PDA

View Full Version : Ben’s style? O-line’s Weakness?


NEWstevo
09-27-2011, 08:34 AM
Age old question.

Big Ben is a very prolific passer in the pocket and when he has time, he can pick apart a defense like a Brady or Manning. But unlike most quarterbacks he gets “better” when he is forced to adlib and extend the play.

The obvious down side to adlibbing is that only HE knows what he’s is going to do, where he is going to run, when he is going to pass etc… and that makes it pretty hard to protect him. When the play called said Ben’s gonna go right, the tackle goes right, and yet Ben goes left, guess what happens? Either a TD to Wallace or some 300lb+ end leaves tire marks on #7.

Brady sits back there and paints his nails while his receivers run across the field in front of him. Then dink-dunk, the Patriots have 4 touchdowns.

How many times have we all said: “Man, what if Ben had that much time to throw?” “Can you imagine if Ben had a great offensive line like the Patriots?” “What if Noll had just drafted Marino?”

So my question is this: Is it Ben Roethlisberger’s style to scramble that gets him sacked and beat up? Or is the Steelers’ offensive line just one of the worst in football?

The answer is both. And what’s worse, is that both factors actually INCREASE the other. So as long as Ben plays QB in the ‘Burgh, nothing will change… except the amount of sacks he takes and the amount of rings on his fingers (plural).

I'm just glad he is the toughest QB in football. Oh, and that now he is married too (haha, it's ok to make that joke, right?).

Go Steelers!

cloppbeast
09-27-2011, 09:40 AM
Big Ben is a very prolific passer in the pocket and when he has time, he can pick apart a defense like a Brady or Manning.

He can be a prolific passer in the right conditions, but he absolutely cannot pick apart a defense like Brady or Manning on a consistent basis. The only way one can conlude he can is by making excuses.

But unlike most quarterbacks he gets “better” when he is forced to adlib and extend the play.

Who cares?

He has a great talent at ad-libbing during a football game, but ad-libbing doesn't make for an efficient offense in the NFL. Especially considering defenses have seemed to learn how to handle Ben.

The obvious down side to adlibbing is that only HE knows what he’s is going to do, where he is going to run, when he is going to pass etc… and that makes it pretty hard to protect him. When the play called said Ben’s gonna go right, the tackle goes right, and yet Ben goes left, guess what happens? Either a TD to Wallace or some 300lb+ end leaves tire marks on #7.

So essentially, we're playing the lottery......

Brady sits back there and paints his nails while his receivers run across the field in front of him. Then dink-dunk, the Patriots have 4 touchdowns.

He dinks and dunks down the field and scores TDs in the red-zone. As long as my team scores a TD, I'm happy.

Ben's offense is consistently in the bottom/middle in the red-zone, compared to other offenses. Blame Arians if you want, go ahead. Ben apologists have shown great logicall flexibility in making their excuses.

How many times have we all said: [I]“Man, what if Ben had that much time to throw?” “Can you imagine if Ben had a great offensive line like the Patriots?” “What if Noll had just drafted Marino?”

Why play the "What if......" game? Ben doesn't have a great offensive line like Brady has consistently had. Ben would certainly benefit from a better one. But,

As Mike Tomlin says: "It is what it is......."

So, instead of playing the hypothetical, let's just evaluate how he handles his situation.

I personally think he handles it pretty well.

Essentially he runs the Mike Martz offense. A bunch of 5 and 7 step drops looking for a big play off of long routes which take some time to develop. Admittedly, this offense doesn't mesh welll with a poor offensive line. Overall, in my opinion, this offense just isn't effecient in general. It requires too much physical talent from WRs, too much talent from the o-line. It also requires a physicall gifted quarterback who can hang in the pocket and make deep throws down the field. But, the quarterback doesn't really need much smarts, compared to what it takes to run the west coast system.

The above system is the only system in which Ben would succeed. I think he does pretty well at it. Out of all the people who've run such an offense, he's probably in the top 10 of all time.

Nevertheless, this offense generally sucks. Mike Martz has been fired a million times. Arains only has a job because Dick Lebeau carred his offense to 3 Super Bowls. This is a 90's offense in 2011. I could personally care less how good Ben runs it; I'd still rather have a smart quarterback capable of running an efficient system. And I would definitely prefer a quarterback who can get TDs in the redzone consistently to one who could chuck it deep.

smheart78
09-27-2011, 09:51 AM
"I'm just glad he is the toughest QB in football."
Well put, No other QB can continue the way Ben does with all these hits and pressure. Though, this shouldn't be an excuse for his accuracy. He's in his 7th year and should have his throws in better control. That said, at least he doesn't complain like Vick.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/michael-vick-philadelphia-eagles-backtracks-after-ripping-officials-092611?gt1=39002

After the game where Vick bruised his hand...
''At some point something catastrophic is going to happen,'' Vick said after the game. ''Not to blame the refs or say that it was their fault, it's just one of those unfortunate situations and I just think more precautions should be taken when I'm inside the pocket. If you look at all the replays, I'm on the ground every time and it's unfortunate for myself and it's unfortunate for my team and I'll be lying if I said I wasn't, if I were to sit here and say I wasn't frustrated right now because of that.''

All I can say at this point, is that we knew to have low expectations of the O-line (so should Ben and Arians). Ben, however, is not meeting the expectations set, IMO, based on the last 4 games.

FanSince72
09-27-2011, 10:08 AM
Age old question.

Big Ben is a very prolific passer in the pocket and when he has time, he can pick apart a defense like a Brady or Manning. But unlike most quarterbacks he gets “better” when he is forced to adlib and extend the play.

The obvious down side to adlibbing is that only HE knows what he’s is going to do, where he is going to run, when he is going to pass etc… and that makes it pretty hard to protect him. When the play called said Ben’s gonna go right, the tackle goes right, and yet Ben goes left, guess what happens? Either a TD to Wallace or some 300lb+ end leaves tire marks on #7.

Brady sits back there and paints his nails while his receivers run across the field in front of him. Then dink-dunk, the Patriots have 4 touchdowns.

How many times have we all said: “Man, what if Ben had that much time to throw?” “Can you imagine if Ben had a great offensive line like the Patriots?” “What if Noll had just drafted Marino?”

So my question is this: Is it Ben Roethlisberger’s style to scramble that gets him sacked and beat up? Or is the Steelers’ offensive line just one of the worst in football?

The answer is both. And what’s worse, is that both factors actually INCREASE the other. So as long as Ben plays QB in the ‘Burgh, nothing will change… except the amount of sacks he takes and the amount of rings on his fingers (plural).

I'm just glad he is the toughest QB in football. Oh, and that now he is married too (haha, it's ok to make that joke, right?).

Go Steelers!


I absolutely agree with this!

The way Ben likes to play, I don't think there really IS a perfect O-line for him (unless they start installing side and rear-view mirrors on lineman's helmets).

That said, I DO think the line play could be more consistent so I'm not giving them a pass, but there's a lot of truth to the fact that Ben often causes the problems we see as "bad protection".

Unfortunately, there really is no solution to this problem.
Making Ben a pocket-passer would ruin his style of play (look at what Philly is trying to do with Vick), but letting him run around kills any continuity on the O-line.

A possible solution might be a lighter O-line which would allow them to run around more without getting too gassed, but that would pretty much take away any chance of any "Power" running game.

Seems like a "West Coast" style would be more in order (which I've been saying ought to be done for years), but then the whole macho "Steeler Football" mythos would have to be shelved.

Frankly, I'd rather the Steelers went in a more West Coast direction, but as long as everyone still thinks Joe Greene is going to come trotting out onto the field, that's not gonna happen.

That's a shame because Ben is much more suited to a West Coast game than he is for "Steeler Football".

cloppbeast
09-27-2011, 10:16 AM
That's a shame because Ben is much more suited to a West Coast game than he is for "Steeler Football".

I couldn't disagree with you more.

A quarterback needs diagnose the defense immediatlly and find the right receiver extremely quickly in a west coast system. I rarely even see Ben go through his progressions.

Ten pump fakes and indecision doesn't cut it in a west coast offense.

FanSince72
09-27-2011, 10:33 AM
I couldn't disagree with you more.

A quarterback needs diagnose the defense immediatlly and find the right receiver extremely quickly in a west coast system. I rarely even see Ben go through his progressions.

Ten pump fakes and indecision doesn't cut it in a west coast offense.

I get what you're saying but I could argue that the reason he does as you say is BECAUSE he doesn't have a West Coast offense.

