Robinson vs. Cook

[T-Dub]

[quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1355403744' post='1192175']
the line was shaky against the Chargers too, as far as pass pro.


They actually ran the ball better against Dallas than San Diego. [b]When they actually ran the ball.[/b]
[/quote]

Definitely the bigger problem.

[scharm]

Settling for FGs. Untimely dropped Ints and Catches. Then 1 bad Int from the QB. Probably the biggest factors in the loss.


The reality is the Center play not that much of a factor.

[|kennethmw|]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1355398627' post='1192152']




What agenda would that be? Wanting them to win?
[/quote]

The "I'm so smart, I know who we should be playing based on my watching TV" agenda. How about that one? Or the "I've never liked Cook, so I'll suck the new guy's dick" agenda? Or the "I'm smarter than Marvin and the coaches, I just haven't got my shot" agenda? I'm sure there are a few more.

[T-Dub]

[quote name='kennethmw' timestamp='1355408055' post='1192189']
The "I'm so smart, I know who we should be playing based on my watching TV" agenda. How about that one? Or the "I've never liked Cook, so I'll suck the new guy's dick" agenda? Or the "I'm smarter than Marvin and the coaches, I just haven't got my shot" agenda? I'm sure there are a few more.
[/quote]

Don't forget the "I'm kind of a troll and think I know more than the average fan", that's a popular one.

[Bengals1181]

man, I'm watching some of the game in Baltimore from last year, that game was intense.

I'm not saying he can't handle it, but thankfully Robinson hasn't had to face anything like that yet.


And my how far the Baltimore defense has fallen.

[|kennethmw|]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1355409815' post='1192192']


Don't forget the "I'm kind of a troll and think I know more than the average fan", that's a popular one.




[/quote]

That is a good one! The only problem is sometimes that one is true and not an agenda!!

[Jamie_B]

Personally my favorite agenda is the I coached pop-warner so I know about this stuff, or I used to play high school football agenda... I call that one the Al Bundy.

[img]http://camdengop.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/albundy.jpg[/img]

[T-Dub]

4 TD's in a single game!

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1355434924' post='1192376']
4 TD's in a single game!
[/quote]

[alleycat]

[quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1355170419' post='1191402']
in an article earlier, Hobson said they rotated every 2 series.


So, assuming that's right (which it isn't because the snap counts don't line up, lol):

Robinson

5 plays, TD - Cincy 30 (70 yards) W
7 plays, FG - Dallas 47 (50 yards) W [b]Sack[/b]
12 plays, FG - Cincy 23 (79 yards) W [b]Penalty[/b] Whit, [b]Sack[/b] (saved by Penalty but I'll count it)
5 plays, FG - Cincy 48 (18 Yards) W
5 plays, punt - Cincy 20 (6 yards) L [b]Sack[/b]

Cook

4 plays, INT - Cincy 25 (14 yards) L [b]INT[/b]
11 plays, FG - Cincy 19 (66 Yards) W [b]Penalty[/b] Cook; [b]Sack[/b];
5 plays, punt - Cincy 34 (15 Yards) L
5 plays, punt (this included BJGE's big gainer) - Cincy 6 (26 yards) L [b]Penalty[/b] Cook; [b]Sack[/b]




How much of the good play, or bad play, had to do with each, obvious takes more analysis. Robinson's drives resulted in more scores, but also typically started with much better field position.

Cook had a few mistakes, I don't remember any on Robinson.
[/quote]

OK, so I went ahead and took a look at last night's game, and here's what I have:

Drive # Plays Result Starting Field Positon Yards Notes

Robinson
1) 6 plays TD PHI 44 56 Yards Win Big BJGE run
2) 3 Plays TD PHI 11 5 Yards L Brandon Graham [b]Sack[/b] (scored a field goal but only gained 5 yards on 3 plays)
6) 4 Plays Punt CIN 20 -6 yards L [b]Penalty[/b] JG Holding [b]Dalton Sacked[/b] by T. Cole
7) 6 plays AD Fumble CIN 10 12 Yards L [b]Penalty[/b] Holding A Smith, Dalton [b]Fumble/Sack[/b] by Cullen Jenkins (Cox drives Robinson back and AD can't step up)
8) 3 plays Punt CIN 23 4 yards L Gresham drops easy first down.
13) 13 Plays Downs PHI 46 40 yards W I'm calling this a win because we drove down field and would have kicked a FG (Gresham almost gets TD), but bc we go for it on fourth we turn over on downs.
14) 3 plays CIN 40 Yards W Last possession of the game, calling it a win bc we got the first down and then took the knee 3 x (which I'm not counting).

