It is currently Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:27 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 12:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:14 pm
Posts: 1262
No, I do not think he is a great pass catching RB if you are comparing him to say somebody like Marshall Faulk.

In 2014 Bell was Faulk-like, but that was before the knee injuries.

In 2014 he averaged 10.3 yards per catch and had 10 receptions over 20+ yards and 3 of those were over 40+ yards. That is explosive, that is dangerous.

In 2017 he is averaging 5.2 yards per catch and has 0 receptions over 20+ yards. If you count the 3 playoff games, if you look at his last 9 games played he is averaging 4.7 yards per catch. We are seeing him tackled and brought down for negative yardage, on both carries and catches, with more frequency.

When you look at how much they target him in the passing game, and how ineffective he is at getting first downs, well, I for one wish they would look elsewhere to pick up first downs. In 2014, yeah, throwing to Bell was a great option but now? Let us try something else.

Bell has been targeted 39 times and has only 8 first downs to show for it. A 20% first down percentage blows. In 2014 that first down percentage on targets was 40%.

Throwing to Bell to pick up first downs seems pointless to me. And having pass plays that are designed with that in mind are doubly so. I look at JuJu who has a stranglehold on that slot WR job now. He has been targeted 23 times and has 12 first downs to show for it. That 52% leads the team. Brown is only at 40%.

I get that people think Bell is back, everything is fine, but our offense is still not good. For all of that rushing yards, for all of that time of possession in this past game, the score was 12 -10 with 6:13 on the clock. Then it was 19-13 with KC at the Pittsburgh 40 with 1:12 left. I fail to see how this offense is going to get past NE and get us to the Super Bowl and win it playing this small ball. All we are doing is giving the opposing team more chances to stay in the game and putting more pressure on our defense to lose it in the end. And all because our offense can't score points.

Forget about 30 points a game, I would be happy with 24 points a game, isn't that possible? Please? Minus the special teams TD, this offense is scoring 18.5 points per game.

This infatuation with Bell and this propaganda of him being like a WR out there is bullshit. They need to be using JuJu and hell, even Rogers on picking up first downs, they need to be getting the TEs involved as well. Haley/Ben are making it too easy for this offense to stall by ignoring all of these other options. A big part of it is all of this excessive targets to Bell.

I have always preached about having a RB who could catch 60 passes and run for over 1,000 yards, but they are taking it to an extreme where it is counter productive. Again, is Bell getting 100 receptions but averaging 5 yards a catch in the best interest of this team, of this offense. Wouldn't it be better if Bell had 60 receptions for the season and that surplus of 40 receptions went to JuJu and Vance McDonald? I think that it would, and I think that would make an offense that could score 30 points a game.

_________________
The Steelers have a greater chance of finding a Unicorn, or a Sasquatch, or the Loch Ness Monster than they do in finding another great 3-4 OLB.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 1:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am
Posts: 6827
^

Great post. I just saw Tennessee hang 35 at home. We score 9 against the Jags. Something is not right with this offense and it won’t be until Haley gets rid of the stale, unimaginative playcalling.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 7:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:31 pm
Posts: 791
FC wrote:
I would be happy if Bell did not line up a single play out wide.

Bell is an elite runner

Bell is a threat anytime he touches the ball

Linebackers safeties Dlinemen have to account for Bell when he is lined up at running back

Throwing windows expand when defenders are hesitant...Bell slows down front 7's


Totally agree!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 7:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 7983
Scunge wrote:
I get that people think Bell is back, everything is fine, but our offense is still not good.


Literally no one on the board thinks that everything is now magically fine.

_________________
Frank Sinatra, Jr. 'Black Night'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdwl7X6Jruo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:47 am
Posts: 3556
Scunge wrote:
No, I do not think he is a great pass catching RB if you are comparing him to say somebody like Marshall Faulk.

In 2014 Bell was Faulk-like, but that was before the knee injuries.

In 2014 he averaged 10.3 yards per catch and had 10 receptions over 20+ yards and 3 of those were over 40+ yards. That is explosive, that is dangerous.

In 2017 he is averaging 5.2 yards per catch and has 0 receptions over 20+ yards. If you count the 3 playoff games, if you look at his last 9 games played he is averaging 4.7 yards per catch. We are seeing him tackled and brought down for negative yardage, on both carries and catches, with more frequency.

