Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: On Hazards And Hulks And Tigers, Oh My!

Week In Review: Bengals Hire Jay Gruden As The Team's Offensive Coordinator

After the Bengals fired offensive coordinator Bob Bratkowski on Monday, the team went search mode for a replacement. Marvin Lewis wanted someone younger with fresh ideas broadcasting the general belief that the Bengals head coach was looking within the college ranks for a new offensive coordinator. Former Vikings head coach Brad Childress was believed to be a candidate, simply because he joined Marvin Lewis for dinner several weeks ago. In the end, I guess he just wanted to have dinner with Childress, who was reportedly passing through on a trip to Florida.

On Wednesday night, PFT released a report, via a source, that the Bengals were going to hire the UFL's Virginia Destroyers head coach Jay Gruden to become the team's next offensive coordinator. We wrote up a quick history on the Gruden.

PFT's story was confirmed Thursday morning with a press conference later that afternoon. Gruden wants to get Carson Palmer back, saying that they're going to do everything right for the franchise quarterback. At the same time, Gruden echoed Marvin Lewis' demands weeks ago that the team will pound the football.

Gruden will bring a form of the West Coast to the Cincinnati Bengals.

Comment 33 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

The good old “What’s old is new again!”

by ashunte23 on Feb 5, 2011 6:02 PM EST reply actions  

Haters

Why are all the Bengals fans so pessimistic about everything. Things are looking up, Jay’s got what it takes.

by rugstar81 on Feb 5, 2011 11:06 PM EST up reply actions  

IDK

Maybe the last 20yrs of MB management has made us a little jaded.

"When you chart (the plays) and see where it broke down there was no common theme to it." - Bob Bratkowski

by featherman on Feb 6, 2011 10:44 AM EST up reply actions  

I'm with you

the key is providing him talent (aka offensive linemen) to execute what he draws up

Moisture is the essense of wetness, and wetness is the essense of beauty.

by Blue Steel on Feb 6, 2011 2:47 AM EST up reply actions  

Maybe by pounding the football they mean adding the player ability and play calling that

will enable them to rush effectively on third and short? That may have been the most frustrating part of last season, the failure to gain any yards on the ground in short yardage situations, which led to passing under pressure and timing routes, w/ guys that weren’t too concerned about their timing, or seemed to lack awareness of the first down marker at times.

I doubt they’ll install a rush heavy offense just for the hell of it. Depends on the personnel. I mean if Carson’s gone, I’d hope they bring in a run heavy scheme. If he’s here and they draft a HB, hopefully they lean more towards the passing side.

by Grizzlyfox on Feb 5, 2011 6:30 PM EST reply actions  

Deion Sanders is now a Hall of Famer

and with that, the Cincinnati Reds have as many former players in the NFL Hall of Fame as the Bengals.

by FordhamRam on Feb 5, 2011 9:28 PM EST reply actions  

is he a HOF in baseball or football?

Moisture is the essense of wetness, and wetness is the essense of beauty.

by Blue Steel on Feb 6, 2011 2:46 AM EST up reply actions  

ohh, duh

I was slightly enebriated last night when I read your comment and for some reason couldn’t connect the dots…. But yea, that is pretty sad, isn’t it?

Moisture is the essense of wetness, and wetness is the essense of beauty.

by Blue Steel on Feb 6, 2011 11:09 AM EST up reply actions  

We pounded the football in ‘05, so what’s new? I think what he will bring is disguised formations, better balance, and in game adjustments. All things that Brat couldn’t do. The play action will be effective and the audibles will make sense, not just a run off LT. In a WC offense we will see the 2 back sets more often. Reminiscent of the old days with Brooks sharing the backfield with a plethora a big backs. Shit is about to get good again!

http://bengalsworld.com/forum/image.php?u=35&type=sigpic&dateline=1195110784

by Dr. Johnny Fever on Feb 5, 2011 10:14 PM EST reply actions  

You know, I have no idea if Jay will be a good replacement or not. But he can’t be worse than Bratworst. He just can’t. It’s physically impossible. I noticed in an earlier article Josh mentioned we had “three seasons with a top-ten ranking on offense” during his tenure. This rant is mostly in response to that comment… though it will also help those who are less than enthused by Jay to realize we have NOWHERE to go but up.

You know, Josh, I understand that you want to play “responsible journalist” and all, and I even appreciate it most of the time. But pointing out that we had three top-ten offensive seasons on offense under Bratsuckski is like saying that the Bengals are a successful organization because Mikey makes a profit every year. Technically it is even true from a ultra-narrow point of view, but it has zero relationship to any reality that any other rational person on the planet cares about.

Plus, let’s look at the numbers a bit closer. I looked at both rankings in points AND in total yards for all ten years, so there are a theoretical maximum of 20 rankings that could be bad or good. I’ll show that info here below (and I REALLY wish SBN would just allow table in comments… grr):

……………..Pts/Gam….Rank…….Yds/Game…….Rank
2001……….14.1……….31……….300……………..23
2002……….17.4……….28……….325.4…………..18
2003……….21.6……….13……….333.1…………..13
2004……….23.4……….10……….321.3…………..18
2005……….26.3……….4…………358.1…………..6
2006……….23.3……….8…………341.4…………..8
2007……….23.8……….11……….348……………..10
2008……….12.8……….32……….245.4…………..32
2009……….19.1……….22……….309.1…………..24
2010……….20.1……….22……….330.6…………..20

OK so now let’s count stuff up. Of those years, we had 6 top-10 rankings (30%) which is at least decent, but we had only one ranking in which we cracked the top 5, which is not. Worse yet, we also had nine rankings at 20 or below (45%), and two more at 18. That means that over half of the time (55%) we were in the bottom half of the league. Furthermore, there were three dead last rankings (15%), which I highlighted above.

Finally, let’s look at the pattern. He started slowly — very slowly in fact, but did (again slowly) increase over the years as the talent level improved. But he peaked in 2005 and 2006 and then collapsed and could not recover, even when we spent lots of draft picks on the offense trying to improve it. Now granted not ALL of that was his fault, but as a coach he did have input into the draft decisions, so some of it was.

Now if he had no talent to work with, it would be a different story. But we all know that’s not the case. In almost every year save one he had increasing talent levels available and even in that one he didn’t truly have “nothing” at all, if he was remotely competent he could have come up with something to at least avoid dead last in ONE of those categories. That’s a pitiful standard I’m asking him to live up to, by the way, because merely 4 extra TDs or just 60 yards over the entire season would have accomplished that goal.

Worst of all, he didn’t recover from that bad year. It’s one thing to have a bad year. It’s another to be so incompetent that you cannot figure out any way to recover the next, or for that matter ever again.

by FriarBob on Feb 6, 2011 4:54 AM EST reply actions  

How many times last year did we hear "The Bengals continue to find ways to lose the game" ?

Sub par O line or not. IF you can’t pile up the scoreboard with the amount of Offensive talent on the team last year, there’s something fundamentally wrong with your playcalling. Especially when you throw in the number of penalties on offense for simple, mental mistakes. Even more so when your players publicly state the offense has no identity.

Therefore, if Jay ONLY brought the team some focus, we’d be an improved team. I say he’s going to bring much more.

2010 - The Year of the LOLCats.

by UpStateMike on Feb 6, 2011 8:46 AM EST up reply actions  

Agreed

now, if only we had a QB.

"When you chart (the plays) and see where it broke down there was no common theme to it." - Bob Bratkowski

by featherman on Feb 6, 2011 10:49 AM EST up reply actions  

FriarBob, I think you put more time and effort into your comments than most people put into posts

and I wish you’d post more. As for these stats, I think pts/game and yards/game can be distorted, based on your defense and how much time they need to spend on the field. But for the sake of argument, I’ll go with them.

Obviously, 2005-2006 was the acme of Brat’s OC career. I wouldn’t say 2007 was a collapse. We still narrowly missed the playoffs (I believe coming down to a missed FG if memory serves correct) and of course, our defense was still horrendous, so our offense was carrying the defense.

2008, you may as well throw out the window. Palmer missed pretty much the entire season, plus our offensive line was completely decimated, and we had lost Henry by that point, along with Chad playing injured.

2009, we bounce back with a running-oriented offense, harnessing a RB and linemen we picked up off the street, which carried us into the playoffs.

2010 is the only year I might fault Bratkowski. Though, when you’re working with a fumbling RB, interception-throwing QB, and 3/5th of your offensive line were undrafted, you can’t say he was exactly set up for success.

Moisture is the essense of wetness, and wetness is the essense of beauty.

by Blue Steel on Feb 6, 2011 11:26 AM EST up reply actions  

Sure all stats are easy to distort. That’s part of the fun of NFL stats, because in isolation no one stat truly means anything.

But a couple of quibbles. One, 2007 wasn’t the collapse I was talking about, 2008 was. I guess I poorly phrased it by pointing out that the peak truly was 2005 and 2006, but I just skipped 2007 and jumped straight to the collapse of 2008.

And I don’t throw it out the window. In fact, 2008 is THE reason Brat needed so badly to go. Anybody can win games when he has 5 or 10 elite players to work with. When the injury bug hits and the crap hits the fan and you have to work with backups and try to find a way to win anyway, that is what truly defines an offensive coordinator as either good or crap.

When Tom Brady went down, Bill Bellichick and his OC found a way to still win 11 games and nearly make the playoffs. When Tony Romo went down, John Kitna stepped in and immediately was a fantasy powerhouse and eventually won five games (four more than Tony) while also giving the Saints and Eagles a run for their money. When Matt Ryan went down in 2009 the Falcons still found a way to be competitive and win at least a few games. With all the Dolphins QBs that have gone down over the last few years, it’s a miracle they’ve won a game… except that they keep finding a way to use the talents of the next man up to accomplish at least something. Heck even the Raiders — of all teams the one so mismanaged that at times they almost make Mikey look competent — had at least two QB injury situations to deal with over the last two years, and still found a way to win 13 (5+8) games between the two years. I’ll ignore Kolb because the clearly superior quarterback was the backup there, but there are obviously plenty of other similar incidents to look at. But finally, I’ll point to Buffalo, which had one of the most talent-less rosters the league has seen in probably decades or more, yet Ryan Fitzpatrick — the QB that Bratworst had available to work with found a way to win 4 games, and almost all of them were clear upsets as well. In the process the guy threw for 3000 yards in only 13 games without a single decent receiver on the roster. At that time we still had Chad AND TJ, even though Chad was playing hurt he was still better than anybody the Bills had this year, and TJ was clearly so. Plus we had Slim around for a good chunk of the year. And there were other sources of talent had they been properly groomed and utilized.

So no, 2008 isn’t something to ignore. Sure the OL sucked. Doesn’t matter. Yeah the RB situation was a problem. Doesn’t matter. They’re just excuses. If Brat had had the brains of a three-year-old child, he could have found a way to get us into the upper 20s or better with the talent he had available, and we could have won at least two more games. Our defense that year was GREAT, with just a little help they would have been better and the offensive rankings would have shot up the charts.

Worse yet, even IF 2008 was a viable excuse, 2009 proves the lie. Had Brat had the ability to be a good OC, he would have found a way to get the team to the mid teens that year. He didn’t.

I understand that people make excuses, saying that the coach can’t be expected to win without his starting quarterback. I say bull crap. Every coach should be expected to do something with what he has available, no matter how crappy. New England found a way. Dallas found a way. Atlanta found a way. Miami found a way. The Raiders found a way. Even Buffalo found a way. In every single case they had to adjust their game plans and their personnel packages and their playcalling, but they still found a way.

Brat was too stupid and too incompetent to find a way.

by FriarBob on Feb 6, 2011 2:56 PM EST up reply actions  

question for you, who was the longest tenured OC ever (during modern era)

and how long did he keep his job? I actually don’t know that answer, but wouldn’t guess much longer than Bratkowski’s tenure. The point I’m making is practically nobody has held onto a coaching gig for very long, because eventually failure eclipses and suddenly everyone is calling for his head.

I believe coaching, especially OC, is like cooking. Ultimately, you’re only as good as what you have to work with, since nothing you can chalk up is new and hasn’t been tried before. As an anonymous coach once said, it’s essentially X’s and O’s and comes down to whether or not your X’s can block the defense’s O’s. I think the only legitimate way to measure an OC’s ability is what he does with good talent. If he succeeds, he’s adequate. If he fails, he’s not. When Brat had talent (namely the offensive line which is the critical aspect), he succeeded. When his line deteriorated, his success was up and down, as expected.

And I’m not sure I follow the examples you mentioned. NE is good because they have a great offensive line that has been maintained and held in tact over the years. When Bellichek was with Cleveland, he failed. I think Brady is a good QB, but not as elite as many claim. And Matt Cassel happens to be a current probowler by the way, so losing Brady wasn’t necessarily a huge hit to the Patriots.

With Dallas, if they have such a good OC, why couldn’t he get it done with Romo?

And how can you laud Buffalo? They had a worse season than we did. In fact, if you remember, towards the end of 2008, we actually were getting better and won a few games (probably as many as Buffalo did this year) with Fitzpatrick and a bunch of backup o-linemen off the streets. Had Fitzpatrick started from day one, I think we would have had more success.

Moisture is the essense of wetness, and wetness is the essense of beauty.

by Blue Steel on Feb 6, 2011 3:17 PM EST up reply actions  

it's called a debate

I never said I think Bratkowski is a great OC. I’m simply offering counter arguments because I’m still not wholly convinced Bratkowski was really that bad – espeically in light of some of the most devisive and derogatory recievers in the NFL publicly praising him.

and I started off by complimenting FriarBob’s arguments, though I’m not entirely sold on them.

Moisture is the essense of wetness, and wetness is the essense of beauty.

by Blue Steel on Feb 6, 2011 4:44 PM EST up reply actions  

I have no idea who is the longest-tenured, but it’s probably Brat. It’s very rare for an OC to last that long. But not so much because they tend to get fired quickly. That’s part of it, of course, but a huge chunk of it is that they also tend to get promoted quickly, to take over head coaching jobs either in the NFL or perhaps in college/UFL/etc.

I think that anonymous coach was making excuses for his own failures. It’s all about execution, yeah, he’s probably right about that. But he’s wrong at the same time because he ignores a far more critical detail. It’s not solely execution. It’s execution after you’ve come up with a superior plan than your opponent. That can be accomplished in basically two ways. You can scheme and formation your way into mismatches that can be taken advantage of. Or you can fool your opponent into thinking something else is coming first, then execute something they weren’t expecting. And anybody can do one or the other (or even both) IFF they have the brains to come up with proper schemes and gameplans.

Now as I did say, if you have no talent whatsoever at all, it’s another story. But nobody has pro-bowlers at every single offensive or defensive position. They just can’t. And barring completely incompetent drafting, everybody has at least some talent to work with. I remember back in the 90s when the Saints didn’t, and I’m sure some of you remember back in the 90s when the Bengals didn’t as well. That’s not realistically possible anymore absent gross mismanagement. And even at the absolute nadir of the last six years, we’ve never had no talent. At times sub-standard, yes, but none?, no. And plenty of other teams have made-do with sub-standard talent and at least accomplished something with it.

Sean Payton doesn’t really have THAT great of talent on the offensive side of his team. Oh he’s got talent, but it’s not like he’s got pro bowlers at every spot. He had three this year and one of them (Jahri Evans) was a bit of a stretch. He has Drew who is obviously very very good (whether you call him elite or not), and his two guards are clearly elite. But his tackles are not — one is crap and the other was playing hurt this year and looked like crap. Not one TE or WR made the pro-bowl or was even close to it (tho Colston should have been in 2009), and he couldn’t keep a RB healthy for love or money this year. But regardless, he didn’t have great talent this year, yet he still hasn’t had an offense ranked below #6 in yards in five years, and this year was his worst.

Bill Bellichick is much the same way. He’s got a great QB, (mostly) good OL (but not that great), good TEs and WRs but nobody truly elite (anymore, at least, tho Moss was clearly still that in 2007). But he still gets the job done. And he also needs a defense to get the job done as well. In 2008 (when Brady went down) their defense was pretty good, but not great, in part because of bad drafting for years. Same with 2009. People expected the same here in 2010, but he rebuilt that defense far faster than anybody expected and got the job done (at least until the playoffs). His success in 2010 and in 2008 — at least in my opinion — pretty much proves that his problems in Cleveland were far more a pretty strong lack of talent combined with a lack of experience on his part, rather than any sort of outright incompetence. And hey, maybe with a few years off and some learning from others who are better, Brat comes back somewhere and does a good job. It could happen. I figure it’s more likely that pigs fly, but it could happen.

Falcons are a slightly different situation. They have a really great TE, a very good RB, and a more-or-less elite WR, with a few supporting players (including the OL) that help out. Their QB is still decent, but he’s not elite. So in some ways it was actually easier for them to adjust when he went down, except that at the same time they also lost their star RB to injury that year as well, and at least one other WR (can’t remember off the top of my head if it was White or not). Yet they still adjusted anyway, they found a way to scheme to victory.

Dallas looks different on the surface, but when you really dig in it wasn’t. They had problems early in the year, yes, but one of those games they lost by pure fluke. The others, their defense was pathetic, giving up on average 31.3 points a game. So yeah Romo wasn’t exactly performing great and the OL wasn’t great either, but they still put up 24.5 points a game (if you ignore the GB outlier when they clearly had given up). Their problem wasn’t offense in this case, it was defense. And who was in charge of that defense again? Oh yeah, Wade Phillips, who got his butt canned after the GB debacle because it was clear his team had given up on him. And no matter how great or not great the former OC guy was or wasn’t, he came in and immediately turned the team around with two wins and a very close loss, and in those two wins his new DC also turned things around and gave up only 19.5 points a game… one of those games to a team they had given up 41 to only three weeks earlier. So in Dallas, once again it wasn’t talent that saved the day, it was motivation and adjustments to the schemes. And it was inspiration from their coaches, coaches they believed in, who both inspired them AND came up with schemes to hide their weaknesses and exploit any weaknesses they could find in their opponents.

Buffalo was in many ways far more proof than anything else. Yeah, they sucked, and they had a worse year than we did. But with that roster that was almost completely devoid of talent, they still found a way to scheme their way to four wins and a significant number of close losses. They FOUGHT all year long, because their coaches inspired them to do so. Brat didn’t do that for this team.

And fitzy did come very close to starting from day one for us. He first started in week four after all, and I’m pretty sure with a better OC we would have won that day. For that matter, I think we might well have won against Baltimore with a better OC as well, they weren’t THAT great that year. Now some of the next few games were against very tough opponents, but this was still the Mangini Jets at that point and Farve or no Farve we should have at least put up more of a fight there. That’s two, maybe three more wins right there. Add in Dallas and one more game somewhere (maybe Philly instead of a tie?) and we’d have been 8-8 instead of 4-11-1.

And had Brat found a way to accomplish that — or even 7-9 — he’d still be employed today, and he’d deserve to be.

by FriarBob on Feb 7, 2011 1:09 AM EST up reply actions  

No huddle'd

From John Clayton, after game 1 of 2006: "The adjustment was going to the no-huddle offense, the staple of the Bengals’ playoff drive last season. By the end of 2005, the Bengals were running the no-huddle 80 percent of the time. They didn’t do it in the first quarter, and it allowed Cunningham and the Chiefs to get creative.
As soon as the Bengals went no-huddle in the second quarter, they were like a machine. Palmer engineered two touchdown drives in a nine-minute span that put the game on ice.
“The no-huddle throws a defense off-balance,” Johnson said. “It’s hard to call a defensive play when you go no-huddle. Basically, in no-huddle, you just to line up and just play ball.”"
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2582251

by Grizzlyfox on Feb 6, 2011 4:40 PM EST up reply actions  

And why did Carson like the no huddle so much?

“I’d love to do a lot more (of it),” quarterback Carson Palmer says. “It gives you a chance to call your own plays. It gets the game in an up-tempo mode. It wears on the defense. It’s fun.”
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/10453319/from/RL/#storyContinued

by Grizzlyfox on Feb 6, 2011 4:44 PM EST up reply actions  

So in the Bengals best 2 years at least (05 and 06), Brat wasn't even calling plays.

Debate that if you must, but I’m not sure there’s a much more damning fact against Brat out there.

by Grizzlyfox on Feb 6, 2011 4:47 PM EST up reply actions  

okay, now that is probably one of the better argments I've heard

basically you’re saying we had more success when Brat wasn’t calling plays. I can buy that. Though I still thnk the key was the line and as they deteriorated, so did the no-huddle which is why they shifted away from it over the years to try other thngs.

Moisture is the essense of wetness, and wetness is the essense of beauty.

by Blue Steel on Feb 6, 2011 4:55 PM EST up reply actions  

I will at least agree that the deterioration of the OL was a big part of things. It was probably the most direct cause of the reduction of the no-huddle, because only an experienced line can handle that on a full-time basis. But if anything that puts Brat more on the hook, not less. Because when it wasn’t him calling the plays, we did pretty well, and when it was him, we didn’t.

by FriarBob on Feb 7, 2011 12:27 AM EST up reply actions  

ive said it here about brat before

But everyone in the nfl is good. Sure some are better but you should be able to win with any player I think. It comes down to putting your players in a spot to exceed. Play to the streanth of your players which is not what brat does. He does not change his scheme or gameplan to fit his personel.

by JCompton41 on Feb 6, 2011 5:48 PM EST via mobile reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Cincinnati Bengals.

Editor-In Chief

Cj_small Josh Kirkendall

Editor/Managing Editor

Rudiblanket_small Anthony Cosenza

5255_133614603784_666578784_2414703_1976100_n_small Jason Garrison

Authors

Photo_3_small BeerRun

010511170110_small Joe Goodberry

40297_422933299865_509514865_4658259_6466915_n_small Ryan Harper

Small Brennen Warner

Sb_nation_small Jack Cassidy

580551_10150822857707018_613867017_11694254_1239726425_n_small Nick_Crago

Img_0783_small Mike Fightmaster

Moderators

Nfl palewook

680764146_0eac16fabd_small 80%OFTHETIMEIMRIGHTEVERYTIME

Tawky_tawny_small UpStateMike

Joeb698_86e260_small joeb69

Bengals_stamp_by_jamaal10_small Doc Scratch