PDA

View Full Version : For those who buy into the "D is too complicated" myth



stlrz d
01-31-2010, 11:35 AM
Please to be providing a list of players (along with explanations why) who should be on the field ahead of the guys who have proved they belong out there.

Thank you.

Slapstick
01-31-2010, 04:03 PM
Please to be providing a list of players (along with explanations why) who should be on the field ahead of the guys who have proved they belong out there.

Thank you.

It's not a myth...

It isn't necessarily that you want your young players to be starting...it's that you want your young players to at least be able to contribute in a meaningful way...

Would guys like Keenan Lewis and Joe Burnett play better if the defensive scheme weren't so complicated? I think so...

Would Ziggy have made more plays earlier in the year if the assignments for the Steelers' DEs weren't so numerous? Perhaps...

Some players develop at different rates than others...it took Aaron Smith a year to figure out what he was doing...Brett Keisel didn't become a starter until his 5th season...it took Ike Taylor a while to find his way into the starting lineup...McFadden couldn't do it until year 4...

Is there a way to get the younger players on the field faster in the current scheme? There doesn't seem to be...

Hell, Timmons played behind Foote for two years...one due to an injury putting him behind...the other because Foote knew the defense better...

There is a pattern here...

steelsnis
01-31-2010, 05:48 PM
I fall more on the stlrz d side of this debate. There is a reason that we are usually drafting in the latter parts of the rounds. It means we have a good team that generally finishes the season in the playoffs. This also means that you are RARELY gonna grab a guy that is going to step right in and contribute as a rookie.

In my mind, that's a GOOD thing. With Lewis and Burnett, what happened to patience??? These guys weren't late first rounders, they were 3rd and 5th round draft picks! Ziggy played as much as any defensive rookie in recent history, and that was more out of necessity than anything else due to injuries.

I know people love the "promise" that rookies bring, I do too, but this team's history shows that it's not always necessary to jam rooks into the starting lineup.

feltdizz
01-31-2010, 06:01 PM
Please to be providing a list of players (along with explanations why) who should be on the field ahead of the guys who have proved they belong out there.

Thank you.

Is this a trick question? If someone thinks the D is too complicated he won't have a list of players because, well..it's too complicated for them.

I think the argument Oviedo (he is the one who repeats it constantly so I assume it's directed at him and those who agree with him) has is the D makes it so the young guys can't get ahead of the vets... yet the vets and Gay were getting torched.

Were Tyrone Carter and Deshea really worthy of roster spots or is it their knowledge of the D?

I agree our D is complicated.. but it is also the reason it's damn good once you grasp it.

My frustration is the drop off in basic football technique once Troy left. Guys were bumping into each other and couldn't even call the D before the snap. That is a problem. We were making the worst offenses in football look really good. I don't expect Troy's replacement to play Troy D. But I expect you to be in the TV frame when the ball is caught.

Mister Pittsburgh
01-31-2010, 06:19 PM
First round pick Ziggy Hood not being able to start for an injured Aaron Smith. Travis Kirshke is a superior player?

birtikidis
01-31-2010, 07:04 PM
Felt, I agree, I couldn't believe how bad our technique was. and the defense standing around waiting for the offense to snap the ball and still not knowing what the defensive play call was? what the hell is that?
guys seem to want the blockbuster blue chip athelete that can come in and dominate as a rookie. sorry guys you're rooting for the wrong team, those players get picked early in the first round by teams that suck every year. I mean how many defensive guys have we even drafted in the first round in the last 10 years? it's not a whole lot, and those we did draft, with the exception of timmons, were late in the first round (I know troy was drafted early but he was a trade up scenario).

feltdizz
01-31-2010, 07:30 PM
My wish would be for our D too be complicated enough to confuse opposing D's but not so complicated we have to keep old vets past their prime...

Troy is the biblical reference of what Bad Word Lebeau's D is...
He is like the second coming of Lebeau in a young athletic body...

But if Troy goes down again... we need to have a scaled down D... and if this scaled down D is toast because it's all base on Troy we have a problem.

I'm just hoping it was one of those perfect storms where losing Troy exposed our youth who are one year from being ready.

NJ-STEELER
01-31-2010, 07:59 PM
i can see both ides of the argumnt, and even started a thread on it refencing the green bay defense this past year with raji and clay mathews being big factors while playing a similiar defenive scheme.


the last rookies to make an immediate impact for the defense were hampton and KBell. ad that was before DL came back to coach with us.

i dont expect a 3rd (last pik of 3rd) lik lewis or a 5th lik burnett to contribute righ away, but find it a little puzzling why a top 2 rounder cant be a help right away

SteelerNation1
01-31-2010, 08:05 PM
My frustration is the drop off in basic football technique once Troy left. Guys were bumping into each other and couldn't even call the D before the snap. That is a problem. We were making the worst offenses in football look really good. I don't expect Troy's replacement to play Troy D. But I expect you to be in the TV frame when the ball is caught.

It was so obvious (especially being at the games) that a number of guys had NO IDEA what was going on pre snap. Guys were constantly screaming across the field and looked very confused...especially during the Raider game. I'm not blaming this on LeBeau's D being too complicated, I'm thinking more lack of prep/understanding of the game plan and/or adjustments.

birtikidis
01-31-2010, 08:50 PM
My wish would be for our D too be complicated enough to confuse opposing D's but not so complicated we have to keep old vets past their prime...

Troy is the biblical reference of what Bad Word Lebeau's D is...
He is like the second coming of Lebeau in a young athletic body...

But if Troy goes down again... we need to have a scaled down D... and if this scaled down D is toast because it's all base on Troy we have a problem.

I'm just hoping it was one of those perfect storms where losing Troy exposed our youth who are one year from being ready.
MY wish for our TEAM would be to have backups that are capable.
after we lost troy it was like we had reed playing safety. and not ed reed.
too many of our guys that are backups shouldn't even be in the league.

stlrz d
01-31-2010, 10:51 PM
Would guys like Keenan Lewis and Joe Burnett play better if the defensive scheme weren't so complicated? I think so...

Would Ziggy have made more plays earlier in the year if the assignments for the Steelers' DEs weren't so numerous? Perhaps...

To quote one of the greatest movie characters of all time, "Well that's like your opinion, man."

See, I can just as easily say they wouldn't have. The DBs were mid to late round picks. Ziggy was a project AND changing positions.


i can see both ides of the argumnt, and even started a thread on it refencing the green bay defense this past year with raji and clay mathews being big factors while playing a similiar defenive scheme.


the last rookies to make an immediate impact for the defense were hampton and KBell. ad that was before DL came back to coach with us.

i dont expect a 3rd (last pik of 3rd) lik lewis or a 5th lik burnett to contribute righ away, but find it a little puzzling why a top 2 rounder cant be a help right away

Green Bay is a bad example. They just switched to a 3-4 this year. And even though they just made that change Raji played in 14 of 16 games, starting only 1 of them and totaling only 25 tackles. He was taken 9th overall.

