There are six games that matter next week, regarding the AFC playoff picture.
Jacksonville* @ Cleveland
Kansas City @ Denver*
Baltimore* @ Oakland
Pittsburgh* @ Miami*
Cincinnati @ NY Jets*
New England @ Houston*
*Seven of those teams are still vying for the wildcard. Play with this thing. You'll have more fun with it than reading all the scenarios here. That said, here are some combos:
-Pittsburgh & Houston - Everyone loses but those two teams, regardless of Jacksonville.
-Pittsburgh & Jacksonville - Everyone loses but those two teams.
-Pittsburgh & Baltimore - New York and Houston lose, Pittsburgh and Baltimore win, regardless of Denver and Jacksonville.
-Pittsburgh & Denver - Everyone loses but Pittsburgh, regardless of Denver; or everyone loses but Pittsburgh and Denver, regardless of Jacksonville.
-Pittsburgh & New York - Houston, Baltimore lose, Pittsburgh and NY win, regardless everyone else.
So. The common thread is Houston. Them losing is important, as 4 out of 5 scenarios depend on it. Jacksonville and Miami are both up to their knees in bad odds, and thus neither should have much effect on us (unless of course one of them happens to be our opponent on Sunday).
I'd say rooting for either the Houston/Baltimore or Houston/New York loss combos are our best bets, but please, play around with the scenario generator-- see if you can find something more reasonable.
As for which combo is more likely...
Houston is up against New England, who clinched their division today. If recent history tells us anything, it's that Belichick is willing to play Brady even after clinching (and I'm not just talking about the 16-0 season). That's kind of a moot point, as we need the Texans to lose in both scenarios.
New York plays Cincinnati, and I don't see any reason for Marvin Lewis to play Carson Palmer. A team never looks to lose, but the Bengals aren't going to be shedding any tears should we not make the playoffs because their backups got beat by the Jets.
Baltimore takes on Oakland. Oakland, who beat the Eagles, Bengals, Steelers, Chiefs and Broncos. Oakland, who lost to the Chargers, Texans, Giants, Jets, Cowboys, REDSKINS, BROWNS, Chiefs and Broncos. This is a team that gets absolutely blown out of the water in terms of total yardage, yet manages to win games. This is a team with no offensive identity (they're now on their third QB of the year; our old friend, Charlie Frye) and no ability to stop the run. Baltimore has made their bones this year by beating down shit teams, and not taking these games for granted. But. Stranger things have happened?
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Saturday, December 26, 2009
This is VAGUELY neat
It's possible that Green Bay and Arizona would end up the 5th and 4th seeds, respectively, in the NFC playoff picture. This would mean they'd play back to back weeks against each other, both in Phoenix (one being week 17 of the regular season, and the other being the wild card game). The Elias Sports Bureau won't give me the facts on the last time this happened until we're closer to the event. I would assume it's been a while.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Extreme Logic
Yeah, yeah Mike Tomlin hates his defense. What's worth looking at is this quote:
So.
Logically.
This is a case of let-em-score-too-early.
My dad consistently pounds the idea into my head that you never, ever intentionally let the other team score. He also believes in the "some points are better than no points" maxim, always. I guess I'm a relativist on these things, and really judge it by the situation. In some scenarios, it's simply worth it to risk 3 for the gain of 4. And sometimes, when you have a guy named Ben Roethlisberger + five explosive playmakers, you realize that if your D is a crap shoot, you may as well do everything possible to ensure your O gets the last 2 minutes; even if that means allowing your opponent to take a striking-distance lead.
So.
I completely agree with Tomlin placing his faith in #7, but I think his mistake was allowing for the possibility that Ike may have recovered the ball legally. *Maybe* it was all an act, and Ike was intentionally muffing the legal recovery. But had I been big Mike, I would have been tempted to have Reed shank the ball out of bounds, allowing the Packers a super short field, and myself the last possession with zero mystery involved in my intentions.
“My 8-year-old asked me what I was thinking. Other than that, I make no apologies,” Tomlin said. “In the latter part of the fourth quarter, I felt that both offenses were capable of moving the football. Making that decision to kick the onside kick started first and foremost with the belief we could get the football legally. We weren’t able to do that. Even if we weren’t able to do that with four minutes left, if we were not able to stop them, I felt we’d have significant time to navigate down the field.”He was entirely right, except that I dare speculate that while our offense could "move the football" and "navigate down the field," there's the very real possibility that had we legally recovered the kick, we wouldn't have been able to convert a TD in the redzone-- simply because we didn't have to. There's the very real possibility that we would have left 4 points and time on the scoreboard, which, as we've found out earlier this year, isn't enough.
So.
Logically.
This is a case of let-em-score-too-early.
My dad consistently pounds the idea into my head that you never, ever intentionally let the other team score. He also believes in the "some points are better than no points" maxim, always. I guess I'm a relativist on these things, and really judge it by the situation. In some scenarios, it's simply worth it to risk 3 for the gain of 4. And sometimes, when you have a guy named Ben Roethlisberger + five explosive playmakers, you realize that if your D is a crap shoot, you may as well do everything possible to ensure your O gets the last 2 minutes; even if that means allowing your opponent to take a striking-distance lead.
So.
I completely agree with Tomlin placing his faith in #7, but I think his mistake was allowing for the possibility that Ike may have recovered the ball legally. *Maybe* it was all an act, and Ike was intentionally muffing the legal recovery. But had I been big Mike, I would have been tempted to have Reed shank the ball out of bounds, allowing the Packers a super short field, and myself the last possession with zero mystery involved in my intentions.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Things I'm Not "Right" About
I admit it, I thought the Saints could do it.
I was helping my dad* put away his groceries this morning, and we were talking about the Saints/Colts, and he said he didn't think both teams would do it, and that the Saints would be his pick to falter first. However, he thought they'd plow Dallas, and while I felt like the 'Boys might be the spoiler, I agreed in so much that it'd be great to watch them choke down yet another December.
*This is one of those rare cases where My Old Man and I are both wrong. I don't know if you've found this to be true with you and Your Old Man, re: Hockey/Canada, but M.O.M. and I agree about 80% of the time, and are almost always correct in our assessments when we do; obviously, when we disagree one of us is right and the other wrong, and that happens at a near even split of cagey old-timer wisdom, and upstart, 'reads blogs' streets-smart. Anyway, he was right that the Saints wouldn't make it, and I wasn't wrong to not commit myself to saying it wouldn't be the Cowboys to beat 'em.
RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING!
I was helping my dad* put away his groceries this morning, and we were talking about the Saints/Colts, and he said he didn't think both teams would do it, and that the Saints would be his pick to falter first. However, he thought they'd plow Dallas, and while I felt like the 'Boys might be the spoiler, I agreed in so much that it'd be great to watch them choke down yet another December.
*This is one of those rare cases where My Old Man and I are both wrong. I don't know if you've found this to be true with you and Your Old Man, re: Hockey/Canada, but M.O.M. and I agree about 80% of the time, and are almost always correct in our assessments when we do; obviously, when we disagree one of us is right and the other wrong, and that happens at a near even split of cagey old-timer wisdom, and upstart, 'reads blogs' streets-smart. Anyway, he was right that the Saints wouldn't make it, and I wasn't wrong to not commit myself to saying it wouldn't be the Cowboys to beat 'em.
RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING!
Thursday, December 17, 2009
How Moderate Cynicism Works
Chris Henry's death will not help the Bengals.
I'm not saying that to be a prick or to be funny, I'm just saying it as someone who saw a lot of articles written about how the intangibles of Nick Adenhart's death would aid the Angels playoff run; it didn't.
It's great that Chris Henry was turning his life around and really trying to do everything possible to not get arrested anymore; it's a shame he was a Bengal; it's far, far more of a shame that he died at such a young age in such a senseless way. I think that's pretty much all there is to say about it, but brace yourself-- with the team in question being in the playoff hunt, there'll be a hell of a lot more to say about it by guys who get paid to do what I do for free..
I'm not saying that to be a prick or to be funny, I'm just saying it as someone who saw a lot of articles written about how the intangibles of Nick Adenhart's death would aid the Angels playoff run; it didn't.
