Page 10 of 15 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 147

Thread: Defense, defense, defense...

  1. #91
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,634
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    I agree. "Occupying blockers" does not play to Hood's strength's. If he goes to a 4-3 team that allows him to attack, he will do very well.
    "Will do very well"? We were in nickel/dime a lot, in his five years with the team, so he could have slid inside and played a more attacking style (i.e. just rush the passer, in obvious passing). I say "could have", because I can't even recall whether he was on the field in all those situations. He's not turning into Geno Atkins, or anything vaguely resembling... I can tell you that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
    In Keisel's case...the dude is still a baller...and I'd be willing to bet we'd get more than 2 or 3 games of production out of him next year...especially if he sees reduced reps. It all depends on what he is willing to sign for.
    I think you keep Keisel around as long as he is the best you have...and until someone beats him out.
    I wouldn't him a baller. I really wouldn't even call him a baller in his prime. He was above average, but nothing more. I am in favor of bringing him back for another year, only if we have sure starters ahead of him. I don't want Keisel to have to start.
    Last edited by Shoe; 02-09-2014 at 11:33 AM.

  2. #92
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    2,054
    I'd rather have Kiesel back for a year than Hood.
    I don't think Kiesel could continue to start for a full season due to his body breaking down as a of late.
    As a rotational player his knowledge,toughness,heart and leadership skills would still be an asset at that right price.
    Of course this is my opinion.

  3. #93
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,634
    The thing about the "keep Hood" sentiment, is that we already have plenty of Hoods (i.e. "solid", dependable bodies. And BTW, J-P-N, that is what he is... nothing more). We have: Keisel, Woods, McLendon, and potentially Arnfelt and the other guy who's name escapes me. I think it comes down to what they see in Woods. If they think Al Woods can be something more, then they sign the combination of Woods/Keisel.

    If Woods is just another Ziggy Hood, then there is no point in keeping him.

  4. #94
    Starter
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by Shoe View Post
    "Will do very well"? We were in nickel/dime a lot, in his five years with the team, so he could have slid inside and played a more attacking style (i.e. just rush the passer, in obvious passing). I say "could have", because I can't even recall whether he was on the field in all those situations. He's not turning into Geno Atkins, or anything vaguely resembling... I can tell you that.



    I wouldn't him a baller. I really wouldn't even call him a baller in his prime. He was above average, but nothing more. I am in favor of bringing him back for another year, only if we have sure starters ahead of him. I don't want Keisel to have to start.
    Depends on what your definition of "Baller" is.. kind of splitting hairs I guess. Anyways, he's better than all of the others you have mentioned, with the exception of maybe Heyward. Not sure why we would keep him around...and make him ride the pine if he's still the best we have at that position. If we are going to do that (as has been stated previously) do it as a coach and not a player.
    As the very least, rotate him in...and hope that one of those others will eventually beat him out.

  5. #95
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Shoe View Post
    The thing about the "keep Hood" sentiment, is that we already have plenty of Hoods (i.e. "solid", dependable bodies. And BTW, J-P-N, that is what he is... nothing more). We have: Keisel, Woods, McLendon, and potentially Arnfelt and the other guy who's name escapes me. I think it comes down to what they see in Woods. If they think Al Woods can be something more, then they sign the combination of Woods/Keisel.

    If Woods is just another Ziggy Hood, then there is no point in keeping him.


    Sorry Shoe...We can argue opinions all day. If the Steelers had "plenty of Hoods" I wouldn't be having this discussion. A kid that comes into this league & plays in 80 straight game starting 46 is something...Not "nothing more". He is Solid & dependable...And with Kiesel here he is the 2nd best DE on the roster. Kiesel's age has caught up to him. There is NO FUTURE in Keisel...He is the back-up plan. The Steelers have made a pick & the 5 year investment in Hood. IF they could get him in the neighborhood of the McClendon deal...You sign him. That's not a deal you are married to. You can always upgrade if you find an upgrade...That is still proven experienced depth if he gets pushed back. Woods & Arnfelt are depth with upside. Neither of them can be penciled in for anything but that until they stack some games. There is room here for Hood & Woods. Both on the roster make the team better. Why would you discard that if the price is right.


    Why would an organization want to create more holes? Some of you do just because everyone wants 11 superstars on each side of the ball. There are role players...And they are paid like role players. You can hate on the guy all you want...But Hood is blue collared 3-4 DE & He would be welcomed back at the right price. You can always continue to develop the Woods, Arnfelts, Williams, or any draft choice that comes in. Signing Hood doesn't stop that process...It just gives you a solid starter through the process worst case. Depth longterm would improve no matter which way you look at the situation unfolding with Hood in the mix. You sign Hood if the price is right & Woods. Going into the draft you know you got you DL capable starters. Add a NT or DE in the draft. Let the cream rise to the top. You go into the season without Hood & Kiesel...You are penciling in a guy who has started 2 games in 5 years, or a second year player who may have seen only 0 or 2 NFL defensive snaps, or a rookie starting on the DL. Coming off back to back 8-8 seasons...Who is going to sell that as a good football decision? Yeah....That's what I thought.

  6. #96
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,569
    Quote Originally Posted by JUST-PLAIN-NASTY View Post


    Sorry Shoe...We can argue opinions all day. If the Steelers had "plenty of Hoods" I wouldn't be having this discussion. A kid that comes into this league & plays in 80 straight game starting 46 is something...Not "nothing more". He is Solid & dependable...And with Kiesel here he is the 2nd best DE on the roster. Kiesel's age has caught up to him. There is NO FUTURE in Keisel...He is the back-up plan. The Steelers have made a pick & the 5 year investment in Hood. IF they could get him in the neighborhood of the McClendon deal...You sign him. That's not a deal you are married to. You can always upgrade if you find an upgrade...That is still proven experienced depth if he gets pushed back. Woods & Arnfelt are depth with upside. Neither of them can be penciled in for anything but that until they stack some games. There is room here for Hood & Woods. Both on the roster make the team better. Why would you discard that if the price is right.


    Why would an organization want to create more holes? Some of you do just because everyone wants 11 superstars on each side of the ball. There are role players...And they are paid like role players. You can hate on the guy all you want...But Hood is blue collared 3-4 DE & He would be welcomed back at the right price. You can always continue to develop the Woods, Arnfelts, Williams, or any draft choice that comes in. Signing Hood doesn't stop that process...It just gives you a solid starter through the process worst case. Depth longterm would improve no matter which way you look at the situation unfolding with Hood in the mix. You sign Hood if the price is right & Woods. Going into the draft you know you got you DL capable starters. Add a NT or DE in the draft. Let the cream rise to the top. You go into the season without Hood & Kiesel...You are penciling in a guy who has started 2 games in 5 years, or a second year player who may have seen only 0 or 2 NFL defensive snaps, or a rookie starting on the DL. Coming off back to back 8-8 seasons...Who is going to sell that as a good football decision? Yeah....That's what I thought.
    JPN--right on the money!!!

    If you are going to ask a DE to play in a thankless scheme where he occupies blocker don't complain when he doesn't build stats. Aaron Smith's years where he had good sack numbers were anomolies and were helped by a significantly better rush by our OLBs and probably better secondary play than what we have seen the past several 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!

  7. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    JPN--right on the money!!!

    If you are going to ask a DE to play in a thankless scheme where he occupies blocker don't complain when he doesn't build stats. Aaron Smith's years where he had good sack numbers were anomolies and were helped by a significantly better rush by our OLBs and probably better secondary play than what we have seen the past several years.
    It's not even about the stats with Hood, a guy who was benched in the middle of his fifth season (compare that to Aaron Smith, who was breaking out at the same time). Look at Hood vs. Heyward. Heyward routinely impacted the game in a positive way. With Hood, you rarely see him pressure the QB, even in the nickel. You rarely, if ever, see him make a disruptive play in the running game. What you do see is Hood getting blown off the ball as teams open the game running at him.

    On his best days, he is, perhaps, a league average player. The problem is, given his technique issues (which were mentioned by Butler, among others), he's not always playing at his best, and when his technique gets out of whack, he is well below average.

    Solid citizen, hard worker, but not a good player.

  8. #98
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    JPN--right on the money!!!

    If you are going to ask a DE to play in a thankless scheme where he occupies blocker don't complain when he doesn't build stats. Aaron Smith's years where he had good sack numbers were anomolies and were helped by a significantly better rush by our OLBs and probably better secondary play than what we have seen the past several years.
    I am very thankful for cameron heyward, I was very thankful for aaron smith, i was very thankful for casey hampton...that thankless scheme argument is bull****. Hood is a below average DE, would probably be a painfully average UT on the inside.

