It is currently Tue May 22, 2018 5:45 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 6499
GreekSteel wrote:
Lifelongsteel wrote:
Bud and Jarvis had two completely different approaches to accomplishing the same result (or lack of results)

Man, this team struggles to DEVELOP the OLB and CB positions.



fixed it for you..and that lack of development is an indictment on TOMLIN and HIS COACHES

I’m leaning more to the development aspect also. Not all these players can be this bad...can they?

_________________
"They're standing around, Butz!" - Kevin O'Shea


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:10 am
Posts: 966
86n96 wrote:
Worilds absolutely fucked this team when he retired. The fact that Colbert can't draft a pass rusher to save his life doesn't help, either. Unless I'm mistaken, in 17 years, Colbert has drafted exactly 2 serviceable starters at OLB: Haggans and Woodley. That's fucking horrible. I mean, I guess you could give him credit for bringing Debo in, but that was more Harrison's agent leveraging him onto the roster because Cowher wanted another client of his. IMO, Tomlin and Colbert should both be gone. The Superbowl equity has expired.

I would give the Haggans pick to Porter, if I remember he convinced the Steelers to take him.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 7:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:33 pm
Posts: 15736
Dupree isn't so far off of Joey Porter's first three seasons numbers, and is ahead of the pace of Gildon and Worilds. If Bud turns into a Worilds that doesn't quit the game right when he finally starts playing, that would be great. It's not impossible-- remember what Worilds looked like at this point of his career.

_________________
Suwanee88 wrote:
But it’s your fault that you are kind of a stubborn jagoff that would argue with a fence post


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 8:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:45 pm
Posts: 12594
Really the thing that kills me is observing Dud as he watches plays unfold. Stands there and does nothing to contribute to the tackle. Does nothing but stop his pursuit and watch. The part that kills me the most is he has the best seat in the house to watch games. If you go back and watch Dupree you'd see him in the midst of the play looking like, "oh good someone else got 'em" as he stops his play. It's infuriating. I agree with the post that claimed they panicked with the Burns pick. You know how they like to sprint to the podium. Burns is soft like Dupree.

_________________
Tomlin wrote:
You Know; Really Not A Lot To Say. I Really Don't Plan A Lot For These Moments http://www.steelers.com/videos/videos/T ... b99b3e2551


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 9:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:43 pm
Posts: 3794
So if they sign the 5th year it only guaranteed if he injured. If they cut him before the new season we are not charged cap wise


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:14 pm
Posts: 1600
Yeah, maybe Bud will turn out to be a 'Dud', but I think the 3-4 scheme that we employ also plays a big part in the diminishing returns of our pass rushing OLBs. Even Worilds was not really all that good, and only flashed late before retiring.

I keep saying this but our scheme sucks, it confuses our players, makes them think too much, negates their gifts, their athleticism. I will give you an example of what I mean in terms of how other teams avoid this paralysis by analysis.

Carl Lawson. Seemingly everyone on SteelerFury wanted the Steelers to draft this edge rusher. Would be perfect as one of our OLBs I was told. I didn't see it because I saw a player who would not be great dropping into coverage or at setting the edge. I do think he would have been perfect in a 4-3 defense where he was part of a rotation and was allowed to just seek and destroy as a pass rusher.

This is what Cincy did. They took this player and said hey we don't care if you can set the edge, we don't care if you can't drop into coverage, see that QB? Put him on the ground.

Carl Lawson played in all 16 games as a rookie and was officially credited with just one game started. He played 42% of the defensive snaps, he played in a rotation. He had 8 sacks as a rookie. He only had 15 tackles on the year, 10 of them solo. Again, the Bengals found a way to maximize this young man's talents. If he were playing 85% of the snaps as a 3-4 OLB he would probably be exposed as a pretty poor defender against the run, he would probably also be abused in pass coverage, and he might also see his pass rushing suffer due to his head swimming with trying to keep up with this assignment or that, this responsibility or that. In effect he might be another Bud Dupree.

But Lawson is not Bud Dupree and it is because of the scheme and having less responsibilities. He is in a defense that allows him to play fast, play hard and just pass rush. This stuff is not that hard, it is really easy in my mind. Only in Pittsburgh have we taken playing defense to the point where it is so damn complicated.

Fix the scheme, fix the pass rush. 4-3 teams draft 6'2" 250-260 pass rushers all the time and play them as DEs and have great success. We take these same players and then proceed to confuse them and put too much on their plates and neuter them. It really is that simple and clear cut, at least to me anyway.

Look at Brandon Graham of Philly. He was not setting the world on fire as a 3-4 OLB in Philly. Then Schwartz comes in changes the defense to a 4-3 and Graham responds with his best play ever as a pass rusher. Graham would be just as ineffective as Dupree if we had drafted him and played him in our 3-4 defense.

_________________
We have got to come up with a better name for 'sub package defense'!! Any ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:06 am
Posts: 9019
Scunge wrote:
Yeah, maybe Bud will turn out to be a 'Dud', but I think the 3-4 scheme that we employ also plays a big part in the diminishing returns of our pass rushing OLBs. Even Worilds was not really all that good, and only flashed late before retiring.

I keep saying this but our scheme sucks, it confuses our players, makes them think too much, negates their gifts, their athleticism. I will give you an example of what I mean in terms of how other teams avoid this paralysis by analysis.

Carl Lawson. Seemingly everyone on SteelerFury wanted the Steelers to draft this edge rusher. Would be perfect as one of our OLBs I was told. I didn't see it because I saw a player who would not be great dropping into coverage or at setting the edge. I do think he would have been perfect in a 4-3 defense where he was part of a rotation and was allowed to just seek and destroy as a pass rusher.

This is what Cincy did. They took this player and said hey we don't care if you can set the edge, we don't care if you can't drop into coverage, see that QB? Put him on the ground.

Carl Lawson played in all 16 games as a rookie and was officially credited with just one game started. He played 42% of the defensive snaps, he played in a rotation. He had 8 sacks as a rookie. He only had 15 tackles on the year, 10 of them solo. Again, the Bengals found a way to maximize this young man's talents. If he were playing 85% of the snaps as a 3-4 OLB he would probably be exposed as a pretty poor defender against the run, he would probably also be abused in pass coverage, and he might also see his pass rushing suffer due to his head swimming with trying to keep up with this assignment or that, this responsibility or that. In effect he might be another Bud Dupree.

But Lawson is not Bud Dupree and it is because of the scheme and having less responsibilities. He is in a defense that allows him to play fast, play hard and just pass rush. This stuff is not that hard, it is really easy in my mind. Only in Pittsburgh have we taken playing defense to the point where it is so damn complicated.

Fix the scheme, fix the pass rush. 4-3 teams draft 6'2" 250-260 pass rushers all the time and play them as DEs and have great success. We take these same players and then proceed to confuse them and put too much on their plates and neuter them. It really is that simple and clear cut, at least to me anyway.

Look at Brandon Graham of Philly. He was not setting the world on fire as a 3-4 OLB in Philly. Then Schwartz comes in changes the defense to a 4-3 and Graham responds with his best play ever as a pass rusher. Graham would be just as ineffective as Dupree if we had drafted him and played him in our 3-4 defense.



It could be that for sure but then Dud Dupree could be another Jervis. You're probably right tho and thats why Harrison did indeed have something left. I mean if your scheme is neutering your players, ya change the scheme or fire these turds who are neutering them. Id personally be more inclined to fire these dumbasses and change the scheme.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 3870
1994 called and they want their scheme back. What we do fools nobody. Evidenced by the fact green ass rooks and crap QBs can have career days against us.

Steve Young (who I think is a douche) made a point a few years back about our defense being more complicated to run than it is to decipher. He said it’s actually not that complicated to exploit.

Pair that with rule changes that favor the offenses heavily and all signs point to a change in order.

Call me crazy but I want my dline and linebackers to worry about stopping the run and killing the QB while my CBs & safeties worry about coverage.

If I’m blessed to have a linebacker that excels at both then bonus.

What I dont want is a linebacker who’s mediocre to ill equipped in coverage spending a lot of time doing so.

And the days of thinking it’s ingenious to drop a dline into coverage are long gone. All it does is provide an opportunity to get exploited.


Last edited by 955876 on Thu Feb 01, 2018 2:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:06 am
Posts: 9019
955876 wrote:
1994 called and they want their scheme back. What we do fools nobody. Evidenced by the fact green ass rooks and crap QBs can have career days against us.

Steve Young (who I think is a douche) made a point a few years back about our defense being more complicated to run than it is to decipher. He said it’s actually not that complicated to exploit.

Pair that with rule changes that favor the offenses heavily and all signs point to a change in order.

Call me crazy but I want my dline and linebackers to worry about stopping the run and killing the QB while my CBs & safeties worry about coverage.

If I’m blessed to have a linebacker that excels at both then bonus.

What I dont want is a linebacker who’s mediocre to I’ll equiped in coverage spending a lot of time doing so.


And the days of thinking it’s ingenious to drop a dline into coverage are long gone. All it does is provide an opportunity to get exploited.




Tomlins got this...just be patient, its only year 8 of his rebuild. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Starkey nails it on Dud Dupree
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 5341
bradshaw2ben wrote:
Dupree isn't so far off of Joey Porter's first three seasons numbers, and is ahead of the pace of Gildon and Worilds. If Bud turns into a Worilds that doesn't quit the game right when he finally starts playing, that would be great. It's not impossible-- remember what Worilds looked like at this point of his career.


Good points. I'm not sure why some people are acting like Worilds was some amazing draft pick/elite rusher. The guy pretty much stunk his first three years and then had two VERY slightly above average years before he retired. The reason it was a shock was because we were very very thin at the position as it was.
This waxing poetic about Worilds is comical.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group