• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Shaking my head at some of you

Ron Burgundy said:
I'm not really pissed off at Tomlin or even the team, granted they can't seem to draft defensive players to save their ***. 11-5 and a division championship is an improvement from last year. It's just be frustrating that they're so maddeningly inconsistent from week to week. You just never knew which team was going to show up.
Click to expand...

Where would you place them with offensive players?
 
FAB802 said:
This is a fact. They have to do something to lighten the load if they want to extend his shelf life. I think they anticipated him getting 15-18 touches a game so they brought Blount in to help with a couple drives here and there. Once they got into the season Bell was just having a ridiculous run so the touches for Blount never materialized. I can see him being pissed for not getting what they promised him, but you can't walk out and be left on the roster.

I don't know what they were looking at with the guys they chose to keep around, but they weren't ready to contribute enough. Sadly they either misjudged the guys in the fold or they dropped the ball on bringing someone in for an earlier look. Ultimately he got hurt and the offense went in the ******* with it. I hope that they can find a veteran back who doesn't mind the light load from the start next season. If Bell is himself it's all that will be available. Ideally we can get a UFA that's younger and get lucky enough to find a diamond in the rough like Willie Parker was.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they dropped the ball there, but I was fine with it. I give the FO credit for recognizing the value of the RB spot. The problem they ran into was that Bell's backups after cutting Blount were very, very poor. It's hard to implement a replacement-level runner like Harris or a (?) like Archer on a level that it will give your lead dog any real rest. IMO we needed an interior back to spell Bell on early downs.

Hate to emulate the Pats, but they've done it right with regards to their run game. They've excelled for years in running the ball without a workhorse. They have a passing down back (Vereen) and rotate their inside backs (Gray/Blount). It's OK if it takes two backs to hammer down the interior run game, as long as they come cheaply and don't fumble.

Bell's absence had a big impact, no doubt, as he's the league's best player at his position and our backups aren't starting-caliber or close, and we were far too one-dimensional the other night. But the play-calling just fed right into that. They tried giving Bell's role to Harris and Tate in little patches, as though they have Bell's ability create holes for himself behind our blah line. If you're forced to be one-dimensional, go balls-deep on your one dimension and don't ask Josh Harris to act like Le'Veon Bell.
 
Idioteque said:
Yeah, they dropped the ball there, but I was fine with it. I give the FO credit for recognizing the value of the RB spot. The problem they ran into was that Bell's backups after cutting Blount were very, very poor. It's hard to implement a replacement-level runner like Harris or a (?) like Archer on a level that it will give your lead dog any real rest. IMO we needed an interior back to spell Bell on early downs.

Hate to emulate the Pats, but they've done it right with regards to their run game. They've excelled for years in running the ball without a workhorse. They have a passing down back (Vereen) and rotate their inside backs (Gray/Blount). It's OK if it takes two backs to hammer down the interior run game, as long as they come cheaply and don't fumble.

Bell's absence had a big impact, no doubt, as he's the league's best player at his position and our backups aren't starting-caliber or close, and we were far too one-dimensional the other night. But the play-calling just fed right into that. They tried giving Bell's role to Harris and Tate in little patches, as though they have Bell's ability create holes for himself behind our blah line. If you're forced to be one-dimensional, go balls-deep on your one dimension and don't ask Josh Harris to act like Le'Veon Bell.
Click to expand...


Agreed, the play calling blew my mind. I thought BA was calling the plays again. We should have just passed the ball 50 times using the shorter , quick hitting stuff instead of the run.
 
That would of put alot of pressure on the Oline and young WRs. The Ravend played back in coverage. The young WRs would of had a hard time reading the different coverages they faced over and over. The Oline would of had to hold up even more against a team with their ears pinned back knowing we werent running. If we dont convert constantly the defense would of been on the field the whole game.
 
Last edited:
antdrewjosh said:
That would of put alot of pressure on the Oline and young WRs. The played back in coverage. The young WRs would of had a hard time reading the coverages they faced over and over. The Oline would of had to hold up even more against a team with their ears pinned back knowing we werent running. If we dont convert constantly the defense would of been on the field the whole game.
Click to expand...

Wait...youre talkin like youve got some sense
 
antdrewjosh said:
That would of put alot of pressure on the Oline and young WRs. The Ravend played back in coverage. The young WRs would of had a hard time reading the different coverages they faced over and over. The Oline would of had to hold up even more against a team with their ears pinned back knowing we werent running. If we dont convert constantly the defense would of been on the field the whole game.
Click to expand...

