PDA

View Full Version : Green Bay's passing attack is NOT better then ours!


sarahpalinhater
01-26-2011, 09:11 PM
Why are alot of people out there insisting that the Packers offense, and especially their passing game is SOOO much better then ours ? I mean that is ridiculous.
Okay yeah I know if one looks at the numbers right now it will say the Packers averaged 257.1 yards per game passing. And the Steelers 225.8.


But why aren't those same people not figuring our first 4 games without Ben ? I mean if you figure Ben had 3200 passing yards in 12 games this season, well what is 3200 divided by 12 ?...what ?, 266.6 Yards per game ? And last time I checked, that's better then the Packers 257.1 isn't it ?


I mean everyone is so busy sucking up to " Capt America "a.k.a.....Aaron Rodgers,,,or as I like to call him...." Jake Gyllenhaal 2.0 "...and dogging out Ben for what they say was a horrible performance against the Jets last weekend, they totally have forgotten that Ole Jakey Boy pretty much sucked it up against the Jets as well earlier this year.
Not unless completing 15 passes on 34 attempts for 170 Yds, and zero TD's is Impressive ?


And all this talk about how their WR core is SO MUCH better then ours....why ? I mean their top-4 WR's during the season did outgain ours, but only barely, 3,090 Yds for Green Bay to 2,900 Yds for ours. Their 4 did score 23 Td's to our 19. But that's not bad considering how much more we try to run down close to the goalline. As where the Packers mostly wanna pass,pass and pass just to UP Ole Jakey Boy's stats.


So again fellow Steeler fans, all this talk about how the Packers pass offense is so much better then ours, and how we can't stop their " Spread " offense is just plain
ridiculous! :screwy:

SeinfeldNut
01-26-2011, 09:19 PM
Agree, plus the Packers when up against a great defense has not done great. Take a look at the game against the Jets earlier this year, they won that game despite themselves with 3 FGs. In the last 2 meetings with the Bears they have struggled to have a consistent offensive throughout the game. They will have their moments but they seem to hit a lull in these games, thats where the Steelers offense has to take advantage. The Steelers will be ready for what the Packers want to do. Even if Green Bay take move the ball down the field, the Steelers are more than capable of holding them out of the endzone.

SH-Rock
01-26-2011, 09:45 PM
Well more people are on the hype of that Rodgers has been playing phenomenal in the past 4-5 games, but the Bears did a good job showing that he too is mortal. The Packers really miss Jermichael Finley so we should and conversely I think Heath should have a huge game.

steeltheone
01-26-2011, 09:46 PM
Jennings is an ALL-PRO...

StainlessStill
01-26-2011, 09:47 PM
Fact of the matter is, is that Green Bay is HOT right now. They started the season hot, fluctuated between a mediocre and good team, looked bad some weeks and then got some help in the NFC in controlling their own destiny. Pittsburgh has played the same style of ball all year and has remained consistent.

With that said, Green Bay has like 16 guys on injured reserve, one involving their star running back and a tight end who could be mis-match nightmares for a defense. Rodgers certainly has the arm to torch anyone downfield, but their o-line is suspect still and Rodgers is known to hit the turf quite easily. They have a nice passing attack, but I'd like to think we do too.

Our speed on offense is incredible. I think that's being VASTLY overlooked.

tony hipchest
01-26-2011, 10:05 PM
Jennings is an ALL-PRO...

jennings- 76rec/1265yds/12td
wallace- 60rec/1257yds/10td

sarahpalinhater
01-26-2011, 10:18 PM
Fact of the matter is, is that Green Bay is HOT right now. They started the season hot, fluctuated between a mediocre and good team, looked bad some weeks and then got some help in the NFC in controlling their own destiny. Pittsburgh has played the same style of ball all year and has remained consistent.

With that said, Green Bay has like 16 guys on injured reserve, one involving their star running back and a tight end who could be mis-match nightmares for a defense. Rodgers certainly has the arm to torch anyone downfield, but their o-line is suspect still and Rodgers is known to hit the turf quite easily. They have a nice passing attack, but I'd like to think we do too.

Our speed on offense is incredible. I think that's being VASTLY overlooked.




I agree with you. But Injuries are not our fault. I mean you act as if we haven't had our share of Injuries either. And yes Finely out is huge cause our team has had trouble with good opposing TE's. Which is why I feel we have a chance to stop them up close, in the red zone where WR's like Jennings and Jones will have a hard time to get open close to the goalline. That's where a guy like Finely and his height and athleticism could help. So even though I agree that the Packers might move the ball at times on us from the 20 to the 20, once Inside that, we could hold them to FG's which would be huge for us.

ZoneBlitzer
01-27-2011, 12:23 AM
There really is no comparison here. GB passing game is head and shoulders above the Steelers. They have a QB who can release the ball at will using perfect form and delivery from a variety of steps and angles. Their receiving corps is also superior as well especially when it comes to experience and size. The Steelers passing game has struggled for stretches throughout the year. It is most successful in the hurry-up. Last week during the Jets game the Steelers had -3 yards passing in the second half - that, combined with Ben's poor passing numbers should tell the story.

sarahpalinhater
01-27-2011, 12:35 AM
There really is no comparison here. GB passing game is head and shoulders above the Steelers. They have a QB who can release the ball at will using perfect form and delivery from a variety of steps and angles. Their receiving corps is also superior as well especially when it comes to experience and size. The Steelers passing game has struggled for stretches throughout the year. It is most successful in the hurry-up. Last week during the Jets game the Steelers had -3 yards passing in the second half - that, combined with Ben's poor passing numbers should tell the story.




Too bad the numbers don't prove you right. And mine do! Oh BTW, did you see Rodgers numbers against the Jets ? As for our 2nd half passing against the Jets, that's not Ben's fault, that was our coaches fault. I mean they only called 5 total passes for Ben in the 2nd half.. I mean even after it was clear that the Jets were stacking 9 fuys at the Line to DARE the steelers to pass, Tomlin still chose to run, run and run.


Pittsburgh passing yards per game = 266.6
Green Bay's passing yards per game = 257.1


So how exactly are they better again :doh:

lionslicer
01-27-2011, 12:38 AM
Greenbay's offensive coordinator, which happens to be their head coach, is 10 times better than Bruce Arians... Doesn't matter what players they have with all the injuries, they make it work.
I believe in my heart that the Steelers defense can hold them, but statistically and skill wise of the greenbay coaching staff, I find the Steelers at a disadvantage.

sarahpalinhater
01-27-2011, 12:42 AM
Greenbay's offensive coordinator, which happens to be their head coach, is 10 times better than Bruce Arians... Doesn't matter what players they have with all the injuries, they make it work.
I believe in my heart that the Steelers defense can hold them, but statistically and skill wise of the greenbay coaching staff, I find the Steelers at a disadvantage.




Then why is their offense not better then ours, or their passing game ? Or did you not see my numbers above. Green Bay is a good balanced team. But they are NOT some super great offense.

lionslicer
01-27-2011, 12:53 AM
Then why is their offense not better then ours, or their passing game ? Or did you not see my numbers above. Green Bay is a good balanced team. But they are NOT some super great offense.

I'm just saying what I noticed, numbers are usually very bland and don't tell the whole story. Just from watching them, when they call certain plays in certain situations, its a better set up offense. Its only super explosive sometimes, but thats only if Rodgers can get into a rhythm.

This offense can be terrible if it goes 3 and out over and over and the defense hits them in the face early on, but if the defense lets up 1 bit, allows him to have 1 good drive, he'll come out and have another, and another. He gets hot fast and he wont let up.

But like I said this offense can be very flat if the defense stops them early on and often. And its only how I see it, my experience with the game obviously makes my view different than yours, so don't get all mad because I'm disagreeing.

sarahpalinhater
01-27-2011, 12:57 AM
I'm just saying what I noticed, numbers are usually very bland and don't tell the whole story. Just from watching them, when they call certain plays in certain situations, its a better set up offense. Its only super explosive sometimes, but thats only if Rodgers can get into a rhythm.

This offense can be terrible if it goes 3 and out over and over and the defense hits them in the face early on, but if the defense lets up 1 bit, allows him to have 1 good drive, he'll come out and have another, and another. He gets hot fast and he wont let up.

But like I said this offense can be very flat if the defense stops them early on and often. And its only how I see it, my experience with the game obviously makes my view different than yours, so don't get all mad because I'm disagreeing.




Most passers are rhythm passers. And I do agree that Green bay is in reality is a better passing team, even though with Ben we did average a bit more. But what I was saying is that they're not ridiculously a better passing, or offensive scoring team then us. I suspect they will be nervous early on with that pressure and noise. If we can jump on them early, and get a stable ground game going, we could end this game very early on.

tony hipchest
01-27-2011, 01:03 AM
There really is no comparison here. GB passing game is head and shoulders above the Steelers. They have a QB who can release the ball at will using perfect form and delivery from a variety of steps and angles. Their receiving corps is also superior as well especially when it comes to experience and size. The Steelers passing game has struggled for stretches throughout the year. It is most successful in the hurry-up. Last week during the Jets game the Steelers had -3 yards passing in the second half - that, combined with Ben's poor passing numbers should tell the story.youre not too familiar with situational football are you?

im sorry your fantasy team lost.

Packerstud
01-27-2011, 01:25 AM
youre not too familiar with situational football are you

46 net yards on 26 plays in the second half. If this is your idea of situational football, then I can't wait until game time.

tony hipchest
01-27-2011, 01:35 AM
i cant wait to be up 24-0 on the packers in the SB.

PackAttack
01-27-2011, 05:09 AM
But why aren't those same people not figuring our first 4 games without Ben ? I mean if you figure Ben had 3200 passing yards in 12 games this season, well what is 3200 divided by 12 ?...what ?, 266.6 Yards per game ? And last time I checked, that's better then the Packers 257.1 isn't it :

Maybe it's because they are "Team Stats" and not individual stats. Just because Ben isn't playing doesn't mean the team stops accumulating stats, (or does it?)

It is a Team Sport afterall.

plenewken
01-27-2011, 06:56 AM
Maybe it's because they are "Team Stats" and not individual stats. Just because Ben isn't playing doesn't mean the team stops accumulating stats, (or does it?)

It is a Team Sport afterall.

I will give you all the yards you want between the 20yd lines, as long as I shut you down in the red zone and you only score FGs. That's why YPG means absolutely squat to me.

madtowndrunkard
01-27-2011, 08:43 AM
Anyone know how the Packers have done against the 3-4 defense this year?


