WTF, this still bothers me about DL's "system."

[lloydroid]

Well, you can see that the Steelers understand how to burn when CBs play way off; as we saw so far this season, Ben hits wide outs quick whenever they are giving up a huge cushion.

So, apparently, the Steeler are aware of how to burn such soft coverage. So why is it, that when on D, Pgh also plays way off WRs too many times, in my opinion. I never understood why DL has CB coverage play so far off the wide outs. Is he really that paranoid of getting toasted? If our CBs are that terrible, then f----g find new ones? You mean after 12 years, they have still FAILED to find a single decent CB who can play tight coverage? Something is FAIL here. Either they are completely incompetent at finding CB talent, or the system is gamed to be so damned scared to be beat deep that they never can play tight. I don't get it. And, no I don't buy that DL's systems is so complex that the regular guy can't grasp it. This is football, not NASA. F that excuse.

[Oviedo]

IMO, it's coaching "scared." It's part of his "bend don't break" philosophy. THat ise to work when you could actually put pressure on the QB and force the QB to make a mistake but when you rush only 3 or 4 guys against 5 or 6 blockers you aren't going to pressure the QB. That is what our opponents have figured out. Keep 6 in to protect or "leak" a RB or TE into the flat and force Harrison or Woodley to account for that person and therefore not rush.

The other big difference is how many teams were playing the 3-4 6 or 7 years ago compared to now. THe QBs see the 3-4 at least half of their games. It isn't a surprise anymore. They see all the blitz combinations week after week so they know how to adjust coverages.

[SidSmythe]

Weren't we #1 vs. the Pass last year in a Pass First Football League??? #2 in Pts. allowed???

I swear most football fans think that we should only be giving up 150 yards passing per game and shutting out opponents on a regular basis.

[lloydroid]

Weren't we #1 vs. the Pass last year in a Pass First Football League??? #2 in Pts. allowed???

I swear most football fans think that we should only be giving up 150 yards passing per game and shutting out opponents on a regular basis.

Key in your total assertion: LAST YEAR

Every season can be vastly different than the last. In this case. The Steeler D is 6th this year in D, and we haven't even played more than 1 decent offense yet (Denver). The other two offenses we played (Jet's and Raiders) are 28th and 22nd, respectfully. That sounds like total sh-t to me.

[SteelCrazy]

We cant afford to play b&r when our LB's cant pressure the QB. That cushion is needed to assure we dont give up 6 in one play. When our LB's get some pressure going and throw the QB out of rhythm, then we will play with a little less of a cushion.

[SidSmythe]

Key in your total assertion: LAST YEAR

Every season can be vastly different than the last. In this case. The Steeler D is 6th this year in D, and we haven't even played more than 1 decent offense yet (Denver). The other two offenses we played (Jet's and Raiders) are 28th and 22nd, respectfully. That sounds like total sh-t to me.

You are the one who said "12 yrs."

[Slapstick]

The Steelers were #1 in points allowed last year...

As we saw from the Broncos game and the Raiders game, the Steelers lose when they give up big plays...

DL's "system" has been as successful as any other coach's "system" and the Steelers have the results to back that up...

[Oviedo]

Weren't we #1 vs. the Pass last year in a Pass First Football League??? #2 in Pts. allowed???

I swear most football fans think that we should only be giving up 150 yards passing per game and shutting out opponents on a regular basis.

Last year means nothing. The dynamics change every year because our opponents adapt. If the past was a predictor of future success we would still be playing a 4-3 defense since we won four Super Bowls doing that.

[Jooser]

660

Look out everyone! LOOK OUT!!!!!!!!!!

[Eich]

We're able to play tight coverage. Remember last year against the Cheaters. We shut that offense down. I'm not sure why we don't try to do it more often. Although, this year, we're playing without Harrison, Troy, Gay and game one was without Clark. So, some of this probably contributes to playing a little more conservative.

I hate playing conservative. I'd much rather go down playing agressive, tight coverage and going after the QB with everything we have than sitting back and waiting for the other team to make a mistake.

[Oviedo]

We're able to play tight coverage. Remember last year against the Cheaters. We shut that offense down. I'm not sure why we don't try to do it more often. Although, this year, we're playing without Harrison, Troy, Gay and game one was without Clark. So, some of this probably contributes to playing a little more conservative.

