Jump to content

PFF article on the Bengals use of the 3-man line


Recommended Posts

Full article: https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-teaching-tape-cincinnati-bengals-and-the-rpo

 

Most relevant snippet: We charted 1,321 instances of run-pass options a season ago – over five a game. No team gained more yards on them though than the Bengals’ 444, even though they only had the third most RPO attempts. Cincinnati averaged 6.2 yards per play on RPOs! Remember, this is all an extension of the running game and completely removed from any traditional dropback passing concepts. Even on just their rushing attempts, Cincinnati’s yards per attempt went from 3.9 yards per carry without the option look, to 4.6 yards per carry with it. Maybe the biggest advantage of all is that these are not risky plays. On 648 RPO pass attempts last year, only five were intercepted (Cincinnati had none) – a 0.77 percent turnover rate. The league-wide fumble rate was over double that at 1.6 percent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool.

 

Our offense looked like shit last year compared to the previous season so I guess some random RPO stat can be our consolation prize. I'm usually pretty positive when it comes to good Bengals statistics, but I can't get very excited with our O after what happened last season, it was flat out unacceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, omgdrdoom said:

Cool.

 

Our offense looked like shit last year compared to the previous season so I guess some random RPO stat can be our consolation prize. I'm usually pretty positive when it comes to good Bengals statistics, but I can't get very excited with our O after what happened last season, it was flat out unacceptable.

 

 

Well have fun complaining about how bad A J Green sucks.

 

Personally I am able to discuss both positive and negative aspects of the team.  I congratulate them on the good things, like this success with run/pass options, but also berate them for the poor aspects like the pass protection.  I don't feel the need to shit on everything positive just because there were other flaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, fredtoast said:

 

 

Well have fun complaining about how bad A J Green sucks.

 

Personally I am able to discuss both positive and negative aspects of the team.  I congratulate them on the good things, like this success with run/pass options, but also berate them for the poor aspects like the pass protection.  I don't feel the need to shit on everything positive just because there were other flaws.

 

I'll ignore the A.J. strawman, you know better.

 

Anyway, I just don't find this to be a very impressive statistic. We were slightly below average (tied for 17th/18th I believe) in yards per play on offense, so like I said, this #1 RPO stat is just a consolation prize. It's cool to be #1 in anything positive, but the offense bummed me out last year so I'm not going to get too excited about this single obscure stat.

 

Feel free to keep up the good work insinuating that I'm shitting on "everything positive" just because I wasn't throwing a parade for this one stat that I don't find to mean very much of anything. FWIW, I don't even think our pass protection was as bad as most people make it out to be, there's a ton of overreaction regarding our 2016 line (though the 2017 concerns are usually valid). The offense took a step back from '15 to '16 and it wasn't just pass pro that was the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SF2 said:

It was my understanding that PFF rankings and stats were considered worthless and arbitrary on this board.

 

All rankings done by the NFL football media are worthless and arbitrary. So are opinions by the NFL football media worthless and arbitrary.

 

Indeed, anything related to the NFL is worthless and arbitrary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Jason said:

Run/Pass option

 

So every offensive snap, then? Don't they always have that option? Unless they mean designed run/pass plays which they couldn't possibly know for certain without being in the huddle. This assumed omniscience is why PFF is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, T-Dub said:

 

So every offensive snap, then? Don't they always have that option? Unless they mean designed run/pass plays which they couldn't possibly know for certain without being in the huddle. This assumed omniscience is why PFF is a joke.

 

Actually it is easy to see when receivers are running routes instead of blocking.

 

Here is my take on PFF.  They keep track of a lot of stats and most of the analysis based just on numbers is interesting.  But the individual player ranking systems are worthless.  First of all a player can do his job and still get anything from a "0" to a "+2" based on total subjective opinion.  Then these faulty numbers are plugged into a formula where player A can play fewer snaps that player B, mess up more often than player B, yet still be ranked higher than player B.  In 2015 most of the raw stats showed that Dre was a top 30 CB, but PFF had him ranked 112th behind a ton of scrubs who barely played.

 

So PFF is some good and some bad.  A lot like most things in life. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, fredtoast said:

 

Actually it is easy to see when receivers are running routes instead of blocking.

 

 

Sure but that doesn't mean anything. Hines Ward is going to the HoF for run blocking on passing plays.

 

Quote

Here is my take on PFF.  They keep track of a lot of stats and most of the analysis based just on numbers is interesting.  But the individual player ranking systems are worthless.  First of all a player can do his job and still get anything from a "0" to a "+2" based on total subjective opinion.  Then these faulty numbers are plugged into a formula where player A can play fewer snaps that player B, mess up more often than player B, yet still be ranked higher than player B.  In 2015 most of the raw stats showed that Dre was a top 30 CB, but PFF had him ranked 112th behind a ton of scrubs who barely played.

 

 

Yeah, it assumes too much, like the DE's -1.7 pass rush when the play called for contain etc etc.  

 

 I've been using Pro Football Reference for stats.

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/

 

Quote

So PFF is some good and some bad.  A lot like most things in life. 

 

 

 

43737635.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in regards to the 3 man line, the RPO is always on the table. Its about getting a team in m2m splitting everyone out and making the running back beat the one unblocked player still in the box before trying to beat a safety.  If in zone or more than 3 guys sitting at the LOS, you throw the bubble screen and let those big lineman roll downfield. This stat just shows how good Andy is at diagnosing which way to go with the football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only stat I REALLY care about is W/L record. Last year's team pissed away so many chances to win AT LEAST three more games instead of coming away with six wins and a fucking sister-kissing tie. Bad kicking, bad blocking, terrible running game...ugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah...and I'm STILL pissed about that Tyler Boyd fumble that wasn't a fumble. One of the worst calls EVER. I can still hear the surprise in Dave Lapham's voice when they made that the final decision. We were totally jobbed by the refs. That's yet another game we COULD have won as we were driving like crazy and were only down eight points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2017 at 3:32 PM, fredtoast said:

 

So PFF is some good and some bad.  A lot like most things in life. 

 

They're also trying to do something no one else does. (Or, at the very least, they're the best at what several people are trying to do...) Raw stats don't indicate if you were covering AJ Green or Rex Burkehead. They don't tell you if your RB had a big day against Cleveland twice and 14 horrible days against actual NFL teams. They don't tell you if your QB had a bad day when his top 3 starters were injured.

The stats are interesting, but not gospel. Remember that everyone thought Sabermetrics was a joke and a half until some team gave them a chance to prove it out.

I find the blind "I don't believe in PFF" to be as short-sighted as treating them as gospel. It's an avenue to generate discussion, as much as some posters here dislike discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LostInDaJungle said:

 

They're also trying to do something no one else does.

 

 

Hardly.  Football Outsiders have been using composite stats like this for ages & they're not the only ones. What makes them (and so many others) better than PFF is that they're transparent about how they're compiled.  Their numbers are still arbitrary at times, but they will at least say so and even test those numbers by trying to predict future performance.  They'll also admit when those numbers are wrong.

 

PFF is bad because their methodology is bad, not because they're doing something so ground-breaking the average pleb can't understand it.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, T-Dub said:

 

 

Hardly.  Football Outsiders have been using composite stats like this for ages & they're not the only ones. What makes them (and so many others) better than PFF is that they're transparent about how they're compiled.  Their numbers are still arbitrary at times, but they will at least say so and even test those numbers by trying to predict future performance.  They'll also admit when those numbers are wrong.

 

PFF is bad because their methodology is bad, not because they're doing something so ground-breaking the average pleb can't understand it.  

 

 

 

I'm giving this post a -.06

 

:mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...