Reasons for Monday's Lopsided Loss

[RIPackerFan]

After much reflection, here are my reasons while the score was exaggerated:

• It seems that MM is highly secretive and wants to win the first Bear game at all costs – so much so that he is already closing off practices to game plan for the Bears and dedicating his time focusing on developing a scheme to stop the Bears rather than to stop the opposing teams in preseason. (MM is also unwilling to do much cut-blocking in the preseason (for whatever reason) – I am assuming this will change in the regular season.)
• So far, the offensive and defensive sets for the Packers have been very vanilla, which seems to reinforce the MM is worried about letting too much out too quickly.
• Playing a vanilla scheme is not necessarily bad – it can lead to a better valuation of talent. Differing schemes can hide deficiencies, but by playing vanilla, you either make the play or not.
• Reinforcing this idea is that MM went for it on 4th down two different times in the game and the amount of onside kicks. It seems he cares less about the game and more about putting his players in situations and seeing how they react.
• The Bengals were getting back Palmer - and purposely developed a game plan for him to succeed. This included the no-huddle offense, 4 – 5 receiver sets, multiple formations. They knew it was imperative for him to have a good game and created schemes to create an atmosphere to have him succeed.
• The players also were incredibly psyched in the game to play their best for Palmer (even saying so in interviews before the game) – this created an effect similar to the game that Favre played after his father died, when all the Packers brought their A game for Favre.
• The Bengals are better than 95% of the NFC and 100% of the NFC North. Palmer is better than any QB that we play against in the NFL North.

All of the above led to the loss to be a lopsided loss. Don’t get me wrong – the Bengals are better than the Packers, but they are better than most of the teams in the league. Also, the Packers have a lot to work on – individually we were beat a lot.

However, it seems the lopsidedness of the loss is causing everyone to jump ship. By putting in elaborate schemes against vanilla defenses, with a psyched team, the Bengals assured themselves of a better performance. To me, this exaggerated the score and how the Packers lost.

There is always a chance that our schemes are because 1) our coaches lack the creativity or understanding to develop more elaborate schemes or 2) our players are too inexperienced or can’t implement them. I prefer to look at the other side for now due to the reasons mentioned above – but we will get to see what is the reality at the Bears game.

However, while the score on Monday night does represent a win by a better team, I think it is more representative of how well a team that purposely creates multiple schemes will do against a team that does not.

[RashanGary]

The Bengals are a great team. The Packers arn't. It's really that simple to me.

[Fritz]

I think what's bothering me is that this team looked so much like the Mike Sherman teams of the last two years in the sense of the defense being unable to actually tackle, and sloppy dumb penalties reigning supreme. Ugh.

[cheesner]

The Bengals are a great team. The Packers arn't. It's really that simple to me.

True. But I agree with RIP, the difference is not as great as this game would suggest.

The first fumble w/return for a TD was a huge factor. It pumped up the Bengals and the fans. Packers were moving the ball - had they gone in for a score the Pack still looses - but it is a close game.

[Tony Oday]

I think it was lopsided because of the score ;)

[billy_oliver880]

I think it was lopsided because of the score ;)

:shock: So your a math major? :shock:

[Willard]

If your theory of holding our cards close to the vest so we can unleash our true fury on the unsuspecting Bears on Sept 10 turns out to be true I will plant a wet one on Coach McCarthy's unusually large forehead!

[RIPackerFan]

There was some sloppy tackling, but at least in the first half, much of it was caused by a bad secondary (specifically Woodson - who miffed on at least 4 big plays).

As I said in another thread, our run D wasn't that bad - keeping the running backs of the Bengals at a 3 yds/carry in the first half (while the Packers offense had a 3.5 yd/carry in the first half). We also didn't have any negative yard carries in the first half, while the Bengals had 3.


Penalties are a different story - I was ticked to get as many, especially after the first few games were relatively penalty free. I am hoping this was an abberation.

[MJZiggy]

If your theory of holding our cards close to the vest so we can unleash our true fury on the unsuspecting Bears on Sept 10 turns out to be true I will plant a wet one on Coach McCarthy's unusually large forehead!

I knew M3 had some unusually large parts, but hadn't counted his forehead among them. btw did anyone else notice that he's the first coach in the last decade or so to lose a little weight after taking this particular job?

[CaptainKickass]

If your theory of holding our cards close to the vest so we can unleash our true fury on the unsuspecting Bears on Sept 10 turns out to be true I will plant a wet one on Coach McCarthy's unusually large forehead!

I knew M3 had some unusually large parts, but hadn't counted his forehead among them. btw did anyone else notice that he's the first coach in the last decade or so to lose a little weight after taking this particular job?

MJ -

Maybe he's taking a page from Gruden and working out with his players and using Rock as his personal trainer?

Maybe?

[Willard]

If your theory of holding our cards close to the vest so we can unleash our true fury on the unsuspecting Bears on Sept 10 turns out to be true I will plant a wet one on Coach McCarthy's unusually large forehead!

I knew M3 had some unusually large parts, but hadn't counted his forehead among them. btw did anyone else notice that he's the first coach in the last decade or so to lose a little weight after taking this particular job?

MJ -

Maybe he's taking a page from Gruden and working out with his players and using Rock as his personal trainer?

Maybe?

He also wore long sleaves throughout TC, even when it was 100+ degrees outside. He may be following the "Sweating with the Oldies" technique introduced by Richard Simmons. The skinnier he gets the more you will notice the size of his melon though.

[RIPackerFan]

I think it is less about holding a lot against the vest vs. game planning and scheming.

It seemed the Bengals specifically schemed against the Packers, with a full offensive playbook - as opposed to the Pack, which seemed to do the same schemes and plays over and over again.

I am hoping that this is a case of MM purposely deciding on not to play the team in preseason, but to plan for the regular season. To me, the scheme can cover a lot of defiencies and attack the deficiencies of the other team. Belichek is unbelievable at this - which is the reason that while having a lack of playmakers, they continue to win.

I am not saying the MM is Belichek, but I am hoping that he is looking ahead rather than scheme for the preseason games - because if he is, we are in big trouble

[Cheesehead Craig]

The Bengals are a great team. The Packers arn't. It's really that simple to me.
Sometimes the simplist answers are the correct ones. Well said.

[jack's smirking revenge]

The Bengals are a great team. The Packers arn't. It's really that simple to me.
Sometimes the simplist answers are the correct ones. Well said.

Agreed. I wont' rehash my thoughts on the game. If M3 is sacrificing preseason conditioning for secretive preparation for the Bears game, I'll start the "Fire M3" petition. You DO NOT sacrifice the preseason for a single f'in game.

tyler

[]{ilr]3]

I didnt want to get my hopes up too much from that Falcons game and I was hoping to see more of the same in the Bengals game. I certainly am not jumping ship, but I am dis-heartened about our chances this season. I would love to see them do well, and given the likely hood that this wont be a stellar season, I atleast hope they can begin to get back the Lambeau Advantage for the home crowd and then build from there

[LEWCWA]

Get used to this Vanilla offense! This is what Hackett was known for and criticized for! Very conservative offense, guess who mentored our beloved coach! :sad:

[MJZiggy]

Would Hackett have gone for it on 4th down? Would he have tried the onside kicks?

[woodbuck27]

The Bengals are a great team. The Packers arn't. It's really that simple to me.
Sometimes the simplist answers are the correct ones. Well said.

Agreed. I wont' rehash my thoughts on the game. If M3 is sacrificing preseason conditioning for secretive preparation for the Bears game, I'll start the "Fire M3" petition. You DO NOT sacrifice the preseason for a single f'in game.

tyler

tyler:


Last year we sacrificed the Preseason for not even being ready for Game one " the Lions ".

TC 2005 was a total wash. The focus wasn't relevant to where the team was and need for that to be emphsized. I was shocked at TC last year.

I see alot more effort and focus this season all round, from most Vet's and of course... the new guys.

We played two preseason games and anyone who felt we needed to be 3-0 or 2 -1 is wrong. It has nothing to do with wins. Harvey demonstrated "that fact" in a post not long ago.

Maybe M3 is experimenting with schemes? OK? .... NO.

Yet, why ever go there? There isn't one Vet on that Team you could fool and certainly not Green and Favre (Henderson) so M#3 can't be making excuses nor trying to hide things. Trying useless schemes.

We have to beat the Bears and DAM another monday night Football Game. Kinda... "in your face" I'd say.

I believe Mike McCarthy is just simply finding his way. It's that simple.

Where would he be without Brett Favre here this season to assist his learning curve. Favre here for Aaron rodgers? NO !!

Favre is here for M3 and to WIN with his team mates and win for " the Packer fans". No other NFL player has more passion for the win than Brett Favre.

Maybe Favre has a chance with Mike McCarthy, because he got zero from Ted Thompson. Favre got Dick ALL, for two off season's now from Ted Thompson.

Oh that's right. It's not about Brett Favre but isn't he about winning?

Then if Favre is that? About winning... then Ted Thompson isn't on the same page as Favre and winning means Dick All to Ted Thompson.

Mike McCarthy has to be with Favre and winning because losing HC's often,don't last out their Contract otherwise.

Favre back next season? The answer to that is either Yes or NO, depending on the position of the car on the roller coaster. What OUR team does in 2006.

Packers !

[run pMc]

Let's not forget that CIN has had the same staff & system on O & D for a few years...where GB has a new staff, new run blocking, revised WCO, and several new faces in the starting O & D. Yes, this is a fact of life, but when you factor continuity + emotion of Palmer's return + better talent base in CIN after years of high draft picks, it's not surprising.

Just disappointing when the score is so lopsided and the improvement from week 2 is hard to find.

[mmmdk]

The Lambeau advantage; that's the key to success for the Packers. I predicted a 6-10 record but if somehow Lambeau Field became a fort (again) then it's a 10-6 record. The hill climb is steep; Packers has to continue winning -even on friday night vs Titans. Then the Bears and Saints in week 1 and 2. If Packers any of these games then they'll start questioning the Lambeau advantage. If they want it bad enough I think it happen even with such a young team. But you gotta start a looong win streak at to get the young players really believe in it. Just a thought.

[KYPack]

.[/quote]

You DO NOT sacrifice the preseason for a single f'in game.

tyler[/quote]

Wow, I amazed.

I usually agree with everything Tyler & everything he posts.

This time, I must totally disagree.

Pre-Season is largely meaningless, & nothing that goes on in these games matters at all. The only thing we needed to get out of these games is to come out of 'em injury free, which we've done.

I could give a shit if we lose all 4 Pre-season games 100 - 0, as long as we beat the Bears in Lambeau for our first regular season game.

For real.

[Cheesehead Craig]

True that. Going 4-0 in the preseason doesn't mean much. The Vikings went 4-0 in preseason for several years and it didn't enable them to win a championship.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Let's not forget that CIN has had the same staff & system on O & D for a few years...where GB has a new staff, new run blocking, revised WCO, and several new faces in the starting O & D. Yes, this is a fact of life, but when you factor continuity + emotion of Palmer's return + better talent base in CIN after years of high draft picks, it's not surprising.

Just disappointing when the score is so lopsided and the improvement from week 2 is hard to find.

Excellent post run pMc! My thoughts exactly.

tyler

[woodbuck27]

.

You DO NOT sacrifice the preseason for a single f'in game.

tyler[/quote]

Wow, I amazed.

I usually agree with everything Tyler & everything he posts.

This time, I must totally disagree.

Pre-Season is largely meaningless, & nothing that goes on in these games matters at all. The only thing we needed to get out of these games is to come out of 'em injury free, which we've done.

I could give a shit if we lose all 4 Pre-season games 100 - 0, as long as we beat the Bears in Lambeau for our first regular season game.

For real.[/quote]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Were we preopared for "the Bengals" ?

Maybe?

Did OUR first string "O" look sharp? NO.

Word today, is that Aaron Rodgers will swing it, with the first stringers... to start "the Titans" game, tomorrow.

So at least, Favre should stay healthy for da Bears.

The rest, we'll get a real look at. :mrgreen:

GO PACK GO ! FAITH FANS in 2006.

[Noodle]

Would Hackett have gone for it on 4th down? Would he have tried the onside kicks?

Buddy Hackett? Hell yeah, that guy was a reguler riverboat gambler.

[MJZiggy]

HaHa. But what would Paul Hackett have done?

[the_idle_threat]

WWPHD?

[Iron Mike]

I think it was lopsided because of the score ;)

:shock: So your a math major? :shock:

So, you're an English major? :razz:

[KYPack]

WWPHD?

Dern it, "Threat", ya beat me to it.

I wanted to slag Zig for spamming for the WWPHD web site.

[Chubbyhubby]

I hope Monday's loss wasn't a result in the Packers giving up. I watched the game Monday and saw 2 things that stuck out.

1st. They showed Brett Favre face after the 13 play 90 yard drive he looked pissed.

2nd. When Cinnci was up 10-0 the Packers had the ball in the second quarter all Favre did was call run the ball. It appeared they wanted to get out of there. There was no emotion whats so ever.

Posters have refered this to "Vanilla"

I think it was more like " invisable"