Interesting stats from this season

[FSF]

I hope for our run Ds sake you are right. But if they are going to stay the course they will still need better depth just in case both are out again. Or one doesn't come in with the same level of play.

Tuitt even not at the top of his game is better than 80% of the league and 100% of our DL not named Cam. He'll be fine.

 

[FSF]

My concern is that Tuitt will have been away from football for the better part of 2 years when he comes back to play. I don't see him ever being the same player after taking that much time off.

By that logic, a player missing a year is always done?

Will have to check on that....

Rod Woodson? No
Tom Brady? No
John Stallworth? No
Peyton Manning? No
Marshall Yanda? No
Kurt Warner? No
Issac Bruce? No
Kendall Simmons? No
Maurkice Pouncey? No
Garrison Hearst? No
Andrew Luck? No
Marvel Smith? No
Steve Smith? No
Matthew Stafford? No
Eric Berry? No
Chad Pennington? No

There seems to be quite a few players that missed 1 season due to injury and came back. This 2 years since playing football is drawn out hyperbole. Its a single season. Happens every single year too.

 

[CoolieMan]

9-2 actually -- losses to Packers and Bengals (one suffering from Groin injury the other he tested positive for Covid next day)

did he play 60% of the snaps in those games?

I'm not doing the math to find out

 

[FSF]

I get the benefits.

I'm looking at results. I'm sorry, but won-loss record is more important than turnovers. You don't get into the playoffs based on your turnover ratio. You get in based on won-loss record.

The Colts gave up 1854 (109 ypg) rush yards this season with a +14 turnover ratio.
The Steelers gave up 2483 (146 ypg) rush yards this season with a +2 turnover ratio.

One team is sitting and the other is playing.

Apparently you aren't getting it.

Let me spell this out for you:

In the Steelers 9 wins - they forced 16 turnovers while surrendering only 5.

• T.J. Watt's sack vs. Seattle set up the game winning FG.
• T.J. Watt's recovered fumble set the Steelers up for a FG and a 19-13 lead (after 2 other turnovers on consecutive previous drives led to a 9 unanswered points and a win)
• Cam Sutton 4th quarter Interception vs. Baltimore prevented the Ravens from taking a 17-6 lead, the Steelers come back to win 16-13
• James Pierre 4th quarter Interception with 17 seconds left at the 3-yard line sealed the Steelers 27-19 win over Denver
• T.J. Watt 4th quarter fumble recovery cause by Joe Schobert helped close out 15-10 win over the Browns

Quite frankly, I could point to a turnover in 7 games that resulted in points that were the difference in 7 wins. The lone exceptions were the MNF game vs. the Browns and week 1 vs. the Bills (where a blocked punt resulted in a TD - technically not a turnover but a defensive special teams TD.)

Conversely in the Steelers 7 losses and 1 tie, they forced only 6 turnovers while surrendering 15.

• The Minkah Fitzpatrick blocked FG for TD called back changed the game vs. Green Bay from a 17-14 Steelers lead at halftime to a Packers 17-10 lead. That call may very well have changed the outcome of the game.

Turnovers create points and scoring opportunities and they also stop scoring opportunities. Perhaps you remember the Troy Polamalu Interception that clinched the 2008 AFC Championship Game or the 100-yard Interception return by James Harrison that was a 14-point swing in Super Bowl XLIII.

The pick-6 that Roethlisberger threw in Super Bowl XLV was the difference in the game but they likely would have won if not for the 4th quarter Mendenhall fumble.

This debate is done and shut. It's so insane that you are dug into a position of no logic. You voted Biden didn't you?

 

[FSF]

did he play 60% of the snaps in those games?

I'm not doing the math to find out

85% (with bad groin) vs. Packers
81% (Covid positive next day) vs. Bengals

 

[FatsHolmes]

Apparently you aren't getting it.

Let me spell this out for you:

In the Steelers 9 wins - they forced 16 turnovers while surrendering only 5.

• T.J. Watt's sack vs. Seattle set up the game winning FG.
• T.J. Watt's recovered fumble set the Steelers up for a FG and a 19-13 lead (after 2 other turnovers on consecutive previous drives led to a 9 unanswered points and a win)
• Cam Sutton 4th quarter Interception vs. Baltimore prevented the Ravens from taking a 17-6 lead, the Steelers come back to win 16-13
• James Pierre 4th quarter Interception with 17 seconds left at the 3-yard line sealed the Steelers 27-19 win over Denver
• T.J. Watt 4th quarter fumble recovery cause by Joe Schobert helped close out 15-10 win over the Browns

Quite frankly, I could point to a turnover in 7 games that resulted in points that were the difference in 7 wins. The lone exceptions were the MNF game vs. the Browns and week 1 vs. the Bills (where a blocked punt resulted in a TD - technically not a turnover but a defensive special teams TD.)

Conversely in the Steelers 7 losses and 1 tie, they forced only 6 turnovers while surrendering 15.

• The Minkah Fitzpatrick blocked FG for TD called back changed the game vs. Green Bay from a 17-14 Steelers lead at halftime to a Packers 17-10 lead. That call may very well have changed the outcome of the game.

Turnovers create points and scoring opportunities and they also stop scoring opportunities. Perhaps you remember the Troy Polamalu Interception that clinched the 2008 AFC Championship Game or the 100-yard Interception return by James Harrison that was a 14-point swing in Super Bowl XLIII.

The pick-6 that Roethlisberger threw in Super Bowl XLV was the difference in the game but they likely would have won if not for the 4th quarter Mendenhall fumble.

This debate is done and shut. It's so insane that you are dug into a position of no logic. You voted Biden didn't you?

And yet, you ignore the numbers of how the rushing yards against did not equate to losses - which was the point to begin with. You're changing the topic from what you first contended.

Neither Dale Lolley or I ever said turnovers didn't have an effect on wins and losses. You somehow extrapolated that. We both said that this year, rushing yards against seemed to not have an effect on wins and losses. All you have to do is look at the numbers I gave you above to see that was true.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Our beloved Steelers finished undefeated in games we allowed less than 24 points (8-0-1).

Also lead the league in most wins by one score, with 8.

If we can manage to keep this game close on Sunday, I like our chances...

Sports radio guy tonight was saying that the Steelers are -55 in points and are in the playoffs but somebody else, I forget who, is like +65 and not in the playoffs.
The Yankees outscored the Pirates in the 1960 World Series too, just not when it counted.

 

[FatsHolmes]

Sports radio guy tonight was saying that the Steelers are -55 in points and are in the playoffs but somebody else, I forget who, is like +65 and not in the playoffs.
The Yankees outscored the Pirates in the 1960 World Series too, just not when it counted.

Steelers -55, Colts +86

Only playoff team worse than Steelers was Raiders at -65.

 

[FSF]

I get the benefits.

I'm looking at results. I'm sorry, but won-loss record is more important than turnovers. You don't get into the playoffs based on your turnover ratio. You get in based on won-loss record.

The Colts gave up 1854 (109 ypg) rush yards this season with a +14 turnover ratio.
The Steelers gave up 2483 (146 ypg) rush yards this season with a +2 turnover ratio.

One team is sitting and the other is playing.

And yet, they went 7-4-1 while giving up 165 yards rushing per game.
And they went 2-1 in games they gave up over 200.

Sure, there were some really ugly ones, but those are both easily playoff-level records if extended to 16 games.

What's the goal, winning games or having Minkah Fitzpatrick in passing lanes for INTs?

And yet, you ignore the numbers of how the rushing yards against did not equate to losses - which was the point to begin with. You're changing the topic from what you first contended.

Neither Dale Lolley or I ever said turnovers didn't have an effect on wins and losses. You somehow extrapolated that. We both said that this year, rushing yards against seemed to not have an effect on wins and losses. All you have to do is look at the numbers I gave you above to see that was true.

It's like a train wreck abusing your lack of logic. It's such a disaster one cannot look away from the stupidity.

1. Your data set is inaccurate to start with: The Steelers were not 2-1 in games in which they gave up 200 yards rushing.
   • Official totals were 4x giving up 200 yards or more
   • Ignoring the Bengals 198 yards (when they lost 3 yards on their final drive just letting the clock run out) is both semantics and cherry picking.
   • They were 2-2-1, with a tie to the (at the time winless) Lions as well as surrendering 36 & 41 points
2. To even use 200 yards rushing as a baseline is ridiculous. Giving up 150 yards is a poor performance (the Chargers would have done more if they weren't as unstoppable passing that night).
   • Does it mean nothing that the Steelers only win by more than one score came with Najee nearly cracked 200 yards rushing himself?
3. Was Lolley making that same argument when the 2020 Steelers defense was nearly impossible to run on for during the 11-0 start of 2020?
   • When they also generated 23 turnovers and 3 defensive TDs?
   • Or was it convenient to his argument to forget the Steelers 1-5 finish as the average went to just under 140 rushing yards allowed per game and only generating 4 turnovers?
4. "Somehow extrapolated that" when it comes to turnovers and the effect on wins and losses? It seems pretty obvious that not only is there a correlation but you forced it into the equation when you pushed the Indianapolis +14 turnover ratio vs. the Steelers +2 turnover ratio and asked "What is the goal, winning games or having Fitzpatrick in passing lanes for INTs" I simply exploited your lack of logic by looking at the actual data.
   • In those 2 wins when surrendering 200+ yards rushing, the Steelers forced 7 turnovers and gave up only 1.
   • In the 2 losses and 1 tie, they forced 2 turnovers and gave up 8.

Let's pretend you can rationalize this: I would rather have Minkah Fitzpatrick playing Free Safety and and playing passing lanes as he is in a rare class of player that can actually change the outcome of a game with his ability to make the big play. It's exactly why I want T.J. Watt rushing the passer instead of dropping into coverage - because... if you hadn't noticed, he makes game changing plays with sacks and forced fumbles. Watt arguably had the greatest season of any OLB ever and if there were real justice, he would truly earn MVP votes instead of the default QB pick, because this team would be lucky to have 5 wins without him. And that even with the array of skill talent this team actually does have.

This year more than any other shows exactly how the game is won up front at the line of scrimmage with the dirty work that gets no credit but most often is what allows the stars to shine. It's an insult and a joke for Dale Lolley to argue that ridiculous point and you come off as a fool to defend it.

 

[FatsHolmes]

It's like a train wreck abusing your lack of logic. It's such a disaster one cannot look away from the stupidity.

1. Your data set is inaccurate to start with: The Steelers were not 2-1 in games in which they gave up 200 yards rushing.
   • Official totals were 4x giving up 200 yards or more
   • Ignoring the Bengals 198 yards (when they lost 3 yards on their final drive just letting the clock run out) is both semantics and cherry picking.
   • They were 2-2-1, with a tie to the (at the time winless) Lions as well as surrendering 36 & 41 points
2. To even use 200 yards rushing as a baseline is ridiculous. Giving up 150 yards is a poor performance (the Chargers would have done more if they weren't as unstoppable passing that night).
   • Does it mean nothing that the Steelers only win by more than one score came with Najee nearly cracked 200 yards rushing himself?
3. Was Lolley making that same argument when the 2020 Steelers defense was nearly impossible to run on for during the 11-0 start of 2020?
   • When they also generated 23 turnovers and 3 defensive TDs?
   • Or was it convenient to his argument to forget the Steelers 1-5 finish as the average went to just under 140 rushing yards allowed per game and only generating 4 turnovers?
4. "Somehow extrapolated that" when it comes to turnovers and the effect on wins and losses? It seems pretty obvious that not only is there a correlation but you forced it into the equation when you pushed the Indianapolis +14 turnover ratio vs. the Steelers +2 turnover ratio and asked "What is the goal, winning games or having Fitzpatrick in passing lanes for INTs" I simply exploited your lack of logic by looking at the actual data.
   • In those 2 wins when surrendering 200+ yards rushing, the Steelers forced 7 turnovers and gave up only 1.
   • In the 2 losses and 1 tie, they forced 2 turnovers and gave up 8.

Let's pretend you can rationalize this: I would rather have Minkah Fitzpatrick playing Free Safety and and playing passing lanes as he is in a rare class of player that can actually change the outcome of a game with his ability to make the big play. It's exactly why I want T.J. Watt rushing the passer instead of dropping into coverage - because... if you hadn't noticed, he makes game changing plays with sacks and forced fumbles. Watt arguably had the greatest season of any OLB ever and if there were real justice, he would truly earn MVP votes instead of the default QB pick, because this team would be lucky to have 5 wins without him. And that even with the array of skill talent this team actually does have.

This year more than any other shows exactly how the game is won up front at the line of scrimmage with the dirty work that gets no credit but most often is what allows the stars to shine. It's an insult and a joke for Dale Lolley to argue that ridiculous point and you come off as a fool to defend it.

1 - Lolley was just talking about the last twelve games, which gives the discrepancy for the 200-yard games.

2 & 3 - He was just pointing out an interesting statistic, not trying to make a federal case for having a poor rush defense. Relax. Breathe in and out. It's only a game.

4 - Okay, I discuss how the lack of run defense hasn't affected the record. You say something "but the lack of a run defense doesn't allow Minkah to run free and create turnovers" so it does cause them to lose games. I show you records showing that the lack of run defense didn't cause them to to miss the playoffs while a team with a better run defense did. You somehow twist it that I'm saying that turnovers don't affect win-loss records. I never did and never would say that. Don't put words in my mouth. That's what I meant by extrapolating. You took one thing I said and claimed I meant something completely different.

Look, I'd rather have a complete shut-down defense that doesn't allow more than five yards for a game and has a turnover every other play, but that just isn't going to happen. My primary interest, though, is did they win or did they lose.

Your last statement is just bizarre. The game is won up front at the line of scrimmage? And yet somehow, with a horrible offensive line (likely the worst I've seen as a Steeler fan since 1969) and a defensive line missing all but one of its starters, and a middle linebacker corps performing poorly, the Steelers made the playoffs. The game is won as a team. It is won by the full team. The Steelers proved that this year.