PDA

View Full Version : Shaun Alexander anyone???



rpmpit
12-09-2008, 08:59 AM
Discuss.

And don't just say "NO", jackasses :lol:

stlrz d
12-09-2008, 09:02 AM
Ok, how about no jackasses!?! :lol:

flippy
12-09-2008, 09:03 AM
no thank you.

rpmpit
12-09-2008, 09:04 AM
Ok, how about no jackasses!?! :lol:

no :D

rpmpit
12-09-2008, 09:07 AM
no thank you.

Ok, Willie is hurt. Moore is great - but in my opinion, not a starter. I'd love to see more of Russell, but that doesn't seem to be happening. I can't believe Alexander wouldn't help our pathetic running game.

Oviedo
12-09-2008, 09:11 AM
Aleaxander is done. The Bumgals looked at him and determined he couldn't help their pathetic running game.

No one who is sitting at home right now is going to do any better than who we have. Davenport would be about the only viable option. I don't understand why we don't see more of Russell and let him get into a rythm running the ball versus coming in cold.

We are going to have to ride the horses we have. Mendenhall's injury has really hurt us. If healthy he would be a really positive addition to the running game. he was showing glimpses of being really good when he got hurt.

flippy
12-09-2008, 09:11 AM
no thank you.

Ok, Willie is hurt. Moore is great - but in my opinion, not a starter. I'd love to see more of Russell, but that doesn't seem to be happening. I can't believe Alexander wouldn't help our pathetic running game.

we'd be better off with Dookie at this point if we need an extra body.

rpmpit
12-09-2008, 09:22 AM
no thank you.

Ok, Willie is hurt. Moore is great - but in my opinion, not a starter. I'd love to see more of Russell, but that doesn't seem to be happening. I can't believe Alexander wouldn't help our pathetic running game.

we'd be better off with Dookie at this point if we need an extra body.

I think I'd rather have Alexander and the possibility (however remote) that he's still got something left, and even more important - something to prove.

AngryAsian
12-09-2008, 09:28 AM
I see your perspective on this one, but then again, my eyes are slanted and vision not too good. :x

MeetJoeGreene
12-09-2008, 09:29 AM
no thank you.

Ok, Willie is hurt. Moore is great - but in my opinion, not a starter. I'd love to see more of Russell, but that doesn't seem to be happening. I can't believe Alexander wouldn't help our pathetic running game.

we'd be better off with Dookie at this point if we need an extra body.

I think I'd rather have Alexander and the possibility (however remote) that he's still got something left, and even more important - something to prove.[/quote]

That assumes he has any fire left as well -- and I just don't think he has.
I agree that we aren't in the best of shape, running back wise, but we either stick w/ what we got or bring back the dumptruck for a game or two. Again.

proudpittsburgher
12-09-2008, 09:29 AM
no thank you.

Ok, Willie is hurt. Moore is great - but in my opinion, not a starter. I'd love to see more of Russell, but that doesn't seem to be happening. I can't believe Alexander wouldn't help our pathetic running game.

we'd be better off with Dookie at this point if we need an extra body.

I think I'd rather have Alexander and the possibility (however remote) that he's still got something left, and even more important - something to prove.


Alexander couldn't run unless he had a gaping hole to run through, and we all know that ain't gonna happen with this line. I would much prefer to have Dookie back there.

rpmpit
12-09-2008, 09:38 AM
no thank you.

Ok, Willie is hurt. Moore is great - but in my opinion, not a starter. I'd love to see more of Russell, but that doesn't seem to be happening. I can't believe Alexander wouldn't help our pathetic running game.

we'd be better off with Dookie at this point if we need an extra body.

I think I'd rather have Alexander and the possibility (however remote) that he's still got something left, and even more important - something to prove.


Alexander couldn't run unless he had a gaping hole to run through, and we all know that ain't gonna happen with this line. I would much prefer to have Dookie back there.

Isn't that one of the biggest complaints people have about FWP? And when healthy, he does pretty well behind our o-line.

