PDA

View Full Version : Offensive Line


Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:05 PM
I have repeatedly said our O-line is fine and that the sacks are on Ben. I will maintain the same theme for today. Dixons sacks were a result of him being too slow to process the information. He should have gotten the ball out. Our Line gets a bad rap.

DoctorCAD
09-12-2010, 04:08 PM
Oh, so its NOT that the O line lets the defenders through, it's that ANY QB must be able to react to pressure in less than 1 second.

You're delusional.

The O line played slightly less than fair today.

ajs8207
09-12-2010, 04:09 PM
So that sack when they rushed 3 is Dixon's fault? He needs some time when we have 5 receivers and they have 8 pass defenders. Give me a break.

Need4spd
09-12-2010, 04:15 PM
You're delusional.

Well said regarding the OP.

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:16 PM
So that sack when they rushed 3 is Dixon's fault? He needs some time when we have 5 receivers and they have 8 pass defenders. Give me a break.

Yes it was. He had 6-7 seconds to find someone.

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:18 PM
Oh, so its NOT that the O line lets the defenders through, it's that ANY QB must be able to react to pressure in less than 1 second.

You're delusional.

The O line played slightly less than fair today.

The sack problem is on Ben. We had pro Bowlers in front of Ben and he still got sacked a lot. Our line played well today.

tony hipchest
09-12-2010, 04:21 PM
You're delusional.

.

i agree. getting rid of larry z should make a world of difference. also good to see an honest commitment to the run (sure paid off with our last one).

did anyone notice the game callers say it looked like the steelers line was having fun?

good deal.

figg
09-12-2010, 04:22 PM
SOME SACKS WERE ON BEN NO DOUBT. HOW MANY HAS HE AVOIDED THOUGH?

Need4spd
09-12-2010, 04:25 PM
On a side note... How's that QB controversy between Dixon and Ben looking for Week 5? Thank God that conversation can now be short lived.

SteelKnight
09-12-2010, 04:26 PM
Oh, so its NOT that the O line lets the defenders through, it's that ANY QB must be able to react to pressure in less than 1 second.

You're delusional.

The O line played slightly less than fair today.

I can't read the OP but I must say I thought the line played well today.

The sack with the 3 rushers, Dixon needs to be able to move a little. The pocket was there but he failed to adjust. He needs to work the pocket.

The only sack that I thought was the O-line's fault was the one where Starks let the guy by. That's it. Te run blocking was excellent. I saw several early holes that were missed.

The pass blocking was good. Any decent QB would have moved a little and adjusted.

tony hipchest
09-12-2010, 04:26 PM
SOME SACKS WERE ON BEN NO DOUBT. HOW MANY HAS HE AVOIDED THOUGH?

he has taken up the flag as "resident ben basher".

you will never get through to him. most here just place him on *ignore* :noidea:

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:28 PM
SOME SACKS WERE ON BEN NO DOUBT. HOW MANY HAS HE AVOIDED THOUGH?

He wouldnt have to avoid them if he got rid of the ball. It will lenghten his career.

figg
09-12-2010, 04:28 PM
he has taken up the flag as "resident ben basher".

you will never get through to him. most here just place him on *ignore* :noidea:

I noticed. Sorry about the caps I had something important to say :wink02:

figg
09-12-2010, 04:29 PM
He wouldnt have to avoid them if he got rid of the ball. It will lenghten his career.

So would good pass protection lol

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:30 PM
he has taken up the flag as "resident ben basher".

you will never get through to him. most here just place him on *ignore* :noidea:

Not a Ben basher. I tell the truth. Your point was the new line coach will do wonders. What about the lack of sacks with Batch, Dixon and leftwich with the old line coach?
Again this is bashing "Ben sucks" "Ben is a bum". I never say that. Sorry if you guys are senitive to anyone telling the truth about the Big Distraction.

fer522
09-12-2010, 04:30 PM
I have no problems with the O line my problem is with our OC 2 weeks ago Dixon was doing a lot of running and not enough passing and today it looked like B A told him whatever you do dont run I still believe that he can do much more than what he showed today Hes a big threat but they really have to cut him loose:wave:
:tt03:

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:31 PM
So would good pass protection lol

How come Batch, Lefwich and Dixon dont have sack problems behind the same line. Ben had fits vs the Eagles, Skins and Browns. In comes leftwich and no problems. Thats the line? I know. Sure it is. :tt04:

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:32 PM
I have no problems with the O line my problem is with our OC 2 weeks ago Dixon was doing a lot of running and not enough passing and today it looked like B A told him whatever you do dont run I still believe that he can do much more than what he showed today Hes a big threat but they really have to cut him loose:wave:
:tt03:

Agree wholeheartedly

figg
09-12-2010, 04:33 PM
How come Batch, Lefwich and Dixon dont have sack problems behind the same line. Ben had fits vs the Eagles, Skins and Browns. In comes leftwich and no problems. Thats the line? I know. Sure it is. :tt04:

Whats the winning % with those 3 combined? lol

figg
09-12-2010, 04:34 PM
I have no problems with the O line my problem is with our OC 2 weeks ago Dixon was doing a lot of running and not enough passing and today it looked like B A told him whatever you do dont run I still believe that he can do much more than what he showed today Hes a big threat but they really have to cut him loose:wave:
:tt03:

No doubt. B.A. is a dope. Let the kid play.

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:38 PM
Whats the winning % with those 3 combined? lol

Way to avoid the question. Translation: I have no answer.
Fact is the line is fine

StainlessStill
09-12-2010, 04:39 PM
Looks like Foster came in and played up to the standard. My hats off to this unit. Adversity and heavily scrutinized, they went out there and performed at great lengths and had a key roll in our entire scheme and how we won. Didn't get Dixon killed and didn't have too many breakdowns. Good to see thus far. Committing to the power run game will play into these guys' strength.

Any word on Starks?

figg
09-12-2010, 04:42 PM
Way to avoid the question. Translation: I have no answer.
Fact is the line is fine

It's better this year no doubt. Fact is it has sucked the last few years. lol

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:43 PM
Looks like Foster came in and played up to the standard. My hats off to this unit. Adversity and heavily scrutinized, they went out there and performed at great lengths and had a key roll in our entire scheme and how we won. Didn't get Dixon killed and didn't have too many breakdowns. Good to see thus far. Committing to the power run game will play into these guys' strength.

Any word on Starks?

High ankle sprain is all I have heard.

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=1691

Curtain_of_Steel
09-12-2010, 04:46 PM
Right on Need4spd.

3 games and counting

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:46 PM
It's better this year no doubt. Fact is it has sucked the last few years. lol

Not when Batch 31 passes vs Ravens (zero sacks), Dixon vs Ravens 26 atts (zero sacks). Ben 4 sacks in a half vs the Skins, gets hurt. Lefty comes in behind the SAME line and has none of the same problems. Ben is sacked 8 times vs the Eagles. Leftwich comes in and moves us right down the field, no sack issue. Ben is sacked, picked and harrassed vs the Browns and carried out on a stretcher. Byron comes in and the line is fine. Again. Problem - Ben.

You will see the same thing when he returns. Sacks.

MACH1
09-12-2010, 04:48 PM
If Ben played today we win by two td's easy!

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 04:51 PM
If Ben played today we win by two td's easy!

Ben didnt look so hot in the Pre season. Nor did he look good in our opening game vs the Titans last season. As I have been saying all along- with our D, it doesnt take much from the qb to get a win. Dixon is credited with a comeback win without hardly doing anything. Ben has a boat load of those kind of wins. SB 40 was one of them.

MACH1
09-12-2010, 04:55 PM
Ben didnt look so hot in the Pre season. Nor did he look good in our opening game vs the Titans last season. As I have been saying all along- with our D, it doesnt take much from the qb to get a win. Dixon is credited with a comeback win without hardly doing anything. Ben has a boat load of those kind of wins. SB 40 was one of them.

Uhhh...Dixon isn't credited with winning this game, Mendy is with his 'suddenness and glide'.

Dixon credited with not losing it for us.

StainlessStill
09-12-2010, 04:58 PM
If Ben played today we win by two td's easy!

Exactly what I said. WIth Ben in the lineup, we ATLEAST put up 21 points, or atleast keep the chains moving to keep our D off the field. We completley out played Atlanta across the board when it came to poise and felt we were getting some gashes on their defense and getting behind their corners. Dixon's inability to throw a single slant is a HUGE concern. He missed about 6 passes out there that were nothing but routine. His throwing motion is PUTRID and has no arc, accuracy or touch.

If he hits one of those passes, we keep the drives alive and who knows what could have come out of it, esp playing the clock and BAD field position.

figg
09-12-2010, 04:59 PM
I read somewhere that Ben was in the middle of the pact when it came to who gets rid of the ball faster. Hate all you want. He's a 2 time SB champion.

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 05:10 PM
Uhhh...Dixon isn't credited with winning this game, Mendy is with his 'suddenness and glide'.

Dixon credited with not losing it for us.

