+- 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: Some interesting data about this defense.. (/thread-17838.html)
Pages:
1
2
Some interesting data about this defense.. - Tlawsonmariat82 - 10-31-2018
I was looking at blitz rates and stumbled across what I think sums up our defensive issues this season.I honestly didn't know that the Bengals defense has forced the most third downs so far this season.
Currently we have the lowest blitz rate in the whole league,here's the top nine blitzing teams and percentages of the time they blitz..
Cards-38.1%
Browns-37.8%
Ravens-35.8%
Titans-30.4%
Jets-30.3%
Steelers-30.1%
Broncos-30.1%
Texans -27.8%
Vikings-27.8%
Teams with the lowest blitz rates..
Bengals-11.5%
Colts-13.1%
Eagles-16.3%
Chiefs-16.3%
Lions-16.8
Austin has to incorporate the blitz more than 11.5% of the time, it's to predictable of an approach,I wouldn't even waist time on preparing for blitz pressure when game planning the Bengals...
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - bengalhoel - 10-31-2018
(10-31-2018, 08:20 PM)Tlawsonmariat82 Wrote: I was looking at blitz rates and stumbled across what I think sums up our defensive issues this season.I honestly didn't know that the Bengals defense has forced the most third downs so far this season.
Currently we have the lowest blitz rate in the whole league,here's the top nine blitzing teams and percentages of the time they blitz..
Cards-38.1%
Browns-37.8%
Ravens-35.8%
Titans-30.4%
Jets-30.3%
Steelers-30.1%
Broncos-30.1%
Texans -27.8%
Vikings-27.8%
Teams with the lowest blitz rates..
Bengals-11.5%
Colts-13.1%
Eagles-16.3%
Chiefs-16.3%
Lions-16.8
Austin has to incorporate the blitz more than 11.5% of the time, it's to predictable of an approach,I wouldn't even waist time on preparing for blitz pressure when game planning the Bengals...
The problem is, the other team seems to see our blitz coming and audible to a quick pass to which our LBs respond like they have never played football before.
Its weird because when we do a screen or a short pass it always seems like someone is covering our receivers but when the teams do it against us I dont see a player withing 5 yards.
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - Tlawsonmariat82 - 11-01-2018
Just think of how how easy it must be to gameplan against the Bengals,even though they force alot of third downs we can rest assured that we will see a four man pass rush that we can block up and easily convert the first down...
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - Socal Bengals fan - 11-01-2018
We suck at defense. Conclusion
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - TSwigZ - 11-01-2018
Yeah but we’re 3rd in the league for defensive pressures with 99 so i don’t think this is our main concern. It’s more about executing tackles and not covering long enough. I think our LB/ cover issues also factor into why we don’t blitz a lot
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - Bilbo Saggins - 11-01-2018
Interesting stats indeed. Forcing 3rd downs is good, but there are so many play calls where it seems as though they just give up 1st down yardage unless the receiver drops it. Perhaps the critical chink in the armor is covering the "gutter" routes and trusting they guys to follow through should the QB have a little bit of time?
Back when they had Reggie Nelson in his prime, I remember some of that scheming fondly. They would cover a 3rd and short very tight but would trust Reggie to clean up the play should the other team convert it. Being able to trust your backend to tackle and prevent the TD on 3rd and short is huge imo. Bates has looked impressive so far, but Austin doesn't seem to be comfortable having him play the super deep and conservative safety while clamping down with most everyone else. Maybe a cover 1 sort of deal with Evans in the middle with Bates super deep would be the way to go on 3rd?
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - ochocincos - 11-01-2018
(10-31-2018, 08:20 PM)Tlawsonmariat82 Wrote: I was looking at blitz rates and stumbled across what I think sums up our defensive issues this season.I honestly didn't know that the Bengals defense has forced the most third downs so far this season.
Currently we have the lowest blitz rate in the whole league,here's the top nine blitzing teams and percentages of the time they blitz..
Cards-38.1%
Browns-37.8%
Ravens-35.8%
Titans-30.4%
Jets-30.3%
Steelers-30.1%
Broncos-30.1%
Texans -27.8%
Vikings-27.8%
Teams with the lowest blitz rates..
Bengals-11.5%
Colts-13.1%
Eagles-16.3%
Chiefs-16.3%
Lions-16.8
Austin has to incorporate the blitz more than 11.5% of the time, it's to predictable of an approach,I wouldn't even waist time on preparing for blitz pressure when game planning the Bengals...
One does have to scratch his/her head when he/she hears that Austin is all about aggressiveness but has the lowest blitz percentage in the league.
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - J24 - 11-01-2018
(11-01-2018, 06:17 AM)TSwigZ Wrote: Yeah but we’re 3rd in the league for defensive pressures with 99 so i don’t think this is our main concern. It’s more about executing tackles and not covering long enough. I think our LB/ cover issues also factor into why we don’t blitz a lot
Curious where you got this info from?
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - thompson19osu - 11-01-2018
(10-31-2018, 11:51 PM)bengalhoel Wrote: The problem is, the other team seems to see our blitz coming and audible to a quick pass to which our LBs respond like they have never played football before.
Its weird because when we do a screen or a short pass it always seems like someone is covering our receivers but when the teams do it against us I dont see a player withing 5 yards.
This. Other teams can audible when we blitz because we do it so infrequently. Nkt only that, but Austin doesn’t disguise as either a blitz or fake blitz. We are either 4 men down And LBs back or linebackers up to the line to blitz. It’s just so obvious. I maybe have mot paid close enough attention but I don’t really recall faking a blitz and dropping back into coverage. The setup bedore the snap is so incredibly vanilla its no wonder teams eat us up.
