PDA

View Full Version : Reliance on the pass not just a trend in NFL


mesaSteeler
01-10-2010, 09:35 PM
Reliance on the pass not just a trend in NFL
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_661512.html#
By Scott Brown
PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, January 10, 2010

The four teams that received first-round byes in the NFL playoffs have a combined record of 52-12. To say they ran over the competition en route to the postseason would not be entirely accurate.

All of those teams have won big by using the pass as their primary mode of moving the ball. Their success may initiate what could be considered a seismic shift in strategy if it hasn't already happened.

The Indianapolis Colts are challenging the long-standing football tenet that victory is directly proportional to a team's ability to run the ball. Indianapolis finished the regular season with a 14-2 record despite ranking 31st out of 32 teams in rushing offense.

The Peyton Manning-led Colts were No. 2 in passing offense, and of the eight division winners, only the Cincinnati Bengals did not rank in the top 10 in that category.

The Bengals are ranked last among the 12 playoff teams by Las Vegas oddsmakers, according to gaming expert R.J. Bell of pregame.com.

"I've said a thousand times, the league evolves offensively and defensively," said Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, who threw for a franchise-record 4,328 yards this season. "And you have to keep up with Indianapolis, the (New Orleans) Saints, teams like that. Because if you don't, you are going to be left behind."

The passing sensibility that has gripped the NFL is evident even with a team such as the 12-4 Minnesota Vikings.

While Adrian Peterson rushed for almost 1,400 yards this season, quarterback Brett Favre became the centerpiece of the Vikings' offense. Minnesota ranked eighth in the NFL in passing offense.

"I think what people are starting to see is that 'three or four yards and a cloud of dust' is not good enough anymore, and that we need chunk plays," said Miami Dolphins coach Tony Sparano, whose team finished 7-9 despite ranking fourth in rushing offense.

The Steelers, who have long been associated with a smash-mouth ethos, appeared to embrace that concept this season as they finished seventh in passing offense.

More and more, defenses are daring teams to throw, which often results in bigger passing numbers.

"If you get eight in the box, that means there's three covering, and you have three receivers," Philadelphia Eagles fullback Leonard Weaver said. "So if you have those odds, that's exactly what you'll take."

The odds are further stacked against defensive backs because of rules that are geared toward more scoring and higher TV ratings.

Defensive players are not allowed to initiate contact with a receiver beyond 5 yards of the line of scrimmage. A pass interference penalty, meanwhile, is a spot foul; in college it is a 15-yard infraction.

"If you're smart, you've got to take advantage of that," Eagles linebacker Jeremiah Trotter said of the rules that help passing offenses. "You can't really touch the receiver after five yards, and if you breathe on them, you get a flag. You'd be crazy not to take advantage of that."

More and more teams are doing just that, said Steelers inside linebacker James Farrior, a 13-year veteran.

"When I first came into the league, there was a lot more running involved," he said. "I think with the type of athletes we have on offense, you're more apt to go to for big plays. The main guy on the field is the quarterback, and they want to throw the ball 100,000 times a game."

San Diego quarterback Philip Rivers set career highs this season in passing attempts (486) and yards (4,254), and he is a major reason why the Chargers take an 11-game winning streak into the postseason.

Rivers has taken over an offense that not too long ago ran through running back LaDainian Tomlinson, the league's MVP in 2006.

But Rivers said the running game is still vital to the Chargers' offense, which works best off play-action passes.

That teams are not about to abandon the run can be seen in what happened with the Steelers last week. Coach Mike Tomlin considered going in another direction with the offense even though the Steelers had their first 4,000-yard passer, two 1,000-yard receivers and 1,000-yard rusher in franchise history.

Offensive coordinator Bruce Arians is returning for at least one more season, but the Steelers could put more of an emphasis on running the ball in 2010.

"Teams still run the ball," Trotter said. "They have to establish the run. But a lot of times you see teams in passing sets and run the ball that way. It's the nature of the beast."

Passing interest

Top passing teams are also among the best teams in the NFL this season. Here is a look at such teams compared with teams that were the most successful running the ball:

Combined record of top 10 passing teams: 113-47

Combined record of top 10 running teams: 87-73

Playoff teams among top 10 passing teams: 8

Playoff teams among the top 10 running teams: 5

Teams with a winning record among top 10 passing teams: 10

Teams with a winning record among top 10 running teams: 5

Scott Brown can be reached at sbrown@tribweb.com or 412-481-5432.

