PDA

View Full Version : RUN the Ball....Please!!!!!


Blackvette
11-23-2009, 04:18 PM
Like the subject says - who else is with me? :banging:

Psyychoward86
11-23-2009, 04:57 PM
What makes you think we didnt try, the lack of YPC? Cuz we sure as hell tried

Christian Snyder
11-23-2009, 05:00 PM
I would like to see us run a little more also... We seem a little to pass oriented.

Angus Burgher
11-23-2009, 05:03 PM
We should only run the ball if we can do it effectively. I'm not so sure that we can, to be honest. Not sure if it's the RB or the O-Line's fault on that one, but we were stuggling against one of the worst run defenses in the league.

Psyychoward86
11-23-2009, 05:09 PM
The play calling was 45 pass to 30 run. FWP and Mendy averaged about 4 YPC, but with the Chiefs breathing down our necks, and that minuscule lead that we held throughout the game until we lost, we couldnt afford to run the ball as much as we wanted to. Besides, we ran the ball less and less effectively as the game progressed because or some strange reason, we were trying to run the ball toward Glenn Dorsey and Tamba Hali, who were probably the two guys most likely to give our running game trouble. We ran the ball as much as we could and should

Christian Snyder
11-23-2009, 05:10 PM
The play calling was 45 pass to 30 run. FWP and Mendy averaged about 4 YPC, but with the Chiefs breathing down our necks, and that minuscule lead that we held throughout the game until we lost, we couldnt afford to run the ball as much as we wanted to. Besides, we ran the ball less and less effectively as the game progressed because or some strange reason, we were trying to run the ball toward Glenn Dorsey and Tamba Hali, who were probably the two guys most likely to give our running game trouble. We ran the ball as much as we could and should
Hmm... 45 pass attempts to 30 run-attempts ain't so bad.:tt05:

solardave
11-23-2009, 05:13 PM
What makes you think we didnt try, the lack of YPC? Cuz we sure as hell tried


Not enough run consistency though. Look what the Raiders did yesterday to the Bengals. They ran all over them.We could have too. Last week the Chiefs gave up 180 yards rushing so you don't abandon it early. You keep running until they get tired.Mendenhall can handle it. If not him yesterday Willie was running hard for a change. He looked like he had a chip on his shoulder and we didn't give him the ball nearly enough.

Preacher
11-23-2009, 05:15 PM
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

ONce again, the RUNNING THE BALL SOLVES ALL PROBLEMS crowd shows up. Let's take a look at reality shall we?

Chiefs Defense: 27th in the league against the rush. average 4.5 yards a carry against them.

Steelers rushing last game: Mendy-3.8 yard average. almost a full yard UNDER the average of all other teams against the Chiefs... 27th in the league.

Now, if we we almost a FULL yard worse than the average, what in the WORLD makes you think we are going to be able to run the ball against a top 5 rushing defense?

Please. Common sense. You THROW the ball against a 17th ranked passing defense...

We will have a better chance throwing the ball against the Ravens with a 3rd string QB and an injury backup than we will running it. History says we can't run against them, stats say we WONT be able to run against them, common sense says they will be keying off on the run.

But some of you still want to run the ball right? And if we lose you will be the same one saying, "Why didn't BA throw the ball?"

BlastFurnace
11-23-2009, 05:23 PM
The problem is that they are not running the ball when the game dicates that they should. We don't need to pass on nearly every single 3rd and 2.

Steel Duck
11-23-2009, 05:28 PM
We are known for being a running team...I don't know what happened...but passing has proven to be very dangerous lately. SOMETHING HAS TO HAPPEN!

ricardisimo
11-23-2009, 05:36 PM
The problem is that they are not running the ball when the game dicates that they should. We don't need to pass on nearly every single 3rd and 2.

Perzaktly. And when you are up 17-7 at the half, you would think running the ball would become more attractive. Instead we came out throwing... an interception, no less. Still leading, we go back to the run? No. We throw like crazy again, and another interception follows. At that point we are no longer leading, and running is no longer the luxury it was.

