Brian Callahan going OFF on the offense

[Bengalstripes9]

"Would consider going under center more."

I really don't like this idea. We suck running from the I formation. Defenses know it's going to be a run and stop it most of the time.
Sunday we had a 3rd and 1 and tried to run from the I formation and it got stuffed.
Burrow had a look like he wished he would have audibled to a pass.
It's too predictable.

We did a great job last year when we switched to shotgun as our base and ran the ball very effectively out of shotgun because it kept the defense off balance.
This year we are struggling throwing the ball and we don't have a quick back like Perine that can also block well.

In general they need to get more creative on offense--but not with slow-developing plays (and defintinely not bringing Chase into the backfield).

Throwing the ball to the running back.
Quick hitters.
Quick runs on downs and formations the defense may not expect a run.
Using motion.

The biggest issue with the offense is it's stale and predictable.
The bye is a good time to blow it up and look at what works--and what other teams are doing well also.

I think we need to run more often too. Need to find ways to run even out the run/pass percentage.
This will be tought against the 9ers because they are great against the run.
Hopefully we can do it creatively when they don't expect it to give us an edge.

[brian5562]

Have to be more willing to attack the middle of the field in the passing game. So much of the passing game currently is outside the numbers. The middle of the field is there for the taking.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Maybe we should just have Brian Callahan OFF the offense?

[*psychdoctor*]

(10-16-2023, 06:00 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Please promote Tanner Hudson or find another TE to add via trade or off the street.
Smith is useless.
Sample is contributing as a blocker but not as a receiver.
Bengals could use another option to help get the offense going.

Agree.  Irv Smith is waste of roster spot.  

[*ochocincos*]

We heard during the Dalton era that an offense shouldn't need a full set of strong weapons and good OL to be effective.
Having a good QB and just 2 offensive weapons and just a decent OL should be enough that you can be top half of league with some cheaper veterans and/or mid-late round draft picks.
The Bengals should be able to be a Top 10 offense with Burrow, Chase, and Higgins. Add in Boyd and Mixon and this should easily be a Top 5 offense.

[Joelist]

Once Burrow gets his accuracy fixed a lot of this goes away.

[*ochocincos*]

(10-18-2023, 04:49 PM)Joelist Wrote: Once Burrow gets his accuracy fixed a lot of this goes away.

Burrow has >65% accuracy in 4 games this season, including the last 3.

With that said, should it all have to fall on Burrow being so incredibly accurate and being so mobile to keep this offense from moving like a boulder?

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(10-18-2023, 05:34 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Burrow has >65% accuracy in 4 games this season, including the last 3.

With that said, should it all have to fall on Burrow being so incredibly accurate and being so mobile to keep this offense from moving like a boulder?

Burrow at just 3.6 is averaging half a yard less of air yards per completion than the 2nd least and a full 2.0 yards less than 2022 and 2.8 less than 2021.

https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/comp---by-target-depth.html
In 2021 the league average completion % on a pass 3 yards deep was 73%. 4 yards deep was 75%. 

The Fisher Price's My First Dink and Dunk Passing Offense that the Bengals have run this year is inherently inclined towards a very high completion percentage.

It's also worth noting that even if we ignore the fact that dink and dunk passes are way more easily completed (and also gives your OL less opportunity to allow sacks) 65% completion isn't what it used to be. Derek Carr is at 65.0% completion and he's 19th in the NFL... and he's throwing the ball 2.1 air yards further per completion than Burrow.

Burrow's Cmp%+ is 95 (5% below league average) and his Y/A+ is 65 (35% below league average) this year. Inaccurate extreme dink-and-dunk.

[*ochocincos*]

(10-18-2023, 06:20 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Burrow at just 3.6 is averaging half a yard less of air yards per completion than the 2nd least and a full 2.0 yards less than 2022 and 2.8 less than 2021.

https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/comp---by-target-depth.html
In 2021 the league average completion % on a pass 3 yards deep was 73%. 4 yards deep was 75%. 

The Fisher Price's My First Dink and Dunk Passing Offense that the Bengals have run this year is inherently inclined towards a very high completion percentage.

It's also worth noting that even if we ignore the fact that dink and dunk passes are way more easily completed (and also gives your OL less opportunity to allow sacks) 65% completion isn't what it used to be. Derek Carr is at 65.0% completion and he's 19th in the NFL... and he's throwing the ball 2.1 air yards further per completion than Burrow.

Burrow's Cmp%+ is 95 (5% below league average) and his Y/A+ is 65 (35% below league average) this year. Inaccurate extreme dink-and-dunk.

Where someone falls in the rankings doesn't mean what they achieved is automatically good or bad.

For example, if you get a 60% on a test but 90% of the class did worse than you, does that mean you did well? No.
Or if you got a 93% on a test but over half the class did better than that, does that mean you did bad? No.

You measure on a static metric, not relative. At least I don't. 65% is good enough in my book. Always will be.

What matters more in this case is what you're also mentioning though - YPA.
Being 65% but only 4 YPA is different if 65% and 7 YPA.
The 65-7 is clearly better.
But what I was responding to was "bad accuracy." If that person thinks 65% is bad, that's on them. But I don't think that's bad.

