PDA

View Full Version : Parker Made Co-Captain When He Should Be Benched?


Pages : 1 [2]

revefsreleets
12-18-2008, 11:30 AM
LOL...this thread reminds me A LOT of all the "Dookie is better than Parker" threads from last year.

Based on the stats, I believe a case could be made for that circa 2007, although it'd be incorrect to assert that Dookie is a better back. There are an awful lot of circumstances that go along with those stats.

Dino 6 Rings
12-18-2008, 11:35 AM
I was NOT going to bring this thread back to life...but since Revs did, I shall continue...

"I am not quite sure what to say to this. You seem to be consciously ignoring the clear facts that have been presented."

The facts presented are just stats that have been manipulated to put Parker into the worst light possible.

You have not answered a single question of mine, have not answered any questions in regards to down and distance, situational stats, or defensive formations or offensive formations or made any allowances for bad plays made by Other players on the offense while Willie is on the field.

So you are the one that is Wrong and I will say it until the cows come home because I am 100% positive that Moore is not a better option than Parker, and that Parker in no way deserves to be Benched, as this thread Says in its Title

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 11:42 AM
LOL...this thread reminds me A LOT of all the "Dookie is better than Parker" threads from last year.

Based on the stats, I believe a case could be made for that circa 2007, although it'd be incorrect to assert that Dookie is a better back. There are an awful lot of circumstances that go along with those stats.

I don't think those threads were anywhere near as serious, because it was pretty obvious that Davenport didn't bring anything special to the table. Mainly, I wish they'd been smarter about how they used him, like throwing a few more screen passes his way, since he seemed to do well on those. But otherwise, he was pretty ridiculous -- a 250-pound guy trying to run like a scat back, with limited success.

revefsreleets
12-18-2008, 11:47 AM
I don't think those threads were anywhere near as serious, because it was pretty obvious that Davenport didn't bring anything special to the table. Mainly, I wish they'd been smarter about how they used him, like throwing a few more screen passes his way, since he seemed to do well on those. But otherwise, he was pretty ridiculous -- a 250-pound guy trying to run like a scat back, with limited success.

Tell that to the people who believed it. They had stats on their side, too.

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 11:51 AM
You have not answered a single question of mine, have not answered any questions in regards to down and distance, situational stats, or defensive formations or offensive formations or made any allowances for bad plays made by Other players on the offense while Willie is on the field.

The answer to that is that Parker almost always sucks against top-quality opponents.

Then the "haters" say it's a problem with Parker and his one-dimensional running style.

Then the supporters say things like "OMG ITS NOT BC PARKER SUX ITS BECAUSE NOBODY COULD RUN AGAINST THAT DEFENSE!!!! & BETTIS WOULD JUST TACKALED IN TEH BACKFIELD 2!!!!1! ITS NOT LIKE BETTIS ALWAYS HAD A GREAT GAME, U JUST WANT BETTIS TO COME BACK & ITS NOT HAPENING SO STFU!!!!!1!!!!11"

I mean seriously, I've actually seen people suggest that Parker is doing a great job in some of those 30-yard stink bomb performances, because Bettis wouldn't have had time to reach the quarterback and take the handoff.

Sorry, but I don't buy the nobody-can-run-against-good-defenses line of crap. Maybe you can't do well every game, but if you've had as many chances against good defenses as Willie's had, and you get shut down that consistently, chances are it's just because you're lame.

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 11:54 AM
Tell that to the people who believed it. They had stats on their side, too.

Yeah, and so does everyone. I guess the real difference was, you never saw Dookie put together a very good complete-game performance, so it was hard to buy those arguments. Moore, on the other hand, has done that a few times and made his case more legitimate.

revefsreleets
12-18-2008, 12:00 PM
I don't understand this thread at all. I have no allegiance to either player, and only hope that we play the player who gives us the best chance to win.

That being said, I take Parker over Moore every day if Parker is more than 85% healthy. Head to head, both players at 100%, this isn't even close: Parker is the superior back. And, yes, that's just an opinion, but I'd like to think it's an informed one based on empirical data.

He runs with balance and speed. He's patient and follows his blocks. He's more powerful than he's given credit for. He also is handed the ball in the more obvious running situations in obvious running formations. The only clear advantage I give to Moore is pass catching ability out of the backfield.

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 12:15 PM
With other backs, it was always no contest because they had the exact same weaknesses as Parker but fewer positives. To me, Moore looks like he's equal to Parker in every important area, but slightly more powerful and a much better receiver, which lets him succeed much more consistently. Guess that's the fundamental issue that people can't agree on.

Dino 6 Rings
12-18-2008, 12:29 PM
I guess what set me off, was the "he should be benched" comment. I disagree with that more than anything else.

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 12:40 PM
I guess what set me off, was the "he should be benched" comment. I disagree with that more than anything else.

Sometimes he should. Or at the very least, we need to figure out early on when he's having one of his awful games -- and instead of trying to bash stupidly ahead with the same players and gameplan, change things up. By now, it's not difficult to identify a lot of the games ahead of time where Parker is likely to run into trouble, and when he's in full-on suck mode, you can usually tell the difference right away.

So yeah, I'd be plenty happy continuing to use Parker if we're smart about it, just not all the time. If Moore and Russell come in and they also get shut down like they did this week, then oh well, it wasn't our day, but at least we tried. Unfortunately, as long as he's still on the team as the "incumbent starter," it seems all too likely that they're going to give him the lead role more often than they should, just because of that.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 01:24 PM
I was NOT going to bring this thread back to life...but since Revs did, I shall continue...

"I am not quite sure what to say to this. You seem to be consciously ignoring the clear facts that have been presented."

The facts presented are just stats that have been manipulated to put Parker into the worst light possible.

You have not answered a single question of mine, have not answered any questions in regards to down and distance, situational stats, or defensive formations or offensive formations or made any allowances for bad plays made by Other players on the offense while Willie is on the field.

So you are the one that is Wrong and I will say it until the cows come home because I am 100% positive that Moore is not a better option than Parker, and that Parker in no way deserves to be Benched, as this thread Says in its Title The facts are what they are, unfavorable to Parker. They have not been manipulated in any way.

Once again you have chosen to ignore the fact that I certainly did answer that question the last time you asked it.

Football Outsiders ranks RBs in regards to down and distance and situations. That metric is tracked by what they call success rate, and they rank Mewelde Moore 7th overall and Willie Parker 34th overall. And again I ask if Football Outsiders has an anti-Willie agenda?

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 01:27 PM
The answer to that is that Parker almost always sucks against top-quality opponents.

Then the "haters" say it's a problem with Parker and his one-dimensional running style.

Then the supporters say things like "OMG ITS NOT BC PARKER SUX ITS BECAUSE NOBODY COULD RUN AGAINST THAT DEFENSE!!!! & BETTIS WOULD JUST TACKALED IN TEH BACKFIELD 2!!!!1! ITS NOT LIKE BETTIS ALWAYS HAD A GREAT GAME, U JUST WANT BETTIS TO COME BACK & ITS NOT HAPENING SO STFU!!!!!1!!!!11"

I

I challenge you to show me anywhere in this thread where someone has said this.:coffee:

NYC SteelersFan
12-18-2008, 01:30 PM
I was NOT going to bring this thread back to life...but since Revs did, I shall continue...

"I am not quite sure what to say to this. You seem to be consciously ignoring the clear facts that have been presented."

The facts presented are just stats that have been manipulated to put Parker into the worst light possible.
You have not answered a single question of mine, have not answered any questions in regards to down and distance, situational stats, or defensive formations or offensive formations or made any allowances for bad plays made by Other players on the offense while Willie is on the field.

