“In critical situations, I would much rather go to our best players rather than to run a certain play against a certain scheme. To me, in the end, I want to give our best players—our toughest, smartest, most dependable players—an opportunity to win the game.”
The above quote is from Bill Belichick, who explained his coaching philosophy at a clinic in 2017. The Pats coach was talking about offensive play-calling.
-- Credit to The Ringer for all the above.
It's open season on Zac Taylor. He went right-of-Reagan with his decision-making and play-calling Sunday. No one is letting him forget it.
It’s time to let him forget it.
Beyond the games themselves, the second-guessing game is the most fun a fan can have with the teams he loves. Around here, it’s more prevalent with the Reds than the Bengals. Second-guessing the manager is second nature. Without it, talk radio would have to run more ads than it does already. (And lately, the proliferation of ads on the radio is approaching unbearable. Mo Egger could take a roadie to Skyline in the time he has between the top of the hour and when he resumes talking.)
Three weeks ago, we loved Joe Mixon and the resurgent running game. All hail Frank Pollack! Balance is the name of the game. All together now: You Have To Run To Win The AFC North.
Mixon carried 58 times in successive games, both wins. That kept Joe Burrow from the sideline ER (ie, the tent) and allowed the Bengals to control tempo.
You loved it.
Now?
Taylor goes with the same approach late on Sunday and you go berserk.
I know, I know. Different opponents, different situations. I’m not saying you were wrong for bitching about feeding Mixon in OT. You weren’t. Every scribe in town suggested the same. Throw the damned ball.
I’m saying IMO pounding Mixon in that situation was consistent with what the Bengals have done for weeks. Smart people would call it their “identity.’’ Taylor has noted that eventually teams tire of trying to tackle Mixon and his yards pile up at winning time. You nodded in agreement. Me, too, grudgingly.
Now, the demand is to Go With Your Best Guy! That’d be Burrow.
My issue is more general.
Whom do the Bengals want to be?
Early this year, Taylor was going for it on 4th down on his own side of the field. Sunday, he determined that kicking field goals was better on 4th-and-1/2 from SF’s 10/19- yard lines.
Earlier, on the way to 5-2, Taylor said the play-calling and risk-taking would continue to be aggressive. We take what we want, not what the defense gives us. Now, Mixon gets seven yards on 1st and 2nd down, and Bosa sacks Burrow on an obvious passing down.
One run, OK. Two?
Quoting Pete Townshend: Who are you?
At the very least, Taylor needed to have a better feel for the immediate situation.
Another thought: Is the recent conservatism a product of the pressure to win every game?
Taylor’s still growing into the gig. It’s understandable, given his thin NFL resume before he got here. His assistants were not longtime NFL coaching vets when he hired them. December is not the time of the season for learning on the job. While I give the head coach big credit for creating locker room synergy – and believe it’s a decent reason for the team’s success – I also wonder if his inexperience in the big-game saddle hasn’t hurt him some.
He’ll be better for it. That doesn’t help him today.
That becomes even more relevant when you consider that the head coach is also the one calling the plays.
Look at the rest of the year. Taylor v. Vic Fangio this week. Taylor-Andy Reid, Taylor-John Harbaugh. Even 39-year-old Kevin Stefanski was Minnesota’s offensive coordinator for two years before the Browns hired him.
Taylor was the QB coach for Sean McVay. McVay’s seen as an offensive mastermind.
You could suggest the matchup between play caller and opposing D-coordinator is more meaningful. But again, Zac is calling the plays.
Those of us who predicted 7-10/8-9 for the ’21 Bengals aren’t down on Zac Taylor. I don’t blame the guy for exceeding expectations. I do wish he’d be more consistent in the late-season crucible. And trust the confidence and talent of his QB.
Now, then. . .
I HAVE NO IDEA what anyone could do to make whole the victims of Larry Nassar. Nothing, probably. Having the former trainer/molester rot in prison is justice. The nine-figure cash punishment is impressive, though how much of it these young women will see is anybody’s guess. Insurance companies for the US Olympic and Paralympic Committee supposedly will fund the bill. Michigan State, Nassar’s former employer, already has promised to give $500 million to the victims.
The huge fine, if we want to call it that, is a deterrent from keeping this from happening again. How much of a deterrent? If you’re as sick as Larry Nassar, maybe not much.
The women affected will have to lean on the legacy they’ve created and continue to create. NY Times:
One legacy of the case will be how it empowered victims to speak about their sexual abuse and face their accusers. At Nassar’s sentencing hearings in early 2018, more than 100 girls and women he abused, including some of his patients at Michigan State University, stood in front of him and gave witness statements about how he had hurt them.
The next generation of aspiring champions should benefit from the sad experiences of their predecessors.
TUNE O’ THE DAY. . . Since we’re talking about fans, it’s always interested me why we are fans of one rock group and not another. Why, for example, do I dislike Phish but I’m OK with the Grateful Dead? I don’t like Rush, but I do like, I dunno, Queen.
Love the Stones, OK with Zeppelin.
Whom do you love and about whom are you ambivalent?
BTW, I neglected to note the passing of Mike Nesmith. He was the best (some say only) musician in the Monkees made-for-TV ensemble. Here’s his best composition, IMO, given life by Linda Ronstadt.
Source link
