The New Steel Curtain

[steelreserve]

If the Taperiots can score any number of points that they want, at any time that they want, why did they punt on the second possession of the game??? The game was hardly out of reach at the time.

Didn't we start out playing some man coverage, or at least playing the receivers tighter, and then abandoned it because we thought it wasn't working? Sounds like it was working better than whatever other bullshit we switched to.

I also think that when you have the game well in hand, you tend to score a bit less than you would if you continued to go all-out for points. Not because you're being altruistic or whatnot, but because you play safer, which is a tactically sound decision to tilt the odds further in your favor. (unless taken to extremes, which unfortunately you also see a lot of)

But, again, GBMelBlount's point was "if the Steelers had scored 40 points" (which would have been 5 points/drive), they could have won.

You keep saying that the Taperiots would have simply scored more points.

I contend that the Steelers scoring more points would have indeed improved their chances vastly of winning.

Everyone can continue ignore the offense's lackluster output and blame that loss solely on "not playing man coverage." But, in reality, 17 points wasn't going to cut it. Yes, the defense sucked, but to continue to say that the offense had zero part in the loss is asinine (and frustrating to read hundreds upon hundreds of times).

I think the offense would've needed a lot more possessions to score 40 points. Basically, the offense needed to play better and the defense needed to play better. I think that's a lot more realistic path to victory than saying we could beat them with the same defense just by playing better offense. That game really was like ... if we made a game of it, they would've simply scored another touchdown on the next possession, because we couldn't stop shit. But we didn't make a game of it with our offense, so they didn't have to even do anything more than coast.

Time of possession is fairly important.

The Pats comeback win in the SB was in a larger part because the Falcons offense ran like 2 plays in the entire second half. That defense was gassed.

And why did the Falcons' offense hardly run any plays in the second half? Because Tom Brady stopped them, or because the Patriots' defense stopped them?

That's why time of possession is misleading. It's an important indicator, but people think it's all because of your offense and it's not. Getting a three-and-out does just as much if not more to swing that in your favor, and by extension, wear out the opposing defense. Your offense can't stop the other offense from making a long scoring drive. A lopsided time of possession in your favor usually means you're just dominating the game in general.

This is not to disagree with the rest of what you said, by the way. That particular game was going to be very difficult for us to win, for exactly the reasons you pointed out. I think the man-coverage argument is only that by playing the defense we did, we took it from a 10-15% chance of winning to no chance at all.

[st33lersguy]

I also think that when you have the game well in hand, you tend to score a bit less than you would if you continued to go all-out for points. Not because you're being altruistic or whatnot, but because you play safer, which is a tactically sound decision to tilt the odds further in your favor. (unless taken to extremes, which unfortunately you also see a lot of)

Also you deliberately take as much time as you are allotted off the play clock before running a play to run down more time and it takes you longer to run the same amount of plays. The Failcons for example didn't do either of those things and lost partly because of it

[st33lersguy]

Gravedigger and Bud both came on strong late in the year, I think if they can improve and make a real impact that will help the defense providing a solid interior and edge pass rusher (or if TJ produces 10+ sacks as a rookie which is less likely). Burns and Davis improving will also help. My main concern is the safety position next to Davis. Mitchell is only adequate against weak pass offenses and doesn't hold up well if at all against better offenses (the ones you tend to see more of in the postseason) and Golden and Dangerfield are just backup calibre.

[Born2Steel]

Cockrell and Burns were not terrible last season, and both should be improved.
Why wouldn't Dupree be better this season? He played well even after missed time for injury.
Harrison is still a monster.
Shazier and VW aren't going to slow down.
Heyward is back, Hargraves is a year better, and Tuitt has been great so far.
Davis and Mitchell both played well injured. Both should be better when healthy, wouldn't you think.

The depth in the front 7 has improved, and Sutton may be the steal of the draft. I find no downside in this starting lineup.

Ben is back and focused.
Bell, Conner, and Davis is a pretty solid RB corps.
Top 5 Oline. arguably best Steeler Oline ever.
AB, Bryant, Rogers, and JuJu will be nightmares for opposing DCs.
Only let down is our TE group, but Outlaw has played solid, and let's hope Grimble has a breakout season.

Why can this offense NOT put up 30-40 pts per game?

[teegre]

It's not realistic to think that the steelers will score 5 points per drive against a very good defense and a great defensive coach(BB of course) as the Pats have.

It's almost impossible and even if they do that, they are not certain to win if our defense continues to be bad against them.This is the problem.

Routine... no.
Possible... yes.

Again, the defense was not the ONLY problem in that game. 17 points doesn't beat most teams, let alone the Taperiots.

[teegre]

Didn't we start out playing some man coverage, or at least playing the receivers tighter, and then abandoned it because we thought it wasn't working? Sounds like it was working better than whatever other bullshit we switched to.