So you are the one that is Wrong and I will say it until the cows come home because I am 100% positive that Moore is not a better option than Parker, and that Parker in no way deserves to be Benched, as this thread Says in its Title

If the facts have been manipulated, they were manipulated by the reality of what happened in the last 5 games, not by the OP. Posting all the stats for the last 5 games is not manipulating stats, it's simply showing the stats for the last 5 games. I don't understand your accusation of manipulating stats. Who manipulated them?

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 02:03 PM
I challenge you to show me anywhere in this thread where someone has said this.:coffee:

Not in this thread, in the previous threads where the topic has been "beaten to death." There are several non-statistical arguments that Parker supporters have used relentlessly over the course of the season:

- You only want a powerful back because you miss Bettis.

- (after a bad performance) You can't blame Parker because "Bettis/any other running back would've gotten stuffed against that defense too."

- You want a powerful running back on the roster, so now let's turn the tables and treat it as if you want T.J. Duckett or some other lumbering short-yardage guy to be the only one who sees the field.

- Bettis didn't always have a great game.

- Hey, remember that one time Moore or Russell got stuffed at the line.

- We somehow know that Moore is incapable of playing a full season at a high level.

- Parker gained over 1,000 yards with a less-than-stellar offensive line; therefore, we will say there's no way to compare that to any other RB's stats, and we'll imply that other RBs would not have done as well.

- Also, if we're talking about the weakness of the line, we'll bring up Barry Sanders a lot but then say we're not trying to compare Parker to him.

- You're self-serving if you calculate what Parker's average would be without the big runs, because you can't ignore his importance as a "breakaway" threat.

- However, we'll go ahead and calculate rushing averages for Moore or anyone else without the big runs so we can say "See? Without that, he's only getting 3.4 YPC, which is no better than Parker."

NYC SteelersFan
12-18-2008, 02:14 PM
Not in this thread, in the previous threads where the topic has been "beaten to death." There are several non-statistical arguments that Parker supporters have used relentlessly over the course of the season:

- You only want a powerful back because you miss Bettis.

- (after a bad performance) You can't blame Parker because "Bettis/any other running back would've gotten stuffed against that defense too."

- You want a powerful running back on the roster, so now let's turn the tables and treat it as if you want T.J. Duckett or some other lumbering short-yardage guy to be the only one who sees the field.

- Bettis didn't always have a great game.

- Hey, remember that one time Moore or Russell got stuffed at the line.

- We somehow know that Moore is incapable of playing a full season at a high level.

- Parker gained over 1,000 yards with a less-than-stellar offensive line; therefore, we will say there's no way to compare that to any other RB's stats, and we'll imply that other RBs would not have done as well.

- Also, if we're talking about the weakness of the line, we'll bring up Barry Sanders a lot but then say we're not trying to compare Parker to him.

- You're self-serving if you calculate what Parker's average would be without the big runs, because you can't ignore his importance as a "breakaway" threat.

- However, we'll go ahead and calculate rushing averages for Moore or anyone else without the big runs so we can say "See? Without that, he's only getting 3.4 YPC, which is no better than Parker."

LOL...beautiful. I have literally heard every single one of these more than once. The bolded ones are just classic.

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 02:14 PM
No, I will say the same thing I have been saying. That both backs have a substantial ROLE and are both EQUALLY important. This isn't freaking swimming or some freaking golf tournament it's freaking FOOTBALL where roughly half the league is using a 2 back system. And one guy doesn't make the team go or fail. How is that such a bad thing? Answer that please? Someone?

NYC SteelersFan
12-18-2008, 02:21 PM
No, I will say the same thing I have been saying. That both backs have a substantial ROLE and are both EQUALLY important. This isn't freaking swimming or some freaking golf tournament it's freaking FOOTBALL where roughly half the league is using a 2 back system. And one guy doesn't make the team go or fail. How is that such a bad thing? Answer that please? Someone?

My answer to that is simple. I don't think Parker should be benched unless he is that "injured", at which point he should only be benched so he can fully "heal".

IF he is not injured, I do not think Parker should be cut or benched or anything of the sort, but Moore should be getting a lot more carries to see what he does with them. Right now Moore comes in for passing situations or to give Parker a breather. All I'm saying is that maybe Parker should be giving Moore a breather, just temporarily to see if anything good comes out of it. How is that such a bad thing?

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 02:27 PM
My answer to that is simple. I don't think Parker should be benched unless he is that "injured", at which point he should only be benched so he can fully "heal".

IF he is not injured, I do not think Parker should be cut or benched or anything of the sort, but Moore should be getting a lot more carries to see what he does with them. Right now Moore comes in for passing situations or to give Parker a breather. All I'm saying is that maybe Parker should be giving Moore a breather, just temporarily to see if anything good comes out of it. How is that such a bad thing?

Didn't Moore start four games this year?

NYC SteelersFan
12-18-2008, 02:47 PM
Didn't Moore start four games this year?

Did I say for Moore to start or for Moore to be the lead back and have Parker back him up? And yeah, Moore did start 4 games without Parker taking a single carry:

Moore's 5 games by himself:

88 carries
373
4.2 yards per carry, that's pretty damn good

(This includes the 8 carries for 13 yards against Baltimore, 8 carries? Yeah we were really committed to rushing Moore that game. I would love to see Parker's stats if they gave him 10 or less carries per game)


That brings up an interesting point, How many games has Moore started without Parker and how many games has Parker started without Moore? Seems to me one of them needs the other a lot more.

paw-n-maul-u
12-18-2008, 03:15 PM
I can't wait till parker is gone. Moore/Mendenhall is cheaper ... and more efficient. Parker see's his time here dwindling and knows it.

Couple with Smith and Starks leaving ... a lot of money to make a decent splash in FA.

steelpride12
12-18-2008, 03:23 PM
I can't wait till parker is gone. Moore/Mendenhall is cheaper ... and more efficient. Parker see's his time here dwindling and knows it.

Couple with Smith and Starks leaving ... a lot of money to make a decent splash in FA.

Wow after a tough injuries and seasons of excellent expectations coming from Parker and it's good enough to get rid of him? Hmmm check out the stats of Parker the last 3 seasons and you will see why he is out starter.

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 03:35 PM
No, I will say the same thing I have been saying. That both backs have a substantial ROLE and are both EQUALLY important. This isn't freaking swimming or some freaking golf tournament it's freaking FOOTBALL where roughly half the league is using a 2 back system. And one guy doesn't make the team go or fail. How is that such a bad thing? Answer that please? Someone?

I don't think many of us object to Parker playing his part, and also not many are saying we should cut him entirely or anything. But I personally think Moore has been the more effective of the two and brings more options to the table, so he should have the bigger role. It's become apparent that that still won't solve our overall power rushing problem, but in the short term, I think Moore at least takes us from an F to a D in that category.

Also, a huge part of the problem that I and others have with Parker is not with him specifically, so much as the fact that for so long, the team stubbornly stuck with him in every situation even if he was performing terribly. Their motto might as well have been, "Parker isn't running well between the tackles this week? OK, we'll use Parker anyway." That's one problem the two-back rotation is supposed to solve -- if one guy is screwing up, you don't have to wait all game to find out if the other guy has the hot hand. We weren't even trying that until recently; it was Parker-or-nothing.