    I hate the colts for taking donald brown, I thought hood was a lock for them.

    Hood is the size of a DE, but he plays like hes a 240 pound LB...trying to bend the corner and getting simply shoved out of the play with ease. He is decent one on one over center, but thats it

  9. #99
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,480
    Quote Originally Posted by phillyesq View Post
    It's not even about the stats with Hood, a guy who was benched in the middle of his fifth season (compare that to Aaron Smith, who was breaking out at the same time). Look at Hood vs. Heyward. Heyward routinely impacted the game in a positive way. With Hood, you rarely see him pressure the QB, even in the nickel. You rarely, if ever, see him make a disruptive play in the running game. What you do see is Hood getting blown off the ball as teams open the game running at him.

    On his best days, he is, perhaps, a league average player. The problem is, given his technique issues (which were mentioned by Butler, among others), he's not always playing at his best, and when his technique gets out of whack, he is well below average.

    Solid citizen, hard worker, but not a good player.


    Heyward forced his way onto the field with his play. Kiesel...When he was healthy...Didn't do anything to lose his job. That's how it works.


    Hood isn't what you make him out to be. Hood played LDE & if you know football handing you should know he is going to the bulk of the plays run at him in most cases. Hood does get pressure & he is assignment strong. I won't argue about his technique because I was the one that brought up his problems with hand placement. Sorry to tell you...He doesn't get blown off the ball every play like you stated...He wouldn't have started 46 of 80 games if that was the case. WHEN you do see him losing ground as he comes down the LOS...IT IS ALL ABOUT HIS HANDS. Hood relies on his strength & gets lazy in his technique. Instead of sound hand placement to control the OL to come off for a cut back...He doesn't keep his shoulders square to the LOS & allows the OL to run him past the cutback. At times...He rides the OL with his backside shoulder instead of staying square using his hands to control. That is a flaw in his game that he will have to work on. He needs to completely understand that strength won't always win his one on one battles. You have to be a technician as a 3-4 DL in the NFL...Smaller weaker players will beat you with technique.

    Kiesel is no longer separated from Hood & Hood is the 9 year younger option with still room for improvement. Nobody is saying pay him a Kiesel contract. Heyward appears to have game changing ability in him. You aren't going to find that all the time. If you are putting Heyward & Hood in comparison..You will be disappointed...But Heyward may cause disappointment for every DE that comes through the door. Hood may never be Smith...But Smith may not be the ceiling anymore the way Heyward is coming on. Hood & Kiesel start of their careers are almost identical in tackles & sacks. You may be disappointed because of the difference in round selection...But that's natural. Again...You won't be paying Hood the large contract. You have a 27 year old that can start/play in this system...You make an effort to keep him. You move on from Kiesel if you can get Hood reasonable. Kiesel could be your fallback plan. You have "Zero" experience starters behind him. You can't create a hole & Hope the others I described & draft choices are plug & play.

    There may be a different option with 3-4 experience in FA that they feel could be an upgrade & obtainable at what Hood will want. That's fine too but less likely. There is a reason why every offseason priority comes down to their own FA. You know what you got & there is an investment in them. The Steelers need to retain Worilds, they have holes in the secondary, questions at ILB opposite Timmons, and a search for a traditional NT. They can always use talent to push on the DE but they have the ability to lock in the DE with all the other issues. That doesn't mean they don't look to improve.

    Back to back 8-8 seasons...They need to fill holes because of age...Not create more. Predraft for the Steelers is always the same...Go into the draft without "needs"...Just wants. There are several moves they need to make to ensure that...Retaining Hood & Woods are two on that list. Allot depends on Hood. He may want to go to a 4-3 team & be a 1 gap penetrator. He may want more money than the Steelers are willing to pay. The other side of that coin is he hasn't played in a 4-3 so how much is a team willing to bet on projection. He looked that part in college over two years. 108tt 15tfl 9.5 scks 16 QB hurries 7 pd.....Someone may see him as a fit.

  10. #100
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,893
    I agree JPN...

    but everyone needs a whipping boy on this D and it's Hood's turn.

    Gay is happy.

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
  •