(08-31-2022, 09:24 AM)fredtoast Wrote:

I don't get it....What am I obsessed with?  PFF?  Keeping threads on the rails about actual Bengal topics instead of pointless, rehashed debates?  Joe Burrow?  Watching pitt suffer?  There are so many choices...

(09-02-2022, 09:29 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I don't get it....What am I obsessed with?  PFF?  Keeping threads on the rails about actual Bengal topics instead of pointless, rehashed debates?  Joe Burrow?  Watching pitt suffer?  There are so many choices...

Hint...Look at what those two posts have in common.

It takes a little analytical skill but I think you can figure it out.

(09-02-2022, 09:29 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I don't get it....What am I obsessed with?  PFF?  Keeping threads on the rails about actual Bengal topics instead of pointless, rehashed debates?  Joe Burrow?  Watching pitt suffer?  There are so many choices...

I think it is stupid and annoying lol

Always have when he does this to posters.

Acting like some posters are obsessed with him while he just tries to get argument after argument going.

He is obsessed with arguing, no shit.

(09-02-2022, 02:25 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I think it is stupid and annoying lol

Always have when he does this to posters.

Acting like some posters are obsessed with him while he just tries to get argument after argument going.

He is obsessed with arguing, no shit.

Nate, you have it backwards here.

go back and read this thread.  SHRacerX was the one sidetracking this thread with multiple posts that were nothing more than personal shots at me.  I never did anything like that.  


Sometimes when I point out how I am being stalked it will embarrass the stalker into stopping with the OT personal insult posts.

But not always.  

(09-02-2022, 03:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Nate, you have it backwards here.

go back and read this thread.  SHRacerX was the one sidetracking this thread with multiple posts that were nothing more than personal shots at me.  I never did anything like that.  


Sometimes when I point out how I am being stalked it will embarrass the stalker into stopping with the OT personal insult posts.

But not always.  

Now you are starting to sound like another poster we have here that accuses people who comment on his posts of following him around "stalking his posts"

(09-02-2022, 03:49 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Now you are starting to sound like another poster we have here that accuses people who comment on his posts of following him around "stalking his posts"

Don't worry.  I won't do it unless I use the quote function to show it is true.

I understand how snide remarks can arise during a heated back-and-forth discussion between board members, but in this case I was not even discussing anything with SHRacerX.  He just came in out of the taking multiple shots at me.

That is straight-up stalking.

(08-28-2022, 09:23 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: I'm optimistic about the defense, mainly because of continuity. Last year, the Bengals defense was a middle of the road group. Even in the playoffs, really. Their per play metrics were mostly the same, but they had a massive uptick in turnovers. I don't think that is sustainable, but I do think they can make an improvement there over last year and hopefully improve their per play metrics.

I would disagree on playoff assessment,  yards per game was about same but points they gave up less than 20 a game vs over 22 in regular seasonand turnovers as you pointed out were better with 2 per game vs 1.2 in season. 
I think what we forget how ineffective our offense was in playoffs vs regular season. We only scored 5 tds in our 3 playoff games and were below our avg yards per game in all 3 playoff games, if it was not for our defense we don't make super bowl. 

(09-03-2022, 03:06 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I would disagree on playoff assessment,  yards per game was about same but points they gave up less than 20 a game vs over 22 in regular seasonand turnovers as you pointed out were better with 2 per game vs 1.2 in season. 
I think what we forget how ineffective our offense was in playoffs vs regular season. We only scored 5 tds in our 3 playoff games and were below our avg yards per game in all 3 playoff games, if it was not for our defense we don't make super bowl. 

*4 games

And we scored 7 TD’s in the postseason. Burrow threw for 5, and Mixon had one passing + one rushing.

(09-02-2022, 10:11 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Hint...Look at what those two posts have in common.

It takes a little analytical skill but I think you can figure it out.

Hmmmm.  Condescending tone.  Frustration that he didn't get to argue another pointless PFF debate.  

Let me guess:  Just want to argue something else that has nothing to do with the Bengals?  Did I win?  What are the prizes?

(09-02-2022, 03:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Nate, you have it backwards here.

go back and read this thread.  SHRacerX was the one sidetracking this thread with multiple posts that were nothing more than personal shots at me.  I never did anything like that.  


