PDA

View Full Version : Lolly's Blog: Something to think about



costanza2k1
09-25-2008, 01:44 AM
Not saying this maybe all true but it does make you think. I agree with what MeetJoeGreene said in another post...it does make your wonder.


Wednesday, September 24, 2008
The one constant
The time has come to point the finger at the real blame for much of the Steelers problems with protection of the quarterback.

In 2006, Ben Roethlisberger was sacked 46 times working behind the same offensive line that had given up 32 sacks the previous season - eight of which were recorded against potted plant Tommy Maddox.

Roethlisberger's 23 sacks came on 268 pass attempts in 2005, while his 46 sacks the next season came on 469 attempts. By comparison, Charlie Batch, who threw 53 passes in 2006, was sacked just three times.

In 2007, Roethlisberger went down 47 times on 404 pass attempts, more than one time per 10 pass attempts. Batch threw 36 passes and was not sacked.

The line was a little different. Sean Mahan replaced Jeff Hartings at center and Willie Colon was in place of Max Starks at right tackle. Marvel Smith also missed some time at left tackle, with Starks replacing him.

But remember, Smith missed some time in 2005 and was replaced by Trai Essex, then a rookie. And still, the Steelers gave up 32 sacks on 379 pass attempts that season.

Roethlisberger has already been sacked 12 times this season, including eight on Sunday against Philadelphia.

Again, the line is different, with Justin Hartwig replacing Mahan and Chris Kemoeatu in for Alan Faneca.

The only constant has been Roethlisberger.

The biggest problem on Sunday against the Eagles was that on a number of occasions, Philadelphia sent more guys after Roethlisberger than the line could block.

But when the defense is sending six pass rushers and you have five blockers, the quarterback is responsible for the extra man.

But Roethlisberger trusts his scrambling ability too much. How many times on Sunday did we see him try to scramble up into the pocket to escape on oncoming rusher only to step into a sack? Five, six?

Think he would have been better served getting rid of the ball or taking a shot throwing to a receiver working on one-on-one coverage?

Certainly not all of the blame lies with Roethlisberger. The line play was not good - particularly once the Eagles got rolling.

But Roethlisberger's got to realize that when the defense is rushing six or seven guys, he's got one-on-one coverage.

He's got to recognize that and take a shot at beating the one-on-one. That's the only way teams will stop sending the house at him.
Posted by Dale Lolley at 11:50 PM

Shawn
09-25-2008, 02:56 AM
Agreed...you have to send Holmes deep and let him make some plays. I don't believe many DBs in the NFL can hang with Holmes one on one.

Jooser
09-25-2008, 06:35 AM
Damnit, bench him and start Leftwich..... :stirpot :stirpot :lol:

steelblood
09-25-2008, 07:26 AM
A few of us have been saying this for years. Big Ben must develop into more of a rhythm passer. He loves to wait until the play breaks down. This is good sometimes, but not against 6 or 7 blitzers. Get it and chuck it. Even if you are throwing it away. Arians has to give him more outlet passes that take advantage of upfield rushers. I'm not talking about screens. I'm talking about swings and dumps.

phillyesq
09-25-2008, 07:50 AM
Agreed...you have to send Holmes deep and let him make some plays. I don't believe many DBs in the NFL can hang with Holmes one on one.

SMG, I was saying this the whole game. The Eagles played their corners tight with only one deep safety for almost the entire game. I think that Arians is partially to blame for not calling more deep passes. But the WRs share a lot of the blame as well. They were not getting any separation, and they seemed to struggle getting off the line. Big Ben's first read was almost always covered, and by the time he looked to the second, there was somebody in his face.

Ben holds the ball too long, but the WRs need to do better against press coverage, and they need to work on getting better separation. I also fault the play calling -- BA needs to be creative and find ways to create room for the WRs when they can't get open. Quick WR screens, bunch formations, something...

SteelerNation1
09-25-2008, 08:00 AM
We are talking about 2 different O Coordinators, multiple lineman, different backs, and a few different TE's. The one constant is BR7. Does he hold the ball too long? YES. Does he take a sack when other QB's would throw the ball away? YES. Does he make plays no other QB can make? YES. IMO, you take a 10-15 extra sacks a year, to make 10-15 unbelievable plays a year.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
09-25-2008, 09:13 AM
We are talking about 2 different O Coordinators, multiple lineman, different backs, and a few different TE's. The one constant is BR7. Does he hold the ball too long? YES. Does he take a sack when other QB's would throw the ball away? YES. Does he make plays no other QB can make? YES. IMO, you take a 10-15 extra sacks a year, to make 10-15 unbelievable plays a year.

Exactly. Whether or not we like it, this is Ben Roethlisberger. It can be maddening on a night like last Sunday, but it is spectacular when he escapes the rush and turns in a monster play.

As for those who were saying that we needed to send Holmes deep to make plays against Philly, unfortunately, Ben would have been on his back by the time Santonio got deep. The Philly game was not the game to have tried that. I would have prefered watching Mendenhall slip out and take a screen pass with blockers in front of him. One of the best ways to slow down a pass rush to to make the D fear the screen. They know that if four guys are bearing down on Ben, but the ball is in the hands of the RB already then the O has a 10 on 7 going, presumably with several blockers right out in front of the back.

proudpittsburgher
09-25-2008, 10:04 AM
IMO, you take a 10-15 extra sacks a year, to make 10-15 unbelievable plays a year.

:Agree completely

Oviedo
09-25-2008, 10:14 AM
I weon't assign the blame to Ben or the OC because we just don't know ( I think it is both play calling and Ben not adjusting), but we need to have a lot more plays where the TEs and RBs are the first option for passing not the option of last resort. Big splashy plays may be great, but they are low percentage plays. I'd rather work down the field and eat up the clock with six 8-10 yard pass plays versus waiting for one 50 yard play and getting the QB sacked two or three times.

RussBII
09-25-2008, 10:37 AM
I weon't assign the blame to Ben or the OC because we just don't know ( I think it is both play calling and Ben not adjusting), but we need to have a lot more plays where the TEs and RBs are the first option for passing not the option of last resort. Big splashy plays may be great, but they are low percentage plays. I'd rather work down the field and eat up the clock with six 8-10 yard pass plays versus waiting for one 50 yard play and getting the QB sacked two or three times.

I agree with this totally.

Also, the Eagles didn't disguise a lot of those blitzes, why isn't Ben audibling into a different play, protection scheme or changing some routes? Holmes on a quick slant can be devastating.

SanAntonioSteelerFan
09-25-2008, 11:44 AM
I weon't assign the blame to Ben or the OC because we just don't know ( I think it is both play calling and Ben not adjusting), but we need to have a lot more plays where the TEs and RBs are the first option for passing not the option of last resort. Big splashy plays may be great, but they are low percentage plays. I'd rather work down the field and eat up the clock with six 8-10 yard pass plays versus waiting for one 50 yard play and getting the QB sacked two or three times.

I agree with this totally.

Also, the Eagles didn't disguise a lot of those blitzes, why isn't Ben audibling into a different play, protection scheme or changing some routes? Holmes on a quick slant can be devastating.

I would not be surprised at all if Ariens had no plays like that in the playbook. I don't think Ben enjoys getting pulverized, he would have called them if he could have is my guess.