Is Minnesota really that much better then us?

[Oldcat]

[quote name='GoBengals' date='15 December 2009 - 10:37 AM' timestamp='1260898653' post='842775']
even with all the panlties we were in it going into the 4th... we utterly collapsed then..

but ye.a. they are better currently..

[/quote]

The wilting of the defense in the 4th quarter I believe is a consequence of the lack of offense. We need the offense to give the D a rest by controlling the ball. As the second half went on the offense did that less and less and the D got worse an worse.

For most of the game the D stopped them, or forced FGs. It's the offense's job to respond with scores, or drives of their own to keep us in it. On Sunday we didn't do it, but I didn't see that we couldn't. We ran on them some, made some passes here and there.

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='AmishBengalFan' date='15 December 2009 - 03:24 PM' timestamp='1260905048' post='842810']
Concur, but I'm not convinced that there wasn't at least a little bias on the part of one of the zebras - at least early on.

The Head Linesman, #24 (Tom Stabile), threw his flag on questionable back-to-back calls against Joseph in the first quarter. On the Vikings' second posession, they had gone 5 yards on their first two plays (Peterson off left tackle for 3, Taylor up the middle for 2) making it 3rd and 5 from the 38. They had not made a first down yet in the ballgame, the first posession having been a 3-and-out affair with them only gaining 4 yards. Favre threw a pass to Rice at the 41 which was broken up by Joseph, and Stabile called Joseph for illegal contact, giving the Vikings 5 yards and a first down. Thing is, Rice had only gone 3 yards, so any contact by Joseph was within the first 5 yards of the line of scrimmage and, hence, was legal. Furthermore, if the contact had occurred while the ball was in flight, it would've been Pass Interference. By flagging for Illegal Contact, Stabile was indicating that the contact was while Rice was running his route PRIOR to Favre throwing the ball. To my mind, there is no logical way that Joseph could have committed an Illegal Contact penalty without having been beyond the 43 yard line, and Rice never got past the 41.

On the following play, Favre again threw an incompletion, this time to the TE Shiancoe. I don't know if Joseph was jawing or not, but Shiancoe slammed his helmet into Joseph's. Stabile threw his flag and got in Joesph's face - you could easily see it on TV during. Based on Stabile's actions, I am convinced he would've called Joseph for a penalty alone had Shiancoe not speared him (Joseph), but Stabile only threw the flag and glared at Joseph AFTER Shiancoe's head-butt. So which is it? Did Joseph earn a penalty on his own, or did Stabile decide to give him a penalty only because he was obligated to flag Shiancoe for the head-butt? Seems blatantly inconsistent to me - as if Joseph's penalty was manufactured specifically to cancel out the obvious 15 yarder Shiancoe had earned.

Later in the quarter (on a different Minnesota drive), the Vikings had a 1st and 10 from our 21. Favre threw an illegal forward pass where he crossed the LOS by 2 yards before throwing an apparent TD to Rice. But guess who threw the flag? It wasn't Stabile - it was the referee Scott Green. Stabile blew his primary post-snap pass-play duty, leading to an apparent Minnesota TD.Remember, the LOS was the 21, which meant that Favre had to cross the 20 yards line AND IT'S BIG FAT WHITE STRIPE before he got to where he threw the ball. How could Stabile NOT see that, when he's specifically supposed to be looking for it, and when it was so obvious that Favre was beyond the LOS (hell, he was inside the 20!). Understand, Green only threw the flag because it was apparent to him, from BEHIND THE PLAY, that Favre was well beyond the LOS. Since this penalty is of the "spot of the foul" variety, Green flagged Favre from the Cincinnati 17, instead of the 19 where he actually was when he threw it, giving Minnesota 2 unearned yards. Instead of 1st and 13 from the 24, it was 1st and 11 from the 22. 2 yards didn't make much of a difference, but how can Stabile have missed throwing the flag in the first place?!?

And the coup de gras was in the 2nd half. Palmer passes to Benson, he's tackled, he's down, and the ball rolls out from underneath AND BEHIND him. The first ref on the scene is, you guessed it, good 'ol #24. Instead of blowing the play dead like he should, he instead decides to allow the play to continue, resulting in an apparent Minnesota TD. Only when the Bengals challenge the call (and burn a challenge) is the obvious confirmed. Once the snap has happened and the play has begun, the Head Linesman has primary responsibility for only two things: (1) monitoring the line of scrimmage to ensure that any attempted forward pass happens behind it, and (2) monitoring the sideline to determine if and where the ball carrier goes out of bounds, but then only if the play is closer to him than to the Side Judge. He has a secondary responsibility during runs and short pass plays to his side of the line of scrimmage to determine when a player is downed and to "bean bag" the play if an apparent fumble has occurred. With Benson catching the ball right in front of him and being tackled clearly in-bounds, there wee no duties on his part regarding the LOS or sideline. His primary responsibility then becomes to observe the downing play and to spot the ball for the next play. He failed to observe Benson being downed, even though it happened right in front of him, and he failed to "bean bag" the play when he decided that he was going to allow the Vikings to make off with the ball.

I cannot resolve these contracictions without raising questions of Tom Stabile's competence and/or impartiality.
[/quote]



well done. I was outraged at the over the line of scrimmage one, and I don't think they even penalized them that one yard. It shows up in the play-by-play as the 22yd line, but I think it was still marked on the 21. Regardless, utter bullshit.

[-GoBengals-]

[quote name='Oldcat' date='15 December 2009 - 03:43 PM' timestamp='1260906222' post='842832']
The wilting of the defense in the 4th quarter I believe is a consequence of the lack of offense. We need the offense to give the D a rest by controlling the ball. As the second half went on the offense did that less and less and the D got worse an worse.

For most of the game the D stopped them, or forced FGs. It's the offense's job to respond with scores, or drives of their own to keep us in it. On Sunday we didn't do it, but I didn't see that we couldn't. We ran on them some, made some passes here and there.
[/quote]

I agree, lack of drives from the offense coupled with lack of depth on defense.. heck most of the game we were down to our ONLY TWO safeties.. and our only two real DT's + harris.

with so many guys benched we havent been able to rotate in guys like we want and have all year to keep guys fresh.. having 3-4 capable producing DE's was a dream come true early in the season.. and we rotate DT's like no other as well..

keeping the D fresh has been a luxury this year.. once we dont currently have..

the D gave up a lot of points, gotta also respect that the vikings kept the foot on the gass to put us away.. most teams went conservative and kept us in it... and cost them the game.. vikings planned and executed very well..

[bgwilly31]

A few people around here like to act as if im a bengals Hater.

Im not and this will be just another tell as to why im not a hater but more a realist.

And being that kind of fan, my perspective from that game is The vikings are Definitely NOT that much better than us.
Considering how one sided the penalties were in that game. And how the penalties basically forced us to give Minn good field position all game.

They start from the 45 we start from 15-20.

You can chalk that game up to penalties with a touch of terrible Play calling. It seemed as if we could decently move the ball. at least enough to switch over the field position battle. but with penalties thrown in there we had no chance.

Fix those two things and were very evenly matched with the vikings.

[JBandJoeyV]

[quote name='bgwilly31' date='15 December 2009 - 06:07 PM' timestamp='1260914849' post='842892']
A few people around here like to act as if im a bengals Hater.

Im not and this will be just another tell as to why im not a hater but more a realist.

And being that kind of fan, my perspective from that game is The vikings are Definitely NOT that much better than us.
Considering how one sided the penalties were in that game. And how the penalties basically forced us to give Minn good field position all game.

They start from the 45 we start from 15-20.

You can chalk that game up to penalties with a touch of terrible Play calling. It seemed as if we could decently move the ball. at least enough to switch over the field position battle. but with penalties thrown in there we had no chance.

Fix those two things and were very evenly matched with the vikings.
[/quote]


Bravo...nice post.

Thats my whole point. Obviously we didnt make the plays and we made the mistakes. But how often in a game between two good teams (or one great and one good, notice im not calling the bengals great), anyways how often does every single break go one way. We didnt catch a single break all game, combined with all of our mental mistakes which we can fix. Those two things and we are in that game.

And Jamie in your post you kept saying this one thing didnt lose it, this one thing didnt lose it...but combine all those things and even give us half of them and we probably are very close in that game. The only aspect of the game they dominated us was our Oline vs their dline. But I also thought that our Dline did a great job hitting brett and stuff as well. Most of their yards came from dumps and stuff. Besides that we are pretty even with them. The plays we didnt make we CAN MAKE, just didnt that game.

Im not saying that we are better then the vikes but I think if we play them 10 times we lose by 20+ 1 of 10, lose by 10-19 maybe twice, lose by less then 10 3-4 times, and beat them the other 3-4.

And yeah all that matters for that game is that we lost, but in the future its not like we have guaranteed losses against all good teams like some people around here are making it out to be.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' date='15 December 2009 - 11:25 PM' timestamp='1260933931' post='842974']
Bravo...nice post.

Thats my whole point. Obviously we didnt make the plays and we made the mistakes. But how often in a game between two good teams (or one great and one good, notice im not calling the bengals great), anyways how often does every single break go one way. We didnt catch a single break all game, combined with all of our mental mistakes which we can fix. Those two things and we are in that game.

And Jamie in your post you kept saying this one thing didnt lose it, this one thing didnt lose it...but combine all those things and even give us half of them and we probably are very close in that game. The only aspect of the game they dominated us was our Oline vs their dline. But I also thought that our Dline did a great job hitting brett and stuff as well. Most of their yards came from dumps and stuff. Besides that we are pretty even with them. The plays we didnt make we CAN MAKE, just didnt that game.

Im not saying that we are better then the vikes but I think if we play them 10 times we lose by 20+ 1 of 10, lose by 10-19 maybe twice, lose by less then 10 3-4 times, and beat them the other 3-4.

And yeah all that matters for that game is that we lost, but in the future its not like we have guaranteed losses against all good teams like some people around here are making it out to be.
[/quote]


A number of the things you mentioned are freak things that a team shouldnt have to have to win games. The penalies are the only thing anyone can realistily point to as being a "reason". Im sorry but they are just a better team. Thats not to say we arent good, but they are better.

[JBandJoeyV]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='15 December 2009 - 11:34 PM' timestamp='1260934468' post='842977']
A number of the things you mentioned are freak things that a team shouldnt have to have to win games. The penalies are the only thing anyone can realistily point to as being a "reason". Im sorry but they are just a better team. Thats not to say we arent good, but they are better.
[/quote]

Fair enough, but never did I say Is minnesota better then us or that we were better... I said "that" much better. I think after last weeks game people on here think we would lose 9 out of 10 to them, but I think we probably win 4/10 on a neutral field.

Not that any of this matters unless we play them in the superbowl, but my point is we arent nearly as bad as we looked Sunday.

Hopefully people will realize this once we beat SD.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' date='15 December 2009 - 11:36 PM' timestamp='1260934599' post='842978']
Fair enough, but never did I say Is minnesota better then us or that we were better... I said "that" much better. I think after last weeks game people on here think we would lose 9 out of 10 to them, but I think we probably win 4/10 on a neutral field.

Not that any of this matters unless we play them in the superbowl, but my point is we arent nearly as bad as we looked Sunday.

Hopefully people will realize this once we beat SD.
[/quote]


Sorry but that team had the best matchup issues against us we have or will see all year. I do think the 9 of 10 we lose to them, just due to the fact that they are very good against what we suck at right now. Oline vs Dline. Add in that our passing game is in the crapper and they are a good running D....

I think we match up much better this week and if we can get over the west coast thing have a very good shot of winning this game.

[JBandJoeyV]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='15 December 2009 - 11:39 PM' timestamp='1260934760' post='842981']
Sorry but that team had the best matchup issues against us we have or will see all year. I do think the 9 of 10 we lose to them, just due to the fact that they are very good against what we suck at right now. Oline vs Dline. Add in that our passing game is in the crapper and they are a good running D....