For the record, I noticed a LOT of complaints about the passing even following Ws this year, so no one should be claiming that we'd be crying for the pass if they had run and lost. I think some people are Steeler purists, and that's neither here nor there. But many of us would like to see the run set up the pass or the pass set up the run, but not the pass set up the pass, setting up the interceptions, setting up the sacks, setting up the hurry-up pass, setting our QB up in the hospital for the week... with a half-dozen rushes tossed in there just so BA can say "I told you so."

LVSteelersfan
11-23-2009, 05:38 PM
Running will be utter suicide against the Ratbirds. Have any of you who keep saying run, run, run watched the games we have played against them the past couple years? We beat them with the pass. With Kemo out for a few weeks the run will be stuffed. Plain and simple.

Preacher
11-23-2009, 05:41 PM
Running will be utter suicide against the Ratbirds. Have any of you who keep saying run, run, run watched the games we have played against them the past couple years? We beat them with the pass. With Kemo out for a few weeks the run will be stuffed. Plain and simple.


Sigh, silly Steelers, logic has no place in this discussion, we were a running team!

BlastFurnace
11-23-2009, 05:44 PM
Running will be utter suicide against the Ratbirds. Have any of you who keep saying run, run, run watched the games we have played against them the past couple years? We beat them with the pass. With Kemo out for a few weeks the run will be stuffed. Plain and simple.

I agree and I am not clamoring to go back to Cowherball. We will need to beat the Ravens via the air because they are weak in their secondary this year. My point is that there will be times where we will need to run the ball against them and others.

The empty back set when we are first and goal has proven not to be a good set for us near the goal line.

ricardisimo
11-23-2009, 05:50 PM
Running will be utter suicide against the Ratbirds. Have any of you who keep saying run, run, run watched the games we have played against them the past couple years? We beat them with the pass. With Kemo out for a few weeks the run will be stuffed. Plain and simple.

Firstly, we're not saying "run, run, run", we're saying "run, pass, run".

Secondly, we won the last game against them with defense (3 picks of Flacco), the prior one with defense (two picks and a FR), and the first one with Jeff Reed and Lamarr Woodley (FR for a TD). The pass became a bit more prominent in each one, but was really not the decisive factor in any of them.

Thirdly, who's Kemo?

Edit: Ah! Kemoeatu! For some reason I thought you were hearkening back to Kimo von Oelhoefen.

LVSteelersfan
11-24-2009, 01:43 AM
I like the running game with Mendenhall a lot. Parker not so much. Perhaps we can set the run up with the pass against the Ravens. If Dixon plays, it might be a good idea to try to run but they will probably have 8 or 9 in the box and stuff it. I heard the Ratbirds lost another player for the season out of their secondary. So that makes them ripe for the picking. Just quit trying to throw the darn home run ball. Do the shorter routes. And for gods sake, quit running that empty backfield set in the red zone. IT NEVER WORKS. I agree we should try to pound it down there a few times and see what happens.

T.Richardson
11-24-2009, 12:46 PM
Firstly, we're not saying "run, run, run", we're saying "run, pass, run".

Secondly, we won the last game against them with defense (3 picks of Flacco), the prior one with defense (two picks and a FR), and the first one with Jeff Reed and Lamarr Woodley (FR for a TD). The pass became a bit more prominent in each one, but was really not the decisive factor in any of them.

Thirdly, who's Kemo?

Edit: Ah! Kemoeatu! For some reason I thought you were hearkening back to Kimo von Oelhoefen.

run, pass, run is a horrible plan. This offense is more like pass, pass, run... this offense is different now, get used to the pass first offense.

Flacco isnt a rookie anymore, so i dont expect him to make many mistakes. So the offense will be forced to do what it does best. Passing the ball

revefsreleets
11-24-2009, 01:33 PM
If we run the ball more, people will just bitch that we run it too much and we need to pass more.

If we keep passing the ball, people will continue to bitch that we don't run it enough.

