2011 Bengals Discussion

[medford]

Using the prevent is just playing the odds. Keep everyone in front of you and let the clock be your friend. The Steelers went to a lot of heavy blitzes on Baltimore's final possession last night, they got burnt on a couple of passes to the deep corner, 1 for the TD, one that should have been caught several plays earlier. The knife cuts both ways, if you bring pressure, you better get the QB or you're just leaving your secondary exposed. Of course it works infinently better when you can get pressure from your front 4, which the rotation and combination of Johnson and Dunlap has worked great for the Bengals so far.

[Mario-Rijo]

Wow, I remember being disappointed in the draft picks of Dalton and Green.

I wasn't disappointed perse' but perhaps a shade underwhelmed. I really wanted Marcell Dareus and wanted us to make a move to get him so that disappointed me. Turns out everyone was right....so far. Dareus has been an immense help for Buffalo, has helped shave like 10 PPG off the Bills defense of last year. Green and Dalton have been good also but I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop. I need to see continued improvement by Green, and Daltons arm needs to convince me it will be good enough. I think Green will get there and I hope Daltons arm is enough even when the conditions aren't ideal. But clearly not matter what happens from here on out the Bengals certainly could have done much worse on both counts.

[Mario-Rijo]

The Bengals get to the QB as well as anyone in this league. Pitt's offensive line is atrocious, and you can rest assured the Bengals will rough up Big Ben. Maybe Pitt pulls out the W, but this team deserves respect, tough schedule or weak schedule, elite QBs faced or not elite.

Well said on all counts. Especially the last part they have won games and in the NFL no win is to be taken for granted just ask K.C. this week or New Orleans last.

[dougdirt]

That just tells you how watered down the league has become.

Please. The pool of players is the largest ever. Athletes are bigger, faster, stronger and while maybe not smarter, certainly play smarter because of the technology that they have to help them play smarter. I am so tired of hearing that today's sports are watered down. They aren't. Teams today would obliterate teams from 10 years ago, much less 20+, in all sports.

[reds1869]

Please. The pool of players is the largest ever. Athletes are bigger, faster, stronger and while maybe not smarter, certainly play smarter because of the technology that they have to help them play smarter. I am so tired of hearing that today's sports are watered down. They aren't. Teams today would obliterate teams from 10 years ago, much less 20+, in all sports.

+1.

[Stray]

We gotta keep Wallace in front of us on Sunday. The Pitt running game isn't what it usually is so I'm confident we can stop it. Let our D-Line wear em down and tee off in the 2nd half like usual.

I think we're gonna win on Sunday. Dalton just needs to play smart and stay away from Polamalu.

[RedsBaron]

Teams today would obliterate teams from 10 years ago, much less 20+, in all sports.

While I agree that athletes today are generally bigger and faster, that is a bit of an overstatment. If the increase in the quality of play was as great as you claim, with the athletes of today being to "obliterate" those who played a mere 10 years ago, then Ray Lewis wouldn't be on his way to yet another Pro Bowl, 14 years after his first Pro Bowl, Brett Favre would not have been a Pro Bowl player as far back as 1992 and as recently as 2009, and Tom Brady would not still be one of the top 3 or 4 QBs in the NFL, a full decade after his first Pro Bowl season.
Do you really think the 2011 Cardinals would obliterate the 1998 Yankees, or the 1975 Reds for that matter? Do you really think that Michael Jordan, in his prime, would be obliterated by today's NBA players?

[Hoosier Red]

I think you're taking the exceptions rather than the rules.

Brett Favre and Ray Lewis are exceptional athletes. The fact that they played as long as they did in a sport where the average career is somewhere around 3 years shows how exceptional they are.

I don't know if anyone would beat Michael Jordan, but I'd venture a guess that the 2011 Bulls would run everyone not named Jordan or Pippen off the court.

The reason people don't see the vast improvement in athletes is because they don't focus on the fact that the 99% of players that make up the core of the game are light years better than they were 15-20-30 years later.

The 1975 Reds were the exception to the rest of the league, but remember that they had guys like Merv Rettenmund, Bill Plummer, and Darrel Chaney getting about 200 AB's per season and all batting at or under the mendoza line.

Think of what a competitive advantage it was for the BRM to have guys like Concepcion and Morgan who could play gold glove defense at SS and 2b and could also hit a little. The Pirates starting SS was a guy who had a .541 OPS, and they would take him out to put a better defender in.

