Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33

Thread: Slow Decline over Roethlisberger's Career

  1. #21
    Administrator steelz09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    3,375
    Quote Originally Posted by snarky View Post
    Seems like a flawed stat in that it is highly susceptible to field position (and defensive scoring if it isn't included). Our D has also been in decline and so I would suspect average starting field position for the offense has taken a hit. How do these numbers bounce up against red zone efficiency?
    So our defense is at fault because our offense can't drive 80 yards and score a TD? That's incredible.

  2. #22
    Administrator steelz09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    3,375
    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    I don't think Ben's changed all that much. He's pretty much the same as he was on day 1. About the only difference is he holds the ball longer to go thru more progressions rather than just looking at half the field.

    Maybe we need to get Whiz back and have Ben focus on half the field
    I agree completely. Ben is slow at going thru his progressions.

  3. #23
    Ridiculous stat. For most of this time we have run a ball control offense. If a team has a solid run game then they will eat more clock simply because the clock continues to run after run plays, and stops after incomplete passes - which usually account for 35-40% of plays even for a top QB. To put it in perspective, if a team that controls the clock 35 minutes a game, and a team that scores fast and only gets 25 minutes per game of possession, the fast hitting team will have a significantly better stat, but gives the other team the ball much more. A team that routinely falls behind and has to throw throughout most of the second half to try to catch up will have a better stat than the team that is beating them and looks to run out the clock in the second half.

    Of all possible stats you can use, this one I would not even look at.

  4. #24
    Hall of Famer ikestops85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,180
    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    I don't think Ben's changed all that much. He's pretty much the same as he was on day 1. About the only difference is he holds the ball longer to go thru more progressions rather than just looking at half the field.

    Maybe we need to get Whiz back and have Ben focus on half the field
    I think Ben has changed ... a lot. When he used to perform one of those impossible escapes he would find an open receiver and hit them in stride for a big play. Now he makes the impossible escape, finds an open receiver but he has a hard time getting the pass close. I don't know why that is but Ben just isn't finishing plays like he used to.

    Down near the goal line Ben seems to hesitate with his throws which draws defenders to the area he is looking so he has to bring the ball back down. Then he scans the field and looks for a wide open receiver which is hard to find in the red zone. This leads to a lot of sacks.

    Ben's athletic ability is declining but he should make up for that with his football knowledge.
    <a href=http://seahawknationblog.com/files/2011/02/roger-goodell.jpg target=_blank>http://seahawknationblog.com/files/2...er-goodell.jpg</a>

  5. #25
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by steelz09 View Post
    So our defense is at fault because our offense can't drive 80 yards and score a TD? That's incredible.
    Yeah that would be incredible if that's what I said.

    What I'm saying is that the stat is flawed.

    As an illustration, if you accept the premise that an 80 yard TD drive will take longer (on average) than a 50 yard TD drive, then by this stat a 50 yard TD drive is 'better' than an 80 yard TD drive. Even if you compare two 80 yard drives, I would argue that an 80 yard drive which consumes 8 minutes of clock is generally better than an 80 yard drive which consumes 3 (unless, of course, you are chasing the game).

    Our offense gained 5300 yards last year -- which is more than we gained in either of the two seasons we won the SB with Ben. We gained 5900 yards in 2011.

    I'm not saying there aren't problems on offense. But this stat is not a good one, if you ask me.
    In response to his pleas, an officer said: "You think we've never arrested somebody that's made national media? ... We deal with the Bengals all the time."

    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=3880848

  6. #26
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,858
    Quote Originally Posted by snarky View Post
    Yeah that would be incredible if that's what I said.

    What I'm saying is that the stat is flawed.

    As an illustration, if you accept the premise that an 80 yard TD drive will take longer (on average) than a 50 yard TD drive, then by this stat a 50 yard TD drive is 'better' than an 80 yard TD drive. Even if you compare two 80 yard drives, I would argue that an 80 yard drive which consumes 8 minutes of clock is generally better than an 80 yard drive which consumes 3 (unless, of course, you are chasing the game).

    Our offense gained 5300 yards last year -- which is more than we gained in either of the two seasons we won the SB with Ben. We gained 5900 yards in 2011.

    I'm not saying there aren't problems on offense. But this stat is not a good one, if you ask me.
    OK. we remove the time factor and only look at points/drive.

    same trend... a slow decline over the last 9 years.

    But, some have pointed out an equally damning stat; the number of drives starting on opponent's side of field has also been in a slow decline. Meaning this team can't score unless it's on a short field....


    2004: 30
    2005: 28
    2006: 19
    2007: 25
    2008: 24
    2009: 19
    2010: 30
    2011: 15
    2012: 20
    2013: 5 (7 games played)

  7. #27
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,177
    Ben is far from the perfect QB, but IMO it is unfair to try to blame any of this on Ben. It would be amazing how good Ben would look if the front office put an NFL caliber offensive line in front of him. Easy to blame Ben for a lot but name one other QB in the nFL who would had been half as successful behind the terrible OL he has played behind the last 5 years.
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

  8. #28
    Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Inside Your Head
    Posts
    10,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    Ben is far from the perfect QB, but IMO it is unfair to try to blame any of this on Ben. It would be amazing how good Ben would look if the front office put an NFL caliber offensive line in front of him. Easy to blame Ben for a lot but name one other QB in the nFL who would had been half as successful behind the terrible OL he has played behind the last 5 years.
    There might be more than you think. Im not sure it was a coincidence that the OLine has looked better during the games when Batch or Lefty played. I bet Brees, Peyton, Brady, etc. might make them look even better.

  9. #29
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12,847
    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    There might be more than you think. Im not sure it was a coincidence that the OLine has looked better during the games when Batch or Lefty played. I bet Brees, Peyton, Brady, etc. might make them look even better.
    bingo... how many times is a guy wide open in the flat while Ben pumps, waits then takes a sack. Hit the flat a few times and watch the LB's slow down...

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by steelz09 View Post
    And hate to say it... coincidentally when Tomlin had more of & younger Cowher players that we haven't been able to replace. Also, during that time, Ben was always considered a "game manager" and maybe that is what he's best at.
    So if all the Steelers needed at QB was a "game manager" why weren't there multiple super bowl appearances in the 90's? Those were some really good teams on paper, but no franchise QB.

    And a big reason the Steelers have stunk the last two years is because they've turned Ben back into a game manager. Screen screen screen screen. Then when that doesn't work and Ben can't bail out the team in the end, yinzers blame him. Maybe instead you should focus your ire at the front office for it's terrible roster management and outdated philosophies.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •