PDA

View Full Version : What's Different About BA - 2007 to 2008?



flippy
12-16-2008, 02:28 PM
2007, BA helps Ben have his best season
2008, BA's play calling sucks

2007, FWP was leading the league in rushing
2008, FWP is unhappy w/o a FB

2007, Steeler fans love BA
2008, Steeler fans hate BA

2007, OLine struggled
2008, OLine struggled early, but is improving

The biggest difference in this offense is Big Ben has been hurt and underperformed. And he's not been practicing, so the Steelers WRs are a bit out of synch. Not to mention we have 4 new starters on the OLine and it's taking time to gel.

Everyone's decided BA is to blame for all that ails this offense.

He's gone from hero to goat in a season.

Fair?

He probably wasn't as good as we thought he was last year. And he's not as bad as fans are painting him this year.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

So who is BA really?

2007 BA was great.
2008 BA is the plague.

Which is true?

BigBen2112
12-16-2008, 03:17 PM
Bruce Arians wasn't worth sh*t last year.

He wasn't a hero at all...lots of people correctly saw through the season ben was having in SPITE of Arians.

Arians blew plenty of games with this stupid playcalling last year...and honestly you have a better shot at doing better if you're not a very good OC in your first year when the league doesnt know your tendencies very well.

He's a horrible OC and really holds this offense back. Between him and the OL our Offense is producing at 1/2 or less of its expected output and ability.

Djfan
12-16-2008, 03:20 PM
I hated him last year. If MSM were here you could see the stats go in the toilet under BA. It's just not good.

I really hope he's gone this off season. Even if we win the big show.

SidSmythe
12-16-2008, 03:33 PM
Bruce Arians just isn't a smash mouth football kind of guy.

stlrz d
12-16-2008, 03:35 PM
I didn't like him last season and felt Ben excelled despite Arians.

Steeler Mafia
12-16-2008, 03:35 PM
Bruce Arians is more of a "foot in mouth" football kind of guy

Djfan
12-16-2008, 03:38 PM
Bruce Arians just isn't a smash mouth, finesse, disguise the play, use player to their strengths, play unpredictably, use new ideas, try something new, keep the defenses guessing football kind of guy.

Fixed that for you.

SteelerOfDeVille
12-16-2008, 03:56 PM
I didn't like him last season and felt Ben excelled despite Arians.
BINGO!!

papillon
12-16-2008, 04:28 PM
No one is manning up to thinking that Bruce Arians did a good job last year? Hmmm... :moon :P

Pappy

Oviedo
12-16-2008, 04:41 PM
2007, BA helps Ben have his best season
2008, BA's play calling sucks

2007, FWP was leading the league in rushing
2008, FWP is unhappy w/o a FB

2007, Steeler fans love BA
2008, Steeler fans hate BA

2007, OLine struggled
2008, OLine struggled early, but is improving

The biggest difference in this offense is Big Ben has been hurt and underperformed. And he's not been practicing, so the Steelers WRs are a bit out of synch. Not to mention we have 4 new starters on the OLine and it's taking time to gel.

Everyone's decided BA is to blame for all that ails this offense.

He's gone from hero to goat in a season.

Fair?

He probably wasn't as good as we thought he was last year. And he's not as bad as fans are painting him this year.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

So who is BA really?

2007 BA was great.
2008 BA is the plague.

Which is true?

2008=Injuries on the OL. Injuries to the top 2 RBs. Season long nagging injury to QB.

fans only think they know playcalling but anyone watching a game on TV who thinks they know the play that was called is clueless. They only know the play that was executed and that is probably more Big ben than Arians.

Arains is just a convenient scapegoat because nearly everyone loves Ben and most of the other players and fans could care less about coaches. But Arians isn't throwing interceptions, fumbling and dropping passes.

I could really care less if Arians stays or goes because history has proven without a fact that Steeler fans will always find fault with whoever is the OC and will have these same anti-OC threads next year and every year after that.

flippy
12-16-2008, 04:57 PM
Last year, everyone was loving the fact that Ben liked Arians. And Arians was going to involve Ben in the offense. And allow him to be more involved.

By all accounts, BA's giving Ben more leash and more accountability in this offense.

Is it possible Arians is putting too much on Ben?

And why can't Ben overcome Arians this year like he did last year. Ben's getting more responsibility this year in the offense, so he should be having more success, not less, if he was truly excelling in spite of Arians.

