(12-08-2022, 07:14 AM)Synric Wrote: Bengals were 17th in scoring defense in 2021 with 21.8 points allowed per game. Tampa Bay was 7th with 20.9... The difference between the Bengals being 17th and a top 5 scoring defense was 1.2 points per game...

In 2022 Bengals are 13th with 21.3 points per game with alot of the top 10 teams hovering around 18 to 19 points per game allowed.


For me scoring defense isnt something you worry about the "Ranking" it's about being around that 21 points per game or lower. 21 is the sweet spot for good NFL defenses. 

Except it's all about how to stack up against your peers in that year. In 2020 the league average points scored was 24.8, in 2022 it's 21.9, and that's nearly 3 points difference. You can't just give a static number of "good" because things in the NFL can change year-to-year and numbers that were good last year might not be good this year, or vice versa.

In 2005, 11 teams allowed less than 19 points per game. If you wanted to be top-7, you needed to allow less than 17 points per game, 21.0 points per game would make you 17th, or below average.

In 2009, 21.0 points per game would make you 18th.
In 2015 it would make you 14th.
In 2021 it would make you 7th.
This year 12th.

If a defense in 2009 allows 21 points per game, it would be a worse defense than one that allowed 21 points per game in 2021. 

You say 1.2 points between the Bengals and Patriots as if it's nothing, but that is 14.4 points so far this year (presumably 14, but there was rounding?). The Bengals first 3 losses this year came by a combined 8 points. That could potentially be the difference between them being 8-4 and 11-1. The NFL is often a close game.

ZT has done a solid job since taking over a team that was spiraling back to the 90s feel. He transformed the roster with some solid drafts and FA pickups and seemed to have built excellent communication skills, hardly any drama and over the last two years avoided those dreaded 3 game losing streaks and on cusp of winning back to back division championships since our first SB team . Any short falls he might have so far as OC is outweighed by his strengths and really should be involved in AFC coach of the year consideration if teams continues to win

Even during the horrible 2019 season, I could tell Zac was going to be a good coach. That season was a massive, bloodletting purge of the Marvin era. In the strange 2020 season, the Bengals were on track to do something special and then the thugs in Washington bent Joe's leg back sideways.

(12-08-2022, 12:14 AM)Tomkat Wrote: I'm not gonna lie - I was pissed at first and hated the play call (when Dunlap blew up the sweep on 4th down) but after
thinking about it... I LIKE the aggressiveness.  It portrays 2 things - trust in the offense (to make it) and trust in the defense (if they don't.)
It's better than conservative Marvin-ball, that's for sure.

To be clear, I love the aggressiveness as well.  My dad was saying "take the 3 points" and I was arguing "not against KC".  It was the selection on that down and distance that bothered me.  Maybe a little more than normal because Dunlap got play out of it. 

But that last play on 3rd and 11 tells you everything you know about the aggressiveness of this team.  

Other than Joe Burrow, I think a lot of the recent success has to do with Mike Brown taking a back seat and letting the kids take over.  I never wanted Marvin to leave because I figured he was the best coach that could put up with Mike Brown.

(12-07-2022, 09:55 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Yes, I agree going with Perine straight up the gut is probably what I would have done, but it's also what KC was expecting and set up for. Maybe I'm not remembering, but when has Taylor had ball security issues. I know he muffed a couple of punts, but I don't remember him losing many if any passes.

Okay, sure, he's from my hometown , but Trent Taylor is extremely sure-handed. He had the one muff a few weeks ago which,I think, led to the opposition scoring, but that's the only one I remember. He's been very reliable since being brought up. Likely wouldn't have won @ KC without his catch on the 2 pt. conversion. 

(12-08-2022, 10:25 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: To be clear, I love the aggressiveness as well.  My dad was saying "take the 3 points" and I was arguing "not against KC".  It was the selection on that down and distance that bothered me.  Maybe a little more than normal because Dunlap got play out of it. 

But that last play on 3rd and 11 tells you everything you know about the aggressiveness of this team.  

Right, you have to factor in who is on the other side of the ball. You can't settle for field goals when you play the Chiefs with Mahomes, unless down and distance dictates it. That's why so many other coaches lose to KC consistently and why Taylor is so aggressive in these games. Give Joe the ball, good things will most likely happen.  

(12-09-2022, 09:06 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Right, you have to factor in who is on the other side of the ball. You can't settle for field goals when you play the Chiefs with Mahomes, unless down and distance dictates it. That's why so many other coaches lose to KC consistently and why Taylor is so aggressive in these games. Give Joe the ball, good things will most likely happen.  

