PDA

View Full Version : Prisuta: Rematch Least of Steelers Concerns


HometownGal
12-10-2007, 07:48 AM
Potential rematch the least of Steelers' concerns

By Mike Prisuta
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Monday, December 10, 2007

FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- The second-worst part about Patriots 34, Steelers 13 is it could have been worse (Randy Moss dropped a touchdown pass and Stephen Gostkowski missed a 48-yard field goal).

The worst part, from the Steelers' perspective, is it's painfully obvious this morning that this is not 2005 and the Patriots are not the Colts.

The Steelers ventured into Indy in late November 2005 and were beaten, 26-7, but came away with a feeling they'd be able to handle Peyton Manning and the crowd noise and give a much better accounting of themselves should they be fortunate enough to play the Colts again.

The rest, particularly their 21-18 playoff triumph in Indianapolis in January 2006, is Super Bowl history. This time around it's the Patriots who are in the process of making history.

And after becoming a footnote to history by becoming the 13th consecutive victim on what appears to be a relentless march toward 16-0, the Steelers had much more to digest than what might happen if they get another chance at the Pats.

"That's a good, heartfelt story to go back to something that happened in the past that we pulled off, but in all honesty that doesn't mean anything to this team," Steelers guard Alan Faneca said. "We come back here, we still have to go out there and play football and try to win the game; it's not just a given."

It's anything but because the Patriots are not the Colts of 2005 and the Steelers are not the Steelers of 2005.

The Steelers could run the ball then.

They no longer can.

Not when it matters.

They put their fall from grace on the ground on film at the outset of the fourth quarter, when, trailing 31-13 but a mere 1 yard away from threatening to make a game of it again, the Steelers tried a pass and a gadget play to get the TD they desperately needed.

In their defense, they had intended to run it up the gut on third-and-goal from the New England 1-yard line, but the offense sensed a bunching Patriots defense was all over that and sight-adjusted to a fade to wide receiver Santonio Holmes.

Veteran safety Rodney Harrison was all over that, as well, which left the Steelers confronting fourth-and-goal from the 1.

They came up with an empty-backfield set and opted for a sweep to motioning wide receiver Hines Ward.

Tackle Willie Colon got blown up.

Ward got blown up.

And the Steelers' reputation as a team to be feared on the ground was likewise blasted into oblivion.

Forget Willie Parker's standing among his fellow rushers or the Steelers' ranking in rushing offense.

Those statistics mean nothing after such a development.

The Steelers don't have a back or a play they can count on when they have to have a yard at crunch time.

A touchdown there would have only delayed the inevitable, but at least the Steelers could have emerged feeling a little bit better about themselves and their game.

Instead, they exited having exposed a problem that must be solved before they can begin to think seriously about winning a playoff game, let alone writing a different script in a New England rematch.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/s_542020.html

wiz1120
12-10-2007, 08:44 AM
you are insane....u dont need a good running game in the playoffs, you need the THREAT of a good running game..
if u remember, the steelers jumped out to a 14 point start because ben stood back there and threw on the colts defense expecting the run..
Once the Steelers tried running the ball to eat the clock, the offense went no where, they only scored 7 points the rest of the game.
Let's face it, the Steelers running game is not even close to what it was in the late 90's. Not only that, the offensive line is getting old, and we may be looking at a rebuilding year shortly

Jman
12-10-2007, 08:57 AM
I couldn't disagree more with Prisuta. Sorry. Reality check needed.

geo123
12-10-2007, 09:12 AM
We certainly need a better passing game. Bens 19/32 for 187 is no great accomplishment. Ward lead the team with 5 catches for a big 39 yards. Your not going to win too many games with those numbers, no matter who you play! This is especially true of NE. I think we all knew( many posted) we needed to score 27.

Jeremy
12-10-2007, 09:14 AM
I couldn't disagree more with Prisuta. Sorry. Reality check needed.

