Mixon severely underutilized in passing game

[Fullrock]

Saw this stat on Twitter. Mixon is averaging 8 pass routes run per game. 8!?!
To put that in perspective, Leveon Bell averages 24. Gurley and Kamara 20+
Most effective pass catching backs are between 15-21
Joe gets 8 despite the Bengals trailing on nearly 77 percent of their offensive snaps. Mind-blowing.

I realize with a bad offensive line he's probably being asked to block more than other RB's, but this is just an obsurd under-utilization of the skill set of your top offensive player on the field.

[mhbsavant]

(10-17-2019, 10:17 AM)Fullrock Wrote: Saw this stat on Twitter. Mixon is averaging 8 pass routes run per game. 8!?!
To put that in perspective, Leveon Bell averages 24. Gurley and Kamara 20+
Most effective pass catching backs are between 15-21
Joe gets 8 despite the Bengals trailing on nearly 77 percent of their offensive snaps. Mind-blowing.

I realize with a bad offensive line he's probably being asked to block more than other RB's, but this is just an obsurd under-utilization of the skill set of your top offensive player on the field.

The Bengals have underutilized players for years. It's the only reason that Pittsburgh was able to use a middle school offensive attack and beat the Bengals. Noticed how they used what they had..

Bernard is a high paid blocking back... In NewEngland he gets 60 catches a year...book it!

Mixon is a REAL NICE receiving back, yet, he gets only 8 passing routes a game

Brandon Wilson return like 6 kicks and punts in college for a touchdown..yet, no returns in 2017 and 2018
Darrius Philips returned like 5 interceptions and kick returns in college, yet no real returns in 2018

We have no use for Eifert in goal line situations...

Ross fumbled in one game and was made to sit the whole year...

No use for Finley or Dolegala

You know what, watching the Bengals the first 4 games (Haven't watched the last 2 games, I'm over it) and for the last few years you get the sense that they are undefeated and they have no use for certain guys. Funny how they are not trying to discover the spark amongst an unused or an under-utilized player.

I hope they go 0-16

HEADS need to roll 

[THE PISTONS]

Don't worry...we'll hire a young coach who has a modern NFL mind that figures out how to use all of these guys.

[*ochocincos*]

(10-17-2019, 10:17 AM)Fullrock Wrote: Saw this stat on Twitter. Mixon is averaging 8 pass routes run per game. 8!?!
To put that in perspective, Leveon Bell averages 24. Gurley and Kamara 20+
Most effective pass catching backs are between 15-21
Joe gets 8 despite the Bengals trailing on nearly 77 percent of their offensive snaps. Mind-blowing.

I realize with a bad offensive line he's probably being asked to block more than other RB's, but this is just an obsurd under-utilization of the skill set of your top offensive player on the field.

Indeed.

8 pass routes and only up to 5 targets per game. For a team lacking healthy WRs and not having enough time for receivers to get downfield, they need to get their RBs more involved in the passing game. They also could get a true FB (only 3 teams utilize a FB and all 3 have great records) to improve the run game.

[THE PISTONS]

(10-17-2019, 10:55 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Indeed.

8 pass routes and only up to 5 targets per game. For a team lacking healthy WRs and not having enough time for receivers to get downfield, they need to get their RBs more involved in the passing game. They also could get a true FB (only 3 teams utilize a FB and all 3 have great records) to improve the run game.

Isn't a foundation of the WC offense using short passes to augment runs. IF you can't run the ball, some short passes to the RB's seem like a way to go.

[Au165]

If he isn't running a route and he is in the game that means he is blocking, you know because the O line with a 4th string LT needs a little extra help. Running five out on routes with a patch work O line is how you get your QB killed. I actually wonder how many times he has had check and release routes where he simply couldn't release because of the need to block.

[Fullrock]

(10-17-2019, 10:55 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Indeed.

8 pass routes and only up to 5 targets per game. For a team lacking healthy WRs and not having enough time for receivers to get downfield, they need to get their RBs more involved in the passing game. They also could get a true FB (only 3 teams utilize a FB and all 3 have great records) to improve the run game.

Totally agree with the FB comment, especially for a team with a bad offensive line. Unfortunately, there isn't one on the roster, but you could always use that 2nd rounder Drew Sample as a lead blocking FB and at least get something out of his amazing blocking ability...

[*ochocincos*]

(10-17-2019, 10:58 AM)Au165 Wrote: If he isn't running a route and he is in the game that means he is blocking, you know because the O line with a 4th string LT needs a little extra help. Running five out on routes with a patch work O line is how you get your QB killed. I actually wonder how many times he has had check and release routes where he simply couldn't release because of the need to block.

I fully believe that's part of it. However, Bernard is also a good blocker and pass catcher. Deploy both in the game, have one stay in to block and the other go out on a route. Change up who it is periodically to keep the defense guessing. That way, you also get some use out of your newly-extended (backup) RB along with your starter.

[Fullrock]

(10-17-2019, 10:58 AM)Au165 Wrote: If he isn't running a route and he is in the game that means he is blocking, you know because the O line with a 4th string LT needs a little extra help. Running five out on routes with a patch work O line is how you get your QB killed. I actually wonder how many times he has had check and release routes where he simply couldn't release because of the need to block.

It's the offensive coaching staff's job to figure out how to get him the ball despite the offensive line. There are things that can be done with some creativity. Unfortunately, there has been none. 

[Au165]

(10-17-2019, 11:04 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I fully believe that's part of it. However, Bernard is also a good blocker and pass catcher. Deploy both in the game, have one stay in to block and the other go out on a route. Change up who it is periodically to keep the defense guessing. That way, you also get some use out of your newly-extended (backup) RB along with your starter.

I'd rather have WR's running routes if the idea is just to have people run routes. Just having a HB run routes for the sake of it doesn't really provide a lot of value, especially compared to a guy who all they do is run routes. The value of a back in game that can catch is a mismatch because the other team has to match personnel. Since we can't run they can go lighter personnel nullifying the value of a pass catching back. If you have two backs in and you are three wide you lose your TE who you probably need attached to one of our bad tackles for a chip. A back coming to help from space isn't as effective as an attached TE. If you keep the TE then you have two wide, but with has bad as our run game has been you can still run nickel personnel and let the slot corner take the back out to the strong side which loses you that mismatch.

I'm just saying this all sounds cool, but it comes back to the fact that our line is bad. We need them to pass block in general so that limits you but we also can't run therefor we can't demand the mismatches that makes this whole thing valuable. Gurley for example usually runs a flat route of a PA outside zone leaving him in the flat while the LB's get sucked into the wash to fill gaps. If you don't have to fill gaps because the run game isn't a threat you scrape with depth and get out wide. 

[Au165]

(10-17-2019, 11:05 AM)Fullrock Wrote: It's the offensive coaching staff's job to figure out how to get him the ball despite the offensive line. There are things that can be done with some creativity. Unfortunately, there has been none. 

Why is getting him a ball in the passing game a priority? The disconnect here is you think that is more valuable than keeping the QB upright, which is the disconnect. Priority one is always to get the ball off and we struggle to do that. As I said, without knowing the call I'd venture to say the HB's are on a decent amount of check and release routes where they are being forced to stay in because of pressure not by play call.

[*ochocincos*]

(10-17-2019, 11:11 AM)Au165 Wrote: I'd rather have WR's running routes if the idea is just to have people run routes. Just having a HB run routes for the sake of it doesn't really provide a lot of value, especially compared to a guy who all they do is run routes. The value of a back in game that can catch is a mismatch because the other team has to match personnel. Since we can't run they can go lighter personnel nullifying the value of a pass catching back. If you have two backs in and you are three wide you lose your TE who you probably need attached to one of our bad tackles for a chip. A back coming to help from space isn't as effective as an attached TE. If you keep the TE then you have two wide, but with has bad as our run game has been you can still run nickel personnel and let the slot corner take the back out to the strong side which loses you that mismatch.