Unfortunately for us, a Moore/Parker rotation isn't going to be as effective as some other combos might, because their physical build and running styles aren't drastically different. Bettis/Parker worked pretty damn well ... you look at other great combos and you'll find a lot where you have two guys with different styles. So in the long term, it seems like Moore-Mendenhall or something like that would be the way to go. But in the short term, if Moore and Parker are what we've got, I'd still rather have Moore's versatility out there most of the time.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 03:37 PM
No, I will say the same thing I have been saying. That both backs have a substantial ROLE and are both EQUALLY important. This isn't freaking swimming or some freaking golf tournament it's freaking FOOTBALL where roughly half the league is using a 2 back system. And one guy doesn't make the team go or fail. How is that such a bad thing? Answer that please? Someone? A-ha, now we seem to be getting somewhere.

I dont think anyone is arguing that both backs shouldnt have a role, but given the overwhelming evidence (facts, not opinions) that says that the Steelers are a more effective offense with Moore why is FWP being made captain and being given the much larger role?

This is the original question from 26 pages ago.

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 03:52 PM
I dont think anyone is arguing that both backs shouldnt have a role, but given the overwhelming evidence (facts, not opinions) that says that the Steelers are a more effective offense with Moore why is FWP being made captain and being given the much larger role?

"Because he's the starter."

I can't really describe it exactly, but if you've been around organized team sports for any length of time, you've probably encountered that special sports atmosphere that's a mix of stubbornness/Rah-Rah/"Yes, sir, anything for the team, sir" that turns up in random places from the pros all the way down to a high school JV team.

95% of the time the coach might be reasonable and understand exactly what's going on and do a great job, but then the other 5% he'll just have some random hangup where things have to be a certain way, to which you say "Rah-rah, anything for the team, sir." It might be anything from running laps in practice, to your footwork in layup drills, to how long you stick with a guy at running back; it just depends on the coach. I've always gotten the sense that the Parker situation had some element of that.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 04:07 PM
"Because he's the starter."

I can't really describe it exactly, but if you've been around organized team sports for any length of time, you've probably encountered that special sports atmosphere that's a mix of stubbornness/Rah-Rah/"Yes, sir, anything for the team, sir" that turns up in random places from the pros all the way down to a high school JV team.

95% of the time the coach might be reasonable and understand exactly what's going on and do a great job, but then the other 5% he'll just have some random hangup where things have to be a certain way, to which you say "Rah-rah, anything for the team, sir." It might be anything from running laps in practice, to your footwork in layup drills, to how long you stick with a guy at running back; it just depends on the coach. I've always gotten the sense that the Parker situation had some element of that. Oh, I agree completely. And this thread was intended to probe into that question.

FWP seems to have reached some sort of untouchable status. Seems that most players who run their mouth to the press about coaches get benched or reprimanded, FWP gets made captain. Especially when that player is not producing.

Further, given that FWP is holding the offense back and there is a clear path to a Super Bowl in the short term, at what point is this a problem?

MACH1
12-18-2008, 04:13 PM
Football Outsiders is overrated, the stats show it. :cheer:

fansince'76
12-18-2008, 04:21 PM
Football Outsiders is overrated, the stats show it. :cheer:

C'mon, Mach - the statistics are clear. Willie remaining as starter and being named captain is the only thing keeping this offense from putting up 30+ a game. Not Colon killing every other drive and in some cases even nullifying long TD passes with holding penalties, or Santo and Nate dropping passes they're being paid to catch on 3rd down, or untimely sacks given up by the OL or anything like that. :coffee:

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 04:24 PM
C'mon, Mach - the statistics are clear. Willie remaining as starter and being named captain is the only thing keeping this offense from putting up 30+ a game. Not Colon killing every other drive and in some cases even nullifying long TD passes with holding penalties, or Santo and Nate dropping passes they're being paid to catch on 3rd down, or untimely sacks given up by the OL or anything like that. :coffee:

Hey, again: If Parker has a shitty game and three other guys also have a shitty game ... that doesn't change the fact that Parker had a shitty game.

MACH1
12-18-2008, 04:31 PM
C'mon, Mach - the statistics are clear. Willie remaining as starter and being named captain is the only thing keeping this offense from putting up 30+ a game. Not Colon killing every other drive and in some cases even nullifying long TD passes with holding penalties, or Santo and Nate dropping passes they're being paid to catch on 3rd down, or untimely sacks given up by the OL or anything like that. :coffee:

Oh gee, you'd think the stats and numbers would account for all that. :doh:

:cheer: :cheer:

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 04:37 PM
C'mon, Mach - the statistics are clear. Willie remaining as starter and being named captain is the only thing keeping this offense from putting up 30+ a game. Not Colon killing every other drive and in some cases even nullifying long TD passes with holding penalties, or Santo and Nate dropping passes they're being paid to catch on 3rd down, or untimely sacks given up by the OL or anything like that. :coffee:

Frankly, you can feel free to ignore that every statstical category possible shows Moore>Parker.

That every TD the Steelers have scored in the past 5 games has come with Moore on the field is all that you need to know. Period.

Dino 6 Rings
12-18-2008, 04:39 PM
Last 5 games...I'm curious as to why you only evaluate the last 5 games.

Facts are these.

Last week against the Ravens, Willie Parker broke a Ray Lewis Tackle in the hole. Made Ray Ray look like a fool and got good yardage on that play.

Also Willie vs the Ravens, 14 carries 47 yards 3.4 average.

Moore vs the Ravens 7 carries 16 yards, 2.3 average.

Ben vs the Ravens 4 runs 21 yards, 5.3 average.

Hey, Maybe Ben should just run the Wild cat all day?

Willie is the Starter, he has Earned the Job and no one has earned the right to take his job away.

Dino 6 Rings
12-18-2008, 04:39 PM
Frankly, you can feel free to ignore that every statstical category possible shows Moore>Parker.

That every TD the Steelers have scored in the past 5 games has come with Moore on the field is all that you need to know. Period.

Moore wasn't on the field when Townsend took it to the house!

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 04:41 PM
Also Willie vs the Ravens, 14 carries 47 yards 3.4 average.
Moore vs the Ravens 7 carries 16 yards, 2.3 average.
Ben vs the Ravens 4 runs 21 yards, 5.3 average.

Hey, Maybe Ben should just run the Wild cat all day?


Hell yeah, let's get all drunk and run some wildcat shit.

Dino 6 Rings
12-18-2008, 04:43 PM
Hell yeah, let's get all drunk and run some wildcat shit.

I mean, statistically speaking, our offense scores more when Ben is on the field, and since he had the best per carry average against the Ravens, it only makes sense that he should go ahead and carry the load.

fansince'76
12-18-2008, 04:46 PM
Frankly, you can feel free to ignore that every statstical category possible shows Moore>Parker.

That every TD the Steelers have scored in the past 5 games has come with Moore on the field is all that you need to know. Period.

Thanks, I will. And you can feel free to ignore all the other factors that have gone into our drives being killed and continue to place the blame solely on Parker still being the starter over Moore. By your rationale, I am supposed to believe that the winning 12-play, 92 yard drive against the Ravens was only possible because of one 3-yard plunge by Moore, while Ben went 7-11 for 89 yards the rest of the drive, with NONE of those passes going to Moore? Whatever. :coffee:

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 04:49 PM
As an update, I went back further and its even scarier.

The last TD the Steelers scored with FWP in the game was Q3 vs the Redskins. On that drive FWP had 4 carries for 13 yards and scored on a 1 yd TD after Leftwich completed a 3rd down pass to MM on the 1 yard line.

Before that, the last time the Steelers scored a TD with FWP was IN WEEK 2 Q2 vs the Browns. FWP had 5 carries for 19 yards on that drive.

So since week 1, where FWP had 3 TDs, the Steelers entire team has 3 TDs in the 8 games FWP has played in with FWP in the lineup. That is horrendous. FWP has been in the lineup for a total of 6 TDs through 14 games

MM has been on the field for 15 TDs through 14 games and has played far less.

Coincidence?

Dino 6 Rings
12-18-2008, 04:49 PM
Thanks, I will. And you can feel free to ignore all the other factors that have gone into our drives being killed and place the blame solely on Parker still being the starter over Moore. By your rationale, I am supposed to believe that the winning 12-play, 92 yard drive against the Ravens was only possible because of one 3-yard plunge by Moore, while Ben went 7-11 for 89 yards the rest of the drive, with NONE of those passes going to Moore? Whatever. :coffee:

Oh no, watch the Youtube video of the final td pass against the Ravens...Moore was on the field...see...he was standing there...at about the 6 yard line...kind of facing back to Ben...standing there...watched the pass go right to Holmes...that is why we scored...Moore willed it to happen by watching it...see that's what I think the stats show on that FootballOutsiders site.

Which also shows that Antonio Bryant is a Better Receiver than Hines Ward....we should totally make that trade...SARC SMILEY!

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 04:50 PM
Oh no, watch the Youtube video of the final td pass against the Ravens...Moore was on the field...see...he was standing there...at about the 6 yard line...kind of facing back to Ben...standing there...watched the pass go right to Holmes...that is why we scored...Moore willed it to happen by watching it...see that's what I think the stats show on that FootballOutsiders site.

Which also shows that Antonio Bryant is a Better Receiver than Hines Ward....we should totally make that trade...SARC SMILEY! The threat of a receiver out of the backfield requires a defense to account for him. How can you ignore that?

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 04:53 PM
Thanks, I will. And you can feel free to ignore all the other factors that have gone into our drives being killed and continue to place the blame solely on Parker still being the starter over Moore. By your rationale, I am supposed to believe that the winning 12-play, 92 yard drive against the Ravens was only possible because of one 3-yard plunge by Moore, while Ben went 7-11 for 89 yards the rest of the drive, with NONE of those passes going to Moore? Whatever. :coffee:

15 TDs vs 6 TDs.

"He definitely gives them a dimension they really needed." Ron Meeks, Colts DC

fansince'76
12-18-2008, 05:00 PM
15 TDs vs 6 TDs.

Steelers' W/L record....

....with Moore as starter: 2-2

....with Willie as starter: 8-1

:coffee:

MACH1
12-18-2008, 05:04 PM
Oh no, watch the Youtube video of the final td pass against the Ravens...Moore was on the field...see...he was standing there...at about the 6 yard line...kind of facing back to Ben...standing there...watched the pass go right to Holmes...that is why we scored...Moore willed it to happen by watching it...see that's what I think the stats show on that FootballOutsiders site.

Which also shows that Antonio Bryant is a Better Receiver than Hines Ward....we should totally make that trade...SARC SMILEY!


Its called the Jedi Mind trick. :chuckle:

NYC SteelersFan
12-18-2008, 05:14 PM
Thanks, I will. And you can feel free to ignore all the other factors that have gone into our drives being killed and continue to place the blame solely on Parker still being the starter over Moore. By your rationale, I am supposed to believe that the winning 12-play, 92 yard drive against the Ravens was only possible because of one 3-yard plunge by Moore, while Ben went 7-11 for 89 yards the rest of the drive, with NONE of those passes going to Moore? Whatever. :coffee:

lol..It would've been a 3-yard plunge in the opposite direction had Parker been on the field.

Everything you mentioned, plus Arian's play-calling is indeed a problem. But I feel a key problem that is not discussed is Parker because somehow, in 3 years time, he has reached "legendary Steelers" status and the mere mention of Parker in a negative fashion is treated like a white guy screaming the N word on Malcom X blvd and 145th street. I wonder if there was this much loyalty for Reuben Droughs on the Browns forums. I love how most will throw the 0-line under the bus in the blink of an eye cause most don't even know who they are or what they look like, but mention something bad about a recognized star player? Prepare for the tornado to follow.

fansince'76
12-18-2008, 05:21 PM
lol..It would've been a 3-yard plunge in the opposite direction had Parker been on the field.

Yeah, that would explain the higher YPC average Willie had against the Ravens, all right.

Everything you mentioned, plus Arian's play-calling is indeed a problem. But I feel a key problem that is not discussed is Parker because somehow, in 3 years time, he has reached "legendary Steelers" status and the mere mention of Parker in a negative fashion is treated like a white guy screaming the N word on Malcom X blvd and 145th street. I wonder if there was this much loyalty for Reuben Droughs on the Browns forums. I love how most will throw the 0-line under the bus in the blink of an eye cause most don't even know who they are or what they look like, but mention something bad about a recognized star player? Prepare for the tornado to follow.

The question was asked in the initial post of this thread "Parker Made Co-Captain When He Should Be Benched?" which was given the same and very obvious answer a number of times in pretty much the same way in the first two pages: "It was Tomlin's decision." Apparently that wasn't a sufficient answer, because from there the thread has turned into a 30-page exercise in circular logic. I'm personally not going to throw the guy under the bus because of one bad season.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 05:22 PM
Steelers' W/L record....

....with Moore as starter: 2-2

....with Willie as starter: 8-1

:coffee: Talk about not telling the whole story, I will go ahead and complete that.

Moore as a starter- Moore 113 yds/game, Big Ben 6 TDs, 8 INTs
FWP as starter- 73 yds/game, Big Ben, 9 TDs, 4 INT

Or did you try to pin a loss on one player as I have been criticized for.

15 TDs vs 6 TDs. Its that simple.

fansince'76
12-18-2008, 05:25 PM
Or did you try to pin a loss on one player as I have been criticized for.

15 TDs vs 6 TDs. Its that simple.

Yes, I did. I'm using basically the same type of argument you have been making all along, flawed as it may be.

TeeJay
12-18-2008, 05:25 PM
Well a week away from these boards, and a week of therapy has just been undone in one thread! Wow......more anti Willie posts...:thud:..:coffee:

...Just STFU..:rocket:......

Well at least therapy seems to have worked. I Didn't write f**k once!
Just as well....can't afford anymore sessions right now!



"In Parker I trust"

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 05:25 PM
Yeah, that would explain the higher YPC average Willie had against the Ravens, all right.



The question was asked in the initial post of this thread "Parker Made Co-Captain When He Should Be Benched?" which was given the same and very obvious answer a number of times in pretty much the same way in the first two pages: "It was Tomlin's decision." Apparently that wasn't a sufficient answer, because from there the thread has turned into a 30-page exercise in circular logic. I'm personally not going to throw the guy under the bus because of one bad season.
1) There is no circular logic. The facts are quite clear and there seems to be lots of excuse making and folks who want to attack the messenger because they dont like what the facts say. I accept the facts as they are and would love to see a discussion about what that means for the Steelers SB hopes.

2) No one is throwing anyone under a bus for 1 bad season. All that matters is that it is a bad season and it is THIS season. There is a Super Bowl on the line here, so why are the coaches deferring to someone HAVING A BAD SEASON when there is a better option.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 05:28 PM
Yes, I did. I'm using the same argument you have been making all along, flawed as it may be. No, because I am including the RB and the subsequent impact on the offense over the course of the season in my analysis. That takes other factors, like how many INTs the QB throws, the opponent, how the defense plays, etc. out of the equation.

You are mistaken if you think that is an equal comparison. I have used only fair comparisons between two RBs.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 05:30 PM
Well a week away from these boards, and a week of therapy has just been undone in one thread! Wow......more anti Willie posts...:thud:..:coffee:

...Just STFU..:rocket:......

Well at least therapy seems to have worked. I Didn't write f**k once!
Just as well....can't afford anymore sessions right now!



