PDA

View Full Version : All you wanting us to run more...


Prok
01-24-2010, 09:37 PM
Look at which 2 teams are in the big game. This is how the league has evolved. I'd be all in favor of smashmouth had we not had the franchise QB, but we got one !!

Another thing to note is how Peyton and the Colts finished off the Jets. i KNOW in my heart of hearts that Ben could do that. Put Ben in that system and we are talking dynasty IMO. :drink: :tt:

stillers4me
01-24-2010, 09:40 PM
There's no reason to not want or need a better running game.

Some of you people act like Ben will never get a chance to throw the ball again.

X-Terminator
01-24-2010, 09:50 PM
Yes, there are 2 passing teams in the Super Bowl, but you still need to be able to have a good running game. Unless you have Peyton Manning as your QB, then it doesn't matter.

Again, it's not necessarily running MORE, but doing it effectively in the right situations and showing some kind of commitment to the run, even if you only do it 45% of the time.

steelerdude15
01-24-2010, 09:55 PM
I'd like to see it be 50/50 on the pass/run ratio, but that's IMO.

Psyychoward86
01-24-2010, 09:57 PM
Look at which 2 teams are in the big game. This is how the league has evolved. I'd be all in favor of smashmouth had we not had the franchise QB, but we got one !!

Another thing to note is how Peyton and the Colts finished off the Jets. i KNOW in my heart of hearts that Ben could do that. Put Ben in that system and we are talking dynasty IMO. :drink: :tt:

u are not making a valid point at all.

1) The Jets had a rookie QB. Sanchez is only the 2nd rookie QB to win 2 playoff games. He was lucky to even be in the AFCCG

2) The Vikings turned the ball over, i believe, 5 times to the Saint's 1?

tony hipchest
01-24-2010, 09:58 PM
Look at which 2 teams are in the big game. :

:mg:

saints are 6th in the league in rushing.

the colts are dead last....

what is your point? :noidea:

*flush*

X-Terminator
01-24-2010, 09:58 PM
I'd like to see it be 50/50 on the pass/run ratio, but that's IMO.

Yeah but there aren't a whole lot of teams that achieve that kind of perfect balance. They're either more run-oriented or pass-oriented, depending on their personnel. Right now, the Steelers have the personnel to be more pass-oriented, while still having a legitimate rushing threat in Mendenhall. Like I said in another thread, if you give Mendenhall 20-25 carries per game, based on his YPC average (4.6), he'd easily gain around 1,600 yards.

steelerdude15
01-24-2010, 10:02 PM
Yeah but there aren't a whole lot of teams that achieve that kind of perfect balance. They're either more run-oriented or pass-oriented, depending on their personnel. Right now, the Steelers have the personnel to be more pass-oriented, while still having a legitimate rushing threat in Mendenhall. Like I said in another thread, if you give Mendenhall 20-25 carries per game, based on his YPC average (4.6), he'd easily gain around 1,600 yards.
Everything you said is true, I'm pretty sure it's hard to have a 50/50 ratio going on with any team in this league. I hope though that Arians can at least make some better call playing, but we're not going to start another Arians thread. But yes, I agree with you terminator.

zulater
01-24-2010, 10:02 PM
:mg:

saints are 6th in the league in rushing.

the colts are dead last....

what is your point? :noidea:

*flush*

The Colts actually mixed in the run pretty well today. 23 runs from rb's for 101 yards. Doesn't sound like it wasn't a factor to me? :noidea:

Aussie_steeler
01-24-2010, 10:18 PM
Again, it's not necessarily running MORE, but doing it effectively in the right situations and showing some kind of commitment to the run, even if you only do it 45% of the time.

I think this sums up the situation best. More is not always the answer.

Any fan, of any team, who is seeking improvement ( and at the end of the season that is 31 teams) just wants to see that their team can do things more effectively in the right situation each and every time.

The VIkes and Jets both have great running games. I didnt get to see any of the games today but I am guessing a couple of key plays, executed with greater efficiency may have swung the balance of the game. That point can also be made for every other team unit and their excellence of execution.

The league will never evolve away from the principle that the most efficient team in all facets of the game usually wins 95% of contests.

Merchant
01-24-2010, 10:26 PM
Look at which 2 teams are in the big game. This is how the league has evolved. I'd be all in favor of smashmouth had we not had the franchise QB, but we got one !!

Another thing to note is how Peyton and the Colts finished off the Jets. i KNOW in my heart of hearts that Ben could do that. Put Ben in that system and we are talking dynasty IMO. :drink: :tt:

You do realize that we wouldn't have blown all those 4th quarter leads if we had been able to run the ball effectively and run out the clock, right? Just one of the many reasons why it's crucial to have a good running game, no matter who your QB is.

tony hipchest
01-24-2010, 10:26 PM
steelers averaged 26 rushes per game.

33 passes per game.

one more rush per quarter and we probably win a few more games, cut down on bens sacks, and achieve balance. its really not that difficult at all (especially being that we were leading in just about every game we were in).

You do realize that we wouldn't have blown all those 4th quarter leads if we had been able to run the ball effectively and run out the clock, right? Just one of the many reasons why it's crucial to have a good running game, no matter who your QB is.


great point. not only did the colts use the 2 minute drill to bring the game closer at the half, they used the 4 minute drill at the end to ice it.

the steelers only use the 4 minute drill if ben is hurt.

lionslicer
01-24-2010, 10:34 PM
Colts have the worst rushing attack, but their run-pass ratio is better than the Steelers... Manning calls all the plays and relizes if he keeps passing, he'll get destroyed, and he needs the run to open up the pass a bit, and the pass opens up the run. Saints are a huge passing team, but they use a lot of short passes, screen passes and run plays a lot with that passing attack. Our passing attack was tell Ben to throw it 10+ yards every play... you can't run out the clock like that...

Atranox
01-24-2010, 11:00 PM
You do realize that we wouldn't have blown all those 4th quarter leads if we had been able to run the ball effectively and run out the clock, right? Just one of the many reasons why it's crucial to have a good running game, no matter who your QB is.

Our offense was in the top 5 in the league in time of possession. If you're blaming the offense on 4th quarter blown leads, then I don't know what to say. The offense is the only reason that we won a few of those games, with how poorly the defense playing.

Now, I do agree that we need to run the ball more effectively in particular situations - 3rd and shorts and some goalline situations. However, that does not equate to running the ball [b]more[/]b, it simply equates to calling the correct play in those situations.

ytsan2q
01-24-2010, 11:33 PM
We definitely need to do something about the defense first of all. If you can't stop anybody it doesn't matter what type of offense you have.

Merchant
01-25-2010, 12:06 AM
Our offense was in the top 5 in the league in time of possession. If you're blaming the offense on 4th quarter blown leads, then I don't know what to say. The offense is the only reason that we won a few of those games, with how poorly the defense playing.

Now, I do agree that we need to run the ball more effectively in particular situations - 3rd and shorts and some goalline situations. However, that does not equate to running the ball [b]more[/]b, it simply equates to calling the correct play in those situations.

Oh, is that right? Time of possession doesn't mean much if you can't maintain possession when it counts.. How many 4th quarter leads did we have that we couldn't maintain? Yes, the defense is partly to blame too in giving up the lead but if our offense could stayed on the field and ran out the clock with the run game then the defense wouldn't have been on the field in the first place.

We need to run the ball more effectively, especially when it matters (e.g. running out the clock in the 4th quarter). That's Steeler football.

Bubbabanjo
01-25-2010, 12:25 AM
Passing hits the kill shots...but the run butters em up and beats em to death. Cant be all throw. If you have only one dimension its to easy to shut it down. We just need that big guy that can get the 3rd and 2-3 for us. Ben has a short career if he keeps gettin pummeled like he is.

MasterOfPuppets
01-25-2010, 04:15 AM
steelers averaged 26 rushes per game.

33 passes per game.

one more rush per quarter and we probably win a few more games, cut down on bens sacks, and achieve balance. its really not that difficult at all (especially being that we were leading in just about every game we were in).



great point. not only did the colts use the 2 minute drill to bring the game closer at the half, they used the 4 minute drill at the end to ice it.

the steelers only use the 4 minute drill if ben is hurt.
that passing stat is a bit deceiving. they ONLY count the number of times he actually got the pass off, not how many times they intended to throw the ball but he never got the pass off.....
50 sacks
40 rush attempts
so figure in 50 more "intents" from the sacks, and i doubt ben had 40 "called" rushes for himself, maybe 20, and there's another 70. that brings that 33 up to about 37. passing "intentions" and lowers the number of called running plays...:tap:

Galax Steeler
01-25-2010, 05:38 AM
You do realize that we wouldn't have blown all those 4th quarter leads if we had been able to run the ball effectively and run out the clock, right? Just one of the many reasons why it's crucial to have a good running game, no matter who your QB is.

I know what you are a saying but you have to look at what coasted us those leads. Our defense gave up big drives to let the other teams score. Our kick off coverage sucked that did not help much either. There was more to it then not being able to run the ball in the fourth quarter.

revefsreleets
01-25-2010, 09:48 AM
I think you'll find that the Steelers pass/rush ratio is right in line with the rest of the league.

We need to IMPROVE our rushing game by making it more efficient...that doesn't necessarily mean we need to rush MORE, although with improvements, there's no reason we couldn't run more.

I think the "problem" is that Arians plays to our strengths, which is passing the ball. He calls what works the best the most. If we can get better blocking up front, and run the ball more effectively, I'm sure we'll run the ball more.

lamberts-lost-tooth
01-25-2010, 09:55 AM
We need to IMPROVE our rushing game by making it more efficient...that doesn't necessarily mean we need to rush MORE, although with improvements, there's no reason we couldn't run more.

Very well put!!!!

The only other option is becoming so one-dimensional that teams will easlily be able to scheme against us.

Atranox
01-25-2010, 10:06 AM
Oh, is that right? Time of possession doesn't mean much if you can't maintain possession when it counts.. How many 4th quarter leads did we have that we couldn't maintain? Yes, the defense is partly to blame too in giving up the lead but if our offense could stayed on the field and ran out the clock with the run game then the defense wouldn't have been on the field in the first place.

We need to run the ball more effectively, especially when it matters (e.g. running out the clock in the 4th quarter). That's Steeler football.

When your defense is giving up 2-3 touchdowns in the 4th quarter, you're going to lose. It makes no difference if we put together long drives - opposing teams were marching down the field and scoring at will. Regardless of whether or not you have a dominant running game, the other team will get the ball in the 4th quarter at one point or another. When that time came, they scored.

Look at how games drives we have up by going three & out with horrendous run-run-pass combos. That style of play is predictable and is slowly dying out. When we won our past two Super Bowls, it wasn't due to that style of play. Yes, we were able to run it effectively in given situations which is what this team currently needs. However, that doesn't equate to simply sitting on the ball in the 4th quarter and being content with your lead. We can't be careless and wing the ball all over the field when we have a 4th quarter lead, but we also can't sit around & anticipate a lead holding up.

Steelers football is winning. It has nothing to do with playstyle.

revefsreleets
01-25-2010, 10:10 AM
That's another interesting point, At....it really wouldn't matter much HOW long we held the ball against KC and the Raiders (to name two glaring examples), because in key drives we gave up HUGE plays to them, in particular the long TD pass to Oakland. It matters not if you hold the ball for a minute or ten minutes if the other team only needs 15 seconds to score.

lamberts-lost-tooth
01-25-2010, 10:18 AM
When your defense is giving up 2-3 touchdowns in the 4th quarter, you're going to lose. It makes no difference if we put together long drives - opposing teams were marching down the field and scoring at will. Regardless of whether or not you have a dominant running game, the other team will get the ball in the 4th quarter at one point or another. When that time came, they scored.

Look at how games drives we have up by going three & out with horrendous run-run-pass combos. That style of play is predictable and is slowly dying out. When we won our past two Super Bowls, it wasn't due to that style of play. Yes, we were able to run it effectively in given situations which is what this team currently needs. However, that doesn't equate to simply sitting on the ball in the 4th quarter and being content with your lead. We can't be careless and wing the ball all over the field when we have a 4th quarter lead, but we also can't sit around & anticipate a lead holding up.

Steelers football is winning. It has nothing to do with playstyle.

I think more people are agreeing with you than you realize.

Yes, we were able to run it effectively in given situations which is what this team currently needs. However, that doesn't equate to simply sitting on the ball in the 4th quarter and being content with your lead.

I would disagree that being a predominately run first offense is outdated in the NFL because EVERYTHING is on a pendelum and swings back and forth. But I think most people will agree with the above statement.

7SteelGal43
01-25-2010, 10:33 AM
Yeah we need more run. Not sure about 50/50 but certainly enough runs (and an effective running game) to keep the opposing D honest and open things up for Ben to do his thing.


I been thinking too, I wish in our offensive scheme, we'd see more flee flicker and play action type stuff. :noidea: just a fans thoughts.

steelreserve
01-25-2010, 11:27 AM
I don't get it. I think we showed this year that we CAN run the ball effectively whenever we choose to do so. We DON'T need to make any personnel changes in order to play "smashmouth" football. I don't really think that's the answer to everything, though.

Seems like we just decide to make the running game part of our offense for a series here and a series there, and then sort of forget we can do it even though it was going well. Maybe it's a lingering Parker effect, where we just assume the run isn't going to work when we need it, based on years of experience with the run not working when we need it. :noidea:

Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is that the offense seems to work pretty well regardless, and I don't see the point of running the ball more just to run the ball more. But we do seem to be almost absent-minded about the run and waste a lot of key plays trying to be cute instead. That's what I wish would change.

Nadroj 20
01-25-2010, 12:21 PM
When your defense is giving up 2-3 touchdowns in the 4th quarter, you're going to lose. It makes no difference if we put together long drives - opposing teams were marching down the field and scoring at will. Regardless of whether or not you have a dominant running game, the other team will get the ball in the 4th quarter at one point or another. When that time came, they scored.

Look at how games drives we have up by going three & out with horrendous run-run-pass combos. That style of play is predictable and is slowly dying out. When we won our past two Super Bowls, it wasn't due to that style of play. Yes, we were able to run it effectively in given situations which is what this team currently needs. However, that doesn't equate to simply sitting on the ball in the 4th quarter and being content with your lead. We can't be careless and wing the ball all over the field when we have a 4th quarter lead, but we also can't sit around & anticipate a lead holding up.

Steelers football is winning. It has nothing to do with playstyle.

Yea most of us agree with you, when it comes down to it regardless of what our O did the D had a chance to stop teams from driving down the field in the last few min and the D failed...simple as that.... failed.

steelax04
01-25-2010, 03:49 PM
Here's a link to what I found for the Steelers' redzone stats...

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/steelers/redzone.htm?loc=interstitialskip

60 rushes to 64 passes

Outside of the Redzone YPC - 4.5
Redzone YPC - 2.1

To me, at first glance, the redzone attack was balanced, just absolutely ineffective on the rushing side. So I would take the argument even further and say the Steelers simply have to get better at running the ball inside the 20. They don't have to run it more or less, just better... and really only better inside the 20 yard line.

Chidi29
01-25-2010, 05:48 PM
For the most part, I'm in agreement with steelax and anyone who has stated what he was getting at. It's not about creating a tough-nosed, smashmouth running game. There are just certain siituations, namely short yardage, that need to be improved. If you add that to a back and a line that was averaging 5 yards a carry with the passing attack we have, you'll cut down on a ton of problems.

Blocking hat on a hat needs to be improved in order for the team to get better on those 3rd and shorts/goals, whatever the case may be. Sometimes, it's tough to pull your guard in those situations with the linebackers eager to try to shoot the gap and get immediate penetration.

And anyone who says the Steelers aren't balanced is wrong. We're a top eight team in terms of balance.

Prok
01-27-2010, 08:20 PM
Easy there big fella's... I was merely pointing out that you don't need a dominant run game in today's NFL. A complimentary one so long as you have a Big Ben at QB? YES.

Our problem was NOT due to running the ball less. It was due to poor situational play-calling. I can't stress this point enough and I fear our CS and FO will overlook that aspect...