More Creativity Needed on Offense

[THE PISTONS]

I see teams like the Steelers that have backs that can catch and what they do is the bring them in motion and line them up at WR. Sometimes, they have an empty backfield with 5 WR's. Then the defense responds by going dime.

Other times, they motion the backs into the backfield and have 3-4 WRs/TEs and run the ball. The defense may have Dime coverage on the field so it creates a blocking advantage.

We have 2 really good receiving backs in Bernard and Mixon. I feel like a creative offensive coordinator would put them both on the field at the same time and move them around to exploit defenses.

Then you have Boyd in the slot. AJ Green going deep. Then you can use Ross on some creative plays too.

THAT would be a tough defense to stop!

Also, to get Ross open, bring him to the backfield sometimes and let him get 3-5 yards to run without being bumped.

Instead...after we were down to our 3rd TE, we ran the same plodding offense. We bring the TE in motion and when he gets near the tackle we snap the ball and run it. So predictable.

We definitely don't have a creative OC.

[Fan_in_Kettering]

With an offensive line made up of Waddle, Hold, Flinch, Lurch, and False Start, it’s hard to be creative. In fact, this reduces the playbook to a half sheet of ripped notebook paper.

I like the OP though. +1.

[THE PISTONS]

(12-17-2018, 01:05 AM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: With an offensive line made up of Waddle, Hold, Flinch, Lurch, and False Start, it’s hard to be creative.  In fact, this reduces the playbook to a half sheet of ripped notebook paper.  

I like the OP though.  +1.

Agreed. The line does need addressed. It's painfully obvious.

It's just a mix of bad personal and unimaginative coaching. Then when players get hurt, they run the same offense and don't adjust.

[impactplaya]

Lazor has really disappointed me. Yeah I get it the oline has been a factory of penalties. and the injuries are a factor.
but his offense is so predicatable based on yardage..persinal groupsings.
I even noticed the WRs run very basic vanilla routes that are easy for the db's to read

[No-huddle Joe]

(12-17-2018, 01:08 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Agreed. The line does need addressed. It's painfully obvious.

It's just a mix of bad personal and unimaginative coaching. Then when players get hurt, they run the same offense and don't adjust.

We don't need to adjust.  That's just a sound bite for the announcers.  Marv said so.  Just do your job.

[SunsetBengal]

More creativity? They're already working with an imaginary QB, receivers, and OL. Don't know how much more creative they can get..

[SnakeEyez925]

The offense looked more creative in the early stages of the season, maybe because it was "fresh" to most of us and they wrinkled in some cute stuff like RPO's with AD/AJ.. and the quick game with all of the bubble screens, etc.

But after the wins vs. Baltimore and Atlanta in September... the offense became clearly stagnant. Eifert, Mixon, and Price were both lost for long periods of time and it felt like the rug kinda got pulled from under the unit... they looked bad vs. Carolina and Pittsburgh despite the close scores.

I think it's a combination of two things: Defenses were able to digest the Bengals' offense at 4-1 after a month of the season and "catch up" to it. Lazor did make a conscious effort imo early on to "protect" his QB and mask the OLine with his quick and screen game. After a month, there was enough tape out there now that the rest of the NFL can see and adjust to what we were doing. The bubble screens, swing pass screens to Mixon, etc... none of that stuff has been "working" really anymore since early on. Teams like ours that struggle with running the ball, those passes are how Lazor was trying to compensate on early downs.

Additionally, after almost 10 years of the same scheme, the Bengals were doing some things differently and with their weapons healthy it was working. But that production began sinking into a trench from that point forward with the loss of Eifert (and to a lesser extent, Mixon.)
We've had no threat to control the middle of the field and our star RB being out pushed the safeties back out of the box. Then injuries have began piling up and the OLine began regressing back to the dumpster fire of 2017.

Yes, Mixon returned.. but we still can't consistently run the ball against any decent defense. The Raiders do not count.

It still starts with the offensive line. We get too many penalties and we get way too many defenders hitting our RB 2-3 yards in the backfield before he has a chance to even make a read or cut.