"In Parker I trust" Nope. Only the facts.

In Parker you trust? That sums it up, the player seems to be more important than the team here.

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 05:30 PM
Talk about not telling the whole story, I will go ahead and complete that.

Moore as a starter- Moore 113 yds/game, Big Ben 6 TDs, 8 INTs
FWP as starter- 73 yds/game, Big Ben, 9 TDs, 4 INT

Or did you try to pin a loss on one player as I have been criticized for.

15 TDs vs 6 TDs. Its that simple.


Tell me again who is better for the team and Ben?

fansince'76
12-18-2008, 05:30 PM
No, because I am including the RB and the subsequent impact on the offense over the course of the season in my analysis. That takes other factors, like how many INTs the QB throws, the opponent, how the defense plays, etc. out of the equation.

You are mistaken if you think that is an equal comparison. I have used only fair comparisons between two RBs.

5 games? That's not the entire season. And you accused me of intellectual dishonesty earlier. How much impact did Moore have on the game-winning drive against the Ravens? One 3-yard plunge? Never mind, I'm out.

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 05:31 PM
Nope. Only the facts.

In Parker you trust? That sums it up, the player seems to be more important than the team here.


Sounds just like your mantra to me.:noidea:

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 05:33 PM
5 games? That's not the entire season. And you accused me of intellectual dishonesty earlier. How much impact did Moore have on the game winning drive against the Ravens? One 3-yard plunge? Never mind, I'm out. ACtually, if you check, I revised the findings over the whole season and the disparity is even more pronounced. 15 vs 6 is more than a trend.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-18-2008, 05:34 PM
Sounds just like your mantra to me.:noidea: This is really frustrating.

I am advocating using the more productive player. Does anyone think that playing the less productive player is in the best interest of the team? I dont get it?

TeeJay
12-18-2008, 05:35 PM
In Parker you trust? That sums it up.

Damn f**king right it does!

And not sure what planet you're on when you bring the whole 'more important than the team bollocks' into it there. Don't recall writing anything along those lines...but....whatever......

NYC SteelersFan
12-18-2008, 05:36 PM
Yeah, that would explain the higher YPC average Willie had against the Ravens, all right.



The question was asked in the initial post of this thread "Parker Made Co-Captain When He Should Be Benched?" which was given the same and very obvious answer a number of times in pretty much the same way in the first two pages: "It was Tomlin's decision." Apparently that wasn't a sufficient answer, because from there the thread has turned into a 30-page exercise in circular logic. I'm personally not going to throw the guy under the bus because of one bad season.

Nor would I. And perhaps calling for a bencing was harsh, though a lesser role would be fair at this point in time.

The decision was made by the coach and nothing anyone on this forum says would ever make a shread of difference. But if we were to stop talking about anything we don't have control over then 99.9% of what is discussed on this forum would stop being discussed. Here are the current first 16 threads on the first page of the forum:

Parker Made Co-Captain When He Should Be Benched?
Finnegan-Ward the battle within the battle
Santonio Holmes as a steeler
Steeler packrats!
Name for our defense?
We should able to F UP!!!! the Titans run defense.
I'm starting to get concerned about our run defense.......
Ben Roethlisberger: Master Of The Two Minute Drill
Steelers Notebook: Bailey selected as team's top rookie
Steelers vs Ravens Poem (12/14/08)
DUNGY: JAMES HARRISON IS THE NFL MVP
If the final touchdown hadn't been overturned..
Why are so many of our key starters not practicing????
Titans seem unlikely to get No. 1 seed now
Nashville weather forecast
Big Ben MVP?

Now except the "Steeler packrats!" thread, all the other topics are completely pointless cause there isn't a damn thing anyone can do about them, right? So where would the forum be without threads where "no one can do anything about". And apparently these "negative" threads are always the most popular so for all the complaints from those complaing about these "type" of threads, they sure visit often. Not you Fansince76, you've done a great job staying away because I know you don't agree with the threads point. Maybe if others did the same, the thread would never reach 30 pages.

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 05:37 PM
This is really frustrating.



No shit! :banging:

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 05:40 PM
Nor would I. And perhaps calling for a bencing was harsh, though a lesser role would be fair at this point in time.

The decision was made by the coach and nothing anyone on this forum says would ever make a shread of difference. But if we were to stop talking about anything we don't have control over then 99.9% of what is discussed on this forum would stop being discussed. Here are the current first 16 threads on the first page of the forum:

Parker Made Co-Captain When He Should Be Benched?
Finnegan-Ward the battle within the battle
Santonio Holmes as a steeler
Steeler packrats!
Name for our defense?
We should able to F UP!!!! the Titans run defense.
I'm starting to get concerned about our run defense.......
Ben Roethlisberger: Master Of The Two Minute Drill
Steelers Notebook: Bailey selected as team's top rookie
Steelers vs Ravens Poem (12/14/08)
DUNGY: JAMES HARRISON IS THE NFL MVP
If the final touchdown hadn't been overturned..
Why are so many of our key starters not practicing????
Titans seem unlikely to get No. 1 seed now
Nashville weather forecast
Big Ben MVP?

Now except the "Steeler packrats!" thread, all the other topics are completely pointless cause there isn't a damn thing anyone can do about them, right? So where would the forum be without threads where "no one can do anything about". And apparently these "negative" threads are always the most popular so for all the complaints from those complaing about these "type" of threads, they sure visit often. Not you Fansince76, you've done a great job staying away because I know you don't agree with the threads point. Maybe if others did the same, the thread would never reach 30 pages.

Wait a second here. Didn't you respond in the "Steeler Packrats" thread saying "what is the point of this thread" numerous times? Give me a freaking break dude. Your acting like a damn 4 year old.:banging:

fansince'76
12-18-2008, 05:43 PM
Wait a second here. Didn't you respond in the "Steeler Packrats" thread saying "what is the point of this thread" numerous times? Give me a freaking break dude. Your acting like a damn 4 year old.:banging:

Please, no need to make this personal. Attack the post, not the poster.

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 05:45 PM
Please, no need to make it personal.


My bad. I take it back.:doh:

NYC SteelersFan
12-18-2008, 05:50 PM
Wait a second here. Didn't you respond in the "Steeler Packrats" thread saying "what is the point of this thread" numerous times? Give me a freaking break dude. Your acting like a damn 4 year old

Cause the guy who started that thread came into this one to rag on the OP of this thread for starting it. No matter what, regardless of how you pick and choose what you want to argue, of those 1st 16 threads on the front page of this forum currently, only 1 is a thread where the members have any control over the topic. So whenever YOU, ESPECIALLY YOU, CAUSE YOU ALWAYS DO, come onto someone else's thread and say;

:banging::banging::banging::tombstone:sign05:

I am pretty sure everyone here knows how you feel. So if this is all you have to offer this board you can :sign07:

Because I don't want to waste my time trying to refute something that I have no control over. I prefer to trust the coaches judgement not yours. Thanks, that is all. NEXT.

I LOVE THE STEELERS, THERE COACHES AND ALL THE PLAYERS CAUSE I AM JUST A BIG OLE CHEERLEADER!

Hasn't this already been argued for the last 3 weeks? Thread meet dead horse.

Well said Preach as usual. But unfortunately your words are falling on deaf ears, or blind eyes. Whatever.

UFN and NYC that's who. You see, they are really the coaching staff masquerading as trolls.:wink02:

:cheer::cheer::cheer:

:coffee:

Write the front office cause the only other poster that cares what your saying is UFN. Maybe they will hire you, and then you can implement any changes you want. :thumbsup:

Cause your like a bad car accident. It's human nature. I can't help it, I'm human.

:cheer::cheer::cheer:

Just waiting for your inevitable meltdown.

:cheer::cheer:

Actually the night I blasted you I was a bit intoxicated, and really didn't give you the benefit of the doubt. Now that I have however, I wish I hadn't. The only thing you post about is the running game...All negative all the time with you. I am just tired of your act to be honest. I don't have to bait you. Your doing fine all by yourself.

:cheer::cheer:

You can't possibly mean the Steelers coaching staff knows what they are doing?
:wink02:

Probably. Maybe they should go root for the Lions or the Bungles. At least then they would have something legitimate to bitch about.

Just remember that most threads on this forum are pointless and no one has any control over them. Just look at the type of comments you have contributed to this thread. And that is only the first 10 pages.

TeeJay
12-18-2008, 05:51 PM
The decision was made by the coach and nothing anyone on this forum says would ever make a shread of difference..


Now that's about the only thing you've ever said that I agree with. Damn...that's progress! :thumbsup:

Although I'd have to add, it does make me feel better after I've 'vented' my opinion. So that makes a difference....to me! :laughing:

fansince'76
12-18-2008, 05:52 PM
Nor would I. And perhaps calling for a bencing was harsh, though a lesser role would be fair at this point in time.

The decision was made by the coach and nothing anyone on this forum says would ever make a shread of difference. But if we were to stop talking about anything we don't have control over then 99.9% of what is discussed on this forum would stop being discussed. Here are the current first 16 threads on the first page of the forum:

Parker Made Co-Captain When He Should Be Benched?
Finnegan-Ward the battle within the battle
Santonio Holmes as a steeler
Steeler packrats!
Name for our defense?
We should able to F UP!!!! the Titans run defense.
I'm starting to get concerned about our run defense.......
Ben Roethlisberger: Master Of The Two Minute Drill
Steelers Notebook: Bailey selected as team's top rookie
Steelers vs Ravens Poem (12/14/08)
DUNGY: JAMES HARRISON IS THE NFL MVP
If the final touchdown hadn't been overturned..
Why are so many of our key starters not practicing????
Titans seem unlikely to get No. 1 seed now
Nashville weather forecast
Big Ben MVP?

Now except the "Steeler packrats!" thread, all the other topics are completely pointless cause there isn't a damn thing anyone can do about them, right? So where would the forum be without threads where "no one can do anything about". And apparently these "negative" threads are always the most popular so for all the complaints from those complaing about these "type" of threads, they sure visit often. Not you Fansince76, you've done a great job staying away because I know you don't agree with the threads point. Maybe if others did the same, the thread would never reach 30 pages.

Point taken. :drink:

NYC SteelersFan
12-18-2008, 05:55 PM
Point taken. :drink:

You are a fair, respectful and objective man as always sir, it must be that Denver weather :hatsoff: :drink:

steelreserve
12-18-2008, 06:02 PM
Steelers' W/L record....

....with Moore as starter: 2-2

....with Willie as starter: 8-1

:coffee:

One thing that wasn't mentioned: The two losses were to the Giants and the Colts, both pretty good teams. And they were both games we blew with turnovers and/or special teams f*** ups. We've been on a roll since the Colts game, but it's not as if Parker has been tearing it up and carrying us to victory.

Polamalu43
12-18-2008, 06:21 PM
Hahaha this dude is questioning parker?? lol comedy bro really. if you think moor should be the starter kool, but guess what that aint gonna happen!!

lilyoder6
12-18-2008, 06:27 PM
evry game this yr has been against good teams except 4 the bungles...

43Hitman
12-18-2008, 09:47 PM
If you want to quote all of my posts without quoting the preceding posts to prove your point NYC then so be it. I am pretty sure everyone here has read all the bullshit in this thread by now. So they know where I stand as a true STEELER fan. You have shown what you and UFN are all about. I am done going in circles with you and UFN. It's obvious to me that you and UFN think only about one player instead of said player's ROLE on this team. And that both of those players have played a significant ROLE in this teams success this year. So if you and UFN want to argue about which player is better for your fantasy football team then so be it. I am done with this worthless thread.

tony hipchest
12-18-2008, 11:21 PM
the 2 hottest teams in the league right now supposedly have no running game (colts and steelers).

they do have the best defense and the best QB though.

i'd take p. manning or steelers defense any day of the week over parker, moore, slash & dash, pound & round, earth, wind, & fire, and whatever it is the titans and carolina backs are squabbling over calling themselves.

carry on....

:popcorn:

memphissteelergirl
12-19-2008, 08:19 AM
I'm with HTG...this thread needs to die and quickly. :doh:

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-22-2008, 12:52 PM
I was wondering if most folks still think this is a dead/non-issue?

While the OL, OC and playcalling continue to be a problem, the running game works fine with MM in the backfield. (Once again, not an opinion but fact).

Touches/First downs vs the Titans

FWP- 19/1
MM- 5/3

Steelers run game with FWP/MM starting

FWP- 10 starts, 67 yds/game
MM-4 starts, 90 yds/game

And once you factor in MMs reception yardage during his 4 starts (22 yds/game), you get 112 yds/game from MM as a starter.

MM is playing behind the same OL with the same OC. So why do they continue to defer to FWP when its clear that he is part of the problem?

The_WARDen
12-22-2008, 01:20 PM
I was wondering if most folks still think this is a dead/non-issue?

While the OL, OC and playcalling continue to be a problem, the running game works fine with MM in the backfield. (Once again, not an opinion but fact).

Touches/First downs vs the Titans

FWP- 19/1
MM- 5/3

Steelers run game with FWP/MM starting

FWP- 10 starts, 67 yds/game
MM-4 starts, 90 yds/game

And once you factor in MMs reception yardage during his 4 starts (22 yds/game), you get 112 yds/game from MM as a starter.

MM is playing behind the same OL with the same OC. So why do they continue to defer to FWP when its clear that he is part of the problem?

Don't question the almighty Steelers, they are 11-4!!!

:cheer::cheer::cheer:

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 01:44 PM
11-4! WHOOOOOO HOOOOOOOOOO!

X-Terminator
12-22-2008, 01:52 PM
I will simply say this - if the Steelers do not magically find any semblance of a running game, then their playoff run will be short-lived. I'm not going to pin the blame on any one guy like many others in this thread are wont to do, but there's no question that somehow, it has to be fixed. Unfortunately, it probably won't be until next season. If the Steelers run the ball even average yesterday, I believe they would have beaten the Titans. You've got to come up with more than 57 yards on 21 total carries against a team without it's 2 best defensive linemen. BTW, 18 carries for Parker vs. 3 for Moore? I thought they were going to start rotating them more often?

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 01:57 PM
I will simply say this - if the Steelers do not magically find any semblance of a running game, then their playoff run will be short-lived.

I believe the defense can have 3 straight games of near perfection. I also believe if the defense does not come through, the offense has just ONE bailout in them, but only one, anything more is asking for a miracle.

If the Steelers run the ball even average yesterday, I believe they would have beaten the Titans.

Without a doubt

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-22-2008, 01:58 PM
I will simply say this - if the Steelers do not magically find any semblance of a running game, then their playoff run will be short-lived. I'm not going to pin the blame on any one guy like many others in this thread are wont to do, but there's no question that somehow, it has to be fixed. Unfortunately, it probably won't be until next season. If the Steelers run the ball even average yesterday, I believe they would have beaten the Titans. You've got to come up with more than 57 yards on 21 total carries against a team without it's 2 best defensive linemen. BTW, 18 carries for Parker vs. 3 for Moore? I thought they were going to start rotating them more often?
I will say this again.

The Steelers run game has been perfectly fine when Moore gets the carries. Why is this so hard for both the coaches and the fans to comprehend?

Dino 6 Rings
12-22-2008, 02:07 PM
I will say this again.

The Steelers run game has been perfectly fine when Moore gets the carries. Why is this so hard for both the coaches and the fans to comprehend?

Yeah but didn't we score 2 touchdowns with Willie Parker on the field this weekend?

X-Terminator
12-22-2008, 02:07 PM
I will say this again.

The Steelers run game has been perfectly fine when Moore gets the carries. Why is this so hard for both the coaches and the fans to comprehend?

I still have a problem with handing the job over to a career backup. He has performed well when he's been called upon and I'd like to see him have a larger role in the offense, but the starting job over Parker? No. Sorry, there's a reason this guy has been a backup. I'd have rather them hand over the job to Mendenhall had he stayed healthy than to Moore.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-22-2008, 02:17 PM
Yeah but didn't we score 2 touchdowns with Willie Parker on the field this weekend?
Very astute, but as with the other TD drives that included FWP, he was mostly an innocent bystander.

On the first TD drive FWP had 6 carries for 15 yards on an 80 yard TD drive and 1 carry for 0 yards on the second TD drive.

That still brings the year-long tally to 8 TDs with FWP this season and 15 TDs with MM this season and FWP has played far far more. At some point, you are going to have to acknowledge that the Steelers run game (and offense in general) are more productive with MM.

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 02:18 PM
I still have a problem with handing the job over to a career backup. He has performed well when he's been called upon and I'd like to see him have a larger role in the offense, but the starting job over Parker? No. Sorry, there's a reason this guy has been a backup. I'd have rather them hand over the job to Mendenhall had he stayed healthy than to Moore.

Backups have been handed starting jobs in football more times than someone could count. And they have been successful more times than someone can count as well. The point is that it doesn't hurt to try especially given how utterly horrible the starter has been in our current situation.

Although I believe at this point it might be too late. Moore is not going to start in the playoffs. We just need to believe an offensive miracle will occur in 3 weeks for 3 straight games. Or the more realistic scenario is believe the defense will play near perfection for 3 straight games and the offense will simply make sure to not help the other teams offense by turning the ball over.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-22-2008, 02:20 PM
I still have a problem with handing the job over to a career backup. He has performed well when he's been called upon and I'd like to see him have a larger role in the offense, but the starting job over Parker? No. Sorry, there's a reason this guy has been a backup. I'd have rather them hand over the job to Mendenhall had he stayed healthy than to Moore.
That is sillly. In his 1st 4 seasons, Moore played the same 3rd down back role that Tiki Barber and Brian Westbrook did early in their careers. Tiki Barber didnt start until year 4.

Priest Holmes was a career backup until he started and Ryan Grant was a 5th string RB a year before he started. Labels are silly and mean nothing. Production is all that matters.

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 02:21 PM
Very astute, but as with the other TD drives that included FWP, he was mostly an innocent bystander.

On the first TD drive FWP had 6 carries for 15 yards on an 80 yard TD drive and 1 carry for 0 yards on the second TD drive.

That still brings the year-long tally to 8 TDs with FWP this season and 15 TDs with MM this season and FWP has played far far more. At some point, you are going to have to acknowledge that the Steelers run game (and offense in general) are more productive with MM.

He'll acknowledge it when Parker had 20 carries for 50 yards in a playoff game and we lose. Even then he probably won't. He'll blame the fat, dumb and faceless o-line. You'll have a better time convincing the coaching staff then some members UFN. They look right passed objective stats and just concentrate on the "beloved star" player you are speaking negatively about.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-22-2008, 02:42 PM
He'll acknowledge it when Parker had 20 carries for 50 yards in a playoff game and we lose. Even then he probably won't. He'll blame the fat, dumb and faceless o-line. You'll have a better time convincing the coaching staff then some members UFN. They look right passed objective stats and just concentrate on the "beloved star" player you are speaking negatively about.

Lets call him player X.

Player X has not topped 50 yards rushing in over 3 weeks. Player X has 101 yards on 44 carries over the past 3 games for an anemic 2.3 yds/carry.

Player Y, with the same OL, has 66 yards on 15 carries for 4.4 yds/carry over those same 3 weeks. Player Y also has 56 yards on 6 catches.

Player X- 48 touches for 112 yards.
Player Y- 21 touches for 122 yards

How is this not obvious? This is frustrating to see. This is a championship team that only needs to make this one change.

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 02:46 PM
Lets call him player X.

Player X has not topped 50 yards rushing in over 3 weeks. Player X has 101 yards on 44 carries over the past 3 games for an anemic 2.3 yds/carry.

Player Y, with the same OL, has 66 yards on 15 carries for 4.4 yds/carry over those same 3 weeks. Player Y also has 56 yards on 6 catches.

Player X- 48 touches for 112 yards.
Player Y- 21 touches for 122 yards

How is this not obvious? This is frustrating to see. This is a championship team that only needs to make this one change.

Cause it's not player X and player Y, that is exactly why. Cause one guys is "Fast" Willie Parker and the other guy is Mewlede "hard to pronounce" Moore

That's just the way it is for some members. You're preaching to the quire. I already posted all those stats for others who refuse to believe that Parker is probably done. You'll have as much luck as me.

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-22-2008, 02:52 PM
Cause it's not player X and player Y, that is exactly why. Cause one guys is "Fast" Willie Parker and the other guy is Mewlede "hard to pronounce" Moore

That's just the way it is for some members. You're preaching to the quire. I already posted all those stats for others who refuse to believe that Parker is probably done. You'll have as much luck as me. And thus the original point of this thread.

With the only thing holding this team back being FWP, is the Steelers franchise going to give up a 6th ring to appease the ego of their Super Bowl hero?

It is simple. If you add 112 yds/game to the RB position to go with this passing game and defense a 6th Super Bowl seems somewhat likely. Do the fans/coaches have the guts to bench FWP?

T.Richardson
12-22-2008, 02:58 PM
Here's a post from ESPN.com from a guy named jcharding.

As I have consistently stated, the two RBs are getting their carries in entirely different situations. FWP tends to get his carries in obvious running downs, whereas Moore gets his carries out of passing sets. In yesterday's game, MM got his carries on:

1. A first down shotgun set (17 yards, under two minutes in the half).
2. A first down run (8 yards) over left guard (don't know the set from the game log)
3. A second down shotgun set (3 yards, halfway through the 4th quarter).

If you go back and check the splits for the year for both RBs, this tends to be the trend for the whole year. FWP has many more runs (both total and a percentage of his carries) out of 2 TE (or more sets) or two WR sets (i.e. traditional running downs), whereas Moore is getting much more carries out of shotgun sets or 3 WR sets (and very few carries when multiple TEs are on the field).
Moreover, when you look at the Baltimore game (conveniently forgotten), FWP had 14 carries for 47 yards (3.4 YPC) verses Moore at 7 carries for 16 yards (2.3 yards). In all honestly, it really doesn't matter who we have back there because on obvious running downs our OL can't move the pile and/or create holes for anyone

Link (http://boards.espn.go.com/boards/mb/mb?sport=nfl&id=pit&tid=4034251&lid=3)

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 03:06 PM
Here's a post from ESPN.com from a guy named jcharding.

As I have consistently stated, the two RBs are getting their carries in entirely different situations. FWP tends to get his carries in obvious running downs, whereas Moore gets his carries out of passing sets. In yesterday's game, MM got his carries on:

1. A first down shotgun set (17 yards, under two minutes in the half).
2. A first down run (8 yards) over left guard (don't know the set from the game log)
3. A second down shotgun set (3 yards, halfway through the 4th quarter).

