Zac Taylor Changed the Culture of Cincinnati Football

[Savagehenry54]

(12-22-2021, 10:49 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: I genuinely have no idea what you are trying to say. You mention "dark horse shit" so I am assuming you're saying that all of these aforementioned teams were also considered middling teams and rated out so by SRS? If so, that's not accurate. Cincinnati currently ranks 14th in the NFL by SRS (best SRS rating in the AFC North). Here are all of the Super Bowl victors since 2005 and their SRS rating...

2020 - Bucs (2nd)

2019 - Chiefs (4th)

2018 - Patriots (9th)

2017 - Eagles (1st)

2016 - Patriots (1st)

2015 - Broncos (9th)

2014 - Patriots (1st)

2013 - Seahawks (1st)

2012 - Ravens (13th)

2011 - Giants (12th)

2010 - Packers (2nd)

2009 - Saints (2nd)

2008 - Steelers (1st)

2007 - Giants (11th)

2006 - Colts (6th)

2005 - Steelers (6th)

So, in the past 16 years, there has been three teams win the Super Bowl that landed outside of the top 10 in SRS, which I think is pretty fair to call them dark horses. You mentioned the Seahawks, Colts and Steelers as well, all of which graded out as either elite or borderline elite teams in their respective season. 

Regarding defense and running game, the defense part is true but not so much with the running game. There is essentially zero relationship to victories and run game performance within the playoffs. I am using last years playoffs as an example here, and I'm aware that the dataset is small but I'm doing this as a quick example before work. I am using YPC as my metric here and I ran a regression on YPC and wins to try to find the relationship. Exactly 0% of the variation in playoff victories last year can be explained by differences in run game performance. You don't need a strong running game to do well in the playoffs, but you do need a strong QB OR at the bare minimum, strong QB performances.

Is that where their ratings were before their playoff runs?  Or were they all rated so high with 3 reg season games left?  Plus I already admitted the Packers and saints didn't really fit my position and several of the other years were won by teams that could have been called "middling" during much of the reg season.

As for the run game, your numbers might not show it but if you're not aware of the effectiveness and how often over the years teams have used the run to salt away playoff dubs idk what to tell ya.

[KillerGoose]

(12-22-2021, 03:51 PM)Savagehenry54 Wrote: Is that where their ratings were before their playoff runs?  Or were they all rated so high with 3 reg season games left?  Plus I already admitted the Packers and saints didn't really fit my position and several of the other years were won by teams that could have been called "middling" during much of the reg season.

As for the run game, your numbers might not show it but if you're not aware of the effectiveness and how often over the years teams have used the run to salt away playoff dubs idk what to tell ya.

That is their SRS at the end of the regular season. At this point in the season, it is going to be difficult to move that rating much. It accounts for SOS and MOV, so a team would have to play very highly rated teams and beat them by a significant margin to get much movement. Cincinnati could potentially move into the top 10 with some big victories down the line, but Cleveland and Baltimore are not rated very highly.

I’m aware that the run game has a purpose late in games by burning the clock, but that isn’t really what you said. You mentioned that a run game goes a long way in the playoffs - it doesn’t. Run game effectiveness doesn’t have a correlation to victories. Now, run game attempts might because you’re salting the game away at the end, burning clock. That’s something that any team can do, though, just run the ball without much concern for efficacy. What does go a long way is defense and a strong QB.

[Savagehenry54]

(12-22-2021, 04:03 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: That is their SRS at the end of the regular season. At this point in the season, it is going to be difficult to move that rating much. It accounts for SOS and MOV, so a team would have to play very highly rated teams and beat them by a significant margin to get much movement. Cincinnati could potentially move into the top 10 with some big victories down the line, but Cleveland and Baltimore are not rated very highly.

I’m aware that the run game has a purpose late in games by burning the clock, but that isn’t really what you said. You mentioned that a run game goes a long way in the playoffs - it doesn’t. Run game effectiveness doesn’t have a correlation to victories. Now, run game attempts might because you’re salting the game away at the end, burning clock. That’s something that any team can do, though, just run the ball without much concern for efficacy. What does go a long way is defense and a strong qb.

