(Yesterday, 01:16 PM)jj22 Wrote: So it'a a shootout or a low scoring game?

That isn't a great philosophy. But it does seem accurate with this team, and why we really don't see many blowouts. or I guess as many as you'd think with an "elite" offense.

Sounds like we'll forever be stressed and on edge in the 4th quarter. 

He didn't say it was either/or.  

(Yesterday, 12:52 PM)Whatever Wrote: Uhhh...reacting when the defense adjusts and making them do something different is the exact same thing as adjusting your offense to what the defense is doing....

The only way you don't have to adjust to what the defense is doing is if such a wide talent disparity exists that you can just do whatever, but such talent gaps don't exist at the NFL level.  If you're like Ohio State in a tune up game against some MAC school, then yeah.

But all Joe is saying is that if it's a close, low scoring game where points are at a premium, he's going to be more conservative in his  decisions because a turnover can be a backbreaker.  If it's a high scoring game, he's gonna take more chances because there's more pressure to get points on every drive.

Adjusting to a defense isn't the same as a passive mindset. If they go into the game "let's try this...let's try that..." to see how the defense reacts, that's lame. There are obvious adjustments by both sides throughout the game. 

I'd prefer an offense that has the mindset to put pressure on a defense, not feel them out and react to what they're doing. It's obviously a fine line, i just don't like the line Zac is drawing. 

Being conservative, keeping it close, then hoping to close at the end is a Marv (and sure, many others) staple and i've never been a fan of it. 

Gimme Wyche all day. 

(Yesterday, 12:52 PM)Whatever Wrote: Uhhh...reacting when the defense adjusts and making them do something different is the exact same thing as adjusting your offense to what the defense is doing....

The only way you don't have to adjust to what the defense is doing is if such a wide talent disparity exists that you can just do whatever, but such talent gaps don't exist at the NFL level.  If you're like Ohio State in a tune up game against some MAC school, then yeah.

But all Joe is saying is that if it's a close, low scoring game where points are at a premium, he's going to be more conservative in his  decisions because a turnover can be a backbreaker.  If it's a high scoring game, he's gonna take more chances because there's more pressure to get points on every drive.

Found this…
It's not that uniform across the board. Some teams do. Some may script just the first few, some may script more. It's not a "You're in the NFL, so you need to do this" kind of thing. Scripting the first 15 plays was more of a thing with the classic West Coast teams, such as the 80's/90's 49ers and the 90's Packers. I really don't think teams are scripting that far ahead anymore, but for the most part yes, they do script their first series or sequences of calls.

WHY

It ensures you use everything you practiced; gives you a chance for the best return on investment in practice installs.
Plays are usually called in sequences, series, or progressions; 2-4 plays that are designed to compliment or work together to stress the defense in a particular way. Scripting one for multiple rom each progression or sequence allows you to see how the defense is going to play each one.
Overall, scripting plays allows you to see how the defense is going to respond, which then prompts your future calls once you're off the script.
Gives players and QB's a heads up to mentally prepare before taking the field. Knowing what plays they'll run first allows them to relax once they get out there, because they have already mentally prepped for the first few plays. As the script goes, they, along with the coaches can see together how the game and play-calling may develop.
Having a script can help your play caller get into the flow or rhythm. Play calling is not as easy as it looks, and you have to know what play you want and begin sending it in almost immediately after the last play ends. I'm an OC for the team I coach and call the offense...one of the hardest things I've had to grow or get better at is calling plays quickly. By scripting some plays, it allows that play calling to be easy and you can get them in quickly without any stress. I don't script the first 15, but I always try to have at least the first three ready before the opening kickoff.
Choosing the Script (again, it's not always 15)

It's all based on scouting the opponent and looking at the strengths/weaknesses of your offenses. You have your core system + the auxiliary stuff your team is doing well. You search for ways to incorporate those schemes by scouting your opponent, and tweak the game-plan further by adjusting to take advantage of the opponent's defense. A combination of these factors leads you to which plays you want to run first.

It's common for an initial script to feature formations or plays that answer certain questions such as...

How do they line up against trips? Twins? Double tight? Empty?
How is the secondary rotating/moving with motion?
Are they moving DB's around to cover our best receivers, or are they staying in their spots?
What fronts and stunts are they gonna use against which of our formations?
What coverages are we going to get when we run certain formations or specific releases by our WR's?
Down and Distance

The script is usually designed with downs in mind; if they're going to script the first three plays and not bend no matter what, the third play will likely be a pass play, or a high percentage 3rd down play for them. The script doesn't have to be that fixed either. They may have the "first X" number of play calls, but change the order around in which they're called based on down and distance. QB's may be given the ability to audible too.

There may be occasions that do throw the script completely off; an early injury, and obvious weakness in the defense they didn't show in previous film/scouting content, some other reason, etc.

(Yesterday, 12:52 PM)Whatever Wrote: Uhhh...reacting when the defense adjusts and making them do something different is the exact same thing as adjusting your offense to what the defense is doing....

The only way you don't have to adjust to what the defense is doing is if such a wide talent disparity exists that you can just do whatever, but such talent gaps don't exist at the NFL level.  If you're like Ohio State in a tune up game against some MAC school, then yeah.

But all Joe is saying is that if it's a close, low scoring game where points are at a premium, he's going to be more conservative in his  decisions because a turnover can be a backbreaker.  If it's a high scoring game, he's gonna take more chances because there's more pressure to get points on every drive.

Was waiting till someone got to it. Spot on, the tough games in the NFL are the ones where points are at a premium and you cannot afford a
turnover. Let's not act like any Offense is so elite in the NFL that they can overcome turnovers like the Lions did in one game last season.

That was 1 out of a million games to turn the ball over that many times and somehow come out with a win. We are in the AFC North and if we
want to sweep the Division for once with Burrow this is the mentality for Burrow to have. Our Defense just needs to keep the Offenses from 
scoring 38+ points like they couldn't do last year under Lou.

(Yesterday, 01:16 PM)jj22 Wrote: So it'a a shootout or a low scoring game?

That isn't a great philosophy. But it does seem accurate with this team, and why we really don't see many blowouts. or I guess as many as you'd think with an "elite" offense.

Sounds like we'll forever be stressed and on edge in the 4th quarter. 

It is the AFC North and the Playoffs what Burrow is obviously talking about. More often than not Joe Burrow and this Offense are going to be 
taking it to any Defense that has weaknesses that our strengths can take advantage of.

(Yesterday, 02:50 PM)Whatever Wrote: He didn't say it was either/or.  

he only mentioned two scenarios .... I must have misted a 3rd. 

(Yesterday, 06:12 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: It is the AFC North and the Playoffs what Burrow is obviously talking about. More often than not Joe Burrow and this Offense are going to be 
taking it to any Defense that has weaknesses that our strengths can take advantage of.

It certainly isn't the AFCN as the defenses in the North haven't been great for years. 

I think this is exactly why nearly every game comes down to the wire. Regular season and playoffs. 

(Yesterday, 12:38 AM)phil413 Wrote: That's actually their identity on offense. Not many teams can say they're like Mike Tyson with knockout punch on any given play but that's the Bengals.  The high percentage big plays either from Chase or Tee breaking open or getting YAC.  

I think we read this and see this team as capable of the kill we instinct during the regular season of the SB run but the quote sounds more like the playoffs where the defense led us and the offense made timely big plays.  Some of this was higher competition, so maybe we shouldn't read so much into the comment.  I don't think it's justifying the Ravens game settling for a long FG, but if we see that again then yeah...come back to this comment lol.

I'm trying to remember the plays exactly that led up to the FG attempt. They were well in McPherson's range, but he whiffed it is all I remember.
I do think Brown will get more touches this year, making him a bigger weapon that defenses will have to account for. I guess what I am trying to say is we won't need to always rely on big plays coming from the passing game, maybe they can come from the running game.

(Yesterday, 07:06 PM)jj22 Wrote: It certainly isn't the AFCN as the defenses in the North haven't been great for years. 

I think this is exactly why nearly every game comes down to the wire. Regular season and playoffs. 

What do you mean? Sure, early last season the Ravens weren't that good but they became one of the best Defenses in the league late last season.

The stealers were a pretty damn good Defense again last year and the Browns are always pretty good on Defense with Garrett and company.

I get your point that we need to dictate and be the aggressors on Offense but we are not going to score 38+ every game even with Burrow, Chase
and Tee. Just not realistic, have to win the close games to win our Division. If we blow them out that is gravy, but our Defense will have to make 
some stops and our Kicker needs to be better this year as well.

(Yesterday, 07:06 PM)jj22 Wrote: It certainly isn't the AFCN as the defenses in the North haven't been great for years. 

I think this is exactly why nearly every game comes down to the wire. Regular season and playoffs. 

2024
Ravens: 10th overall/9th scoring
Steelers: 12th overall/8th scoring

2023
Ravens: 6th overall/1st scoring
Steelers: 21st overall/6th scoring

2022
Ravens: 9th overall/3rd scoring
Steelers: 13th overall/10th scoring

- - - - -

I agree that when you have Burrow and the highest paid WR duo in the league you shouldn't be "taking what the other team gives you" and the like, you should be dictating and crushing teams by running up scores regardless of what they're doing... but there's still good defenses in the AFCN. Neither the Ravens nor the Steelers have failed to be a top-10 scoring defense in any of the last 3 years. Heck, Baltimore's been 1st, 2nd, and 5th in sacks each of the last 3 years too.

I think this has gone off the rails and taking Burrows comments too literally. All he’s saying is you have to be judicious in close games with a lead. That’s football. Good grief. You can be less conservative with a lead. In high scoring games you have no choice but be aggressive. He’s learned you can’t throw into double coverage on Tee or Chase no matter what.

(3 hours ago)Soonerpeace Wrote: I think this has gone off the rails and taking Burrows comments too literally. All he’s saying is you have to be judicious in close games with a lead. That’s football. Good grief. You can be less conservative with a lead. In high scoring games you have no choice but be aggressive. He’s learned you can’t throw into double coverage on Tee or Chase no matter what.

I still don't like the passive mentality and/or "take what the defense gives you". 

There's a fine line between being aggressive and stupidity, that doesn't mean you can't go into a game looking to put pressure on a defense--dictate the flow of a game--which in turn puts pressure on the other team's offense. We've seen plenty of times how they can open it up and score in bunches and we've seen too many times where they get in these lulls and go multiple series without scoring, in tight games. 

At least part of the reason for some of these tight games is because you're playing too conservative and just trying to 'keep it close', from the beginning. 

Reacting to what the defense gives you is just too passive a mentality, imo and one i've never liked. I have no problem going down swinging but i do have a problem with 'stay close and try to close late', and failing. Hindsight is 20/20 but i'm more than willing to live with aggressive mistakes. It's a failure on the FO if you haven't built a team that can run the ball with a late lead, something the Bengals have been very inconsistent with in the Zac era, hell, even before that. 

Of course, all this is fan opinion and varies from person to person. I just don't have a passive personality so i'm not a fan of it. 

(3 hours ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: 2024
Ravens: 10th overall/9th scoring
Steelers: 12th overall/8th scoring

2023
Ravens: 6th overall/1st scoring
Steelers: 21st overall/6th scoring

2022
Ravens: 9th overall/3rd scoring
Steelers: 13th overall/10th scoring

- - - - -

I agree that when you have Burrow and the highest paid WR duo in the league you shouldn't be "taking what the other team gives you" and the like, you should be dictating and crushing teams by running up scores regardless of what they're doing... but there's still good defenses in the AFCN. Neither the Ravens nor the Steelers have failed to be a top-10 scoring defense in any of the last 3 years. Heck, Baltimore's been 1st, 2nd, and 5th in sacks each of the last 3 years too.

Thought so, thanks for this TLL.

And the Stains were the best Defense in the NFL a couple years back when they made the Playoffs with Flacco.

(3 hours ago)Soonerpeace Wrote: I think this has gone off the rails and taking Burrows comments too literally. All he’s saying is you have to be judicious in close games with a lead...

That sounds a lot like playing not to lose.

(2 hours ago)007BengalsFan Wrote: That sounds a lot like playing not to lose.

Not turning the ball over is a good thing. It isn't a coincidence that we were in it tied at 17 in the 3rd quarter with the SB Champs last 
year until the interception happened and that completely turned around the momentum. Have to be aggressive but be smart about it is 
all I am getting from Joe here.