PDA

View Full Version : Colts SB offense looked like Steelers of '09


tony hipchest
02-08-2010, 07:22 PM
if arians plan was to turn the steelers offens into the colts, i would say he has succeeded.

i swear i was watching the steelers yesterday in the superbowl. infact, other than the final results (and the gaudy passing yardage and atttempts) it kinda looked like the steelers offens in last years superbowl.

both the colts and steelers seemed to open the game on fire and move the ball at will, then they stalled all of the 2nd and into the 3rd quarter. 10 points in the first quarter, just makes you anticipate a 40 point game.

serveral untimely 3 and outs, really hurt.

in the 4th, the no huddle seems to work, but by that point the running game is pretty much abandoned. when addai is averaging 5.9 yds per carry, why is mike hart (3rd string) even given a touch. this reminded me of the steelers vs vikings where mendenhall was tearing it up, but only had 10 carries.

just like ben, it seemed a no brainer that manning could drive the ball down the field for a tie and eventually a win. but that is when the interception happened.

the team that had the most passing attempts and passing yards lost. they also had the lone turnover of the game. while the saints had 2 fewer rushes than the colts (17 vs 19) the threat of the run was more prominent. both teams rb's touched the ball an equal amount of times (saints rb's had 2 more receptions).

like just about every playoff game this year the MORE balanced team won.

yes, the league is more geared towards a pass, but the more 1 dimensional a team becomes, the easier it is to predict and defend the plays, get a sack, or take a pick six to the house.

i know the steelers coulda beat the ravens and jets, just like the colts did. not so sure they coulda beat the saints, unless they were dedicated to the run game and keeping the ball out of drews hands.

much credit goes to the saints and drew brees (who absolutely caught fire after the 1st quarter).

fansince'76
02-08-2010, 07:29 PM
And a defense which seemed to run out of gas, couldn't get off the field to save it's life and allowed a bunch of second half points. Certainly looked like an '09 Steelers performance all around.

supa_fly_steeler
02-08-2010, 07:29 PM
i know the steelers coulda beat the ravens and jets, just like the colts did. not so sure they coulda beat the saints, unless they were dedicated to the run game and keeping the ball out of drews hands.

much credit goes to the saints and drew brees (who absolutely caught fire after the 1st quarter).

yea we coulda beat the ravens but we didn't why? because they won more games than us and they were better than us this season.

u keep rambling on about all this crap, i bet u predict 16-0 each year.

grow up seriously.

steelpride12
02-08-2010, 07:32 PM
yea we coulda beat the ravens but we didn't why? because they won more games than us and they were better than us this season.

u keep rambling on about all this crap, i bet u predict 16-0 each year.

grow up seriously.

In what way was he trying to express a 16-0 season? What's wrong with looking at a team and giving his opinion, that's the point of a forum. If you don't like what he has to say just ignore the thread and move on, not be a jerk.

Nadroj 20
02-08-2010, 07:33 PM
yea we coulda beat the ravens but we didn't why? because they won more games than us and they were better than us this season.

u keep rambling on about all this crap, i bet u predict 16-0 each year.

grow up seriously.

:wtf::uhh:.....what?!?

fansince'76
02-08-2010, 07:40 PM
yea we coulda beat the ravens but we didn't why? because they won more games than us and they were better than us this season.

u keep rambling on about all this crap, i bet u predict 16-0 each year.

grow up seriously.

Cool it....OK?

tony hipchest
02-08-2010, 07:53 PM
yea we coulda beat the ravens but we didn't why? because they won more games than us and they were better than us this season.

u keep rambling on about all this crap, i bet u predict 16-0 each year.

grow up seriously. we DID beat the ravens.

they DIDNT have a better record this year.

and speaking of ramblings and growing up, it is pretty evident you attended the m. vick and d. hester school of linguistics.

wtf are you even talking about? seriously, lay off the ebonics, and try to patch together a coherent thought.

nobody knows what the hell you are saying... ever.

supa_fly_steeler
02-08-2010, 08:36 PM
we DID beat the ravens.

they DIDNT have a better record this year.

and speaking of ramblings and growing up, it is pretty evident you attended the m. vick and d. hester school of linguistics.

wtf are you even talking about? seriously, lay off the ebonics, and try to patch together a coherent thought.

nobody knows what the hell you are saying... ever.

The Ravens were better than us this year face it. They got off to a hot start yes against bad teams, went quiet and then went average towards the end of the year... we managed to lose against many teams the ravens beat, they were clearly better than us, we have a better team but they had the better year and thats how it unfolded. Im glad we had a crap year it pays off now we have a shot at earl thomas and others.

and btw the ravens did have a better record than us they had a better divisional record which comes under the overall record. Mr know it all. Maybe i should read back all your glorious posts 26,541 and see if i can pick up better english.

RoethlisBURGHer
02-08-2010, 08:58 PM
The Ravens were better than us this year face it. They got off to a hot start yes against bad teams, went quiet and then went average towards the end of the year... we managed to lose against many teams the ravens beat, they were clearly better than us, we have a better team but they had the better year and thats how it unfolded. Im glad we had a crap year it pays off now we have a shot at earl thomas and others.

and btw the ravens did have a better record than us they had a better divisional record which comes under the overall record. Mr know it all. Maybe i should read back all your glorious posts 26,541 and see if i can pick up better english.

How does a better divisional record give them a better overall record? I don't understand that. Did that give them a tenth win on the regular season?

The Steelers and Ravens went 9-7 this season and split the season series 1-1. The Ravens had a better divisional record which gave them the TIEBREAKER to get a wild card playoff spot.

tony hipchest
02-08-2010, 09:01 PM
And a defense which seemed to run out of gas, couldn't get off the field to save it's life and allowed a bunch of second half points. .that definitely seemed to be the gameplan.

the colts defense took the field first. looked pretty good in the first quarter. in the 2nd quarter the offense only had the ball for like 4 minutes (and the consecutive 3 and outs was killer). then the defense had to take the field to open the 2nd half.

all in all, the offense only had the ball for 8 possessions where the average per team-per game is 12.

at some point a great offense has to be able to move the ball against an inferior defense like the saints did. of course it was easier for the saints to impose its defensive will when they pretty much knew what was coming.

last week tim ryan said j. addai would have 13 carries in the game, because that is what they do and who they are. pat kirwan agreed and theis was his #1 thing to look out for in his pre-game write up-
Many factors to keep an eye on in Super Bowl XLIV

1. Who establishes the run?

With two tremendous passing attacks, you might wonder why this tops my list. The Saints ranked 28th in rushing a year ago and jumped to sixth this season. They want to use a balanced attack, but the Colts really slowed down the Jets' top-ranked rushing attack in the AFC title game. The tip here is that the Saints don't run outside, and they can't let the Colts' defense bounce the run game wide. The Colts' speed wins that battle.

