Malcolm Gladwell in "What the Dog Saw" to tries to quantify why some players and people perform exceptionally when under stress. In the chapter "The Art of Failure" he attenpts to explain choking. It is not scientific, as Gladwell isn't, it is interesting. The general conclusion was that those who perform exceptionally have automaticity down and under control even in stress. That means they just don't think but are able to do the activity or task with no thought. Those that fail think too much. It really explains the difference in golfers and FG kickers (I was actually shocked when Graham kicked the game winner for the Saints because he usually always misses in pressure situations). Dalton falls into the cateory of thinking about what could be a myriad of things, fotwork, passing lanes, etc. When under no game pressure he can do those things without thinking. An excellent example is driving your car. When you take the same route to work every day, you just don't think, you are on autopilot. You probably get to work and if someone told you they passed you and what were you looking at during some point of teh drive, you probably could not tell them. Now if you drive to work and the road you usually drive is closed, there's a wreck, or something abnormal, you go to thinking mode and problem solve your way around it. Interesting read and I think it explains, Dalton's problems in key situations but Eli doesn't, Kenny Perry's problems finishing majors and Tiger having no problems, why Vinateiri makes clutch kicks and Rackers doesn't. In normal every day things no difference really in performing the task, but pressure and stress well.....

You have been against Dalton and Gruden from the beginning. However the Bengals each year with these two have gotten better on offense. The Bengals became a top 10 offense this year, so having a bad QB and a bad OC doesn't add up to become a top 10 offense. So its one or the other it is Dalton is not that good of a QB, or Gruden is over matched as an OC. An OC that is bad with a poor QB does not get better each year and become a top 10 offense. I am more in the thinking that poor QB play makes the plays look bad. When Dalton is on, it doesn't seem like people question any of the calls. Gruden has some questionable calls sometimes, however I think he is a better OC than we give him credit for but is brought down by QB play.

 

I will add though that it is Gruden's own fault since he wanted Dalton. However for the most part I think his play calling is not as bad as people think, its bad QB play. We wouldn't be a top 10 offense with both a bad QB and bad OC it just doesn't add up.

 

Right so it took you 3 years to see I was right. I don't think either one of them are terrible. Just neither one of them are good either. Dalton is average but he has amazingly good weapons, a really good line and a fantastic D to help him and Gruden get the ball back quickly.

Right so it took you 3 years to see I was right. I don't think either one of them are terrible. Just neither one of them are good either. Dalton is average but he has amazingly good weapons, a really good line and a fantastic D to help him and Gruden get the ball back quickly.

 

That is the thing I don't agree. I am saying it is one or the other. I could buy a team being a top 10 offense if they have a really good QB to make up for a bad OC. Or I could even buy a team being a top 10 offense if they have an average to bad QB but a good OC. I can't buy a team being a top 10 offense if both are bad like people make them both out to be. It simply does not add up. On offense the guy calling the plays in from the sideline, and the guy under center are the two that will depend on how the offense does. So if this is a top 10 offense, then one of them are not as bad as people make them out to be.

 

Which I told you from the start it was not fair to judge Andy until after year 3, and it is year 3 and well now I do agree your judgement on him was right. What is crazy though he played bad but he probably threw the two best deep passes of his life in this game and they lost haha.

I have to disagree with you about Gruden. I think he tries to be too cute in his play calling and is still living in the arena football world where you have to throw downfield the majority of the time.

 

Gruden fails miserably when it comes to what it takes to beat some teams. It's easy to beat bad teams with simply better talent and that is what the bengals can do. His problem is when you actually need to beat a good team by out coaching them. Instead he thinks his game plans that beat bad teams will work with every team. Yesterday he didn't change anything from last weeks game plan. We beat the Chargers last time by running the ball.

 

Yesterday what did we start off doing really good? Running the ball. They ran the ball great and it couldn't be stopped. What does Gruden do? I think his ego gets the best if him and he is determined to make throwing the ball work. What happens? The team that was favored to win by the largest margin this weekend ends up losing by the biggest margin because Gruden goes against what was working and also goes with the weakest part of the offense and that is Dalton's arm.

 

What was the thing people complained most about Brakowski, his offense was so predictable. Now we complain that Gruden gets to cute with it? You claim Dalton is horrible and I agree with you on that. However a team does not become a top 10 offense with a bad QB and a bad OC calling the plays. Something has to give there, and one of them obviously is not as bad as people think.

 

As for the game they did start off running, but think about the second half the first drive they ran the first play and then stalled at around the 50. San Diego goes and scores to go up 14 to 10. The next drive I believe they ran it got suffed, passed incomplete, so third and long and next play Dalton fumbles. Now they are down 17 to 10. They get the ball back and the 2nd play on that drive I believe Dalton throws the pick and now they are down 20 to 10 in the 4th. Dalton's turnovers killed any chance of being able to truly stick with the run, to be able to stick with the run you still need first downs. Now I do admit he probably should have tried to run a little bit more in the 4th because being down 10 they could have mixed in the run some more. However with how the Chargers were controlling the clock at that point with their running game, you don't want to drain to much of the clock either on your drives.

 

So I am not as down on Gruden, I am down on the fact that Dalton simply pressed and chocked once they got down 14 to 10. I feel like he was calm and actually played well until they got down 14 to 10. Which you have to be able to trust your QB to stay calm and our QB folds like a rock in those situations sadly. So Gruden is not a great OC but is better than what most people think IMO. If he was as bad as people to go along with a bad QB this offense would be in the bottom 10 not the top 10.

What was the thing people complained most about Brakowski, his offense was so predictable. Now we complain that Gruden gets to cute with it? You claim Dalton is horrible and I agree with you on that. However a team does not become a top 10 offense with a bad QB and a bad OC calling the plays. Something has to give there, and one of them obviously is not as bad as people think.

 

As for the game they did start off running, but think about the second half the first drive they ran the first play and then stalled at around the 50. San Diego goes and scores to go up 14 to 10. The next drive I believe they ran it got suffed, passed incomplete, so third and long and next play Dalton fumbles. Now they are down 17 to 10. They get the ball back and the 2nd play on that drive I believe Dalton throws the pick and now they are down 20 to 10 in the 4th. Dalton's turnovers killed any chance of being able to truly stick with the run, to be able to stick with the run you still need first downs. Now I do admit he probably should have tried to run a little bit more in the 4th because being down 10 they could have mixed in the run some more. However with how the Chargers were controlling the clock at that point with their running game, you don't want to drain to much of the clock either on your drives.

 

So I am not as down on Gruden, I am down on the fact that Dalton simply pressed and chocked once they got down 14 to 10. I feel like he was calm and actually played well until they got down 14 to 10. Which you have to be able to trust your QB to stay calm and our QB folds like a rock in those situations sadly. So Gruden is not a great OC but is better than what most people think IMO. If he was as bad as people to go along with a bad QB this offense would be in the bottom 10 not the top 10.

 

Being predictable and being stupid is not too far off from eachother.

 

You are talking about the second half, I'm talking about the entire game. If we ran more in the first half there is no doubt in my mind we would of had a bigger lead than a 10-7 score.

 

When you are clearly gashing the Chargers with the run, breaking off 8-9-12 yard chunks at a time and you only give that player the ball 8 times, all this after you just played the same team a month ago and they couldn't stop your running game then and they lost....well going away from the run like they did and putting the ball, the game, the season in the hands of a player who trips over himself trying to give the other team the ball game in and game out, well that is bad play calling and Gruden is the one to blame for that. Remember even Bratkowski had this team in the top 10 in offense which tells me even a blkind squirrel finds a nut now ant then.

 

Green-Ellis was averaging over 5 yards a carry, yet only touched the ball 8 times. Shoot even Gio was right around 4 yards a carry. There is no excuse for only giving your leading rusher that game 8 touches. To make things look even worse for Gruden. The very first offensive series for the Bengals Green-Ellis runs the ball 3 times for 18 yards. He only touches the ball a total of 5 more times the rest of the game. That is unforgivable for a OC.

 

Here is the breakdown of the play calling by series

(These are designed plays, so when Dalton is flushed from the pocket and he scrambles I am counting it as designed pass and not a run, I am counting runs as anytime another player other than Dalton rushes the ball. I do know there was 1 designed Dalton run so I will include that in the run total and put it in the 2nd offensive series.)

 

1st series 4 runs 4 passes

 

2nd series 2 (including dalton run) run 3 passes

 

3rd series 7 runs 3 passes (We score a TD...notice run / pass ratio and also notice this is the only TD we score the entire game)

 

4th series 1 run 4 passes

 

5th series 0 run 5 passes (FG) last points by the Bengals scored

 

6th series 2 run 2 pass

 

7th series 0 run 3 pass (Dalton Fumble)

 

8th series 1 run 2 pass (int)

 

9th series 3 run 5 pass (int)

 

10th series 1 run 10 pass

 

11th series 0 run 7 pass

 

12th 0 run 12 pass

 

That my friend is the story of how you lose a game when you let a turnover machine throw the ball instead of handing it to your running backs who couldn't be stopped.

Edited January 7, 201412 yr by Hellbird

That is the thing I don't agree. I am saying it is one or the other. I could buy a team being a top 10 offense if they have a really good QB to make up for a bad OC. Or I could even buy a team being a top 10 offense if they have an average to bad QB but a good OC. I can't buy a team being a top 10 offense if both are bad like people make them both out to be. It simply does not add up. On offense the guy calling the plays in from the sideline, and the guy under center are the two that will depend on how the offense does. So if this is a top 10 offense, then one of them are not as bad as people make them out to be.

 

Which I told you from the start it was not fair to judge Andy until after year 3, and it is year 3 and well now I do agree your judgement on him was right. What is crazy though he played bad but he probably threw the two best deep passes of his life in this game and they lost haha.

 

So if Dalton is the problem and Gruden is also a problem for picking Dalton over Kaepernick both are a problem right? My entire thing about Gruden right away was he only worked for his brother in the NFL. He had to go to Arena after his brother was gone. That's the guy the Bengals let make the QB pick. That's an issue. Gruden just isn't that good during games either. The Chargers players basically laughed at the Bengals offensive play calling after the game. They said they knew every single play and had seen them all. Said they didn't see one new wrinkle. That's an issue.

So if Dalton is the problem and Gruden is also a problem for picking Dalton over Kaepernick both are a problem right? My entire thing about Gruden right away was he only worked for his brother in the NFL. He had to go to Arena after his brother was gone. That's the guy the Bengals let make the QB pick. That's an issue. Gruden just isn't that good during games either. The Chargers players basically laughed at the Bengals offensive play calling after the game. They said they knew every single play and had seen them all. Said they didn't see one new wrinkle. That's an issue.

 

Did you listen to the Bengal players on defense after the game? They also said the exact same thing about the Chargers offense. They knew what was coming, they were prepared for it, Zimmer drew up exactly what they were going to do, but they just didn't execute as well as normally. The Bengals players said the exact same thing about the Chargers offense. It was the 17th game of the year, and 2nd against those teams. I bet you most defenses will say the exact same thing about any team they play in the 17th game. We knew what they were going to do, it just comes down to executing. What the Chargers said is the exact same thing the Bengals defenders said, so there is nothing there.

 

Now Gruden wanting Dalton over Kaep he was definitely wrong on that. Which I am fine if people think Gruden is a bad OC but probably shouldn't say Dalton is horrible then. However it simply does not add up for people to say we have a bad QB and a bad OC and be a top 10 offense. Obviously one of them is not as bad as people make them out to be. Which I don't think Gruden is as bad as people think, however his first big decision in the NFL is hurting him by choosing Dalton instead.

Being predictable and being stupid is not too far off from eachother.

 

You are talking about the second half, I'm talking about the entire game. If we ran more in the first half there is no doubt in my mind we would of had a bigger lead than a 10-7 score.

 

When you are clearly gashing the Chargers with the run, breaking off 8-9-12 yard chunks at a time and you only give that player the ball 8 times, all this after you just played the same team a month ago and they couldn't stop your running game then and they lost....well going away from the run like they did and putting the ball, the game, the season in the hands of a player who trips over himself trying to give the other team the ball game in and game out, well that is bad play calling and Gruden is the one to blame for that. Remember even Bratkowski had this team in the top 10 in offense which tells me even a blkind squirrel finds a nut now ant then.

 

Green-Ellis was averaging over 5 yards a carry, yet only touched the ball 8 times. Shoot even Gio was right around 4 yards a carry. There is no excuse for only giving your leading rusher that game 8 touches. To make things look even worse for Gruden. The very first offensive series for the Bengals Green-Ellis runs the ball 3 times for 18 yards. He only touches the ball a total of 5 more times the rest of the game. That is unforgivable for a OC.

 

Here is the breakdown of the play calling by series

(These are designed plays, so when Dalton is flushed from the pocket and he scrambles I am counting it as designed pass and not a run, I am counting runs as anytime another player other than Dalton rushes the ball. I do know there was 1 designed Dalton run so I will include that in the run total and put it in the 2nd offensive series.)

 

1st series 4 runs 4 passes

 

2nd series 2 (including dalton run) run 3 passes

 

3rd series 7 runs 3 passes (We score a TD...notice run / pass ratio and also notice this is the only TD we score the entire game)

 

4th series 1 run 4 passes

 

5th series 0 run 5 passes (FG) last points by the Bengals scored

 

6th series 2 run 2 pass

 

7th series 0 run 3 pass (Dalton Fumble)

 

8th series 1 run 2 pass (int)

 

9th series 3 run 5 pass (int)

 

10th series 1 run 10 pass

 

11th series 0 run 7 pass

 

12th 0 run 12 pass

 

That my friend is the story of how you lose a game when you let a turnover machine throw the ball instead of handing it to your running backs who couldn't be stopped.

 

How much more did you want them to run in the first half? I mean if it wasn't for the Bengals trying to get in field goal range at the end of the half, then the Bengals would have ran the ball much more than they passed in the first half. Them having to throw the ball 5 times at the end of the first half to get in field goal range was the only reason why it was a 50/50 split pass to run in the first half.

 

In the 2nd half they still started off trying to run. Now the 2nd series of the second half I thought they ran it on first down, but based on what you put I guess they did only drop back to pass each time. So I could buy people being upset with not even attempting a run on that series. The 8th series did start with a run I believe and was stuffed. Then set up the next two passes and the interception. If you get stuffed on 1st down running the ball it sets you back. By the 9th series they are now down by 10 in the 4th. With how the Chargers were controlling the clock you didn't want to be mainly run because your not in position to take a lot of time off the clock while down 10 in the 4th. So I have no problem with 3 run and 5 pass in that situation.

 

So basically the only real series in the game that it made no sense for why they didn't try to run was the 7th series of the game. Other than that they did run the ball more in the first half, until they had to pass to get in field goal range. Then the game itself in the 2nd half really dictated how it went. So besides the 7th series it really is hard to say much about it.

Malcolm Gladwell in "What the Dog Saw" to tries to quantify why some players and people perform exceptionally when under stress. In the chapter "The Art of Failure" he attenpts to explain choking. It is not scientific, as Gladwell isn't, it is interesting. The general conclusion was that those who perform exceptionally have automaticity down and under control even in stress. That means they just don't think but are able to do the activity or task with no thought. Those that fail think too much. It really explains the difference in golfers and FG kickers (I was actually shocked when Graham kicked the game winner for the Saints because he usually always misses in pressure situations). Dalton falls into the cateory of thinking about what could be a myriad of things, fotwork, passing lanes, etc. When under no game pressure he can do those things without thinking. An excellent example is driving your car. When you take the same route to work every day, you just don't think, you are on autopilot. You probably get to work and if someone told you they passed you and what were you looking at during some point of teh drive, you probably could not tell them. Now if you drive to work and the road you usually drive is closed, there's a wreck, or something abnormal, you go to thinking mode and problem solve your way around it. Interesting read and I think it explains, Dalton's problems in key situations but Eli doesn't, Kenny Perry's problems finishing majors and Tiger having no problems, why Vinateiri makes clutch kicks and Rackers doesn't. In normal every day things no difference really in performing the task, but pressure and stress well.....

 

This brings to my mind the old Al McGuire comment that he would rather have a basketball team made up of C students than A students.

Did you listen to the Bengal players on defense after the game? They also said the exact same thing about the Chargers offense. They knew what was coming, they were prepared for it, Zimmer drew up exactly what they were going to do, but they just didn't execute as well as normally. The Bengals players said the exact same thing about the Chargers offense. It was the 17th game of the year, and 2nd against those teams. I bet you most defenses will say the exact same thing about any team they play in the 17th game. We knew what they were going to do, it just comes down to executing. What the Chargers said is the exact same thing the Bengals defenders said, so there is nothing there.

 

Now Gruden wanting Dalton over Kaep he was definitely wrong on that. Which I am fine if people think Gruden is a bad OC but probably shouldn't say Dalton is horrible then. However it simply does not add up for people to say we have a bad QB and a bad OC and be a top 10 offense. Obviously one of them is not as bad as people make them out to be. Which I don't think Gruden is as bad as people think, however his first big decision in the NFL is hurting him by choosing Dalton instead.

 

I'm not in the NFL but a guy that is was shocked the Gals didn't have any new wrinkles.

 

So you're firmly in the it's all on Dalton and Gruden is good camp? They both look like they will get a new chance to prove who is better.

I'm not in the NFL but a guy that is was shocked the Gals didn't have any new wrinkles.

 

So you're firmly in the it's all on Dalton and Gruden is good camp? They both look like they will get a new chance to prove who is better.

 

I am in the obviously one of them is better via what most give them credit for. Shoot I bet most people didn't know they were in the top ten in offense this year. So obviously somethin went more right than most teams. Maybe it is him that's the problem or maybe it Dalton. I think it's Dalton. However I could be wrong. The fact remains this wouldn't be a top ten offense if both were as bad as people claim. One is obviously better than what we give credit for.