the difference in the defense between this week and last

[makewayhomer]

was not as much as some would have you believe.

Baltimore's RB's ran 36 times for 162 yards (4.5 Y/C).

Pittsburgh's RB's ran 27 times for 157 yards (5.8 Y/C)

Edge: Pitt

Ben was 19/32, 187 yards, 1 TD.
Boller was 15/23 , 210, 2 TD, 1 INT.

Edge: Boller

of course, Baltimore scored 24 points, Pitt 13. but remove some terrible playcalling on the goaline (when Pitt ran a fade route, then the WR run, where Rodney made 2 great play) and just pound ahead twice, and I think Pitt ends up with 20 points.

basically, for all the talk about how "we stepped up", etc, I'm not sure we were that much better, defensively.

(offensively, we certainly played a lot better)

 

[xmarkd400x]

How many INTs did Boller throw? How many did Big Ben throw? (I'm asking a serious question, not attempting to prove a point).

I remember Brady saying, if he had his choice, that he would rather take 0 INTs guaranteed over 3 TDs guaranteed in a game. I thought Big Ben played pretty well and did exactly what Tomlin asked him to do.

 

[makewayhomer]

I see that Mike Reiss touched on this. he notes that 33 of the yards came on the 4th when the Pats were playing dime/light.

I'm not sure how many running attempts came on this drive (6 or 7?) but if you remove those 33 yards and 6 or 7 carries, the #'s really don't look any better.

also, he notes that 58 yards came on just 3 carries. ok. but a) these plays count and b) if you remove the 3 biggest running plays Baltimore had, those #'s would look better as well

 

[makewayhomer]

How many INTs did Boller throw? How many did Big Ben throw? (I'm asking a serious question, not attempting to prove a point).

I remember Brady saying, if he had his choice, that he would rather take 0 INTs guaranteed over 3 TDs guaranteed in a game. I thought Big Ben played pretty well and did exactly what Tomlin asked him to do.

Boller threw 1 , Ben 0

 

[patsox23]

was not as much as some would have you believe.

Baltimore's RB's ran 36 times for 162 yards (4.5 Y/C).

Pittsburgh's RB's ran 27 times for 157 yards (5.8 Y/C)

Edge: Pitt

Ben was 19/32, 187 yards, 1 TD.
Boller was 15/23 , 210, 2 TD, 1 INT.

Edge: Boller

of course, Baltimore scored 24 points, Pitt 13. but remove some terrible playcalling on the goaline (when Pitt ran a fade route, then the WR run, where Rodney made 2 great play) and just pound ahead twice, and I think Pitt ends up with 20 points.

basically, for all the talk about how "we stepped up", etc, I'm not sure we were that much better, defensively.

(offensively, we certainly played a lot better)

I wasn't wild about the D, either - the runs in the 2nd half were surely a result of the Pats defense playing back, but they ran the ball in the 1st half, too, so you're correct that the D wasn't as lights out as it may appear.

HOWEVER, the D only gave up 13 points. Some of that has to do with our OFFENSE forcing the Pitt offense to become one-dimensional-ish, but it's still a very solid point-total.

 

[makewayhomer]

HOWEVER, the D only gave up 13 points. Some of that has to do with our OFFENSE forcing the Pitt offense to become one-dimensional-ish, but it's still a very solid point-total.

keep in mind that that 13 could easily have been 20. if Pitt just runs Davenport twice instead of the fade & the gimmick, then they score 7 more points imho. I have no idea why they used trickery when straigh tahead stuff was working so well

 

[bradmahn]

keep in mind that that 13 could easily have been 20. if Pitt just runs Davenport twice instead of the fade & the gimmick, then they score 7 more points imho. I have no idea why they used trickery when straigh tahead stuff was working so well

So you're against taking away the long runs that heavily skew the totals "because they still happened," but you're okay with adding an extra touchdown at the goal line because of lousy play calling by the opponent? The Pats could have stopped the thirty yard scamper by Parker and changed the rushing totals of the game, but they didn't, it happened. The Steelers could have scored another seven points by running up the middle (which very well could have been just as unsuccessful). They didn't, so the goal line stand happened.

The defense could have played better, but they limited Parker up the middle and were pretty good in the second half. The rushing totals for Pittsburgh wouldn't be as high if they hadn't waved the white flag with nearly seven minutes left in the fourth quarter and started eating the clock by running the ball against a nickel and dime defense designed to prevent the quick strike. The Patriots played well on defense when it mattered most.

 

[Patsman]

The difference in this game and last game is not the defense at all, it's that our offense put pressure on their offense early. If we go up early and start forcing the other team to keep up, it's a totally different kind of game. If we let the other team play close and dictate the tempo, it can be close. Make no mistake about it, this team wins with their offense. This is a world class offense and an average to slightly above average defense.

 

[RayClay]

was not as much as some would have you believe.

Baltimore's RB's ran 36 times for 162 yards (4.5 Y/C).

Pittsburgh's RB's ran 27 times for 157 yards (5.8 Y/C)

Edge: Pitt

Ben was 19/32, 187 yards, 1 TD.
Boller was 15/23 , 210, 2 TD, 1 INT.

Edge: Boller

of course, Baltimore scored 24 points, Pitt 13. but remove some terrible playcalling on the goaline (when Pitt ran a fade route, then the WR run, where Rodney made 2 great play) and just pound ahead twice, and I think Pitt ends up with 20 points.

basically, for all the talk about how "we stepped up", etc, I'm not sure we were that much better, defensively.

(offensively, we certainly played a lot better)

Do you actually watch the games?

How many sacks did Vrabel have yesterday?

 

[makewayhomer]

So you're against taking away the long runs that heavily skew the totals "because they still happened," but you're okay with adding an extra touchdown at the goal line because of lousy play calling by the opponent? The Pats could have stopped the thirty yard scamper by Parker and changed the rushing totals of the game, but they didn't, it happened. The Steelers could have scored another seven points by running up the middle (which very well could have been just as unsuccessful). They didn't, so the goal line stand happened.

I'm saying that the score can be deceiving with regard to how the team actually played.

...but they limited Parker up the middle and were pretty good in the second half. The rushing totals for Pittsburgh wouldn't be as high if they hadn't waved the white flag with nearly seven minutes left in the fourth quarter and started eating the clock by running the ball against a nickel and dime defense designed to prevent the quick strike. The Patriots played well on defense when it mattered most.

I already referenced this. our defense was not good in either half

 

[bradmahn]

Do you actually watch the games?

How many sacks did Vrabel have yesterday?

I don't think he does. Hell, who needs to watch the games when you can simply look at the statistics and determine whether or not a defense played well or a quarterback is a hall of famer.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

the difference was:

1. red zone defense

2. pats getting up by 2-3 scores and putting pressure on ben

 

[makewayhomer]

Do you actually watch the games?

How many sacks did Vrabel have yesterday?

uh, did you watch? he didn't have any.

anyways, I said in my OP that Boller had a better day than Ben. but the run defense was still bad.

 

[makewayhomer]

I don't think he does. Hell, who needs to watch the games when you can simply look at the statistics and determine whether or not a defense played well or a quarterback is a hall of famer.

or, who needs to actually read and understand the OP when you can just troll instead. that's much easier/requires less thought.

 

[bradmahn]

I'm saying that the score can be deceiving with regard to how the team actually played.

And I'm saying that's how the game played out, and that's how they stopped them. The statistics can be deceiving with regard to how the team actually played.

I already referenced this. our defense was not good in either half

The first two possessions for the Steelers of the second half resulted in 23 net yards and two punts. How is that not good?

That third drive resulted in no points. How is that not good?

Their fourth drive of the half they ran several times down 21 points with 7 minutes to play in the half. They moved down the field some, but stalled at the NE 19. How is that not good?

The fifth drive they were taking down the clock.

Four possessions, two punts after a total of seven plays, and two stands in the red zone. How is that not good?

You cannot simply look at the statistics (and even if you did, 0 points is the most important one) and deem whether or not a team played well.

Yes, this, of course, is trolling.

 

[cstjohn17]

basically, for all the talk about how "we stepped up", etc, I'm not sure we were that much better, defensively.

(offensively, we certainly played a lot better)

I think the defense played with a lot more passion, and the red zone stops should not be dismissed. As you said the offense played a lot better and getting out to an early lead certainly helps the defense.