I thought people seemed to like some of the complex formations that BA brought to the table.

He also kept a lot from Whiz that Ben liked.

Bruce catered this offense to Ben.

Doesn't Ben deserve more accountability for it's success or failure?

SteelerOfDeVille
12-16-2008, 05:01 PM
No one is manning up to thinking that Bruce Arians did a good job last year? Hmmm... :moon :P

Pappy
i can't say that i thought he did a good job. i wanted him fired after last year.

felt like his offense was ruining a potentially great football team.

still feel the same this year.

flippy
12-16-2008, 05:05 PM
2007, BA helps Ben have his best season
2008, BA's play calling sucks

2007, FWP was leading the league in rushing
2008, FWP is unhappy w/o a FB

2007, Steeler fans love BA
2008, Steeler fans hate BA

2007, OLine struggled
2008, OLine struggled early, but is improving

The biggest difference in this offense is Big Ben has been hurt and underperformed. And he's not been practicing, so the Steelers WRs are a bit out of synch. Not to mention we have 4 new starters on the OLine and it's taking time to gel.

Everyone's decided BA is to blame for all that ails this offense.

He's gone from hero to goat in a season.

Fair?

He probably wasn't as good as we thought he was last year. And he's not as bad as fans are painting him this year.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

So who is BA really?

2007 BA was great.
2008 BA is the plague.

Which is true?

2008=Injuries on the OL. Injuries to the top 2 RBs. Season long nagging injury to QB.

fans only think they know playcalling but anyone watching a game on TV who thinks they know the play that was called is clueless. They only know the play that was executed and that is probably more Big ben than Arians.

Arains is just a convenient scapegoat because nearly everyone loves Ben and most of the other players and fans could care less about coaches. But Arians isn't throwing interceptions, fumbling and dropping passes.

I could really care less if Arians stays or goes because history has proven without a fact that Steeler fans will always find fault with whoever is the OC and will have these same anti-OC threads next year and every year after that.

I've been thinking more about this since Tomlin called out FWP that he was leading the league in rushing with essentially the same offense and the same style of play calling.

It was a subtle way of Tomlin calling out execution, not coaching for the offensive problems. And he must know more than the rest of us.

The only evidence I can see that's a consistent problem with Arians is how long it takes him to get a play call in. We're always snapping the ball at ~0.

What specifically did Arians do so bad? And how does Ben succeed in spite of him one year and struggle the next?

flippy
12-16-2008, 05:07 PM
No one is manning up to thinking that Bruce Arians did a good job last year? Hmmm... :moon :P

Pappy
i can't say that i thought he did a good job. i wanted him fired after last year.

felt like his offense was ruining a potentially great football team.

still feel the same this year.

i thought the defense and st were the problem last year. not the offense.

this year it's the opposite.

Oviedo
12-16-2008, 05:21 PM
Before anyone rushes to fire Arians I'm sure our Franchise QB will have something to say about that. Ben seems to have a positive rapport with Arians--something he didn't have with Whisenhunt. Does anyone really want to screw that up because some "message board geniuses" think they know what plays are being called and they don't like them?

I think Arians does need to reconsider the number of one back sets he starts out of and use a real FB more but firing a OC on an 11-3 team because of that is unlikely.

SteelerOfDeVille
12-16-2008, 05:25 PM
No one is manning up to thinking that Bruce Arians did a good job last year? Hmmm... :moon :P

Pappy
i can't say that i thought he did a good job. i wanted him fired after last year.

felt like his offense was ruining a potentially great football team.

still feel the same this year.

i thought the defense and st were the problem last year. not the offense.

this year it's the opposite.
i thought injuries hurt the defense... but, felt like the team would have overcome were it not for BA's incompetence.

DBinAL
12-16-2008, 05:45 PM
I can't understand why everyone is down on Arians this year. I do not like the 'no fullback' philosophy, but despite not having a fullback, Parker was leadiing the league in rushing last year before the injury. Ben had a breakout year in 2007. So something was being done correctly.

Has anyone ever thought that the makeup of the offensive line plays a major role in the success of the running game and the passing attack?

The 2008 offensive line is almost a 100% revision from 2007. It takes time to get a cohesive group together. Then you add all of the injuries and you get more disarray. Bruce Arians is not the problem, despite what all of the naysayers proclaim. It's the execution of the plays that is the problem.