In no way am I defending Lazor, because while I was very pleased with how he was using the pieces when we were 4-1... I have seen a lot of why he also fell out of favor in Miami since then: He throws the ball way too much considering our personnel, and they just look too predictable. But it has been amplified by the weakness of our OLine and it's inability to control the LOS. As a unit they are better pass blockers than run blockers, so again we look pretty damn soft up front.

[Tomkat]

Incompletion on first down... brings up 2nd and 10.
GUESS WHAT THE NEXT PLAY WILL BE, 99% OF THE TIME?

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-18-2018, 09:49 AM)SnakeEyez925 Wrote: The offense looked more creative in the early stages of the season, maybe because it was "fresh" to most of us and they wrinkled in some cute stuff like RPO's with AD/AJ.. and the quick game with all of the bubble screens, etc.

But after the wins vs. Baltimore and Atlanta in September... the offense became clearly stagnant.  Eifert, Mixon, and Price were both lost for long periods of time and it felt like the rug kinda got pulled from under the unit... they looked bad vs. Carolina and Pittsburgh despite the close scores.

I think it's a combination of two things: Defenses were able to digest the Bengals' offense at 4-1 after a month of the season and "catch up" to it.  Lazor did make a conscious effort imo early on to "protect" his QB and mask the OLine with his quick and screen game.  After a month, there was enough tape out there now that the rest of the NFL can see and adjust to what we were doing.  The bubble screens, swing pass screens to Mixon, etc... none of that stuff has been "working" really anymore since early on.  Teams like ours that struggle with running the ball, those passes are how Lazor was trying to compensate on early downs.

Additionally, after almost 10 years of the same scheme, the Bengals were doing some things differently and with their weapons healthy it was working.  But that production began sinking into a trench from that point forward with the loss of Eifert (and to a lesser extent, Mixon.)
We've had no threat to control the middle of the field and our star RB being out pushed the safeties back out of the box.  Then injuries have began piling up and the OLine began regressing back to the dumpster fire of 2017.

Yes, Mixon returned.. but we still can't consistently run the ball against any decent defense.  The Raiders do not count.  

It still starts with the offensive line. We get too many penalties and we get way too many defenders hitting our RB 2-3 yards in the backfield before he has a chance to even make a read or cut.  

In no way am I defending Lazor, because while I was very pleased with how he was using the pieces when we were 4-1... I have seen a lot of why he also fell out of favor in Miami since then:  He throws the ball way too much considering our personnel, and they just look too predictable.  But it has been amplified by the weakness of our OLine and it's inability to control the LOS.  As a unit they are better pass blockers than run blockers, so again we look pretty damn soft up front.

Very well said my man.....and welcome to the board.

You are spot on, as far as I can tell.  I'd also point out something that I read in the preseason, and before Eifert went down, (and then Kroft) about the TEs.  Lazor said we were going to see a lot of the TE in this year's version of the offense.  Until after Atlanta, we did.  I recall seeing all three of them on the field at times, and a helluva lot of two TE sets.  That gives you a plethora of options in the run game and passing game.  It can help with the oline struggles as well, obviously.  Once Eifert and Kroft went out, that was it.

[fredtoast]

(12-18-2018, 10:04 AM)Tomkat Wrote: Incompletion on first down... brings up 2nd and 10.
GUESS WHAT THE NEXT PLAY WILL BE, 99% OF THE TIME?

This is a perfect example of fans thinking they know enough to criticize the coaches when they really don't understand what is happening.

Bengals have had a 2nd and 10 sixty-seven times this year and have called a pass over half of the time (36).  Bengals throw the ball 54% of the time on 2nd and 10 which is not that much different from the league average of 62%.

Over the years I have heard a lot of fans claiming they could always predict what play the offense was going to run, but in fact they don't know at all.

[*bengalfan74*]

With all the injuries and bad Oline we need more innovation, not less. And Lazor provides little to none. By and large this offense is stagnant, lifeless, and all to predictable.

It's a staple of Marvin Lewis lead teams, vanilla, safe. We either out execute the opposition or fail. Same thing on D, line up in base defense and do or die, little to no blitzing, little movement, disguise and so on.

This coaching staff has the creativity of a snail.

