Grade Bruce Arians

[zulater]

This is not meant to be inflammatory, or redundant,. Simply put, be it anonymous via the poll provided, or on the record by post ( preferably both) give us your grade for Bruce Arains for the 2011 season to date.

As for myself I'm leaning B, possibly B+, but I'll wait until later ( assuming the thread isn't whacked :chuckle:) to post my vote.

The reason I'm leaning B is because I've seen vast improvement in the Steelers short passing game, and Ben has done a better job getting the ball out in time. The reason I'm leaning away from B+ is the ongoing redzone issues. Now obviously it's debatable how much is execution, and how much is on design, but in the end the OC's desk is the place where the buck stops.

[43Hitman]

I'd give him a B as well. By the way Zu, you forgot to post the poll.

[zulater]

I'd give him a B as well. By the way Zu, you forgot to post the poll.

It's up now. Vote away! :thumbsup:

[fansince'76]

As for myself I'm leaning B, possibly B+...


I'd give him a B as well.

Apologists. :chuckle:

[polamalubeast]

C + or B

It's not just the steelers fan who hates their OC.

This is the same thing in Baltimore and New York(jets)

[Devilsdancefloor]

B

[86WARD]

C+. He still hasn't fixed the Redzone offense...specifically inside the 10. There are waaaaaaaaaay too many points being left on the field.

[Iron Steeler]

The one thing that bothers me about Arians is that he doesn't seem to gear up to dominate the next team on his schedule. For instance the game against the Cheats he probably hit the video room hard. I loved the "Give and Take" approach (quoting Eric Mangini) And isn't that what the quarterback position is all about? Taking what the defense gives you? I loved all the quick underneath routes with Heath, and drags with Wallace.

Now fast forward to KC. This game looked like he didn't really had a specific game plan. He was just shooting plays from the hip. Most of all I hated all the long routes. YES YES I know we have an indestructible QB and one of the fastest WRs Core in the NFL, but that doesn't mean you have to go for the long ball on every play. Sidenote: have you every watched a Jets game lately, Schotenheimer is sending all his WRs to deep that the defense gets on Sanchez and when he wants to throw the ball all of his WRs has his back to him still running their route.

I conclude with this... From what I see every time the Steelers score first, the Steeler defense does there job and goes three and out. Then we get the ball back and we obviously want to control the ball with some run plays, and then a shot deep. (Usually a penalty somewhere in this drive) What I am saying is that I don't have any problem controlling the ball but I want Bruce Arians to learn how to control the ball with the passing game. Quick passes ,short routes ,high percentage catches. Loosen up the defense then the run and deep ball will be that much more affective.

Sometimes I think gets away with a lot because his WRs are sooo athletically gifted. But we definitely have not reached our full potential

[Iron Steeler]

I gave him a B... so much untapped potential to this offense and so many points being left off the board.

[zulater]

The one thing that bothers me about Arians is that he doesn't seem to gear up to dominate the next team on his schedule. For instance the game against the Cheats he probably hit the video room hard. I loved the "Give and Take" approach (quoting Eric Mangini) And isn't that what the quarterback position is all about? Taking what the defense gives you? I loved all the quick underneath routes with Heath, and drags with Wallace.

Now fast forward to KC. This game looked like he didn't really had a specific game plan. He was just shooting plays from the hip. Most of all I hated all the long routes. YES YES I know we have an indestructible QB and one of the fastest WRs Core in the NFL, but that doesn't mean you have to go for the long ball on every play. Sidenote: have you every watched a Jets game lately, Schotenheimer is sending all his WRs to deep that the defense gets on Sanchez and when he wants to throw the ball all of his WRs has his back to him still running their route.

I conclude with this... From what I see every time the Steelers score first, the Steeler defense does there job and goes three and out. Then we get the ball back and we obviously want to control the ball with some run plays, and then a shot deep. (Usually a penalty somewhere in this drive) What I am saying is that I don't have any problem controlling the ball but I want Bruce Arians to learn how to control the ball with the passing game. Quick passes ,short routes ,high percentage catches. Loosen up the defense then the run and deep ball will be that much more affective.

Sometimes I think gets away with a lot because his WRs are sooo athletically gifted. But we definitely have not reached our full potential

I'm giving the offense a mulligan for the Chiefs game. I think they fell victim to the bye.

[The Duke]

C + or B

It's not just the steelers fan who hates their OC.

This is the same thing in Baltimore and New York(jets)

Baltimore and NY?? Try around half(or more) the fanbases in the league

[fansince'76]

Baltimore and NY?? Try around half(or more) the fanbases in the league

I'd venture to guess it's closer to 90%.

[SCSTILLER]

C+, like was mentioned before about the red zone offense just way too many points being left on the board. I would also give him this grade for lack of adjustments mid-game, it just seems to me that when something is going right or the defense has it gameplanned he sticks with it, instead of going with something different to get the ball moving. My two cents on him.

[X-Terminator]

I'd venture to guess it's closer to 90%.

Only Packers, Saints and Pats* fans are happy with their OC. The rest of them either want him fired, or in the case of Arians, Schottenheimer and Cameron, publicly executed.

However, I'm shocked that there isn't a single F and only one D grade for Arians, and that half have given him a B or better. Especially with the way he gets blamed for everything, including the defense screwing up.

[fansince'76]

Only Packers, Saints and Pats* fans are happy with their OC. The rest of them either want him fired, or in the case of Arians, Schottenheimer and Cameron, publicly executed.

However, I'm shocked that there isn't a single F and only one D grade for Arians, and that half have given him a B or better. Especially with the way he gets blamed for everything, including the defense screwing up.

http://appetiteindulgence.com/wp-content/themes/thesis/images/800px-simpsons_angry_mob.png

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[suitanim]

LOL at everyone giving out less than a B. I can't envision any scenario, no matter how tough the grading curve, where he earns less than an 85...and that's factoring in some things he has no control over, but ultimately has to be at least somewhat accountable for just because it's the NFL.

[JayC]

i feel like his play calling holds our offense back. i hope he retires after this year. but since i want that, it won't happen

[Count Steeler]

I have to go B. The most glaring frustrating area of the offence is the Red Zone. If we can control the line of scrimmage, (the O line has improved, but still a ways to go) we can dominate a game offensively. We have the weapons at WR and at RB and at QB to be seriously dangerous. However, more often than not, the Oline has an untimely hold, false start or misses blocking assignments in the Red Zone. If we can add a better than average guard, we can have a much improved O Line and take advantage of more opportunities.

[HometownGal]

I give him a B+. While he isn't perfect by any means (who of us is in our jobs?) lack of execution at times by the players of the plays that are called play a large role.

[Psycho Ward 86]

If it weren't for the last two seasons it's an F. He's a barely there C for me

[suitanim]

So wait....the Steelers, arguably the greatest franchise in all of sports, have kept an OC who grades out at an F? An organization that could attract the top minds in the NFL on their winning percentage alone CHOOSES to keep a failing coordinator year after year?


Really?

No, seriously..........really?

[steelreserve]

Patriots suck and Tom Brady is gay.

[Shoes]

I gave him a new necktie....:chuckle:

http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z211/vestkap/knot-hangmans-noose-black-backdrop-18mm-manila-1-AJHDSteelers.jpg

[pepsyman1]

LOL at everyone giving out less than a B. I can't envision any scenario, no matter how tough the grading curve, where he earns less than an 85...and that's factoring in some things he has no control over, but ultimately has to be at least somewhat accountable for just because it's the NFL.

WE DON'T SCORE! We've been out of the top 10 in scoring every year of his tenure but one and that was 4 years ago. The offenses job is not to get yards but to SCORE and he has all the weapons needed to do that and still can't do it consistently. Giving him an 85 is like giving Al Gore credit for "inventing" the Internet.

