PFF Week 1, top 5 and bottom 5

[KillerGoose]

(09-13-2022, 04:04 PM)higgy100 Wrote: Play action only works when you're running the ball well. Outside of Mixon's 31 yard run he averaged less than 2 ypc. Bengals going to have to prove to the world they can get good, positive running yards on 1st/2nd down (I believe defenders hit the Bengals RB's on over 52% of their running plays last season before the LOS).

I believe that play-action will become a key staple of their offense in the next few weeks.

This isn’t quite true. Play-action simply works, regardless of how well you’re running. Each play has run fits, and defenders have to play those fits. Play-action works due to the freezing of the linebackers, primarily. There is essentially zero correlation to PA success and run game success. If you’re a terrible running team, play-action still works. For instance, Heinicke was the best PA QB in the league in 2021 despite Washington being a mediocre rushing team. Mayfield and Wentz were bottom half of the league in PA success despite being the two best rushing teams in the league.

That said, I think Cincinnati should incorporate it more along with RPOs.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(09-13-2022, 04:49 PM)BoomerFan Wrote: We were never that far behind. The Steelers are known to be weak against the run. 

Agree about that.....but it doesn't change the fact they couldn't run.....3.0 ypc with a 31 yarder mixed in there. That's bad.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(09-13-2022, 04:58 PM)Synric Wrote: That was 2021 Welcome to 2022. Last year the Steeles expected Stephon Tuitt back be he never got their and they they lost their NT Tyson Alualu 2 games into the season forcing Heyward into that position.

This year they signed Ogunjobi to replace Tuitt and Alualu is healthy. They also drafted DeMarvin Leal and just picked a role guy Malik Reed from Denver.

Forgot about those injuries last year, good call.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(09-13-2022, 12:45 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Well, could have called the one where he didn't get his feet in an incomplete target that was on target...

On target if you’re Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, maybe. It was amazing Chase even came down with that one.

[Shake n Blake]

(09-13-2022, 09:18 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: Need a coach that can call a Offensive Game plan... or make one for that matter... Sling the ball all day isnt much of a plan

Well in fairness, we went into a quick 17-3 hole due to Burrow, and Mixon wasn't running well initially.

Also, didn't Mixon have like 27 carries? We were just constantly on offense due to all the turnovers.

[Essex Johnson]

(09-13-2022, 07:37 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Well in fairness, we went into a quick 17-3 hole due to Burrow, and Mixon wasn't running well initially.

Also, didn't Mixon have like 27 carries? We were just constantly on offense due to all the turnovers.

Actually Mixon averaged about 5 yards a carry over on 9 rushes in the first 4 series so he did not start off slow, he actually had a solid 1st half but we were screwed with three turnovers in 3 of the 4 first series.. 

[Joelist]

Play action also needs the offense to stop telegraphing the play by the formation. This stupid issue goes back before Zac weirdly as the last Bengals offensive coach who actually DIDN'T telegraph the play call like this was Hue Jackson.

Will they ever learn how to run and pass out of the same formation? Until they do the offense will always have that maddening inconsistency about it.

[*SHRacerX*]

(09-13-2022, 12:49 PM)740Bengal Wrote: Ok run someone who can actually get the edge, Mixon is a north south back. 

I've been wondering this as well.  The steelers seem to stack the middle of the formation (because they know that is where our run plays are designed to go...always) and I can't help but wonder if Evans and his ability to get outside could take advantage of this alignment.  Then again, we tell our hand by only busting it outside with Evans.  

That's my biggest criticism with Zac's offense.  Hurst pass blocked on 1 play, out of something like 70 snaps.  It just tells the opponent what is coming with no wrinkles to worry about.  

[*SHRacerX*]

(09-13-2022, 07:09 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: On target if you’re Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, maybe. It was amazing Chase even came down with that one.

I watched it a few times, I don't think it was that high.  

[Nicomo Cosca]

(09-14-2022, 08:49 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: I watched it a few times, I don't think it was that high.  

Ok maybe more behind him than high, but I definitely wouldn’t call it on target. It required an insane catch to even bring it in.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(09-13-2022, 04:10 PM)Wyche Wrote: Yeah, I agree, but then came all of the turnovers..... can't leave that part out. I tend to believe the plan changed at that point.

If we would of been running it the turnovers wouldn't of happened most likely. At least not the first one that lead to a poor
offensive start. Mixon is good at not fumbling and the Offensive Line can gain chemistry much better, faster in run blocking 
situations. Something all of the guys we had starting are better at than pass protection.

Just saying we should of tried to grow in run blocking and gaining that chemistry instead of jumping right into passing the
ball the first 2 plays of the game. Hence, sack on 1st down, interception on the 2nd play of the game. Both pass plays 
called by whoever, Zac, Brian or Joe. Not smart calls early in a game with pretty much an entirely new OL.

(09-13-2022, 04:32 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Mixon touched the ball around 20 times in 1st half which was around half of offensive plays ...

Yeah and when it was downhill running right up the gut it was effective. Those toss plays and pitches are terrible plays
that we run entirely too often. Get them out of the playbook with this OL. They are directional blockers for the most part
and you can see it is very blatant.

You just cannot put your team in a hole like that with a pick 6 early in the game. It limits what you can do offensively.

(09-13-2022, 04:58 PM)Synric Wrote: That was 2021 Welcome to 2022. Last year the Steeles expected Stephon Tuitt back be he never got their and they they lost their NT Tyson Alualu 2 games into the season forcing Heyward into that position.

This year they signed Ogunjobi to replace Tuitt and Alualu is healthy. They also drafted DeMarvin Leal and just picked a role guy Malik Reed from Denver.

True and Ogunjobi made a splash play early like always lol.

Leal is a good player, wanted us to draft him.

[*Go Cards*]

(09-13-2022, 12:20 PM)BengalsLUFC Wrote: Hubbard wasn’t great on Sunday he was solid enough witching shining apart from that snap that should have been called for IG.

But the play where he jumped offside creating the free play that led to the field goal he was that damn early and still missed the qb. No excuse to jump that quick and still get nowhere near him.

Felt Hubbard play below average for what he usually brings to the table. 

But not worried about him and expecting a bounce back game this week.

The offense I'm still concerned with until they show some cohesiveness though.

 

[THE PISTONS]

(09-13-2022, 07:37 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Well in fairness, we went into a quick 17-3 hole due to Burrow, and Mixon wasn't running well initially.

Also, didn't Mixon have like 27 carries? We were just constantly on offense due to all the turnovers.

We played like 100 snaps on offense.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(09-14-2022, 01:53 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We played like 100 snaps on offense.

No doubt lol

I think the RB is going to get some touches. Doesn't mean that the play calling was setting him up for success though...

[higgy100]

(09-13-2022, 05:21 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: This isn’t quite true. Play-action simply works, regardless of how well you’re running. Each play has run fits, and defenders have to play those fits. Play-action works due to the freezing of the linebackers, primarily. There is essentially zero correlation to PA success and run game success. If you’re a terrible running team, play-action still works. For instance, Heinicke was the best PA QB in the league in 2021 despite Washington being a mediocre rushing team. Mayfield and Wentz were bottom half of the league in PA success despite being the two best rushing teams in the league.

That said, I think Cincinnati should incorporate it more along with RPOs.

You're correct BUT it's not the case with for a Bengals team that only, I believe, 4-5 teams that rushed for less yards than they did last year PLUS a team where the RB's got hit behind the LOS on 52% of the hand offs and that's with primarily just a front 7.That's staggering. There is no S in this league that loads the box on 1st down against the Bengals  in fear of defending a 5-6 yard gain unless it's a S blitz/CB blitz to get to Burrow.

