OTA's

[ValleyBengal]

I'm kinda surprised Dennards agent let him participate.

 

A couple ACL's got blown out yesterday around the league. Sign your contract then start practicing would be my advice as an agent.

 

ETA: Is there really any incentive for the team to sign him quickly if he's gonna show up anyway?

Don't they sign injury agreements before participation? Plus, with the new CBA, I think there is really nothing to lose anyway if the injury agreement is signed.

[coup000]

I wouldn't even say they know that. Guys coming on to the Bengals are greeted with most players that know nothing other than playoffs.

Just counted, there are only 4 guys who were on the Bengals prior to 2009 and only about 10-15 who were here for 2010. So the vast majority of the team knows only playoffs in 3 consecutive years or at worst 4 playoff berths in 5 years. Kind of crazy when you realize that.

[Madieu Superstar]

One more Gresham nugget:

 

In his 4 year career, he has 8 fumbles

 

In Jason Witten's 11 year career, he has 5 fumbles

 

(By the way, I keep using Witten as a guide because he has the same type of blocking responsibility as Gresham. He doesn't split wide too often. Despite his HOF numbers, he's a classic TE)

 

 

*The more I've looked into Gresham's numbers and used my own recollection of his performance, the more I want him gone. Initially, I was in the camp of trying to lock him up to a reasonable deal. After kinda re-living his tenure with the Bengals though, I truly think they'll be better off without the drops, fumbles, penalties, selfishness. Now that they have Eifert, you could spend a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a TE that perhaps wouldn't suffer the mental lapses that Gresham seems to never get over. As a bonus, his allotted extension money could go to a guy who doesn't have these types of problems. 

[HairOnFire]

One more Gresham nugget:

 

In his 4 year career, he has 8 fumbles

 

 

Remember when Gresham spent the offseason telling anyone who'd listen about how he had learned a painful lesson from the Houston disaster?

 

He promptly went out and fumbled more than he had in any previous season.

 

 

 

*The more I've looked into Gresham's numbers and used my own recollection of his performance, the more I want him gone. Initially, I was in the camp of trying to lock him up to a reasonable deal. After kinda re-living his tenure with the Bengals though, I truly think they'll be better off without the drops, fumbles, penalties, selfishness. . 

 

You might be years late in reaching that conclusion but I say why quibble?

 

Eventually all Bengal fans will end up here.

[Zins30]

Just throwing this in there.....

 

Pro Football Focus‏@PFF May 26

TEs with lowest drop rate in '13(min 60 targets): 1.C.Fleener(3.1), 2.M.Bennett(4.4), 3.T.Gonzalez(4.6) 4.R.Gronkowski(4.9) 5.J.Gresham(5.4)

 

 

I too am frustrated with the inconsistency of Gresham, but I think the focus on the bad is a little blown out of proportion.  His lapses in judgment do seem to come at the worst times, but his talent is undeniably there.  I'd like to see him put it together (finally) to dominate, but think we know what we have with him and don't see much of an upward trend.  I would be disappointed if he didn't re-sign and I think his contributions would be missed greatly but I don't think he's irreplaceable.  I'm also interested to see if Hue has him run different routes and use him better. 

[scharm]

I'm kinda surprised Dennards agent let him participate.
 
A couple ACL's got blown out yesterday around the league. Sign your contract then start practicing would be my advice as an agent.
 
ETA: Is there really any incentive for the team to sign him quickly if he's gonna show up anyway?

I thought there was a rule change with new CBA that basically gets them contract they were drafted on?

[Bengals1181]

Just counted, there are only 4 guys who were on the Bengals prior to 2009 and only about 10-15 who were here for 2010. So the vast majority of the team knows only playoffs in 3 consecutive years or at worst 4 playoff berths in 5 years. Kind of crazy when you realize that.

 

 

agreed, though more to my point, kids being drafted today were ages 9-10 last time the Bengals were a laughing stock in 2002.  They've grown up with the Bengals as a top half team in the league.

[alleycat]

Just throwing this in there.....

 

Pro Football Focus‏@PFF May 26

TEs with lowest drop rate in '13(min 60 targets): 1.C.Fleener(3.1), 2.M.Bennett(4.4), 3.T.Gonzalez(4.6) 4.R.Gronkowski(4.9) 5.J.Gresham(5.4)

 

 

I too am frustrated with the inconsistency of Gresham, but I think the focus on the bad is a little blown out of proportion.  His lapses in judgment do seem to come at the worst times, but his talent is undeniably there.  I'd like to see him put it together (finally) to dominate, but think we know what we have with him and don't see much of an upward trend.  I would be disappointed if he didn't re-sign and I think his contributions would be missed greatly but I don't think he's irreplaceable.  I'm also interested to see if Hue has him run different routes and use him better. 

 

 

This is my entire problem with him, and the loss in Houston, which was the result of a game-plan based almost entirely on him, cemented it. He's the anti-clutch.
 

And here's what's amazing.  Gresham, like certain other players, seem to get passes because:

 

 

his talent is undeniably there. 

 

And yet, guys who maybe have a little less talent but perform dependably don't seem to get the same love.  It's like some kind of projection, where people would rather cling to the dream of potential (their own), rather than accept the higher values of hard work and dependability/accountability that actually bring true success. 

[Bengals1181]

Just throwing this in there.....

 

Pro Football Focus‏@PFF May 26

TEs with lowest drop rate in '13(min 60 targets): 1.C.Fleener(3.1), 2.M.Bennett(4.4), 3.T.Gonzalez(4.6) 4.R.Gronkowski(4.9) 5.J.Gresham(5.4)

 

 

I too am frustrated with the inconsistency of Gresham, but I think the focus on the bad is a little blown out of proportion.  His lapses in judgment do seem to come at the worst times, but his talent is undeniably there.  I'd like to see him put it together (finally) to dominate, but think we know what we have with him and don't see much of an upward trend.  I would be disappointed if he didn't re-sign and I think his contributions would be missed greatly but I don't think he's irreplaceable.  I'm also interested to see if Hue has him run different routes and use him better. 

 

 

I haven't ever run the stats, but it would be curious to see what stats would look like if all things were equal.  He wouldn't be on the same level, but it bears keeping in mind that guys like Graham get a lot more targets.  They're never asked to block on passing plays (and hell rarely inline block on running plays) whereas Gresham not only blocks on running plays, but is often kept in to pass block as well, lowering his targets.  For example, Jimmy Graham had 78 more passes thrown to him than Gresham in 2013.  So obviously Graham's gonna have prettier stats.

 

Crunching a little:

 

Gresham had .7 catches per target.  Graham had .6 catches per target.  

 

So if Gresham got as many targets (144) as Graham did, his extrapolated numbers would be:

 

100 catches, 6.5 TD's 999yds

 

What Graham did with those 144 targets:  86 catches, 1215yds, 16 TD's.

[scharm]

Just counted, there are only 4 guys who were on the Bengals prior to 2009 and only about 10-15 who were here for 2010. So the vast majority of the team knows only playoffs in 3 consecutive years or at worst 4 playoff berths in 5 years. Kind of crazy when you realize that.

It is simply what people threw out in the 90s as the missing foundation. Teams that were successful had the expectation and history of winning.

[HairOnFire]

 

 

I haven't ever run the stats, but it would be curious to see what stats would look like if all things were equal.  He wouldn't be on the same level, but it bears keeping in mind that guys like Graham get a lot more targets.  They're never asked to block on passing plays (and hell rarely inline block on running plays) whereas Gresham not only blocks on running plays, but is often kept in to pass block as well, lowering his targets.  For example, Jimmy Graham had 78 more passes thrown to him than Gresham in 2013.  So obviously Graham's gonna have prettier stats.

 

Crunching a little:

 

Gresham had .7 catches per target.  Graham had .6 catches per target.  

 

So if Gresham got as many targets (144) as Graham did, his extrapolated numbers would be:

 

100 catches, 6.5 TD's 999yds

 

What Graham did with those 144 targets:  86 catches, 1215yds, 16 TD's.

 

 

The fake Gresham I keep reading about is perfectly awesome.

 

The real one not so much.

[Madieu Superstar]

 

 

I haven't ever run the stats, but it would be curious to see what stats would look like if all things were equal.  He wouldn't be on the same level, but it bears keeping in mind that guys like Graham get a lot more targets.  They're never asked to block on passing plays (and hell rarely inline block on running plays) whereas Gresham not only blocks on running plays, but is often kept in to pass block as well, lowering his targets.  For example, Jimmy Graham had 78 more passes thrown to him than Gresham in 2013.  So obviously Graham's gonna have prettier stats.

 

Crunching a little:

 

Gresham had .7 catches per target.  Graham had .6 catches per target.  

 

So if Gresham got as many targets (144) as Graham did, his extrapolated numbers would be:

 

100 catches, 6.5 TD's 999yds

 

What Graham did with those 144 targets:  86 catches, 1215yds, 16 TD's.

It's presumptive at it core. All joking aside, my guess would be that the more times the ball is in his hands, the more times he would fumble it away, meaning these drives would be cut short and opportunities for more catches, yards, and TD's would decrease. 