I think we match up much better this week and if we can get over the west coast thing have a very good shot of winning this game.
[/quote]

Alright, we'll agree to disagree. But these answers have been better then just yes

Also...I dont think there is a single team in the AFC similar to Minnesota. We can beat Indy and SD and depending on what Pats team shows up we can beat them too.

This week will determine a lot, if we get the 2 seed I really think we beat SD at home.

I just hope they can find a way to pass this week, even if it takes a couple trick plays or something.

[T-Dub]

They need to shake that shit off quick and get their minds right for the Bolts. How did we end up with *one* home game in December?

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='AmishBengalFan' date='15 December 2009 - 03:24 PM' timestamp='1260905048' post='842810']
Concur, but I'm not convinced that there wasn't at least a little bias on the part of one of the zebras - at least early on.

[/quote]



another: Antoine Winfield doing the pushups which should have been nailed for taunting, unsportsmanlike conduct, or at the very least falls under the "you can't go to the ground during a celebration" rule.

[JBandJoeyV]

[quote name='Bengals1181' date='16 December 2009 - 11:25 AM' timestamp='1260977135' post='843072']
another: Antoine Winfield doing the pushups which should have been nailed for taunting, unsportsmanlike conduct, or at the very least falls under the "you can't go to the ground during a celebration" rule.
[/quote]

Um it wasnt a celebration or taunting...vikings have a thing where if they drop what should be an interception they have to do ten push ups...in practice and in games.

I think other teams do it as well.

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='GoBengals' date='15 December 2009 - 03:33 PM' timestamp='1260905590' post='842821']
there seems to be ZERO accountability for officials.

the closed doors review process is shady at best. public correction of calls and officials performance i would imagine would lead to better officiating.

why is it all so hidden?

and seemingly terrible in every single game...
[/quote]


When you pay attention to the lines/etc coming out of Vegas (which I know you do), the officiating begins looking far less "incompetent".... And then you get ex mafia guys (eg Michael Franzese) who come out and say fixing happens in the NFL [b]BEYOND A DOUBT[/b]... You have to be really naive to not think it's at least somewhat questionable.

[oldschooler]

We beat a team twice that beat them.
A team they got destroyed by (Cards), got destroyed by a team
they beat with a hail mary pass (49ers).

No I don't think they are that much better than us.
We had an off game. Shit happens.

[|kennethmw|]

There are some really good posts in this thread. Is Minnesota better than us? Yes, Especially with Winfield playing and being in that home dome. Much better? I don't think so. We had a lot of mistakes early, similar to the 1st Pissburg game, and some questionable penalties, both from our players, and as Amish showed from the Officials as well. I think this will be an interesting week in the development of this team.

I also want to say that I think Zimmer has done a Fabulous job with the D. Even with all of the injuries, this D is a force to be reckoned with. I hope we can find a way to keep him.

[|Bengal Migration|]

[quote name='kennethmw' date='17 December 2009 - 01:20 AM' timestamp='1260980430' post='843099']
Zimmer has done a Fabulous job with the D. Even with all of the injuries, this D is a force to be reckoned with. I hope we can find a way to keep him.
[/quote]

+1000000000000000000000000

[scharm]

Vikes stop the run and pressure the passer very well. That matches up well against the Bengals who have relying on the run to get things going on offense.

I think our defense can play with the Vikes. So it's a question if a rematch ever happened could our O impose their will on the Vikes by doing a better job running?

[bgwilly31]

The way we would beat the vikings is to get rid of the dumbass penalties, which is very doable.

It would help to play at home.

AND. We would have to change our game plan of POUNDING THE FOOTBALL no matter what.

We had one drive in there mid way through the 2nd quarter i believe where we threw first and it opened up the running game GREATLY.

It was a great mix of throwing and benson pounding. And we scored with ease. For some reason we didnt see that type of drive style for the rest of the game. But that was obviously the formula to beat the vikings for us. If we do that we beat them!

So in other words throw the dayum ball more.

[ccartman2]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='15 December 2009 - 11:39 PM' timestamp='1260934760' post='842981']
Sorry but that team had the best matchup issues against us we have or will see all year. I do think the 9 of 10 we lose to them, just due to the fact that they are very good against what we suck at right now. Oline vs Dline. Add in that our passing game is in the crapper and they are a good running D....