I hate playing conservative. I'd much rather go down playing agressive, tight coverage and going after the QB with everything we have than sitting back and waiting for the other team to make a mistake.

Agree with this. I'd rather go down attacking and fighting than sitting back and watching the defense get picked apart.

[ikestops85]

We're able to play tight coverage. Remember last year against the Cheaters. We shut that offense down. I'm not sure why we don't try to do it more often. Although, this year, we're playing without Harrison, Troy, Gay and game one was without Clark. So, some of this probably contributes to playing a little more conservative.

I hate playing conservative. I'd much rather go down playing agressive, tight coverage and going after the QB with everything we have than sitting back and waiting for the other team to make a mistake.

I do remember last year ... against the broncos. We played tight coverage and got burned by Tebow. If we would have played off and made Tebow try and pick his way down the field on a 10-12 play drive we would have won that game.

The only thing that is wrong with the defense is we are not pressuring the QB. Sitting back, although frustrating at times, is a great system when you get pressure on the QB because you force him into mistakes. Now, if we have to send the house to get pressure then we have to rely on our DBs to stay on the receivers and they aren't and never have been very good at that.

[Oviedo]

I do remember last year ... against the broncos. We played tight coverage and got burned by Tebow. If we would have played off and made Tebow try and pick his way down the field on a 10-12 play drive we would have won that game.

The only thing that is wrong with the defense is we are not pressuring the QB. Sitting back, although frustrating at times, is a great system when you get pressure on the QB because you force him into mistakes. Now, if we have to send the house to get pressure then we have to rely on our DBs to stay on the receivers and they aren't and never have been very good at that.


Your second paragraph correctly identifies why "the system" isn't working. So why don't we see adjustments?

And I would disagree that it is a "great system" if it isn't working.

[RuthlessBurgher]

Let's see...Chris Carter is getting zero pressure from the QB's blindside, and Ryan Mundy is responsible for over-the-top coverage...sounds like a perfect scenario for bump-and-run coverage!!!

[birtikidis]

Keep the play in front of you and force the offense to make mistakes. Very sound football if you ask me. Especially when you have your former DMVP's on the field. There is a significant drop off from James Harrison to Chris Carter. Same with from Troy to Mundy. It's not playing scared.

[birtikidis]

Your second paragraph correctly identifies why "the system" isn't working. So why don't we see adjustments?

And I would disagree that it is a "great system" if it isn't working.

Well since it isn't working, mainly due to injuries, then you're kind of screwed. That's when you have to ask guys like Woodley to drop into coverage. That's like Manning running the option. It's all because the offense can shift it's blocking scheme to focus on Wood. You can blitz up the middle, but most teams understand that that has to be our gameplan. We normally would just get creative and send Troy on a few different blitzes. Can't do that because neither Mundy or Clark are good like that. So instead you have to be much more conservative.

[SteelBucks]

Let's see...Chris Carter is getting zero pressure from the QB's blindside, and Ryan Mundy is responsible for over-the-top coverage...sounds like a perfect scenario for bump-and-run coverage!!!

Didn't you know that Carter is the second coming of LT and Mundy is Polamalu reincarnated? With those two monsters, I'm surprised we even need CB's on the field, let alone play bump coverage.

[hawaiiansteel]

Polamalu: Steelers' scheme isn't the problem

Dejan Kovacevic

http://www.oodegr.com/english/empeiries/eikones/troy-polamalu2.jpg

Troy Polamalu gave a flat answer when asked if the Steelers' defense needed to change: "To be quite honest, this is a question that you guys ask us at this same point every single year since I've been here. We're not going to change. It's about how we execute and how we can win our one-on-one matchups. If we don't, it's nothing to do with the scheme of things. It's just that we're not performing."

He then laughed and added, "Maybe I ought to make a recording of that."

http://sulia.com/channel/pittsburgh-steelers/f/70f86136-edac-4d1c-b23e-50b63fcb731d/?source=twitter

[SidSmythe]

Polamalu: Steelers' scheme isn't the problem

Dejan Kovacevic

http://www.oodegr.com/english/empeiries/eikones/troy-polamalu2.jpg

Troy Polamalu gave a flat answer when asked if the Steelers' defense needed to change: "To be quite honest, this is a question that you guys ask us at this same point every single year since I've been here. We're not going to change. It's about how we execute and how we can win our one-on-one matchups. If we don't, it's nothing to do with the scheme of things. It's just that we're not performing."

