“We’re not going down the field as much and they’re sitting on a lot of out routes. They’re scheming us like that, I think we need to take a couple of shots down the field to open things up. They’re not respecting us going deep. We haven’t been doing it much.”

Interesting, verrrry interesting.  Now, what about Bob?

Bob: “The (Vikings) had a good plan, they jammed the heck out of the receivers. They rode them up the line…

B-Flow: And it’s already getting awkward…

Bob: “and rode them up the field five yards and let the four-man rush get there. With the noise in that building it doubles the job of the offensive linemen. It makes it harder. The hope was that we could run it and hit our play-action shots down the field and they really didn’t want to give us that.

B-Flow: This seems like a good time to bring up Gameplanning 101.  “The hope was that we could run it and hit our play-action shots down the field.”  Really, Bob?  Really?  That was the plan?  We are talking about a team that using advanced statistics was 19th vs. the pass and 1st – that’s right, number 1, best in the league – vs. the run and our plan was to run it and then work play-action? Using conventional statistics the Vikings have a similar split, 16th vs. the pass and 6th vs. the run, and this is AFTER giving up only 94 yards through the air against over 100 on the ground vs. the Bengals. Given these numbers, how can the gameplan POSSIBLY  be to do what we always do, attempt to run it up the middle on the best DT tandem in recent NFL history?  This doesn’t even bring up the fact that Arizona provided a perfect blueprint of how to beat the Vikings last week, namely, throwing the football on 22 of 32 first half plays en route to a 21-10 halftime lead. This means that either Bobby knows his wideouts cannot get open – note that this may be because a) they aren’t talented (not likely), or b) because they haven’t run a pattern over 8 yards since week 2 and therefore are having every route jumped as described by Andre “Einstein” Caldwell above, you decide – or that he is too stupid to understand that the best teams are the best teams specifically because they are MULTIPLE, and can run or pass as is dictated by a combination of situation and opponent.  It’s all well and good to “stamp your will” on a football game by “doing what you always do,” but given the overwhelming evidence against this strategy vs. this particular opponent it comes across as stubborn and myopic.

The second problem with this quote is “they really didn’t want to give us that.”  Uhh… WHAT?  The opposing team “didn’t want to give you” what you wanted so you just shut it down?  What does that even mean?  Of course they didn’t want to give you that, they don’t give ANYONE that, that’s how they succeed!  They stop the run first and foremost, and sit two safeties over the top to prevent big hits on play-action.  IT’S THE SAME VIKINGS DEFENSE IT HAS BEEN FOR 5 YEARS!

Bob (continuing to enlighten us on the Vikings defensive tendencies): “They said they were going to stay in a two-high (safety) shell most of the game and jam the receivers and see if we could beat them by just running the ball.”

What an excellent decision by them!  What was your strategy to counteract this?  What?  You didn’t have one?  Further, your lead back actually DID rush for 6 YPC against this elite defense, and you still didn’t sniff the opponent!  And why, pray tell – and this is directed at Carson as well – is it that anytime a team even so much as suggests they might show/stay in a cover-2 that you basically concede attempting a throw over 10 yards?  People still throw on a cover-2, Bob.  Seriously, you yourself used to do it in 2005!  Are you telling me in 2005 and 2006 when Carson averaged almost 4000 yards per season, a 65% completion rate, 30 touchdowns, and, most importantly, almost 12 yards per completion that opposing defenses never showed you a cover-2?  I understand that you’ve swapped TJ for Coles, but if nothing else hasn’t this season shown us that TJ was a product of Chad and not the other way around?  And it’s not exactly like TJ was a burner in the first place.  Yes, the Chris Henry loss hurts, but you weren’t exactly winging it down the field when he was there – the guy never had more than 3 catches in a game.  One last point on this one, if you were saying you didn’t want to throw beyond 10 yards because it was too risky against the cover-2, well, I wouldn’t agree with it but it would at least be somewhat comprehensible.  What has actually happened, however, is that you’ve simply cut the field into 10 yard windows so it’s like you’re throwing in the Red Zone all the way down the field (notoriously more difficult because less space to defend), and as a result Carson is throwing incredibly dangerous balls into triple coverage all over the place except they’re on 6 yard ins instead of 50 yard bombs.  50 yard bombs present a risk-reward proposition that is acceptable, as an interception usually turns into nothing more than an early punt – a punt, btw, that would be about 15 yards longer than your punter provides on a weekly basis.  An interception on a 6 yard in, however, is a big problem.  The risk-reward of throwing to a triple covered 6 yard in is not acceptable.  The 6 yard ins are all triple covered because the safeties are jumping routes like they’re LA cops on Rodney King.  I apologize for the crudeness of the comment, but it’s getting ridiculous.  It’s called a slant and go, Bob, Jon Gruden yells about them every Monday Night.  He calls them “sluggo’s.”  Read up on them.

