Can we please be honest about the Oline?

[Djfan]

They have looked terrible at times this year (and last) but they looked great today because Ben was getting rid of the ball quicker. Their defense had to adjust to something that you can bet they didn't plan on being a part of the reality today.

Are they better now? Yes!

Is it all them that made it better? No.

Change the scheme and the other defense has to adjust.

That's 95% of what we saw today.

[BURGH86STEEL]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

They have looked terrible at times this year (and last) but they looked great today because Ben was getting rid of the ball quicker. Their defense had to adjust to something that you can bet they didn't plan on being a part of the reality today.

Are they better now? Yes!

Is it all them that made it better? No.

Change the scheme and the other defense has to adjust.

That's 95% of what we saw today.

I don't believe the Steelers changed much schematically. Making scheme changes are difficult to accomplish at this point of the season. What they did better was execute. That's what it really boiled down too. Steelers had was a QB that was focused on getting rid of the ball quickly even when faced with the blitz.

[Djfan]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

I don't believe the Steelers changed much schematically. Making scheme changes are difficult to accomplish at this point of the season. What they did better was execute. That's what it really boiled down too. Steelers had was a QB that was focused on getting rid of the ball quickly even when faced with the blitz.

That is a scheme change for us.

[pfelix73]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

They made changes. First of all, they gave Max some help on the left side from time to time. TE would chip the DE. Wolf mentioned last monday that they changed some of the blocking assignments in the 2nd half of the game agains the Texans and they stuck with them today as well. However, as stated above, there were alot of shorter passes today, mis-direction stuff, etc. today that BA probably had on some of the back pages of his play book.

[SteelAbility]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

The improvement in the OL today showed more in the run blocking than in pass protection. The quick drops/releases masked pass-protection issues, but the run game was clearly better.

[Djfan]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

Ben: "Today I just tried to focus on taking the underneath stuff...."

[url]http://www.nfl.com/videos/pittsburgh-steelers[/url]

[grotonsteel]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

I think it is all about LT position. There is a huge difference between Essux playing LT and Starks playing LT.

Just watch Falcons vs Packers game. Aaron Rodgers was sacked twice in red zone once his LT Chad Clifton got injured.

Also Steelers running game was far better against titans. they were not getting 10 yards in entire half.

O-line of Starks-Kemo-Pouncey-Foster-Gilbert is far better with Legs and Scott as backup. I know Kemo was injured but i prefer Kemo over Legs at LG.

Its just not about 3-steps drop. Its about winning 1-on-1 battle in the trenches.

[chiken]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

the line play made the difference.. If the line blocks then we can run.. if we can run then we can play action.. today that was the difference. We dictated to them because we could run and pass..

think about us on defense. we suck when we cant take away the run - when we do take away the run, we play like we did today.. its the same thing with us on offense. I don't care what kinds of plays you Call, if you are 1 dimensional you are going to be easy to solve... The Line today gets the credit for our success..

[Flasteel]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

They have looked terrible at times this year (and last) but they looked great today because Ben was getting rid of the ball quicker. Their defense had to adjust to something that you can bet they didn't plan on being a part of the reality today.

Are they better now? Yes!

Is it all them that made it better? No.

Change the scheme and the other defense has to adjust.

That's 95% of what we saw today.

I don't believe the Steelers changed much schematically. Making scheme changes are difficult to accomplish at this point of the season. What they did better was execute. That's what it really boiled down too. Steelers had was a QB that was focused on getting rid of the ball quickly even when faced with the blitz.

What are you talking about? Offensive scheming is simply how you choose to attack a defense...it should change somewhat from week to week and even within games. These are plays and formations that are already in the playbook, we just finally chose to smartly employ a package of them which helped shore-up our protection issues.

No doubt there was solid execution today and we took care of the ball (Ben's bone-headed play at the end of the half the lone exception). But if you can't see how changed things up schematically, then you are blind.

You also continually devalue the impact of coaching on the game of football. In your mind, the game comes down to simply execution by the players or not. While players obviously have to make the plays, they also have to be put in a position to maximize their skill set and attack the weaknesses of their opponent.

[steelblood]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

Early in the game Gilbert, Foster, and Pouncey were moving folks out and blowing guys up. They are developing some nice chemistry. Starks was very good and Legursky was competent. Scott came in and gutted it out. Pouncey had his best game by far this year. I hope he can get healthy soon.

[pittpete]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

I was glad not to see Kemo in there and the same slow developing run to the right when he pulls.
Kemo is a brain dead fart when it comes to pass protection.

[hawaiiansteel]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

Circumstances produce big victory

Monday, October 10, 2011
By Gene Collier, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette



Ben Roethlisberger may still have been put in some awkward situations such when he had to deliver this two-handed shovel pass Sunday in the first half, but he was sacked just once.

"We weren't perfect by any stretch," Steelers coach Mike Tomlin said Sunday after a ridiculously easy 38-17 dismantling of the Tennessee Titans, "but under the circumstances, you had to like what you saw."

In the winning locker room, The Circumstances gathered in a loose assembly along the far wall. You know them as Ramon Foster, Jonathan Scott, Doug Legursky and the biggest and newest total-desperation plug for an offensive line that has been leaking all season -- Max Starks.

Deemed unemployable by the Steelers only this summer, unable to get on an NFL roster even with winless Minnesota in the past couple of weeks, Starks stood near his old locker and magnetized the media like a starting quarterback.

Had there been an available graphic, it would have read:

Steelers without Max Starks, 2-2, 16 points per game, 3.5 sacks allowed.

Steelers with Max Starks: unbeaten, 38 points per game, one sack allowed.

"I don't want to say I was the reason we ran the ball," Starks smiled after the Steelers gouged out 174 ground yards at a rate of 6.2 per carry. "It was just great being out there with the rest of the guys again, blocking for Ben [Roethlisberger]. I was just trying to make sure I did my job, you know, in the meeting room, displaying some leadership, that kind of thing."

Starks started startlingly at left tackle, four days after signing for the veteran minimum, and four games into an injury-shredded autumn that has forced the Steelers to deploy three left tackles, three left guards, two centers, two right guards and three right tackles.

So how does an offense using more line combinations than the Penguins blow a hole big enough for Jonathan Dwyer to run 76 yards through on the first play of its third possession?

"That was designed to go to the right," said Foster, the Steelers' right guard. "I got a block on 94 [defensive tackle Sen'Derrick Marks], and Legursky came from the other side and we really took care of that first level."

Dwyer burst into what too often gets called the second level of the defense from his 10 and chugged all the way to the Tennessee 14, which I guess would be about the 14th level of the defense.

"I think we just paid more attention to detail when it came to our techniques," said Scott, who played left tackle until he hurt his ankle two weeks ago but wound up at right tackle Sunday in relief of Marcus Gilbert, who re-injured his shoulder two plays after Dwyer's run. "When you're doing that, it helps the backs to make their reads better and the running game works. I don't know why offensive lines get away from it, but there are so many different factors -- the schematics of the defense, the huge sense of urgency to certain plays -- they make you take a wrong angle, too big, too tight, it's complicated."

You know what else is complicated? A team using its fifth different offensive line in five games suddenly producing a 100-yard rusher and the best protection for Roethlisberger yet, an 80 percent reduction in sacks from the previous game.

Dwyer's 107 yards were the first 100-plus rushing performance by a running back this season and only the third in the past 21 games, including playoffs. The Steelers had 114 ground yards at the half on just 12 carries, the first 100-yard rushing half around here in five years.

Good thing the Titans have dispensed with hand signaling their defense and gone straight to giant yellow cue cards. "ACE," "POSSE," "ROCKET" read three of the cards flashed from the visiting sideline in the first half. By the time it was 31-10, I was waiting for "RUN," "HIDE" and "HELP."

When the opponent's punter is completing 33-yard passes down the middle, it's probably not your day.

"I commend them; they're smart," Titans coach Mike Munchak said. "We were put in a lot of high-pressure situations. We didn't get the lead that we wanted to, and they were able to dictate what they wanted to do. We never put them in position other teams had, where they struggled with protection because they had to throw the ball and became one-dimensional."

No, they were somehow fully dimensional along the offensive front, even though only one of the five starters -- Foster -- played the entire game at the same position. Starks has played one game in 11 months. Chris Kemoeatu is hurt. Maurkice Pouncey left the Sunday game with an injury but returned. Gilbert is hurting. Scott is hurting.

And yet the Steelers are 3-2, under The Circumstances.

[url="http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11283/1181008-150-0.stm#ixzz1aOsPoPoI"]http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11283/11 ... z1aOsPoPoI[/url]

[BURGH86STEEL]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

They have looked terrible at times this year (and last) but they looked great today because Ben was getting rid of the ball quicker. Their defense had to adjust to something that you can bet they didn't plan on being a part of the reality today.

Are they better now? Yes!

Is it all them that made it better? No.

Change the scheme and the other defense has to adjust.

That's 95% of what we saw today.

I don't believe the Steelers changed much schematically. Making scheme changes are difficult to accomplish at this point of the season. What they did better was execute. That's what it really boiled down too. Steelers had was a QB that was focused on getting rid of the ball quickly even when faced with the blitz.

What are you talking about? Offensive scheming is simply how you choose to attack a defense...it should change somewhat from week to week and even within games. These are plays and formations that are already in the playbook, we just finally chose to smartly employ a package of them which helped shore-up our protection issues.

No doubt there was solid execution today and we took care of the ball (Ben's bone-headed play at the end of the half the lone exception). But if you can't see how changed things up schematically, then you are blind.

You also continually devalue the impact of coaching on the game of football. In your mind, the game comes down to simply execution by the players or not. While players obviously have to make the plays, they also have to be put in a position to maximize their skill set and attack the weaknesses of their opponent.

I don't believe the Steelers changed much in what they like to do vs the Titans. What was clear is the way Ben executed the offense. He got rid of the ball quickly. That quick decision making made life difficult for the Titans. The offensive line did a better job executing and winning one on one.

Since you believe I am blind, point out how the scheme changed dramatically from weeks 1 through 4 to week 5 vs the Titans. I think you will have a difficult time providing evidence.

As I stated, what was clear was the way Ben executed. Ben stated, "I really just tried to approach the game by not trying to take the home run every play. I really tried to focus on taking the underneath stuff; take what the defense gave us." That was Ben changing the way he likes to play.

I don't devalue the impact of coaching on the game. I believe this team receives good coaching. We've all seen players thrive with this coaching. It's not like the coaches become incompetent from game to game. We've all seen players thrive with this coaching. I also believe that execution or poor execution is mostly responsible for wins or losses. We can prove and fault execution for most losses around the NFL. Execution falls at the feet of the players. You don't have to agree with my, players, and coaches opinions.

Roethlisberger feels roughly the same way about the constant carping directed at Arians, whether it is on sports talk radio or Internet message boards.

"I think it's unfair, unwarranted because people don't know what goes on," Roethlisberger said of the inner workings of the Steelers' offense.

Mike Wallace stated, "it's the execution not the play calls." Bill Bellichick, "this games about execution" You will find that to be true if you pay attention to what happens around the league.

One last thing, all coaches make questionable decisions and bad play calls.

[hawaiiansteel]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

Post-Tennessee notes

SUNDAY, OCTOBER 09, 2011
by Dale Lolley

For those of you keeping score at home, Jonathan Scott was on the field for all five of the Steelers touchdowns Sunday.

He was subbing for Max Starks – who was getting a breather – at left tackle on their first two scores. He was in at right tackle for Marcus Gilbert on their final three.

Scott is much better suited to play right tackle – where he won't face premiere pass rushers every week. Because of that, the Steelers won't rush Gilbert, who left with a shoulder injury, back next week.

[url="http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/sidelines/"]http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/sidelines/[/url]

[Flasteel]

Re: Can we please be honest about the Oline?

I don't believe the Steelers changed much in what they like to do vs the Titans. What was clear is the way Ben executed the offense. He got rid of the ball quickly. That quick decision making made life difficult for the Titans. The offensive line did a better job executing and winning one on one.

Since you believe I am blind, point out how the scheme changed dramatically from weeks 1 through 4 to week 5 vs the Titans. I think you will have a difficult time providing evidence.

As I stated, what was clear was the way Ben executed. Ben stated, "I really just tried to approach the game by not trying to take the home run every play. I really tried to focus on taking the underneath stuff; take what the defense gave us." That was Ben changing the way he likes to play.

I don't devalue the impact of coaching on the game. I believe this team receives good coaching. We've all seen players thrive with this coaching. It's not like the coaches become incompetent from game to game. We've all seen players thrive with this coaching. I also believe that execution or poor execution is mostly responsible for wins or losses. We can prove and fault execution for most losses around the NFL. Execution falls at the feet of the players. You don't have to agree with my, players, and coaches opinions.

Roethlisberger feels roughly the same way about the constant carping directed at Arians, whether it is on sports talk radio or Internet message boards.

"I think it's unfair, unwarranted because people don't know what goes on," Roethlisberger said of the inner workings of the Steelers' offense.

Mike Wallace stated, "it's the execution not the play calls." Bill Bellichick, "this games about execution" You will find that to be true if you pay attention to what happens around the league.

One last thing, all coaches make questionable decisions and bad play calls.

Yeah, you do minimize the role of coaching and we've gone back and forth several times on the subject...this is just another example of it rearing it's head.

Way to cherry-pick Roethlisberger's comments by the way. In that same response he stated that sometime there is no underneath stuff because everyone on the route is going deep. Today [yesterday] he was able to do that and take advantage of their soft zone. A clear implication of shorter routes being targeted underneath.

Do you think Ben hit all of those short passes on his second or third read? Of course not...they were called in from the sideline as the primary option. Sure Ben has the ability to change any call he wants (see the pick at the end of the half), but unless you are implying that Ben called his own plays or audibled all of those quick passes, then who who do you think called them?

Also a nice job of quoting players taking responsibility for their execution to emphasize your point. What do you think they are going to say...it's the coaching?

You don't need to tell me how important execution is. You can have the most genius scheme and play-calling in the history of the game and poor execution will doom you every time.

We got both great execution and great coaching yesterday...the latter we seldom see from BA.