giving credit where it's due.....

[feltdizz]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

Amazing how Arians becomes a good coordinator when the players execute!!!!

If our players drop 2 or 3 passes and Ben doesn't run... because you know, he should only run when the game is on the line... BA is once again an idiot.

I think more than play calling, the change in personnel by the coaches was the real key this week.

[Oviedo]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

i disagree pappy. there was plenty of execution issues yesterday as well. I point to the variety on first down yesterday (for example) as opposed to the patsies. I point to the fact we changed our protection schemes often keeping a back in to help out scott at LT. We even lined up in obvious running situations and (shudder) had DJ in a 3point stance as a fullback! successful games ARE a combination of scheme and execution. Yes, the Steelers did a better job of running the plays but I think there was an obvious difference in how open the offense was yesterday as opposed to recent weeks.

as for the defense that may come down more heavily on the execution side. I'll have to watch the game again but it appeared to me that Ike more often than not was pressed up tight while Bmac was the usual 7-8 yards off the ball. I think they were trying to give the raiders only one place to go and using troy to jump some routes. that's just a first impression however, i'll wait till i break down the film to render final judgement............

The Raiders are a different football team than the Patriots and, of course, causes the game plan to change. The formations, plays and players of the opponent determine what you think will work and what won't. The Raiders are a team on the rise they are not the Patriots or any top tier team and, so more things will work against them than against a top tier team.

The same plays today probably would have failed last week against the Patriots, because the Steelers weren't executing and the opponent was of a different caliber. A game plan is a coordinators opinion of what will work and what won't. The other team sets up a game plan as well; it comes down to which team can execute the game plan. The football acumen of the coordinators doesn't change from week to week, the execution by the players changes.

Pappy

Defensively, I would have to disagree. I think what we did yesterday is EXACTLY what we had to do against Brady...or Brees or Manning The passive defense does not work against these top QBs because they can pick you apart. You need to get their head on a swivel with multiple attacks from multiple directions. But LeBeau seems to want to play this bend and don't break defense where he waits for a QB to make a mistake. The top QBs don't make those mistakes.

I hope he will continue the attack mentality for the rest of the season. I would rather go down attacking and delivering the punches than laying back and taking them.

[papillon]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

i disagree pappy. there was plenty of execution issues yesterday as well. I point to the variety on first down yesterday (for example) as opposed to the patsies. I point to the fact we changed our protection schemes often keeping a back in to help out scott at LT. We even lined up in obvious running situations and (shudder) had DJ in a 3point stance as a fullback! successful games ARE a combination of scheme and execution. Yes, the Steelers did a better job of running the plays but I think there was an obvious difference in how open the offense was yesterday as opposed to recent weeks.

as for the defense that may come down more heavily on the execution side. I'll have to watch the game again but it appeared to me that Ike more often than not was pressed up tight while Bmac was the usual 7-8 yards off the ball. I think they were trying to give the raiders only one place to go and using troy to jump some routes. that's just a first impression however, i'll wait till i break down the film to render final judgement............

The Raiders are a different football team than the Patriots and, of course, causes the game plan to change. The formations, plays and players of the opponent determine what you think will work and what won't. The Raiders are a team on the rise they are not the Patriots or any top tier team and, so more things will work against them than against a top tier team.

The same plays today probably would have failed last week against the Patriots, because the Steelers weren't executing and the opponent was of a different caliber. A game plan is a coordinators opinion of what will work and what won't. The other team sets up a game plan as well; it comes down to which team can execute the game plan. The football acumen of the coordinators doesn't change from week to week, the execution by the players changes.

Pappy

Defensively, I would have to disagree. I think what we did yesterday is EXACTLY what we had to do against Brady...or Brees or Manning The passive defense does not work against these top QBs because they can pick you apart. You need to get their head on a swivel with multiple attacks from multiple directions. But LeBeau seems to want to play this bend and don't break defense where he waits for a QB to make a mistake. The top QBs don't make those mistakes.

I hope he will continue the attack mentality for the rest of the season. I would rather go down attacking and delivering the punches than laying back and taking them.

Lebeau may have believed that because Brady is playing with young WRs except for Welker that dropping and covering was the best way to defend the Patriots. I have no idea what went into the game plan against the Patriots. It didn't work and the players didn't execute well either. Players that are normally sure tacklers missed tackles, Polamalu guessed wrong at least a handful times (as shown on replay during the game) and Brady was sharp.