I'm just saying this all sounds cool, but it comes back to the fact that our line is bad. We need them to pass block in general so that limits you but we also can't run therefor we can't demand the mismatches that makes this whole thing valuable. Gurley for example usually runs a flat route of a PA outside zone leaving him in the flat while the LB's get sucked into the wash to fill gaps. If you don't have to fill gaps because the run game isn't a threat you scrape with depth and get out wide. 

I think Mixon and Bernard are better receivers than the back-end WRs the Bengals have.

[Au165]

(10-17-2019, 11:18 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I think Mixon and Bernard are better receivers than the back-end WRs the Bengals have.

Yea, that's a big no. Especially when they aren't going to offer anything intermediate as that is a refined route running skill. If a HB splits wide you are looking at drag/slant/hitch or vertical. You play inside leverage and get hands on them as long as they aren't a burner and run trail. If you're a corner and you get beat by a comeback/curl/dig by a HB you probably are getting cut. 

[*ochocincos*]

(10-17-2019, 11:23 AM)Au165 Wrote: Yea, that's a big no. Especially when they aren't going to offer anything intermediate as that is a refined route running skill. If a HB splits wide you are looking at drag/slant/hitch or vertical. You play inside leverage and get hands on them as long as they aren't a burner and run trail. If you're a corner and you get beat by a comeback/curl/dig by a HB you probably are getting cut. 

Well all the receivers aside from Boyd and now Tate aren't doing jack, so they need to find better pass catchers or utilize their players better. Whatever it takes to get more production. That's all I (and most fans) care about.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(10-17-2019, 11:26 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Well all the receivers aside from Boyd and now Tate aren't doing jack, so they need to find better pass catchers or utilize their players better. Whatever it takes to get more production. That's all I (and most fans) care about.

Erickson had a good game last week.

We all know he isn't burning by anybody, but great, precise routes and hands are his forte.

[THE PISTONS]

(10-17-2019, 11:04 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I fully believe that's part of it. However, Bernard is also a good blocker and pass catcher. Deploy both in the game, have one stay in to block and the other go out on a route. Change up who it is periodically to keep the defense guessing. That way, you also get some use out of your newly-extended (backup) RB along with your starter.

I've pointed this out too. There are things from a scheme perspective that could be done. These coaches just haven't figured them out.

[Pat5775]

(10-17-2019, 11:32 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I've pointed this out too. There are things from a scheme perspective that could be done. These coaches just haven't figured them out.

Simply put, this team is still horribly coached. And it’s the obvious, easy stuff they keep screwing up. It’s like Marvin never left.

[*ochocincos*]

(10-17-2019, 11:31 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Erickson had a good game last week.

We all know he isn't burning by anybody, but great, precise routes and hands are his forte.

He basically puts up pass-catching RB numbers. But if he's in over Mixon or Bernard, it's more obvious what's going to be called, as he isn't going to pass block or rush with the ball. At least with having both Mixon and Bernard in, you don't know which one (if either) will run with the ball, go out for a pass, or help block.

Bottom line is I don't see Erickson offering as much on offense as either Mixon or Bernard will.
Not changing my mind on that.

[THE PISTONS]

(10-17-2019, 11:45 AM)Pat5775 Wrote: Simply put, this team is still horribly coached. And it’s the obvious, easy stuff they keep screwing up. It’s like Marvin never left.

Honestly, I think they were coached way better under Marvin all but the last year or so...and I think some of that was the assistants.

[RunKijanaRun]

It's easy and fun to keep piling on Taylor, and some of it is deserved.

He hired perhaps the worst collection of assistants in NFL history. Seriously. These guys are all useless.

But he's so freaking hamstrung by this offensive line and by missing his best WR, there's just not much he can do.

I know we all think we know more than coaches, but if there was something that could be figured out over coffee and a few chicken wings that would fix this, it would be done.

Now, if he doesn't at least show some improvement over the course of the season, I may join the ever-burgeoning Fire Zac contingency. But I'm nowhere near there yet. But his assistants? All of them - each and every one - should be gone.