The best way I could describe what we have now is a "Steeler Offense" that wants to be a West Coast offense.

cloppbeast
09-27-2011, 10:43 AM
I get what you're saying but I could argue that the reason he does as you say is BECAUSE he doesn't have a West Coast offense.

Fair enough. I would love to at least try it, to see how well it works. This offense does not belong in the NFL at all.

The best way I could describe what we have now is a "Steeler Offense" that wants to be a West Coast offense.

We don't even have a "Steeler Offense" in my opinion. If we want one, we should go get Shanahan. This offense doesn't revolve around running the ball at all. Arians only calls runs because he ought to, not because he wants to. He doesn't want to get yelled at. Running the ball is not a priority. Arian's sole priority throwing deep. It's almost like watching the Raiders in the 70's.

FanSince72
09-27-2011, 11:01 AM
We don't even have a "Steeler Offense" in my opinion. If we want one, we should go get Shanahan. This offense doesn't revolve around running the ball at all. Arians only calls runs because he ought to, not because he wants to. He doesn't want to get yelled at. Running the ball is not a priority. Arian's sole priority throwing deep. It's almost like watching the Raiders in the 70's.

Well, part of that problem ( a big part) is that we've never tried to replace Bettis.

We got Parker who was more of a Barry Sanders style runner and we tried to turn him into Jerome and we've done that with every back we've had since.

Jerome was one of a kind.

Fully dressed for a game, I'd bet that Jerome actually measured almost four feet from shoulder pad to shoulder pad AND he had extremely powerful legs.
His running style was shoulder down, hit a gap (it didn't have to be a hole) and push.

He'd actually spread the guard and the tackle or the guard and the center apart and he's come popping out the other side like a watermelon pit and then tumble forward for three or four yards.
And if he actually hit a hole and could run, he couldn't be tackled. Tackling Jerome was like trying to tackle a Volkswagen Beetle -- there was nothing to grab because everything was so round.
I used to call him a "260 lb. cage ball with legs".

But Parker, Mendy and even Redman and Moore are NOT Jerome and never will be, yet we still try to make them plow through the line like Bettis and they simply aren't built for it.
If we really wanted to replace Bettis, we should have grabbed Mike Tolbert.
Tolbert is Bettis' twin.
He's built the same way, has strong legs and in uniform he looks exactly like Jerome.
In fact, if you put him in Jerome's jersey and sent him onto the field, people would swear that Jerome came out of retirement.

Parker was more suited to a West Coast / off-tackle running game than he EVER would be for an up-the-middle running game and he ended up doing the same thing that Mendy is doing now; waiting for a hole to open up and ultimately getting hammered behind the line.

I don't really care if we stay with "Steeler Football" or go West Coast, but I just wish we'd pick SOMETHING and stay with it.

If we stay with the power running game, then we need a tailback like Bettis and a solid fullback.
If we go West Coast, then we could probably keep the backs we have now, but we'd have to lighten up the O-line a bit and make them more mobile.

All I know is that whatever we have now isn't working, it's just getting a lot of people hurt and that's not good.

SoCalFan
09-27-2011, 11:18 AM
Nice writeup and I agree,somewhat! Its more simple than everyone is making it out to be! The O-lines protection breaks down before any recievers get open= Ben leaving the pocket and adlibbing! Which happens 75% of the time!!! My blame goes to the O-line... If they could cut that percentage down to 40% Ben would be great!

mizzouristeeler
09-27-2011, 11:28 AM
Nice writeup and I agree,somewhat! Its more simple than everyone is making it out to be! The O-lines protection breaks down before any recievers get open= Ben leaving the pocket and adlibbing! Which happens 75% of the time!!! My blame goes to the O-line... If they could cut that percentage down to 40% Ben would be great!

I agree. Its not like he waits in the ''pocket''(if that's what you call what our line giives him) for six or seven seconds before he scrambles, its more like two or three IMO.:noidea:

tanda10506
09-27-2011, 11:43 AM
Ben's style of play is due to the line, he doesnt just start running around for fun. When the pocket protection is decent he stays in the pocket. The style of offense we have is not short quick passing and this line is so bad that usually a defender is in the backfield in a second or two. Now there are times in the pocket and on the run that he holds on to the ball WAY to long and that is strictly on him, but he doesnt run around just because, his "style" of play is due to the o line.

Fire Haley
09-27-2011, 11:57 AM
Good Ben/Bad Ben - it is what it is...

Ben has known nothing but suckage at O-line as long as he's been a Steeler - - he wouldn't know how to act behind a decent line. They keep putting the same stiffs out there at OT and hope for better results in protecting a $100M investment - that's a poor business decision, no matter how you look at it.

The only thing I can blame Ben for is for him saving his pet hamster, Arians', job - -well that and Ben's ginormous swollen ego in covering up for his steaming piles of crap on the line (except Pouncey).

Run Ben Run

PhantomJB93
09-27-2011, 12:37 PM
It's both. Occasionally Ben holds on too long and gets sacked, but when you have an Oline with a rookie tackle, Jonathan Scott, and Doug Legursky, bad things are going to happen regardless.

Ricco Suavez
09-27-2011, 04:51 PM
Showed a stat on the NFL network earlier. Ben has been sacked more than 60 more times than any other QB since 2006. I for one believe this is the product of #1 a generally inept O-line, #2 Ben holds the ball trying to extend plays, and #3 Arians play calling involves more slower developing plays and less options to dump off for quick gains and efficient runs.

I think the offense should use Bens ability out of the pocket and design more roll outs. More running similar to what I have seen so far will result in 2nd and long and 3rd and long. We need to run better, not just more often. If a fullback is needed than lets hope the coaches see that. IMO the line needs some time to jell and work better as a unit so we can control the line. If we cannot at least reach the level of last years squad then it will truly be a long year.

WickedSteel
09-27-2011, 05:52 PM
It's no coincidence that Ben and Cutler are two of the most sacked QBs in the league. Arians and Martz are twins. They both call these LONG developing pays that involve the QB needing 5-7 seconds to find an open receiver running a fly route up the sideline. This results in the QB's protection breaking down because of poor O line play. The Bears' and Steelers' O lines are without a doubt the two worst in the league. I feel sorry for Cutler because he doesn't have the physical skills to escape the pressure like Ben.

Arians and Ben must figure out that these long routes to speed receivers can't work every time. They need to start hitting receivers on quick slants and get the running game going to keep the defenses honest. If the O line doesn't improve then adjustments need to be made to the offensive scheme. The status quo will simply not work against good defenses.

Rotorhead
09-27-2011, 10:01 PM
Actually u r all forgetting that BA's insistence on long passing routes which take minutes to actually develop also play a part in our problems. Case in pt, in Indy we would run for a loss, try to go deep and either throw it away or get sacked, then go with a short 10-12 yd quick pass for a first down. Obviously the short passing game worked, look at out 3rd down conversions all game long. If we do more of that, our Oline wont have to maintin the blocks for so long, ben wont have to buy as much time while the receivers a breaking out of their 50yd curls. So we have the trifecta of not working working against us.

Riddle_Of_Steel
09-27-2011, 10:16 PM
I couldn't disagree with you more.

A quarterback needs diagnose the defense immediatlly and find the right receiver extremely quickly in a west coast system. I rarely even see Ben go through his progressions.

Ten pump fakes and indecision doesn't cut it in a west coast offense.

And I beg to differ beyond that-- a West Coast offense is based on short, timed routes and very little "reading" of the defense. It involves creating mismatches by spreading a defense out and forcing LBers to cover speedier and taller TEs or slot WRs.

A vertical pasing game like the one we TRY to run requires more decision making on the part of the QB-- he can't just throw the ball to a spot after a 2 step drop and know the WR will there executing the hook on his pattern at the right time. He needs to be cognizant of where his WRs are, and what zones the defense is playing, oftentimes 30 yards downfield from where he stands and with a 1 second transit time on the ball.

The reason we use the pump-fakes is to freeze the defense and allow guys like Mike Wallace a split second to separate from a hesitating defender, NOT because Ben doesn't know who to throw it to or whatever you are trying to say.

I guess this makes me a "Ben apologeticist" or whatever, but I just don't see much accuracy in what you say. The few historic instances when Ben actually had descent protection, he lit up the other teams (2004, 2005, 2007, 2009-- and I use the terms "descent protection" pretty lightly here-- he was sacked 46 times in 2007 when he finished 2nd behind Brady in passing TDs with 32).

And what it comes down to:

Ben would have a LOT more success playing in the Patriot's/Colt's offense, than Brady/Manning would have playing in our offense, behind our Oline.

Folks like you get to say all the time that a better pocket passer who doesn't hold the ball for as long, would get sacked less and our offense would be more "efficient". Oh yeah? I know of a couple other pocket passers that had a pretty thin time behind our Oline.... Leftwich has not survived through week 2 of the preseason behind our Oline since 2008-- he has gotten knocked out for the year twice now before the season even started. Dixon survived for 2 games behind our Oline before his year was ended on IR. Batch got his wrist broken on the very first play from scrimmage in 2009 and barely survived until week 5 (starting from week 3) of last year when Ben came back from his suspension.

If the Oline cannot even give the QB enough time to hand-off the ball or throw a freaking screen pass, you cannot blame the QB or RBs much for a stymied/inconsistent offense....our offense can only go as far as the Oline can block.

Riddle_Of_Steel
09-27-2011, 10:32 PM
Good Ben/Bad Ben - it is what it is...

Ben has known nothing but suckage at O-line as long as he's been a Steeler - - he wouldn't know how to act behind a decent line. They keep putting the same stiffs out there at OT and hope for better results in protecting a $100M investment - that's a poor business decision, no matter how you look at it.

The only thing I can blame Ben for is for him saving his pet hamster, Arians', job - -well that and Ben's ginormous swollen ego in covering up for his steaming piles of crap on the line (except Pouncey).

Run Ben Run

Your posts are entertaining, if nothing else. That one almost made me spit out my dinner on my keyboard....was pretty much spot-on.

cloppbeast
09-28-2011, 08:09 AM
And I beg to differ beyond that-- a West Coast offense is based on short, timed routes and very little "reading" of the defense. It involves creating mismatches by spreading a defense out and forcing LBers to cover speedier and taller TEs or slot WRs.

It may involve creating mismatches, but why does that lessen the necessity of reading a defense? That's just smart offense.

In any event, I didn't necessarilly mean read the defense before the snap. All quarterbacks should do this, no matter their offense scheme. Most defense are pretty good at disquising. So, reading a defense is absolutely not a science; no quarterback is correct every time.

But the west coast offense requires a quarterback to diagnose a defense after the snap and make a decision very quickly. Much more quickly than a Bruce Arians or Mike Martz type of offense. In the latter offense, the WRs run longer, slower developing routes. With 5 and 7 step drops, the quarterback has more time to see if what the defense does after the snap.


The reason we use the pump-fakes is to freeze the defense and allow guys like Mike Wallace a split second to separate from a hesitating defender, NOT because Ben doesn't know who to throw it to or whatever you are trying to say.

Sometimes he uses pump fakes in such a manor, and it works occassionally. I refuse to believe this is the only reason he pump fakes, though. The vast majority of his pump fakes come from indecision.

The few historic instances when Ben actually had descent protection, he lit up the other teams (2004, 2005, 2007, 2009-- and I use the terms "descent protection" pretty lightly here-- he was sacked 46 times in 2007 when he finished 2nd behind Brady in passing TDs with 32).

First of all, you do recognize more goes into taking sacks than just the offensive line. To compare offensive lines by sacks doesn't account for the QBs input. Ben would take sacks no matter what system he played it.

Secondly, outisde of maybe 2007 Ben has never lit up the league, unless you use the term "lit up" more liberally than me.

Ben would have a LOT more success playing in the Patriot's/Colt's offense, than Brady/Manning would have playing in our offense, behind our Oline.

We can agree to disagree in this regard, but I do question the logic you laid out. I'm sure you have other reasons, but your explanation is lacking.

Your basic argument: since Batch (who was run out of Detroit in favor of Joey Harrington), Leftwhich (who was run out of Jacksonville in favor of David Gerrard), and Dixon takes sacks and can't succeed as well as Ben in the Steelers system, this basically means Tom Brady or Peyton Manning couldn't.

steelfury02
09-28-2011, 08:39 AM
This is where I'd like to see some "tale of the tape" and by that I mean taking similar plays by Brady/Manning and putting them up against a similar play by Roethlisberger and seeing where they are different in

1. Reading the defense before snap
2. Reading defense post snap (progressions, pump fakes, etc)
3. Protection
4. Timing and delivery mechanics

Obviously they would have to take a play that is a bread and butter play or one that is used often against a similar look by the defense. That would be some awesome/pain-staking research but would possibly provide some insight. It would not only dissect the QB, but the blocking assignments and route running in general. This would give us a better picture of where these offenses thrive, struggle, and possibly clear the air for QB comparisons sake.

