MNF: Bengals/Colts

[Hoosier Red]

I think you're right Johnny, Whitworth and Andrews have value. And they are both going to be valuable as guards. But Freeney and Mathis are probably the two worst matchups you can think of for guys who as a tackle makes a pretty good guard.

[WMR]

That time-out on the first drive was just simply retarded. Why do you give them a chance to challenge the play? WHY? I don't get it.

REALLY bad coaching last night.

Chris Henry needs to get socked in the face. Or SOMETHING. SOMETHING to wake this guy up. Has he EVER fought for a ball? Damn that pissed me off.

Ugh, what a shame of a game.

[remdog]

If the Bengals don't call a time-out on the first drive they either have first & 10 at the 21 or they make the Colts challenge and get the time out from them. Who called the time-out and why? Was it to give Chad a 'blow'? If that's the case, use another reciever for one play. At that point in the game, with the Bengals 'game plan' it's likely that the next play was a run anyway. Geez!

Rem

[paintmered]

Originally Posted by WilyMoROCKS

That time-out on the first drive was just simply retarded. Why do you give them a chance to challenge the play? WHY? I don't get it.

Chad's nads needed the timeout.

[CTA513]

Originally Posted by remdog

If the Bengals don't call a time-out on the first drive they either have first & 10 at the 21 or they make the Colts challenge and get the time out from them. Who called the time-out and why? Was it to give Chad a 'blow'? If that's the case, use another reciever for one play. At that point in the game, with the Bengals 'game plan' it's likely that the next play was a run anyway. Geez!

Rem

The ball hit Chad in the crotch, but he was getting up and it looked like they had enough time to get him off the field and replaced by another reciever without having to call a time out.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Razor Shines 1B

I don't know. Have you seen how other teams have beat the Colts? It wasn't by keeping them off balance, it was by running the ball down their throats, I mean Jacksonville's third stringer tore us up. From someone who obviously is not a Bengal fan, I'd say the biggest problem was not committing to a game plan. I think if they would have just committed to the run in the first half they would have won. It seemed like they ran at all the wrong times. I think they should have run every first down and maybe every second down in the first half.

In the first drive the only ran twice and Rudi fumbled one of those, but they recovered threw the incomplete pass to CJ and then it was 3 and 5 and the Colts new a pass was coming and that's the only good part of the Colts D is when they know you have to pass. So the ran twice for 10 yds in the first drive and on 2nd and 5 they decided to pass. I just think they allowed Peyton to control the game, by not keeping him on the bench for long periods of time with the run. But that's just my opinion.

How other teams beat the Colts should only be a small part of how any other team game plans against another. The Bengals can run the ball, but they hamstrung one of the most dynamic receiving duos in the league when the other team was playing scrubs in the secondary. Why only focus on one weakness? Why leave your team's greatest offensive strength when the other team probably will not be able to do anything about it? Hopefully these are questions the Bengals staff all visited in their skull sessions and they just chose a poor course of action. It happens, coaches are not immune from making wrong choices.

As for Peyton controlling the game, that is on the D. By choosing to play prevent D the entire game, they allowed him to control the clock with dinks and dunks. Running plays were a diversion because he was licking his chops knowing that the zone was not picking up guys in the middle of the field. What kind of D lets a running back sit down 8 yards out with no defenders within 5 yards? Who where the LBers covering?

And then the zone lets Marvin Harrison...Marvin Harrison (stunning isn't it) go across the middle without anyone picking him up. Soft zone on Marvin Harrison? I remember distinctly on one play that he went across the middle, Jonathon Joseph let him go on a left cut, Marvin is running to the left, and after Joseph lets hims go, the DB (never got the number) took two steps to the right. By then, Marvin is wide open in the middle of the field for about a 20 yarder. So, we're either talking really dumb players who or really bad coaching that they do not have a game plan in place to handle Marvin Harrison. I know, he's all-world and he catches ball on everyone, but it was way too easy last night. I doubt if he even broke a sweat, other than stubbing his finger, which had nothing to do with the D.

[CrackerJack]

Marvin's coaching is as inconsistent as his players week-to-week and last night was a big disappointment.

To get blown out like that was pitiful and the Bengals' simply let the city and the fans down big time.

I had some faith in this team after the 4 game winning streak, but now, we see what they tend to play like and how poorly they're prepared for big, tough games like this. They'll never survive on the road in the playoffs - just aren't good enough.

It's too bad the 0-line is full of injury prone players who are unreliable and that the back-ups aren't very good either. Without Palmer having time to throw often enough, they are really not that good of a team.

[Cedric]

Marvin has never been good with clock management or in game adjustments. He always has that confused as hell look on his face.

I'm impressed with the culture change and the personnel changes he has provided here. I'm not so impressed with his coaching.