[medford]

I think we're gonna win on Sunday. Dalton just needs to play smart and stay away from Polamalu.

This is what I'm most interested in. At some point Polamalu is going to come off the edge, unaccounted for, and Andy is going to have to not only pick it up, but hit his hot read. Joe Flacco did it perfectly twice on the final drive last night, can Dalton do likewise? Pittsburgh is going to try their best to confuse the heck out of Dalton, how will a rookie QB and Jay Gruden adjust? I've been immensly impressed with both this season, look forward to seeng how they adjust to blitzburg.

My other key question is what will the mental state of Pittsburgh be like? They're coming off games vs New England and Baltimore, emotionally, they have to be spent, will they be able to get up again for the Bengals? You'd think coming off the lose, they would, but perhaps sufferring a 2nd loss to Baltimore gets them out of sorts as they're hopes for the division took a big blow last night. Conversly, what state of mind will the Bengals be in? Surely they'll be fired up, want to prove themselves to the skeptics that point to the schedule. Will they play within themselves, or will they try to do "too much" and leave themselves out of position and undisciplined?

Finally, how does Pittsburgh come out of last night's game health wise? Typically that's a pretty bruising game, will they be worn down physically? Will Hines Ward be able to suit up?

It almost feels like this whole season comes down to the next 4 games. I was amongst the many who thought at the begining of the season, this 4 game stretch was nothing more than a chance to beat the browns at home. All of a sudden its so much more. Going from where I was just hoping to see progress in the recent draft picks to where I find the Bengals now is amazing. Simply splitting the next 4, combined w/ the schedule of the last 4 probably puts them in the drivers seat for a playoff spot. Anything better than 2-2 and we can start thinking about a division championship and a bye.

[dougdirt]

While I agree that athletes today are generally bigger and faster, that is a bit of an overstatment. If the increase in the quality of play was as great as you claim, with the athletes of today being to "obliterate" those who played a mere 10 years ago, then Ray Lewis wouldn't be on his way to yet another Pro Bowl, 14 years after his first Pro Bowl, Brett Favre would not have been a Pro Bowl player as far back as 1992 and as recently as 2009, and Tom Brady would not still be one of the top 3 or 4 QBs in the NFL, a full decade after his first Pro Bowl season.
Do you really think the 2011 Cardinals would obliterate the 1998 Yankees, or the 1975 Reds for that matter? Do you really think that Michael Jordan, in his prime, would be obliterated by today's NBA players?

I bet you that Ray Lewis in 2007 was better than Ray Lewis in 1999, in terms of what he was capable of, if we could take Ray Lewis and everything he has access to, and place him back in 1999. The simple technological advances he would have to study film gives him a huge advantage. You can watch so much more film today than ever before because of the technology we have. You don't have to be at the stadium to do it. You can do it anywhere with your iPad. You can instantly watch every pass/run from any player in the league. You don't have to fastforward tape/DVD's.

The guys you are talking about have all had access to better training/technology as they have gotten older. That has meant they have been able to take advantage of these things.

And yes, I absolutely believe that the 2011 Cardinals would CRUSH the 1975 Reds. The scouting reports alone would give them an incredible advantage, let alone the quality of the pitchers and hitters. Toss in that the hitters could watch endless video of the pitchers.... it wouldn't even be fair.

As for basketball.... Jordan may not be dominated by todays guys, but his teammates would. Much less the 80's era Bulls. Guys are simply faster and stronger now than they were then. Todays teams would run all over those types of teams. They would jump over them too.

[Reds Freak]

It almost feels like this whole season comes down to the next 4 games. I was amongst the many who thought at the begining of the season, this 4 game stretch was nothing more than a chance to beat the browns at home. All of a sudden its so much more. Going from where I was just hoping to see progress in the recent draft picks to where I find the Bengals now is amazing. Simply splitting the next 4, combined w/ the schedule of the last 4 probably puts them in the drivers seat for a playoff spot. Anything better than 2-2 and we can start thinking about a division championship and a bye.

I agree. They have to get the Cleveland game and one of the three against Pittsburgh & Baltimore. That puts them at 8-4 with games remaining against Houston, @St. Louis, Arizona, Baltimore. Go 2-2 in that stretch of four and you're looking at a 10-6 record. Does 10-6 get them in?

[redsfandan]

There is only one rookie QB who has thrown 12 TDs in his first 8 games since the NFL merger in 1970.

He wears #14 for the Bengals.

Your wording is a little off. Dalton has thrown for 12 touchdowns this year, the most by a rookie in his team's first eight games of the season since the merger in 1970.

Marino is one guy that had more tds (15) in his first 8 games. (He didn't play in the first two games.) It's still really impressive what Dalton has done considering we're half way through the season and he's had all of the snaps.

edit: That wasn't meant as a knock on Dalton. I doubt Dalton will be quite as prolific a td producer as Marino. On the other hand, not only wasn't Dalton on the sidelines at the start of the season, but he also didn't have the benefit of a normal NFL training camp. Makes me wonder how many teams are kicking themselves for letting him slide to the Bengals in the 2nd round.

[RedsBaron]

In "The Politics of Glory," published in 1994, Bill James, while stating that he believed that the quality of play was "a little" better, took note of an article in the May 1992 edition of "Playboy" which argued that the 1954 Indians, who went 111-43, would be slaughtered if they played the 1991 Indians, who went 57-105: "That's nonsense; that's the ramblings of a young man intoxicated by new-found voice, and essent;. ially ignorant of history. One can demonstrate that it is nonsense, because if history's inclinehat steep, then the best players in the game in 1954 would have been pushed to near medicocrity was tby the mid-sixties. This did not happen."
If the NFL players of 2001 would be "obliterated" by the players of 2011, no matter how exceptional a player Ray Lewis is, a decade older Lewis would not still be a Pro Bowl player. If MLB players from a decade ago would be "obliterated" by today's players, we wouldn't be seeing any players having two decade+ careers.

[dougdirt]

If the NFL players of 2001 would be "obliterated" by the players of 2011, no matter how exceptional a player Ray Lewis is, a decade older Lewis would not still be a Pro Bowl player. If MLB players from a decade ago would be "obliterated" by today's players, we wouldn't be seeing any players having two decade+ careers.

Why wouldn't we? Did those players not get the advantages of the technology and training?

Here is what I am saying.....

Take Ray Lewis in 1999 and progress his career forward, but he has to use the exact same technology for the rest of his career moving forward as he had available in 1999 and the exact same training principles that he had available in 1999, including supplements and compare it to moving that exact same player who was able to use new technology and supplements and training.... who is going to be better?

Of course it is going to be the guy who has the better technology, supplements and training. That is why guys today would be better than guys 10 years ago, 20 years ago and 30 years ago. They have athletic advantages that make them bigger, faster, stronger and quicker in reaction. They have technological advantages that also prepare them better, by infinite amounts if you are able to go back 15-20 years or longer. That makes them all play smarter and quicker.

When you put those things together, it is just going to make better players. I really can't figure out where the other side of the argument is. Guys today are better. Part of it is genetics, because as humans we are generally just getting bigger, but a lot of it is the technology we have. Between what we know now with training, guys are just better athletes than ever before. It isn't to say the guys in the past wouldn't be if they had the same advantages, but they didn't have the same advantages.

[RiverRat13]

I agree. They have to get the Cleveland game and one of the three against Pittsburgh & Baltimore. That puts them at 8-4 with games remaining against Houston, @St. Louis, Arizona, Baltimore. Go 2-2 in that stretch of four and you're looking at a 10-6 record. Does 10-6 get them in?

It probably depends which teams they beat to get to 10-6. Right now it looks like NE, NYJ, Buffalo, CIN, PITT and Baltimore are the six teams vying for four spots (AFC East/North titles and the two wild cards). Looking at Buffalo's schedule, 10-6 to me looks like its best case scenario. The Bengals would obviously have the head-to-head tiebreaker. I have the Jets at 10-6, which would then come down to tiebreakers. While the Jets are 1 1/2 games behind the Bengals in conference record, I think there's a pretty good chance they'd actually finish with a better conference record than the Bengals. I have Pittsburgh at no worse than 11-5 even if they just split with the Bengals. I think if the Ravens sweep the Bengals, they go 13-3.

I still think the best scenario for the Bengals to get in is for Baltimore to runaway with the division (which they may well do), and the Bengals come into Week 17 at 10-5 with a game that Baltimore rests its starters.