Vontaze Burfict 2012 highlight video

[Bengals1181]

 

And let's be clear hear.  We have a long and varied history of you assigning blame to one player to defend another (typically your favored player, i.e. Rey and Cook).

 

 

 

so who exactly am I defending by pointing out that Burfict made mistakes as a rookie?

 

 

 

And where exactly am I defending Rey, who I spent most the offense saying shouldn't be the starting MLB anymore?  Heck, I was even criticized for knocking the team for signing Harrison over Dansby because it meant Maualuga was staying at MLB rather than SLB.

 

 

But keep on re-writing history to fit your narrative.

[Jamie_B]

 

 

I'll be honest, I'm not reading this long list of bullshit at 11pm.  Didn't really need to read further than the 2nd sentence.  This isn't about Burfict's future potential.  It's about his pass pro in 2012.  

 

Even so he provided video examples of the plays you were talking about, so when you wake up and have a cup of coffee.....

[Bengals1181]

 

Even so he provided video examples of the plays you were talking about, so when you wake up and have a cup of coffee.....

 

 

never much of a coffee drinker.  I've seen the plays, we both clearly have our interpretations of what happened.  

 

 

 

It's really not worth dragging on, and some of the things being said are pretty pathetic at this point.  Why the notion that a rookie has something to improve on dragged on a page and a half in the first place is beyond me. 

[Jamie_B]

 

 

never much of a coffee drinker.  I've seen the plays, we both clearly have our interpretations of what happened.  

 

 

 

It's really not worth dragging on, and some of the things being said are pretty pathetic at this point.  Why the notion that a rookie has something to improve on dragged on a page and a half in the first place is beyond me. 

 

Was that the argument? IIRC it was that Taz wasn't good in coverage?

[Bengals1181]

 

Was that the argument? IIRC it was that Taz wasn't good in coverage?

 

 

was never even "an argument".  I said "very good" isn't how I'd describe his pass D in 2012.  No aspect of the Pass D by the linebacking corp would be described as "very good" last year.  It was the single biggest weakness of the defense last year.  

[EnglishBengal]

I just hope he's our starting MIKE this year.

[Jamie_B]

 

 

was never even "an argument".  I said "very good" isn't how I'd describe his pass D in 2012.  No aspect of the Pass D by the linebacking corp would be described as "very good" last year.  It was the single biggest weakness of the defense last year.  

 

 

I guess we all have our own thoughts on what constitutes "very good" just like we all have our own interperation of plays. ;)

[Bengals1181]

I just hope he's our starting MIKE this year.

 

 

I would have agreed prior to free agency, but now.  If Burfict is the starting MLB at some point this year, that means Maualuga has gotten worse.

[Zins30]

 

 

was never even "an argument".  I said "very good" isn't how I'd describe his pass D in 2012.  No aspect of the Pass D by the linebacking corp would be described as "very good" last year.  It was the single biggest weakness of the defense last year.  

 

Not to drag this out any further but I'd have to side with 1181 on this particular comment. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Vontaze is great and he had a hell of a rookie season.  I'm hoping he comes back even hungrier and by all accounts it looks like he will be.  But not EVERY aspect of his game was spectacular last season.  Even if he looked better in coverage than the other LBs we had on the field (other than maybe Lamur), I wouldn't consider it his strong suit.  He can be a great player and still have something to work on in my mind.  I'm not "going to the tape" or quoting stats but simply stating that while watching the games last season I was never blown away by his coverage ability, unlike the other parts of his game.  So yes, I think he could get substantially better in pass coverage, and if he does... he'll eventually be a pro bowler since he'd have a great all around skill set.  Right now I'd say he's a very good LB but with better coverage skills he could possibly be elite.

[coup000]

 

Not to drag this out any further but I'd have to side with 1181 on this particular comment. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Vontaze is great and he had a hell of a rookie season.  I'm hoping he comes back even hungrier and by all accounts it looks like he will be.  But not EVERY aspect of his game was spectacular last season.  Even if he looked better in coverage than the other LBs we had on the field (other than maybe Lamur), I wouldn't consider it his strong suit.  He can be a great player and still have something to work on in my mind.  I'm not "going to the tape" or quoting stats but simply stating that while watching the games last season I was never blown away by his coverage ability, unlike the other parts of his game.  So yes, I think he could get substantially better in pass coverage, and if he does... he'll eventually be a pro bowler since he'd have a great all around skill set.  Right now I'd say he's a very good LB but with better coverage skills he could possibly be elite.

I would agree, I was just surprised by the assertion that almost half the TD passes we gave up were somehow related to him, which is why I went and re watched those plays. That turned out to not be true at all. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have room to improve, he certainly does.  

[Khatmandude]

 
Let me explain the difference to you. It's called upside/potential.  Guys like Maulauga and Cook have disqualified themselves from the upside/potential conversation.  They have hit their ceilings and still aren't satisfactory, despite more than enough opportunities. 
 
Guys like Burfict and Dalton are defended because they are rookies on the upswing, that are improving until further notice (nice effort, trying to throw me in the Dalton detractor camp; I'm a clear supporter).  That's the difference.  If you're willing to choose a limited, highly suspect vet over a youngin' with clear upside then I don't know what to tell you.  But Burfict in his first year walked onto this squad and outperformed Rey in every measure.  So while you malign a guy like Burfict and defend the mediocrity of a guy like Rey M, you can expect me to stand up to that shit every time.
 
 

 
Absolutely, and I'll challenge you to find an instance where I was using "kid gloves" to defend him.  I plainly stated that he may have been burned , but nowhere near the frequency or the the degree you attributed to him. I completely accept his limitations, and in actuality, because he had so few as a baptism-by-fire rookie, I'm greatly encouraged.
 
I went on to say that Burfict is a good pass defender, and then you responded by citing him for 5 of our 11 pass TDs this season.  And then something Glorious happened.  Third party, objective observers jumped in and pulled your pants down.  You spit out highly factual sounding stats like "5 out of 11" and then when pressed immediately had to top it off at 4.  Furthermore, when those 4 examples are actually analyzed, your interpretation is directly challenged.  
 
And let's be clear hear.  We have a long and varied history of you assigning blame to one player to defend another (typically your favored player, i.e. Rey and Cook). In fact, I accused you of this very thing before Coup jumped into the fray.  As it happens, I'm now finally back and my laptop, so rather than rely on you to provide the requested clips (you did not), and despite coup's rep-boosting contributions, we can throw the plays in question up here now for all to see and judge for themselves.  Shall we?
 
Jax:
 
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2012093009/2012/REG4/bengals@jaguars?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr#menu=highlights&tab=recap
 
As has been stated, Burfict got beat here.  But as has also been stated, that was about as good as coverage as you can ask for. Well, we could have asked for a hair more, which is that he could have turned back to find the ball).  Still, even had he done so, the ball was perfectly placed.  Leon hall has numerous moments in his career when he's been torched by a perfect throw, and we'd both agree that he's pretty good in coverage.  The reality is (as the cliche goes), the perfect throw will beat perfect coverage every time, and has no defense.  
 
Further, if we look at this game in context, we'll see that it was very early on in Burfict's ascendency and learning curve.  The guy had just started playing and was all over the right guy - meaning, he made the right read and he put himself in his hip-pocket.  You can't ask for more than that from your LB covering a move TE, much less a rook who just started playing with the big boys (and forget about seeing that from Rey M).  But let's go ahead and give you this one.  Burfict gave up a defensive TD.
 
CLE:
 
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2012091606/2012/REG2/browns@bengals?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr#menu=highlights&tab=recap
 
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!  Seriously man, you attributing this to Burfict simply exposes the fact that you don't know what your talking about, at the very least regarding LB play.  Burfict is CLEARLY blitzing around the LE, so much so that he continues to pursue Weeden after he steps up into the pocket.  You know who was responsible for the RB?  I'll give you a hint, his initials are RM.  In that scenario the MLB has the responsibility for the RB coming out of the backfield in EVERY CASE.  It's POSSIBLE (though unlikely) that he could have been responsible for a TE releasing, but you know what?  THERE WAS NONE!
 
That was Rey's guy 100%, and if you need any more evidence just watch what he does after the snap: he runs around like a chicken with his head cut-off, and turns his back to the LOS (a MAJOR no-no) without even having anyone to pursue or anyone entering his zone.  He was confused, lost, whatever, but it's practically criminal that you want to pass that on a promising young rookie.  So 1-1 now.
 
PIT:
 
 
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2012102110/2012/REG7/steelers@bengals?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr#menu=highlights%7CcontentId%3A0ap2000000083179&tab=analyze&recap=fullstory
 
Another interpretation that makes me  :facepalm:
 
Miller was so much Terrence Newman's man that Newman was about 6 inches away from making the play.  Especially on the second angle you can clearly see that he's Newman's man all the way, and the moment Miller makes his cut Newman closes.  Burfict had dropped into his zone, and Miller clearly exploited the edge of it, but to even say Burfict was 20% responsible is a gross overstatement.  
 
1-2.
 
DEN
 
And then this one wasn't even close.  Just because Burfict happens to be the guy there at the end of the play - that is, the guy who runs like hell to cover for the guys who didn't do their job, doesn't mean he was the one in pass defense.  As coup plainly pointed out, we had 4 LB's in coverage, and the Burfict was the THIRD guy away from Dressen and his route.  Who was responsible?  Yep, you guessed it, that poor SOB who looks perpetually lost, Rey Maulauga.
 
1-3.
 
 
As for the fifth game, you couldn’t come up with that so I guess we’ll just have to take your word on that one.  But after you’ve already been so exposed, why should we?
 
Now everyone on this board can go and look at these plays and tell us who was at fault.  Other than the play where his blanket coverage was beat, you'll not get much support.
 
 
 

 
 
Maybe what we would do for a living would be relevant, but that comparison needn't even been made when we're talking about one of us simply seeing things that aren't there.  The fact of the matter is, for whatever reason, you have a bias and/or agenda (and that's the generous reading of the problem) that's leading you to make outrageous statements that simply aren't supported by the basic evidence. 
 
The fact of the matter is, you were in the camp that didn't see the Burfict phenomenon as all that much, and you've been trying to cover your ass ever since.  Let me remind you with your own words: 
 
 
http://forum.go-bengals.com/index.php?/topic/65143-tears-for-binnscheers-for-burfict/?p=1145358
 
"May not mean anything as if it were a real game I'm sure it would have been Skuta, but while I think Burfict will make the team he still has a lot to do to get to that point. "
 
http://forum.go-bengals.com/index.php?/topic/65143-tears-for-binnscheers-for-burfict/?p=1146840
 
"I thought it was a great signing from a football perspective, though at the time I did comment that they'd take an unfair PR hit from it (didn't end up being that bad).

It's worked out great so far. He's nowhere near ready to start, and I'd wait a good year (barring injury) before considering him as a starter. 1) because I like the starters we have and 2) Just to make sure he's fully in the system and has shed his undisciplined ways on the field. 
 
Its a good position for the team. I think he'll certainly make the top 7 linebackers and they don't have to rely on him early, while having him under contract for basically 4 years."
 
Wrong much?
 
I like you 1181, I just don't know why you keep sticking your neck out when the shit flies, because it keeps hitting you in the face. It's OK to be wrong.  What's not OK is to invent a bunch of bullshit in order to hide that fact and CYA.

 

Boom goes the dynamite.

 

Hey tough guy, why don't you stick to writing screenplays cuz your football logic goes against statistics.  Statistics are what matter....nothing else.

[SocalBengalEd]

Boom goes the dynamite.
 
Hey tough guy, why don't you stick to writing screenplays cuz your football logic goes against statistics.  Statistics are what matter....nothing else.

What the hell does that mean? Anyways both are partially correct, Burfict never gave up 5 tds through the air, but he does need to improve his pass defense which isn't really bad. But 1181 is coming around on Maualuga , he has stated recently he preferred Maualuga on the strong side rather then the middle.

[Bengals1181]

What the hell does that mean? Anyways both are partially correct, Burfict never gave up 5 tds through the air, but he does need to improve his pass defense which isn't really bad. But 1181 is coming around on Maualuga , he has stated recently he preferred Maualuga on the strong side rather then the middle.

 

 

again, to clarify, he "had a hand in" not "solely responsible for."

 

 

and yes, the red is the key to this entire conversation.  Not "bad" but also not "very good."

 

 

 

as for Khat, don't worry, it was just a feeble attempt to insult me. :)

[Jamie_B]

[Khatmandude]

Not at all, making a point that statistics are but a variable in the equation.  They should be analyzed and included in the factoring of something but to use statistics solely to prove a point is rather foolish. 

[Jamie_B]

Not at all, making a point that statistics are but a variable in the equation.  They should be analyzed and included in the factoring of something but to use statistics solely to prove a point is rather foolish. 

 

 

Context, schmontext.

[Bengals1181]

Not at all, making a point that statistics are but a variable in the equation.  They should be analyzed and included in the factoring of something but to use statistics solely to prove a point is rather foolish. 

 

 

I wasn't aware it was my sole basis, or that I was even trying to prove anything.  I gave an opinion and tossed out an example why.    I don't have any interest in proving my opinion right or someone else's wrong.

 

 

He's a rookie that has quite a bit of room to improve his pass D.  I'm content in that opinion.  I'm not worried about trying to justify it.

[Khatmandude]

It's a pretty obvious assessment that he needs to improve after his rookie year......that's all fine and dandy but to throw around blatantly false statistics to try to bring him down....well, that's another thing. 

 

I don't think anyone would disagree that he has to improve....that's no revelation.  He was a rookie last year. 

[Bengals1181]

It's a pretty obvious assessment that he needs to improve after his rookie year......that's all fine and dandy but to throw around blatantly false statistics to try to bring him down....well, that's another thing. 

 

I don't think anyone would disagree that he has to improve....that's no revelation.  He was a rookie last year. 

 

 

yea, because that's what I did. :lol:

 

 

 

Tell me, what's my incentive for "trying to bring Burfict down" ?

[Khatmandude]

 

 

yea, because that's what I did. :lol:

 

 

 

Tell me, what's my incentive for "trying to bring Burfict down" ?

 

Did you not say that he had a direct hand in 5 TD's given up last year?  Was this shown to you to be false?  Does this false info not "bring him down"?  Why would you say that?  I don't really give a shit so I'm not going to speculate as to why you did it....maybe it's a question to ask yourself?

[Bengals1181]

 

Did you not say that he had a direct hand in 5 TD's given up last year?  Was this shown to you to be false?  Does this false info not "bring him down"?  Why would you say that?  I don't really give a shit so I'm not going to speculate as to why you did it....maybe it's a question to ask yourself?

 

I wasn't aware alleycat's opinion was fact.  Duly noted.  

 

I'll keep that in mind next time and save us all the trouble. 

 

 

 

I have nothing to gain by saying Burfict's pass D has plenty of room for improvement.  You've basically admitted as well that he needs to improve.  Everything else is just a waste of time. 

[Khatmandude]

Good, we're in agreement, he needs to improve since he was a rookie last year.  Enjoy your day. 

[Jason]

Wow. 

 

It is amazing how personally some people on this board take disagreement with an opinion.

 

:shrug:

[Bengals1181]

fwiw, just looked up an old post where I  provided this same stat (ironically no one had a problem with it then), and the Bengals gave up 15 receiving touchdowns in 2012, not 11.  My bad. 

[Jamie_B]

Wow. 

 

It is amazing how personally some people on this board take disagreement with an opinion.

 

:shrug:

 

 

It is indeed. :)