That was a reality check. At least to everyone who can take off the blinders for 5 minutes.

Jman
12-10-2007, 09:17 AM
That was a reality check. At least to everyone who can take off the blinders for 5 minutes.

Are you going to continue to take shots at every post I make?

:coffee:

Jeremy
12-10-2007, 09:18 AM
Are you going to continue to take shots at every post I make?

:coffee:

Are you going to keep making excuses for the pathetic performance you saw yesterday? If your answer is yes then so is mine.

Jman
12-10-2007, 09:20 AM
Are you going to keep making excuses for the pathetic performance you saw yesterday? If your answer is yes then so is mine.

I have an opinion, you have yours. If you want to call it an excuse, that's also your opinion.

As far as this drama is concerned, you can do what you want. I'm done. Mods will handle this as they see fit.

HometownGal
12-10-2007, 09:58 AM
Are you going to keep making excuses for the pathetic performance you saw yesterday? If your answer is yes then so is mine.

No - he is doing what most of us are doing after a loss - stating his opinion and moving on.

Avoid LLoyd1975
12-10-2007, 10:34 AM
Children come on now...Similar to what I posted already in another thread.

1. Take away the blown coverage play that went deep to Moss. (Take away 7 points)
2. Take away the lucky throwback play that Moss fumbled that could have easily went for six back our way. (Take away another 7)
3. Take away the muffed punt play that bounced behind our players leg that NE luckliy recovered. (Minus 7 more that drive)

Tie game with easily a shot at least 3 more our way. The Cheatriots aren't all that. Both our starting safeties were out of the game. All they proved is that they could beat up on an depleted secondary on their home field with a few lucky plays. Troy makes all the calls back there for the secondary and I am damn sure those plays don't happen if he is on that field. I can't wait to see if we get another shot at these fools.

Jeremy
12-10-2007, 10:37 AM
Children come on now...Similar to what I posted already in another thread.

1. Take away the blown coverage play that went deep to Moss. (Take away 7 points)
2. Take away the lucky throwback play that Moss fumbled that could have easily went for six back our way. (Take away another 7)
3. Take away the muffed punt play that bounced behind our players leg that NE luckliy recovered. (Minus 7 more that drive)

Tie game with easily a shot at least 3 more our way. The Cheatriots aren't all that. Both our starting safeties were out of the game. All they proved is that they could beat up on an depleted secondary on their home field with a few lucky plays. Troy makes all the calls back there for the secondary and I am damn sure those plays don't happen if he is on that field. I can't wait to see if we get another shot at these fools.

Well I live in a little place called reality. And in reality you can't take back plays just because you thought they were bad ones.

HometownGal
12-10-2007, 10:45 AM
Well I live in a little place called reality. And in reality you can't take back plays just because you thought they were bad ones.

In reality, you also can't take back losses, so put it behind you and move on already. Sheesh!!!! :dang::dang:

Jeremy
12-10-2007, 10:50 AM
In reality, you also can't take back losses, so put it behind you and move on already. Sheesh!!!! :dang::dang:

I'm not the one making lists of excuses.

HometownGal
12-10-2007, 10:53 AM
I'm not the one making lists of excuses.

I don't view them as excuses, Jeremy. I see them as viable points. Doesn't change the outcome one iota, but I think it was a well written post.

Jeremy
12-10-2007, 10:55 AM
I don't view them as excuses, Jeremy. I see them as viable points. Doesn't change the outcome one iota, but I think it was a well written post.

Wow....just wow.

Avoid LLoyd1975
12-10-2007, 10:56 AM
Hey Jeremy no shit. "Rematch Least of Steelers Concerns" Reality note...Read title of thread and comment your thoughts. Since you can't read the obvious I will break it down Barny style for you...The game could have easily gone the other way if a few blown secondary calls and lucky bounces didn't go their way.

On a sidebar note, I see that you have a habit of trying...I emphasize trying to downsize people's posts around here with your peanut of a brain. You sure don't intimidate me.

Jeremy
12-10-2007, 10:59 AM
Hey Jeremy no shit. "Rematch Least of Steelers Concerns" Reality note...Read title of thread and comment your thoughts. Since you can't read the obvious I will break it down Barny style for you...The game could have easily gone the other way if a few blown secondary calls and lucky bounces didn't go their way.

On a sidebar note, I see that you have a habit of trying...I emphasize trying to downsize people's posts around here with your peanut of a brain. You sure don't intimidate me.

LOL....tough guy behind a keyboard.

Atlanta Dan
12-10-2007, 11:15 AM
IMO this team has abandoned being a credible power running team - after Ben had a sneak and Davenport powered on 4th and 1, we had the first half 4th and 1 throw out of the shotgun (which worked) followed by the nonsense at the goal line down 31-13. It may be Arians has an addiction to trickeration but it also may be knowing the shortcomings of the personnel.

The interior offensive line strength just is not there - a key play when the momentum turned for good was when Ben got sacked on an up the middle surge on 1st down at midfield on the first possession of the second half.

Replacing Faneca will be job #1 on the OL for 2008 but IMO Mahan simply is not the answer at center.

Jeremy
12-10-2007, 11:18 AM
IMO this team has abandoned being a credible power running team - after Ben had a sneak and Davenport powered on 4th and 1, we had the first half 4th and 1 throw out of the shotgun (which worked) followed by the nonsense at the goal line down 31-13. It may be Arians has an addiction to trickeration but it also may be knowing the shortcomings of the personnel.

The interior offensive line strength just is not there - a key play when the momentum turned for good was when Ben got sacked on an up the middle surge on 1st down at midfield on the first possession of the second half.

Replacing Faneca will be job #1 on the OL for 2008 but IMO Mahan simply is not the answer at center.

Replacing 2/3s of the interior line certainly doesn't sound all that enticing for next season. I still think we should have drafted Nick Mangold.

Atlanta Dan
12-10-2007, 11:27 AM
Replacing 2/3s of the interior line certainly doesn't sound all that enticing for next season. I still think we should have drafted Nick Mangold.

Not my preference either but they were in denial during the draft (while knowing Faneca's issues at that point) and decided LB, a third TE & a punter were the more pressing needs. Then they panic, decide they need to re-sign some OL preseason, and throw $$ at Simmons, which crimps the OL budget for any further signings.

Now they pay the price.

Jeremy
12-10-2007, 11:30 AM
Not my preference either but they were in denial during the draft (while knowing Faneca's issues at that point) and decided LB, a third TE & a punter were the more pressing needs. Then they panic, decide they need to re-sign some OL preseason, and throw $$ at Simmons, which crimps the OL budget for any further signings.

Now they pay the price.

But everyone loved that pick!

Yeah....the FO is going to have to face the harsh reality that 3/5s of that line shouldn't be starting in the NFL. And of the two guys who should be starting, one is out of position and the other is probably leaving as a FA.

Atlanta Dan
12-10-2007, 11:32 AM
[QUOTE=Jeremy;337549]But everyone loved that pick!
QUOTE]

Not everyone:smile:

Sep has done fine but I still believe he came at too high a price in terms of trading up to draft him.

jjpro11
12-10-2007, 03:16 PM
i thought parker and the oline were the least of our worries yesterday.

Mosca
12-10-2007, 04:14 PM
Children come on now...Similar to what I posted already in another thread.

1. Take away the blown coverage play that went deep to Moss. (Take away 7 points)
2. Take away the lucky throwback play that Moss fumbled that could have easily went for six back our way. (Take away another 7)
3. Take away the muffed punt play that bounced behind our players leg that NE luckliy recovered. (Minus 7 more that drive)

LOL. Add all your breaks along with:

1. Assume that we get into the end zone instead of a field goal on the first drive.
2. Figure Hines Ward gets in from the 1.
3. One of Parker's runs probably could have gone for a touchdown...