Cook
3) 11 plays Punt CIN 13 48 yards L Dalton incomplete x3
4) 3 Plays Punt CIN 47 4 yards L Dalton throws high twice
5) 4 Plays AD Fumble CIN 35 1 yard L MJ False Start [b]Penalty[/b], AD [b]Fumble/Sack[/b] by Brandon Graham
9) 3 Plays Punt CIN 15 - 5 yards L [b]2 sacks[/b] by Fletcher Cox, both through the A Gap, both times Cook was helping a Guard who didn't need it.
10) 10 plays TD PHI 40 60 yards W [b]Penalty[/b] Roland Holding, Big BJGE Run; [b]Penalty[/b] Delay AD; this is the drive that turned the tide after Leons INT. (AD took over with this two scrambles that made the difference. On looking back at the game, this gives me confidence in him, because he just took it on his shoulders. He was angry. I liked it)
11) 4 plays FG PHI 13 -1 yards L [b]Penalty[/b] Holding Zeitler;
12) 6 Plays TD PHI 33 33 yards W Penalty keeps drive alive during FG attempt ( a gift, but I'll take it).


[b]So let's add it all up![/b]

Robinson: 7 Drives 38 plays 126 Yards (3.31/play) 3 winning drives; 4 Losing (42.8%) 3 Sacks 2 Penalties 1 TO
Cook: 7 Drives 41 plays 139 Yards (3.39/play) 2 winning; 5 losing (28.5%) 3 Sacks 4 Penalties 1 TO

My most interesting observations are that we were absolutely clicking until Cook's first series, which marked the beginning of our ineptitude for the next 8 drives, and then we run 4 of the last 5 drives.

The most glaring errors I saw were Robinson getting pushed back into AD on the Cullen Jenkins sack, not allowing Andy to step up; and Cook helping the wrong guy on the two Fletcher Cox Sacks up the A gap.

[b]If I take a quick look at last weeks game (from 1181's work) and total we get:[/b]

Robinson: 34 Plays 223 Yards (6.56/play) 4 Winning Drives; 1 Losing (80%) 3 sacks 1 penalty
Cook: 25 Plays 121 Yards (4.84/play) 1 Winning Drives; 3 Losing (25%) Drives 2 Sacks 2 Penalties 1 TO

[b]Add it all up over the last two games and you get:[/b]


Robinson: 72 Plays 349 Yards ([b]4.85/play[/b]) 7 Winning Drives; 5 Losing ([b]58.3%[/b]) 6 sacks 3 penalty 1 TO
Cook: 66 Plays 260 Yards ([b]3.4/play[/b]) 3 Winning Drives; 8 Losing Drives [b](27.2%[/b]) 5 Sacks 6 Penalties 2 TO

[b]The takeaway?[/b]

In both games we scored each time we had the ball until Cook came in (two scoring drives each game, followed by INT vs Dallas and 3 incompletions vs. Eagles when Cook comes in for his first drive). In both games, that change pretty much marked the reversal of momentum - which it took us a long time to get back if we could. You can look at a lot of numbers, but I don't see how you can look past this affect on momentum, or the flow of the game. Why not stay with the hot hand? Why change something when you are winning? Also, it's hard to disagree with the average yards per play (4.85 vs 3.4) and the percentage of winning drives (58.3 vs 27.2).

While I was doing the individual drives, I thought it was much more balanced than it ended up being overall. One thing is that the Dallas game was hugely unbalanced in favor of Robinson. The other thing was noticing this change in momentum both times.

