It is currently Sun Dec 16, 2018 11:34 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 7102
steelclan wrote:
bradshaw2ben wrote:
jewelsongs wrote:
Dale Lolley said Ben checked out of a run play and called the pass.

still doesn't indicate if the pass option was part of the play call


Ben in his statements makes it clear it was his call. On that 3rd & goal play Bell was held so blatantly it was ridiculous. Johnson basically tackled him.

Not only Bell. If you re-watch the play, focus on James and JuJu...both had there jersey stretched so badly, that they would fit Casey Hampton.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 12103
bradshaw2ben wrote:
a check with me RPO is different than what I'm talking about-- you're talking about when ben gives a hand signal to one receiver for a route and no one else knows. I'm talking about two plays called and one is confirmed before the snap.


I think we're talking about different plays. I'm talking about the fade to AB. And I'm saying that WAS NOT a "check with me" because Ben held it too long if it had been a running play. Might have been an audible, but there only appeared to be two guys in routes. In either case, audible or playcall I thought it was garbage to have only two options, with one being the fade.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:33 pm
Posts: 16849
agreed.

Ben said he audibled out of the first run call because we didn't have the desired personnel to win the play vs what KC showed.

_________________
Fuck the Patriots.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 12103
bradshaw2ben wrote:
agreed.

Ben said he audibled out of the first run call because we didn't have the desired personnel to win the play vs what KC showed.


That might be something they should look at (they won't). I don't know how often Ben does that, but sometimes, especially on 1st down, you put on the big boy pants and just give the guys the chance to execute the play.

Then again, if the call was another slow developing run that they seem to like in the RZ, then Ben was probably correct. AB 1-on-1 is never a bad option, but there's not a lot of room to work down there and I always hate putting all the eggs in one basket. And I would rather have seen a back shoulder throw there than the fade. Would have to see the replay - I think if AB runs the slant there it's an easy TD.

Or - MAYBE - if that's the look and personnel KC showed, your audible is a PA to the TE. I just hate that was the audible choice in that situation.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2014 7:56 pm
Posts: 1040
SP wrote:
I thought this thread was about Chef's waist size.

At any rate, the Nix/Watson combo has not been stopped all season on short yardage plays. Why not build a goal line package off it and work in some passes to the TEs to catch people off guard.


Goddammit! That made me shoot Mountain Dew out my nose! You know how painful that is?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 10194
randomsteelerfan wrote:
SP wrote:
I thought this thread was about Chef's waist size.

At any rate, the Nix/Watson combo has not been stopped all season on short yardage plays. Why not build a goal line package off it and work in some passes to the TEs to catch people off guard.


Goddammit! That made me shoot Mountain Dew out my nose! You know how painful that is?


I can't imagine shooting MD through your nasal cavity is much more painful than having to endure the taste of it while drinking it.

_________________
Orangesteel wrote:
We could have ended the game there and Tomlin’s band of assholes let them back in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 2:46 pm
Posts: 1463
I agree. First and goal from the two is about brutality. Line up jumbo with nix and Watson. I run 4 times if needed too. Send the message you’re not gonna stop us from scoring.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 12103
it's still yggy wrote:
I agree. First and goal from the two is about brutality. Line up jumbo with nix and Watson. I run 4 times if needed too. Send the message you’re not gonna stop us from scoring.


And sometimes it's just about setting up the defense. NE runs plenty in that situation, and no doubt it contributes to a lot of easy TD passes Brady gets because the defense has to respect the run.

Empty set on 1st and Goal from the 2 is just mind-numbingly stupid. And I have no doubt Ben prefers shotgun/empty set....but, c'mon dude, it just isn't working. And if that isn't evidence enough, you can also go back and look at the 2-pt failures last year.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 7102
Kodiak wrote:
it's still yggy wrote:
I agree. First and goal from the two is about brutality. Line up jumbo with nix and Watson. I run 4 times if needed too. Send the message you’re not gonna stop us from scoring.


And sometimes it's just about setting up the defense. NE runs plenty in that situation, and no doubt it contributes to a lot of easy TD passes Brady gets because the defense has to respect the run.

Empty set on 1st and Goal from the 2 is just mind-numbingly stupid. And I have no doubt Ben prefers shotgun/empty set....but, c'mon dude, it just isn't working. And if that isn't evidence enough, you can also go back and look at the 2-pt failures last year.

If we're talking about the series that ended in the FG right before the half, they weren't empty on 1st down. Ben was in the shotgun, Bell as the sidecar.
I agree, run it down there, but screw that blubber package. Spread the D, run to the void. Makes it much easier than slamming into a wall of fat fucks. Just saying...