When looking at the match up Rogers vs Ben is not what concerns me at all. What concerns me is the Steelers pass defense vs Rogers. Our one weakness is pass defense. Sure the season stats say we are pretty good in pass defense. But if you look at our pass defense vs good QB's it's not so pretty.

We've played 2 teams with elite QB's....Saints and Patriots. Both teams beat us. Both Qb's moved the ball at will. I'd put Rogers and GB's passing game in that category. So we need to figure out how to slow that down. If we do not, we will lose.

IMO the key to slowing down the Packers passing game is for our OWN offense to score points. We need to keep Rogers and Co off the field. If Ben is as inaccurate as he was last week then we will get our butts whipped. Ben has to hit those deep passes. If he does we win, if he does not...I really cannot see our defense keeping GB out of the end zone with out help from our offense.

plenewken
01-27-2011, 09:02 AM
Anyone know how the Packers have done against the 3-4 defense this year?


When looking at the match up Rogers vs Ben is not what concerns me at all. What concerns me is the Steelers pass defense vs Rogers. Our one weakness is pass defense. Sure the season stats say we are pretty good in pass defense. But if you look at our pass defense vs good QB's it's not so pretty.

We've played 2 teams with elite QB's....Saints and Patriots. Both teams beat us. Both Qb's moved the ball at will. I'd put Rogers and GB's passing game in that category. So we need to figure out how to slow that down. If we do not, we will lose.

IMO the key to slowing down the Packers passing game is for our OWN offense to score points. We need to keep Rogers and Co off the field. If Ben is as inaccurate as he was last week then we will get our butts whipped. Ben has to hit those deep passes. If he does we win, if he does not...I really cannot see our defense keeping GB out of the end zone with out help from our offense.

We beat Green Bay last season after losing 5 games in a row.
We're coming out of 2 key wins against much stronger teams and although we didn't play great for 60mn we managed to completely dominate the opponent for 1/2 of the game.
I believe we'll beat Green Bay much more convincingly than last year if we play 60mn and not 30.

ZoneBlitzer
01-27-2011, 09:13 AM
Anyone know how the Packers have done against the 3-4 defense this year?


When looking at the match up Rogers vs Ben is not what concerns me at all. What concerns me is the Steelers pass defense vs Rogers. Our one weakness is pass defense. Sure the season stats say we are pretty good in pass defense. But if you look at our pass defense vs good QB's it's not so pretty.

We've played 2 teams with elite QB's....Saints and Patriots. Both teams beat us. Both Qb's moved the ball at will. I'd put Rogers and GB's passing game in that category. So we need to figure out how to slow that down. If we do not, we will lose.

IMO the key to slowing down the Packers passing game is for our OWN offense to score points. We need to keep Rogers and Co off the field. If Ben is as inaccurate as he was last week then we will get our butts whipped. Ben has to hit those deep passes. If he does we win, if he does not...I really cannot see our defense keeping GB out of the end zone with out help from our offense.

Absolutely spot on analysis. I have to say, a blow out wouldn't surprise me at all. Our offense must step it up this time and help out the defense.

43Hitman
01-27-2011, 09:16 AM
BLOWN OUT! What!??! You guys need to do a nut check or something. I acknowledge that they have a good team BUT WE HAVE THE BEST DEFENSE! They will NOT blow us out! My God, what has this fan base become?

ZoneBlitzer
01-27-2011, 09:24 AM
BLOWN OUT! What!??! You guys need to do a nut check or something. I acknowledge that they have a good team BUT WE HAVE THE BEST DEFENSE! They will NOT blow us out! My God, what has this fan base become?

Defense great, yes. But can they handle AR on a fast track facing multiple possessions if our offense goes 3 and out on several occasions? Also, the Steelers style of defense is to bend and not break. There will be a lot of bending against that GB team. Our offense has shown signs of greatness but conversely they have sputtered woefully on occasion as well. They cannot do that against GB. Every possession counts. They have to move the ball for 60 minutes.

madtowndrunkard
01-27-2011, 10:12 AM
We also have to figure out how to contain Mathews. If he is knocking Ben around, turnovers will happen. If we turn the ball over, game over.

There is a reason we are underdogs.

Mavajo
01-27-2011, 11:21 AM
We beat Green Bay last season after losing 5 games in a row.
We're coming out of 2 key wins against much stronger teams and although we didn't play great for 60mn we managed to completely dominate the opponent for 1/2 of the game.
I believe we'll beat Green Bay much more convincingly than last year if we play 60mn and not 30.

You do realize that things change from year to year? The Packers pass defense this year is in a whole different stratosphere than last year's.

Also, I would disagree with your "2 key wins against much stronger teams" premise. We won 3 games on the road. You won 2 at home.

cubanstogie
01-27-2011, 11:45 AM
Defense great, yes. But can they handle AR on a fast track facing multiple possessions if our offense goes 3 and out on several occasions? Also, the Steelers style of defense is to bend and not break. There will be a lot of bending against that GB team. Our offense has shown signs of greatness but conversely they have sputtered woefully on occasion as well. They cannot do that against GB. Every possession counts. They have to move the ball for 60 minutes.

We never went 3 and out versus the Jets. Our shortest drive besides the obvious safety was 7 plays. I think we will move the ball like we have most of the year. We just have to score 7 instead of 3 in red zone. I still think Jets D better than GB's.Woodson is a great CB but gets beat much more than Revis. We should be able to throw on them as well.

steelers33
01-27-2011, 11:54 AM
Aaron Rodgers is a bitch, hit him hard like Peppers does and he completely go a fluke. Look at big game James and Wood to knock the snout out of him and make him scared. And if our o-line plays well we will win.

plenewken
01-27-2011, 12:01 PM
You do realize that things change from year to year? The Packers pass defense this year is in a whole different stratosphere than last year's.

Also, I would disagree with your "2 key wins against much stronger teams" premise. We won 3 games on the road. You won 2 at home.

I realize that things change from year to year for you but for us too.
Baltimore and the Jets were stronger teams because the odds for them to win the SB were lower than CHI, ATL or PHI.

pete74
01-27-2011, 12:15 PM
like i said in another post, the jets, pittsburgh or baltimore would all beat green bay or any nfc team in the superbowl. were way to brutal and there not used to that. we all play smash mouth football and thats not what there used to seeing in the nfc. it will be a close game but in the end there going to be to beat up to win and the steelers will get there 7th ring

Mavajo
01-27-2011, 12:40 PM
We never went 3 and out versus the Jets. Our shortest drive besides the obvious safety was 7 plays. I think we will move the ball like we have most of the year. We just have to score 7 instead of 3 in red zone. I still think Jets D better than GB's.Woodson is a great CB but gets beat much more than Revis. We should be able to throw on them as well.

Woodson is not our shut down corner - Williams is. We also have Sam Shields, a guy that's played as good or better than any nickel back in the league. Nick Collins is a Pro Bowler at Free Safety, and Charlie Peprah has stepped up fantastically this year at Strong Safety when we got hit with injuries there early in the year,.

Also, once Leonhard went down, the Jets secondary took a dip. The Packers secondary and pass defense in general are the best in the NFL this year, and are better than the Jets. Revis is a phenomenal cover corner, but he's one guy - taken as a whole, the Packers secondary is better than the Jets.

Also, the Packers defense is a very physical team. I'm not sure where you guys got this illusion that only the AFC can play physical football. The Packers were only one behind the Steelers in sacks this year. The Colts and Patriots (along with the Steelers) have been dominating the AFC for years now, and they're not very physical teams. Also, it takes more to judge a team than looking up stats on ESPN. The Packers run defense stats aren't impressive, but they got nailed with injuries along the defensive line and at inside linebacker early in the season. Despite that, there haven't been many games where we got dominated on the ground. The first Falcons and Vikings games, maybe. Outside of that, the Packers rush D held up well. You guys will get yours on the ground, but you seem to have this illusion that the Packers run defense is a sieve - that's not the case. The Packers are especially stout when teams try to run up the gut - which is exactly where the Steelers running strength is. We're vulnerable at the edges, but unfortuantely for you, that's not the Steelers run blocking strenth - your outside zone game is weak. Also, our biggest weakness against backs has been in the short passing game, especially in the middle of the field. Again, unfortuantely for you, that's not a strength for your offense. Mendenhall is rarely used to catch passes - Moore is your receiving back.

I get that most people can't avoid being a homer, but at least make an effort.

4xSBChamps
01-27-2011, 01:24 PM
... we also have Sam Shields, a guy that's played as good or better than any nickel back in the league. Nick Collins is a Pro Bowler at Free Safety, and Charlie Peprah has stepped up fantastically this year at Strong Safety when we got hit with injuries there early in the year,.

... the Packers secondary and pass defense in general are the best in the NFL this year... the Packers secondary is better than the Jets.

... the Packers defense is a very physical team... the Packers are especially stout when teams try to run up the gut... your outside zone game is weak...

... most people can't avoid being a homer, but at least make an effort.

:doh:

43Hitman
01-27-2011, 02:41 PM
taken as a whole, the Packers secondary is better than the Jets.

most people can't avoid being a homer

Irony is ironic

pjfoley4vb
01-27-2011, 04:06 PM
like i said in another post, the jets, pittsburgh or baltimore would all beat green bay or any nfc team in the superbowl.

That's why the Packers went on the road and beat the Jets...err...

Dino 6 Rings
01-27-2011, 04:08 PM
That's why the Packers went on the road and beat the Jets...err...

Yes, the Packers won at NY.

13 First Downs
2-14 on 3rd Down
156 Passing Yards
81 Rushing yards
0 Turnovers.

Jets had 3 turnovers. Pretty much see how the game was 9-0 Packers.

pjfoley4vb
01-27-2011, 04:09 PM
Yes, the Packers won at NY.

13 First Downs
2-14 on 3rd Down
156 Passing Yards
81 Rushing yards
0 Turnovers.

Jets had 3 turnovers. Pretty much see how the game was 9-0 Packers.

You're right, so the Jets had 3 turnovers at home. So let's just discount the fact that the Packers won the game at the Jets. The Jets are a better team. With a home loss as the only piece of evidence that we have between these 2 teams...

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 04:14 PM
Irony is ironic

Look 'em up - the Jets pass defense allowed more yards, 50% more TDs, and intercepted the ball only half as much as the Packers. The Packer pass defense is better - period.

Dino 6 Rings
01-27-2011, 04:14 PM
You're right, so the Jets had 3 turnovers at home. So let's just discount the fact that the Packers won the game at the Jets. The Jets are a better team. With a home loss as the only piece of evidence that we have between these 2 teams...

I must be coming into the conversation late here...the Jets are better than Who?

We could talk who's defense is better, Jets, Steelers Packers Ravens Bears Vikings Dolphins Saints and then compare how each offense did against the ones they faced....Like, we know the Packers shredded the Vikings who finished the season in the top 10 defenses. And we know the Steelers lost to the Saints...and split with the Ravens and Jets. And the Packers split with Bears...

We can go numbers for numbers down the line and try to break down who has the best shot. Determine who played against 4-3, 3-4 and situational offensive breakdowns of every game....including Sacks allowed against what defense, where the sacks happened, the Interceptions thrown vs interceptions gained by the defense. I mean...we can break down the numbers...

or....

we could just say something like THE STEELERS ARE GOING TO SMASH IN THE PACKERS SKULLS AND RIP OUT THEIR GUTS AND FEAST UPON THEIR ENTRAILS!!!!!

I can go either way in that regard...I love breaking down stats...but really love shouting at the top of my lungs.

StainlessStill
01-27-2011, 04:17 PM
I can go either way in that regard...I love breaking down stats...but really love shouting at the top of my lungs.

I'm slowly but surely entering this territory and it won't be pretty... I'm calm now.. I think. By the time this week ends I'm going to be sitting in the corner of the room to have an exorcist on speed-dial.

Dino 6 Rings
01-27-2011, 04:17 PM
Look 'em up - the Jets pass defense allowed more yards, 50% more TDs, and intercepted the ball only half as much as the Packers. The Packer pass defense is better - period.

Ok, that's solid stuff, but then you have to break it down game by game...How often were the Packers leading, forcing the other team to throw the ball to play catch up? How often were the Jets running the ball and eating clock, keeping games close and keeping other teams in a basic offense only passing when they needed to.

Packers are the #5 Ranked Defense, Jets were #6. Not much difference there really.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 04:24 PM
Ok, that's solid stuff, but then you have to break it down game by game...How often were the Packers leading, forcing the other team to throw the ball to play catch up? How often were the Jets running the ball and eating clock, keeping games close and keeping other teams in a basic offense only passing when they needed to.

Packers are the #5 Ranked Defense, Jets were #6. Not much difference there really.

If we're going to try and break everything down into contexts, the whole concept of game stats goes out the window.

Taking it to the opposite extreme, you're giving me the #5 and #6, which is a measure based purely on yards per game.

Which is going to be?

My main point was that the Packers' secondary outdid the Jets in several meaningful categories so that it isn't simply homerism to say they were better. I think that still holds water.

SH-Rock
01-27-2011, 04:27 PM
Packers receiving corp> Steelers receiving corp
Jets secondary> Packers secondary

was that so hard?

StainlessStill
01-27-2011, 04:36 PM
Fact of the matter is, is that both of these defense's are top dawg for a REASON. We understand the type of all-out blitz packages that Dom Capers is capable of making (and we know a LOT of Capers here!)

It's the matter of what team is more equipped to handle the pressure givin the history and model of both defense's and I think Pittsburgh is built, from head to toe, to deal with the style that is the Green Bay Packers defense. They use our model and we've historically played against one of the most aggressive defense's you could possibly plan for in Baltimore, twice a year, for a whole decade.

Green Bay has very nice X-factors on defense, but there are many holes in their 3-4 I can see us taking advantage of since we are FAR MORE balanced than G.B.

The Pack will put up a fight, and I still don't know who has the edge, but I think, at this point, we'd have an easier time chewing up yardage and moving the ball and chains at a better rhythm than I see G.B moving the ball on our relentless defense that has been doing this for decades.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 05:37 PM
Packers receiving corp> Steelers receiving corp
Jets secondary> Packers secondary

was that so hard?

Let's see:

My organ > Texas

You're right - that was easy! It may not necessarily reflect anything close to the truth, but it is easy!

A good composite measure for those who don't like taking scoring, yards, turnovers, etc... on their own, and like some reflection of opponent strength, is Football Outsiders' "DVOA" (explained here: Team Defense (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef))

By that measure, the Packers' pass defense was tops in the league (reg. season), just ahead of Pittsburgh, and well ahead of the Jets, who were #7.

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 06:02 PM
I think the turf will help us move the ball and play into our advantage a little. If we can protect Rodgers and give him time I think we can move the ball but your secondary is really good as well. Troy Polamalu didn't play the last time we met and our secondary has gotten alot better since the last time we met as well. Philly and Chicago's defense did a good job keeping us out of the end zone for the second half of those games.

ZoneBlitzer
01-27-2011, 08:19 PM
We also have to figure out how to contain Mathews. If he is knocking Ben around, turnovers will happen. If we turn the ball over, game over.

There is a reason we are underdogs.

Agreed. I am concerned that the pedigree of that offensive line will finally show up.

Packerstud
01-27-2011, 10:09 PM
Just from watching them, when they call certain plays in certain situations, its a better set up offense. Its only super explosive sometimes, but thats only if Rodgers can get into a rhythm.

This offense can be terrible if it goes 3 and out over and over and the defense hits them in the face early on, but if the defense lets up 1 bit, allows him to have 1 good drive, he'll come out and have another, and another. He gets hot fast and he wont let up.

But like I said this offense can be very flat if the defense stops them early on and often

100%

I'm definitely not predicting a blow out here. Both Ds are just to good, but I could see a shootout. Is that something you want to get into with Rodgers in a dome?

tony hipchest
01-27-2011, 10:12 PM
Both Ds are just to good, but I could see a shootout. Is that something you want to get into with Rodgers in a dome?

HELL YEAH! :tt03::tt02::helmet:

(and no matter how you slice it, our defense is better- check the records, check the stats, watch the games, check the rings.)

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 10:17 PM
HELL YEAH! :tt03::tt02::helmet:

(and no matter how you slice it, our defense is better- check the records, check the stats, watch the games, check the rings.)

Your defense is better but not by much at all. Our defense has won us many games this season and kept us in many. The Bears defense I think is as good as the Steelers defense. That means we could have a low scoring game.

DFWSTEELERFAN
01-27-2011, 10:28 PM
Your defense is better but not by much at all. Our defense has won us many games this season and kept us in many. The Bears defense I think is as good as the Steelers defense. That means we could have a low scoring game.

The Bears defense as good as ours? You can't be serious...

Comparison: We pressure more, give up few points per game, and allow less yardage... Not even close...

yards per game 276 to 314
give up fewer points per game 14.5 to 19.9
48 sacks to 34
:tt03:

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 10:31 PM
The Bears defense as good as ours? You can't be serious...

Comparison: We pressure more, give up few points per game, and allow less yardage... Not even close...

yards per game 276 to 314
give up fewer points per game 14.5 to 19.9
48 sacks to 34
:tt03:

I think our defense is almost as good as yours as well. Not disrespecting your team at all. The most points we gave up all year was 31 to New England and we never gave up more then 30 in any other game. Julius Peppers is probably the best defensive lineman in the league. We seen that in the 3 games we played him this year.

DFWSTEELERFAN
01-27-2011, 10:33 PM
:tt04:I think our defense is almost as good as yours as well. Not disrespecting your team at all. The most points we gave up all year was 31 to New England and we never gave up more then 30 in any other game.

It's not even close.... Your D is good, but you are giving up 4.5 yards per rush. If you do that against us, you will be looking at that first drive we had against the Jets all over again several times. 4.5 yards allowed per rush is aweful!

I looked it up.. Yards per attempt, we are first and you are 28th... We have been on fire running the ball well lately .. If they try that two man line garbage against us and we will run it down their throat...

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 10:34 PM
Your defense is better but not by much at all. Our defense has won us many games this season and kept us in many. The Bears defense I think is as good as the Steelers defense. That means we could have a low scoring game.

Keep in mind that out of the 19 games the Pack have played this year, only 4 were against good quarterbacks. Matt Ryan (twice), Tom Brady, and Vick. Green Bay went 2-2 in those 4 games.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 10:37 PM
Keep in mind that out of the 19 games the Pack have played this year, only 4 were against good quarterbacks. Matt Ryan (twice), Tom Brady, and Vick. Green Bay went 2-2 in those 4 games.

Good one - and now let's see the results of the Steelers' matchups against good QBs.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 10:39 PM
:tt04:

It's not even close.... Your D is good, but you are giving up 4.5 yards per rush. If you do that against us, you will be looking at that first drive we had against the Jets all over again several times. 4.5 yards allowed per rush is aweful!

This would be an excellent point if rushing yards per carry were somehow incorporated into the score. The Packers gave up 15 points per game, the Steelers gave up 14.5.
That is even close.

DFWSTEELERFAN
01-27-2011, 10:44 PM
This would be an excellent point if rushing yards per carry were somehow incorporated into the score. The Packers gave up 15 points per game, the Steelers gave up 14.5.
That is even close.

It's misleading though. We will be two dimensional because they don't stop the run. After playing the Jets and Ravens back to back, I wouldn't be surprised if Mendenhall goes off... The Pack loves the Nickel and Ben will change the play at the line when they try it. I think we gash them...They like it because that's what they run their exotic blitzes out of.

Who have they beaten thats had a good running game and a stud QB?

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 10:47 PM
Keep in mind that out of the 19 games the Pack have played this year, only 4 were against good quarterbacks. Matt Ryan (twice), Tom Brady, and Vick. Green Bay went 2-2 in those 4 games.

Actually Vick played the second half of the week 1 game against Philly. We also beat Sanchez and the Jets 9-0 in their house. I wont mention Cutler though, think he isnt that good of a qb. I guess you can say we are 4-2 then.

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 10:48 PM
Atlanta, Philly and Chicago didnt run the ball that well at all against us. We shut them all down. I will say you guys are on a whole different level though then those teams. I hope we can shut your running game down, that is the part of your offense that worries me.

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 10:51 PM
This would be an excellent point if rushing yards per carry were somehow incorporated into the score. The Packers gave up 15 points per game, the Steelers gave up 14.5.
That is even close.

Going back to what I just said. It's pretty easy to keep your opponent out of the endzone when you're facing the likes of Chad Henne, Kevin Kolb, Trent Edwards, Shaun Hill, Jon Kitna, Troy Smith, etc.