Finally, and this may be splitting hairs, but the momentum of crapitude was finally stopped when AD scrambled (because he had no time) those two times to finally score and get us going again. No doubt this is an emotional game. There's also little doubt that our team does better when Robinson is on the field

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='alleycat' timestamp='1355512644' post='1193837']
OK, so I went ahead and took a look at last night's game, and here's what I have:

Drive # Plays Result Starting Field Positon Yards Notes

Robinson
1) 6 plays TD PHI 44 56 Yards Win Big BJGE run
2) 3 Plays TD PHI 11 5 Yards L Brandon Graham [b]Sack[/b] (scored a field goal but only gained 5 yards on 3 plays)
6) 4 Plays Punt CIN 20 -6 yards L [b]Penalty[/b] JG Holding [b]Dalton Sacked[/b] by T. Cole
7) 6 plays AD Fumble CIN 10 12 Yards L [b]Penalty[/b] Holding A Smith, Dalton [b]Fumble/Sack[/b] by Cullen Jenkins (Cox drives Robinson back and AD can't step up)
8) 3 plays Punt CIN 23 4 yards L Gresham drops easy first down.
13) 13 Plays Downs PHI 46 40 yards W I'm calling this a win because we drove down field and would have kicked a FG (Gresham almost gets TD), but bc we go for it on fourth we turn over on downs.
14) 3 plays CIN 40 Yards W Last possession of the game, calling it a win bc we got the first down and then took the knee 3 x (which I'm not counting).

Cook
3) 11 plays Punt CIN 13 48 yards L Dalton incomplete x3
4) 3 Plays Punt CIN 47 4 yards L Dalton throws high twice
5) 4 Plays AD Fumble CIN 35 1 yard L MJ False Start [b]Penalty[/b], AD [b]Fumble/Sack[/b] by Brandon Graham
9) 3 Plays Punt CIN 15 - 5 yards L [b]2 sacks[/b] by Fletcher Cox, both through the A Gap, both times Cook was helping a Guard who didn't need it.
10) 10 plays TD PHI 40 60 yards W [b]Penalty[/b] Roland Holding, Big BJGE Run; [b]Penalty[/b] Delay AD; this is the drive that turned the tide after Leons INT. (AD took over with this two scrambles that made the difference. On looking back at the game, this gives me confidence in him, because he just took it on his shoulders. He was angry. I liked it)
11) 4 plays FG PHI 13 -1 yards L [b]Penalty[/b] Holding Zeitler;
12) 6 Plays TD PHI 33 33 yards W Penalty keeps drive alive during FG attempt ( a gift, but I'll take it).


So let's add it all up!

Robinson: 7 Drives 38 plays 126 Yards (3.31/play) 3 winning drives; 4 Losing (42.8%) 3 Sacks 2 Penalties 1 TO
Cook: 7 Drives 41 plays 139 Yards (3.39/play) 2 winning; 5 losing (28.5%) 3 Sacks 4 Penalties 1 TO

My most interesting observations are that we were absolutely clicking until Cook's first series, which marked the beginning of our ineptitude for the next 8 drives, and then we run 4 of the last 5 drives.

The most glaring errors I saw were Robinson getting pushed back into AD on the Cullen Jenkins sack, not allowing Andy to step up; and Cook helping the wrong guy on the two Fletcher Cox Sacks up the A gap.

If I take a quick look at last weeks game (from 1181's work) and total we get:

Robinson: 34 Plays 223 Yards (6.56/play) 4 Winning Drives; 1 Losing (80%) 3 sacks 1 penalty
Cook: 25 Plays 121 Yards (4.84/play) 1 Winning Drives; 3 Losing (25%) Drives 2 Sacks 2 Penalties 1 TO

Add it all up and you get:


Robinson: 72 Plays 349 Yards ([b]4.85/play[/b]) 7 Winning Drives; 5 Losing ([b]58.3%[/b]) 6 sacks 3 penalty 1 TO
Cook: 66 Plays 260 Yards ([b]3.4/play[/b]) 3 Winning Drives; 8 Losing Drives [b](27.2%[/b]) 5 Sacks 6 Penalties 2 TO

The takeaway?

In both games we scored each time we had the ball until Cook came in (two scoring drives each game, followed by INT vs Dallas and 3 incompletions vs. Eagles when Cook comes in for his first drive). In both games, that change pretty much marked the reversal of momentum - which it took us a long time to get back if we could. You can look at a lot of numbers, but I don't see how you can look past this affect on momentum, or the flow of the game. Why not stay with the hot hand? Why change something when you are winning? Also, it's hard to disagree with the average yards per play (4.85 vs 3.4) and the percentage of winning drives (58.3 vs 27.2).

While I was doing the individual drives, I thought it was much more balanced than it ended up being overall. One thing is that the Dallas game was hugely unbalanced in favor of Robinson. The other thing was noticing this change in momentum both times.

Finally, and this may be splitting hairs, but the momentum of crapitude was finally stopped when AD scrambled (because he had no time) those two times to finally score and get us going again. No doubt this is an emotional game. There's also little doubt that our team does better when Robinson is on the field
[/quote]



great analysis. Still tough to say that any of the struggles are directly due to the rotation, as by and large both are playing well and the struggles of the offense aren't due to who's playing center.

Working on a sack write-up I'll post in a bit.

[alleycat]

[quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1355513339' post='1193842']
great analysis. Still tough to say that any of the struggles are directly due to the rotation, as by and large both are playing well and the struggles of the offense aren't due to who's playing center.

Working on a sack write-up I'll post in a bit.
[/quote]

Yes, but...

The point that I'm trying to make is that I don't even think you need to look at the stats, just look at something more subtle - the shapes and feels of the games. In both, we were rolling - and then we put Cook in - and then we weren't.

Another way to think of it is this: Andy Dalton has his hands firmly planted up beneath another man's ass. It can't be too easy to get accustomed to that. But once he does comfortable with that ass, why ask him to get familiar with a different, flabbier ass from the past - when he's just gotten into a rhythm with this tight young new one?

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='alleycat' timestamp='1355514045' post='1193848']
Yes, but...

The point that I'm trying to make is that I don't even think you need to look at the stats, just look at the shapes of the games. In both, we were rolling - and then we put Cook in - and then we weren't.

Another way to think of it is this: Andy Dalton has his hands firmly planted up beneath another man's ass. It can't be too easy to get accustomed to that. But once he does comfortable with that ass, why ask him to get familiar with a different, flabbier ass from the past - when he's just gotten into a rhythm with this tight young new one?
[/quote]


I whole-heartedly think they need to pick one and stick with him, and I'd be fine with either, but I'm just saying you can't know the whole story just looking at the results. So much of what happens is out of their control. If Dalton throws a bad pass, if someone drops a ball, etc... You can't just say "so and so was in when they had this bad drive" and make the correlation that they are to blame.


I know you hate Cook that's fine and dandy. Your hate for him is well-documented. However, you're making correlations that just can't be made. Is there an argument that the rotation is hurting the chemistry? Absolutely, but from what I watched against Dallas, and what I've watched against Philly so far, you can't blame either Robinson or Cook individually for the struggles of the offense. Both played well against Dallas, and so far (I'm in the 3rd quarter), neither has been the problem with the Philly game.

You can blame the rotation, but you can't blame either one of them individually.

[SocalBengalEd]

Robinson > Cook . Cook would bea solid back up next year. expensive though

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='alleycat' timestamp='1355512644' post='1193837']
9) 3 Plays Punt CIN 15 - 5 yards L [b]2 sacks[/b] by Fletcher Cox, both through the A Gap, both times Cook was helping a
[/quote]


if you're assigning any blame on that 2nd sack to Cook, you're bias against him is far bigger than I ever imagined.


Boling's man starts out trying to split he and Whit. Cook was helping out Zeitler, who's man cut up, and then tried to cut in and split he and cook.

[alleycat]

[quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1355514342' post='1193852']
I whole-heartedly think they need to pick one and stick with him, and I'd be fine with either, but I'm just saying you can't know the whole story just looking at the results.
[/quote]

Ahhh, but this is where we disagree. Or should I say, this is where we differ. Because I agree that you can't just look at results - from a microcosmic point of view. But when you look at the broad results, that is, over an entire game, or even more broadly, over two games, and you keep getting the same message over and over...well then I think not looking is foolhardy.

