Pitch on the move?

[cincygrad]

So now it looks like Pitch has been given permission to interview for OC jobs that include play-calling duties. So, Zac is so dug in on play-calling that the Bengals are willing to let one of their best assistant coaches walk.

This reminds me of something I took away from that Duke presser..... Duke went on and on about how the Bengals have lost close games and they need to get that out of their DNA. Here's the thing - I think I remember seeing that over 70% of NFL games are within one score at some point in the 4th quarter. It is 100% true that most NFL games swing on a couple of critical plays or critical drives. Particularly when teams are at full (or almost full) health and still competing for playoff spots. The Bengals organization somehow think that the teams that lose these games are just unlucky or 'just need to get it out of their DNA.' It's called coaching and Zac is one of the least situationally aware coaches in the league. Any real franchise would have lifted playcalling from him 2 seasons ago as it has become 100% clear he can't manage the duties while still ensuring plays are called on time, the offense moves with tempo and the correct decisions are made when to go or when to kick.

I know this goes without saying, but this franchise just continues to be stupid and they have no hope for change.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

So now it looks like Pitch has been given permission to interview for OC jobs that include play-calling duties. So, Zac is so dug in on play-calling that the Bengals are willing to let one of their best assistant coaches walk.

This reminds me of something I took away from that Duke presser..... Duke went on and on about how the Bengals have lost close games and they need to get that out of their DNA. Here's the thing - I think I remember seeing that over 70% of NFL games are within one score at some point in the 4th quarter. It is 100% true that most NFL games swing on a couple of critical plays or critical drives. Particularly when teams are at full (or almost full) health and still competing for playoff spots. The Bengals organization somehow think that the teams that lose these games are just unlucky or 'just need to get it out of their DNA.' It's called coaching and Zac is one of the least situationally aware coaches in the league. Any real franchise would have lifted playcalling from him 2 seasons ago as it has become 100% clear he can't manage the duties while still ensuring plays are called on time, the offense moves with tempo and the correct decisions are made when to go or when to kick.

I know this goes without saying, but this franchise just continues to be stupid and they have no hope for change.

Agreed. However, if I am Taylor and he thinks that is his strength, regardless of what us as fans think, I can understand him living or dying by his own sword. Problem is, we as fans think this is a mistake and we have to live with the consequences and hope like hell we are wrong. Do the players think this is a mistake? Are they truly behind Taylor calling plays? Or is it just lip service?

 

[Cincyfan78]

So now it looks like Pitch has been given permission to interview for OC jobs that include play-calling duties. So, Zac is so dug in on play-calling that the Bengals are willing to let one of their best assistant coaches walk.

This reminds me of something I took away from that Duke presser..... Duke went on and on about how the Bengals have lost close games and they need to get that out of their DNA. Here's the thing - I think I remember seeing that over 70% of NFL games are within one score at some point in the 4th quarter. It is 100% true that most NFL games swing on a couple of critical plays or critical drives. Particularly when teams are at full (or almost full) health and still competing for playoff spots. The Bengals organization somehow think that the teams that lose these games are just unlucky or 'just need to get it out of their DNA.' It's called coaching and Zac is one of the least situationally aware coaches in the league. Any real franchise would have lifted playcalling from him 2 seasons ago as it has become 100% clear he can't manage the duties while still ensuring plays are called on time, the offense moves with tempo and the correct decisions are made when to go or when to kick.

I know this goes without saying, but this franchise just continues to be stupid and they have no hope for change.

I agree mostly - but I think it's fair to point out: While the offense has had their chances to win some games, the defense has also had far more chances to close out games over the past 3 seasons and failed to do so at an ENORMOUS clip. So, while we can hem/haw on the play-calling (and trust me, I'm no fan of Taylor's here), I think the fault has been laid at the feet of the defense, largely, for their inability to close out games.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Agreed. However, if I am Taylor and he thinks that is his strength, regardless of what us as fans think, I can understand him living or dying by his own sword. Problem is, we as fans think this is a mistake and we have to live with the consequences and hope like hell we are wrong. Do the players think this is a mistake? Are they truly behind Taylor calling plays? Or is it just lip service?

My 2 biggest complaints under Taylor: The need to be more multiple, and the need to run the ball with more authority. I thought that he did that fairly well this year - and I think that showed both with Flacco and Burrow's return. Also, hard to argue with '24 Burrow and the offense...even if they could have still been even better....

 

[cincygrad]

My 2 biggest complaints under Taylor: The need to be more multiple, and the need to run the ball with more authority. I thought that he did that fairly well this year - and I think that showed both with Flacco and Burrow's return. Also, hard to argue with '24 Burrow and the offense...even if they could have still been even better....

I don't have as many issues with his playcalling as others. I think this weekend's games prove that playcalling is inconsistent even with some of the best in the game. Ben Johnson and Sean McVay both ran plays that we would have destroyed Zac Taylor for running.

I disagree that this is just on the defense to close out games. A good head coach would manipulate the clock differently. He would have more time outs at the end of games. He wouldn't limit offensive output by being conservative at the wrong time. Many of these issues were at play in the the games that we collapsed on the defensive side of the ball. It was noted time and again that this team is not capable of playing complementary football - To me, you'll see more of this with a coach that has a coherent plan and is thoughtful in meaningful situations. Zac is not and I think it's because he is streteched to thin running offense.

And it's ultimately on the head coach if any of the units don't succeed. Zac is not just the offensive coordinator. If he is overseeing an operation with missed tackles, unprepared players, and other issues that have led to slow starts and innective schemes, well, he needs to change it. It's clear that his offseason work does not prepare the team for September football and the team consistently loses games because of it. The head coach makes the offseason plans. The head coach builds the culture. The culture that has emereged is a team that is neither physically or mentally tough - They are a team with special athletic talent at key positions that can't get out of their own way because they do not have an identity or a plan.

 

[cincygrad]

And my point is this..... Why not try something different? You have an in-house guy that is good enough to interview for head jobs. He's good enough to interview for OC jobs for a contender. Turn over playcalling to him, change your gameday approach and see if it pays off. Stop being afraid of change because it will potentially minimize your own role. I'm not asking him to be fired - I'm asking him to change.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I don't have as many issues with his playcalling as others. I think this weekend's games prove that playcalling is inconsistent even with some of the best in the game. Ben Johnson and Sean McVay both ran plays that we would have destroyed Zac Taylor for running.

I disagree that this is just on the defense to close out games. A good head coach would manipulate the clock differently. He would have more time outs at the end of games. He wouldn't limit offensive output by being conservative at the wrong time. Many of these issues were at play in the the games that we collapsed on the defensive side of the ball. It was noted time and again that this team is not capable of playing complementary football - To me, you'll see more of this with a coach that has a coherent plan and is thoughtful in meaningful situations. Zac is not and I think it's because he is streteched to thin running offense.

And it's ultimately on the head coach if any of the units don't succeed. Zac is not just the offensive coordinator. If he is overseeing an operation with missed tackles, unprepared players, and other issues that have led to slow starts and innective schemes, well, he needs to change it. It's clear that his offseason work does not prepare the team for September football and the team consistently loses games because of it. The head coach makes the offseason plans. The head coach builds the culture. The culture that has emereged is a team that is neither physically or mentally tough - They are a team with special athletic talent at key positions that can't get out of their own way because they do not have an identity or a plan.

The management of the clock and game situation is accurate. I'll also agree on not having them more ready to play - but I think some of that again falls under the drafting/GM/FA approach because...you can prepare all you want, but when you suck...you suck. When you don't have enough experience....you don't have the experience. When you combine those 2 together on a singular unit (Defense) well...yeah. You get a large portion of the 2025 Bengals defense.

 

[Cincyfan78]

And my point is this..... Why not try something different? You have an in-house guy that is good enough to interview for head jobs. He's good enough to interview for OC jobs for a contender. Turn over playcalling to him, change your gameday approach and see if it pays off. Stop being afraid of change because it will potentially minimize your own role. I'm not asking him to be fired - I'm asking him to change.

I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who disagree with this.

 

[cincygrad]

The management of the clock and game situation is accurate. I'll also agree on not having them more ready to play - but I think some of that again falls under the drafting/GM/FA approach because...you can prepare all you want, but when you suck...you suck. When you don't have enough experience....you don't have the experience. When you combine those 2 together on a singular unit (Defense) well...yeah. You get a large portion of the 2025 Bengals defense.

Well sure.... Talent is needed. But Zac's teams have always been significantly better in November/December than they have in September/October. If this was opposite, it would be even more discussed. And some coaches have their teams better prepared for the first game. Or the first game after a bye. Or the Sunday game after 10 days due to a Thursday night game. Look at Zac's record in all of these games. That's not a talent or lack of talent situation - Some very good Bengal teams still had these issues under Taylor. A good organization asks why these trends exist. The Bengals organization says things like "we need to get it out of our DNA" or "we just have to find a way" or some other empty phrase. With a big enough sample size, you have to move on from calling it luck or coincidence and start asking why it happens. We are not asking why.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Well sure.... Talent is needed. But Zac's teams have always been significantly better in November/December than they have in September/October. If this was opposite, it would be even more discussed. And some coaches have their teams better prepared for the first game. Or the first game after a bye. Or the Sunday game after 10 days due to a Thursday night game. Look at Zac's record in all of these games. That's not a talent or lack of talent situation - Some very good Bengal teams still had these issues under Taylor. A good organization asks why these trends exist. The Bengals organization says things like "we need to get it out of our DNA" or "we just have to find a way" or some other empty phrase. With a big enough sample size, you have to move on from calling it luck or coincidence and start asking why it happens. We are not asking why.

