A Fluke, a Coincidence, and a Trend
Posted on September 29th, 2005 in the defense sucks by JANET || 4 Comments
So now 2-0 has become 3-0 and the question still remains: How good are we?
I think it’s a safe bet to say that the offense is in near perfect shape. After only being able to capitalize on just a pair of Kyle Orton’s four interceptions in the first half, the offense managed to right itself in the second putting the ball into the endzone twice. Chad Johnson has proved to be one of the NFL’s premier receivers, and Carson Palmer continues to impress all onlookers with his growth in the QB position.
Flipping over to the defense, we’ve got to ask ourselves a serious question. Namely: Have we played against offenses that are just that terrible, or is our defense instead rising up to the challenge? I think we can all agree that the scoring capability of the Browns, Vikings, and Bears isn’t quite up to par in this young season so far. Scoring however, is not the big question I have regarding the Bengal defense.
What has me wondering isn’t the lack of points by our opponents, but the incredible number of turnovers being generated by Marvin’s D. Week 1 the Browns committed three as Dilfer tossed a pair of picks and lost a fumble. This could rightly be considered a fluke playing against a subpar team such as Cleveland.
Week 2 saw Minnesota come to town, and Daunte Culpepper continued the trend he had set the week before. By then end of the game he had connected with five Bengal defenders (three of those caught by Deltha O’Neal) while Michael Bennett had dropped a pair of his own on the turf. Combined there were seven turnovers to give the Bengals a +6 ratio for the game. This event, especially considering Culpepper’s previous exploits this year, could have merely been a coincidence.
Then we arrive at last Sunday’s game in Chicago. Orton did his best Culpepper impersonation by tossing five interceptions himself while wide receiver Bobby Wade fumbled three times, one of which was recovered by Cincinnati. That’s six on the day which gave the Bengals a +4 ratio after taking away the two lost fumbles split between Houshmandzadeh and Chris Perry. Take that stat, together with the previous weeks, and you can’t help but think that maybe we’re starting to see a trend develop.
I want to tell you that our defense is just that good at causing the opposing offense to cough it up three, six, or even seven times a game. I really do. Thinking about each game however, I’m forced to step away from that ledge and rethink my position.
Cleveland would seem to support the argument I want to make, because in the two weeks subsequent to their Bengal bitch slap they haven’t turned the ball over once. Neither the Packers nor Colts could get one from the Browns, which honestly surprised me. Cleveland has fumbled a couple of times, but in each case a Brown fell on it to retain possession.
I cannot in good conscience however, make the case that the Bengal defense and that defense alone was responsible for the Viking ship that split and sank at Paul Brown in Week 2. Watching highlights and subsequent game film breakdowns showed beyond any doubt that Culpepper was missing wide open receiver after wide open receiver. At game time some of the sacks the Cincinnati defense pulled off appeared to be coverage sacks, with Culpepper unable to find anyone to throw the ball to. A second look down the field however, revealed serious gaps in the secondary that he simply couldn’t exploit. Apparently not having Randy Moss to look for had Daunte more rattled then he or the Vikings would like to admit.
Likewise I’m unable to put forward any kind of serious case that Kyle Orton was the victim of a swarming and tenacious defense that had him confused and shaken. Actually it appeared to be true that Orton was in over his head last Sunday, but that isn’t surprising given that he is a rookie starting only his third game in the NFL. Add to that the fact that he wasn’t even supposed to be playing this year, instead backing up the once again injured Rex Grossman, and his awful play comes in to perspective. I think we all remember some of the horrendously bad decisions our own C. Palmer made at the beginning of last year.
So in one out of the three games this year you could take the position that our defense managed to get in the heads of the other team’s offense and take some possessions away from them. But then again you have to wonder, can lightning strike three times in a row? Two picks, followed by five picks, and then caboosed by five more interceptions makes you start to consider the possibilities, however.
We’ve had our fluke, the coincidence, and quite possibly a trend. The question is then, are we going to start to see a pattern this week against Houston? And if we do, does it mean anything given that it’s the perennially below average Texans?
As I said in my last post, we really won’t know anything for sure until Week 5 at Jacksonville.