***Week 3 GameDay Thread - Bengals @ Bills***

[Fan_in_Kettering]

(09-22-2019, 06:06 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The OL is plenty bad, but Dalton is also a terrible fit. We need a much more athletic QB that can make plays on the move, or a big strong QB like Allen that is extremely hard to bring down.

Do you ever notice the horrendous run blocking or do you only pay attention on pass plays?

[Nicomo Cosca]

(09-22-2019, 06:08 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: Do you ever notice the horrendous run blocking or do you only pay attention on pass plays?

Your reading comprehension is poor, I JUST said the OL is bad. With that said Mixon averaged 4.1 yds today. Baby steps.

[Fan_in_Kettering]

(09-22-2019, 06:10 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Your reading comprehension is poor, I JUST said the OL is bad. With that said Mixon averaged 4.1 yds today. Baby steps.

That’s all he can take behind that line: Baby steps. Today was indeed better; you’re right about that.

[Timanky12]

(09-22-2019, 05:37 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yep - We lack playmakers on defense in a huge way. At all levels.

On offense, the line is bad...and we obviously don't have an elite QB.

I keep drinking the kool-aid thinking it’s got to change eventually but it never does.. They give you a chance to root for them, then they pull they rug out from under you. When will I learn and just pick another team and move on, I give up.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-22-2019, 06:07 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I thought play started at the 33 yard line, 20 and inside is the redzone.. Trash away, but do it with facts, not lies.

lol. wow. 

I had to go back and look and the ball was actually snapped at the 28 and the pass was tipped at the 18. I was thinking the ball was snapped at the 18.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-22-2019, 05:57 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: A three dimensional vector space.

(09-22-2019, 06:06 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Thank you. I was going to ask him to ask you to explain what happens when velocity is added to a trajectory that causes a 6'5" man to have to jump and extend his arms behind his head to catch a football that's thrown from 10 yards away. 

You know the math way better than i do. I just know it doesn't work out well for the receiver.

But more to my point, i was trying to get him to realize that "2 hands on the ball=should catch, full stop" is not right because, in that...(keep in mind, i'm trying to explain this in layman's terms and i'm probably going to butcher it) three dimensional vector space, vector A (the flight of the ball), when it reaches it's coordinates (a1+a2+a3 (?) gives a statistical probability of a successful completion between 0-100. Taking the human element out of it--knowing that a receiver can drop a perfect throw--the coordinates of vector A (this is where i start to get fuzzy--because i'm imagining a bullseye being in the place of the receiver but i don't know if there's a technical term for it), when they get further away from the "center", cause the statistical probability of a successful catch to drop. When you add velocity to vector A, that causes the statistical probability to drop further (when we put the human element back in--with the ability to grasp the ball). 

So....*exhales*, physically speaking, using (added) velocity + trajectory (away from center), the likelihood of a successful catch drops dramatically when the tail and the head of vector A are a shorter distance AND the coordinates are further away from center (and that's not even taking into account that the receiver is moving laterally to the vector of the ball). 

That's kind of what NextGen stats do. They calculate the statistical probability of a catch based on the conditions. 

FTR, i'm 82% tempted to not hit "post reply" because i don't know if what i typed makes a damn bit of sense, physically and as a mathematical equation.

[swilson3828]

(09-22-2019, 05:24 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Getting a new HC didn't fix things and we aren't getting any new FO personnel, so people have to hope for some sort of plausible change.

 A head coach gets his players into a position to win, but the players have to make the plays.  The Bengals frustration over the last several years.....there are still a few common denominators left, and until they're gone we, as Bengals fans, get what we get.  I didn't see or listen to the game but for some reason I have a feeling Kirkpatrick was involved negatively on the Bills final scoring drive.

