Rothlisberger Talks About Not Needing a True Fullback

That's what they've been trying to do. Carey Davis, Frank Summers, David Johnson... all non-fullbacks that they tried to turn into fullbacks, thinking, "Eh, he's the right size for it. We'll teach him to lead block and he'll be fine." It's not that easy. It's an art, like you said.

 

Am I mistaken? Sorry I have to prove you other wrong (see stats below). I agree that a true FB can help but by no means does a true FB determine the success of an offense in short yardage, red zone situations, or goal line situations. Short yardage and goal line success is determined by the offensive line. Overall success of an offense usually hinges on the play of the QB.

The offense had success rushing the ball in the red zone and in short yardage situations at times. They are not going to score the way fans expect by rushing the football. Most of the top scoring offenses in the league don't, can't, or find it difficult to maintain offensive balance. The type of offensive balance many fans dream of is almost mythical and very few teams can maintain that type of offense.

I am going to show you why more points did and can result from the passing game:

Packers (1st in scoring)
QB's passed for 51 TD's
Rush TD's 12 total (RB's 7 TD's, QB's 4, Def 1)
(26th in the league in total rushing 1558, rush average 3.9)

Saints (2nd in scoring)

QB's passed for 46 TD's
Rush TD's 16 (one by QB)
(6th in total rushing offense 2127, rush average 4.9) Those rush stats only resulted in the Saints scoring 15 rush TDs.

New England (3rd in scoring)

QB's passed for 39 Td'S
Rush Td's 18 (15 RB's, 3 QB, 1 TE)
(20th total rushing 1764, 21st rush average 4)

Detroit Lions (4th in scoring)

QB's passed for 41 Td's
Rush TD's 9 all RB's
(29total rushing 1523, 12th rush average at 4.3)

Panthers 5th in scoring (**there special circumstance in the Panther's case)

QB 21 passing TD's
Rush TD's 26 (**14 by QB, 11 by RB's, 1 TE)
(**3rd in total rushing, **1st in rushing average)

** Newton accounted for 35 TD's, 706 rush yards (5.6 average).

I am not a big stat guy because I understand there are more multiple factors that go into team success. However, the stats suggest that passing is the way to scoring a lot or the most points possible in today's the NFL. The Steelers offense will most likely need Ben to pass for 30+ TD's for the offense to rank in the top 5 scoring offenses.

Look, there were times the offense had a balanced attack, good situational play calling, and good attack in the red zone. I can't speak on the thoughtfulness of the game plan because I wasn't in on the game planning. I don't limit my thinking to believe, "these things were non existent under Arians" because it can be proven differently when one looks at the facts. I don't base my thoughts or opinions based on one game, situations where there was bad play calling, ect. because all coaches have good and bad play calling.

You don't know what Haley will do. You don't know what the offense will look like. I believe Haley should listen to Ben. How much he should listen is up to debate.

I believe they hired Haley in the attempt to get more points out of the offense.
The offensive rushing wasn't great under Haley.

Cards in 2007 - 29th in rush yds, rush avg 3.6
2008 last in the league rush yds, rush avg 3.5

Chiefs 2009 11th rush yards, rush avg 4.4
2010 1st rush yards, rush avg 4.7
2011 15th rush yards, 3.9 average

What do you make of those stats?

My attempt is not to bash Haley. I believe fans need to be more realistic in regard to their expectations. That way, if the offense doesn't live up to the almost mythical potential that fans have it won't be a big let down. Ultimately, the success of Haley's offense will be determined by the players on the field. I don't believe he will have as big an impact as some believe. That's because many of the players on the team will remain the same. Unless Ben improves under Haley, the offense will struggle to score the points that some fans expect. I can care less as long as the team continues to win. I realized a long time ago there are many ways to win in the NFL.

 

Those stats prove that successful passing results in more yards and points than running. Everyone already knew that. That's why there are very few running plays by teams facing 3rd and 20, or teams down by 4 touchdowns.

I believe our point (definitely mine) is that an H-Back that stinks at blocking and is marginally better at receiving does nothing for your team that couldn't be done better by a RB or TE or WR with actual talent. A true FB makes a difference in the running game, and an H-back that can't block very well doesn't.

As for the OL determining success of a running game, of course that is true. But the FB is an extension of the offensive line. Not only that, but the block he makes is usually right at the point of attack, one of the very most important blocks on the play. Having a lead blocker that stinks at lead blocking is no different than having a guard that stinks at run blocking and then running behind him every single play. It makes a major difference. A good fullback can take the most dangerous threat and push him out of the way. A bad fullback not only won't be able to push him out of the way, but might not block the right guy at all. And when he does block the right guy, he might do a terrible job. It's almost impossible to have a successful running play when your fullback messes up, be it from mental error or lack of ability.

 

Did you read the reply, "more points will not result mostly from the effectiveness of the passing game"? Apparently, some people don't know that more points result from passing the football effectively.

I can care less if this team does or does not have a true FB. I don't believe having a true FB is going to make or break the Steeler's overall rush offense. Having a true FB is a coaches personal offensive philosophy. Some coaches like to have them and some coaches don't. As staples in offenses, true FB's appear to be a dying breed around the NFL. It is what it is.