It's definately been worth it so far though.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by CrackerJack

To get blown out like that was pitiful and the Bengals' simply let the city and the fans down big time.

A bit melodramatic, don't ya think?

[flyer85]

The Bengals are the most effective team in football when passing on first down. They kinda forgot about that last night.

The Colts defense is still effective when they can get the opponent in obvious passing downs. The keys were a) the Colts getting a lead and b) the Bengals ending up in too many obvious passing situations

[Razor Shines]

Originally Posted by traderumor

How other teams beat the Colts should only be a small part of how any other team game plans against another. The Bengals can run the ball, but they hamstrung one of the most dynamic receiving duos in the league when the other team was playing scrubs in the secondary. Why only focus on one weakness? Why leave your team's greatest offensive strength when the other team probably will not be able to do anything about it? Hopefully these are questions the Bengals staff all visited in their skull sessions and they just chose a poor course of action. It happens, coaches are not immune from making wrong choices.

The Colts may have scrubs in the secondary but they don't have scrubs on the D line and Bengals have one on the O line. So if passing was so effective why didn't they score more? They threw the ball 28 times.

As for Peyton controlling the game, that is on the D. By choosing to play prevent D the entire game, they allowed him to control the clock with dinks and dunks. Running plays were a diversion because he was licking his chops knowing that the zone was not picking up guys in the middle of the field. What kind of D lets a running back sit down 8 yards out with no defenders within 5 yards? Who where the LBers covering?

I know, I know Sorgi could have done it. I get it, everybody is sick of hearing how good Peyton is when he's not that good.

My answers are....you know

[traderumor]

Many of those 28 throws were desparation at the end. I noted that there were only 12 or 13 throws through 3 quarters.

Your other answer is simply an argument I never made, nor anyone else on this thread. Manning did a heckuva job hitting wide open receivers. He is a great QB. The D's job is still to stop the other team, no matter who the QB is. The D played a very, very soft zone against someone who had the ability to pick them apart. Every QB needs pressure, and the Bengals had been effectively using the blitz and stunts to do so of late. Last night, they were passive and it was obvious that was their intent. Don't fall over yourself trying to give someone props that you do not look at both sides of the coin. The D made it way too easy for someone who didn't need any help.

Oh, duh, I see your location now. Now I see why your comments are lopsided.

[redsfanmia]

Originally Posted by traderumor

Many of those 28 throws were desparation at the end. I noted that there were only 12 or 13 throws through 3 quarters.

Your other answer is simply an argument I never made, nor anyone else on this thread. Manning did a heckuva job hitting wide open receivers. He is a great QB. The D's job is still to stop the other team, no matter who the QB is. The D played a very, very soft zone against someone who had the ability to pick them apart. Every QB needs pressure, and the Bengals had been effectively using the blitz and stunts to do so of late. Last night, they were passive and it was obvious that was their intent. Don't fall over yourself trying to give someone props that you do not look at both sides of the coin. The D made it way too easy for someone who didn't need any help.

Oh, duh, I see your location now. Now I see why your comments are lopsided.

The Bengals just picked thier poison, had they tried to go one on one Peyton would have gone deep. I understand everyone is tired of seeing Peyton everywhere but to try to say he is not great is just wrong. The guy is the best QB in the game with the only arguement coming from New England. Plus there have been no chinks in his armor off the field yet. Face it the Bengals just got beat by a better team, next year maybe but not now.

[Jpup]

Drew Brees is looking awfully tough down in the Big Easy.

[Razor Shines]

Originally Posted by traderumor

Many of those 28 throws were desparation at the end. I noted that there were only 12 or 13 throws through 3 quarters.

Your other answer is simply an argument I never made, nor anyone else on this thread. Manning did a heckuva job hitting wide open receivers. He is a great QB. The D's job is still to stop the other team, no matter who the QB is. The D played a very, very soft zone against someone who had the ability to pick them apart. Every QB needs pressure, and the Bengals had been effectively using the blitz and stunts to do so of late. Last night, they were passive and it was obvious that was their intent. Don't fall over yourself trying to give someone props that you do not look at both sides of the coin. The D made it way too easy for someone who didn't need any help.

Oh, duh, I see your location now. Now I see why your comments are lopsided.

Actually the exact argument that Sorgi could have beat the Bengals was used in this thread.

I don't what you're talking about with the "lopsided" stuff. Teams beat the Colts when they run the ball. The Bengals averaged 4.4 yds a carry. I think in the first half them keeping the ball and Manning off the field was the most important thing for them. Whether Peyton controlled the game or the Bengals allowed him to control the game, keeping the offense off the field and controlling the ball was thier best chance of winning.

And one half of your dynamic recieving duo was not catching the ball, maybe he was thinking about his shoes, I don't know. While our best reciever, who I have only once seen celebrate a TD and was penalized for it, went out and caught 3 TDs. There's some "lopsided" talk for you.