If you go back and check the splits for the year for both RBs, this tends to be the trend for the whole year. FWP has many more runs (both total and a percentage of his carries) out of 2 TE (or more sets) or two WR sets (i.e. traditional running downs), whereas Moore is getting much more carries out of shotgun sets or 3 WR sets (and very few carries when multiple TEs are on the field).
Moreover, when you look at the Baltimore game (conveniently forgotten), FWP had 14 carries for 47 yards (3.4 YPC) verses Moore at 7 carries for 16 yards (2.3 yards). In all honestly, it really doesn't matter who we have back there because on obvious running downs our OL can't move the pile and/or create holes for anyone

Link (http://boards.espn.go.com/boards/mb/mb?sport=nfl&id=pit&tid=4034251&lid=3)

How would you know it doesn't matter who we have back there until you switch the two? Let Parker get the ball on "non-running downs" and shotgun formations and let Moore get the ball on "traditional running downs" and then see what happens.

I also challenge your/their theory in general until you post EXACTLY how many times the two have rushed out of the different formations. Saying "much more" isn't telling us what the numbers are. This is a complicated theory, one of those "so complicated" most won't bother to argue theories. But it is a meaningless theory if it is not shown every single rush and formation used for both RB's for the entire season. And where would you get such information? Where would it show how many TE's were on the field and what formation the defense was running for every single down for the season? Does such a website exist? I'll be happy to do the research. It just seems like a cop out theory from Willie Parker cheerleaders if you ask me.

And as I posted elsewhere, there are 3 possibilities as Moore is running behind the exact same line as Parker:

1. Moore is better than Parker right now
2. The coaches are intentionally calling the rush plays that actually work when Moore is on the field and not when Parker is on the field because they dislike Parker and are trying to make him look bad.
3. The coaches are unintentionally calling the rush plays that actually work when Moore is on the field and not when Parker is on the field because the coaches are absolute morons.

steelreserve
12-22-2008, 03:07 PM
BTW, 18 carries for Parker vs. 3 for Moore? I thought they were going to start rotating them more often?

... and THAT, my friend, perfectly exemplifies the problem I've been bitching about for three years. It's simply a given that Parker will have a bad performance like that every two or three games. But we compound the problem by leaving him in there and running the same plays, to the exclusion of everyone else.

Listen, bad games happen to everyone -- even LT, even Brandon Jacobs, even (gasp) Jerome Bettis. The key to overcoming that is to recognize it early and try some other options. There will be times when your starting running back sucks, and either the backup has to step up, or you make up the difference with some passes out of the backfield, or whatever else you can think of. You do not just say, "Well, the draw play isn't working ... OK, now back to the draw play."

Seriously, it's obvious pretty early on when Parker's going to have a bad game. That should never go on much beyond the first quarter.

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 03:17 PM
There will be times when your starting running back sucks, and either the backup has to step up, or you make up the difference with some passes out of the backfield, or whatever else you can think of. You do not just say, "Well, the draw play isn't working ... OK, now back to the draw play."

Seriously, it's obvious pretty early on when Parker's going to have a bad game. That should never go on much beyond the first quarter.

And at the very least you don't just say, "Well, the draw play hasn't been working with Parker...Ok, now let's try another draw play with Parker."

UltimateFootballNetwork
12-22-2008, 03:19 PM
Here's a post from ESPN.com from a guy named jcharding.

As I have consistently stated, the two RBs are getting their carries in entirely different situations. FWP tends to get his carries in obvious running downs, whereas Moore gets his carries out of passing sets. In yesterday's game, MM got his carries on:

1. A first down shotgun set (17 yards, under two minutes in the half).
2. A first down run (8 yards) over left guard (don't know the set from the game log)
3. A second down shotgun set (3 yards, halfway through the 4th quarter).

If you go back and check the splits for the year for both RBs, this tends to be the trend for the whole year. FWP has many more runs (both total and a percentage of his carries) out of 2 TE (or more sets) or two WR sets (i.e. traditional running downs), whereas Moore is getting much more carries out of shotgun sets or 3 WR sets (and very few carries when multiple TEs are on the field).
Moreover, when you look at the Baltimore game (conveniently forgotten), FWP had 14 carries for 47 yards (3.4 YPC) verses Moore at 7 carries for 16 yards (2.3 yards). In all honestly, it really doesn't matter who we have back there because on obvious running downs our OL can't move the pile and/or create holes for anyone

Link (http://boards.espn.go.com/boards/mb/mb?sport=nfl&id=pit&tid=4034251&lid=3)

Mewelde Moore is 10th in the NFL at 4.9 yds/carry on 1st and 10.
http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2008&type=Rushing&range=NFL&rank=229

Willie Parker is averaging 3.6 yds/carry on 1st down

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/7073/situational;_ylt=Ah1oj6H_exY1i_bLYuIqH67.uLYF

Again I wonder why people are trying to find any reason why reality is somehow unfair to FWP?

steelreserve
12-22-2008, 03:22 PM
And at the very least you don't just say, "Well, the draw play hasn't been working with Parker...Ok, now let's try another draw play with Parker."

Yeah, the playcalling and the personnel can both contribute to failure ... if you ask me, Parker's running style exacerbates problems with the playcalling and the line.

No, Willie, you are not going to gain positive yardage by doing a dancing half-juke in the backfield, turning your back to the line of scrimmage and diving sideways into the pile. That's not using your "breakaway speed" effectively either.

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 03:26 PM
No, Willie, you are not going to gain positive yardage by doing a dancing half-juke in the backfield, turning your back to the line of scrimmage and diving sideways into the pile. That's not using your "breakaway speed" effectively either.

lol

steelreserve
12-22-2008, 03:28 PM
lol

Well hey, at least he dives awkwardly into the pile faster than Bettis.

NYC SteelersFan
12-22-2008, 03:33 PM
Well hey, at least he dives awkwardly into the pile faster than Bettis.

and bounces backwards for 1 yard or no gain usually.

Dino 6 Rings
01-11-2009, 07:29 PM
This thread is HILARIOUS!

I love a good comedy. And this thread is comedic Gold!

X-Terminator
01-11-2009, 07:30 PM
Only a 1-week reprieve. The haters will all be back next week if Willie struggles again.

cubanstogie
01-11-2009, 07:31 PM
I don't think so, that is the best I have ever seen Willie, bar none. Props to the line as well.

Dino 6 Rings
01-11-2009, 07:33 PM
Its amazing that this year, we are Healthy going into the playoffs, playing our best ball of the year...

even after the "toughest" schedule in the NFL...12 wins later, home field advantage, playoff win at home, hosting the Title game

Holy Crap...

I just love the smell of napalm in the morning...that gasoline smell...it smells like Victory!

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2009, 07:56 PM
Yeah, but if you take away the long runs...........oh, he actually averaged around 5 YPC.

Here's to this silly thread being benched.

Preacher
01-11-2009, 07:59 PM
Yeah, but if you take away the long runs...........oh, he actually averaged around 5 YPC.

Here's to this silly thread being benched.

Absolutely!!

ShutDown24
01-11-2009, 08:00 PM
Yeah, but if you take away the long runs...........oh, he actually averaged around 5 YPC.

Here's to this silly thread being benched.

The thread has been a joke since its inception. Now that Willie is healthy, the bashers are gone.

43Hitman
01-11-2009, 08:02 PM
Yeah, but if you take away the long runs...........oh, he actually averaged around 5 YPC.

Here's to this silly thread being benched.

QFT! :laughing: