The costly mistakes of CB Antwon Blake

[steelreserve]

I will say this about Boykin's lack of knowing the playbook...

Denver playoff game.
Third-&-12.
A fifth-string scrub receiver converts, because Boykin is doing "I don't know what".

On the other hand, is that a worse result than what Blake would give us?

How about the other Denver game where he basically spotted them FOUR touchdowns? (He had a little help from Allen on two of them, but as I've said before, I think Allen is an OK player normally, but when he's on the same side as Blake, they both play 10 times worse.)

Boykin comes in and Blake goes to the bench. We give up no points for the rest of the game. I don't know how much more clear-cut it gets.

Boykin had a few lousy plays here and there, but on the whole looked like a regular CB. Blake was a doorknob to the asshole. The fact that Blake actually KNOWS the playbook and is as bad as he is ought to tell us something ...

[teegre]

On the other hand, is that a worse result than what Blake would give us?

How about the other Denver game where he basically spotted them FOUR touchdowns? (He had a little help from Allen on two of them, but as I've said before, I think Allen is an OK player normally, but when he's on the same side as Blake, they both play 10 times worse.)

Boykin comes in and Blake goes to the bench. We give up no points for the rest of the game. I don't know how much more clear-cut it gets.

Boykin had a few lousy plays here and there, but on the whole looked like a regular CB. Blake was a doorknob to the asshole. The fact that Blake actually KNOWS the playbook and is as bad as he is ought to tell us something ...

I hear you, but a few counter points.

Blake often plays against the top receiver.

In the Denver game, when Boykin came in, and they changed the coverages (Boykin was covering the slot guy). Plus, the front seven came out highly motivated in the second half. (I think that they got their asses chewed off.)

To clarify: I am not defending Blake; he's not very good. But, I don't think that there is much evidence that Boykin would have been markedly better than Blake. Then again, almost anyone would have been an improvement over Blake.

[Steel Peon]

How about the other Denver game where he basically spotted them FOUR touchdowns?

Statements like this are the main reasons I almost stopped commenting on these fan boards altogether. Even with this being as absurd an insinuation as it is, I'm afraid many, many, many Steelers fans actually think this is possible.

[SteelerFanInStl]

I will say this about Boykin's lack of knowing the playbook...

Denver playoff game.
Third-&-12.
A fifth-string scrub receiver converts, because Boykin is doing "I don't know what".

So you're saying that a player that knows the playbook never gets caught out of position?

[steelreserve]

Statements like this are the main reasons I almost stopped commenting on these fan boards altogether. Even with this being as absurd an insinuation as it is, I'm afraid many, many, many Steelers fans actually think this is possible.

Yeah we all know. Blah blah, team game, blah blah blah. Did you see how badly they took advantage of Blake, and the Blake/Allen tandem, in that game? Get some regular defense out of those guys, and Denver isn't in position to score any of those TDs.

I guess you could argue that it would've happened anyway, or there were plays made against other defenders on those drives too ... but the real back-breakers were almost all Blake and Allen. Blake is the starting point for a cascading failure across the entire defensive secondary, just like McLendon and Cam Thomas are the starting point for a cascading failure across the front seven.

If you can't see that, then I'm afraid you're the one who is disconnected with reality, and sure, go ahead and stop commenting; I doubt many would miss it.

[teegre]

So you're saying that a player that knows the playbook never gets caught out of position?

I never said that.

What I am indeed saying is that if we are going to mercilessly lambast Blake for giving up receptions to players like AJ Green, we should at least make a note of it when Boykin makes a gaff.

[steelreserve]

I never said that.

What I am indeed saying is that if we are going to mercilessly lambast Blake for giving up receptions to players like AJ Green, we should at least make a note of it when Boykin makes a gaff.

Well, nobody's perfect, that's for sure. Boykin just seemed to have a more or less normal amount of mistakes. Whereas Blake could be counted on to leave receivers wide open way down the field 5 or 6 times a game, and the only question was whether the QB would overthrow him or not. Fortunately, we seemed to be blessed by a high number of key situations throughout the season where the QB did just that, or overlooked it and threw to someone else - otherwise we may well have been watching the playoffs from a couch.

[SteelerFanInStl]

I never said that.

What I am indeed saying is that if we are going to mercilessly lambast Blake for giving up receptions to players like AJ Green, we should at least make a note of it when Boykin makes a gaff.

You said that Boykin didn't know the playbook and you offered that play as proof.

Being out of position on a play doesn't mean that the player doesn't know the playbook. Even the best players get caught out of position now and then.

What happened last year is history. I'd rather talk about how we can make the team better.

[teegre]

Well, nobody's perfect, that's for sure. Boykin just seemed to have a more or less normal amount of mistakes.

Maybe, maybe not. I'm not entirely certain that Boykin would have been drastically better at covering opposing teams' #1 and #2 receivers.

Again, I'm not saying Blake is great, but for whatever reason, no one regularly points out Boykin's mistakes. He seems to get a free pass.

