The Sporting News produces an excellent on-line newsletter that gets delivered to your inbox every morning. That being said, yesterday morning's edition made me want to throw up.
In this piece by Clifton Brown, Bengals Offensive Coordinator Bob Bratkowski is NOT listed as one of the six coordinators on the hot seat for 2009. Now maybe Brown is smart enough to know that here in Cincinnati, we don't hold our coaches accountable for small things like play on the field and offensive performance (dead last in 2008). But I still think this is absolutely a make or break year for Sideshow Bob.
With Carson Palmer at full strength, the addition of Laveranues Coles, and the celebrated drafting of Andre Smith and Jonathan Luigs, Bratkowski is out of excuses in 2009.
Even going back to 2007, the offense started to look stale and predictable...especially towards the end of the season. Once again, Bratkowski avoided the firing line and he has another chance to work with a great quarterback. He's shown his uncanny knack for negative creativity when he has to work with a backup like Ryan Fitzpatrick.
Bratkowski is commonly known as the biggest 'yes' man in the organization and the only person on the staff that agreed (or failed to strongly disagree) with bringing back Chris Henry. He has long been a favorite of Mike Brown...despite Marvin Lewis's opinions on who should be offensive coordinator.
Feel free to respond in the comments, but if the offense has another dismal year (this time with the full arsenal at his disposal), Bratkowski has to go.
The only reason that he has any success at all over the pass few years has been because Carson has been given the ability to change the play calling in the huddle or at the line. Without Carson running his offense he is worthless.
Posted by: REW | May 08, 2009 at 08:38 AM
I think brat's head should be added to the manafesto!
Posted by: RK | May 08, 2009 at 09:28 AM
As much as I hate to quote a Steeler, Ward said two or three years ago that the Bengals were predictable in their play-calling. This shows little imagination or initiative by BB when a team you play twice a year, every year, thinks you are predictable.
Posted by: Robinsgr | May 08, 2009 at 09:52 AM
Agreed with REW: we enjoyed our most success in 2005, when, like Peyton Manning in Indianapolis, Carson Palmer was given freedom at the line to change the play called and appeared to do so quite extensively. Also, he ran the no-huddle almost to perfection, which was perfect for keeping fatass Casey Hampton on the field during passing plays, something I could argue was crucial in earning the Bengals a win, and the division title, late in the 2005 season. Since 2006, that autonomy (essentially letting the best player on the team play his best) has steadily decreased, not-so-coincidentally along with our offensive output. Going into 2006, the Bengals' offense was widely considered top-5 in the league, and Carson was a consensus top-3 quarterback (behind Manning and Brady, although I'd put him above Brady personally). Yes, we play in the AFC North, a traditionaly smashmouth football conference, but we enjoyed our greatest success airing the ball out and then running in the fourth quarter when we already had a lead. So why the switch to a run-first offense that's proven time and again to be ineffective with the personnel we have in place? Why put your best player on a leash and force him to work within what's clearly an uninspired and uninspiring offensive framework. Let Carson do what he does best instead of trying to shoehorn him into a system that clearly limits his effectiveness. His 2005 numbers speak for themselves - 34-10 touchdown to interception ratio, was it?
Posted by: Wyatt | May 08, 2009 at 10:37 AM
He also had a line.
Posted by: Gambling Fool | May 08, 2009 at 04:46 PM