DFWSTEELERFAN
01-27-2011, 10:51 PM
Atlanta, Philly and Chicago didnt run the ball that well at all against us. We shut them all down. I will say you guys are on a whole different level though then those teams. I hope we can shut your running game down, that is the part of your offense that worries me.

Yeah, if we can run the ball it's going to be a big deal. we will control the clock. It will be interesting to see how it works out... The Giants + Atlanta wins were the most impressive...

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 10:52 PM
It's misleading though. We will be two dimensional because they don't stop the run. After playing the Jets and Ravens back to back, I wouldn't be surprised if Mendenhall goes off... The Pack loves the Nickel and Ben will change the play at the line when they try it. I think we gash them...They like it because that's what they run their exotic blitzes out of.

Who have they beaten thats had a good running game and a stud QB?

Um... the Falcons come to mind...

Philadelphia (twice) - was in the top 5 in rushing, and I think you'd call Vick a stud QB...

Jets were top 5 rushing (#4) but I don't think I'd call that a stud QB...

Giants were #6 rushing, but again, I don't think of Eli as a stud QB...

Dallas... LMAO - just feels good to remember how bad Dallas was this year.:wink02:

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 10:53 PM
Actually Vick played the second half of the week 1 game against Philly. We also beat Sanchez and the Jets 9-0 in their house. I wont mention Cutler though, think he isnt that good of a qb. I guess you can say we are 4-2 then.

Green Bay was up 20-3 when Vick first stepped on the field, Sanchez is Sanchez lol, and I agree on Cutler.

DFWSTEELERFAN
01-27-2011, 10:56 PM
Um... the Falcons come to mind...

Philadelphia (twice) - was in the top 5 in rushing, and I think you'd call Vick a stud QB...

Jets were top 5 rushing (#4) but I don't think I'd call that a stud QB...

Giants were #6 rushing, but again, I don't think of Eli as a stud QB...

Dallas... LMAO - just feels good to remember how bad Dallas was this year.:wink02:

I'll give you the Falcons, but I wouldn't call vick a stud because of his passing/reading defenses... If I recall, he only had 100 yards passing that game..(not sure he played the whole game)

Pack did beat the Jets

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 10:56 PM
Going back to what I just said. It's pretty easy to keep your opponent out of the endzone when you're facing the likes of Chad Henne, Kevin Kolb, Trent Edwards, Shaun Hill, Jon Kitna, Troy Smith, etc.

We also faced Eli Manning so we are 5-2 against good qbs.

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 10:56 PM
Good one - and now let's see the results of the Steelers' matchups against good QBs.

The only game that stands out is the New England game...neither of our teams did well against Tom Brady, lol. The Steelers beat everyone they should have beaten, and held the "good" QBs they faced in check enough to have a chance at winning the game. Except Brady of course.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 10:57 PM
Going back to what I just said. It's pretty easy to keep your opponent out of the endzone when you're facing the likes of Chad Henne, Kevin Kolb, Trent Edwards, Shaun Hill, Jon Kitna, Troy Smith, etc.

And for Pittsburgh...

Kerry Collins
Josh Freeman
Colt McCoy (x2)
Chad Henne
Gradkowski/Campbell
Fitzpatrick
Clausen

And twice against a pathetic shell of what Carson Palmer once was...

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 10:58 PM
I'll give you the Falcons, but I wouldn't call vick a stud because of his passing/reading defenses... If I recall, he only had 100 yards passing that game..(not sure he played the whole game)

The jets beat them, so ......

Did they now? Or did they maybe get shut out?

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 10:58 PM
Yeah, if we can run the ball it's going to be a big deal. we will control the clock. It will be interesting to see how it works out... The Giants + Atlanta wins were the most impressive...

Who did you guys beat this year? Not talking smack asking that question, I seriously didnt follow much of the Steelers this year. I know you beat Baltimore and NY which is solid wins for you guys but who else?

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 10:58 PM
We also faced Eli Manning so we are 5-2 against good qbs.

Eli's pushing it. The Giants were a very streaky team this year and they were playing extremely bad when the Pack faced them. That was the game right after the collapse against Philly.

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 11:02 PM
And for Pittsburgh...

Kerry Collins
Josh Freeman
Colt McCoy (x2)
Chad Henne
Gradkowski/Campbell
Fitzpatrick
Clausen

And twice against a pathetic shell of what Carson Palmer once was...

Like I said, the Steelers beat everyone they should have beaten (unlike the Packers, who had a couple 'head-scratcher' losses), and held the "good" QBs they faced in check enough to have a chance at winning the game (except Brady).

Green Bay LOST to Shaun Hill, Donovan McNabb, and Chad Henne.

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 11:04 PM
Eli's pushing it. The Giants were a very streaky team this year and they were playing extremely bad when the Pack faced them. That was the game right after the collapse against Vick.

Eli Manning is a good qb. I thought we beat alot of good teams this season. People like to downplay our season all the time.

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 11:06 PM
Like I said, the Steelers beat everyone they should have beaten (unlike the Packers, who had a couple 'head-scratcher' losses), and held the "good" QBs they faced in check enough to have a chance at winning the game (except Brady).

Green Bay LOST to Shaun Hill, Donovan McNabb, and Chad Henne.

Shaun Hill isnt that bad of a qb, Mcnabb was great a couple years ago and Henne isnt horrible either.

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 11:06 PM
Eli Manning is a good qb. I thought we beat alot of good teams this season. People like to downplay our season all the time.

He is, and that was a good win, putting up 45 points on a decent Giants defense, it's just where the game happened to fall is what makes it seem that way.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 11:13 PM
Green Bay did lose to those QBs and they ARE mediocre at best, but they didn't lose by getting torched by the passing game.

GB didn't lose to Shaun Hill, though - they lost to Drew Stanton, who racked up all of 117 yards on them.
McNabb had better success, but only by passing 49 times.
Henne had an alright day, for Henne.

Those are embarassing losses, and they happened to the Pack. But the Pack is capable of being an entirely different team, and has been turning it on very well when the pressure is on.

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 11:16 PM
Green Bay did lose to those QBs and they ARE mediocre at best, but they didn't lose by getting torched by the passing game.

GB didn't lose to Shaun Hill, though - they lost to Drew Stanton, who racked up all of 117 yards on them.
McNabb had better success, but only by passing 49 times.
Henne had an alright day, for Henne.

Those are embarassing losses, and they happened to the Pack. But the Pack is capable of being an entirely different team, and has been turning it on very well when the pressure is on.

Not really embarassing dude. The first half of the year we werent a good team. We were 3-3 at one point. We turned it on the second half of the season. The Bears were so lucky to win the first game against us I wont even go there. We beat ourselves in that game more then they did anything to beat us.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 11:19 PM
Not really embarassing dude. The first half of the year we werent a good team. We were 3-3 at one point. We turned it on the second half of the season. The Bears were so lucky to win the first game against us I wont even go there. We beat ourselves in that game more then they did anything to beat us.

Preaching to the choir - I think the Pack were about a play away in every loss they had. They are still way too good of a team to have ever been in that position - they had some real growing pains adapting to the losses of Finley, Grant, etc...

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 11:21 PM
Preaching to the choir - I think the Pack were about a play away in every loss they had. They are still way too good of a team to have ever been in that position - they had some real growing pains adapting to the losses of Finley, Grant, etc...

I myself cant believe we made it this far! This is an amazing run we have had very similar to the 2007 Giants run. I mean we were 8-6 at one point and we almost missed the playoffs. Im just happy to be here but now that were here i want to win this as much as you guys do.

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 11:26 PM
Let me just say that you guys are a lot nicer than some of those Jets clowns we had to deal with all last week.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 11:30 PM
I myself cant believe we made it this far! This is an amazing run we have had very similar to the 2007 Giants run. I mean we were 8-6 at one point and we almost missed the playoffs. Im just happy to be here but now that were here i want to win this as much as you guys do.

Dude I'm a Packer fan so I'm right there with you. My name might be confusing - I use it to mean "cheese curd lover" which I am.

Anyways - I feel like we're still in the bonus - I had let my expectations down for this season and started thinking about how great we will be next season when we get all our guys and a couple more Thompson draft gems fighting for roster space.

Then they make this amazing run and Rodgers lights it up - it's actually been hard to get back to demanding victory - I'm just so pleased we're here! But now that we are, let's keep it going for one more game!

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 11:32 PM
Let me just say that you guys are a lot nicer than some of those Jets clowns we had to deal with all last week.

Thanks man. Not talking smack to a team and fans I like and respect. You guys have always been nice to us as well and I appreciate that.

SteelCityMom
01-27-2011, 11:43 PM
We also faced Eli Manning so we are 5-2 against good qbs.

:sofunny:

Eli Manning isn't that good. Sorry.

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 11:44 PM
Thanks man. Not talking smack to a team and fans I like and respect. You guys have always been nice to us as well and I appreciate that.

The Pack were my favorite team for about 10 years, when I was a kid. I had a Favre jersey, knick-knacks, you name it...I actually still have Packers bedspread on my bed at my parents' house.


With that said, :tt04:



:wink02:

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 11:45 PM
:sofunny:

Eli Manning isn't that good. Sorry.

Agreed.

SteelCityMom
01-27-2011, 11:48 PM
And for Pittsburgh...

Kerry Collins
Josh Freeman
Colt McCoy (x2)
Chad Henne
Gradkowski/Campbell
Fitzpatrick
Clausen

And twice against a pathetic shell of what Carson Palmer once was...

Josh Freeman is a decent QB.

I'm not discounting the Packers passing attack at all though, I know Rodgers and Co. are good. You'll get some yards through the air no doubt. Steelers often gave up a lot of yardage at times this season, but not a lot of points. Brady and Fitzpatrick (for whatever reason...he was hot at the time) were the only ones that put big points up against them.

Both teams beat up on some shitty QBs at times, and lost to some good ones. I think the passing attacks will be more evenly matched than either side wants to admit.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 11:48 PM
The Pack were my favorite team for about 10 years, when I was a kid. I had a Favre jersey, knick-knacks, you name it...I actually still have Packers bedspread on my bed at my parents' house.


With that said, :tt04:



:wink02:

I'm from a generation earlier - the Steelers were my team in the 70s. I got such pleasure watching them beat the hated Vikings and Cowboys! Loved that whole team, at a time when there wasn't much to love in Green Bay. I still grew up steeped in the lore about Bart Starr and Lombardi and always loved Green Bay, but it wasn't until Don Majkowski that I came back to the Pack with fervor...