Of the first 14 games played, the Steelers played 9 of them against the top 16 total defenses in the league. In these same 14 games, the Steelers were against 8 of the top 16 rushing defenses. Sometimes the other guys are pretty good, too.

Chemsteel
12-16-2008, 06:05 PM
Bruce Arians had a clause in his contract that statd he would be elevated to Offensive Coordinator if Ken Whisenhut left.

Coach Tomlin has supported Arians in many ways. We should not forget that Mike Tomlin was a WR in school.

We should not forget what happened to the Cleveland Browns when Arians had enough receivers to employ a similar offense. The running game withered to nothing as did the Browns. When Arians left the first thing the Browns did was upgrade their offensive line and running back.

SteelerOfDeVille
12-16-2008, 06:11 PM
We should not forget what happened to the Cleveland Browns when Arians had enough receivers to employ a similar offense. The running game withered to nothing as did the Browns. When Arians left the first thing the Browns did was upgrade their offensive line and running back.
this is the argument that drives me crazy. Cleveland sucked when BA was the OC...

all we remember is the game where they lit us up....

BURGH86STEEL
12-16-2008, 06:20 PM
2007, BA helps Ben have his best season
2008, BA's play calling sucks

2007, FWP was leading the league in rushing
2008, FWP is unhappy w/o a FB

2007, Steeler fans love BA
2008, Steeler fans hate BA

2007, OLine struggled
2008, OLine struggled early, but is improving

The biggest difference in this offense is Big Ben has been hurt and underperformed. And he's not been practicing, so the Steelers WRs are a bit out of synch. Not to mention we have 4 new starters on the OLine and it's taking time to gel.

Everyone's decided BA is to blame for all that ails this offense.

He's gone from hero to goat in a season.

Fair?

He probably wasn't as good as we thought he was last year. And he's not as bad as fans are painting him this year.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

So who is BA really?

2007 BA was great.
2008 BA is the plague.

Which is true?

2008=Injuries on the OL. Injuries to the top 2 RBs. Season long nagging injury to QB.

fans only think they know playcalling but anyone watching a game on TV who thinks they know the play that was called is clueless. They only know the play that was executed and that is probably more Big ben than Arians.

Arains is just a convenient scapegoat because nearly everyone loves Ben and most of the other players and fans could care less about coaches. But Arians isn't throwing interceptions, fumbling and dropping passes.

I could really care less if Arians stays or goes because history has proven without a fact that Steeler fans will always find fault with whoever is the OC and will have these same anti-OC threads next year and every year after that.

I agree. People questioned the play calling under Cowher. They will question the play calling in the future. Up grade the Oline, get RBs back and healthy, TEs to block better, WRs work on catching, and Ben to play better on a consistant basis and the offense will be fine.

BURGH86STEEL
12-16-2008, 06:21 PM
I can't understand why everyone is down on Arians this year. I do not like the 'no fullback' philosophy, but despite not having a fullback, Parker was leadiing the league in rushing last year before the injury. Ben had a breakout year in 2007. So something was being done correctly.

Has anyone ever thought that the makeup of the offensive line plays a major role in the success of the running game and the passing attack?

The 2008 offensive line is almost a 100% revision from 2007. It takes time to get a cohesive group together. Then you add all of the injuries and you get more disarray. Bruce Arians is not the problem, despite what all of the naysayers proclaim. It's the execution of the plays that is the problem.

Of the first 14 games played, the Steelers played 9 of them against the top 16 total defenses in the league. In these same 14 games, the Steelers were against 8 of the top 16 rushing defenses. Sometimes the other guys are pretty good, too.

I agree with you too.

Chadman
12-16-2008, 06:35 PM
We should not forget what happened to the Cleveland Browns when Arians had enough receivers to employ a similar offense. The running game withered to nothing as did the Browns. When Arians left the first thing the Browns did was upgrade their offensive line and running back.
this is the argument that drives me crazy. Cleveland sucked when BA was the OC...

all we remember is the game where they lit us up....


That is simply not true.

The Browns made the play-offs with KELLY HOLCOMB at QB because of the offence Arians used- spread WR's, plenty of downfield passing.

Arians got the Browns to the play-offs. Then he was moved on, they grabbed a RB & O-Line as Chem suggested, and went downhill until last season.

The only complaint Chadman has with Arians is RED ZONE PLAYCALLING. It is here that Arains needs to get a bit more clever about things.

But most of the other problems on offence stem from execution, not play calling.

SteelerOfDeVille
12-16-2008, 06:45 PM
We should not forget what happened to the Cleveland Browns when Arians had enough receivers to employ a similar offense. The running game withered to nothing as did the Browns. When Arians left the first thing the Browns did was upgrade their offensive line and running back.
this is the argument that drives me crazy. Cleveland sucked when BA was the OC...

all we remember is the game where they lit us up....


That is simply not true.

The Browns made the play-offs with KELLY HOLCOMB at QB because of the offence Arians used- spread WR's, plenty of downfield passing.
my point exactly. Kelly Holcomb started TWO games for the browns...
their two QBs (Couch, Holcomb) had 2800+ and 700+ yards respctively. They went 9-7, with a top 10 defense. Meanwhile, the offense was in the bottom half of the NFL.

revisionist history.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/t ... e/2002.htm (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/2002.htm)

Chadman
12-16-2008, 06:57 PM
We should not forget what happened to the Cleveland Browns when Arians had enough receivers to employ a similar offense. The running game withered to nothing as did the Browns. When Arians left the first thing the Browns did was upgrade their offensive line and running back.
this is the argument that drives me crazy. Cleveland sucked when BA was the OC...

all we remember is the game where they lit us up....


That is simply not true.

The Browns made the play-offs with KELLY HOLCOMB at QB because of the offence Arians used- spread WR's, plenty of downfield passing.
my point exactly. Kelly Holcomb started TWO games for the browns...
their two QBs (Couch, Holcomb) had 2800+ and 700+ yards respctively. They went 9-7, with a top 10 defense. Meanwhile, the offense was in the bottom half of the NFL.

revisionist history.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/t ... e/2002.htm (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/2002.htm)

That's strange...Chadman doesn't remember it like that at all, yet the stats prove you right...oh well, guess Chadman was wrong after all.

SteelerOfDeVille
12-16-2008, 07:04 PM
We should not forget what happened to the Cleveland Browns when Arians had enough receivers to employ a similar offense. The running game withered to nothing as did the Browns. When Arians left the first thing the Browns did was upgrade their offensive line and running back.
this is the argument that drives me crazy. Cleveland sucked when BA was the OC...

all we remember is the game where they lit us up....


That is simply not true.

The Browns made the play-offs with KELLY HOLCOMB at QB because of the offence Arians used- spread WR's, plenty of downfield passing.
my point exactly. Kelly Holcomb started TWO games for the browns...
their two QBs (Couch, Holcomb) had 2800+ and 700+ yards respctively. They went 9-7, with a top 10 defense. Meanwhile, the offense was in the bottom half of the NFL.

revisionist history.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/t ... e/2002.htm (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/2002.htm)

That's strange...Chadman doesn't remember it like that at all, yet the stats prove you right...oh well, guess Chadman was wrong after all.
http://www.dawgsports.com/images/admin/USC_chest_bump.jpg

Flasteel
12-16-2008, 07:48 PM
Before anyone rushes to fire Arians I'm sure our Franchise QB will have something to say about that. Ben seems to have a positive rapport with Arians--something he didn't have with Whisenhunt. Does anyone really want to screw that up because some "message board geniuses" think they know what plays are being called and they don't like them?

I think Arians does need to reconsider the number of one back sets he starts out of and use a real FB more but firing a OC on an 11-3 team because of that is unlikely.

Earlier this year I heard Ben threw Arians under the bus after the Washington game when Lefty went in. The defensive players, coaches, and Willie Parker have all made public statements (albeit few) expressing displeasure with the offensive scheme.

This offense has completely under-performed and we rank in the bottom half of every statistical category in the league. Now we're dead last in 3rd and 1 conversions...that's sacrilege! There are a few mitigating circumstances such as injuries and poor execution, but the vast majority of the problem lies with his piss-poor philosophies and inconsistent playcalling. Arians did nothing to counter the huge rush Ben was facing earlier this season and his overall body of playcalling is among the least innovative I've ever seen.

We've got way too much talent to be as bad as we are offensively and if you don't see Arians role in this beyond the fullback issue then I'm sorry O. To say that he's an easy scapegoat or that he's getting the same business as every other OC before him is absurd. I may not be an offensive genius, but it doesn't take one to recognize the garbage offense he calls. The only two guys who were worse than this guy in my lifetime are Joe Walton and Ray Sherman...neither had a clue. Gilbride wasn't bad, but his offense didn't suit our personnel and he couldn't adapt. Arians doesn't understand the value of a blocking back, throwing to a weapon like Heath Miller, the three-step drop, mixing in the no-huddle, occasional misdirection, or getting our speed back on the edge or in space. He also lacks imagination, and seemingly a strong grasp of fundamental football.

I hope he fools some college into offering him a head coaching position in the offseason. Best of luck Bruce!

pittpete
12-16-2008, 07:59 PM
Arians biggest imaginative play is the reverse to Nate which has netted him a spectacular 18 yards on 5 carries.
Isnt it sad that when we absolutely positively game on the line need to score, we do it when Ben goes no huddle.

California-Steel
12-16-2008, 08:08 PM
NFL coaching is all about matchups and adjustments. BA never matches up anything and leaves it up to Ben to make his own adjustments.

BA does not even look at our O Line to matchup the play calling let alone any matchups against other teams.

Does not matter what the team did last year. Can you keep it going and make the adjustments when needed. In BA's case, NO!

flippy
12-16-2008, 08:36 PM
Bruce Arians had a clause in his contract that statd he would be elevated to Offensive Coordinator if Ken Whisenhut left.

Coach Tomlin has supported Arians in many ways. We should not forget that Mike Tomlin was a WR in school.

We should not forget what happened to the Cleveland Browns when Arians had enough receivers to employ a similar offense. The running game withered to nothing as did the Browns. When Arians left the first thing the Browns did was upgrade their offensive line and running back.

So what's your take Chem?

Did 09 just give Arians more time to screw things up? And 08 was more of a reflection of Whiz's offense.

Why has Ben gone from flourishing under Arians to struggling a bit.

And why do Ben and Ward seem to like Arians better than they liked Whiz?

And if Ben wasn't hurt this year and playing up to previous standards, would Arians' performance go unnoticed?

I think we can all concur that something isn't right.

Everything seems to point to Arians.

But it's not clear what the real story is here to me.

BURGH86STEEL
12-16-2008, 08:43 PM
NFL coaching is all about matchups and adjustments. BA never matches up anything and leaves it up to Ben to make his own adjustments.

BA does not even look at our O Line to matchup the play calling let alone any matchups against other teams.

Does not matter what the team did last year. Can you keep it going and make the adjustments when needed. In BA's case, NO!

How do you know BA does not match up or make adjustments? Are you in on the game plan(they call plays Ben likes to run)? Do you know why they are calling certain plays? Who they are taking advantage of? I will give you an example of how they tried to take advantage of a Raven's player. When Fabian Washington went out of the game, they threw it to that side of the field to try and take advantage of the player wearing # 41. They threw it to that side back to back. Once to Washinton and the other to Holmes. Players did not execute those plays. I am sure there are other instances. For us to really know, we would have to watch game tapes. None of us are privy to that type of information.

It is easy for people to sit here and complain about the play calling. Especially when no one knows why they are calling the plays. When the plays do not work, some of it is on the coaches but most times it falls on the players for not executing (dropped passes, missing open WR, poor blocking, protection break downs, goes on and on). I find it funny that people had the same complaints that Cowher did not make adjustments. We can go through this all day.

Do you have any facts to back up the lack of adjustments? Ben makes adjustments but who designs the plays for him to adjust? Ben does not go out there and draw up plays in the dirt.

BURGH86STEEL
12-16-2008, 08:49 PM
Bruce Arians had a clause in his contract that statd he would be elevated to Offensive Coordinator if Ken Whisenhut left.

Coach Tomlin has supported Arians in many ways. We should not forget that Mike Tomlin was a WR in school.

We should not forget what happened to the Cleveland Browns when Arians had enough receivers to employ a similar offense. The running game withered to nothing as did the Browns. When Arians left the first thing the Browns did was upgrade their offensive line and running back.

So what's your take Chem?

Did 09 just give Arians more time to screw things up? And 08 was more of a reflection of Whiz's offense.

Why has Ben gone from flourishing under Arians to struggling a bit.

And why do Ben and Ward seem to like Arians better than they liked Whiz?

And if Ben wasn't hurt this year and playing up to previous standards, would Arians' performance go unnoticed?

I think we can all concur that something isn't right.

Everything seems to point to Arians.

But it's not clear what the real story is here to me.

I agree that something is not right with the offense. I believe most of it goes back to the players. Injuries play a role, the Olines inconsistancies, loss of Faneca, WRs dropping passes, Ben's inconsistancies, and so on. People are looking for one person to place the blame. So they choose Arians. There is plenty of blame to go around and I think most of it is on the players for not executing.

mshifko
12-16-2008, 11:22 PM
to tell you the truth i wasn't pleased with him last season, i think a lot of our success just came from a strong run game and ben being a little bit smarter with the ball...this year, he's been hurt and pressing a little bit too much at times, plus we haven't had a running game...ben wasn't practicing either, which is why our offense struggled at times...

BA's scheme is where we are running into problems...i think last year, not many guys had tape on our zone blocking scheme and double tight sets...we were able to run the ball...this year, it seems like teams have figured out when we're in this set, we're going to do this...and it's obvious our current scheme isn't allowing us to run the football and it's a trickle effect from there...

Captain Lemming
12-17-2008, 12:58 AM
Bruce Arians just isn't a smash mouth football kind of guy.

How can you play "smashmouth" without the personel to play that brand of football?
Our Oline is incapable of dominating.
Our RB is both small and injured.
Dratted a bigger back who is out for the season.
Our healthy backs best asset is as a pass catcher.
We cant protect Ben for any length of time.

Any wonder we have gone from Smash Mouth to short passing?
Might the playacting reflect the Personnel?

I believe if BA tried to call plays the traditional "Steeler Way" we would be a far worse offense.

He has no choice with what his has.

It is interesting to note that when we run the ball well, we hardly throw.
Look at the period Flippy referred to when Parker was leading the league.

Given a good running attack, Arians was all too happy to use it to its full potential.

Captain Lemming
12-17-2008, 01:13 AM
BA's scheme is where we are running into problems...i think last year, not many guys had tape on our zone blocking scheme and double tight sets...we were able to run the ball...this year, it seems like teams have figured out when we're in this set, we're going to do this...and it's obvious our current scheme isn't allowing us to run the football and it's a trickle effect from there...

Or just maybe our starter being hurt, our horrible oline, our rookie power back being hurt, and a career backup pass catching specialist getting much of the snaps, has something to do with it?

Really, what scheme will give you a good run game under those circumstances?

I think Flippy has a point.

flippy
12-17-2008, 06:42 AM
To some degree, even though Parker lead the league in rushing until he got hurt, he wasn't a consistent runner. He would go for 1, -1, 2, 2, 1, 0, 2, 1, 1, -2, 54, etc.

He made a lot of big runs that skewed his stats.

But overall, those big plays were important and we're not seeing them.

How much have we missed Parker's big plays?

Does Ben need the threat of those big running plays to be more effective?

Captain Lemming
12-17-2008, 11:16 AM
To some degree, even though Parker lead the league in rushing until he got hurt, he wasn't a consistent runner. He would go for 1, -1, 2, 2, 1, 0, 2, 1, 1, -2, 54, etc.

He made a lot of big runs that skewed his stats.

But overall, those big plays were important and we're not seeing them.

How much have we missed Parker's big plays?



To add to your point even with a healthy Parker, that Kind of running makes it hard to be a ball control team. A reason to draft a bigger RB in the first round, one who just happened to have a season ending injury.

Also how often were those long runs sprung by Faneca?
Think about it people. Take away those long runs sprung by Alan, and Parkers career has a whole different look.
Now we don't even have that. And Parkers hurt.

Parker has played well with a fullback and with two tight ends.
His play declined when Faneca left.

Oviedo
12-17-2008, 11:40 AM
Bruce Arians just isn't a smash mouth football kind of guy.

How can you play "smashmouth" without the personel to play that brand of football?
Our Oline is incapable of dominating.
Our RB is both small and injured.
Dratted a bigger back who is out for the season.
Our healthy backs best asset is as a pass catcher.
We cant protect Ben for any length of time.

Any wonder we have gone from Smash Mouth to short passing?
Might the playacting reflect the Personnel?

I believe if BA tried to call plays the traditional "Steeler Way" we would be a far worse offense.

He has no choice with what his has.

It is interesting to note that when we run the ball well, we hardly throw.
Look at the period Flippy referred to when Parker was leading the league.

Given a good running attack, Arians was all too happy to use it to its full potential.

Totally agree with your sentiments. No one wants to realize how fortunate we were with Jerome Bettis. he was the ultimate power back but a RB like him comes around once every 10-15 years. Everyone also wants to forget the RBs we had between Franco and Bettis. No better than we have now or one or two year wonders.

We can't do what we did with Bettis because we don't have Bettis. IMO Bettis made Cowher because without him his conservative, predictable offense would have been terrible. Bettis was unique and when he retired and Tomlin came in he was smart enough to realize you can't do what you did with Bettis without Bettis. That meant looking at what was being successful around the league (this is a copy cat league) and that meant being more like the Patriots who designed an offense to totally exploit the NFL rule changes to favor a passing attack.

The changes implemented made sense. The problem this year remains one of execution and injuries. Parker led the league in rishing last essentially running the same offense. Ben had the best season ever by a Steelers QB running the same offense.

We have won 21 games and counting in two seasons. You don't do that with a incompetent OC as much as everyone wants to think the team wins in spite of him. I'll keep on harping on the fact that don't underestimate how much you could screw up Big Ben by bringing someone else in. That could be the true disaster.

flippy
12-17-2008, 11:55 AM
Bruce Arians just isn't a smash mouth football kind of guy.

How can you play "smashmouth" without the personel to play that brand of football?
Our Oline is incapable of dominating.
Our RB is both small and injured.
Dratted a bigger back who is out for the season.
Our healthy backs best asset is as a pass catcher.
We cant protect Ben for any length of time.

Any wonder we have gone from Smash Mouth to short passing?
Might the playacting reflect the Personnel?

I believe if BA tried to call plays the traditional "Steeler Way" we would be a far worse offense.

He has no choice with what his has.

It is interesting to note that when we run the ball well, we hardly throw.
Look at the period Flippy referred to when Parker was leading the league.

Given a good running attack, Arians was all too happy to use it to its full potential.

Totally agree with your sentiments. No one wants to realize how fortunate we were with Jerome Bettis. he was the ultimate power back but a RB like him comes around once every 10-15 years. Everyone also wants to forget the RBs we had between Franco and Bettis. No better than we have now or one or two year wonders.

We can't do what we did with Bettis because we don't have Bettis. IMO Bettis made Cowher because without him his conservative, predictable offense would have been terrible. Bettis was unique and when he retired and Tomlin came in he was smart enough to realize you can't do what you did with Bettis without Bettis. That meant looking at what was being successful around the league (this is a copy cat league) and that meant being more like the Patriots who designed an offense to totally exploit the NFL rule changes to favor a passing attack.

The changes implemented made sense. The problem this year remains one of execution and injuries. Parker led the league in rishing last essentially running the same offense. Ben had the best season ever by a Steelers QB running the same offense.

We have won 21 games and counting in two seasons. You don't do that with a incompetent OC as much as everyone wants to think the team wins in spite of him. I'll keep on harping on the fact that don't underestimate how much you could screw up Big Ben by bringing someone else in. That could be the true disaster.


Good thought. What impact would firing BA have on BEN?

BURGH86STEEL
12-17-2008, 12:22 PM
Bruce Arians just isn't a smash mouth football kind of guy.

How can you play "smashmouth" without the personel to play that brand of football?
Our Oline is incapable of dominating.
Our RB is both small and injured.
Dratted a bigger back who is out for the season.
Our healthy backs best asset is as a pass catcher.
We cant protect Ben for any length of time.

Any wonder we have gone from Smash Mouth to short passing?
Might the playacting reflect the Personnel?

I believe if BA tried to call plays the traditional "Steeler Way" we would be a far worse offense.

He has no choice with what his has.

It is interesting to note that when we run the ball well, we hardly throw.
Look at the period Flippy referred to when Parker was leading the league.

Given a good running attack, Arians was all too happy to use it to its full potential.

Totally agree with your sentiments. No one wants to realize how fortunate we were with Jerome Bettis. he was the ultimate power back but a RB like him comes around once every 10-15 years. Everyone also wants to forget the RBs we had between Franco and Bettis. No better than we have now or one or two year wonders.

We can't do what we did with Bettis because we don't have Bettis. IMO Bettis made Cowher because without him his conservative, predictable offense would have been terrible. Bettis was unique and when he retired and Tomlin came in he was smart enough to realize you can't do what you did with Bettis without Bettis. That meant looking at what was being successful around the league (this is a copy cat league) and that meant being more like the Patriots who designed an offense to totally exploit the NFL rule changes to favor a passing attack.

The changes implemented made sense. The problem this year remains one of execution and injuries. Parker led the league in rishing last essentially running the same offense. Ben had the best season ever by a Steelers QB running the same offense.

We have won 21 games and counting in two seasons. You don't do that with a incompetent OC as much as everyone wants to think the team wins in spite of him. I'll keep on harping on the fact that don't underestimate how much you could screw up Big Ben by bringing someone else in. That could be the true disaster.

Bettis made Cowher? I have to disagree. Cowher's teams had success without Bettis. Several RBs had successful seasons under Cowher. Steelers never made the SB with Bettis as a feature RB. IMO, Cowher usually had players in place that fit his philosophy. That is a huge reason why he was successful. That and the emphasis he placed on playing good defense.

Tomlin never had Bettis so I doubt he was thinking about Bettis or cared. He coached with what he had and did a good job. The Pats did not have that level of success on offense till last season. It was Tomlin's 1st season as coach and he did not have time to implement that plan if he wanted too. How many teams copied the Pats last year to this year? I do not think any. Teams have to have the players to execute that style of offense. How many teams have the QB or the players to execute that style of offense? There are not any. The Pats have all the players except one. There are more ways than one to win in the NFL. Steelers are doing it mostly with defense this season.

I agree that the problems on offense are mostly due to execution, injuries, and inconsistent play.

SteelerOfDeVille
12-17-2008, 01:10 PM
To some degree, even though Parker lead the league in rushing until he got hurt, he wasn't a consistent runner. He would go for 1, -1, 2, 2, 1, 0, 2, 1, 1, -2, 54, etc.

He made a lot of big runs that skewed his stats.

But overall, those big plays were important and we're not seeing them.

How much have we missed Parker's big plays?

Does Ben need the threat of those big running plays to be more effective?
not exactly true. i read somewhere last year that Davenport had more 20+ yard runs than Parker.

Parker actually just got a LOT of attempts. he only averaged 4.1 YPC, a career low... until this year.

Since BA has taken over, FWP is at 4.0 flat - and might dip under before the year is out.

papillon
12-17-2008, 01:27 PM
Fans may want Bruce Arians fired, but, I'm almost certain that Mike Tomlin doesn't see it that way. The Steelers will finish this season and whatever that brings (hopefully, a Superbowl) and then they'll go to the draft and try to make the team better.

We may see a defensive lineman taken in the first round this year. Then offensive linemen based on draft position and scouting reports. One thing is for sure about the Steeler front office and management -- They do not panic and they won't this year either. They know the offense isn't as productive as they would like, but, I also get the impression that they believe there isn't a total overhaul needed either.

We'll see what happens and lets hope that the offense can contuinue to protect the ball and make some first downs. This past week the protecting of the ball wasn't real good and the Steelers are fortunate that the defense really made a difference when they were put in bad situations. The offense just needs to be patient and they have for the most part the past 4-5 weeks and the Steelers have won.

Stupid penalties and turnovers are the only things that will beat this version of the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Pappy

Oviedo
12-17-2008, 01:50 PM
Fans may want Bruce Arians fired, but, I'm almost certain that Mike Tomlin doesn't see it that way. The Steelers will finish this season and whatever that brings (hopefully, a Superbowl) and then they'll go to the draft and try to make the team better.

We may see a defensive lineman taken in the first round this year. Then offensive linemen based on draft position and scouting reports. One thing is for sure about the Steeler front office and management -- They do not panic and they won't this year either. They know the offense isn't as productive as they would like, but, I also get the impression that they believe there isn't a total overhaul needed either.

We'll see what happens and lets hope that the offense can contuinue to protect the ball and make some first downs. This past week the protecting of the ball wasn't real good and the Steelers are fortunate that the defense really made a difference when they were put in bad situations. The offense just needs to be patient and they have for the most part the past 4-5 weeks and the Steelers have won.

Stupid penalties and turnovers are the only things that will beat this version of the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Pappy

Tomlin, the players and front office are the only ones who opinions matter because they are the only ones who really know something. Fans sitting in front of a "b**b tube" with beer in their hands only like to think they know something.

Like I have said before anyone who thinks they know what plays are called from the stand or watching on TV are delusional. All they know is what Ben audibled to before the snap.