 

Whatever you think of his talent, his false-starts and holding penalties kill the flow of the offense. Those are absolute drive-killers and his talent isn't great enough to make up for them. Then when you take into consideration his fumbles....

[HairOnFire]

This is my entire problem with him, and the loss in Houston, which was the result of a game-plan based almost entirely on him, cemented it. He's the anti-clutch.

 

 

Jay Gruden must have awakened that playoff morning and said to himself..."We should use Jermaine Gresham as often as the Saints use Jimmy Graham."

[|SF2|]

 

 

I haven't ever run the stats, but it would be curious to see what stats would look like if all things were equal.  He wouldn't be on the same level, but it bears keeping in mind that guys like Graham get a lot more targets.  They're never asked to block on passing plays (and hell rarely inline block on running plays) whereas Gresham not only blocks on running plays, but is often kept in to pass block as well, lowering his targets.  For example, Jimmy Graham had 78 more passes thrown to him than Gresham in 2013.  So obviously Graham's gonna have prettier stats.

 

Crunching a little:

 

Gresham had .7 catches per target.  Graham had .6 catches per target.  

 

So if Gresham got as many targets (144) as Graham did, his extrapolated numbers would be:

 

100 catches, 6.5 TD's 999yds

 

What Graham did with those 144 targets:  86 catches, 1215yds, 16 TD's.

I am a Saints fan and Graham is not a  real TE.  He rarely blocks and goes out for passes on almost every play.   Not a knock on Graham since he is excellent in that roll but he and Gresham are not similar players.

[alleycat]

I am a Saints fan and Graham is not a  real TE.  He rarely blocks and goes out for passes on almost every play.   Not a knock on Graham since he is excellent in that roll but he and Gresham are not similar players.

 

Ah, but Jermaine Gresham, he of the phantom block, rarely does that either so...

[Madieu Superstar]

Ah, but Jermaine Gresham, he of the phantom block, rarely does that either so...

If you want to laugh, go watch Gio's crazy TD run against Miami and look for Gresham's attempt at a cut-block.

[Tigris]

If you want to laugh, go watch Gio's crazy TD run against Miami and look for Gresham's attempt at a cut-block.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E0-p5VT3Kk

 

May not be as bad as AJ getting worked. Sanu gave it his all right there. Gresham does look funny. Looked like Frogger.

[bubba]

Greg Rosenthal

Around The League Editor

REPLAYWhich RBs will make a big impact?
Hue Jackson is not wasting any time before making his impact felt on the Cincinnati Bengals' offense.

The team's new offensive coordinator installed running back Jeremy Hill, the team's second-round pick, ahead of veteran BenJarvus Green-Ellis on the first day of OTAs Tuesday. Giovani Bernard took snaps as the starter, according to the team's official website.

It's only the first day of voluntary practices, but Jackson is sending a message. It's not a hugely surprising one if you listened to NFL Media's Bucky Brooks on a recent "Around The League Podcast," during which he said that Hill will be a huge part of what the Bengals do on offense this season. Green-Ellis declined comment to the team's official website.

That wasn't the only change that Jackson implemented on Day 1. The team displayed a faster pace with more formation variation and "unconventional" plays than usual.

"The first play, (the offense) did a nice little run," said safety Danieal Manning. "But then they did shifts and motions and then a reverse. I'm saying, 'Oh, I know how practice is going to be.'"

We've also heard from Cincinnati that Marvin Jones should take over as a true No. 2 wide receiver, and there will be more vertical shots down the field. Time will tell if the Bengals' offense will be better. But it certainly should be more interesting under Jackson than previous coordinator Jay Gruden.

"I can tell it's going to be a lot different. It's going to be a shake, I tell you that," said cornerback Adam Jones.

The latest "Around The League Podcast" breaks down the news and discusses players who could be summertime trade targets.

[Tigris]

Sanu might have decleated his dude if the DE didn't bounce off someone else.

[bubba]

Darqueze Dennard not worried as he practices without Bengals contract
By Jason Marcum  @JasonB_Marcum on May 28 2014, 1:16p 6

the Cincinnati Bengals began Phase III of Organized Team Activities Tuesday, first-round cornerback Darqueze Dennard took to the practice field without having signed his rookie contract.

"I don't know what's going on," he said, shaking his head at his locker following the Bengals' first practice of organized team activities (OTAs). "I guess it's just a timing thing."
It seems like a small risk, but when you see news of the Dallas Cowboys losing linebacker Sean Lee to a torn ACL, it suddenly looks like a risky move.

Still, Dennard said he wasn't worried about getting hurt while not getting paid.