True, but sorry guys, that's what they're paid and started to do. I'd rather put Antonio, Wheaton, and Bryant on the spot than Harris, Tate, and Archer.

The Ravens knew we weren't running (much) and didn't care. What were the chances Harris, Tate and Archer punished them on the ground?
 
antdrewjosh said:
That would of put alot of pressure on the Oline and young WRs. The Ravend played back in coverage. The young WRs would of had a hard time reading the different coverages they faced over and over. The Oline would of had to hold up even more against a team with their ears pinned back knowing we werent running. If we dont convert constantly the defense would of been on the field the whole game.
Click to expand...

Could it have turned out any worse than it did? We got pounded literally and physically. We lost trying to run the ball with 3 unproven backs.
 
SCSteeler4life said:
Could it have turned out any worse than it did? We got pounded literally and physically. We lost trying to run the ball with 3 unproven backs.
Click to expand...


Yes it could of been alot worse. We were in the game. A couple of stops on third down. Different game. Brown stays on his feet instead of jumping thats a td
 
Last edited:
Idioteque said:
True, but sorry guys, that's what they're paid and started to do. I'd rather put Antonio, Wheaton, and Bryant on the spot than Harris, Tate, and Archer.

The Ravens knew we weren't running (much) and didn't care. What were the chances Harris, Tate and Archer punished them on the ground?
Click to expand...

I would too, but as you've previously stated, can you really trust ben to go with a hot read? if not, he'll be running around like one of the 3 stooges while the keystone cops block for him. not an ideal scenario facing a ravens team in the playoffs. we had to use the RBs to at least try to keep the defense honest.
 
blitzburghv5 said:
Theres quite a bit of information that wont be turned over to the press or the public with regards to locker room and player/coach interactions. Tomlin and management thought that suspension was not an option here....if that be the case then there was likely bigger issues than we assume.

I think whats being lost in all of this woulda-coulda is the divisional championship we claimed............folks are quick to write this season off as a failure and still gripe and complain when we accomplished ONE of our goals. Im not loosing sight of that..........baby steps, and victories counted where you get em............
Click to expand...

While some information might be lacking, again, 0 carries versus 33 carries still doesn't add up. If Tomlin had additional issues with Blount prior to the Titans game, he should have simply not dressed the guy.

And you can wear your 2014 AFC NORTH CHAMPIONS hat with pride, if you'd like. Doesn't mean **** to me, just like 8-8 counting as a "non-losing" season.
 
antdrewjosh said:
Actually i was going off Pouncey's and Foster reactions and comments. We also cant dismiss his prior incident.
Click to expand...

Foster wanted Blount "gone"? Really? This is what he said before Blount was cut:

“I can’t say he’s a bad guy,” Foster said. “He’s a good guy. Any time you ask him to do something, he’ll do it. We’ll just have to hear him out and see what coach says, also. I’m sure he’ll address it in a major way...He is a good teammate if you get to know the guy. But, whatever happened last night, we can’t have that type of thing. For whatever reason, you can’t bring negativity to the team.”

Sounds to me like some sort of disciplinary action (you know, like a suspension) for Blount would have been just fine with Foster.
 
Should have just put in extra lineman on the offense to give Ben max protection. Rat birds new in second half we had to pass. The receivers would have been able to have gotten open with the little extra time. we could have used an extra lineman then dragged Heath across the line in motion as saftey valve-blocker. Putting archer and brown in the backfield under intense pass rush was not only stupid it was embrassing.
 
We were a dangerously average team in a parity filled league. We offensively crushed some unlikely opponents and fell on our face to the dregs of the league yet again which is becoming a pattern. I think 11-5 was about the best this unit could've expected.

The problem is next year we likely face tougher opponents and the travel situation will definitely be worse and we probably fall back towards 8-8...the current standard for the pedigree we possess. This is where the frustration sets in for many a fan who expect more than the current administration does.

The transition could be worse for sure, but with the way this FO drafts of late, throws extensions that seem over priced around and pushes salary problems into future years it appears like it will be a long transition of being dangerously average. Heck maybe we'll win a playoff game before Ben retires and if so hopefully we can string some wins together for SB #7. It can happen because the silver lining is that 80% of the league is dangerously average as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top