Dixon is 1-1 as a Steeler starter. Thats a fact. I agree with you but how come the same doesnt apply to Ben when Willie runs a 70 yarder and Randle El throws a TD to Hines? Ben was not credited for not losing it for us? Why the double standard?

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 05:12 PM
I read somewhere that Ben was in the middle of the pact when it came to who gets rid of the ball faster. Hate all you want. He's a 2 time SB champion.

So is Ike Taylor, Max Starks, Hines, Willie Parker, Farrior, Harrison, Polamalu, Hampton, Hoke,Deshae Townsend etc and your point is?

figg
09-12-2010, 05:14 PM
I think 25 or more teams wouldnt mind having Ben as their qb. What do you think?

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 05:15 PM
I think 25 or more teams wouldnt mind having Ben as their qb. What do you think?

That sure wasnt the case when he was being shopped.

figg
09-12-2010, 05:16 PM
So is Ike Taylor, Max Starks, Hines, Willie Parker, Farrior, Harrison, Polamalu, Hampton, Hoke,Deshae Townsend etc and your point is?

He's a QB ya dope lmao! He pulled the trigger on one of the more memorable td's in NFL history to win it all!

MACH1
09-12-2010, 05:16 PM
Dixon is 1-1 as a Steeler starter. Thats a fact. I agree with you but how come the same doesnt apply to Ben when Willie runs a 70 yarder and Randle El throws a TD to Hines? Ben was not credited for not losing it for us? Why the double standard?

No double standard. Ben is the starting(one of the best qb's in the league) on our team. And your point is? Ben's not starting material?

figg
09-12-2010, 05:16 PM
That sure wasnt the case when he was being shopped.

:doh:

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 05:18 PM
No double standard. Ben is the starting(one of the best qb's in the league) on our team. And your point is? Ben's not starting material?

There is a double standard. You said Dixon gets credit for not losing it. What about Ben vs the Titans, Ravens and Vikings last season and SB 40. Its the SAME thing.

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 05:20 PM
He's a QB ya dope lmao! He pulled the trigger on one of the more memorable td's in NFL history to win it all!

And ALL the attention was on the CATCH and not the pass. In fact he thought it was intercepted (according to Ben). Who was MVP?

Fact is, Bens style hurts this line and thats my point

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 05:22 PM
Gnight Gents. Time to go to the boardwalk. Toodles

MACH1
09-12-2010, 05:22 PM
http://images2.cpcache.com/product/your+village+called-they%27re+missing+an+idiot-stupid/13802952v34_225x225_Front.jpg

figg
09-12-2010, 05:23 PM
And ALL the attention was on the CATCH and not the pass. In fact he thought it was intercepted (according to Ben). Who was MVP?

Fact is, Bens style hurts this line and thats my point

This line couldnt run or pass block the past couple of years. Where have you been? How come this team has sucked so bad in short yardage situation's?

figg
09-12-2010, 05:24 PM
Gnight Gents. Time to go to the boardwalk. Toodles

Become a Bills fan while your at it lol

cubanstogie
09-12-2010, 05:26 PM
This line couldnt run or pass block the past couple of years. Where have you been? How come this team has sucked so bad in short yardage situation's?

It was great to see some 3rd and 1 conversions early without having to run trick plays.

figg
09-12-2010, 05:35 PM
It was great to see some 3rd and 1 conversions early without having to run trick plays.

No doubt. They look to be improved. :thumbsup:

lionslicer
09-12-2010, 06:00 PM
From today's game, I thought the line did very well. There were times that guys got through very easily, but they were pretty good defenders, its not like they let a 190 pound corner back through one on one. This is definatally a huge improvement over the past couple years. Yes many sacks are Ben's fault, but I remember so many times Ben getting sacked within 2 seconds of snapping the ball. But today the only sacks came after a good 4-5 seconds in the pocket, and they could have been avoided if Dixon moved around a little.

zulater
09-12-2010, 06:25 PM
I have repeatedly said our O-line is fine and that the sacks are on Ben. I will maintain the same theme for today. Dixons sacks were a result of him being too slow to process the information. He should have gotten the ball out. Our Line gets a bad rap.

How many seven step drops did Dixon have today? Maybe two, and he got sacked on one. You have any idea how much different the game plan is when Ben is the qb? You don't understand how the qb's vulnerbility is increased when you run 15-20 yard out's as opposed to 5 yard crossing routes? You didn't see the difference in how the game was managed today , how the playbook was limited?

:doh:

LVSteelersfan
09-12-2010, 06:54 PM
You constantly beat the same old tired drum. The line that Dixon was behind today WAS NOT a line that Ben has ever played with. Pouncey and Adams make up 2/5 of a new line. Do us a favor and stop the Ben bashing. With Ben in the game we win that game by at least 2 TDs in regulation.

Edit: Didn't read the other threads but I see other people agree with me we win by at least 2 TDs if Ben is in.

I have repeatedly said our O-line is fine and that the sacks are on Ben. I will maintain the same theme for today. Dixons sacks were a result of him being too slow to process the information. He should have gotten the ball out. Our Line gets a bad rap.

Downbylaw
09-12-2010, 07:54 PM
You constantly beat the same old tired drum. The line that Dixon was behind today WAS NOT a line that Ben has ever played with. Pouncey and Adams make up 2/5 of a new line. Do us a favor and stop the Ben bashing. With Ben in the game we win that game by at least 2 TDs in regulation.

Edit: Didn't read the other threads but I see other people agree with me we win by at least 2 TDs if Ben is in.

Dixon played behind that line last year. Pouncey was in college. Dixon passed 26 times vs the RAvens and wasnt sacked one time. Ben played in game two vs the Ravens and was sacked 4 times. When Ben comes back and the sacks return, I cant wait to hear your excuses then. I know it will be the Lines fault, Arians fault but never bens. lol

ricksteelers55
09-12-2010, 08:48 PM
I agree that the O-Line gets a bad rep.Today we were missing our 2 best players on the line(arguably even though Pouncey is going to be great) and we still were able to do a decent job so I think when all healthy this line is better than we think

stb_steeler
09-12-2010, 09:00 PM
i agree. getting rid of larry z should make a world of difference. also good to see an honest commitment to the run (sure paid off with our last one).

did anyone notice the game callers say it looked like the steelers line was having fun?

good deal.

Yep i heard them say that. When Hines cracks the smile then we know their having fun!

figg
09-12-2010, 09:16 PM
I hate Ben Roethlisberger! He can do no good in my eye's. He sucks! I could play QB better!



:chuckle:

MikeHaullace
09-12-2010, 09:54 PM
Yes it was. He had 6-7 seconds to find someone.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a point of reference/contact for this statement. Sounds like an over-exaggeration to add root to your argument.

Not once today did I see a sack/pressure when I thought "Man, he sure did have a lot of time to throw the ball."

I'm not sure what game you were watching, but there wasn't a 6-7 second pocket for Dixon.

MikeHaullace
09-12-2010, 09:59 PM
The Adams move now makes sense.

As not-so-good as he is with his pass blocking, he is an absolute haus in the run game.

O-Line gets an A- from me today for run blocking and a C+/B- in pass protection.

Looks like the run game is back in Pittsburgh. So far. For one game. Against a defense that was built to defend the pass.

Can someone answer this for me? : Why Scott and not Hills when Starks went down? Seemed silly.

xXTheSteelKingsXx
09-12-2010, 10:10 PM
Can someone answer this for me? : Why Scott and not Hills when Starks went down? Seemed silly.

Hills was not one of the 45 active players today. In hindsight, it was pretty risky putting both Hills and Foster on the inactive list.

MikeHaullace
09-12-2010, 10:43 PM
Hills was not one of the 45 active players today. In hindsight, it was pretty risky putting both Hills and Foster on the inactive list.

EXACTLY my point.

scsteeler
09-12-2010, 10:46 PM
I have repeatedly said our O-line is fine and that the sacks are on Ben. I will maintain the same theme for today. Dixons sacks were a result of him being too slow to process the information. He should have gotten the ball out. Our Line gets a bad rap.


Why do you keep beating this Dead Horse you are going to have some that agree but most are not. LOL

We all see things from our point of view and will have several different perspectives on the same thing.

Downbylaw
09-13-2010, 05:12 AM
You constantly beat the same old tired drum. The line that Dixon was behind today WAS NOT a line that Ben has ever played with. Pouncey and Adams make up 2/5 of a new line. Do us a favor and stop the Ben bashing. With Ben in the game we win that game by at least 2 TDs in regulation.

Edit: Didn't read the other threads but I see other people agree with me we win by at least 2 TDs if Ben is in.

We will never know because Ben is too selfish and is suspended due to that selfishness. Ben being gone will make this team closer

Downbylaw
09-13-2010, 05:15 AM
:chuckle:

You are so desperate that you have to fabricate posts by me? Wow lol

Downbylaw
09-13-2010, 05:18 AM
I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a point of reference/contact for this statement. Sounds like an over-exaggeration to add root to your argument.

Not once today did I see a sack/pressure when I thought "Man, he sure did have a lot of time to throw the ball."

I'm not sure what game you were watching, but there wasn't a 6-7 second pocket for Dixon.

Sure there was. He dropped back and the Falcons were playing coverage, so they rushed only 3 men. Dixon had six seconds to find someone and he couldnt. He got sacked. Not the lines fault it was Dixons.. You didnt see anyone pierce through right away because Dixon stays IN THE POCKET. Thats my point. Ben will drop back and IMMEDIATELY take off to the right, the defender sees this but the OLineman cant, so it hard to block for Ben because they never know where he is at. Batch, Dixon and Leftwich all stay in the pocket so it much easier to block for a guy when you know where he is at. Hence, no sack problem when they are in.

Downbylaw
09-13-2010, 05:22 AM
Why do you keep beating this Dead Horse you are going to have some that agree but most are not. LOL

We all see things from our point of view and will have several different perspectives on the same thing.

I dont have a problem with your point of view so why do you have a problem with mine. I dont like the O-line getting a bad rap, so I comment on it and give my perspective.
When someone calls Ben a rapist, you dont like that so you voice you opinion to the contrary. Its the same thing. Why is one case ok and the other beating a a dead horse? Please explain.

Downbylaw
09-13-2010, 07:02 AM
I have no problems with the O line my problem is with our OC 2 weeks ago Dixon was doing a lot of running and not enough passing and today it looked like B A told him whatever you do dont run I still believe that he can do much more than what he showed today Hes a big threat but they really have to cut him loose:wave:
:tt03:

I agree with this post 100% BA was critical of him when he ran (Im not happy because he missed open receivers) He is not using one of the kids skills (running). Its like telling Michael Jordan to shoot set shots and not take advantage of his jumping ability.

Downbylaw
09-13-2010, 07:04 AM
I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a point of reference/contact for this statement. Sounds like an over-exaggeration to add root to your argument.

Not once today did I see a sack/pressure when I thought "Man, he sure did have a lot of time to throw the ball."

I'm not sure what game you were watching, but there wasn't a 6-7 second pocket for Dixon.

My bad, I stand corrected. I timed the play, he had 5.3 seconds to find someone. I still maintain that that sack was on Dixon and not the line. He has got to get the ball out.

finesward
09-13-2010, 07:24 AM
It's called a coverage sack, when they rush 3 guess where the other 8 are.... in COVERAGE with 1 or two spying the qb to negate the run. you just start watching football or something?

Downbylaw
09-13-2010, 07:27 AM
It's called a coverage sack, when they rush 3 guess where the other 8 are.... in COVERAGE with 1 or two spying the qb to negate the run. you just start watching football or something?

There is on excuse for a coverage sack. Throw the ball out of bounds or at a receivers feet and live to fight another down. Sacks are negative yards that put your offense in a bad spot. NO team has two defenders spying a qb, one yes but two? Thats absurd lol

figg
09-13-2010, 11:53 AM
:applaudit: does this count as another post?

:flap:

ajs8207
09-13-2010, 11:59 AM
There is on excuse for a coverage sack. Throw the ball out of bounds or at a receivers feet and live to fight another down. Sacks are negative yards that put your offense in a bad spot. NO team has two defenders spying a qb, one yes but two? Thats absurd lol

3rd down, less than 2 minutes left. You want an incomplete pass to stop the clock over a sack so they don't need to use a timeout? Why give them an extra timeout? The receivers need to get open. If Dixon forced it into coverage we would have given him crap for that. You also say the offensive line is better when the qb stays in the pocket. So you want Dixon to stay in the pocket and throw the ball away? So you want him to be called for intentional grounding?

Downbylaw
09-13-2010, 02:26 PM
3rd down, less than 2 minutes left. You want an incomplete pass to stop the clock over a sack so they don't need to use a timeout? Why give them an extra timeout? The receivers need to get open. If Dixon forced it into coverage we would have given him crap for that. You also say the offensive line is better when the qb stays in the pocket. So you want Dixon to stay in the pocket and throw the ball away? So you want him to be called for intentional grounding?

I wanted him to take off and run. They had 8 in coverage so use your feet, you know like Vick did yesterday? If you throw the ball out of bounds or at a receivers feet that is not intentional grounding as long as you are outide the tackle, still in the pocket sir.

MACH1
09-13-2010, 02:39 PM
Hey dipshit, learn how to use the multi quote!

ajs8207
09-13-2010, 02:48 PM
I wanted him to take off and run. They had 8 in coverage so use your feet, you know like Vick did yesterday? If you throw the ball out of bounds or at a receivers feet that is not intentional grounding as long as you are outide the tackle, still in the pocket sir.

Take off and get what 5 yards? When you have 8 in coverage, you have at least 6 guys faster than Dixon on the field. Dixon isn't Vick fast, and if you look back on his long runs, the Packers were bringing 5 or 6, not 3.

kirklandrules
09-13-2010, 03:17 PM
5.3 secs really is not that long when you consider they rushed 3 guys and the Steelers were blocking with 6 (they kept Miller in to block). The O-line has sucked the past few years. Manning and Brady would be chumps if they had this line. Ben is a stud because he plays behind a very bad line and never dumped on them (like Manning will do to his line).

But it does appear they are getting better. Atlanta has a pretty good pass rushing defense and it certainly didn't turn into a blood bath for Dixon. On the flip side, I felt through the course of the game that the Steelers had less time in the pocket than Atlanta.

joeyssteelcurtain
09-13-2010, 04:36 PM
I thought they played very well

zulater
09-13-2010, 06:30 PM
. They did play well for the most part. But they also played differently than they would have had any other Steelers qb been behind center. They must have run from the two tight end set 70% of the time or better.

finesward
09-13-2010, 10:06 PM
5.3 seconds? no way...go to nfl.com and watch again.. of the three sacks the longest developing one was 4 seconds. the other two were 2 and 3 respectively. all of them were from blown assignments by the edge guys or TE's or both. and the one had a spy and a middle linebacker coming in to coral dennis as he broke for the outside. the announcers even made mention of them using an extra guy to keep dennis in the pocket. it's called game planning. for the most part it worked didn't it? how many guys were waiting for ball reading the qb's eyes yesterday? how many near int's did he have? if they aren't rushing and waiting for either the pass or run then they are spying the QB. lol

MikeHaullace
09-13-2010, 11:55 PM
Let's get away from the 'coverage sack'. I'm with Down on that. There is no excuse for DENNIS FRIGGIN' DIXON to be coverage sacked with 3 rushers. None. Whatsoever. Really, *any* QB with two working legs. He should have been passing the line of scrimmage @ 5.0 seconds.

To my point:

Heath Miller can't block for p00p, and because of such, gave up a sack as well. The defender got around Flozell, but still. Flozell wasn't brought in because of his lightning fast footwork, hence someone 2/3 his size blasting around him... Right into Heath, squared up. He popped Miller in the mouth like the new bully on the block on his way to Dixon. Wrapped up and going to the ground in about 4 seconds.

Something to chew on.

tony hipchest
09-14-2010, 12:18 AM
To my point:

Heath Miller can't block for p00p, and because of such, gave up a sack as well.

Something to chew on.

this is news to me.

even the best arent perfect. joe montana threw incompletions and interceptions.

jerry rice dropped passes.

even walter payton and barry sanders fumbled and were stopped behind the LOS.

i'll have to side with jack del rio who, just last week, called heath miller the best all around TE in the game today. :noidea:

ricardisimo
09-14-2010, 03:20 AM
To my point:

Heath Miller can't block for p00p, and because of such, gave up a sack as well.
Huh? Really? That's your point?

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:02 AM
5.3 secs really is not that long when you consider they rushed 3 guys and the Steelers were blocking with 6 (they kept Miller in to block). The O-line has sucked the past few years. Manning and Brady would be chumps if they had this line. Ben is a stud because he plays behind a very bad line and never dumped on them (like Manning will do to his line).

But it does appear they are getting better. Atlanta has a pretty good pass rushing defense and it certainly didn't turn into a blood bath for Dixon. On the flip side, I felt through the course of the game that the Steelers had less time in the pocket than Atlanta.

