Brat: Ugh

Bob Bratkowski has done some nice things this season, such as creating unique, running-based formations that include unbalanced offensive line sets.

Still, I continue seeing him as a sub-par (and that's putting it mildly) offensive play-caller and game planner. Sure, he'll have his isolated strong moments, like in the Chicago game, but these have been aberrations; Brat remains the guy I thought he was back in July. Last Sunday's game, not lost only because of Brat's poor performance but certainly partially as a result of it, only further proved this.

Brat's offense ran forty-three times, only passing on twenty-two plays. Below, I'll attempt to enter the man's mind (I'm not exactly looking forward to it) and pinpoint why exactly he thought it necessary to call such an unbalanced set of plays.

Reason 1: We'll move the ball this way

Despite Cedric Benson's absence, I expected a strong running game from the Bengals on Sunday, for the Raiders came in being the fifth-worst run defense according to Football Outsider's DVOA.

However, a mediocre 4.1 Y/A by Cincinnati backs, even inflated some by Bernard Scott's long sixty-one yard dash, was the end result. The offensive line had a down day against a bad defensive front seven, which made running so many times to strictly move the ball illogical (Palmer's Y/A was more than two-and-a-half yards greater).

The way Oakland's D played did too. On just about all first and second down plays, eight defenders came into the box, determined on stopping the run. Maybe they would have backed off if Brat's offense wasn't so damn one-sided and predictable-- on their thirty-two first down plays, the Bengals passed only seven times (with two of those coming at the end of both halves). No, that isn't a typo-- seven passing plays. Bratkowski idiotically relied on a ground attack dragged down severely by his own predictability, among other things.

Reason 2: We'll run the clock out

This is a purely BS reason; the Bengals came out running and simply stayed that way.

Regardless, if Brat actually let up after the Bengals took a fourteen-zip lead then...damn. Good teams don't take their foots off the pedal in the first half with only a two possession lead; instead, they continue pushing ahead using their most efficient offensive methods. Far too much can go wrong in an entire half of football like, say, a fumble on a kickoff return, or an unexpected defensive collapse, making a moderate lead unsafe.

Reason 3: We'll control the ball with time of possession

Oh, TOP, the most maddening (in my opinion) of traditional football lore. TOP, in the same way as rushing attempts are, is an effect, not a cause, of superiority. Going in with a plan of controlling the ball is akin to planning to get touchdowns or first downs.

If an offense can pass the ball best, it should base its offense around passing; TOP (unless it's really time to run the clock out) should not in any way come into play. A team doesn't necessarily gain an advantage by shortening the game, unless the truncation occurs because of a successful offense running the ball.

In fact, Brat would ideally have developed his game plan around making the game longer. Think about it. The Bengals, even though they lost, were and still are the better team. A game with more possessions reduces the variables that can assist a worse team in beating a better one. Mathematically this makes complete sense, but consider this example: Say the Colts played the Browns next Sunday. Would the Browns have a better chance of' winning a five minute game, with only two possessions for both sides, or a full sixty minute game, with a normal amount of possessions between the two teams? Obviously, the former is the correct answer.

Reason(s) 4: Everything else-- Play-action, Nnamdi Asomugha, Etc.

The Bengals passed better than they ran on Sunday. Period. The Raiders' defense, especially when focused on the run with eight in the box, is susceptible to the passing game even with Asomugha in. Play-action is important, but does not warrant nearly a 1:2 ratio of passes to runs. Palmer may not have had his best game due to Asomugha, and the offensive line's struggles, but allowing him to make more plays would have yielded better results.

We can only hope that Brat doesn't come in stubborn to go away from the ground attack in the future, should it struggle once again. The Bengals have an offense better than most projected at the beginning of the season, but it'll significantly regress if this infuriating, unnecessary problem pops up more in the second half of the season.

Comments

[5chw4r7z]

I wondered about running the at the the beginning of the second half.
As I became more and more frustrated I was yelling at the TV, HELLO!! throw it to Ocho Cinco!!!!

[FeedMikeBrownToAquaBengal]

We don't know how much of this to blame on Marvin Lewis. Does he never call plays?