For the Colts, don't forget they won Super Bowl XLI three years ago with a great rushing attack against the Bears. Even though the Colts ranked last in the NFL in rushing, the Saints, who ranked 21st in run defense, can be run on.

note that the colts defense was able to control the jets because they pretty much knew what was coming.

while the saints didnt exactly shut down manning, he nearly threw a pick in the end zone, and porter (through simple film study and recognizing tendencies was easilly able to pick him off to seal the deal).

while the saints executed nearly perfectly in all three phases, the coaching was one of the finest called games of the year. offense-defense and special teams all showed up big and executed near flawlessly. while their running game was far from effective, the colts still had to respect it and could not ignore it.

it seemed as if the saints ignored the colts run and practically begged them to do so. the colts didnt cash in on the opportunity that presented itself. they were determined to win with peytons arm.

that is what the steelers have become.

a healthy ball hawking defense, and not leaning so heavilly on the pass should do wonders to looking more like the saints as opposed to the colts.

Vincent
02-08-2010, 09:01 PM
Why are we looking at anything that glorifies vick in this forum?

tony hipchest
02-08-2010, 09:05 PM
Mr know it all. Maybe i should read back all your glorious posts 26,541 and see if i can pick up better english.maybe you should just pick up a 2nd grade math textbook Mr. Eboniking.

9-7 = 9-7

and instead of reading all of my posts why dont you try to read yours 15-20 times before hitting the "submit" button.

clean that shit up and atleast give an ounce of effort to make it legible.

El-Gonzo Jackson
02-09-2010, 01:50 AM
Who is this Pat Kirwin person.....and what is this "balanced attack" he speaks about?? :confused:

What does he really know?? He obviously has not been informed that the NFL is a passing league and a team with the #6 rushing attack in the NFL cant possibly be successful. :banging:

And I dont think that you can compare these Colts to the '09 Steelers. Kelvin Hayden isnt nearly as bad of a CB as William Gay.

supa_fly_steeler
02-09-2010, 08:12 AM
How does a better divisional record give them a better overall record? I don't understand that. Did that give them a tenth win on the regular season?

The Steelers and Ravens went 9-7 this season and split the season series 1-1. The Ravens had a better divisional record which gave them the TIEBREAKER to get a wild card playoff spot.

there are many things that establish the overall record.

wins in the divisions, wins, losses, wins against afc, wins against nfc.... that determines tie brakers and playoff spots... baltimore had better stats than us at that. therefore the godforsaken ratbirds had a better year than us.

steelpride12
02-09-2010, 09:04 AM
there are many things that establish the overall record.

wins in the divisions, wins, losses, wins against afc, wins against nfc.... that determines tie brakers and playoff spots... baltimore had better stats than us at that. therefore the godforsaken ratbirds had a better year than us.

What does all that matter and who cares about stats this is not the BCS. If they had better stats and a better year and still came out with the same record and season series, I guess stats mean nothing.:doh:

supa_fly_steeler
02-09-2010, 10:03 AM
What does all that matter and who cares about stats this is not the BCS. If they had better stats and a better year and still came out with the same record and season series, I guess stats mean nothing.:doh:

stats mean everything, thats why we are not in the playoffs.

1. We performed inconsistently throughout the year, points come under stats, during that 5 game losing streak we were outscored in stats, if we outscored those five opponents we wouldn't be 9-7.
2. We lost the tiebrakers losing to some poor teams and not dominating our division.

Please if you dont respect my views and opinions just leave it along and don't reply i believe Baltimore had a better year, you obviously think Pittsburgh had a better year. So just leave it alone now.

MACH1
02-09-2010, 10:28 AM
stats mean everything, thats why we are not in the playoffs.

1. We performed inconsistently throughout the year, points come under stats, during that 5 game losing streak we were outscored in stats, if we outscored those five opponents we wouldn't be 9-7.
2. We lost the tiebrakers losing to some poor teams and not dominating our division.

Please if you dont respect my views and opinions just leave it along and don't reply i believe Baltimore had a better year, you obviously think Pittsburgh had a better year. So just leave it alone now.

Stats mean squat. You don't break any tie breakers for having a 4000 yd passer.

Remember this isn't FF.

supa_fly_steeler
02-09-2010, 10:37 AM
Stats mean squat. You don't break any tie breakers for having a 4000 yd passer.

Remember this isn't FF.

then what do you call a 2-4 record within the division? i would place it under stats though.

MACH1
02-09-2010, 10:42 AM
so in other words 9-7 = 9-7.

I don't think we had a better year, they had a better division record. But in the end 9-7 = 9-7.

steelpride12
02-09-2010, 11:00 AM
In the end it doesn't matter. They had a better divisional record so if not for that the Steelers make the playoffs and your not talking Supa. Stats are for college football and the BCS this is the NFL.

revefsreleets
02-09-2010, 11:21 AM
I can only shake my head at this. Some people will literally bend ANY stat to push their agenda.

BOTH these teams threw the ball about 2-1 over passing. The Colts were MORE effective running the ball. The Colts stats were skewed, as well, because down 14 with 3:05 remaining they HAD to throw, and they did. 8 of their last 9 plays were passes.

Not only were the Colts FAR more effective running the ball (5.2 YPC to just 2.8), they had the better stat line in almost every offensive category. TOP was virtually tied. Colts averaged more yards per play, more yards per pass, they had more first downs, etc, etc....

Back to the OP. Balance and running the ball did NOT win this game for the Saints, nor did relying too heavily on the pass lose the game for the Colts. The Colts played THEIR game, as they had passed about 70% of the time all season, and the SAINTS PASSED MORE THAN USUAL.

Had the Colts deviated and run the ball more, they'd have probably scored even FEWER points.

It's a passing league and passing teams win. The Saints WON by PASSING.

supa_fly_steeler
02-09-2010, 11:48 AM
It's a passing league and passing teams win. The Saints WON by PASSING.

tell Chris Johnson that :sofunny::chuckle:

revefsreleets
02-09-2010, 12:01 PM
tell Chris Johnson that :sofunny::chuckle:

Interesting observation. However, Johnson also caught 50 passes this year.

supa_fly_steeler
02-09-2010, 12:15 PM
Interesting observation. However, Johnson also caught 50 passes this year.

That's true but i think the Titans turnaround was pretty much his deadly running. Nobody really knew if Vince was gonna throw, take off and feed to ball to Chris Johnson I wonder if he had his running performence from the latter stages of the season and had that momentum in game 1 against the steelers, I dunno if he would of run all over us :z hmmm.

steelax04
02-09-2010, 12:20 PM
if arians plan was to turn the steelers offens into the colts, i would say he has succeeded.

i swear i was watching the steelers yesterday in the superbowl. infact, other than the final results (and the gaudy passing yardage and atttempts) it kinda looked like the steelers offens in last years superbowl.

both the colts and steelers seemed to open the game on fire and move the ball at will, then they stalled all of the 2nd and into the 3rd quarter. 10 points in the first quarter, just makes you anticipate a 40 point game.

serveral untimely 3 and outs, really hurt.

in the 4th, the no huddle seems to work, but by that point the running game is pretty much abandoned. when addai is averaging 5.9 yds per carry, why is mike hart (3rd string) even given a touch. this reminded me of the steelers vs vikings where mendenhall was tearing it up, but only had 10 carries.

just like ben, it seemed a no brainer that manning could drive the ball down the field for a tie and eventually a win. but that is when the interception happened.

the team that had the most passing attempts and passing yards lost. they also had the lone turnover of the game. while the saints had 2 fewer rushes than the colts (17 vs 19) the threat of the run was more prominent. both teams rb's touched the ball an equal amount of times (saints rb's had 2 more receptions).

like just about every playoff game this year the MORE balanced team won.

yes, the league is more geared towards a pass, but the more 1 dimensional a team becomes, the easier it is to predict and defend the plays, get a sack, or take a pick six to the house.

i know the steelers coulda beat the ravens and jets, just like the colts did. not so sure they coulda beat the saints, unless they were dedicated to the run game and keeping the ball out of drews hands.

much credit goes to the saints and drew brees (who absolutely caught fire after the 1st quarter).

I definitely agree that much credit goes to Brees, because the Saints were quite one-dimensional and put the Super Bowl on his shoulders.

I'm not understanding how the Saints were more balanced... they had fewer rushing attempts and yards. I'm not sure how that equates into the "threat" of the run being more prominent? A 2.8 YPC doesn't strike fear into many defenses.

Are you talking about the pure pass/run play ratio?

Saints: 39/17 - 70%/30%
Colts: 45/19 - 70%/30%

Or the yardage ratio?

Saints: 288/52 - 85%/15%
Colts: 333/99 - 77%/23%

In both cases the Saints were one-dimensional (as were the Colts). Even more so in the yardage breakdown.


I think the fact that the lone turnover was a pick six played more into the Colts losing than the balance of either offense. That turnover was an immediate 14 point swing as the Colts were driving for the tying score. Quite possibly, if the Colts get the tying score, the Saints become even more one-dimensional, trying to get into field goal range with less than 2 minutes left in the game.

I feel that the better passing team won. Brees showed Peyton how it's done.

revefsreleets
02-09-2010, 12:29 PM
Thanks, lax....that further illustrates the point. The Saints may have been a more balanced team in the regular season, but they were a pure passing team when they played the tougher competition in the playoffs. They did run more against the Cards (34 run, 32 pass), but that was basically salting away the blowout. In fact, 15 of their last 17 plays were rushes, including Brees taking a knee 3X. Up until that point, they were still throwing the ball 66% of the time.

They aren't the Pats, and they weren't going to keep winging the ball up by 30 points.

X-Terminator
02-09-2010, 12:37 PM
Actually, the Saints actually were MORE pass-heavy than the Colts - 74%/26%, compared with 70/30 for the Colts...and yet they still won.

revefsreleets
02-09-2010, 02:08 PM
Actually, the Saints actually were MORE pass-heavy than the Colts - 74%/26%, compared with 70/30 for the Colts...and yet they still won.

That being said, I don't ever want to see the Steelers passing the ball 70% of the time. 60/40 works for me. Which falls right in line with the rest of the league.

I do NOT want to waste our 100 million dollar QB handing off the ball 7 out of 10 plays, either.

JPPT1974
02-09-2010, 02:40 PM
Well they played it safe as well didn't take risks like the Saints there, like the onside kick. Also overconfidence may have played a key.

Indo
02-09-2010, 02:43 PM
In any event, this sums the game up pretty well

while the saints executed nearly perfectly in all three phases, the coaching was one of the finest called games of the year. offense-defense and special teams all showed up big and executed near flawlessly.


Sean Payton knew that his team would be in a Battle, and had them practice to Perfection...and it paid big dividends in the end

HometownGal
02-09-2010, 02:44 PM
That being said, I don't ever want to see the Steelers passing the ball 70% of the time. 60/40 works for me. Which falls right in line with the rest of the league.

I do NOT want to waste our 100 million dollar QB handing off the ball 7 out of 10 plays, either.

Get your hard helmet on revs. I stated the exact same thing about 6 weeks ago and was ostracized for daring to have such a notion.

MACH1
02-09-2010, 03:31 PM
He doesn't get paid to make internet forum users happy. He gets paid to play football, and yes handing the ball off is a part of football. So what your saying is IF we were playing a team that couldn't stop the run all day long, you'd abandon the run just because Ben gets paid to much to hand it off?

HometownGal
02-09-2010, 03:37 PM
He doesn't get paid to make internet forum users happy. He gets paid to play football, and yes handing the ball off is a part of football. So what your saying is IF we were playing a team that couldn't stop the run all day long, you'd abandon the run just because Ben gets paid to much to hand it off?

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm simply saying that we are NOT presently a run dominant team as we have been in the past, as we have a multi-million dollar playmaking QB who is more than capable of doing more than handing off the ball 40-50 times a game. Believe it or not, I'm all in favor of a more balanced offense - I could very well live with the 60/40 pass/run ratio. If we are playing a team who isn't able to stop our running game, I would be all in favor of a 60/40 run/pass ratio in that event.

MACH1
02-09-2010, 04:19 PM
I think if they commit to running more consistently (no I don't mean 3yds and a cloud of dust all game), at least have that threat. It would help Ben improve his play and cut down on the sacks he takes by keeping d's more honest, instead of being able to pin their ears back and go after him like they do. And better situational play calling would go a long way too. (not bashing)

HometownGal
02-09-2010, 04:41 PM
I think if they commit to running more consistently (no I don't mean 3yds and a cloud of dust all game), at least have that threat. It would help Ben improve his play and cut down on the sacks he takes by keeping d's more honest, instead of being able to pin their ears back and go after him like they do. And better situational play calling would go a long way too. (not bashing)

I think we could also benefit from drafting a couple of OL'men as I just don't have a whole lot of confidence in our current OL, particularly at C. I also believe our OL cutting down on penalties at crucial times could go a long way in helping the overall situation as well.

I'd also like to add to a point I made above:

If we are playing a team who isn't able to stop our running game, I would be all in favor of a 60/40 run/pass ratio in that event.


I also would be in total favor of an overall passing attack with some runs mixed in here and there if we are playing a team who is weak against the pass.

MACH1
02-09-2010, 04:45 PM
Yeah that too. But I think were kinda stuck with what we have. Unless they draft rookies that can step right in and win a starting job?

revefsreleets
02-09-2010, 05:05 PM
That's what I HATE about this board now.

I never said anything remotely approaching the ridiculous mischaracterization above. But, because said poster has a problem with pretty much everything I say now, well, it becomes something else.

How's THAT work?

MACH1
02-09-2010, 05:07 PM
:yawn:

tony hipchest
02-09-2010, 06:19 PM
Not only were the Colts FAR more effective running the ball (5.2 YPC to just 2.8), they had the better stat line in almost every offensive category. TOP was virtually tied. Colts averaged more yards per play, more yards per pass, they had more first downs, etc, etc....