X-Terminator
01-10-2010, 10:02 PM
Hey Scott, keep your silly stats to yourself. You know better than to bring stats and facts into an argument, especially if they are in support of BA. He should have been fired the second the Ravens game ended on Sunday night! :coffee:

MasterOfPuppets
01-10-2010, 10:07 PM
and the ratbirds just beat the pass happy cheaters with only 4 completions for 38 yds....:coffee:

X-Terminator
01-10-2010, 10:12 PM
and the ratbirds just beat the pass happy cheaters with only 4 completions for 38 yds....:coffee:

Which, of course, is going to happen each and every time. :coffee:

Still don't know why so many of you are afraid of passing the ball more...

Bluedust
01-10-2010, 10:15 PM
I choose to ignore facts and stats and base my views purely on the emotional impact it has on me, thx

MasterOfPuppets
01-11-2010, 03:11 AM
Which, of course, is going to happen each and every time. :coffee:

Still don't know why so many of you are afraid of passing the ball more...

hey i'm not against the forward pass...whatever moves the chains and scores TD's works for me....17th in 3rd down conv, and less than 50% in the redzone , tells me that something ain't quite right with the system. i'm not advocating going back to the 3 yds and a cloud of dust cowher ball. but they need to pick there poison a little better in situations. going shotgun an empty backfield on 3rd and short is just stupid football. :noidea: it doesn't take a professional to realize that.

lionslicer
01-11-2010, 04:01 AM
Passing the ball isn't bad, but you have to be good at it :]
Ben is a great quarterback, but the years the Steelers past the ball more are the years we didn't make the playoffs. We don't have a finess enough defense to hold big leads. Most 3-4 defenses aren't built to hold leads. Did anyone see the Packer/Cardinal game? they both had 3-4 defenses, and at points of the game the Cards defense were dominant, and later in the game the Packer defense was Dominant, but when it became a shootout, both defenses fell.

When a team passes a lot, they tend to get an early lead, when that happens, the other team passes a lot to catch up. Unless you have a good pass defense, you'll lose, and the Steelers pretty much showed that the whole 2009 season. Until the Steelers figure out a way to strengthen the pass defense, and not just by blitzing every play, we'll fail as a passing team.

pepsyman1
01-11-2010, 04:39 AM
I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with passing the ball. But if you become one dimensional as a passing team, history tells us you're not gonna win anymore Superbowls than if you are a one dimensional running team. Last years Steelers and the Colts from 2 years before are the only teams in the last 15 years that won the Superbowl with a rushing attack that wasn't in the top 3rd of the league. You need to be able to do both effectively and be able to gameplan appropriately (Bruce, 30 mile per hour winds and 20 degree temps do merit running the ball just a tad). If we run the ball well, Ben will be even MORE effective. Everybody remembers the Rams "Greatest Show on Turf" that scored over 500 pts 3 straight years...2 of those years they were in the top 5 in rushing yardage. If THAT'S what the Steelers put together, they'll get no argument from me...lol

X-Terminator
01-11-2010, 08:20 AM
I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with passing the ball. But if you become one dimensional as a passing team, history tells us you're not gonna win anymore Superbowls than if you are a one dimensional running team. Last years Steelers and the Colts from 2 years before are the only teams in the last 15 years that won the Superbowl with a rushing attack that wasn't in the top 3rd of the league. You need to be able to do both effectively and be able to gameplan appropriately (Bruce, 30 mile per hour winds and 20 degree temps do merit running the ball just a tad). If we run the ball well, Ben will be even MORE effective. Everybody remembers the Rams "Greatest Show on Turf" that scored over 500 pts 3 straight years...2 of those years they were in the top 5 in rushing yardage. If THAT'S what the Steelers put together, they'll get no argument from me...lol

Again, the "Greatest Show on Turf" had the one thing the Steelers do not have - a great OL. That's why they were able to run the ball as effectively as they passed it. The Steelers do NOT have such a line, so they have to rely on the pass more in order to move the ball. Of course that Rams offense is what I'd like to see here, but the OL has to improve if they want to get anywhere near that point.

MACH1
01-11-2010, 11:33 AM
Again, the "Greatest Show on Turf" had the one thing the Steelers do not have - a great OL. That's why they were able to run the ball as effectively as they passed it. The Steelers do NOT have such a line, so they have to rely on the pass more in order to move the ball. Of course that Rams offense is what I'd like to see here, but the OL has to improve if they want to get anywhere near that point.

Umm, they also had a guy named Marshall Faulk. You know, the rb.

SteelGhost
01-11-2010, 11:37 AM
The Rats KILLED the Patsies with powerful running game :noidea: Flacco was just handling the ball to Rice, McGahee and McClain, he just throw for 34 yds. and won. I don't think it will be enough to beat the Colts.