[Austin87]

Was torn between a C and C+, went with a C. I feel that he is nothing more than an average OC.

Before I forget, LOL at the people who gave him an A and an F, if it was intended to be serious...epic fail. If it was meant as a joke then my bad.

[suitanim]

I just posted why the offense doesn't score...cutting and pasting from "112th" thread:

I think people are once again missing the point. The way defenses stop offenses in the NFL is through attrition. You basically ask the defense to eventually stop the offense by making them successfully execute, and do it repeatedly. The longer the field, the more opportunities for break-downs, ergo, the Steelers have trouble scoring because they have long fields to work with. The stats bear that out.

Why do the Pats score so many points with their little dink and dunk? Because they execute brilliantly almost every game (and it pains me to admit that). In their match-ups with defenses, they simply execute better than the defense does, and have less break-downs. So what we see from the stats is that the Steelers are taking longer, and using more plays, to get into the RZ. Once there, they break down more because of attrition. The ways to fix that are to create more turnovers and to have a better return game. Short fields equal more points.

Now, if you want to blame Arians for the bad starting filed position and poor field position differential, that's fine....but please realize you might as well go ahead and blame Obama as well, because both have absolutely about the same amount of influence on the situation, which is none.

[suitanim]

Here are some other stats to chew on:
-Pittsburgh is only 12th in Red Zone scoring attempts per game, averaging 3.4 per game. That is actually an improvement over last years 3.2.
-Steelers are currently 3rd in the NFL at converting 3rd downs. I remember this was a HUGE issue for Arians haters. Looks like he's fixed that.
-Steelers are also #2 in TOP

What does that tell us? The Steelers are clearly good at possessing the football. They convert 3rd downs. But we also know that their average starting field position sucks, meaning they are naturally going to have to drive the ball further than most teams to even get INTO the redzone. Once there, they are top 3rd in RZ play attemps, but only in the middle in converting. I don't know (because I can't find it), but the final piece of this puzzle is how they stack up as far as redzone trips. They have 37 so far this year...my guess is, based on all the other evidence, that that number is middle-of-the road or lower, too...since if they have long fields to work with, and there are break-downs occurring IN the redzone, it would stand to reason that there will be break-downs in execution that will also happen before they get into the redzone that are keeping them out.

Again, all this adds up to the offense having an unusual uphill climb by constantly battling bad field position and a lack of short fields due to no turnovers. That means the offense is generally doing an pretty good job considering the handicaps they have to work with. So, even given the fact that the offensive line is less-than average, and we lack good starting field position, we still manage to be middle-of-the pack in RZ scoring, we move the ball well, we convert 3rd downs and we win football games...and some people have the OC grading out at an F. LOL

[X-Terminator]

Considering all other factors, their inability to run the football in the red zone is why they are 19th and not in the top 10 in scoring. That is why I gave him a B, and it's something that needs to be fixed moving forward.

[tube517]

One thing BA said was that the offense goes thru Mendenhall. Now, the OL is only average at best and he has had a poor year running the ball. He should create plays for Mendy in the passing game. Mendy's only had 13 catches and he is a better receiver than previous RB's. I think he should use him more in the passing game.

[GodfatherofSoul]

I gave him a B. I'd like to see more focus on getting the running game going. If you're not getting enough gametime reps running the ball, you'll never get better at it. My other major gripe is the all-deep routes with no quick outlets. Other than that, can't complain much.

