So, ....does tonight's game put to rest any foolish talk of Dri Archer....

[madinsomniac]

So if Bell can't go, do we sign someone or do we go into this game with Harris/Archer and just figure we were not running on them anyhow

 

[Wingman]

At this point who knows. How limited would the replacement be based on his knowledge of the playbook? Even if a talented player were found who do you release to sign him, and what do you do with him when Bell is ready to go again?

 

[Steelz]

I think they have to sign someone, I'm not even sure Archer will hold up the whole game especially if he has to block.

 

[SteelerFan448]

So if Bell can't go, do we sign someone or do we go into this game with Harris/Archer and just figure we were not running on them anyhow

Probably promote a RB from the practice squad and just accept that it is up to Ben and Brown to win it.

 

[SteelBuckeye]

So if Bell can't go, do we sign someone or do we go into this game with Harris/Archer and just figure we were not running on them anyhow

When Blount was released and Harris was promoted Tomlin said that Will Johnson was "tailback capable" in a pinch. I think Johnson will be the 3rd tailback if Bell can't go.

 

[bermudasteel]

Obviously at all of 160 lbs. he's not the guy you want A) picking up blitzing linebackers or B) running between the tackles. But that was common knowledge already.

In other news, the Steelers won the AFC North.

A wise friend of mine told me, when I was a nube here, "stop rousing the herd"...Common sense responses tend to do that...

Eh, he did what was asked of him tonight, I hope he becomes more of a weapon, but time will tell. We have another shitbag scrub bust who was drafted in the first round to play outside linebacker, he sucked so bad they moved him inside. I read for years how he would NEVER, and I repeat NEVER be a pro bowl player. Guess where he's going this year?

Time will tell what mr Archer can and can't do, he hasn't show much this year, but he hasn't been out there much either.

Joe

Well said, Joe. Well said...

Pro bowl means what exactly ?

What EXACTLY do you mean??? Your illicit hate for all things Tomlin/Timmons is obvious.

Lawrence Timmons played well enough, THIS YEAR, to be voted to the Pro Bowl by his peers and the fan base. Tell us, oh great one, what your definition of a Pro Bowl player/selection is???

At this point who knows. How limited would the replacement be based on his knowledge of the playbook? Even if a talented player were found who do you release to sign him, and what do you do with him when Bell is ready to go again?

So you're saying you want us to sign Ray Rice this week???

 

[JupiterBnG]

Obviously at all of 160 lbs. he's not the guy you want A) picking up blitzing linebackers or B) running between the tackles. But that was common knowledge already.

Someone should tell Tomlin and Haley that, then, so they stop putting him on the field and calling plays where he's expected to pick up blitzes or run between the tackles. While you're at it, let Ben know, so he doesn't audible into something Archer can't physically do.

 

[JupiterBnG]

You don't draft Archer to have him run run of the mill plays. They have not been particularly creative with him, then again, he hasn't shown much when he's had the opportunity.

You also can't be "creative" on every play. There's a reason why no one runs a double-reverse flea flicker on every down. And that's Archer's downfall: in order to use him properly, we have to design trick plays that leverage his abilities, but in that case, his mere presence on the field is either a pretty good tip-off that it's one of those trick plays, or else we're essentially resigning ourselves to playing with 10 useful players on the field while we run a "regular" play. He can't block; he's not particularly effective running between the tackles because he has no power; despite all his vaunted speed, he hasn't broken any runs off-tackle; and he hasn't flashed any special receiving skills.

 

[POP]

Right after we drafted him, I said it was a bad pick - he was far to small to make it in the NFL. I was bashed for claiming so. Then I researched and watched video and thought maybe he was a very special exception to the rule of a player that small cutting it. Well, it looks like my initial views were accurate. He's too small to cut it.

 

[Coryea]

If we can hit him on swing pass or something and he can make something happen it would give the Rats something to worry about

 

[Wingman]

A wise friend of mine told me, when I was a nube here, "stop rousing the herd"...Common sense responses tend to do that...


So you're saying you want us to sign Ray Rice this week???