One can make numbers say damn near anything they want.
 
A strong run game can absolutely carry the day for a team especially in the playoffs.  Thats not to say that with how the game is called now that it happens as often as it used to.

Running the football still can and often still does have a huge impact on the game.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

Been some good discussion in this thread! Just in to say it's good to see Savage and basballguy back around. Welcome back boys.

[KillerGoose]

(12-22-2021, 04:31 PM)Savagehenry54 Wrote: One can make numbers say damn near anything they want.
 
A strong run game can absolutely carry the day for a team especially in the playoffs.  Thats not to say that with how the game is called now that it happens as often as it used to.

Running the football still can and often still does have a huge impact on the game.

You can, but I'm not. All I am doing is gathering rush data for 2020 playoff games and using a binary indicator to signify whether the team won or lost. That's it, it isn't some magic. Out of the below list, who do you think won their games?

A - 163 yards @ 5.43 yards per carry

B - 129 yards @ 7.16 yards per carry

C - 107 yards @ 6.29 yards per carry

D -  123 yards @ 5.12 yards per carry

E - 112 yards @ 5.09 yards per carry

F - 136 yards @ 5.44 yards per carry

A strong run game will be defeated by a strong passing game the vast majority of the time - there is a reason why nearly every single team in the NFL throws more than they run. One, it is more effective and two, a strong passing game better correlates to success. Now, to be clear, I'm not saying that a running game is completely worthless. What I am saying is that you don't need a strong running game to have playoff success, and the data so far (a very limited dataset) suggests that a strong running game doesn't do much for your chances of victory - a strong passing game and defense, however, does. 

[HarleyDog]

I loved Zacs approach on wanting smart intelligent leaders on this team. He doesn't want a player based on talent alone like many others who would sign a diva like Antonio Brown or OBJ. It helps to reduce the possibilities of lockeroom cancers. Add that with having a young team whom are growing together, I think that is a winning formula in the making and it's the main ingredients to changing the culture for the good.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-22-2021, 05:20 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: I loved Zacs approach on wanting smart intelligent leaders on this team. He doesn't want a player based on talent alone like many others who would sign a diva like Antonio Brown or OBJ. It helps to reduce the possibilities of lockeroom cancers. Add that with having a young team whom are growing together, I think that is a winning formula in the making and it's the main ingredients to changing the culture for the good.

Gotta agree. I think that's the best thing Zac has done over the last two seasons....or had a hand in targeting those types of players. Team captains, guys who've won championships in college, pros that have been apart of playoff runs, etc. Team fist guys, and vets that have had a taste of winning in the postseason. It's a good mix.

[C0de_M0nkey]

Now, do you believe?

[Soonerpeace]

Saturday’s game may have riding on it the NFL COY
https://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/odds/coach-of-the-year/

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-15-2022, 09:56 PM)C0de_M0nkey Wrote: Now, do you believe?

Some posters have been conspicuously absent since Saturday....lol.

[TecmoBengals]

(01-18-2022, 11:50 AM)Wyche Wrote: Some posters have been conspicuously absent since Saturday....lol.

Which is crazy because I contend it's more fun to post when things are going good for the franchise. It's miserable when the focus of posts have to be about firing the coach, drafting in the top 5, or moping about 30+ years of Bungling it up.

I much prefer winning, seeing our QB discussed as having the ability to win the Super Bowl, talking up Chase/Burrow/Taylor for NFL awards, and debating who we should match up against in the playoffs. Positive vibes for the win.

[*ochocincos*]

(12-22-2021, 05:14 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: You can, but I'm not. All I am doing is gathering rush data for 2020 playoff games and using a binary indicator to signify whether the team won or lost. That's it, it isn't some magic. Out of the below list, who do you think won their games?

A - 163 yards @ 5.43 yards per carry

B - 129 yards @ 7.16 yards per carry

C - 107 yards @ 6.29 yards per carry

D -  123 yards @ 5.12 yards per carry

E - 112 yards @ 5.09 yards per carry

F - 136 yards @ 5.44 yards per carry

A strong run game will be defeated by a strong passing game the vast majority of the time - there is a reason why nearly every single team in the NFL throws more than they run. One, it is more effective and two, a strong passing game better correlates to success. Now, to be clear, I'm not saying that a running game is completely worthless. What I am saying is that you don't need a strong running game to have playoff success, and the data so far (a very limited dataset) suggests that a strong running game doesn't do much for your chances of victory - a strong passing game and defense, however, does. 

When was the last time a true rushing team won the SB?
The 2013 Seahawks with Marshawn Lynch?
I don't know if I'd consider the 2017 Eagles as a true rushing team. They'd be the closest to a rushing team though since the 2013 Seahawks though.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-18-2022, 12:02 PM)TecmoBengals Wrote: Which is crazy because I contend it's more fun to post when things are going good for the franchise. It's miserable when the focus of posts have to be about firing the coach, drafting in the top 5, or moping about 30+ years of Bungling it up.

I much prefer winning, seeing our QB discussed as having the ability to win the Super Bowl, talking up Chase/Burrow/Taylor for NFL awards, and debating who we should match up against in the playoffs. Positive vibes for the win.

Absolutely!

[KillerGoose]

(01-18-2022, 12:06 PM)ochocincos Wrote: When was the last time a true rushing team won the SB?
The 2013 Seahawks with Marshawn Lynch?
I don't know if I'd consider the 2017 Eagles as a true rushing team. They'd be the closest to a rushing team though since the 2013 Seahawks though.

Yes, they were a genuine run first team. They threw the ball 47% of the time and their offense wasn't that good. They had an above average offense according to EPA and a top tier, elite defense. The Broncos had an elite offense but a below average defense. 

Comparing that team to this years Bengals, Cincinnati has a better offense than that Seattle team but the defenses aren't even close. 

[*ochocincos*]

(01-18-2022, 12:17 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Yes, they were a genuine run first team. They threw the ball 47% of the time and their offense wasn't that good. They had an above average offense according to EPA and a top tier, elite defense. The Broncos had an elite offense but a below average defense. 

Comparing that team to this years Bengals, Cincinnati has a better offense than that Seattle team but the defenses aren't even close. 

They = Seahawks, or Eagles?
I'm assuming you mean Seahawks, as the Eagles threw the ball 564 times and rushed 473 times in 2017 (excluding playoffs).

[KillerGoose]

(01-18-2022, 01:08 PM)ochocincos Wrote: They = Seahawks, or Eagles?
I'm assuming you mean Seahawks, as the Eagles threw the ball 564 times and rushed 473 times in 2017 (excluding playoffs).

Whoops, yes I was referencing the Seahawks. Philly was 24th in pass play % in 2017, passing the ball 55% of the time. 

[fredtoast]

(01-18-2022, 10:51 AM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Saturday’s game may have  riding on it the NFL COY
https://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/odds/coach-of-the-year/

I always thought that the voting for all these awards was done before the postseason started.

[Soonerpeace]

(01-18-2022, 01:53 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I always thought that the voting for all these awards was done before the postseason started.

Don’t know but there are several awards.

[*ochocincos*]

Genuine question - What was wrong with the culture before?
I get changing schemes that fit more of that the coordinator is familiar with running, but I didn't think the culture was terrible.
I felt the biggest reason for the decline was that both the offense and defense schemes were changed so much that a lot of the players didn't really fit in them well.

[kalibengal]

(12-22-2021, 05:23 PM)Wyche Wrote: Gotta agree. I think that's the best thing Zac has done over the last two seasons....or had a hand in targeting those types of players. Team captains, guys who've won championships in college, pros that have been apart of playoff runs, etc. Team fist guys, and vets that have had a taste of winning in the postseason. It's a good mix.

I think you meant team "FIRST" guys ...LOL
 a team fist guy may have a totally diff meaning Haha
But I agree...I have to give ZT credit, with all the loses, the Joe B injury, he continued to build this the way he thought it would work and stuck to his guns inspite of everyone calling for his firing (including myself). We kept hearing the team really loves this guy and is buying in to what was being built so I guess that was not a big load of BS afterall