the difference in the defense between this week and last

[Ring 6]

Therefore..........he didn't have a great influence on Rottenburger rushing passes?

What do run statistics matter when you win by three touchdowns?

I think the point of the question how many sacks did Vrabel have was that he knew the answer was zero, which shows in your stats book, but anyone watching the game knows that Vrabel owned Colon, and flushed Roethlisberger out of the pocket many times, disrupting plays. He was held once that was called and at least 5 times I saw that werent, but Roesthlisberger was unable all day long to stay in the pocket and throw. That is because our defense played well.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

agree, we played a lot of "bend but don't break" both then and now. but "bend but don't break" doesn't mean you let them down to your 1 and then stop them. that was certainly not intended.

Maybe this was before your time but did you notice Rodney running back down the field with one finger in the air after that stop? I think he was mimicking Willie from the stop that beat Indy in Indy on 4th and goal back in the day...

All bend but don't break means is you allow meaningless yards but stop or limit scoring in the final analysis of a drive...

You guys who crave imaginary style points must have hated the entire 7 year to date run.

 

[Ring 6]

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

I need to understand.
We lead by 18 points with less than 19 minutes left in the game.
The Steelers go on a drvie that takes up 6 minutes, and we stuff them at the goalline.
How is that NOT good defense? Do you understand that when you have an 18 point lead with 19 minutes left that the other team taking 6 minutes to get in scoring position is GOOD FOR THE DEFENSE? Do you understand that if it were a 7 or 10 point game, WE WOULD HAVE PLAYED DEFENSE DIFFERENTLY?
The other 'long drive that concerns you' started with 7 minutes left and a 21 point lead. In other words, what we were defending against was ONLY a TD drive that took less than 2 minutes. Otherwise, game over.
The Steelers took over 4 minutes to get inside the 30 and stall. That is good defense.
I suppose you would rather that in those situations we played aggressively, stuffed the run, and made them beat us passing? That way they could score quickly.
These 2 drives you are talking about were in the last 19 minutes of the games, took up over 10 minutes, and resulted in zero points.

 

[Joker]

heh...this thread is like the Twilight Zone...13 total points, none in the 2nd half...yeah, we have some real problems...

 

[Ring 6]

I dont have the #'s, but my guess is that YPC was nearly as bad in the first half when we played much more base defense.



agree, we played a lot of "bend but don't break" both then and now. but "bend but don't break" doesn't mean you let them down to your 1 and then stop them. that was certainly not intended.

as others have said, the difference in the game yesterday was our OFFENSE. if the offense plays like it did last week (or if the Pittsburgh D played like the Baltimore D) then this game probably ends up pretty close to the Baltimore game.

that's my point.

Of course defensively you are happy with a drive going all the way to your 1, when it starts with an 18 point lead and less than 19 minutes left in the game, and it takes them 6 minutes to get there.
I don't get what else you wanted the defense to do. Basically, up 18 with 19 minutes left, a defense will say, go ahead run if you want to, but by the time you score you've bled the clock. Would they rather stop the run while playing a prevent type of defense, sure, but the defense that was being played was the "up 18 with 19 minutes left" defense, not what they would play in a tight game.

 

[Joker]

You're missing the point Andy...it's not what happened, it's what COULD have happened that counts.

BTW, I'm missing the point too

 

[IcyPatriot]

The difference between this week and last was a restfull week of practice, playing in their own crib and sleeping in their own beds ... oh, did I forget to mention less crowd noise?

 

[Joker]

yeah...the crowd was silent...I was there...I got so mad I lost my voice

 

[Ring 6]

You're missing the point Andy...it's not what happened, it's what COULD have happened that counts.

BTW, I'm missing the point too

Again, that is why they say stats are for losers. At the 19 minute mark, we probably could have played a 1-1-9 defense, allowed 10 yards a rush, and TDs on every one of their drives, and they still wouldn't have won, because it would have taken too much time. Yet, we played a D that asked them to use up all of the clock, (oh, yeah, and shut them out the rest of the way) and thats somehow a bad thing that has anything to do with what we would do if it were a 7 point game with 19 minutes left? Yeah, right.

 

[Ring 6]

You're missing the point Andy...it's not what happened, it's what COULD have happened that counts.

BTW, I'm missing the point too

I think there should be a rule that any time you leave a game with as many wins as you allowed points, no Chicken Little fans should be allowed to speak about the defense.

 

[onegameatatime]

Random thoughts on D:

Over all, the D still does not feel like it has in past championship seasons. I was particularly concerned in the first half by the run D.

But in the second, the Steelers started with a 4-play drive and a punt, followed by a 3-and-out. Typical Pats -- readjust and refocus at halftime.

Nice pass D -- other than the Davenport/Hobbs breakdown, Pitt got no really big plays in the air.

I hope Seymour can return to form -- he is not his old self.

 

[makewayhomer]

You're missing the point Andy...it's not what happened, it's what COULD have happened that counts.

BTW, I'm missing the point too

again, I hope you never try to bet sports. b/c probabilities rule. if you don't understand this, ok.

 

[makewayhomer]

Again, that is why they say stats are for losers.

as long as "losers" include Theo Epstein, aka the guy who just led the local baseball team to it's 2nd World Series in 4 years using "stats" as bedrock for his analysis.

I took you off ignore too see what kind of idiotic nonsense you would spout, and you did not disappoint.

your ignorance is only matched by your idiocy

 

[Joker]

again, I hope you never try to bet sports. b/c probabilities rule. if you don't understand this, ok.

you'll be happy to know that I went to Vegas in October (4th through the 8th) and hit EVERY parlay I played Sunday using the Jets to lose as the 2nd bet. Left $3500 richer. Nice try though.

 

[makewayhomer]

you'll be happy to know that I went to Vegas in October (4th through the 8th) and hit EVERY parlay I played Sunday using the Jets to lose as the 2nd bet. Left $3500 richer. Nice try though.

whoah!!! you must be a super genius!!!

 

[Joker]

no...I NEVER claimed I was any smarter than anyone else...THAT seems to be YOUR province

 

[makewayhomer]

no...I NEVER claimed I was any smarter than anyone else...THAT seems to be YOUR province

I'm just smarter than people who think "stats are for losers"

 

[MoLewisrocks]

as long as "losers" include Theo Epstein, aka the guy who just led the local baseball team to it's 2nd World Series in 4 years using "stats" as bedrock for his analysis.

I took you off ignore too see what kind of idiotic nonsense you would spout, and you did not disappoint.

your ignorance is only matched by your idiocy

Baseball lends itself to statistical analysis in a way football never will. Fans who understand the nuances of the NFL game grasp that. Andy is one of those. You apparently aren't.

 

[Joker]

I'm just smarter than people who think "stats are for losers"

well, you ARE a loser when you attempt to twist stats to fit one of your patented kockamamie if/then scenarios like the one you tried to use about the Pitt drive in the 4th quarter. The only statistic that MATTERED then was "stopped on 4th down". Period.

 

[makewayhomer]

Baseball lends itself to statistical analysis in a way football never will. Fans who understand the nuances of the NFL game grasp that. Andy is one of those. You apparently aren't.

the guys doing advanced statistical analysis of the NFL understand the nuances of the NFL far better than 99% of the posters here, or you. this is what YOU don't understand. go read some football outsiders analysis.

these guys are smarter and know more than you about football, and btw BB listens to them. go read Chris Price's new book.

or just go back to waving your pom pom, whatever makes you feel nice and warm.