PDA

View Full Version : It makes me a little sick to my stomach...



msp26505
01-09-2010, 07:59 PM
To watch teams play the style of game that the Steelers made famous in the playoffs, while the Steelers sit at home after a season of playing the style of game that the they used to routinely shut down.

Aside from the obvious difference in the style of play, the biggest difference between what we have now and the really good Steelers teams from the mid-90's and early 2000's that came up short is that now, we have Ben. Replace O'Donnell or Stewart with Big Ben and we are probably talking about trying to get Lombardi #8 or 9 now.

Now the problem is that we have an OL that is made up of mid-to-late round picks (that perform like it), throw on 3rd and short, can't eat clock when necessary, and can't play defense worth crap. But boy, those stats are pretty... :roll:

No need to offer explanations for any of this. :Blah I haven't been living under a rock for the last year, I just wanted to vent.

But I also want a team that can run, stop the run (actually, stop everything), and wins a game by out working a team and being more physical. You add that to Ben's heroics, and you have a perennial SB contender.

pfelix73
01-09-2010, 08:05 PM
I'm sorry, but I disagree with you regarding the OL. This OL is fine the way it is. If you want to tweak any of it- do so at the RT position for next year... Most of those sacks were on BB and we did have a 1000 yard rusher- even though we have no FB. Think what our RB could really do out of the I formation with a big time FB in front of him.

We need a FB.

:tt1

stlrz d
01-09-2010, 08:07 PM
I'm sorry, but I disagree with you on the OL statement you made. This OL is fine the way it is. If you want to tweak any of it- do so at the RT position for next year... Most of those sacks were on BB and we did have a 1000 yard rusher- even though we have no FB. Think what our RB could really do out of the I formation with a big time FB in front of him.

We need a FB.

:tt1

I don't know that I'd say most, but he has his share no doubt.

pfelix73
01-09-2010, 08:21 PM
2 years ago, I remember a thread on here where we discussed that in detail. Which ones were on Ben, etc.... I'd define my 'most' in that statement above as maybe 60% or more.

We'd actually have to go back this year and check out all 50 sacks- I believe he was sacked 50 times, unless I'm mistaken. I would be willing to bet a buck that Ben may have been at fault for 30 of those.... Maybe as the weeks go along here, we can figure this out by looking at some of the games....

This could be a good topic of discussion again as we get closer to Feb. and March....

:tt1

msp26505
01-09-2010, 08:29 PM
2 years ago, I remember a thread on here where we discussed that in detail. Which ones were on Ben, etc.... I'd define my 'most' in that statement above as maybe 60% or more.

We'd actually have to go back this year and check out all 50 sacks- I believe he was sacked 50 times, unless I'm mistaken. I would be willing to bet a buck that Ben may have been at fault for 30 of those.... Maybe as the weeks go along here, we can figure this out by looking at some of the games....

This could be a good topic of discussion again as we get closer to Feb. and March....

:tt1

That definitely sounds like a reasonable percentage.

But my point was that the Steelers are no longer the physical team they once were (regardless of sack numbers).

It's more a statement about offensive philosophy.

pfelix73
01-09-2010, 08:33 PM
OK. I'll agree with that in that this team has gotten away from the physical running game- something we need to get back to- IMO.

:tt1

papillon
01-09-2010, 11:52 PM
I'm sorry, but I disagree with you on the OL statement you made. This OL is fine the way it is. If you want to tweak any of it- do so at the RT position for next year... Most of those sacks were on BB and we did have a 1000 yard rusher- even though we have no FB. Think what our RB could really do out of the I formation with a big time FB in front of him.

We need a FB.

:tt1

I don't know that I'd say most, but he has his share no doubt.

Ben is responsible for more of the sacks than the oline without a doubt.

Pappy

stlrz d
01-10-2010, 12:01 AM
Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. When someone is in his face right away and he runs around trying to avoid it only to be sacked by someone else that one is on the line from the get go. If he immediately ditched the ball on those plays the offense would never sustain any drives because many times he does get away.

I'd love for someone to go through every sack because I believe it is much closer to 50/50 than people think it is.

skyhawk
01-10-2010, 12:12 AM
I'm sorry, but I disagree with you regarding the OL. This OL is fine the way it is. If you want to tweak any of it- do so at the RT position for next year... Most of those sacks were on BB and we did have a 1000 yard rusher- even though we have no FB. Think what our RB could really do out of the I formation with a big time FB in front of him.

We need a FB.

:tt1

Duude...

Sacks do happen. Some are on Ben, some are on the OL when they can't block a thing. This OLine is the worst line since the late 1980's.

Look at a mediocre Jet's offense. With that line, on any given sunday, they can win b/c they are stout up front. The Steelers used to be this way (before Ben). Unfortunately, when they had the best line in football, the QB left a little to be desired.

