I don't mind the 4th down call

[jwalker3853]

(09-12-2021, 09:45 PM)Trademark Wrote: I know a lot of people are criticizing it, but we have wanted an aggressive team for a while, so I don't mind the aggressive play calls at times. I did hate all of the run plays when we have offensive weapons galore, but regardless a win is a win.

I can't say that I am in love with the call.    I would really rather he be smarter about where, but at the time, we had momentum, the D was playing well and if Mixon hadn't stumbled, I don't know that we are still talking about this one.  

[Frank Booth]

(09-13-2021, 05:45 PM)spazz70 Wrote: Just listening to Dehener on 700 WLW.....He said it was a total analytics play and actually was the correct play.... He said it had a 1% higher win rate than punting and playing defense.

1% lol

We have one of the best punters in the league, and a defensive line that was destroying their offensive line

I really don’t want to hear analytics crap

Analytics would tell you that Russel bodine is an average center (he’s out of the league btw)

[*bfine32*]

It's amazing what we will complain about after a victory

FWIW: We just lost our shot at Kayvon Thibodeaux

[spazz70]

(09-13-2021, 05:48 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: and... ?

Why the hell don't teams do this kind of stuff all of the time then?

It can't be that great of a decision.

Not sure....I did not even know that they had an analytics coach.  I guess he and Zac or whomever take a whole day during the week and go over scenario after scenario.  

[JaggedJimmyJay]

(09-13-2021, 05:48 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: and... ?

Why the hell don't teams do this kind of stuff all of the time then?

It can't be that great of a decision.

They're doing it more and more.

Why didn't they do it all the time in the past?

Because they were morons with no basic understanding of math or probability. It's the same general mindset that eventually made Moneyball a movie.

[BengalsRocker]

(09-13-2021, 07:07 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: They're doing it more and more.

Why didn't they do it all the time in the past?

Because they were morons with no basic understanding of math or probability. It's the same general mindset that eventually made Moneyball a movie.

I know what analytics are.  You don't have to explain.

I just don't recall a bunch of "going for it on your own 30yd line with the lead and plenty of time left for your opponent" calls the past few years.

Unless

A - Your season record is trash
B - You're down 1-2 score with little time left
C - Better field position than 30yds
D - Your D is completely inept and you have no faith in them
E - You're an awful coach in desperation

[Frank Booth]

The people going with the “ANALYTICS ACTUALLY SAYS IT’S THE RIGHT MOVE” are the same people who repeat whatever pff says.

You can’t talk to these people. Logic states them right in the face, and they just ignore it.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

(09-13-2021, 07:20 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: The people going with the “ANALYTICS ACTUALLY SAYS IT’S THE RIGHT MOVE” are the same people who repeat whatever pff says.

You can’t talk to these people. Logic states them right in the face, and they just ignore it.

No. I tend to find PFF okay enough, but do not place a ton of value in their “grades”. They try.

That’s not the same thing as probabilistic analytics. That comparison is clueless.

[Frank Booth]

(09-13-2021, 07:23 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: No. I tend to find PFF okay enough, but do not place a ton of value in their “grades”. They try.

That’s not the same thing as probabilistic analytics. That comparison is clueless.

I wouldn’t hate the move to go for it if the bengals had a top 10 high powered offense, a bottom 10 defense, and a bad punter. Wouldn’t hate the move at all.

But like I said, the defense was keeping Minnesota’s offense in check, and Huber is a top 5 punter

[BengalsRocker]

(09-13-2021, 07:20 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: The people going with the “ANALYTICS ACTUALLY SAYS IT’S THE RIGHT MOVE” are the same people who repeat whatever pff says.

You can’t talk to these people. Logic states them right in the face, and they just ignore it.

I just don't see examples of this call being made by Zac like it's typical.

Going back to BB's call is an anomaly in my opinion.

[Frank Booth]

(09-13-2021, 07:29 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: I just don't see examples of this call being made by Zac like it's typical.

Going back to BB's call is an anomaly in my opinion.

Yea BB plays it conservatively since he is a defensive guru. Also keeps his special teams loaded

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I think what's typically missing from this dialogue (not entirely, but largely) is the motivation.

Is Zac Taylor a terrible coach? Is he a big dumb dumb? Maybe. There are arguments to be made that one or both of those statements might be true. But let's consider why he elected to take this risk instead of regurgitating over and over that it was a risk.

What happens if the Bengals convert? They retain possession of the football with 3:16 (and counting) remaining in the third quarter. They continue the drive and chew more clock, minimally restricting Minnesota's time to make up the deficit or maximally scoring again to take a three-score lead. The AnAlYtIcS don't suggest the move is permissible because ~numbers exist~ and ~blah blah nerd stuff~, but rather because they attempt to account for the possible outcomes with a holistic and collapsed probability value (probability to win the game). It's not a process without flaws, but it is absolutely less flawed than unaided human cognition. If you ask a human being to understand on a deep level the meaning of a risk being taken, they are generally going to be awful in that task. They just suck at it, period. That's why you employ someone or someones with that kind of expertise.