And clearly, he is doing this 100% now.  Remember during the SF game last year?  We were all like:  "Why take the ball out of Burrow's hands?".  No longer.  

(12-08-2022, 10:25 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: To be clear, I love the aggressiveness as well.  My dad was saying "take the 3 points" and I was arguing "not against KC".  It was the selection on that down and distance that bothered me.  Maybe a little more than normal because Dunlap got play out of it. 

But that last play on 3rd and 11 tells you everything you know about the aggressiveness of this team.  

Regarding passing on 3rd and 11, with the risk of an incompletion and clock stoppage, look at what Mayfield did last night. A 98-yard drive with 1:45 on the clock and no time outs, down six, that ended in the game-winning TD.  It puts an emphasis on the wisdom of not running the ball on 3rd and 11 to kill clock and kicking a field goal to go up 6 -- only to turn the ball over to Mahommes with maybe 1:20 on the clock starting at the 25. 

(12-08-2022, 08:54 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Except it's all about how to stack up against your peers in that year. In 2020 the league average points scored was 24.8, in 2022 it's 21.9, and that's nearly 3 points difference. You can't just give a static number of "good" because things in the NFL can change year-to-year and numbers that were good last year might not be good this year, or vice versa.

In 2005, 11 teams allowed less than 19 points per game. If you wanted to be top-7, you needed to allow less than 17 points per game, 21.0 points per game would make you 17th, or below average.

In 2009, 21.0 points per game would make you 18th.
In 2015 it would make you 14th.
In 2021 it would make you 7th.
This year 12th.

If a defense in 2009 allows 21 points per game, it would be a worse defense than one that allowed 21 points per game in 2021. 

You say 1.2 points between the Bengals and Patriots as if it's nothing, but that is 14.4 points so far this year (presumably 14, but there was rounding?). The Bengals first 3 losses this year came by a combined 8 points. That could potentially be the difference between them being 8-4 and 11-1. The NFL is often a close game.

Right. Everything is relative. Something can't be "good" unless something else is "bad". It's just how analyze these things. Relative rankings are quick and easy methods of judging a player or unit. It doesn't have the nuance you may want for a more detailed answer, but if a team is ranked 32nd in something you know they are probably pretty damn bad. 

(12-09-2022, 09:06 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Right, you have to factor in who is on the other side of the ball. You can't settle for field goals when you play the Chiefs with Mahomes, unless down and distance dictates it. That's why so many other coaches lose to KC consistently and why Taylor is so aggressive in these games. Give Joe the ball, good things will most likely happen.  

I think you will start to see a real renaissance where teams start valuing complete ball control over clock management/killing the clock. Unless you are killing the clock down to less than 30 seconds, it honestly doesn't matter. There's a ton more value in just gambling and throwing the ball and picking up first downs. All teams need to drive down the field these days and be in field goal range is about 30 seconds. I loved the call to pass the ball on 3rd and 11 and try to close out the game last Sunday. 

Also, that play was on Burrow. ZT said he gives Joe 3 plays and that was Joe's ultimate decision to pass to try and pick up that 3rd down. It was actually the exact same play they ran against the Rams that the lost the Super Bowl on. 

(12-09-2022, 11:17 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I think you will start to see a real renaissance where teams start valuing complete ball control over clock management/killing the clock. Unless you are killing the clock down to less than 30 seconds, it honestly doesn't matter. There's a ton more value in just gambling and throwing the ball and picking up first downs. All teams need to drive down the field these days and be in field goal range is about 30 seconds. I loved the call to pass the ball on 3rd and 11 and try to close out the game last Sunday. 

Also, that play was on Burrow. ZT said he gives Joe 3 plays and that was Joe's ultimate decision to pass to try and pick up that 3rd down. It was actually the exact same play they ran against the Rams that the lost the Super Bowl on. 

Same route concept by Tee and Taylor but different plays. The final play of the Super Bowl was four wide with Chase running a go route down the sideline. The Chiefs play was three wide with Chase running a dig. It could be same concept from different personnel grouping with Chase having an option, though.

I think we are seeing this renaissance occurring already. Teams are becoming more aggressive in these situations (along with 4th downs) as each year passes by. 

(12-09-2022, 11:17 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I think you will start to see a real renaissance where teams start valuing complete ball control over clock management/killing the clock. Unless you are killing the clock down to less than 30 seconds, it honestly doesn't matter. There's a ton more value in just gambling and throwing the ball and picking up first downs. All teams need to drive down the field these days and be in field goal range is about 30 seconds. I loved the call to pass the ball on 3rd and 11 and try to close out the game last Sunday. 

Also, that play was on Burrow. ZT said he gives Joe 3 plays and that was Joe's ultimate decision to pass to try and pick up that 3rd down. It was actually the exact same play they ran against the Rams that the lost the Super Bowl on. 

The play clock starts at 40 seconds. They’ve got 25 seconds to come up with a play and give it to Joe. I’d assume the last 10 seconds is when they give it to him. Normally Zac gives him 2 based on the coverages and possibly a run play or pass play. In this instance they discussed two he dismissed and he liked the third.

(12-09-2022, 11:28 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: Same route concept by Tee and Taylor but different plays. The final play of the Super Bowl was four wide with Chase running a go route down the sideline. The Chiefs play was three wide with Chase running a dig. It could be same concept from different personnel grouping with Chase having an option, though.

I think we are seeing this renaissance occurring already. Teams are becoming more aggressive in these situations (along with 4th downs) as each year passes by. 

Yep you are right, I missed the different route by Chase on the other side. 

They LOVE running that slant with Higgins when they need to pick up a clutch first down. I just hope they don't go to the well too many times. The Rams were def prepared for that play in the SB. 

(12-09-2022, 11:36 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Yep you are right, I missed the different route by Chase on the other side. 

They LOVE running that slant with Higgins when they need to pick up a clutch first down. I just hope they don't go to the well too many times. The Rams were def prepared for that play in the SB. 

Regardless, it is very similar. Really, the only route that I see that is different is Chase's. But yeah, they really love running that play. There was another game last year where they called that play up and Tee had a catch and run down the middle of the field for 30-ish yards. It's a good play. 

(12-09-2022, 11:38 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: Regardless, it is very similar. Really, the only route that I see that is different is Chase's. But yeah, they really love running that play. There was another game last year where they called that play up and Tee had a catch and run down the middle of the field for 30-ish yards. It's a good play. 

It's also possible Chase could have a choice route depending on coverage. 

(12-09-2022, 11:36 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Yep you are right, I missed the different route by Chase on the other side. 

They LOVE running that slant with Higgins when they need to pick up a clutch first down. I just hope they don't go to the well too many times. The Rams were def prepared for that play in the SB. 

It’s a huge dichotomy. Go to what works great regardless whether or not your opponent may expect it or try to fool them. I’ve known 2 college OC’s. Both have won a NC. One always put the ball in his best skill players hands and the other used them as a decoy.

(12-09-2022, 09:34 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: And clearly, he is doing this 100% now.  Remember during the SF game last year?  We were all like:  "Why take the ball out of Burrow's hands?".  No longer.  

He hasn't since that game.....

(12-07-2022, 09:20 AM)Sled21 Wrote: You know who agrees with you and would have taken the 3??? Most of the other coaches in the NFL. You know, the one's that KC is something like 40-2 against while Taylor is 3-0. Taking 3 is the safe thing to do. It's also how KC beats most people. When you're playing Mahomes, you have to score touchdowns. It's that simple. The proof is in the pudding as they say, or in this case, the record.

It's hard to make this argument when the Bengals did not get that TD and even threw away 3 points and still won handily while knocking on the door of the end zone at the games end. Going for it and failing had nothing to do with the victory, Burrow won despite doing that.
 
Just don't think a 7 point lead with KC getting the ball first in 2nd half was something to scoff at. Believe me, wanted the TD as well but they had just stuffed us on 2nd and inches with ease. 

The 3rd and 11 was a great play by Joe and Tee and I always dislike throwing short of the sticks when needing a 1st down, unless it's 3rd and forever. 

After deciding to go for it on the 4th down play though, really don't hate the play call because they had the middle stacked up so hard that the play before on the QB sneak, they got so much push Joe's feet were knocked out from under him backwards without any defender touching him it seems. They were not giving up the middle imo. 

Was thinking personally to roll Joe out with a pass or run option and pass if TE or Trent if they were absolutely wide open, yet believe Joe could have just walked in. Or give to the RB as you suggested but once again, don't think they were giving the middle up.   

(12-06-2022, 04:08 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: The end around was audible to by Joe and it actually wasn't a bad call. If it would have worked we all would have loved it. Dunlap just made a special play on it. 

Which I've heard was going to be a bad play if Joe had not audibled.

Sorry no link.   I think I heard Bengals San say it on Locked on Bengals.

So I'm given to understand it could have been a brilliant audible that looked like crap because the defensive player got lucky