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - Daddy-O - 11-01-2018
(11-01-2018, 06:17 AM)TSwigZ Wrote: Yeah but we’re 3rd in the league for defensive pressures with 99 so i don’t think this is our main concern. It’s more about executing tackles and not covering long enough. I think our LB/ cover issues also factor into why we don’t blitz a lot
Not sure I follow here. If our LB cover issues are a factor why are we wasting them in coverage? May as well blitz them if they can't cover.
Our corners are pretty decent in press. Williams is serviceable in coverage and Bates appears to be able to cover as as well. I'd much rather add an extra lineman like Hubbard and pull a piss poor coverage backer off the field. Tackle the check downs and see what happens. Hell, it can't be any worse than the current which is on pace to be the worst ever in NFL history (yards given up).
One might argue there is more potential to give up big plays in press coverage. I would argue just the opposite watching or defense in the first half of the season. In zone we are seeing consistent and unacceptable breakdowns leaving people wide open, in some cases without a defender within 7 - 10 yards of the pass catcher. At least manned up you will know who you are responsible for and have a chance to make a play.
No way should we see deep plays out of the defenses we've been playing, but we are. Breakdowns, mostly due to inexperience or crappy schemes. So man up!
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - TSwigZ - 11-01-2018
(11-01-2018, 09:45 AM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Curious where you got this info from?
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000981835/article/projected-final-win-totals-for-2018-rams-chiefs-riding-high
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - grampahol - 11-02-2018
Quote:Browns defense ranks first in takeaways with 22. There are a lot of high-potential pieces on this team, but they haven't seemed to work together yet. For example, Cleveland's offense has only been able to earn 34 points off those turnovers. Compare that to the Patriots, who lead the league in points off turnovers with 69 (off of 16 turnovers).22 takeaways with only 34 points to show for it.. With an effective offense they'd be ridiculous good instead of just ridiculous.
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - bengalhoel - 11-02-2018
(11-02-2018, 06:41 AM)grampahol Wrote: 22 takeaways with only 34 points to show for it.. With an effective offense they'd be ridiculous good instead of just ridiculous.
How about our offense and their defense. Urban Meyer as head coach, Luke Fickell DEF coordinator.... Make an Ohio Superteam.
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - SunsetBengal - 11-02-2018
So, we "die by the blitz" on the final play of the Steelers game, and the OP wants to blitz more often?
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - Tlawsonmariat82 - 11-02-2018
(11-02-2018, 08:18 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, we "die by the blitz" on the final play of the Steelers game, and the OP wants to blitz more often?The OP Definitely wants to blitz more than 11.5 percent of the time, and the zero blitz call in against Pittsburgh was stupid and made out of desperation..The objective of football from a scheme standpoint is to try and be as unpredictable as possible,in other words play on your toes and not your heels,just rushing 4 and being vanilla won't work and never has worked in the nfl and that's exactly why the defensive statistics look like they do..
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - sandwedge - 11-02-2018
(11-02-2018, 11:13 AM)Tlawsonmariat82 Wrote: The OP Definitely wants to blitz more than 11.5 percent of the time, and the zero blitz call in against Pittsburgh was stupid and made out of desperation..The objective of football from a scheme standpoint is to try and be as unpredictable as possible,in other words play on your toes and not your heels,just rushing 4 and being vanilla won't work and never has worked in the nfl and that's exactly why the defensive statistics look like they do..
I do agree with that. Zero coverage was as dumb as it gets in that situation.
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - SunsetBengal - 11-02-2018
(11-02-2018, 11:13 AM)Tlawsonmariat82 Wrote: The OP Definitely wants to blitz more than 11.5 percent of the time, and the zero blitz call in against Pittsburgh was stupid and made out of desperation..The objective of football from a scheme standpoint is to try and be as unpredictable as possible,in other words play on your toes and not your heels,just rushing 4 and being vanilla won't work and never has worked in the nfl and that's exactly why the defensive statistics look like they do..
If your defense can't cover anyone well in base, why are you going to go ahead and just give them an open spot to throw the ball to? In this particular defense, lack of pressure is a fault of the interior DL. The NT HAS to consume two blockers, or else the OL has all 5, plus a back or TE with which to pick up a blitz.
For whatever reason, the Bengals DL isn't eating up enough blockers, in order to make blitzing profitable.
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - 3wt - 11-02-2018
(11-01-2018, 06:17 AM)TSwigZ Wrote: Yeah but we’re 3rd in the league for defensive pressures with 99 so i don’t think this is our main concern. It’s more about executing tackles and not covering long enough. I think our LB/ cover issues also factor into why we don’t blitz a lot
If we're getting that level of pressure without blitzing that's a good thing.
I think you're right about our inability to cover dictating both not having to blitz and the added risk of blitzing.
I think it's a combination of confusion in the defensive backfield and the inability of our linebackers to adequately cover.
The confusion may be related to a new scheme in the defensive backfield or a bad scheme.
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - Tlawsonmariat82 - 11-02-2018
(11-02-2018, 11:28 AM)3wt Wrote: If we're getting that level of pressure without blitzing that's a good thing.
I think you're right about our inability to cover dictating both not having to blitz and the added risk of blitzing.
I think it's a combination of confusion in the defensive backfield and the inability of our linebackers to adequately cover.
The confusion may be related to a new scheme in the defensive backfield or a bad scheme.
The LBers can't cover so why not just start sending them on cross blitzes like the one they sent against Tampa that resulted in a sack??I think we'll get more benefits from sending LB blitzes more often..
RE: Some interesting data about this defense.. - Wyche'sWarrior - 11-02-2018
(10-31-2018, 11:51 PM)bengalhoel Wrote: Its weird because when we do a screen or a short pass it always seems like someone is covering our receivers but when the teams do it against us I dont see a player withing 5 yards.
You notice that too, eh? :andy: