Eagles week.

[DanBengalfan]

we are favored to win.

 

[Cincyfan78]

we are favored to win.

I believe the line was 2.5....usually you get about 3pts for being the home team, so on a neutral field, it would be Eagles .5....

This will be the first real game for the defense to show if they are taking real steps forward, or if they've just benefited from playing the woeful Giants and Browns the last 2 weeks. This is where the rubber starts to meet the road a bit, because they have the woeful Raiders the following week.

Win this, and take care of business next week...5-4 heading back to Baltimore....suddenly it gets interesting.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Moving this discussion to this thread to keep current:

Speaking of Gesicki's reduced role - it hasn't been just him.

Andrei Iosivas and Mike Gesicki:1st three games: 24 catches Last four games: 8 catches

Not sure what has caused this - maybe more TE blocking and if you go with more 12 personnel you are usually only going 2 WR...which means you are seeing Sample and All together.

I think there is a balance here - but I feel, and I'm only guessing here, that they are trying to help the OL - but also Taylor loves him extra blockers on runs. I'd like to see more runs, direct runs, from a 3 and even 4 split out...you can either use Gesicki or All - and at this point it is looking like All would be the better option because of his blocking and pass-catching, which gives you way more flexibility with the scheme alignment...but regardless if the TE is inline or split out - I'd like to see more natural space created for the RB's.

If defenses are going to still bunch up when you have 3/4 split - then I trust Burrow to make that read, and complete some easy pitch and catch passes.

 

[cincygrad]

Moving this discussion to this thread to keep current:

Speaking of Gesicki's reduced role - it hasn't been just him.

Andrei Iosivas and Mike Gesicki:1st three games: 24 catches Last four games: 8 catches

Not sure what has caused this - maybe more TE blocking and if you go with more 12 personnel you are usually only going 2 WR...which means you are seeing Sample and All together.

I think there is a balance here - but I feel, and I'm only guessing here, that they are trying to help the OL - but also Taylor loves him extra blockers on runs. I'd like to see more runs, direct runs, from a 3 and even 4 split out...you can either use Gesicki or All - and at this point it is looking like All would be the better option because of his blocking and pass-catching, which gives you way more flexibility with the scheme alignment...but regardless if the TE is inline or split out - I'd like to see more natural space created for the RB's.

If defenses are going to still bunch up when you have 3/4 split - then I trust Burrow to make that read, and complete some easy pitch and catch passes.

Yoshi is playing over 70% of offensive snaps in a game and only being targeted 3 times a game. He's had a big impact on some games, so it's hard to say he's been invisible, but given the volume of snaps and given that he should benefit from teams being concerned about Chase and Higgins, it's not nearly enough production. I think they need more snaps for Burton or Jones.

For Gesicki - He is only playing about 20 snaps a game. I don't think this offense and these coaches are a good fit for his skill set.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Moving this discussion to this thread to keep current:

Speaking of Gesicki's reduced role - it hasn't been just him.

Andrei Iosivas and Mike Gesicki:1st three games: 24 catches Last four games: 8 catches

Not sure what has caused this - maybe more TE blocking and if you go with more 12 personnel you are usually only going 2 WR...which means you are seeing Sample and All together.

I think there is a balance here - but I feel, and I'm only guessing here, that they are trying to help the OL - but also Taylor loves him extra blockers on runs. I'd like to see more runs, direct runs, from a 3 and even 4 split out...you can either use Gesicki or All - and at this point it is looking like All would be the better option because of his blocking and pass-catching, which gives you way more flexibility with the scheme alignment...but regardless if the TE is inline or split out - I'd like to see more natural space created for the RB's.

If defenses are going to still bunch up when you have 3/4 split - then I trust Burrow to make that read, and complete some easy pitch and catch passes.

Tee Higgins.

 

[cincygrad]

Tee Higgins.

Yeah.... That's all well and good, but only two receivers had catches against the Brows (Higgins and Chase). It would be one thing if our offense was dominating with the two of them, but we were not dominating.... Time to let some other receivers get some reps so that we can open up the passing game more AND so we can begin to develop a strategy for life without Tee.

 

[redskinsfan1963]

we are favored to win.

hope it becomes fact.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Yeah.... That's all well and good, but only two receivers had catches against the Brows (Higgins and Chase). It would be one thing if our offense was dominating with the two of them, but we were not dominating.... Time to let some other receivers get some reps so that we can open up the passing game more AND so we can begin to develop a strategy for life without Tee.

Cincy asked why has the production of those other guys dropped off, or at least targets. My answer was Tee Higgins, that is specifically why the production has dropped off, because look at the number of targets for Chase and Higgins since week 3. Higgins came back and after Burrow got a taste of the sure hands in week 3, most balls got fed to Chase and Higgins there after. I am not saying we shouldn't be spreading the ball around. I am marking the event that caused the drop of opportunities for other guys. That event was Higgins coming back from his hamstring.

 

[DanBengalfan]

Cincy asked why has the production of those other guys dropped off, or at least targets. My answer was Tee Higgins, that is specifically why the production has dropped off, because look at the number of targets for Chase and Higgins since week 3. Higgins came back and after Burrow got a taste of the sure hands in week 3, most balls got fed to Chase and Higgins there after. I am not saying we shouldn't be spreading the ball around. I am marking the event that caused the drop of opportunities for other guys. That event was Higgins coming back from his hamstring.

true. that's the way it is with most teams really. the #1,2 guys get more. in some cases the #3 wr gets some action, but not many. most of the time the #3 wr is really the tight end or one of the rbs.

 

[cincygrad]

Cincy asked why has the production of those other guys dropped off, or at least targets. My answer was Tee Higgins, that is specifically why the production has dropped off, because look at the number of targets for Chase and Higgins since week 3. Higgins came back and after Burrow got a taste of the sure hands in week 3, most balls got fed to Chase and Higgins there after. I am not saying we shouldn't be spreading the ball around. I am marking the event that caused the drop of opportunities for other guys. That event was Higgins coming back from his hamstring.

Oh, I agree.... I think your point hits the nail on the head. But, I wish our offense would stop regressing to the 'lets just let Joe, Tee, and JaMarr figure it out.' I don't ever read or hear about coaches of other good offenses consistently talk about how they couldn't do certain things because the D took it away. That's what we hear again this week - Cleveland surprised the Bengals because they played them different than they expected. I just don't understand how you can't make appropriate adjustments and why you can't scheme up some plays when your offense needs a boost. I used to think it was because we were limited by the offensive line, but I no longer see that as the issue. I just don't think our offense is as flexible as it needs to be.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Oh, I agree.... I think your point hits the nail on the head. But, I wish our offense would stop regressing to the 'lets just let Joe, Tee, and JaMarr figure it out.' I don't ever read or hear about coaches of other good offenses consistently talk about how they couldn't do certain things because the D took it away. That's what we hear again this week - Cleveland surprised the Bengals because they played them different than they expected. I just don't understand how you can't make appropriate adjustments and why you can't scheme up some plays when your offense needs a boost. I used to think it was because we were limited by the offensive line, but I no longer see that as the issue. I just don't think our offense is as flexible as it needs to be.

Taylor is NOT a good offensive play-caller.

He's bailed out by having Burrow, Chase, and Higgins.

When you look around the league - like SF, or Mia, etc...you see an offense that finds ways to create mismatches and get guys the ball in space. Tua isn't Burrow. Neither is Purdy. Yet, they are out there and slinging it up and down the field (Well, maybe not Tua at the moment, but last year). I dream of an offense run by someone like McDaniel with Burrow, Chase, HIggins, Brown...Gesicki/All, Yoshi...

The biggest gripe I have with Taylor (Beside the lack of running the ball/scheme) is that this offense is consistently inconsistent in ways it should not be with the talent this team has. Formations so basic, or formations used only 90% for certain plays. It was last year, I believe, that someone from the Steelers said they are able to call out the Bengals plays just by alignment. That kind of approach makes it really hard to find consistency when defenses are already able to disregard a portion of the offense just based on how the offense lines up - or, in some of my gripes, knowing that they'll never worry about the run game because Taylor won't run it consistently enough to make it a threat.

OC's have come and gone, but the same issues persist because in the end, Taylor is the one making the calls...and I fear that this offense, with Burrow, will never reach what it could as long as he refuses to allow someone else to take over that duty - or at least all more input from someone else. He talks about it a lot....Taylor talks a lot about things...but he rarely, RARELY, ever actually makes those changes.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Taylor is NOT a good offensive play-caller.

He's bailed out by having Burrow, Chase, and Higgins.

When you look around the league - like SF, or Mia, etc...you see an offense that finds ways to create mismatches and get guys the ball in space. Tua isn't Burrow. Neither is Purdy. Yet, they are out there and slinging it up and down the field (Well, maybe not Tua at the moment, but last year). I dream of an offense run by someone like McDaniel with Burrow, Chase, HIggins, Brown...Gesicki/All, Yoshi...

The biggest gripe I have with Taylor (Beside the lack of running the ball/scheme) is that this offense is consistently inconsistent in ways it should not be with the talent this team has. Formations so basic, or formations used only 90% for certain plays. It was last year, I believe, that someone from the Steelers said they are able to call out the Bengals plays just by alignment. That kind of approach makes it really hard to find consistency when defenses are already able to disregard a portion of the offense just based on how the offense lines up - or, in some of my gripes, knowing that they'll never worry about the run game because Taylor won't run it consistently enough to make it a threat.

OC's have come and gone, but the same issues persist because in the end, Taylor is the one making the calls...and I fear that this offense, with Burrow, will never reach what it could as long as he refuses to allow someone else to take over that duty - or at least all more input from someone else. He talks about it a lot....Taylor talks a lot about things...but he rarely, RARELY, ever actually makes those changes.

Can we watch Detroit? Perhaps Burrow and company are not as good as we think they are? I have no idea.

I do think the lack of running lanes and genuine run feeding on offense has hurt. However, to Taylor's defense, Mixon thought he was Laveon Bell and would stand behind the line of scrimmage until a hole would open. I really like this Brown kid. Fast and hits the hard and fast. Not a lot of side to side movement until he finds a lane.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Can we watch Detroit? Perhaps Burrow and company are not as good as we think they are? I have no idea.

I do think the lack of running lanes and genuine run feeding on offense has hurt. However, to Taylor's defense, Mixon thought he was Laveon Bell and would stand behind the line of scrimmage until a hole would open. I really like this Brown kid. Fast and hits the hard and fast. Not a lot of side to side movement until he finds a lane.

Well, when you align a certain way, and run a specific play 90% of the time, or even 80% of the time out of that formation - it really makes it much easier on the defense to hedge on what is going to happen. I think this is what happens with divisional games who see this offense twice a year now for 5-6 years. They know. I think it's at least part of the reason the Bengals do so well outside of the division, and struggle inside the division - despite having the talent.

If they are going to run more 12 personnel - then there has to be more passing out of that set, more play-action, and a tad less running. If they are going to go spread, then there has to be less play-action (until they run the ball more out of this set), more running out of the spread, and a tad less passing (until they can establish they will run out of this set). This is where Taylor struggles, along with keeping a balanced approach, but also keeping defenses honest with how the offense aligns pre-snap.

Far too often we see games get into that 80/20 split - and it may balance at the end, like it did last week - but why does it take a half and a clear "run out the clock" approach to get the run game a bit more evenly called? Noticed what happened as they ran more last week - the defense came up in the box - Brown faced a stacked box at a higher clip last week than any other RB in the NFL. Considering he got, I think 1 carry in the 1st half (maybe 2) - the majority of these came in the 2nd half. What did that do? It left Chase 1-1. It left Higgins 1-1. They went on to be in position to score 17 points (14 thanks to missed FG). It absolutely changes how defenses approach the Bengals offense. I'll always point out - I'm not looking for 50/50 or even 55/45...I think 60-65 to 40-35 is a fair balance because with Burrow, Chase, and Higgins - you want the ball in Burrow's hand...but the runs have to be enough, and varied enough, to keep defenses from just attacking down hill on Burrow (and the OL) every single snap.

I 100% agree with you on Brown - and I've been saying it almost all year. He just runs different. Moss is more patient and waits for development of the blocks, which with this offensive line isn't going to work as well. He's at 3.3 YPC. On nearly the same volume, Brown is at 5.0, and has been close to breaking the long distance run nearly every game.

Moss may be the "better blocker" in terms of pass-pro, but Brown is going to get the attention of the defense AND makes the offense more explosive/diverse. It's been trending this way for a few weeks, but it needs to get to about 70/30 for Brown - where you can still use Moss on 3rd downs and 4+ yards, or on longer to-go plays on 2nd down and to spell Brown...but Brown just adds a different dimension to this offense.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Well, when you align a certain way, and run a specific play 90% of the time, or even 80% of the time out of that formation - it really makes it much easier on the defense to hedge on what is going to happen. I think this is what happens with divisional games who see this offense twice a year now for 5-6 years. They know. I think it's at least part of the reason the Bengals do so well outside of the division, and struggle inside the division - despite having the talent.

If they are going to run more 12 personnel - then there has to be more passing out of that set, more play-action, and a tad less running. If they are going to go spread, then there has to be less play-action (until they run the ball more out of this set), more running out of the spread, and a tad less passing (until they can establish they will run out of this set). This is where Taylor struggles, along with keeping a balanced approach, but also keeping defenses honest with how the offense aligns pre-snap.

