Studs and Duds: Home vs. Cincinatti

[milani]

Yesterday was really odd and a few people have pointed it out. I saw offensive holding multiple times, by both teams, that went uncalled. I guess I would rather have it that way, than the opposite, a flag every other play for holding.

After a sea of yellow in the first month it was great to see the green grass. Fans in the stands were commenting after a kickoff or punt that " No flags! "

 

[Heyjoe4]

Hafley's defense tends to keep everything in front avoiding the big play. I thought yesterday that we could have played more press coverage considering that Flacco would not have time to go long and being new to the offense. He played well but we gave the guy a lot of short stuff.

Thanks milani. And you're right, Hafley's game plan keeps the ball and the carrier in front of the defense. So jumping a route would be inconsistent with that plan.

And with Flacco having to throw quickly, I'm surprised as well that Hafley didn't use man coverage more often. I mostly saw soft zones that were giving the receivers 5-7 yard pitch and catch plays. That's how the Bengals engineered a mind-boggling 10 minute plus drive to open the 2H. That really wore the D down for the rest of the half, and it was reflected in their play.

A win is a win, and better than the results of the last two games.

 

[Heyjoe4]

After a sea of yellow in the first month it was great to see the green grass. Fans in the stands were commenting after a kickoff or punt that " No flags! "

Interesting and I only noticed it after reading the comments from you and Poker. The officials were letting them play. And I agree with Poker that it's better if the refs let the teams play, with consistency. So a "no call" on holding applies to both teams. Holding penalties are especially irritating because they could be called on almost every play. So consistently is important.

 

[Pugger]

Interesting and I only noticed it after reading the comments from you and Poker. The officials were letting them play. And I agree with Poker that it's better if the refs let the teams play, with consistency. So a "no call" on holding applies to both teams. Holding penalties are especially irritating because they could be called on almost every play. So consistently is important.

I know what you are saying but I was watching highlights of the game yesterday (we didn't get the game down here) and some OL almost pulled Parsons' jersey off on one play where the Bengals scored in the second half.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I know what you are saying but I was watching highlights of the game yesterday (we didn't get the game down here) and some OL almost pulled Parsons' jersey off on one play where the Bengals scored in the second half.

Yeah some others have commented on the obvious holding of Parsons. When a ref can see a jersey being pulled, well that's an automatic hold IMO. The refs can't miss these.

 

[gopkrs]

Thanks milani. And you're right, Hafley's game plan keeps the ball and the carrier in front of the defense. So jumping a route would be inconsistent with that plan.

And with Flacco having to throw quickly, I'm surprised as well that Hafley didn't use man coverage more often. I mostly saw soft zones that were giving the receivers 5-7 yard pitch and catch plays. That's how the Bengals engineered a mind-boggling 10 minute plus drive to open the 2H. That really wore the D down for the rest of the half, and it was reflected in their play.

A win is a win, and better than the results of the last two games.

Like you said, it appears Hafley's D doesn't allow for jumping the route. But just to mix it up sometimes he, imho, should back a side up for deep, and allow a DB to jump a route. And just allowing those short passes and really long, time consuming drives isn't going to make it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Like you said, it appears Hafley's D doesn't allow for jumping the route. But just to mix it up sometimes he, imho, should back a side up for deep, and allow a DB to jump a route. And just allowing those short passes and really long, time consuming drives isn't going to make it.

Agree. I hardly see Xavier McKinney on the field. It is almost like he is playing deep on every play, just so nobody gets by the DB's. As we saw on Sunday, getting nickel and dimed over and over, can end up being death by a thousand cuts. This defense needs to get more aggressive and force some turnovers in the process.

 

[milani]

Interesting and I only noticed it after reading the comments from you and Poker. The officials were letting them play. And I agree with Poker that it's better if the refs let the teams play, with consistency. So a "no call" on holding applies to both teams. Holding penalties are especially irritating because they could be called on almost every play. So consistently is important.

This was a crew with which I was not as familiar. Seemed like they were almost too lazy to call them. Not complaining.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Like you said, it appears Hafley's D doesn't allow for jumping the route. But just to mix it up sometimes he, imho, should back a side up for deep, and allow a DB to jump a route. And just allowing those short passes and really long, time consuming drives isn't going to make it.

Well said. I saw Nixon jump a route, it may have been against the Commanders. He missed but not due to lack of effort. And you're right on the setup. Recognize a hot pass coming, slide safety cover behind a corner and have the corner jump the route. If the call is completed, the safety can keep the gain to a minimum. But if they get it right, it's sure to be a pic 6.

Actually Valentine would be perfect for this play.

I'm having a hard time understanding why the D wasn't able to get after Flacco. It's been pointed out he was throwing a lot of quick outs, but that resulted in a 10-minute drive. And this is Cincinnati for chrissakes. Hafley was slow to come out of a soft zone and play man with a chip at the snap.

Can't complain too much at 3-1-1, but as a team, the Packers are still stuck in the tier below elite. Than again, the Bucs and maybe the Chiefs look to be the only two elite teams. Lots of games left.......

 

[Heyjoe4]

This was a crew with which I was not as familiar. Seemed like they were almost too lazy to call them. Not complaining.

I much prefer when the refs let the players play. I've heard that offensive holding could be called on every play.

The obvious penalties have to be called. Grabbing someone's jersey is an instant flag. Otherwise, let em have at it.

 

[milani]

Well said. I saw Nixon jump a route, it may have been against the Commanders. He missed but not due to lack of effort. And you're right on the setup. Recognize a hot pass coming, slide safety cover behind a corner and have the corner jump the route. If the call is completed, the safety can keep the gain to a minimum. But if they get it right, it's sure to be a pic 6.

Actually Valentine would be perfect for this play.

I'm having a hard time understanding why the D wasn't able to get after Flacco. It's been pointed out he was throwing a lot of quick outs, but that resulted in a 10-minute drive. And this is Cincinnati for chrissakes. Hafley was slow to come out of a soft zone and play man with a chip at the snap.

Can't complain too much at 3-1-1, but as a team, the Packers are still stuck in the tier below elite. Than again, the Bucs and maybe the Chiefs look to be the only two elite teams. Lots of games left.......

Hard to believe that we still have 12 games to play. The next time we face the Lions they will be primed to execute much better than the first time. Hafley could have pressed a lot more. No way Flacco was going to succeed trying to go long.

 

[gopkrs]

If LaFleur insists on running so many end runs; I suggest he watch some bears tape. They know how to run it. Especially to the right side.

 

[Pugger]

If LaFleur insists on running so many end runs; I suggest he watch some bears tape. They know how to run it. Especially to the right side.

I wish MLF would take these types of plays out. They haven't worked in weeks. What is the definition of insanity....?

 

[Magooch]

I wish MLF would take these types of plays out. They haven't worked in years. What is the definition of insanity....?

Fixed that for you

(tongue in cheek but you get the point)

 

[mradtke66]

I wish MLF would take these types of plays out. They haven't worked in weeks.

Please define "haven't worked in weeks" when they have been, at worse, fine.

Matthew Golden is averaging 5.6 yards per carry on 8 carries. Savion Williams is averaging 4.6 yards per carry on 6 carries, though I believe he has 3 wildcat QB carries (struggling to find the exact numbers.) That leave us at 11 jet sweep plays over 5 games or roughly 2 per game.

And then you presume the only benefit is the yardage. Sending players in motion with the threat of giving them the ball makes linebackers just a tick longer. If you never give on the motion, it's less valuable as a threat.

 

[tynimiller]

Please define "haven't worked in weeks" when they have been, at worse, fine.

Matthew Golden is averaging 5.6 yards per carry on 8 carries. Savion Williams is averaging 4.6 yards per carry on 6 carries, though I believe he has 3 wildcat QB carries (struggling to find the exact numbers.) That leave us at 11 jet sweep plays over 5 games or roughly 2 per game.

And then you presume the only benefit is the yardage. Sending players in motion with the threat of giving them the ball makes linebackers just a tick longer. If you never give on the motion, it's less valuable as a threat.

You beat me to it...

 

[OldSchool101]

I wish MLF would take these types of plays out. They haven't worked in weeks. What is the definition of insanity....?

I also want to see some creativity on Teams. Such as on a 4th n 3 doing a Savion rollout with an outlet to either Run it for 3 yards or outlet to throw a 5 yard pass if needed.
I’m talking about after a short Defensive (3 n out) and then quicker Offensive series (just outside of Opponent FG range (past the GB 44 yardline area)

GB needs to start applying more pressure on opponents at our discretion. I’m not talking about at the GB34 with :20 sec and no timeouts. That’s getting suicidal there. Create a ruse, Let opponents think we had another Punt blocking mishap and if they bite and overcommit.. then punish them with a designed rollout to Savion and a lead blocker and receiver outlet. Rely on our D a little more earlier in games. It’s in season enough to be a little more unpredictable.

 

[Magooch]

The thing with LaFleur's "signature" jet sweep (and similar) is that IMO - anecdotally speaking - it often feels "unnatural" or "out of place". It's like it doesn't fit in or flow well, and often ends up feeling like a big momentum-killer, like it just disrupts the game flow for us and not in a positive way overall.

On the whole we have had two scoring drives all year that included a handoff to either one of Golden or Williams, combined...this of course does not tell the whole story but if nothing else on a very surface-level analysis our "positive" drives more frequently do *not* include this sort of play. I haven't looked at the exact numbers for the advanced analytics (and I am not even sure if I would have access to them if I wanted to) but I would love to see the EPA for these sort of plays. My gut says they are not a particularly high (positive) EPA-contribution, but I can't say for sure.

 

[Magooch]

Actually, it turns out there IS a play-by-play EPA for this sort of thing. Let's go back and look.
In Week 1 we did not attempt any such plays.

In Week 2:
Golden right end for 6 yards, +0.4 EPA
Golden right end for 9 yards, +0.6 EPA
Williams left end for 8 yards, +0.4 EPA
(Also worth noting that Savion had a direct snap/wildcat rush for 16 yards, +1.4 EPA)

Week 3:
(Again - direct snap/wildcat to Savion, 2 yards, -0.2 EPA; direct snap/wildcat to Savion, -3 yards, -1.2 EPA)
Golden left end for 2 yards, -0.2 EPA
Golden left end for 4 yards, 0.0 EPA
Golden right end for 3 yards, -0.2 EPA
(I would also point out that these last two end-arounds came on consecutive plays; we were up 10-3 with ~3 min left and ran two end-arounds before throwing an INT on 3rd...The rest was history)

Week 4:
Golden right end for 5 yards, +0.5 EPA
Williams left end for 1 yard, -0.4 EPA

Week 5: Bye

Week 6:
Golden right end for 8 yards, +0.6 EPA
Golden left end for 8 yards, +0.6 EPA
Williams right end for 3 yards, -0.2 EPA

All in all, that works out to +0.19 EPA per attempt on jet sweeps/end-arounds. Worth it??? You be the judge I suppose...

 

[mradtke66]

The thing with LaFleur's "signature" jet sweep

For a play that we run no more than 3 times per game this season, calling it a "signature" play sure seems like a stretch to me.

All in all, that works out to +0.19 EPA per attempt on jet sweeps/end-arounds

Two question or follow ups:

1. How are you computing 0.19? Are you averaging it or is that cumulative?

2. What happens if you do the same to our traditional running plays?

 

[gopkrs]

I wish MLF would take these types of plays out. They haven't worked in weeks. What is the definition of insanity....?

At least run fewer and somehow better

 

[tynimiller]

At least run fewer and somehow better

We average 5.18 yards per play with Golden/Savion end arounds so far....

 

[gopkrs]

The thing with LaFleur's "signature" jet sweep (and similar) is that IMO - anecdotally speaking - it often feels "unnatural" or "out of place". It's like it doesn't fit in or flow well, and often ends up feeling like a big momentum-killer, like it just disrupts the game flow for us and not in a positive way overall.

On the whole we have had two scoring drives all year that included a handoff to either one of Golden or Williams, combined...this of course does not tell the whole story but if nothing else on a very surface-level analysis our "positive" drives more frequently do *not* include this sort of play. I haven't looked at the exact numbers for the advanced analytics (and I am not even sure if I would have access to them if I wanted to) but I would love to see the EPA for these sort of plays. My gut says they are not a particularly high (positive) EPA-contribution, but I can't say for sure.

I like your point. And it's a completely different looking play when bears or lions run it. There is actually space and blocking. Also, it's also thise **** passes out there. You have to count those as those type of plays imo. Fewer and better execution would be very nice.

 

[Magooch]

For a play that we run no more than 3 times per game this season, calling it a "signature" play sure seems like a stretch to me.



Two question or follow ups:

1. How are you computing 0.19? Are you averaging it or is that cumulative?

2. What happens if you do the same to our traditional running plays?

It's mostly meant to be tongue-in-cheek. It's just poking fun at how for years now MLF has seemed to be dead-set on making it "a thing"

+0.19 is total EPA per end-around (combined) averaged out over end-around rush attempts.

IN terms of total averages, double-check my math perhaps (I'm trying to rush to get this in before leaving work for the day, lol)
Season-wide totals...
Rush EPA per play = 0.00
Pass EPA per play = 0.32

I don't have time at the moment to parse out every play to separate out end-around rushes/jet sweeps vs "traditional" rushes though so that above rush EPA/play figure does include ALL rush plays

 

[gopkrs]

Where it looked to me where we started running the ball effectively was right up the middle or just off center. Probably the left side of center. And that without motioning a tight end and having said TE standing right behind where we are going to run the ball, thereby telling the defense where to beef up. Sometimes an extra blocker in tight quarters just gives them two more tacklers. Now running around end is different. There you should be able to sneak out one or two blockers so as to outnumber the tacklers. Same with a well executed screen pass. Imho. The bears really executed the around end last game without having to scramble for every single yard with more tacklers showing up every second. At least that's the difference I see on that end around.