I felt in 2003 against the undefeated Chiefs. That feeling that you just know you're team is going to win. However, had the Steelers beat the Bengals best shot, this wouldn't hurt so much.
Matt said the game was over when he got hurt. Did you stop watching the game after Palmer was hurt? If you believed the game was over when that happened, why didn't you just stop watching? Matt doesn't know if Palmer would have made the difference, nor do you or I since, as far as I know, none of us can foretell the future. Would Palmer given the Bengals a better chance? Sure but it's not from a sure thing that the Bengals would have won like so many Bengals fans believe.
You're a stats guy, MWM. Look at those stats. The Steelers held 3 top offenses to well below their season averages for scoring. Those offenses included Shawn Alexander, the NFL MVP and Peyton Manning last year's MVP. Not exactly a bunch of stiffs, wouldn't you say? Yet you and other Bengals fans want to blame Kitna for the loss? I know it pains you and other Bengals fans to do it but give PIT's defense a little credit in that victory.
Chip, you got me curious so I went back and looked in more detail at the game summary. Again, I'm not trying to suggest the Bengals would have won, but when you look at the facts it paints a little different picture than the one you're painting. You're basing your analysis of the Bengals defense as the problem based on reputation and what they did the last part of the year, not on how they played that game. In reality, the Bengals defense wasn't all that bad in that particualr game. The Steelers only had 346 total yards.
The problem in the second half was that the Bengals offense couldn't stay on the field. It's not that the defesne was all that bad and they got ran over. I think people just assume that to be the case because it's the Bengals. The first drive for the Bengals in the second half was 11 plays and 43 yards for 5 minutes. After that drive, they ran all of 19 plays for a grand total of 33 yards. It's kind of silly to think it wouldn't have been different with Palmer. I watched, Kitna was bad. Had the Bengals been able to mount any kind of sustained drive in he second half, that means the Bengals D is not on the field as much as they were and the score is most liekly closer down the stretch.
The problem in that game was the offense as much as it was the defense. The fact is, no matter how you slic it, Palmer is better than Kitna. It's not a leap of faith to think the offense would have been better with Palmer running show. Would that have been eough? Who knows, all we can do is guess. But it's perfectly logical to conclude the Bengals would have played much better on offense.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
I was chatting over on ochre's site during the game. It can be verified that said the game was over the second Palmer was carted off the field. I knew going in it would probably be close. If I were a betting man, I would have steered clear of that game. I never thought the Bengals would surely win. I thought they had a chance, that's it. But I knew they had NO CHANCE at all with Kitna at the helm. None. Even when they were ahead at the half, I knew the game was over. Of course I didn't stop watching. What does that have to diwht anything? Are you going to watch the Reds this year even though you know they have no chance to win?
And I certainly think the Steeler defense deserves some credit. They're areally good defense. But what they did AFTER the game in question has no bearance on what happened in THAT game. These two teams play each other twice every year. There were no secrets. All I'm suggesting is that it is almost a certainty the Bengals offense would have played better.
Yet you and other Bengal haters want to act like Kitna made no difference at all. Of course, the Pitt defense gets credit, but it's silly not to at least acknowledge that they were facing an inferior product than what otherwise would have been. That's all I'm suggesting. Do you at least admit that Kitna is inferior to Palmer?Yet you and other Bengals fans want to blame Kitna for the loss?
Last edited by MWM; 02-09-2006 at 03:54 PM.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote