I believe you are correct. I think it is all Hue and Marvin's tenacity to run the ball. They believe and rightly so that will get the Bengals to the Super Bowl with AD at QB. In reality, besides the Colts, the offense has been pretty good. The defense isn't upper tier yet and that is the biggest issue.

 

I miss those short passes (that AD can do) to Gio that have the potential for serious YAC.

I believe you are correct. I think it is all Hue and Marvin's tenacity to run the ball. They believe and rightly so that will get the Bengals to the Super Bowl with AD at QB. In reality, besides the Colts, the offense has been pretty good. The defense isn't upper tier yet and that is the biggest issue.

 

Agreed! Hopefully this game they just played was a sign that the defense may start getting back to to their old ways and doing well. It's probably not a coincidence that Burfict actually was on the field all game and Atkins showed more signs of progress.

Without Green, Eifert or really any other receiving threats its not hard to account for him. Him being out there sure didn't open anything up against the Colts. Now I can buy it if the Bengals had all their other weapons, that having him just makes them that much more dangerous. It also seemed like we seen more big plays from him last year in the role they had for him.

 

Either way I would like to see them get to more of a equal amount for both. Honestly I would love to see them both in the game at the same time. Because with Bernard you can also split him out into the slot.

 

This clearly is a better take on what is happening. In the prior post you said teams really didn't have to, but they have been without Green, especially. Eifert hasn't played enough to get a read on what he can really do over the long haul. When teams do start game planning against him, then we will know how good or valuable he can really be. Last year he was so,so., the first quarter this year he was awesome. Verdict still out on him IMO.

I miss those short passes (that AD can do) to Gio that have the potential for serious YAC.

 

They tried against the Colts several times and they almost killed him on swing passes and short balls over the middle. It was obvious the Colts plan was not to let Gio beat them.

To be the "starter" lasts all of one play. Couldn't care less who gets the nod first. Also, I hate designating anyone as your "third down back". I mean, if they're good enough to get you the necessary yardage on third down, why don't you have them in there to get yardage on first or second down? So, mix it up. Both are good enough to give you quality carries, as well as catch the ball.

 

Gio's proven that he can take it to the house from just about anywhere, and on any type of play...so, he'd get a slight edge in my book as far as the number of touches. But, I still want him somewhat "fresh" in the 4th quarter too, in case we need that big play.

They tried against the Colts several times and they almost killed him on swing passes and short balls over the middle. It was obvious the Colts plan was not to let Gio beat them.

 

Case of not enough weapons in the arsenal. Gio and A.J. need each other.

Start Hill then let Gio run wild.

I think they both should be in the backfield together and don't understand why they aren't. We don't use a FB the way we ahould

ans if you need Peko in on goal line then your doing it wrong in the first place.

I would use Hill on the goal line I'll tell you that.

 

Yesterday don't blame hill. Ngata blew those plays up.

Better question might be who should finish. Gio has been unable to finish the last two games.

I would still start Gio but it really would be more RB by committee than a starter and a back up.

 

I see no reason why Hill can't carry the same load as BJGE did. Most rookies are bad in pass pro but he must be doing a good job since he's playing during passing downs and catching two per game in limited time.