X-Terminator
01-11-2010, 11:51 AM
Umm, they also had a guy named Marshall Faulk. You know, the rb.

Well DUH. I know that. Faulk's versatility really made that offense click, because he was as good a receiver as he was a RB. But do you REALLY think he'd have been as effective as he was if he had a poor or even average OL in front of him? If you do, you're kidding yourself.

Crow-Magnon
01-11-2010, 11:55 AM
Manning is an awesome QB and Indy has been a winner this past decade. Yet....only one SB win.

Rivers has been a dominant QB. How many Supes has he won?

IMO, nothing beats a power running game and a brutal defense. Yes, you still have to be able to get the ball downfield to keep the opposing defense honest, but nothing crushes the other team's spirit like a grinding rushing attack that just kills the clock.

fansince'76
01-11-2010, 11:56 AM
The Rats KILLED the Patsies with powerful running game :noidea: Flacco was just handling the ball to Rice, McGahee and McClain, he just throw for 34 yds. and won.

The Ravens' offense was also given a short field on a number of occasions due to their defense creating turnovers. Outside of Rice's long run at the beginning of the game and their final TD drive, the Ravens didn't have a scoring drive longer than 25 yards.

MACH1
01-11-2010, 11:58 AM
Well DUH. I know that. Faulk's versatility really made that offense click, because he was as good a receiver as he was a RB. But do you REALLY think he'd have been as effective as he was if he had a poor or even average OL in front of him? If you do, you're kidding yourself.

I didn't say that. The rams had the ability to run the ball when they wanted to with their personnel. Thats part of what made them so dangerous, not just airing it out all day.

But the line is not the only problem the steelers have on the O.

X-Terminator
01-11-2010, 12:04 PM
Manning is an awesome QB and Indy has been a winner this past decade. Yet....only one SB win.

Rivers has been a dominant QB. How many Supes has he won?

IMO, nothing beats a power running game and a brutal defense. Yes, you still have to be able to get the ball downfield to keep the opposing defense honest, but nothing crushes the other team's spirit like a grinding rushing attack that just kills the clock.

Which is why, for us, the Denver game and the last 4 minutes of the Miami game were so much fun to watch. They just ran the ball down their throats and there wasn't a damn thing either defense could do to stop it. Seeing Champ Bailey throw his hands up in the air on the Steelers' final drive was an awesome sight

Listen people, there aren't too many who enjoy seeing power football than me. I LOVE it. I just do not want the passing game to be completely ignored because of all the weapons we have. That is all I'm saying. Yes, I may have been over the top with the stuff about the fans wanting exactly that, but hell, someone had to say it, because it's the truth for many in our fan base, and I have never been one who has been afraid to call anyone in our fan base out. They don't like it, and that's fine, but I'm not here to win friends and influence people. I speak my mind based on my own observations.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 12:17 PM
Orlando Pace, Adam Timmerman, Tom Nutten, Andy McCollum, Fred Miller and Ryan Tucker were not much more than average to good for the Rams. Pace was the headliner, but to say that the 1999 Rams O line was vastly superior to the current Steelers O line is a stretch.

I dont think you can say Timmerman, Nutten, Miller are any better or worse than Kemoateu, Hartwig, Colon. Even McCollum or Tucker being marginally better than Essex is reasonable.....so basically X-Terminator's arguement is that if we just had a franchise LT instead of Starks.......we can be the Greatest Show on Turf. I disagree.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 12:24 PM
Manning is an awesome QB and Indy has been a winner this past decade. Yet....only one SB win.

Rivers has been a dominant QB. How many Supes has he won?

IMO, nothing beats a power running game and a brutal defense. Yes, you still have to be able to get the ball downfield to keep the opposing defense honest, but nothing crushes the other team's spirit like a grinding rushing attack that just kills the clock.

Crow, you are preaching to me in the choir on this one.

I like your Ravens to beat the Colts this weekend with that philosophy and even the Chargers, as both of those teams have undersized and weak defensive 7-man fronts. As much as it hurts........I think the Ravens will rep the AFC in the bowl if they dont turn it over.

SteelGhost
01-11-2010, 12:28 PM
Manning is an awesome QB and Indy has been a winner this past decade. Yet....only one SB win.

Rivers has been a dominant QB. How many Supes has he won?

IMO, nothing beats a power running game and a brutal defense. Yes, you still have to be able to get the ball downfield to keep the opposing defense honest, but nothing crushes the other team's spirit like a grinding rushing attack that just kills the clock.