...and yet they still lost.

unbeknownst to him, revs perfectly illustrates my point (unlike supa-fly, who for some reason has attempted to hijack this thread and talk about the ravens).

the colts looked almost exactly like the steelers offense of '09 and the 1 that played in last years superbowl. dominate every statistical category, yet still cant put up more than 17 points and come away with the loss.

manning's pick came on the 'under' route. it was formerly known as the "marvin harrison" route. it is the colts bread and butter play. they have used it for years whenever it is imperative on third and midrange distance, that they get a first down. greg williams called the perfect defense, and porter recognized, diagnosed, and jumped (i.e. executed) the play. he knew what was coming.

its kinda like when ben goes shotgun-empty backfield on third and short and it results in 2 sacks, 2 series in a row. let a crappy team know what is coming and with proper preparation, even they can execute.

people are enamored with a $100 million qb with 4000+ yds and multiple 1000+ yd receivers, but other than 4 mvp's and a ton of commercials, what has that gotten manning? the manning/colts/arians offense has been no more successful than cowher's "3 yds and a cloud of dust" martyball.

if youre gonna play the extremes, you will lose more often than not. colts won their only superbowl, when manning had an average game, and he was forced to hand off in stormy conditions.



It's a passing league and passing teams win. The Saints WON by PASSING.

it is a passing league, but when 25 or so teams pass more than run, it is logical to assume more passing teams will make the playoffs than running teams.

as for "passing teams win" that is really an opinion passed off as fact. try telling that to matt schaub, and ben roethlisberger, who saw their 9-7 counterparts jets and ravens make the playoffs. running teams win too.

the FACT is passing teams have been losing more sb's than they win.

colts
cardinals
patriots
seahawks
eagles
raiders
rams

in addition to cheating, the patriots were able to win 3 superbowls thanks to a. smith, c. dillon, and k. faulk. ass soon as they went pass happy, they became predictable and teams tee'd off on them = they lost.

the ravens won with a power running game, as did the bucs.

the rams and the titans showed 2 of the best runners in the league at the time (george and faulk) and while the rams were the greatest show on turf, the titans showed to have a qb who could run around, wing it, and make plays with his arm. they fell a yard short taking it into overtime.

i dont think its a coincidence that warner has more passing yards in superbowls in 3 games than brady, bradshaw, montana, elway, have in 4 or more, yet him and the likes of manning have only 1 win.

the formula is there and the formula is proven. the league is cyclical. to pretend it is undergoing some sort of genesis, is ignoring all past history.

the rooneys know this.

lets re-stock the defense, tweak the offensive playcalling to be more geared towards situational football, as opposed to pro-bowls, fantasy football, and resume building, and resemble the superbowl champs as opposed to the superbowl losers.

Indo
02-10-2010, 09:47 AM
...and yet they still lost.

unbeknownst to him, revs perfectly illustrates my point (unlike supa-fly, who for some reason has attempted to hijack this thread and talk about the ravens).

the colts looked almost exactly like the steelers offense of '09 and the 1 that played in last years superbowl. dominate every statistical category, yet still cant put up more than 17 points and come away with the loss.

manning's pick came on the 'under' route. it was formerly known as the "marvin harrison" route. it is the colts bread and butter play. they have used it for years whenever it is imperative on third and midrange distance, that they get a first down. greg williams called the perfect defense, and porter recognized, diagnosed, and jumped (i.e. executed) the play. he knew what was coming.

its kinda like when ben goes shotgun-empty backfield on third and short and it results in 2 sacks, 2 series in a row. let a crappy team know what is coming and with proper preparation, even they can execute.

people are enamored with a $100 million qb with 4000+ yds and multiple 1000+ yd receivers, but other than 4 mvp's and a ton of commercials, what has that gotten manning? the manning/colts/arians offense has been no more successful than cowher's "3 yds and a cloud of dust" martyball.

if youre gonna play the extremes, you will lose more often than not. colts won their only superbowl, when manning had an average game, and he was forced to hand off in stormy conditions.





it is a passing league, but when 25 or so teams pass more than run, it is logical to assume more passing teams will make the playoffs than running teams.

as for "passing teams win" that is really an opinion passed off as fact. try telling that to matt schaub, and ben roethlisberger, who saw their 9-7 counterparts jets and ravens make the playoffs. running teams win too.

the FACT is passing teams have been losing more sb's than they win.

colts
cardinals
patriots
seahawks
eagles
raiders
rams

in addition to cheating, the patriots were able to win 3 superbowls thanks to a. smith, c. dillon, and k. faulk. ass soon as they went pass happy, they became predictable and teams tee'd off on them = they lost.

the ravens won with a power running game, as did the bucs.

the rams and the titans showed 2 of the best runners in the league at the time (george and faulk) and while the rams were the greatest show on turf, the titans showed to have a qb who could run around, wing it, and make plays with his arm. they fell a yard short taking it into overtime.

i dont think its a coincidence that warner has more passing yards in superbowls in 3 games than brady, bradshaw, montana, elway, have in 4 or more, yet him and the likes of manning have only 1 win.

the formula is there and the formula is proven. the league is cyclical. to pretend it is undergoing some sort of genesis, is ignoring all past history.

the rooneys know this.

lets re-stock the defense, tweak the offensive playcalling to be more geared towards situational football, as opposed to pro-bowls, fantasy football, and resume building, and resemble the superbowl champs as opposed to the superbowl losers.

You can add A. vinatieri to that list...

revefsreleets
02-10-2010, 10:16 AM
My point is the Saints offense ALSO looked exactly like the Steelers offense of 2009.

Both offenses did in the Super Bowl. And one offense LOST the biggest game of the year, and the other WON the biggest game of the year whilst employing pretty much an Arians-type gameplan.

Look, there is a PERFECT example of the sort of flawed logic that seems to be becoming more and more prevalent on this board. (Thanks to Indo's quote) I can see that the logic is that, even though there are only like 5 teams in the league that run more than they pass, and only one of those teams made the playoffs, it's STILL better to run because teams that pass lose the championship more often.

HUH?

OF COURSE they do! When 85% of the league is made up of passing teams, and 95% of the playoff teams are passing teams, passing teams are going to both win AND lose more games in the playoffs because running teams are woefully under-represented....namely because it's now firmly established in both the statistical AND the win/loss data that the NFL is a passing league.

Look at it another way. If 85% of the teams have black as a color in their jersey, and 90% of the teams that have black in their jersey make the playoffs, you can bet that the overwhelming majority of teams that have black in their jersey will both win AND lose their playoff games because only one team can win the championship. It makes absolutely no sense to try and claim that teams that have the color black in their jersey LOSE more often in the playoffs...it's basically the same as saying that teams that play the game of football in the football playoffs lose more than teams that ALSO play the game of football in the football playoffs, and trying to make that completely obvious fact mean something other than what it really means

It would help if people put a little bit more thought into their positions and arguments ahead of time, instead of just hammering away with a failed and faulty position because it would be losing face to admit that the position is wrong.

X-Terminator
02-10-2010, 10:54 AM
That being said, I don't ever want to see the Steelers passing the ball 70% of the time. 60/40 works for me. Which falls right in line with the rest of the league.

I do NOT want to waste our 100 million dollar QB handing off the ball 7 out of 10 plays, either.