It's great that Chris Henry was turning his life around and really trying to do everything possible to not get arrested anymore; it's a shame he was a Bengal; it's far, far more of a shame that he died at such a young age in such a senseless way. I think that's pretty much all there is to say about it, but brace yourself-- with the team in question being in the playoff hunt, there'll be a hell of a lot more to say about it by guys who get paid to do what I do for free..
Sunday, December 13, 2009
The Colts' defense
Take note: Indy may have the best defense in the league this year. And considering that they also have one of the most potent offenses in the AFC, behind only New England (a team that runs up the score) and the Chargers (a team that simply doesn't have a running game or a defense), we could be looking at the best Colts' team since their 14-2 run in 2005 (of course, it was the somewhat defense deficient Colts' team that took home the Lombardi trophy a year later, so just remember: regular season rankings don't count for shit in January).
I've talked about the Indianapolis defensive philosophy before, but I'll talk about it again here as a refresher.
They run a 4-3, but a very unique one. The guiding principle is "speed, not size," and it was the brainchild of Chuck Noll and his defensive coordinator, Tony Dungy.
Basically, instead of running a traditional 4-3, where you have 4 fatties up front, 3 linebackers in the middle, and 4 defensive backs in the secondary, the Colts' system treats the middle linebacker like a third safety and the DEs as LBs. So, they're running a 2-4 nickel or a 4-3 base at any given time, and it's up to their opponent to figure out which it is.
Robert Mathis and Dwight Freeney are their two DEs. Mathis is 6'2", 235 lbs; an absolute dwarf for his position, but lightning fast. Freeney is 6'1", 268 lbs; pure muscle and certainly a power rusher, but he also happens to be lightning fast. The two of them have recorded more sacks than any pair of teammates in the past 4 years. They're very, very effective at getting to the quarterback from the edge.
And here's the thing about the Colts' defense: it very much relies on having the lead. If it was trailing by a bunch, it would have to strain an unreasonable amount to make a stop (and it has done that, twice this year). When Indy has the lead, though, and the opposing QB sees Peyton Manning leaving him in the dust, he gets one-dimensional. He starts thinking pass every time, and when that happens Mathis and Freeney spread outside those offensive tackles, and speed rush off the edges.
Meanwhile, the middle linebacker no longer has to devote himself to covering the run. Instead, he sneaks backwards and covers the middle third of the deep zone, while the two safeties split and cover the corner thirds. This allows for the OLBs and CBs to play tighter on their men, knowing that the deep part of the field is covered three times over, instead of just twice.
Anyway. It's easy to understand why they would be underrated, what with playing on the same team as Peyton Manning, but the Colts' defensive unit is really going above and beyond everyone else this year, and Indy's playoff run will live or die with the D's performance.
I've talked about the Indianapolis defensive philosophy before, but I'll talk about it again here as a refresher.
They run a 4-3, but a very unique one. The guiding principle is "speed, not size," and it was the brainchild of Chuck Noll and his defensive coordinator, Tony Dungy.
Basically, instead of running a traditional 4-3, where you have 4 fatties up front, 3 linebackers in the middle, and 4 defensive backs in the secondary, the Colts' system treats the middle linebacker like a third safety and the DEs as LBs. So, they're running a 2-4 nickel or a 4-3 base at any given time, and it's up to their opponent to figure out which it is.
Robert Mathis and Dwight Freeney are their two DEs. Mathis is 6'2", 235 lbs; an absolute dwarf for his position, but lightning fast. Freeney is 6'1", 268 lbs; pure muscle and certainly a power rusher, but he also happens to be lightning fast. The two of them have recorded more sacks than any pair of teammates in the past 4 years. They're very, very effective at getting to the quarterback from the edge.
And here's the thing about the Colts' defense: it very much relies on having the lead. If it was trailing by a bunch, it would have to strain an unreasonable amount to make a stop (and it has done that, twice this year). When Indy has the lead, though, and the opposing QB sees Peyton Manning leaving him in the dust, he gets one-dimensional. He starts thinking pass every time, and when that happens Mathis and Freeney spread outside those offensive tackles, and speed rush off the edges.
Meanwhile, the middle linebacker no longer has to devote himself to covering the run. Instead, he sneaks backwards and covers the middle third of the deep zone, while the two safeties split and cover the corner thirds. This allows for the OLBs and CBs to play tighter on their men, knowing that the deep part of the field is covered three times over, instead of just twice.
Anyway. It's easy to understand why they would be underrated, what with playing on the same team as Peyton Manning, but the Colts' defensive unit is really going above and beyond everyone else this year, and Indy's playoff run will live or die with the D's performance.
There is no immitation for a good defensive back
Pittsburgh - Polamalu = shit.
Philadelphia - Dawkins = 370 passing yards to the Giants tonight.
Denver + Dawkins = 2nd best pass defense in NFL in 2009 (26th in 2008)
Minnesota - Sharper = stinks against the pass
New Orleans + Sharper = undefeated.
=============
I kind of went off on a Yahoo! Sports article about how great safeties are in our current age, but like, it is true: there have been some sea-changes in the NFL's balance of power this year, and the places to look for answers tend to be secondaries.
New England is still the Tom Brady / Randy Moss / Wes Welker show, but it seems like every week now, they're having to squeak by, not knowing if their safeties have shown up to play.
And as sighted above, both the Broncos and Saints were offensive powerhouses last year with no defense; and now? Both have upgraded their secondaries, and because of it are able to strangle the life out of opponents.
This entry was prompted mostly by tonight's SNF. Eagles at Giants. Both teams gained just a sickening number of yards. Both teams destroyed nonsense coverage, and exposed the other team's secondary as poor at best. The Eagles are playing an ex-Brown in the place of Brian Dawkins (their franchise's Troy Polamalu), while the Giants had to move a cornerback, Aaron Ross to the safety position for tonight's game. This led to just a total shitshow of breakaway points.
So. In conclusion. Defensive backs are kind of important.
Philadelphia - Dawkins = 370 passing yards to the Giants tonight.
Denver + Dawkins = 2nd best pass defense in NFL in 2009 (26th in 2008)
Minnesota - Sharper = stinks against the pass
New Orleans + Sharper = undefeated.
=============
I kind of went off on a Yahoo! Sports article about how great safeties are in our current age, but like, it is true: there have been some sea-changes in the NFL's balance of power this year, and the places to look for answers tend to be secondaries.
New England is still the Tom Brady / Randy Moss / Wes Welker show, but it seems like every week now, they're having to squeak by, not knowing if their safeties have shown up to play.
And as sighted above, both the Broncos and Saints were offensive powerhouses last year with no defense; and now? Both have upgraded their secondaries, and because of it are able to strangle the life out of opponents.
This entry was prompted mostly by tonight's SNF. Eagles at Giants. Both teams gained just a sickening number of yards. Both teams destroyed nonsense coverage, and exposed the other team's secondary as poor at best. The Eagles are playing an ex-Brown in the place of Brian Dawkins (their franchise's Troy Polamalu), while the Giants had to move a cornerback, Aaron Ross to the safety position for tonight's game. This led to just a total shitshow of breakaway points.
So. In conclusion. Defensive backs are kind of important.
Friday, December 11, 2009
I'd like to dub them "America's Family"
Everyone in James Harrison's family is psychotic.
Police say it’s not clear why the party turned violent
Yeah, it's a hard one to figure.
Police say it’s not clear why the party turned violent
Yeah, it's a hard one to figure.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
There have been worse games we've lost...
But not many.
The game against Oakland in 2006 was worse than this. Then there was one against the Ravens later that year that got really ugly. Our losses to KC and Oakland this year are up there, but probably not as bad as tonight's.
Losing to the Pats in 2004 sucked, just because it looked like they had robbed the Bus of a championship.
The game we played against the Eagles last year, that was a bullshit game.
Those are the ugly ones that come to my mind since becoming a Steelers' fan. Tonight is going to be up there.
It's really very simple how it happened: we lost the battle at the line of scrimmage. Our front seven failed to stop the run, and our offensive game plan failed to dial up the run.
I get it, Mendenhall wasn't lighting the world on fire with his 3.3 y/c. BUT HE ONLY GOT 16 TOUCHES!!!!!! WHAT DON'T YOU GET, ARIANS!?!?!?!?!? KEEP GIVING HIM THE BALL!!!!!
Our first series of the night:
1st-10, PIT15 12:22 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 5 yard gain
2nd-5, PIT20 11:42 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 4 yard gain
3rd-1, PIT24 10:58 B. Roethlisberger sacked by C. Williams
4th-10, PIT15 10:27 D. Sepulveda punt.
!!!!!
Second series of the night:
1st-10, PIT6 7:08 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 5 yard gain
2nd-5, PIT11 6:29 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
3rd-3, PIT13 5:45 B. Roethlisberger sacked by H. Poteat
4th-13, PIT3 5:01 D. Sepulveda punt.
Starting to see a pattern here????
I don't know if I've talked about this before, but here's how a defensive line works: on first and second down, a 3-4 defense will have their NT on the field, and the DEs will be angling themselves at the interior of the offensive line. This is to prevent running lanes from forming. On 3rd down, or a passing down, the NT comes off the field, and the DEs angle themselves outside the offensive tackles, because they know the QB will be dropping back to pass and they'd like to try getting by his periphery with their speed, instead of bullrushing in his line of sight. Anyway, when you take the running threat off the field on 3rd down, you're essentially giving the defense a free pass to pull the NT and angle everyone to blitz from the edge. When the running threat is on the field for third down, it means the defense can't sell out and blitz the QB. Thus the QB gets sacked less when a RB gets into a defensive's head.
The proof is in the pudding: Ben got sacked EIGHT times, Quinn got sacked once. This is because our D-line was busy catching their breath, while the Browns' defense was seeing every one of our plays telegraphed.
A couple more:
1st-10, PIT28 7:01 B. Roethlisberger incomplete pass to the left
2nd-10, PIT28 6:53 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
3rd-7, PIT31 6:04 B. Roethlisberger sacked by D. Bowens
4th-18, PIT20 5:30 D. Sepulveda punt. J. Cribbs returned punt for 6 yards
1st-10, PIT7 11:52 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, PIT10 11:15 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
3rd-5, PIT12 10:30 B. Roethlisberger incomplete pass to the right
4th-5, PIT12 10:16 D. Sepulveda punt, no return
POUND. THE. FOOTBALL. !!!!!
I don't care if you go 3-and-out on three straight run plays. Doing that at least forces the other team to remain in the trenches and wonder how far you're willing to go with the physical challenge. Tonight Cleveland stayed in the trenches on offense, and just kept pounding the ball. They kept Casey Hampton on the field for more downs than he's used to, and it worked.
I'd like to congratulate the Browns and have it not be conditional, but the truth is, we did everything possible to lose, and they only did enough to barely win. Knowing this city, I know they'll take it. But don't be fooled: we didn't get beat by some sleeping giant defense (I have to say this because the stats are an eye-popping 8 sacks, 6 points, 216 yards), we simply stunk. We simply played out the dumbest gameplan possible, and there's no reason to think any team could have lost to us tonight.
Final thought: it was all too much fun sitting out in the subzero cold for this; win or lose, I love these guys.
The game against Oakland in 2006 was worse than this. Then there was one against the Ravens later that year that got really ugly. Our losses to KC and Oakland this year are up there, but probably not as bad as tonight's.
Losing to the Pats in 2004 sucked, just because it looked like they had robbed the Bus of a championship.
The game we played against the Eagles last year, that was a bullshit game.
Those are the ugly ones that come to my mind since becoming a Steelers' fan. Tonight is going to be up there.
It's really very simple how it happened: we lost the battle at the line of scrimmage. Our front seven failed to stop the run, and our offensive game plan failed to dial up the run.
I get it, Mendenhall wasn't lighting the world on fire with his 3.3 y/c. BUT HE ONLY GOT 16 TOUCHES!!!!!! WHAT DON'T YOU GET, ARIANS!?!?!?!?!? KEEP GIVING HIM THE BALL!!!!!
Our first series of the night:
1st-10, PIT15 12:22 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 5 yard gain
2nd-5, PIT20 11:42 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 4 yard gain
3rd-1, PIT24 10:58 B. Roethlisberger sacked by C. Williams
4th-10, PIT15 10:27 D. Sepulveda punt.
!!!!!
Second series of the night:
1st-10, PIT6 7:08 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 5 yard gain
2nd-5, PIT11 6:29 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
3rd-3, PIT13 5:45 B. Roethlisberger sacked by H. Poteat
4th-13, PIT3 5:01 D. Sepulveda punt.
Starting to see a pattern here????
I don't know if I've talked about this before, but here's how a defensive line works: on first and second down, a 3-4 defense will have their NT on the field, and the DEs will be angling themselves at the interior of the offensive line. This is to prevent running lanes from forming. On 3rd down, or a passing down, the NT comes off the field, and the DEs angle themselves outside the offensive tackles, because they know the QB will be dropping back to pass and they'd like to try getting by his periphery with their speed, instead of bullrushing in his line of sight. Anyway, when you take the running threat off the field on 3rd down, you're essentially giving the defense a free pass to pull the NT and angle everyone to blitz from the edge. When the running threat is on the field for third down, it means the defense can't sell out and blitz the QB. Thus the QB gets sacked less when a RB gets into a defensive's head.
The proof is in the pudding: Ben got sacked EIGHT times, Quinn got sacked once. This is because our D-line was busy catching their breath, while the Browns' defense was seeing every one of our plays telegraphed.
A couple more:
1st-10, PIT28 7:01 B. Roethlisberger incomplete pass to the left
2nd-10, PIT28 6:53 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
3rd-7, PIT31 6:04 B. Roethlisberger sacked by D. Bowens
4th-18, PIT20 5:30 D. Sepulveda punt. J. Cribbs returned punt for 6 yards
1st-10, PIT7 11:52 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, PIT10 11:15 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
3rd-5, PIT12 10:30 B. Roethlisberger incomplete pass to the right
4th-5, PIT12 10:16 D. Sepulveda punt, no return
POUND. THE. FOOTBALL. !!!!!
I don't care if you go 3-and-out on three straight run plays. Doing that at least forces the other team to remain in the trenches and wonder how far you're willing to go with the physical challenge. Tonight Cleveland stayed in the trenches on offense, and just kept pounding the ball. They kept Casey Hampton on the field for more downs than he's used to, and it worked.
I'd like to congratulate the Browns and have it not be conditional, but the truth is, we did everything possible to lose, and they only did enough to barely win. Knowing this city, I know they'll take it. But don't be fooled: we didn't get beat by some sleeping giant defense (I have to say this because the stats are an eye-popping 8 sacks, 6 points, 216 yards), we simply stunk. We simply played out the dumbest gameplan possible, and there's no reason to think any team could have lost to us tonight.
Final thought: it was all too much fun sitting out in the subzero cold for this; win or lose, I love these guys.
Tonight
I am going to freeze my face off tonight. After this I will no longer be able to use my face. It will be damaged beyond fixing.
This I don't mind.
But if I don't get to see 35+ running plays out of our offense, swear to fucking Jesus, I am going down onto the field and body slamming Bruce Arians.
The Browns were the 29th worst team against the run before they lost Shaun Rogers for the season. Now they're unreasonably bad. Ward is out. There are going to be ridiculous gusts of wind throughout. There is NO reason not to run run run. It's the motherfucking Browns!!! RUN ON THEM!
This I don't mind.
But if I don't get to see 35+ running plays out of our offense, swear to fucking Jesus, I am going down onto the field and body slamming Bruce Arians.
The Browns were the 29th worst team against the run before they lost Shaun Rogers for the season. Now they're unreasonably bad. Ward is out. There are going to be ridiculous gusts of wind throughout. There is NO reason not to run run run. It's the motherfucking Browns!!! RUN ON THEM!
Monday, December 7, 2009
"Tomlin fires team" -A.P.
Check this out.
Tomlin’s response to the Super Bowl champions’ latest improbable loss and the franchise’s longest losing streak since a five-game slide in 2003? He’s taking out an eraser and wiping away names.
You hear that, James Harrison? You're about to get erased!
Rookie cornerback Joe Burnett is expected to start for the oft-beaten William Gay, who sustained a concussion late in the Steelers’ can-you-believe-it 27-24 loss to the Raiders on Sunday. Gay might not play in Cleveland.
Another rookie cornerback, Keenan Lewis, plus defensive end Ziggy Hood and wide receiver Mike Wallace, also might earn elevated status for the Browns (1-11). Wallace is expected to start if Hines Ward (hamstring) can’t go, which seems likely given the short week.
These are not significant changes. Burnett or Lewis are behind Taylor and Gay. Likewise for Wallace in regards to Ward and Holmes. If one of our starters goes out, we bring in fresh blood. That's called a depth chart. And asking Nick Eason and Travis Kirschke--career journeymen backups-- to make way for our first round pick, that isn't exactly a shakeup.
“Nothing stays the same in this game,” Tomlin said. “Players are ascending, players are descending. People catch up with schemes, schemes evolve. Playing and coaching, this thing is ever-changing.”
That's entirely fine. I trust Tomlin will make the necessary adjustments. He's not erasing the team.
I bring this to your attention as something of a silver lining: the Steelers are playing terribly pathetic ball, but at least we don't have the problem of determining whether our first round draft pick QB is better than Kerry Collins, Brad Gradkowski, Derek Anderson or Daunte Culpepper. We don't have to guess as to whether we could be doing better than Ward, Holmes, Mendenhall, Miller, Harrison, Farrior, Woodley, Keisel, Hampton, Sepulveda, Wallace, etc.
There are few teams that have as few question marks as we do.
Obviously, there have been some red flags in the secondary as of late. We need to experiment with personnel, but that's not the same thing as having to decide between Hank Poteat or a wide receiver to play nickelback (that's what the Browns go through every game).
I think we may see more Keyaron Fox. Farrior is so clutch in bringing that D together... or at least that's the rap on him. The D hasn't been coming together, and having our oldest player on the field for 4 quarters doesn't serve any advantage then. I'm not saying that he'll be the one cut down in playing time, but I wouldn't be surprised if we went to a MLB rotation like we did last year, with Timmons and Foote platooning, and thus moving Potsie around to different positions.
I wonder if Townsend will play any safety. Wouldn't be a huge surprise.
I spent about 2 hours thinking about this on the drive home the other day: I haven't given up on Limas Sweed. He was too promising in college and in the preseason. While we were winning and had 4 quality receivers in front of him, there was no reason to play him. But now that shit is mayhem, I think he may get one last trial by fire before offseason roster moves (we'd still have rights to him for another two years at very cheap, should we hold onto his contract).
Tomlin’s response to the Super Bowl champions’ latest improbable loss and the franchise’s longest losing streak since a five-game slide in 2003? He’s taking out an eraser and wiping away names.
You hear that, James Harrison? You're about to get erased!
Rookie cornerback Joe Burnett is expected to start for the oft-beaten William Gay, who sustained a concussion late in the Steelers’ can-you-believe-it 27-24 loss to the Raiders on Sunday. Gay might not play in Cleveland.
Another rookie cornerback, Keenan Lewis, plus defensive end Ziggy Hood and wide receiver Mike Wallace, also might earn elevated status for the Browns (1-11). Wallace is expected to start if Hines Ward (hamstring) can’t go, which seems likely given the short week.
These are not significant changes. Burnett or Lewis are behind Taylor and Gay. Likewise for Wallace in regards to Ward and Holmes. If one of our starters goes out, we bring in fresh blood. That's called a depth chart. And asking Nick Eason and Travis Kirschke--career journeymen backups-- to make way for our first round pick, that isn't exactly a shakeup.
“Nothing stays the same in this game,” Tomlin said. “Players are ascending, players are descending. People catch up with schemes, schemes evolve. Playing and coaching, this thing is ever-changing.”
That's entirely fine. I trust Tomlin will make the necessary adjustments. He's not erasing the team.
I bring this to your attention as something of a silver lining: the Steelers are playing terribly pathetic ball, but at least we don't have the problem of determining whether our first round draft pick QB is better than Kerry Collins, Brad Gradkowski, Derek Anderson or Daunte Culpepper. We don't have to guess as to whether we could be doing better than Ward, Holmes, Mendenhall, Miller, Harrison, Farrior, Woodley, Keisel, Hampton, Sepulveda, Wallace, etc.
There are few teams that have as few question marks as we do.
Obviously, there have been some red flags in the secondary as of late. We need to experiment with personnel, but that's not the same thing as having to decide between Hank Poteat or a wide receiver to play nickelback (that's what the Browns go through every game).
I think we may see more Keyaron Fox. Farrior is so clutch in bringing that D together... or at least that's the rap on him. The D hasn't been coming together, and having our oldest player on the field for 4 quarters doesn't serve any advantage then. I'm not saying that he'll be the one cut down in playing time, but I wouldn't be surprised if we went to a MLB rotation like we did last year, with Timmons and Foote platooning, and thus moving Potsie around to different positions.
I wonder if Townsend will play any safety. Wouldn't be a huge surprise.
I spent about 2 hours thinking about this on the drive home the other day: I haven't given up on Limas Sweed. He was too promising in college and in the preseason. While we were winning and had 4 quality receivers in front of him, there was no reason to play him. But now that shit is mayhem, I think he may get one last trial by fire before offseason roster moves (we'd still have rights to him for another two years at very cheap, should we hold onto his contract).
Playoff predictions
I hate doing predictions, but here's my sense of things for the divisional winners:
New England
Cincinnati
Indianapolis*
San Diego
Philadelphia
Minnesota
New Orleans*
Arizona
Nothing too crazy here; in fact, two of those teams* have already clinched playoff berths.
For the NFC wild cards, I see Green Bay and probably New York locking things up. The Cowboys are a better team than the Giants, but their two losses to them make it entirely possible for things to get crazy. We'll learn a lot after tonight's game, but if Green Bay loses to Baltimore, it's possible that their remaining schedule makes them the odd man out, and both the Giants and 'boys make it.
Baltimore is probably my dark horse pick to blow through the end of their season and go deep into the playoffs. I don't really have the analysis to back that prediction, but I feel like I may as well call a shot. They're absolutely the best team to not be in the current playoff cut, and I think they've got the talent to go on a rampage of upsets in a small sample size.
Jacksonville and Denver have the inside tracks to the AFC wild card seeds. Denver will probably be able to hang on, Jacksonville probably not. The Broncos are a decent team with a 2-2 schedule coming. The Jaguars are over-performing and have to play the Dolphins, Pats and Colts before getting to the Browns.
Jets, Dolphins, Ravens and Steelers are where the final seed is coming from. A lot of similar opponents and crossing schedules, so we should be able to eliminate at least two of those teams from the discussion very soon. I'm not throwing in the Terrible Towel when I say this, but my guess is the Ravens will emerge from the fray, and Denver will come perilously close to imploding when it counts.
New England
Cincinnati
Indianapolis*
San Diego
Philadelphia
Minnesota
New Orleans*
Arizona
Nothing too crazy here; in fact, two of those teams* have already clinched playoff berths.
For the NFC wild cards, I see Green Bay and probably New York locking things up. The Cowboys are a better team than the Giants, but their two losses to them make it entirely possible for things to get crazy. We'll learn a lot after tonight's game, but if Green Bay loses to Baltimore, it's possible that their remaining schedule makes them the odd man out, and both the Giants and 'boys make it.
Baltimore is probably my dark horse pick to blow through the end of their season and go deep into the playoffs. I don't really have the analysis to back that prediction, but I feel like I may as well call a shot. They're absolutely the best team to not be in the current playoff cut, and I think they've got the talent to go on a rampage of upsets in a small sample size.
Jacksonville and Denver have the inside tracks to the AFC wild card seeds. Denver will probably be able to hang on, Jacksonville probably not. The Broncos are a decent team with a 2-2 schedule coming. The Jaguars are over-performing and have to play the Dolphins, Pats and Colts before getting to the Browns.
Jets, Dolphins, Ravens and Steelers are where the final seed is coming from. A lot of similar opponents and crossing schedules, so we should be able to eliminate at least two of those teams from the discussion very soon. I'm not throwing in the Terrible Towel when I say this, but my guess is the Ravens will emerge from the fray, and Denver will come perilously close to imploding when it counts.
What happened yesterday: the defense
Real quickly, here's the breakdown:
Our defense allowed 21 points to the Oakland Raiders in one quarter of play.