Prepare yourself, here comes a cliche, the best defense is a good offense.

In the Patriots case, the best case for a an aging LB core is the most dominant offense in the history of the league. As long as the Patriots score 27+ PPG our defense will hold. If the offense sputters and scores 20-24 then anything could happen.

 

[nowayback]

pats really stink . the difference is if the pats played the ravens again boller would not make half of the completions he made.

did anyone see BB at press conference? i rarely have seen him so happy. he gave them the run. so we count that the steelers maybe would have scored with davenport....but nothing about 2nd and 25..and they make it.that wont happen again.

the pats have had a brutal schedule..the night games. game over at 1230 home at 3-4. monday is wasted. its like playing on a short week last 4 weeks. and yet..what happens every team we beat...the next week is flat. the ravens yesterday...were flat...not near the intensity of the pats game. yea they said they were going to be intense...but it wasntin their heart.

 

[makewayhomer]

And I'm saying that's how the game played out, and that's how they stopped them. The statistics can be deceiving with regard to how the team actually played.



The first two possessions for the Steelers of the second half resulted in 23 net yards and two punts. How is that not good?

That third drive resulted in no points. How is that not good?

Their fourth drive of the half they ran several times down 21 points with 7 minutes to play in the half. They moved down the field some, but stalled at the NE 19. How is that not good?

The fifth drive they were taking down the clock.

Four possessions, two punts after a total of seven plays, and two stands in the red zone. How is that not good?

You cannot simply look at the statistics (and even if you did, 0 points is the most important one) and deem whether or not a team played well.

Yes, this, of course, is trolling.

I'm not just looking at the statistics. I am recognizing that if we keep allowing teams to run for > 5 YPC, and put ourselves in situations defending 3rd and goal from the 1, then we are going to allow lots of points, more than 13/game on average.

2 of those drives they got no points were because 1) our offense had built up such a big lead that they chose not to kick a FG and 2) their goaline playcalling sucked

if you are happy looking at things in the most basic way possible, ok.

 

[bradmahn]

I'm not just looking at the statistics. I am recognizing that if we keep allowing teams to run for > 5 YPC, and put ourselves in situations defending 3rd and goal from the 1, then we are going to allow lots of points, more than 13/game on average.

2 of those drives they got no points were because 1) our offense had built up such a big lead that they chose not to kick a FG and 2) their goaline playcalling sucked

if you are happy looking at things in the most basic way possible, ok.

You obviously don't get it then.

The Steelers converted on fourth down several times in that game. If our offense isn't mercilessly moving the ball on them maybe the Steelers punt and the Pats' defense doesn't even have to make the stop on third and one (or fourth and one).

If the Pats offense isn't putting up points like it's going out of business, the defense isn't forced to stop them twice at the one yard line because the Steelers would have kicked the field goal. And throwing the ball on third and 1 isn't exactly crazy play calling.

The two punts that the defense forced in the third quarter were with leads of 4 and 11 points, not nearly as overwhelming as you imply.

The defense had lapses on several drives, but for the most part they played a good game. Averages would tell you otherwise.

 

[makewayhomer]

You obviously don't get it then.

The Steelers converted on fourth down several times in that game. If our offense isn't mercilessly moving the ball on them maybe the Steelers punt and the Pats' defense doesn't even have to make the stop on third and one (or fourth and one).

If the Pats offense isn't putting up points like it's going out of business, the defense isn't forced to stop them twice at the one yard line because the Steelers would have kicked the field goal. And throwing the ball on third and 1 isn't exactly crazy play calling.

The two punts that the defense forced in the third quarter were with leads of 4 and 11 points, not nearly as overwhelming as you imply.

The defense had lapses on several drives, but for the most part they played a good game. Averages would tell you otherwise.

the Steelers going on 4th down those times is actually optimal strategy. they should be doing that..

so to recap, the Steelers had 4 2nd half drives before the final useless one:

the Pats forced 2 "3 and outs".
on 1 other, the Steelers drove 56 yards to the 1. there the drive stalled, but almost always they will come away with points there. it turned out ok for us THIS time, but normally won't.

then on the 4th drive, they drive 57 yards, and b/c they are down by 21 points, they choose not to kick a 37 yard FG.

this is not great defense