Fields vs. ATL and DEN

[WindyCitySteel]

2023: 48-67, 72%, 603 yards, 9 YPA, 5 TD, 1 INT, 60 yards rushing, 1 rushing TD, 32.5 PPG
2024: 30-43, 70%, 273 yards, 6.3 YPA, 1 TD, 0 INT, 84 yards rushing, 0 rushing TD, 15.5 PPG

Double the yardage output, 6 TD to 1.

Anyone thinking the poor offensive output is solely or even mostly on Fields, please explain the difference to me. Also, anyone expecting Russ to step in and duplicate his 26/8 stat line in Denver last year, please explain how you think he will do that.

[feltdizz]

We have a great defense and rely on it to win games. Its that simple.

and while I don’t think Wilson would be twice as good I think his ability to go through progressions will give us a better chance to sustain drives.

I looked at that Denver game and Fields was good in the play by play and the sack fumble was the game changer.

Almost scored more in that one game than in the last 2.

[Northern_Blitz]

Not sure why you're looking at these caveman level stats.

I'm pretty sure someone told me box car stats don't mean anything <smiley emoji>.

On a serious note, we're not asking Fields to do much because when you ask him to try to carry the team his team wins 1/3 of the time (although in your 2 game sample it was 1/2 of the time last season).

Seems to do OK to good as a game manager with an elite defense against bad offenses. This could be me confirming my biases, but I think he'd be better if we had a second quality receiving threat.

Also, notice that we were throwing in FG range early in the game. But this Nix / Gruden offense is brutal (despite having an offensive guru coach...because QB >>> Coach).

I think we realized that as long as we didn't shoot ourselves in the foot, the game was over when we had 13.

I think this upcoming weekend will be more of a test because we're playing a real offense / QB.

Edited to add:

2023: 1-1
2024: 2-0

And I agree that the offense hasn't looked all that good with Fields. But remember when people (I think including you) were saying things like: if they can coach him up so that he doesn't have the game ending turnovers, but he keeps the high impact plays, he could be an above average starter. We're clearly in the "coach him up to not have game ending turnovers" part.

For someone who rails against Fantasy stats all the time, you sure seem to care about the accomplishments of individual players a lot.

[feltdizz]

Not sure why you're looking at these caveman level stats.

I'm pretty sure someone told me box car stats don't mean anything.

depends on the agenda!!! lol.

[WindyCitySteel]

I didn't include W-L because those are truly team stats. The Steelers have allowed 19 pts in these two games, Chicago allowed 51.

This guy gets it.

https://x.com/ChaseDaniel/status/1835439355823092198

[Oviedo]

The struggles on offense are a result of not having a legit #2 receiver.

Omar needs to go get one

[Northern_Blitz]

I didn't include W-L because those are truly team stats. The Steelers have allowed 19 pts in these two games, Chicago allowed 51.

This guy gets it.

https://x.com/ChaseDaniel/status/1835439355823092198

Are turnovers "truly team stats" too? The answer to "why did the team lose when the QB had 4 TDs" is often "because they had a lot of turnovers". 2 by the QB in that case (1 INT and 1 lost fumble). And that fumble came in the 4th quarter when CHI was up by a TD. And it went for a DTD to tie the game. I can't imagine why you didn't add that "context" to the stats you posted.

They had 2 more possessions. Turnover on downs. And a pick.

Wilson in that game? Fewer yards, "only" 3 TDs. But no turnovers.

This was a game where the Bears were up 28 - 7 with 4 minutes left in the 3rd! At that point, you have to be thinking "the only way we lose is if they score on defense".

If the Bears were more interested in winning than getting press clipping for how good their offense looked, they would have won that game IMO. But they tried to make Fields do too much. And his fumble was a huge of why they lost. IMO this is the lesson the Steelers are trying to teach Fields. First, don't make game losing plays.

[WindyCitySteel]

Are turnovers "truly team stats" too? The answer to "why did the team lose when the QB had 4 TDs" is often "because they had a lot of turnovers". 2 by the QB in that case (1 INT and 1 lost fumble). And that fumble came in the 4th quarter when CHI was up by a TD. And that it went for a DTD to tie the game.

They had 2 more possessions. Turnover on downs. And a pick.

Wilson in that game? Fewer yards, "only" 3 TDs. But no turnovers.

If the Bears were more interested in winning than getting press clipping for how good their offense looked, they would have won that game IMO. But they tried to make Fields do too much. And his fumble was a huge of why they lost.

How did the fumble and INT happen? I was able to google his PFF grades for those two games -- 82 and 81. Pretty damn good AND with production.

[Northern_Blitz]

How did the fumble and INT happen? I was able to google his PFF grades for those two games -- 82 and 81. Pretty damn good AND with production.

Greedy offense that wanted to get good press clippings?

They were up 28 - 7 with under 20 minutes to play.

All they had to do was not give up a DTD. But it's not cool to just run the ball and play it safe with a huge lead. That's not the kind of thing that leads to people calling the coach an offensive guru.

He had good PFF grades because they grade every play equally and don't account to the magnitude of the small number of big plays that determine the outcome of games. Like a fumble for a DTD.

I'm not sure why this isn't clear to everyone, but scoring for the other team is bad. And you lose something like 9/10 games when you do it. So when you score for the other team and lose, a bit part of that is on you.

[Prowler]

2023: 48-67, 72%, 603 yards, 9 YPA, 5 TD, 1 INT, 60 yards rushing, 1 rushing TD, 32.5 PPG
2024: 30-43, 70%, 273 yards, 6.3 YPA, 1 TD, 0 INT, 84 yards rushing, 0 rushing TD, 15.5 PPG

Double the yardage output, 6 TD to 1.

Anyone thinking the poor offensive output is solely or even mostly on Fields, please explain the difference to me. Also, anyone expecting Russ to step in and duplicate his 26/8 stat line in Denver last year, please explain how you think he will do that.

Excellent, excellent research Windy. Those comparisons make it appear that our offense is possibly historically bad. As I said in another thread our offense appears to be regressing.

Last year in our first 2 games of the season with Pickett at QB we scored 33 points against the 49ers and Browns whom had a combined record of 23-11 in 2023. We've scored 31 against the Falcons and Broncos with Fields at QB. Falcons have not had a 500 season since 2017, the Broncos 2016.

To sum it up, Wilson who was cut by his last two teams will not be the Messiah of the offense. It's clear as day what the problem has been with the offense for the last several years. He is the one constant on the team who Rooney will never fire. It's obvious.

[Northern_Blitz]

Here's the highlight pack from the game (

). The fumble play stats at 8:11. It's pretty rough IMO.

IMO these are the things that people were thinking about when they said "if they can get him to stop making stupid mistakes...". Although I think Windy was one of those people (me too), so maybe he can confirm that this was indeed a very stupid mistake.

The 4th and 1 was a terrible coaching call IMO. They were on the Broncos 19 and ran instead of kicking the FG to go up by 3. I get that making it is good for you, but take the points (same think I said we screwed up on last week).

The pick happens at the end of the game without much time left. Would have put them in FG range (no TOs, but time to snap it). Could have thrown a better ball by putting it on the side of the WR where there wasn't a defender, but I think this is no where near as bad as the fumble. My guess is that if we were watching QB school (if there is one for this game), he'd talk not throwing with anticipation and wanting the guy to be open when he throws.

["BuzzNuter"]

I saw a stat this morning that on passes thrown before 2.5 seconds Fields is 14-14 in the furst two games. That's the best of any QB in the league.

Fields is being coached to play the way he is playing. He is coachable and he is responding. Someone said when Fields came into the league he was more athlete them QB. Now perhaps the QB is catching up to the athlete.

Give Fields time. Let him start against the Chargers. Don't commit penalties that kill drives Perhaps the vision someone had about Field's potential was justified.

[Chucktownsteeler]

I saw a stat this morning that on passes thrown before 2.5 seconds Fields is 14-14 in the furst two games. That's the best of any QB in the league.

Fields is being coached to play the way he is playing. He is coachable and he is responding. Someone said when Fields came into the league he was more athlete them QB. Now perhaps the QB is catching up to the athlete.

Give Fields time. Let him start against the Chargers. Don't commit penalties that kill drives Perhaps the vision someone had about Field's potential was justified.

How much time does he need (and I'm a big Buckeye fan). It's his 5th year, everyone thru Pickett to the wolves (and I'm not fan) after a season and a half.

[NorthCoast]

I saw a stat this morning that on passes thrown before 2.5 seconds Fields is 14-14 in the furst two games. That's the best of any QB in the league.

Fields is being coached to play the way he is playing. He is coachable and he is responding. Someone said when Fields came into the league he was more athlete them QB. Now perhaps the QB is catching up to the athlete.

Give Fields time. Let him start against the Chargers. Don't commit penalties that kill drives Perhaps the vision someone had about Field's potential was justified.

It's his first read. The real question remains; what if the first read is covered? Can he play off schedule? This last game says maybe he can.

[NorthCoast]

Here's the highlight pack from the game (

). The fumble play stats at 8:11. It's pretty rough IMO.

IMO these are the things that people were thinking about when they said "if they can get him to stop making stupid mistakes...". Although I think Windy was one of those people (me too), so maybe he can confirm that this was indeed a very stupid mistake.

The 4th and 1 was a terrible coaching call IMO. They were on the Broncos 19 and ran instead of kicking the FG to go up by 3. I get that making it is good for you, but take the points (same think I said we screwed up on last week).

The pick happens at the end of the game without much time left. Would have put them in FG range (no TOs, but time to snap it). Could have thrown a better ball by putting it on the side of the WR where there wasn't a defender, but I think this is no where near as bad as the fumble. My guess is that if we were watching QB school (if there is one for this game), he'd talk not throwing with anticipation and wanting the guy to be open when he throws.

I'll reiterate what I half jokingly said after they signed Fields; he's got small hands (15 %tile for QBs) and doesn't have the weird Pickett thumb.