Manning and Brady would use hot routes and get the ball out quick like all cerebral qbs do. How was Brady's line when he was out a season? Cassel sacked 46 times. That NEVER happens to Brady. Its not the line, its Brady. Just like our line is not bad, Ben is just too slow to process the information.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:08 AM
this is news to me.

even the best arent perfect. joe montana threw incompletions and interceptions.

jerry rice dropped passes.

even walter payton and barry sanders fumbled and were stopped behind the LOS.

i'll have to side with jack del rio who, just last week, called heath miller the best all around TE in the game today. :noidea:

Heath is NOT in the class of the aformentioned guys talk about Hyperbole. I love Heath but his blocking has been bad the last 2 years. Heath and Troy are probably me two most favorite Steeler.
Who is Jack Del Rio? How is he an authority on our team? He doesnt watch every game. He has Garrard starting for his team. That right there kills his credibility.

cubanstogie
09-14-2010, 10:23 AM
Heath is NOT in the class of the aformentioned guys talk about Hyperbole. I love Heath but his blocking has been bad the last 2 years. Heath and Troy are probably me two most favorite Steeler.
Who is Jack Del Rio? How is he an authority on our team? He doesnt watch every game. He has Garrard starting for his team. That right there kills his credibility.

your ignorance ruins your credibility.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:25 AM
5.3 seconds? no way...go to nfl.com and watch again.. of the three sacks the longest developing one was 4 seconds. the other two were 2 and 3 respectively. all of them were from blown assignments by the edge guys or TE's or both. and the one had a spy and a middle linebacker coming in to coral dennis as he broke for the outside. the announcers even made mention of them using an extra guy to keep dennis in the pocket. it's called game planning. for the most part it worked didn't it? how many guys were waiting for ball reading the qb's eyes yesterday? how many near int's did he have? if they aren't rushing and waiting for either the pass or run then they are spying the QB. lol

I have the game recorded why do I need to go to nfl.com? It was 5.3 seconds. Who cares if they keep a spy in? What does that mean? You outrun that slow lb and get your positive yardage. You dont think the packers had a spy of Vick Sunday? All he did was outrun him, Dixon can too. The difference is Dixon has someone in his ear saying "Dont run". Terrible advice. Just like Arians tells Ben "we dont care if you take sacks, they will even out'. All he is doing is taking years off of Bens career. He should be coaching Ben up, so that he can get better pre snap reads, so that he has an idea what he wants to do before he actually has to do it. Its a smart mans game and the smartest quarterbacks have the best results.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:26 AM
your ignorance ruins your credibility.

Thx for the compliment. Your inability to put together a post to disprove my point shows your ignorance.

cubanstogie
09-14-2010, 10:36 AM
Thx for the compliment. Your inability to put together a post to disprove my point shows your ignorance.

no need to really, the fact that having David Garrard as his QB ruins Del Rio's credibility to give Heath a compliment makes zero sense. No logic what so ever. Not to mention your hatred of Ben clouds your ability to admit he is a great QB. It would be one thing if you admitted you didn't like the guy but could acknowledge his talent , but you are blinded. Therefore your ignorance is so obvious I don't really need to put much together because you have nothing to dispute.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:44 AM
no need to really, the fact that having David Garrard as his QB ruins Del Rio's credibility to give Heath a compliment makes zero sense. No logic what so ever. Not to mention your hatred of Ben clouds your ability to admit he is a great QB. It would be one thing if you admitted you didn't like the guy but could acknowledge his talent , but you are blinded. Therefore your ignorance is so obvious I don't really need to put much together because you have nothing to dispute.

I dont hate Ben you just HATE me being critical of him. You think Ben is great and I think he is good, no problem. I dont care if you have a differing opinion than me, so why do you care if I have a differing one than you? Del Rio is is about to lose his job this season, then what? I could see if a great coach had made that comment but Del Rio? What has he ever done? Uh saying someone is GOOD is acknowledging their talent. A lot of Bens success can be attributed to the STEELERS. Put Ben on the Lions and he would not have even close the success he has now. I'm ignorant, ok, again, thanks for the compliment.

MACH1
09-14-2010, 11:06 AM
What a tard.

Put Brady, Manning or Brees on the Lions and I'll guarantee they wouldn't be successful either. Must just be the greatness of the the pats*, colts and saints other players.

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 11:13 AM
Another thread that turned into a Ben debate and how he is just good and not elite orchestrated by Downbylaw. "SIGH."

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 11:22 AM
What a tard.

Put Brady, Manning or Brees on the Lions and I'll guarantee they wouldn't be successful either. Must just be the greatness of the the pats*, colts and saints other players.

The Colts WERE the Lions how do you think they got Manning in the 1st place? Peyton was on a 3-13 team his rookie season. Manning built that success. Saints were TERRIBLE with Aaron Rogers pre Brees and now look at them. Brady, Manning and Brees get hurt and the Saints, Pats and Colts suck. They are the PRIMARY reason their teasm are good. Ben is out and we win with a 3rd team qb. See the difference?

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 11:23 AM
Another thread that turned into a Ben debate and how he is just good and not elite orchestrated by Downbylaw. "SIGH."

Ben plays behind the O-line and gives them a bad rap see the OP. SIGH

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 11:31 AM
The Colts WERE the Lions how do you think they got Manning in the 1st place? Peyton was on a 3-13 team his rookie season. Manning built that success. Saints were TERRIBLE with Aaron Rogers pre Brees and now look at them. Brady, Manning and Brees get hurt and the Saints, Pats and Colts suck. They are the PRIMARY reason their teasm are good. Ben is out and we win with a 3rd team qb. See the difference?

You mean Aaron Brooks? How do you explain Matt Cassel stepping in and taking the Pats to an 11-5 record and that next year Brady wins one game less then Cassel, then Cassel goes to KC and wins only 4 games in '09? Could this possibly mean that Tom Brady has the people around him to make him the QB he is?!

The Colts/Saints built all of their fortune around a down the field attack system with Manning/Brees. They lay all of their chips on the line on those players and with the system that their in, they are bound for success. The Steelers run a more balanced attack and build their entire team around their drafted players rather than building around one player. It's a moot point to debate.

I have said this numerous times, and Trent Dilfer said it PERFECTLY. He said the pressure to be a game managing quarterback is the toughest pressure any QB can have. He said the throws that ARE called upon are throws that need to be made more than 90% of the time and that's tough when you don't even throw a ball for 40 minutes then all of a sudden you need to drop back and complete a 3rd down ball. Toughest position to be in for any QB. I agree with him 100%.

What about in 2003 with Tommy Maddox, the Steelers go 6-10, then in 2004 Ben takes the Steelers to a 15-1 record and to the AFC Championship game then takes them to win the Super Bowl in his next. Do you really think someone like Tommy Maddox could of gotten the Steelers to the Super Bowl, let alone winning it? You simply give Roethliseberger 0 credit when he has been monumental in our success since his arrival.

MACH1
09-14-2010, 11:32 AM
The Colts WERE the Lions how do you think they got Manning in the 1st place? Peyton was on a 3-13 team his rookie season. Manning built that success. Saints were TERRIBLE with Aaron Rogers pre Brees and now look at them. Brady, Manning and Brees get hurt and the Saints, Pats and Colts suck. They are the PRIMARY reason their teasm are good. Ben is out and we win with a 3rd team qb. See the difference?

:doh:

finesward
09-14-2010, 12:04 PM
I have the game recorded why do I need to go to nfl.com? It was 5.3 seconds. Who cares if they keep a spy in? What does that mean? You outrun that slow lb and get your positive yardage. You dont think the packers had a spy of Vick Sunday? All he did was outrun him, Dixon can too. The difference is Dixon has someone in his ear saying "Dont run". Terrible advice. Just like Arians tells Ben "we dont care if you take sacks, they will even out'. All he is doing is taking years off of Bens career. He should be coaching Ben up, so that he can get better pre snap reads, so that he has an idea what he wants to do before he actually has to do it. Its a smart mans game and the smartest quarterbacks have the best results.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/pittsburgh-steelers/09000d5d81a7c2d2/Falcons-defense-sack-9-yd-loss

clock starts at 2:05 when the snap is made. dixon is wrapped up at 2:01. unless you want dixon to make a pass when he's on the ground theres no way he had 5.3 seconds, you've already gone from quoting 6 seconds, then you pull 5.3 out of your ass, man up..it was 4 seconds. you exaggerate when it suites you. using what another team did with a different qb as proof it would work for us is asinine.

finesward
09-14-2010, 12:09 PM
downsyndrome, you sure have unveiled your "knowledge" on everyone

lol...you've been refuted, rebuked, proved wrong again and again, your "logic" exposed as invalid, basically you've been pwned. congrats on all the posts though....

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 12:57 PM
The Colts WERE the Lions how do you think they got Manning in the 1st place? Peyton was on a 3-13 team his rookie season. Manning built that success. Saints were TERRIBLE with Aaron Rogers pre Brees and now look at them. Brady, Manning and Brees get hurt and the Saints, Pats and Colts suck. They are the PRIMARY reason their teasm are good. Ben is out and we win with a 3rd team qb. See the difference?

What happened with the Pats when Brady was out for the whole year and Matt Cassel (who had never started a game since HS) was thrown into the mix?

Brady is a system QB. They win on team efforts. If they can go 11-5 and JUST barely miss the playoffs with an untested QB, then Brady can't be the reason their team is good.

Brady is good, and he fits the Pats system very well, but with that record in any other year the Pats would have been in the playoffs w/o him. He is not the team (though he likes to think that he is).

Brees I'll half-heartedly agree with you. He's a great QB, but the team didn't become great until they molded a defense that could hold it's own. That's why they were an 8-8 team (at best) with Brees for a while.

Aaron Rodgers never played for the Saints. Are you thinking of Aaron Brooks? Of course they were crap with him. He was a shitty QB, that's why the Raiders picked him up.

Manning I'll agree with somewhat...though with the way that line is built and the receivers and TE's they have, it's not like he's playing with a bunch of misfits. That team was crafted around Manning to make him even better. Many QB's (decent ones) would enjoy success on that team. It's the defense that drags them down most of the time.