Far too often we see games get into that 80/20 split - and it may balance at the end, like it did last week - but why does it take a half and a clear "run out the clock" approach to get the run game a bit more evenly called? Noticed what happened as they ran more last week - the defense came up in the box - Brown faced a stacked box at a higher clip last week than any RB. What did that do? It left Chase 1-1. It left Higgins 1-1. They went on to be in position to score 17 points (14 thanks to missed FG). It absolutely changes how defenses approach the Bengals offense. I'll always point out - I'm not looking for 50/50 or even 55/45...I think 60-65 to 40-35 is a fair balance because with Burrow, Chase, and Higgins - you want the ball in Burrow's hand...but the runs have to be enough, and varied enough, to keep defenses from just attacking down hill on Burrow (and the OL) every single snap.

I 100% agree with you on Brown - and I've been saying it almost all year. He just runs different. Moss is more patient and waits for development of the blocks, which with this offensive line isn't going to work as well. He's at 3.3 YPC. On nearly the same volume, Brown is at 5.0, and has been close to breaking the long distance run nearly every game.

Moss may be the "better blocker" in terms of pass-pro, but Brown is going to get the attention of the defense AND makes the offense more explosive/diverse. It's been trending this way for a few weeks, but it needs to get to about 70/30 for Brown - where you can still use Moss on 3rd downs and 4+ yards, or on longer to-go plays on 2nd down and to spell Brown...but Brown just adds a different dimension to this offense.

Do you think some of this initial game plan was designed this way because of Burrow in college and giving him more say so in the offense? Keep in mind, a lot of Burrow's pass plays in college were trees based on alignment. Same setup for offense, but the route trees changed per player based on defensive coverage. Maybe they have not slid out of that enough to make the offensive more NFL ready.

I don't know. It would be nice to see all these offensive weapons perform like the game against Washington a little more often.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Do you think some of this initial game plan was designed this way because of Burrow in college and giving him more say so in the offense? Keep in mind, a lot of Burrow's pass plays in college were trees based on alignment. Same setup for offense, but the route trees changed per player based on defensive coverage. Maybe they have not slid out of that enough to make the offensive more NFL ready.

I don't know. It would be nice to see all these offensive weapons perform like the game against Washington a little more often.

Agreed. You don't need to put up 38 every week - but the lack of consistency in so many games is my biggest gripe/concern.

I honestly don't know what the answers are with Burrow or Taylor...so all I can go by is what we all read and what we see.

There have been stats that backup a lot of the points I'm making - though over the years I have no clue where they are now. But it was pointed out last year, IIRC, that when under center - it's a run 90% of the time. That's damning for the offense. You simply cannot line up in a formation and have it be a run/pass 90% of the time. Again - I feel like this is, potentially, a reason why in division games - the offense seems to struggle more - they see this twice a year for 4-5-6 years now. Other divisions see it way less, so there's not the same familiarity.

The run thing is soley on Taylor. You just have to have more balance. In games where they've never trailed, had the lead, or were never really out of it - they just don't run the ball. We'll get a game here and there where it works out (like the Mixon games) or when it finally evens out - but to go into a half of football having 5 offensive series - ending in 5 punts - and attempting just 3 runs from the RB's is....just....bad offense. Especially considering you started the game off with the lead thanks to the return TD.

Taylor faced a lot of the same issues when hew as at UC - so I'm a bit more aware of his propensities thanks to his time in Cincinnati prior to being with the Bengals. A lot of the same gripes then are the same gripes now. Lack of flexibility on offense. Lack of ability to adapt. A need to have full control over the offense - even when things are clearly not working.

But - the only way we'd know for sure how things are working, and not working, under Taylor would be for him to allow someone to call the game offensively for a stretch. Maybe if Callahan were still here that could happen - but Pritcher is too green, likely, to be given that kind of responsibility by Taylor - so - it is what it is.

 

[cincygrad]

Do you think some of this initial game plan was designed this way because of Burrow in college and giving him more say so in the offense? Keep in mind, a lot of Burrow's pass plays in college were trees based on alignment. Same setup for offense, but the route trees changed per player based on defensive coverage. Maybe they have not slid out of that enough to make the offensive more NFL ready.

I don't know. It would be nice to see all these offensive weapons perform like the game against Washington a little more often.

I think Burrow is part of the issue. I think this is a common thing with some of the franchise quarterbacks in the league. It's been the same with Aaron Rodgers for years.... He gets to run the offense he wants to run including hand-picking his own coordinator that will run the offense he likes. Those that evaluate these sort of things say it is too limited - Not enough play action, not enough disguise, not enough schemed passes to start dries, etc. Same is true for Burrow. He's been better about getting under center and using the play action game, but it's clear he still wants to make his decisions based on the defense fronts.

