Steelers Botched End Of Game Management Is Most Frustrating

BY ALEX KOZORA DECEMBER 18, 2017 AT 11:44 AM
I didn’t want Ben Roethlisberger to spike the ball. I’m glad he didn’t. But I can’t imagine anyone is happy with what the Pittsburgh Steelers substituted. And I’m not talking about the result, the hindsight of the outcome, an interception that sealed the win for the Patriots. I’m talking about the process. For all the end-of-game absurdity, that’s most frustrating.
Bouncing off what I’ve said on Twitter and touched on in my video recap, the Steelers can’t control what decision the refs come to. What they can control is their response. And that wasn’t a passing grade. Not even close.
http://www.steelersdepot.com/2017/12...t-frustrating/

I can not actually picture the play clearly in my head, but this fake spike has been run before - successfully. I think that play had the similar players standing around and one dude in the router, etc.

If I could remember when that play was ran, it would be interesting to compare.

It is possible (probable?) that the critique in the article is about the play design NOT confusion or effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mojouw

I can not actually picture the play clearly in my head, but this fake spike has been run before - successfully. I think that play had the similar players standing around and one dude in the router, etc.

If I could remember when that play was ran, it would be interesting to compare.

It is possible (probable?) that the critique in the article is about the play design NOT confusion or effort.

---

Ben to AB in the Dallas game last year

But it was a route down the sideline, not into coverage in the middle of the end zone, and was of course AB rather than Eli Rogers running the route

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJpLNh7iVTg

http://www.nfl.com/m/share?p=%2Fvide...ive-fake-spike

They just got absolutely jobbed out of a TD and time was of the essence. Hard to recover mentally from that, especially at a moment's notice.

And never mind Eli Rogers getting tackled in the end zone which led to the INT to begin with.

If anyone gets a failing grade, it's Corrente and his crew.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mojouw

I can not actually picture the play clearly in my head, but this fake spike has been run before - successfully. I think that play had the similar players standing around and one dude in the router, etc.

If I could remember when that play was ran, it would be interesting to compare.

It is possible (probable?) that the critique in the article is about the play design NOT confusion or effort.

---

All of the above. I think it was against Dallas, but I could be wrong. AB was the receiver and he didn't run a slant.

Great stuff. Thanks for helping me remember.

Bottom line, the design of the call can be questioned. Ben's decision can be questioned. But I saw elsewhere that James and Bell should be taken to task for lack of effort on the play. That likely isn't appropriate.

I think my only real issue with this play about a day later is that Rogers route takes him and the ball into defenders instead of away from defenders. Players that were "fooled" by the play are suddenly involved again by the direction of the route. That is kinda maddening.

When I look at the play, I see Ben pumping like he expects the corner route from Eli. Then he holds it when he see him run the slant. Ben does force it, no question. It appeared the ball might have been tipped a little at the line before the defender tipped it up... Maybe why nothing was called there as far as PI. Shitty end no doubt, but just like always, more could have been done before that is even the deciding factor in the game.

Would have been nice for Heyward-Bey to get out of bounds on the previous play. That way it's not such a last second decision to spike or not.

But...you spike it there and kick for the OT. We probably win it or tie it, either keeps us a #1 seed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Born2Steel

But...you spike it there and kick for the OT. We probably win it or tie it, either keeps us a #1 seed.

---

There was time to run a play and still kick the field goal if it's incomplete. 5 second kneel down proves that. I don't mind them taking a shot for a regulation win. It was a tough play... and not a great throw. A very tight window. He could have just thrown it away, but he took a shot to end it. It didn't happen. Game over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteelMember

There was time to run a play and still kick the field goal if it's incomplete. 5 second kneel down proves that. I don't mind them taking a shot for a regulation win. It was a tough play... and not a great throw. A very tight window. He could have just thrown it away, but he took a shot to end it. It didn't happen. Game over.

---

Same thing I was saying. Spike it, or fake spike and the play is not there, throw it away. Kick for the OT.

I honestly don't think the route was so bad, he had the position, he had open space in front of him, if the defender wouldn't have climbed up his back to defend it or if the tip would have gone any other direction aside from up (luck as he was swatting down if I recall correctly) it is incomplete and we kick the FG. As for OT, someone already posted in a different thread, we then rely on the coin flip, 50/50 chance we don't ever see the ball considering how the last NE drive went . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rotorhead

I honestly don't think the route was so bad, he had the position, he had open space in front of him, if the defender wouldn't have climbed up his back to defend it or if the tip would have gone any other direction aside from up (luck as he was swatting down if I recall correctly) it is incomplete and we kick the FG. As for OT, someone already posted in a different thread, we then rely on the coin flip, 50/50 chance we don't ever see the ball considering how the last NE drive went . . .

---

And considering how our last drive went too.

I don't dislike the play being called. It's the throw into tight coverage that was a bad decision. Live to play another down there. The risk was too great, obviously. Just my opinion maybe, but BB should have known better and thrown that one away.

Judging by the anger displayed on the sidelines by our defense after that INT, I would not be very surprised if we don't give up another point to ANY team all the way through the superbowl. Should have won, could have won, leave nothing to chance. If they can't score, they can't beat us.

All I can say is that I'm glad that ending didn't come in the AFCCG. Wow! That would be some way to go into the offseason!

Still cant believe it happened... we are yhe new 28- 3 falcons