Then the fans and viewers are inevitably results-oriented in their assessment of any coaching decision. When it goes wrong and is already contrary to their biased understanding of risk, naturally the coach gets a hailstorm of shit. In this case, I think that hailstorm is representative of misunderstanding rather than any actual coaching mistake. I expected and would have fully approved of a punt in that situation. Taylor's willingness to take that risk on the side of the math though (however slightly) is encouraging to me. We're always groaning about how behind the times this franchise is, and that play was a sharp move toward modernity. It's even ahead of the curve. That kind of stuff will be more ordinary than it feels right now within a few years I suspect.

But the play call still sucked. 

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

Field position made it a questionable call to say the least. However, if Mixon doesn't slip out of his cut, we probably pick it up. I think Zac got a little too overconfident there, but you gotta look at the analytics. Weren't we the best team in the league at 4th down conversions last season? I think he also sends a message to his defense there....I believe in you. You know what, without a penalty, they did stop them.

[BengalsRocker]

(09-13-2021, 07:40 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: I think what's typically missing from this dialogue (not entirely, but largely) is the motivation.

Is Zac Taylor a terrible coach? Is he a big dumb dumb? Maybe. There are arguments to be made that one or both of those statements might be true. But let's consider why he elected to take this risk instead of regurgitating over and over that it was a risk.

What happens if the Bengals convert? They retain possession of the football with 3:16 (and counting) remaining in the third quarter. They continue the drive and chew more clock, minimally restricting Minnesota's time to make up the deficit or maximally scoring again to take a three-score lead. The AnAlYtIcS don't suggest the move is permissible because ~numbers exist~ and ~blah blah nerd stuff~, but rather because they attempt to account for the possible outcomes with a holistic and collapsed probability value (probability to win the game). It's not a process without flaws, but it is absolutely less flawed than unaided human cognition. If you ask a human being to understand on a deep level the meaning of a risk being taken, they are generally going to be awful in that task. They just suck at it, period. That's why you employ someone or someones with that kind of expertise.

Then the fans and viewers are inevitably results-oriented in their assessment of any coaching decision. When it goes wrong and is already contrary to their biased understanding of risk, naturally the coach gets a hailstorm of shit. In this case, I think that hailstorm is representative of misunderstanding rather than any actual coaching mistake. I expected and would have fully approved of a punt in that situation. Taylor's willingness to take that risk on the side of the math though (however slightly) is encouraging to me. We're always groaning about how behind the times this franchise is, and that play was a sharp move toward modernity. It's even ahead of the curve. That kind of stuff will be more ordinary than it feels right now within a few years I suspect.

But the play call still sucked. 

What it fails to do is to assess the scenario fully if used in a blanket.

In game matchups, key injuries, player productivity all change in real time.

Analytics can be a productive tool in the right hands so there's another room for error by how they are used.

[*jason*]

(09-13-2021, 05:23 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote:

https://t.co/MLc74nNAa8 pic.twitter.com/9FGHKgKlfP

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) September 13, 2021

Just to be clear I’m not defending Taylor here (I didn’t like the call), but to say “Belichick would never do that” is wrong.

I actually remember that... I don't think too many coaches worry about Kirk Cousins like that though.

It's over now, and they barely pulled off that win, but Taylor would be wise to not pull that shit again. The momentum tangibly turned from that moment on. We'd also be screaming bloody murder if that was Joe Mixon "fumbling" the ball away in overtime.

A win's a win though... Especially when they're rare.

[Housh]

Personally I do mind it. It was a stupid call. And it literally resurrected the Vikings.

[PCB Bengal Fan]

(09-13-2021, 02:43 PM)Benton Wrote: So the biggest argument seems to be that it was the wrong call because we had the lead. Only issue there is, you don't know you're going to have the lead later

If we punted the ball there and ended up losing the game by a score, the majority of threads here would be filled posts about Zac being gutless and how he should've went for it on fourth down, how were always be a bad team with weak coaches, etc.

Pick a lane. Most people wanted a coach that wasn't going to take his foot off the gas. We got it.

Absolutely nobody would have questioned a punt at our own 30. Nobody would have called Zac gutless for punting while up 14. If it was at the 50 and we didnt go for it, maybe some would have moaned.

[ezekiel23]

Maybe it’s just me,but it appeared that Zac was doing everything he could to try and lose this game.Going for it on fourth down at your own 30 is totally ridiculous.I may have been tempted to go for it if it were just inches.But it looked like a yard or maybe a little more.Aside from fourth down attempts,Zac Taylor called the most conservative game I’ve seen him call yet.

When the game is on the line,you want the ball in Joe Burrows hands.Let him take control,like he did at the end of the game,and set them up for the winning field goal.

[Destro]

Being aggressive doesn't mean being stupid. I also want a coach to hold players accountable, but if Burrow is 5 minutes late for a meeting, I don't want him benched for a game.
Analytics probably say Taylor should not still be a coach in the NFL.
Even if they converted, I would have not liked the call. I can actually not like the call but like the result. The same as I can hate the result of a play I liked.
People bring up the Bengals going for it on 4th a lot previously, but do you know why they are not as well remembered? Because they were not at such a poor point with such a poor result.

[Benton]

(09-13-2021, 03:49 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: no one would blame zach for punting up by 2 tds

Come on xeno, you been around here a bit. ZT didn't go 16-0 his first season so to some folks he's garbage; whatever he does is the wrong thing.

If we punted there and lost the game, I have no doubt people would've said he should've gone for it.