He then laughed and added, "Maybe I ought to make a recording of that."

http://sulia.com/channel/pittsburgh-steelers/f/70f86136-edac-4d1c-b23e-50b63fcb731d/?source=twitter

Troy's First Hand Knowledge > Message Board Gurus

[lloydroid]

I do remember last year ... against the broncos. We played tight coverage and got burned by Tebow. If we would have played off and made Tebow try and pick his way down the field on a 10-12 play drive we would have won that game.

True, but we also applied ZERO safety help all game long, including the final play in OT. I never said I was against safety help; they are not mutually exclusive concepts. We could apply closer CB coverage AND offer some safety help, at least on some plays. I never advocated tighter CB coverage on the LOS __and__ no safety help, which is what they did in the Denver game. The other point about providing QB pressure is always a part of the overall picture. I am so sick of DL's having the CBs play 10 yards off. It's like, we are GIVING them first downs without trying.

[lloydroid]

Troy's First Hand Knowledge > Message Board Gurus

Just because a player says something doesn't mean it's true. If players were always right, we wouldn't even need coaches. Some players are as dumb as a sack of hammers. They are just physically gifted, but not always smart. Just because TP asserts this doesn't mean it's 100% infallible. By the way, I don't think TP is stupid, but I also don't think he is all-knowing.

[fordfixer]

Just because a player says something doesn't mean it's true. If players were always right, we wouldn't even need coaches. Some players are as dumb as a sack of hammers. They are just physically gifted, but not always smart. Just because TP asserts this doesn't mean it's 100% infallible. By the way, I don't think TP is stupid, but I also don't think he is all-knowing.
So we should take your word over Troy's???

[SteelCrazy]

We cant afford to play b&r when our LB's cant pressure the QB. That cushion is needed to assure we dont give up 6 in one play. When our LB's get some pressure going and throw the QB out of rhythm, then we will play with a little less of a cushion.

Look up for the answer

[Eddie Spaghetti]

I have never seen anyone have such a fascination with the word "assertion".

[DukieBoy]

660

Look out everyone! LOOK OUT!!!!!!!!!!

Made me laugh. Thanks Joos.

[ikestops85]

I have never seen anyone have such a fascination with the word "assertion".

Is the fascination with "assertion" or "insertion"? :shock:

[lloydroid]

I have never seen anyone have such a fascination with the word "assertion".

Don't worry Eddie: You can still look up words in something called a "dictionary." What was long and hard on Eddie? 3rd grade.

[lloydroid]

So we should take your word over Troy's???

My "word?" I didn't know anyone even had the capability of giving their "word" on an Internet message board. Are you on any kind of medication? Giving one's opinion on a message board is hardly any sort of promise, whatsoever. I am confused by your mode of thought.

[Oviedo]

I wish our defense was as agressive attacking our opponents as some some posters are with each other. We'd be undefeated right now.

Nothing here is important enough to attack another poster over or make it personal...really!!!!

[steelblood]

Well, you can see that the Steelers understand how to burn when CBs play way off; as we saw so far this season, Ben hits wide outs quick whenever they are giving up a huge cushion.

So, apparently, the Steeler are aware of how to burn such soft coverage. So why is it, that when on D, Pgh also plays way off WRs too many times, in my opinion. I never understood why DL has CB coverage play so far off the wide outs. Is he really that paranoid of getting toasted? If our CBs are that terrible, then f----g find new ones? You mean after 12 years, they have still FAILED to find a single decent CB who can play tight coverage? Something is FAIL here. Either they are completely incompetent at finding CB talent, or the system is gamed to be so damned scared to be beat deep that they never can play tight. I don't get it. And, no I don't buy that DL's systems is so complex that the regular guy can't grasp it. This is football, not NASA. F that excuse.

We have played a lot more bump and run since the 2010 playoff run. Probably more than we played than any time in the last 10 seasons. It was bump and run for many of the big plays in the playoff game in Denver last season. There was quite a bit of bump and run late in the game against Oakland two weeks ago. In the last two years, Troy has been playing a lot more cover 2 style safety. Before that he was in the box more, so we had to play more cover 3 which dictates that the CBs must play off so nothing gets behind them.

[lloydroid]

I wish our defense was as agressive attacking our opponents as some some posters are with each other. We'd be undefeated right now.

Nothing here is important enough to attack another poster over or make it personal...really!!!!

I never start sh-t Ovi. Just some knuckle-dragging troglodytes - who have self-esteem issues if you use words with more than two syllables - always have to start. I am never the one who starts with insults.

[fordfixer]

My "word?" I didn't know anyone even had the capability of giving their "word" on an Internet message board. Are you on any kind of medication? Giving one's opinion on a message board is hardly any sort of promise, whatsoever. I am confused by your mode of thought.
So your words are mean nothing.

[RuthlessBurgher]

I never start sh-t Ovi. Just some knuckle-dragging troglodytes - who have self-esteem issues if you use words with more than two syllables - always have to start. I am never the one who starts with insults.

Oviedo just kindly reminded everyone that attacking other posters and making things personal is not something that something that we do here, and you responded to that exact post by calling other posters knuckle-dragging troglodytes??? Seriously? Not to mention a deliberate attempt to circumvent the profanity filter as well in the very same post. I'm going to consider Ovi's reminder as your first warning, and this is now your second warning. Be sure to familiarize yourself with our Board Code of Conduct if you wish to avoid a strike three (and you're out).

http://www.planetsteelers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php/29-Code-of-Conduct

[lloydroid]

So your words are mean nothing.

So my words "are mean nothing?"

I need my special "gibberish to English" decoder ring to figure your content out. I maintain my position that posting on an Internet message board is in no way akin to "giving your word." "Giving your word" applies to things like promising to take care of your dog or making any kind of commitment or promise in general - none of which is similar to posting on a message board. But, my words "are mean nothing" as you say. :D

[lloydroid]

Oviedo just kindly reminded everyone that attacking other posters and making things personal is not something that something that we do here, and you responded to that exact post by calling other posters knuckle-dragging troglodytes??? Seriously? Not to mention a deliberate attempt to circumvent the profanity filter as well in the very same post. I'm going to consider Ovi's reminder as your first warning, and this is now your second warning. Be sure to familiarize yourself with our Board Code of Conduct if you wish to avoid a strike three (and you're out).

http://www.planetsteelers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php/29-Code-of-Conduct

I've read your "board rules." And you fail to enforce them each and every time other posters START the insults. You have never mentioned anything about "the rules" when that occurs. Hmmm, that is curious. And, by the way, just so you know, you can't give someone their second "warning" when they were never given their first warning to begin with. Just in case you wanted to operate in the realm of the real world; the choice is yours. So, if you are comfortable operating in double standards, then knock yourself out. By the way, there is nothing in this content that is "against the rules," but feel free to operate in double standards if that is how you live your life. Live clean, white man from town. Live clean.

[RuthlessBurgher]

Live clean, white man from town. Live clean.

Alrighty then. :???:

[hawaiiansteel]

Live clean, white man from town. Live clean.


is this opposed to "Live clean, black man from country. Live clean?" :confused:

[Ghost]

troglodytes? - who are you calling a small, wren like bird....

[GGPa]

@lloydroid
You remind me of a poster that I used to battle on the old Steelerslive board.
I quit posting there because most people don't come here to battle.
Steelers fans come to a Steelers fan board to talk about the Steelers.
As the OP you asked a question.
You got quite a few good answers to your question.
You should try to concentrate on others answers instead of taking issue with other posters.
Just because someone offended you dosen't mean you should return the complement.

Oh and by the way I am not the self appointed internet police.
I am just trying to keep you from getting banned.
Everyone should have the right to be heard.

[Oviedo]

I've read your "board rules." And you fail to enforce them each and every time other posters START the insults. You have never mentioned anything about "the rules" when that occurs. Hmmm, that is curious. And, by the way, just so you know, you can't give someone their second "warning" when they were never given their first warning to begin with. Just in case you wanted to operate in the realm of the real world; the choice is yours. So, if you are comfortable operating in double standards, then knock yourself out. By the way, there is nothing in this content that is "against the rules," but feel free to operate in double standards if that is how you live your life. Live clean, white man from town. Live clean.

