This needs to be hung on Zac Taylor's office wall

[*bengalfan74*]

It's no secret I'm a big believer in the power of a good running game.

[Soonerpeace]

Excerpts from Paul Dehner on the screen game and Joe Mixon, theleonardleap’s favorite player


CICINNATI — There’s an old football phrase that Bengals center Ted Karras likes to use when talking about screen passes.
“Screens are either a s—house or a castle play,” he said. “There’s no in between.”

“It’s really been something I think has come along for us this year,” Callahan said. “We’ve had positive gains, efficient plays on our screens.”

Mixon broke a 39-yarder against the Steelers and a 28-yarder against the Jaguars, two of his three longest gains of the season (along with a designed catch-and-run against the Ravens in Week 2).
The bottom line is finding explosive plays on the ground has proved elusive for Mixon in recent years. He’s rarely broken tackles and the electric jump cuts of his younger days have given way to punishing, hard-charging plods for what the Bengals hope will be efficient yardage.
Yet, in recent weeks, Mixon’s found himself again breaking tackles in open space thanks to the screen game. He was tracked for five broken tackles on receptions against Jacksonville. Eleven of his 34 missed tackles forced have come catching the ball and the majority of those on screens, according to Pro Football Focus. (and Zac this summer on Solomon Wilcots podcast talked about how punishing Joe is in the screen game)

The Bengals ran 23 screens to Mixon over the past three seasons combined and just one over the first six games of this year (it gained 6 yards in the opener). At the bye, however, Taylor, Callahan and Pollack decided to lean back into them and see what happened.

The Mixon screen proved a real weapon and part of the game plan more than any other point in their tenure.

Joe Mixon on screen passes
STAT LAST 3 YEARS LAST 6 WEEKS
Receptions-Targets 19-23 11-11
Yards/target 6.6 11.8
10+ % 32% 45%
First-down % 17% 45%
Success % 48% 83%
Yards 152 130
Yards/game 4.1 21.7

“Sometimes, screens are a little bit of luck,” Taylor said.

In New England, Karras said you would be docked for a missed assignment if you did not cut block on a screen. Without that weapon, lumbering offensive linemen trying to track down corners and safeties in space has been a challenge, making it even more remarkable how they have posted an 83 percent success rate on Mixon’s screens.

They’ve provided a significant weapon for where the Bengals are at now, more reliant on easy throws for the quarterback, slowing the pass rush and non–rushing methods for finding Mixon space.

[Whatever]

(12-06-2023, 11:37 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: I think people are getting a little too bent out of shape with the eight carries line. Cincinnati only ran 40 plays, excluding a kneel at the half. They ran the ball 20% of the time, a notable deviation from their standard 34% of the time. In order to get down into that range, you would bump Mixon's carries from eight to 13. The defense has to account for the possibility of running the ball if a RB is on the field. They can't just disregard him, even if the team isn't running the ball often. Those run fits still have to be played. It's why RPOs and playaction just work, whether your running game is performing well or not.  

Frankly, there's a decent amount of false causality in this thread. They didn't score 30 because they ran the ball 30 times.  They ran the ball 30 times because the run game was effective.  If we ran the ball 30 times last week against Pittsburgh, it would've been pretty ugly. 

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(12-06-2023, 07:38 PM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: I'm glad Brown got on the field and I'm even happier he had success. But we do need to see a bit more of it. He obviously had the explosive plays but he also had 2 or 3 negative gains and that is something Mixon rarely does. I would personally keep Mixon as the main back. But that's not saying Brown doesn't deserve to continue to get more touches. I would also like to see him get some targets.

Cannot disagree. If the OL doesn't open up immediate holes Chase Brown is a little easier to tackle than Mixon behind the line.

Chase Brown is smaller than Mixon and not quite as strong.

(12-07-2023, 09:32 AM)Daddy-O Wrote: Think about it from the OL perspective.  If your QB is sitting in the shotgun all the time you never get the chance to be in attack mode.  You are always stepping back at the snap to essentially try to form a pocket.  