Now, all that said - IMHO - Brady would not be able to make the same unorthodox plays Ben makes when the play breaks down. When receivers are covered, receivers are covered and Brady all of a sudden is very pedestrian against pressure where Ben tends to thrive when flushed. Yes - it is completely different way of approaching the game. They have the speed, timing, and precision and where everything hinges on near-perfect execution and we tend to have more improv plays.

cloppbeast
09-28-2011, 09:34 AM
This is where I'd like to see some "tale of the tape" and by that I mean taking similar plays by Brady/Manning and putting them up against a similar play by Roethlisberger and seeing where they are different in

1. Reading the defense before snap
2. Reading defense post snap (progressions, pump fakes, etc)
3. Protection
4. Timing and delivery mechanics

I have equal interest. I would love to see that.

Now, all that said - IMHO - Brady would not be able to make the same unorthodox plays Ben makes when the play breaks down. When receivers are covered, receivers are covered and Brady all of a sudden is very pedestrian against pressure where Ben tends to thrive when flushed.

There's two different kinds of pressure: pressure from offensive line breaking down, and pressure created artifically from blitzes.

Brady is absolutely the best quarterback I've ever seen against the blitz; which explains why he does so well against Pittsburgh. Ben doesn't impress me against blitzes, on the other hand.

However, Ben does well with probably the most porous line by using his brute. We have yet to see Brady play behind such a bad o-line. I think it's safe to say Brady would handle the situation differently than Ben by getting rid of the ball more quickly. Brady uses his brain, Ben uses his brawn.

Would Brady do better than Ben in the same system? Who knows. That's what makes in interesting and fun to talk about.


And let's be fair, Brady has played behind the greatest coach of all time. Ben has had a pretty mediocre OC most of his career. Without Belichick, Brady would never have gotten so good.

Then again, Belicheck couldn't have turned just anybody into such a good quarterback. So while it's unfair, at the same time, you can't really take anything away from Brady either. Right place, right time; the stars alligned with Brady and Belicheck.

lotas
09-28-2011, 09:55 AM
Ben has never really been able to play QB the way Manning and Brady play. He plays more like a schoolyard football QB style than predetermined, mental QB. It's frustrating when 3/4 passing plays break down and Ben has the ball for more than a few seconds. That's always frustrated me watching the Steelers. Why can't we design pass plays where the ball is out in 2-3 seconds and the line's role is minimized? Why do we only make those plays maybe 1 out of every 4 we throw?

I can't even remember how many times Brady and the Patriots have completely pulled us apart by throwing 8-12yd passes to Welker, Troy Brown, enter Pats receiver here, where the ball is out in a few seconds before our D even has a chance to apply pressure.

That being said, I saw a few throws from Ben this last game that looked absolutely great. A few got away from him, but there were also several that were spot on, Manning/Brady/Rivers style throws. That's good hope. Maybe he hasn't reached his peak yet as a QB. Let's hope.

That deep TD to Wallace showed great promise. They silently communicated that play moments before the snap, and executed it perfectly. That would be great to see that tandem develop more and more this season into a Brady/Moss type of scenario.

/my one post a month :)

Go Steelers!

steelerjim58
09-28-2011, 01:42 PM
Then again, Belicheck couldn't have turned just anybody into such a good quarterback. So while it's unfair, at the same time, you can't really take anything away from Brady either. Right place, right time; the stars alligned with Brady and Belicheck.

But he did turn just anybody into a good qb. He took a nobody , 6th round draft pick, who was as pitiful looking an athlete as you will find and turned him into the most over rated qb of all time. That offense has always been about the dink and dunk, and dont bring up the Moss years, in the final analysis it was still the dink and dunk that was the bread and butter than also. And if you want to run that offense he is the man for you. I honestly believe that a great many qbs if given the opportunity to learn and grow with the same system as brady has been, thay would be wildly successful also.

bornaSteelersfan
09-29-2011, 12:36 AM
Sorry, steelerjim, but give credit where it is due. Tom Brady came into that offense as a rookie and got a chance when Bledsoe went down. He did everything right and won the starting job over a QB everyone thought was one of the best in the league. He didn't have any time to "learn and grow" with the system as you say. It also seems when he has a bad day or is injured, the Pats don't win. The Pats go as Brady goes and that is the truth. While I despise them, I respect them.

cloppbeast
09-29-2011, 07:43 AM
But he did turn just anybody into a good qb. He took a nobody , 6th round draft pick

What a fallacious thought.

He may have been a 6th round pick, but he wasn't a 6th round talent. These GMs and scouts don't evaluate talent perfectly; they missed when they let Brady slide to the 6th round.

Will you argue Alex Smith was better than Aaron Rodgers? After all, Smith was taken 20 picks earlier.

If we had a draft today with all the NFL players, Tom Brady would probably get picked first, or at least in the top 5.

That offense has always been about the dink and dunk, and dont bring up the Moss years, in the final analysis it was still the dink and dunk that was the bread and butter than also.

First of all, I disagree. They aren't solely dink and dunk. They certainly dink and dunk against the Steelers because it's the proper game plan against LeBeau's defense. This season he ranks 1st with 9.98 yards per attempt. Last year he ranked 5th with 7.93 yards per attempt.

Further, dinking and dunking isn't as easy as you think it is. Many other quarterbacks come from dink and dunk systems and Tom Brady is the best out of them all. And frankly, I don't care how many times he has to throw the ball in order to work his way down the field as long as his offense scores TDs. Tom Brady scores TDs in the red-zone, unlike your golden boy.

And if you want to run that offense he is the man for you. I honestly believe that a great many qbs if given the opportunity to learn and grow with the same system as brady has been, thay would be wildly successful also.

The Patriots, ala Belicheck, don't think so. Otherwise they wouldn't pay him so much; they would just find one of those other "great many qbs....... who would be wildly successful also" and save a little money - and we all know about the Patriot's thrift; they always look for ways to save money. They obviously feel Brady has unique talent, making him worth the money. So, sorry, I'll take their word for it over yours.

Rick5895
09-29-2011, 10:42 AM
Fair enough. I would love to at least try it, to see how well it works. This offense does not belong in the NFL at all.



We don't even have a "Steeler Offense" in my opinion. If we want one, we should go get Shanahan. This offense doesn't revolve around running the ball at all. Arians only calls runs because he ought to, not because he wants to. He doesn't want to get yelled at. Running the ball is not a priority. Arian's sole priority throwing deep. It's almost like watching the Raiders in the 70's.

My thoughts exactly, we seem to be very much like the 70's Raiders, difference being the raiders of the 70's had HOF offensive lineman in Shell and Upshaw.

cloppbeast
09-29-2011, 10:57 AM
My thoughts exactly, we seem to be very much like the 70's Raiders, difference being the raiders of the 70's had HOF offensive lineman in Shell and Upshaw.

I vaguely recall the Raiders having the ability to run the ball too. They just didn't make it a priority, at least compared to their contemperaries.

steelerjim58
09-29-2011, 01:51 PM
The Patriots, ala Belicheck, don't think so. Otherwise they wouldn't pay him so much; they would just find one of those other "great many qbs....... who would be wildly successful also" and save a little money - and we all know about the Patriot's thrift; they always look for ways to save money. They obviously feel Brady has unique talent, making him worth the money. So, sorry, I'll take their word for it over yours.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you look closely I said a qb who could learn and grow with the system, which is what brady has been able to do for 10 years. If belichick sticks around long enough the next qb will put up numbers comparable to brady.

cloppbeast
09-29-2011, 02:48 PM
If you look closely I said a qb who could learn and grow with the system, which is what brady has been able to do for 10 years. If belichick sticks around long enough the next qb will put up numbers comparable to brady.

Cassel sat behind Brady for three seasons learning the system before he got to play, and he didn't put up numbers close to Brady's. Cassel isn't a half bad quarterback, either. Cassel threw 21 TDs, 11 INTs, took 41 sacks, lost 5 fumbles, for a rating of 89 with the Patriots. Not bad by any stretch, but not Tom Brady good.

Fire Haley
09-29-2011, 03:17 PM
Your posts are entertaining, if nothing else. That one almost made me spit out my dinner on my keyboard....was pretty much spot-on.

here's another one



Cotchery better get his ass on the field and score some points or I'll trade him for an OT - - Coach Killer


I have spoken