 

It's one thing to replace your blocker with a weapon. If we were going to take out Kreider and put in Darren Sproles or Aaron Hernandez , then you're talking about a change in philosophy and a matter of opinion. Blocking vs. ball handling. I can't speak for 2012 yet, but since 2007 that's not what the Steelers have done. They've replaced Kreidier with another guy who is there to do the exact same blocking job, and he just can't do it. It's clear as day that Carey Davis and David Johnson have not added one morsel of "weaponry," and it's also clear as day that they have hurt our running game more than they've helped it, just like any bad blocking offensive linemen. You say it doesn't make or break a running game, but it absolutely makes or breaks individual plays throughout a game. That's an impact. Plenty of guys on an active gameday roster only have a serious impact on a few plays throughout a game, including receivers and tight ends. And a lot of those plays where the fullback makes a big difference are very important ones. Without thinking about it too hard, I know a true fullback would have been a difference in the 4th and goal play against Seattle. Christ, it was our H-back's lead blocking that lead to Rashard Mendenhall's fumble in the Super Bowl, which a lot of people pinpoint as the moment we lost the game. I know he still didn't have to fumble, but the guy that caused it should have been blocked at least somewhat instead of coming right past our H-back untouched. Mendenhall clearly expected him to get blocked and was not anticipating the hit.

We haven't used fullbacks any less since Dan Kreider left. We haven't changed philosophies. We just don't get any blocking out of the fullbacks we use, and don't get anything else either.

 

i think as soon as we get a truely capable pulling guard alot of the TE/Hback/FB problems will clear themselves up. that is also a reason we are not creating holes in the run game. kemoeatu was not as good as people had made him out to be in the run game. legursky is not the answer either. that position alone will make a difference in opening holes. DJ is no more than a bad blocking kemoeatu in the run game. if these two are not on the same page it results in a cluster f--k at the point of attack, and dancing as alot of people like to call it when our RB runs into the backs of these guys. i don't care what carey davis, DJ, and summers did here, there are guys that can block, run and catch out there, we just need to find one.

 

I think you have hit upon the reason that zone blocking wasn't working and why many of us feel that a lead blocker is needed, or more to the point a true lead blocker. This Oline lacked the athleticism needed to make zone blocking in a single back set work. Pouncey is the only really athletic linemen and since they don't run between the center and guard that doesn't help. If they move Pouncey to guard maybe then no fullback works since he could chip in on a double team and then move into the second level and clear a path for the RB. As it is they lack that type of athletic linemen and so I lead blocker is necessary. THis is how it should look

[youtube:32de7vmj]rqlz77Zg8vY[/youtube:32de7vmj]

That is how zone blocking should work and it is beautiful to watch. Unlike a similar play in 2010 where the Steelers faced the Panthers. Double TE set with a single back. Miller set up on the line beside the LT and Johnson on the right. Johnson motions into the backfield as the FB left of Mendenhall and the ball is snapped. Miller runs a short crossing route where his job is to seal off the ILB as he begins the route he is hit by Johnson who is coming through the hole created by the LT and LG. Running into his own man confuses Johnson and instead of taking care of his responsibility(sealing off the OLB) and allowing Mendenhall to break into the second level an take on the safety he chooses to Help Miller DBl team his man which Miller doesn't need. The OLB flows into the hole and stuffs Mendenhall instead of achieving the result that the Packers did in the clip above.

 

GB does use a true FB or running back that's in to block on a lot of their plays. The key is someone that "can" make that read and block.

Most of those teams in your stats on passing offenses have a real blocker in their scheme. GB has Kuhn, Saints have 2 on the roster and looks like they get snaps in every game. When you need that kind of skill set, you put the guy on the field that fits the position. the TE's are not getting it done when it counts.

 

You wasted all that time talking about Packers 1st, Saints 2nd, and Saints 3rd in scoring. They all lost last year with all that so called scoring. However, I will say that the Saints used Darren Sproles very well. They especially thru the ball to him out of the back field.

 

I totally I agree with this!!!

I was never against the use of 3 TE's and eliminating the FB, but Arians never utilized them properly as he initially stated he was going to. I envisioned us using our TE's a lot like the Patriots do now and it never happened. Patriots move all 3 of their TE's all over the field, line them up at FB and even give them some carries. DJ played FB full time and Heath rarely goes in motion anymore. Who the heck was that fooling?

To me, who cares if they call you a FB or a TE, if you are a serious triple threat to run, block, catch you can help the team. If there is a FB out there like that Steelers shouldn't pass on them. If there is a TE out there like that they should pass on them either.

 

Haley also lost his starting running back in the 1st game of 2011. Remember J. Charles. how could I forget I drafted him with like the 6th pick.

 

Ben there is a reason your OC and friend BA is gone.

 

I was showing you the light because you didn't seem to understand how most scoring occurs in the NFL. Coaches figure out a long time ago that it's easier to pass for TD's then it is to rush for TD's. Scoring is what many BA detractors want. The Steelers won't score more points because they have a true FB on the roster. Scoring more points will only result because Ben passes for more TD's. Don't hold your breath. Ben hasn't proven to be that type of QB on a consistent basis.