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 11:48 PM
The Pack were my favorite team for about 10 years, when I was a kid. I had a Favre jersey, knick-knacks, you name it...I actually still have Packers bedspread on my bed at my parents' house.


With that said, :tt04:



:wink02:

So this wasnt too long ago.

Buddha Bus
01-27-2011, 11:50 PM
:sofunny:

Eli Manning isn't that good. Sorry.


http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y108/rschilla/blasphemer.jpg


SCM, daughter of Deuteronomy of Gath,... you have been found guilty by the elders of the town of besmirching the great Manning name, and so, as a blasphemer... you are to be stoned to death!







Yeah, Eli sucks. :sofunny:

GBpack2010
01-27-2011, 11:51 PM
Josh Freeman is a decent QB.

I'm not discounting the Packers passing attack at all though, I know Rodgers and Co. are good. You'll get some yards through the air no doubt. Steelers often gave up a lot of yardage at times this season, but not a lot of points. Brady and Fitzpatrick (for whatever reason...he was hot at the time) were the only ones that put big points up against them.

I hope Rodgers can show he is great in this game and pass for a lot of yards. You really never know which team is going to show up. Pittsburgh has a grind it out kind of offense. They have always been like that ever since I have been watching them.

LegendSteel
01-27-2011, 11:54 PM
So this wasnt too long ago.

No, I'm 21. I'd say I really liked GB from about 5 to 12...so 7 years, not 10. I did like the Vikings too during that same time period, though, which is blasphemy for Packers fans.

Curdoisseur
01-27-2011, 11:55 PM
Collins played the Titans game after VY stunk it up and got benched, neither present as a quality QB for this comparison.

Freeman isn't bad, but was in his third game of the season and didn't play a full (or good) game.

tony hipchest
01-27-2011, 11:57 PM
Preaching to the choir - I think the Pack were about a play away in every loss they had. They are still way too good of a team to have ever been in that position - they had some real growing pains adapting to the losses of Finley, Grant, etc...we were a play away in every loss we had last year. and that was the difference between the 9-7 defending champs missing out on the playoffs because of a 3-way tiebreaker and a 10-6 sixth seed.

what was your record this season? [rhetorical]

i hear you on the growing pains though. it was rough beating atlanta, tennessee, and tampa bay, w/o our qb.

ziggy hood is now coming of age filling in for our pro bowler aaron smith.

j. scott, f. adams, and legursky are holding down the fort on our offesnive line.

it sucks to lose games when heath or troy are out, but nobody can really replace them.

but "the standard is the standard". growing pains are no excuses for losses.

just ask antonio brown, e. sanders or mike wallace (who had to fill in for the booted holmes).

i see your kicker and punter are still doing fine. we replaced those guys on our squad as well.

i'll give you this... having 15 players on IR is impressive, but probably half of the nondescript ones needed to be replaced anyways for you guys to make it this far.

i mean if youre gonna brag about doing well w/o justin harrell, we might as well brag about limas sweed sitting at home.

GBpack2010
01-28-2011, 12:01 AM
we were a play away in every loss we had last year. and that was the difference between the 9-7 defending champs missing out on the playoffs because of a 3-way tiebreaker and a 10-6 sixth seed.

what was your record this season? [rhetorical]

i hear you on the growing pains though. it was rough beating atlanta, tennessee, and tampa bay, w/o our qb.

ziggy hood is now coming of age filling in for our pro bowler aaron smith.

j. scott, f. adams, and legursky are holding down the fort on our offesnive line.

it sucks to lose games when heath or troy are out, but nobody can really replace them.

but "the standard is the standard". growing pains are no excuses for losses.

just ask antonio brown, e. sanders or mike wallace (who had to fill in for the booted holmes).

i see your kicker and punter are still doing fine. we replaced those guys on our squad as well.

i'll give you this... having 15 players on IR is impressive, but probably half of the nondescript ones needed to be replaced anyways for you guys to make it this far.

i mean if youre gonna brag about doing well w/o justin harrell, we might as well brag about limas sweed sitting at home.

LMAO Justin Harrell has been the biggest bust ever for the Packers. We don't even know what kind of a player he is cause he breaks a fingernail every time he plays and is done for the year.:chuckle: I agree with you though there are no excuses for losses. You guys had the better record but hopefully we prove were the better team. It will be tough.

SteelCityMom
01-28-2011, 12:01 AM
I hope Rodgers can show he is great in this game and pass for a lot of yards. You really never know which team is going to show up. Pittsburgh has a grind it out kind of offense. They have always been like that ever since I have been watching them.

Yeah they do...sometimes they don't make a lot of plays, but the ones they do make count for a lot. And surprisingly, the redzone offense hasn't been too shabby this year (something they struggled with a lot in the past). It's just been getting to the redzone sometimes that's the challenge lol.

Like I said though, you guys will probably get a good bit of yardage. The pass D isn't the best by any means (not horrible either...a little above average at best), but the redzone defense has been extremely good this year.

I know right now they're second (for the postseason) in passing defense, but that's pretty much because of how few yards they let up against the Ravens. The Jets kinda torched them a little bit in the second half. They stepped up when needed though.

They were 12th in the regular season...but again, even for being a semi-average pass defense, they still allowed the fewest points.

GBpack2010
01-28-2011, 12:03 AM
Yeah they do...sometimes they don't make a lot of plays, but the ones they do make count for a lot. And surprisingly, the redzone offense hasn't been too shabby this year (something they struggled with a lot in the past). It's just been getting to the redzone sometimes that's the challenge lol.

Like I said though, you guys will probably get a good bit of yardage. The pass D isn't the best by any means (not horrible either...a little above average at best), but the redzone defense has been extremely good this year.

I know right now they're second (for the postseason) in passing defense, but that's pretty much because of how few yards they let up against the Ravens. The Jets kinda torched them a little bit in the second half. They stepped up when needed though.

They were 12th in the regular season though...but again, even for being a semi-average pass defense, they still allowed the fewest points.

I think if we can stop the run then we can shut you guys down. Our defense IMO has the ability to stop you guys. Your defense can stop us though. Like you said we need to keep you out of the end zone and you guys need to do the same to us.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 12:04 AM
i'll give you this... having 15 players on IR is impressive, but probably half of the nondescript ones needed to be replaced anyways for you guys to make it this far.

i mean if youre gonna brag about doing well w/o justin harrell, we might as well brag about limas sweed sitting at home.

I wouldn't ever include Harrell on a list of Packers who matter - he hasn't ever been one of those. But Finley, Grant, Barnett, Jolly, Neal (unproven but promising) were all hard hits, along with lost time by some others.

Not making excuses either - they flat sucked for a few games, so that's that. Just saying that the team that sucked hasn't been around in awhile, and I'm not expecting to see them back any time soon!

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 12:10 AM
They were 12th in the regular season...but again, even for being a semi-average pass defense, they still allowed the fewest points.

In my opinion people shouldn't go by that. Those are skewed because that's what the DBs are told to do. They play off, give the WR about 6-8 yards, then wrap him up. People complained to 93.7 The Fan all year about that, but it's very effective at keeping teams out of the endzone, albeit the stat of YPG being inflated.

SteelCityMom
01-28-2011, 12:10 AM
I think if we can stop the run then we can shut you guys down. Our defense IMO has the ability to stop you guys. Your defense can stop us though. Like you said we need to keep you out of the end zone and you guys need to do the same to us.

:chuckle: Did you just mind meld with John Madden?

“Hey, the offensive linemen are the biggest guys on the field, they're bigger than everybody else, and that's what makes them the biggest guys on the field.”

Sorry, I had to, it made me giggle.

SteelCityMom
01-28-2011, 12:13 AM
In my opinion people shouldn't go by that. Those are skewed because that's what the DBs are told to do. They play off, give the WR about 6-8 yards, then wrap him up. People complained to 93.7 The Fan all year about that, but it's very effective at keeping teams out of the endzone, albeit the stat of YPG being inflated.

Oh no, I get that. Wasn't complaining about it. Just saying, they've given up big chunks of yardage at times...but they've made the stops when they've needed to (for the most part). That's why the ppg and passing TD's allowed was so good.

tony hipchest
01-28-2011, 12:14 AM
I wouldn't ever include Harrell on a list of Packers who matter - he hasn't ever been one of those. But Finley, Grant, Barnett, Jolly, Neal (unproven but promising) were all hard hits, along with lost time by some others.

Not making excuses either - they flat sucked for a few games, so that's that. Just saying that the team that sucked hasn't been around in awhile, and I'm not expecting to see them back any time soon!

me neither, really. the pack has done just fine. i had it predetermined that if the steelers didnt make it to the SB i was gonna be a huge packers or bears fan.

never would i root for the ravens, patriots, or jets even against the NFC (unless it was dallas).

i rooted for the packers to beat the patriots and broncos (shoulda been the steelers delivering favre that SB loss).

if it werent this year i would have no problem pulling for the pack and getting wrapped up in their story. their defense is "steelers midwest", so naturally i wish them well.

this season, the packers had 2 rough stretches where they lost 3 of 4 games.

its time for them to begin another one of those funks. :tt02:

:helmet:

ncsteeler
01-28-2011, 04:04 AM
The Bye is a killer to the "HOT" teams. And what is this non sense GB and their headcoach are selling "were not getting ready for the super bowl" were just getting ready to play the next game. OH please just wait till they get there.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 06:20 AM
The Bye is a killer to the "HOT" teams. And what is this non sense GB and their headcoach are selling "were not getting ready for the super bowl" were just getting ready to play the next game. OH please just wait till they get there.

Whatever you have to tell yourself...

steelerschik
01-28-2011, 07:34 AM
Whatever you have to tell yourself...

No one here has to tell ourselves anything. We have confidence in our team just like you do in yours. You're just another one of those fans who come here and say "your weakness is this, your downfall is that, that will be what loses it for the Steelers, Steelers can't contain so and so", blah, blah, blah. Same crap the Ravens fans said, same crap the Jets fans said now same crap the GB fans are saying. You're nothing new here, the Packers aren't invincible, they're beatable just like all other teams, you're just another team to play to get the trophy. It's more like keep telling YOURSELF whatever you have to tell yourself. And BTW, the bye CAN cool a "hot" team down. What makes them hot is they're playing on a roll consecutively, the roll is now on a 2 week break practicing amongst themselves. Not saying that's gonna happen or even that the Steelers need that to happen to win, just sayin' get over yourself, you haven't won a damn thing yet.