[fredtoast]

(12-18-2018, 11:26 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: It's a staple of Marvin Lewis lead teams, vanilla, safe.

This is getting funny.

Remember when all the fans were complaining about Hue getting "too cute" with all his different formations and pre-snap motion.  Back then everyone was saying "That fancy stuff doesn't win games.  We just need to execute and outplay the other teams instead of trying to trick them."

[Au165]

The problem is people complain when "creativity" doesn't work saying they are being too cute and call it gimmicky. Hue actually used to do a lot of what is in vogue today a few years back and people thought it was just a gimmick. Things like running a bunch of reverse actions on a lot of plays with an occasional hand off. People got mad when the hand off didn't gain much but they don't understand that it's window dressing because it moves responsibility across players. When you move responsibility between players you increase the odds of blown assignments.

The "Monster" formation that he used where he split linemen out had many reads and checks in it, but people got mad when they'd start in it and motion guys back in. The reason was it was a check that if a look wasn't there they checked out of. Later in the year they added some pop passes out of it beyond the screens with some success. If you were here though you'd remember a bunch of complaints about gimmick offenses and how they never work.

In the end the bread and butter of a lot of teams aren't the fancy window dressed up things. For instance the Rams run the same formation a majority of the time, 12 personnel tight, then they will show the same stretch play and either it's the hand off or it's a play action off it. It's not super creative, they just are really good at using this similar action in different ways. KC has kind of skewed people's idea of what effective offense is for a lot of people. I would simply be happy with a OC who embraces identifying a strength and finding different ways to use it, for instance positioning Boyd and Green to the same side creates a problem for safeties as it forces him to play one leaving the other single covered. Not fancy, just practical and Lazor started doing that a bit this year with AJ in the slot but we need more of that kind of thinking.

[*jason*]

(12-18-2018, 08:00 AM)No-huddle Joe Wrote: We don't need to adjust.  That's just a sound bite for the announcers.  Marv said so.  Just do your job.

Gotta clean some things up, and do a better job on 3rd down.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-18-2018, 11:52 AM)Au165 Wrote: The problem is people complain when "creativity" doesn't work saying they are being too cute and call it gimmicky. Hue actually used to do a lot of what is in vogue today a few years back and people thought it was just a gimmick. Things like running a bunch of reverse actions on a lot of plays with an occasional hand off. People got mad when the hand off didn't gain much but they don't understand that it's window dressing because it moves responsibility across players. When you move responsibility between players you increase the odds of blown assignments.

The "Monster" formation that he used where he split linemen out had many reads  and checks in it, but people got mad when they'd start in it and motion guys back in. The reason was it was a check that if a look wasn't there they checked out of. Later in the year they added some pop passes out of it beyond the screens with some success. If you were here though you'd remember a bunch of complaints about gimmick offenses and how they never work.

In the end the bread and butter of a lot of teams aren't the fancy window dressed up things. For instance the Rams run the same formation a majority of the time, 12 personnel tight, then they will show the same stretch play and either it's the hand off or it's a play action off it. It's not super creative, they just are really good at using this similar action in different ways. KC has kind of skewed people's idea of what effective offense is for a lot of people. I would simply be happy with a OC who embraces identifying a strength and finding different ways to use it, for instance positioning Boyd and Green to the same side creates a problem for safeties as it forces him to play one leaving the other single covered. Not fancy, just practical and Lazor started doing that a bit this year with AJ in the slot but we need more of that kind of thinking.

Amen about Hue Jackson.  For as much shit as he gets as a HC, I thought he was a damn fine OC.  I point to 2014 as a prime example.  No Eifert, no Marvin Jones, no AJ for a stretch, and we still won 10 games and scored enough, including 5 rushing TDs and a reception TD from our QB.  He had no choice other than to be creative, and he was.  2015 showed us what this offense can do with a full slate of playmakers.  Imagine if he had Joe Mixon.

Window dressing is important.  Not only does it give you looks during pre-snap, it sets up playcalling on down the line.  Very insightful and great post.

[*ochocincos*]

Need to remember that John Ross and Josh Malone were selected to fit in Zampese's offense, not Lazor's. That might be playing into why they are not being properly utilized now. I think they would be better utilized in a Hue Jackson offense.

[sandwedge]

(12-18-2018, 09:49 AM)SnakeEyez925 Wrote: The offense looked more creative in the early stages of the season, maybe because it was "fresh" to most of us and they wrinkled in some cute stuff like RPO's with AD/AJ.. and the quick game with all of the bubble screens, etc.

But after the wins vs. Baltimore and Atlanta in September... the offense became clearly stagnant.  Eifert, Mixon, and Price were both lost for long periods of time and it felt like the rug kinda got pulled from under the unit... they looked bad vs. Carolina and Pittsburgh despite the close scores.

I think it's a combination of two things: Defenses were able to digest the Bengals' offense at 4-1 after a month of the season and "catch up" to it.  Lazor did make a conscious effort imo early on to "protect" his QB and mask the OLine with his quick and screen game.  After a month, there was enough tape out there now that the rest of the NFL can see and adjust to what we were doing.  The bubble screens, swing pass screens to Mixon, etc... none of that stuff has been "working" really anymore since early on.  Teams like ours that struggle with running the ball, those passes are how Lazor was trying to compensate on early downs.

Additionally, after almost 10 years of the same scheme, the Bengals were doing some things differently and with their weapons healthy it was working.  But that production began sinking into a trench from that point forward with the loss of Eifert (and to a lesser extent, Mixon.)
We've had no threat to control the middle of the field and our star RB being out pushed the safeties back out of the box.  Then injuries have began piling up and the OLine began regressing back to the dumpster fire of 2017.

Yes, Mixon returned.. but we still can't consistently run the ball against any decent defense.  The Raiders do not count.  

It still starts with the offensive line. We get too many penalties and we get way too many defenders hitting our RB 2-3 yards in the backfield before he has a chance to even make a read or cut.  

In no way am I defending Lazor, because while I was very pleased with how he was using the pieces when we were 4-1... I have seen a lot of why he also fell out of favor in Miami since then:  He throws the ball way too much considering our personnel, and they just look too predictable.  But it has been amplified by the weakness of our OLine and it's inability to control the LOS.  As a unit they are better pass blockers than run blockers, so again we look pretty damn soft up front.

Pretty good read! The loss of Eifert really derailed the offense IMO. I was excited to see what Lazor was going to do, but I agree with a lot here, we've become very predictable.

[sandwedge]

(12-18-2018, 11:09 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is a perfect example of fans thinking they know enough to criticize the coaches when they really don't understand what is happening.

Bengals have had a 2nd and 10 sixty-seven times this year and have called a pass over half of the time (36).  Bengals throw the ball 54% of the time on 2nd and 10 which is not that much different from the league average of 62%.

Over the years I have heard a lot of fans claiming they could always predict what play the offense was going to run, but in fact they don't know at all.

Fred, not sure if you watched the Oakland game, but that is pretty much what we did on 2nd down.  2nd and long we ran the ball almost the entire game.

[Au165]

(12-18-2018, 12:49 PM)sandwedge Wrote: Fred, not sure if you watched the Oakland game, but that is pretty much what we did on 2nd down.  2nd and long we ran the ball almost the entire game.

I hate defending Fred, but.....

There were 21 occurrences of 2nd and at least 7 yards in the game last week. Of those 21 occurrences 11 of them were run plays and 10 of them were passes. Of the 11 run plays on 2nd and long, 8 occurred in the 2nd half while we were nursing a lead. Of the 6 pass attempts in the first half he didn't connect on 4 of them and took off on one, which probably changed the play calling post half.

In reality game situation dictated play calling on 2nd and long much more than anything. Early on we were passing on 2nd down in longer situations, but later in the game we were running which was probably more of an indictment on their trust in Driskel to manage longer passing situations. 

[Millhouse]

I haven't been the biggest Lazor fan by any means. But I think he called a good enough game against Oakland.

One gripe many have right now is why not use Triskel's athleticism more, in terms of rollouts/rpo/etc instead of just dropping back traditionally. But maybe Lazor just doesn't have that experience in calling an offense like that, or knowing how to design plays for that style of offense? I don't know.