[reuben.ahmed]

can't win when you only play 1 half, nothing going on here this year

[Fan_in_Kettering]

(09-22-2019, 07:32 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: But more to my point, i was trying to get him to realize that "2 hands on the ball=should catch, full stop" is not right because, in that...(keep in mind, i'm trying to explain this in layman's terms and i'm probably going to butcher it) three dimensional vector space, vector A (the flight of the ball), when it reaches it's coordinates (a1+a2+a3 (?) gives a statistical probability of a successful completion between 0-100. Taking the human element out of it--knowing that a receiver can drop a perfect throw--the coordinates of vector A (this is where i start to get fuzzy--because i'm imagining a bullseye being in the place of the receiver but i don't know if there's a technical term for it), when they get further away from the "center", cause the statistical probability of a successful catch to drop. When you add velocity to vector A, that causes the statistical probability to drop further (when we put the human element back in--with the ability to grasp the ball). 

So....*exhales*, physically speaking, using (added) velocity + trajectory (away from center), the likelihood of a successful catch drops dramatically when the tail and the head of vector A are a shorter distance AND the coordinates are further away from center (and that's not even taking into account that the receiver is moving laterally to the vector of the ball). 

That's kind of what NextGen stats do. They calculate the statistical probability of a catch based on the conditions. 

FTR, i'm 82% tempted to not hit "post reply" because i don't know if what i typed makes a damn bit of sense, physically and as a mathematical equation.

I get it. You’re adding vectors in three space. The resultant of the addition of two vectors is another vector. The magnitude of the new vector will be the difference between the trajectory and the intended aiming point.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-22-2019, 08:05 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: I get it.  You’re adding vectors in three space.  The resultant of the addition of two vectors is another vector.  The magnitude of the new vector will be the difference between the trajectory and the intended aiming point.

I think i was just looking for a yes or no. lol  

But what i'm getting at is, the additional vectors have different directions but the magnitude remains essentially the same. Each vector gives a different probability of success, in terms of how easy or hard the ball would be to catch. Does that make sense, or does using vectors and velocity not really work with what i'm trying to say?

We're kind of getting away from the intent of the post, but this stuff interests me. 

[Timanky12]

Daniel Jones the Qb the bengals were interested in the draft, wins his first game with the giants. Thanks bengals for passing on him, we still got Mandy as our Qb.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(09-22-2019, 08:54 PM)Timanky12 Wrote: Daniel Jones the Qb the bengals were interested in the draft, wins his first game with the giants. Thanks bengals for passing on him, we still got Mandy as our Qb.

Wait...you’re allowed to replace a veteran QB who’s had some success in the league with a rookie in the middle of the season??

Has to be against some kind of rule...

[Timanky12]

(09-22-2019, 09:20 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Wait...you’re allowed to replace a veteran QB who’s had some success in the league with a rookie in the middle of the season??

Has to be against some kind of rule...

You mean replace a Qb who won a super bowl with a rookie Qb. Who would of thought.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(09-22-2019, 09:26 PM)Timanky12 Wrote: You mean replace a Qb who won a super bowl with a rookie Qb. Who would of thought.

2 actually...

[Timanky12]

Bingo

[Timanky12]

We give all that money to Gino Atkins and Dunlap, and never hear their names mentioned in the game until they come out for an injury. Where are they? Money well spent , as usual.

[Timanky12]

Bengals stadium is going to be pretty empty by the time bengals get back at 0-4. It s Goingto be like playing in a morgue. Good luck even giving away free tickets by then.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(09-22-2019, 09:32 PM)Timanky12 Wrote: We give all that money to Gino Atkins and Dunlap, and never hear their names mentioned in the game until they come out for an injury. Where are they? Money well spent , as usual.

Geno had a sack, and forced the throw that Phillips picked off. He had a decent game.

Dunlap looked slow, and not himself to me. Even before he got banged up on that one play.

[reuben.ahmed]

I'm usually mad about Geno not producing stats but he statistically did pretty well that game.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-22-2019, 05:27 PM)Synric Wrote: If it hits both hands its catchable...was it a great throw no but it was catchable. Doesnt change the fact they had 0 points and 0 first downs in the first half.

I wonder if this was that pass that was "catchable" that Tate apparently got both hands on...



Looks kind of like a pass that was high and behind his head, just like i said.