Steelers>NFL
01-28-2011, 08:00 AM
Green Bay's play calling is better than the Steeler's.
I think McCarthy does a better job than BA. No doubt.

steelers33
01-28-2011, 08:06 AM
Reasons to like our chances: GB is facing the best quarterback in Ben since they have arrived in the playoffs. Overall we have better team talent( you could make a case for 10 guys on our defense to be pro bowl worthy while 5 guys on offense ( but we won't have Pouncey in the SB so 4.) The Packers have been on elimination games for what like the past 7 games, I can see that finally catching up with them. I live in Wisconsin and I saw this team was pretty inconsistent in the middle of the season, I can definately see that catching up with them in the pressure of the Super Bowl. And ultimately I like our experience and coaching over them.

isunormalil
01-28-2011, 08:10 AM
GreenBay has one sweet receiver in Jennings. Driver is as old as the tree in my back yard. Ward is better than Driver, Wallace is as good as Jennings, Miller is better than their TE.

PackAttack
01-28-2011, 08:18 AM
I can certainly see how Steelers experience could make the difference.
But the fact that the Packers have won 3 road playoff games speak volumes about their ability as a team.
Something the Steelers are underappreciating it seems to me.

Steelers have had a soft 2nd half of the regular season and a easy enough time playing at home in the Playoffs.

Meanwhile the Packers have been running into a headwind for weeks now.
They'll be rested for this game and their speed (youngest team in the nfl i believe) could make the difference.

steelerschik
01-28-2011, 08:46 AM
I can certainly see how Steelers experience could make the difference.
But the fact that the Packers have won 3 road playoff games speak volumes about their ability as a team.
Something the Steelers are underappreciating it seems to me.

Steelers have had a soft 2nd half of the regular season and a easy enough time playing at home in the Playoffs.

Meanwhile the Packers have been running into a headwind for weeks now.
They'll be rested for this game and their speed (youngest team in the nfl i believe) could make the difference.

I'm quite certain the "Steelers" aren't underappreciating anything. I'm quite certain they're preparing just as hard as they have their last 2 SB appearances. They never faced offenses like the Cardinals or the Seahawks or played "hot" QBs before. I believe we heard the same stuff those 2 times as well. I still find it quite amusing when fans of other teams come here and say "the Steelers haven't faced this, they had a soft 2nd half of the season", again a lot of nothing. Yeah, the Ravens and Jets are very soft, lol. Everything "could" make a difference. I like our chances.

PackAttack
01-28-2011, 09:12 AM
I still find it quite amusing when fans of other teams come here and say "the Steelers haven't faced this, they had a soft 2nd half of the season", again a lot of nothing. Yeah, the Ravens and Jets are very soft, lol. Everything "could" make a difference. I like our chances.
The last 6 regular season games (in reverse order):

Crushed the 5-11 Browns away
Crushed the 2-14 Panthers at home
Lost to the 11-5 Jets at home
Crushed the 4-12 Bengals at home
Won the Ravens in a close one away (split the series with Ravens this year)
Beat the the 4-12 Bills away

So, 2 tougher opponents amidst playing some of the poorest teams in the league.
Does not a Tough Schedule Make.
It looks rather soft, and having 2 home playoff games would certainly be the preffered route to the SB for any team. Everybody knows it's tough to win a Playoff game in an opponents stadium.

SteelCityMom
01-28-2011, 09:31 AM
The last 6 regular season games (in reverse order):

Crushed the 5-11 Browns away
Crushed the 2-14 Panthers at home
Lost to the 11-5 Jets at home
Crushed the 4-12 Bengals at home
Won the Ravens in a close one away (split the series with Ravens this year)
Beat the the 4-12 Bills away

So, 2 tougher opponents amidst playing some of the poorest teams in the league.
Does not a Tough Schedule Make.
It looks rather soft, and having 2 home playoff games would certainly be the preffered route to the SB for any team. Everybody knows it's tough to win a Playoff game in an opponents stadium.

Those games don't matter now. At all. Not in their mindset, and not in how they come out and play in the SB.

Once the playoffs started, those were the only games that mattered. If you want, you can look at those weak teams and call it "practice". I don't care.

They just beat the Ravens and the red hot Jets. If those games at the end of the regular season had affected anything, it would have affected those games. They didn't.

These guys know hot to prepare for the SB, physically and mentally. They'll be ready.

And yes, many of them know how tough it is to play nothing but road playoff games en route to the SB. They were the first ones to do it. They also know how to play home playoff games en route to the SB. Not sure how much that really matters.

plenewken
01-28-2011, 09:47 AM
Everybody knows it's tough to win a Playoff game in an opponents stadium.

What SCMom said.

We did it in 2006 as a #6 seed. At the end of the day, road game or home game doesn't matter much. You have to be the best team that day, regardless if you play in front of your home crowd or not. Some elements can make it more challenging such as outdoor vs indoor, grass vs turf, but the players are professionals and they're paid big bucks to play in all kind of conditions and environments.

Anyway, the playoffs are over now and how we both made it to the SB doesn't matter.
There's one road game left for both teams and we both start with a clean slate.

steelerschik
01-28-2011, 09:48 AM
The last 6 regular season games (in reverse order):

Crushed the 5-11 Browns away
Crushed the 2-14 Panthers at home
Lost to the 11-5 Jets at home
Crushed the 4-12 Bengals at home
Won the Ravens in a close one away (split the series with Ravens this year)
Beat the the 4-12 Bills away

So, 2 tougher opponents amidst playing some of the poorest teams in the league.
Does not a Tough Schedule Make.
It looks rather soft, and having 2 home playoff games would certainly be the preffered route to the SB for any team. Everybody knows it's tough to win a Playoff game in an opponents stadium.

Wow. The regular season, huh? Well congratulations on beating up on a lot of 6-10 teams yourself there buddy (Dallas, SF, Minny). Oh and good win against Detroit, 3-7....oops and "creaming" the Jets 9-0 (how many TDs does that equate to?) I couldn't care less about the regular season. I care about now and the smoke your blowing up your team's butt ain't cutting it. I have great respect for the GB Packers org, not so much their fans. The POs are a different beast, the Steelers are a different beast in the POs and they're pretty successful in SBs. You can take the regular season and flaunt it all you want, it means squat. I'll say it again, I like the Steelers chances.

PackAttack
01-28-2011, 10:28 AM
Actually the last 6 regular season games the Packers played went like this:
(reverse order)

Beat the 11-5 Bears at home
Crushed the 10-6 Giants at home
Lost to the 14-2 Patriots away (Rogers out for this game)
Lost a close one to the 6-10 Lions away (Rogers out of this game since 1st Qtr)
Crushed the 6-10 49ers at home
Lost a close one to the 13-3 Falcons away.

People claim that the "Regular Season" doesn't count in the Playoffs but it's not explicitly true.
For one, the teams are seeded according to their regular season record.

It's true that those regular season games "don't matter now", but they are a useful indicator.
And the indications i get from comparing the Steelers last 6 regular season games with the Packers, is that the Steelers met some poorer teams.
They did very well against those poorer teams and it indicates the Steelers have an ability to score lots of points.

Incidently, the Packers played the Jets in NY way back on week 9 and won.
But i felt that the further from now you go looking back into the regular season, the less reliable the indicators are. Teams make a lot of changes from the beginning of the season to the end, which is why i also thought it completely irrelevant that the Packers beat the Eagles at Philly on Week 1.
But if it were week 10? That's a lot more relevant.
You'd expect a team would have their roster figured out and their plays well rehearsed by week 10.

SteelCityMom
01-28-2011, 10:41 AM
Actually the last 6 regular season games the Packers played went like this:
(reverse order)

Beat the 11-5 Bears at home
Crushed the 10-6 Giants at home
Lost to the 14-2 Patriots away (Rogers out for this game)
Lost a close one to the 6-10 Lions away (Rogers out of this game since 1st Qtr)
Crushed the 6-10 49ers at home
Lost a close one to the 13-3 Falcons away.

People claim that the "Regular Season" doesn't count in the Playoffs but it's not explicitly true.
For one, the teams are seeded according to their regular season record.

It's true that those regular season games "don't matter now", but they are a useful indicator.
And the indications i get from comparing the Steelers last 6 regular season games with the Packers, is that the Steelers met some poorer teams.
They did very well against those poorer teams and it indicates the Steelers have an ability to score lots of points.

Incidently, the Packers played the Jets in NY way back on week 9 and won.
But i felt that the further from now you go looking back into the regular season, the less reliable the indicators are. Teams make a lot of changes from the beginning of the season to the end, which is why i also thought it completely irrelevant that the Packers beat the Eagles at Philly on Week 1.
But if it were week 10? That's a lot more relevant.
You'd expect a team would have their roster figured out and their plays well rehearsed by week 10.

Honestly? The only thing I'm taking away from your last half comparisons are that the Steelers beat a playoff team and lost to a playoff team (both teams they would face again and consequently win).

The Packers lost to two playoff teams and beat a playoff team (which they would consequently beat again). They beat two decent teams overall (one that didn't make the playoffs and one that did), beat a scrub team and lost to another scrub team outside of that.

I think the Steelers had their rosters all figured out and well rehearsed by week 10.

I'm just not understanding what any of that has to do with the Superbowl (other than seeding). Both teams beat who they needed to beat to get into the playoffs and both teams beat who they needed to beat to get to the Superbowl. Both teams have gained momentum in doing so. Any part of the regular season is meaningless now in that regard.

steelerschik
01-28-2011, 10:53 AM
Actually the last 6 regular season games the Packers played went like this:
(reverse order)

Beat the 11-5 Bears at home
Crushed the 10-6 Giants at home
Lost to the 14-2 Patriots away (Rogers out for this game)
Lost a close one to the 6-10 Lions away (Rogers out of this game since 1st Qtr)
Crushed the 6-10 49ers at home
Lost a close one to the 13-3 Falcons away.

People claim that the "Regular Season" doesn't count in the Playoffs but it's not explicitly true.
For one, the teams are seeded according to their regular season record.

It's true that those regular season games "don't matter now", but they are a useful indicator.
And the indications i get from comparing the Steelers last 6 regular season games with the Packers, is that the Steelers met some poorer teams.
They did very well against those poorer teams and it indicates the Steelers have an ability to score lots of points.