When you look at how much they target him in the passing game, and how ineffective he is at getting first downs, well, I for one wish they would look elsewhere to pick up first downs. In 2014, yeah, throwing to Bell was a great option but now? Let us try something else.

Bell has been targeted 39 times and has only 8 first downs to show for it. A 20% first down percentage blows. In 2014 that first down percentage on targets was 40%.

Throwing to Bell to pick up first downs seems pointless to me. And having pass plays that are designed with that in mind are doubly so. I look at JuJu who has a stranglehold on that slot WR job now. He has been targeted 23 times and has 12 first downs to show for it. That 52% leads the team. Brown is only at 40%.

I get that people think Bell is back, everything is fine, but our offense is still not good. For all of that rushing yards, for all of that time of possession in this past game, the score was 12 -10 with 6:13 on the clock. Then it was 19-13 with KC at the Pittsburgh 40 with 1:12 left. I fail to see how this offense is going to get past NE and get us to the Super Bowl and win it playing this small ball. All we are doing is giving the opposing team more chances to stay in the game and putting more pressure on our defense to lose it in the end. And all because our offense can't score points.

Forget about 30 points a game, I would be happy with 24 points a game, isn't that possible? Please? Minus the special teams TD, this offense is scoring 18.5 points per game.

This infatuation with Bell and this propaganda of him being like a WR out there is bullshit. They need to be using JuJu and hell, even Rogers on picking up first downs, they need to be getting the TEs involved as well. Haley/Ben are making it too easy for this offense to stall by ignoring all of these other options. A big part of it is all of this excessive targets to Bell.

I have always preached about having a RB who could catch 60 passes and run for over 1,000 yards, but they are taking it to an extreme where it is counter productive. Again, is Bell getting 100 receptions but averaging 5 yards a catch in the best interest of this team, of this offense. Wouldn't it be better if Bell had 60 receptions for the season and that surplus of 40 receptions went to JuJu and Vance McDonald? I think that it would, and I think that would make an offense that could score 30 points a game.


Great stuff Scunge

I have seen a lot of angst on the board this season over Ben's deep ball. I'm not worried at all, and here's why...

A couple seasons ago Ben went on a streak rivaling Bradshaw at throwing the deep ball. I have never seen a better deep ball thrower than Bradshaw. Ben was that good.

I argued on the board at that time that we needed to keep throwing them. We were not among the great offenses in the league in terms of efficiency, but on any given day we were the most dangerous.

I don't know if we are going to see that version of Ben again. But we don't have to.

I agree with Scunge, that if we win the Lombardi this season the offense is going to look similar to what he laid out in his post.

It might be more running the football to set up the pass and that's fine with this current group. Whatever works. Most importantly it's what we do with the passing game when we do throw the football.

I'm much more concerned about the mid range game than the deep ball with this version of Ben. We aren't winning the Lombardi living off the horizontal bullshit and dump offs to Bell. We have to get wr's and McDonald running free over the vertical middle of the field.

We also have to find a way to improve in the RZ as we all know.


Last edited by Havoc on Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 3245
He used to be a great receiving back. Before the injuries. Scunge is 100% correct. A great third down back has to have speed to create mismatches. Bell doesn't have that anymore. Does anyone remember the play versus KC where Bell catches the ball over the middle. There isn't anyone remotely near him other than a safety. The old Bell would have easily juked this guy and been off to the races. 2017 Bell can't get by him in the open field and he is tackled a half yard short of the first.

Bell is going get his running yards between the tackles and off tackle. He is not however scaring anyone in space the way many NFL 3rd down backs do. That's a real problem now for this offense.

I agree that we have to get the TEs more involved and keep feeding Juju and Rogers. 3rd down has been a real problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:26 pm
Posts: 3542
I think this year has proven Bell isn't worth $15m. Might not even be worth the $12m we offered him.

_________________
"Antonio Brown doesn't need to respond to anything," Tomlin said. "He walks into stadiums and he's Antonio Brown and he made Antonio Brown plays."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:20 am
Posts: 4347
Quote:
Wouldn't it be better if Bell had 60 receptions for the season and that surplus of 40 receptions went to JuJu and Vance McDonald


Absolutely.
I think, hope, each game, that the Ben to JuJu and Ben to McDonald connections and sync continue to grow.
We know McDonald is alot faster than Jessie James. He needs to be that seam buster. Slant to the hash marks pass plays that we saw Ben miss once and connect a second time.

