Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What Bruce Arians has designed most closely resembles the old "Run and Shoot" offense. The Run and Shoot relies on speed more than power, which is why FBs and TEs are seldom used in it. It's also a vertical offense that relies on stretching the field, which is also what makes it notoriously inefficient in the red zone, because the field can't be stretched. The only real difference in design between the Run and Shoot and whatever it is that Arians has designed is that Arians uses TEs more often. Otherwise it's basically the same.
The problem with the offensive line is that it's built for power, not speed. If Bill Cowher was still the head coach and Ken Whisenhunt was still the offensive coordinator, then it'd be fine because they prefer "power" offenses. Otherwise, Maurkice Pouncey is the only starting offensive lineman who's a good fit for a speed-based offense, and the rest of them are too large and too slow to execute it properly. I guess it's Arians' fault if he believes that his system can work in spite of it. On the other hand, if he's lobbied for more nimble offensive linemen and been denied until recently, then it's the front office's fault.
Give it a rest, dude. Pittsburgh won a SuperBowl without Cowher and against Wizzy, no less. Even made it to another SuperBowl last year. The problem is that the Steelers are, like a lot of good teams, finding it hard to reload year after year. Players get old. Coaches move on. It's hard to keep reloading year-in and year-out, but the coaching staff of Pittsburgh is not the problem. They probably missed Mendenhell, and they missed Ben's mobility and ability to make plays. Also, credit the Broncos playcalling and TT's ability to make big throws in the big moments. That's what this game came down to, and that's why Denver won. Deal with it.
Before the game, I figured this would be a close one. I thought Pitt would be just barely good enough to beat Denver with an injured squad, but as it turned out, Denver just played one of the best games of the entire season. They were good enough to beat an aging, battered group of players.
I don't think Denver will be so lucky next week. The Patriots have been unstoppable on offense, and I think they'll be too much for Denver. Even so, if Denver can bring pressure on the lines, they have a chance.
Waa more shoulda coulda woulda. Why don't you take your boring Steeler stats to the Steeler thread?
Because this is the 2011 NFL Playoff thread, and the Pittsburgh Steelers were participants therein. It is perfectly acceptable to analyze not only where the winning teams went right, but also where the losing teams went wrong. From an execution standpoint, the Broncos offense outperformed the Steelers defense, and I never said otherwise. All I was saying is that stopping the Steelers offense is no great feat because more often than not it stops itself by design. More simply put, Tim Tebow is the hero of the day, not the Broncos defense. Apparently giving a factual rebuttal that doesn't fit the preferred narrative gets people accused of crying when they're not. I'm actually relieved that this season is over, because that means the Steelers can get to work searching for a new offensive coordinator.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
I've got some more Denver Bronco Victory gloating to do. Would you mind?
Gloat all you want to. Just don't accuse me of something that I'm not doing.
Give it a rest, dude. Pittsburgh won a SuperBowl without Cowher and against Wizzy, no less.
Because the defense in 2008 was dominant enough to compensate for all the flaws in the design and the coordination of the offense. It's still a good defense, but it's clearly not dominant anymore, and it's exposing the offense's inability, by design, to pick up the slack. This is why I want Bruce Arians gone. There's too much talent on the offense to only score 21 to 24 points per game, especially in the new era of Tecmo Bowl rules.
Sorry, but I'm not giving it a rest until the Steelers find an offensive coordinator who actually knows what to do with the talent on that side of the ball.
Well you're the one who ran me out of the Steeler thread. Analyze all you want.
I'm going to enjoy my week. When Saturday comes, I'm going to do like I did today... not expect much and listen to all the "experts" talk about how the Broncos got no chance. If the Broncos play like they did in three of the last four games, the game will be over quick. The Steelers played a good Bronco team today. I'm glad about that, as well as surprised.
With Phil Simms calling the game, I thought the Broncos were doomed on that basis alone. He had some mighty good suggestions for the Broncos. They should heed his advice... like what NOT to do on first and second down.
I'd agree the Steelers were a banged up team coming into the playoffs and they are in the toughest AFC division too.
I did see some gloating in the Steeler thread today and I didn't expect to be accused of as much.
The final play wasn't totally Ike Taylor's fault. The safety (Monday) was out of position showing blitz. Amazing Pittsburgh screwed that play up so much...
The final play wasn't totally Ike Taylor's fault. The safety (Monday) was out of position showing blitz. Amazing Pittsburgh screwed that play up so much...
M-U-N-D-Y
Amazing that all these announcers see how it's spelled and still screw up the pronunciation.
Anyway, yeah, he was playing well that game...until overtime.
Let's just talking about the passing game for a moment. There are two parts. The line/linebackers get pressure and the secondary having coverage. They don't work in isolation. If either part isn't working it makes it extremely difficult for the other part to perform well.
Again, I'm not trying to say Taylor had a good game. It was poor. But he needed help and didn't get it.
Just like everyone has a role on the field, Ike just had to defend one guy. The line prevented the run but pressuring the QB more would have helped. The plain and simple fact is that Ike DID NOT do his job. He was a significant part of the problem and more than any other player.
Just like everyone has a role on the field, Ike just had to defend one guy. The line prevented the run but pressuring the QB more would have helped. The plain and simple fact is that Ike DID NOT do his job. He was a significant part of the problem and more than any other player.
We will have to just disagree on this. On a pass play the line has one job to do and they DID NOT do it. Pressure the QB.
I still would like to know where the safeties were on all these long plays. Aren't they supposed to be the deepest guys on the field?
I'm not understanding the safety situation on several teams/games this year. Teams are getting torched big time, is it the scheme/plays defensive coordinator making wrong assumptions?
Understandably seeing as they always run first, one would have thought it would be a run play by the Broncos, the game was an accident waiting for a place to happen. Broncos had control of the game.
Because the defense in 2008 was dominant enough to compensate for all the flaws in the design and the coordination of the offense. It's still a good defense, but it's clearly not dominant anymore, and it's exposing the offense's inability, by design, to pick up the slack. This is why I want Bruce Arians gone. There's too much talent on the offense to only score 21 to 24 points per game, especially in the new era of Tecmo Bowl rules.
I think the Tecmo Bowl style of play is exciting and all, but I also suspect that it's a bit hyped and overrated and that will be proven in time. I think big boy football is still alive and well. I know that's increasingly looking like a silly thing to say when you've got guys like Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, and Drew Breese throwing for 450 yards a game, and I might end up changing my mind if we keep seeing it. But I still think that a physical style of play on defense and a good ground game that mixes up the pass well can still be extremely effective. I think Pittsburgh's losing its edge because of age and wear-and-tear, not coaching or offensive schemes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
