May The Bengals Have Peaked Too Early?
This past season was something that many of us, along with many prognosticators, did not expect. The team accomplished more than expected by sweeping the division for the first time in franchise history which propelled them to a second division title in 5 years. They did it with a conservative offense that had only one true scoring outburst against the Chicago Bears and a defense only few of us saw coming (myself included). Although this team frustrated the hell out of us, it did nothing short of produce win after win.
After losing to the Denver Broncos on a fluke play, the team started to put together wins (albeit close on a number of occasions) building a 9-3 record and looking like it could make a true run at the Super Bowl. The defense had carried them each week making important play after important play, allowing an offense that barely could score until the outcome was in doubt to deliver the knockout punch. After getting shredded for 472 yards by the Houston Texans, the defense improved not only on the field but on the stat sheet, climbing into the upper echelon of total and run defense.
Going into those last four games, the Bengals had established an identity - that of a tough defense and strong running game, and appeared to be playing at their best. They had just come off of a streak of six games in which the defense held opponents to 235 yards and 11.5 points per game posting a 5-1 record heading to the final quarter of the season. Most soothsayers will tell you that shutting down the run (making opposing teams one dimensional in theory) is essential to winning. The Bengals defense did just that, holding opposing teams to just 66.6 rushing yards per game during the same stretch of games. However, during the final four games the Bengals defense started to show cracks as the total yards per game average ballooned to 325 yards per game while allowing 26 points per game, posting a dismal 1-3 record. The rushing defense also took a beating during the final four games as they allowed 148 yards per game.
Excitement level was running high going into the last four games of the season, considered the toughest portion of the year with back to back road trips to Minnesota and San Diego and rounding out the season with the New York Jets in the Meadowlands with a home game against the Kansas City Chiefs sandwiched in between. The Vikings proved to be formidable foes basically dominating the game. Against the Chargers, the usually reliable defense became unable to make a stop along with Shayne Graham failing to convert when the game was on the line. The Chiefs were able to move the ball effectively but turnovers helped dispel any chances of a win. Against the Jets, most of the Bengal starters played only a half a game which may have exposed the lack of depth on the defensive side. Even when the starters were playing they looked ineffective, sluggish and disinterested.
A team's ability to peak at the right time can lead them to not only ending the season favorably; it could lead to a deep run through the playoffs allowing them to satisfy the thirst for a championship. If a team starts the season sluggishly it does not mean that the finish can't be strong. This season the Bengals started out well for the first six games and then turned a corner that proved just how well they can play, only to fizzle for a stretch run where they had to continue playing their best heading into the playoffs.
The defense is what garnered the Bengals attention not seen since the team finished ninth in total defense in 2001. With their ability to stop the run and keeping opposing offenses out of the end zone, the Bengals looked as if they were headed to heights not seen since the 80's. However, the season is a grind with ebbs and flows that can affect a team in so many ways. When approaching the end of a season every team hopes to be playing their best. This season, the Bengals may have peaked at the wrong time of the year.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bengals peaking to early.....lol
That is really stupid saying the Bengals peaked to early. Injuries where the downfall of this team. They lost their top (2) tight ends. Lets see….they lost their best pass rusher…they lost their starting SS who was playing very well at the time…They lost their best run stopper..They lost Keith Rivers for a 3 or 4 game stretch….and finally the straw that broke the camels back was the lost of Rey, who was having a very good season, he did an outstanding job of coming downhill to smash the opposing offenses FB allowing Dhani and Rivers to come in and finish the play. Now you tell me if any other team could take those losses and win their division…By the way, Carson played one handed for almost the entire year..
Kenneth Lewis Moore
The defense actually held up pretty well despite the injuries. They played well enough to win games. It’s old hat, but you’ve got to hang it on the offense. Of course there were the ridiculous penalties(Thanks, Whitworth!), but on top of that teams finally clued in that the Bengals legitimately couldn’t pass the ball. Each opponent knew we had a limited number of formations and a limited number of plays. Wonder what they’ll run when Dennis Roland comes in motion? Not difficult to figure out. Basically, we weren’t playing that much worse down the stretch. The luck just ran out. When the offense does nothing but kick field goals and leans on the defense to bail them out, it’s called playing with fire. Let’s hope they pick up a few playmakers and overhaul the passing attack. It’s a shame that farce wiped out some unbelievable efforts from Benson and the entire defense.
hell yea we peaked early..
we peaked in the 80’s and haven’t been able to do anything since..
by 80%OFTHETIMEIMRIGHTEVERYTIME on Jan 23, 2010 12:57 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
+1
" I don't lie, I tell a different version of the truth."
by Purple City Middie on Jan 23, 2010 3:14 PM EST up reply actions
All Things Considered...
We held up despite many setbacks, but peaking too early wasn’t one of them.
I don’t think coaching was up to the task for most of the year in that the offense depended on good D to prop them up. The OC needed to work around injuries by playing personnel to get the right person in. Caldwell’s drops and fumbles in Oakland may have spelled the well-deserved need for a break (yeah, even after a bye). Benson and Scott/Leonard/Johnson in the backfield would’ve told the other team some serious head-knocking’s coming at ya! Less predictable play calling let’s your team know you (as an OC) are serious about moving the ball and scoring, not waiting for the next series on 2nd/3rd down . Also, after 5 months can’t we get more than one TE to consistently catch a ball?! Who’s coaching the danged offense?
I saw no personnel adjustments that told me the OC was even aware of the team’s depleted position, let alone trying to trying to get consistent results. Cold hands drop balls and we saw a lot of that in the last 5 games and that was more a reason for the losses than any injury. How were they practicing?
Also, I’m not a fan of the thinking that Chris Henry’s departure screwed up the offense. Aren’t they supposed to have someone else available to catch the ball? Chris was viable, but not an intricate part of the O. Still, he will be tremendously missed.
I don’t fault Zimmer for the defense because they propped us up this year and one way to tell that’s true is the disproportionate injuries on the defensive side. Fact is if this is the game plan for next year, it’ll be a 6 win season.
Bratkowski should be ashamed and he’d better improve.
Minister of Great Legs
Brat better leave town,
B/c if he does this again, you think we were calling for his head this year? It’ll be 5 times worst next year. He’ll step down and leave just like Bruce Coslet did. Coslet couldn’t handle the pressure from the fans.
I can only hope! We need to turn the heat up more on Brat.
I couldn't agree more
We need to run Brat out of town. I will be trying to attend one home game next year.
Slim 15, you will be missed. RIP Chris Henry
by Danimal, Destroyer of Worlds on Jan 25, 2010 3:19 AM EST up reply actions

by 






