Sometimes when I point out how I am being stalked it will embarrass the stalker into stopping with the OT personal insult posts.

But not always.  

Multiple shots?  Really?  You hijacked the thread, as usual, arguing with Sooner and others, and then I point out how someone ignored yet another attempt to argue and you call me obsessed?  You have really gone off the rails, Fred.  The rhyming post was meant to be funny.  But yes, you hijacked the thread and didn't like me pointing that out so you tried to turn the tables.

Bzzzt.  Wrong answer.  Try again.  

(09-03-2022, 03:06 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I would disagree on playoff assessment,  yards per game was about same but points they gave up less than 20 a game vs over 22 in regular seasonand turnovers as you pointed out were better with 2 per game vs 1.2 in season. 
I think what we forget how ineffective our offense was in playoffs vs regular season. We only scored 5 tds in our 3 playoff games and were below our avg yards per game in all 3 playoff games, if it was not for our defense we don't make super bowl. 

You're not really disagreeing on anything, I just worded my sentence weird. On a play-by-play basis, Cincinnati was still a mediocre defense, allowing 4.5 yards per play in both the playoffs and regular season. For reference, that was good for 20th in the regular season and 9th out of 14 in the post-season. Where they improved was turnovers, which helped them allow slightly less points. In the end, they were a better defense than what we had been seeing.

I agree. The defense was a huge part of our Super Bowl run. My only concern is that what we saw from our defense is likely an outlier. Turnovers tend to be volatile and inconsistent, so it is why I usually make the distinction that I do; the defense was still mediocre from a play-by-play perspective but they capitalized on their turnover opportunities.

(09-03-2022, 08:30 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Multiple shots?  Really?  You hijacked the thread, as usual, arguing with Sooner and others, 

If "disagreement" = "hijacking" then everyone here hijacks threads all the time.

Soonerpeace posted a cryptic comment about how the Bengals disagreed with me and I was unable to even engage him in a discussion because he refused to ever say what decision the Bengals disagreed with me over.  Instead he just posted personal insults accusing me of being "asleep" or "stupid".

I don't care how many of you refuse to debate with me and just resort to personal insults I am not going to stop asking questions and making comments.

I am not allowed to use personal insults.  I get suspended and banned for that type of stuff.  But I am not going to back down from people who do.

Argue with me everyone..LOOK AT ME! I'm really good at ignoring it so you won't have to feel like I'm attacking you..
OK...I'm just good at not really caring that some schmuck likes to argue and hear his head rattle.. 

(09-03-2022, 12:03 PM)grampahol Wrote: Argue with me everyone..LOOK AT ME! I'm really good at ignoring it so you won't have to feel like I'm attacking you..
OK...I'm just good at not really caring that some schmuck likes to argue and hear his head rattle.. 

(09-03-2022, 10:06 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: You're not really disagreeing on anything, I just worded my sentence weird. On a play-by-play basis, Cincinnati was still a mediocre defense, allowing 4.5 yards per play in both the playoffs and regular season. For reference, that was good for 20th in the regular season and 9th out of 14 in the post-season. Where they improved was turnovers, which helped them allow slightly less points. In the end, they were a better defense than what we had been seeing.

I agree. The defense was a huge part of our Super Bowl run. My only concern is that what we saw from our defense is likely an outlier. Turnovers tend to be volatile and inconsistent, so it is why I usually make the distinction that I do; the defense was still mediocre from a play-by-play perspective but they capitalized on their turnover opportunities.

Well im finding different  yards per play.. from pro football reference we were at 5.5 during the season ranking of 20th... if you say we were at 4.5 in playoffs that would have put us 1st in regular season.  here is my reference.. and that is one component, turnovers , points are another component in rating a defense..  which all three we improved upon in the playoffs.. 

I just like the defense finished strong in the playoffs and was the reason we moved on in the playoffs.. I think this team now knows they can win with the defense especially when offense is under performing like in playoffs

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2021/opp.htm

I'm hoping with the re-vamped O-Line that our offense explodes. This will only help our defense for a multitude of reasons.

(09-03-2022, 12:47 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Well im finding different  yards per play.. from pro football reference we were at 5.5 during the season ranking of 20th... if you say we were at 4.5 in playoffs that would have put us 1st in regular season.  here is my reference.. and that is one component, turnovers , points are another component in rating a defense..  which all three we improved upon in the playoffs.. 