[pepsyman1]

Okay...The Patriots are only 18th in starting field position but manage to be 3rd in scoring. We're better on 3rd down? Are you watching our 3rd downs? Most of the time we've still got Ben making something happen to get those third downs, its just that now he's got more weapons to help make it happen. If the Patriots can manage to be in the top ten in scoring EVERY year but 1 for a decade while we manage to do it every once every 4 or 5 years years (even with the weapons we have) I'm of the opinion that the OC is only average at best. I don't know what results you see that warrant any higher rating than that. The offenses' job is to score, we don't score consistently and we haven't scored consistently on offense for YEARS. That's it in a nutshell...if you're looking at yardage, or starting field position or the stats of how we do in certain situations you are missing the larger picture. He's a midpack OC at best. My proof is our defense. Coach D has us as one of the top defenses against scoring every year...we're in the top ten of scoring defense the way the Pats are on offense. He deals with the injuries, lack of talent at one of the CB positions for years, new rules that work against us..he still gets it done (regardless of how we complain of the approach sometimes) We have as much talent on offense now as we have on defense and we are still 19th in scoring. You figure it out.

[polamalubeast]

The patriots, packers and saints are by far the top 3 offense in the NFL.


The reasons why the Steelers are 19th.

no order

1.Lack of possesion(last in nfl)
2.Bad field position
3.very average running game
4.lack of turnovers
5.Red zone problems
6.first four game


between week 5 and week 10, the Steelers scored 142 points in 6 games, which is close to 25 points per game(despite the lack of turnovers).And it is since that Jonathan Scott is not a starter.

His stats prove that the offense played very well since six games before the bye. The game against the Chiefs, it's just a bad game.I'm not worried

[X-Terminator]

You're wasting your time, PB. No matter what you say, all you're going to hear is "Arians sucks" and "19th in scoring." I'm officially throwing in the towel. Let the haters have this thread.

[suitanim]

The Pats are 18th in starting position, but we are 27th. The differential is +9 for the Pats...that's substantial because they have the most prolific offense (arguably) in the NFL. I'd say that of we were 18th instead of 27th, we'd probably be top 10 (or better) in scoring. Little things make big differences.

And, I'm sorry if people disagree with out 3rd down conversion percentage. It happens to be 3rd in the NFL. I can't change that fact........people who hate Arians are certainly free to editorialize and attempt to make 3 out of 32 a BAD thing, but that's outside my current purview (which is trying to keep reality in mind).

[pepsyman1]

Keeping REALITY in mind: Since Arians took over in 2007 there have been 75 regular season games played per team and averaging all 75 over those 4 plus, almost 5 seasons we get these results

Patriots: 30.3 PPG
Saints: 28.0 PPG
Packers: 27.8 PPG
Chargers: 26.6 PPG
Eagles: 25.0 PPG
Colts: 24.4 PPG (they were at 26.2 going into this year in case anyone doubted Manning's importance)

Steelers : 22.9

All those teams consistently crack 400 and sometimes 500 points every year with just a few exceptions. We haven't cracked 400 points since 1995. We haven't had an average high enough in a single season to top what any of those teams have AVERAGED over the last 5 years. What criteria would you use to determine the effectiveness of your OC if not your scoring? This is his 5th year, we haven't gotten any better putting the ball in the endzone.

[suitanim]

Keeping REALITY in mind: Since Arians took over in 2007 there have been 75 regular season games played per team and averaging all 75 over those 4 plus, almost 5 seasons we get these results

Patriots: 30.3 PPG
Saints: 28.0 PPG
Packers: 27.8 PPG
Chargers: 26.6 PPG
Eagles: 25.0 PPG
Colts: 24.4 PPG (they were at 26.2 going into this year in case anyone doubted Manning's importance)

Steelers : 22.9

All those teams consistently crack 400 and sometimes 500 points every year with just a few exceptions. We haven't cracked 400 points since 1995. We haven't had an average high enough in a single season to top what any of those teams have AVERAGED over the last 5 years. What criteria would you use to determine the effectiveness of your OC if not your scoring? This is his 5th year, we haven't gotten any better putting the ball in the endzone.

Winning.

Since 2007 the only team that could possibly have a better winning percentage is NE.


Bitching about Arians is pissing in the wind. As for the points thing, the Steelers usually get conservative with a lead. They never trashily pad stats or run up scores. If you like that sort of thing, the Pats whorewagon is always looking for new Brady's Lady's. Me, I'm sticking with good defense and scoring enough to win.

[zulater]

You're wasting your time, PB. No matter what you say, all you're going to hear is "Arians sucks" and "19th in scoring." I'm officially throwing in the towel. Let the haters have this thread.

It doesn't seem as if there's much of a plurality on this board as far as "haters" go. Only 4 of 37 voters found his work to be substandard, this coming on the heels of the Steelers worst offensive performance since week one. I think for the most part posters have been measured in their criticism of Bruce. Obviously there's an exception or two, but even with them I think they've presented some fair points without injecting too much hyperbole to the argument.

[zulater]

Keeping REALITY in mind: Since Arians took over in 2007 there have been 75 regular season games played per team and averaging all 75 over those 4 plus, almost 5 seasons we get these results

Patriots: 30.3 PPG
Saints: 28.0 PPG
Packers: 27.8 PPG
Chargers: 26.6 PPG
Eagles: 25.0 PPG
Colts: 24.4 PPG (they were at 26.2 going into this year in case anyone doubted Manning's importance)

Steelers : 22.9

All those teams consistently crack 400 and sometimes 500 points every year with just a few exceptions. We haven't cracked 400 points since 1995. We haven't had an average high enough in a single season to top what any of those teams have AVERAGED over the last 5 years. What criteria would you use to determine the effectiveness of your OC if not your scoring? This is his 5th year, we haven't gotten any better putting the ball in the endzone.

Not a bad argument. But I'd also factor in that the Steelers haven't had anything resembling a good offensive line since 2005. I'd love to see how many points this offense could produce with the 2001, or 2004-05 offensive line.

[suitanim]

Not a bad argument. But I'd also factor in that the Steelers haven't had anything resembling a good offensive line since 2005. I'd love to see how many points this offense could produce with the 2001, or 2004-05 offensive line.

And I'm sorry, you can't look at PPG alone and out-of-context. Look at the teams on that list. Some of them have had putrid defenses. If the Steelers needed to score more points they would...if they were 9-7 every year, and were playing from behind more, they'd probably be winging the ball around more, especially late in games, and probably scoring a FG more a game. Losing teams don't have "The victory formation". They don't generally salt away wins by running the ball in the 4th quarter.

Over that timeline above, we've been 49-24, were 5-2 in the playoffs and played in two, and won one SB. When Tomlin says "The standard is the standard", he means winning, not scoring more meaningless points than other teams.

[X-Terminator]

It doesn't seem as if there's much of a plurality on this board as far as "haters" go. Only 4 of 37 voters found his work to be substandard, this coming on the heels of the Steelers worst offensive performance since week one. I think for the most part posters have been measured in their criticism of Bruce. Obviously there's an exception or two, but even with them I think they've presented some fair points without injecting too much hyperbole to the argument.

Yeah, I think those exceptions are what is getting to me. Hell, I flat-out blamed BA for the shitty game plan on Sunday and still do, so it's not like I'm in love with the guy. So you're right that most of the criticism has been fair for the most part, which is all I've ever asked for.

[zulater]

And I'm sorry, you can't look at PPG alone and out-of-context. Look at the teams on that list. Some of them have had putrid defenses. If the Steelers needed to score more points they would...if they were 9-7 every year, and were playing from behind more, they'd probably be winging the ball around more, especially late in games, and probably scoring a FG more a game. Losing teams don't have "The victory formation". They don't generally salt away wins by running the ball in the 4th quarter.

Over that timeline above, we've been 49-24, were 5-2 in the playoffs and played in two, and won one SB. When Tomlin says "The standard is the standard", he means winning, not scoring more meaningless points than other teams.

I tend to agree with you. Game circumstances change a lot of things. If the Steelers had to score more, they usually would.

[zulater]

Yeah, I think those exceptions are what is getting to me. Hell, I flat-out blamed BA for the shitty game plan on Sunday and still do, so it's not like I'm in love with the guy. So you're right that most of the criticism has been fair for the most part, which is all I've ever asked for.

Honestly I don't think the game plan was a problem. Look how the Steelers moved the ball down the field on the opening possession. Well that is until Bruce called for the drop in the end zone by Wallace and followed it up with the designed fumble by Mooore. :chuckle: :wink02:

[fansince'76]

I think for the most part posters have been measured in their criticism of Bruce. Obviously there's an exception or two, but even with them I think they've presented some fair points without injecting too much hyperbole to the argument.

I agree - I don't think this thread has gotten out of hand like it probably would have in seasons past.

[zulater]

I agree - I don't think this thread has gotten out of hand like it probably would have in seasons past.

Or on another board which shall remain nameless perhaps? :wink02:

[fansince'76]

Or on another board which shall remain nameless perhaps? :wink02:

Yep. :chuckle:

[tube517]

Or on another board which shall remain nameless perhaps? :wink02:

firebrucearians.com ?? :chuckle:

[fansince'76]

firebrucearians.com ?? :chuckle:

Might as well have been (and probably still is). :chuckle:

[GBMelBlount]

C+.

Perhaps I am being tough but if we want to make a run at another super bowl we need to be better in the red zone imo.

[HometownGal]

Honestly I don't think the game plan was a problem. Look how the Steelers moved the ball down the field on the opening possession. Well that is until Bruce called for the drop in the end zone by Wallace and followed it up with the designed fumble by Mooore. :chuckle: :wink02:

AMEN. 95% of the time, it all boils down to E-X-E-C-U-T-I-O-N. Football 101.

[zulater]

Maybe I'm off base in this, but I think Arains might have held back a little bit against the Chiefs. By that mean, here you are coming off a bye, which was preceded by a game against the Bengals. Or in other words, knowing the Chiefs were down to a non NFL quarterback, you know, or a least thought you could win this game with a vanilla game plan. And save the "A" game plan for the rematch with the Bengals where it's almost certainly going to be needed.

And the fact is they should have romped in this game with the game plan they had, were it not for a few poorly executed plays and a little bit of bad luck. To wit the first possession should have resulted in a touchdown were it not for a drop by Mike Wallace, and save that at least a fg minus a fumble by Mewelde Moore. A later possession in the first half that resulted in no score, came as a result of a very marginal holding call on Heath Miller, , where had the ref more correctly "held" onto his flag, the Steelers would have netted the result of a 20 yard carry by Mendenhall which would have given them first and goal at the Bengals 3. Then on the very next possession Wallace has a ball go through his hands, which he should have caught, and had he done so the Steelers set up shop inside the Bengals 15, or more likely Wallace goes the distance and gets the td etc....

Anyway the Chiefs defense fed of Steelers miscues, and the crowd, and grew in confidence, while the Steelers merely got frustrated on offense, and didn't seem to have that good "B" option, once things started to slip away.

So bringing us to the present. I think Arains and the Steelers will have some different looks and a better focus for the Bengals. I'm confident the offense will be sharp this week, and will put enough points on the board to get the job done.

btw if the Steelers put up the sort of offensive showing I'm expecting this week, my grade for Bruce will go up to B+ for the year. :wink02:

[BlacknGoldBabe]

It's kind of difficult for points to be put on the board when the QB is being swarmed. The OL needs to provide better protection so that Ben can concentrate on carrying out the plays.

[86WARD]

http://img.tapatalk.com/aefc5496-2598-d53c.jpg

[suitanim]

Maybe I'm off base in this, but I think Arains might have held back a little bit against the Chiefs. By that mean, here you are coming off a bye, which was preceded by a game against the Bengals. Or in other words, knowing the Chiefs were down to a non NFL quarterback, you know, or a least thought you could win this game with a vanilla game plan. And save the "A" game plan for the rematch with the Bengals where it's almost certainly going to be needed.

