Assistants Arians, LeBeau will return next season for Steelers

[suitanim]

Props to Smizik for at least bothering to put a fresh new look on the old and tired act of scapegoating Arians for the myriad problems this team faces in all 3 facets of the game. Pardon me for asking, though, but what the Hell does Arians relationship with Ben have to do with poor starting field position? For a complete lack of TO's created by the defense? For shaky special teams play? For poor (at times) or mediocre (most of the rest) field goal kicking? For giving up a 92 yard game losing drive with just over a minute left against a very average Flacco in perhaps the most important game of the regular season (and at home to boot)? For making an H-back playing out of position look like the second coming of Joe Montana in a playoff game? For the multiple clock management and challenge flag mistakes that the team made?

Sorry, I'm going to defer to the front office.

[tube517]

Did I say Tampa? Got my Florida teams mixed up...

Anyway, their stats weren't all that much better than ours, and their record was worse, and he has already failed as a HC once, but they couldn't wait to snatch him up...

Their owner looks like Tony Orlando with Rollie Fingers' moustache and Al Sharpton's hair.

http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/dish...ticket-holders

[Chidi29]

The case against Arians-Bob Smizik


This is about Bruce Arians and why he should not be the offensive coordinator of the Steelers. It’s not about what an unimaginative and predictable play-caller he is. It’s not about what a dreary offense he runs. I don’t believe either to be the case.

My belief that Arians should step aside -- as gently as possibly because he deserves that -- is based on what many people believe to be his strength: His relationship with quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. The two men are close. It has been described as a friendship; as a father-son relationship; as an uncle-nephew relationship. Whatever, this type of a relationship is viewed as a positive.

I view it as a negative. Roethlisberger doesn’t need a friend, a father or an uncle as his offensive coordinator. He needs a boss. Not a tyrant, but someone to lead him to a better place. Arians is not capable, because of the long-standing close relationship, of altering Roethlisberger’s style.

I’m not sure Roethlisberger has a boss with the Steelers. And that’s not a knock on him. By most accounts, he’s been a team guy, not a prima-donna in his latest reincarnation.

But he is the organization’s $100 million man and, as such, gets special treatment. Nothing wrong with that either -- to an extent. But the Steelers have allowed Roethlisberger to become too undisciplined in his approach to the job. He needs someone to make him more adhere to a specific offense.

read more....http://communityvoices.sites.post-ga...against-arians

Oh Bob, how quickly we forget the articles we (meaning: you) write. A November article entitled, "In defense of Arians".

http://communityvoices.sites.post-ga...ense-of-arians

Granted, it has to deal with the team's offensive line and not Ben but did Bob forget how that was apart of the equation in evaluating Arians just a few short months ago?

And funny how there is no mention of Randy Fitchner who probably talks to Ben as much as Arians does.

The biggest thing that bothers me about this, "Ben isn't playing the way he could be" argument is that fans are going to try and make this and at the same time, call him a top 5 QB a Hall of Famer, and how ESPN unfairly treats him like Brady and Brees because of his different playing style. You can't have it both ways.

[Chidi29]

The case against Arians-Bob Smizik


This is about Bruce Arians and why he should not be the offensive coordinator of the Steelers. It’s not about what an unimaginative and predictable play-caller he is. It’s not about what a dreary offense he runs. I don’t believe either to be the case.

My belief that Arians should step aside -- as gently as possibly because he deserves that -- is based on what many people believe to be his strength: His relationship with quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. The two men are close. It has been described as a friendship; as a father-son relationship; as an uncle-nephew relationship. Whatever, this type of a relationship is viewed as a positive.

I view it as a negative. Roethlisberger doesn’t need a friend, a father or an uncle as his offensive coordinator. He needs a boss. Not a tyrant, but someone to lead him to a better place. Arians is not capable, because of the long-standing close relationship, of altering Roethlisberger’s style.

I’m not sure Roethlisberger has a boss with the Steelers. And that’s not a knock on him. By most accounts, he’s been a team guy, not a prima-donna in his latest reincarnation.

But he is the organization’s $100 million man and, as such, gets special treatment. Nothing wrong with that either -- to an extent. But the Steelers have allowed Roethlisberger to become too undisciplined in his approach to the job. He needs someone to make him more adhere to a specific offense.

read more....http://communityvoices.sites.post-ga...against-arians

Plus, I disagree with his premise anyway. First, that's a statement that can't really be backed up. Does he know what is going on in the locker room? What in Ben's game makes him look any less disciplined than previous years?

I thikn Ben had his best year in terms of getting the ball away quickly and he has really developed his mental game. He's not perfect and the aspects Bob talks about aren't perfect either and probably never will be but he's showing yearly progression and had another fantastic year. Why mess with it? Why is a good relationship between QB and OC a bad thing?

[Chidi29]

Smizik basically calls for Ben to be like Brady, Brees, and Rodgers but in an October 24th article he writes, "Roethlisberger is no Brady and might never be..."

Again Bob, you can't have it both ways.

[NCSteeler]

Props to Smizik for at least bothering to put a fresh new look on the old and tired act of scapegoating Arians for the myriad problems this team faces in all 3 facets of the game. Pardon me for asking, though, but what the Hell does Arians relationship with Ben have to do with poor starting field position? For a complete lack of TO's created by the defense? For shaky special teams play? For poor (at times) or mediocre (most of the rest) field goal kicking? For giving up a 92 yard game losing drive with just over a minute left against a very average Flacco in perhaps the most important game of the regular season (and at home to boot)? For making an H-back playing out of position look like the second coming of Joe Montana in a playoff game? For the multiple clock management and challenge flag mistakes that the team made?

Sorry, I'm going to defer to the front office.

Bad starting field position - our offense is 5th in yards per drive , while only being 14th in points per drive , sounds like the nick name FieldGoal Bruce actually fits
defense lack of turn overs - our offense is 29th in turning it over, pretty bad combination

[Count Steeler]

Bad starting field position - our offense is 5th in yards per drive , while only being 14th in points per drive , sounds like the nick name FieldGoal Bruce actually fits
defense lack of turn overs - our offense is 29th in turning it over, pretty bad combination

Seems the defense should take some blame here. Bad starting field position, move the ball, punt away. Opponents should start with bad field position. Get a 3 and out and we get the ball back with much better starting field position. Either our ST's did not perform in keeping returns down, or our defense did not stop opponents deep. They let them move the ball and get us pinned once again.

[BlacknGoldBabe]

Smizik basically calls for Ben to be like Brady, Brees, and Rodgers but in an October 24th article he writes, "Roethlisberger is no Brady and might never be..."

Again Bob, you can't have it both ways.

Bob must have CRS

[suitanim]

Bad starting field position - our offense is 5th in yards per drive , while only being 14th in points per drive , sounds like the nick name FieldGoal Bruce actually fits
defense lack of turn overs - our offense is 29th in turning it over, pretty bad combination

Without knowing you said it, you said it. We were also 29th in starting field position last time I looked. Because of lack of turnovers, our average starting field position sucked. We were 5th in yards per drive because we actually HAVE a good offense (in spite of the line). The reason we drop to 14th in points is simply a measure of having so much more field between us and 28 of the 31 other teams. If our offense really sucked as bad as you myopic Arians scapegoaters claimed, we'd be bottom 3rd in yards per drive and bottom 3rd in points per drive and overall scoring.

As I've said a million times before, you can't be critical of chess if you only understand the game of checkers, and that's exactly what dumping all or almost all the blame for this teams shortcomings on Arians is...

[86WARD]

I guess I'm content with old and slow.

[El-Gonzo Jackson]

According to this site, http://www.advancednflstats.com/2011...-starting.html the Steelers were 11th in average opponent starting field position which correlates to win percentage and yes...the Steelers had a 12-4 record.

Steelers had the 5th most fumbles lost, the 15th most interceptions thrown and the 30th ranked fumbles recovered and 25th in defensive interceptions. On average, they start drives at their own 27 yard line, while the 49ers start theirs at the 33 yard line.

The Packers give up more yards to opponents than they gain. The Saints are ranked #21 in turnover differential, the Steelers are #29, but the Saints score 13.9 more points per game than the Steelers. I just think many on the board are tired of hearing how the Steelers CAN be as productive on offense as the Saints, Patriots, Packers ......it would be nice to see the Offense back it up.

[X-Terminator]

According to this site, http://www.advancednflstats.com/2011...-starting.html the Steelers were 11th in average opponent starting field position which correlates to win percentage and yes...the Steelers had a 12-4 record.

Steelers had the 5th most fumbles lost, the 15th most interceptions thrown and the 30th ranked fumbles recovered and 25th in defensive interceptions. On average, they start drives at their own 27 yard line, while the 49ers start theirs at the 33 yard line.

The Packers give up more yards to opponents than they gain. The Saints are ranked #21 in turnover differential, the Steelers are #29, but the Saints score 13.9 more points per game than the Steelers. I just think many on the board are tired of hearing how the Steelers CAN be as productive on offense as the Saints, Patriots, Packers ......it would be nice to see the Offense back it up.

And what is the one constant among those 3 teams? If you said a better OL, go to the head of the class. The guys up front being semi-competent makes a HUGE difference. Improve the OL, and the offense improves as a whole. This isn't rocket science, but yet, so many fans want to put ALL of the blame on "Field Goal Bruce" and refuse to consider any other factors that go into a successful offense.

[GBMelBlount]

And what is the one constant among those 3 teams? If you said a better OL, go to the head of the class.

The guys up front being semi-competent makes a HUGE difference. Improve the OL, and the offense improves as a whole. This isn't rocket science, but yet, so many fans want to put ALL of the blame on "Field Goal Bruce" and refuse to consider any other factors that go into a successful offense.

ABSOLUTELY.

A better offensive line would increase our scoring, decrease turnovers and improve field position...

That being said....I am still not an Arians fan.

[El-Gonzo Jackson]

And what is the one constant among those 3 teams? If you said a better OL, go to the head of the class. The guys up front being semi-competent makes a HUGE difference. Improve the OL, and the offense improves as a whole. This isn't rocket science, but yet, so many fans want to put ALL of the blame on "Field Goal Bruce" and refuse to consider any other factors that go into a successful offense.

There are at least 20 other teams with better O lines than us. I believe the Saints have the best O line in the NFL. But the Packers with Marshall Newhouse, Scott Wells, TJ Lang, Josh Sitton are nothing special. They get the ball out quick and score points.

I'm tired of hearing every August how Ben is in the same class as Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers...when the offenses are not the same. The Steelers offense is going to be average again next season and the defense is no longer as dominant as it was 2 or 3 years ago that it can keep the Offense in games or score points.

[suitanim]

There are at least 20 other teams with better O lines than us. I believe the Saints have the best O line in the NFL. But the Packers with Marshall Newhouse, Scott Wells, TJ Lang, Josh Sitton are nothing special. They get the ball out quick and score points.

I'm tired of hearing every August how Ben is in the same class as Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers...when the offenses are not the same. The Steelers offense is going to be average again next season and the defense is no longer as dominant as it was 2 or 3 years ago that it can keep the Offense in games or score points.

So we should......what? Pass more?

I completely 100% disagree with your assessment of the offense. This team USED to have decent skill players, an average QB, a good RB and a great line, and they won, but they didn't win Super Bowl's. It had NOTHING to do with the OC.

Now the team has at least a top 10 QB, if not better, great skill players, an above average RB tandem, and a shitty OL. They won Super Bowl's with this configuration because the OL was a little below average. It has gotten worse. We are perhaps a CURRENT olineman staying healthy (thinking Pouncey) and 1-2 new guys, or maybe newer guys improving along the front away from winning Super Bowl's again.

There is WAY too much blame being placed on Arians. It makes no sense. It's illogical and irrational, knee-jerk, reflexive scapegoating.

[El-Gonzo Jackson]

So we should......what? Pass more?

I completely 100% disagree with your assessment of the offense. This team USED to have decent skill players, an average QB, a good RB and a great line, and they won, but they didn't win Super Bowl's. It had NOTHING to do with the OC.

Now the team has at least a top 10 QB, if not better, great skill players, an above average RB tandem, and a shitty OL. They won Super Bowl's with this configuration because the OL was a little below average. It has gotten worse. We are perhaps a CURRENT olineman staying healthy (thinking Pouncey) and 1-2 new guys, or maybe newer guys improving along the front away from winning Super Bowl's again.

There is WAY too much blame being placed on Arians. It makes no sense. It's illogical and irrational, knee-jerk, reflexive scapegoating.

There are very few teams in the NFL that are concerned that the Steelers offense will get to the 10 yard line, control the line of scrimmage and physically dominate the Defensive front and score. They are worried that Mike Wallace and Antonio Brown will run by them....but not from the 10 yard line. And since there is no threat of the vertical speed in the red zone, you cant run a bubble screen from there either. That is why the Steelers can put up statistics, but end up kicking FG's instead of scoring TD's.

I am not advocating going back to 1970's run dominated football. I am and always have advocated the balance between a good passing game and a physical run game. Since 2007 that notion of having a physical running game has been devalued and the Steelers have become a soft passing team. Joey Porter called the 2005 Colts "soft". The 2011 Steelers offense has become softer than that Colts Offense was.

