It worked two years ago. It's worked for Pittsburgh for years.Originally Posted by Joseph
It worked two years ago. It's worked for Pittsburgh for years.
But the NFL has evolved. It got us to the playoffs two years ago, but we got drilled in the first round, and many of our wins that year, quite frankly, were luck-oriented.
The last 3 or 4 NFL champs have rushed for less than 100 yards in the Super Bowl. That's a telling statistic to me. Even Pittsburgh has evolved. The run game still exists, but it's much more about Big Ben and those receivers nowadays.
Cin, you and I get along pretty well and at times even drink from similar water sources (so to speak we live pretty close and we both have/do frequent Pizza Pause) so don't take this personal but I completely disagree.
2 years ago the Bengals got to the playoffs running the ball, playing good defense and sprinkling in the pass. Towards the end and especially in the playoff game Bratkowski stopped using the run to set up the pass and started to get pass happy (once he thought Carson was finally out of the danger zone with his shoulder). He inexplicably started trying to pass the ball around on the #1 passing defense in the league, yet whenever he gave the ball to Ced he ran wild on the Jets (169 yards IIRC on 21 carries). My opinion isn't that they got lucky that season, but that they took a sound approach as a team and wore out the opposition creating a situation where they were often the better team at the end of games. Pittsburgh has won despite the fact they pass the ball way too much IMO and as a matter of fact their owner came out after '09 and said they needed to get back to running the ball more which they did but it wasn't quite enough IMO.
One thing is true about offense always, turnovers hurt every squad on the team and the team overall itself. To keep turnovers low it is wise to be run heavy and/or run a short passing scheme which makes putting the ball up less risky.
I like Grudens philosophical approach to the game (according to the talks he has had with the press so far as a Bengal) and it should be just what we see here (run/pass 55/45 with a short passing game and a good play action long game). If we can't bring back Palmer, Kevin Kolb is now a very sound fit for this team. Sure he isn't Mike Vick but he with Benson in the backfield I think the offense can be quite effective. What we would then need is a premier defensive player of some kind, a difference maker like Clay Matthews at LB, Polamalu or Ed Reed at Safety or a monster on the line. Pretty good balance across the board should bring this team back to relevance quickly.
"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."
--Woody Hayes
Running is overrated in the NFL. It's even debatable whether it's truly safer. It can be argued that Mendenhall's fumble cost the Steelers the game. The lack of passing is where the Bengals fell short in 2009.
Running, passing,....what does it matter? Without a solid OL neither will get you anywhere.
Wear gaudy colors, or avoid display. Lay a million eggs or give birth to one. The fittest shall survive, yet the unfit may live. Be like your ancestors or be different. We must repeat!
Really, It wouldn't be the TD Roethlisberger threw to the Packers defense that kept GB ahead for good? Sorry running the ball/a short passing game i.e. low risk/high reward is IMO the best way to go in the NFL. Even the worst fumblers don't turn the ball over as much as even the best guys at eluding picks. And further the game itself lends to playing together, not just individual to individual but unit to unit as well. Not making mistakes, possessing the clock and so on offensively plays into how well your defense and the opposing offense plays. Not to mention special teams.
Bottom line is execution is the most important part of any game plan and a number of things play into that and IMO running it lends itself to better execution. Now granted in todays NFL you can't just run the ball 70 or 80% of the time because you need bigger chunks of yardage at times so some balance is required. But forcing the opposing defense to defend the run first and foremost and supplementing it with a short to intermediate controlled passing game, with the occasional long ball, preferably off of play action is ideal IMO. Coming out going intermediate to deep often and spotting that with a run game is a recipe for disaster IMO. Sure you'll have the occasional team make some noise with it but rarely does a team like that go deep into the playoffs.
"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."
--Woody Hayes
I'd love to see the Bengals move to more of a short yardage passing game. Way too much of Brat's offense was high risk sideline stuff. I'd also love to never have to see another fade route to Chad in the end zone.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
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