Bob: “There were guys that struggled yesterday,” [Bratkowski said of the receivers trying to get open] “Part of the plan was to jam the receivers and drop the linebackers deep, which means by the time you combine the pass rush and the receivers getting jammed, they’re a little slow to the break points, and the pass rush gets to you. If they had more time in some cases they might have got open. They didn’t have the time and they were getting ridden off the line of scrimmage and we didn’t get off the line as well as we should have.”

B-Flow: I am not even going to grace this admission of lack of athleticism in his wideouts directly, but I will point out 2 things: 1) the Vikings corners outside of Antoine Winfield are atrocious, 2) you, Bob Bratkowski, oversaw the drafting of one “Jerome Simpson” in the 2nd round of the 2008 draft.  I put “Jerome Simpson” in quotes because Bengal fans are unsure if, in fact, he really exists.  He has dressed for zero games.  Ever.  Now, you drafted this gentleman ostensibly for his athleticism, but apparently you won’t let him play because “he can’t contribute on special teams,” and is “still learning the offense.”  It’s been two years, and all you need the guy to do to open it up for you is play Chris Henry’s role of running straight down the field just to stretch the defense.  You never threw to Henry anyway, so who cares if Simpson isn’t in the right place.  At least he’s stretching the field.  Maurice Purify and Quan Cosby are dressing instead.  You didn’t deem either of those gentlemen draft worthy, and again, Jerome was a 2nd rounder.  They are part of our league worst coverage units.  We already have two wideouts who start and don’t play special teams that can’t run more than 10 yards (Coles, Caldwell), why not start one who can at least run that far and get off a goddamned jam? Oh,  and you know what else is really good for beating a physical cover-2?  A good receiving tight end that can split the seam.  Yea, like you drafted in the 3rd round – that’s right, the number 1 receiving tight end in NCAA history.  Oh, what’s that, you decided to IR him for the season because you “weren’t going to dress him?”  Why?  Oh, because he doesn’t contribute on special teams…  Sigh.  When did our ST coach become the most powerful man on the team?

Bob [from Bengals.com on the ridiculous screen at the end of the half]: “Bratkowski said one of the receivers didn’t release quickly enough and get downfield fast enough to aid the guard in his block.”

B-Flow: Bob, you called a screen pass with the clock running and 11 seconds to go in the half after you had just run a draw with 2 timeouts and used neither of them from your own 30 yard line and you are contending the problem is that a receiver didn’t release quickly enough to get a block on the corner?  Really?  Of course Hobson won’t mention that receiver was Coles – I know, I watched the tape because I am psycho – because Hobson loves Coles and was quoted only last week as saying what a great blocker he was.  Too bad he isn’t as all objective measures confirm, and this play highlights.  Dammit!  You got me distracted, Bob, again!  The real problem here is, when you are on your own 20 (as the Bengals are to start every possession after a kickoff when Bernard Scott isn’t playing, thanks Quan!) with 25 seconds left, you can either kneel or go for the FG, but nothing inbetween.  When you ran a draw the first play that was disappointing and stupid, but, you could at least have argued for the surprise 20 yard gain there.  Either way, after that play, based on the result of that play you must a) call one of your two timeouts remaining to try to continue to get to FG range as there are now 16 seconds left (5 more ticked off as Carson tried to rush the team to the line for no reason), or b) assume the 9 yard draw wasn’t enough to get to FG range in time, and just run into the locker room.  That’s right, YOU DIDN’T EVEN HAVE TO RUN A FREAKING PLAY!  Not only did you, stupidly, but you compounded that stupid decision with an even more unfathomable one by calling a screen to an essential FULLBACK with 11 seconds to go in the half and the clock running at your own 30!?!?  If there were no defenders on the field Brian Leonard could not have run into FG range and gotten out of bounds in time to kick anything better than a 60 yard field goal.  There is no possible logical explanation for this playcall.  “We were trying to get the FG” is not acceptable, nor is “we wanted to run out the clock.”  The screen was the wrong call for either of those options and frankly to spend more time on this is infuriating.

Bob [and finally, on my boy Andre Smith, 6th overall pick]: “He had too many critical mistakes and it’s from a lack of playing. He’ll be a good player. He’s shown signs in the last three weeks. He’s had outstanding blocks. He can’t have those critical mistakes, particularly with the (small) amount of plays. Two crucial mistakes and not playing every down, what happens if you play every down?”

First of all, if two critical mistakes from an O-Lineman is too many to warrant playing time, then I’m not entirely sure we’ve got 5 on the roster who can play on a weekly basis.  Fortunately for Bengals fans, we’ll never have to find out what happens if he plays every down, because despite being the best RT on the roster RIGHT NOW, if there’s one thing we’ve learned from Bob over the years it’s that he prefers the known quantity over the relative unknown even if that known quantity is a known suck and the relative unknown has upside.  Roland we know cannot pass block (we even go so far as to insert Anthony Collins in at RT on passing downs), and we also know is an inferior run blocker to Smith, again, by objective measures.  However, because Bob knows what to expect from Roland – suckiness – and doesn’t know what to expect from Andre – random mistakes with potential for awesomeness – he goes with what he knows.  This is also what happened with Purify and “Jerome Simpson.”  It’s also what happened with JP Foschi – who couldn’t make a roster in preseason – and 3rd round perfect fit for our team Chase Coffman.  The Bengals aren’t good enough to win against reasonable teams with those players.  If Bob doesn’t figure that out soon, this team is certainly incapable of going beyond the divisional round, and potentially capable of losing their last 3 to miss the playoffs altogether.

To Consider:

1) Enough with the pregame circle jerks starring Ray “When does this start getting embarrassing for me after we give up 400 yards of offense weekly” Lewis and Brian “I’ve been on this team for half a season and I’m already yelling about protecting this house” Dawkins.  I mean, seriously, have you seen these yahoos?  Here’s Ray Lewis doing one from some recent game vs. the Giants, and here’s Dawkins doing his version plus a cheesy postgame speech.  Of course, you don’t need to see those videos because you were probably watching either CBS’ or ESPN’s NFL coverage at some point this weekend, and there is nothing those two networks love more than to show a bunch of players hopping up and down in a circle 30 minutes before kickoff around some maniac yelling about disrespect (a maniac who is disrespected to the tune of being paid millions of dollars to play football, btw), protecting “his house,” declaring – completely contradictory to the fact that the other gentlemen are, in fact, in uniform ready to play – that the other team “doesn’t want to play us,” or some sort of “bring the pain” mantra.  I saw two such displays this weekend: first, Ray Lewis right before his defense got rolled right over in the first half by a far more physical Bengals offense, and secondly Dawkins about 30 minutes and one half before the more physical Steelers completely wore down the Broncos undersized defense.  Moral of the story: these little plays are ridiculous publicity stunts that may even deteriorate athletic performance through over-exertion and dehydration more than they actually perform any type of “pumping up.”  Perhaps the Ravens should be less concerned about being pumped up, and more concerned with overrunning their gaps and playing disciplined defense so that this doesn’t happen anymore.  I mean, really, a) these things happen 30 minutes before the game kicks off, so any potential adrenaline created has more than dissipated over that time, b) the other teams could care less what sort of dances you’re doing, especially when they aren’t even on the field and have already beaten you once this season, and finally c) ever heard of Murtaugh?  You guys are too old for this sh*t.

2) Getting back to football for a second, we’ve also confirmed once and for all the blueprint to beat the Broncos.  We linked to Pete Prisco’s take on this after the Baltimore game last week, and we also mentioned our suspicion that the Broncos were especially vulnerable to big, physical football teams at the point of attack.  While the Broncos showed pretty well in the first half Monday night, they borderline collapsed in the second as Rashard Mendenhall gashed them for over 150 yards on the ground and Kyle Orton self-destructed on the other side of the ball.  As we’ve mentioned all along, Denver must be perfect to win against good, physical teams and they were not on Monday.  The problem, of course, is that to wear Denver down you’ve got to be in the lead early – no easy feat considering the Broncos outstanding first half defense – and be able to prevent the Broncos from leading their trademarked 9 play 51 yard drives for punts to win field position that also milk like 6 minutes off the clock.  What the Steelers and Ravens are both excellent at, and what other teams will try to do, is to mix up a lot of blitzes with fire zones behind them to clog passing lanes on the short hot routes.  Orton has struggled to read these zones, and the Denver O-Line is on the smaller side, making it vulnerable to big, bull rushing linebackers and strong nosetackle play.  The result has not been pretty, as it does seem as if defenses are figuring out the fact that Orton cannot throw accurately beyond 15 yards at this point, so the ball is in Josh McDaniels’ court as far as adjusting back to the league’s initial adjustments to him.  Denver’s remaining schedule – like many of the AFC contenders – contains 4 very winnable games (@WAS, @KC, OAK, KC) and 4 tougher games (SD, NYG, @IND, @PHI).  I’m not convinced this Denver team is collapsing like last year’s, but I feel pretty good about the Broncos only going 1-3 in those toughies, leaving them potentially 11-5 if they sweep the easy ones.  In this year’s AFC they will need to do that, but given that two of their tough ones would be out of conference losses, their playoff chances are still pretty good.

3) Peter King would like to announce that “Arizona’s dangerous.”  Mmk, check, glad to hear Peter hasn’t written off the division leading, NFC defending champions.

4) Peter King would also like to announce Michael Oher – yes, that Michael Oher – as his ALL PRO RIGHT TACKLE for midseason.  Before I get on a rant here, and believe me one is coming, let me first say I think Michael Oher is probably a really nice kid, certainly a promising prospect, and I wish him nothing but the best for him going forward.  Now, here’s the only other person who probably voted for Oher as a midseason All-Pro:

Here’s what TMQ had to say about Oher in his weekly article:

The Nevermores’ offensive line is a mess — it allowed four sacks against Cincinnati, while clearing few rushing lanes — and the offensive line is always the best window into a team’s psychology. Right now, rookie left tackle Michael Oher looks terrible. Oher has, at a tender age, already had a lifetime of complex emotional experiences, plus been the subject of a book that’s been made into a big-studio movie that opens next week. When Oher was drafted, TMQ noted, “The true story of an impoverished African-American boy adopted by an affluent white family has obvious Hollywood appeal, but can any 22-year-old handle such media pressure?” Maybe Baltimore needs to take him out of the lineup for a while.

So one guy wants him to be benched, and the other calls him All-Pro?  Of course I am more inclined to side with Easterbrook here, but let’s be fair and go to the stats.  Football Outsiders uses something called Adjusted Line Yards to evaluate rushing success – and let’s start with rushing since run blocking is Oher’s strength – and we generally feel this is the best approximation of lineman success outside of detailed tape review.  I know Peter King has not done the latter, so let’s start with the stats.  On runs off right tackle, Oher’s position, the Ravens are averaging 4 ALY per carry, a respectable 16th in the league.  Oher has also played some left tackle, so let’s use those as well, and we see a slightly worse 3.66 ALY figure, good for 19th best.  These numbers aren’t too shabby, except when we look at the fact that overall Baltimore ranks 3rd in the league at ALY and they excel specifically at runs between the guards and all the way around right end.  Now, maybe Oher is awesome at sealing the corner, but the fact that the Ravens aren’t so great when running right behind him suggests to me that he isnt quite “uber dominant” yet as a run blocker, especially considering how inferior they have been behind him as compared to everywhere else.  Also, according to at least one count, Oher had given up 2.5 sacks as of October 22, and while sacks are often as much a result of the QB as the O-Line (paging Rodgers, Aaron) the fact of the matter is Flacco has been going down.  To put that in perspective elite RT’s have been known to go SEASONS without giving up a single sack.  I have also personally watched, and read others who have watched Oher get beat up the field by speed rushers and then abused by double moves.  Look, I don’t know if Michael Oher is going to be great or not.  I’m pretty sure he could be, and I’m pretty sure he’s doing fine for a rookie.  That said, the idea, even the idea of having the idea, that he is remotely close to being the very best right tackle in the National Football League is somewhere between asinine and embarrassing.  Either Peter King opted to have a little fun with his RT pick on his midseason All-Pro team, or…  well you get the idea.

5) Moving on from Peter King, let’s leave you with some quick hits Peter King style just so he isn’t too angry at me (obvious sarcasm since he has more people following him for his “coffeenerdness,” ugh I can’t even say it without cringing, than I will ever have in my entire lifetime):

a) Houston is a good football team.  They also have 4-5 easily winnable games left and just went toe to toe with the    Colts.  This team is  a legitimate playoff contender.  Note: It’s almost strange how just about every relevant team left in the AFC has 4 easy games and 4 tough games left as opposed to anyone being especially skewed.

b) The whole Qwest Field advantage thing for the Seahawks is dead to me.  The Seahawks are dead to me.  That was the softest cover ever at home against the Lions and it took 5 Matt Stafford INT’s including a pick 6 with 22 ticks remaining to do it.  That pick 6, however, is why we gamble – what a worthless game, meaningless pick, even more meaningless return, but because the moron decides to take it to the house someone wins and someone loses.  Awesome.

c) The 49ers justified our concern with that putrid home performance, though to be fair Tennessee is looking quite a bit feistier lately thanks largely to the fact that excellent rushing qb’s like Vince Young almost always result in an uptick in performance from the team’s RB’s thanks to the added delay and attention opposing LB’s give the QB scramble option.  I’m tired and it’s late so I don’t have a link for that but remind me and I will, I promise it’s a real thing – FO writes about it all the time and I believe ESPN even had a piece on it this week.  Back to the 9ers, though, the fact of the matter is they don’t have an NFL QB, and when Alex Smith/Shaun Hill/Hannah Montana is behind center creating 4 turnovers a game, you put yourself in a tough spot.

d) An ESPN.com poll of about 32,000 people today displayed the fact that 53% of “SportsNation” considers the Bengals-Steelers showdown this week to be a bigger game than Pats-Colts.  As someone who has begun to tire of the whole Manning-Brady “rivalry,” this struck me as progress.  In honor of that, we leave this week’s musings with a nice shot of one of the lovely Ben-Gals.  Enjoy.

(ED. NOTE: FIRST EMAIL AUTHORED BY J.THAYER, STB ESQ.)

Im sorry but are the coaches really saying that despite the fact that Coffman dominates in practice and catches everything thrown to him, they wont activate him because he never had to cover kickoffs at Missouri? Did I miss the part in any of the last 6 games where Daniel Coats or the foshster made huge tackles in kick coverage? Brats take on our 3rd and 4th string tight ends?: “There have been times they’ve both done some really good things,” Bratkowski said. “They’ve both made plays in the pass game and they have both made good plays blocking. It’s not as consistent as we would like. Obviously the dropped balls and the fumbles are an issue. They’ve just got to come out of it.” Didn’t we try the “just got to come out of it” strategy with St Louis? Is that even a strategy?

(ED. NOTE: HERE COME THE RESPONSES)

the answer, sir, is no, it is not a freaking strategy its just pathetic.  its unreal that after all the team has been through to try to battle back this season that the coaching staff is falling for an error all too common in baseball: overrating “experience.”  as all sane people understand, the only way a player gets “experience” is by playing, so if, as a coach, you forever condemn a player for lack of experience he will in fact never see the light of day.  on the other hand, if you go by my and every other rational persons’ motto of: “let your best players play,” then you end up giving your very best shot at every game, as opposed to hiding behind two 3rd and 4th string guys who weren’t even going to make the goddamned roster if the top 2 hadnt gotten hurt.  i mean seriously.  JP FREAKING FOSCHI?????  he should never, EVER, EVER, be on a professional football field.  if you want an extra blocker, throw in an extra lineman or fullback.  if you want an extra receiver put a goddamned receiver on the field, or, better, PUT THE GUY YOU DRAFTED TO RECEIVE OUT OF THAT POSITION ON THE FREAKING FIELD.  and the whole special teams argument is beyond baffling.  our kickoff coverage is, quite literally, the worst in the entire NFL!  the worst!  you’re telling me swapping out 4th string tight ends is going to permanently affect kickoffs in a negative way?  and how about my other most hated roster spot, the designated “special teams superstar,” in our case kyries hebert, who can never actually play a real football down.  what has he done this season?  well, lets see, make zero memorable plays except for punching some guy in the face on sunday for no particular reason.  guys like that are freaking dime a dozen, just like long snappers, just like 4th string tight ends.  when youre in one of those spots, and you screw up like foschi did and like hebert did, you should be cut.  why?  because there are 10 other guys of at least equal caliber waiting to come in and play who DID NOT  screw up.  you could actually argue that coats and foschi cost the football team a game on sunday, and when two players who aren’t noticeable better than people sitting on the street cost you games, they should be eradicated immediately.  its freaking nuts, its just freaking nuts and i cant stand it.  i hate bratkowski, i hate marvin lewis’ roster management (tell me again why roy williams is starting and chris crocker often assumes the nickel corner role?), and we are 1 loss away from being the same old bengals one more time.  i dont want that.  i/bengals fans dont deserve that.

(ED. NOTE – 4.5 HOURS ELAPSE)

ok i just did a tour de bengals.com, and, basically, i cant go back for the rest of the week.  i am so enraged with the assinine comments by bratkowski and lewis re tight ends, bernard scott, the no-huddle, run/pass balance, etc.  particularly i was annoyed with bratkowski talking about how he “cant get bscott involved bc we werent on the field a lot.”  hey fucking genius: the reason you arent on the field is because of YOUR FUCKING PLAYCALLING.  its not going to be that every game you get to run 80 plays so you can give ced 25 carries, chad 10 balls, caldwell 20 balls, coles 5 balls, henry 5 balls, foschi and coats 100 balls, and then bscott 10 touches.  guess what?  sometimes you have to make things work on the timetable you get in the game!  sometimes teams win games and have variety on offense without running 70000 plays!  sometimes you lose the time of possession battle and win the game!

i havent been this angry about the bengs for a while, but its just because i love them and because this year – unlike last year – the team has a real chance to do something, but we’re watching two stooges run the team from the scared shitless perspective of 3 straight non-winning seasons.  seriously.  those two turkeys would rather NOT win games 34-20.  i am almost thinking theyd rather either lose or at the very least win 17-16 every week than even consider putting up 24 points in a football game.  there are several things that should be done every game that would make the bengals so much better its just painful that it doesnt happen more: 1) throw fucking chad the fucking ball, 2) cut foschi and start coffman.  immediately.  tangent!  we scored 27 points a game with no tight ends in 2005.  i know they (coaches curly (brat) and moe (lew) hate that team because it “collapsed.”  well guess what, it did NOT collapse!  its qb blew out his freaking knee!  ive been reading about how steelers fans were actually scared ofthe 2005 team but they know this team isnt the same threat because they take no chances and basically have to play a perfect game to win.  a team witha  good offense and a bad defense that loses a playoff game then struggles does not mean that to win you must have a boring/bad offense.  it means you need a better fucking defense.  take a look at every good team in the league: pats, colts, steelers, ravens, saints, giants, falcons, etc ALL OF THESE TEAMS HAVE GREAT OFFENSES, 3) get b scott 5 touches a game MINIMUM EVERY GAME NO MATTER THE NUMBER OF PLAYS, 4) get your defense the memo – specifically the safeties – that you dont need to ridiculously overcommit to every play, and think of yourselves as awesome when you give up 500 yards to the texans.

basically chad, instead of taking more money, had part of his new promotional contract with motorola include the company buying 1200 tickets so that the bengals could avoid a blackout by virtue of not getting a sellout in their game vs houston this weekend.  name me another player who does that.  motorola will now give out the 600 pairs of tickets tomorrow for free.  also, don’t hold your breath on espn covering this story, since it isn’t negative and doesn’t involve anything where trent dilfer can go nuts about how selfish diva wide receivers are.  chad just wants the fans to be able to see the show, his words, not mine, on sunday.  just check out his ustreams to verify

Check all that apply. There is a guy in your fantasy league who:

-Has offered you Felix Jones and Mike Sims-Walker for Anquan Boldin and Brandon Jacobs, not because he thinks he is hosing you, but because he really thinks it’s a fair deal