The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

[stilla9er]

The Good: The team is 2-1. Last year this time we were 0-3.

The Bad: We have to face three pretty good teams in our next three games.

The Ugly: One word..... "offense"


hopefully ( yes Im praying ) the offense will get better as the season moves along.

 

[CalamityX11]

The Good - The team is 2-1, s/b 3-0

The Bad - Our offense

The Ugly - Our schedule all of a sudden.

 

[deep9er]

just throwing this out.................................i'm NOT advocating we stick with this offensive strategy, but looking at these PAST three games......maybe.....just maybe it allowed us to stay in the games? it allowed us to actually win two games?

no doubt its been ugly, but maybe....just maybe out coaching staff know the players can't handle it so soon?

 

[tomikcon1971]

Assuming no major injuries for us or our opponents (other than what's out there already) which is a major assumption, and at our current performance level, we should end up somewhere between 7-9 and 9-7. Many of these wins will likely come in the division but there are a couple of others we should be competitive in...the Iggles are vulnerable but it's hard to see the "DREAM TEAM" going 1-3. We should be able to beat CLE. TB is not dominating anyone right now and the NY Giants seem to be inconsistent right now. If we go 5-1 in the division, we have CIN under our belt, then it comes down to CLE, NYG (at home), an TB (at home)...7-9, 8-8, or 9-7. I get the "any given Sunday" principle, but those other games will be a real challenge. A win over the Iggles would be huge and losing to "lung boy" may ultimately bite us in the arse.....my pedestrian two cents.

 

[tallglassofwater007]

The Good: Vick probably wont be playing next week and Young has a little hamstring issue. So that game got more winable
The bad and ugly are both our offense, especially the run game.

 

[CalamityX11]

just throwing this out.................................i'm NOT advocating we stick with this offensive strategy, but looking at these PAST three games......maybe.....just maybe it allowed us to stay in the games? it allowed us to actually win two games?

no doubt its been ugly, but maybe....just maybe out coaching staff know the players can't handle it so soon?

The same offensive strategy could also be viewed as 0-3.... Ginn won gm 1 for us and gm 3 could've(maybe should've) gone Cincy's way....

 

[PaleRider]

I think we are playing teams 'ugly' because that's all we are capable of atm that gives us a chance to win. I think we will start looking better later in the season. I don't particularly like watching 'ugly' ball, but we are 2-1 and in or winning every game we've played thus far. I look for the trend to continue against the eagles next week. Until the O-line can protect and/or run block we'll be seeing this a lot. The positive is we likely won't be getting blown out of any games this year. The downside is we'll have to watch some ugly ass football.

Is it solely the zone blocking scheme that is screwing with the run blocking this year? Sing (or was it Raye?) came out and said we wanted to run 60% of the time last year and we could still run the ball. What gives this year?

 

[imac_21]

The same offensive strategy could also be viewed as 0-3.... Ginn won gm 1 for us and gm 3 could've(maybe should've) gone Cincy's way....

I love this game.

If we opened up the offense we could easily be 0-3. Smith could be turning the ball over and the turnstiles wearing numbers in the 60s and 70s could be getting him (and Kaepernick, and Tolzien) killed. We could be sending Josh McCown out there at QB.

 

[Rvnight18]

The same offensive strategy could also be viewed as 0-3.... Ginn won gm 1 for us and gm 3 could've(maybe should've) gone Cincy's way....

Ginn put the game out of reach. We had the lead before he returned the kick. No questioned he sealed it, but you can not say we only won because of him.

 

[imac_21]

Ginn put the game out of reach. We had the lead before he returned the kick. No questioned he sealed it, but you can not say we only won because of him.

Particularly considering that Ginn's returns led to two lost possessions offensively. It's possible we could have put together a TD drive on the first one. We seem to be good for about one of those per week.

 

[Rvnight18]

Particularly considering that Ginn's returns led to two lost possessions offensively. It's possible we could have put together a TD drive on the first one. We seem to be good for about one of those per week.

It drives me nuts when people say that. Our defense was great in the first half. But hey that has nothing to do with it. We didn't turn the ball over but who cares about that. We had a 16-0 lead and led all game. Yet that seems to be lost.

