PDA

View Full Version : Moore still attractive as Parker returns


lamberts-lost-tooth
10-21-2008, 06:10 AM
Moore still attractive as Parker returns
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
By Ed Bouchette, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette


Rookie Rashard Mendenhall joined Willie Parker in the backfield this year to supposedly give the Steelers the best one-two punch at running back they've had in years.

They were to be No. 1 and 1-A. Coordinator Bruce Arians even talked about teaming them to form a "pony" backfield on occasion.

Everyone, even the coaching staff, forgot about the exercise pony, or their three-four punch, Mewelde Moore.

Moore was signed as an unrestricted free agent from the Minnesota Vikings two days after free agency began to take over as the Steelers' third-down back. He seemed perfect for the job, better than they have had in the past because he not only could block, he was a threat to run and catch passes as well.

"He has things that are potentially attractive to us," Steelers coach Mike Tomlin said on the day they signed him to a three-year contract for $4.95 million that included a $1.35 million signing bonus.

Then the season began, and Moore became a forgotten man. They hardly used him, other than as a returner. He had one carry in the first four games and no receptions.

The Steelers then took a one-two-three punch to their backfield. First, Parker left with a sprained left MCL Sept. 21 in Philadelphia. Baltimore's Ray Lewis knocked Mendenhall out of the season for good Sept. 29 with a fractured shoulder. Fullback/halfback Carey Davis, who was getting more third-down action than Moore, followed that game against the Ravens with a sprained ankle and has yet to return.

The Steelers coaches, with little choice, turned to Moore and he helped them win not one, not two, but three games. His latest came in spectacular fashion when he ran 20 times for 120 yards, caught five passes and scored three touchdowns in a 38-10 victory at Cincinnati Sunday.

To put it in perspective, Parker scored two touchdowns the entire 2007 season and it took him 47 starts before he scored three in one game, in the opener this season.

Let there be no doubt, when Parker fully heals he will return to start, perhaps Sunday against the Super Bowl champion New York Giants. But Moore has added one big punch to the Steelers' offense and has guaranteed himself a prominent spot even when Parker returns.

"He's become the locker-room favorite and we make no bones about why we feel the way we do about each other," Tomlin said after presenting Moore with a game ball Sunday. "It's based on deeds. This guy is delivering time and time again with his legs, with his hands. He's just doing a nice job. He's a pro; he prepares himself. He's doing a nice job for us."

The Steelers likely would have lost at least two of their past three games without him. Moore caught three passes against Baltimore -- one for 24 yards on third down to keep the Steelers' winning drive going, and a little later another on third down for 7 yards to put Jeff Reed in position to kick a 46-yard field goal for a 23-20 victory.

Moore made his first start for them and ran 17 times for 99 yards in a 26-21 victory in Jacksonville. Sunday, he virtually played every down as the starting halfback and third-down back until Gary Russell mopped up late with the game well in hand.

Moore has 238 yards rushing and a 5.2-yard average with 11 receptions, all but one carry for 6 yards over the past three games.

"In this league, it is one of those things that is tremendous to be able to run the football, pass the football, have halfbacks catching the ball out of the backfield and also have wide receivers with the ball in their hands on reverses and screens," Moore said. "What it boils down to is having a lot of guys on your team that can make plays and are hungry to make plays and want the ball in their hands."

That describes him perfectly, and it's not as if he never performed. At 5 feet 11, 209 pounds, Moore, 26, weighs the same as Parker and stands an inch taller. He topped 100 yards rushing four times with the Vikings, who drafted him in the fourth round in 2004, after he became only the second player in NCAA history to rush for 4,000 yards and have 2,000 yards receiving, at Tulane.

"Willie Parker goes down, Mendenhall is out for the year, and he steps in and does everything we asked him to do," Hines Ward said. "He's run the ball well, and that's all you can ask of the guy. When guys go down, other guys need to step up, and that's exactly what he's done for us."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08295/921515-66.stm

Da Steeler Soprano
10-21-2008, 11:30 AM
Moore needs to be the starter until proven otherwise. Work Parker back in gingerly, and save his legs for down the stretch.

Edman
10-21-2008, 11:35 AM
I hope Moore isn't regulated to the bench. He's been such a tremendous asset for the Steelers.

Line him up as a second reciever out of the back field on passing plays.

rbryan
10-21-2008, 11:41 AM
I agree that you keep WP on the bench until fully healthy, no need to rush him back too soon, but lets not get ahead of ourselves here. Moore has one good game(Jax) and then another against the Bunglers. Every teams backup has a big day against Cincy.

Blitzburgh_Fever
10-21-2008, 11:55 AM
I agree that you keep WP on the bench until fully healthy, no need to rush him back too soon, but lets not get ahead of ourselves here. Moore has one good game(Jax) and then another against the Bunglers. Every teams backup has a big day against Cincy.

And comes out to be total clutch against the Ravens. Not saying your points aren't valid, but at this point he pretty much couldn't do better. I agree WP is still the better back, but Moore can come in without changing our game plan (whether that's a good or bad thing) and freshen him up, and be what is, in my eyes, the third best receiving HB in the league when it comes to hands and vision (behind Westbrook and Bush, of course).

El-Gonzo Jackson
10-21-2008, 12:00 PM
When FWP is healthy, he will be the starter. At least this gave them a reason to give MeMo the ball and now have confidence in getting it to him more.

Moore also had a great pickup on Odom when he swam inside of Starks on a pass play. Moore stoned him and allowed Ben to get the pass away.

the_king_from_leon
10-21-2008, 12:00 PM
Good atricle Mewelde is looking good at the mo and definately dont want to see him being pushed back onto the bench

Leftoverhard
10-21-2008, 12:02 PM
I love Willie but damn MM can really find holes - the guy just keeps those legs moving and where Wiliie might get flattened, MM seems to work a few more yards out of it - he's very creative. Nothing against WIliie -his strength is obviously quickness but I feel like MM has earned the right to play.

LVSteelersfan
10-21-2008, 12:03 PM
And comes out to be total clutch against the Ravens. Not saying your points aren't valid, but at this point he pretty much couldn't do better. I agree WP is still the better back, but Moore can come in without changing our game plan (whether that's a good or bad thing) and freshen him up, and be what is, in my eyes, the third best receiving HB in the league when it comes to hands and vision (behind Westbrook and Bush, of course).

I knew when we got him he was a steal. Thank god we had him when the others went down. Or we would be losing with Najeh and Russell. BTW, he IS the #1 receiving back in the league right now because Westbrook and Bush are both hurt. :thumbsup::tt02::tt03::applaudit:

steelreserve
10-21-2008, 12:14 PM
When FWP is healthy, he will be the starter. At least this gave them a reason to give MeMo the ball and now have confidence in getting it to him more.

In that case, I'm hoping for one of those nagging injuries that isn't serious, but keeps Parker just iffy enough to be second-string for the rest of the year. Moore has shown he can do everything Willie can, but without the blatant holes in his game.

Can he be consistent enough to do it over 10 more games? Who cares? Willie can't be that consistent either. If Moore is playing like this, keep him the f*ck in there until he gives you a reason not to.

steelpride12
10-21-2008, 12:59 PM
Moore knows his role as a backup only.
He is doing his job, playing his best and is "filling in" for Parker and he knows he will become the back up when Parker returns, but that won't stop him.

Godfather
10-21-2008, 02:12 PM
I hope we keep Moore as the starter and bring Willie back slowly. It'll take a while for a speed back like Willie to recover fully.

fansince'76
10-21-2008, 02:16 PM
I hope we keep Moore as the starter and bring Willie back slowly. It'll take a while for a speed back like Willie to recover fully.

Nice problem to have though, eh? A year ago, there wouldn't have been any question about Parker getting the lion's share of the carries upon returning from injury since Davenport represented such a significant downgrade. Moore? Not so much.

MasterOfPuppets
10-21-2008, 03:05 PM
parker may be faster, but i think moore has better footwork when hitting holes. moore is better at making people miss than parker.

steelreserve
10-21-2008, 03:39 PM
parker may be faster, but i think moore has better footwork when hitting holes. moore is better at making people miss than parker.

Don't forget catching, blocking, getting stood up at the line less ... basically, show me one thing Parker can do that Moore can't.

Preacher
10-21-2008, 04:02 PM
Don't forget catching, blocking, getting stood up at the line less ... basically, show me one thing Parker can do that Moore can't.

A TREMENDOUS increase in hitting the homerun ball EVERY TIME he touches the ball. Not to mention Parker WILL run to darkness at times now. He learned very well from Bettis.

Sorry, Willie doesn't get to run over a 1000 yards every year by only being an around the edge speed back.

MM is a great backup, but I doubt he can take the pounding up the middle time after time. Willie has actually started doing that.


As I said before, Willie is our number 1 back, Moore is going to be a great 3rd down back, and SHOULD be our no huddle back since he does catch better out of the backfield.

I think we have a 1-2 combination right now that, with our receivers and QB, is the most dangerous offensive combination in the NFL. If we can just get our line together and Ben a bit more experience calling plays, there is no stopping this offense.

fansince'76
10-21-2008, 04:04 PM
A TREMENDOUS increase in hitting the homerun ball EVERY TIME he touches the ball. Not to mention Parker WILL run to darkness at times now. He learned very well from Bettis.

Sorry, Willie doesn't get to run over a 1000 yards every year by only being an around the edge speed back.

MM is a great backup, but I doubt he can take the pounding up the middle time after time. Willie has actually started doing that.


As I said before, Willie is our number 1 back, Moore is going to be a great 3rd down back, and SHOULD be our no huddle back since he does catch better out of the backfield.

I think we have a 1-2 combination right now that, with our receivers and QB, is the most dangerous offensive combination in the NFL. If we can just get our line together and Ben a bit more experience calling plays, there is no stopping this offense.

Wasting your keystrokes, Preacher. Willie sucks and always has. :coffee:

Preacher
10-21-2008, 04:09 PM
Wasting your keystrokes, Preacher. Willie sucks and always has. :coffee:

:rofl:


Oh ye of little faith!

First time Willie breaks a 80 yarder to win a game... just watch the Willie love on this board!

Sharkissle29
10-21-2008, 04:14 PM
I think moore has earned a bigger role in the offense. But i still think when willie comes back, he should get more carries than moore. I think the distribution should be 20 carries for willie, and 10-15 for mewelde. You wouldnt think the 2 would be a change of pace but they actually would be. moore is a lot more shiftier where willie relies more on speed. Both are pretty quick tho, willie obvioulsy being faster of the 2

Preacher
10-21-2008, 04:17 PM
Now,

I agree with letting Willie sit this week and next week, just to make sure he is healthy down the stretch.

We are REALLY going to need him. My other worry concerns Hampton... he has shown that he really has no work ethic when it comes to being in shape. Just what has he been doing with himself over the last few weeks?