I also think that when you have the game well in hand, you tend to score a bit less than you would if you continued to go all-out for points. Not because you're being altruistic or whatnot, but because you play safer, which is a tactically sound decision to tilt the odds further in your favor. (unless taken to extremes, which unfortunately you also see a lot of)




I think the offense would've needed a lot more possessions to score 40 points. Basically, the offense needed to play better and the defense needed to play better. I think that's a lot more realistic path to victory than saying we could beat them with the same defense just by playing better offense. That game really was like ... if we made a game of it, they would've simply scored another touchdown on the next possession, because we couldn't stop shit. But we didn't make a game of it with our offense, so they didn't have to even do anything more than coast.




And why did the Falcons' offense hardly run any plays in the second half? Because Tom Brady stopped them, or because the Patriots' defense stopped them?

That's why time of possession is misleading. It's an important indicator, but people think it's all because of your offense and it's not. Getting a three-and-out does just as much if not more to swing that in your favor, and by extension, wear out the opposing defense. Your offense can't stop the other offense from making a long scoring drive. A lopsided time of possession in your favor usually means you're just dominating the game in general.

This is not to disagree with the rest of what you said, by the way. That particular game was going to be very difficult for us to win, for exactly the reasons you pointed out. I think the man-coverage argument is only that by playing the defense we did, we took it from a 10-15% chance of winning to no chance at all.

PARAGRAPH 1:
Sean Davis got injured. (Technically, he was injured for most of the season, but could no longer play through the pain.) As soon as he went out, on the very next play, Belichick went after Golden... touchdown!!! Then, Mike Mitchell began to overcompensate, and bit hard on a play fake... touchdown!!!

PARAGRAPH 2:
Spot on. This sums up the game perfectly. Post that in every AFCCG thread. Really.

As as far as points go, three dropped touchdowns by Hamilton & Coates, plus a wasted first-&-goal is 25 points (taking us to 42 points). I'm not saying it's actually that "easy", but in a way, it shoulda/coulda been.

PARAGRAPH 3:
The SuperBowl reminds me of the AFCCG: the defense garners all of the blame, when the Falcons offense is just as culpable. Specifically, if the Falcons had converted two more third downs, they win.

Instead of fumbling the ball, if they had run the ball (played safe), they kick a FG.

Instead of trying to go for the kill-shot on 3rd-&-1, if they run the ball, they can take an additional 2 minutes off of the clock.

(Great post, by the way.)

[teegre]

Gravedigger and Bud both came on strong late in the year, I think if they can improve and make a real impact that will help the defense providing a solid interior and edge pass rusher (or if TJ produces 10+ sacks as a rookie which is less likely). Burns and Davis improving will also help. My main concern is the safety position next to Davis. Mitchell is only adequate against weak pass offenses and doesn't hold up well if at all against better offenses (the ones you tend to see more of in the postseason) and Golden and Dangerfield are just backup calibre.

I don't know how to post pics (fansince76 and tube have both walked me through it, but I'm an idiot).

Anyway, I have a pic of stats showing how Gravedigger was the best** rookie DT from week 12 on.

**(It was from PFF; so take that with a grain of salt.)

[st33lersguy]

Wouldn't surprise me, he came on strong last year and I think he can be a real game-wrecker if he is healthy

[Mojouw]

A bit of a tangent. But for the next 5 years, what other defensive roster do you want? Young, fast, scheme flexible. Only a few other units across the league that ooze this much upside. Admittedly, all unrealized, but still...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pczach]

I know they haven't shown it yet, but the defense is loaded with athletic, young, and fast players. If the current defensive draft class turns out to be a good one, this defense could be and maybe should be scary good for a while.

Much of this is dependent on Dupree becoming a consistent playmaker and Watt turning into what we all hope he can be very soon, and the athletes in the secondary that they just drafted. Hitting in both of these areas not only makes them better. It also makes them deeper and able to absorb injuries while still allowing them to play multiple styles and schemes.

[BostonBlackie]

A bit of a tangent. But for the next 5 years, what other defensive roster do you want? Young, fast, scheme flexible. Only a few other units across the league that ooze this much upside.

And the across the board younger, faster, more athletic, Falcons lost to the Patriots. And the legion of boom lost to the Patriots.

It takes more then talent.

[Born2Steel]

And the across the board younger, faster, more athletic, Falcons lost to the Patriots. And the legion of boom lost to the Patriots.

It takes more then talent.

Should read ALL the posts first. The Failcons choke has already been discussed. The Rainy City Bitch Pidgeons 'worse play call in SB history' has been picked clean to the bones already. 2 examples of teams shooting themselves in the foot and the Pats capitalizing. All those 2 games come down to. But congrats, really. Now back to the topic.....

[BostonBlackie]

Should read ALL the posts first. The Failcons choke has already been discussed. The Rainy City Bitch Pidgeons 'worse play call in SB history' has been picked clean to the bones already. 2 examples of teams shooting themselves in the foot and the Pats capitalizing. All those 2 games come down to. But congrats, really. Now back to the topic.....

It takes a lot more then talent.

[Born2Steel]

It takes a lot more then talent.

I knew you were still lurking....

From your viewpoint, I'm sure it does take more than talent. You need to film other teams' signals, deflate the footballs a bit, make sure your players take their PEDs regularly, bug your stadium's visitor lockerroom, interfere with comm systems, run plays from illegal formations, use a snowplow to give yourself an unfair advantage, etc...
Even though the tuck rule wasn't one of the Patriot gimmicks, the Pats are still the only team to ever get that call. But that was just more Brady brilliance, I'm sure.

[Mojouw]

And the across the board younger, faster, more athletic, Falcons lost to the Patriots. And the legion of boom lost to the Patriots.

It takes more then talent.

Takes more than talent to do what? I never made any statement aside from I really like the top 13-15 guys on the defensive roster on potential.

But while you're at it, oh wise septuagenarian football sage, please spread your pearls of wisdom before me. I beg of you, enlighten me as to what factors besides talent create winning NFL teams.

White guy scrappiness?
Video based cheating?
Elite QB talent and good coaching?
A bit of luck and good fortune?

I wait with bated breath. Pour a small dram for me from your cup of wisdom.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[st33lersguy]

And the across the board younger, faster, more athletic, Falcons lost to the Patriots. And the legion of boom lost to the Patriots.

It takes more then talent.

Shouldn't you be ballwashing Brady and Bellichick on an online Pats fan echo chamber or were you kicked out of all of them

[Craic]

It takes a lot more then talent.

So that's why the Pats* rely on faulty communication equipment, deflated balls, cameras, and probably a host of other things in order to win. Right?

[ALLD]

More like the foil sandwich wrap. A Steel Curtain gets sacks.

[BostonBlackie]

Takes more than talent to do what? I never made any statement aside from I really like the top 13-15 guys on the defensive roster on potential.

But while you're at it, oh wise septuagenarian football sage, please spread your pearls of wisdom before me. I beg of you, enlighten me as to what factors besides talent create winning NFL teams.

White guy scrappiness?
Video based cheating?
Elite QB talent and good coaching?
A bit of luck and good fortune?

I wait with bated breath. Pour a small dram for me from your cup of wisdom.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fans that actually live in the same state the team does.

- - - Updated - - -

Shouldn't you be ballwashing Brady and Bellichick on an online Pats fan echo chamber or were you kicked out of all of them

I'll let Rothlisberger ballwash Brady for me, he's so good at it.

- - - Updated - - -

So that's why the Pats* rely on faulty communication equipment, deflated balls, cameras, and probably a host of other things in order to win. Right?

Anymore excuses?

[BostonBlackie]

I knew you were still lurking....

From your viewpoint, I'm sure it does take more than talent. You need to film other teams' signals, deflate the footballs a bit, make sure your players take their PEDs regularly, bug your stadium's visitor lockerroom, interfere with comm systems, run plays from illegal formations, use a snowplow to give yourself an unfair advantage, etc...
Even though the tuck rule wasn't one of the Patriot gimmicks, the Pats are still the only team to ever get that call. But that was just more Brady brilliance, I'm sure.

[Mojouw]

You're detailed and insightful responses are simply staggering.

You're likely the smartest guy you know. Every night at the bar you're buddies tell you how funny and smart you are. Thst 6th grade education really stands out. So, which one are you; Sully, Murph, or Tommy?

Stay Boston Strong, Masshole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GBMelBlount]

You're detailed and insightful responses are simply staggering.

You're likely the smartest guy you know. Every night at the bar you're buddies tell you how funny and smart you are. Thst 6th grade education really stands out. So, which one are you; Sully, Murph, or Tommy?

Stay Boston Strong, Masshole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sadly, I am getting the feeling we are his best friends.

I would imagine he is getting more attention here than he gets anywhere else in his life...

[st33lersguy]

And this ladies and gentlemen demonstrates why it is impossible to have a rational discussion with a Cheatriots fan

[Mojouw]

Sadly, I am getting the feeling we are his best friends.

I would imagine he is getting more attention here than he gets anywhere else in his life...

Between this Boston dude and the man coverage "debate" every thread just gets detailed lately.

I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but if you're gonna bother to post something, at least take the time to have point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BostonBlackie]

You're detailed and insightful responses are simply staggering.

You're likely the smartest guy you know. Every night at the bar you're buddies tell you how funny and smart you are. Thst 6th grade education really stands out. So, which one are you; Sully, Murph, or Tommy?

Stay Boston Strong, Masshole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[polamalubeast]

Why BostonBlackie is not banned?

The only thing that he does is to ruin threads!

At least TeeTee and even crash was funny sometimes.

[BostonBlackie]

Why BostonBlackie is not banned?

The only thing that he does is to ruin threads!

I merely said it takes more than talent, than you guys went into meltdown mode.

[st33lersguy]

Why BostonBlackie is not banned?

The only thing that he does is to ruin threads!

At least TeeTee and even crash was funny sometimes.

Agree, Brady fangirl getting banned would be a major addition by subtraction to the board

[BostonBlackie]

Agree, Brady fangirl getting banned would be a major addition by subtraction to the board

Dish it out but you can't take it.

[Mojouw]

I merely said it takes more than talent, than you guys went into meltdown mode.

Right. Which is a meaningless statement without any additional information. But hey, non sequiturs are fun!

Boston is the worst major city in the country and is full of annoying sports fans. Even Philly thinks you all are crazy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk