+- 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: Passing this much is not sustainable (/thread-21072.html)
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - THE PISTONS - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 12:25 PM)McC Wrote: Things always change from year to year. They were certainly not bad against the run yesterday. At least the offense didn't keep trying to force the issue when it clearly wasn't going to happen.
We just needed one more TD from outside the red zone. It was too hard to score on them when the field got reduced inside the 20. If only DreK didn't get tackled by the turf monster...
I kinda wish we tried to run outside more...instead of between the tackles which failed.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - sandwedge - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 12:27 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I kinda wish we tried to run outside more...instead of between the tackles which failed.
With Seattle's LBs, not sure that would have had better results..
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - McC - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 12:27 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I kinda wish we tried to run outside more...instead of between the tackles which failed.
The six man front sets a mighty wide edge. But I was hoping to see more of an attempt to get wide. Adam Archuleta said more than once that when teams ran on Seattle last year, they did it by running wide. Obviously, Pete Carroll knew this, so maybe they made not allowing that a focus.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - BengalChris - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 10:06 AM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: You’re absolutely right. There was no run game because the run blocking was historically bad. This must be turned around or the season will be very long.
Let’s consider yesterday in perspective; a “snapshot” if you will. Andy Dalton HAD to throw it 51 times. I didn’t like seeing that — and neither did Zac Taylor or Brian Callahan — but with no run game it was the only way to move the ball. I’m not faulting Zac for calling all those pass plays, either, and the fact that he didn’t keep trying the run is commendable because he knew it wasn’t there.
35/51 for 418 yards and two touchdowns is an anomaly. Don’t forget this.
I agree with this. You still have to be able to run the ball against another team's base defense. We couldn't. It played a role in the loss yesterday. We only scored 3 points in the second half.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - THE PISTONS - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 12:54 PM)sandwedge Wrote: With Seattle's LBs, not sure that would have had better results..
Teams ran for a 4.9 ypc average last year on them, so some teams must have figured out a way to do it.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - McC - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 12:58 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I agree with this. You still have to be able to run the ball against another team's base defense. We couldn't. It played a role in the loss yesterday. We only scored 3 points in the second half.If they had just kept pounding and pounding the run, there might have been some bigger runs. But how many three and outs would have come from it?
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - THE PISTONS - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 01:02 PM)McC Wrote: If they had just kept pounding and pounding the run, there might have been some bigger runs. But how many three and outs would have come from it?
That's the point in that situation. Running and getting it stopped does nothing, but create 3rd and long.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - BengalChris - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 01:02 PM)McC Wrote: If they had just kept pounding and pounding the run, there might have been some bigger runs. But how many three and outs would have come from it?
I'm not complaining about the play calling. The running game needs to improve if this team expects to win enough games to make the playoffs. It's something they need to figure out how to do better. Getting Mixon outside successfully would be a start, he can break tackles.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - fredtoast - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 12:58 PM)BengalChris Wrote: You still have to be able to run the ball against another team's base defense.
The only time we "have to" be able to run is in short yardage and goal line situations. Otherwise in today's NFL it does not matter if you throw the ball 50 times and run only 5 if that is how you best move the ball.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - THE PISTONS - 09-09-2019
One of the CincyJungle people tweeted this.
Hart gave up 6 pressures, Smith 5, and Jordan 4. That's the con of passing 51 times. Those will turn into sacks with fumbles and interceptions at some point.
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>geno atkins (5), sam hubbard (4) carl lawson (3), carlos dunlap (2): 14 pressures
— john sheeran (@John__Sheeran) September 9, 2019
bobby hart (6), andre smith (5), michael jordan (4): 15 allowed pressures
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - Wyche'sWarrior - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 12:27 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I kinda wish we tried to run outside more...instead of between the tackles which failed.
I would have liked to see more of that myself. Maybe that's something they'll see on film and correct.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - BengalChris - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 01:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The only time we "have to" be able to run is in short yardage and goal line situations. Otherwise in today's NFL it does not matter if you throw the ball 50 times and run only 5 if that is how you best move the ball.
Has anyone won a SB with that kind of ratio? I can't think of anyone, but maybe there has been.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - THE PISTONS - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 02:38 PM)BengalChris Wrote: Has anyone won a SB with that kind of ratio? I can't think of anyone, but maybe there has been.
I was wondering that myself.
Last year, the highest pass to run ration was 66.6% by...the Steelers.
https://www.fftoday.com/stats/18_run_pass_ratios.html
2017: 62.58% pass.
2016: 64.91% pass.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - XenoMorph - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 10:06 AM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: You’re absolutely right. There was no run game because the run blocking was historically bad. This must be turned around or the season will be very long.
Let’s consider yesterday in perspective; a “snapshot” if you will. Andy Dalton HAD to throw it 51 times. I didn’t like seeing that — and neither did Zac Taylor or Brian Callahan — but with no run game it was the only way to move the ball. I’m not faulting Zac for calling all those pass plays, either, and the fact that he didn’t keep trying the run is commendable because he knew it wasn’t there.
35/51 for 418 yards and two touchdowns is an anomaly. Don’t forget this.
anomaly as in we wont throw that much or anomaly as in Dalton cant keep those stats up? its the first time hes ever had 50+ attempts I believe.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - Sled21 - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 02:56 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: anomaly as in we wont throw that much or anomaly as in Dalton cant keep those stats up? its the first time hes ever had 50+ attempts I believe.
It's ridiculous to try to run the ball just to run the ball, when the passing game is there, or vice versa. If and when that breaks down, then move to something else
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - jason - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 03:02 PM)Sled21 Wrote: It's ridiculous to try to run the ball just to run the ball, when the passing game is there, or vice versa. If and when that breaks down, then move to something else
That... And I also think Seattle was daring us to throw because they thought we didn't have it in us... When Mr Green returns, I doubt we'll see stacked boxes for an entire game again.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - Wyche'sWarrior - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 03:42 PM)jason Wrote: That... And I also think Seattle was daring us to throw because they thought we didn't have it in us... When Mr Green returns, I doubt we'll see stacked boxes for an entire game again.
Yep, and we might not see it anyway after the barrage of yards in the air. Went deep, went short, and when the backers cheated up, they ran curls intermediate between them and the DBs. These cats know modern NFL offense. And how bout Sweet Lou's defense? I certainly didn't expect that.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - PhilHos - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 02:56 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: anomaly as in we wont throw that much or anomaly as in Dalton cant keep those stats up? its the first time hes ever had 50+ attempts I believe.
It was Dalton's 4th game throwing 50+ passes. All losses. Dalton has thrown 45 passes or more 9 times. The Bengals are 1-8 in those games. INterestingly enough, Dalton's most attempts came in 2016 against Pittsburgh. Threw 54 times for 336 yards 1 TD and 0 INT and was only sacked once. Still lost.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - THE PISTONS - 09-09-2019
(09-09-2019, 03:50 PM)PhilHos Wrote: It was Dalton's 4th game throwing 50+ passes. All losses. Dalton has thrown 45 passes or more 9 times. The Bengals are 1-8 in those games. INterestingly enough, Dalton's most attempts came in 2016 against Pittsburgh. Threw 54 times for 336 yards 1 TD and 0 INT and was only sacked once. Still lost.
Generally you pass a lot trying to catch up.
I looked at the past 3 years and 66.6% was the most any team passed in a season.
RE: Passing this much is not sustainable - bfine32 - 09-09-2019
A lead backer or more pulling would have been more effective than a better line (to a point) IMO yesterday. I saw holes open up on the first level and the LB was right there waiting on our runner. Their leading tackler on the Dline had only 2 solo tackles.