JJ does not need to be on the field 55 of 63 snaps.
McDonalds - 31 snaps
Grimble - 0

_________________
"Tomlin doubled down on dumb" JackSplat58


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2014 12:48 pm
Posts: 955
Stosh-67 wrote:
Quote:
Wouldn't it be better if Bell had 60 receptions for the season and that surplus of 40 receptions went to JuJu and Vance McDonald


Absolutely.
I think, hope, each game, that the Ben to JuJu and Ben to McDonald connections and sync continue to grow.
We know McDonald is alot faster than Jessie James. He needs to be that seam buster. Slant to the hash marks pass plays that we saw Ben miss once and connect a second time.

JJ does not need to be on the field 55 of 63 snaps.
McDonalds - 31 snaps
Grimble - 0

Good stuff, Stosh. I believe they have much bigger plans for McDonald as he gets more comfortable in this offense. I think he'll be a much bigger part of the picture by the time the playoffs roll around. I've seen him play plenty in his career and he has much more potential than most here realize. It may take a little more time, but he's going to make his mark, imo.

Edit: I'll add that I think Vance (if used right) has the potential to be a much, much better blocking version of Zach Ertz (with a slight step below his hands).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Bell really a great receiving back?
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:14 pm
Posts: 1262
I thought it was interesting that Eli Rogers was active for this game but only had 13 snaps on offense and was credited with 1 special teams snap. He was not targeted at all.

I have a hard time understanding how he fits in with this team moving forward. You can't just remove JuJu from the field he is your second most productive WR in terms of catch percentage, first down percentage, his blocking, scoring. Brown is not coming off the field. Bryant has to be a presence on the field, the vertical threat.

Do we run 4 wides with Bell and no TEs? Again, I would rather see Vance McDonald on the field, we have to get him involved in this offense, beyond his magnificent blocking in the run game.

The best 5 to get on the field, are Brown, Bryant, JuJu, McDonald and Bell. How does Rogers fit in? That best 5 allows you to use JuJu as a quasi-TE, we have seen how he can crack down on Safeties and Linebackers, Rogers can't do that. And I would argue that Jesse James can't do that either if he were to come on the field to be that second TE.

They need to drastically reduce the number of snaps and targets that Jesse James and Eli Rogers get and dramatically increase the snaps that JuJu and Vance McDonald do get. That is the transition that is starting to take place but it is not happening fast enough for me.

Rogers has seen his snaps go from 39 to 37 to 21 to 13, while JuJu has seen his increase 25, 38, 51, 54, 66, 43, to nearly 67% of the snaps on offense. YES!!! That has to continue. Our three amigos at WR have to be Brown, Bryant and JuJu, that is your best 3 WRs.

At TE I feel the transition to McDonald as the #1 starter is happening, just at a slower pace due to him being signed so late and having to learn the offense on the fly without the benefit of an offseason or training camp. Twice in the past 3 games he has gotten over 30 snaps and they are using him to get the running game going with his blocking. Honestly, I know his pass catching will eventually take off but I have been surprised at his blocking, just did not expect it to be so strong.

I feel like they need to just bite the bullet and give McDonald the majority of the snaps. Say there is 70 snaps a game, yes, they do use two TE sets but the breakdown of snaps has been James seeing 85%, McDonald seeing 26% and Grimble with 6%. They need to flip McDonald and James. Vance needs to be getting the 50-60-70 snaps a game not Jesse James. With more snaps comes more targets and more opportunities to develop as a pass catcher.

This past game James saw 86% of the snaps, 55 snaps, and did not have a single catch. I can't even remember if they even threw a single pass his way. Maybe somebody else can chime in here but when was the last time a Pittsburgh Steeler #1 TE saw 86% of the snaps on offense and wasn't even targeted in the passing game? I think the writing is on the wall with Jesse James, it is almost Vance McDonald time as the #1 TE and it can't come soon enough for me.

_________________
The Steelers have a greater chance of finding a Unicorn, or a Sasquatch, or the Loch Ness Monster than they do in finding another great 3-4 OLB.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], green50, JackSplat58, Smashmouth21 and 10 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