PDA

View Full Version : Cowher 100-2-1 with a 10 point lead


tony hipchest
10-09-2006, 12:19 PM
thats the 2nd loss in 103 games where the steelers had a 10 point lead. why not stick with what works? isnt the early 3rd quarter too soon to abandon the running game? why have we been going into prevent defense in the 2nd quarter only to let the bengals and chargers easilly walk back into the game 10 yards at a time?

i cant blame the players no longer. we have a great running back but no running game.:dang: it has more to do with decisions being made, not personnel.

HometownGal
10-09-2006, 12:34 PM
thats the 2nd loss in 103 games where the steelers had a 10 point lead. why not stick with what works? isnt the early 3rd quarter too soon to abandon the running game? why have we been going into prevent defense in the 2nd quarter only to let the bengals and chargers easilly walk back into the game 10 yards at a time?

i cant blame the players no longer. we have a great running back but no running game.:dang: it has more to do with decisions being made, not personnel.

Agreed, Tony. I do feel that the run was abandoned way too early last night and the Steelers lost control of the LOS - never a good thing. What I don't understand is why Davenport wasn't utilized more in the offensive game plan. We have the fast cutting east-west back coupled with the big, strong, powerful north-south back - to me, that's a HC's dream.

As for the prevent defense being utilized so early in the last 2 games, I don't get the mindset there either.

Big D
10-09-2006, 12:36 PM
i think this season has shown that whiz may not have what it takes to be our next head coach. I've questioned alot of his play calling all year.

Btrice
10-09-2006, 12:38 PM
i think this season has shown that whiz may not have what it takes to be our next head coach. I've questioned alot of his play calling all year.

Quoted for truth.

I seriously want to know what goes through Whiz and LeBeau's heads the moment they decide to switch things up from stuff that works well at the beginning of the game. Is it random? Or is there a reason like player fatigue? Or are they trying to mix things up?

Atlanta Dan
10-09-2006, 12:39 PM
With regard to the defensive scheme, I read this morning the Chargers went to max protect, which apparently caused LeBeau to play max protect pass defense. Chargers won that chess match.

I agree the lack of a running game is becoming a cause for concern. While in 2003 the Steelers lacked both an O-line (injuries) and a running back (the failed Zeroue experiment), that season was a disaster that resulted in Cowher going back to basics (running game and pressure defense). Parker has talent, but for whatever reason the runs just aren't there againt quality defenses so far.

Hopefully Whiz is not sinking into creeping Mularkeyism - nothing wrong with the occasional gadget play, but if the play is not there the QB should not force it. For the second game in a row Ben has forced a deep throw into coverage with predicrtable results.

Since I bet Cowher is not going to be involved in 2007 (any thoughts on whether Whiz already has been given the nod? - if not these offensive woes are not helping job prospects for Whiz or Grimm) I will be interested to see if we have any adjustments in O-line or receiving starters.

Btrice
10-09-2006, 12:43 PM
With regard to the defensive scheme, I read this morning the Chargers went to max protect, which apparently caused LeBeau to play max protect pass defense. Chargers won that chess match.


That kind of makes sense then, but against any team going into a max protection type pass defense is sending the Steelers into that chess match without a Queen and a Rook (CB/DB).

Big D
10-09-2006, 12:51 PM
Since I bet Cowher is not going to be involved in 2007 (any thoughts on whether Whiz already has been given the nod? -

I think he is erasing himself right off the coaching list. I put Ron Rivera on top of that list

Atlanta Dan
10-09-2006, 01:10 PM
Good call on Rivera being a hot candidate for HC somewhere with the way the Bears are playing.

Steelers have always (well, always in the sense that they have made 2 HC hires since 1969) gone with defensive coaches by hiring Noll and Cowher. There also is a danger of complacency if you promote from within; for every George Seifert (who had the benefit of DeBartolo buying talent in a pre-cap era) you can point to Phil Bengsten after Lombardi and Richie Petitbon after Gibbs (although if Rivera were hired I believe you would lose LeBeau, Grimm, and Whiz, which would be a lot of turnover for what will still be a team with plyoff level talent in 2007)

The Rooneys hiring what (I believe) would be the first Hispanic HC would be an interesting twist on the Rooney Rule seeking diversity.

Black@Gold Forever32
10-09-2006, 01:14 PM
Ok Willie Parker had 14 carries for 57 yards and a TD last night against the Chargers defense. Thats about 4.1 yards a carry for Parker. You give him 25 attempts and thats 100 yards. Even Jerome Bettis in his prime had days for only 50 some yards with 14 carries. Bill Cowher just didn't give Willie the ball enough last night.

stlrtruck
10-09-2006, 02:57 PM
To me it seems the Dickie LeBeau didn't do anything else other than Max Coverage after SD went into Max Protect. It seems the players lost the edge last night after going up 10-0 and wanted to give the game away.

And with our O-Line allowing Ben to be hit like a tackling dummy last night, they weren't going to sit up anything for the run, PA, or pass.

Last night just flat out stunk worse than the Bungles game!

19ward86
10-09-2006, 05:03 PM
we did give up on the run way too early, some might disagree but we dont lose games when roethlisberger throws 30+ times. we lose games when he is forced to throw 30+ times. i think that when we play the chiefs or the raiders, those games can be won by ben throwing 35 times. but ben cant throw 30 times a game with the type of offense we have. we have no big time players on offense this year and i think that is why we are losing games. santonio holmes was drafted to make up for big play randle el. the first int. wasnt bens fault it was holmes' fault b/c he backed away from it, that is not what he was supposed to do.