It was just a thought, guys. I just want our running game to be a threat again. Ben has looked terrible, but I blame most of that on defenses knowing we can't run for chit :evil:

Ballbuster
12-09-2008, 09:50 AM
Right - just what we need. And old, beaten hasbeen who can't manage to hold a pine-rider position on other teams.

I hear Jim Brown is still in the market.

rpmpit
12-09-2008, 09:52 AM
Right - just what we need. And old, beaten hasbeen who can't manage to hold a pine-rider position on other teams.

I hear Jim Brown is still in the market.

Quit bustin' my balls!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Ballbuster
12-09-2008, 09:55 AM
Right - just what we need. And old, beaten hasbeen who can't manage to hold a pine-rider position on other teams.

I hear Jim Brown is still in the market.

Quit bustin' my balls!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

:wink:

papillon
12-09-2008, 10:01 AM
He was soft in his prime; he won't help out situation at this point of the season. The Steelers are going to have to win the Superbowl with a subpar running game. :tt2

I do believe that giving either Parker or Moore (doesn't matter which one) the majority of the carries and use the other as the situational back would help. It looks like neither back can get in a rhythm because, they play a series or two and then are on the bench for a series or two. Each appears to have the need to carry the ball many times to get in the flow of the game.

Neither is good enough to just be inserted and be instant offense, IMHO.

Pappy

proudpittsburgher
12-09-2008, 10:40 AM
He was soft in his prime; he won't help out situation at this point of the season. The Steelers are going to have to win the Superbowl with a subpar running game. :tt2

I do believe that giving either Parker or Moore (doesn't matter which one) the majority of the carries and use the other as the situational back would help. It looks like neither back can get in a rhythm because, they play a series or two and then are on the bench for a series or two. Each appears to have the need to carry the ball many times to get in the flow of the game.

Neither is good enough to just be inserted and be instant offense, IMHO.

Pappy

I kind of disagree with you pappy. I think Moore is better suited to enter a game and become that instant offense, mostly because he can take the checkdown for yards. Plus, he has shown a bit of toughness in his running this season. I was very much a FWP supporter and still am, but I like using both. I honestly wouldn't mind seeing both in the backfield. If you aren't goin gto give either a blocking back, then at least put someone back there who can block on occasion (moore) and also gain us some yardage on a checkdown. As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

phillyesq
12-09-2008, 11:30 AM
Right - just what we need. And old, beaten hasbeen who can't manage to hold a pine-rider position on other teams.

I hear Jim Brown is still in the market.

I think I might actually prefer Jim Brown. :shock:

As Pappy said, Alexander was soft in his prime, and is likely even softer now. I can't see him helping the team -- no thanks!

papillon
12-09-2008, 11:35 AM
He was soft in his prime; he won't help out situation at this point of the season. The Steelers are going to have to win the Superbowl with a subpar running game. :tt2

I do believe that giving either Parker or Moore (doesn't matter which one) the majority of the carries and use the other as the situational back would help. It looks like neither back can get in a rhythm because, they play a series or two and then are on the bench for a series or two. Each appears to have the need to carry the ball many times to get in the flow of the game.

Neither is good enough to just be inserted and be instant offense, IMHO.

Pappy

I kind of disagree with you pappy. I think Moore is better suited to enter a game and become that instant offense, mostly because he can take the checkdown for yards. Plus, he has shown a bit of toughness in his running this season. I was very much a FWP supporter and still am, but I like using both. I honestly wouldn't mind seeing both in the backfield. If you aren't goin gto give either a blocking back, then at least put someone back there who can block on occasion (moore) and also gain us some yardage on a checkdown. As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

Then make Moore the "man" for the rest of the season. My complaint is that neither back is good at running the ball consistently when they aren't used consistently. As I said, I don't care who that back is, but, put him in the game and give him the ball 20 times plus a few passes. If that's Moore, fine, if it's Parker, fine, but, I don't believe that either of these two guys is good in the running back by committee mode.