For Matthews, football is the family business and he's no typical rookie. His grandfather played in the NFL, his father played in the NFL as did his uncle. It's in their blood. Matthews not starting for the Packers would have been like Manning not starting for the Colts. And even for the first 3 games Matthews didn't start.

~~~

This is the NFL. Offenses are complicated for every team. Defenses are complicated for every team. Some guys pick it up faster than others. That's the way it is. Our D has been consistently stellar for quite some time. It's hard for rookies to get PT in a situation like that. Look at how late we typically draft as well, and the fact that because our D is so good we can take "project" guys and there you have it.

NJ-STEELER
01-31-2010, 11:07 PM
Raji split time with pickett. in a constant rotation.


no i dont think the GB system is that much easier then ours.

for the most part, i believe if the Kid is that good (rookie year or not) he's going to see time on the field. for most of the players, there's a little adjustment period

birtikidis
01-31-2010, 11:10 PM
People make it sound like the vets are just gonna sit down and die after a rook is drafted.
these guys are in the NFL and VETERANS for a reason. it's because they're pretty darn good football players themselves.

feltdizz
01-31-2010, 11:30 PM
People make it sound like the vets are just gonna sit down and die after a rook is drafted.
these guys are in the NFL and VETERANS for a reason. it's because they're pretty darn good football players themselves.

Tyrone Carter being our best option to replace Troy is unnacceptable.

birtikidis
01-31-2010, 11:58 PM
People make it sound like the vets are just gonna sit down and die after a rook is drafted.
these guys are in the NFL and VETERANS for a reason. it's because they're pretty darn good football players themselves.

Tyrone Carter being our best option to replace Troy is unnacceptable.
oh i absolutely agree.
I wouldn't let carter serve me a burger at mcdonalds. I've said it once and I'll say it again, he is by far the worst professional athlete that i've seen.

Dee Dub
02-01-2010, 02:03 AM
...it took Aaron Smith a year to figure out what he was doing...

This isnt the only reason it took Smith time to become a starter. Smith came to the Steelers as a 4-3 DE who weighed 275lbs. He was considered a project when he was drafted by the Steelers. Now Ziggy Hood was evaluated by the Steelers and their scouts who many considered to be some of the best scouts in the NFL and they had him graded out as a player who was worthy of a late first round. Then it was written and said that in camp he was a fast learner, hard worker, and was progressing faster than had expected.

I personally would have like to have seen more of Ziggy than Travis Kirschke or Nick Eason. Whatever the learning curve or rookie mistakes would have been I think would have been balanced out by Ziggy's sheer tallent.

Slapstick
02-01-2010, 06:46 AM
Would guys like Keenan Lewis and Joe Burnett play better if the defensive scheme weren't so complicated? I think so...

Would Ziggy have made more plays earlier in the year if the assignments for the Steelers' DEs weren't so numerous? Perhaps...

To quote one of the greatest movie characters of all time, "Well that's like your opinion, man."

See, I can just as easily say they wouldn't have. The DBs were mid to late round picks. Ziggy was a project AND changing positions.


Yeah...and?

Of course it's just an opinion...when you ask a hypothetical question that cannot be proven right or wrong, aren't you really just asking for opinions and conjecture?

We disagree...big surprise....

But what kind of answer did you expect, silly? :moon

Now, I'm not advocating a move to a pure Tampa-2 defense, but that was one of the beautiful qualities of Tony Dungy's defensive philosophy: Assignments were simple, so young players could contribute right away...less thinking, more reacting...it's a defense based more upon doing your job and doing it well as opposed to having 107 jobs to do and doing them all well...

What I'm saying is that it isn't a bad thing...

flippy
02-01-2010, 09:16 AM
Ziggy took forever to get ahead of Kirschke/Eason.

Timmons took a while to get time. And he's still a work in progress.

No young guy could get ahead of Ty Carter.

This is no myth. Our defense is complex. You've got athletes like Troy P that have been slowed down initially by the complexity.

Look how long it took James Harrison to learn the defense. I've even heard him comment last year that he was just beginning to understand his position when he won DMVP.

Perhaps the myth is the defensive players we have are great.

We've got 4 studs in Troy, Aaron, Woodley, and Harrison. And possibly an emerging star in Timmons.

We should be able to make it simple to plug in some young athletic talent, but we all know a young guy will most likely be lost out there because of the complex schemes.

