(09-26-2022, 07:08 PM)Bengalstripes9 Wrote: Kicking the FG there is taking the points that they're giving you. Going for it at that point in the game with their lead and the way the defense is playing... It's just not necessary. It gives the Jets an opportunity to make a play when you can go up 3 scores with the kick. 

Of course, I have McPherson in fantasy and wanted them to kick it (or throw a touchdown pass). But yeah, if they are going to go for it,  come up with a better call. A sneak, quick run, or a pass with 4+ receivers out there would be what I'd look for. Or even a gadget play. They weren't fooling anyone with that toss..

Making the FG is no longer a given since we lost Clark. He's had one blocked and missed what, 2?

(09-26-2022, 10:28 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Making the FG is no longer a given since we lost Clark. He's had one blocked and missed what, 2?

Change his name to Maybe Mac

The average points scored per drive(on offense) across the NFL during the 2021 regular season was 2.04


The team with the highest points per drive during the 2021 regular season was the Chiefs with 2.7 points scored per drive. 

So how is attempting a FG bad in that scenario? Wouldn't 3 points have afforded a nice cushion against a series of flukes or catastrophes?

Going up by 3 scores is the only reasonable call in that situation.

(09-26-2022, 07:52 PM)Go Cards Wrote: Agree completely, when Joe walked to the LS and there were only two in the middle immediately thought he would see this and do a quick snap and get an easy 1st down. 

Then like you I thought maybe it was to protect Joe until they did the QB sneak later and I was like WTF. 

With that being said I still would have taken the FG without even thinking twice, being up by 3 scores in the second half is nothing to gamble away.

As they were about to snap it I said "I don't know why they're doing this. It probably doesn't matter, but what do you gain from getting a touchdown vs a field goal?"

But by that point the game was pretty much over so many Zac just wanted to try some shit out, I don't know haha.

(09-26-2022, 10:28 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Making the FG is no longer a given since we lost Clark. He's had one blocked and missed what, 2?

I was just going to say, apparently a FG isn't guaranteed either

I just made it thru 11 mins of a 30 min video of Zac talking because I can only handle so much stupid in one sitting. This is why it takes me 2 weeks to watch a two-hour movie on Netflix or Hulu.

Analytics told Zac to run the ball to the outside on 4th and 1 and he listened. Then he is asked does Perine getting nice production change anything in the snap count between him and Joe. Zac said no because everyone has their role. So, no matter how great you play Bengal players you will not see any increase in snaps this is a very bad message to send to players.

(09-27-2022, 06:31 AM)BengalsBong Wrote: Then he is asked does Perine getting nice production change anything in the snap count between him and Joe. Zac said no because everyone has their role. So, no matter how great you play Bengal players you will not see any increase in snaps this is a very bad message to send to players.

This is a silly take. Taylor has been watching these players in practice and on the field for years. He is not going to make some knee-jerk overreaction move based on 5 carries.

Reminds me of when Vincent Ray was the best LB we had based on one great game against the Ravens.

(09-26-2022, 10:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Change his name to Maybe Mac

Mac and Please? 

(Think about it)

All this analytics stuff is fine but what about old fashioned gut feel? That close and an extra 3 then would make it a 30-12 game and a comfy lead. I kept thinking how Flacco won the week before on late drives. If a short FG then for 3 isn't almost a sure thing then even with a new snapper the kicking game has issues too. And if they are going on 4th and 1 why the hell not let Joe follow Karras for the 1 yard? Zac tries to be too fancy, dancy with his play calls. He admits mistakes then does the same thing the following game.

Here's the thing with going for it with me. Circumstances are "everything".

I like an aggressive HC, fake punts, fake FG's going for it on 4th down "under the right circumstances", field position, score, time in the game and so on.

I know there's no guarantee of a FG. However, with shooter kicking a FG from the 19 I like our chances. That's what like a 35 yarder?