I know he couldn't keep his wind up... but how much food did he put down??

The Duke
10-21-2008, 04:26 PM
Just what has he been doing with himself over the last few weeks?



http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m184/artiefisk/burger.jpg

Preacher
10-21-2008, 04:29 PM
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m184/artiefisk/burger.jpg


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

:rofl:

steelreserve
10-21-2008, 05:49 PM
A TREMENDOUS increase in hitting the homerun ball EVERY TIME he touches the ball. Not to mention Parker WILL run to darkness at times now. He learned very well from Bettis.

He has three touchdown runs over 30 yards EVER, plus a couple of 70-yard runs in a game against New Orleans that didn't go for TDs. He doesn't rush for "home runs" any more than an NBA player makes a halfcourt shot. Any decent RB is going to break off a long run now and then. I don't see anything stopping Moore from doing it just as often, other than the fact that he doesn't play.

MM is a great backup, but I doubt he can take the pounding up the middle time after time. Willie has actually started doing that.
Funny, I would've said the same thing, only with the names reversed. Which one is the guy who's missed something like 5 out of our last 8 official games by getting his ass kicked running the ball?

Preacher
10-21-2008, 06:25 PM
He has three touchdown runs over 30 yards EVER, plus a couple of 70-yard runs in a game against New Orleans that didn't go for TDs. He doesn't rush for "home runs" any more than an NBA player makes a halfcourt shot. Any decent RB is going to break off a long run now and then. I don't see anything stopping Moore from doing it just as often, other than the fact that he doesn't play.


Funny, I would've said the same thing, only with the names reversed. Which one is the guy who's missed something like 5 out of our last 8 official games by getting his ass kicked running the ball?

Um... breaking your fibula on carpet has nothing to do with running up the middle. Go back and watch Willie run the ball... Many times, he is running the ball up the middle into darkness, going for the hit. Moore hasn't yet been in a situation to show that. So we don't know what he will do.

I just find it amazing that everyone dislikes Willie so much...

It reminds me of the first girlfriend after the breakup of a beloved long time relationship. The family just doesn't like the next girlfriend.. .regardless of who she is... she isn't HER... the ex.

Jerome is the ex.. and Willie is the new... and this family just doesn't want to accept him. Period.

Its emotional.. its understandable.. but its still wrong. Willie is a top back in the league..

lilyoder6
10-21-2008, 06:47 PM
fwp is the better back and he has proven it.. and memo has proven that he can run the ball when needed.. but a game agaist jax, and a game against a hopeless cincy is not to go on..

but i would say that memo should be in more passing situations

steelpride12
10-21-2008, 09:59 PM
This is getting ridiculous saying Moore should be the Starter over FWP.
Other than Ben and the defense, if it was not for Parker we would have not had the success we have over the last 4 season!

steelreserve
10-21-2008, 10:18 PM
This is getting ridiculous saying Moore should be the Starter over FWP.
Other than Ben and the defense, if it was not for Parker we would have not had the success we have over the last 4 season!

Why? Nothing ridiculous about staying with the guy who's hot. It could be because he's good.

When you put a guy on a pedestal just because he's the starter, you're not doing yourself any favors. And that's what a lot of Steelers fans seem to do with Parker. I mean, the guy has obvious problems with certain things, so why the hell shouldn't we be keeping our eyes open for waysto improve? If the Patriots* used the same logic as Steelers fans use with Parker, they'd still have Drew Bledsoe as their starting QB.

God, I wish that had happened.

SunshineMan21
10-21-2008, 10:22 PM
I agree . . . I think Moore has done great, but you have to put it into context. Cincinnati is one of the worst defenses in the league--when he tried to run against Baltimore it wasn't quite so pretty. I'm not trying to deride Moore--I think he's a great pickup, a shifty rusher who does all the little things (catching, blocking, etc . . . ) well, but you don't knock off the starting back based on two games against subpar defenses unless the starting back is Chris Perry-esque.

If anything, the main lesson we should get from Mewelde Moore is the same one we should have gotten from Willie Parker--good running backs aren't that hard to find, and there are a lot of guys out there who just need a shot.

steelwall
10-21-2008, 10:34 PM
Parker is the starter....whats the old saying, you don't loose your starting job from an injury, it must be taken fairly.

Moore has been immpressive. I personaly didnt know he was as fasta runner as he has shown to be. Unless Mendenhall shows some stuff when he gets back......well you know.

Godfather
10-21-2008, 10:35 PM
Um... breaking your fibula on carpet has nothing to do with running up the middle. Go back and watch Willie run the ball... Many times, he is running the ball up the middle into darkness, going for the hit. Moore hasn't yet been in a situation to show that. So we don't know what he will do.

I just find it amazing that everyone dislikes Willie so much...

It reminds me of the first girlfriend after the breakup of a beloved long time relationship. The family just doesn't like the next girlfriend.. .regardless of who she is... she isn't HER... the ex.

Jerome is the ex.. and Willie is the new... and this family just doesn't want to accept him. Period.

Its emotional.. its understandable.. but its still wrong. Willie is a top back in the league..

I love Willie. I just think we don't need to rush him back when we have Moore. Especially since a speed back recovering from a bad knee is going to lose a step for a while.

Preacher
10-21-2008, 10:50 PM
I love Willie. I just think we don't need to rush him back when we have Moore. Especially since a speed back recovering from a bad knee is going to lose a step for a while.

Of all the "let moore play in the place of willie" arguments... this is the only one that holds water for me.

Least for a few weeks.

steelwall
10-21-2008, 10:53 PM
Of all the "let moore play in the place of willie" arguments... this is the only one that holds water for me.

Least for a few weeks.

agreed....:thumbsup:

fansince'76
10-21-2008, 10:55 PM
Of all the "let moore play in the place of willie" arguments... this is the only one that holds water for me.

Least for a few weeks.

It's Willie's fault we're not 6-0. :chuckle:

Preacher
10-21-2008, 10:56 PM
It's Willie's fault we're not 6-0. :chuckle:

Its Willie's fault that JFK was assassinated.

stillers4me
10-21-2008, 10:56 PM
I'm grateful we have Moore .......alot of people had high hopes for this season with the Parker/Mendenhall combo. We lost them both and barely lost a step. He singlehandedly saved this season.

steelwall
10-21-2008, 10:58 PM
Its Willies fault the Bermuda triangle is such a mystery......

Preacher
10-21-2008, 10:59 PM
Hey... This HAS to be a new thread...


What can we blame on Willie Parker?

Preacher
10-21-2008, 11:01 PM
I'm grateful we have Moore .......alot of people had high hopes for this season with the Parker/Mendenhall combo. We lost them both and barely lost a step. He singlehandedly saved this season.

I wouldn't go that far.

He did save a loss against the Jags.

I give him his props... he did great and I have a lot of confidence if Willie goes down. But saved the season? No, I can't go there.

steelwall
10-21-2008, 11:06 PM
Hey... This HAS to be a new thread...


What can we blame on Willie Parker?

LOL... agreed.

TheMightyEx
10-21-2008, 11:14 PM
Moore needs to be the starter until proven otherwise. Work Parker back in gingerly, and save his legs for down the stretch.

Moore has the speed Parker used to.

fansince'76
10-21-2008, 11:18 PM
How many people's bowls of Wheaties has Willie pissed in, I wonder? Sheesh. "Moore has the speed Parker used to." Ludicrous.

\m/xtrememarine\m/
10-21-2008, 11:25 PM
They just need to keep both of them. Parker needs to slowly get back into the swing of thins. The o-line seems to be working well with Moore's style. Maybe keep Moore the starter and use Parker like a third down back till we know that he's fully heathy.:helmet:

steelwall
10-21-2008, 11:40 PM
How many people's bowls of Wheaties has Willie pissed in, I wonder? Sheesh. "Moore has the speed Parker used to." Ludicrous.


Yeah that's really nonsense at this point. Line a healthy Willie Parker next to Moore and run a 40 yard dash............result... They dont call Willie, FAST Wille Parker for nothing.


Moore is fast I will give him that, but not as fast as the man who's nick name starts with "Fast".

stlrtruck
10-22-2008, 08:48 AM
To compare the two is ridiculous. Willie wins by a landslide but what Moore brings to the table in regards to relieving FWP is an intangible that only a few other teams have the luxury of having.

They don't lose much when he comes in.

LVSteelersfan
10-22-2008, 01:57 PM
I like Willie but I have seen him stopped for losses so many times that it is almost embarrassing. I don't think Arians uses him correctly by constantly running him up the middle. His strength is rushing to the outside. Put him out there. Maybe they need to put Willie and Moore back there together in that damn pony formation we heard so much about. WHERE IS IT ARIANS ?????????

steelreserve
10-22-2008, 02:37 PM
To compare the two is ridiculous. Willie wins by a landslide but what Moore brings to the table in regards to relieving FWP is an intangible that only a few other teams have the luxury of having.

They don't lose much when he comes in.

Can anyone please tell me one thing Willie brings to the table that Moore doesn't, other than "he's the incumbent starter, so he must be godlike by default"? 40 speed is not a determining factor in how good a running back you are. Unless you're talking about a big lumbering guy like Christian Okoye, virtually all NFL running backs have sufficient speed to make a big play.

stlrtruck
10-22-2008, 02:45 PM
Can anyone please tell me one thing Willie brings to the table that Moore doesn't, other than "he's the incumbent starter, so he must be godlike by default"? 40 speed is not a determining factor in how good a running back you are. Unless you're talking about a big lumbering guy like Christian Okoye, virtually all NFL running backs have sufficient speed to make a big play.

From what I've seen, when Willie gets through the hole, he's got a second, third, fourth, and sometimes even fifth gear. Sorry, I haven't seen that pull away speed from Moore. I think FWP bounces out better than Moore.

But these are just my observations. I'm sure you won't like them and you'll find some other information to counter balance what I've mentioned. But someone mentioned FWP getting nailed behind the LOS for losses - just a quick question about that. How many times did Barry Sanders get tackled behind the LOS only to break out a big one the next play or the next series? People give him HOF props all the time. Now I'm not saying that FWP is Barry but to be up in arms about being tackled behind the LOS and to not recognize that it happens to the best of them is a little outlandish. The difference being that FWP has a better offense than Barry Sanders could have only dreamt about!

steelreserve
10-22-2008, 03:58 PM
From what I've seen, when Willie gets through the hole, he's got a second, third, fourth, and sometimes even fifth gear. Sorry, I haven't seen that pull away speed from Moore. I think FWP bounces out better than Moore.

But these are just my observations. I'm sure you won't like them and you'll find some other information to counter balance what I've mentioned. But someone mentioned FWP getting nailed behind the LOS for losses - just a quick question about that. How many times did Barry Sanders get tackled behind the LOS only to break out a big one the next play or the next series? People give him HOF props all the time. Now I'm not saying that FWP is Barry but to be up in arms about being tackled behind the LOS and to not recognize that it happens to the best of them is a little outlandish. The difference being that FWP has a better offense than Barry Sanders could have only dreamt about!