Still, Brat's playbook is tiny and worse still they've shrunk it this year because Coles can't do what TJH did, and because Chris Henry is gone and they no longer throw Fly patterns to Ocho. The number of people the other team has to cover is shrinking. Jeremi Johnson? JP Foschi? Half the time you've got basically three guys on the field the ball can go to, and the Bengals don't even pass effectively to their backs most of the time so it's more like two.

The last week I've been wondering why activate Purify if you're not going to design a couple of plays for him. Or activate Chase Coffman instead, and line him up in the slot a handful of times as the big old comparitively slow wide receiver. Or design a play or two to get the ball to Quan Cosby behind a couple of blockers. There's no creativity in Brat's playbook, excepting that horrible pass to Leonard on 3rd and 4 that never should have been devised. The one trick play Brat knows is the reverse that almost never works.

The Bengals offense needs to find a few plays that go down the hash marks. On Sunday they tried on quick slant to Ocho that went for 12 yards. That's about it. The safeties can play run support until it's a passing down and then they can help out on the outside.

[TJanns]

This game was so frustrating. Palmer started 8-10 for 129 yards, yet they continued to run. The 32 first down plays stat, and only 7 passes? That's insane!

If you take away Palmer's two scrambles (and qb sneak), and 3 sacks...it was 40 run plays to 27 pass plays. (called plays) Which is still ridiculous.

So many good teams throw quick outs, slants, screens and other 2-3 step passes when the Defense has 7-9 in the box. Brat does not know how to do that for some reason. Or, this team doesn't have the talent to do that. Which I doubt. Coles made a living as a slot receive on quick routes.

Did they run one HB screen? To offset the blitzing? Not once? I think maybe they did in the first quarter, but that was it.

Brat has been with this team since '01. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I think the Offense has been in the top 10 maybe 3 times. 3 our of 8 after this year. He sucks.

[TheCarlPickensClause]

I despise the argument "if they didn't get this big play, then it would only be blah blah blah". How many times did we Bengal fans hear this argument when the Bengals struggled. "If Jamal Lewis didn't break off those two runs of 55 and 72 yards, the run defense would have been stout". Scott made the big play. That's part of rushing statistics. Yes, there were WAY too many negative run plays, but look at Barry Sanders and Adrian Peterson. Are they any less of an NFL back because many of their runs went for negative yards? If you get the yards, count it. Don't hide behind that lame argument. To that point, 4.1 YPC is NOT mediocre. Mediocre is 3.6-3.9 YPC. Subpar to poor is 3.5 and below. I'd take 4+ YPC from the Bengals any day of the week.
That being said, the Bengals offense was exposed last week. They've been a ball-control, grinding offense--one that we're not used to with Carson and Chad on this team. I'm almost positive that Carson hasn't had a 300-yard game this year. Yes, they need to get a bit more creative, but I also think that Benson being in there is a big deal on a number of fronts. I'd like to see them get the ball to Ocho a little more. Get him screens, slants and slant and go's. One, he's playing pretty well this year, and two, he's starting to get the unhappy looks of 2007-2008.
The thing is that they can't get too cute and think they can throw it all over the place. This is what has gotten them in trouble from 2006-2007. Carson would have 330 yards, 2 TDs and 3 INTs. This team isn't built that way. Their defense is better. So, while I agree that they need to spice it up a little offensively, they need to keep doing what they've been doing for the most part. Keep running the ball, but keep them honest with the good QB that Palmer is. I am confident that if the run game isn't there, Carson will keep them in the game, if not win it. They didn't put the ball in Carson's hands last week and were unbalanced. I'd like to seem them be more balanced offensively, with a bit more runs than passes. That's what they've done most of the year--and while it hasn't been pretty, it's gotten them wins.

[Comrade Robert]

Ok admittedly I am not a Brat hater.
Having said that I think most fans tend to overlook something.
When the offense clicks Brat gets no love, when it sucks he catches it all. Granted that is the nature of the job. Yes Brat is over the offense but how much control does he truly have. Look at the asst coaches, some of which have been here longer that this blogs writers have been alive probably.
At what point are the position coaches held accountable?
Sadly since they are employed by MB never. And remember these coaches are also the scouts, 'nough said.

[PutBratOnAMeatSlicer]

Gives a whole new meaning to "Bratwurst".....

