Palmer in the no-huddle vs. ball control offense

[HairOnFire]

I co-sign COB's posts and will be subscribing to his newsletter.

You're just in time for my big issue on domestic issues. The lead story is, "An Almost Daily Serving of Hamburger Helper: Reasonable Nutrition, or The Basis for a Justifiable Homocide Defense?"

I look forward to it. In fact, the very reason I chose your newsletter over those offered by Hokie or Hoosier is the recipes you include. For example, your Pumpkin Fudge Cake recipe was a perfect way to celebrate the Cleveland loss. And the Pulled Porkpie Potpie entree was a timely way to celebrate TO's breakout game. I eagerly anticipate what you've got planned for the Buccaneer game. (Tampa Bay Flounder?)

[membengal]

No sense arguing to argue. At some point it ceases to be fun. I think you are grasping at straws hair, in thinking what they did last year was sustainable as opposed to pure luck. Bottom line, a regression to ugly was coming if they didn't change. Hell a regression to ugly may be coming even with the change. The schedule is markedly harder and the bengals have caught no breaks (played pats w/ moss, no other afc north team will...play steelers w/ roeth twice unlike ravens...play jets w/ holmes and revis unlike ravens) and it was going to be a tough slog anyway. But the constant bleating that somehow a giants style 1990 offense would work, well, I simply disagree and that's where it shall be. Too much is heaped on the defense when this team never can get a lead or build on one. And running like you want ensures that the games remain a toss-up. At best. It is just not a sustainable approach to success.

(Posted from blackberry so sorry in advance for errors)

[HairOnFire]

No sense arguing to argue. At some point it ceases to be fun.

For the record, I'm still having fun.

I think you are grasping at straws hair, in thinking what they did last year was sustainable as opposed to pure luck.

If I were grasping at straws I'd be the only one talking about this stuff. But it's everywhere now.

Bottom line, a regression to ugly was coming if they didn't change. Hell a regression to ugly may be coming even with the change.

Well, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to counter the increasing popular claim that something that worked very recently but is no longer being attempted would have failed. All I'll say is repeat that when your passing game clicks on several record setting levels but rarely scored TD's, resulting in losses to teams you should beat, your ugly regression with changes is already here, stats be damned.

The schedule is markedly harder and the bengals have caught no breaks (played pats w/ moss, no other afc north team will...play steelers w/ roeth twice unlike ravens...play jets w/ holmes and revis unlike ravens)

They got Cleveland with Seneca Wallace....and never led.

But the constant bleating that somehow a giants style 1990 offense would work, well, I simply disagree and that's where it shall be.

But a predominantly no-huddle offense circa 1988 is better?

Too much is heaped on the defense when this team never can get a lead or build on one.

I agree. And because I agree I'll point to the Bengals failure to do those very things using the pass.

[membengal]

Or, you know, the run.

[BengalPimp]

Palmer played very well today vs. Cleveland with the up-tempo offense. Turnovers, blocked FG, no running game, and spotty defense did them in.

25/36 346 yards and 2 TDs. QB rating of 121.4

Hopefully, Brat can keep the playcalling such so the opposing defenses can't dig in. Palmer playing more up-tempo fits him better. Evidence again shown today.

The reason Palmer played well, is because they used the no-huddle, and Carson audibled. He kept changing the plays at the line of scrimage depending on what he saw from the opposing Defense....in short, Carson was so effective because he was calling the plays...NOT Brat!

[cincyhokie]

Palmer played very well today vs. Cleveland with the up-tempo offense. Turnovers, blocked FG, no running game, and spotty defense did them in.

25/36 346 yards and 2 TDs. QB rating of 121.4

Hopefully, Brat can keep the playcalling such so the opposing defenses can't dig in. Palmer playing more up-tempo fits him better. Evidence again shown today.

The reason Palmer played well, is because they used the no-huddle, and Carson audibled. He kept changing the plays at the line of scrimage depending on what he saw from the opposing Defense....in short, Carson was so effective because he was calling the plays...NOT Brat!

Right, but my point is that Brat decides to use the no-huddle or not use it. I should have said "schemes" or formations rather than playcalling.

[BengalPimp]

Bottom line, a regression to ugly was coming if they didn't change. Hell a regression to ugly may be coming even with the change.

Well, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to counter the increasing popular claim that something that worked very recently but is no longer being attempted would have failed. All I'll say is repeat that when your passing game clicks on several record setting levels but rarely scored TD's, resulting in losses to teams you should beat, your ugly regression with changes is already here, stats be damned.

You act like the Bengals would score more TD's Running the ball...Funny since Benson had all of 6 TD's last year to go along with his 1,251 yds....not very good...and this year we have no Fullback.

[COB]

...and this year we have no Fullback.

Part of the problem. And it was by design. Palmer has a lot of sway with Mike Brown, I am convinced of that. So did he go and lobby for a fullback, did he lobby for a guard, or a tackle? Nope, he lobbied for more guys to throw to.

And our fullback will be playing. Unfortunately he'll be in a Bucs uniform, Chris Pressley. I liked that guy on Hard Knocks, wish we could have kept him. If only he could play wideout.

[HairOnFire]

You act like the Bengals would score more TD's Running the ball...

And you act like throwing for impressive yardage without scoring TD's is enough to beat teams. Instead, it's like Cedric Benson just said. Opposing teams don't fear the Bengals passing game and aren't gameplanning to stop it. Rather, they're gameplanning to stop the run while daring the Bengals to beat them with the pass.

I'm just guessing on this one but after 3 quarters of play Palmer must have already had about 260-275 yards of passing, yet the Bengals had just 13 points to show for it. And most of that passing yardage, and the rest that followed, was overwhelmingly produced from either no-huddle or the shotgun formations....so there's not much more you can do to open up the offense than what they just attempted against Cleveland.

And to those who say the answer to the passing games problems are to simply play better and eliminate mistakes, well....isn't that true of everything? Doesn't the better question ask why anyone should expect better immediate results from newbies like Gresham, Shipley, and Owens. Or from an O-line almost entirely manned by Sluggos who can't pass block very well. Or from a douchebag like Chad, last seen drawing a penalty flag that ended any hope of winning Sunday.

Bottom Line(s): We can debate this stuff forever, but my gut tells me the issue has already been decided and this team will continue showing a greater commitment to the passing game in the coming weeks. In short, Smashball has died from neglect, and this team will now sink or swim playing Bratball.

[cincyhokie]

Interesting that teams will resort to the pass when the run game is struggling but rarely, unless the QB is throwing multiple picks, does the team go to the run if the passing game is not working.

Teams don't abandon the pass game early to go to the run. There are also multiple matchups and ways to move the ball in the passing game. In the run game, it's one guy against the opposing defense. It's alot easier to see early on if it's going to work or not.

We could assume that the Bengals did not commit to the run enough against Cleveland but then we could also say that Cleveland was playing the run tough. Also, when the other team is scoring quicker than you are, you're forced to pass the ball to keep up. If you take a chance of getting too far behind, then you are completely limited to passing.

We could test both of these offenses, the ball control running offense, as well as the high tempo pass heavy offense. Both more than likely would fail, through the course of the season,and then once they did we could turn around and blame it on the lack of offensive "balance". The Bengals didn't "run the ball enough" or they didn't "use their receivers enough".

In reality the offensive line would be the downfall. We can keep "dressing up the pig" with schemes like the unbalanced line and the no-huddle, but in the end, they are just quick fixes. Fixes that opposing teams will figure out at some point, more than likely right around playoff time. The core issues with the offense will remain to be with the o-line until the o-line is fixed.

[BengalPimp]

Smashmouth doesn't work when you use only 1 Rb who averages 3.3 yards per carry. Worse, when his longest run of the year (80 attempts) is 13 yards. You can't keep running if your RB is setting you up for 2nd or 3rd and longs because he's getting a yard or 2 on each carry. I think they should probably run a little more, just not with Benson all the time. Bernard Scott should be getting MINIMUM 10 touches a game. I'll put money on him averaging a hell of a lot more than Ced's 3.3yds.

[Sea Ray]

Smashmouth doesn't work when you use only 1 Rb who averages 3.3 yards per carry. Worse, when his longest run of the year (80 attempts) is 13 yards. You can't keep running if your RB is setting you up for 2nd or 3rd and longs because he's getting a yard or 2 on each carry. I think they should probably run a little more, just not with Benson all the time. Bernard Scott should be getting MINIMUM 10 touches a game. I'll put money on him averaging a hell of a lot more than Ced's 3.3yds.

No, it sure doesn't with this team. I disagree with the hypothetical that giving the ball to Ced more often and throwing to TO less aften would have resulted in a win last week.

