Rooney wants old Steelers offense

[BigRick]

Originally Posted by Raw Steel

Part of the reason Arians was not retained is because Art II wants to get back to old Steeler football, at least to a degree. Expect a fullback at Heinz Field in 2012.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/74...?eleven=twelve

Then they better start by getting a decent OL. I know the Steelers aren't big players in the free agent market, but it's time to step up.

[Whodis]

Originally Posted by Raw Steel

Part of the reason Arians was not retained is because Art II wants to get back to old Steeler football, at least to a degree. Expect a fullback at Heinz Field in 2012.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/74...?eleven=twelve

YDR had a quote from the great Jon Witman saying how hard it was watching a RB trying to run without a FB to open holes.

[Curtain_of_Steel]

With the Rooneys basically pushing the run,, dont be surprised if Wallace signs an offer sheet elsewhere.
Pats could easy blow late 1st round picks on him n a ton of cash.

We fo not have the rbs or oline to be a running team, nor the cash to bring in players.

[FanSince72]

Originally Posted by Raw Steel

Part of the reason Arians was not retained is because Art II wants to get back to old Steeler football, at least to a degree. Expect a fullback at Heinz Field in 2012.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/74...?eleven=twelve

That's exactly what I've been saying and I hope his comments are more rhetorical than sincere because it would be a shame to allow all of the receiving talent we have as well as a QB who's genetically built to throw a football turned into little more than spectators just because of some mythological vision of "Steeler Football" and one man's resistance to change.

I'd like to see a fullback too and a power back like Bettis (John Clay, anyone?), but only to serve as one of many things we can do and to be used strategically when needed while still favoring a passing game overall.

I think the days of being "one thing" are gone and to be truly successful in today's league a team needs to be many things and needs to be able to adapt to a given situation.

[jjpro11]

Originally Posted by Curtain_of_Steel

With the Rooneys basically pushing the run,, dont be surprised if Wallace signs an offer sheet elsewhere.
Pats could easy blow late 1st round picks on him n a ton of cash.

We fo not have the rbs or oline to be a running team, nor the cash to bring in players.

and they're offense would pretty much be unstoppable. they don't even have a deep threat, yet their tight ends still are able to get open at will underneath... imagine if they got someone like Wallace to take the top off of defenses. my worse fear regarding Wallace is that he leaves and heads straight to New England. Brady gets all the time in the world thanks to his O-line to allow plays to develop downfield... we saw what they could do with a top flight deep threat in 2007.. i know they didn't win the Super Bowl, but nobody wants to see them play like that again.

[4xSBChamps]

Originally Posted by Raw Steel

Part of the reason Arians was not retained is because Art II wants to get back to old Steeler football, at least to a degree. Expect a fullback at Heinz Field in 2012.

after watching the Steelers offense in recent seasons, imagine my surprise when last week's SI arrived

I thought this formation (tailback behind the fullback, behind the quarterback, behind the center) had been outlawed years-ago

Originally Posted by tanda10506

I would like to move in that direction but ultimately we still need to pass at least 50% of the time.

2008 ~ 460 rushes, 506 pass attempts + 49 sacks = 555 pass plays
45.3% / 54.7%

2009 ~ 428 rushes, 536 pass attempts + 50 sacks = 586 pass plays
42.2% / 57.8%

2010 ~ 471 rushes, 479 pass attempts + 43 sacks = 522 pass plays
47.4% / 52.6%

2011 ~ 434 rushes, 539 pass attempts, + 40 sacks = 579 pass plays
42.8% / 57.2%

running the ball frequently will help keep opposing defenses honest, and prevent them from teeing-off on our QB (who is averaging just-under 3 sacks per-game, and a similar number of broken bones each season), and make our passing game even more dangerous:
maybe he'll reach his 35th birthday without needing to use a walker

if you believe (as I do) that this year's Steeler team wasn't a serious threat to win the Super Bowl depsite it's 12-4 record, you'll see that the 2 most recent successful seasons (2008 SB Champs, 2010 Conference Champs) had the run/pass ratio closer to 50/50, and that the weak 2009 & 2011 teams were 42/58-ish:
besides, we play in a physically-demanding, foul-weather division, so running the ball is important

[steelfury02]

Funny how defenses and ability to run the ball effectively in key situations is still the recipe for success

Furthermore - one could argue that even the Pats defense has stepped it up in time for playoffs. Lastly - the Green Bay offense did in fact look fantastic against us in SB XLV - but a pick 6 and a critical forced fumble on Mendy is what truly won them the game - opportunistic defense won the day. If we wouldn't have turned it over I fully believe we would have won.

[FanSince72]

Originally Posted by steelfury02

Funny how defenses and ability to run the ball effectively in key situations is still the recipe for success

Furthermore - one could argue that even the Pats defense has stepped it up in time for playoffs. Lastly - the Green Bay offense did in fact look fantastic against us in SB XLV - but a pick 6 and a critical forced fumble on Mendy is what truly won them the game - opportunistic defense won the day. If we wouldn't have turned it over I fully believe we would have won.

And the operative phrase is "in key situations" which is a lot different than "all the time".

[steelfury02]

exactly - balance for the sake of balance means nothing - but some innovation, creativity and less predictability means quite a lot.

"Old Steelers football" is long dead and in no way do I want that back. Slinging it 40 to 50 times a game doesn't work consistently and especially in the playoffs either. Sure you can beat a really awful defense that way - but you are ripe for the pickin (and your QB a beatin) if you think you can do that against playoff defenses.

Not saying I hate Bruce Arians as a person - but Ben covered up for him quite a bit IMHO and regardless of what anyone thinks or if they agree - that is and will be his legacy.

[FanSince72]

Originally Posted by steelfury02

exactly - balance for the sake of balance means nothing - but some innovation, creativity and less predictability means quite a lot.

"Old Steelers football" is long dead and in no way do I want that back. Slinging it 40 to 50 times a game doesn't work consistently and especially in the playoffs either. Sure you can beat a really awful defense that way - but you are ripe for the pickin (and your QB a beatin) if you think you can do that against playoff defenses.

Not saying I hate Bruce Arians as a person - but Ben covered up for him quite a bit IMHO and regardless of what anyone thinks or if they agree - that is and will be his legacy.

I don't want to argue about Arians anymore other than to say that although he may not have been the ideal OC for this team, his ideas about opening up the passing game were not wrong.

You're absolutely right that balance is what it's all about.
But to install a running game as the main event when we have a boatload of receiving talent and a QB who loves to throw would be nothing short of ridiculous.