The scoring problem has nothing to do with the passing game

[steelfury02]

Originally Posted by Ricco Suavez

This comment alone proves that you are living in the past. Its a new NFL like it or not. The run is now secondary and until someone can either change the rules or can sign an Adrian Petersen on every team and sign several top notch OLinemen then it is not going to change.

yea, the past man, ...man

[Ricco Suavez]

Originally Posted by steelfury02

yea, the past man, ...man

They were good times.

[GoFor7]

Originally Posted by Ricco Suavez

This comment alone proves that you are living in the past. Its a new NFL like it or not. The run is now secondary and until someone can either change the rules or can sign an Adrian Petersen on every team and sign several top notch OLinemen then it is not going to change.

Predictable play calling doesn't help either.

1st down: RUTM
2nd down: RUTM
3rd & long: BEN HELP!

[steelfury02]

Originally Posted by GoFor7

Predictable play calling doesn't help either.

1st down: RUTM
2nd down: RUTM
3rd & long: BEN HELP!

are we talking about now, or the 3 previous predictable seasons before that?

[Millers the sh!t]

Interesting read I guess, but I'm more interested in redzone trips and TD % while in the redzone. You have the info on that?

[GoFor7]

Originally Posted by steelfury02

are we talking about now, or the 3 previous predictable seasons before that?

The previous 3 three seasons were better than 2012.

As for the 2009 season, the offense ranked 12th. While the offense certainly wasn't blameless, that year was known for the defense blowing 4th quarter leads.

Funny though, because after the 2009 season Artie started getting involved and making more demands about what he wanted to see from the offense - and the offense has been worse ever since. Maybe the organization should have wondered why the defense was blowing 4th quarter leads instead of pretending the offense was the main culprit of that season.

[steelfury02]

Steelers 2009 Cumulative Red Zone efficiency:
41 trips, 20 TDs, 15 FGs, 1 missed FG, 5 turnovers

2010:
49 trips, 24 TDs, 19 FGs, 1 missed, 2 turnovers

2011:
53 trips, 27 TDs, still looking for FGs, missed, and turnovers in RZ

EDIT:
49.7 efficiency over 3 years. Sounds a lot like live by the sword and equally die by it offense to me.

Again Gofor7 - why don't you compare an equal body of work, then maybe I'll agree with you.

[Ricco Suavez]

Originally Posted by Millers the sh!t

Interesting read I guess, but I'm more interested in redzone trips and TD % while in the redzone. You have the info on that?

I can only offer my opinion, you and others feel free to give yours. Red Zone was Arians downfall, his teams moved the ball from 20-20 as well as anyone, (it did not help that we are usually near the bottom in starting field position, a product of poor ST and lack of TOs) When inside the 20 you have "shortened the field" and it becomes more difficult to pass the closer you get to the goal line. I.E, on the 20 you have 30 yds of space and on the 5 you have narrowed it to 15, DBs and LBers crowd the line eliminating short quick passes if possible. These situations favor an offense with either a. a competent running game, or b. recievers that are big, and or physical. Arians did not use Heath to his advantage in these situations and if you have paid attention the last few years you know we struggled in short yardage situations. I think if Arians was here to run the offense til we crossed the opponents 20 and then implemented Haleys offense we would of scored more often.

[GoFor7]

Originally Posted by steelfury02

Steelers 2009 Cumulative Red Zone efficiency:
41 trips, 20 TDs, 15 FGs, 1 missed FG, 5 turnovers

2010:
49 trips, 24 TDs, 19 FGs, 1 missed, 2 turnovers

2011:
53 trips, 27 TDs, still looking for FGs, missed, and turnovers in RZ

EDIT:
49.7 efficiency over 3 years. Sounds a lot like live by the sword and equally die by it offense to me.

Again Gofor7 - why don't you compare and equal body of work, then maybe I'll agree with you.

So why did the 2009 offense rank 12th and those offenses rank worse? That year the offense scored more points than in the following 3 years.

Living by the sword and dying by it seems better than possessing the ball, hoping the defense keeps the team in it, and hoping Ben bails everyone out at the end.

[steelfury02]

Originally Posted by Ricco Suavez

I can only offer my opinion, you and others feel free to give yours. Red Zone was Arians downfall, his teams moved the ball from 20-20 as well as anyone, (it did not help that we are usually near the bottom in starting field position, a product of poor ST and lack of TOs) When inside the 20 you have "shortened the field" and it becomes more difficult to pass the closer you get to the goal line. I.E, on the 20 you have 30 yds of space and on the 5 you have narrowed it to 15, DBs and LBers crowd the line eliminating short quick passes if possible. These situations favor an offense with either a. a competent running game, or b. recievers that are big, and or physical. Arians did not use Heath to his advantage in these situations and if you have paid attention the last few years you know we struggled in short yardage situations. I think if Arians was here to run the offense til we crossed the opponents 20 and then implemented Haleys offense we would of scored more often.

yes - you can say by record alone that we witnessed the worst TEAM since 2006, but 8-8 isn't a reflection of any one facet or coordinator alone.

If that were the case, Kordell's 13-3 squad was better than the 08 12-4 team. Record isn't any real indication of progress.

The Patriots game is a fine example of the red zone failures. We won, but were 2/5 in the red zone. God awful. It should have been by a larger margin.