And the fact is they should have romped in this game with the game plan they had, were it not for a few poorly executed plays and a little bit of bad luck. To wit the first possession should have resulted in a touchdown were it not for a drop by Mike Wallace, and save that at least a fg minus a fumble by Mewelde Moore. A later possession in the first half that resulted in no score, came as a result of a very marginal holding call on Heath Miller, , where had the ref more correctly "held" onto his flag, the Steelers would have netted the result of a 20 yard carry by Mendenhall which would have given them first and goal at the Bengals 3. Then on the very next possession Wallace has a ball go through his hands, which he should have caught, and had he done so the Steelers set up shop inside the Bengals 15, or more likely Wallace goes the distance and gets the td etc....

Anyway the Chiefs defense fed of Steelers miscues, and the crowd, and grew in confidence, while the Steelers merely got frustrated on offense, and didn't seem to have that good "B" option, once things started to slip away.

So bringing us to the present. I think Arains and the Steelers will have some different looks and a better focus for the Bengals. I'm confident the offense will be sharp this week, and will put enough points on the board to get the job done.

btw if the Steelers put up the sort of offensive showing I'm expecting this week, my grade for Bruce will go up to B+ for the year. :wink02:

There was a whole section in ESPN The Mag a few weeks ago that basically followed every aspect of the Steelers/Texans game. One of the articles was about the game planning. It was VERY instructive...and probably should be required reading for anyone who wants to chime in about what an idiot Arians is. The basic narrative is that game planning is an art form, and there are literally tens of hours of watching film and breaking down tendencies (on both sides of the ball) that go into it. When people say things like "Arians should be running instead of passing" it's basically saying that him and his staff's hundred hours of breaking down the oppositions film is less important than layman fans just reflexively looking at a play that doesn't work and claiming to know more than an entire NFL staff. That dog don't hunt.

The biggest reason: OPPOSING COORDINATORS. In the article the Texans decided that they were going to take a formation they previously did one thing out of, and do the opposite (in this case it was run out of a formation they almost exclusively passed out of in the past). It fooled the Steelers until they adjusted in the second half. The Texans also admitted to "backing off" their offensive aggressiveness in the 3rd quarter to neutralize the Steelers blitz.

The bottom line is that these are incredibly complex planning operations, and when something doesn't work, it's NOT because of an idiot OC or lack of planning or laziness, rather a combination of lack of execution and great counter game planning form the opposing team.

Back to Zu's post...he's right. MOST teams have bread-and-butter game plans that they stick pretty closely to, and just add new wrinkles situationally,. If a playbook is 1000 pages long, you don't add 200 pages each week, you just find things in your own system that work. It's very unusual for real innovation to occur...the article cited maybe 3 or 4, and one of them was actually the Browns playing Brady and not having a single defensive player put a hand on the ground the whole game. Point is, we probably did NOT have an innovative plan for the Chiefs, rather a basic strategy that called for the team to execute and win individual battles simply based on the Steelers having better talent. It failed NOT because it was poorly planned, rather poorly executed.

[Steeldude]

http://img.tapatalk.com/aefc5496-2598-d53c.jpg

lol

[Steeldude]

or a least thought you could win this game with a vanilla game plan. And save the "A" game plan for the rematch with the Bengals where it's almost certainly going to be needed

shouldn't each game plan be an "A"? also, each game plan should be different for each opponent.

[Moose]

I gave him a ' C '. For the reason the ' C ' stated. I don't like alot of his play calling.

[Psycho Ward 86]

http://img.tapatalk.com/aefc5496-2598-d53c.jpg

:lol:

[SteelGhost]

B+, he and Ben only need a good enough O' line to show their real potential :nod: