A stud RB fixes a bunch of problems

[*Synric*]

(10-30-2024, 12:21 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: why waste draft picks on RBs when it's clearly a personell/scheme issue. Moss was average last year, he is now terrible this year. Mixon was bad last year, and now he's really good this year

look at the difference between saquon with the giants, and now saquon with the eagles. 

I doubt the Bengals want to spend money or high draft capital at RB with their pass heavy offense but Zach Moss will be in the final year of his deal in 2025 so the Bengals could look for his replacement day 3 of the deep 2025 RB class.

[Lucius Cincinnatus]

(10-30-2024, 12:09 PM)casear2727 Wrote: I never said Mixon is bad and Moss is good.  No idea why you would even say that?  Are you making something up or do you have me confused with someone else?

Neither are doing well in this offense, both did/are better in other offenses.  Not sure how you missed this?

Mixon was not getting yards after contact, Miss did.  Mixon didnt have any bursts, Moss did.  Mixon couldnt pass block, Moss does.

Ignoring advanced stats and going with the just the basics is laughable.

You literally said Mixon was bad last year on the Bengals and Moss was good last year on the Colts...they had essentially the same stats last year. You want advanced stats? Sure lol Mixon was better in 2023 than Moss was in the majority of categories...

Mixon:
- 2.6 yards before contact
- 1.4 yards after contact
- 25.7 atts/broken tackle (10 total broken tackles)
- 4.6 yards per touch
- Juke rate 17.2% (34th)
- 53 Evaded tackles (14th)
- 8 Breakaway runs (3.1%)
- Yards created 990 or 58.2 p/g (6th)
- Yards created per touch: 3.2 (35th)
Expected Points Added: -12.8 (110)
Average defenders in the box 6.4
- Stacked front Carry % (13.6% or 41st)
- Yards per Reception: 7.2 (18th)
- Yards per Route Run: 1.4 (16th)
- Catch Rate: 81.3% (13th)

Moss:
- 2.5 yards before contact
- 1.9 yards after contact
- 45.8 atts/broken tackle (4 total broken tackles)
- 4.7 yards per touch
- Juke Rate 15.2% (44th)
- 32 evaded tackles (36th)
- 7 Breakaway runs (3.8%)
- Yards created 613 or 43.8 y/g (36th)
- Yards created/touch: 2.92 (48th)
- Expected Points Added: -20.3 (124)
- Average defenders in the box: 6.4
- Stacked front Carry % (9.8% or 53th)
- Yards per reception: 7.1 (19th)
- Yards per route run: .95 (30th)
- Catch Rate: 73% (27th

It's laughable that you blindly hoped that the advanced stats would paint the picture you wanted without a clue if that was accurate or not. Please, share some advanced stats if you have them...this is what Pro Football Reference and Player Profiles has....

I'm not sure how you can look at the stats as a whole and say Mixon was bad last year and Moss was good last year. They were pretty even with Mixon probably being slightly better. 

[*Synric*]

PS. If you don't know who Iowa C Logan Jones is yet....

Logan Jones former defensive lineman. Holds the squat record at Iowa - think about how many elite players come from Iowa. Learn the name friends. pic.twitter.com/TbO9Ndo0Mr

— Mike (@MikeForcella) October 24, 2024

[SunsetBengal]

(10-30-2024, 01:16 PM)Synric Wrote: PS. If you don't know who Iowa C Logan Jones is yet....

Logan Jones former defensive lineman. Holds the squat record at Iowa - think about how many elite players come from Iowa. Learn the name friends. pic.twitter.com/TbO9Ndo0Mr

— Mike (@MikeForcella) October 24, 2024

That ain't no Billy Price fool's gold, either. Logan Jones is a guy that wakes up every day looking forward to seeing how many times he can put the guy across from him on the ground. Wouldn't surprise me one bit to find out he was a Championship Wrestler in HS, either. (he just looks like he has that sort of body control)

[casear2727]

Moss was a backup RB for the Colts and he is splitting time here.  The fact that you think Mixon, as the premier RB1, was so awesome the last couple of years is on you.  The entire focus of my comment was that the scheme, the play calling, and the oline are not good and thus backs will likely not perform well in this offense.  But you failed to grasp the point....

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(10-29-2024, 03:06 PM)Bengalfan4life27c Wrote: Lets face it we have a bottom 5 RB room I feel a stud RB would allow us to control TOP more open up the passing game and even protect a bad defense. This line isn't terrible best Zac has had nobody is afraid of our RB's

Yeah, it is time to add a stud RB. I really like Chase Brown and his explosiveness and Moss is harder to bring down than Mixon was for us 
but these guys aren't the answers for a 3 down RB. If we get a stud, this Offense will be much harder to plan against. We need a guy that
Defenses don't want to tackle that punishes Defenders and can also catch the ball out of the backfield.

[R3stangs]

(10-29-2024, 03:25 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: Hilarious post

Joe Mixon is a stud right now in Houston. He was terrible when he was here. Do the math

Got to agree here. Mixon is tearing it up behind a real line. Funny thinking he was the problem.

Everyone will struggle behind this line and scheme.

[TheCincinnatiKid]

This franchise absolutely needs to treat the run game with more respect. A run game that was even just average would help our offence a ton. Right now, every defence can virtually just send the DL after Burrow all game, because there's no need to respect our run game (outside of the occasional impressive burst from Chase Brown).

Unfortunately, planning has been Bengals 101 since Burrow got here. Rely on the star QB and WR to make it all happen. A rungame of any quality would take so much pressure off of the QB and we seemingly do nothing to try and make it work.

[Joelist]

The backs we have would look just fine in a legit offensive scheme. This is why Mixon looks so much better (and some of us called this when he was traded). Get under center a lot more, run power (actual drive power), run more as in 40% and both run and pass out of the same formation and finally break tendencies - run when expected to pass and vice versa SOME of the time. Make the defense actually have to guess instead of giving the play away and letting the defense pin its ears back.

[TheCincinnatiKid]

(10-30-2024, 02:58 PM)Joelist Wrote: The backs we have would look just fine in a legit offensive scheme. This is why Mixon looks so much better (and some of us called this when he was traded). Get under center a lot more, run power (actual drive power), run more as in 40% and both run and pass out of the same formation and finally break tendencies - run when expected to pass and vice versa SOME of the time. Make the defense actually have to guess instead of giving the play away and letting the defense pin its ears back.

I'm not convinced they would, but the Scheme certainly doesn't help. I do like Chase Brown but I don't personally see a guy there who'll be more than somebody who occasionally drops in a big run. I'm really not convinced Zack Moss is a particularly effective RB. 

I think Mixon was/could be a tier above the guys we have now, I never believed we were improving at RB. But I don't disagree the lack of respect we give to the importance of a proper run game is helpful.

[Lucius Cincinnatus]

(10-30-2024, 01:31 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Moss was a backup RB for the Colts and he is splitting time here.  The fact that you think Mixon, as the premier RB1, was so awesome the last couple of years is on you.  The entire focus of my comment was that the scheme, the play calling, and the oline are not good and thus backs will likely not perform well in this offense.  But you failed to grasp the point....

What does Moss (who started 8 games due to Taylor's injuries) being a back-up or splitting time have anything to do with the fact that you said he was good last year and Mixon was bad last year when essentially every stat (traditional or advanced) would tell you that they were very similar or Mixon is actually better? It's not like we are looking at just volume stats, we looked at the advanced stats like you suggested and Mixon was better in almost every single one....

When did I say anything about Mixon being awesome lol? It's so funny when people are called out for misinformation and then completely fabricate an argument to attempt to justify their comment. I never said Mixon was awesome, great, or even good. Simply that if you called Mixon "bad" last year, I'm not sure how you can possibly argue that Moss was "good". 

I didn't fail to grasp the point. The example you used to make your point was just blatantly false, hence my comment. I'm not sure why have failed to grasp reality...

[THE PISTONS]

(10-30-2024, 01:31 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Moss was a backup RB for the Colts and he is splitting time here.  The fact that you think Mixon, as the premier RB1, was so awesome the last couple of years is on you.  The entire focus of my comment was that the scheme, the play calling, and the oline are not good and thus backs will likely not perform well in this offense.  But you failed to grasp the point....

I saw something that under Shanahan, the 49ers have had a bunch of different RBs, some undrafted rush for 100 yards in a game.

I don't think the RB's are the issue here. I think it's the blockers and scheme, and willingness to call runs.

This was from October of last year: But Shanahan has coached five different running backs who have averaged 4.7 yards per carry in a season while sharing at least 27.5% of the 49ers’ carry distribution.

Kyle Shanahan turns average RBs into Derrick Henry, so why can’t the Browns run without Nick Chubb? -- Jimmy Watkins - cleveland.com

[*bfine32*]

One of the best RBs I ever watched in College was Leonard Fournette. The dude's had 12 carries since 2022.

I'd like to see if he could do anything with his LSU homies.

[SladeX]

No he doesn’t.
He just gets stuffed behind a line that can’t run block…

[*Synric*]

(10-30-2024, 02:58 PM)Joelist Wrote: The backs we have would look just fine in a legit offensive scheme. This is why Mixon looks so much better (and some of us called this when he was traded). Get under center a lot more, run power (actual drive power), run more as in 40% and both run and pass out of the same formation and finally break tendencies - run when expected to pass and vice versa SOME of the time. Make the defense actually have to guess instead of giving the play away and letting the defense pin its ears back.

What does the bolded mean? "Drive Power" isn't a play. The Bengals run a dominate gap/man rush offense.

[Boomer Anderson]

I'm not convinced that Derrick Henry could run behind our O-line and Pollack's goofy scheme.

[*bfine32*]

(10-30-2024, 04:28 PM)Synric Wrote: What does the bolded mean? "Drive Power" isn't a play. The Bengals run a dominate gap/man rush offense.

But it is one of my many good traits. 

[Frank Booth]

(10-30-2024, 04:29 PM)Boomer Anderson Wrote: I'm not convinced that Derrick Henry could run behind our O-line and Pollack's goofy scheme.

do you remember early derrick henry with the titans? very unproductive until they got the personnel and scheme change

[Joelist]

(10-30-2024, 04:28 PM)Synric Wrote: What does the bolded mean? "Drive Power" isn't a play. The Bengals run a dominate gap/man rush offense.

Basically stop being cute like we keep doing. We mix concepts a lot with some gap, some zone, pulling and other stuff. Pick an approach the linemen can do well and make it your signature. We have no identity on runs aside from trying to do them out of shotgun, not running a lot and telegraphing the play.

Also Drive Blocking has a definition:

• Drive block: One-on-one block used when a DL lines up directly over an offensive lineman. The OL drives his hips forward, delivering the block from a wide base while keeping his head up and shoulders square.
  

https://footballuniversity.org/technique-tuesday-offensive-line-blocking/

[Nicomo Cosca]

(10-30-2024, 04:29 PM)Boomer Anderson Wrote: I'm not convinced that Derrick Henry could run behind our O-line and Pollack's goofy scheme.

Mixon averaged 4.9 ypc the first time Pollack was here.