I expect that to change this season and Mixon averaged close to 5 ypc on several runs in the first half last week but, again, the 4 TO's just interrupted any flow or rhythm.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(09-14-2022, 03:32 PM)higgy100 Wrote: You're correct BUT it's not the case with for a Bengals team that only, I believe, 4-5 teams that rushed for less yards than they did last year PLUS a team where the RB's got hit behind the LOS on 52% of the hand offs and that's with primarily just a front 7.That's staggering. There is no S in this league that loads the box on 1st down against the Bengals  in fear of defending a 5-6 yard gain unless it's a S blitz/CB blitz to get to Burrow.

I expect that to change this season and Mixon averaged close to 5 ypc on several runs in the first half last week but, again, the 4 TO's just interrupted any flow or rhythm.

Have to agree, I think it is pretty absurd to say that a good running game doesn't help play-action at all...

A bad running game you don't have to pay attention to near as much as a good running game.

KillerGoose is a smart dude and knows a lot but this is what he seems to be disagreeing with.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-14-2022, 07:38 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Have to agree, I think it is pretty absurd to say that a good running game doesn't help play-action at all...

A bad running game you don't have to pay attention to near as much as a good running game.

KillerGoose is a smart dude and knows a lot but this is what he seems to be disagreeing with.

Using the SIS DataHub, I pulled data from 2015-2019 to compare the relationship between a team’s EPA per Rush with their EPA per Play-Action Dropback. The results are in agreement with previous findings, as there’s very little relationship between the two. If we compare success rates, we see a slightly stronger relationship, though still weak by most standards.
https://cowboyswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/18/nfl-analytics-study-running-the-ball-play-action-success-mike-mccarthy-dallas-cowboys/

This is the main relationship of interest. Regardless of which of the six measures of rushing one chooses, there is no meaningful relationship between the effectiveness of play-action passing and a team's rushing statistics in the game to that point. Aside from a couple extreme cases with very small sample sizes (zero rushes or eight rushes in the previous 10 plays), there is no relationship in the data between the median, mean, or 75th percentile of yards gained and a team's previous rush attempts. This is consistent with the scatterplots of team rushing versus team play-action passing for entire seasons that were displayed in the beginning of this article.
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/rushing-success-and-play-action-passing

Research from both Hermsmeyer and Baldwin has shown that not only is play action much more effective than regular drop-back passing, it is also effective regardless of rushing attempts or rushing success.
https://theathletic.com/980870/2019/07/26/teams-dont-have-to-establish-the-run-to-win-games-and-the-analytics-proves-it-but-the-run-isnt-dead-either/

A study done by Sean Clements, who is now a data analyst for the Baltimore Ravens, found that establishing the run early in NFL games does not open the passing game later in games.
https://atbnetwork.com/2022/07/01/does-running-the-ball-set-up-the-pass/


As you can see, the data points are all over the place, indicating there really isn’t any correlation between rushing efficiency and play-action efficiency.  Indeed, the correlation is p = .1477 (not significant), meaning a better running attack doesn’t result in better play-action passing.
https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/setting-up-play-action-with-the-run-is-false

[KillerGoose]

(09-14-2022, 10:38 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Using the SIS DataHub, I pulled data from 2015-2019 to compare the relationship between a team’s EPA per Rush with their EPA per Play-Action Dropback. The results are in agreement with previous findings, as there’s very little relationship between the two. If we compare success rates, we see a slightly stronger relationship, though still weak by most standards.
https://cowboyswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/18/nfl-analytics-study-running-the-ball-play-action-success-mike-mccarthy-dallas-cowboys/

This is the main relationship of interest. Regardless of which of the six measures of rushing one chooses, there is no meaningful relationship between the effectiveness of play-action passing and a team's rushing statistics in the game to that point. Aside from a couple extreme cases with very small sample sizes (zero rushes or eight rushes in the previous 10 plays), there is no relationship in the data between the median, mean, or 75th percentile of yards gained and a team's previous rush attempts. This is consistent with the scatterplots of team rushing versus team play-action passing for entire seasons that were displayed in the beginning of this article.
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/rushing-success-and-play-action-passing