Those points came on three drives of 57 yards, 84 yards and 88 yards. These were not short fields the defense was inheriting.
From the first quarter on, the D-line was getting beat. Casey and Keisel were penetrating the line, but then getting knocked off their positions. When a D-line gets moved laterally like they were, it's very hard for linebackers to stay in their run gaps. When that happens, two adjustments need to be made: the LBs have to step back from their passrushing positions on the edge, and the safeties have to come in to assist in the run stopping.
At one point during the game, the Raiders busted through our line for several rushing yards and a first down; you turned to me and asked if that should concern you as much as it did; I said: yes. It was absolutely the case of our front seven getting knocked out of their run gaps. Staying in our run gaps is the alpha and the omega of our defensive gameplan. It is how we set everything up to beat the Vikings and the Broncos. It didn't happen all day yesterday.
The Raiders play calling included a lot of tosses and pitches on run plays. These are the kind of run plays that Troy explodes in the backfield, hitting the ball carrier and allowing the LBs to flow to him. We didn't have Troy, and we didn't win at the line, so the LBs were isolated on these assignments. The truth about our linebackers: outside of Timmons, they're not terribly fast. Harrison has good quickness on the pass rush, but you saw his 100 yard dash. Woodley and Farrior rely entirely on positioning to get to the play. When these guys are isolated and have to initiate the play, they're not at their best.
Anyway, Gradkowski really didn't do anything on pass plays except chuck the ball as far as he could. Considering that he was terribly inaccurate for 3 quarters of play, and that his WRs were dropping the balls that came to them, it was fair that we would bring the safeties into the box to stop the run.
By the 4th quarter, we normally pull linemen and replace them with DBs, but the Raiders continued to sample their entire playbook, running the ball well on the first drive of the quarter. So we continued to keep the nose tackle on the field. This meant cover 0 and cover 1. That's the coverage you saw when Ike got burnt.
I'm watching MNF and they just showed Ray Lewis' pre-game pep talk to his defense. He just had them break their huddle on "1,2,3 PHYSICAL!" I hate him so much, but he's got exactly the right idea.
Anyway, I don't blame LeBeau. He was making the adjustments he needed to without completely compromising himself. The culprit was execution by the players.
Let me just say, I hate it when people say "Lack of execution is why we lost! Had we only executed well we would have been better!" Yeah, no shit. Tautology 101. But anyway, I think it's fair to talk execution if we're specific, and the specific areas of performance that we didn't execute were as follow:
-controlling the line of scrimmage
-stopping the run with the front 7
-swatting or intercepting balls when we had the coverage
Obviously it was a huge blunder on Ike's part when he allowed a 342 yard touchdown pass, but no more so than when we had double or triple coverage on a guy and let him catch the ball. No more than when Joe Burnett dropped a ball that hit him in the numbers. No more so when William Gay fell down every time the ball was in his zone. Ike was bad, but he was in single coverage because our front seven weren't getting the job done. The other guys don't have any excuse.
As for Ryan Mundy-- he's not very good. He's okay, if you hide him in the midst of several very good players, or on a practice squad. He got burnt twice, once in the endzone and once by a flag. The flag is going to get thrown in Gary Bettman's NFL whether we like it or not. It really was the result of the previous play, in which Mundy slammed into his own teammate with his helmet. When the officials saw him leading with his helmet two plays in a row, it was important to them that this guy get his wings clipped because he was endangering 21 other guys. As for his poor coverage in the endzone, it was attributed to a miscommunication. That's bullshit, and a recipe for missing the playoffs.
If we're going to win in Cleveland, we're going to have to shut off the run in the first half and with the front 3. If the Browns are keeping Casey Hampton on the field in the 4th, it'll be a much closer game than we want to play.
Our defense allowed 21 points to the Oakland Raiders in one quarter of play.
Those points came on three drives of 57 yards, 84 yards and 88 yards. These were not short fields the defense was inheriting.
From the first quarter on, the D-line was getting beat. Casey and Keisel were penetrating the line, but then getting knocked off their positions. When a D-line gets moved laterally like they were, it's very hard for linebackers to stay in their run gaps. When that happens, two adjustments need to be made: the LBs have to step back from their passrushing positions on the edge, and the safeties have to come in to assist in the run stopping.
At one point during the game, the Raiders busted through our line for several rushing yards and a first down; you turned to me and asked if that should concern you as much as it did; I said: yes. It was absolutely the case of our front seven getting knocked out of their run gaps. Staying in our run gaps is the alpha and the omega of our defensive gameplan. It is how we set everything up to beat the Vikings and the Broncos. It didn't happen all day yesterday.
The Raiders play calling included a lot of tosses and pitches on run plays. These are the kind of run plays that Troy explodes in the backfield, hitting the ball carrier and allowing the LBs to flow to him. We didn't have Troy, and we didn't win at the line, so the LBs were isolated on these assignments. The truth about our linebackers: outside of Timmons, they're not terribly fast. Harrison has good quickness on the pass rush, but you saw his 100 yard dash. Woodley and Farrior rely entirely on positioning to get to the play. When these guys are isolated and have to initiate the play, they're not at their best.
Anyway, Gradkowski really didn't do anything on pass plays except chuck the ball as far as he could. Considering that he was terribly inaccurate for 3 quarters of play, and that his WRs were dropping the balls that came to them, it was fair that we would bring the safeties into the box to stop the run.
By the 4th quarter, we normally pull linemen and replace them with DBs, but the Raiders continued to sample their entire playbook, running the ball well on the first drive of the quarter. So we continued to keep the nose tackle on the field. This meant cover 0 and cover 1. That's the coverage you saw when Ike got burnt.
I'm watching MNF and they just showed Ray Lewis' pre-game pep talk to his defense. He just had them break their huddle on "1,2,3 PHYSICAL!" I hate him so much, but he's got exactly the right idea.
Anyway, I don't blame LeBeau. He was making the adjustments he needed to without completely compromising himself. The culprit was execution by the players.
Let me just say, I hate it when people say "Lack of execution is why we lost! Had we only executed well we would have been better!" Yeah, no shit. Tautology 101. But anyway, I think it's fair to talk execution if we're specific, and the specific areas of performance that we didn't execute were as follow:
-controlling the line of scrimmage
-stopping the run with the front 7
-swatting or intercepting balls when we had the coverage
Obviously it was a huge blunder on Ike's part when he allowed a 342 yard touchdown pass, but no more so than when we had double or triple coverage on a guy and let him catch the ball. No more than when Joe Burnett dropped a ball that hit him in the numbers. No more so when William Gay fell down every time the ball was in his zone. Ike was bad, but he was in single coverage because our front seven weren't getting the job done. The other guys don't have any excuse.
As for Ryan Mundy-- he's not very good. He's okay, if you hide him in the midst of several very good players, or on a practice squad. He got burnt twice, once in the endzone and once by a flag. The flag is going to get thrown in Gary Bettman's NFL whether we like it or not. It really was the result of the previous play, in which Mundy slammed into his own teammate with his helmet. When the officials saw him leading with his helmet two plays in a row, it was important to them that this guy get his wings clipped because he was endangering 21 other guys. As for his poor coverage in the endzone, it was attributed to a miscommunication. That's bullshit, and a recipe for missing the playoffs.
If we're going to win in Cleveland, we're going to have to shut off the run in the first half and with the front 3. If the Browns are keeping Casey Hampton on the field in the 4th, it'll be a much closer game than we want to play.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
What happened today
For the 5th time this season, we lost by a field goal after blowing a 4th quarter lead. We have only played 12 games. If we want to be generous and include the second Cinci loss in this category (in that one, we blew a THIRD quarter lead, and lost by TWO field goals) then we're 50/50: win, or bullshit loss that looked like a win.
It's easy to say those losses "should have been" wins, but I'm not sure that's true. The truth is, when you play it close, there is only "could have been"-- for both teams. Both teams "could have" lost, both teams "could have" won. Last year we went 5-1 in games where the margin of victory was 5 points or less. This year we're 1-7. It could have been that this didn't happen and that this did. That's the funny thing about tight games in any sport: anything could happen, and over a large enough sample size, everything does happen in about even proportions.