All of a sudden we win 28-13!

They beat us in every way a team could be beaten. We knew going in that they were a top quality team, and that the Steelers are a good team, and that it would take a superior effort on our part to impose our will and also overcome any of the twists that always happen in a football game. We didn't cover the first part, imposing our will; once you don't get that, you can't rationalize the second part, the twists that always occur.

I think we all know that the Steelers didn't progress and get better as the weeks have gone by. Some parts have improved, but some parts have gotten worse. Overall this team is exactly like Coach Tomlin says; as good as its tape. We are better than most, as good as some, and not as good as the best. We will be able to win a playoff game, with luck, but we have to get a lot better if we want to play in the Super Bowl. And time is running out on learning.

Overall I'm pleased with the season so far, even though it's been maddening to lose to the Jets, Broncos, and Cards. But it is what it is. That is exactly how good we are. Good enough to beat some good teams, and lousy enough to lose to some bad teams.

Dino 6 Rings
12-10-2007, 04:58 PM
The lack of a running game? is that what this post is about?

Only Minnesot and Jacksonville have a better running game than the Steelers statistically.

So I'm not sure what you can be mad about with the running game. Sounds like some Haters taking out some frustration at not seeing Bettis or a Bettis clone in our backfield.

I see a very good running team, with an efficient passing attack that needs to take advantage of opportunities in the redzone and stop settling for Field goals over Touchdowns. That's it with the offense.

Oh, and don't be cute, just smash it in there, on 3rd and goal from the 1, sometimes...sometimes you should go ahead and run it, and if you don't get it, screw it, run it again.

Atlanta Dan
12-10-2007, 05:10 PM
The lack of a running game? is that what this post is about?

Only Minnesot and Jacksonville have a better running game than the Steelers statistically.

So I'm not sure what you can be mad about with the running game. Sounds like some Haters taking out some frustration at not seeing Bettis or a Bettis clone in our backfield.

I see a very good running team, with an efficient passing attack that needs to take advantage of opportunities in the redzone and stop settling for Field goals over Touchdowns. That's it with the offense.

Oh, and don't be cute, just smash it in there, on 3rd and goal from the 1, sometimes...sometimes you should go ahead and run it, and if you don't get it, screw it, run it again.

By the end of this post I think we are in agreement that this is not a very good running team

last 4th and 1 call - pass out of shotgun

3rd and goal at the 1 (in 4 down territory) - fade pattern

4th and goal at the 1 - flanker run

Does not appear Arians believes the running game can deliver

SteelCityMan786
12-10-2007, 05:28 PM
No - he is doing what most of us are doing after a loss - stating his opinion and moving on.

And he is right

Those of you who don't believe a good running game isn't as important as a threat, where the heck have you been? Threats mean nothing in sports(in terms of on the field). Fufilling the threat is what matters.

klick81
12-10-2007, 05:39 PM
I couldn't disagree more with Prisuta. Sorry. Reality check needed.

Come on man. There are times when a writer is full of shit. This is not one of them.

Dynasty
12-10-2007, 05:46 PM
The thing is, just because Arians believes that we would not have been able to make those runs does not mean we could not have been able to. There is statistical evidence that the ability to run the ball does not correlate to wins. The best running teams have not been Super Bowl winners. If we would have been able to pass with more success, which would have allowed us to sustain drives, i think this would have been a much closer game. And since it seems like the thing to do in this thread is make what-if scenarios, if Ryan Clark was playing, we would have let up at least 1 less TD, if not more. Really, we had some bad breaks, the defense played poorly while missing half of the defensive backfield, and we were playing one of the best teams all-time. There really isn't that much else to say. Other than some possible mental problems, I don't think anything was revealed this game other than we don't have as good of a record as we did last week.