No, I am questioning the logic in signing anyone who would come in with nearly no knowledge of the offense and the assignments etc for the position. And with signing anyone there is also the who do you release question to answer, a question that has been answered by loosing players from our practice squad already this year.

 

[SteelerFan448]

You also can't be "creative" on every play. There's a reason why no one runs a double-reverse flea flicker on every down. And that's Archer's downfall: in order to use him properly, we have to design trick plays that leverage his abilities, but in that case, his mere presence on the field is either a pretty good tip-off that it's one of those trick plays, or else we're essentially resigning ourselves to playing with 10 useful players on the field while we run a "regular" play. He can't block; he's not particularly effective running between the tackles because he has no power; despite all his vaunted speed, he hasn't broken any runs off-tackle; and he hasn't flashed any special receiving skills.

The Chiefs seem to be creative enough with Thomas. Being creative does not mean running trick pays.

 

[Steeltime]

Recent image of Archer working on his blitz pickup:

 

[JupiterBnG]

The Chiefs seem to be creative enough with Thomas. Being creative does not mean running trick pays.

Can't say that I know anything about Thomas or how they use him, I don't watch a lot of other games, but his season stats certainly look more like what we ought to have hoped to see from Archer, given all the hype.

Is the mismatch in production because the Steelers had the luxury of a lot more talent (like Brown and Bell) ahead of Archer, thus the fewer reps and less production? Archer had 10 rushing attempts for 40 yards, and 7 receptions on 10 targets for 23 total yards (with one long reception of 15 yards, which means the other 6 of his receptions barely netted a yard each). Thomas, on the other hand had 14 rushing attempts for 113 yards, and was 23/31 on pass targets for 156 yards. What was the "creativity" that allowed Thomas to be so much more productive than Archer?

I guess that's ultimately my problem with the pick, especially after he quickly lost his return duties. Was 63 yards total offense worth the third round pick, when we had other needs, even if the other needs would have arguably been a reach? Could we have packaged his pick with a 3rd or 4th from next year and moved up to get someone better? We've gotten good value in the middle rounds before, but Archer's production doesn't seem to say "value" to me. Maybe it's just because he's a rookie, I'm expecting too much, and maybe next year he'll contribute more - I hope that's the case.

 

[TriadSteeler]

Bottom line with Archer is that he can be a weapon if used correctly. If we try to use him like we used Verron Haynes...(err I mean Vernon Hayes), it will fail.

Use him to create a matchup issue and get him in the open field. a la a Darren Sproles....

 

[Stryker]

Getting any production out of a 3rd Round comp pick IS worth it. Most 3rd rounders are out of the league in a couple years if they stick on a team at all.

 

[JupiterBnG]

Getting any production out of a 3rd Round comp pick IS worth it. Most 3rd rounders are out of the league in a couple years if they stick on a team at all.

That's just it, though. Over the 12 games he's dressed for, is 5 yards offense per game, a longest KO return of 23 yards (before he was pulled from returns), and no TDs on the season really what you'd call "production" for someone whose speed and athleticism supposedly made him a "luxury" pick?

Martavis Bryant was picked after Archer, and some people wondered that we didn't take Bryant with the pick in the third, and others were saying Bryant was still there in the fourth round, so obviously it was a "safe" move. But, just following this crazy notion I have of "relative value," that players in the NFL ought to generally be expected to contribute at a level comparable to when they were drafted, Bryant is having a HUGE year in comparison to Archer... 549 yards and 8 TDs as a rookie. He's the receiver that Ben's been begging for for years.

I know everyone hates the "what if game," but I have to wonder, what would we have really given up had we taken Bryant in the third, and either Archer or some other opportunity would have presented itself where we took Bryant in the 4th round. Hell, De'Anthony Thomas wasn't taken by KC until six spots after Bryant... all else being equal, it looks like that would have been a better pick, and there's no reason why us taking Bryant in the 3rd would have triggered any kind of chain of events that wouldn't have given us either Archer or Thomas in the fourth if we couldn't have found any other player to help us with our actual needs.

 

[Stryker]

Still better than zero production or cut...