HI Crow, first of all congrats on the win on the Patsies :thumbsup:

IMHO the Colts will be tougher to beat, Robert Mathis and Dwight Freeney are a better DE combo than the Patsies' *. It will be a tough and entertaining game to watch for sure, brutal defense against brutal aerial offense.

SteelGhost
01-11-2010, 12:31 PM
The Ravens' offense was also given a short field on a number of occasions due to their defense creating turnovers. Outside of Rice's long run at the beginning of the game and their final TD drive, the Ravens didn't have a scoring drive longer than 25 yards.

True fs'76, they didn't need to throw the ball :drink:

Crow-Magnon
01-11-2010, 12:47 PM
Crow, you are preaching to me in the choir on this one.

I like your Ravens to beat the Colts this weekend with that philosophy and even the Chargers, as both of those teams have undersized and weak defensive 7-man fronts. As much as it hurts........I think the Ravens will rep the AFC in the bowl if they dont turn it over.

I don't want to make any "predictions" as of yet. But I feel a lot more comfortable about this Saturday's match-up now then I did a day-and-a-half ago. Manning and the Colts have had the Ravens number the past several games. Then again, so did Brady and the Pats. 8-0 in home playoffs under Brady and no homefield losses in the post-season since 1978 had almost everyone picking New England over Baltimore. And it will be the same this Saturday. But if the Ravens can pound it between the tackles against the Colts like they did against the Pats, they have a great shot.

IMHO the Colts will be tougher to beat, Robert Mathis and Dwight Freeney are a better DE combo than the Patsies' *. It will be a tough and entertaining game to watch for sure, brutal defense against brutal aerial offense.

The last time these two teams played, Mathis and Freeney were non-factors and had zero sacks. And the Ravens O line was not playing anywhere near as well as they did yesterday. And neither was the Ravens pass rush. Unlike Roethlisberger, Manning cannot throw accurately when being chased out of the pocket or with two-three guys hanging on him.

Edman
01-11-2010, 12:51 PM
I have no issue with passing the ball, especially when it's working.

I have an issue with passing the ball 40+ times in crappy weather, 30th in Red Zone Efficiency, predictable empty sets on 3rd and short, passing in running situations and vice versa, blatant ignorance of the no-huddle and the playaction when Ben has long-proven to thrive on both and worst of all, allowing eight sacks to the worst Defense in the league missing two starters.

Yeah, we have a 4,000 yard passer, but we're also sitting at home watching other teams play.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 12:55 PM
I don't want to make any "predictions" as of yet. But I feel a lot more comfortable about this Saturday's match-up now then I did a day-and-a-half ago. Manning and the Colts have had the Ravens number the past several games. Then again, so did Brady and the Pats. 8-0 in home playoffs under Brady and no homefield losses in the post-season since 1978 had almost everyone picking New England over Baltimore. And it will be the same this Saturday. But if the Ravens can pound it between the tackles against the Colts like they did against the Pats, they have a great shot.



The last time these two teams played, Mathis and Freeney were non-factors and had zero sacks. And the Ravens O line was not playing anywhere near as well as they did yesterday. And neither was the Ravens pass rush. Unlike Roethlisberger, Manning cannot throw accurately when being chased out of the pocket or with two-three guys hanging on him.

Yeah, I really dont think mathis and Freeney will be huge factors, because they are not great run defenders. Keep grinding the ball against that small D line of the Colts and throw some play action to move the chains.

That should keep Manning of the field and I think Peyton is gonna be rusty for the 1st half at least. Wayne, Gonzalez, Collie, Clark are a much better group of receivers.....than the Pats had, but I think defense and run game beats no defense and passing game.

X-Terminator
01-11-2010, 12:55 PM
Orlando Pace, Adam Timmerman, Tom Nutten, Andy McCollum, Fred Miller and Ryan Tucker were not much more than average to good for the Rams. Pace was the headliner, but to say that the 1999 Rams O line was vastly superior to the current Steelers O line is a stretch.

I dont think you can say Timmerman, Nutten, Miller are any better or worse than Kemoateu, Hartwig, Colon. Even McCollum or Tucker being marginally better than Essex is reasonable.....so basically X-Terminator's arguement is that if we just had a franchise LT instead of Starks.......we can be the Greatest Show on Turf. I disagree.

I disagree that that line wasn't better than our current OL. I'd take all of those guys over anyone we have right now except Kemo. Average to good is still better than straight average, which is what our OL is right now.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 01:10 PM
I disagree that that line wasn't better than our current OL. I'd take all of those guys over anyone we have right now except Kemo. Average to good is still better than straight average, which is what our OL is right now.

Sadly dillusional. Kemo isnt even the best O lineman on the Team and most coaches, analyst, scouts acknowledge that. You probably compare both units based on sack numbers alone......without wanting to consider that Warner normally had the ball out of his hands in 2 seconds, while Ben runs around with it for 10 seconds.

Greatest show on turf would never have made the conference finals if they had to play outdoor on grass in December or January. QB with quick release, HOF running back, 2 Pro bowl WR's and astroturf made them successful...............NOT Adam Timmerman, Tom Nutten, Fred Davis, Ryan Tucker.

X-Terminator
01-11-2010, 01:21 PM
Sadly dillusional. Kemo isnt even the best O lineman on the Team and most coaches, analyst, scouts acknowledge that. You probably compare both units based on sack numbers alone......without wanting to consider that Warner normally had the ball out of his hands in 2 seconds, while Ben runs around with it for 10 seconds.

Greatest show on turf would never have made the conference finals if they had to play outdoor on grass in December or January. QB with quick release, HOF running back, 2 Pro bowl WR's and astroturf made them successful...............NOT Adam Timmerman, Tom Nutten, Fred Davis, Ryan Tucker.

Nope, I compare them on their ability to run block well enough for their HOF RB to shine, and their running game to consistently be ranked near the top of the league. When has this particular OL ever been able to consistently run block? I'm not talking about a game here or there, I'm talking about consistently, throughout the entire season? They have not. The Rams offense was still going to put up huge numbers through the air regardless, because of Warner and his wideouts. What made them truly great was that they were a dual threat, which the Steelers clearly are NOT. And that all starts UP FRONT. If the Steelers' OL ever starts to run block more effectively, allowing the precious running game that you all love so much to flourish, with those offensive weapons, they would be damn near unstoppable.

No matter. Since you're the self-professed "expert," I'm sure you'll disagree.

pepsyman1
01-11-2010, 02:20 PM
Hey Crow!
Very nice job of putting The Mighty Metrosexual on his a**! They played exactly the kind of game I expected out of them. A fine representation of AFC North football. I think Flacco is gonna have to step it up for you guys to take further, good luck.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 02:21 PM
Nope, I compare them on their ability to run block well enough for their HOF RB to shine, and their running game to consistently be ranked near the top of the league. When has this particular OL ever been able to consistently run block? I'm not talking about a game here or there, I'm talking about consistently, throughout the entire season? They have not. The Rams offense was still going to put up huge numbers through the air regardless, because of Warner and his wideouts. What made them truly great was that they were a dual threat, which the Steelers clearly are NOT. And that all starts UP FRONT. If the Steelers' OL ever starts to run block more effectively, allowing the precious running game that you all love so much to flourish, with those offensive weapons, they would be damn near unstoppable.

No matter. Since you're the self-professed "expert," I'm sure you'll disagree.

I'm no guru............but I cant figure out how you can compare average linemen (excluding Pace) to average linemen on the Steelers and believe they are superior????

If Ben got the ball out of his hands the way Warner did on those Rams teams, the Steelers O line would have 6 sacks allowed per year.

If the Steelers played on astroturf with Marshall Faulk, in a 4 wide set against dime defenses......their O line would look just as good. Faulk vs. Willie Parker(or Mendenhall)???? Its like saying the Detroit Lions had a better O line because of the rushing stats Barry Sanders put up. He did most of that with Lomas Brown and some scrubs on the O line.

X-Terminator
01-11-2010, 02:36 PM
I'm no guru............but I cant figure out how you can compare average linemen (excluding Pace) to average linemen on the Steelers and believe they are superior????

If Ben got the ball out of his hands the way Warner did on those Rams teams, the Steelers O line would have 6 sacks allowed per year.

If the Steelers played on astroturf with Marshall Faulk, in a 4 wide set against dime defenses......their O line would look just as good. Faulk vs. Willie Parker(or Mendenhall)???? Its like saying the Detroit Lions had a better O line because of the rushing stats Barry Sanders put up. He did most of that with Lomas Brown and some scrubs on the O line.

Were those Rams teams NOT able to run the ball more effectively than the Steelers can? For God's sake, they were ranked in the top 5 or 10 in rushing during their heyday! That does NOT happen if your OL can't run block worth a damn! If the Steelers OL could run block even half as well as those guys did, their offense would have easily scored 30+ points per game. Hell, even the Saints with all of their passing stats were 6th in the NFL in rushing. Is their OL any better talent-wise than ours? Probably not, but they sure as shyt got the job done when they needed to.

Anyway, whatever. I'll never win an argument with you and you'll never see my point, so I won't waste my font any further on this issue.

lionslicer
01-11-2010, 03:21 PM
Again, the "Greatest Show on Turf" had the one thing the Steelers do not have - a great OL. That's why they were able to run the ball as effectively as they passed it. The Steelers do NOT have such a line, so they have to rely on the pass more in order to move the ball. Of course that Rams offense is what I'd like to see here, but the OL has to improve if they want to get anywhere near that point.

They also had the number 1 defense :P

X-Terminator
01-11-2010, 03:34 PM
They also had the number 1 defense :P

Yes they did. In fact, their D doesn't get nearly enough credit - the offense gets all the glory. That certainly helped them, no question about it. Defense wins championships, after all.

ricardisimo
01-11-2010, 04:56 PM
There is no stat quite as definitive as D: eight of the top twelve defenses made the playoff, while the Steelers and Denver just missed. Defense still wins championships, if we are to understand that you need to get into the playoffs to win a championship. There a few mediocre Ds that made the playoffs (Saints, Colts) but no bad ones.

There are, on the other hand, horrible passing offenses that made the playoffs, and one of them (Jets) just advanced to the Divisional Round, by beating another (Cincy). You can get to the playoffs without too much of a passing game. Is that what you want? No, of course not.

There are two things for the Steelers to consider, in my humble estimation:

A strong running game makes your defense better;
The AFC North, specifically, is won with D and the run.

Assuming that we want to make it to the playoffs by the easiest route, then we want to win our division outright. That is done with "Steelers football", whether or not it's actually the Steelers doing it. It's just part of the character of the division. The Bengals won it this year with Steelers Football, and the Ravens got in as well with it. We do it most years.

It's also why the Browns, who insist on copying either New England or some other nouveau-West Coast team, simply cannot get any traction. I actually think Mangini might start winning a few games now because of his attention to this detail.

tony hipchest
01-11-2010, 05:06 PM
Well DUH. I know that. Faulk's versatility really made that offense click, because he was as good a receiver as he was a RB. But do you REALLY think he'd have been as effective as he was if he had a poor or even average OL in front of him? If you do, you're kidding yourself.

XT you really need to do some research of faulk. how bout the suck ass 1-15 team he ran behind in '97. how bout in '98 with a 3-13 team and a rookie qb, he had 1300 yds and 900 rec.yds. then in '98 he joined a 4-12 rams team (that had been perennial bottom dwellers for over a decade). again he had 1300 yds and 1000 rec.yds.

faulk is just a rare and special player like ladanian tomlinson. look how many seasons he put up near probowl stats when they were earning the #1 pick in the draft and said to have the most horrible offensive line in the league.

Were those Rams teams NOT able to run the ball more effectively than the Steelers can? For God's sake, they were ranked in the top 5 or 10 in rushing during their heyday! That does NOT happen if your OL can't run block worth a damn! If the Steelers OL could run block even half as well as those guys did, their offense would have easily scored 30+ points per game. Hell, even the Saints with all of their passing stats were 6th in the NFL in rushing. Is their OL any better talent-wise than ours? Probably not, but they sure as shyt got the job done when they needed to.how come trung candidate completely sucked behind the exact same line?

the offensive line didnt make that team. kurt warner, marshall faulk, rookie torry holt all being added in '99 (plus bruce finally getting over his chronic hamstring issues), is what made that line look good. faulk + manning + edgerrin = colts below average line looks good.

tomlinson + brees = chargers sucky line looks better.

brees+ bush+ mccalister = saints line looks good.

mendenhall with 325 (behind our supposedly shitty line) carries X his 4.7 ypc looks just as good as any of them. do the math.

you can start with faulk- http://www.nfl.com/players/marshallfaulk/profile?id=FAU138264

Crow-Magnon
01-11-2010, 05:30 PM
Hey Crow!
Very nice job of putting The Mighty Metrosexual on his a**! They played exactly the kind of game I expected out of them. A fine representation of AFC North football. I think Flacco is gonna have to step it up for you guys to take further, good luck.

I think so, too. I believe Flacco turned out to injured a good deal more than was let on. He was throwing the ball like a madman for half the season until he had his ankle stepped on not once, but twice. Whether that caused his hip problem or he took a shot there, I don't know. But while 34 yards in the air was "enough" to beat NE, the passing game will need to improve. Even 125-130 yards would be enough if Rice, McGahee and McClain can keep pounding it.

And you are 150% correct. Ain't nuthin' like AFCN football!

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 06:50 PM
how come trung candidate completely sucked behind the exact same line?

[/url]
Trung Candidate.....:chuckle: that name always makes me smile. I'm surprised he wasnt an all pro with Nutten, Timmerman, Miller, Tucker and Pace blocking for him?? :noidea:

revefsreleets
01-11-2010, 07:15 PM
It'll be Colts/Saints in the Super Bowl. They'll most likely just outscore everyone they play and make this whole thread valid.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 07:43 PM
It'll be Colts/Saints in the Super Bowl. They'll most likely just outscore everyone they play and make this whole thread valid.

Yeah, the NFC pretty much slants to that as the 4 teams are either dome teams or warm climate teams that dont run much. Really, there are 6 of 8 teams that fit that bill.

I guess the secret to success in the NFL is put your team in the south, or build a dome for them. (unless the Ravens and Jets meet in the AFCCG :chuckle:)

tony hipchest
01-11-2010, 07:54 PM
Yeah, the NFC pretty much slants to that as the 4 teams are either dome teams or warm climate teams that dont run much. Really, there are 6 of 8 teams that fit that bill.

I guess the secret to success in the NFL is put your team in the south, or build a dome for them. (unless the Ravens and Jets meet in the AFCCG :chuckle:)actually dallas and arizona are now dome teams too. no wind, 72 degree, january football, for all 4 remaining in the nfc.

anyways, revs point is invalidated by the fact that the saints dont rely on the pass.

while they are 4th with 34 pass per game, they are 6th in the league with 29 rushes per game.

looks like they rely more on ball control and balance. what a novel idea. they lead the league in scoring, and i bet in TOP.

revefsreleets
01-11-2010, 08:29 PM
Yeah, the NFC pretty much slants to that as the 4 teams are either dome teams or warm climate teams that dont run much. Really, there are 6 of 8 teams that fit that bill.

I guess the secret to success in the NFL is put your team in the south, or build a dome for them. (unless the Ravens and Jets meet in the AFCCG :chuckle:)

Well, there's also the factor that Baltimore and the Jets are the last two AFC teams who could play in adverse weather. They are both on the road this week, and SD is practically a dome.

I don't care about a run game if passing wins, and passing will KILL the Ravens this week. The best QB in the league has had several weeks AND film of him v. the same team to rely on.

Manning will rip the Rats apart, and I'd not be entirely surprised if, along the way, the Colts surpass their 80 yards per game rushing along the way.

It's a passing league now, at least as long as the pendulum is swung this way, and that's just the way it is.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 08:59 PM
Well, there's also the factor that Baltimore and the Jets are the last two AFC teams who could play in adverse weather. They are both on the road this week, and SD is practically a dome.

I don't care about a run game if passing wins, and passing will KILL the Ravens this week. The best QB in the league has had several weeks AND film of him v. the same team to rely on.

Manning will rip the Rats apart, and I'd not be entirely surprised if, along the way, the Colts surpass their 80 yards per game rushing along the way.

It's a passing league now, at least as long as the pendulum is swung this way, and that's just the way it is.

I think the Colts Ravens game is gonna be a good one. I just dont see the Colts having an easy time of it, when they played weeks 16 and 17 so half assed and then had last week off. I'm actually thinking the Ravens win this one. Defense and running game beats Passing game and no defense of the Colts.

And, I dont think that its so black and white as to say the NFL is a "passing league now". If it were, then we would all see the re-emergence of the Run N' Shoot.

X-Terminator
01-11-2010, 09:03 PM
XT you really need to do some research of faulk. how bout the suck ass 1-15 team he ran behind in '97. how bout in '98 with a 3-13 team and a rookie qb, he had 1300 yds and 900 rec.yds. then in '98 he joined a 4-12 rams team (that had been perennial bottom dwellers for over a decade). again he had 1300 yds and 1000 rec.yds.

faulk is just a rare and special player like ladanian tomlinson. look how many seasons he put up near probowl stats when they were earning the #1 pick in the draft and said to have the most horrible offensive line in the league.

how come trung candidate completely sucked behind the exact same line?

the offensive line didnt make that team. kurt warner, marshall faulk, rookie torry holt all being added in '99 (plus bruce finally getting over his chronic hamstring issues), is what made that line look good. faulk + manning + edgerrin = colts below average line looks good.

tomlinson + brees = chargers sucky line looks better.

brees+ bush+ mccalister = saints line looks good.

mendenhall with 325 (behind our supposedly shitty line) carries X his 4.7 ypc looks just as good as any of them. do the math.

you can start with faulk- http://www.nfl.com/players/marshallfaulk/profile?id=FAU138264

You are right about Faulk - I wasn't giving him enough credit for how great he was.

And with that, I am done with this thread.

revefsreleets
01-11-2010, 09:09 PM
I think the Colts Ravens game is gonna be a good one. I just dont see the Colts having an easy time of it, when they played weeks 16 and 17 so half assed and then had last week off. I'm actually thinking the Ravens win this one. Defense and running game beats Passing game and no defense of the Colts.

And, I dont think that its so black and white as to say the NFL is a "passing league now". If it were, then we would all see the re-emergence of the Run N' Shoot.


THAT's black and white. Who said the league becoming more pass oriented made it a run-n-shoot thing?

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-11-2010, 09:21 PM
THAT's black and white. Who said the league becoming more pass oriented made it a run-n-shoot thing?

Your last line on the previous page about "Its a passing league now......" I dont think this league could ever be described as simple as the swinging of a pendulum towards either passing or running.

The only real teams I can think of in the modern era that abandoned the run and passed entirely were the Rams with Kurt Warner and the Oilers with Moon commanding the run n shoot. Still probably at least half the league runs the ball and uses it to setup the pass.

revefsreleets
01-12-2010, 09:43 AM
The teams remaining in the playoffs are:
Saints
Colts
Chargers
Vikes
Rats
Cards
Jets
Cowboys

Saints pass 544/rush 468
Colts pass 601/rush 366
Chargers pass 519/ rush 427
Vikes pass 553/rush 467
Rats pass 510/ rush 468
Cards pass 594/ rush 365
Cowboys pass 550/rush 436
Jets pass 393 / rush 607

Only ONE team on that list rushes more than passes. Even the Rats are like 55 pass/45 rush. Cards are 594/365, Colts are 601/366. Even the Vikes passed the ball almost 100 times more than they ran it.

Passing league, and why even argue? This is the prevailing offensive philosophy of the NFL. The article made a bunch of salient points supporting the position that the league is tilting increasingly towards being pass first. It's all right there in the stats....Steelers fans don't like it, so it can't be so?

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-12-2010, 10:31 AM
I just dont see how the NFL has some how progressed to becoming such a "passing league" as everybody says it is. I guess they are just believing everything that is written.

It really doesnt seem that much more pronounced than the 80's and 90's when Miami(Marino), Denver(Elway), Buffalo(Kelly), SD(Fouts), SF(Montana and Young), Houston (Moon), STL (Warner), etc had offenses that relied more heavily on the pass than the run.

It seems pretty much the same to me....the only reason it seems to become a topic is because the PITTSBURGH STEELERS have become a passing team. I also think the bubble screen is used by teams much more which definately makes the numbers look like there are more passes.

revefsreleets
01-12-2010, 10:52 AM
I just dont see how the NFL has some how progressed to becoming such a "passing league" as everybody says it is. I guess they are just believing everything that is written.

It really doesnt seem that much more pronounced than the 80's and 90's when Miami(Marino), Denver(Elway), Buffalo(Kelly), SD(Fouts), SF(Montana and Young), Houston (Moon), STL (Warner), etc had offenses that relied more heavily on the pass than the run.

It seems pretty much the same to me....the only reason it seems to become a topic is because the PITTSBURGH STEELERS have become a passing team. I also think the bubble screen is used by teams much more which definately makes the numbers look like there are more passes.



Nonsense....the West Coast offense is predicated on short passes substituting for runs, and it's been around for almost 30 years now.

How very foolish of me to interpret the stats exactly as they read for exactly what they are instead of listening to you....you say it ain't a passing league (in SPITE of the literal mountains of evidence that show it's exactly that) so, By God, It ain't a passing league!

El-Gonzo hath ruled on this matter, and the matter is closed.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-12-2010, 11:03 AM
Nonsense....the West Coast offense is predicated on short passes substituting for runs, and it's been around for almost 30 years now.

How very foolish of me to interpret the stats exactly as they read for exactly what they are instead of listening to you....you say it ain't a passing league (in SPITE of the literal mountains of evidence that show it's exactly that) so, By God, It ain't a passing league!

El-Gonzo hath ruled on this matter, and the matter is closed.

I just thought that oversimplifying the NFL as "a passing league", because some figurative clock pendulum has allegedly swung this way, seemed a little like..............checkers, not chess.

I thought the guru wasn't a fan of checkers. :noidea:

revefsreleets
01-15-2010, 11:20 AM
Well, you'd be wrong....again.