I think this is true, but more so for the offense, than the defense. They changed that up this year - and they still stunk to start the season...so...LOL

I get it - ZT is far from great. And as a leading critic, all I'm saying is - he's probably not AS bad as we tend to want him to be. Yes, having Burrow, Chase, Higgins helps that a ton - but who wouldn't that help.

Long story short - outside of getting some lightening in a bottle (a la '21, or a few years under Marvin) the organizational setup makes it really, really hard to be consistently good. Which is one big reason why - this organization, regardless of leaders, coaches, and players who have all come and go - cannot sustain winning here at any relevant clip.

 

[DanBengalfan]

I have to get the feeling that maybe, just maybe, Taylor doesn't appear to be the bafoon to his players that he seems to be to literally everyone else watching. I'm trying very hard to get that feeling. One day... it will come.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I have to get the feeling that maybe, just maybe, Taylor doesn't appear to be the bafoon to his players that he seems to be to literally everyone else watching. I'm trying very hard to get that feeling. One day... it will come.

Yeah - the players really seem, overall, to like him and respect him. The original intent on my "defending" him a bit was more geared towards his play-calling and offense in general. I think it devolved a bit to the overall management of the team, and the roster construction - which are fair arguments to have - it's just not a part of this very specific argument.

I still think his offense can be more multiple and still needs to focus on the run a bit more (they did seem to do this more this year, but is that because of the Burrow thing? If so - will they see the success and stick with it, or revert back to 75/25? However, regardless...overall, the past 3 seasons, he has shown, even with Burrow out, that his offense can evolve (now, sticking to it once Burrow returns is another topic), and that the offense can do well.

This team has lost far, far, FAR more games because of the defense than the offense...and this team has gotten themselves into position to win late games/1 score games far, far, FAR more because the offense did what it needed to do - and the defense could not.

So, on the topic of play-calling and just running the offense...yes, I have gripes. Yes, I still would like to see some things change, but it's really hard to point the finger at the offense in this topic of whether Taylor would/should give up main play-calling duties to keep Pitcher around.

Now excuse me while I go throw up a little...

 

[cincygrad]

Yeah - the players really seem, overall, to like him and respect him. The original intent on my "defending" him a bit was more geared towards his play-calling and offense in general. I think it devolved a bit to the overall management of the team, and the roster construction - which are fair arguments to have - it's just not a part of this very specific argument.

I still think his offense can be more multiple and still needs to focus on the run a bit more (they did seem to do this more this year, but is that because of the Burrow thing? If so - will they see the success and stick with it, or revert back to 75/25? However, regardless...overall, the past 3 seasons, he has shown, even with Burrow out, that his offense can evolve (now, sticking to it once Burrow returns is another topic), and that the offense can do well.

This team has lost far, far, FAR more games because of the defense than the offense...and this team has gotten themselves into position to win late games/1 score games far, far, FAR more because the offense did what it needed to do - and the defense could not.

So, on the topic of play-calling and just running the offense...yes, I have gripes. Yes, I still would like to see some things change, but it's really hard to point the finger at the offense in this topic of whether Taylor would/should give up main play-calling duties to keep Pitcher around.

Now excuse me while I go throw up a little...

I get what you're saying, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree a little. I think it is up to the head coach to understand how to best play complimentary football. This is the reason why some offensive coaches ultimately fail - They don't always put their defense in the best place. Whether it is clock management, priority or allocation of resources, or some other variable, the head coach is responsible for all units. And I think it's fair to ask if the the game would be managed better if Taylor were not burdened with playcalling.

And I do think it's worth noting that while the offense hasn't been as big of issue as the defense, they certainly have come up short at some big times and there have been some curious decisions with regard to playcalling in those spots. I can name those games if you'd like, but I think you have the same games in mind.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I get what you're saying, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree a little. I think it is up to the head coach to understand how to best play complimentary football. This is the reason why some offensive coaches ultimately fail - They don't always put their defense in the best place. Whether it is clock management, priority or allocation of resources, or some other variable, the head coach is responsible for all units. And I think it's fair to ask if the the game would be managed better if Taylor were not burdened with playcalling.

And I do think it's worth noting that while the offense hasn't been as big of issue as the defense, they certainly have come up short at some big times and there have been some curious decisions with regard to playcalling in those spots. I can name those games if you'd like, but I think you have the same games in mind.

No - I think we agree in general. There are still shortcomings. I'm just looking at it through the long-view, meaning...in the grand scheme of things - the offense is the least of my concerns from a play-calling standpoint ... even though it grinds my gears a ton when they don't run it...LOL

It is what it is...on most days, the offense has been good enough (now whether that means they were good is dependent) but we can say, with 100% accuracy, the defense has been downright dreadful, and some of the worst in the NFL for 3 straight years, and has been so bad that it was able to tank an offense that set organizational records in '24 with a fully healthy Burrow...and this includes the teams that went to the SB and AFCC game under Burrow and that offense...'24 was even better than those...and missed the playoffs....