Incidently, the Packers played the Jets in NY way back on week 9 and won.
But i felt that the further from now you go looking back into the regular season, the less reliable the indicators are. Teams make a lot of changes from the beginning of the season to the end, which is why i also thought it completely irrelevant that the Packers beat the Eagles at Philly on Week 1.
But if it were week 10? That's a lot more relevant.
You'd expect a team would have their roster figured out and their plays well rehearsed by week 10.

LOL, an indicator to post season play? No, but injuries do play a part and I noticed you made it clear what games Aaron was out. The Steelers lost to the Jets without Troy and Heath Miller, so there's the injury excuse. And no, this has nothing to do with how the SB will be played. You make it sound like the Pack is so far superior, the Steelers might as well not show up, lol. Truth be told, the teams are more alike than not with the edge in QB play to GB and the edge in D to Pitt. I like the Steelers chances better at this point in time and you haven't showed me anything to feel otherwise.

SH-Rock
01-28-2011, 11:29 AM
I really hope the Steelers though study long and hard of the 3 Packers-Bears game. It's crucial to know how they stopped the offense.

BKAnthem
01-28-2011, 11:35 AM
Greenbay has better corners...If they stop the run we may lose

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 12:16 PM
And BTW, the bye CAN cool a "hot" team down. What makes them hot is they're playing on a roll consecutively, the roll is now on a 2 week break practicing amongst themselves. Not saying that's gonna happen or even that the Steelers need that to happen to win, just sayin' get over yourself, you haven't won a damn thing yet.

I think a good example of that is the 05 Steelers. They were 7-5 at one point (similar to GB's 8-6), and won out to win the SB. However, they were no doubt extremely flat in Super Bowl XL (maybe due to the bye, maybe not...who knows), and could have lost the game if it weren't for some trickery and an awesome run by Parker (please leave the refs out of this, Pack fans).

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 12:21 PM
The last 6 regular season games (in reverse order):

Crushed the 5-11 Browns away
Crushed the 2-14 Panthers at home
Lost to the 11-5 Jets at home
Crushed the 4-12 Bengals at home
Won the Ravens in a close one away (split the series with Ravens this year)
Beat the the 4-12 Bills away

So, 2 tougher opponents amidst playing some of the poorest teams in the league.
Does not a Tough Schedule Make.
It looks rather soft, and having 2 home playoff games would certainly be the preffered route to the SB for any team. Everybody knows it's tough to win a Playoff game in an opponents stadium.

This is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" argument. Whether they won or lost against those teams, you're going to criticize them either way. All that matters is they beat who they were supposed to beat, unlike last year.

The Steelers won the Super Bowl with the toughest schedule in the NFL in 08, so if anything this just makes their case for winning it this year even stronger.

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 12:25 PM
Greenbay has better corners...If they stop the run we may lose

Their defense is nowhere near as good as the Jets' defense...especially the corners...and the Steelers overcame that just fine. Against the rush GB was 18th...NYJ were 3rd.


They didn't come back against the Ravens, and beat the Jets, only to lose to the Packers. I'm sorry, but I just don't see it happening, especially with a group as tightly-knit as this one.

4xSBChamps
01-28-2011, 12:37 PM
I think a good example of that (week between Championship & Super Bowl taking momentum) is the 05 Steelers. They were 7-5 at one point (similar to GB's 8-6), and won out to win the SB. However, they were no doubt extremely flat in Super Bowl XL...

if the Steelers, full of momentum, would've played the Weephawks the week-after the Denver game in SB40, Seattle would've taken such a beating the city would've tried to secede from the Union, and join France

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 12:42 PM
No one here has to tell ourselves anything. We have confidence in our team just like you do in yours. You're just another one of those fans who come here and say "your weakness is this, your downfall is that, that will be what loses it for the Steelers, Steelers can't contain so and so", blah, blah, blah. Same crap the Ravens fans said, same crap the Jets fans said now same crap the GB fans are saying. You're nothing new here, the Packers aren't invincible, they're beatable just like all other teams, you're just another team to play to get the trophy. It's more like keep telling YOURSELF whatever you have to tell yourself. And BTW, the bye CAN cool a "hot" team down. What makes them hot is they're playing on a roll consecutively, the roll is now on a 2 week break practicing amongst themselves. Not saying that's gonna happen or even that the Steelers need that to happen to win, just sayin' get over yourself, you haven't won a damn thing yet.

Defensive much? I don't claim to be anything new, nor to have any knowledge of what's to come. Nor would I ever claim that the Steelers don't stand a great chance of winning this game. But I do tend to call people out when they bring foggy reasoning to the table. Bye weeks don't cool hot teams off - opponents do. Both teams are taking the same break and by the look of both of their last games, they need it - neither one looked particularly hot in their conference championships.

I really don't need to "get over myself" since I'm not making any claims in the first place - if you read what I wrote - ever - you'll see I've brought nothing but information with the occasional opinion.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 12:53 PM
Their defense is nowhere near as good as the Jets' defense...especially the corners...and the Steelers overcame that just fine. Against the rush GB was 18th...NYJ were 3rd.

This just doesn't stop getting repeated, but it's plain wrong. The Jets gave up 24 passing TDs, and had 12 INTs while giving up more 20+ yard plays and more yards/game than the Packers, who gave up only 16 TDs and had 24 INTs.

You can refute the importance of those stats, and deny the validity of Football Outsiders (who rank the Packers #1 and the Jets #7 in pass defense) DVOA rankings which also account for quality of opponent, and maybe gain back some ground in the argument somehow, but you'll never make that point strong enough to make valid the claim that the Packers corners are nowhere as good as the Jets.

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 01:10 PM
This just doesn't stop getting repeated, but it's plain wrong. The Jets gave up 24 passing TDs, and had 12 INTs while giving up more 20+ yard plays and more yards/game than the Packers, who gave up only 16 TDs and had 24 INTs.

You can refute the importance of those stats, and deny the validity of Football Outsiders (who rank the Packers #1 and the Jets #7 in pass defense) DVOA rankings which also account for quality of opponent, and maybe gain back some ground in the argument somehow, but you'll never make that point strong enough to make valid the claim that the Packers corners are nowhere as good as the Jets.

The Steelers gave up a lot of YPG too...all that means is the corners like to play off their WRs more often than not.

The Patriots had a ton of picks also, and it's one of the main reasons their defense played so well in the final weeks of the season (they couldn't do much else except intercept passes), but they were still a HORRID pass defense.

The Jets let up big plays because they are a team that plays close, jamming man-to-man all the time. They were also depleted at the safety position (come on, Brodney Pool, the clown that played for Cleveland? and Eric Smith, the dude that's famous for knocking out Boldin?) and provided mediocre help over the top...at best.


Green Bay might have the more complete secondary overall, but Revis and Cromartie are miles better than Woodson and Williams.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 01:22 PM
The Steelers gave up a lot of YPG too...all that means is the corners like to play off their WRs more often than not.

The Patriots had a ton of picks also, and it's one of the main reasons their defense played so well in the final weeks of the season (they couldn't do much else except intercept passes), but they were still a HORRID pass defense.

The Jets let up big plays because they are a team that plays close, jamming man-to-man all the time. They were depleted at the safety position (come on, Brodney Pool, the clown that played for Cleveland? and Eric Smith, the dude that's famous for knocking out Boldin?) and provided mediocre help over the top...at best.


Green Bay might have the more complete secondary overall, but Revis and Cromartie are miles better than Woodson and Williams.

Or to paraphrase - they might not...um... defend the pass as well, but the Jets corners are way better at...um....

They're just better!

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 01:36 PM
Or to paraphrase - they might not...um... defend the pass as well, but the Jets corners are way better at...um....

They're just better!

It's a hard point to argue, especially when teams avoid players like Revis. Same with Asomugha, he's undoubtedly one of the best corners in the game, but there aren't going to be many stats to back that up when teams only go his way 30 times per year.

There are a lot more intangibles that need to be taken into account than YPG and interceptions.

steelerschik
01-28-2011, 01:43 PM
Defensive much? I don't claim to be anything new, nor to have any knowledge of what's to come. Nor would I ever claim that the Steelers don't stand a great chance of winning this game. But I do tend to call people out when they bring foggy reasoning to the table. Bye weeks don't cool hot teams off - opponents do. Both teams are taking the same break and by the look of both of their last games, they need it - neither one looked particularly hot in their conference championships.

I really don't need to "get over myself" since I'm not making any claims in the first place - if you read what I wrote - ever - you'll see I've brought nothing but information with the occasional opinion.

No not defensive at all, just sick of the whole "keep telling yourself that" stuff. I'm just tired of reading garbage and tired of hearing the Steelers can't cover this guy, stop this guy and so on. It gets old especially when they prove time and time again they can stop the guys they aren't supposed to. And opinions are fine, and in my opinion when you take a "hot" team and put them on a 2-week bye, any team not just the SB teams, it absolutely can have a cooling effect. If the team comes out flat, it's hard to rebound from that, but then again I'm not a real big fan of bye weeks and that's one of the reasons. And as I stated I'm not predicting that to happen, just saying it can. Some teams come out and play just horribly after a bye. And you're right, neither of these teams played a whole 60 minutes of football on Sunday which is another reason I can't place GB as anything other than equal to the Steelers. Both teams can come out flat and it come down to the kicker winning it. I just don't see either team dominating the other and God help us if it's another 36-37 game. I hope it's more defensive because the Manning (aka the choker)/Brees type air show SBs bore the crap out of me.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 01:44 PM
It's a hard point to argue, especially when teams avoid players like Revis. Same with Asomugha, he's undoubtedly one of the best corners in the game, but there aren't going to be many stats to back that up when teams only go his way 30 times per year.

There are a lot more intangibles that need to be taken into account than YPG and interceptions.

"Intangibles" is all well and good, but I'd like to see numbers. The only numbers I can dig up anywhere (kind of irks me that nobody is putting out CB ratings/targets/efficiency numbers) point to the Packers corners being on par with the Jets.

This notion that nobody is throwing at the Jets CBs doesn't hold up - they grade out 10th in the league against teams' #1 WRs and 24th in the league against teams' #2 receivers. Not sure how that doesn't point directly at the cornerbacks. (Football Outsiders pass defense stats).

The Packers, by comparison were 3rd in the league against #1 WRs and 5th against #2s.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 01:47 PM
I hope it's more defensive because the Manning (aka the choker)/Brees type air show SBs bore the crap out of me.

Well I don't think you'll be bored with this one. This one should keep you on the edge of your seat - these are two great defenses and nothing is going to come easy in this one. I'd be pretty shocked to see any kind of shootout type game, anyways.

steelerschik
01-28-2011, 01:53 PM
Well I don't think you'll be bored with this one. This one should keep you on the edge of your seat - these are two great defenses and nothing is going to come easy in this one. I'd be pretty shocked to see any kind of shootout type game, anyways.

LOL, I don't like those "edge of your seat" games either. Too much of a heart risk! What ever happened to just having a comfortable lead and being able to sit back, relax, eat, have a wine spritzer and be calm? And I'm a big enough person to say I'd never wish a heart attack on a GB fan either!

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 01:57 PM
"Intangibles" is all well and good, but I'd like to see numbers. The only numbers I can dig up anywhere (kind of irks me that nobody is putting out CB ratings/targets/efficiency numbers) point to the Packers corners being on par with the Jets.

This notion that nobody is throwing at the Jets CBs doesn't hold up - they grade out 10th in the league against teams' #1 WRs and 24th in the league against teams' #2 receivers. Not sure how that doesn't point directly at the cornerbacks. (Football Outsiders pass defense stats).

The Packers, by comparison were 3rd in the league against #1 WRs and 5th against #2s.

You want numbers? Here you go then. Revis is tied with Antoine Winfield at 71 percent for the best success rate in the league amongst cornerbacks. Last year, Woodson's was 57%, so I'm guessing it's high 50s or low 60s at best. Cromartie and Williams are about even (high 40s, low 50s).

What is success rate?

"Success rate is another Football Outsiders game-charting metric that indicates the percentage of plays targeting a defensive player on which the offense was unsuccessful. “Unsuccessful” plays include incompletions, interceptions and the inability to gain 45 percent of necessary conversion yardage on first downs, 60 percent on second downs, and 100 percent on third and fourth down."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=An8VmDH.kNb5N7uAmQJpxsJDubYF?slug=ys-intangibles012711

Revis isn't thrown to that often (58 times according to Yahoo), but he has a very high success rate when he is targeted.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 01:59 PM
After this playoff run, beginning in the last two games of the regular season for the Pack, the edge of my seat is well-worn. There was about a quarter of a game (Atlanta) where I felt almost relaxed in there, but it's been quite a ride. Not sure if it's a good thing to reach your "target heart rate" sitting still on the couch!

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 02:01 PM
You want numbers? Here you go then. Revis is tied with Antoine Winfield at 71 percent for the best success rate in the league amongst cornerbacks. Last year, Woodson's was 57%, so I'm guessing it's high 50s or low 60s at best. Cromartie and Williams are about even (high 40s, low 50s).

What is success rate?

"Success rate is another Football Outsiders game-charting metric that indicates the percentage of plays targeting a defensive player on which the offense was unsuccessful. “Unsuccessful” plays include incompletions, interceptions and the inability to gain 45 percent of necessary conversion yardage on first downs, 60 percent on second downs, and 100 percent on third and fourth down."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=An8VmDH.kNb5N7uAmQJpxsJDubYF?slug=ys-intangibles012711

Love those numbers - would love them even more if they weren't preceded by "I'm guessing" of course... :wink:

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 02:05 PM
If you can find Woodson's for this year, then by all means post it! I couldn't for the life of me, but the percentages have been fairly consistent over the past few years.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 02:13 PM
If you can find Woodson's for this year, then by all means post it! I couldn't for the life of me, but the percentages have been fairly consistent over the past few years.

Not really even concerned with Woodson's so much as Williams and Shields - they're our two cover corners. Woodson doesn't line up that way very much - he's our hybrid guy - nickel/slot corner, strong safety, OLB. It's the guys on the outside who get the matchups with guys like Wallace, Roddy White, DeSean Jackson, etc...

Wish I could get the numbers, like I said. But failing that, we have to infer from the numbers we do have, and those point to a secondary for the Packers that's as good or better than the Jets. And that being the case, there isn't really any way to say that the corners on the Jets are miles ahead of those on the Packers.

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 03:12 PM
My main point was that the Steelers have already dealt with and overcame elite secondaries, so it's not like this will be uncharted territory for them.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 03:23 PM
Their defense is nowhere near as good as the Jets' defense...especially the corners...

Not to be an annoying nitpicker (okay - expressly to be an annoying nitpicker), but you're main point was a little more strongly stated in the above quote.

And yes you did beat the Jets, but not by beating their secondary - wouldn't exactly say that you "overcame" them when you got 5 balls out to wide receivers.

plenewken
01-28-2011, 03:30 PM
Not to be an annoying nitpicker (okay - expressly to be an annoying nitpicker), but you're main point was a little more strongly stated in the above quote.

And yes you did beat the Jets, but not by beating their secondary - wouldn't exactly say that you "overcame" them when you got 5 balls out to wide receivers.

He didn't say we overcame the Jets' secondary, he said "we overcame elite secondaries".
I'm just sayin'.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 03:39 PM
He didn't say we overcame the Jets' secondary, he said "we overcame elite secondaries".
I'm just sayin'.

Not in so many words, but by revolving the discussion around the comparison between the Packers and Jets' secondaries, then saying that his point was that you'd overcome elite secondaries, he kinda did say that.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 03:42 PM
Here's another good one for you in reference to the pass defense of the Packers and how the Steelers might attack it (I know the topic has strayed a bit from the original premise -- sorry about that...)


The Packers defense allowed the lowest completion percentage (44.9) and passer rating (49.3) against play-action, and was the only unit to not allow a TD on a play-action pass.

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 03:47 PM
Not to be an annoying nitpicker (okay - expressly to be an annoying nitpicker), but you're main point was a little more strongly stated in the above quote.

And yes you did beat the Jets, but not by beating their secondary - wouldn't exactly say that you "overcame" them when you got 5 balls out to wide receivers.

You failed to include the next set of words, which stated "and the Steelers overcame that just fine," which WAS my main point and what I was originally getting at, as I said. I don't know what game you were watching, but the game was sealed and won on a passing play...that's overcoming their secondary, especially when it mattered the absolute most. Not to mention the deep play to Brown to seal the Ravens game, again, overcoming an elite secondary (with Ed Reed in it I might add). I want to break away from the "the Jets are better" discussion, because that's not what I had originally intended this to be about, not to mention we've started grasping for straws and the entire discussion is going in circles.

The fact of the matter is that the Steelers overcame Reed, Webb, Revis, and Cromartie...a damn good set of players. Whether the Steelers directly passed all over them or not, they came up with the big plays against them when they needed to, and didn't let any of those players be deciding factors for the other team, which they very well could have been considering their playmaking abilities. Again, getting back to those intangibles that are just as important as stats.

Curdoisseur
01-28-2011, 03:54 PM
It'll be great to see this play out - your offense poses some major challenges for the Packer defense to be sure. Up to the point it's actually played, all of this is just talk, but then I enjoy talk.

LegendSteel
01-28-2011, 04:07 PM
Eh, I jumped the gun a bit...my post sounded a bit mean. Read my edit and discard the post you quoted.

SteelerEmpire
01-28-2011, 04:42 PM
Yea guys... we do have the better Air Force of the two...

BlackNGoldBearer
01-28-2011, 06:36 PM
I mean everyone is so busy sucking up to " Capt America "a.k.a.....Aaron Rodgers,,,or as I like to call him...." Jake Gyllenhaal 2.0 "

Funny, I heard someone else say that too - Jake Gyllenhaal 2.0

I can see that. But I think he looks more like Ringo Starr, and with the #12, I've been calling him "Ringo Starrbach."

To the tune of Octopus's Garden...

"I'd like to be,
ahead by 23,
but Roethlisberger's gotten me outplayed."

Or handed me a grenade..
Or Black and Gold has brought on the brigade...
Or turned us into a buffet...

You get the drift.

BlackNGoldBearer
01-28-2011, 06:54 PM
Oh yeah, back the the topic about who's got the best passing attack...

Who cares! IMO, stats are for losers no matter how you break it down.

The Steelers have had some of the worst offensive games statistically, but manage to WIN games. I don't care if Ringo Starbach throws the ball over the river and through the woods - or over the mountain for that matter. The Steelers manage to put up W's and fill up cabinets with trophies.

Let the statisticians play with calculators...

The Steelers just need to WIN, as freakin' ugly as it may be.

cubanstogie
01-28-2011, 07:37 PM
Oh yeah, back the the topic about who's got the best passing attack...

Who cares! IMO, stats are for losers no matter how you break it down.

The Steelers have had some of the worst offensive games statistically, but manage to WIN games. I don't care if Ringo Starbach throws the ball over the river and through the woods - or over the mountain for that matter. The Steelers manage to put up W's and fill up cabinets with trophies.

Let the statisticians play with calculators...

The Steelers just need to WIN, as freakin' ugly as it may be.

very true', the Steelers aren't concerned with anything but winning. The record doesn't lie. We won last week with a great start and held on. The week before we were down 14 to a great D and came back. One week we couldn't run so Ben had a good day passing. Last week we did run and struggled to consistently pass. In the end though Ben converted on two big pass plays. It doesn't make sense to compare passing attacks. They can't run so have to pass. We stop that and win. We have proven we can win either way. I say offensively we have and advantage due to more balance. If they wan't to say they have a better passing attack so be it. If they say they have a better secondary so be it. We have the best D in the game.

GBpack2010
01-29-2011, 10:27 AM
It couldnt come to down to better teams to fight for the lombardi trophy IMO.

pjfoley4vb
02-07-2011, 12:19 PM
The Packers have the better passing attack. Sorry, but Rodgers RIGHT NOW is the best/hottest quarterback in the NFL. Will he be the best quarterback next year? Probably not. But he will certainly be up there. Big Ben is a big time player, but he isn't a player who throws up big numbers like Rodgers or Brady do. The guy wins and that's all that matters, but when talking about purely a passing offense the Packers is better.

Our wideouts are also better. Our number 3/4 (sometimes James Jones is 3, sometimes Jordy Nelson is 3) wideout had 140 yards and a touchdown last night. I understand Sanders was out for you guys (your number 2) but so was Driver (our number 2). Your loss probably hurt more because we have the depth to have guys just step right in and fill in for the missing piece, but that just goes to show just how good our wide receivers are on this team. Our number one (Jennings) wideout had 2 touchdowns compared to 1 from Wallace (your number 1).

Great game last night, but I think we can put to rest the idea that the Steelers passing attack is as good as the Packers.