I think we match up much better this week and if we can get over the west coast thing have a very good shot of winning this game.
[/quote]
I think we match up really well in this game as well. Sproles can be a problem running, but our run D has been stand up all year. If they can hold AP down, I'll feel real good facing their rushing attack. Gates is also problematic, but who doesn't he cause problems with. I think our corners can hang with any receiver in the league, though we will need to get to Rivers.

On offense, they are bad against the run. Vikes are good against it and Benson still put up 97. Plus, I have to imagine that Brat has saved a few tricks for this week. This is our biggest game since week 9 and a virtual playoff game (at least for position). And for good measure, I hope Baltimore loses sunday so I'm celebrating either way.

[cwing]

They lost --------- enough said. Those mistakes have been an issues for sometime. 10 penalties per game the last 3 games. Minn also had injuires to key players but they got it done.

In a nut shell

Good teams win in spite of, bad teams lose because of ----- I am not calling us bad. However, no matter the reason ------ the bottom line WE LOST the GAME !!!

Although I hope I am wrong ------- I predict a very simliar game this week against SD. If the offense cannot become more balanced the box will be loaded, the offense will fail to move the ball consistently enough to score points and keep the D off the field. The D will fight hard and wear down as the game goes on. Until the O gets better --- this will be the MO against good teams.

[cwing]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='15 December 2009 - 02:58 PM' timestamp='1260899928' post='842787']
Playcalling left things to be desired, but WRs that cant get open for the past month (outside of chad) are a bigger problem.
[/quote]


Overall a good post. However, I disagree with this. When defenses only have to guard against 5-10 yd routes, the receivers are easy to cover. Caldwell runs a 4.3. Coles was a big play receiver. COC is a big play receiver. these guys can get down ffiled but they are not running plays to spread the field.

The question is why do they not go down the field? Your guess is as good as mine but it is not because they do not have the pplayers to get down the field. I believe they (coaches) do not have the confidence in the Oline to protect the QB long eenough to allow receivers to get down the field.

[cwing]

[quote name='Bengals1181' date='15 December 2009 - 03:31 PM' timestamp='1260901877' post='842798']
I think you have that backwards. Our scheme is completely based on the lack of talent and athleticism on the offensive line. We've got a bunch of maulers who can get downhill and outphysical you, but aren't holding up well in the passing game because some of them aren't athletic enough.
[/quote]



WOW we agree !!!

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='Bengals1181' date='16 December 2009 - 11:25 AM' timestamp='1260977135' post='843072']
another: Antoine Winfield doing the pushups which should have been nailed for taunting, unsportsmanlike conduct, or at the very least falls under the "you can't go to the ground during a celebration" rule.
[/quote]


another: watching the first drive, Coles throws a great block and gets called for offensive pass intereference, which I'm not sure is even technically possible under the circumstance as the ball wasn't in the air yet.

[cwing]

[quote name='oldschooler' date='16 December 2009 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1260978335' post='843080']
We beat a team twice that beat them.
A team they got destroyed by (Cards), got destroyed by a team
they beat with a hail mary pass (49ers).

No I don't think they are that much better than us.
We had an off game. Shit happens.
[/quote]


I know you have been around long enough to know that the we beat this team and they beat so and so stuff doesn't fly. It is about match ups. Look no further than the AFC North. Over the last 4-5 yrs we have owned the Ravens yet struggled against the Steelers. The Steelers laid it to us but struggled against the Ravens.

We all know that NFL games typically come down to 3-5 plays. MOre often than not, the better of the two teams will execute those plays.

If the Bengals can find a way to balance the offense ------- yes, they have enough talent to win. However, whether it be by talent or scheme, they are not going far unless they can get balance.

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' date='16 December 2009 - 11:42 AM' timestamp='1260978148' post='843078']
Um it wasnt a celebration or taunting...vikings have a thing where if they drop what should be an interception they have to do ten push ups...in practice and in games.

I think other teams do it as well.
[/quote]


the fact that other players on the team do it too doesn't make it legal.