I was in the closed endzone at the Raiders game and it was crazy how confused our defense was. Guys had no idea where to line up or who was covering who. They were leaving players uncovered and we had complete chaos in the 4th quarter with young DBs in the game.

On the flip side, look at how we were able to simplify things for Big Ben when he was a rookie. We just don't do this on the defensive side of the ball.

We ask players to come in a change everything on defense rather than taking advantage of the talents and skills the young players bring to the table.

It seems to serve us well over the long term, but in the modern NFL and the frequency that guys change teams, more teams are trying to simplify to bring along young player quicker than they used to. But we don't.

Good or bad? It's debateable. But it's not a myth.

stlrz d
02-01-2010, 09:41 AM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.

grotonsteel
02-01-2010, 10:18 AM
Please to be providing a list of players (along with explanations why) who should be on the field ahead of the guys who have proved they belong out there.

Thank you.

Well i believe Steelers D is so complicated that it confuses Steelers players instead of Opp QB.

Well atleast Ike Taylor and Art Rooney II agree with me.

If you can't find a rookie or a young player to contribute for Aaron Smith/Tyrone Carter and William Gay then either Steelers D is too complicated or players on Steelers D outright sucks.


And going by what i saw this year, Steelers D is one injury away (Troy P) from being horrible in 2010. Rookies don't contribute so this draft class is of no use in 2010. Steelers don't have players apart from Troy and J Harrison who can create turnovers.

Oviedo
02-01-2010, 11:22 AM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.

It's not a myth. I listen to "The Drive" on the internet and actually emailed the question to Mike Logan who should know better than anyone. He said the defense is "very complicated and while not impossible very difficult for young players to grasp."

The issue is not pushing a veteran out of the starting line up as much as being able to get on the field for a quality number of reps so you can develop young players so they can step in for injuries or possibly more importantly push veterans.

I do not think it is an accident that the only "newcomers" we see playing early are veteran free agents like Ryan Clark, Mike Logan, etc.

phillyesq
02-01-2010, 11:30 AM
To quote one of the greatest movie characters of all time, "Well that's like your opinion, man."


First, I want to give you props for the reference to The Dude.

Going back to 2004, the worst the Steelers D ranked in total yardage was #9. Outside of that, the D didn't finish outside of the top 5, and I believe that there were three #1 finishes. I realize that there are a lot better stats to use, stats have flaws, etc., but I'm a guy on a message board at work, not a paid professional. From those numbers, I think it is fair to say that the Steelers have generally had a good defense going back to 2004.

Looking at the defense this year, I can't say that there is a rookie that should have played in front of any of the vets. Lewis was a late third round pick who couldn't even get on the field for special teams. That is a red flag for me -- I felt the same way about Bruce Davis. Burnett played some later in the year, but he was a 5th round pick -- again, I don't expect those guys to contribute as rookies.

Ziggy Hood didn't play from week 1, but he contributed by the end of the season. Kirshke is a very solid vet, and he plays well when used sparingly. I also thought that Eason played well in spot duty this year. Hood played -- he just didn't start. That could be trying to ease pressure on the rookie as much as anything.

Woodley contributed as a pass rusher his rookie year, and unseated Haggans, who was a solid player. Timmons was initially competing for the right OLB job. I'm quite glad that Harrison beat him out. Smith and Kiesel were both undersized projects who grew into their starting roles.

Ike Taylor was a huge project from a small school, and it took him time to grow as a starter. In contrast, McFadden was from a big school, contributed as a rookie, and ended up sharing time with Deshea because Deshea was a very heady player. Everybody assumed that Anthony Smith and McFadden would unseat Deshea and Clark, but Deshea and Clark proved to be crafty veterans who understood how to play in the NFL. That is a compliment to the veteran players, not an indictment of the defensive system.

feltdizz
02-01-2010, 11:37 AM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.


He is the elephant in the room when the complicated D comes up.

If the Steelers find a capable back up at Carter's position something is wrong. All these players and Carter is the best option? The only reason he is the best option is because he knows the playbook...

we should have kept Kill Switch... sure he was a nut and undisciplined but the kid made plays. Carter is always in position and hardly ever made plays. That's more frustrating to me as a fan...

ikestops85
02-01-2010, 11:59 AM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.

It's not a myth. I listen to "The Drive" on the internet and actually emailed the question to Mike Logan who should know better than anyone. He said the defense is "very complicated and while not impossible very difficult for young players to grasp."

The issue is not pushing a veteran out of the starting line up as much as being able to get on the field for a quality number of reps so you can develop young players so they can step in for injuries or possibly more importantly push veterans.

I do not think it is an accident that the only "newcomers" we see playing early are veteran free agents like Ryan Clark, Mike Logan, etc.

I guess my question would be why is it easier for a vet to pick up the system than a rookie? Ryan Clark didn't play in a 3-4 defense before he came to the Steelers. If our defense were that much more complicated than anybody elses defense then a player like Ryan Clark wouldn't be able to come in and contribute right away.

Please ask any player who is "new" to a system when he finally gets comfortable and the vast majority will tell you not til after a year. I'd really like to hear what Barry Foote has to say about adjusting to the system in Detroit.

I think we are starting to hear all this "complicated" stuff because our defense didn't play up to expectations which were set extremely high due to the success they had in 2008. The biggest problem we had was the DB lost confidence (much the same as they did in 2006). Once they lose confidence it's very hard to get it back so they play tenatively and make even more mistakes.

I also think it is funny that everyone seems to assume that because Troy is a great player, has fantastic instincts, and tremendous athletic ability that he is "smart". Now I have no idea how intelligent Troy is but there is probably a reason it took awhile for him to learn a new system. These guys are football players, not rocket scientists (see Terry Bradshaw :D ).

The off-season will do more for the steeler defense than heal injuries. It will give the DBs a chance to get that confidence back which they will need no matter how simplistic a system we install. Besides, I don't hear any of the players complaining about how complicated our system is and how they can't grasp it. In fact they seem to love the system and the man who teaches it.

:tt2 :tt2

phillyesq
02-01-2010, 12:34 PM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.


He is the elephant in the room when the complicated D comes up.

If the Steelers find a capable back up at Carter's position something is wrong. All these players and Carter is the best option? The only reason he is the best option is because he knows the playbook...

we should have kept Kill Switch... sure he was a nut and undisciplined but the kid made plays. Carter is always in position and hardly ever made plays. That's more frustrating to me as a fan...

Re: Carter, he seems to play pretty well in a limited role. He had a pick six this past season, and he had a few the season before that. He also plays ok against the run. When Carter plays very limited snaps, he was effective. When he had to play a bit more, he was exposed.

I certainly don't want to see him on the roster again, but I don't think him being on the roster means that the D is too complicated.

cruzer8
02-01-2010, 02:05 PM
Philly and Ike: nice posts. You guys summed it up to me perfectly as I don't believe in the too complicated myth either.

Oviedo
02-01-2010, 02:10 PM
Philly and Ike: nice posts. You guys summed it up to me perfectly as I don't believe in the too complicated myth either.

I would be interested then in alternative explanations on why our young players can't break into the line up until the 2 or 3 year mark on the defensive side of the ball?

The same issue doesn't appear to happen on the offensive side of the ball. Is Arians just a better coach at developing players or putting them in a position to suceed?

cruzer8
02-01-2010, 02:12 PM
Philly and Ike: nice posts. You guys summed it up to me perfectly as I don't believe in the too complicated myth either.

I would be interested then in alternative explanations on why our young players can't break into the line up until the 2 or 3 year mark on the defensive side of the ball?

The same issue doesn't appear to happen on the offensive side of the ball. Is Arians just a better coach at developing players or putting them in a position to suceed?

More holes to fill on offense than on defense. Also more personnel packages that allow different players to get on the field.

Oviedo
02-01-2010, 02:24 PM
Philly and Ike: nice posts. You guys summed it up to me perfectly as I don't believe in the too complicated myth either.

I would be interested then in alternative explanations on why our young players can't break into the line up until the 2 or 3 year mark on the defensive side of the ball?

The same issue doesn't appear to happen on the offensive side of the ball. Is Arians just a better coach at developing players or putting them in a position to suceed?

More holes to fill on offense than on defense. Also more personnel packages that allow different players to get on the field.

Seems like the scheme on the defense IS the problem. Can you disagree that it is better to give a player a couple of plays to rest? We don't even seem to do that except for DL.

Isn't a constant complaint of Arians and his offense that they don't do enough to "protect" the defense and last year it wore down late in games? Isn't that why we need a FB to run the clock out and control the ball since it is clear that a team with a quick strike offense can't make it to the Super Bowl or win :shock:

If the defense is getting tired why not put fresh young players in?

flippy
02-01-2010, 02:41 PM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.


Ziggy should have been playing when Aaron Smith went down, but he needed to learn the Steeler defensive line way of taking on blockers before he was ready. It's not like the guys that were ahead of him are great players.

But this is beside the point. We need that D'Art guy around so he could explain the fallacy in your argument. Just because we don't have great young players doesn't mean the defense isn't complicated because you don't have names of rookies who should be playing. Those are 2 separate issues completely.

1. Is our defense complex?

2. Do we have any good young defenders on the bench?

SanAntonioSteelerFan
02-01-2010, 03:08 PM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.


Ziggy should have been playing when Aaron Smith went down, but he needed to learn the Steeler defensive line way of taking on blockers before he was ready. It's not like the guys that were ahead of him are great players.

But this is beside the point. We need that D'Art guy around so he could explain the fallacy in your argument. Just because we don't have great young players doesn't mean the defense isn't complicated because you don't have names of rookies who should be playing. Those are 2 separate issues completely.

1. Is our defense complex?

2. Do we have any good young defenders on the bench?

Dear Flippy -

Please stop being logical. It only detracts from the discussions at hand! :shock: :lol:

Slapstick
02-01-2010, 04:11 PM
I guess my question would be why is it easier for a vet to pick up the system than a rookie? Ryan Clark didn't play in a 3-4 defense before he came to the Steelers. If our defense were that much more complicated than anybody elses defense then a player like Ryan Clark wouldn't be able to come in and contribute right away.


Free agent veterans can come in and start watching film and work on learning the defense immediately after signing their contract. If they sign in March, they have a significant learning curve advantage over rookies who aren't drafted until April and don't get any meaningful work in until they finally sign their contract sometime in June or July.

birtikidis
02-01-2010, 04:17 PM
I guess my question would be why is it easier for a vet to pick up the system than a rookie? Ryan Clark didn't play in a 3-4 defense before he came to the Steelers. If our defense were that much more complicated than anybody elses defense then a player like Ryan Clark wouldn't be able to come in and contribute right away.


Free agent veterans can come in and start watching film and work on learning the defense immediately after signing their contract. If they sign in March, they have a significant learning curve advantage over rookies who aren't drafted until April and don't get any meaningful work in until they finally sign their contract sometime in June or July.
Not only that but vets are used to the speed of the game. they're used to playing against guys that are already at the highest level. college athletes go from playing a team like the citadal to LSU in the span of a week whereas pro athletes are going against the best of the best each week. you have to learn all those little things over again. because you can't rely on JUST your natural talent anymore.

Slapstick
02-01-2010, 04:21 PM
Not only that but vets are used to the speed of the game. they're used to playing against guys that are already at the highest level. college athletes go from playing a team like the citadal to LSU in the span of a week whereas pro athletes are going against the best of the best each week. you have to learn all those little things over again. because you can't rely on JUST your natural talent anymore.

I agree...

But, even vets can't just walk in off the street and start, or even contribute...

How many snaps did Joey Galloway play this year?

cruzer8
02-01-2010, 04:24 PM
I guess my question would be why is it easier for a vet to pick up the system than a rookie? Ryan Clark didn't play in a 3-4 defense before he came to the Steelers. If our defense were that much more complicated than anybody elses defense then a player like Ryan Clark wouldn't be able to come in and contribute right away.


Free agent veterans can come in and start watching film and work on learning the defense immediately after signing their contract. If they sign in March, they have a significant learning curve advantage over rookies who aren't drafted until April and don't get any meaningful work in until they finally sign their contract sometime in June or July.

If you don't think those rookies are studying film and learning the D from the moment they're drafted then I don't think you have a very firm grasp of the process.

Slapstick
02-01-2010, 04:28 PM
If you don't think those rookies are studying film and learning the D from the moment they're drafted then I don't think you have a very firm grasp of the process.

Whether they do that or not, they are still a month behind...

cruzer8
02-01-2010, 04:30 PM
Philly and Ike: nice posts. You guys summed it up to me perfectly as I don't believe in the too complicated myth either.

I would be interested then in alternative explanations on why our young players can't break into the line up until the 2 or 3 year mark on the defensive side of the ball?

The same issue doesn't appear to happen on the offensive side of the ball. Is Arians just a better coach at developing players or putting them in a position to suceed?

More holes to fill on offense than on defense. Also more personnel packages that allow different players to get on the field.

Seems like the scheme on the defense IS the problem. Can you disagree that it is better to give a player a couple of plays to rest? We don't even seem to do that except for DL.

Isn't a constant complaint of Arians and his offense that they don't do enough to "protect" the defense and last year it wore down late in games? Isn't that why we need a FB to run the clock out and control the ball since it is clear that a team with a quick strike offense can't make it to the Super Bowl or win :shock:

If the defense is getting tired why not put fresh young players in?

You need to start watching teams other than the Steelers. Every team plays it the way the Steelers play it. Rotate on the D line and the backers and secondary personnel remain the same unless the team is going nickel or dime.

To use an example from our own division, how often do you see Ray Lewis taken out for a breather when he's tired? The answer: you don't. The only time he comes off the field is when the Ravens are running a defensive package that does not include him,

And people keep bringing up Ziggy. Ziggy (like it has already been stated) played a different position in college and was taken as a project due to his athletic ability. So not only is he learning a new defense, he's also learning a new position in that new defense.

This whole argument is a big waste of cyber space. Including the part about FA's coming in earlier and "getting a jump" on learning the D.

birtikidis
02-01-2010, 04:31 PM
Not only that but vets are used to the speed of the game. they're used to playing against guys that are already at the highest level. college athletes go from playing a team like the citadal to LSU in the span of a week whereas pro athletes are going against the best of the best each week. you have to learn all those little things over again. because you can't rely on JUST your natural talent anymore.

I agree...

But, even vets can't just walk in off the street and start, or even contribute...

How many snaps did Joey Galloway play this year?
Oh absolutely. I never said they could. i just was saying that's a portion of the reason why rooks don't step off the bus at latrobe and are automatic starters.

Slapstick
02-01-2010, 04:33 PM
This whole argument is a big waste of cyber space. Including the part about FA's coming in earlier and "getting a jump" on learning the D.

Yeah, well that's just your opinion, man....

birtikidis
02-01-2010, 04:43 PM
This whole argument is a big waste of cyber space. Including the part about FA's coming in earlier and "getting a jump" on learning the D.

Yeah, well that's just your opinion, man....
cruzer I think what they're saying is Free agency starts well ahead of the draft so players can start studying weeks in advance.
my point is that vets Know all the little things about the game: how to prepare your body (nutrition and working out), how fast the game is, how to study film, what to expect, adjusting to the life of a millionaire at 20... etc e

ikestops85
02-01-2010, 04:46 PM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.


Ziggy should have been playing when Aaron Smith went down, but he needed to learn the Steeler defensive line way of taking on blockers before he was ready. It's not like the guys that were ahead of him are great players.

But this is beside the point. We need that D'Art guy around so he could explain the fallacy in your argument. Just because we don't have great young players doesn't mean the defense isn't complicated because you don't have names of rookies who should be playing. Those are 2 separate issues completely.

1. Is our defense complex?

2. Do we have any good young defenders on the bench?

I agree that they are separate questions although I think they both should be re-phrased to the following:

1. Is our defense more complex than most others?

2. Do we have any rookies on the bench that should be a starter?

I think the answer to question 1 is a resounding NO. We have a lot of activity with our defense but I don't think it is inherently more complex than anybody elses.

I also think the answer to question 2 is NO. Hood was placed into the rotation after Smith was hurt but he didn't start. Hood is also learning a new position so I don't think he was ready for the full time responsibility of starting ... not when we have solid veterans as backups in that position.

I think teams that are consistently in the top 5 on offense or defense make it hard for rookies to crack the starting lineup. They generally don't have glaring weaknesses in any one area. I think that is why we see more rookies start on offense than defense for the steelers.

Besides, how complicated can our defense be when even I know what is going to happen. The dbs are going to line up 10 yards off the opponents receivers and the receivers are going to run an 8 yard out for a completion. :HeadBanger :HeadBanger

stlrz d
02-02-2010, 12:07 AM
Nah...it's definitely a myth. And still no one has been able to list players who, if the D were "less complicated", should be on the field instead of the vets.

And I'm in complete agreement on Carter. But that's a lack of having a capable back up at the position. There's just no where to go after Carter so it's him by default.


Ziggy should have been playing when Aaron Smith went down, but he needed to learn the Steeler defensive line way of taking on blockers before he was ready. It's not like the guys that were ahead of him are great players.

But this is beside the point. We need that D'Art guy around so he could explain the fallacy in your argument. Just because we don't have great young players doesn't mean the defense isn't complicated because you don't have names of rookies who should be playing. Those are 2 separate issues completely.

1. Is our defense complex?

2. Do we have any good young defenders on the bench?

I agree that they are separate questions although I think they both should be re-phrased to the following:

1. Is our defense more complex than most others?

2. Do we have any rookies on the bench that should be a starter?

I think the answer to question 1 is a resounding NO. We have a lot of activity with our defense but I don't think it is inherently more complex than anybody elses.

I also think the answer to question 2 is NO. Hood was placed into the rotation after Smith was hurt but he didn't start. Hood is also learning a new position so I don't think he was ready for the full time responsibility of starting ... not when we have solid veterans as backups in that position.

I think teams that are consistently in the top 5 on offense or defense make it hard for rookies to crack the starting lineup. They generally don't have glaring weaknesses in any one area. I think that is why we see more rookies start on offense than defense for the steelers.

Besides, how complicated can our defense be when even I know what is going to happen. The dbs are going to line up 10 yards off the opponents receivers and the receivers are going to run an 8 yard out for a completion. :HeadBanger :HeadBanger

*ding*

phillyesq
02-02-2010, 08:06 AM
But, even vets can't just walk in off the street and start, or even contribute...

How many snaps did Joey Galloway play this year?

Galloway gut cut from the Pats* early in the season. He didn't sign until the last week. He didn't play much because he is a bum. With Ward, Holmes, Wallace, Heath and Mendy/Moore, the Steelers already had solid options for passing downs.

Mister Pittsburgh
02-02-2010, 09:13 AM
Not only that but vets are used to the speed of the game. they're used to playing against guys that are already at the highest level. college athletes go from playing a team like the citadal to LSU in the span of a week whereas pro athletes are going against the best of the best each week. you have to learn all those little things over again. because you can't rely on JUST your natural talent anymore.

I agree...

But, even vets can't just walk in off the street and start, or even contribute...

How many snaps did Joey Galloway play this year?

I think that is due to Joey Galloway being old as dirt. He was chilling on his couch at home for a reason.