Pappy

ikestops85
12-09-2008, 12:43 PM
As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

Just curious why you would say that. I haven't noticed Willie dropping a ton of passes. I haven't even seen him being given a chance to drop many passes. He caught 31 passes in 2006 ... 3 for TDs but then when Arians came in they quit throwing to him. I'm still not sure why.

phillyesq
12-09-2008, 12:50 PM
As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

Just curious why you would say that. I haven't noticed Willie dropping a ton of passes. I haven't even seen him being given a chance to drop many passes. He caught 31 passes in 2006 ... 3 for TDs but then when Arians came in they quit throwing to him. I'm still not sure why.

Parker has never been especially noted for his pass catching skills. When he was an UDFA, I remember scouting reports squashing the notion that his speed would make him a candidate as a third down back because of questions with his receiving ability. Catching 31 passes in a season is less than 2 per game -- it kind of indicates that he was a dump off and/or screen option, but no more.

One thing that really bothers me now is when the Steelers split FWP out wide and go with an empty backfield. They never throw to him, he isn't a great receiver, and it eliminates even the threat of a run.

MeetJoeGreene
12-09-2008, 01:18 PM
As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

Just curious why you would say that. I haven't noticed Willie dropping a ton of passes. I haven't even seen him being given a chance to drop many passes. He caught 31 passes in 2006 ... 3 for TDs but then when Arians came in they quit throwing to him. I'm still not sure why.

Parker has never been especially noted for his pass catching skills. When he was an UDFA, I remember scouting reports squashing the notion that his speed would make him a candidate as a third down back because of questions with his receiving ability. Catching 31 passes in a season is less than 2 per game -- it kind of indicates that he was a dump off and/or screen option, but no more.

One thing that really bothers me now is when the Steelers split FWP out wide and go with an empty backfield. They never throw to him, he isn't a great receiver, and it eliminates even the threat of a run.

It bothers you because you are incapable of understanding the true genius that is Bruce Arians.

ikestops85
12-09-2008, 01:36 PM
As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

Just curious why you would say that. I haven't noticed Willie dropping a ton of passes. I haven't even seen him being given a chance to drop many passes. He caught 31 passes in 2006 ... 3 for TDs but then when Arians came in they quit throwing to him. I'm still not sure why.

Parker has never been especially noted for his pass catching skills. When he was an UDFA, I remember scouting reports squashing the notion that his speed would make him a candidate as a third down back because of questions with his receiving ability. Catching 31 passes in a season is less than 2 per game -- it kind of indicates that he was a dump off and/or screen option, but no more.

One thing that really bothers me now is when the Steelers split FWP out wide and go with an empty backfield. They never throw to him, he isn't a great receiver, and it eliminates even the threat of a run.

It bothers you because you are incapable of understanding the true genius that is Bruce Arians.

Uh huh ... to understand the true genius that is Bruce Arians you would need to lick that paper with the dot on it before every game. :shock: I have heard that it causes you to also see bright colors and say "Wow, man" using a Tommy Chong type of voice. :lol:

proudpittsburgher
12-09-2008, 01:40 PM
He was soft in his prime; he won't help out situation at this point of the season. The Steelers are going to have to win the Superbowl with a subpar running game. :tt2

I do believe that giving either Parker or Moore (doesn't matter which one) the majority of the carries and use the other as the situational back would help. It looks like neither back can get in a rhythm because, they play a series or two and then are on the bench for a series or two. Each appears to have the need to carry the ball many times to get in the flow of the game.

Neither is good enough to just be inserted and be instant offense, IMHO.

Pappy

I kind of disagree with you pappy. I think Moore is better suited to enter a game and become that instant offense, mostly because he can take the checkdown for yards. Plus, he has shown a bit of toughness in his running this season. I was very much a FWP supporter and still am, but I like using both. I honestly wouldn't mind seeing both in the backfield. If you aren't goin gto give either a blocking back, then at least put someone back there who can block on occasion (moore) and also gain us some yardage on a checkdown. As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

Then make Moore the "man" for the rest of the season. My complaint is that neither back is good at running the ball consistently when they aren't used consistently. As I said, I don't care who that back is, but, put him in the game and give him the ball 20 times plus a few passes. If that's Moore, fine, if it's Parker, fine, but, I don't believe that either of these two guys is good in the running back by committee mode.

Pappy

I get what you are saying, but to me, that means that you lose the attribute that the one you decided to cast off brings. Willie can flat-out run with the ball, but Moore brings a bit more toughness and the ability to bail Ben out on the dump-off. I know you have to make a decision eventually on FWP, but in the meantime, do we really want to let willie's speed sit there on the bench?

proudpittsburgher
12-09-2008, 01:43 PM
As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

Just curious why you would say that. I haven't noticed Willie dropping a ton of passes. I haven't even seen him being given a chance to drop many passes. He caught 31 passes in 2006 ... 3 for TDs but then when Arians came in they quit throwing to him. I'm still not sure why.

Parker has never been especially noted for his pass catching skills. When he was an UDFA, I remember scouting reports squashing the notion that his speed would make him a candidate as a third down back because of questions with his receiving ability. Catching 31 passes in a season is less than 2 per game -- it kind of indicates that he was a dump off and/or screen option, but no more.

One thing that really bothers me now is when the Steelers split FWP out wide and go with an empty backfield. They never throw to him, he isn't a great receiver, and it eliminates even the threat of a run.

Agreed, if you aren't going to consider him as an option, then why waste the player on the field. Part of this may fall on Ben though, and one of the positives that Moore has brought is that he taught Ben to dump it off more. Each of these players are still in the developemental stage of their career. To me, MM brings more to the table than dioes willie right now, but FW has the potential to become a star in this league. I worry about wasting that possibility with a win now mentality.

papillon
12-09-2008, 05:48 PM
He was soft in his prime; he won't help out situation at this point of the season. The Steelers are going to have to win the Superbowl with a subpar running game. :tt2

I do believe that giving either Parker or Moore (doesn't matter which one) the majority of the carries and use the other as the situational back would help. It looks like neither back can get in a rhythm because, they play a series or two and then are on the bench for a series or two. Each appears to have the need to carry the ball many times to get in the flow of the game.

Neither is good enough to just be inserted and be instant offense, IMHO.

Pappy

I kind of disagree with you pappy. I think Moore is better suited to enter a game and become that instant offense, mostly because he can take the checkdown for yards. Plus, he has shown a bit of toughness in his running this season. I was very much a FWP supporter and still am, but I like using both. I honestly wouldn't mind seeing both in the backfield. If you aren't goin gto give either a blocking back, then at least put someone back there who can block on occasion (moore) and also gain us some yardage on a checkdown. As much as I like FWP, it is becoming readily apparent that the boy would lose a pass-catching contest with Ike Taylor.

Then make Moore the "man" for the rest of the season. My complaint is that neither back is good at running the ball consistently when they aren't used consistently. As I said, I don't care who that back is, but, put him in the game and give him the ball 20 times plus a few passes. If that's Moore, fine, if it's Parker, fine, but, I don't believe that either of these two guys is good in the running back by committee mode.

Pappy

I get what you are saying, but to me, that means that you lose the attribute that the one you decided to cast off brings. Willie can flat-out run with the ball, but Moore brings a bit more toughness and the ability to bail Ben out on the dump-off. I know you have to make a decision eventually on FWP, but in the meantime, do we really want to let willie's speed sit there on the bench?

Well, I'm thinking the only way we get to see it is with the perfectly blocked play (not likely) or if he gets the ball handed to him consistently. If Moore's doing the job, I don't have a problem with Willie sitting. He's injured and has shown some flashes of his old self, but, not enough I don't think.

On the other hand, if Arians went with Parker and used Moore as situational I'd be fine with that too. The offense needs consistency in the backfield and they haven't gotten it recently. Even against the Pats, they had a lot of yards, but, the consistency that you need to finish a game wasn't there.

Maybe it's the line, maybe it's Arians, maybe it's Zeirlein, I'm not sure, but, if I were Arians I have to try something different. What he's donig isn't working as far as I can tell.

Pappy

pittpete
12-09-2008, 07:19 PM
The guy has no heart
nuff said
A big NO