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 12103
Jobus Rum wrote:
I agree, run it down there, but screw that blubber package. Spread the D, run to the void. Makes it much easier than slamming into a wall of fat fucks. Just saying...


Generally, but I feel like I've seen plenty of empty shotgun sets in that situation, or similar.

And I don't like shotgun much there, period. The defense is going to recognize pass quicker out of the shotgun. The pitches and delayed handoffs in those situations they've tried this year have mostly been hot garbage.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 7102
Kodiak wrote:
Jobus Rum wrote:
I agree, run it down there, but screw that blubber package. Spread the D, run to the void. Makes it much easier than slamming into a wall of fat fucks. Just saying...


Generally, but I feel like I've seen plenty of empty shotgun sets in that situation, or similar.

And I don't like shotgun much there, period. The defense is going to recognize pass quicker out of the shotgun. The pitches and delayed handoffs in those situations they've tried this year have mostly been hot garbage.

But doesn't that fall on the play caller/designer. I've seen plenty of goal line success out of shotgun and pistol formation over the recent years. I'm of the belief that teams can have good success running out of spread formations, if called and designed correctly. I think Bell, despite his lack of breakaway speed, is well suited for the spread formation...shifty and quick. Todays pro defenses are just too fast to compact everything between the hashmarks and have consistent success. Just my 2 cents...

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 5:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 12103
Jobus Rum wrote:
But doesn't that fall on the play caller/designer. I've seen plenty of goal line success out of shotgun and pistol formation over the recent years. I'm of the belief that teams can have good success running out of spread formations, if called and designed correctly. I think Bell, despite his lack of breakaway speed, is well suited for the spread formation...shifty and quick. Todays pro defenses are just too fast to compact everything between the hashmarks and have consistent success. Just my 2 cents...


I feel like if the QB is under center, then the defense has to respect the run until he finishes his 3-5 step drop. Otherwise, Ben gets it in the shotgun and maybe does a half-ass PA, but it gives the defense more time to drop into the passing lanes because it's a quicker read for the defense.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 7102
Kodiak wrote:
Jobus Rum wrote:
But doesn't that fall on the play caller/designer. I've seen plenty of goal line success out of shotgun and pistol formation over the recent years. I'm of the belief that teams can have good success running out of spread formations, if called and designed correctly. I think Bell, despite his lack of breakaway speed, is well suited for the spread formation...shifty and quick. Todays pro defenses are just too fast to compact everything between the hashmarks and have consistent success. Just my 2 cents...


I feel like if the QB is under center, then the defense has to respect the run until he finishes his 3-5 step drop. Otherwise, Ben gets it in the shotgun and maybe does a half-ass PA, but it gives the defense more time to drop into the passing lanes because it's a quicker read for the defense.

See, I think just the opposite. I think the QB in the gun with a RB gives so many more options. The D still has to honor the run threat and PA. I just think it’s easier to run out of spread formations. You bring in Hubbard at TE, Nix at FB, plus one or two other TEs, the defense is going to counter with an extra D lineman or two, moves LB inside and brings the safeties up. Congestion between the tackles, and now you have limited pass options. Now, if you insist on putting Ben under center, then give me two or three WR, along with Bell in the backfield and that could work. But “Jumbo” packages are just lousy, lazy football in this day and age.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 9:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:33 pm
Posts: 16849
Jobus Rum wrote:
Kodiak wrote:
Jobus Rum wrote:
But doesn't that fall on the play caller/designer. I've seen plenty of goal line success out of shotgun and pistol formation over the recent years. I'm of the belief that teams can have good success running out of spread formations, if called and designed correctly. I think Bell, despite his lack of breakaway speed, is well suited for the spread formation...shifty and quick. Todays pro defenses are just too fast to compact everything between the hashmarks and have consistent success. Just my 2 cents...


I feel like if the QB is under center, then the defense has to respect the run until he finishes his 3-5 step drop. Otherwise, Ben gets it in the shotgun and maybe does a half-ass PA, but it gives the defense more time to drop into the passing lanes because it's a quicker read for the defense.

See, I think just the opposite. I think the QB in the gun with a RB gives so many more options. The D still has to honor the run threat and PA. I just think it’s easier to run out of spread formations. You bring in Hubbard at TE, Nix at FB, plus one or two other TEs, the defense is going to counter with an extra D lineman or two, moves LB inside and brings the safeties up. Congestion between the tackles, and now you have limited pass options. Now, if you insist on putting Ben under center, then give me two or three WR, along with Bell in the backfield and that could work. But “Jumbo” packages are just lousy, lazy football in this day and age.

I couldn't agree more.

_________________
Fuck the Patriots.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2014 7:56 pm
Posts: 1040
Still Lit wrote:
randomsteelerfan wrote:
SP wrote:
I thought this thread was about Chef's waist size.

At any rate, the Nix/Watson combo has not been stopped all season on short yardage plays. Why not build a goal line package off it and work in some passes to the TEs to catch people off guard.


Goddammit! That made me shoot Mountain Dew out my nose! You know how painful that is?


I can't imagine shooting MD through your nasal cavity is much more painful than having to endure the taste of it while drinking it.


Oh, come on! Everybody loves the taste of a carbonated piss-colored beverage.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am
Posts: 9832
But at one point in the Chiefs game, wasn’t Bell at 7.1 YPC or something like that? And weren’t a lot of those out of the jumbo package with Nix, McDonald and James mauling people left and right?

I like the looks we get from running the spread, but Haley’s fucking playcalling out of it drives me nuts. Yay, another WR screen to Bryant or 5 yard out to Brown. No.

My brother and I always joke when we watch the game that 1st and goal from the 3 yard line this team is fucked. Haley doesn’t know what to call, which is oddly similar to the 2pt conversion try that apparently he is a wizard at. No.

I don’t care anymore how they do it. Just get in the goddamn end zone.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:33 pm
Posts: 16849
Before this week, Steelers offense was something like 16th in red zone and 6th in goal to go success... FWIW

_________________
Fuck the Patriots.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:40 pm
Posts: 3187
Orangesteel wrote:
But at one point in the Chiefs game, wasn’t Bell at 7.1 YPC or something like that? And weren’t a lot of those out of the jumbo package with Nix, McDonald and James mauling people left and right?

I like the looks we get from running the spread, but Haley’s fucking playcalling out of it drives me nuts. Yay, another WR screen to Bryant or 5 yard out to Brown. No.

My brother and I always joke when we watch the game that 1st and goal from the 3 yard line this team is fucked. Haley doesn’t know what to call, which is oddly similar to the 2pt conversion try that apparently he is a wizard at. No.

I don’t care anymore how they do it. Just get in the goddamn end zone.


Eh? Mate Haley had run called. You can debate if he had right personnel for run but fact remains Ben changed play not Haley. As to screens: Bryant had one and it went for 7 yards. Brown had a few one went for first and another was called back due to dumb hold call by rookie.

How about you and your brother do less joking and actually try and make an attempt to think critically beyond knee jerk need to rail on about coaches?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:18 pm
Posts: 4930
Location: Sunny Delaware (but the murdery part)
bradshaw2ben wrote:
Before this week, Steelers offense was something like 16th in red zone and 6th in goal to go success... FWIW


While I'm sure those numbers probably went down this week, as Steelers fans, we do tend to view those red zone issues through Black and Gold colored glasses; the good looks better than it is, and the bad looks worse. That said, I think a lot of the frustration comes from the fact that the talent on the roster should be producing better results offensively. The red zone isn't the only area where this unit has underachieved. I'm choosing to see some signs that we're beginning to put it together. Ask last year's Chiefs (and maybe this year's in a few weeks) whether it's better to peak in October or January.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 11:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am
Posts: 9832
steelclan wrote:
Orangesteel wrote:
But at one point in the Chiefs game, wasn’t Bell at 7.1 YPC or something like that? And weren’t a lot of those out of the jumbo package with Nix, McDonald and James mauling people left and right?

I like the looks we get from running the spread, but Haley’s fucking playcalling out of it drives me nuts. Yay, another WR screen to Bryant or 5 yard out to Brown. No.

My brother and I always joke when we watch the game that 1st and goal from the 3 yard line this team is fucked. Haley doesn’t know what to call, which is oddly similar to the 2pt conversion try that apparently he is a wizard at. No.

I don’t care anymore how they do it. Just get in the goddamn end zone.


Eh? Mate Haley had run called. You can debate if he had right personnel for run but fact remains Ben changed play not Haley. As to screens: Bryant had one and it went for 7 yards. Brown had a few one went for first and another was called back due to dumb hold call by rookie.

How about you and your brother do less joking and actually try and make an attempt to think critically beyond knee jerk need to rail on about coaches?


Ok my brother and I will stop joking around if you go fuck yourself, deal? I don’t want to see WR screens to Bryant. Are you forgetting about when we did it in other games this season to no avail? I remember the play Bryant scored on this season, do you? It wasn’t a WR screen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 11:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am
Posts: 9832
^ And I mean that with all due respect.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:47 am
Posts: 4478
Jobus Rum wrote:
But “Jumbo” packages are just lousy, lazy football in this day and age.


I am not a fan of jumbo packages.

Just run the offense.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: alancac98, Stosh-67, W&M_Steeler and 41 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