You are off base. There has been a consistent message sent by Ruthless and the other mods when thread become name calling activities...STOP IT! THis is not about you. It is about talking about football and becoming so personally invested in ones ego that they have to embaraass or denigrate another poster. You have said some decent things here and off base things. Keep it in the former and you will enjoy being here.

[Slapstick]

Even I've been warned, and I'm the nicest dude here!!!;)

[lloydroid]

Even I've been warned, and I'm the nicest dude here!!!;)

But did you get your 1st and 2nd warning both at the same time? I've never heard of such
a thing in my life. Also, it's amusing how I get personally attacked first, and nothing is said
to those usual suspects. Very interesting.

[lloydroid]

troglodytes? - who are you calling a small, wren like bird....

I only knew it as the below definition. I never knew it to refer to a bird.


trog·lo·dyte
   [trog-luh-dahyt]
noun
1.
a prehistoric cave dweller.
2.
a person of degraded, primitive, or brutal character.
3.
a person living in seclusion.
4.
a person unacquainted with affairs of the world.
5.
an animal living underground.

I think it's a descriptive word. I've always been a fan.

[Slapstick]

But did you get your 1st and 2nd warning both at the same time? I've never heard of such
a thing in my life. Also, it's amusing how I get personally attacked first, and nothing is said
to those usual suspects. Very interesting.

Oh, woe is you!

Life is tough...wear a cup...

[lloydroid]

is this opposed to "Live clean, black man from country. Live clean?" :confused:

It's a quote from an underrated movie, "Thinner" based on a novel from Stephen King. Near the end of the movie, the main character gets the gypsy to take the curse of, that is causing him to lose so much body weight that he is near death. They gypsy says someone must eat the pie for the curse to be lifted, and he feels the guy should eat it himself instead of having someone else eat it, which would kill the eater and take the curse off the guy, which is when they gypsy says, "Die clean white man from town; die clean." I screwed it up; it is "die" not "live" and I don't want anyone to die. I meant it as to say, shoot straight. Roll clean.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJCus_YeupM

[hawaiiansteel]

But did you get your 1st and 2nd warning both at the same time? I've never heard of such a thing in my life.

http://www.sectalk.com/board/public/imported_images/stardestroyer.net/DoubleSecretProbation.jpg

[phillyesq]

You are off base. There has been a consistent message sent by Ruthless and the other mods when thread become name calling activities...STOP IT! THis is not about you. It is about talking about football and becoming so personally invested in ones ego that they have to embaraass or denigrate another poster. You have said some decent things here and off base things. Keep it in the former and you will enjoy being here.

I'm going to jump in here. Few posters disagree more than Ovi and I, or Ovi and Eddie, but as much as we may debate back and forth, there is a difference between personal attacks and attacking the opinion of somebody else. Your post earlier clearly fell within the realm of the former.

I'm not intended to pile on here or anything else. You create some interesting threads, even if I often disagree with your assessments. One of the reasons I choose to post here as opposed to other forums is because this forum is generally civil. Hopefully you'll enjoy that and stick around.

[hawaiiansteel]

I'm going to jump in here. Few posters disagree more than Ovi and I, or Ovi and Eddie

sounds like this Ovi guy is a real troublemaker...;)

[Oviedo]

sounds like this Ovi guy is a real troublemaker...;)

Actually it's LeBeau:D Guy is a troublemaker and a distraction.

[Oviedo]

Few posters disagree more than Ovi and I, or Ovi and Eddie

WHAT????? Why am I always the last to know these things?

[Eich]

I do remember last year ... against the broncos. We played tight coverage and got burned by Tebow. If we would have played off and made Tebow try and pick his way down the field on a 10-12 play drive we would have won that game.

The only thing that is wrong with the defense is we are not pressuring the QB. Sitting back, although frustrating at times, is a great system when you get pressure on the QB because you force him into mistakes. Now, if we have to send the house to get pressure then we have to rely on our DBs to stay on the receivers and they aren't and never have been very good at that.

Actually - against the donkeys last year, we played the run. We sold out against the run. We dared Tebow to throw, putting corners on an island. And it burned us.

Our game against the Cheaters last year is the blueprint for how to play most teams in the league who can throw the ball. But it does require a few more good players than we've had available this year.

[RuthlessBurgher]

But did you get your 1st and 2nd warning both at the same time? I've never heard of such
a thing in my life. Also, it's amusing how I get personally attacked first, and nothing is said
to those usual suspects. Very interesting.

There is no rule saying that we have to give anyone 3 strikes. For instance, when spammers pop up, we ban them immediately without even a second chance. We have chosen to give you another chance here, though...be thankful for that rather than criticizing how this board is governed. If you don't feel that we are fair, well, no one is forcing you to stay.

Warnings can be sent in private via PM, so you have no idea who else has been warned. I usually send warnings via the PM route myself, but since Oviedo had just given a friendly reminder to all within an open thread (not specifically just to you...everyone involved in that particular discussion), I felt like I had to make this particular warning public, since you showed blatant disregard to what Ovi was saying by responding to his post with more name calling and a deliberate attempt to circumvent the board filter as well in the same post.

By the way, as you are complaining about being warned twice at one time, you should know that Fordfixer has also warned you via PM about language in another thread as well (just in case you haven't checked your private messages). I just found that out today, because the mods typically will discuss things of this nature amongst themselves before any harsh action is taken. We are merely acting in the best interest of the board as a whole...if you are able to conduct yourself in a civil manner, you are welcome to stay...if not, then you won't be here for long...that is entirely up to you, not the mods. Shoot straight, roll clean.

[hawaiiansteel]

Steelers trying to keep defense disguised

Seeing it coming?

Opposing quarterbacks’ statistics against the Steelers’ blitzes:

Quarterback, Team Performance

Michael Vick, Eagles 12 of 18, 134 yards, 2 TDs

Carson Palmer, Raiders 10 of 14, 90 yards, 1 TD

Mark Sanchez, Jets 8 of 17, 90 yards, 1 TD

Peyton Manning, Broncos 8 of 10, 146 yards, 2 TDs

By Alan Robinson
Published: Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Chaos theory is a complex form of mathematics in which seemingly random events become predictable when precise equations are applied, but even the slightest variation can cause unreliable results.

The Steelers’ defense is much the same way.

With its zone blitzes, multiple disguises and numerous schematic variations, the defense is designed to be as confusing to a quarterback as algorithms are to a college freshman. Remove the chaos and the mystery, and it becomes much more unreliable and unpredictable. And beatable.

According to several defensive starters, the Steelers repeatedly tipped their defense during losses in Denver and Oakland, thereby allowing Peyton Manning and Carson Palmer to decipher what was coming and to adjust to it.

The acquired knowledge helped Manning and Palmer lead a combined eight scoring drives in the second half against a Steelers defense that was much more effective against them in the first half. Denver scored 24 points past halftime in its 31-19 win on Sept. 19, and Oakland put up 20 points in the second half in upsetting the Steelers, 34-31, on Sept. 23.

Manning, operating a hurry-up offense, took advantage of the defense’s tendency to line up too quickly and adjusted his play call to what he was reading.

Palmer was more deliberate, waiting out the Steelers at the line of scrimmage and looking for any hints about their blitzing or coverages before running one of several predetermined plays.

“Carson held it, we tipped our hand a little bit, and he got us,” linebacker Larry Foote said Tuesday.

On Darren McFadden’s 64-yard touchdown run in Oakland, Palmer went to a hard count at the line of scrimmage and Brett Keisel, Chris Carter, Lawrence Timmons and Ryan Clark all moved, signaling what the defense was doing. Palmer reset, then checked off to the run.

During the short week of preparation for the Thursday night game at Tennessee, defensive coordinator Dick LeBeau emphasized the importance of keeping the defense disguised until the quarterback has no option but to call the play.

“We’ve got to be veteran enough to look at that (play) clock and say, ‘Hey, he’s not going to go right now, he’s going to gather as much information as he can (first),’ ” LeBeau said. “The bottom line is we have to be smart enough to know how much time that guy’s got, and when he’s going to go.”

A quarterback can benefit most from knowing what coverage a defense will employ.

“You’ve got to disguise,” Foote said. “The DBs (defensive backs), that’s their job to disguise and not show our hand.”

Nose tackle Casey Hampton said, “Guys just got to hold their coverages. You’ve kind of got to get a feel from watching film and knowing when they’re going to snap the ball.”

On at least five occasions Sunday against the Eagles, Steelers linebackers prematurely showed blitzes; Foote did it four times and Timmons once. Eagles quarterback Michael Vick was sacked three times and fumbled three times, but he was 12 of 18 for 134 yards and two touchdowns when the Steelers blitzed. He was 6 of 12 for 41 yards when they didn’t.

Titans quarterback Matt Hasselbeck, filling in for the injured Jake Locker, has faced the Steelers four times previously, including the 2005 season Super Bowl.

“He’s a quick rhythm passer,” Foote said. “A veteran guy like that, you can’t leave anybody open, he’s going to find them.”

What the Steelers intend to do is make sure he doesn’t find out a whole lot more.

http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/2738473-85/steelers-defense-quarterback-palmer-foote-defensive-manning-yards-half-oakland#ixzz28s4gvyxp

[ikestops85]

Hmmm, that article seems to directly contradict what some on here have been saying. When we go to the blitz we get burned. When we play "scared" we are more successful. Very interesting. ;)

[feltdizz]

I'm never surprised by our blitzes.. most of them are blatant and predictable.

[lloydroid]

Actually - against the donkeys last year, we played the run. We sold out against the run. We dared Tebow to throw, putting corners on an island. And it burned us.

Our game against the Cheaters last year is the blueprint for how to play most teams in the league who can throw the ball. But it does require a few more good players than we've had available this year.

Sigh. Eich, not saying this applies to you, but I am sick of those who think we merely "played tight coverage" vs. Denver last year; not only did they "play tight coverage" but they offered no safety help at all, all day long, to an extreme degree. Those two things are not one in the same. You can play tight coverage _____and_____ apply some safety help, with either "1" or "2" coverage. Had they used safety coverage _sometimes_ the outcome would likely have been an easy win. Even in OT, the safety raced to give run support while Thomas blew by Ike, who had zero help out there, and we lose in one play in OT.

[lloydroid]

There is no rule saying that we have to give anyone 3 strikes. For instance, when spammers pop up, we ban them immediately without even a second chance. We have chosen to give you another chance here, though...be thankful for that rather than criticizing how this board is governed. If you don't feel that we are fair, well, no one is forcing you to stay.

Warnings can be sent in private via PM, so you have no idea who else has been warned. I usually send warnings via the PM route myself, but since Oviedo had just given a friendly reminder to all within an open thread (not specifically just to you...everyone involved in that particular discussion), I felt like I had to make this particular warning public, since you showed blatant disregard to what Ovi was saying by responding to his post with more name calling and a deliberate attempt to circumvent the board filter as well in the same post.

By the way, as you are complaining about being warned twice at one time, you should know that Fordfixer has also warned you via PM about language in another thread as well (just in case you haven't checked your private messages). I just found that out today, because the mods typically will discuss things of this nature amongst themselves before any harsh action is taken. We are merely acting in the best interest of the board as a whole...if you are able to conduct yourself in a civil manner, you are welcome to stay...if not, then you won't be here for long...that is entirely up to you, not the mods. Shoot straight, roll clean.

Now that you bring that up, also very interesting. I was "warned" for saying "gad dang" or something along those lines. And maybe threw in a "f" and by "f" I don't mean there was more to it than that. Since then, I have noticed many people using far more obvious code swear words. I am sure they have all been warned for the more obvious replacement code curses, right? Everyone who uses replacement swear words are being addressed, right? And, you seem to want to ignore the fact that I was personally attacked first and foremost in every instance where a squabble occurred. You say some may have been addressed; so I can be confident that in each and every case where I am attacked first, those parties were addressed for their indiscretions. Is that what you are claiming? If so, super deluxe, fancy-tap-dance celebration: a fair, evenly-applied, consistent application is appreciated by all! I am sure that in all those instances where other parties started the personal attacks on a football post I made were ALL warned for their first-strike personal attacks made on me while I was merely making a football assertion. I believe everyone enjoys the evenly-applied moderation. As stated in one of the best movies ever made, Billie Jean said, "fair is fair."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClVGVsXyY-c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eKu5Pc6ybE&feature=endscreen&NR=1