It's not about hate. I know you think I have a bias against Cook. (My problem with Cook is that I've often found him unathletic, sloppy, and a bit undisciplined). My issue now is that, with some analysis, we now see that, BY A SIGNIFICANT MARGIN, this team does better when Robinson is on the field. Not just by extracting a drive or two, or even a game. In fact, statistically the team does TWICE as well when Robinson is in.

And this is my biggest point of all: the intangible one. How does the TEAM do with one vs. the other? Right now, the facts are overwhelming in support of Robinson. The slightly more subtle argument that I'm making is that, in both the last two games, the team has also been dominant (scoring on their first two drives in both), only to screw the pooch immediately after that - which happens to perfectly coincide with Cook's entry.

At the end of the day, this is a profession that's based on performance. The team has been winning with Robinson in. When you take a guy out - despite the fact that the team is doing about as well as possible while he's in - you're sending a message to the rest of the team that it's NOT all about performance. And that has to take the wind out of some sails, and make people watch their back, and maybe be a little more careful, and maybe not just give that little bit of extra effort - because you've seen evidence that success is actually NOT the determining factor of whether or not you get to play and get paid. Either way, like it or not, when Cook comes in the chemisty and success we've had in the last two games instantly nose dives.

Or, to put it another way, if there's no "I" in "Team," why are you telling you're team that you're going to change up something that's working (meaning you are dominating offensively when he's in in this case) to put in a guy that, quite simply, isn't?

[alleycat]

[quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1355515686' post='1193857']
if you're assigning any blame on that 2nd sack to Cook, you're bias against him is far bigger than I ever imagined.


Boling's man starts out trying to split he and Whit. Cook was helping out Zeitler, who's man cut up, and then tried to cut in and split he and cook.
[/quote]
I don't need to engage the bias argument at all.

I have the luxury of cold hard facts on my side, and they couldn't be more clear

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='alleycat' timestamp='1355516085' post='1193858']
Ahhh, but this is where we disagree. Or should I say, this is where we differ. Because I agree that you can't just look at results - from a microcosmic point of view. But when you look at the broad results, that is, over an entire game, or even more broadly, over two games, and you keep getting the same message over and over...well then I think not looking is foolhardy.

It's not about hate. I know you think I have a bias against Cook. (My problem with Cook is that I've often found him unathletic, sloppy, and a bit undisciplined). My issue now is that, with some analysis, we now see that, BY A SIGNIFICANT MARGIN, this team does better when Robinson is on the field. Not just by extracting a drive or two, or even a game. In fact, statistically the team does TWICE as well when Robinson is in.

And this is my biggest point of all: the intangible one. How does the TEAM do with one vs. the other? Right now, the facts are overwhelming in support of Robinson. The slightly more subtle argument that I'm making is that, in both the last two games, the team has also been dominant (scoring on their first two drives in both), only to screw the pooch after that - which happens to perfectly coincide with Cook's entry.

At the end of the day, this is a profession that's based on performance. The team has been winning with Robinson in. When you take a guy out - despite the fact that the team is doing about as well as possible while he's in - you're sending a message to the rest of the team that it's NOT all about performance. And that has to take the wind out of some sails, and make people watch their back, and maybe be a little more careful, and maybe not just give that little bit of extra effort - because you've seen evidence that success is actually NOT the determining factor of whether or not you get to play and get paid.

Or, to put it another way, if there's no "I" in "Team," why are you telling you're team that you're going to change up something that's working (meaning you are dominating offensively when he's in in this case) to put in a guy that, quite simply, isn't?
[/quote]

but again, you're giving robinson credit for things he has nothing to do with and assigning blame to cook on things he has nothing to do with.

You can't just look at their drive results and pretend its all about them. A WR drops a pass that ends a drive that cook is under center, you count that as a negative against cook when he had nothing to do with it. Dalton throws a bad pass, you chalk it up to Cook being under center.