If we're 100% balanced (and we have been before...believe we were close last year), two camps will emerge, one bitching that we were run the ball too much, and one bitching that we passed the ball too much. The one constant is 90% of the people will bitch 100% of the time.

The bottom line is, even if we WIN, most of the people are going to bitch about the offense, and scream for the head of the OC (no matter who it is, or how good of a game they actually call...same "logic" as above). Using real logic in this debate feels very much like Sisyphus must, eternally pushing his boulder up the mountain...

arge5809
11-25-2009, 08:58 AM
I would like to see us run a little more also... We seem a little to pass oriented.


We do run the ball on EVERY play.... sometimes it is cleverly disguised as Ben scrambling before the throw...

:rofl: :flap: :toofunny: :sofunny: :doh:

markymarc
11-25-2009, 11:50 AM
Sure let's run the football more. Better yet let's keep running a toss sweep play to Moore! Just do things on offense, defense and special teams to start winning again :tt02:

arge5809
11-25-2009, 11:59 AM
If we run the ball more, people will just bitch that we run it too much and we need to pass more.

If we keep passing the ball, people will continue to bitch that we don't run it enough.

If we're 100% balanced (and we have been before...believe we were close last year), two camps will emerge, one bitching that we were run the ball too much, and one bitching that we passed the ball too much. The one constant is 90% of the people will bitch 100% of the time.

The bottom line is, even if we WIN, most of the people are going to bitch about the offense, and scream for the head of the OC (no matter who it is, or how good of a game they actually call...same "logic" as above). Using real logic in this debate feels very much like Sisyphus must, eternally pushing his boulder up the mountain...


AMEN!!! :doh: :banging:

Christian Snyder
11-25-2009, 12:32 PM
We do run the ball on EVERY play.... sometimes it is cleverly disguised as Ben scrambling before the throw...

:rofl: :flap: :toofunny: :sofunny: :doh:
:chuckle::chuckle:

shinoff2183
11-25-2009, 12:36 PM
I like the pass heavy offense, and believe its worked it for the most part. I think are problem is on the other sides of the ball. The only game this year I feel are defense was its normal self(last year wise) was the bronco game. Also the ST but I dont have much to say about that squad you guys already know.

Against the chiefs I think the offense played good, or well enough to win, and we were well on are way downfield to score then batch had to come in. I get scared everytime I see this man come in a game, he really makes me nervous. The D gave up that big ass play at the end which killed us.

Sure ben threw that pick in the endzone and the guy ran it back but the defense couldve held them. I really dont think the blame is on the offense this time around.

Riddle_Of_Steel
11-25-2009, 03:17 PM
This is gonna make the Carey Davis haters jump and scream, but back in the first couple weeks of the season, when we were averaging like 1.8 Yard per carry, we brought back Carey Davis and the next week, Mendenhall ripped off 160+ yards against the Chargers.

Carey Davis has been out with an injury that last few weeks, and look what happens-- we are barely able to manage 3 YPC against the 27th ranked run defense....

Davis comes back to the starting lineup this week, and wemay have been missing him on special teams as well.

Does anybody know why Ramon Foster is going to be taking Kemo's spot, and not Doug Legursky? Isn't Legursky a C/G?

Angus Burgher
11-25-2009, 03:22 PM
No, the blame for this one is on the D and ST. The turnovers by the offense didn't help, but they still put 24 points on the board. Against a 2-win team, that should be sufficient.

I wish Ben would never throw a pick again simply because everytime he does, people want to make that error the deciding factor of the game. If your D can get the job done, turnovers shouldn't matter unless they're pick 6's.

ricardisimo
11-25-2009, 04:28 PM
24 points allowed per game is what the Chiefs are averaging this year, so putting 24 up on them is nothing for Pitt's offense to crow about, especially considering these guys play Oakland twice a year.

The D had allowed something like 180 yards up until the last five minutes, and one of the offense's TDs should be credited to Timmons.

There's more than enough blame to go around, clearly. However, people should start comparing Tomlin's game stats with Cowher's in order to get some perspective. Cowher definitely had his deficiencies (like big game chokes at home), but I remember seeing some positively astounding figure, like that he blew a double-digit lead twice in his entire tenure. I certainly don't remember those two games... does anyone else?

Two games - more or less - in fifteen seasons, and yet we've already equaled that this year. Do you know how he did it? Running the ball. Period. Bam Morris was not a better back than either RushHard or Willie, and late-Bettis/early Willie was not a better combo than what we have now, but Cowher knew how to make the running game work to his advantage once the team was up. That's not rocket science, just playing the football numbers game wisely.

T.Richardson
11-25-2009, 07:00 PM
24 points allowed per game is what the Chiefs are averaging this year, so putting 24 up on them is nothing for Pitt's offense to crow about, especially considering these guys play Oakland twice a year.

The D had allowed something like 180 yards up until the last five minutes, and one of the offense's TDs should be credited to Timmons.

There's more than enough blame to go around, clearly. However, people should start comparing Tomlin's game stats with Cowher's in order to get some perspective. Cowher definitely had his deficiencies (like big game chokes at home), but I remember seeing some positively astounding figure, like that he blew a double-digit lead twice in his entire tenure. I certainly don't remember those two games... does anyone else?

Two games - more or less - in fifteen seasons, and yet we've already equaled that this year. Do you know how he did it? Running the ball. Period. Bam Morris was not a better back than either RushHard or Willie, and late-Bettis/early Willie was not a better combo than what we have now, but Cowher knew how to make the running game work to his advantage once the team was up. That's not rocket science, just playing the football numbers game wisely.

the reason why the Steelers werent so successful in the playoffs. doing that allows the opposing team to come back in the game. The opposing team stacks up the box, forces 3 and outs, and the opposing offenses gets more chances to score.

ricardisimo
11-25-2009, 07:15 PM
Please... I remember getting blown out of many of those playoff games, not being up and letting them back in.

Steel_Bus_24
11-25-2009, 07:52 PM
going to be tough sledding this week.....we never are successful running against the ravens

stb_steeler
11-25-2009, 08:00 PM
How about if we quit giving up a 14 or 17 point lead and this team would win them all. Then there would be no debating. :tt02:

Nighthawk
11-25-2009, 08:31 PM
Honestly... we just play DOWN to the competition a lot of times.

We can RUN on top ranked rush Defenses
We can RUN on bottom ranked rush Defenses

The same goes for the passing game - all too often though we see poor execution when playing those bad teams.

Riddle_Of_Steel
11-25-2009, 09:13 PM
Two games - more or less - in fifteen seasons, and yet we've already equaled that this year. Do you know how he did it? Running the ball. Period. Bam Morris was not a better back than either RushHard or Willie, and late-Bettis/early Willie was not a better combo than what we have now, but Cowher knew how to make the running game work to his advantage once the team was up. That's not rocket science, just playing the football numbers game wisely.

Funny....just a few weeks ago, I recall lots of people on here complaining about a certain Bruce Arians, and how he messed up and lost the game because he took the air out of the ball too early and let the other team back in the game because we started trying to run the ball in the second half instead of sticking to what got us a lead in the first place. Now, when we keep the attack on, he is wrong for not running the ball more in the second half....

Anybody see a pattern emerging here?

steel9guy
11-25-2009, 09:17 PM
Stupid turnovers don't help.

Preacher
11-25-2009, 09:42 PM
Two games - more or less - in fifteen seasons, and yet we've already equaled that this year. Do you know how he did it? Running the ball. Period. Bam Morris was not a better back than either RushHard or Willie, and late-Bettis/early Willie was not a better combo than what we have now, but Cowher knew how to make the running game work to his advantage once the team was up. That's not rocket science, just playing the football numbers game wisely.

Funny....just a few weeks ago, I recall lots of people on here complaining about a certain Bruce Arians, and how he messed up and lost the game because he took the air out of the ball too early and let the other team back in the game because we started trying to run the ball in the second half instead of sticking to what got us a lead in the first place. Now, when we keep the attack on, he is wrong for not running the ball more in the second half....

Anybody see a pattern emerging here?


:huh:


Oh wait...

I recognize that....

Oh, there it is ...





LOGIC:chuckle:

ricardisimo
11-25-2009, 10:21 PM
Funny....just a few weeks ago, I recall lots of people on here complaining about a certain Bruce Arians, and how he messed up and lost the game because he took the air out of the ball too early and let the other team back in the game because we started trying to run the ball in the second half instead of sticking to what got us a lead in the first place. Now, when we keep the attack on, he is wrong for not running the ball more in the second half....

Anybody see a pattern emerging here?

???

I'm sure I can scour these forums and find people denying the Holocaust and Darwinian Evolution and saying that Elvis is dead (as if...), but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? You quoted me in this post of yours, so the suggestion is clearly that I am one of these people who has waffled on this issue, or that I check which way the wind is blowing before I speak, or something of the sort. So go ahead and show us any other post of mine where I have suggested anything different on Pittsburgh's running game under Arians.

You won't find anything of the sort, of course. Quite to the contrary of what you are saying, I have found that most of the people who are complaining now were complaining during the victories as well, albeit with less sky-is-falling enthusiasm.

People have to stop with that line of argument... that because you can find previous posts that said different, that somehow those cancel out the newer posts, or that they must be the same people flip-flopping, or who knows what. It's meaningless. You can find just about any post on any topic in these forums. It doesn't mean anything outside of the thread in question.

MasterOfPuppets
11-25-2009, 10:27 PM
if they run the ball 30 times and pass it 30 times.. and lose......what excuse will you fall back to ? they ran up the middle too much ?

ricardisimo
11-25-2009, 10:57 PM
if they run the ball 30 times and pass it 30 times.. and lose......what excuse will you fall back to ? they ran up the middle too much ?

Maybe you don't understand something... we are Steelers fans. We want them to win. We don't want them to suck so that we can complain.

Besides, please do us and yourself a favor and try to find anywhere in any NFL team's fan forums the argument from any fan at all that a team is simply too balanced in its attack, and that it is losing because of that, or that this will come back to haunt it.

Do you really think you're going to hear that ever? Do you really think you could find that post somewhere?

BlockMonsta
11-25-2009, 11:00 PM
In over time, I think #34's three touches went for 7,7 and 8 yards. So, why not keep with it?

shinoff2183
11-26-2009, 12:47 AM
In over time, I think #34's three touches went for 7,7 and 8 yards. So, why not keep with it?



Because someone decided to toss right to moore for three yards, Im not an arians hater(I actually like him) but I think that was stupid. Im not gonna complain though. This is a good team, and they can do it.

Lets go STELERS!

ricardisimo
11-26-2009, 01:05 AM
You're right. This is a good team, and a really good offense, I think. I think the run game can be really special, too.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think Arians is a very good offensive coordinator, and he is clearly saying all of the right things to his guys, making them believe they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, even when they can't. That doesn't alter the fact that his play-calling is suspect and his game-management skills are just flat-out bad.

In fairness to all of the angry posters here, I don't see many calling for Arians' head in the same way people want Ligashesky's up on a pike. I think people just want him to grow and to change, which is more than fair of them to ask.

shinoff2183
11-26-2009, 02:02 AM
You're right. This is a good team, and a really good offense, I think. I think the run game can be really special, too.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think Arians is a very good offensive coordinator, and he is clearly saying all of the right things to his guys, making them believe they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, even when they can't. That doesn't alter the fact that his play-calling is suspect and his game-management skills are just flat-out bad.

In fairness to all of the angry posters here, I don't see many calling for Arians' head in the same way people want Ligashesky's up on a pike. I think people just want him to grow and to change, which is more than fair of them to ask.



My only problem with the play calling is, and this might be bens fault also is the lack of the short pass, or screen play. We have been beaten up by this play, I say beat them back. Offensively this is my only beef. RM has the ablilty to catch it out of the backfield, and I know moore does.