I'm not going to say this is pure luck, and that somehow we're just recessing to the mean. There's also skill involved in a huge way. Last year's D wasn't simply lucky: it was lucky and hella talented on just an epic magnitude. This year's D is unlucky and fielding less talent.
Finally, I'd say there's a sum-of-the-parts effect at work, where the talent and luck, or lack thereof, align and amplify a team's fate. We saw this with the Titans when they were down on their luck: mostly the same roster as the one that went 13-3. Everything about last year's team just clicked and complimented and built on itself, just as everything about this year's team contributed to the total implosion.
Ugh... enough theorizing. Let's just leave it at this: our roster hasn't been completely replaced by incompetent impostors; these are the same guys, and they are still capable of regaining their previous form (even if it may be too late to matter).
Okay, so what went wrong today:
1. Bad offensive play calling
2. Bad defensive execution
Those were the killers.
Special teams didn't cause me stress. I've got plenty to say about them, but not right off the bat. First we need to talk about Bruce Arians and the 11 guys on defense. (I'm still very angry, so everything that follows may not be entirely cohesive.)
BRUCE ARIANS IS A DUMB MOTHERFUCKING DIPSHIT PUS BRAIN BULLSHIT BUTTMUNCH FART HEAD COCKSUCKER IDIOT.
I remember being irritated with him when he first took over in 2007. I remember being irritated with him at the end of last year, and being very nervous going into the playoffs that he'd fuck things up. Turns out he did very well for himself in that run. He also behaved fairly well for the first half of this season, but ...today. Today was a new land speed record for stupid, as measured in miles per hour.
Let's review: Ben had been out because of a head injury. The Raiders have the worst run defense in the league. Mendenhall has been on a tear, where he's been giving you a decent (bordering on STELLAR) 5.0 y/c this season. He just came off a game in which he stuck it to the Baltimore run defense, and completely carried an inexperienced, backup QB on his shoulders.
Now, back to Arians: I don't mind if he wants Ben to get in his throws; I wouldn't even mind if he had Ben set up the run with the pass. What bothers me is how many times Ben was asked to go 5-wide, empty set. WHAT THE FUCK????? Those huge passes to Tone and Ward... those came out of sets where Ben had a check down coming out of the backfield. I mean seriously... WHAT THE FUCK????? We don't even have 5 guys worth lining up as receivers!!! After Ward, Holmes, Wallace, and Miller, you have Spaeth, Sweed, and Mendenhall/Moore. Spaeth is a total non-factor when he's the 5th target behind those other 4 guys. Sweed can't catch. Mendenhall/Moore are fine receiving backs, but there's absolutely no advantage to putting them on the line of scrimmage and telegraphing the pass!
Empty backfield was bullshit #1. Bullshit #2 was the lack of running when running was the correct thing to do. Running was the correct thing to do all day, on every down.
The scouting report on the Raiders is that they lead in tackles for losses and also allowing the most rushing yards. It's either feast or famine with them. If they stop you, just run at them again.
Let's look at the record on designed runs:
2nd-5, OAK14 14:26 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 1 yard loss
1st-10, PIT28 8:30 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, PIT31 7:52 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for 4 yard loss
2nd-4, PIT26 4:10 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 60 yard gain
1st-10, OAK14 3:19 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for 4 yard gain
2nd-6, OAK10 2:38 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 5 yard gain
3rd-1, OAK5 1:56 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for no gain
4th-1, OAK5 1:15 B. Roethlisberger rushed up the middle for no gain
1st-10, PIT26 8:11 W. Parker rushed to the right for 5 yard gain
2nd-5, PIT31 7:36 W. Parker rushed to the left for 9 yard gain.
1st-10, PIT45 7:15 W. Parker rushed to the left for 1 yard gain
1st-10, OAK29 1:53 M. Moore rushed to the right for 7 yard gain
1st-10, PIT20 11:07 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, PIT23 10:27 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for 6 yard gain
3rd-1, PIT29 9:51 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for 4 yard gain
1st-10, PIT33 9:13 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, PIT36 8:34 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for no gain
2nd-3, PIT49 4:51 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
3rd-1, OAK49 4:05 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
2nd-5, OAK42 2:48 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 1 yard loss
1st-10, OAK29 1:44 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
2nd-8, OAK27 1:01 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 2 yard gain
1st-3, OAK3 7:13 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 3 yard touchdown.
1st-10, PIT47 4:46 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 8 yard gain
1st-10, OAK21 3:25 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
Yes, that 60 yarder helped the average. No denying it. But, as I already said, the beauty of the Oakland Raiders is that they're good for allowing more than just one big play, if you give them enough chances.
7 times where we had 4 or less yards to go; we went 4 for 7 converting on those runs. I'm starting to hate this argument that Mendenhall "can't gain the tough, short yards when they're needed." It's made by people who call in to radio shows; the same people who put a lot of stock into shit stats like RBI and game winning goals. The bottom line is this: Mendenhall is legit in any situation. Yes, he got stuffed on 3rd and 1, after running for 4 and 5 yards on the previous two plays. On 4th and 1 you either have to give him the ball again, OR kick the field goal. I like risking the 3 points for the chance to have 7; I don't like risking the 3 points and my franchise QB's skull for the chance to have 7, especially when my running back is averaging 3 y/c on the previous 3 plays.
On another 3rd and 1, Mendenhall gained 4 yards. On a 2nd and 3, he gained 2 yards, followed by a 3rd and 1 where he gained 2 yards. On 1st and goal from the 3 yard line, he rushed for a TD on his first try. There is simply no truth to the idea that he can't bust it up the gut when the chains need to be moved. If it seems like that's true, it's because our play calling consistently tends to shy away from pounding the football in short yardage situations.
I'll never understand our redzone trip at the end of the second quarter, where we get to the Oakland 22-yard line with 1:19 left, 3 timeouts, and it's 2nd and 3. 22 yards to the goal. 1:19 left. Timeouts coming out of our ears. 3 yards to move the chains. What do we do? Pass for 6 yards to Wallace, setting up at the 16 with 0:59 left. Okay. 16 yards to the goal. Great. One minute left. Our running back is averaging like 8 yards a carry. We can stop the clock. We can either get a big gain and shave some seconds off the clock to precisely where we want it, or we can get stuffed, stop the clock and pass the ball another 2 or 3 times. The beauty of running in this situation is that it keeps the defense honest. Naturally, we go 5-wide, and they put every defensive back on their team in the endzone, where they pick Ben off. Luckily we still had our timeouts, so we were able to force them to punt so we could then run the clock down with a knee.
!!!
Let me make this disclaimer: second-guessing the play calling is always much easier than actually calling the plays. But it absolutely feels like we got away from the basics this week, we got away from smash-mouth, running football, even after it looked so good in Baltimore.
Do I think the passing game was excellent? Yes, kind of. Excellent results, but that had much more to do with the Raiders, and not as much to do with the play calling. The lack of Heath (1 catch), and that 145 yards of Ben's 278 came on only 4 plays doesn't scream mastery. If that was a legitimate thing, a thing his coach was calling and Ben was executing at will, then they'd do what Peyton Manning and his crew do: score a lot more points than the other team ever could hope to score. Instead, it felt like a fluke series or two. It felt like this was a team that was flat, and didn't have an identity, and was just relying on latent ability to put up points.
I think it speaks to that lack of offensive identity when we lose in time of possession to the Oakland Raiders. Yes, the passing was fine, yes the running was fine... but we struggled all day to put together a dominating series.
I'm not sure that firing Bruce Arians is the key. It may be. But offensive coordinators in general are going to irk us Pittsburghers. We're neurotically committed to a style of football that was successful for about 25 years, and is now very antiquated. If we got our way, the leading rusher would be the fullback, and we'd hide two of the greatest WRs ever in the shadows of a power run game.
The bottom line on Bruce, as far as I'm concerned: I like his playbook, I like some of his theories on offense, and I don't think he's hurt any of his players development (and in fact, I'd say he's improved some from where they were under Cowher/Whisenhunt); however, he's consistently failed to establish an identity for this offense in the last three regular seasons. (I guess they had an identity last regular season, which was as damsel in distress, constantly requiring the D to do butt-crazy things to bail out the offense.)
What I like about Arians' is his interest in loading up multi-dimensional options for Ben. Mendenhall is a very west-coast style player, in that he can receive, and he can rack up huge yards in a single-back set. Lining up Heath and Holmes and Ward in the bunch, or bringing in Wallace for 3-wide formations, I like that, too, because Ben is a good enough passer to juggle 4 check-downs at a time. It also means that Mendenhall has the advantage of rushing against a defense that is preoccupied with receiving threats. I like this "spread 'em out" philosophy with our personnel. The difference between this group of skill players and the Colts or Pats, isn't what they can do, but how they do it. There still seems to be this tentative vibe with everything our offense does. Sometimes we run no-huddle because we need to change pace, or sometimes we don't run no-huddle because we think maybe we need to go back to something else because maybe no-huddle wasn't exactly working. Sometimes we do a 2 play, 80 yard passing drive for a TD because we want points. Sometimes we go three-and-out in a random part of the game, but not before wasting a timeout because we fucked up on the play clock.
If you've ever seen the Colts play, you understand what I'm getting at. Indianapolis runs their offense with military-like precision. Every route is run crisply, so that Manning doesn't even have to look, he can just time out where his guys will be. Every play is rehearsed and drilled and then scripted, so that the players can run up to the line of scrimmage and know exactly what's going to happen without having to talk about it. The Colts have an incredibly defined identity, but past that, I don't think they have any more talent than us. Nor do I think they have a better playbook than us. Just one that everyone on the team has read and knows by memory.
Bruce Arians is probably fine as a coach, and he's even good at scripting plays, but no one has really established a protocol for how our offense behaves, and him being the O-coordinator, that's where the blame ends up going.
See: the Chargers-Steelers divisional playoff game from last year; that was a brilliant example of methodical, deliberate, scripted playcalling. That's what we need to do every week.
========
I've said enough for now. Tomorrow we'll cover the defense and how much it betrayed our trust, once again.
It's easy to say those losses "should have been" wins, but I'm not sure that's true. The truth is, when you play it close, there is only "could have been"-- for both teams. Both teams "could have" lost, both teams "could have" won. Last year we went 5-1 in games where the margin of victory was 5 points or less. This year we're 1-7. It could have been that this didn't happen and that this did. That's the funny thing about tight games in any sport: anything could happen, and over a large enough sample size, everything does happen in about even proportions.
I'm not going to say this is pure luck, and that somehow we're just recessing to the mean. There's also skill involved in a huge way. Last year's D wasn't simply lucky: it was lucky and hella talented on just an epic magnitude. This year's D is unlucky and fielding less talent.
Finally, I'd say there's a sum-of-the-parts effect at work, where the talent and luck, or lack thereof, align and amplify a team's fate. We saw this with the Titans when they were down on their luck: mostly the same roster as the one that went 13-3. Everything about last year's team just clicked and complimented and built on itself, just as everything about this year's team contributed to the total implosion.
Ugh... enough theorizing. Let's just leave it at this: our roster hasn't been completely replaced by incompetent impostors; these are the same guys, and they are still capable of regaining their previous form (even if it may be too late to matter).
Okay, so what went wrong today:
1. Bad offensive play calling
2. Bad defensive execution
Those were the killers.
Special teams didn't cause me stress. I've got plenty to say about them, but not right off the bat. First we need to talk about Bruce Arians and the 11 guys on defense. (I'm still very angry, so everything that follows may not be entirely cohesive.)
BRUCE ARIANS IS A DUMB MOTHERFUCKING DIPSHIT PUS BRAIN BULLSHIT BUTTMUNCH FART HEAD COCKSUCKER IDIOT.
I remember being irritated with him when he first took over in 2007. I remember being irritated with him at the end of last year, and being very nervous going into the playoffs that he'd fuck things up. Turns out he did very well for himself in that run. He also behaved fairly well for the first half of this season, but ...today. Today was a new land speed record for stupid, as measured in miles per hour.
Let's review: Ben had been out because of a head injury. The Raiders have the worst run defense in the league. Mendenhall has been on a tear, where he's been giving you a decent (bordering on STELLAR) 5.0 y/c this season. He just came off a game in which he stuck it to the Baltimore run defense, and completely carried an inexperienced, backup QB on his shoulders.
Now, back to Arians: I don't mind if he wants Ben to get in his throws; I wouldn't even mind if he had Ben set up the run with the pass. What bothers me is how many times Ben was asked to go 5-wide, empty set. WHAT THE FUCK????? Those huge passes to Tone and Ward... those came out of sets where Ben had a check down coming out of the backfield. I mean seriously... WHAT THE FUCK????? We don't even have 5 guys worth lining up as receivers!!! After Ward, Holmes, Wallace, and Miller, you have Spaeth, Sweed, and Mendenhall/Moore. Spaeth is a total non-factor when he's the 5th target behind those other 4 guys. Sweed can't catch. Mendenhall/Moore are fine receiving backs, but there's absolutely no advantage to putting them on the line of scrimmage and telegraphing the pass!
Empty backfield was bullshit #1. Bullshit #2 was the lack of running when running was the correct thing to do. Running was the correct thing to do all day, on every down.
The scouting report on the Raiders is that they lead in tackles for losses and also allowing the most rushing yards. It's either feast or famine with them. If they stop you, just run at them again.
Let's look at the record on designed runs:
2nd-5, OAK14 14:26 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 1 yard loss
1st-10, PIT28 8:30 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, PIT31 7:52 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for 4 yard loss
2nd-4, PIT26 4:10 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 60 yard gain
1st-10, OAK14 3:19 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for 4 yard gain
2nd-6, OAK10 2:38 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 5 yard gain
3rd-1, OAK5 1:56 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for no gain
4th-1, OAK5 1:15 B. Roethlisberger rushed up the middle for no gain
1st-10, PIT26 8:11 W. Parker rushed to the right for 5 yard gain
2nd-5, PIT31 7:36 W. Parker rushed to the left for 9 yard gain.
1st-10, PIT45 7:15 W. Parker rushed to the left for 1 yard gain
1st-10, OAK29 1:53 M. Moore rushed to the right for 7 yard gain
1st-10, PIT20 11:07 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, PIT23 10:27 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for 6 yard gain
3rd-1, PIT29 9:51 R. Mendenhall rushed up the middle for 4 yard gain
1st-10, PIT33 9:13 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, PIT36 8:34 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for no gain
2nd-3, PIT49 4:51 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
3rd-1, OAK49 4:05 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
2nd-5, OAK42 2:48 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 1 yard loss
1st-10, OAK29 1:44 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
2nd-8, OAK27 1:01 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 2 yard gain
1st-3, OAK3 7:13 R. Mendenhall rushed to the left for 3 yard touchdown.
1st-10, PIT47 4:46 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 8 yard gain
1st-10, OAK21 3:25 R. Mendenhall rushed to the right for 2 yard gain
Yes, that 60 yarder helped the average. No denying it. But, as I already said, the beauty of the Oakland Raiders is that they're good for allowing more than just one big play, if you give them enough chances.
7 times where we had 4 or less yards to go; we went 4 for 7 converting on those runs. I'm starting to hate this argument that Mendenhall "can't gain the tough, short yards when they're needed." It's made by people who call in to radio shows; the same people who put a lot of stock into shit stats like RBI and game winning goals. The bottom line is this: Mendenhall is legit in any situation. Yes, he got stuffed on 3rd and 1, after running for 4 and 5 yards on the previous two plays. On 4th and 1 you either have to give him the ball again, OR kick the field goal. I like risking the 3 points for the chance to have 7; I don't like risking the 3 points and my franchise QB's skull for the chance to have 7, especially when my running back is averaging 3 y/c on the previous 3 plays.
On another 3rd and 1, Mendenhall gained 4 yards. On a 2nd and 3, he gained 2 yards, followed by a 3rd and 1 where he gained 2 yards. On 1st and goal from the 3 yard line, he rushed for a TD on his first try. There is simply no truth to the idea that he can't bust it up the gut when the chains need to be moved. If it seems like that's true, it's because our play calling consistently tends to shy away from pounding the football in short yardage situations.
I'll never understand our redzone trip at the end of the second quarter, where we get to the Oakland 22-yard line with 1:19 left, 3 timeouts, and it's 2nd and 3. 22 yards to the goal. 1:19 left. Timeouts coming out of our ears. 3 yards to move the chains. What do we do? Pass for 6 yards to Wallace, setting up at the 16 with 0:59 left. Okay. 16 yards to the goal. Great. One minute left. Our running back is averaging like 8 yards a carry. We can stop the clock. We can either get a big gain and shave some seconds off the clock to precisely where we want it, or we can get stuffed, stop the clock and pass the ball another 2 or 3 times. The beauty of running in this situation is that it keeps the defense honest. Naturally, we go 5-wide, and they put every defensive back on their team in the endzone, where they pick Ben off. Luckily we still had our timeouts, so we were able to force them to punt so we could then run the clock down with a knee.
!!!
Let me make this disclaimer: second-guessing the play calling is always much easier than actually calling the plays. But it absolutely feels like we got away from the basics this week, we got away from smash-mouth, running football, even after it looked so good in Baltimore.
Do I think the passing game was excellent? Yes, kind of. Excellent results, but that had much more to do with the Raiders, and not as much to do with the play calling. The lack of Heath (1 catch), and that 145 yards of Ben's 278 came on only 4 plays doesn't scream mastery. If that was a legitimate thing, a thing his coach was calling and Ben was executing at will, then they'd do what Peyton Manning and his crew do: score a lot more points than the other team ever could hope to score. Instead, it felt like a fluke series or two. It felt like this was a team that was flat, and didn't have an identity, and was just relying on latent ability to put up points.
I think it speaks to that lack of offensive identity when we lose in time of possession to the Oakland Raiders. Yes, the passing was fine, yes the running was fine... but we struggled all day to put together a dominating series.
I'm not sure that firing Bruce Arians is the key. It may be. But offensive coordinators in general are going to irk us Pittsburghers. We're neurotically committed to a style of football that was successful for about 25 years, and is now very antiquated. If we got our way, the leading rusher would be the fullback, and we'd hide two of the greatest WRs ever in the shadows of a power run game.
The bottom line on Bruce, as far as I'm concerned: I like his playbook, I like some of his theories on offense, and I don't think he's hurt any of his players development (and in fact, I'd say he's improved some from where they were under Cowher/Whisenhunt); however, he's consistently failed to establish an identity for this offense in the last three regular seasons. (I guess they had an identity last regular season, which was as damsel in distress, constantly requiring the D to do butt-crazy things to bail out the offense.)
What I like about Arians' is his interest in loading up multi-dimensional options for Ben. Mendenhall is a very west-coast style player, in that he can receive, and he can rack up huge yards in a single-back set. Lining up Heath and Holmes and Ward in the bunch, or bringing in Wallace for 3-wide formations, I like that, too, because Ben is a good enough passer to juggle 4 check-downs at a time. It also means that Mendenhall has the advantage of rushing against a defense that is preoccupied with receiving threats. I like this "spread 'em out" philosophy with our personnel. The difference between this group of skill players and the Colts or Pats, isn't what they can do, but how they do it. There still seems to be this tentative vibe with everything our offense does. Sometimes we run no-huddle because we need to change pace, or sometimes we don't run no-huddle because we think maybe we need to go back to something else because maybe no-huddle wasn't exactly working. Sometimes we do a 2 play, 80 yard passing drive for a TD because we want points. Sometimes we go three-and-out in a random part of the game, but not before wasting a timeout because we fucked up on the play clock.
If you've ever seen the Colts play, you understand what I'm getting at. Indianapolis runs their offense with military-like precision. Every route is run crisply, so that Manning doesn't even have to look, he can just time out where his guys will be. Every play is rehearsed and drilled and then scripted, so that the players can run up to the line of scrimmage and know exactly what's going to happen without having to talk about it. The Colts have an incredibly defined identity, but past that, I don't think they have any more talent than us. Nor do I think they have a better playbook than us. Just one that everyone on the team has read and knows by memory.
Bruce Arians is probably fine as a coach, and he's even good at scripting plays, but no one has really established a protocol for how our offense behaves, and him being the O-coordinator, that's where the blame ends up going.
See: the Chargers-Steelers divisional playoff game from last year; that was a brilliant example of methodical, deliberate, scripted playcalling. That's what we need to do every week.
========
I've said enough for now. Tomorrow we'll cover the defense and how much it betrayed our trust, once again.
My dog smells terrible
I still love him, but I wish he would go into another room.
It's the same way with the Pittsburgh Pirates; we often wish they would just go into another room. We don't ever expect to feel this way about our Steelers.
Blogging about them will be no small effort. We should probably start with this game, then an analysis of this season compared to previous ones, and finally, what the future holds beyond this season.
The Cardinals just ran the wildcat with their free safety taking the direct snap. Ugh... let's start with the first post.
It's the same way with the Pittsburgh Pirates; we often wish they would just go into another room. We don't ever expect to feel this way about our Steelers.
Blogging about them will be no small effort. We should probably start with this game, then an analysis of this season compared to previous ones, and finally, what the future holds beyond this season.
The Cardinals just ran the wildcat with their free safety taking the direct snap. Ugh... let's start with the first post.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Special Teams
I don't really understand how special team coaching works, so I can't explain the technique or strategy, except to say that our guys are whiffing on tackles and committing their body position too soon.
From a personnel standpoint, we were at our strongest last year when rookies Patrick Bailey and Donovan Woods joined with veterans Anthony Madison and Keyaron Fox. We cut Madison in training camp, which some guy for the Trib said was going to undo everything. We also had Woods playing on the practice squad. Patrick Bailey (who had been our team rookie of the year in 2008) turned into a total non-factor, while Keyaron Fox found his duties split between special teams (where he was a captain) and our starting defensive unit when Timmons couldn't play.
The Madison thing may have come back to bite us. Maybe not.
He went on to play for the Browns special teams (which, to be fair, is a tough unit to make, considering they have, at any given time, 50 special team players on their roster). He was cut from Cleveland. The Browns also cut Cory Ivy (who, like Madison is listed as a CB, but is pretty much just good for kick coverage). Then the Colts gave Madison a try, eventually cutting him.
We signed Ivy last week. Nothing happened. We cut him. And just recently, re-signed Anthony Madison.
I have no idea if having him back will make the difference. I mean, if he's so valuable, you'd think he wouldn't have gotten cut three times this season. Then again, James Harrison got cut three times. It's a weird league.
I think the reason we're not seeing Keisel on special teams isn't that he can't play on the coverage team (he and Harrison were the fastest guys who couldn't be blocked when they were on the unit in 2005), but rather because we can't afford to risk a D-lineman. Right now big Brett is playing as well as ever before, and we pretty much need every snap at the line of scrimmage that he'll give us.
Wish I had more to tell you. Keep hoping we kick it out of bounds.
From a personnel standpoint, we were at our strongest last year when rookies Patrick Bailey and Donovan Woods joined with veterans Anthony Madison and Keyaron Fox. We cut Madison in training camp, which some guy for the Trib said was going to undo everything. We also had Woods playing on the practice squad. Patrick Bailey (who had been our team rookie of the year in 2008) turned into a total non-factor, while Keyaron Fox found his duties split between special teams (where he was a captain) and our starting defensive unit when Timmons couldn't play.
The Madison thing may have come back to bite us. Maybe not.
He went on to play for the Browns special teams (which, to be fair, is a tough unit to make, considering they have, at any given time, 50 special team players on their roster). He was cut from Cleveland. The Browns also cut Cory Ivy (who, like Madison is listed as a CB, but is pretty much just good for kick coverage). Then the Colts gave Madison a try, eventually cutting him.
We signed Ivy last week. Nothing happened. We cut him. And just recently, re-signed Anthony Madison.
I have no idea if having him back will make the difference. I mean, if he's so valuable, you'd think he wouldn't have gotten cut three times this season. Then again, James Harrison got cut three times. It's a weird league.
I think the reason we're not seeing Keisel on special teams isn't that he can't play on the coverage team (he and Harrison were the fastest guys who couldn't be blocked when they were on the unit in 2005), but rather because we can't afford to risk a D-lineman. Right now big Brett is playing as well as ever before, and we pretty much need every snap at the line of scrimmage that he'll give us.
Wish I had more to tell you. Keep hoping we kick it out of bounds.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