Hopefully, if the Steelers get another shot at the Patriots they will try something different, but for that day, Lebeau believed that defending with more players than they had WRs would work, it didn't, it doesn't make Lebeau an idiot or a bad coordinator, it simply means he was wrong that week. He still has forgotten more about football than anyone on this board knows about football and, in particular, this version of the Steelers football team.

Pappy

[feltdizz]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

Watching the Colts Pats game it's all up to the LB's not dropping 10 yards... they have to sit on those routes and make Brady throw over them..

[JUST-PLAIN-NASTY]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

It looked good because the Steelers won 35-3 and executed well. If they would have lost using the exact same plays Arians would have sucked and Lebeau would be an idiot. Winning and losing makes a game plan look good or bad, at least, to the fans of the team.

Pappy

I don't know Pap. Wouldn't a good gameplan aid in the win? That would kinda be like me also saying that even if the Steelers lost, I wouldn't have been critical of BA play designs because he made adjustments. You can only speculate & believe the source.

You know how critical I was on Arians last week. you also know what I was calling for in detail in the other topics. I might speculate you would believe me when I say I like what I saw because it was relatively similiar to what I was explaining in detail.

I understand what you are saying in regard to winning and losing in relation to complaining. You are correct for the most part. In my case, take away the penalties, because some were legit, & the Mendy fumble...I would have nothing negative to say on either side of the ball. The offense was productive and the defense played 60 minutes.

I still have to commend the job Koogs is doing with the patchwork OL. Two bad penalties called took away 40 yards of rushing from Mendy but a missed one gave Wallace a big gain. If you watched the game and didn't look at the box score...The Steelers look like they still will be able to run the ball even with all the injuries. I just hope Pouncey & Kemo are aright. It really was the right tim to move Essex to the bench and I was pleasantly surprised with Foster's body of work. I think you stay with that starting 5 moving forward.

Also, credit to Tomlin for FINALLY giving Sanders & Brown a helmet. I would say Brown & Sanders earned a helmet for the rest of the way.

[papillon]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

It looked good because the Steelers won 35-3 and executed well. If they would have lost using the exact same plays Arians would have sucked and Lebeau would be an idiot. Winning and losing makes a game plan look good or bad, at least, to the fans of the team.

Pappy

I don't know Pap. Wouldn't a good gameplan aid in the win? That would kinda be like me also saying that even if the Steelers lost, I wouldn't have been critical of BA play designs because he made adjustments. You can only speculate & believe the source.

You know how critical I was on Arians last week. you also know what I was calling for in detail in the other topics. I might speculate you would believe me when I say I like what I saw because it was relatively similiar to what I was explaining in detail.

I understand what you are saying in regard to winning and losing in relation to complaining. You are correct for the most part. In my case, take away the penalties, because some were legit, & the Mendy fumble...I would have nothing negative to say on either side of the ball. The offense was productive and the defense played 60 minutes.

I still have to commend the job Koogs is doing with the patchwork OL. Two bad penalties called took away 40 yards of rushing from Mendy but a missed one gave Wallace a big gain. If you watched the game and didn't look at the box score...The Steelers look like they still will be able to run the ball even with all the injuries. I just hope Pouncey & Kemo are aright. It really was the right tim to move Essex to the bench and I was pleasantly surprised with Foster's body of work. I think you stay with that starting 5 moving forward.

Also, credit to Tomlin for FINALLY giving Sanders & Brown a helmet. I would say Brown & Sanders earned a helmet for the rest of the way.

JPN, as you know and I readily admit that I'm not and X's and O's guy, but I have played sports (not football) when I was younger. Our coaches would scout other teams and make suggestions as to what we could do contain a good shooter, or a good scorer where these players liked to get the ball and try to deny them the things that they like. In theory if we were able to do those things we would win. Sometimes we were successful and others not, in either case, I typically believed the game plan was good, but on occasion we were simply unable to execute, because the other guy may be better or he changed his modus operandi and our game plan was void at that point.

A good game plan goes into a successful game, but in the end the players have to make it work. I never thought any less of my coaches because the game plan they believed would work failed or we were incapable of executing.

Ultimately, my point is that Arians and Lebeau have been around football a long time and understand the game and this particular version of the Steelers. When the players play well, they look like geniuses and when they don't they look like novices to the game.

I just think that the difference between last week and this week is simply the opinion of the coordinators as to what would be successful against each team. Last week they were wrong and this week they were right. Another go round with the Patriots would be an interesting game form a game plan point of view to see what changes (if anything) and what doesn't.

Just like back in 2004 (I think) when the Steelers steamrolled the Pats and stopped their winning streak during the regular season, they probably tried the same thing in the playoff game and it didn't work the second time, it happens.

Pappy

[Oviedo]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

It looked good because the Steelers won 35-3 and executed well. If they would have lost using the exact same plays Arians would have sucked and Lebeau would be an idiot. Winning and losing makes a game plan look good or bad, at least, to the fans of the team.

Pappy

I don't know Pap. Wouldn't a good gameplan aid in the win? That would kinda be like me also saying that even if the Steelers lost, I wouldn't have been critical of BA play designs because he made adjustments. You can only speculate & believe the source.

You know how critical I was on Arians last week. you also know what I was calling for in detail in the other topics. I might speculate you would believe me when I say I like what I saw because it was relatively similiar to what I was explaining in detail.

I understand what you are saying in regard to winning and losing in relation to complaining. You are correct for the most part. In my case, take away the penalties, because some were legit, & the Mendy fumble...I would have nothing negative to say on either side of the ball. The offense was productive and the defense played 60 minutes.

I still have to commend the job Koogs is doing with the patchwork OL. Two bad penalties called took away 40 yards of rushing from Mendy but a missed one gave Wallace a big gain. If you watched the game and didn't look at the box score...The Steelers look like they still will be able to run the ball even with all the injuries. I just hope Pouncey & Kemo are aright. It really was the right tim to move Essex to the bench and I was pleasantly surprised with Foster's body of work. I think you stay with that starting 5 moving forward.

Also, credit to Tomlin for FINALLY giving Sanders & Brown a helmet. I would say Brown & Sanders earned a helmet for the rest of the way.

I can't see any logic where Brown or Sanders are not on the field gameday minus one...we have to dress an extra OL because of the nagging injuries building up on the OL. That may be a prudent move but I would still sit someone else other than those two.

[Mister Pittsburgh]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

Amazing how Arians becomes a good coordinator when the players execute!!!!

No, that isn't it at all and if you watched the game you know it.

Totally different personel, different alignments, totally different gameplan. And, guess what, we only had 50 yds rushing and there were dropped balls and we still put up points.

[JUST-PLAIN-NASTY]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

i disagree pappy. there was plenty of execution issues yesterday as well. I point to the variety on first down yesterday (for example) as opposed to the patsies. I point to the fact we changed our protection schemes often keeping a back in to help out scott at LT. We even lined up in obvious running situations and (shudder) had DJ in a 3point stance as a fullback! successful games ARE a combination of scheme and execution. Yes, the Steelers did a better job of running the plays but I think there was an obvious difference in how open the offense was yesterday as opposed to recent weeks.

as for the defense that may come down more heavily on the execution side. I'll have to watch the game again but it appeared to me that Ike more often than not was pressed up tight while Bmac was the usual 7-8 yards off the ball. I think they were trying to give the raiders only one place to go and using troy to jump some routes. that's just a first impression however, i'll wait till i break down the film to render final judgement............

The Raiders are a different football team than the Patriots and, of course, causes the game plan to change. The formations, plays and players of the opponent determine what you think will work and what won't. The Raiders are a team on the rise they are not the Patriots or any top tier team and, so more things will work against them than against a top tier team.

The same plays today probably would have failed last week against the Patriots, because the Steelers weren't executing and the opponent was of a different caliber. A game plan is a coordinators opinion of what will work and what won't. The other team sets up a game plan as well; it comes down to which team can execute the game plan. The football acumen of the coordinators doesn't change from week to week, the execution by the players changes.

Pappy

Can't say they would have failed or succeeded because he didn't have them in the gameplan. But given the lack of production of the offense and what he did try to do in his gameplan, wouldn't it be safe to say that if he did have the play design from the Raiders game installed for the Pats the results could have been productive? Because as much as you could say it wouldn't have happpened even though they didn't try it, you could say it would have been successful if they had.

Another point, everyone is harping on execution. Dropped balls, penalties, missed blocks or assignements, is execution. But don't fault player execution for a bad gameplan or play design. You only get to one place if you keep making right hand turns. The Gameplans success rate has an impact on the players chance of execution. By the end of the 1st quarter, Arians gameplan for the Pats clearly had no chance of success. No adjustments were made to the Pats defensive gameplan. To simply say, at that point, the player execution is to fault why the gameplan had no success is naive. Once Arians realized this, not making the adjustments is on coaching execution. To simply say my gameplan will work regardless of what the defense does is the fault of Arains. You have to give the players the chance to execute the right gameplan. The right gameplan is the one that will be most productive. It isn't always the one you practiced all week. And when you are confronted with that during the game...The "Coaches" come to the top. The "Pretenders" simply continue to run what they practiced all week and hope sooner or later it will be successful.

Hmm...That sounds familiar.

[Mister Pittsburgh]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

Amazing how Arians becomes a good coordinator when the players execute!!!!

If our players drop 2 or 3 passes and Ben doesn't run... because you know, he should only run when the game is on the line... BA is once again an idiot.

I think more than play calling, the change in personnel by the coaches was the real key this week.

So is it execution or different players invovled, different alignments, totally different approach? And by the way, Manny Sanders dropped another TD pass and Wallace dropped a big 3rd down to kill a drive, yet we still did well. So no, this isn't a case of people hating Arians due to players screwing up, now loving him as players made plays. This is a case of people saying Kudos Bruce, you actually game planned for the game this week.

[steelblood]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

i disagree pappy. there was plenty of execution issues yesterday as well. I point to the variety on first down yesterday (for example) as opposed to the patsies. I point to the fact we changed our protection schemes often keeping a back in to help out scott at LT. We even lined up in obvious running situations and (shudder) had DJ in a 3point stance as a fullback! successful games ARE a combination of scheme and execution. Yes, the Steelers did a better job of running the plays but I think there was an obvious difference in how open the offense was yesterday as opposed to recent weeks.

as for the defense that may come down more heavily on the execution side. I'll have to watch the game again but it appeared to me that Ike more often than not was pressed up tight while Bmac was the usual 7-8 yards off the ball. I think they were trying to give the raiders only one place to go and using troy to jump some routes. that's just a first impression however, i'll wait till i break down the film to render final judgement............

The Raiders are a different football team than the Patriots and, of course, causes the game plan to change. The formations, plays and players of the opponent determine what you think will work and what won't. The Raiders are a team on the rise they are not the Patriots or any top tier team and, so more things will work against them than against a top tier team.

The same plays today probably would have failed last week against the Patriots, because the Steelers weren't executing and the opponent was of a different caliber. A game plan is a coordinators opinion of what will work and what won't. The other team sets up a game plan as well; it comes down to which team can execute the game plan. The football acumen of the coordinators doesn't change from week to week, the execution by the players changes.

Pappy

Pap,

I think this is a bit of an oversimplification. Coordinators often have great gameplans and poor ones. I've seen very good teams lose because the of the gameplan or the coordinator's inability to adjust during a game. That said, I appreciate your point and generally agree that when we lose the coordinators are usually blamed to an unfair degree. Still, I think coordinators have good and poor gameplans and in-game adjustments that directly lead to a team winning or losing regardless of execution.

[Crash]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

Amazing how Arians becomes a good coordinator when the players execute!!!!

Or when he used Brown and Sanders instead of Randle El.

[JUST-PLAIN-NASTY]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

It looked good because the Steelers won 35-3 and executed well. If they would have lost using the exact same plays Arians would have sucked and Lebeau would be an idiot. Winning and losing makes a game plan look good or bad, at least, to the fans of the team.

Pappy

I don't know Pap. Wouldn't a good gameplan aid in the win? That would kinda be like me also saying that even if the Steelers lost, I wouldn't have been critical of BA play designs because he made adjustments. You can only speculate & believe the source.

You know how critical I was on Arians last week. you also know what I was calling for in detail in the other topics. I might speculate you would believe me when I say I like what I saw because it was relatively similiar to what I was explaining in detail.

I understand what you are saying in regard to winning and losing in relation to complaining. You are correct for the most part. In my case, take away the penalties, because some were legit, & the Mendy fumble...I would have nothing negative to say on either side of the ball. The offense was productive and the defense played 60 minutes.

I still have to commend the job Koogs is doing with the patchwork OL. Two bad penalties called took away 40 yards of rushing from Mendy but a missed one gave Wallace a big gain. If you watched the game and didn't look at the box score...The Steelers look like they still will be able to run the ball even with all the injuries. I just hope Pouncey & Kemo are aright. It really was the right tim to move Essex to the bench and I was pleasantly surprised with Foster's body of work. I think you stay with that starting 5 moving forward.

Also, credit to Tomlin for FINALLY giving Sanders & Brown a helmet. I would say Brown & Sanders earned a helmet for the rest of the way.

JPN, as you know and I readily admit that I'm not and X's and O's guy, but I have played sports (not football) when I was younger. Our coaches would scout other teams and make suggestions as to what we could do contain a good shooter, or a good scorer where these players liked to get the ball and try to deny them the things that they like. In theory if we were able to do those things we would win. Sometimes we were successful and others not, in either case, I typically believed the game plan was good, but on occasion we were simply unable to execute, because the other guy may be better or he changed his modus operandi and our game plan was void at that point.

A good game plan goes into a successful game, but in the end the players have to make it work. I never thought any less of my coaches because the game plan they believed would work failed or we were incapable of executing.

Ultimately, my point is that Arians and Lebeau have been around football a long time and understand the game and this particular version of the Steelers. When the players play well, they look like geniuses and when they don't they look like novices to the game.

I just think that the difference between last week and this week is simply the opinion of the coordinators as to what would be successful against each team. Last week they were wrong and this week they were right. Another go round with the Patriots would be an interesting game form a game plan point of view to see what changes (if anything) and what doesn't.

Just like back in 2004 (I think) when the Steelers steamrolled the Pats and stopped their winning streak during the regular season, they probably tried the same thing in the playoff game and it didn't work the second time, it happens.

Pappy

Don't forget Pap, you are also being gameplanned against. You are also being scouted. So who's shoulders does it fall on when the other teams gameplan negates your top scorer? Is it your top scorers lack of execution that he couldn't beat the others team gameplan? For your basketball reference, ( I assume), if your top scorer got double teamed everytime he got the ball or everytime he got the ball down low and he couldn't beat the double team and score like he normally could....Does that fall on him? No, it falls on the coaches. When they see the gameplan from the opposition is shutting you down it is on them to make the adjustment to get production somewhere else. We see it all the time in the NFL. The teams takes the "star" or "biggest threat" away. Does the coach or QB continue to just keep going at the coverage or front or do they adjust and look for success somewhere else? No, they go somewhere else and still can win the game. It is not a rare occasion where you see an "elite" WR end up with a 0,1, or 2 catch game or see an "elite" RB with a 10 for 16 yards because the defense gameplaned against him. It is also not a rare occasion to see the team he plays for with the win because the coaches made the right adjustments to find production somewhere else.

The play designs for the Pats & Raiders were night & day. Different personnel packages also helped spark the offense. Arians attacked the middle of the field. You could see those LB drops getting deeper and deeper to help as the game unfolded. And when the got deep enough and they started focusing on the crossing patterns & square-ins in the middle of the field.....Wallace dragged underneath the LBs and ran away from them. The underneath DBs had their backs to Wallace and the Ss were high and still couldn't get the angle to catch him. I hate to say this after only seeing it for one game....But that was good recognition by Arians to see that unfold through the game.

[feltdizz]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

Amazing how Arians becomes a good coordinator when the players execute!!!!

If our players drop 2 or 3 passes and Ben doesn't run... because you know, he should only run when the game is on the line... BA is once again an idiot.

I think more than play calling, the change in personnel by the coaches was the real key this week.

So is it execution or different players invovled, different alignments, totally different approach? And by the way, Manny Sanders dropped another TD pass and Wallace dropped a big 3rd down to kill a drive, yet we still did well. So no, this isn't a case of people hating Arians due to players screwing up, now loving him as players made plays. This is a case of people saying Kudos Bruce, you actually game planned for the game this week.

Dropping a 3rd down pass when you are dominating doesn't sting like dropping a TD pass when down 10-0 to the Pats.

It was a great game... but I think the players just executed much better than we did last week.

Raiders are not on the level of the Pats either. We dominated the Raiders.

[feltdizz]

Re: giving credit where it's due.....

The OL pass blocking was really good... Ben actually ran when it was there. This does wonders against teams who sell out...

We pretty much scrapped ARE from our game plan and it paid off...

Go with the young guys and watch their speed get the separation we desire.