When Burrow went out last year, the Bengals were instantly more creative. On Sunday, when OBJ went out, we saw more creativity out of the attack.

I don't fault Burrow - He's clearly happy with the way things are, or guys would be fired. But, if we were going to cater to his needs, I wish they would have hired Joe Brady when they had the chance. As it is now, you have Zac Taylor, who wants to run one particular offense, Dan Pitcher that probably wants to run another, and Joe Burrow who wants it his way. So, you end up with slop. Same issue, different year.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

I think Burrow is part of the issue. I think this is a common thing with some of the franchise quarterbacks in the league. It's been the same with Aaron Rodgers for years.... He gets to run the offense he wants to run including hand-picking his own coordinator that will run the offense he likes. Those that evaluate these sort of things say it is too limited - Not enough play action, not enough disguise, not enough schemed passes to start dries, etc. Same is true for Burrow. He's been better about getting under center and using the play action game, but it's clear he still wants to make his decisions based on the defense fronts.

When Burrow went out last year, the Bengals were instantly more creative. On Sunday, when OBJ went out, we saw more creativity out of the attack.

I don't fault Burrow - He's clearly happy with the way things are, or guys would be fired. But, if we were going to cater to his needs, I wish they would have hired Joe Brady when they had the chance. As it is now, you have Zac Taylor, who wants to run one particular offense, Dan Pitcher that probably wants to run another, and Joe Burrow who wants it his way. So, you end up with slop. Same issue, different year.

I think you are very insightful. I believe this could very well be the case.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I think Burrow is part of the issue. I think this is a common thing with some of the franchise quarterbacks in the league. It's been the same with Aaron Rodgers for years.... He gets to run the offense he wants to run including hand-picking his own coordinator that will run the offense he likes. Those that evaluate these sort of things say it is too limited - Not enough play action, not enough disguise, not enough schemed passes to start dries, etc. Same is true for Burrow. He's been better about getting under center and using the play action game, but it's clear he still wants to make his decisions based on the defense fronts.

When Burrow went out last year, the Bengals were instantly more creative. On Sunday, when OBJ went out, we saw more creativity out of the attack.

I don't fault Burrow - He's clearly happy with the way things are, or guys would be fired. But, if we were going to cater to his needs, I wish they would have hired Joe Brady when they had the chance. As it is now, you have Zac Taylor, who wants to run one particular offense, Dan Pitcher that probably wants to run another, and Joe Burrow who wants it his way. So, you end up with slop. Same issue, different year.

I think this is very, very close to being about as accurate as you can get.

I'd let Burrow run the offense with only the caveat that he needs to run the ball at least 35% of the time, of course depending on gameflow, etc...you can run out of the gun...there isn't a need to go under center, really...its' the same thing IMO - and you can still do playaction out of the gun - but you have to run the ball there to make that work...

 

[cincygrad]

I think this is very, very close to being about as accurate as you can get.

I'd let Burrow run the offense with only the caveat that he needs to run the ball at least 35% of the time, of course depending on gameflow, etc...you can run out of the gun...there isn't a need to go under center, really...its' the same thing IMO - and you can still do playaction out of the gun - but you have to run the ball there to make that work...

It's a bit of a double-edged sword. You want the franchise QB to be happy, but it's not his job to monitor player usage and it's impossible to manage play distribution while executing the plays yourself. I wonder if this dynamic is starting to cause some issues in the building - I thought it was wild that Taylor specifically mentioned calling a pass play during that disastrous sequence in Baltimore. I feel like he wants people to know that these aren't all 'his' ideas.

 

[Cincyfan78]

It's a bit of a double-edged sword. You want the franchise QB to be happy, but it's not his job to monitor player usage and it's impossible to manage play distribution while executing the plays yourself. I wonder if this dynamic is starting to cause some issues in the building - I thought it was wild that Taylor specifically mentioned calling a pass play during that disastrous sequence in Baltimore. I feel like he wants people to know that these aren't all 'his' ideas.

Agreed - but I'll also say - a good QB wants to win first and foremost. I do think Joe is in that mold - as you can kind of tell from his answer this past week about the low scoring wins.

A good QB knows that a solid running game really helps the passing game....so there has to be balance. It will always skew high when you have an elite QB towards passing - that's acceptable.

What can't be is a 75/25 and even 80/20 splits we see...that's bad offense any way you slice it - unless you are down 2 scores.