O'donnell held onto the ball for too long and WOULD NOT throw the ball away. He was immobile and STILL was rarely sacked b/c he played behind the best line in football.

A tradition long gone....

skyhawk
01-10-2010, 12:13 AM
To watch teams play the style of game that the Steelers made famous in the playoffs, while the Steelers sit at home after a season of playing the style of game that the they used to routinely shut down.

Aside from the obvious difference in the style of play, the biggest difference between what we have now and the really good Steelers teams from the mid-90's and early 2000's that came up short is that now, we have Ben. Replace O'Donnell or Stewart with Big Ben and we are probably talking about trying to get Lombardi #8 or 9 now.

Now the problem is that we have an OL that is made up of mid-to-late round picks (that perform like it), throw on 3rd and short, can't eat clock when necessary, and can't play defense worth crap. But boy, those stats are pretty... :roll:

No need to offer explanations for any of this. :Blah I haven't been living under a rock for the last year, I just wanted to vent.

But I also want a team that can run, stop the run (actually, stop everything), and wins a game by out working a team and being more physical. You add that to Ben's heroics, and you have a perennial SB contender.

:Beer

Exactly.

bostonsteeler
01-10-2010, 12:23 AM
Aside from the obvious difference in the style of play, the biggest difference between what we have now and the really good Steelers teams from the mid-90's and early 2000's that came up short is that now, we have Ben. Replace O'Donnell or Stewart with Big Ben and we are probably talking about trying to get Lombardi #8 or 9 now.


O'Donnell was pretty good.

But BB in 1996-2003, particularly in the early period in the Bus' heyday and much of our defensive talent still top class, would've brought us an SB or two.

Heck, if O'Donnell had stayed, we may have had an SB in 96 or 97..

MaxAMillion
01-10-2010, 01:44 AM
I don't think the OL is that good at all. Certainly not on par with the OL we are seeing in the playoffs. Look at the two teams that won today. Both the Cowboys and Jets have multiple first round picks on their line and/or they have spent major dollars on upgrading the OL.

I think the Steelers need to upgrade the OL either through the draft or free agency.

pfelix73
01-10-2010, 01:45 AM
Well duude, I guess the sky really is falling now isn't it?

This OL is fine the way it is- and now with the emergence of Foster like we were talking about earlier, and the eventual return of Stapleton, and another year of experience for Legursky, we actually have some depth there now... And who knows? Maybe Urbik will be able to do something next year as well. Worst OL since the 80's, hmmmm, don't know about that one...The one in 2008 may have been worse than the one in 2009.

feltdizz
01-10-2010, 01:53 AM
I don't think the OL is that good at all. Certainly not on par with the OL we are seeing in the playoffs. Look at the two teams that won today. Both the Cowboys and Jets have multiple first round picks on their line and/or they have spent major dollars on upgrading the OL.

I think the Steelers need to upgrade the OL either through the draft or free agency.

I agree... I'm not seeing our OL get to the second level at all.. it's always a struggle to get off the line. It's not happening with Big Ben at QB though...

Right now it looks like we wasted a second rounder on Sweed... I wonder what was available? I didn't mind the Sweed pick, just wished he would play like it.

Mel Blount's G
01-10-2010, 04:47 AM
I don't think the OL is that good at all. Certainly not on par with the OL we are seeing in the playoffs. Look at the two teams that won today. Both the Cowboys and Jets have multiple first round picks on their line and/or they have spent major dollars on upgrading the OL.

I think the Steelers need to upgrade the OL either through the draft or free agency.

I agree... I'm not seeing our OL get to the second level at all.. it's always a struggle to get off the line. It's not happening with Big Ben at QB though...

Right now it looks like we wasted a second rounder on Sweed... I wonder what was available? I didn't mind the Sweed pick, just wished he would play like it.
If were gonna talk about wasted picks....I wanted an olineman with the pick that ended up as Bruce Davis. And lord I hope Timmons isn't the next tinker k-bell with those ankles of his (sorry folks, I really hope this is NOT the case and he's on the field all year next year). Also, somebody posted an article here where a guy argued that the Steelers should have taken Max Unger last year with that Ziggy pick. Though I did not like most of that article I'm not sure I disagree with that, especially when I consider an interior d-lineman, who is a pass rushing ace, is a waste considering our current defensive scheming. Kinda like the old argument of "why draft a TE in the first round when he won't be used in this offense". Hood mighta been the next Dwight Freeney but he'll be a bulked up gap plugger on our defense, which probably coulda been found later in the draft and that pick better used on Unger.