In all honesty, we're probably just not going to agree about Parker's value, and that probably goes for me with a lot of the other members here too. The big runs stand out to some people; the ones where he gets stuffed at the line stand out to me.

Yes, everyone gets tackled for a loss sometimes, even Bettis or Barry Sanders, but it doesn't seem like an "oh well, it happens" thing with Parker. It really is my sincere opinion that it happens more often than normal to him, to the point where it drags down his effectiveness in ways that aren't fully captured by season stats and averages. Willie has holes in his game that the top teams can easily exploit, and if you ask me, he makes up for it with opportunistic big days against so-so teams that boost his season numbers. That's not a worthwhile tradeoff for an increase in breakaway speed, which comes into play maybe 3 times all season unless you break tackles or make people miss a lot, which he doesn't.

stlrtruck
10-22-2008, 04:28 PM
In all honesty, we're probably just not going to agree about Parker's value, and that probably goes for me with a lot of the other members here too. The big runs stand out to some people; the ones where he gets stuffed at the line stand out to me.

Yes, everyone gets tackled for a loss sometimes, even Bettis or Barry Sanders, but it doesn't seem like an "oh well, it happens" thing with Parker. It really is my sincere opinion that it happens more often than normal to him, to the point where it drags down his effectiveness in ways that aren't fully captured by season stats and averages. Willie has holes in his game that the top teams can easily exploit, and if you ask me, he makes up for it with opportunistic big days against so-so teams that boost his season numbers. That's not a worthwhile tradeoff for an increase in breakaway speed, which comes into play maybe 3 times all season unless you break tackles or make people miss a lot, which he doesn't.

You're right, we worn't agree on it. At least we can agree on that :applaudit: :drink:

Preacher
10-22-2008, 04:44 PM
In all honesty, we're probably just not going to agree about Parker's value, and that probably goes for me with a lot of the other members here too. The big runs stand out to some people; the ones where he gets stuffed at the line stand out to me.

Yes, everyone gets tackled for a loss sometimes, even Bettis or Barry Sanders, but it doesn't seem like an "oh well, it happens" thing with Parker. It really is my sincere opinion that it happens more often than normal to him, to the point where it drags down his effectiveness in ways that aren't fully captured by season stats and averages. Willie has holes in his game that the top teams can easily exploit, and if you ask me, he makes up for it with opportunistic big days against so-so teams that boost his season numbers. That's not a worthwhile tradeoff for an increase in breakaway speed, which comes into play maybe 3 times all season unless you break tackles or make people miss a lot, which he doesn't.

A friendly challenge.

Compare Willies week to week run numbers to Bettis' week to week run numbers... then run a T-test to see if they are statistically significant. If you want, post the number and I will plug them in for a t-test. That will be the better measurement. Actually, what would be better than that is to find a breakdown of every run for Bettis and compare it in the same way.

That way, we can take some of the subjectivity out of this discussion. I really don't know what we will find, but its worth the shot... what do you think?

steelreserve
10-22-2008, 05:04 PM
A friendly challenge.

Compare Willies week to week run numbers to Bettis' week to week run numbers... then run a T-test to see if they are statistically significant. If you want, post the number and I will plug them in for a t-test. That will be the better measurement. Actually, what would be better than that is to find a breakdown of every run for Bettis and compare it in the same way.

That way, we can take some of the subjectivity out of this discussion. I really don't know what we will find, but its worth the shot... what do you think?

I think it'd be worth trying, but what would we be measuring for? Variance in yards from week to week? Number of carries that went for above/below x number of yards? Carries in certain situations? There are a lot of things that could be used.

And while I don't doubt there's use in trying to quantify things more completely, I'm pretty sure that no matter what numbers you find, you'll just run into things like "Well whatever, that doesn't mean anything; it's not the same because the offensive line sucks now," or "So what, nobody has a good rushing game against such-and-such a defense." There are just so many situations in football that for every statistical argument, there's a way to explain it away or dismiss it. And the whole thing is compounded because the teams and opponents themselves change so much from year to year.

Preacher
10-22-2008, 05:10 PM
I think it'd be worth trying, but what would we be measuring for? Variance in yards from week to week? Number of carries that went for above/below x number of yards? Carries in certain situations? There are a lot of things that could be used.

And while I don't doubt there's use in trying to quantify things more completely, I'm pretty sure that no matter what numbers you find, you'll just run into things like "Well whatever, that doesn't mean anything; it's not the same because the offensive line sucks now," or "So what, nobody has a good rushing game against such-and-such a defense." There are just so many situations in football that for every statistical argument, there's a way to explain it away or dismiss it. And the whole thing is compounded because the teams and opponents themselves change so much from year to year.

Do a single tail test... is willie's yardage, week to week, significantly different then Jeromes yardage.

That is why play by play is even better. Is willie's yardage, play by play, significantly different than Jerome's?

A T-test will balance out the big runs... and actually tell us if there is a statistically significant change between Jerome and Willie and the yards ran.

Here is a link I did last spring on Ben's sack totals and the O Line.... It was done to ask the question, "Was there a significant change in Ben's sacks from the beginning of the year to the end of the year? The answer was a an astounding, YES. There was a statistically significant change in the sack totals.

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=24863&page=2

steelreserve
10-22-2008, 06:40 PM
Do a single tail test... is willie's yardage, week to week, significantly different then Jeromes yardage.

That is why play by play is even better. Is willie's yardage, play by play, significantly different than Jerome's?

A T-test will balance out the big runs... and actually tell us if there is a statistically significant change between Jerome and Willie and the yards ran.

Here is a link I did last spring on Ben's sack totals and the O Line.... It was done to ask the question, "Was there a significant change in Ben's sacks from the beginning of the year to the end of the year? The answer was a an astounding, YES. There was a statistically significant change in the sack totals.

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=24863&page=2
It's too bad I missed that thread, some interesting stuff in there. But, to prove the point that in football, there's always more than one explanation for everything, I had another thread a couple weeks ago where I dug up evidence supporting why Ben's high sack totals seem to be coordinated with problems in our running game more than anything else:

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showpost.php?p=452254&postcount=72

Anyway, I'm not saying I'm right or you're right about that one, more just playing devil's advocate. But testing Parker against Bettis would be a good start .. I'm thinking that finding which one has the higher standard deviation from his rushing average could be a telling statistic (e.g. gains of 4-4-4-4 being more consistent/dependable than 0-16-0-0). That could also apply to week-to-week deviation -- were Willie's "bad" games more frequent than Bettis'? (are weeks of 80-90-80-90 more valuable than 130-110-65-35)

Of course, that might tell us a lot, but you still run into the problem of having to account for other situations (was it a blowout loss, did we have some other guy dominate in that game and we didn't give Parker/Bettis the ball much, did someone get disproportionately many/few carries in the red zone, on third down, etc.).

So what I'm saying is, yes, why not do the math if you've got the capacity to do so; it'll help. But I doubt it'll give us a be-all, end-all answer either way.

X-Terminator
10-22-2008, 06:53 PM
Can anyone please tell me one thing Willie brings to the table that Moore doesn't, other than "he's the incumbent starter, so he must be godlike by default"? 40 speed is not a determining factor in how good a running back you are. Unless you're talking about a big lumbering guy like Christian Okoye, virtually all NFL running backs have sufficient speed to make a big play.

I don't think anyone views him as "godlike," they just don't believe he's as horrible as you and his other doubters make him out to be, to the point of wanting him benched for a career backup. I admit that the guy has holes in his game - he's not shown he can be an effective receiver, and he isn't very effective running between the tackles, the latter being the exact reason why Mendenhall was drafted. Moore is not any better at running between the tackles either, so that is a wash. He's also not very shifty - I agree with whomever said that Moore has better footwork. He is more effective running off and outside the tackles and could be pretty effective on screens if they bothered to use them more often. That's how he should be used. But that can be done with him getting the bulk of the playing time and carries, with Moore coming in to spell him.

tony hipchest
10-22-2008, 06:59 PM
moore is just a notch below backs like westbrook and willie, which means he probably isnt a top 5 back in the league but definitely has potential to be a top 10 back. every time in his career he has gotten the start he has produced.

plus he has proven since a rookie he is capable of 25-30 touches a game.

Preacher
10-22-2008, 07:04 PM
Of course, that might tell us a lot, but you still run into the problem of having to account for other situations (was it a blowout loss, did we have some other guy dominate in that game and we didn't give Parker/Bettis the ball much, did someone get disproportionately many/few carries in the red zone, on third down, etc.).

So what I'm saying is, yes, why not do the math if you've got the capacity to do so; it'll help. But I doubt it'll give us a be-all, end-all answer either way.

Nope, it can't do that.. .but it can give us some insights... and also show us whether there is much deviation between Jerome's running and Willie's running.

My first contention is that there aren't as many wild variations between Jerome and Willie as you contend there are. I think Jerome was shut down almost as much as Willie was.

A T-test will help sort that out.. but it has to go play by play. which is quite intensive.

fansince'76
10-22-2008, 07:25 PM
Nope, it can't do that.. .but it can give us some insights... and also show us whether there is much deviation between Jerome's running and Willie's running.

My first contention is that there aren't as many wild variations between Jerome and Willie as you contend there are. I think Jerome was shut down almost as much as Willie was.

A T-test will help sort that out.. but it has to go play by play. which is quite intensive.

I wouldn't even know where to get per-play stats for runs by Willie and the Bus over their entire careers, not to mention plugging all those numbers (almost 3,500 carries for the Bus alone) into a T-test. That's pretty granular.

Preacher
10-22-2008, 07:34 PM
I wouldn't even know where to get per-play stats for runs by Willie and the Bus over their entire careers, not to mention plugging all those numbers (almost 3,500 carries for the Bus alone) into a T-test. That's pretty granular.

Yep.

Though hopefully, a site will have it listed so that it can just be cut and pasted into an excel file, and worked from there.

If the right site, with the rite listing exists... it could probably be done in under an hour.

MasterOfPuppets
10-22-2008, 07:45 PM
wouldn't it be easier to maybe just take both backs 2 most productive years?

X-Terminator
10-22-2008, 07:53 PM
moore is just a notch below backs like westbrook and willie, which means he probably isnt a top 5 back in the league but definitely has potential to be a top 10 back. every time in his career he has gotten the start he has produced.

plus he has proven since a rookie he is capable of 25-30 touches a game.

But save a few games, he's been a career backup. There's obviously a reason for that. He's been a backup to Onterrio Smith and Michael Bennett - not exactly a couple of household names, and lost out to Chester Taylor when the Vikes brought him in. I'm not trying to put the guy down; in fact, I believe he's earned the right to more playing time. I'm trying to give a little perspective to those who want to see him replace Parker as the starter.

Preacher
10-22-2008, 09:38 PM
But save a few games, he's been a career backup. There's obviously a reason for that. He's been a backup to Onterrio Smith and Michael Bennett - not exactly a couple of household names, and lost out to Chester Taylor when the Vikes brought him in. I'm not trying to put the guy down; in fact, I believe he's earned the right to more playing time. I'm trying to give a little perspective to those who want to see him replace Parker as the starter.

It makes me wonder about a durability issue for Moore.

But like you said... the kid has earned a heck of a lot more playing time.. and that can ONLY be good for both him AND Willie in the long run... and good for this team in the long run!!

steelwall
10-22-2008, 09:40 PM
Lets put this to bed....Moore is good, he has impressed me, but Wille is the better back. Numbers don't lie.

Not trying to take anything away from Moore, but he's no FWP....

Polamalu Princess
10-22-2008, 09:43 PM
All I have to say about this is that I was impressed with Moore! He met the mark on Sunday. I look forward to seeing him play.

Polamalu Princess
10-22-2008, 09:45 PM
Lets put this to bed....Moore is good, he has impressed me, but Wille is the better back. Numbers don't lie.

Not trying to take anything away from Moore, but he's no FWP....

Parker - hands down is the one that has proven himself over and over again. I would just like to see what Moore will bring to the team - in time.

steelwall
10-22-2008, 09:47 PM
Parker - hands down is the one that has proven himself over and over again. I would just like to see what Moore will bring to the team - in time.


As would I...any good addition to our team....well just is good.... Sorry not in the poetic form today.

lilyoder6
10-22-2008, 09:50 PM
evryone knows that parker will be the starter.. yes moore has showed he can play and should get more playing time.. which then can take some carries off of parker... at least we know when moore comes in the off is still playing at a high lvl

The Duke
10-22-2008, 09:54 PM
Lets put this to bed....Moore is good, he has impressed me, but Wille is the better back. Numbers don't lie.

Not trying to take anything away from Moore, but he's no FWP....

AND, tomlin has proven that he will ride willie till the wheels come off. he's his starter

we can only hope moore remains in the offensive gameplan, 10-15 touches a game at least. keep willie fresh. A dinamic duo

Yep, it should work out :tt02:

MasterOfPuppets
10-22-2008, 10:03 PM
But save a few games, he's been a career backup. There's obviously a reason for that. He's been a backup to Onterrio Smith and Michael Bennett - not exactly a couple of household names, and lost out to Chester Taylor when the Vikes brought him in. I'm not trying to put the guy down; in fact, I believe he's earned the right to more playing time. I'm trying to give a little perspective to those who want to see him replace Parker as the starter.wasn't parker a carreer backup? :huh: .....

steelwall
10-22-2008, 10:04 PM
AND, tomlin has proven that he will ride willie till the wheels come off. he's his starter

we can only hope moore remains in the offensive gameplan, 10-15 touches a game at least. keep willie fresh. A dinamic duo

Yep, it should work out :tt02:


15 touches maybe a far reach.....but I agree with the rest.

steelreserve
10-23-2008, 01:24 PM
Lets put this to bed....Moore is good, he has impressed me, but Wille is the better back. Numbers don't lie.

Not trying to take anything away from Moore, but he's no FWP....

What numbers? Moore's been having 100 yards a game with more receiving yards. The main question I want to see answered is, can he keep it up? You can't figure that out if you send him back to the bench right away.

Having said that, I'll honestly be happy even if Moore's good play just means we see the gameplan change from what we've been doing for the past three years. The RBs used as receiving threats a little more, and FOR GOD'S SAKE, learn to use different backs in different situations.

Just please, no more forcing Parker into every single role whether he fits it or not. This does not mean putting Moore in and giving him two touches that everyone knew were coming. Our offense will get much better if we learn something from Moore's success and mix things up more.

Edman
10-23-2008, 02:25 PM
Mewelde Moore is more effective as a role player, not a full time starter.

Willie is the Starter, Memo is a role player. A very effective role player. He's a rich man's Najeh Davenport. FWP on the other hand has done nothing but produce during his time here as a Steeler. And he's not exactly old. He's 28 and still has plenty of time ahead of him.

Speaking of using both, whatever happened to that pony backfield Arians was talking about in the offseason? I think it's about time the Steelers used it.

X-Terminator
10-23-2008, 03:22 PM
wasn't parker a carreer backup? :huh: .....

No - obviously he has not been a career backup at the NFL level, which of course is my point of reference.

The_WARDen
10-23-2008, 03:40 PM
No - obviously he has not been a career backup at the NFL level, which of course is my point of reference.

didn't Parker start from day 1? Albeit from necessity due to Staley stealing $$ and Bettis being dinged again.

memphissteelergirl
10-23-2008, 03:49 PM
Moore needs to be the starter until proven otherwise. Work Parker back in gingerly, and save his legs for down the stretch.


:iagree:

Preacher
10-23-2008, 04:09 PM
didn't Parker start from day 1? Albeit from necessity due to Staley stealing $$ and Bettis being dinged again.

No...

Parker was second or third string in 2004. Remember that last game against the Bills? Parker started that game (our starters were put on the bench) and flat out FLEW past the bills defense.

He was the starter the next year. So he had one year of backup... and then starting.



Again, I have to agree with X-Term. here. Parker is our starter. Period.

We let him start, but keep him on a count. Only give him 10 or 15 runs, and let Moore take 5 or 10 run plays as well... with Dookie getting the ball to run up the middle in the late fourth quarter.

Keep our running backs fresh for the stretch.

HometownGal
10-23-2008, 04:11 PM
Mewelde Moore is more effective as a role player, not a full time starter.

Willie is the Starter, Memo is a role player. A very effective role player. He's a rich man's Najeh Davenport. FWP on the other hand has done nothing but produce during his time here as a Steeler. And he's not exactly old. He's 28 and still has plenty of time ahead of him.

Speaking of using both, whatever happened to that pony backfield Arians was talking about in the offseason? I think it's about time the Steelers used it.

This is where I'm at in this situation - imagine the 1-2 backfield punch we could have with FWP and MeMo. :applaudit::thumbsup: Each of them has a different style and the pony backfield could become a tremendous asset to the Steelers O.

MasterOfPuppets
10-23-2008, 04:11 PM
No - obviously he has not been a career backup at the NFL level, which of course is my point of reference.
and my point was, nobody knew what willie was capable of, UNTIL, he got significant playing time. did you know parker was nfl starter quality when the steelers added him to the roster? could it be possable that your maybe giving minnesota's coaching staff"s talent evaluation to much credit? after all, they apparently thought tavaris jackson was good enough to win with.....:thumbsup: i'm not sayin he should be the starter, but i sure as hell think he's earned a lot more playing time.

Preacher
10-23-2008, 04:43 PM
and my point was, nobody knew what willie was capable of, UNTIL, he got significant playing time. did you know parker was nfl starter quality when the steelers added him to the roster? could it be possable that your maybe giving minnesota's coaching staff"s talent evaluation to much credit? after all, they apparently thought tavaris jackson was good enough to win with.....:thumbsup: i'm not sayin he should be the starter, but i sure as hell think he's earned a lot more playing time.

Very true... but X-term has said the same thing...

in fact, I believe he's earned the right to more playing time. I'm trying to give a little perspective to those who want to see him replace Parker as the starter.

So I am not sure what the point of difference is now :hunch:

steelreserve
10-23-2008, 04:43 PM
Mewelde Moore is more effective as a role player, not a full time starter.

Willie is the Starter, Memo is a role player.

Under what set of crazy circumstances does it make any sense to say that, knowing full well that NOBODY'S EVER TRIED TO USE HIM AS A FULL-TIME STARTER :banging: :banging: :banging:

Where does this arbitrary cap on Moore's potential come from? I've heard a lot of it around here, but it's absolute nonsense, unless you're saying you have some ouija board that can accurately predict the path of NFL running backs' careers. To figure out how good a player is, you put him in the damn game and see if he can get the job done. You don't take a wild guess and sit him on the bench all year.

If Moore keeps playing like this, I'd take him over Parker or just about anyone else I can think of. Now let's actually fricking find out, instead of all this rah-rah team pride bullcrap where Parker's automatically the best because he's the incumbent and a familiar face.

I can't fully explain it, but in terms of being open to new ideas, Parker supporters seem like they're right on par with the Catholic church. Of the 1500s. Listening to some of you, it's like you think it's blasphemy to even believe it's possible to find a better running back.

Guess what? It can happen, and sometime within the next few years, it's pretty much guaranteed to happen.

Preacher
10-23-2008, 04:49 PM
Under what set of crazy circumstances does it make any sense to say that, knowing full well that NOBODY'S EVER TRIED TO USE HIM AS A FULL-TIME STARTER :banging: :banging: :banging:

Where does this arbitrary cap on Moore's potential come from? I've heard a lot of it around here, but it's absolute nonsense, unless you're saying you have some ouija board that can accurately predict the path of NFL running backs' careers. To figure out how good a player is, you put him in the damn game and see if he can get the job done. You don't take a wild guess and sit him on the bench all year.

If Moore keeps playing like this, I'd take him over Parker or just about anyone else I can think of. Now let's actually fricking find out, instead of all this rah-rah team pride bullcrap where Parker's automatically the best because he's the incumbent and a familiar face.

I can't fully explain it, but in terms of being open to new ideas, Parker supporters seem like they're right on par with the Catholic church. Of the 1500s. Listening to some of you, it's like you think it's blasphemy to even believe it's possible to find a better running back.

Guess what? It can happen, and sometime within the next few years, it's pretty much guaranteed to happen.

:rolleyes:

Parker haters seem like they are on par with atheists who want to dismantle the church. it is blasphemy to think the church has anything worthwhile or should be kept around.


Extreme rhetoric cuts both ways. Something our politicians haven't figured out yet.

You have a proclivity for disliking Willie. So be it. But until Willie stops producing like a top 3 back in the NFL... there is no reason to seek another back to replace him.

That production hasn't stopped. Sure, he was injured. Oh well. it happens. But when he comes back, we watch his production. If he is on par to run 1200, 1400 yards over a 16 game period (that is, projected and averaged out), then we would be FOOLISH to experiment with another back in the role who HASNT produced yet... no MATTER the reason.

It is the equivelent of trading in that 2 year old mustang for another car that may be better... or may be a lemon.

You just don't do it. You stick with what you KNOW WILL WORK... until it starts to break down. Its called stability. its why the Steelers win.

MasterOfPuppets
10-23-2008, 04:59 PM
Very true... but X-term has said the same thing...



So I am not sure what the point of difference is now :hunch:
But save a few games, he's been a career backup. There's obviously a reason for that. He's been a backup to Onterrio Smith and Michael Bennett - not exactly a couple of household names, and lost out to Chester Taylor when the Vikes brought him in.
was there obviously a reason why parker road the pine in college? the only one i can think of, is the coaches were morons..... just because morons in minnesota thought he wasn't starter quality, doesn't make it so.....get it now? :wink02:

Preacher
10-23-2008, 05:04 PM
was there obviously a reason why parker road the pine in college? the only one i can think of, is the coaches were morons..... just because morons in minnesota thought he wasn't starter quality, doesn't make it so.....get it now? :wink02:

you chose the wrong part of that statement to argue.. you finished with this...

i'm not sayin he should be the starter, but i sure as hell think he's earned a lot more playing time. No one is arguing against that statement.

So no... i don't "get it now"

steelreserve
10-23-2008, 05:25 PM
It is the equivelent of trading in that 2 year old mustang for another car that may be better... or may be a lemon.

An analogy that sums up one part of the situation ... on the other hand, I'd liken our current predicament to owning both a sports car and an SUV. Most of the time, if you're just driving to work or something, the sports car is going to be just as good as the SUV. But let's say you need to pick up some furniture or take your whole family to the airport. If you still insist on using the sports car and keeping the SUV in the garage, you're a moron.

Now let's say you know that you're ALWAYS going to have to pick up furniture at least once a week for the rest of your life, but all you own is a sports car. If you don't think about buying an SUV or a truck, you're also a moron. That's kind of where we've been for the past three years, and that's what I'm afraid we'll fall back into.

lilyoder6
10-23-2008, 05:32 PM
SUV are bad.. they are gas gusslers so y would u want 2 drive the suv all the time..

side note.. don't even know who is who b/c i been busy w/ school and work

lilyoder6
10-23-2008, 05:33 PM
also.. what would u all be saying IF moore was not doing good right now.. 2 games doesn't prove that he can handle all the work load as a starter thru out a reg season

MasterOfPuppets
10-23-2008, 05:34 PM
you chose the wrong part of that statement to argue.. you finished with this...

No one is arguing against that statement.

So no... i don't "get it now"
ok preach.....i'll simplify it.....x-term statement made it sound like willie should be the starter because moore ISN'T good enough to be a starter. he backs it up with ....and not in so many words...he couldn't start in minnesota, so he obviously not a capable starter.....i call :bs: ...... is he better option as a starter? maybe....maybe not, he certainly hasn't proved so far that he's definitely not. i was just pointing out, that just because he's never been a starter, doesn't meen he can't be or shouldn't be. look at how it turned out for willie, just because one person saw potential......

my last statement is simply a disclaimmer....i'm not saying moore SHOULD be the starter, let em prove it on the field, who should be starting.

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-23-2008, 06:41 PM
But save a few games, he's been a career backup. There's obviously a reason for that. He's been a backup to Onterrio Smith and Michael Bennett - not exactly a couple of household names, and lost out to Chester Taylor when the Vikes brought him in. I'm not trying to put the guy down; in fact, I believe he's earned the right to more playing time. I'm trying to give a little perspective to those who want to see him replace Parker as the starter.

A few things...

1) Moore is in his 5th season. Tiki Barber did not become a starter until his 4th season and sat behind guys like Gary Ward, Charles Way and joe Washington. Then the Giants were so sure that Tiki was only a 3rd down back and so they used a 1st round pick on Ron Dayne.

And Moore outproduced Barber over the 1st four years of their careers. Moore also outproduced Brian Westrbook, who didnt start for 4 years either because he was too small to be an every down back.

2) The same coach who thought Moore wasnt good enough to start bet his career on Tarvaris jackson being a playoff QB, so I wouldnt put any faith in Brad Childress thinking.

Willie Parker is a good RB, but I think Moore is a better football player.

Preacher
10-23-2008, 06:50 PM
A few things...

1) Moore is in his 5th season. Tiki Barber did not become a starter until his 4th season and sat behind guys like Gary Ward, Charles Way and joe Washington. Then the Giants were so sure that Tiki was only a 3rd down back and so they used a 1st round pick on Ron Dayne.

And Moore outproduced Barber over the 1st four years of their careers. Moore also outproduced Brian Westrbook, who didnt start for 4 years either because he was too small to be an every down back.

2) The same coach who thought Moore wasnt good enough to start bet his career on Tarvaris jackson being a playoff QB, so I wouldnt put any faith in Brad Childress thinking.

Willie Parker is a good RB, but I think Moore is a better football player.

Hmmm...

what is more interesting however, is that Parker is only in his 4th year starting, and 5th year in the league as well... and has outproduced most of the other backs in the league. So I am not sure why we would shift gears on our starting back long-term.

Preacher
10-23-2008, 06:54 PM
An analogy that sums up one part of the situation ... on the other hand, I'd liken our current predicament to owning both a sports car and an SUV. Most of the time, if you're just driving to work or something, the sports car is going to be just as good as the SUV. But let's say you need to pick up some furniture or take your whole family to the airport. If you still insist on using the sports car and keeping the SUV in the garage, you're a moron.

Now let's say you know that you're ALWAYS going to have to pick up furniture at least once a week for the rest of your life, but all you own is a sports car. If you don't think about buying an SUV or a truck, you're also a moron. That's kind of where we've been for the past three years, and that's what I'm afraid we'll fall back into.

that makes no sense at all... We picked up Mende.

So you keep the Parker for doing the major part of the work. Put mende in there to pound, and keep MeMo to spell both of them.

I have absolutely no problem with that kind of scenario. I can't, for the life of me, understand why other do.

Its the same as baseball. When you have an ace who has a screaming fastball, you don't move him back in the rotation simply because your second man in the rotation has 4 pitches. You keep your ace as your ace and then use the second man to really screw up the guys the next day.

Willie is our ace. League leader last year in yards until he was injured. There is no reason to mess with that. Period. At least MeMo understands that and is comfortable with his position.

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-23-2008, 06:59 PM
Hmmm...

what is more interesting however, is that Parker is only in his 4th year starting, and 5th year in the league as well... and has outproduced most of the other backs in the league. So I am not sure why we would shift gears on our starting back long-term. I think it is pretty simple.

Player 1 is averaging 4.0 yards per carry and Player 2 is averaging 5.2 yards per carry playing for the same team.

More YPC means longer drives, more points and the team offense and point totals with Player 1 vs Player 2 reflect that.

In the NFL (Not For Long) you cannot ignore those differences because of previous allegiences.

Preacher
10-23-2008, 07:16 PM
I think it is pretty simple.

Player 1 is averaging 4.0 yards per carry and Player 2 is averaging 5.2 yards per carry playing for the same team.

More YPC means longer drives, more points and the team offense and point totals with Player 1 vs Player 2 reflect that.

In the NFL (Not For Long) you cannot ignore those differences because of previous allegiences.

Player 1 played against better teams with a HORRIBLE and beaten up front line.

Player 2 played two games, one against one of the worst defenses in the league with a refreshed line and QB.


You can't ignore the differences in who you play based on past biases.

Preacher
10-23-2008, 07:19 PM
This thread is proof of 1 thing.

Ben Roeth. is playing pretty dang good. Otherwise, HE would be the one this thread is about...

One thing about the Steelers nation... we ALWAYS have to be complaining about something.

A superbowl winning, league leading (last year) back included. :laughing:

steelreserve
10-23-2008, 07:24 PM
that makes no sense at all... We picked up Mende.

So you keep the Parker for doing the major part of the work. Put mende in there to pound, and keep MeMo to spell both of them.

I have absolutely no problem with that kind of scenario. I can't, for the life of me, understand why other do.

Because we don't DO it. We pick up other guys and sit them on the bench until Parker gets hurt. maybe we give them one or two touches, and when we do, we usually telegraph it.

Part of the answer is having the other guys to help out; the other half is actually knowing when to use them. We need to be a LOT quicker to try other options when things are going like they were against Philly. And I'm sorry, but there are certain games where Parker is going to get stuffed all day and we pretty much know that by the end of the first drive. Even though he's the starter, he should see the field rarely, if at all, when that's going on.

The Duke
10-23-2008, 07:36 PM
One thing about the Steelers nation... we ALWAYS have to be complaining about something.

A superbowl winning, league leading (last year) back included. :laughing:

hey, at least we don't have problems such as arrests, drugs, coaches on the hot seat, staph infections, hurt qbs, lack of pass rush and running game, prima dona receivers, bad secondaries....I could go on

Like it's been said, the steelers have a good problem with more and willie

just be thankful we're not the bengals :flap:

Preacher
10-23-2008, 10:05 PM
Because we don't DO it. We pick up other guys and sit them on the bench until Parker gets hurt. maybe we give them one or two touches, and when we do, we usually telegraph it.

Part of the answer is having the other guys to help out; the other half is actually knowing when to use them. We need to be a LOT quicker to try other options when things are going like they were against Philly. And I'm sorry, but there are certain games where Parker is going to get stuffed all day and we pretty much know that by the end of the first drive. Even though he's the starter, he should see the field rarely, if at all, when that's going on.


How many times was Ben sacked that game? how often was our line blown up?

Thank God Willie was in there. If it was Bettis, we would have even more sacks because he wouldn't have been able to get to the ball fast enough before another sack happened.

X-Terminator
10-23-2008, 11:18 PM
and my point was, nobody knew what willie was capable of, UNTIL, he got significant playing time. did you know parker was nfl starter quality when the steelers added him to the roster? could it be possable that your maybe giving minnesota's coaching staff"s talent evaluation to much credit? after all, they apparently thought tavaris jackson was good enough to win with.....:thumbsup: i'm not sayin he should be the starter, but i sure as hell think he's earned a lot more playing time.

Remember some guy named Mike Tice? He was the Vikes' HC before Childress and he, not Childress, drafted Moore. If he really was as good as you all say he is, why couldn't he beat out Onterrio Smith? Michael Bennett? Chester Taylor? In fact, with Adrian Peterson emerging as their feature back, they chose Taylor as his backup over Moore, making him expendable. At this point, Moore is and has been a complimentary back and a spot starter when the main guy goes down. He has not shown much more beyond that. But yet, because he has a couple of good games, we have fans who think he should take Parker's job. I like Moore, he's done a great job and deserves more PT. But when Willie is healthy, he should be the starter with Moore spelling him and used the way the Giants use Ward and Bradshaw, or a poor man's Brian Westbrook.


A few things...

1) Moore is in his 5th season. Tiki Barber did not become a starter until his 4th season and sat behind guys like Gary Ward, Charles Way and joe Washington. Then the Giants were so sure that Tiki was only a 3rd down back and so they used a 1st round pick on Ron Dayne.

And Moore outproduced Barber over the 1st four years of their careers. Moore also outproduced Brian Westrbook, who didnt start for 4 years either because he was too small to be an every down back.

2) The same coach who thought Moore wasnt good enough to start bet his career on Tarvaris jackson being a playoff QB, so I wouldnt put any faith in Brad Childress thinking.

Willie Parker is a good RB, but I think Moore is a better football player.

Tiki Barber also had a major fumbling problem that held him back, and it wasn't until that problem was corrected before the Giants felt comfortable with making him the guy. And if Dayne would have panned out like Brandon Jacobs has, we'd still be talking about Tiki as a 3rd down back. He got the job by default, because Dayne was completely ineffective. It's not the same situation with Moore, because whether you or the other haters like it or not, Parker has been productive since becoming The Man. For crying out loud, Parker had 16 TDs just 2 seasons ago, 14 of them on the ground, and many of them from 2-3 yards out. But yet, according to some, he should be benched for a guy who had all of TWO good games against bad/banged up defenses.

I already addressed your second point - Tice drafted Moore and didn't start him either, and lost his backup job to Taylor.

steelreserve
10-24-2008, 01:39 PM
How many times was Ben sacked that game? how often was our line blown up?

Thank God Willie was in there. If it was Bettis, we would have even more sacks because he wouldn't have been able to get to the ball fast enough before another sack happened.

Yeah, thank God Willie was in there to get 20 yards on 13 miserable carries. That's just as bad as adding another three or four sacks.

I don't buy that "Bettis wouldn't get to the ball fast enough" argument. 40 speed and "breakaway" speed does not come into play at all when you're getting ready to take a handoff. There's not really any difference between one back and the next for that.

I was thinking more along the lines of, "Wow, it would've been great if we had Bettis or Moore in there for that game." Bettis would've at least given us a chance of bashing ahead for a few yards despite the line's problems. Moore would've given us a chance to try a few more quick passes. Either one of those could've kept the defense honest and changed things for the offense a lot. Willie didn't offer us either one -- all he brought to the table was the option to get stuffed at the line, with no alternatives.

I've said many times that our play calling in that game absolutely sucked because we refused to make adjustments and try a different strategy. The "Parker-or-nothing" mentality in that game was a big part of that, and is typical of our attitude over the past three years.

Edman
10-24-2008, 02:40 PM
Looking like this is a non-issue for another week. MeMo will probably get another shot at starter.

Avoid LLoyd1975
10-24-2008, 03:55 PM
I don't know but I am not excited that we have to ride the Mewelde Moore train for another week. What if he goes down? Then what fellow Steeler fans? Parker needs to quit doing his best impersonation of DUCE STALEY and get the F-CK back out there on the field.

steelreserve
10-24-2008, 04:07 PM
I don't know but I am not excited that we have to ride the Mewelde Moore train for another week. What if he goes down? Then what fellow Steeler fans? Parker needs to quit doing his best impersonation of DUCE STALEY and get the F-CK back out there on the field.

That's the one thing I worry about. If nothing else, it would be nice to have the depth. If Moore even gets shaken up and misses a series, our options are Russell or Dookie. Ugh.

Having said that, I also wish it didn't take an injury for us to mix things up a bit with our personnel or play calling.

Preacher
10-24-2008, 04:47 PM
I don't know but I am not excited that we have to ride the Mewelde Moore train for another week. What if he goes down? Then what fellow Steeler fans? Parker needs to quit doing his best impersonation of DUCE STALEY and get the F-CK back out there on the field.


Parker needs to stay off the field until he is healthy enough to play.

Am I happy that we don't have our number 1 back on teh field? No. But I will tell you this, right now I am more comfortable with our number 3 back then i would be with half the NFL's number 1.

lilyoder6
10-24-2008, 05:35 PM
preach idk about that.. maybe a few eb's that are starting i would rather have there number 1 than moore, not trying to dis-respect moore, but starters are starters for a reason

steel9guy
10-24-2008, 05:50 PM
I think they shoud start Parker when he's ready but use Moore on 3rd downs.

Steelman16
10-24-2008, 05:50 PM
Parker needs to stay off the field until he is healthy enough to play.

Am I happy that we don't have our number 1 back on teh field? No. But I will tell you this, right now I am more comfortable with our number 3 back then i would be with half the NFL's number 1.

I agree, Parker doesn't need to be a hero and try to play on a bum knee. It'll only further ruin him. MeMo is performing admirably, and will continue until Willie's back at 100%.

MeMo's shouldered the load, and IMO, done it extremely well. I'm surprised he hasn't gotten any love from outside the organization and fans.

steelreserve
10-24-2008, 06:07 PM
I agree, Parker doesn't need to be a hero and try to play on a bum knee. It'll only further ruin him. MeMo is performing admirably, and will continue until Willie's back at 100%.

MeMo's shouldered the load, and IMO, done it extremely well. I'm surprised he hasn't gotten any love from outside the organization and fans.

He's at least getting recognition in a lot of fantasy sites and columns. In a lot of them, he's been the #1 added or recommended player.

Preacher
10-25-2008, 03:06 AM
So I am watching the featured game on the NFL channel.

What do I see?

Bettis running the ball, against the Giants when.

Kind of interesting, with this thread going on.

The very first thing I notice... Is that Bettis is not GETTING TOUCHED for the first 3 - 5 yards that he runs the ball, he is pretty much at the LOS before he is touched. He has the momentum by the time he gets touched... and then he falls forward for a couple yards.

So it seems, least from this snippet, the biggest issue isn't Bettis or Willie, but the OL.

Imagine that.

BTW, for how much we ran that year... there were a number of sacks in the second half of that year.

tony hipchest
10-25-2008, 02:19 PM
The very first thing I notice... Is that Bettis is not GETTING TOUCHED for the first 3 - 5 yards that he runs the ball, he is pretty much at the LOS before he is touched. He has the momentum by the time he gets touched... and then he falls forward for a couple yards.

So it seems, least from this snippet, the biggest issue isn't Bettis or Willie, but the OL.
.

im watching it again too preach. jeromes 1st 5 carries gained 10 yards. a whopping 2 ypc.

people forget that there were plenty of times our opponents knew we were gonna run and even jerome was stopped for a loss, no gain, or 1-2 yard pick up.

same as willie.

same offensive philosophy, worse line, different back. however both willie and jerome were/are always capable of being a top 5 back in yards gained because that is who the steelers are.

we seen it with franco. we seen it with foster. even duce staley led the league in rushing until his injury.

steelers debunk the myth that "size matters". :chuckle:

lilyoder6
10-25-2008, 05:45 PM
and bettis had the extra pounds to be able to fall forward unlike parker can... but if u stack the line not even the best rb's can run all day against that

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-25-2008, 07:16 PM
I guess I dont understand because Moore seems to be averaging 5.2 yards per carry behind this OL

fansince'76
10-25-2008, 09:43 PM
I guess I dont understand because Moore seems to be averaging 5.2 yards per carry behind this OL

Yep, against a terrible Bengals D that Willie routinely shreds and a seriously depleted Jax D that Willie averaged 7+ YPC against last year (when they were at full strength) during a loss to them in the regular season. Of course, I'm sure that loss was Willie's fault too since Jax tore us up for about 250 yards on the ground that day themselves.

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-25-2008, 11:06 PM
Yep, against a terrible Bengals D that Willie routinely shreds and a seriously depleted Jax D that Willie averaged 7+ YPC against last year (when they were at full strength) during a loss to them in the regular season. Of course, I'm sure that loss was Willie's fault too since Jax tore us up for about 250 yards on the ground that day themselves. No, half of his carries have come against the Ravens and aguars defenses.

The Bengals defense is actually not that bad statistically either.

Preacher
10-25-2008, 11:31 PM
No, half of his carries have come against the Ravens and aguars defenses.

The Bengals defense is actually not that bad statistically either.

Its simple.

Watch where the first touch happened... in the first few games, it was in the backfield. Since the Jags game, it has been on the line or beyond.

That isn't the backs issues. Thats the fact that our O line seems to have finally solidified :jawdrop: (did I just say that? especially with Starks on it now?) :chuckle:

The Duke
10-25-2008, 11:43 PM
That isn't the backs issues. Thats the fact that our O line seems to have finally solidified :jawdrop: (did I just say that? especially with Starks on it now?) :chuckle:

isn't it obvious? the oline is playing better because willie isn't there :doh:

heck, even the dline is playing better

boo willie! go mewelde :tt:

(sarcasm smilie )

fansince'76
10-25-2008, 11:50 PM
No, half of his carries have come against the Ravens and aguars defenses.

Yeah, and against the Ravens, Moore had 13 yards on 8 rushes for a 1.6 YPC average, whereas Willie had 42 yards on 23 carries for a 1.8 YPC average the last time he faced them.

Against Jax, Moore had 99 yards on 17 rushes for a 5.8 YPC average, whereas Willie went for 100 yards on 14 carries for a 7.1 YPC average the last time he faced JAX (and they were substanitally healthier then than when Moore faced them).

So where's this huge upgrade that Mewelde Moore represents in rushing again?

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-26-2008, 02:01 AM
Yeah, and against the Ravens, Moore had 13 yards on 8 rushes for a 1.6 YPC average, whereas Willie had 42 yards on 23 carries for a 1.8 YPC average the last time he faced them.

Against Jax, Moore had 99 yards on 17 rushes for a 5.8 YPC average, whereas Willie went for 100 yards on 14 carries for a 7.1 YPC average the last time he faced JAX (and they were substanitally healthier then than when Moore faced them).

So where's this huge upgrade that Mewelde Moore represents in rushing again?

Of the 8 carries against the Ravens, werent 3 of them goalline carries and didnt Moore lose 4 yards on a carry when he slipped before taking the handoff?

I never want to rely on excuses but Moores 5+ YPC average has held steady over his career. Willie Parkers career average is 4.4 YPC and has declined every year and is now at 4.0 YPC. Moore is averaging 1.2 YPC more behind the same OL which is a huge difference. Lets see what happens vs the Giants and revisit then.

Preacher
10-26-2008, 02:07 AM
Of the 8 carries against the Ravens, werent 3 of them goalline carries and didnt Moore lose 4 yards on a carry when he slipped before taking the handoff?

I never want to rely on excuses but Moores 5+ YPC average has held steady over his career. Willie Parkers career average is 4.4 YPC and has declined every year and is now at 4.0 YPC. Moore is averaging 1.2 YPC more behind the same OL which is a huge difference. Lets see what happens vs the Giants and revisit then.

When does Moore come in? When lines and teams are tired. Moore is averaging 1.2 YPC more behind the same OL. The OL in the beginning was HORRIBLE. Now? It is coming together.

Just remember, 9 sacks vs. 0 sacks.

even if it is ALL the same people... it is not the same line.

tony hipchest
10-26-2008, 02:51 AM
The Bengals defense is actually not that bad statistically either.

:rofl: 0-7 = suck.

Borski
10-26-2008, 03:00 AM
Cincy = 29th Points allowed with 182 PA already.

In comparison the Steelers are #2 on that list with only 89 PA

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-27-2008, 05:03 PM
Surprised not to see any threads about MM/FWP pop up. I am of the opinion that Moore should be the starter even if FWP is healthy based on his play so far. Moore and FWP have about the same number of carries and Moore has been far more productive to date.

Also to consider..

Moore 3rd in the NFL in yds/carry on 1st down
http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2008&type=Rushing&range=NFL&rank=229
Moore 8th in YPC
http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2008&type=Rushing&range=NFL&rank=003
Every 6 carries Moore has a 10+ yard play
http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2008&type=Rushing&range=NFL&rank=069
9th in YPC in the 4thQ
http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2008&type=Rushing&range=NFL&rank=080

FWP doesnt rank anywhere near the league leaders in any of these categories. Thoughts?

Preacher
10-27-2008, 05:05 PM
Yeah... I have a thought.

Stop polluting the forum with duplicate threads. This issue was beat to death last week.

Just my opinion...

lilyoder6
10-27-2008, 05:12 PM
yeah,, plz we don't need another thread to compare moore and willie... just lay it to rest

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-27-2008, 05:19 PM
Sorry, but those are absurd answers to what would seem to be a pretty relevant question.

It would seem that you are avoiding the issue because you dont like the answer. Since you are clearly of the opinion that FWP should re-assume the starting role despite vastly inferior production perhaps you can explain why.

randy06
10-27-2008, 05:23 PM
Sorry, but those are absurd answers to what would seem to be a pretty relevant question.

It would seem that you are avoiding the issue because you dont like the answer. Since you are clearly of the opinion that FWP should re-assume the starting role despite vastly inferior production perhaps you can explain why.

Well your saying how Willie doesn't rank nearly as high as Moore does well thats obvious, he hasnt played in over a month....so i think you have a biased opinion of FWP, yes Moore has been great, but last year FWP was one of the top backs in the league till he got hurt.
My bottom line is you cant say FWP has inferior production when he hasnt played, hasnt had a chance, if they were both healthy and playing then, this would be a discussion, your just beating a dead horse, willie is our starter and Moore knows his role.

X-Terminator
10-27-2008, 05:32 PM
Sorry, but those are absurd answers to what would seem to be a pretty relevant question.

It would seem that you are avoiding the issue because you dont like the answer. Since you are clearly of the opinion that FWP should re-assume the starting role despite vastly inferior production perhaps you can explain why.

No, it's because this issue was beaten to death last week, and most posters probably aren't wont to discuss it again.

Parker is going to be the starter when he gets back in whether you like it or not. End of discussion.

Preacher
10-27-2008, 05:50 PM
Sorry, but those are absurd answers to what would seem to be a pretty relevant question.

It would seem that you are avoiding the issue because you dont like the answer. Since you are clearly of the opinion that FWP should re-assume the starting role despite vastly inferior production perhaps you can explain why.


No. Its because this is just another thread going the same subject.

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=28261

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=28219

Not to mention a number of threads that have been hijacked into this topic.

Couldn't you just bump one of those?

Of course not...

19ward86
10-27-2008, 07:55 PM
Not to say anything bad about moore but i believe that other teams figure it is better to allow MM to have a 100 yd game than let Big Ben light up the secondary. If you notice when the Gaints put 8 or 9 guys in the box and dropped 3 their defense was getting picked apart but at the end when they only rushed 3 or 4 they had coverage sacks and incompletions. Of course they also have the personel to only rush 3 or 4 and rely on them.

GBMelBlount
10-27-2008, 08:23 PM
I think Memo's done a great job and I'm damn glad we picked him up. I would have no problem with them splitting carries. It would Keep Willie fresh and that's what we need in these close games.

fansince'76
10-27-2008, 08:43 PM
It would seem that you are avoiding the issue because you dont like the answer.

No, they're sick of this issue being beaten to death in umpteen different threads. Frankly, so am I. Threads merged.

BTW, you take away Moore's 32-yard TD run yesterday and he had 18 carries for only 52 yards (2.89 YPC), since one of the favorite arguments of Willie haters everywhere is that "he sucks if you take away all his long runs." :coffee:

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-28-2008, 02:03 AM
No, they're sick of this issue being beaten to death in umpteen different threads. Frankly, so am I. Threads merged.

BTW, you take away Moore's 32-yard TD run yesterday and he had 18 carries for only 52 yards (2.89 YPC), since one of the favorite arguments of Willie haters everywhere is that "he sucks if you take away all his long runs." :coffee:

Hold up.

Moore has 1 less carry than Parker, but has 60 more yards and 5 more first downs and that doesnt take Moore catching passes into account. Moore has clearly been more productive and more productive by a significant margin.

You are suggesting that the less productive player, coming off a bum knee, should have the starting role no questions asked? I think it is at least worth a discussion.

Willie P. started 3 gms......rushed 66 times for 263 yds, 4.0 ave., 3tds, 12 first dns,18% of his rushes

MMoore started 3 gms......rushed 65 times for 322 yds, 5.0 ave.,17 first dns,3tds 26% of his rushes.t

Preacher
10-28-2008, 02:33 AM
Hold up.

Moore has 1 less carry than Parker, but has 60 more yards and 5 more first downs and that doesnt take Moore catching passes into account. Moore has clearly been more productive and more productive by a significant margin.

You are suggesting that the less productive player, coming off a bum knee, should have the starting role no questions asked? I think it is at least worth a discussion.

Willie P. started 3 gms......rushed 66 times for 263 yds, 4.0 ave., 3tds, 12 first dns,18% of his rushes

MMoore started 3 gms......rushed 65 times for 322 yds, 5.0 ave.,17 first dns,3tds 26% of his rushes.t

Now compare sacks in those games... as testament to how the O line has played.

AMAZING how people think a running backs' production has nothing to do with blocking up front.

Jerome Bettis ran well, because he DID GET TOUCHED until he got to the LOS, not 2 yards BEHIND IT.

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-28-2008, 02:55 AM
Now compare sacks in those games... as testament to how the O line has played.

AMAZING how people think a running backs' production has nothing to do with blocking up front.

Jerome Bettis ran well, because he DID GET TOUCHED until he got to the LOS, not 2 yards BEHIND IT.

Ben got sacked 5 times vs the Giants and Moore still averaged 4.4 YPC

Preacher
10-28-2008, 03:49 AM
Ben got sacked 5 times vs the Giants and Moore still averaged 4.4 YPC


Did you actually WATCH the game?

The line, even though it got sacked.. actually did a decent job.

Also, those sacks came at the very end of the game when they were pinning their ears back and coming at him, unlike the sacks in the first few games that were interspersed throughout the game.

BTW... That average goes WAY down if you take out his 30 yard TD run.. down to 2.something.. Same thing that people argue about Willie... without the big runs, he has no average.

You're just not going to win anyone over on this.. it has been argued NUMEROUS times on this board... Some people think Willie sucks. Others think that Willie is one of the best backs in the NFL.. and others think that he is decent.

Let it go. Please.

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-28-2008, 05:32 AM
Did you actually WATCH the game?

The line, even though it got sacked.. actually did a decent job.

Also, those sacks came at the very end of the game when they were pinning their ears back and coming at him, unlike the sacks in the first few games that were interspersed throughout the game.

BTW... That average goes WAY down if you take out his 30 yard TD run.. down to 2.something.. Same thing that people argue about Willie... without the big runs, he has no average.

You're just not going to win anyone over on this.. it has been argued NUMEROUS times on this board... Some people think Willie sucks. Others think that Willie is one of the best backs in the NFL.. and others think that he is decent.

Let it go. Please. It may have been argued numerous times but that was before the emergence of a legitimate alternative. This is not speculative, Moore has outproduced Parker (even if you for some reason were to take out his 32 yd TD run he still has more yards and more 1st downs on less carries).

If you want to suggest that FWP should still start, that is great and a perfectly acceptable opinion. Please feel free to make that argument, but disregarding facts and asking to drop a topic on a message board looks a lot like dodging the question. If people are unwilling or unable to change their opinion in the presence of new information that is also kind of a problem.

\m/xtrememarine\m/
10-28-2008, 07:20 AM
I say keep Moore as the starter and use Parker as a third down back. We will need both backs for the final stretch.

Preacher
10-28-2008, 03:58 PM
It may have been argued numerous times but that was before the emergence of a legitimate alternative. This is not speculative, Moore has outproduced Parker (even if you for some reason were to take out his 32 yd TD run he still has more yards and more 1st downs on less carries).

If you want to suggest that FWP should still start, that is great and a perfectly acceptable opinion. Please feel free to make that argument, but disregarding facts and asking to drop a topic on a message board looks a lot like dodging the question. If people are unwilling or unable to change their opinion in the presence of new information that is also kind of a problem.


Look to the left of the page... just below your Join Date. You see that number? Now look at the corresponding numbers of those who saying they are tired of the same discussion over and over.

Get the point? Trust me, you aren't saying ANYTHING NEW right now.

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-28-2008, 04:41 PM
Look to the left of the page... just below your Join Date. You see that number? Now look at the corresponding numbers of those who saying they are tired of the same discussion over and over.

Get the point? Trust me, you aren't saying ANYTHING NEW right now. Thats great. I appreciate that I am a new guy and understand what that means.

But I am saying something new.

Last season and in seasons since Bettis retirement, when FWP went down the running game went with him. Now there is a RB who has been better than FWP and now they have a very comparable sample set.

If MM and his 5.0 ypc goes to the bench and FWP and his 4.0 ypc return and cost the Steelers a win, I wonder if it becomes a relevant topic then.

Averaging an additional yard per carry is quite significant.

HometownGal
10-28-2008, 04:59 PM
I have maintained all along that when Willie is ready to resume playing, it will be a tremendous asset to the running game to have both FWP and MeMo switching up in the backfield or even lining up together here and there to confuse the opposing D. There are other teams in the NFL who use the double edged "sword" in their backfields and we are blessed to have this option imho.

UltimateFootballNetwork - your opinions are and will be respected here, though they may be disagreed with. Thank you for being so respectful in your replies. :drink:

Preacher
10-28-2008, 06:48 PM
I have maintained all along that when Willie is ready to resume playing, it will be a tremendous asset to the running game to have both FWP and MeMo switching up in the backfield or even lining up together here and there to confuse the opposing D. There are other teams in the NFL who use the double edged "sword" in their backfields and we are blessed to have this option imho.

UltimateFootballNetwork - your opinions are and will be respected here, though they may be disagreed with. Thank you for being so respectful in your replies. :drink:

I have to agree with HTG here...

I also realize that my tone was a little too harsh... Sorry.

What I keep hinting at, is that all it seems we get around here is how much Willie sucks. First, it was that Willie couldn't run between the tackles, then he put on some muscle and started running through the tackles. Then it was that he fumbled too much. Once that was put to rest, it was that he only runs for average, and isn't consistent. Now that we have seen in this last game MeMo (who I think is a TREMENDOUS asset to this team) get stopped a number of times behind the LOS, a few of us read your post that Willie's average is poor compared to someone else. This comes right on the heals of a big argument about why Willie sucks... based on the fact that averages really DONT tell the story. :hunch:

That was the reason for the responses.. though I probably could have just posted that and let it go there....

:drink: <--- pepsi

DACEB
10-28-2008, 07:03 PM
I say keep Moore as the starter and use Parker as a third down back. We will need both backs for the final stretch.

I must say that I agree, and that's not a knock on FWP. There's no harm in letting FWP ease his way back into the lineup. MeMo has been playing very well and should continue to carry a good portion of the load. I am extremely impressed with MeMo on 3rd downs, he blocks well and knows where he is on the field. For those reasons I would definetly use MeMo on 3rd downs. There's no denying what FWP brings to the table though. Hopefully he can return healthy, and the two backs can carry us into Feb.

steelreserve
10-28-2008, 07:48 PM
For however much this has been argued already, I've got to say I agree with one part more than anything: With each passing week that Moore does well, this becomes more of a "new" debate.

Before, the Parker-sucks arguments had two possible outcomes: a) Keep using Parker, or b) some pie-in-the-sky idea about picking up an All-Pro running back through a trade or free agency. His chief "competition" in this debate for the past two years were players on other teams, and a guy who was best known for taking a dump on someone's rug.*

Now, it's Parker versus a guy who's actually on the roster, and you've got the added question of "can the new guy keep it up?" with pretty compelling results so far. It's kind of infuriating to see that part dismissed outright with "absolutely not, Willie is the starter if he's healthy, period."




* or chair, or laundry bin, or something like that. I forget exactly how it went.

fansince'76
10-28-2008, 07:52 PM
Before, the Parker-sucks arguments had two possible outcomes: a) Keep using Parker, or b) some pie-in-the-sky idea about picking up an All-Pro running back through a trade or free agency. His chief "competition" in this debate for the past two years were players on other teams, and a guy who was best known for taking a dump on someone's rug.*

* or chair, or laundry bin, or something like that. I forget exactly how it went.

It's still funny 6+ years later. :toofunny:

According to police, Davenport crept into a dorm room at Barry University around 6 a.m. on April 1. A woman sleeping in the room, Mary McCarthy, told police she was startled by a strange sound and saw Davenport squatting in her closet. Davenport then allegedly defecated in a laundry basket, McCarthy told detectives.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/2002/0708/1403417.html

steelreserve
10-28-2008, 07:56 PM
I never saw how the whole thing ended. Did they ever find out who the Phantom Logger really was?

fansince'76
10-28-2008, 08:00 PM
I never saw how the whole thing ended. Did they ever find out who the Phantom Logger really was?

I'm not sure either - at least the team addressed Dookie's former "crack problem," though: http://www.steelersfever.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13076

:toofunny: :toofunny: :toofunny:

Preacher
10-28-2008, 08:42 PM
I'm not sure either - at least the team addressed Dookie's former "crack problem," though: http://www.steelersfever.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13076

:toofunny: :toofunny: :toofunny:


:doh:

Noooo Not THAT thread again!! :rofl:


However, I found a link in that thread to THIS thread...

What is wrong when a forum is addicted to Crack and Light Bulbs?

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?p=213288#post213288

UltimateFootballNetwork
10-29-2008, 02:24 AM
For however much this has been argued already, I've got to say I agree with one part more than anything: With each passing week that Moore does well, this becomes more of a "new" debate.

Before, the Parker-sucks arguments had two possible outcomes: a) Keep using Parker, or b) some pie-in-the-sky idea about picking up an All-Pro running back through a trade or free agency. His chief "competition" in this debate for the past two years were players on other teams, and a guy who was best known for taking a dump on someone's rug.*

Now, it's Parker versus a guy who's actually on the roster, and you've got the added question of "can the new guy keep it up?" with pretty compelling results so far. It's kind of infuriating to see that part dismissed outright with "absolutely not, Willie is the starter if he's healthy, period."
t.

RIght. This is not necessarily a knock on FWP (although I do think too many carries has caught up with him and his declining numbers are starting to show that).

But Moores production shouldnt be as big a surprise as it is. Moore got 20+ touches 9 times in Minnesota and averaged about 125 all purpose yards per game, so there is precendent here.

Compare Moores early career to the early career of Tiki Barber, another guy who was considered only a 3rd down back. Maybe Moore is that good.

Steelman16
10-29-2008, 02:44 AM
RIght. This is not necessarily a knock on FWP (although I do think too many carries has caught up with him and his declining numbers are starting to show that).

But Moores production shouldnt be as big a surprise as it is. Moore got 20+ touches 9 times in Minnesota and averaged about 125 all purpose yards per game, so there is precendent here.

Compare Moores early career to the early career of Tiki Barber, another guy who was considered only a 3rd down back. Maybe Moore is that good.

I think that right now, we should focus on getting Willie healthy enough to complete the rest of the season. And then we can enjoy the 1-2 punch they can bring. (ok, go ahead and say it slowly. They Are Both Fast Runningbacks. They Are Not Jerome Bettis. ....that was for the willie haters here :chuckle: )

I believe Moore could be "that good", but more in a Brian Westbrook style than Barber. However, I don't think the organization will get rid of Willie any time soon.

But back to my first point, I agree with DACEB. We have a good thing going with Moore, and I'm not sure Willie can just come in a week or two and carry the same production or up it a notch. If he can or does, that's awesome, but I think we've got to stick with what works. (not talking about the O line, Wr's or Big Ben here...plenty of threads on those subjects. :doh: )

As the original titles says, Moore still attractive as Parker returns.

The Duke
11-04-2008, 12:28 AM
so....can it be put to rest?

moore did a nice job, on 3rd downs, where he belongs now that parker is back

A great backup that ran very well with willie out.

Willie ran very hard today, loved that. and got his TD on his return :tt03:

Preacher
11-04-2008, 12:40 AM
so....can it be put to rest?

moore did a nice job, on 3rd downs, where he belongs now that parker is back

A great backup that ran very well with willie out.

Willie ran very hard today, loved that. and got his TD on his return :tt03:

Everything that people say about willie... wasn't even CLOSE to being true tonight.

steelreserve
11-04-2008, 01:05 AM
Everything that people say about willie... wasn't even CLOSE to being true tonight.

He did OK, but that was about it. Basically, he got 30 fewer rushing yards than Moore has been getting with the same number of carries, and zero receiving yards. It was our worst rushing output since the Philly game, for that matter. It turned out all right, and I guess he deserves a little bit of a break for coming in off of a long layoff. But it certainly wasn't an upgrade over what we've been doing.

What really pissed me off was that sure enough, for the most part, we were right back to our idiotic Parker-or-nothing playcalling. Sure, we used Moore more often than we've used any other second running back for about three years, but that wasn't all that much. We do not need to dial him down to that extent.

Remember when we had both Bettis and Parker on the same team? THAT'S how you use two good running backs. You don't just insist on sticking with one and give the other 4 predictable carries a game.

The Duke
11-04-2008, 01:11 AM
Against the colts next week, both willie and moore should have their chances to run against that pitiful run D

Could help if ben is out....

steelreserve
11-04-2008, 01:23 AM
Against the colts next week, both willie and moore should have their chances to run against that pitiful run D

Could help if ben is out....

Should, but won't. There seems to be an unwritten team rule now that the Steelers shall use one running back and stick with him the whole game, regardless of whether he's doing any good or not. Mark my words: Unless he gets hurt, it'll be Parker all game whether he does well or sucks a fat one.

Preacher
11-04-2008, 01:49 AM
He did OK, but that was about it. Basically, he got 30 fewer rushing yards than Moore has been getting with the same number of carries, and zero receiving yards. It was our worst rushing output since the Philly game, for that matter. It turned out all right, and I guess he deserves a little bit of a break for coming in off of a long layoff. But it certainly wasn't an upgrade over what we've been doing.

What really pissed me off was that sure enough, for the most part, we were right back to our idiotic Parker-or-nothing playcalling. Sure, we used Moore more often than we've used any other second running back for about three years, but that wasn't all that much. We do not need to dial him down to that extent.

Remember when we had both Bettis and Parker on the same team? THAT'S how you use two good running backs. You don't just insist on sticking with one and give the other 4 predictable carries a game.

Um... Moore got his yards against a HORRIBLE D in Cincy. .

Willie got his yards against a VERY GOOD D.

No comparison.


I don't mind giving Parker all the carries tonight. He needs to get back up to speed real fast (no pun intended). But down the stretch, yes, the runs need to be spread out. MeMo should get some more touches.

steelreserve
11-04-2008, 11:51 AM
Um... Moore got his yards against a HORRIBLE D in Cincy. .

Willie got his yards against a VERY GOOD D.

No comparison.


I don't mind giving Parker all the carries tonight. He needs to get back up to speed real fast (no pun intended). But down the stretch, yes, the runs need to be spread out. MeMo should get some more touches.

Hey, Moore did just as well against the Giants -- slightly better, actually -- and their even stronger defense. Willie certainly didn't outclass him with last night's performance; if anything, he fought to a draw, and that's being generous. 70 yards and 3.3 YPC is just barely passable if you're getting all the carries, and I don't care whose defense you're going up against. Even the '85 Bears gave up more yards than that half the time, and our own Steel Curtain teams actually allowed more than that in the vast majority of their games.

So I don't buy the good defense/bad defense argument, except that it sometimes explains why a guy didn't have a 150-yard night. I saw Parker out there, and he wasn't exactly the strength of the offense last night either. He wasn't instrumental in any of our TD drives, which were the result of a turnover and some smart, opportunistic passing plays by Leftwich.

Sorry, but all Parker did was play just well enough to avoid it being labeled a bad game.

Hines0wnz
11-04-2008, 06:11 PM
So I don't buy the good defense/bad defense argument, except that it sometimes explains why a guy didn't have a 150-yard night. I saw Parker out there, and he wasn't exactly the strength of the offense last night either. He wasn't instrumental in any of our TD drives, which were the result of a turnover and some smart, opportunistic passing plays by Leftwich.

Sorry, but all Parker did was play just well enough to avoid it being labeled a bad game.

Its really getting old man. :blah:

If you ask me, the block Parker did for Leftwich on the pass to Nate and the TD run a few plays later look "instrumental" to me on that TD drive. If anything, the O-line tends to play better in the 2nd half and that is when Parker was a little more productive.

Steelers-Skins highlights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-aX43g5wcw)