"Money's going to come," Dennard said. "If you do a great job in this game, you'll get rewarded for it. Money's not a big thing on my mind. The only thing on my mind is helping the team out and winning championships.

"I pray every day. If it's meant to happen, it's going to happen, regardless. give all my worries and problems to God. I know He's got a right plan for me. I'm going to believe in it."
The issue could be offset language, which cuts down on money owed should a player be cut before the end of his rookie deal. The mount of offset language in a contract can be negotiated, and it's delayed many contracts of top picks being signed.

Because Dennard was the 24th-overall pick in the 2014 NFL draft, he's slated to sign a 4-year deal worth about $8 million, and that could include a fifth-year option if the Bengals exercise it.

[alleycat]

Greg Rosenthal

Around The League Editor

REPLAYWhich RBs will make a big impact?
Hue Jackson is not wasting any time before making his impact felt on the Cincinnati Bengals' offense.

The team's new offensive coordinator installed running back Jeremy Hill, the team's second-round pick, ahead of veteran BenJarvus Green-Ellis on the first day of OTAs Tuesday. Giovani Bernard took snaps as the starter, according to the team's official website.

It's only the first day of voluntary practices, but Jackson is sending a message. It's not a hugely surprising one if you listened to NFL Media's Bucky Brooks on a recent "Around The League Podcast," during which he said that Hill will be a huge part of what the Bengals do on offense this season. Green-Ellis declined comment to the team's official website.

That wasn't the only change that Jackson implemented on Day 1. The team displayed a faster pace with more formation variation and "unconventional" plays than usual.

"The first play, (the offense) did a nice little run," said safety Danieal Manning. "But then they did shifts and motions and then a reverse. I'm saying, 'Oh, I know how practice is going to be.'"

We've also heard from Cincinnati that Marvin Jones should take over as a true No. 2 wide receiver, and there will be more vertical shots down the field. Time will tell if the Bengals' offense will be better. But it certainly should be more interesting under Jackson than previous coordinator Jay Gruden.

"I can tell it's going to be a lot different. It's going to be a shake, I tell you that," said cornerback Adam Jones.

The latest "Around The League Podcast" breaks down the news and discusses players who could be summertime trade targets.

 

Pretty clear there's a new sheriff in town in Hue, and that he's been empowered to send a new kind of message.  Coupled with some allusions Marvin made in the SI article posted elsewhere today (we tried status quo and that didn't work), it's quite clear that he's giving his coordinators a wide berth to make their marks.

 

Exhibit 1A: When is the last time an established vet like BJGE was demoted for an incoming 2nd round pick? They can say depth charts don't mean anything, but Hue's move radically departs from historical convention (where Hill would have been listed LAST).

 

IMO, if you've got a roster full of play-off seasoned vets who haven't gotten it down, you can hardly do more to shakeup the team by dethroning some.  Marvin's willingness to roll with Veterans to a fault has long been irritating to me.  Something different is going down.

[dex]

I certainly like much of what i hear from Hue Jackson, especially about new smash-mouth physicality on offense, but I am really troubled by all of this uptempo pace talk. Daltom said just yesterday that one of the objectives of getting to the line quicker is to run more offensive plays in a game. To this I say...WHY? IMO the two best teams in the league last year were the Seahawks and the 49ers, but those teams ranked 30th and 31st in the league in offensive snaps. They played smart efficient offensive football that featured a powerful clock-chewing ground game, took shots down the field off of play action, and didn't turn the ball over on offense. There was nothing flashy about the Seahawks/49ers offenses, but they complimented their strong defenses perfectly.

 

Of course there are good teams who play fast offensively and rack up plenty of snaps. Denver and New England led the league in offensive snaps, and they played in the AFC championship game. But I certainly don't consider Denver a physical offense as their no-huddle game is like the textbook definition of an excellent finesse style. New England ran the football very effectively last season without much in the way of receivers, but I still didn't see them as being overly physical. But my biggest problem with the uptempo style and quick snaps is that it tends to undermine the defense in the long run. Even more so if you turn the ball over often, which of course Manning and Brady don't really do.

 

I've heard posters complain about the Bengals being late to the line some last year, which led to delay of game penalties or unnecessary timeouts.. But Cincinnati was still tied for 4th in offensive snaps in 2013, so they seemed pretty uptempo to me. And they got off a whopping 79 plays against San Diego in the playoffs, but was that really a good thing? Am I supposed to be impressed by  that? Without all of the turnovers, which of course ends drives right in their tracks, they would probably have gotten off snaps at a Denver/NE pace last season. And of course Cincinnati's defense being ranked highly last season is even more impressive when you consider all of the turnovers and high number of offensive snaps, so of course maybe I'm really worried about nothing here. I just think Seattle and San Francisco have the perfect approach to winning championships without an elite quarterback, which is a luxury only a handful of teams have.

 

And let's say Cincinnati does run about 50 or 60 more offensive plays in 2014, and let's make all of them rushing attempts by Bernard/Hill. Does that still mean Dalton will be asked to throw over 500 passes again? Hey, I know the Bengals have terrific receiving options in Green and MJones and hopefully Eifert, and those players need to be utilized fully. I just don't want all of the interceptions and all the fumbles in the pocket again. It puts too much a burden on our defense, which the offense needs to help not hinder.

[alleycat]

I certainly like much of what i hear from Hue Jackson, especially about new smash-mouth physicality on offense, but I am really troubled by all of this uptempo pace talk. Daltom said just yesterday that one of the objectives of getting to the line quicker is to run more offensive plays in a game. To this I say...WHY? IMO the two best teams in the league last year were the Seahawks and the 49ers, but those teams ranked 30th and 31st in the league in offensive snaps. They played smart efficient offensive football that featured a powerful clock-chewing ground game, took shots down the field off of play action, and didn't turn the ball over on offense. There was nothing flashy about the Seahawks/49ers offenses, but they complimented their strong defenses perfectly.

 

Of course there are good teams who play fast offensively and rack up plenty of snaps. Denver and New England led the league in offensive snaps, and they played in the AFC championship game. But I certainly don't consider Denver a physical offense as their no-huddle game is like the textbook definition of an excellent finesse style. New England ran the football very effectively last season without much in the way of receivers, but I still didn't see them as being overly physical. But my biggest problem with the uptempo style and quick snaps is that it tends to undermine the defense in the long run. Even more so if you turn the ball over often, which of course Manning and Brady don't really do.

 

I've heard posters complain about the Bengals being late to the line some last year, which led to delay of game penalties or unnecessary timeouts.. But Cincinnati was still tied for 4th in offensive snaps in 2013, so they seemed pretty uptempo to me. And they got off a whopping 79 plays against San Diego in the playoffs, but was that really a good thing? Am I supposed to be impressed by  that? Without all of the turnovers, which of course ends drives right in their tracks, they would probably have gotten off snaps at a Denver/NE pace last season. And of course Cincinnati's defense being ranked highly last season is even more impressive when you consider all of the turnovers and high number of offensive snaps, so of course maybe I'm really worried about nothing here. I just think Seattle and San Francisco have the perfect approach to winning championships without an elite quarterback, which is a luxury only a handful of teams have.

 

And let's say Cincinnati does run about 50 or 60 more offensive plays in 2014, and let's make all of them rushing attempts by Bernard/Hill. Does that still mean Dalton will be asked to throw over 500 passes again? Hey, I know the Bengals have terrific receiving options in Green and MJones and hopefully Eifert, and those players need to be utilized fully. I just don't want all of the interceptions and all the fumbles in the pocket again. It puts too much a burden on our defense, which the offense needs to help not hinder.

 

Perhaps you are confusing tempo with the game clock.  For example, in a run heavy offense, you will have far fewer plays on average because a much greater proportion of your plays will end with the clock continuing to run, whereas pass plays can stop the clock with incompletions, or receivers going out of bounds (probably more common with the pass than on the ground).

[Oldcat]

 

Perhaps you are confusing tempo with the game clock.  For example, in a run heavy offense, you will have far fewer plays on average because a much greater proportion of your plays will end with the clock continuing to run, whereas pass plays can stop the clock with incompletions, or receivers going out of bounds (probably more common with the pass than on the ground).

 

Exactly - the real key is being ready to run a play early, and using motion to keep the defense guessing and off balance.  You can run the clock once you are at the line.

[dex]

 

Perhaps you are confusing tempo with the game clock.  For example, in a run heavy offense, you will have far fewer plays on average because a much greater proportion of your plays will end with the clock continuing to run, whereas pass plays can stop the clock with incompletions, or receivers going out of bounds (probably more common with the pass than on the ground).

Going off of the Dalton quote in the Hobson article only, not game clock. He is the one saying  that the new uptempo pace will create more offensive snaps. And the Bengals were already in the top five in offensive snaps in 2013, despite also being in the top ten in rushing attempts. I guess my point is that increased offensive snaps is liable to lead more rushing attempts, but not necessarily less pass attempts. I am not at all convinced that more offensive snaps will lead to a run-heavy offense, and I don't think the uptempo approach itself promotes a physical style of football. It feels like finesse football in the actual execution.