It's no wonder they can't consistently run the ball, they're always at a disadvantage.  

Hopefully Burrow will realize this while watching for the rest of the season and be more willing to play from center.  It will prolong his career also.

Great post. Just completely agree Daddy-O. If you look at it from the OL's perspective, you can completely understand why 
always playing in Shotgun puts them at a disadvantage as you say. Need to attack Defenses with a running game and quick 
passes with play action. This is done under Center and lets the RB get up to speed faster like we saw with Chase Brown on 
Monday night so the OL doesn't have to hold their blocks long.

The QB under Center at least half the time just helps the entire Offense so much more than constantly in the Shotgun like 
Burrow was doing in our losses.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-07-2023, 12:14 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Excerpts from Paul Dehner on the screen game and Joe Mixon, theleonardleap’s favorite player


CICINNATI — There’s an old football phrase that Bengals center Ted Karras likes to use when talking about screen passes.
“Screens are either a s—house or a castle play,” he said. “There’s no in between.”

“It’s really been something I think has come along for us this year,” Callahan said. “We’ve had positive gains, efficient plays on our screens.”

Mixon broke a 39-yarder against the Steelers and a 28-yarder against the Jaguars, two of his three longest gains of the season (along with a designed catch-and-run against the Ravens in Week 2).
The bottom line is finding explosive plays on the ground has proved elusive for Mixon in recent years. He’s rarely broken tackles and the electric jump cuts of his younger days have given way to punishing, hard-charging plods for what the Bengals hope will be efficient yardage.
Yet, in recent weeks, Mixon’s found himself again breaking tackles in open space thanks to the screen game. He was tracked for five broken tackles on receptions against Jacksonville. Eleven of his 34 missed tackles forced have come catching the ball and the majority of those on screens, according to Pro Football Focus. (and Zac this summer on Solomon Wilcots podcast talked about how punishing Joe is in the screen game)

The Bengals ran 23 screens to Mixon over the past three seasons combined and just one over the first six games of this year (it gained 6 yards in the opener). At the bye, however, Taylor, Callahan and Pollack decided to lean back into them and see what happened.

The Mixon screen proved a real weapon and part of the game plan more than any other point in their tenure.

Joe Mixon on screen passes
STAT LAST 3 YEARS LAST 6 WEEKS
Receptions-Targets 19-23 11-11
Yards/target 6.6 11.8
10+ % 32% 45%
First-down % 17% 45%
Success % 48% 83%
Yards 152 130
Yards/game 4.1 21.7

“Sometimes, screens are a little bit of luck,” Taylor said.

In New England, Karras said you would be docked for a missed assignment if you did not cut block on a screen. Without that weapon, lumbering offensive linemen trying to track down corners and safeties in space has been a challenge, making it even more remarkable how they have posted an 83 percent success rate on Mixon’s screens.

They’ve provided a significant weapon for where the Bengals are at now, more reliant on easy throws for the quarterback, slowing the pass rush and non–rushing methods for finding Mixon space.

I also watched a clip talking about all of the screens at the start of the Jacksonville game. Taylor said it wasn't all about getting Browning in a rhythm. In fact, he said it was more about seeing what the defense was going to do. Once they saw it, they opened up the offense do downfield throws.  It was an excerpt from the greenlightpod, on BengalsTalk and they were speaking quite highly of Zac. A lot of people on here would've hated to watch it.   They also said the coaches and the team was very confident in Browning after a good week of practice going into the game. This sounds good for the rest of the year if Jake can keep from turning the ball over.

[Soonerpeace]

(12-07-2023, 07:28 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: I also watched a clip talking about all of the screens at the start of the Jacksonville game. Taylor said it wasn't all about getting Browning in a rhythm. In fact, he said it was more about seeing what the defense was going to do. Once they saw it, they opened up the offense do downfield throws.  It was an excerpt from the greenlightpod, on BengalsTalk and they were speaking quite highly of Zac. A lot of people on here would've hated to watch it.

Imagine calling plays with this? See below. KC worst offense they’ve had in several years? Guess what? They’ve gone from 29 to 22 points a game from last year. Oh and guess what their OL isn’t ranked nearly that high. But all the high profile offenses have highly ranked lines. Not #27 at the Bengals.

27. CINCINNATI BENGALS (DOWN 1)

Projected Week 14 starters:

LT Orlando Brown Jr.
LG Cordell Volson
C Ted Karras
RG Alex Cappa
RT Jonah Williams

Cincinnati’s offensive line enjoyed a solid outing in pass protection. The unit gave up seven pressures on 42 dropbacks and ranked fourth in pass-blocking efficiency in Week 13.
Right guard Alex Cappa earned a 78.3 overall grade against the Jaguars, ranking fifth among guards in Week 13.
Best player: Ted Karras

Karras has earned a 79.0 pass-blocking grade since Week 10, which ranks third among centers over that period.

[Soonerpeace]

(12-07-2023, 07:28 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: I also watched a clip talking about all of the screens at the start of the Jacksonville game. Taylor said it wasn't all about getting Browning in a rhythm. In fact, he said it was more about seeing what the defense was going to do. Once they saw it, they opened up the offense do downfield throws.  It was an excerpt from the greenlightpod, on BengalsTalk and they were speaking quite highly of Zac. A lot of people on here would've hated to watch it.   They also said the coaches and the team was very confident in Browning after a good week of practice going into the game. This sounds good for the rest of the year if Jake can keep from turning the ball over.

Can the Bengals be a legitimate threat without Burrow?!? #bengals #RuleTheJungle @MillerLite pic.twitter.com/QZIJvUYMeg

— Green Light with Chris Long (@greenlight) December 7, 2023

[Soonerpeace]

(12-07-2023, 07:28 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: I also watched a clip talking about all of the screens at the start of the Jacksonville game. Taylor said it wasn't all about getting Browning in a rhythm. In fact, he said it was more about seeing what the defense was going to do. Once they saw it, they opened up the offense do downfield throws.  It was an excerpt from the greenlightpod, on BengalsTalk and they were speaking quite highly of Zac. A lot of people on here would've hated to watch it.   They also said the coaches and the team was very confident in Browning after a good week of practice going into the game. This sounds good for the rest of the year if Jake can keep from turning the ball over.

Can the Bengals be a legitimate threat without Burrow?!? #bengals #RuleTheJungle @MillerLite pic.twitter.com/QZIJvUYMeg

— Green Light with Chris Long (@greenlight) December 7, 2023

[Soonerpeace]

(12-07-2023, 07:28 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: I also watched a clip talking about all of the screens at the start of the Jacksonville game. Taylor said it wasn't all about getting Browning in a rhythm. In fact, he said it was more about seeing what the defense was going to do. Once they saw it, they opened up the offense do downfield throws.  It was an excerpt from the greenlightpod, on BengalsTalk and they were speaking quite highly of Zac. A lot of people on here would've hated to watch it.   They also said the coaches and the team was very confident in Browning after a good week of practice going into the game. This sounds good for the rest of the year if Jake can keep from turning the ball over.

Did you see this?


Dehner Jr.:
Attacks on Zac Taylor's Joe Burrow-less record excessive, overblown
Paul Dehner Jr.
Fri, Dec 1
CINCINNATI —


People love to trot out the record without Burrow to hold against Taylor. Would you prefer it was better? Sure. Anybody would. There’s room for improvement everywhere.
There are few numbers I think matter less.
The Bengals are built around Burrow. For Taylor and offensive coordinator Brian Callahan, their relationship with Burrow, their scheme, personnel and basically every decision made comes with augmenting his strengths in mind. Because that’s how this franchise can win the most games and its first championship.
All due respect to Jake Browning, or whomever you see as the best backup quarterback in football, but that’s true for every head coach.
Since the start of 2021 in games with a fully healthy Burrow starting and finishing, Taylor has gone 13-7, 14-5 and 4-1 for a total of 31-13. Oh yeah, that includes 5-2 in the postseason for a franchise that had not won a single playoff game in three decades. Those are the records that matter.