Neither do I, on both accounts. The Steelers had a 56/44 pass-run ratio last season. I have no problem with that, provided that the situational playcalling improves. It makes no sense throwing the ball all over the lot against a team that can't stop the run or in poor weather conditions. And at the same time, it makes no sense to keep pounding the rock against a team that is strong against the run - you have to be able to throw the ball in that situation. You are just asking to lose football games by doing that.

revefsreleets
02-10-2010, 11:02 AM
Neither do I, on both accounts. The Steelers had a 56/44 pass-run ratio last season. I have no problem with that, provided that the situational playcalling improves. It makes no sense throwing the ball all over the lot against a team that can't stop the run or in poor weather conditions. And at the same time, it makes no sense to keep pounding the rock against a team that is strong against the run - you have to be able to throw the ball in that situation. You are just asking to lose football games by doing that.

Conversely, if you are a throwing team, and that's where your strength lies, it doesn't make a whole lotta sense, EVEN AGAINST A TEAM WEAK AGAINST THE RUN, to attempt to run the ball a zillion times if you aren't very good at it.

THAT is what Rooney is talking about. The Steelers haven't been a very effective running team, and they need to get better at it. Therefore, when they DO play teams that are weak against the run, or DO need to run more to protect leads, they can.

It's all fairly simple and rather obvious....I don't really see why there is still so much arguing about something so clear.

X-Terminator
02-10-2010, 11:45 AM
Conversely, if you are a throwing team, and that's where your strength lies, it doesn't make a whole lotta sense, EVEN AGAINST A TEAM WEAK AGAINST THE RUN, to attempt to run the ball a zillion times if you aren't very good at it.

THAT is what Rooney is talking about. The Steelers haven't been a very effective running team, and they need to get better at it. Therefore, when they DO play teams that are weak against the run, or DO need to run more to protect leads, they can.

It's all fairly simple and rather obvious....I don't really see why there is still so much arguing about something so clear.

Yes, and I agree completely. There's not much question that they need to be better at running the ball in ALL situations. I personally love the fact that we now have a passing game to be feared and respected, and it certainly is their strength, but you need that run threat to keep teams honest. That's what makes the Saints so dangerous - they can carve up your secondary, but if they have to, they can pound the rock and grind out yards to close out games. If the Steelers do that, then not many people would complain about being a pass-first offense, except of course the true "3 yards and a cloud of dust" traditionalists.

Fire Haley
02-10-2010, 11:54 AM
Everyone is totally wrong.

Steelers offense could be just as good as the Saints with the short pass-control offense but Ben's giant ego makes him hold the ball and go deep.

revefsreleets
02-10-2010, 11:58 AM
sarcasm smiley....

Indo
02-10-2010, 12:11 PM
http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z175/jindovina/Misc%20Stuff/sarcasm2.gif



Mods---feel free to use this or put it in the smiley panel

St33lersguy
02-10-2010, 12:31 PM
Another example of why it is better to run the ball and why our peabrained OC is hurting the team

Dino 6 Rings
02-10-2010, 12:59 PM
There was a point early on in the 2nd quarter where I said to my wife that "this kid for the Colts is going to win MVP if they keep feeding him the ball and mixing it up this way" I was talking about Adai, not Manning.

He was tearing up the Saints defense. But they went away from him.

Here is the moment of "HUH?"
Right before the half...
Indianapolis Colts at 1:49 NOR IND
1st and 10 at IND 1 M.Hart left guard to IND 5 for 4 yards (S.Ellis).
2nd and 6 at IND 5 J.Addai up the middle to IND 10 for 5 yards (J.Vilma).
Timeout #1 by NO at 00:51.
3rd and 1 at IND 10 M.Hart up the middle to IND 10 for no gain (B.McCray). 1st down measurement. (Hart? got the ball? Why? I don't get that at all)
Timeout #2 by NO at 00:46.
4th and 1 at IND 10 (Punt formation) P.McAfee punts 46 yards to NO 44, Center-J.Snow. R.Bush to NO 48 for 4 yards (A.Francisco).

but then look at this drive after the Saints Onside kick and score: No huddle, but look at the running plays:
1st and 10 at IND 24 (Shotgun) P.Manning pass short right to D.Clark to IND 31 for 7 yards (S.Shanle).
2nd and 3 at IND 31 (Shotgun) P.Manning pass short right to J.Addai to IND 36 for 5 yards (B.McCray).
1st and 10 at IND 36 (No Huddle) J.Addai right tackle to IND 47 for 11 yards (J.Greer).
1st and 10 at IND 47 (No Huddle) P.Manning pass short left to A.Collie to IND 49 for 2 yards (S.Fujita).
2nd and 8 at IND 49 (No Huddle) J.Addai left tackle to NO 47 for 4 yards (T.Hargrove). 3rd and 4 at NO 47 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass deep right to D.Clark to NO 20 for 27 yards (R.Harper, S.Shanle).
1st and 10 at NO 20 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass incomplete short middle to D.Clark (S.Shanle).
2nd and 10 at NO 20 (No Huddle, Shotgun) D.Brown up the middle to NO 15 for 5 yards (J.Vilma).
3rd and 5 at NO 15 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass short middle to D.Clark to NO 4 for 11 yards (D.Sharper; R.Harper).
1st and 4 at NO 4 (No Huddle) J.Addai right tackle for 4 yards, TOUCHDOWN. 13 16
M.Stover extra point is GOOD, Center-J.Snow, Holder-P.McAfee. 13 17
P.McAfee kicks 70 yards from IND 30 to NO 0. C.Roby pushed ob at NO 34 for 34 yards (T.Jennings).

Then the Drive they lost the game on: Not a single running play.
Indianapolis Colts at 5:42 NOR IND
1st and 10 at IND 30 (Shotgun) PENALTY on IND-R.Diem, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at IND 30 - No Play.
1st and 15 at IND 25 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass short right to P.Garcon to IND 42 for 17 yards (J.Greer).
1st and 10 at IND 42 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass incomplete short right to R.Wayne (M.Jenkins).
2nd and 10 at IND 42 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass short middle to P.Garcon to NO 48 for 10 yards (S.Shanle).
1st and 10 at NO 48 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass short left to R.Wayne to NO 36 for 12 yards (T.Porter).
1st and 10 at NO 36 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass short left to R.Wayne to NO 31 for 5 yards (T.Porter).
2nd and 5 at NO 31 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass incomplete short middle to A.Collie. NO-T.Hargrove was injured during the play. His return is Questionable.
3rd and 5 at NO 31 (Shotgun) P.Manning pass short left intended for R.Wayne INTERCEPTED by T.Porter at NO 26. T.Porter for 74 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

tony hipchest
02-10-2010, 02:22 PM
thanks for posting that dino. this was my take from monday-

it seemed as if the saints ignored the colts run and practically begged them to do so. the colts didnt cash in on the opportunity that presented itself. they were determined to win with peytons arm.

i just read kirwans latest article where several saints corroborate my take-

http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story?id=09000d5d816512b8&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Blueprint to beat Colts

After watching the New Orleans Saints defense settle down following the Indianapolis Colts scoring 10 first-quarter points, it became clear coordinator Gregg Williams had a plan and he stuck with it. The Colts only scored seven points the rest of the way.

When the New England Patriots beat the St. Louis Rams in Super Bowl XXXVI, they built a defense that became the blueprint for playing "Greatest Show on Turf" in the years to come. The same thing may have happened Sunday when Williams went to a 3-3-5 defense (three defensive linemen, three linebackers and five defensive backs).

After talking with Saints linebacker Scott Fujita on Monday, I better understand the flexibility the package offers, such as good pressure calls and lots of opportunities to drop eight defenders into coverage. The Saints were fine with the Colts running the ball and bet on the idea that Indianapolis wouldn't stick with the run. With 19 rushes to 45 passes, New Orleans showed it was right.

Even though the Colts ran 42 times in their Super Bowl XLI victory over the Chicago Bears, the Saints didn't waiver in playing the pass all game long. Defensive coordinators around the league will study this game tape all offseason and the Colts will see this package a lot more in 2010.


Mix it up

During my time in the NFL, I quickly learned that breaking down an opponent offensively could be very revealing if the same play-caller remained for several years. If the play-caller was the quarterback and he managed the things from the line of scrimmage, there were habits if you had enough games to plug into the computer. Of course, you still had to stop him but it didn't hurt to have solid tips.


Two Saints told me they had a "great" feel for what the Colts were doing on offense. They felt comfortable playing the "cat and mouse" game before the snap with Manning and understood when they showed inside pressure looks he might check to the "smoke screen" outside. New Orleans made a number of solid tackles on the outside play because the defense believed it knew when it was coming.

The Colts are a great team and Manning, their leader, will break every passing record and probably win another Super Bowl before his career is over. However, it might also be time to mix up the play-calling.:tap: sorta sounds like someone we know. *cough ben cough arians cough*

i already posted how tim ryan was able to accurately predict addai would have 13 carries in the game. it wasnt just a lucky guess. it comes from tons of study of these trends and habits. the study of the trends and habits is what enables the saints to take a pick to the house and seal the deal. the offense became predictable (not only that it would be all pass, but porter diagnosed the exact play that was being run).

exactly how i was able to accurately predict the steelers would abandon the run in a tsunami in cleveland, and the cleveland coaches were able to accurately predict they could tee off on ben and collect 9 sacks.

some habits and trends are hard to break. all it takes is a little (actually alot of) study to diagnose and predict them.

devilsdancefloor
02-10-2010, 03:20 PM
what it all boils down to is "situational" football

tony hipchest
02-10-2010, 03:27 PM
Neither do I, on both accounts. The Steelers had a 56/44 pass-run ratio last season. I have no problem with that, provided that the situational playcalling improves.actually we cannot use that number for the purpose of this discussion, because it ignores the 50 sacks and in addition to making the #1 offseason priority shifting to a more run oriented offense, the team president has also said he wants ben to get the ball out of his hands quicker and reduce the number of sacks. its called protecting the $100 million investment (although not shielding him cowher style how so many fear).

we must compare called pass plays vs called run plays. a sack is a pass play that fails before an attempt can even be made and results in 0 or negative yards. since we dont subtract all rushing attempts that result in 0 or negative yards from the equation, we must treat the pass the same. steelers had 586 pass plays vs. 428 rush = 58%-42%. (this is like a 20% shift since our last sb)

here are the comparative team numbers with sacks factored in- pass per game vs rush per game-

team.....ppg......rpg
IND.......38.4....22.9
PIT........36.6....26.8
NO........35.6....29.2

to be fair i looked at and included all 3 teams back up's in the stats.

brunell- 30 att/0 sack
painter- 28 att/3 sack
dixon- 26 att/0 sack

brees proved less is more. he went from nearly breaking marinos yardage and attempt records and missing the playoffs to breaking ken andersons comp. % record and winning the superbowl. scoring went up as did their rush attempts from the previous year.

speaking of scoring it is fair to note that the colts failed to score more than 17 points of their games this year. the were lucky they played some crappy teams who scored even less.

i have already shown the stat where steelers offense failed to score more than 2 td's in half of their games.

we are becoming the colts. rooney dont like it. i dont care if the rest of the league is throwing it 60% of the time. the rest of the league isnt 6XSB champs and doesnt go to the championship game every 3 years.

the colts play in a dome, and in houston, jacksonville, and tennessee 3X/year. not the steelers. they are the south, we are the north. there is a formula, for winning and we got away from it. good thing the owner recognized it and demanded it be corrected. the fans who saw it happening are not wrong for pointing it out.

tony hipchest
02-10-2010, 08:50 PM
above stat should read- colts failed to score more than 2 td's or a total of 20 points in 6 of their games this year (7 if you include the sb).

kirwan offered more insight of how the saints coaches drew up a perfect scheme to shut manning down-


What did the saints do so well to hold indy to just 17 points?

Pat Kirwan, NFL.com
I thought they had a brilliant defensive game plan. I talked to Scott Fujita yesterday about it, and their best packagae which dominated the game was a 3-3-5 defensive formation. Basically, they treated Dallas Clark like a wide receiver and replaced a defensive lineman with a defensive back. They were able to do the following things: Offer the run opportunity to the Colts, enticing them to run all they wanted. But unlike the first SB win by the Colts when they ran the ball 42 times, the Saints were betting that they wouldn't run it 20 times, and they were right. The package the Saints ran also gave them blitz opportunities with two of the linebackers whenever they wanted and easily put them in eight-man cover schemes, which eventually caused Peyton to get into a dink-and-dunk short passing attack. I wrote about it today for NFL.com. You might be interested in reading the article.


Pat, the Colts were having success running the ball with Addai. Why didn't they make more use of that opportunity?

Pat Kirwan, NFL.com
In the second quarter, as you observed, Peyton would come out in a shotgun formation and get the Saints to declare a coverage call, because in the prior two playoff games, the Colts in shotgun were six runs vs. 77 passes. Once the Saints declared their coverage call, Peyton would get back under center and quickly snap the ball and hand off to Addai or Brown. You saw them get yardage in chunks. The Saints never took the bait and proceeded to continue to play the pass, and Peyton continued to throw at that defense. The next time they play, there will be a lot more runs.abandoning the run because you are better at running the ball is just an excuse.

its all about "want to". addai is a great runner (so was e. james). the colts supposedly have one of the best lines in the league. so the example/pink jersey/fung shuey excuse revs offered up doesnt fly. steelers are not, nor will they become a finesse team, despite arians and bens wishes.

revefsreleets
02-11-2010, 09:57 AM
I guess I just don't understand. The Saints were a bigger threat to run, and more balanced, even though they ran the ball less than the Colts? And had just about the same run/pass ratio? And were FAR less effective at it? And had about half as much yardage? And a terrible YPC average?

It seems as the facts were uncovered, this thread actually did a 180, and we ended up in the exact opposite place we began.

This reminds me a bit of the Ben play-action thread. He's devastatingly effective when they run the play-action, so people want to run it a ton more. Problem is, it's exactly like calling heads every time you flip a coin. The more you run it, the less effective it is.

Had Addai carried the ball 26 times instead of 13, that would first take the ball out of Manning's hands, which is probably a bad idea. Secondly, it almost certainly figures the the Saints would make some adjustments to the run. I seriously doubt that his yardage numbers would have doubled. Even if it would have, Manning's average yards per completion was nearly 11. Even if Addai could have kept up the pace and finished with 144 yards rushing, and kept that gaudy ypc average, he'd still only be averaging about half as many yards/play as Manning.

It's also a bit of a misnomer that this would have slowed the clock down precipitously. These two teams are VERY efficient at passing the football. Manning only missed 14 times all game, and 5 of those came in the last 5-6 minutes of the game (including the pick 6). Incompletions stop the clock, not completions. A catch and run (staying in bounds ) keeps the clock running just as effectively as a run up the middle.

Finally, IF the Colts would have doubled their running production, their stat line would have read 35 passes/29 passes. Would anyone seriously want to put the Super Bowl in the hands of Joseph Addai instead of Peyton Manning? Why would a team that throws 70% of the time start running the ball 60% of the time? They'd have probably lost by another 10 points had they adopted that philosophy.

The fact is, the Colts played their game, and thew Saints defense was ready and more than able to slow it down. This thread would probably more accurately be titled "Saints defense looked just like Steelers D of '08"

MasterOfPuppets
02-11-2010, 11:01 AM
actually we cannot use that number for the purpose of this discussion, because it ignores the 50 sacks and in addition to making the #1 offseason priority shifting to a more run oriented offense, the team president has also said he wants ben to get the ball out of his hands quicker and reduce the number of sacks. its called protecting the $100 million investment (although not shielding him cowher style how so many fear).

we must compare called pass plays vs called run plays. a sack is a pass play that fails before an attempt can even be made and results in 0 or negative yards. since we dont subtract all rushing attempts that result in 0 or negative yards from the equation, we must treat the pass the same. steelers had 586 pass plays vs. 428 rush = 58%-42%. (this is like a 20% shift since our last sb)

here are the comparative team numbers with sacks factored in- pass per game vs rush per game-

team.....ppg......rpg
IND.......38.4....22.9
PIT........36.6....26.8
NO........35.6....29.2

to be fair i looked at and included all 3 teams back up's in the stats.

brunell- 30 att/0 sack
painter- 28 att/3 sack
dixon- 26 att/0 sack

brees proved less is more. he went from nearly breaking marinos yardage and attempt records and missing the playoffs to breaking ken andersons comp. % record and winning the superbowl. scoring went up as did their rush attempts from the previous year.

speaking of scoring it is fair to note that the colts failed to score more than 17 points of their games this year. the were lucky they played some crappy teams who scored even less.

i have already shown the stat where steelers offense failed to score more than 2 td's in half of their games.

we are becoming the colts. rooney dont like it. i dont care if the rest of the league is throwing it 60% of the time. the rest of the league isnt 6XSB champs and doesnt go to the championship game every 3 years.

the colts play in a dome, and in houston, jacksonville, and tennessee 3X/year. not the steelers. they are the south, we are the north. there is a formula, for winning and we got away from it. good thing the owner recognized it and demanded it be corrected. the fans who saw it happening are not wrong for pointing it out.
you also forgot the 40 rushes ben was credited for... i seriously doubt they intentionally wanted ben to run the ball 40 times. i'd say maybe 20 of those were qb sneaks, the other half were probably sacks avoided by getting over the LOS.

X-Terminator
02-11-2010, 11:09 AM
actually we cannot use that number for the purpose of this discussion, because it ignores the 50 sacks and in addition to making the #1 offseason priority shifting to a more run oriented offense, the team president has also said he wants ben to get the ball out of his hands quicker and reduce the number of sacks. its called protecting the $100 million investment (although not shielding him cowher style how so many fear).

we must compare called pass plays vs called run plays. a sack is a pass play that fails before an attempt can even be made and results in 0 or negative yards. since we dont subtract all rushing attempts that result in 0 or negative yards from the equation, we must treat the pass the same. steelers had 586 pass plays vs. 428 rush = 58%-42%. (this is like a 20% shift since our last sb)

here are the comparative team numbers with sacks factored in- pass per game vs rush per game-

team.....ppg......rpg
IND.......38.4....22.9
PIT........36.6....26.8
NO........35.6....29.2

to be fair i looked at and included all 3 teams back up's in the stats.

brunell- 30 att/0 sack
painter- 28 att/3 sack
dixon- 26 att/0 sack

brees proved less is more. he went from nearly breaking marinos yardage and attempt records and missing the playoffs to breaking ken andersons comp. % record and winning the superbowl. scoring went up as did their rush attempts from the previous year.

speaking of scoring it is fair to note that the colts failed to score more than 17 points of their games this year. the were lucky they played some crappy teams who scored even less.

i have already shown the stat where steelers offense failed to score more than 2 td's in half of their games.

we are becoming the colts. rooney dont like it. i dont care if the rest of the league is throwing it 60% of the time. the rest of the league isnt 6XSB champs and doesnt go to the championship game every 3 years.

the colts play in a dome, and in houston, jacksonville, and tennessee 3X/year. not the steelers. they are the south, we are the north. there is a formula, for winning and we got away from it. good thing the owner recognized it and demanded it be corrected. the fans who saw it happening are not wrong for pointing it out.

I still would not be completely upset with 58/42 IF the situational playcalling improves and the team scores more points. As I said before, I like the passing game, and I like finally having a passing attack that is to be feared and respected. We have a top-5 QB and one of the best receiving corps in the league, so let's get the most out of them. That doesn't mean I don't like running the ball either - you still need to be able to do it and do it effectively in order to win games.

I do, however, think attempting to pass 58% of the time is too much. I will concede that. I would prefer a more balanced offense, but still lean more toward the pass since that really is the strength of this team. But at the same time, they would show more of a commitment to the run, which IMO is really what Mr. Rooney wants. A 53/47 pass/run ratio would be ideal, but I'd accept 55/45.

What's probably going to end up happening, though, is that they will run more than pass. How much more they do so remains to be seen, however. I don't believe we would be getting the most out of all of that talent in the passing game if that were to happen, but at least it would appease the "smashmouth football" masses among the fan base. (And before anyone says so, NO, I am not generalizing.)

MasterOfPuppets
02-11-2010, 01:10 PM
i agree with ya XT, but ultimately the goal isn't to "get the most" out of the passing game. the goal is to win games. the problem wasn't that they threw the ball to much , but WHEN they were throwing it. which is why everybody is so down on arians and his play calling.

tony hipchest
02-11-2010, 10:56 PM
damn. the following post is SO wrong, i dont even know where to begin. it was even edited 4 1/2 hours later to add in even more mistakes and fallacies, i suppose. it seems he has a much easier time ignoring past history, facts, stats, and mounting evidence, than my threads or posts. :thumbsup: i think i have to address this, sentence by sentence to be clear, consice, and fair within the confines of a civil debate-

I guess I just don't understand. in this case, you most certainly dont.