[Sea Ray]

The Steelers are tied for 1st place thanks in large measure to a power running game and strong defense. All this despite trading away their most explosive WR during the offseason and being forced to use 2nd, 3rd, and 4th string QB's.

Yes, and let me connect the dots for you. The reason that strategy worked is because they've only given up 50 pts in 4 games. That means they're not falling behind by 2 TDs (or more) like our Bengals did in their two losses. We'd be idiots to run the ball when behind by 2 TDs in the 2nd half. We've given up 77 pts.

Power running game isn't going to score enough to win games when you're giving up that many.

[HairOnFire]

Yes, and let me connect the dots for you.

I fear the childhood game of connect the dots is far too complicated for the likes of you. But let's see how you fare.

That means they're not falling behind by 2 TDs (or more) like our Bengals did in their two losses. We'd be idiots to run the ball when behind by 2 TDs in the 2nd half.

The Bengals never trailed the Browns by 2 TD's or more. In fact, they were only own by 3 at the half and only briefly trailed by 10 before quickly narrowing the gap to 3 again. Furthermore, the Bengals were still "dabbling in the run" well into the 4th quarter, even from the no-huddle packages, precisely because the score of the game allowed them to run the ball as much as they desired. Which obviously wasn't much. Not when over the course of the game they chose to run the ball a total of only 17 times, less than half as often as the threw.

[Sea Ray]

Yes, and let me connect the dots for you.

I fear the childhood game of connect the dots is far too complicated for the likes of you. But let's see how you fare.

That means they're not falling behind by 2 TDs (or more) like our Bengals did in their two losses. We'd be idiots to run the ball when behind by 2 TDs in the 2nd half.

The Bengals never trailed the Browns by 2 TD's or more. In fact, they were only own by 3 at the half and only briefly trailed by 10 before quickly narrowing the gap to 3 again. Furthermore, the Bengals were still "dabbling in the run" well into the 4th quarter, even from the no-huddle packages, precisely because the score of the game allowed them to run the ball as much as they desired. Which obviously wasn't much. Not when over the course of the game they chose to run the ball a total of only 17 times, less than half as often as the threw.

Your facts are flat out wrong. How can we have a discussion if you don't know your facts? They were behind by two TDs (13 pts) midway through the 3rd qtr. After Nugent's FG we cut it to ten points. After our final score, it was narrowed to what was to become the final score of 23-20.

[savagehenry54]

Smashmouth doesn't work when you use only 1 Rb who averages 3.3 yards per carry. Worse, when his longest run of the year (80 attempts) is 13 yards. You can't keep running if your RB is setting you up for 2nd or 3rd and longs because he's getting a yard or 2 on each carry. I think they should probably run a little more, just not with Benson all the time. Bernard Scott should be getting MINIMUM 10 touches a game. I'll put money on him averaging a hell of a lot more than Ced's 3.3yds.

Agreed that Scott needs to get the ball more. I also think it's early and that Cedric, along with Scott will boost the teams average per carry by season's end.

[Sea Ray]

Yes, and let me connect the dots for you.

I fear the childhood game of connect the dots is far too complicated for the likes of you. But let's see how you fare.

I should know better than to get into a pissing war with a skunk but what the heck. One snide comment deserves another...

I don't know about connecting the dots but keeping score sure seems like a challenge for you

[redsbengalsbucks]

Your facts are flat out wrong. How can we have a discussion if you don't know your facts? They were behind by two TDs (13 pts) midway through the 3rd qtr. After Nugent's FG we cut it to ten points. After our final score, it was narrowed to what was to become the final score of 23-20.

This surprises you!

[HairOnFire]

Your facts are flat out wrong. How can we have a discussion if you don't know your facts? They were behind by two TDs (13 pts) midway through the 3rd qtr.

Thirteen points isn't 2 TD's, and in your very next sentence you admitted they were only behind by more than 10 points briefly. And your idiotic claim was based upon the point deficit being so great that the Bengals would be idiots for running the ball in the 4th quarter, right? Well check your own facts a**h*** because the Bengals ran as often in the 4th quarter (5 times) as they did in ANY quarter.

In fact, those 5 4th quarter rushing attempts were only one less than Benson got for the entire 1st half. That's right, just 6 rushing attempts for Benson in the first half that ended with the Bengals down by just 3 points. And here's the rub you've been waiting for. And 4 of those 6 attempts came on the Bengals very first drive of the game. A drive that stalled when the Bengals once again threw incomplete on 3rd and 2....which they've done repeatedly all season long.

After our final score, it was narrowed to what was to become the final score of 23-20.

They ran the ball three times on that 4th quarter drive and 5 times total. For the record, the ran just 3 times in the 2nd quarter, and only 4 times in the 3rd quarter. So your claim that they would be idiots to run the ball in the 4th quarter is proven completely unfounded, isn't it? In fact, the score in the Cleveland game was never enough to take the Bengals out of the running game, as I claimed.

Rather, the Bengals simply showed no interest in running the ball after the 1st drive of the game until the game was nearly over. In fact, from the period between when the 1st drive stalled until the 9th drive began in the 4th quarter the Bengals ran the ball just 8 times.

[COB]

when the Bengals once again threw incomplete on 3rd and 2....

I get rather irate when I see Carson in the shotgun, sometimes with no one behind him, on 3rd and 2. It is just stupid, though I expect the defense loves it.

[HairOnFire]

I should know better than to get into a pissing war with a skunk but what the heck. One snide comment deserves another...

Your insults as are soft as your analysis, and just as easy to ignore. Your claim that the score prevented the Bengals from running the ball against Cleveland was very easily disproven. The Bengals simply abandoned the running game after their first drive stalled on an incomplete pass on 3rd and 2, running the ball only 4 more times in the 1st half despite a close score and plenty of time remaining.

And your further claim that the scoreboard somehow prevented the Bengals from running the ball in the 4th quarter was just as easily disproven. In fact, the Bengals ran as much or more in that quarter than any other.

So suck it, Skunkboy. In fact, suck it twice.

[HairOnFire]

when the Bengals once again threw incomplete on 3rd and 2....

I get rather irate when I see Carson in the shotgun, sometimes with no one behind him, on 3rd and 2. It is just stupid, though I expect the defense loves it.

They throw from the shotgun formation on nearly every 3rd and short, often to Owens, almost always incomplete, and have done so all season long. In fact, after I complained about it after the New England game I was told the sample size was too small to mean anything. Well it's bigger now, and just off the top of my head I can think of three more examples from the Cleveland game, only one of which was converted. To Caldwell. And that was on the 1st drive of the game, the very same one that eventually stalled when they...(wait for it)....threw an incomplete pass to Owens on 3rd and 2.

It's sorta weird. I've never been a Brat basher, but now that I find myself questioning the switch in offensive identity and the miserable playcalling I find myself being swamped under a wave of excuses offered by other posters who apparently can't stand Brat and wish he were fired, but love the switch to passing so much they want to see more of it....including on 3rd and 2.

This offense has lost it's nuts.

[COB]

This is a typical Brat offense. Too complex, the players can't execute it, penalty prone, relies on players who can't come through in the clutch (Chad against Cleveland knocks us out of field goal range). It just simply asks players to do things they aren't capable of doing. Evaluate your whole offense, then tailor a game plan to fit it. Unfortunately, he's so committed to justifying all the reciever hype this team got in the off-season, that he hasn't bothered to do anything except mindlessly call pass plays regardless of personnel or down and yardage. f**k that idiot, I want him gone after this season.

[HoosierCat]

It wasn't that I saw yet another CHFF article today about the importance of the pass over the run that surprised me, but rather that they found a great picture of Hair to go with it.

[Sea Ray]

Thirteen points isn't 2 TD's, and in your very next sentence you admitted they were only behind by more than 10 points briefly.

Oh so now your argument is that 13 points isn't two TDs. Is that it? I'm not going to give this much ink but I thought you could do the math. Here you go...13 points is two TDs plus one extra point. OK, I get where two TDs is 14 pts but do you really want to take me to task on that? For all intents and purposes we were down by two TDs. I was well aware of the score and you were not.

You never admitted they were down by more than 10 pts at all. Do you stand by your comment that they "quickly" narrowed the gap to 3 pts? If you really think they quickly narrowed the gap to 3 pts then you'd have to credit the passing game because a power running game could not have scored 10 pts as quickly as they did. It took them about 11 minutes of clocktime to close the 13 pt gap to 3 pts. They did this thanks to the no huddle. Then they were left with only one more possession to tie/win the game.

Time was of the essence. They had to run the no huddle because as it turns out they were down 13 pts with only 3 possessions left. This brings me back to why Palmer ended up throwing the ball so much. He had to given the score

Just admit you climbed all over me about the score without having your ducks in a line and move on. You'll just look silly arguing anything else.