[Luvnit2]

(10-16-2023, 10:00 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Mixon doesn't have elite speed. It's an issue.

Look around the league and you see most teams have at least 1 RB with elite speed or is a great 3rd round back like they have in KC. The Dolphins have multiple burners, one is hurt but a rookie stud.

The Bengals do not have a burner in the RB room on the 53 man or practice squad. Years ago, we had a guy like Ickey Woods with James Brooks along with Stanley Wilson who missed the super bowl due drugs.

Woods could line up as Fullback or a tailback. Brooks was a little, but tough to tackle RB with speed and great hands. Wilson had more speed than the other two.

We keep harping on Mixon and our running game, but refuse to admit teams who use a fullback have a better run offense, McCaffrey is a great back, but behind no FB at Carolina was inconsistent. Goes to SF and only injury can stop him. Ravens have dual FB threat that weighs almost 300 lbs. They run without elite RB's because they are great run blockers and use a FB.

Why do we refuse to use a FB? The thing about the NFL is the more options a team can game plan, the harder for them to be defended. I cringe when Joey B. goes to an empty backfield. I cringe when we have 3rd or 4th and 1 because I know we have to throw it to get a first down more often than not. Our team is not built for 3rd and 2 or 3rd and 1 and defenses know it.

I hope our coaching staff would be open to adding a FB to the roster in the future, they are not expensive and may have limited use in our offense, but when used, it would hopefully get those last 1 or 2 yards. In the interim, we have to have a great athlete on defense that could become a FB on the goal line or on crucial 3rd and one sitautions.

[reuben.ahmed]

The Bengals have the worst producing offense in the league (yards per game). The dolphins are the highest and are over 100 yards a game clear from 2nd place. They are crushing the league with speed. All we have is Ja'marr chase. We need speed and creativity. Mike McDaniels has his hands full with all his 22mph+ players lol.

That 70pt game they had 350 yards in the air and 350 yards on the ground. THREE HUNDRED FIFTY YARDS RUSHING! We need a fast RB. Elite speed.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(10-18-2023, 06:28 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Where someone falls in the rankings doesn't mean what they achieved is automatically good or bad.

For example, if you get a 60% on a test but 90% of the class did worse than you, does that mean you did well? No.
Or if you got a 93% on a test but over half the class did better than that, does that mean you did bad? No.

You measure on a static metric, not relative. At least I don't. 65% is good enough in my book. Always will be.

What matters more in this case is what you're also mentioning though - YPA.
Being 65% but only 4 YPA is different if 65% and 7 YPA.
The 65-7 is clearly better.
But what I was responding to was "bad accuracy." If that person thinks 65% is bad, that's on them. But I don't think that's bad.

Yes, it actually really does. Because you're in a class of 32 students competing over who is the best and you're better than 90% of them, you are not competing against an arbitrary pass/fail mark, so you're doing quite well. Some tests are easier than others, but it doesn't matter because if you're the best you're the best, and if you're the worst, you're the worst regardless if you're score is a 5% or a 95%.

Ken Anderson led the NFL in Cmp% in 1974 with 64.9% and the league average was 54.5%.
Derek Carr is 19th in the NFL in Cmp% in 2023 with 65.0% and the league average is 65.1%.

One guy was the best in the league and far above average, the other is below average.

Basing things off static metrics with no care for the times or the norm of the day is insanity that will lead to just horrible conclusions, man. It literally will not "always be" good. 65.0% completion is below league average in 2023, and it was below league average in 2020 too.

[KillerGoose]

(10-18-2023, 06:28 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Where someone falls in the rankings doesn't mean what they achieved is automatically good or bad.

For example, if you get a 60% on a test but 90% of the class did worse than you, does that mean you did well? No.
Or if you got a 93% on a test but over half the class did better than that, does that mean you did bad? No.

You measure on a static metric, not relative. At least I don't. 65% is good enough in my book. Always will be.

What matters more in this case is what you're also mentioning though - YPA.
Being 65% but only 4 YPA is different if 65% and 7 YPA.
The 65-7 is clearly better.
But what I was responding to was "bad accuracy." If that person thinks 65% is bad, that's on them. But I don't think that's bad.

Your test example doesn't work as well compared to the NFL. With a test, you always measure statically because there an established scale to grading. The reason a 60% isn't good is because we know exactly where it falls on that scale. However, in the NFL, that scale only exists relatively - there is no static scale, and the scale changes over time. 

If I go back to 1990 and score an 80% on a test, that 80% is viewed the same in 2023. However, if Joe Burrow goes back to 1971 and completes 65% of his passes, that 65% is viewed very different than it is in 2023. In 1971, 65% is comfortably leading the league. In 2023, it is tied for 19th. In this situation, good and bad are all relative. In order to be good, someone else has to be bad because a static scale doesn't exist. 

As far as accuracy goes, I think there are better metrics that can be used to try to account for how accurate a QB is. PFF's adjusted completion percentage is a pretty good one. It accounts for drops, batted passes, spikes and throwaways. Essentially, all "aimed" passes downfield. 

[reuben.ahmed]

(10-17-2023, 10:14 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: That's REALLY easy to say in hindsight. Truth of the matter is that the Bengals defense was playing just as good as the Seahawks. No guarantee the Seahwaks would have 1. gotten the ball back and 2. "marched right down the field" into field goal range. 

I have zero issue with them going for the win in that situation. 

They were marching all game. Bengals sputtered for the half, it wasn't just 1 drive the Bengals O was doing nothing. Higher chance Burrow had a 15 second drive or a game ending drive in that situation (try not to think of hindsight lol)?

Seattle had almost 400 yards of offense, almost double our yards. They were marching, don't have to take it from me, you can look at the stats and hear multiple defensive players talk after the game about giving up yards but not points.

I agree in hindsight it's easy to see that but Seattle was moving the ball and we were not. I predicted a 3 and out but not 15 seconds worth lol

[WeezyBengal]

(10-18-2023, 07:06 PM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: The Bengals have the worst producing offense in the league (yards per game). The dolphins are the highest and are over 100 yards a game clear from 2nd place. They are crushing the league with speed. All we have is Ja'marr chase. We need speed and creativity. Mike McDaniels has his hands full with all his 22mph+ players lol.

That 70pt game they had 350 yards in the air and 350 yards on the ground. THREE HUNDRED FIFTY YARDS RUSHING! We need a fast RB. Elite speed.

All of you guys saying they don't have speed...

YES they do. Their 2023 draft class is dripping with it. Charlie Jones has great speed, Chase Brown has Elite speed, and Yoshi has elite speed. 

They basically drafted purely for speed. Look up the RAS scores. 

The problem is that they refuse to give these guys any opportunities. The thing this offense is lacking is literally sitting there on the bench. 

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(10-18-2023, 07:13 PM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: They were marching all game. Bengals sputtered for the half, it wasn't just 1 drive the Bengals O was doing nothing. Higher chance Burrow had a 15 second drive or a game ending drive in that situation (try not to think of hindsight lol)?

Seattle had almost 400 yards of offense, almost double our yards. They were marching, don't have to take it from me, you can look at the stats and hear multiple defensive players talk after the game about giving up yards but not points.

I agree in hindsight it's easy to see that but Seattle was moving the ball and we were not. I predicted a 3 and out but not 15 seconds worth lol

That's their philosophy. Keep everything in front of you, then clamp down inside the red where the offense doesn't have as much space to operate out of. They give you a couple or three three and outs, FGs instead of TDs, and you should win. If you can score...

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-18-2023, 05:34 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Burrow has >65% accuracy in 4 games this season, including the last 3.

With that said, should it all have to fall on Burrow being so incredibly accurate and being so mobile to keep this offense from moving like a boulder?

When they only rush the ball 15 times during the Seattle game it falls on Burrow.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-18-2023, 12:23 PM)Bengalstripes9 Wrote: "Would consider going under center more."

I really don't like this idea. We suck running from the I formation. Defenses know it's going to be a run and stop it most of the time.
Sunday we had a 3rd and 1 and tried to run from the I formation and it got stuffed.
Burrow had a look like he wished he would have audibled to a pass.
It's too predictable.

We did a great job last year when we switched to shotgun as our base and ran the ball very effectively out of shotgun because it kept the defense off balance.
This year we are struggling throwing the ball and we don't have a quick back like Perine that can also block well.

In general they need to get more creative on offense--but not with slow-developing plays (and defintinely not bringing Chase into the backfield).

Throwing the ball to the running back.
Quick hitters.
Quick runs on downs and formations the defense may not expect a run.
Using motion.

The biggest issue with the offense is it's stale and predictable.
The bye is a good time to blow it up and look at what works--and what other teams are doing well also.

I think we need to run more often too. Need to find ways to run even out the run/pass percentage.
This will be tought against the 9ers because they are great against the run.
Hopefully we can do it creatively when they don't expect it to give us an edge.

Well I imagine they would also throw from under center more often.

[Bengal Dude]

(10-18-2023, 11:10 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: It has everything to do with how they have drafted. You wouldn't have to go out and aquire outside help if you would have drafted better. 

The drafting has been terrible but so had the coaching. Both things are true. 

Who does the drafting fall on? That's my biggest question. Is it more Duke getting his guys? Are they drafting guys Pollack wants? I know they brought in Paul Alexander as a consultant for the Carman pick. Who's it fall on?

Definitely falls on Duke. It was talked about during the Marvin 2.0 era, that Marvin wanted the coaches to have more say in prospects and who got drafted. Towards the end of his tenure here, it seemed like it became Duke vs. Marvin in the war room. I believe when Zac came on board, it was known that Duke was going to be the head honcho in the draft process. Zac has mentioned before that Duke comes to the coaches with the prospects in January/February and then the coaches work from there, but Duke is the one in charge on draft day.

[Bilbo Saggins]

Maybe they should just go run run curl punt?  Has anyone ever considered this?