[Competitiveness]

CarlPickens:

It's indisputable that I a 4.1 yard average gotten mostly because of a big play is less valuable than a 4.1 yard average without the "boom-or-bust" runs. It's an over simplification to say that the Bengals just had this average; it has to be further dissected

[FeedMikeBrownToAquaBengal]

@Competitiveness has it correct. If you had 20 carries for zero yards, ending 7 drives with punts from deep in your own territory; and one 99 yard touchdown run, that is 21 for 99, which is a stellar 4.7 yards per carry. That's neither a ball control offense nor a very good running attack. So you have to check the number of carries that got nothing. Barry Sanders was an extreme, nobody that famous had more gamebreaking runs and more tackles for losses. The Bengals are trying to be Jerome Bettis lite: Run the ball when you're ahead. Unfortunately, especially without Ced, they don't have the right people for that plan.

Throwing screens to your backs or wide receivers or passes in the middle of the field to your tight end isn't really getting "cute" nor throwing it all over the place. It's simply having a playbook that has as many plays as most teams. Joe Reedy said if the draft were tomorrow the Bengals would pick a TE first. That speaks to the horribleness of the Bengals tight ends, and perhaps says something about Mr Coffman (or at least how Reedy thinks about Mr Coffman)

Even with all the mistakes, Sunday's game would have been a win if they had better accounted for Raiders blitzes by designing plays that work well when the other team blitzes. Is that rocket science?

[Sleeping With Bieniemy]

@comrade robert - I have consistently despised Brat even in victory. Though I leave the writing of that mostly others (aside from a few sensationalistic digs for comedy's sake) because when it comes down to it I really don't know the x and o's and don't think I'm qualified to truly judge.

However, I think as a very close follower of the Bengals over the years it's pretty safe to conclude that he does not come close to using the Bengals offense to it's full potential. He may not have had Carson here every year but he has had a decent offensive line almost every year and some pretty good talent at skill positions. Still, the Bengals only finished top 10 in total yards (my rudimentary measure of offense) in 2005, 2006 and 2007.

I think from Hard Knocks it's pretty clear the position coaches are pretty solid. I mean, can you credibly point to the WR coach, the TE coach or the offensive line coach as the problem? I've read a few things from sites like FO that note the Bengals offensive running sets and offensive line blocking, this year in particular, has been clever and effective. So either the offensive line coach or Brat or both get some credit for that.

Where I think Brat fails is strategy, game-planning and imagination. All else being equal, despite some bad miscues by players, if you changed out Brat with an average offensive coordinator the Bengals would have won vs the Raiders.

@Clause - I hear you, the big runs do count but if it takes you tons of no gains, short gains, and losses just to break one 60 yarder then you need to qualify that average yards per carry stat. It's just unintelligent analysis not to look further.

The first TD scoring drive came on all passing. The 2nd TD scoring drive came by running. That natural balance, that is the outcome of just using all available weapons, is what will work. Not a forced commitment to the run that make zero logical sense.

[HappyNat]

Comrade Robert,

The one time the offense "clicked" this year against the Bears. Brat did get a little love, begrudgingly, on this site and others. The fact the offense has only clicked once this year is as big an indictment of Brat as anything else. We have a RB leading the league in rushing, and former pro bowl players at QB and WR and we are lucky to break 20 points in any game.

[TJanns]

Comrade HappyNat,

Good point about the Bears game. Because, what did the Bengals do well that game? They threw and ran. 5 Tds. Now, the Bears 'D' has been bad most of the season, and Brat obviously saw something.

But, with the Raiders blitzing all day, where was the quick passes? Just seems ridiculously foolish that it didn't happen.

Time to move on. They better destroy Cleveland. A rookie threw 5 TD's against them last week.

[Chris]

I've noticed a trend over the last year or two: Incomplete passes on 1st down are nearly always followed by a running play on 2nd down.

I looked at the game log for the Oakland game and sure enough, there were 4 1st down incomplete passes. All of which were followed by a running play, one of which happened to be Scott's 61 yarder.

I'm too lazy to go back through more game logs to provide more evidence, but if I know I run's coming on 2nd and 10, surely the opposition DC knows it too.

And God help Brat if he were to respond, "That's what the rest of the NFL does." That exactly the reason NOT to do it.