Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Jpoore

Pacman is a top 10 cb

Recommended Posts

I compiled a bunch of stats in another thread a while back showing the Bengals defense vs. types of receivers over the years compared to NFL averages.

 

Our problem clearly isn't our starting outside CBs, we have some good ones. We rank at league average or better almost every year against #1/2 WRs in terms of how often they're thrown to and yardage. Top WRs just don't get open a lot against us compared to the rest of the NFL. I won't argue the semantics of Adam being top 10 or not, but our problems in pass defense are vs. TEs, RBs, and sometimes #3-5 WRs.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have not seen the 2016 CB rankings yet from FootballOutsiders, but Pac was one of their highest rated CBs in 2015.  He was third in "Yards per target", 5th in "success rate" (a stat that takes down and distance in to account), and 13th in "completion percentage allowed".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I compiled a bunch of stats in another thread a while back showing the Bengals defense vs. types of receivers over the years compared to NFL averages.
 
Our problem clearly isn't our starting outside CBs, we have some good ones. We rank at league average or better almost every year against #1/2 WRs in terms of how often they're thrown to and yardage. Top WRs just don't get open a lot against us compared to the rest of the NFL. I won't argue the semantics of Adam being top 10 or not, but our problems in pass defense are vs. TEs, RBs, and sometimes #3-5 WRs.

Hopefully vigil stops that from being a worry anymore. If he can and I believe mitner is a great coverage cb, our defense will be amazing.


Sent from my iPad using Go-Bengals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jason said:

I'd be interested in seeing what his yards per target were. 

 

8.3 yards per target if you take the total number of yards in that graphic and divide it by his 60 targets.

 

But then Football Outsiders has him listed at 6.1 yards per pass which is essentially their yards per target stat if I'm not mistaken.

  • Yd/Pass: Average yards gained on passes where this cornerback was in coverage.

I guess this could be a case of FBO and PFF giving credit/blame for different CBs in coverage on certain plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2017 at 9:08 AM, omgdrdoom said:

I compiled a bunch of stats in another thread a while back showing the Bengals defense vs. types of receivers over the years compared to NFL averages.

 

Our problem clearly isn't our starting outside CBs, we have some good ones. We rank at league average or better almost every year against #1/2 WRs in terms of how often they're thrown to and yardage. Top WRs just don't get open a lot against us compared to the rest of the NFL. I won't argue the semantics of Adam being top 10 or not, but our problems in pass defense are vs. TEs, RBs, and sometimes #3-5 WRs.

 

The thing to remember is that overall our pass defense has been superb.  

 

It is not that our LBs have been terrible.  It is just that our DBs take away so much else.  I bet if you look at the numbers our LBs are probably thrown at as much as almost any team in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, fredtoast said:

 

The thing to remember is that overall our pass defense has been superb.  

 

It is not that our LBs have been terrible.  It is just that our DBs take away so much else.  I bet if you look at the numbers our LBs are probably thrown at as much as almost any team in the league.

 

RBs and TEs are typically thrown at more often with the Bengals defense than most other NFL teams.

 

Last year, only 1 defense had more TE targets per game, 3 teams had more RB targets per game.

In 2015, our defense gave up the most TE targets by a wide margin, 4 teams had more RB targets per game.

I actually had to go back to 2010 to find a year where we were better than league average with TE or RB targets per game.

 

We've had excellent secondary and D-line play for years now and you can't have 11 All-Pro starters. There has been a clear issue with our LBs in coverage and it seems the Bengals have prioritized other parts of the field. This isn't bashing the Bengals D because they've been VERY good for a while now, but there are obvious holes and that is with LBs in coverage and just covering anyone outside of the top 1-2 WRs on the field in general. We shut down the big play, we shut down top WRs, and we typically shut down the run; however, we struggle with mid-range middle of the field yardage compared to most NFL teams. The numbers back it up. I'd agree that the numbers could be a bit inflated due to QBs having to look elsewhere when their WR1/2 are blanketed, but we've also seen some BAD linebacker coverage over the years too and some really piss poor tackling recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We haven't covered TE's well in as long as I can remember. Probably had something to do with Maualuga providing said "coverage".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bunghole said:

We haven't covered TE's well in as long as I can remember. Probably had something to do with Maualuga providing said "coverage".

 

Leon Hall's specialty the last couple of years he was here. Too bad we couldn't have found a way to keep him for that purpose alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Enon Bengal said:

 

Leon Hall's specialty the last couple of years he was here. Too bad we couldn't have found a way to keep him for that purpose alone.

 

 

Always seemed like a class act, too.  Textbook tackler as well AFAIK.  Considering what the DB room has for leadership these days & all the young guys, Hall is missed in many ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I don't think he is really good, but I think the defensive scheme has always been geared towards taking away the big play from the guys outside of the hashes and to let teams do their damage with checking the ball down. Sustaining drives is much harder when only getting 4 to 5 yards a play due to drops/negative plays/pressure of 3rd down/etc. Whether we have had the linebackers to stop that from happening is a different story, but could also be a reason we have been content to go this way. 

 

They've been going after much more athletic linebackers lately so we could see the defense really transform into a dominant package. After they adjusted a little bit last year, they looked really good. Pretty excited about the defense this year. Offense just has to help out by sustaining some drives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JC said:

After they adjusted a little bit last year, they looked really good. Pretty excited about the defense this year. Offense just has to help out by sustaining some drives.

You know, and this is no offense to you personally, I keep hearing people on the radio and on here saying this. And while it is true to an extent, look at the offenses we played in the second half of the season. Bills, Browns, Ravens, Eagles, Redskins...none of them is exactly top tier on offense, unlike earlier in the season when we got absolutely trucked by the Patriots and Cowboys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Bunghole said:

You know, and this is no offense to you personally, I keep hearing people on the radio and on here saying this. And while it is true to an extent, look at the offenses we played in the second half of the season. Bills, Browns, Ravens, Eagles, Redskins...none of them is exactly top tier on offense, unlike earlier in the season when we got absolutely trucked by the Patriots and Cowboys.

Redskins were 3, Pitt was 7, Buffalo was 16 and Baltimore 17.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...