I would like to see a change, but probably will not for at least 2 more years.

[suitanim]

All we have to do is upgrade SLIGHTLY along the offensive line. If we do that, we can run a little better, which will force teams to respect our run game a little more, which will, in turn, open up our pass game. All of that is applicable both in AND out of the redzone.

We aren't far off here....it's not broke, it's just a little damaged. It's far better to fix it then to tear it all up TRYING to fix what isn't already broken. And if we DID apply that philosophy, it'd be much more appropriate to start with our defense than our offense.

[Texasteel]

Both offense and defense can be greatly improved by strengthening the line. We have finally shown a movement in that direction in the last couple of years and I expect it to continue. This is a good draft to do just that.

[ALLD]

I guess I'm content with old and slow.

Brett Favre

[El-Gonzo Jackson]

Both offense and defense can be greatly improved by strengthening the line. We have finally shown a movement in that direction in the last couple of years and I expect it to continue. This is a good draft to do just that.

We could add DeCastro and Jon Martin to this O line from the draft and our offensive will still rank around 12-15th in the league and somewhere 15-20th in scoring. Just wait until next October and we can all feel the deja vu.

[86WARD]

Draft a center and move Pouncey to guard...wow!

[Texasteel]

We could add DeCastro and Jon Martin to this O line from the draft and our offensive will still rank around 12-15th in the league and somewhere 15-20th in scoring. Just wait until next October and we can all feel the deja vu.

You never really know what is going to happen year to year, but I would suspect that a stronger OL would help greatly with a stronger running game, particularly in the red zone. If the defenders have to think about the running game more they would not be able to consentrate on Ben. I would also expect that a stronger middle of the line would cut down on the free runs to Ben by the defenders.

The main deja vu steelers have to deal with is that the Steelers, most year, are in the middle of the title race with a very good chance to make the playoffs. I don't see that as a bad thing.

[NCSteeler]

Without knowing you said it, you said it. We were also 29th in starting field position last time I looked. Because of lack of turnovers, our average starting field position sucked. We were 5th in yards per drive because we actually HAVE a good offense (in spite of the line). The reason we drop to 14th in points is simply a measure of having so much more field between us and 28 of the 31 other teams. If our offense really sucked as bad as you myopic Arians scapegoaters claimed, we'd be bottom 3rd in yards per drive and bottom 3rd in points per drive and overall scoring.

As I've said a million times before, you can't be critical of chess if you only understand the game of checkers, and that's exactly what dumping all or almost all the blame for this teams shortcomings on Arians is...

We are actually 25th in starting field position at something like 26.6 yard line, the 28.8 would move us into the top ten, so not a big difference. The league average is 28.4 for the season. On a side note the best at limiting opponents starting field position is SF, one more reason they are as good as they are. Our Sts are 14th in the league for opponents starting position.

[NCSteeler]

And what is the one constant among those 3 teams? If you said a better OL, go to the head of the class. The guys up front being semi-competent makes a HUGE difference. Improve the OL, and the offense improves as a whole. This isn't rocket science, but yet, so many fans want to put ALL of the blame on "Field Goal Bruce" and refuse to consider any other factors that go into a successful offense.

Are you sure the Oline on many of those teams are not better by play design? How can it be teams that have positioned int eh draft around the same position as us have so much better lines? And don't say they draft better because I'm always told here in reference to Arians that we should defer to the FO, so it's obvious we don't draft poorly. So which is it
A. we draft like total crap
b our coaches don't coach well (position)
c. our play design sucks

It seems like it has to one of them

[X-Terminator]

Are you sure the Oline on many of those teams are not better by play design? How can it be teams that have positioned int eh draft around the same position as us have so much better lines? And don't say they draft better because I'm always told here in reference to Arians that we should defer to the FO, so it's obvious we don't draft poorly. So which is it
A. we draft like total crap
b our coaches don't coach well (position)
c. our play design sucks

It seems like it has to one of them

That's the case for the Packers, maybe, but not the Saints or, to a lesser extent, the Patriots*. The Packers' offense clearly is built around Rodgers' strengths, because they cannot run the ball at all. The Patriots* run it about as well as the Steelers do, but they are very good in pass protection and usually give Marsha a day and a half to throw. That alone makes them better than the Steelers' OL. The Saints, as mentioned, probably have the best OL in the NFL and can both run and pass the ball very well, though obviously they are a much better passing team. That is what the Steelers should strive for - be a passing team, but when it comes time to pound it in, they can do it.

But to answer your question, well obviously they didn't draft very well on the OL until the past 2 seasons. They rode the guys they drafted all those years ago and replaced them with mediocre at best talent. I will admit sometimes the play selection isn't very good. And considering that there has already been an OL coaching change, obviously that means coaching has been a problem. So it's all of the above, and again proves my point that it isn't just one factor, nor is it all one person's (Arians) fault. I'm still not getting this incessant need to blame it all on Arians. It doesn't make any sense and is intellectually lazy IMO.

[pepsyman1]

So we should......what? Pass more?

I completely 100% disagree with your assessment of the offense. This team USED to have decent skill players, an average QB, a good RB and a great line, and they won, but they didn't win Super Bowl's. It had NOTHING to do with the OC.

Now the team has at least a top 10 QB, if not better, great skill players, an above average RB tandem, and a shitty OL. They won Super Bowl's with this configuration because the OL was a little below average. It has gotten worse. We are perhaps a CURRENT olineman staying healthy (thinking Pouncey) and 1-2 new guys, or maybe newer guys improving along the front away from winning Super Bowl's again.

There is WAY too much blame being placed on Arians. It makes no sense. It's illogical and irrational, knee-jerk, reflexive scapegoating.

It's not too much blame being put on Arians. There are plenty of other teams that have O-lines as bad as ours that still manage to score more POINTS. Arians has had a total of 7 years in the NFL as an OC. When have ANY of his teams scored a lot of points? NEVER. He doesn't know how to make best use of the talent we have and refuses to make adjustments to take some pressure off the o-line. It's amazing how we can watch teams use 3 step drops and shorter passes to keep our D from getting to their QB and then our own OC refuses to make the same obvious adjustment for OUR QB when he's barely able to walk. The guy is a stiff and our O will never reach it's true potential under his watch.

[Austin87]

It's not too much blame being put on Arians. There are plenty of other teams that have O-lines as bad as ours that still manage to score more POINTS. Arians has had a total of 7 years in the NFL as an OC. When have ANY of his teams scored a lot of points? NEVER. He doesn't know how to make best use of the talent we have and refuses to make adjustments to take some pressure off the o-line. It's amazing how we can watch teams use 3 step drops and shorter passes to keep our D from getting to their QB and then our own OC refuses to make the same obvious adjustment for OUR QB when he's barely able to walk. The guy is a stiff and our O will never reach it's true potential under his watch.

Good post!

[NCSteeler]

That's the case for the Packers, maybe, but not the Saints or, to a lesser extent, the Patriots*. The Packers' offense clearly is built around Rodgers' strengths, because they cannot run the ball at all. The Patriots* run it about as well as the Steelers do, but they are very good in pass protection and usually give Marsha a day and a half to throw. That alone makes them better than the Steelers' OL. The Saints, as mentioned, probably have the best OL in the NFL and can both run and pass the ball very well, though obviously they are a much better passing team. That is what the Steelers should strive for - be a passing team, but when it comes time to pound it in, they can do it.

But to answer your question, well obviously they didn't draft very well on the OL until the past 2 seasons. They rode the guys they drafted all those years ago and replaced them with mediocre at best talent. I will admit sometimes the play selection isn't very good. And considering that there has already been an OL coaching change, obviously that means coaching has been a problem. So it's all of the above, and again proves my point that it isn't just one factor, nor is it all one person's (Arians) fault. I'm still not getting this incessant need to blame it all on Arians. It doesn't make any sense and is intellectually lazy IMO.

I think were on the same page, but what I'm saying is something has got to change. I don't believe that a slightly better Oline will make much difference, so something else needs to get better too.

[Texasteel]

Are you sure the Oline on many of those teams are not better by play design? How can it be teams that have positioned int eh draft around the same position as us have so much better lines? And don't say they draft better because I'm always told here in reference to Arians that we should defer to the FO, so it's obvious we don't draft poorly. So which is it
A. we draft like total crap
b our coaches don't coach well (position)
c. our play design sucks

It seems like it has to one of them

I think there is a D.

D. Our line either miss their blocks, or gets driven into the backfield, or pick up a stupid penalty.

IMO we have seen a lot of D the last few years, and I think this is the major problem, particularly in the red zone.

I think a better line will fix a large part of the problem.

[The WH]

So why no hate tossed the way of Dick Lebeau?