The "circumstances" that would have at the moment put us up by 21 points. There's something that happens to a team psychologically going down by 3 full Touch Downs. The wind comes out of your sails. There was only like 5 minutes left in 3rd qtr. and 4th of course.

You take the points in that situation, every time.

If you fail going for it on 4th (like we did) it boosts the other team. HEY we've still got a shot.

It was the wrong time to be Aggressive IMO.

(09-27-2022, 12:06 PM)RegularGuy22 Wrote: All this analytics stuff is fine but what about old fashioned gut feel? 

Lost art.... we are reaching the point across all sports where every play needs to be "optimal" 

(09-27-2022, 12:06 PM)RegularGuy22 Wrote: All this analytics stuff is fine but what about old fashioned gut feel? That close and an extra 3 then would make it a 30-12 game and a comfy lead. I kept thinking how Flacco won the week before on late drives. If a short FG then for 3 isn't almost a sure thing then even with a new snapper the kicking game has issues too. And if they are going on 4th and 1 why the hell not let Joe follow Karras for the 1 yard? Zac tries to be too fancy, dancy with his play calls. He admits mistakes then does the same thing the following game.

I fully agree but it actually would have made it 30-9 at that point in the game. They drove down after the 4th down stop and licked another FG giving them the 12.

(09-27-2022, 12:09 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Here's the thing with going for it with me. Circumstances are "everything".

I like an aggressive HC, fake punts, fake FG's going for it on 4th down "under the right circumstances", field position, score, time in the game and so on.

I know there's no guarantee of a FG. However, with shooter kicking a FG from the 19 I like our chances. That's what like a 35 yarder?

The "circumstances" that would have at the moment put us up by 21 points. There's something that happens to a team psychologically going down by 3 full Touch Downs. The wind comes out of your sails. There was only like 5 minutes left in 3rd qtr. and 4th of course.

You take the points in that situation, every time.

If you fail going for it on 4th (like we did) it boosts the other team. HEY we've still got a shot.

It was the wrong time to be Aggressive IMO.

Especially in a game where your D is playing great and it's a huge uphill climb for the offense. That FG in that situation, imo, is no different than a TD in deflating the opponent as 3 TD's ain't going to happen. In a shoot-out type game where your D is getting gashed with points galore happening then it's different.

Ahh, yea you are right. Then even more cushion. The talk of having their foot on the other teams throat was exactly this. The chance to bury them. I was still nervous till they ran the clock with Perine in the 4th. They ate what 6-8 minutes off clock? That was impressive.

(09-26-2022, 11:09 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: The average points scored per drive(on offense) across the NFL during the 2021 regular season was 2.04


The team with the highest points per drive during the 2021 regular season was the Chiefs with 2.7 points scored per drive. 

So how is attempting a FG bad in that scenario? Wouldn't 3 points have afforded a nice cushion against a series of flukes or catastrophes?

Going up by 3 scores is the only reasonable call in that situation.

The argument would be that being more aggressive on 4th down affords you more opportunities to score TDs, which would then raise the ceiling of that points per drive. If you're going for smart 4th downs, you will typically win more than you lose. A 4th-and-1 is usually a smart bet to go for it, even in FG range. I personally would have kicked the FG, and I am heavily into analytics. However, I understand the logic behind it and more NFL teams are trending this way. You're seeing franchises become more and more aggressive as time goes on, which is following what analytical models suggest. 

Most fans are very, very conservative in situations like this, so it isn't surprising to see people up in arms about it. I wasn't upset with it, but I would have just kicked the FG. I like seeing the aggressiveness. People typically only focus on the negatives I.E. when they fail rather than when they actually work, and I find that interesting. For instance, Cincinnati was faced with similar scenario in the playoff game vs. the Raiders. 

4th and 1 at the LV 31, well within FG range. Up 13-6, can just kick the FG to go ahead by 3 more and make it a two score game.

Cincinnati runs the EXACT SAME play, a toss wide to Chase. He picks up the first down, and Cincinnati goes down to score a touchdown. Game is 20-6 instead of 16-6. Pretty huge play, that 4th-and-1, and they did it in a higher stakes game with much less of a margin for error. 

(09-27-2022, 12:06 PM)RegularGuy22 Wrote: All this analytics stuff is fine but what about old fashioned gut feel? 

Gut feel is sub-optimal. If you aren't utilizing some kind of analytical data in your decision making, you're putting yourself at a disadvantage. Most "gut feels" are conservative calls and you can miss out on opportunities to put yourself ahead. Some teams in the NFL are building what essentially amounts to a data science division, employing a large number of data scientists and analysts to give them an analytical advantage. 

At the end of the day, football is just a game where a bunch of guys run around on a field and produce all kinds of numbers. Not analyzing those numbers doesn't make much sense in the grand scheme of things. It's just math and statistics, and you can see a tangible benefit on the field by using them. 

Understand completely, it's the now and the future. Having info and data is power, no doubt about it. Is there a stat that shows the number of times plays fail or succeed using analytics vs. old school gut feel calls? Must be in the results somewhere, would be interesting.

(09-27-2022, 01:08 PM)RegularGuy22 Wrote: Understand completely, it's the now and the future. Having info and data is power, no doubt about it. Is there a stat that shows the number of times plays fail or succeed using analytics vs. old school gut feel calls?  Must be in the results somewhere, would be interesting.

Not explicitly, no. At this point, analytics is involved in everything - 4th down decision making, probabilistic playcalling, personnel adjustments etc. There is a popular analytics personality named Ben Baldwin that evaluates trends over time, though. He has a Twitter full of a bunch of fun data and analyses. 

(09-27-2022, 12:49 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Gut feel is sub-optimal. If you aren't utilizing some kind of analytical data in your decision making, you're putting yourself at a disadvantage. Most "gut feels" are conservative calls and you can miss out on opportunities to put yourself ahead. Some teams in the NFL are building what essentially amounts to a data science division, employing a large number of data scientists and analysts to give them an analytical advantage. 

At the end of the day, football is just a game where a bunch of guys run around on a field and produce all kinds of numbers. Not analyzing those numbers doesn't make much sense in the grand scheme of things. It's just math and statistics, and you can see a tangible benefit on the field by using them. 

I'm not against using analytics as a tool. I just don't think the decision can be based Soley on that. Momentum is real in football and I'm not sure it takes that into account? 

Not to mention the QB/team you're playing against and just how the game is flowing.

(09-27-2022, 12:45 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: The argument would be that being more aggressive on 4th down affords you more opportunities to score TDs, which would then raise the ceiling of that points per drive. If you're going for smart 4th downs, you will typically win more than you lose. A 4th-and-1 is usually a smart bet to go for it, even in FG range. I personally would have kicked the FG, and I am heavily into analytics. However, I understand the logic behind it and more NFL teams are trending this way. You're seeing franchises become more and more aggressive as time goes on, which is following what analytical models suggest. 

Most fans are very, very conservative in situations like this, so it isn't surprising to see people up in arms about it. I wasn't upset with it, but I would have just kicked the FG. I like seeing the aggressiveness. People typically only focus on the negatives I.E. when they fail rather than when they actually work, and I find that interesting. For instance, Cincinnati was faced with similar scenario in the playoff game vs. the Raiders. 

4th and 1 at the LV 31, well within FG range. Up 13-6, can just kick the FG to go ahead by 3 more and make it a two score game.

Cincinnati runs the EXACT SAME play, a toss wide to Chase. He picks up the first down, and Cincinnati goes down to score a touchdown. Game is 20-6 instead of 16-6. Pretty huge play, that 4th-and-1, and they did it in a higher stakes game with much less of a margin for error. 

I thought it was the same play against LV...I mentioned it earlier, but no one wanted to acknowledge it, lol. I couldn't recall if it was the exact play, or a similar outside run with Chase, but I knew it was 4th down and it worked. That took some stones.