The offense ranked fifth in EPA/drive last season and ranked fourth during Burrow’s five fully healthy weeks this year.

Do you know Kyle Shanahan’s record without Jimmy Garoppolo and Brock Purdy (who clearly is not a backup-level QB for anyone paying an ounce of attention)? He’s 9-29.
Sean McVay, the legendary offensive guru whose coaching tree has changed the face of offense in the NFL, went 2-7 without Matthew Stafford the last two years.
Everyone’s favorite, Mike McDaniel, went 1-3 when Tua Tagovailoa didn’t start for Miami last year.
The Ravens are 49-21 with Lamar Jackson since the start of 2019 and 4-8 without him. Fire John Harbaugh, I suppose.
Mike Tomlin’s never had a losing record, of course, but in Pittsburgh, fans have called for his ouster for zero playoff wins in the last six years once the magic of Ben Roethlisberger aged out.
Remember when Bill Belichick was a genius, winner of six titles and the greatest coach of all time? Without Tom Brady, apparently he is a dunce and has no clue how to coach.
Here’s a look at the record of every team in a game started by a player who was not projected to be the starting quarterback at the beginning of this season.
Backup QBs in starts this year
STARTERS W L EPA/PLAY
Josh Dobbs 2 9 -0.1
Zach Wilson 3 6 -0.35
Gardner Minshew 4 3 -0.12
Will Levis 2 3 -0.04
Aidan O'Connell 2 3 -0.19
Tyson Bagent 2 2 -0.08
Tommy DeVito 2 1 -0.3
Tyrod Taylor 1 2 -0.3
D. Thompson-Robinson 1 2 -0.31
PJ Walker 1 1 -0.23
Taylor Heinicke 0 2 -0.21
Tim Boyle 0 1 -0.37
Jake Browning 0 1 -0.26
Andy Dalton 0 1 0.07
Brian Hoyer 0 1 -0.35
Brett Rypien 0 1 -0.79
Clayton Tune 0 1 -1.21
Wins-Losses-Average 20 40 -0.30
That’s 20-40 for a .333 winning percentage.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

That is some high praise in that vid of Zac and the culture being created and how we attack on Offense.

I have seen it with Burrow too, where we do plays early in the game to set the Defense up for a big play later on.

It is planned. The play calling in this game was pretty fantastic and when the players execute you can see it.

When they don't execute, people blame the play calling. Going away from the running game is my main problem, because
look at what we did on Monday Night and what we did against the 49ers. That is what we need to always try and do.

[Soonerpeace]

(12-07-2023, 08:59 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: That is some high praise in that vid of Zac and the culture being created and how we attack on Offense.

I have seen it with Burrow too, where we do plays early in the game to set the Defense up for a big play later on.

It is planned. The play calling in this game was pretty fantastic and when the players execute you can see it.

When they don't execute, people blame the play calling. Going away from the running game is my main problem, because
look at what we did on Monday Night and what we did against the 49ers. That is what we need to always try and do.

Those guys know football they aren’t a bunch of message board geniuses lol like here…. me included.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(12-07-2023, 07:48 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote:

Can the Bengals be a legitimate threat without Burrow?!? #bengals #RuleTheJungle @MillerLite pic.twitter.com/QZIJvUYMeg

— Green Light with Chris Long (@greenlight) December 7, 2023

Yep, that's the one I saw.

(12-07-2023, 08:45 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Did you see this?


Dehner Jr.:
Attacks on Zac Taylor's Joe Burrow-less record excessive, overblown
Paul Dehner Jr.
Fri, Dec 1
CINCINNATI —


People love to trot out the record without Burrow to hold against Taylor. Would you prefer it was better? Sure. Anybody would. There’s room for improvement everywhere.
There are few numbers I think matter less.
The Bengals are built around Burrow. For Taylor and offensive coordinator Brian Callahan, their relationship with Burrow, their scheme, personnel and basically every decision made comes with augmenting his strengths in mind. Because that’s how this franchise can win the most games and its first championship.
All due respect to Jake Browning, or whomever you see as the best backup quarterback in football, but that’s true for every head coach.
Since the start of 2021 in games with a fully healthy Burrow starting and finishing, Taylor has gone 13-7, 14-5 and 4-1 for a total of 31-13. Oh yeah, that includes 5-2 in the postseason for a franchise that had not won a single playoff game in three decades. Those are the records that matter.

The offense ranked fifth in EPA/drive last season and ranked fourth during Burrow’s five fully healthy weeks this year.

Do you know Kyle Shanahan’s record without Jimmy Garoppolo and Brock Purdy (who clearly is not a backup-level QB for anyone paying an ounce of attention)? He’s 9-29.
Sean McVay, the legendary offensive guru whose coaching tree has changed the face of offense in the NFL, went 2-7 without Matthew Stafford the last two years.
Everyone’s favorite, Mike McDaniel, went 1-3 when Tua Tagovailoa didn’t start for Miami last year.
The Ravens are 49-21 with Lamar Jackson since the start of 2019 and 4-8 without him. Fire John Harbaugh, I suppose.
Mike Tomlin’s never had a losing record, of course, but in Pittsburgh, fans have called for his ouster for zero playoff wins in the last six years once the magic of Ben Roethlisberger aged out.
Remember when Bill Belichick was a genius, winner of six titles and the greatest coach of all time? Without Tom Brady, apparently he is a dunce and has no clue how to coach.
Here’s a look at the record of every team in a game started by a player who was not projected to be the starting quarterback at the beginning of this season.
Backup QBs in starts this year
STARTERS W L EPA/PLAY
Josh Dobbs 2 9 -0.1
Zach Wilson 3 6 -0.35
Gardner Minshew 4 3 -0.12
Will Levis 2 3 -0.04
Aidan O'Connell 2 3 -0.19
Tyson Bagent 2 2 -0.08
Tommy DeVito 2 1 -0.3
Tyrod Taylor 1 2 -0.3
D. Thompson-Robinson 1 2 -0.31
PJ Walker 1 1 -0.23
Taylor Heinicke 0 2 -0.21
Tim Boyle 0 1 -0.37
Jake Browning 0 1 -0.26
Andy Dalton 0 1 0.07
Brian Hoyer 0 1 -0.35
Brett Rypien 0 1 -0.79
Clayton Tune 0 1 -1.21
Wins-Losses-Average 20 40 -0.30
That’s 20-40 for a .333 winning percentage.

It's what some of us have been trying to say all along....

[*rfaulk34*]

(12-05-2023, 10:29 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: running it a bunch if you're averaging less than 4 yards a pop is futile. If you're averaging 4.5+, yea, keep running.

I wouldn't use the word futile. 30 carries at 4 a pop would be 120 for the game. 120ypg rushing would make you #11 in the NFL this year.

[*rfaulk34*]

One thing people need to understand. If you're able to run the ball 30 times in a game, it means one of two things.

Either your QB is a sack of potatoes or you're being "effective" running the ball. That comes down to situational play. If they can stay effective and end up running it around 30 times, it's all good in the hood, even if they're only getting around 4 a pop. 

[Soonerpeace]

(12-08-2023, 11:56 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: One thing people need to understand. If you're able to run the ball 30 times in a game, it means one of two things.

Either your QB is a sack of potatoes or you're being "effective" running the ball. That comes down to situational play. If they can stay effective and end up running it around 30 times, it's all good in the hood, even if they're only getting around 4 a pop. 

Don’t give 2 shoots about which QB. But under center with Joe even did you feel we’d could score up the middle with Mixon twice on the goal line like Monday night? One time untouched? The OL is blocking better. The Jags were #11 defensively in yards per rush attempt. Amazing what happens when Volson is your best lineman instead of worst and the whole OL produces.

[*rfaulk34*]

(12-06-2023, 07:33 PM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: This is a situation where I think you can't completely trust the stats. In the 4th qtr you can find yourselves in situations where you are trying to run out the clock or set up a field goal. The other team knows your running and are selling out to stop you.

That's true. I can think of at least a couple games this year where it was line up, with a lead, and run up the middle to keep the clock moving; goes for -1 to 1 yard, several times. Can't remember the game earlier this year, maybe the Rams? Mixon was having a great game and his last 5 carries netted him about 0 yards. Killed his average. 

[Bengalitis]

Bratkowski cost a lot of victories for the Bengals.. I suspect Marvin's legacy and the team's outcome would have been much better with a better OC. Considering the talent he had at his disposal.

Callahan & Zac are much higher up the quality level. They design plays and their call unpredicatability keeps other teams on their toes.

[Whatever]

(12-08-2023, 11:56 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: One thing people need to understand. If you're able to run the ball 30 times in a game, it means one of two things.

Either your QB is a sack of potatoes or you're being "effective" running the ball. That comes down to situational play. If they can stay effective and end up running it around 30 times, it's all good in the hood, even if they're only getting around 4 a pop. 

Thing is, you are almost never just going to get 4 yards consistently with the run.  Usually, you'll get a 10 yard run, then a couple of one yard runs and be forced to pass on 3rd and long.  

Also keep in mind that the average NFL team only runs around 60 offensive plays a game.  If you're hell bent on running the ball 30 times only averaging 4 yards/attempt, you're going to have a lot of short drives and probably only run 50 or so plays.  Good luck trying to win running it 30 times for a 120 and throwing 20 times.

You never go into a game wanting to pass/run the ball a target of times or for a target number of yards.  You call plays based on down and distance, what the defense is doing, what's been working, what hasn't, what's the score, etc.  

[*rfaulk34*]

(12-08-2023, 03:50 PM)Whatever Wrote: Thing is, you are almost never just going to get 4 yards consistently with the run.  Usually, you'll get a 10 yard run, then a couple of one yard runs and be forced to pass on 3rd and long.  

Also keep in mind that the average NFL team only runs around 60 offensive plays a game.  If you're hell bent on running the ball 30 times only averaging 4 yards/attempt, you're going to have a lot of short drives and probably only run 50 or so plays.  Good luck trying to win running it 30 times for a 120 and throwing 20 times.

You never go into a game wanting to pass/run the ball a target of times or for a target number of yards.  You call plays based on down and distance, what the defense is doing, what's been working, what hasn't, what's the score, etc.  

Right. What i was saying was, if you do get around 27-30 carries in a game--as the Bengals did Monday night--it means one of the two things i listed. The main thing is how effective the runs are, i.e., result vs when they happen. 

I'd never go into a game saying, we have to run the ball 30 times to have any hope to win. You may throw it 45 times and run it 15 and win 35-14. The Bengals were able to run the ball effectively Monday night.

Effectiveness > YPC when you don't have a really good run game.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(12-08-2023, 04:39 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Right. What i was saying was, if you do get around 27-30 carries in a game--as the Bengals did Monday night--it means one of the two things i listed. The main thing is how effective the runs are, i.e., result vs when they happen. 

I'd never go into a game saying, we have to run the ball 30 times to have any hope to win. You may throw it 45 times and run it 15 and win 35-14. The Bengals were able to run the ball effectively Monday night.

Effectiveness > YPC when you don't have a really good run game.

Yes sir Rfaulk, execution is where is at. We usually win if we are executing well, I don't know the numbers on how many games we 
have won when we have ran the ball around 30 times a game. I bet it is a great record.