1 versus 2

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(12-06-2020, 12:01 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Scoring is up around the league 12%?  That is your counter to the Bengals scoring 4 more points per game than the 2011 offense under Burrow?  Because "everyone knows it is much easier to score points now than in 2011?".

In 2011, the Bengals faces such juggernauts as a 2 win Browns team (twice), a 6 win Bills team. a 5 win Jags team. a 2 win Curtis Painter-led Colts team, a 7 win Tavarius Jackson-led Seahawks team, and a 2-win Rams team.  

1. Fast foward to 2020 and you see the AFC North is all playoff teams (except the Bengals) and you play them all twice.  The Colts, 2. Eagles, Chargers , and Washington Football Team have top-ranked defenses.   The only offenses I see on their 2020 schedule that are even below average is Jacksonville and Maybe Tennessee, at least while Burrow was playing.  

And 12% of 21.5 gives you 24.1 pts per game, not 25.5, but it is still a lame argument for this team given the different competition faced in 2020.  (EDIT:  The 2011 Bengals scored 20.8 points per game, and adding 12% to that would give you 23.3) The Matt Ryan example is especially pointless, as many teams have played a much more conservative game plan as metrics have shown them that the turnovers are what largely kill their team.  Look at the season DeShawn Watson is having.  A QB rating of 112.5 with a 69% completion %.  Sounds like he's headed to the playoffs and an All-Pro season, right?  Nope.  His QB rating is so high because he doesn't force passes and take any risks.  He tucks it down and runs.  Same with Jackson.  But then when they are behind and need to take chances they can't execute.  If you have a defense like pitt or even what baltimore was doing when healthy, you can do that, but at some point you are going to need to be more gunslinger and win some games.  But QB ratings being high across the board isn't a reflection of simply "offenses score more now", but a shift to game plans where they scheme folks open and don't take risks nearly as often.  


3. Alex Smith had a really good QB rating, but struggled in big games and playoffs because of this mentality.  I am not saying it is wrong (and I sure didn't see any conservative play from Burrow...that was smart for him to start and realize what NFL windows he could fit the ball in to) but it often yields artificially high QB ratings from garbage time where the QB would rather check it down and not force an INT.  

Lastly:  "The 2011 offense under Dalton was higher ranked than the 2020 offense under Burrow."  Wrong again, Fred.  The 2011 team averaged 20.8 points per game and was ranked 19th.  4. The 2020 Bengals were 25.5 points per game (under Burrow) which ranks them 16th in the league.  That 25.5 points is just .1 PPG behind Baltimore with the reigning MVP of the league, and .3 behind Miami at #14 overall.   In a league that you claim is "easier to score points" the Bengals have moved up on their peers in PPG while under Burrow.  

It's a bit post, and there's a lot wrong.... but here's a couple of the most important....

1. It's a whole lot easier to be a division of playoff teams when everyone gets 2 free wins per year off the Bengals. The Browns would be 6-5 if the Bengals won. Saying teams are good because they beat you (a team that is bad) is bad logic.

2. The Eagles have the 16th ranked scoring defense (and get to play 6 games against the worst division in NFL history). The Chargers have the 25th scoring defense in the NFL.

3. Alex Smith has a career 14 TD/2 INT in 7 playoff games, throwing for an average of ~250 yards per game. In the 5 times he's been to the playoffs, he has only struggled 1 time. If you took his average playoff stats and put them to a 16 game season, you would have a 32 TD/4.5 INT, ~4,000 yard season... and that's against playoff teams.

4. Your math is wrong somewhere, you should recheck it. The Bengals scored 21.3 points per game under Burrow (26th). Even if you don't want to count the Washington game (which you should, Burrow threw 34 times before getting hurt, and you already counted their defense earlier in your post) they still only scored 22.7 points per game (24th). Both of those are worse than the 2011 of 19th.

[*SHRacerX*]

(12-06-2020, 12:39 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: It's a bit post, and there's a lot wrong.... but here's a couple of the most important....

1. It's a whole lot easier to be a division of playoff teams when everyone gets 2 free wins per year off the Bengals. The Browns would be 6-5 if the Bengals won. Saying teams are good because they beat you (a team that is bad) is bad logic.

2. The Eagles have the 16th ranked scoring defense (and get to play 6 games against the worst division in NFL history). The Chargers have the 25th scoring defense in the NFL.

3. Alex Smith has a career 14 TD/2 INT in 7 playoff games, throwing for an average of ~250 yards per game. In the 5 times he's been to the playoffs, he has only struggled 1 time. If you took his average playoff stats and put them to a 16 game season, you would have a 32 TD/4.5 INT, ~4,000 yard season... and that's against playoff teams.

4. Your math is wrong somewhere, you should recheck it. The Bengals scored 21.3 points per game under Burrow (26th). Even if you don't want to count the Washington game (which you should, Burrow threw 34 times before getting hurt, and you already counted their defense earlier in your post) they still only scored 22.7 points per game (24th). Both of those are worse than the 2011 of 19th.

So much wrong in this post, but I will try to keep it organized:

Your first point:  1. It's a whole lot easier to be a division of playoff teams when everyone gets 2 free wins per year off the Bengals. The Browns would be 6-5 if the Bengals won. Saying teams are good because they beat you (a team that is bad) is bad logic.


Two free wins a year?  Burrow put up 30+ points on them and it took a last second TD to beat the Bengals.  Discrediting Cleveland because they beat the Bengals twice is stupid.  They only lost to Baltimore, pitt, and Las Vegas.  You might not want to admit it, but the Browns are very good.

Your second point:  2. The Eagles have the 16th ranked scoring defense (and get to play 6 games against the worst division in NFL history). The Chargers have the 25th scoring defense in the NFL.

Philly has the 14th ranked scoring defense, and they are 3rd in the league in sacks.  The Chargers lost their best player after playing the Bengals, but their defense has ranked historically higher when he was playing.  

Your third point:  3. Alex Smith has a career 14 TD/2 INT in 7 playoff games, throwing for an average of ~250 yards per game. In the 5 times he's been to the playoffs, he has only struggled 1 time. If you took his average playoff stats and put them to a 16 game season, you would have a 32 TD/4.5 INT, ~4,000 yard season... and that's against playoff teams.

Exactly, and how many games did he win?  He doesn't take chances when needed and is too conservative, something the QB rating rewards.  I guess you knew more than KC when they went for Mahommes and benched him.  Dumb move, KC. 

Your fourth point:  
[quote pid='960820' dateline='1607269173']
4. Your math is wrong somewhere, you should recheck it. The Bengals scored 21.3 points per game under Burrow (26th). Even if you don't want to count the Washington game (which you should, Burrow threw 34 times before getting hurt, and you already counted their defense earlier in your post) they still only scored 22.7 points per game (24th). Both of those are worse than the 2011 of 19th.
[/quote]

You are correct about the PPG.  I don't know what I left out, but 22.7 is correct.  So they ranked 19th in the league in PPG and the Bengals would have been 24th this year.  I still believe you have to take in to account the level of competition this year, and the matchups of a team like LA with Bosa and Philly with the #3 sack team in the NFL early.  Burrow scored 30 plus points four times in 8 games, the 2011 team only did it twice all year.  And the other point everyone seems to be forgetting is how much easier it is on an offense when you don't have to be one-dimensional and your defense gets stops on occasion.