Research from both Hermsmeyer and Baldwin has shown that not only is play action much more effective than regular drop-back passing, it is also effective regardless of rushing attempts or rushing success.
https://theathletic.com/980870/2019/07/26/teams-dont-have-to-establish-the-run-to-win-games-and-the-analytics-proves-it-but-the-run-isnt-dead-either/

A study done by Sean Clements, who is now a data analyst for the Baltimore Ravens, found that establishing the run early in NFL games does not open the passing game later in games.
https://atbnetwork.com/2022/07/01/does-running-the-ball-set-up-the-pass/


As you can see, the data points are all over the place, indicating there really isn’t any correlation between rushing efficiency and play-action efficiency.  Indeed, the correlation is p = .1477 (not significant), meaning a better running attack doesn’t result in better play-action passing.
https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/setting-up-play-action-with-the-run-is-false

Thanks for posting this. Over the years, I have found nothing that fellow fans will fight me more on than this topic. And I get it, it makes logical sense that a better running attack would result in better play-action passing, but it just doesn’t.

I’m familiar with all of these articles, having read them myself and also sifting through the data on numerous occasions. I’ve looked at it from a season’s perspective, game perspective, drive-by-drive perspective, QB tier perspective, RB tier perspective and play-by-play perspective. Nothing exists. Play-action simply works because of the way a defense has to play ball. They are reading the offense, and each defensive call has run fits. If a defense doesn’t play those run fits, then you have a no-name, backup running back running all over you.

Play-action works because it creates conflict, the same reason why RPOs work. The mere threat of running the ball has to be respected, regardless of efficacy.

[Science Friction]

(09-13-2022, 09:21 AM)impactplaya Wrote: The league has a years worth of film on
The Bengals offense playing at a high level.
Coaches are smart .they find weakness and exploit it.
That empty backfield formation that JB favors
So much the league will catch on.
It would not hurt Zac to use the TE to stay in and
Block. You can still create dynamic plays in a 1 and 2 TE
Sets.

Tre Flowers needs more playing time.everytime
He goes into a game,he locks down whoever he is assigned to.

I have loved Flowers all the way back to last year. Dude is a menace, whether on ST or on defense. Plays tough, hits hard.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(09-14-2022, 10:38 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Using the SIS DataHub, I pulled data from 2015-2019 to compare the relationship between a team’s EPA per Rush with their EPA per Play-Action Dropback. The results are in agreement with previous findings, as there’s very little relationship between the two. If we compare success rates, we see a slightly stronger relationship, though still weak by most standards.
https://cowboyswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/18/nfl-analytics-study-running-the-ball-play-action-success-mike-mccarthy-dallas-cowboys/

This is the main relationship of interest. Regardless of which of the six measures of rushing one chooses, there is no meaningful relationship between the effectiveness of play-action passing and a team's rushing statistics in the game to that point. Aside from a couple extreme cases with very small sample sizes (zero rushes or eight rushes in the previous 10 plays), there is no relationship in the data between the median, mean, or 75th percentile of yards gained and a team's previous rush attempts. This is consistent with the scatterplots of team rushing versus team play-action passing for entire seasons that were displayed in the beginning of this article.
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/rushing-success-and-play-action-passing

Research from both Hermsmeyer and Baldwin has shown that not only is play action much more effective than regular drop-back passing, it is also effective regardless of rushing attempts or rushing success.
https://theathletic.com/980870/2019/07/26/teams-dont-have-to-establish-the-run-to-win-games-and-the-analytics-proves-it-but-the-run-isnt-dead-either/

A study done by Sean Clements, who is now a data analyst for the Baltimore Ravens, found that establishing the run early in NFL games does not open the passing game later in games.
https://atbnetwork.com/2022/07/01/does-running-the-ball-set-up-the-pass/


As you can see, the data points are all over the place, indicating there really isn’t any correlation between rushing efficiency and play-action efficiency.  Indeed, the correlation is p = .1477 (not significant), meaning a better running attack doesn’t result in better play-action passing.
https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/setting-up-play-action-with-the-run-is-false

Okay, so no point in anything is all I got from this...

You would think being good at something would result in something good.