It is currently Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:07 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 7:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:35 pm
Posts: 5003
955876 wrote:
So Tomlin didn't have the personnel to run the defense that's been shown to be effective vs the Pats.

Got it.

However, one could easily argue he also didn't have the personel to run the defense he decided to go with. Results prove that.

So why deploy a scheme that's never shown to be effective? Our D got lit up all day. Receivers where wide open everywhere and Brady didn't even need to bother putting pads on.

If you don't even try to get after the QB you won't. Simple as that.

Further, if you are goin to go down, go down swinging. Playing that lame as scheme they chose was pathetic and embarrassing. Obvious to everyone it has zero chance to succeeed.

I agree our personnel wasn't great. But it wasn't great to run the passive shit they decided to run.

Tomlin is also largely responsible for said personel. Former DC and DB coach yet year after year drafts DB that don't make the team or do and don't make an impact.

He's more part of the problem than he is a victim of circumstance

If you would have preferred to watch Brady pick apart the D because we were blitzing and the blitz wasn't getting there or because we were consistently rushing four, but they weren't getting there, that's fine. I don't need to argue over the best way to watch Brady pick apart the defense. I do know that if you want to stop Brady, you need the pass rushers, and we didn't have them. I don't think it mattered what scheme we would have run.

Yes, Tomlin is responsible for the talent on the team. The defensive players who took us to three super bowls had to be replaced, and Tomlin and co. had to start from scratch. I can agree that I would have liked for the rebuild to have happened faster, but it's not an exact science either. They seem to be on the right track now. I have high hopes for this defense.

If this defense gels as I hope it does and turns into one of the best in the league, don't forget to give Tomlin credit. As you never hesitate to remind us, he is the one in charge after all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 12:10 am
Posts: 465
The bitch of it was the refs allowed a rough pass defense in the AFCC. Watch the tape and how the Pats held and roughed up AB.

We could have gone down swinging. Who cares about the players? We're talking about the Super Bowl and there was one scheme to win. Have some sack and take a risk like a man.

Tomlin chose the face-saving route. He still lost by 20.

Tomlin has about the third-most job security in pro sports (Belichick, Popovich, maybe Stevens) and he's still a pussy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 8:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 3258
Quote:
If you would have preferred to watch Brady pick apart the D because we were blitzing and the blitz wasn't getting there or because we were consistently rushing four, but they weren't getting there, that's fine. I don't need to argue over the best way to watch Brady pick apart the defense. I do know that if you want to stop Brady, you need the pass rushers, and we didn't have them. I don't think it mattered what scheme we would have run.


Yes, I would have preferred to see that. For multiple reasons. It's also does in fact matter what scheme you run.

Now it is quite posssible we lose anyways. So in that regard no it would not have "mattered".

However, the D we chose had zero, zip, nadda, etc etc etc chance if succeeding. Takes but the most novice of observers to know that. What Brady has "put on tape" vs. that scheme over multiple years speaks for itself. So shame on anyone entering a game with that as their strategy.

Further, if you are running that scheme as an omission that you do not have the pass rushers to make the alternative work, then you are also saying you believe your pass defenders to be the stronger part of your defense. That would be quite a stretch for anyone to look at our D last year and say the secondary was the strength. Especially the coaches.

And if you were to also recognize the secondary wasn't a strength either, what was it then you were trying to accomplish by not pass rushing aggressively while at the same time playing a gaping zone?

How do you win with that?

It's also not the D we were running down the stretch during our winning streak. I seem to recall a more aggressive D down the stretch and then come AFCCG we ran out something much different.

You see, in this day and age of defenses not being allowed to play defense combined with being matched-up against a QB/HC duo that excels at using what you do against you, you really have no choice but to do the opposite of what they ran with.

It's not about running a scheme that is going to stone them because unless you have superior defensive talent you won't. What it is about is turning the tide on a handful of possessions. Hitting Brady enough times that he gets his panties in a bunch. And if there is something else Brady has "put on tape" in addition to stellar play that's the fact he cries like a bitch and is far from the same QB in games he gets knocked around.

So you blitz and if it doesn't get there so be it. He will gain as many yards when you give him all day and play zone behind it anyways. Let him complete the pass. But knock him on his ass after he does. Hit him as many times as possible. Be relentless with it. So what if you give up a few 15 yarders in the process. He will get that many yards and more running a gimme crossing route against your passive D.

And one of blitzes just might get there and force a fumble. Or get a sack on third down. Or force an incompletion. And that is that many more chances your offense gets back on the field.

We didn't have the personnel to run either scheme if we are going to use that as an excuse.

We played to not lose and in doing so "lived in our fears"...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 8:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:35 pm
Posts: 5003
955876 wrote:
Quote:
If you would have preferred to watch Brady pick apart the D because we were blitzing and the blitz wasn't getting there or because we were consistently rushing four, but they weren't getting there, that's fine. I don't need to argue over the best way to watch Brady pick apart the defense. I do know that if you want to stop Brady, you need the pass rushers, and we didn't have them. I don't think it mattered what scheme we would have run.


Yes, I would have preferred to see that. For multiple reasons. It's also does in fact matter what scheme you run.

Now it is quite posssible we lose anyways. So in that regard no it would not have "mattered".

However, the D we chose had zero, zip, nadda, etc etc etc chance if succeeding. Takes but the most novice of observers to know that. What Brady has "put on tape" vs. that scheme over multiple years speaks for itself. So shame on anyone entering a game with that as their strategy.

Further, if you are running that scheme as an omission that you do not have the pass rushers to make the alternative work, then you are also saying you believe your pass defenders to be the stronger part of your defense. That would be quite a stretch for anyone to look at our D last year and say the secondary was the strength. Especially the coaches.

And if you were to also recognize the secondary wasn't a strength either, what was it then you were trying to accomplish by not pass rushing aggressively while at the same time playing a gaping zone?

How do you win with that?

It's also not the D we were running down the stretch during our winning streak. I seem to recall a more aggressive D down the stretch and then come AFCCG we ran out something much different.

You see, in this day and age of defenses not being allowed to play defense combined with being matched-up against a QB/HC duo that excels at using what you do against you, you really have no choice but to do the opposite of what they ran with.

It's not about running a scheme that is going to stone them because unless you have superior defensive talent you won't. What it is about is turning the tide on a handful of possessions. Hitting Brady enough times that he gets his panties in a bunch. And if there is something else Brady has "put on tape" in addition to stellar play that's the fact he cries like a bitch and is far from the same QB in games he gets knocked around.

So you blitz and if it doesn't get there so be it. He will gain as many yards when you give him all day and play zone behind it anyways. Let him complete the pass. But knock him on his ass after he does. Hit him as many times as possible. Be relentless with it. So what if you give up a few 15 yarders in the process. He will get that many yards and more running a gimme crossing route against your passive D.

And one of blitzes just might get there and force a fumble. Or get a sack on third down. Or force an incompletion. And that is that many more chances your offense gets back on the field.

We didn't have the personnel to run either scheme if we are going to use that as an excuse.

We played to not lose and in doing so "lived in our fears"...

Well, I will say I'm always a fan of Brady getting hit, so that part has appeal for me. Still don't think we would have stopped him, but sure, might as well hit Brady if possible. I'm not real sure how much we would have actually hit him either.

I remember someone posting shortly after the AFCCG a tweet from someone saying that the Steelers played man against the Patriots three times in the game, and Brady burned them each time.

Think of the times we've seen the Patriots lose in the playoffs. How many of those times came to teams that didn't have pass rushers but instead schemed a pass rush against Brady. I think the answer is zero. Either you have the pass rushers or you don't. I don't see scheming stopping Brady.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 3258
Quote:
If this defense gels as I hope it does and turns into one of the best in the league, don't forget to give Tomlin credit. As you never hesitate to remind us, he is the one in charge after all.


Do you assume I'd have a problem doing so? He's been our coach for 10 years. My bitching bout him started but recently.

I was a fan of his up till a few years ago it started to turn.

If we become a dominant D again and he delivers the goods (another ring) I'd love to heap praise. It's not like I want him to piss me off. Rooney most certainly won't fire the guy.

He will be the longest tenured Steelers coach before it's all said and done.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:36 pm
Posts: 286
There's really only one logical reason for the team not to have played a whole lot more man coverage that day. You have to believe in your heart of hearts they ran some in practice, realized they sucked, and gave up on it, leading up to that game... For what ever reason, they gave up on it. They weren't prepared/coached/practiced enough to feel confident enough to contain Edelman, Amandola, and the Lacrosse player in the AFCC game. Knowing full well what Brady would do, from extensive past experience, they played almost all zone all the time. How anyone can still defend Tomlin after aaaalllll the never ending mind-blowingly retarded moves, I'll never understand.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 3258
Quote:
I don't see scheming stopping Brady.


And if you don't see it, certainly Tomlin and Butler would see it too.

Which brings it back full circle. If nothing you have is going to stop him, at the freaking least make the pansy pay for beating you.

And shit, maybe it just ends up working. Maybe a hit just as he released the pass breaks his finger.

You never know.

If you don't try to hit a great shot you won't.

And maybe stop drafting midget running backs that don't have an NFL position in the third round and use that pick on pass rushers & DBs if you "don't have the personnel".

And while those players might not pan out, at least your mind was in the right place in terms of your process.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:36 pm
Posts: 286
Poltargyst wrote:
955876 wrote:
Quote:
If you would have preferred to watch Brady pick apart the D because we were blitzing and the blitz wasn't getting there or because we were consistently rushing four, but they weren't getting there, that's fine. I don't need to argue over the best way to watch Brady pick apart the defense. I do know that if you want to stop Brady, you need the pass rushers, and we didn't have them. I don't think it mattered what scheme we would have run.


Yes, I would have preferred to see that. For multiple reasons. It's also does in fact matter what scheme you run.

Now it is quite posssible we lose anyways. So in that regard no it would not have "mattered".

However, the D we chose had zero, zip, nadda, etc etc etc chance if succeeding. Takes but the most novice of observers to know that. What Brady has "put on tape" vs. that scheme over multiple years speaks for itself. So shame on anyone entering a game with that as their strategy.

Further, if you are running that scheme as an omission that you do not have the pass rushers to make the alternative work, then you are also saying you believe your pass defenders to be the stronger part of your defense. That would be quite a stretch for anyone to look at our D last year and say the secondary was the strength. Especially the coaches.

And if you were to also recognize the secondary wasn't a strength either, what was it then you were trying to accomplish by not pass rushing aggressively while at the same time playing a gaping zone?

How do you win with that?

It's also not the D we were running down the stretch during our winning streak. I seem to recall a more aggressive D down the stretch and then come AFCCG we ran out something much different.

You see, in this day and age of defenses not being allowed to play defense combined with being matched-up against a QB/HC duo that excels at using what you do against you, you really have no choice but to do the opposite of what they ran with.

It's not about running a scheme that is going to stone them because unless you have superior defensive talent you won't. What it is about is turning the tide on a handful of possessions. Hitting Brady enough times that he gets his panties in a bunch. And if there is something else Brady has "put on tape" in addition to stellar play that's the fact he cries like a bitch and is far from the same QB in games he gets knocked around.

So you blitz and if it doesn't get there so be it. He will gain as many yards when you give him all day and play zone behind it anyways. Let him complete the pass. But knock him on his ass after he does. Hit him as many times as possible. Be relentless with it. So what if you give up a few 15 yarders in the process. He will get that many yards and more running a gimme crossing route against your passive D.

And one of blitzes just might get there and force a fumble. Or get a sack on third down. Or force an incompletion. And that is that many more chances your offense gets back on the field.

We didn't have the personnel to run either scheme if we are going to use that as an excuse.

We played to not lose and in doing so "lived in our fears"...

Well, I will say I'm always a fan of Brady getting hit, so that part has appeal for me. Still don't think we would have stopped him, but sure, might as well hit Brady if possible. I'm not real sure how much we would have actually hit him either.

I remember someone posting shortly after the AFCCG a tweet from someone saying that the Steelers played man against the Patriots three times in the game, and Brady burned them each time.

Think of the times we've seen the Patriots lose in the playoffs. How many of those times came to teams that didn't have pass rushers but instead schemed a pass rush against Brady. I think the answer is zero. Either you have the pass rushers or you don't. I don't see scheming stopping Brady.


It doesn't make a motherfuck if flash lighting is coming unblocked when you play zone. The ball is out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 12:10 am
Posts: 465
Poltargyst wrote:

Well, I will say I'm always a fan of Brady getting hit, so that part has appeal for me. Still don't think we would have stopped him, but sure, might as well hit Brady if possible. I'm not real sure how much we would have actually hit him either.

I remember someone posting shortly after the AFCCG a tweet from someone saying that the Steelers played man against the Patriots three times in the game, and Brady burned them each time.

Think of the times we've seen the Patriots lose in the playoffs. How many of those times came to teams that didn't have pass rushers but instead schemed a pass rush against Brady. I think the answer is zero. Either you have the pass rushers or you don't. I don't see scheming stopping Brady.


This is profoundly dickless reasoning.

Tomlin has a safe job and yet he refuses to take the best chance of winning. Who gives a shit about how much you lose by in the AFCC? Give your players a chance to win.

He "played it safe" and yet the Steelers still lost by 20. They *never* had a chance to win. We all knew this by he first quarter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Steelers defense could be best in AFC
PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 3258
Quote:
Tomlin has a safe job and yet he refuses to take the best chance of winning.


Unfortunately, I think he actually went with the scheme he thought gave him the best chance of winning.

Yet another reason my confidence in him has waned.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], JackSplat58 and 5 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