Btw, does that old TE argument now apply to running backs? i.e. Was Mendenhall a wasted 1st round pick if we throw 70% of the time? A running back drafted after Rashard got 2000 this year but then the Titans have the bulk and talent upfront to do it and so they do.. This debate that the Steelers have blatantly ignored blatant needs on our offensive line has raged on since Hartings retired and Faneca was lost in free agency, though a Lombardi Trophy last year certainly cooled the argument off. Heck, we've seen Steeler fans on these very discussion boards seemingly lose screws - permanently - over this debate.

I dunno, no doubt some of us are talking out of extreme emotional duress and frustration as we watch teams we think we should be better than play on in January while we still dwell on what coulda been. Rubbing salt in the Steelers losing, for me, is "America's Team" winning :HeadBanger . Which is why I opened a thread titled "It makes me a little sick to my stomach" because my stomach has been a little noxious ever since last weekends playoff seedings.

And please, whoever said we would have won more SB's if O'dummell had stayed...well, after he completely and totally hefted the blame squarely on his WR's for his SB pick 6's, unless he did a turn-about, apologized publicly within that week and taken his share of the heat like a man, his chances of success as a Steeler were slim to none ==> imo

Jooser
01-10-2010, 08:58 AM
I don't think the OL is that talented at all. Also, BA's and LZ's zone blocking scheme further degrades their performance. They are big guys and need to be turned into maulers....IMO.

Oviedo
01-10-2010, 09:32 AM
For anyone longing for the days of run first football they may want to evalaute some facts:


Passing interest

Top passing teams are also among the best teams in the NFL this season. Here is a look at such teams compared with teams that were the most successful running the ball:

Combined record of top 10 passing teams: 113-47

Combined record of top 10 running teams: 87-73


Playoff teams among top 10 passing teams: 8

Playoff teams among the top 10 running teams: 5


Teams with a winning record among top 10 passing teams: 10

Teams with a winning record among top 10 running teams: 5

stlrz d
01-10-2010, 12:05 PM
And please, whoever said we would have won more SB's if O'dummell had stayed...well, after he completely and totally hefted the blame squarely on his WR's for his SB pick 6's, unless he did a turn-about, apologized publicly within that week and taken his share of the heat like a man, his chances of success as a Steeler were slim to none ==> imo

I don't recall that. Did he really do that?

The only thing I recall is Jim Gray, after the game, trying to get him to say the WR ran the wrong route on the 2nd pick and NoD's response was, "Jim, we win as a team and we lose as a team".

Which I thought was pretty classy actually because everyone knew that when Bill Bates blitzed from the defensive left that Corey Holliday was the hot route...but he just kept running straight up the field and NoD threw the ball to where Holliday was supposed to be.

The first pick was totally on NoD sailing a pass though.

msp26505
01-10-2010, 01:03 PM
For anyone longing for the days of run first football they may want to evalaute some facts:


Passing interest

Top passing teams are also among the best teams in the NFL this season. Here is a look at such teams compared with teams that were the most successful running the ball:

Combined record of top 10 passing teams: 113-47

Combined record of top 10 running teams: 87-73


Playoff teams among top 10 passing teams: 8

Playoff teams among the top 10 running teams: 5


Teams with a winning record among top 10 passing teams: 10

Teams with a winning record among top 10 running teams: 5



Everyone on this board is well aware of your stance that this is now a passing league. I'm not even in total disagreement with that notion, because the rules have been changed to protect QB's, to favor WR's and to limit DB's. But since you love to throw around stats, here are a few facts that matter to me:

1. The 2009 Steelers are not in the playoffs.

2. The Houston Oilers never won a Super Bowl by passing first and relying on offense.

3. The Buffalo Bills never won a Super Bowl by passing first and relying on offense.

4. The Philadelphia Eagles have never won a Super Bowl by passing first and relying on offense.

5. The Rams won one and were shut down in one by passing first and relying on offense.

6. The pats* stole a couple, but could beat teams running (if necessary) and could play defense (even if it was via camcorder).

7. The Colts have won one SB with Manning in a pass-first offense.

8. Favre has won one SB in 18 years in pass-first offenses and the Vikes have faltered since Brett decided to stop giving Adrian Peterson the ball.

9. The Giants won a SB recently by running and playing defense.


The 2008 Steelers were a combination of great defense and Ben's heroics...not a solid offensive philosophy.

But my whole point is that now that we have Ben, if we would commit to beating the crap out of teams more often than we try to finesse them, we would have a better chance of putting teams away.

The missing piece of the puzzle in the 96, 97, 2001, and 2004 seasons was QB play. Ben was a rookie in 2004, so it's understandable. Ben in his current form is far superior to O'Donnell or Stewart. We could even throw in the lost seasons with Tomczak and Maddox that an experienced Ben may have gotten into the playoffs.

But arguing players from different eras is always a lost cause because there are too many variables. One thing that could change, though, is that the Steelers could start playing football like they did until recently and kick people's asses in the trenches, then use Ben's magic to win the games that those teams of old could not.

feltdizz
01-10-2010, 01:26 PM
For anyone longing for the days of run first football they may want to evalaute some facts:


Passing interest

Top passing teams are also among the best teams in the NFL this season. Here is a look at such teams compared with teams that were the most successful running the ball:

Combined record of top 10 passing teams: 113-47

Combined record of top 10 running teams: 87-73


Playoff teams among top 10 passing teams: 8

Playoff teams among the top 10 running teams: 5


Teams with a winning record among top 10 passing teams: 10

Teams with a winning record among top 10 running teams: 5



Well, Philly is out...
The Bungles are out too..

The whole passing stat goes out the window once the playoffs start...
I'm anxious to see how these passing teams do when they face teams who run and play stout D.

I don't care if we run first... I just want to run more!!!
We didn't win a SB in 2005 running first.. we passed on Indy early and it was due to the threat of the run.. that is key.

pfelix73
01-10-2010, 02:53 PM
Jooser- the OL doesn't always use the zone blocking scheme. In fact, zone blocking is so simple to do and it is used on every level of football from the peewees all the way up- it is very common. This ZBS has gotten blown way out of proportion on this site. It's just one aspect of playing along the OL.

One of the most notable running plays that the Steelers do is a simple trap play where Kemo pulls to his right. This is just one example and there are others and its been in the playbook for a very long time. They also use Essex on traps to the left as well. Just go back and watch some games from this year and you'll see that. On one of those traps, you could have another lineman, 2 or 3, etc zone block, just depends on who is lined up where along the defensive front....

Furthermore- I am so content with the way this OL is right now, that I'll go out on a limb and predict it will be one of the best in the league in the very near future. I like the depth that we have there now. This OL has a lot of youth to it. I would like to see someone challenge Colon at RT though as he is the weak link at this point.

:tt1

Shoe
01-10-2010, 03:14 PM
I'm sorry, but I disagree with you regarding the OL. This OL is fine the way it is. If you want to tweak any of it- do so at the RT position for next year... Most of those sacks were on BB and we did have a 1000 yard rusher- even though we have no FB. Think what our RB could really do out of the I formation with a big time FB in front of him.

We need a FB.

:tt1

I *very much* respectfully disagree with your opinion. I recall a stat where, the Steelers have a woeful number of "10-yard+" runs between the tackles (comparing to other playoff teams, and the rest of the league). A little of it may be scheme/playcall related, but also: a lot of that is subpar O-line play (hole-opening).

Starlifter
01-10-2010, 03:21 PM
as i've said many times, I have no problems with a prolific pass first offense. If it comes at the expense of a power running attack though - then we're screwed. I agree the NFL favors the pass and we should be able to thrive under those rules but if we have no faith in our ability to convert 3rd and 1 or run it in from the 6 yard line, then we'll be stat monsters and miss the playoffs every year.

NorthCoast
01-10-2010, 04:57 PM
Another thing we are seeing in these playoffs is great safety play. This is something we have lacked all year....guys that are at least able to get a few fingers on the ball to disrupt the pass. We sorely need to draft some secondary help. We have plenty of playmakers on offense, time to take care of the defense in the next draft. I don't even favor drafting a RB if we lose Parker. Two years ago Moore filled in just fine.

msp26505
01-10-2010, 06:22 PM
Another thing we are seeing in these playoffs is great safety play. This is something we have lacked all year....guys that are at least able to get a few fingers on the ball to disrupt the pass. We sorely need to draft some secondary help. We have plenty of playmakers on offense, time to take care of the defense in the next draft. I don't even favor drafting a RB if we lose Parker. Two years ago Moore filled in just fine.

I think we are fortunate that the draft is very deep with safeties this year.

msp26505
01-10-2010, 06:23 PM
as i've said many times, I have no problems with a prolific pass first offense. If it comes at the expense of a power running attack though - then we're screwed. I agree the NFL favors the pass and we should be able to thrive under those rules but if we have no faith in our ability to convert 3rd and 1 or run it in from the 6 yard line, then we'll be stat monsters and miss the playoffs every year.

:Agree 110%.

feltdizz
01-10-2010, 06:30 PM
Another thing we are seeing in these playoffs is great safety play. This is something we have lacked all year....guys that are at least able to get a few fingers on the ball to disrupt the pass. We sorely need to draft some secondary help. We have plenty of playmakers on offense, time to take care of the defense in the next draft. I don't even favor drafting a RB if we lose Parker. Two years ago Moore filled in just fine.
Upgrade over Carter and hope someone challenges Gay. I've watched a bunch of DB's make playd on the ball... we couldn't even get a hand on the WR