 

[CalamityX11]

I love this game.

If we opened up the offense we could easily be 0-3. Smith could be turning the ball over and the turnstiles wearing numbers in the 60s and 70s could be getting him (and Kaepernick, and Tolzien) killed. We could be sending Josh McCown out there at QB.

We could only away with this strategy against certain teams... Seattle and Cincy being two of them. Against Dallas, it didn't work as lost it in OT.

I should've been more clear or detailed, today's performance wouldn't have beaten any team on the road outside of Cincy or the Rams. We got away with it with stellar defense and out of gas bengals Offense. We didn't get on the board til late 3rd or early 4th.

But we need better execution and decisions going forward. Harbs had a lead, decided to give a saftey and run the chance of a TD return... that could've killed us. But we got it.

 

[CalamityX11]

Ginn put the game out of reach. We had the lead before he returned the kick. No questioned he sealed it, but you can not say we only won because of him.

At that moment, the Seahawks had momentum and went on a 17-3 run on us.... then Ginn killed their spirits and hopes with back to back returns....

Who knows how our offense would've done? Basing it on Dallas and Cincy, would been runs and conservative play. Maybe a TD by the offense? We'll never know, but basing on gms 2 & 3, conservative plays would've been the likely outcome.

No, our entire team played well that day vs the seahawks, didn't have the pts to show(3 FGs to start) but we owned them defensively and moved the chains well.

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

The Good: The defense today
The bad: Tie between Gore and the O line
The ugly: This win today

 

[imac_21]

We could only away with this strategy against certain teams... Seattle and Cincy being two of them. Against Dallas, it didn't work as lost it in OT.

I should've been more clear or detailed, today's performance wouldn't have beaten any team on the road outside of Cincy or the Rams. We got away with it with stellar defense and out of gas bengals Offense. We didn't get on the board til late 3rd or early 4th.

But we need better execution and decisions going forward. Harbs had a lead, decided to give a saftey and run the chance of a TD return... that could've killed us. But we got it.

So let's give the coaching staff credit. They put together a game plan that produced a win. If we were playing a different team, we likely come with a different game plan.

 

[CalamityX11]

So let's give the coaching staff credit. They put together a game plan that produced a win. If we were playing a different team, we likely come with a different game plan.

LOL i didn't mean it as good thing though

But yea, we got it done, I was expecting a better attack to make amends from last week. I feel we are better and capable of showing more. But I get the gameplan against the Bengals isn't or wouldn't have been something like against the cowboys, saints, bears etc..

ATM, i'm not on board in getting into a shell after a two possesion lead, makes things nervous...

 

[imac_21]

LOL i didn't mean it as good thing though

But yea, we got it done, I was expecting a better attack to make amends from last week. I feel we are better and capable of showing more. But I get the gameplan against the Bengals isn't or wouldn't have been something like against the cowboys, saints, bears etc..

ATM, i'm not on board in getting into a shell after a two possesion lead, makes things nervous...

I know you didn't. But the goal of the team is to win the game. I'd rather play really conservative and win then play wide open and lose.

Another thought, maybe it helps the defense to keep the games low scoring because the opposition is less likely to throw the ball and abuse our secondary? They'll stick to the run game more.

 

[CalamityX11]

I know you didn't. But the goal of the team is to win the game. I'd rather play really conservative and win then play wide open and lose.

Another thought, maybe it helps the defense to keep the games low scoring because the opposition is less likely to throw the ball and abuse our secondary? They'll stick to the run game more.

I didn't say it in the game thread but to myself, our defense plays a lot differen when the game is close vs protecting a lead.... I'm like where's this focus and determination been for us?

 

[coffeeman]

I know you didn't. But the goal of the team is to win the game. I'd rather play really conservative and win then play wide open and lose.

Another thought, maybe it helps the defense to keep the games low scoring because the opposition is less likely to throw the ball and abuse our secondary? They'll stick to the run game more.

Define wide open

 

[coffeeman]

So let's give the coaching staff credit. They put together a game plan that produced a win. If we were playing a different team, we likely come with a different game plan.

I will give them so credit. The more I watch this team. the more I realize just how bad this O line is.