![]() |
Lafell on Lazor - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html) +--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html) +--- Thread: Lafell on Lazor (/thread-15921.html) Pages:
1
2
|
RE: Lafell on Lazor - BengalChris - 05-09-2018 (05-08-2018, 08:16 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: It isn't much, but I like to hear this.... There is a place for 10-12 play drives, but to have that be our norm is koo-koo. It gives the defense that many chances to stop you. Stretching the field and scoring quickly will open up things so that when we need a 12 play, 7 minute drive to close our a game the defense will have to play it more straight up and if they don't you just push it down field anyways and score. I like it. I didn't know the team was shooting for 10-12 play drives as the norm. Of course, that approach sounds like Marvin Lewis. RE: Lafell on Lazor - SHRacerX - 05-09-2018 (05-09-2018, 08:44 AM)fredtoast Wrote: 1. EVERY team tries to score every time they get the ball. Wrong. How ironic you gave a single example ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() RE: Lafell on Lazor - jj22 - 05-09-2018 AU is exactly right about the D being broke by "quick" 3 and outs. It's why the Chip Kelly Offense failed so miserably in the NFL. His D's were gassed by the 4th q and the opposing Offenses couldn't be stopped towards the end of games. Def something to think about. RE: Lafell on Lazor - XenoMorph - 05-09-2018 (05-09-2018, 10:12 AM)BengalChris Wrote: There is a place for 10-12 play drives, but to have that be our norm is koo-koo. It gives the defense that many chances to stop you. control the ball Controll the clock win the game RE: Lafell on Lazor - Wyche'sWarrior - 05-09-2018 (05-09-2018, 11:27 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: control the ball Worked pretty well for this guy named Parcells. RE: Lafell on Lazor - Shake n Blake - 05-09-2018 (05-08-2018, 10:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: A good offense is about balance. The yin and the yang. Establishing the run opens up the pass and play action. Hitting them over the top opens up the run even more. Pretty soon, the defense doesn't know WHAT to do. See our defense in either Texans playoff game. (05-09-2018, 01:48 AM)cinci4life Wrote: He had an offensive line that year that could actually block and give him time to throw. That's definitely part of it. RE: Lafell on Lazor - sandwedge - 05-09-2018 I know this is the old football cliche, but you gotta win on 1st down. When you are constantly in 3rd and 6 or longer, we play it safe. RE: Lafell on Lazor - Go Cards - 05-09-2018 Glad to hear and hoping OL can give Dalton protection and enough of a rushing attack to get back to that style. RE: Lafell on Lazor - psychdoctor - 05-09-2018 Keeps coming back to the offensive line. Need to be able to run the ball for PAP to be effective. Can't run the ball unless the offensive line has been improved. I think Price will help but RT is still a question mark. Hurry-up and no-huddle schemes usually work best with rhythm QB which I am not certain adequately describes Dalton. Dalton needs time to hit targets on complex routes which is why Zampese's schemes did not work well. What I would like to see is a grinding running game with quick strikes on crossing routes and occasionally a deep ball to stretch the defenses. I remember when the Bengals ran the sugar-huddle and no-huddle offenses, the defense players on both sides of the ball were sapped. But it was dynamic and exciting to watch and gave the sense that the offense was in control of the game. RE: Lafell on Lazor - fredtoast - 05-09-2018 (05-09-2018, 11:11 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Wrong. How ironic you gave a single example Still one more example than you. But here are more. Last year Pats led Saints 30-13 at half. Coasted to 36-20 with just 2 FG in second half. Led Falcons by 17 at half. Again coasted with just 2 FGs in second half of 23-7 win Led Broncos by 18 at half. Coasted to just 2 scores in second half of 41-16 win. Led Jets by 18 at half. Offense just scored 1 FG in 2nd half of 26-6 win. RE: Lafell on Lazor - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 05-09-2018 (05-08-2018, 08:16 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: It isn't much, but I like to hear this.... Might actually be able to do this a decent O-line. Gonna have to give Dalton some time to stretch the field and with the additions of Cordy Glenn and Billy Price we should be able to give him a lot more time. Coach up Fisher and one of Westerman and Redmond and boom. We have the talent at the skill positions already in place pretty much. RE: Lafell on Lazor - ochocincos - 05-09-2018 (05-08-2018, 11:26 AM)sandwedge Wrote: Not to mention, you can shorten the field! You know what they say about having a short field... RE: Lafell on Lazor - 3wt - 05-09-2018 (05-08-2018, 10:49 AM)fredtoast Wrote: He said "attack quick" but I don't know if that means "up tempo". It could just mean taking more deep shots down the field, i.e. "quick strike offense". Agree that that the "dink & dunk" offense is difficult to execute. It is a thing of beauty when it is firing on all cylinders though. As you note in your next post a good offense is dependent on balance. So being able to run the ball effectively and having the real potential of scoring on a long yardage play at any time forces the defense to cover the whole field. With Marvin Jones, Eifert and our complete offensive line our offense was difficult to deal with. I love the West Coast Offense, especially when they go no huddle and dictate all the matchups without subbing. I hope Lazor doesn't deviate from it too much. We'll see RE: Lafell on Lazor - 3wt - 05-09-2018 (05-09-2018, 10:12 AM)BengalChris Wrote: There is a place for 10-12 play drives, but to have that be our norm is koo-koo. It gives the defense that many chances to stop you. That is part of the design of the West Coast Offense. It is a ball control offense. The obvious risk as you point out is that it gives the defense more chances to stop you. But its success is predicated on a high volume of high percentage plays. There guys out there now (don't ask me who cuz I heard it on a podcast and didn't write it down) who talk about the stronger likelihood of getting first downs by running the ball on 2nd and 3rd down more often - but again, high percentage plays. The long ball is an awesome tool - if you're good at it. And it is typically a low percentage play. So the risk of using it more often is that you end up with more 3 and outs and your defense gets gassed really quickly. So it really is not a Marvin thing. It really had been our MO since Gruden was the OC. Lazor seems really bright. Hopefully he doesn't swing the pendulum too far the other way. I'm not sure our O line is up to the task. RE: Lafell on Lazor - BengalChris - 05-09-2018 (05-09-2018, 08:26 PM)3wt Wrote: That is part of the design of the West Coast Offense. It is a ball control offense. The obvious risk as you point out is that it gives the defense more chances to stop you. But its success is predicated on a high volume of high percentage plays. There guys out there now (don't ask me who cuz I heard it on a podcast and didn't write it down) who talk about the stronger likelihood of getting first downs by running the ball on 2nd and 3rd down more often - but again, high percentage plays. The long ball is an awesome tool - if you're good at it. And it is typically a low percentage play. So the risk of using it more often is that you end up with more 3 and outs and your defense gets gassed really quickly. I think the Bengals somehow weren't seeing those "high percentage" plays. We did seem to see quite a number runs for -1 to 3 yards on first down though. Appeared very predictable. I understand controlling the clock and having long drives to wear down the other team and keep your defense fresh. But to do that on every drive lets the defense know exactly what to expect. And from a team that couldn't open up any running lanes or pass block it just seemed ugly and it was ugly. RE: Lafell on Lazor - 3wt - 05-10-2018 (05-09-2018, 08:32 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I think the Bengals somehow weren't seeing those "high percentage" plays. We did seem to see quite a number runs for -1 to 3 yards on first down though. Appeared very predictable.It was indeed ugly. The only thing that seemed to make a difference was changing the blocking scheme at the end of the year, which better suited our players. And there's no guarantee that opposing teams will not make a quick adjustment to that right out of the gate. When you let your two best offensive linemen slip away and make a colossal error in assessing your two top drafted replacements - and that on the heels of letting your # 2 receiver walk the year before (I realize he wanted to be the man, but he's not the man in Detroit, and you just make an offer the guy can't refuse), you're going to go down the poop chute like greased lightning. That's what we did and that's what happened. There's no offensive scheme that will survive that. And it will take more than 1 year of better management to reverse the losses, which is why (I believe) Lewis was signed for 2 years. RE: Lafell on Lazor - BengalChris - 05-11-2018 (05-10-2018, 02:08 PM)3wt Wrote: It was indeed ugly. The only thing that seemed to make a difference was changing the blocking scheme at the end of the year, which better suited our players. And there's no guarantee that opposing teams will not make a quick adjustment to that right out of the gate. Just blame Mike Brown, that's what I do. RE: Lafell on Lazor - McC - 05-11-2018 (05-11-2018, 09:50 AM)BengalChris Wrote: Just blame Mike Brown, that's what I do. Of this, we are painfully aware. RE: Lafell on Lazor - 3wt - 05-11-2018 (05-11-2018, 09:50 AM)BengalChris Wrote: Just blame Mike Brown, that's what I do. I don't blame him for everything. But for this I do. |