I don't expect you to take anything away from what I have to say. How can you learn anything when you already think you know it all? But I certainly won't stand idly by whilst you thump your chest blowing hollow puffs of smoke at real solid arguments and positions and then claiming to be some kind of intellectual by doing so. Until I get banned or censured, I'm going to stay after you and your ridiculous pedantic, pseudo-intellectual mumbo-jumbo.
-revs

The Saints were a bigger threat to run, and more balanced, even though they ran the ball less than the Colts? And had just about the same run/pass ratio? And were FAR less effective at it? And had about half as much yardage? And a terrible YPC average?

mistake #1- you are looking at the end result of a game as a casual fan (i will give you being a steelers or osu "die-hard" but when it comes to the rest of the league... casual at best, other than managing fantasy teams, and reading headlines of players in trouble or whatnot). basically what you are talking about is no more than armchair monday morning qb'ing with hindsight being 20/20.

i am talking about the 2 weeks of preparation, film study, diagnoses, devising a gameplan, and implimenting it in practice. these are the things handled by the coaches. the players just need to study what the coaches tell them, and execute.

This reminds me a bit of the Ben play-action thread.
mistake #2- deflection and diversion. having to reply to a post in this manner reminds me of schooling LITP. in other words it really has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Had Addai carried the ball 26 times instead of 13, that would first take the ball out of Manning's hands, which is probably a bad idea.

mistake #3- it sure wasnt a bad idea in 2006 in sb 41 when a rookie rb addai touched the ball 29 times (19 rush 10 rec) compared to mannings 38 pass attempts, when manning actually won the super bowl. :doh: (throw in an additional 21 carries for the journeyman d. rhodes for good measure).

Secondly, it almost certainly figures the the Saints would make some adjustments to the run. FALSE.
mistake #4- ignoring evidence of 3 saints players saying the exact opposite. the saints gameplan (which was instilled by the coaches) was to concede the run all day long. someone with a trained eye is capable of seeing this during live game action, as opposed to reading the stat lines after the fact.

you are missing a basic fundamental concept of gameplanning. the colts had NO CHOICE but to gameplan to address reggie bush and the saints running game because it is ESTABLISHED and thus, must be respected. reggie bush is a match up nightmare and must be addressed and respected.

the saints did not respect the colts commitment to the run (rightfully so) and gambled by conceding it. they would live or die by the colts running game, if it meant taking the ball out of mannings hands. it was a calculated risk that was an aggresive one.

I seriously doubt that his yardage numbers would have doubled. Even if it would have, Manning's average yards per completion was nearly 11. Even if Addai could have kept up the pace and finished with 144 yards rushing, and kept that gaudy ypc average, he'd still only be averaging about half as many yards/play as Manning.

mistake #5- what you do or do not doubt, is really becoming inconsequetial (as proven in this thread). the sentence above is like saying qb's routinely pass for 300+ yards, but running backs never rush for that much (or routinely only rush for 150). tell us something we dont know.

It's also a bit of a misnomer that this would have slowed the clock down precipitously. These two teams are VERY efficient at passing the football. Manning only missed 14 times all game, and 5 of those came in the last 5-6 minutes of the game (including the pick 6). Incompletions stop the clock, not completions. A catch and run (staying in bounds ) keeps the clock running just as effectively as a run up the middle.
mistake #6- of course its a misnomer. the only one who even mentioned it in this thread is YOU. :doh: everybody knows only an incomplete pass or stepping out of bounds will stop the clock from scrimmage.

however you bring up an interresting point. running the ball would have kept the ball out of brees hands (much like the saints kept the ball out of mannings hands for all but 4 minutes of the 2nd quarter and the beginning of the 3rd. why do you think the saints COACHES decided to gamble on 4th and goal from the 1, and with an onsides kick?


Finally, IF the Colts would have doubled their running production, their stat line would have read 35 passes/29 passes.
mistake #7- :wtf:

Would anyone seriously want to put the Super Bowl in the hands of Joseph Addai instead of Peyton Manning?
mistake #8- i guess you would have to ask tony dungy that, cause obviously he would. but then again he has only won 2 rings as a player, 1 as a coach, and assembled 2 teams that reached the SB the year after he left. obviously you know much more than him. :rolleyes:

Why would a team that throws 70% of the time start running the ball 60% of the time? They'd have probably lost by another 10 points had they adopted that philosophy.mistake #9- this one takes the cake! if this isnt the finest example of "arians think" i dont know what is. you think like your footbal mentor, who seems as oblivious to the concept of situational football as you are.

football fundamentals 101 say you take what the defense gives you. controlling the ball and imposing ones will is not a disease. being inflexible is. the steelers allowed arians to adopt this very colts philosophy in '09 and they probably lost by another 4 games.

mistake #10- saying the colts should go from 70% pass to 60% run is irrelevant strawman.

The fact is, the Colts played their game, and thew Saints defense was ready and more than able to slow it down.
mistake #11- that is a fact that i already established in the OP and have repeatedly hit home since. you repeating it does nothing for you. infact it comes off as kind of silly.

This thread would probably more accurately be titled "Saints defense looked just like Steelers D of '08"
mistake #12- oh really? and how so? you can say that, but of yourese you would be once again be proven wrong.

but the fact is, this is MY thread, with MY premise, backed up with facts, stats, and and analysis I have delivered.

it is about the colts sb offense looking like the steelers offense of 09. you bringing up saints defense is a mere diversion. you have brought nothing to the ongoing debate of arians trying to turn the steelers into a finesse coltslike team other than "the rooeneys employ and love arians, and i stand behind their expertise" (an argument that no longer holds water being that the boss put the coaches in check and on notice) and a quote or 2 by manning saying how BA turned him into the HOF man his is today. if you wanted arians to turn ben into a 9-9 playoff record, and SB loser like manning, you almost got your wish. good thing the chief II stepped in.

mistake #13- i cant let the rediculous notion of comparing the saints defense to the steelers defens of last year go. bot theams won the SB last year, but that is where the comparrisson ends. the saints were pretty much in the bottom half of the league in all statistical categories. total offense, points pg allowed (21), pass and rush defense.

in fact a better comparisson would be the '05 bungles who were the same, but were pretty much tops in the league in forcing turnovers and converting them into points just like this years saints. (further proof of just being a casual fan when it comes the other teams in the league).

can you even tell me the last time the steelers utilized a 3-3- defensive package to shut down an opponent?

can you even ackowledge that the colts base package offensively is "11 personel", which also happens to be what the steelers now use most frequently?

X-Terminator
02-12-2010, 10:36 AM
i agree with ya XT, but ultimately the goal isn't to "get the most" out of the passing game. the goal is to win games. the problem wasn't that they threw the ball to much , but WHEN they were throwing it. which is why everybody is so down on arians and his play calling.

Of course the ultimate goal is to win games. I don't really care how that gets done, so long as it gets done. And I can understand people complaining about when they decided to throw - hell, I've said as much myself. I just didn't feel a change in coaches was necessary to correct these problems. Mr. Rooney gave everyone the kick in the ass that they needed, so I expect these problems to be corrected.