Game Thread: Bengals vs. Steelers

[CrashDavisSports]

Mahomes is the real deal. It is amazing how much worse the league made defenses in this era.

 

[cincygrad]

One bit of good news.... Mahomes has yet to have a bad game this season. Even the great qbs have to have an off day every now and then, right? I figure this means they'll only put up 40.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Offensively, hard to argue about when they scored. They could have taken a bit more time off the clock, but honestly, with 3 Time Outs, it wasn't going to be a huge issue. 30-45 seconds wasn't really going to make or break the Steelers' drive. I don't even think they used a TO, did they?

Defensively, TA has got to retailer what he is doing to better help the strength of this team instead of taking the strength of this team away in the DL.

I'm not saying he needs to blitz all out all the time, but it seems that he relies way too much on simple 4-man rushes. The DB's simply are not good enough to cover that long, well outside of Jackson that is. Also, way too often they had JuJu lined up on Dennard or another backup. Jackson should have followed him, or brown, and by default Kirkpatrick should have taken the other.

Conversely, it also appears that when he sends a blitz: A. It's 100% obvious that it is coming. B. The DB's are playing so far off the LOS that a quick out is neutralizing the blitz. I feel that this happens a lot even when it is a 4-man rush on the DL. DB's and LB's are so far back, that any kind of pressure is easily mitigated by the outlet to a dragging WR on an underneath route, a wide open TE, or a RB out of the backfield. That last TD play, McRae is up on the LOS, Brown comes across and Jackson is 10 yards deep. Who exactly is he covering? Yes, it was a pick (let's call it what it is) but it was so poorly defended, that it didn't need to be a pick for the play to work.

I have a feeling the reason that TA preaches turnovers so much is really because it covers up a lot of his faults as a play-caller. He's not been impressive at all.

 

[cincygrad]

Offensively, hard to argue about when they scored. They could have taken a bit more time off the clock, but honestly, with 3 Time Outs, it wasn't going to be a huge issue. 30-45 seconds wasn't really going to make or break the Steelers' drive. I don't even think they used a TO, did they?

Defensively, TA has got to retailer what he is doing to better help the strength of this team instead of taking the strength of this team away in the DL.

I'm not saying he needs to blitz all out all the time, but it seems that he relies way too much on simple 4-man rushes. The DB's simply are not good enough to cover that long, well outside of Jackson that is. Also, way too often they had JuJu lined up on Dennard or another backup. Jackson should have followed him, or brown, and by default Kirkpatrick should have taken the other.

Conversely, it also appears that when he sends a blitz: A. It's 100% obvious that it is coming. B. The DB's are playing so far off the LOS that a quick out is neutralizing the blitz. I feel that this happens a lot even when it is a 4-man rush on the DL. DB's and LB's are so far back, that any kind of pressure is easily mitigated by the outlet to a dragging WR on an underneath route, a wide open TE, or a RB out of the backfield. That last TD play, McRae is up on the LOS, Brown comes across and Jackson is 10 yards deep. Who exactly is he covering? Yes, it was a pick (let's call it what it is) but it was so poorly defended, that it didn't need to be a pick for the play to work.

I have a feeling the reason that TA preaches turnovers so much is really because it covers up a lot of his faults as a play-caller. He's not been impressive at all.

To my recollection, Marvin Lewis has never had a corner specifically shadow a receiver. They play a side of the field and the way the receivers line up, dictates who plays who in coverage. I've never understood this logic from Lewis. I suppose he just wants his D to be run the exact same way, each time, regardless of personnel for us or for them. It seems like its way too easy to exploit for an offensive coordinator. For example, if Bill Lazor were scheming against a Marvin Lewis D, he would feature AJ in the slot or to the other side of Jackson for almost the entire game.

As for the last play.... My understanding is that McCrae is supposed to stay inside of the pick (toward the hash) and then take Brown as he is heading that way. Jackson is taking the guy that goes outside. McCrae definitely got picked - But he also has to see that coming and not let the pick get set.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

None of that series of plays should have even occurred. It is like the playoff game in '15. If Hill doesn't fumble that ball, no comeback for Pittsburgh.

If all we do is not hurry to the line of scrimmage and we don't throw a quick out to get to the sidelines, that is at least two forced timeouts for Pittsburgh, or they are letting time run. If they are calling timeouts, the middle of the field no longer is as much of an option unless it is a mid to deep pass play to hurry to the ball and spike it.

It changes Pittsburgh's entire play calling if they do call timeouts. It was not even guaranteed they were going to call a timeout. 1) We rushed to the line of scrimmage so fast and snapped the ball, they had no need to call a timeout. 2) If we rush to the LOS but start calling a play from the line while letting time run down, we may have caught Pitt in between wondering if we are going to snap the ball quickly to preserve time for their offense, or are we truly milking the clock after rushing to the LOS.

I do not fault the offense for scoring, as they had to score of the comeback meant nothing. I am just saying there are so many ways they could have gone, and none worse than the way we went other than not scoring a TD.

 

[Cincyfan78]

None of that series of plays should have even occurred. It is like the playoff game in '15. If Hill doesn't fumble that ball, no comeback for Pittsburgh.

If all we do is not hurry to the line of scrimmage and we don't throw a quick out to get to the sidelines, that is at least two forced timeouts for Pittsburgh, or they are letting time run. If they are calling timeouts, the middle of the field no longer is as much of an option unless it is a mid to deep pass play to hurry to the ball and spike it.

It changes Pittsburgh's entire play calling if they do call timeouts. It was not even guaranteed they were going to call a timeout. 1) We rushed to the line of scrimmage so fast and snapped the ball, they had no need to call a timeout. 2) If we rush to the LOS but start calling a play from the line while letting time run down, we may have caught Pitt in between wondering if we are going to snap the ball quickly to preserve time for their offense, or are we truly milking the clock after rushing to the LOS.

I do not fault the offense for scoring, as they had to score of the comeback meant nothing. I am just saying there are so many ways they could have gone, and none worse than the way we went other than not scoring a TD.

Look, I get it. It's a valid point. I think we both agree. It's a Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I'll take the points and hope the defense can prevent the drive. Yes, even with how bad they were/are. There's just no way of knowing if they had slowed down if they would have scored. Would they have? Maybe. Probably. But, in the end, all that matters at that point in time is staying in rhythm and scoring. That happened. What happened after is another story.

 

[Cincyfan78]

To my recollection, Marvin Lewis has never had a corner specifically shadow a receiver. They play a side of the field and the way the receivers line up, dictates who plays who in coverage. I've never understood this logic from Lewis. I suppose he just wants his D to be run the exact same way, each time, regardless of personnel for us or for them. It seems like its way too easy to exploit for an offensive coordinator. For example, if Bill Lazor were scheming against a Marvin Lewis D, he would feature AJ in the slot or to the other side of Jackson for almost the entire game.

As for the last play.... My understanding is that McCrae is supposed to stay inside of the pick (toward the hash) and then take Brown as he is heading that way. Jackson is taking the guy that goes outside. McCrae definitely got picked - But he also has to see that coming and not let the pick get set.

You are right, Marvin does not move the CB's around, to my recollection, either. But, when you are down to CB number 4 matching up against Brown/JuJu, I think it's time to adapt on the fly. Just my opinion.

You are probably right on the "rub"/"Pick", but the fact that WJ3 was 10-12 yards off meant it didn't really matter. You can't bring a full on house blitz and then give a WR 10-12 yards of cushion. It 100% defeats the entire purpose of the blitz. It's things like that which are really disappointing to me from a scheme standpoint.

 

[cincygrad]

You are right, Marvin does not move the CB's around, to my recollection, either. But, when you are down to CB number 4 matching up against Brown/JuJu, I think it's time to adapt on the fly. Just my opinion.

You are probably right on the "rub"/"Pick", but the fact that WJ3 was 10-12 yards off meant it didn't really matter. You can't bring a full on house blitz and then give a WR 10-12 yards of cushion. It 100% defeats the entire purpose of the blitz. It's things like that which are really disappointing to me from a scheme standpoint.

It's funny because last night I watched the Russel Wilson pick from the Super Bowl a few years ago. It was essentially the exact same play. The inside corner was picked (pretty obviously).... The difference was that the outside corner went with the receiver and jumped the slant. Whereas Jackson stayed outside. Sorta like you suggest.

 

[Cincyfan78]

It's funny because last night I watched the Russel Wilson pick from the Super Bowl a few years ago. It was essentially the exact same play. The inside corner was picked (pretty obviously).... The difference was that the outside corner went with the receiver and jumped the slant. Whereas Jackson stayed outside. Sorta like you suggest.

And it was just one hell of a play by the CB. Even knowing the play (as Butler said he did from Film), to come up with the INT was an amazing effort. It's one of the reasons why I don't pan that play call there. Yes you have Lynch, yes that's what the "coaching bible" would tell you to do (run), but it wasn't a bad play call. It was just an amazing read, reaction, and play by the CB. Sometimes, you just have to tip your cap to the other team/player and accept the result. Also, I think there was a stat that year where Lynch had only converted 1 TD in that situation in something like 4-5 attempts that year. You figure the defense is gearing up for the run (and IMO, a bunch O-Line formation always favors the defense), so why not go for the quick slant/pass? No issue with the call there, really. I'd say the likelihood of a INT there was very low, in terms of probability. Again, the CB just made a hell of a play.

I don't even fault Jackson being off the line a little bit, after all you don't want to give up the deep ball, either...but with his recovery speed and ability, there's no reason he shouldn't have been at least within 4-5 yards of the LOS when they bunch up like that. If that was the case, why not line Jackson up on the LOS, and have McRae back? Oh well, I digress...

WE'RE ON TO KANSAS CITY!

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Look, I get it. It's a valid point. I think we both agree. It's a Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I'll take the points and hope the defense can prevent the drive. Yes, even with how bad they were/are. There's just no way of knowing if they had slowed down if they would have scored. Would they have? Maybe. Probably. But, in the end, all that matters at that point in time is staying in rhythm and scoring. That happened. What happened after is another story.

Hell I am not saying we would have won. All I am saying is there was no need to be in a hurry there. Force Pitt to call two TO, and leave them with 1 for the FG only. That means you have not quite, but almost taken the middle of the field out of the picture on the attempted FG drive for Ben.

I am questioning execution on the clock management, not us scoring, or guaranteeing any win. There are just right and wrong ways to do things, and Marvin Lewis obviously didn't know what the hell he was doing.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Hell I am not saying we would have won. All I am saying is there was no need to be in a hurry there. Force Pitt to call two TO, and leave them with 1 for the FG only. That means you have not quite, but almost taken the middle of the field out of the picture on the attempted FG drive for Ben.

I am questioning execution on the clock management, not us scoring, or guaranteeing any win. There are just right and wrong ways to do things, and Marvin Lewis obviously didn't know what the hell he was doing.

Agreed. My only counter argument is: What if slowing things down throws off the rhythm of the offense? Maybe they don't end up scoring. That is why I said "Damed if you do, damned if you don't". No point in making Pitt use TO's if you don't score.

If it's clicking and working, then I say keep at it, and worry about the clock/defense later. Afterall, even with the struggles, the defense has been pretty good at closing things out this year in the 4th.

What was a nice change for this game, I never felt they were out of it, and despite the loss, I feel the Bengals are still in a very good position. Pitt won, it sucks, but they didn't punk the Bengals, or the players didn't self-implode. A good team just made the last play. That happens.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Agreed. My only counter argument is: What if slowing things down throws off the rhythm of the offense? Maybe they don't end up scoring. That is why I said "Damed if you do, damned if you don't". No point in making Pitt use TO's if you don't score.

If it's clicking and working, then I say keep at it, and worry about the clock/defense later. Afterall, even with the struggles, the defense has been pretty good at closing things out this year in the 4th.

What was a nice change for this game, I never felt they were out of it, and despite the loss, I feel the Bengals are still in a very good position. Pitt won, it sucks, but they didn't punk the Bengals, or the players didn't self-implode. A good team just made the last play. That happens.

Only one I can remember is Miami. Defense saved the day there.

They got beat down in the 4th by Pittsburgh.

They had to have the offense come from behind twice (Indy and Atlanta).

They got out front early (Baltimore) and then the defense started letting Baltimore back into the game in the second half. Fortunately, they offense spotted them enough points in the first half to hold on.

I am not in the "oh my the sky is falling" mindset at all. I think the Bengals are playing well, but I question the health of our team as they are starting to get banged up and do not appear to have as much depth as thought. They are also very likely going to be going to 4-3 after this weekend. I think they can beat KC, but in KC on Sunday night football, real tall order with the way that Chiefs offense has been playing and the mobility of Mahomes which is still our achillies heel, mobile QB's (see Cam Newton).

We need to get healthy, stay healthy, and that defense has to catch up with our offense a little bit.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Only one I can remember is Miami. Defense saved the day there.

They got beat down in the 4th by Pittsburgh.

They had to have the offense come from behind twice (Indy and Atlanta).

They got out front early (Baltimore) and then the defense started letting Baltimore back into the game in the second half. Fortunately, they offense spotted them enough points in the first half to hold on.

I am not in the "oh my the sky is falling" mindset at all. I think the Bengals are playing well, but I question the health of our team as they are starting to get banged up and do not appear to have as much depth as thought. They are also very likely going to be going to 4-3 after this weekend. I think they can beat KC, but in KC on Sunday night football, real tall order with the way that Chiefs offense has been playing and the mobility of Mahomes which is still our achillies heel, mobile QB's (see Cam Newton).

We need to get healthy, stay healthy, and that defense has to catch up with our offense a little bit.

Defense created turnovers to seal both Indy and Baltimore. Against B-more, Offense jumped out early, but really struggled in the 2nd half. Defense did allow them back in, but made the play to seal the win.

I agree, though. If you were looking at the schedule pre-season, you are thinking: Win at Indy, win vs Bmore, and win 1 of CAR/ATL and maybe win one of Pitt/KC...but losing both to PIT/KC OR both at CAR/ATL wouldn't have been a surprise. What would have really hurt was losing BOTH sets of games.

Bengals may end up 4-3 after next week, but...the schedule does get a bit easier with Denver/Oakland coming into town and at some point the Browns, though they are better.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Defense created turnovers to seal both Indy and Baltimore. Against B-more, Offense jumped out early, but really struggled in the 2nd half. Defense did allow them back in, but made the play to seal the win.

I agree, though. If you were looking at the schedule pre-season, you are thinking: Win at Indy, win vs Bmore, and win 1 of CAR/ATL and maybe win one of Pitt/KC...but losing both to PIT/KC OR both at CAR/ATL wouldn't have been a surprise. What would have really hurt was losing BOTH sets of games.

Bengals may end up 4-3 after next week, but...the schedule does get a bit easier with Denver/Oakland coming into town and at some point the Browns, though they are better.

I know what you mean and can see that. However, once again, what is the point of the playoffs if we can't beat the teams we need to beat now to prove we can hang? Otherwise, one and done again. You never know if you get there, but we need a couple statement wins during the season to make me more confident going into the playoffs if we can make it there to begin with. That Pitt game, was my judgement stick. We lost that. Now, the backup judgement stick is this KC game. We lose this, I don't see what the point is as things have obviously not changed enough to make us mentally tough enough to overcome the odds even if they are supposed to be in our favor.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I know what you mean and can see that. However, once again, what is the point of the playoffs if we can't beat the teams we need to beat now to prove we can hang? Otherwise, one and done again. You never know if you get there, but we need a couple statement wins during the season to make me more confident going into the playoffs if we can make it there to begin with. That Pitt game, was my judgement stick. We lost that. Now, the backup judgement stick is this KC game. We lose this, I don't see what the point is as things have obviously not changed enough to make us mentally tough enough to overcome the odds even if they are supposed to be in our favor.

Agreed, but as long as the team can maybe improve (especially on D) then they will be in a good place if they can reach the playoffs.

As for as measuring stick, I still think the Bengals passed in some respects. I know that a loss is a loss, but for once it never felt like Cincinnati was outclassed by Pitt. Pitt is still a good team, and the fact that this team was right there at the end and even completed a potential game winning drive is a HUGE step, I think, for the players and this team.

I think they know, and they feel they were the better team. Regardless if they are, or not, the fact is the feeling is not the same surrounding this team this year, or even after this game. Yes, it was another loss to Pitt, but in the grand scheme of things, it wasn't like so many of the other losses.