We can't just look at it arbitrarily. I have no idea who's better for the offense at this point. I think both have strengths and weaknesses vs the other. What I do know though, is you can't simply look at drive results and chalk that up to one center being in or the other. There's 10 other guys on the field, and what they do can't be blamed on another player. We can only look at Cook and Robinson's individual play and see if either one is individually hurting or helping the team.

[alleycat]

[quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1355516591' post='1193863']
but again, you're giving robinson credit for things he has nothing to do with and assigning blame to cook on things he has nothing to do with.


[/quote]

OK, then you tell me. How do we define or judge team chemistry, in a game realm that's largely based on emotion/confidence, any other way then by looking at... team results?

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='alleycat' timestamp='1355516941' post='1193865']
OK, then you tell me. How do we define or judge team chemistry, in a game realm that's largely based on emotion/confidence, any other way then by looking at... team results?
[/quote]

as I said in my first response, we can certainly discuss team chemistry, and I think they need to pick one and stick with him for the sake of it. Two weeks ago I said they should stick with Robinson as long as the offense is hot and I still feel they should have.

What you can't do however, and what you are doing, is making correlations that Cook himself is responsible for why certain drives fail.

You can blame the chemistry, but you can't blame Cook's play. He's played quite well, as has Robinson. And as for specific sacks that have been given up over the last week by the offensive line, you can't assign much blame to either of them.

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='alleycat' timestamp='1355516217' post='1193859']
I don't need to engage the bias argument at all.

I have the luxury of cold hard facts on my side, and they couldn't be more clear
[/quote]

that's nice, but opinions aren't fact, and all either of us have are opinions.

fwiw, here's a photo of the play, with Boling's guy moving towards Whit. Cook subsequently keeps his eyes on the other defender much closer.

Boling was one on one and simply got beat.

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v405/Panther1/cook1.png[/IMG]

[alleycat]

[quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1355517172' post='1193867']
as I said in my first response, we can certainly discuss team chemistry, and I think they need to pick one and stick with him for the sake of it. Two weeks ago I said they should stick with Robinson as long as the offense is hot and I still feel they should have.

What you can't do however, and what you are doing, is making correlations that Cook himself is responsible for why certain drives fail.

You can blame the chemistry, but you can't blame Cook's play. He's played quite well, as has Robinson. And as for specific sacks that have been given up over the last week by the offensive line, you can't assign much blame to either of them.
[/quote]

You're misreading me terribly if you think I'm blaming Cook. I'm not. Or, to put it another way, I AM blaming Cook, but not for his play. I'm blaming him for his effect on the Team's Chemistry when he is in, which IS something that is measurable. And for Kyle Cook, those measurements don't look good.

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='alleycat' timestamp='1355517397' post='1193870']
You're misreading me terribly if you think I'm blaming Cook. I'm not. Or, to put it another way, I AM blaming Cook, but not for his play. I'm blaming him for his effect on the Team's Chemistry when he is in, which IS something that is measurable. And for Kyle Cook, those measurements don't look good.
[/quote]

fair enough.

[alleycat]

[quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1355517368' post='1193869']
that's nice, but opinions aren't fact, and all either of us have are opinions.

fwiw, here's a photo of the play, with Boling's guy moving towards Whit. Cook subsequently keeps his eyes on the other defender much closer.

Boling was one on one and simply got beat.

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v405/Panther1/cook1.png[/img]
[/quote]

You keep having a different argument with me than the one I'm having with you, and until we get that squared, we aren't going to get anywhere. I'm not even talking about individual play. I could care less about who does what on which play. You can completely ignore or disagree with my play-by-play analysis. But what you can't disagree with are the aggregate results, the numbers, of how this team does when one guy is in versus another.

And as far as I'm concerned, there's simply no argument there because the facts are devastating. My assertion that we've done well the last two games on the first two drives and then do shitting when Cook comes in? OK, I'll even give you that one, as we COULD chalk that up to chance (rather than a sudden Change in Chemistry). But over the course of two whole games?

Nope, I'm not going to budge an inch there.

EDIT: OK, I just saw your last post. Now we can proceed in peace (or argue about those first two drives )

[T-Dub]

I just want them to FFS pick one and go with it.