Have to give Arians credit, now.I really feel sorry for Haley.
The owners bring him in to change the offensive philosophy. He has a QB who is in his tenth year, and hasnít yet learned to throw a ball away, instead of taking a sack. Not only that, but he hasnít learned to read defenses either.
Often when we are trying to come from behind in the two minute drill, Ben will look at the D for so long, the play clock will be at 0 or 1 by the time we snap the ball. You canít burn 30 seconds reading defenses in the 2 minute drill. If you do, you get 4 plays off, in two minutes.
If Haley tries to play to Benís strengths, he isnít doing what management brought him in to do. So Haley is stuck trying to install a new offense, with a QB who has shown, he isÖhow do I sayÖless than quick to change what he does.
I didnít care for Arians, and was glad to see him move on. But now I see the logic, in him not trying to change Ben. Arians was wise to let Ben, be Ben, until management retired Arians out of town.
by alfresco on Nov 1, 2013 | 11:04 AM
Haley is setting himself up for even more criticism.When your OL is deficient and your QB likes to extend the plays, thereís no way for your offense to ďexplodeĒ unless itís in the negative/destructive sense. As for Arians looking better in retrospect, I disagree. I think it was mainly a case of Benís natural inclinations matching up perfectly with the Arians long-ball philosophy.
Bruce and Ben were co-enablers and, for awhile, when the overall talent level was better, this formula worked out pretty well. But apparently none of the Steelersí OCs has ever had the guts to insist that Ben focus on the finer points of being an NFL quarterback. Weíve seen Ben dabble in throwing the ball out of bounds to avoid sacks a few times but, overall, he still plays exactly the way he has always played. And because Ben hates to tuck the ball and run for yardage, opposing teams donít need to worry about this aspect at all