I just like the defense finished strong in the playoffs and was the reason we moved on in the playoffs.. I think this team now knows they can win with the defense especially when offense is under performing like in playoffs

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2021/opp.htm

Good catch. Yes, 5.5 is correct. My database was excluding records and I am not sure, but I fixed it. With penalties included, Cincinnati allowed 5.59 yards per play in the regular season. I am not sure if PFR rounds or goes to the first decimal, but I have Cincinnati's relative ranking at 22nd. Teams 19-22 all are 5.5x, so I'm assuming we have some rounding discrepancies. Regardless, 5.5 is what they allowed in the regular season.

In the post-season, they allowed 5.58. This is what I mean by they were still mediocre on a play-by-play basis. There wasn't a significant improvement here. In turnovers, however, there was. Thus, they performed slightly better in the playoffs as unit.

The reason why I harp on yards per play is because of how important it is for measuring a defenses ability to play consistently. Yards per play moves tightly with points per game. You can fairly accurately predict points allowed by simply looking at yards-per-play. Here are some examples...

Buffalo Bills - 4.62 yards per play. Insert this into our formula y = 5.62454 * 4.62 + -8.6724 and we get 17.2 points per game. They averaged 16.5 ppg in real life. 

Cincinnati Bengals - 5.59 yards per play. y = 5.62454 * 5.59 + -8.6724 and we get 22.76. Cincinnati averaged 21.05 points per game. 

Some of the PPG measures are slightly different than what you'll find on PFR because I am only using the points that the defense allowed, so not kick/punt return TDs, pick sixes, fumble return TDs etc. 

Hell, another even better method is to use Expected Points Allowed. This is more accurate, even. Doing all of the statistical dance, you can predict over half of the leagues PPG to within less than one point. If you raise that to two points, you have 24 teams. If we start the beginning of the conversation again, Cincinnati was ranked 13th in the league by EPA during the regular season. During the playoffs, they were 7th out of 14. However, their raw value did improve...due to turnovers. Not only did they get several of them, but they were incredibly TIMELY. 

All of this to say, Cincinnati on a play-by-play basis was still a mediocre defense in the playoffs. They notched up their turnovers and snagged several very important turnovers. Hell, they intercepted Carr at the goalline, Tannehill on a potential game winning drive and Mahomes in OT. Those turnovers are about as clutch as they come. The defense was clutch when they needed to be and were the driving force of a SB berth. Sometimes, it is more about making the splash plays than it is about being consistently good and that playoff run proved that out. My original post is just a quick summation of all of this; Cincinnati only improved in the turnovers department, which yes, did lower their points allowed. However, there is no evidence to suggest that Cincinnati is going to keep that improvement in turnovers going. I am optimistic with another year in the scheme that they can improve their per play metrics and be a better defense overall this season. 

(09-02-2022, 03:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Nate, you have it backwards here.

go back and read this thread.  SHRacerX was the one sidetracking this thread with multiple posts that were nothing more than personal shots at me.  I never did anything like that.  


Sometimes when I point out how I am being stalked it will embarrass the stalker into stopping with the OT personal insult posts.

But not always.  

No, you hijacked a great thread once again and SHRacer didn't like it. Same as about all of us.

Star of the 2022 season could honestly be our Offensive Line if they stay healthy. This is the key to our success IMO.

(09-03-2022, 12:03 PM)grampahol Wrote: Argue with me everyone..LOOK AT ME! I'm really good at ignoring it so you won't have to feel like I'm attacking you..
OK...I'm just good at not really caring that some schmuck likes to argue and hear his head rattle.. 

(09-03-2022, 12:47 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote:

(09-03-2022, 02:10 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Good catch. Yes, 5.5 is correct. My database was excluding records and I am not sure, but I fixed it. With penalties included, Cincinnati allowed 5.59 yards per play in the regular season. I am not sure if PFR rounds or goes to the first decimal, but I have Cincinnati's relative ranking at 22nd. Teams 19-22 all are 5.5x, so I'm assuming we have some rounding discrepancies. Regardless, 5.5 is what they allowed in the regular season.

In the post-season, they allowed 5.58. This is what I mean by they were still mediocre on a play-by-play basis. There wasn't a significant improvement here. In turnovers, however, there was. Thus, they performed slightly better in the playoffs as unit.

The reason why I harp on yards per play is because of how important it is for measuring a defenses ability to play consistently. Yards per play moves tightly with points per game. You can fairly accurately predict points allowed by simply looking at yards-per-play. Here are some examples...

Buffalo Bills - 4.62 yards per play. Insert this into our formula y = 5.62454 * 4.62 + -8.6724 and we get 17.2 points per game. They averaged 16.5 ppg in real life. 

Cincinnati Bengals - 5.59 yards per play. y = 5.62454 * 5.59 + -8.6724 and we get 22.76. Cincinnati averaged 21.05 points per game. 

Some of the PPG measures are slightly different than what you'll find on PFR because I am only using the points that the defense allowed, so not kick/punt return TDs, pick sixes, fumble return TDs etc. 

Hell, another even better method is to use Expected Points Allowed. This is more accurate, even. Doing all of the statistical dance, you can predict over half of the leagues PPG to within less than one point. If you raise that to two points, you have 24 teams. If we start the beginning of the conversation again, Cincinnati was ranked 13th in the league by EPA during the regular season. During the playoffs, they were 7th out of 14. However, their raw value did improve...due to turnovers. Not only did they get several of them, but they were incredibly TIMELY. 

All of this to say, Cincinnati on a play-by-play basis was still a mediocre defense in the playoffs. They notched up their turnovers and snagged several very important turnovers. Hell, they intercepted Carr at the goalline, Tannehill on a potential game winning drive and Mahomes in OT. Those turnovers are about as clutch as they come. The defense was clutch when they needed to be and were the driving force of a SB berth. Sometimes, it is more about making the splash plays than it is about being consistently good and that playoff run proved that out. My original post is just a quick summation of all of this; Cincinnati only improved in the turnovers department, which yes, did lower their points allowed. However, there is no evidence to suggest that Cincinnati is going to keep that improvement in turnovers going. I am optimistic with another year in the scheme that they can improve their per play metrics and be a better defense overall this season. 

as I mentioned a single component does not define  a defense sure there are relationships at times between turnovers and points per game but if your not getting turnovers , even if you are having 4.5 yards per play, a team can still drive and score on that average.. in the end the Bengals improved on three areas in the playoffs (turnovers, points and 3rd down stops) and something i left out their 1/2 time adjustments, and limiting points scored to an average of 6 points in the 2nd half which was a dominating performances in those three game... in the end my opinion is looking at broader picture, this defense stepped up in the playoffs and im excited about how we can build on that success heading in this season. moving on from a respectful debate.. Who Dey

(09-03-2022, 10:35 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If "disagreement" = "hijacking" then everyone here hijacks threads all the time.

Soonerpeace posted a cryptic comment about how the Bengals disagreed with me and I was unable to even engage him in a discussion because he refused to ever say what decision the Bengals disagreed with me over.  Instead he just posted personal insults accusing me of being "asleep" or "stupid".

I don't care how many of you refuse to debate with me and just resort to personal insults I am not going to stop asking questions and making comments.

I am not allowed to use personal insults.  I get suspended and banned for that type of stuff.  But I am not going to back down from people who do.

The disagreement turned personal (which happens a lot with you) and that led the thread off the original course.  It wasn't a debate about anything Bengals where we absolutely can debate.  It just kept volleying back and forth with nothing to do with the Bengals.  

It just gets old and tired.  

I applauded when someone refused to take your bait for yet another spinoff argument and you use a massive pic to suggest I'm somehow obsessed with you.  Uh, wrong.  I AM obsessed with the Bengals, however, and love when we chat, debate, promote, and share our general opinions on things.  I have said it many times:  sometimes I don't know what I would have done without the escape of this board.  A bunch of knuckleheads (in my best Charles Barkley voice) that also love the Bengals and love talking about them.  

It just seems to me like you love throwing a wet blanket on almost everything anyone else says.  If it is their opinion, it isn't wrong, it is just their opinion.  You seem to argue all day with folks like that because you believe your opinion is right and no one else's matters.  It is almost always very condescending.  

You do sometimes post interesting stats, provide a unique point of view, and generally bring something of interest to the board.  It is just that you seem to act as though you are the only one that can do that.  Not trying to attack, just give you some explanation as to why I see many things "hijacked" rather than "debated".