- - - Updated - - -

You said that Boykin didn't know the playbook and you offered that play as proof.

Being out of position on a play doesn't mean that the player doesn't know the playbook. Even the best players get caught out of position now and then.

What happened last year is history. I'd rather talk about how we can make the team better.

Okay... fair enough. He knows the playbook, and still can't cover a team's fifth option. That's actually worse.

MOVING ON:
I see Blake or Boykin as status quo... thus, neither of them will cut it. Golson should improve the secondary a little bit. Adding another CB (R3 would be my suggestion) should make the secondary "good enough" to win a championship.

[teegre]

I apologize if I'm coming across as "snarky." It is just that Blake gets ripped in endlessly (this thread keeps popping up again & again), and yet Boykin gets carte blanche.

STORY:
Years ago, on another site, everyone was debating who was better: Sheldon Brown or Pete Hunter??? After about a month, I added my two cents: "They both suck."

Deja vú. That's how I feel right now.

Blake sucked. I get it. But, I truly don't see Boykin as some sort of savior.

Makes sense???

[Cyphon25]

You guys are focusing on the wrong thing. It was NEVER about Boykin vs Blake. 2 different positions that shouldn't even be compared. What it came down to (and this is from the coaches if I remember right) is this:

The coaches were too comfortable with how the defense operated with Gay playing the slot so they were reluctant to move him to the outside. The problem with that reasoning is this (and I like to do it with numbers because I am a nerd)

Let's say they consider Gay an 8.5 in the slot and a 7 on the outside. Boykin is also an 8.5 in the slot so you lose nothing there, and Blake is like a 3 on the outside. Even if you consider Boykin a 7.5 or 8 in the slot, the loss isn't as bad as the positive you gain by moving Gay outside.

Obviously they didn't consider the numbers that way and they were clearly wrong, but nobody in here should be comparing Boykin to Blake. It was never those 2. It was about playing Boykin over Gay in the slot.

[Mojouw]

We need to also inject some outside variables in to this equation. Part of the Steelers secondary's problem was not just that this or that individual player sucked - it was one of communication and handeling overloads. The most obvious example was the Seattle game. The Seahawks identified that the Steelers were playing sides or zones with their DBs. They would send 2-3 receivers into one guys area. Forcing that defender into a "no-win" scenario. Cover Option A or Option B? Whichever one they chose, the other was wide open.

Will Allen and Blake were repeatedly isolated and forced into this decision. Same thing Haley does when he sees the opponent in single high safety. He sends Bryant and AB deep on opposite hashes. No matter what the safety does, he is wrong.

Look, do I really care if Blake every suits up for another NFL game, much less for the Steelers? Nope. But football is a ton more complicated than "that guy sucks" and replacing that cog will fix the broken machine. When the whole machine is kinda dodgy...

- - - Updated - - -

You guys are focusing on the wrong thing. It was NEVER about Boykin vs Blake. 2 different positions that shouldn't even be compared. What it came down to (and this is from the coaches if I remember right) is this:

The coaches were too comfortable with how the defense operated with Gay playing the slot so they were reluctant to move him to the outside. The problem with that reasoning is this (and I like to do it with numbers because I am a nerd)

Let's say they consider Gay an 8.5 in the slot and a 7 on the outside. Boykin is also an 8.5 in the slot so you lose nothing there, and Blake is like a 3 on the outside. Even if you consider Boykin a 7.5 or 8 in the slot, the loss isn't as bad as the positive you gain by moving Gay outside.

Obviously they didn't consider the numbers that way and they were clearly wrong, but nobody in here should be comparing Boykin to Blake. It was never those 2. It was about playing Boykin over Gay in the slot.

But that is a bit of false logic. It is starting with the assumption that Boykin was not seeing the field despite demonstrating the ability to competently play in the Steelers defensive system. We have absolutely no way of knowing if that is true. We can assume it to be true and then fill in all kinds of wacky theories about arrogance and what not for why the better player was nailed to the bench for 10 or 12 weeks.

OR - we can start with a more logical premise. Boykin was NOT doing something that was a foundational expectation for him seeing the field. He eventually demonstrated whatever that criteria was in practice and meetings. He saw the field.

Which one sounds more like how a group of people working towards a goal would proceed?

[Cyphon25]

We need to also inject some outside variables in to this equation. Part of the Steelers secondary's problem was not just that this or that individual player sucked - it was one of communication and handeling overloads. The most obvious example was the Seattle game. The Seahawks identified that the Steelers were playing sides or zones with their DBs. They would send 2-3 receivers into one guys area. Forcing that defender into a "no-win" scenario. Cover Option A or Option B? Whichever one they chose, the other was wide open.

Will Allen and Blake were repeatedly isolated and forced into this decision. Same thing Haley does when he sees the opponent in single high safety. He sends Bryant and AB deep on opposite hashes. No matter what the safety does, he is wrong.

Look, do I really care if Blake every suits up for another NFL game, much less for the Steelers? Nope. But football is a ton more complicated than "that guy sucks" and replacing that cog will fix the broken machine. When the whole machine is kinda dodgy...

- - - Updated - - -



But that is a bit of false logic. It is starting with the assumption that Boykin was not seeing the field despite demonstrating the ability to competently play in the Steelers defensive system. We have absolutely no way of knowing if that is true. We can assume it to be true and then fill in all kinds of wacky theories about arrogance and what not for why the better player was nailed to the bench for 10 or 12 weeks.

OR - we can start with a more logical premise. Boykin was NOT doing something that was a foundational expectation for him seeing the field. He eventually demonstrated whatever that criteria was in practice and meetings. He saw the field.

Which one sounds more like how a group of people working towards a goal would proceed?

That would be a valid point minus one thing. Blake was not doing lots of things that should have been a foundational expectation for keeping him on the field and he was doing it on Sundays, practice be damned. He was really so bad that they had nothing to lose.

And look, the truth is out there in the interviews that Tomlin had some kind of bias whether we want to say it is logical or not. Didn't he say something about liking Blake out there because of his tackling or how he played against the run? And he lead the team and league in missed tackles. Boykin comes in and is a very solid tackler. And I don't remember for sure but I would bet $500 he said at some point he was happy with the DB play. If that is a coach who is happy with what his DB's showed he is a coach who doesn't understand the game of football.

[Mojouw]

That would be a valid point minus one thing. Blake was not doing lots of things that should have been a foundational expectation for keeping him on the field and he was doing it on Sundays, practice be damned. He was really so bad that they had nothing to lose.

And look, the truth is out there in the interviews that Tomlin had some kind of bias whether we want to say it is logical or not. Didn't he say something about liking Blake out there because of his tackling or how he played against the run? And he lead the team and league in missed tackles. Boykin comes in and is a very solid tackler. And I don't remember for sure but I would bet $500 he said at some point he was happy with the DB play. If that is a coach who is happy with what his DB's showed he is a coach who doesn't understand the game of football.

This is where we differ. I assume that everything said by coaches and team officials in the press in media is cliched, scrubbed, and basically nonsense.

[fansince'76]

This is where we differ. I assume that everything said by coaches and team officials in the press in media is cliched, scrubbed, and basically nonsense.

Of course it is. I stopped listening to the pressers and "in-depth interviews" years ago for exactly that reason. They literally blather on for 20+ minutes and sometimes even longer and wind up saying absolutely nothing. If NFL coaches had their druthers, they would never talk to the media. Ever.

[Cyphon25]

This is where we differ. I assume that everything said by coaches and team officials in the press in media is cliched, scrubbed, and basically nonsense.

Don't get me wrong, I agree it is mostly BS as well but you are still held responsible for what you say. We can't be sure he doesn't actually believe it. Especially given that he kept playing Blake. So I lean towards it not being BS and Tomlin actually not understanding DB talent very well.

On top of that, it isn't like he had to give those answers. He could say something where he doesn't bash the player but also doesn't praise them for poor performance.

[Mojouw]

Don't get me wrong, I agree it is mostly BS as well but you are still held responsible for what you say. We can't be sure he doesn't actually believe it. Especially given that he kept playing Blake. So I lean towards it not being BS and Tomlin actually not understanding DB talent very well.

On top of that, it isn't like he had to give those answers. He could say something where he doesn't bash the player but also doesn't praise them for poor performance.

Again, I don't think you are fully taking my point. I do not believe that Tomlin or any other coach really believe 90 or more percent of the cliched nonsense they spew to the media.

Am I arguing that Tomlin is great or even decent judge of DB talent? Nope. I really have no idea, because none of the nonsense he or anyone else says to the media is more than bland spin.

Look, you may be correct. It is highly possible I am wrong. I just have no interest in paying close attention to NFL figures media comments in order to try to armchair analyze my way into their through process and true opinions on anything.

[steelreserve]

Forget what the coaches say in press conferences - the only thing that is on public display, and we all see the same thing, is the game on the field.

And what we saw there was a guy who was completely in over his head, but they continually ran him out there week after week, long after it was apparent to even the casual observer that it was a huge problem, and that it was not improving by giving him time to "adjust," "get comfortable," "get up to speed" or whatever you call it; it was just getting worse as opponents exploited it more. And they did have a guy on the bench who, if not stellar, was certainly not as bad, and showed it when given the chance.

And even then they STILL bent over backwards to keep fucktarded Blake on the field for about 40% of the snaps, despite having THREE guys in front of him who were more skilled and more or less functioned as a unit.

So what I saw was that Tomlin fucked up royally - or if it was someone else's idea, that person fucked up royally and Tomlin fucked up by not putting a stop to it - and it would be very, very difficult to come up with a satisfactory excuse for either. He fucked up. It looks to me like more of Tomlin's doghouse bullshit that he has to do with someone once a year, and this time it cost us more than in the past.

I hate coaches who do that. I've seen them at every level from youth sports to high schools to college and pros, and it just serves no purpose and sometimes messes things up.