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 01:01 PM
Nice post, SC. Pretty much exactly what I said a page earlier. My post was the last post on that last page so I'll re-post it here just in case it was overlooked. Great minds think alike! :)

You mean Aaron Brooks? How do you explain Matt Cassel stepping in and taking the Pats to an 11-5 record and that next year Brady wins one game less then Cassel, then Cassel goes to KC and wins only 4 games in '09? Could this possibly mean that Tom Brady has the people around him to make him the QB he is?!

The Colts/Saints built all of their fortune around a down the field attack system with Manning/Brees. They lay all of their chips on the line on those players and with the system that their in, they are bound for success. The Steelers run a more balanced attack and build their entire team around their drafted players rather than building around one player. It's a moot point to debate.

I have said this numerous times, and Trent Dilfer said it PERFECTLY. He said the pressure to be a game managing quarterback is the toughest pressure any QB can have. He said the throws that ARE called upon are throws that need to be made more than 90% of the time and that's tough when you don't even throw a ball for 40 minutes then all of a sudden you need to drop back and complete a 3rd down ball. Toughest position to be in for any QB. I agree with him 100%.

What about in 2003 with Tommy Maddox, the Steelers go 6-10, then in 2004 Ben takes the Steelers to a 15-1 record and to the AFC Championship game then takes them to win the Super Bowl in his next. Do you really think someone like Tommy Maddox could of gotten the Steelers to the Super Bowl, let alone winning it? You simply give Roethliseberger 0 credit when he has been monumental in our success since his arrival.

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 01:15 PM
Haha...sorry, I did just mimic you. That's what I get for glancing quickly through a thread. :chuckle:

I agree with everything you've said as well. Especially about what Dilfer touched on last night. And it was like the Jets kept doing the opposite of what he said would work.

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 01:17 PM
Haha...sorry, I did just mimic you. That's what I get for glancing quickly through a thread. :chuckle:

I agree with everything you've said as well. Especially about what Dilfer touched on last night. And it was like the Jets kept doing the opposite of what he said would work.

Sorry? For what? Haha, I'm just glad to see someone is thinking what I'm thinking!:tt02:

cubanstogie
09-14-2010, 06:08 PM
What happened with the Pats when Brady was out for the whole year and Matt Cassel (who had never started a game since HS) was thrown into the mix?

Brady is a system QB. They win on team efforts. If they can go 11-5 and JUST barely miss the playoffs with an untested QB, then Brady can't be the reason their team is good.

Brady is good, and he fits the Pats system very well, but with that record in any other year the Pats would have been in the playoffs w/o him. He is not the team (though he likes to think that he is).

Brees I'll half-heartedly agree with you. He's a great QB, but the team didn't become great until they molded a defense that could hold it's own. That's why they were an 8-8 team (at best) with Brees for a while.

Aaron Rodgers never played for the Saints. Are you thinking of Aaron Brooks? Of course they were crap with him. He was a shitty QB, that's why the Raiders picked him up.

Manning I'll agree with somewhat...though with the way that line is built and the receivers and TE's they have, it's not like he's playing with a bunch of misfits. That team was crafted around Manning to make him even better. Many QB's (decent ones) would enjoy success on that team. It's the defense that drags them down most of the time.

Brady is a great QB period. You cant say Brees is great and Brady good IMO. It amazes me how people hate to admit Brady is great. You can call Montana a system QB as well. Bottom line is they both run their system to perfection which makes them great QB's. I hate the pats as much as Ravens and Bengals, but I can't deny Brady is number 1 or 2 best in league. That is debatable.

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 06:12 PM
Brady is a great QB period. You cant say Brees is great and Brady good IMO. It amazes me how people hate to admit Brady is great. You can call Montana a system QB as well. Bottom line is they both run their system to perfection which makes them great QB's. I hate the pats as much as Ravens and Bengals, but I can't deny Brady is number 1 or 2 best in league. That is debatable.

Sorry I didn't get on my knees to slurp at his nutsack or anything. Manning, Brady and Brees are probably the top 3 QB's in the league right now (IMO). My post was in response to whether or not the Pats would do well w/o Brady. They did. Brady is not the team. They've proven they can win (convincingly at times) w/o him and lose with him. That was my only point.

cubanstogie
09-14-2010, 06:25 PM
Sorry I didn't get on my knees to slurp at his nutsack or anything. Manning, Brady and Brees are probably the top 3 QB's in the league right now (IMO). My post was in response to whether or not the Pats would do well w/o Brady. They did. Brady is not the team. They've proven they can win (convincingly at times) w/o him and lose with him. That was my only point.

lol, not saying you need to give him noggin. I get irritated when Ben is called a system QB or game manager and am just trying not to be a hypocrite. Ben gives the Steelers the best chance of winning as well as Brady gives the pats. Neither is more important than the other to their team IMO. I will say IMO though if I needed 1 QB to lead a 2 minuted drill to win a game it would be Brady. I think Manning is great also but I just see Brady making less mistakes. Just an opinion though, many will dispute. No skin off my back.

stb_steeler
09-14-2010, 06:28 PM
I think all teams can win with out their starting QB, but they have to prepare alot harder and it wont come easy. They'd have to be on their best game and execute well. Nothing ever seemed to be that easy for the Steelers, but without agony there is no sweet success!. And i think thats what drives this team the most. You can have all the stats in the league you want, i'll take Lombardi's over that any day! :tt03:

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 07:33 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/pittsburgh-steelers/09000d5d81a7c2d2/Falcons-defense-sack-9-yd-loss

clock starts at 2:05 when the snap is made. dixon is wrapped up at 2:01. unless you want dixon to make a pass when he's on the ground theres no way he had 5.3 seconds, you've already gone from quoting 6 seconds, then you pull 5.3 out of your ass, man up..it was 4 seconds. you exaggerate when it suites you. using what another team did with a different qb as proof it would work for us is asinine.

Lol everyone KNOWS a online stream is not accurate lol Everyone except you. :tt04:

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 07:34 PM
downsyndrome, you sure have unveiled your "knowledge" on everyone

lol...you've been refuted, rebuked, proved wrong again and again, your "logic" exposed as invalid, basically you've been pwned. congrats on all the posts though....

Thx bro. I love my fans!

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 07:42 PM
What happened with the Pats when Brady was out for the whole year and Matt Cassel (who had never started a game since HS) was thrown into the mix?

Brady is a system QB. They win on team efforts. If they can go 11-5 and JUST barely miss the playoffs with an untested QB, then Brady can't be the reason their team is good.

Brady is good, and he fits the Pats system very well, but with that record in any other year the Pats would have been in the playoffs w/o him. He is not the team (though he likes to think that he is).

Brees I'll half-heartedly agree with you. He's a great QB, but the team didn't become great until they molded a defense that could hold it's own. That's why they were an 8-8 team (at best) with Brees for a while.

Aaron Rodgers never played for the Saints. Are you thinking of Aaron Brooks? Of course they were crap with him. He was a shitty QB, that's why the Raiders picked him up.

Manning I'll agree with somewhat...though with the way that line is built and the receivers and TE's they have, it's not like he's playing with a bunch of misfits. That team was crafted around Manning to make him even better. Many QB's (decent ones) would enjoy success on that team. It's the defense that drags them down most of the time.


1. What happened? They missed the playoffs. Something that doesnt happen when Brady is around.

2. A system qb? You could say that, so was Montana and Young so I dont know what your point is. If Brady isnt the reason their team is good then how come he is gone (no playoffs). He comes back (playoffs). Are you really saying that Brady isnt the PRIMARY reason they are good? Again, that is your opinion. You wont find many experts that share it though. Nor Hall of Fame voters.

3. Of course I was thinking of Aaron Brooks. I love how you guys dissect every syllable of my posts for mistakes. Colin Cowherd said thats a sign that you are always right. I'm not saying I'm always right but Im in the 90 percentile lol. Yes, Aaron Brooks, thanks for pointing out the typo. Regardless if he sucks or not, the difference in the Saints is BREES.

4. That team was crap when Manning got there. Manning could go to the Lions right now and make them a contender. There is no qb in the league on his level mentally, physically and preparation wise. The guy is a freak. All Qb coaches teach young qbs to emmulate Peyton Manning for a reason.

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 08:33 PM
The Pats missed the playoffs because the Dolphins over-achieved that season and edged New England out. Matt Cassel won 1 more game in '08 than Brady did in '09. Explain it. I remember I made my season predictions last season and here is what I said while an arrogant New England fan argued with me:

StainlessStill's AFC East 2009 predictions:

New England:

New England is back with Brady, and that right there makes them a better squad than last year, who went 11-5 to miss the playoffs with a Quarterback that's last start was back in High School. Still, we don't know how Brady will pan out, since it's a huge gap missing a year of championship football, from a serious season ending injury, esp in Week 1 of the season. Manning's injury wasn't even as close as major to that of Brady's and Manning has admitted it took him and his knee awhile to get accustomed to playing live football again, so there will be a drop off, but nothing huge. I expect N.E to win the division, but also drop some game due to their defense who has many of holes to begin with, esp without veteran leadership. Miami could be a sleeper and win the division again, esp if Pennington plays mistake free football. Plus, their D should be better, since Joey Porter had another breakout season last year sacking the QB. Buffalo and N.Y.J aren't there yet, and won't be for a couple more years. Its New England to lose and should be a nice setup between them and Miami down the stretch.

New England: 10-6.


John From Boston wrote: You seriously believe that the Patriots will be one game worse with Tom Brady at QB versus Matt Cassel? What are you smoking dude, because I want some! WOW!

StainlessStill wrote: If you would of read on, this is the reason why I predict 10-6 for New England, which isn't far fetched considering how we don't know how Brady will respond.

John From Boston wrote: Dude...I read your reasoning and there is simply NO reasoning on the planet to predict a team is going to become worse with Tom Brady at QB. I don't care if the Patriots lose their entire defense. It's still an ABSURD prediction!

John From Boston

As you could see, a New England fan completley ate his own words and stuck his own foot in his mouth on this matter while New England finished 10-6 that year with Brady.

So, how is it explained that Cassel took the SAME men that Brady plays with to a 11-5 record, but Brady takes them to a 10-6 record that '09 season while Cassel wins only 4 games with the Chiefs?

finesward
09-14-2010, 08:45 PM
Lol everyone KNOWS a online stream is not accurate lol Everyone except you. :tt04:

really? reaaaaallllyyy?

http://cache-02.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/39/2008/10/REALLY_SNL_AIG.flv.jpg

it's not from an online stream, it's from NFL.com you know, the OFFICIAL website of the NFL... not ustream, or justin.tv NFL

everyone is lol at your stupidity just now, but congrats on yet another example of your ignorance...you'll be at 2k before ya know it!

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 08:48 PM
1. What happened? They missed the playoffs. Something that doesnt happen when Brady is around.

Thanks for repeating what I said lol.

2. A system qb? You could say that, so was Montana and Young so I dont know what your point is. If Brady isnt the reason their team is good then how come he is gone (no playoffs). He comes back (playoffs). Are you really saying that Brady isnt the PRIMARY reason they are good? Again, that is your opinion. You wont find many experts that share it though. Nor Hall of Fame voters.

Yes, I'm really saying that Brady isn't the PRIMARY reason they are good. Every expert can hug his nuts all they want (and mind you, I do think he's a very good QB), but he's not the main reason they are good. Matt Cassel proved that by missing the playoffs on a fluke. Yes, it was a fluke that the 8-8 Chargers made the playoffs and the 11-5 Patriots didn't. Fluke meaning it's not something you're going to see happen very often at all.

3. Of course I was thinking of Aaron Brooks. I love how you guys dissect every syllable of my posts for mistakes. Colin Cowherd said thats a sign that you are always right. I'm not saying I'm always right but Im in the 90 percentile lol. Yes, Aaron Brooks, thanks for pointing out the typo. Regardless if he sucks or not, the difference in the Saints is BREES.

I love how you take every post as a personal attack and twist it to be about you. Freud called that narcissism.

4. That team was crap when Manning got there. Manning could go to the Lions right now and make them a contender. There is no qb in the league on his level mentally, physically and preparation wise. The guy is a freak. All Qb coaches teach young qbs to emmulate Peyton Manning for a reason.

I know the Colts were crap when Manning got there. Never said they were good before him. And yes, Manning is a genius of a QB...but no QB will ever be greater than the team around him. You can't complete passes if your WRs are always dropping them, you can't direct your OL if they are not capable and you cannot score more points than the other guy if your defense lets the other guy score more. Manning is blessed with a great team. And his team is blessed with a great QB. I'm just trying to say that a decent QB could come onto that team (as it is now) and do well with it.

finesward
09-14-2010, 08:53 PM
I love how you take every post as a personal attack and twist it to be about you. Freud called that narcissism.


BINGO!

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 09:47 PM
The Pats missed the playoffs because the Dolphins over-achieved that season and edged New England out. Matt Cassel won 1 more game in '08 than Brady did in '09. Explain it. I remember I made my season predictions last season and here is what I said while an arrogant New England fan argued with me:









As you could see, a New England fan completley ate his own words and stuck his own foot in his mouth on this matter while New England finished 10-6 that year with Brady.

So, how is it explained that Cassel took the SAME men that Brady plays with to a 11-5 record, but Brady takes them to a 10-6 record that '09 season while Cassel wins only 4 games with the Chiefs?

Easy, the Pats KNOWN BY ALL EXPERTS had an easy schedule that year. Brady was also coming off of MAJOR knee surgery. How did Ben play in 06 after Major surgery? How does anyone? I cant believe the LENGTHS you guys will go just to oppose ME lol
Why did Cassel gets sent packing? Do tell?

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 09:49 PM
really? reaaaaallllyyy?

http://cache-02.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/39/2008/10/REALLY_SNL_AIG.flv.jpg

it's not from an online stream, it's from NFL.com you know, the OFFICIAL website of the NFL... not ustream, or justin.tv NFL

everyone is lol at your stupidity just now, but congrats on yet another example of your ignorance...you'll be at 2k before ya know it!

So you're saying the online feed on nfl.com is the same as the satelite cable feed? LMAO

cubanstogie
09-14-2010, 09:51 PM
the fact that a couple of you are not giving credit to a 3 time SB winner, 2 of which he was MVP, and his 2007 mvp year was one of the best years by a QB ever truly shows how hate interferes with your common sense. Did you guys just start watching football. What are you looking for in a QB if Ben and Brady aren't "great" qb's. Do you like the stats of Dan Fouts, Dan Marino, or Phillip Rivers. Cassell filled in and did a decent job. Guess what he is a starting QB now. That should tell you he is not chopped liver. I am all for freedom of speech and having opinions but try to back them up.

tony hipchest
09-14-2010, 09:51 PM
downbylaw, why are you so irate?

finesward
09-14-2010, 09:59 PM
So you're saying the online feed on nfl.com is the same as the satelite cable feed? LMAO

its game film, theres no magical slowing down or speeding up of the game clock because it's posted online... wowwwww do you always get this mad when your wrong? you think if you dvr the game and post it online somehow the time on the game clock slows down or speeds up?? really? reaaaallly???? the more likely scenario is you sitting there with a stop watch trying to time a play, which leaves all sorts of room for HUMAN error, and whattaya know your time benefits your argument. hmmmmm

:rofl:

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:06 PM
Thanks for repeating what I said lol.



Yes, I'm really saying that Brady isn't the PRIMARY reason they are good. Every expert can hug his nuts all they want (and mind you, I do think he's a very good QB), but he's not the main reason they are good. Matt Cassel proved that by missing the playoffs on a fluke. Yes, it was a fluke that the 8-8 Chargers made the playoffs and the 11-5 Patriots didn't. Fluke meaning it's not something you're going to see happen very often at all.



I love how you take every post as a personal attack and twist it to be about you. Freud called that narcissism.



I know the Colts were crap when Manning got there. Never said they were good before him. And yes, Manning is a genius of a QB...but no QB will ever be greater than the team around him. You can't complete passes if your WRs are always dropping them, you can't direct your OL if they are not capable and you cannot score more points than the other guy if your defense lets the other guy score more. Manning is blessed with a great team. And his team is blessed with a great QB. I'm just trying to say that a decent QB could come onto that team (as it is now) and do well with it.

How is it a fluke? The Chargers WON their division. Dont divisional champs get an automatic playoff berth? Again, how is that a fluke? Its the rule wow. It is something I see happen often. 4 Divisional champs make the playoffs every year. Pats didnt win their divison, something they would have done with Brady. Research what the experts said about the Pats schedule following a 18-1 season. I will do it for you. I will cite your guys' expert John Clayton.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=4064506

Did you see what he said about the AFC East schedule the year before? Mind you this was at the start of last season. He spoke on how WEAK their schedule was in 08 (that would be the year Brady was hurt) and how they would have to pay the price in 09 (The year Brady came back). So that explains why Cassel had a 11-5 team and Brady a 10-6 team. Brady won his division though. Worth noting.

I dont take every post and call it an attack. Only when I'm called Retard, idiot, ignorant, told to F- OFF etc. Had I displayed any of that type of behavior the mods would be all over me. When its said to me, not a peep. Its cool though, I have thick skin and not narcissistic at all if you think I am then that is your opinion. I dont hate you for having a different opinion than me. It happens.

"No qb will be greater than the team" I find that difficult to believe around here. I am CONSTANTLY saying the Steelers are good and I get opposed from all angles when guys say "No, its because of Ben". But I digress. Take Manning off of the Colts and they pick in the top 10. Example? They lead the Jets, are undefeated. Coach takes out Manning and the VERY NEXT play, the backup is blitzed, and the Jets score. Lead gone just like that. Dont underestimate the preparation and skill that Manning gives that team. He is one of the best qb's I have ever seen. Marino being the best.

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:06 PM
the fact that a couple of you are not giving credit to a 3 time SB winner, 2 of which he was MVP, and his 2007 mvp year was one of the best years by a QB ever truly shows how hate interferes with your common sense. Did you guys just start watching football. What are you looking for in a QB if Ben and Brady aren't "great" qb's. Do you like the stats of Dan Fouts, Dan Marino, or Phillip Rivers. Cassell filled in and did a decent job. Guess what he is a starting QB now. That should tell you he is not chopped liver. I am all for freedom of speech and having opinions but try to back them up.

I give credit to Brady. He's a damn good QB. One of the top 3 in the league as I have said before...but he is not the reason the Pats*** have had so much success. If all it took was a great QB to win some SB's, guys like Marino would be drowning in bling.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:08 PM
the fact that a couple of you are not giving credit to a 3 time SB winner, 2 of which he was MVP, and his 2007 mvp year was one of the best years by a QB ever truly shows how hate interferes with your common sense. Did you guys just start watching football. What are you looking for in a QB if Ben and Brady aren't "great" qb's. Do you like the stats of Dan Fouts, Dan Marino, or Phillip Rivers. Cassell filled in and did a decent job. Guess what he is a starting QB now. That should tell you he is not chopped liver. I am all for freedom of speech and having opinions but try to back them up.

They dont give Brady credit because I DO. They will oppose everything I say just because I say it. I might start a thread saying BEN IS A GREAT QB and watch em scramble lol

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:09 PM
its game film, theres no magical slowing down or speeding up of the game clock because it's posted online... wowwwww do you always get this mad when your wrong? you think if you dvr the game and post it online somehow the time on the game clock slows down or speeds up?? really? reaaaallly???? the more likely scenario is you sitting there with a stop watch trying to time a play, which leaves all sorts of room for HUMAN error, and whattaya know your time benefits your argument. hmmmmm

:rofl:

So If you have a bad online server, laggy connection, dialup that doesnt affect it? WOW
:rofl:

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:10 PM
downbylaw, why are you so irate?

I dont get irate. Its a message board

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 10:11 PM
Easy, the Pats KNOWN BY ALL EXPERTS had an easy schedule that year. Brady was also coming off of MAJOR knee surgery. How did Ben play in 06 after Major surgery? How does anyone? I cant believe the LENGTHS you guys will go just to oppose ME lol
Why did Cassel gets sent packing? Do tell?

Brady still threw for 4,398 yards that season, 23 touchdowns and 13 interceptions, even though his numbers were down from his '07 season, a season that prob won't be duplicated, '09 was hardly a down year so don't tell me it was his knee injury. Again, Brady could only manage 10 wins to Cassel's 11 when comparing the only start Cassel has started in New England, playing in the same system as Brady's players. He goes to KC and only wins 4 with appalling numbers.

Matt Cassel was sent packing because Kansas City offered him top money to be a starting QB in the league BECAUSE OF HIS GREAT SEASON in New England stepping in for Brady. We aren't going against you dude, just your top of the notch moronic statements and logic. Just look at some of the shit you need to argue to be "always right." We just rebut your opinions to see what you could counter next. It's hilarious.

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:16 PM
How is it a fluke? The Chargers WON their division. Dont divisional champs get an automatic playoff berth? Again, how is that a fluke? Its the rule wow. It is something I see happen often. 4 Divisional champs make the playoffs every year. Pats didnt win their divison, something they would have done with Brady. Research what the experts said about the Pats schedule following a 18-1 season. I will do it for you. I will cite your guys' expert John Clayton.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=4064506

Did you see what he said about the AFC East schedule the year before? Mind you this was at the start of last season. He spoke on how WEAK their schedule was in 08 (that would be the year Brady was hurt) and how they would have to pay the price in 09 (The year Brady came back). So that explains why Cassel had a 11-5 team and Brady a 10-6 team. Brady won his division though. Worth noting.

I dont take every post and call it an attack. Only when I'm called Retard, idiot, ignorant, told to F- OFF etc. Had I displayed any of that type of behavior the mods would be all over me. When its said to me, not a peep. Its cool though, I have thick skin and not narcissistic at all if you think I am then that is your opinion. I dont hate you for having a different opinion than me. It happens.

"No qb will be greater than the team" I find that difficult to believe around here. I am CONSTANTLY saying the Steelers are good and I get opposed from all angles when guys say "No, its because of Ben". But I digress. Take Manning off of the Colts and they pick in the top 10. Example? They lead the Jets, are undefeated. Coach takes out Manning and the VERY NEXT play, the backup is blitzed, and the Jets score. Lead gone just like that. Dont underestimate the preparation and skill that Manning gives that team. He is one of the best qb's I have ever seen. Marino being the best.

I know the Chargers won their division. I know how an 8-8 team got into the playoffs while an 11-5 team did not. I called it a fluke b/c it's not something you are going to see happen often.

I don't care what a bunch of experts said about the schedule. Great...they had an easier schedule in '08 than they did in '09 (which I was never comparing the two years anyhow). That doesn't change the fact that Cassel (who had NEVER started a game since HS) just barely missed getting a WC spot for the Pats.

And again, you are taking something one person (me) said, and twisting it around to complain about others opposing your opinions. Both Freud and I know what that means.

You listed Marino as the greatest QB of all time (in your opinion) and he truly was great, but do you ever wonder why sometimes great QBs don't always get the same success as more mediocre QBs (outside of stats)? Without the teams they have around them, Manning and Brady are no better than Marino as far as championships go. And it is always quite possible for either the Colts or the Pats to enjoy success w/o phenoms like Manning and Brady.

finesward
09-14-2010, 10:17 PM
So If you have a bad online server, laggy connection, dialup that doesnt affect it? WOW
:rofl:

no absolutely not. the video is complete and intact and when played after loading will have no continuity issues. a bad online server? what does that even mean? sounds like your pulling excuses out of your ass. laggy connection? nfl.com you think is run by a guy on a 10 year old dell? dialup still exists? lol your saying i have a laggy connection or use dialup or have a bad server? lol no, i have high speed internet, with flawless streaming video. you have slow fingers and a stopwatch.

:rofl:

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:18 PM
Brady still threw for 4,398 yards that season, 23 touchdowns and 13 interceptions, even though his numbers were down from his '07 season, a season that prob won't be duplicated, '09 was hardly a down year so don't tell me it was his knee injury. Again, Brady could only manage 10 wins to Cassel's 11 when comparing the only start Cassel has started in New England, playing in the same system as Brady's players. He goes to KC and only wins 4 with appalling numbers.

Matt Cassel was sent packing because Kansas City offered him top money to be a starting QB in the league BECAUSE OF HIS GREAT SEASON in New England stepping in for Brady. We aren't going against you dude, just your top of the notch moronic statements and logic. Just look at some of the shit you need to argue to be "always right." We just rebut your opinions to see what you could counter next. It's hilarious.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=4064506

Thats why you guys always WHINE "Hes talking about Ben. MODS HES TALKING ABOUT BEN" Thats hillarious

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:18 PM
They dont give Brady credit because I DO. They will oppose everything I say just because I say it. I might start a thread saying BEN IS A GREAT QB and watch em scramble lol

Wow....read the post above this one.

You can drop the victim routine at any time you know.

xXTheSteelKingsXx
09-14-2010, 10:20 PM
So If you have a bad online server, laggy connection, dialup that doesnt affect it? WOW
:rofl:

Clownbyflaw if you would take your head out of your ass and watch the video, you would notice that the actual game clock is in the video. You know what the game clock is right? It doesn't make a difference if you have a shit connection because the clock is in the video. Its not going to change. You have failed yet again. :doh:

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 10:21 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=4064506

Thats why you guys always WHINE "Hes talking about Ben. MODS HES TALKING ABOUT BEN" Thats hillarious

hahahahaha, lame, just a lame ass comeback. That's all the better you can do? Strength of schedule? Gimmie a break. Matt Cassel didn't start since high school, was plugged into the starting role and led the Pats to an 11-5 record just short of the AFC Wild Card seeding. Nothing in between the lines will change that.

tony hipchest
09-14-2010, 10:22 PM
I dont get irate. Its a message boardexactly. so why are you so livid.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:23 PM
no absolutely not. the video is complete and intact and when played after loading will have no continuity issues. a bad online server? what does that even mean? sounds like your pulling excuses out of your ass. laggy connection? nfl.com you think is run by a guy on a 10 year old dell? dialup still exists? lol your saying i have a laggy connection or use dialup or have a bad server? lol no, i have high speed internet, with flawless streaming video. you have slow fingers and a stopwatch.

:rofl:

Of course you will SAY you have high speed. All Im sayng is EVERY internet connection is different and timing something ONLINE is a joke. I just timed Bolt from youtube online. He actually ran 9.58 but when timing it its NOT close to 9.58.
I cant believe you are actually relying on a server for accuracy. THAT IS HILLARIOUS
I have the game recorded and I stand by 5.3.

finesward
09-14-2010, 10:23 PM
i'm still waiting for him to explain how the game clock can be slowed down by a "laggy connection"

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:24 PM
exactly. so why are you so livid.

I dont get irate OR livid. Its a message board. The people who are irate and livid are the ones who spew names, curse words etc in their posts. If you're guilty raise your hand. My hand will remain at my side because I dont partake in such childish antics.

tony hipchest
09-14-2010, 10:25 PM
Of course you will SAY you have high speed. All Im sayng is EVERY internet connection is different and timing something ONLINE is a joke. I just timed Bolt from youtube online. He actually ran 9.58 but when timing it its NOT close to 9.58.
I cant believe you are actually relying on a server for accuracy. THAT IS HILLARIOUS
I have the game recorded and I stand by 5.3.

like ALWAYS, youre wrong.

stand by that.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:25 PM
Wow....read the post above this one.

You can drop the victim routine at any time you know.

I'm no victim. THOSE who oppose me are though lol

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 10:25 PM
Of course you will SAY you have high speed. All Im sayng is EVERY internet connection is different and timing something ONLINE is a joke. I just timed Bolt from youtube online. He actually ran 9.58 but when timing it its NOT close to 9.58.
I cant believe you are actually relying on a server for accuracy. THAT IS HILLARIOUS
I have the game recorded and I stand by 5.3.

Arguein for the sake of argue. Downbylaw at his best ladies and gentleman. Ever wonder that noone else fights in threads, but if you look in every thread DBL is in, people are in an uproar? Why is that? Because of his arrogant attitude and his know it all ****y stature hiding behind stupid and illogical reasons behind his facts. It's no coincidence that DBL needs to always be the center of things when threads go array.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:27 PM
Clownbyflaw if you would take your head out of your ass and watch the video, you would notice that the actual game clock is in the video. You know what the game clock is right? It doesn't make a difference if you have a shit connection because the clock is in the video. Its not going to change. You have failed yet again. :doh:

PRECISELY!! And thats how I timed it on the GAME. You know the actual game and not a online stream. Go back and watch the game and see the clock. 5 seconds run off sir.
BET YOU FEEL DUMB LOL

tony hipchest
09-14-2010, 10:27 PM
I dont get irate OR livid. Its a message board. The people who are irate and livid are the ones who spew names, curse words etc in their posts. If you're guilty raise your hand. My hand will remain at my side because I dont partake in such childish antics.

yes you do, or why else would you continue to partake in such childish antics?

(you can put your hand down now.)

finesward
09-14-2010, 10:27 PM
how is timing something that was digitally sent to your tv from a satellite any different? your really depending on a satellite to time something? it doesnt matter connection speed, it's called the game clock! that doesn't change!! satellite, server, online, or live at the game, the game clock is the game clock and it tells no lies

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:28 PM
i'm still waiting for him to explain how the game clock can be slowed down by a "laggy connection"

:rofl: Me too. I wanna hear how that works.

finesward
09-14-2010, 10:29 PM
PRECISELY!! And thats how I timed it on the GAME. You know the actual game and not a online stream. Go back and watch the game and see the clock. 5 seconds run off sir.
BET YOU FEEL DUMB LOL

what happened to 6? i mean 5.3? ooh wait now it's 5??

slippery slope!!!!

lol

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 10:29 PM
:rofl: Me too. I wanna hear how that works.

I've never seen anything like this dude.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:29 PM
i'm still waiting for him to explain how the game clock can be slowed down by a "laggy connection"

I didnt say it was slowed down. I never even mentioned the game clock. I mentioned your timing. THATS exactly why I told you it was off. In the actual game the clock is in the picture too and thats where I got my timing from. I tend to think the ACTUAL game is more accurate. I love to see these desperate guys scramble "I got him now!!!!" "I finally proved dbl wrong!!! yes lol
WRONG

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:30 PM
yes you do, or why else would you continue to partake in such childish antics?

(you can put your hand down now.)

My sentiments EXACTLY

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:30 PM
PRECISELY!! And thats how I timed it on the GAME. You know the actual game and not a online stream. Go back and watch the game and see the clock. 5 seconds run off sir.
BET YOU FEEL DUMB LOL

:doh:

You aren't understanding what people are saying are you?

Ok. The video is streamed on nfl.com. We all get that. Sometimes streams can be laggy for a number of reasons. We get that too.

But how does the actual game clock (the one from the game) get slowed down because of the internet?

Answer: It doesn't.

finesward
09-14-2010, 10:30 PM
the same game clock is in the video on nfl.com are you a little slow?? or do you just quote posts and not read them?

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:30 PM
Arguein for the sake of argue. Downbylaw at his best ladies and gentleman. Ever wonder that noone else fights in threads, but if you look in every thread DBL is in, people are in an uproar? Why is that? Because of his arrogant attitude and his know it all ****y stature hiding behind stupid and illogical reasons behind his facts. It's no coincidence that DBL needs to always be the center of things when threads go array.

Put me on ignore. That works right?:rofl:

xXTheSteelKingsXx
09-14-2010, 10:31 PM
PRECISELY!! And thats how I timed it on the GAME. You know the actual game and not a online stream. Go back and watch the game and see the clock. 5 seconds run off sir.
BET YOU FEEL DUMB LOL

No because the ACTUAL GAME CLOCK is in the video. You don't have to use your own dumbass timing method because you can watch the real game clock and see how much time was between the snap of the ball and Dixon getting hit in REAL TIME. I don't understand why such a simple concept is so difficult for you to grasp.

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 10:32 PM
I didnt say it was slowed down. I never even mentioned the game clock. I mentioned your timing. THATS exactly why I told you it was off. In the actual game the clock is in the picture too and thats where I got my timing from. I tend to think the ACTUAL game is more accurate. I love to see these desperate guys scramble "I got him now!!!!" "I finally proved dbl wrong!!! yes lol
WRONG

LMAO dude, wake up. That's not the case at all. Your the one that proves your own self wrong. We don't need to when you do it on your own.:doh:

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:32 PM
what happened to 6? i mean 5.3? ooh wait now it's 5??

slippery slope!!!!

lol

Uh six was a guess. I went back and looked at the game and came back and said I was wrong it was 5.3.
SOMEBODY IS DESPERATE

"I finally got him" "I PROVED DBL WRONG!! I GOT HIM I GOT HIM!!!"
LOL
WRONG

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:33 PM
LMAO dude, wake up. That's not the case at all. Your the one that proves your own self wrong. We don't need to when you do it on your own.:doh:

Ok lol

StainlessStill
09-14-2010, 10:33 PM
Can this thread be closed? Troll at work.:coffee:

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:33 PM
I didnt say it was slowed down. I never even mentioned the game clock. I mentioned your timing. THATS exactly why I told you it was off. In the actual game the clock is in the picture too and thats where I got my timing from. I tend to think the ACTUAL game is more accurate. I love to see these desperate guys scramble "I got him now!!!!" "I finally proved dbl wrong!!! yes lol
WRONG

Wow, you're a trip man.

The way you are saying you are timing the play is the same way he is saying he timed the play...going by the play clock on the actual game. The play clock that cannot be slowed down by the internet, the server or the flying spaghetti monster.

Nobody is desperate, you just aren't grasping what someone else is telling you.

finesward
09-14-2010, 10:33 PM
I didnt say it was slowed down. I never even mentioned the game clock. I mentioned your timing. THATS exactly why I told you it was off. In the actual game the clock is in the picture too and thats where I got my timing from. I tend to think the ACTUAL game is more accurate. I love to see these desperate guys scramble "I got him now!!!!" "I finally proved dbl wrong!!! yes lol
WRONG

do you think nfl.com streams cartoon versions of the games? do you think they do a madden 10 version of the highlights and stream them?

i'm sooo getting a hoot from all this :drink:

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:33 PM
No because the ACTUAL GAME CLOCK is in the video. You don't have to use your own dumbass timing method because you can watch the real game clock and see how much time was between the snap of the ball and Dixon getting hit in REAL TIME. I don't understand why such a simple concept is so difficult for you to grasp.

You posted exactly what I posted. So you agree with me? Or no?
No. WOW

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:35 PM
Wow, you're a trip man.

The way you are saying you are timing the play is the same way he is saying he timed the play...going by the play clock on the actual game. The play clock that cannot be slowed down by the internet, the server or the flying spaghetti monster.

Nobody is desperate, you just aren't grasping what someone else is telling you.

So you're saying the NFL.com feed has the game clock in it BUT the Fox (original) doesnt? WOW
lol

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:35 PM
Can this thread be closed? Troll at work.:coffee:

It's getting close to that.

Shame that too many conversations seem to go this way.

Downbylaw
09-14-2010, 10:36 PM
do you think nfl.com streams cartoon versions of the games? do you think they do a madden 10 version of the highlights and stream them?

i'm sooo getting a hoot from all this :drink:

I'm getting a hoot out of the lengths you will ALL go to prove me wrong. Its hillarious. You have visual proof in your face and you STILL fall hook line and sinker. INCREDIBLE lol

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:36 PM
So you're saying the NFL.com feed has the game clock in it BUT the Fox (original) doesnt? WOW
lol

Ummm...no? Where the hell are you getting your ideas from?

SteelCityMom
09-14-2010, 10:37 PM
This thread is done.

It's become nothing but a pissing match.