Arians' offense actually is inefficient

Threw some numbers together today with a buddy of mine. We wanted to measure the Steelers' points against their opponents compared to their opponents' opponents.

The formula: Take the Steelers' opponents' points per game against (not counting Steelers games) and compare to the Steelers' points against that same opponent. We did this for an entire season to see just how well the Steelers offense has played in comparison to other teams. Of course, these numbers do not account for defensive and special teams scores or QB injuries...and rooting out the #s in these situations would take hours. Regardless, these numbers tend to even out pretty much over the course of a season.

We then decided to look at the cumulative QB rating for the team and see if there are parallels.

As a benchmark, we took the Steelers' Super Bowl XIV and XXX teams. The 1979 Steelers' opponents gave up 18.81 pts per game (not counting their games vs Steelers). The Steelers scored 26.00 pts per game. In other words, the Steelers were 7.19 pts better than other teams against their common opponents. That is offesnive efficiency at its best. The 1979 QB rating (Bradshaw and Kruczek) was 76.6 The 1995 Steelers were 3.79 pts better than other teams. The QB rating (O'Donnell and Tomczak) was 76.9.

So we decided to put this formula to the test during the Ben years. Here are the numbers from 2004 to 2006 (with Whisenhunt as coordinator):

2004: +3.38 / QB rating: 93.2
2005 (SB XL champs): +4.45 / QBR: 89.4
2006: +3.02 / QBR: 80.2

Here are the numbers from 2007 to 2010, under Arians (hold your breath):

2007: +1.73 / QBR: 99.9
2008 (SB XLIII champs): +1.46 / 81.9
2009: +.73 / 98.9
2010: +2.45 / 95.2

Our conclusions: Ben's QB play has gotten steadily better. If you were to chart the team's QB play on a line graph, it would be steadily going up, from Ben's rookie year. Under Arians, the QBs have three season with a cumulative QBR over 90! Yet, as you look at the numbers, the Steelers BARELY score any more points against their opponents than other teams do. Compare this to what the team did under Whisenhunt, with a slightly lower QBR. And look at what the Steelers did in 95 and 79 with an ever lower QBR.

I'd have to go back further, into Cowhers' other years and Noll's years with Malone and Brister at QB. But if you ask me, these #s do not speak well for Arians at all. We wanted to see if it's "all in our heads" that the Steelers seem to sputter on offense, and the results of our number-crunching suggests it isn't. He has a QB playng at a high level and relatively NO points to show for it.

 

Very interesting stats!

 

You should post it on the old official board. Maybe someone will see it...

 

The problem is redzone efficiency, FGs versus TD's and the primary difference in the BA era versus teams past that you're comparing to is those past teams had a much better run game which contributes to better redzone efficiency. This is as much a player personnel issue as it is a BA issue. You want more points then improve the redzone efficiency. You want improved redzone efficiency then upgrade the OL to improve the run game. You want to upgrade the OL then you'll need to spend less money on the skilled positions like backs and receivers and remember there's only so much money to go around. You see the dilemma right

 

Or we could just use our power running back in short yardage/goal line situations... no wait! That would make sense

 

We need a better offensive line. Ravens ran up the gut against the Browns for 200+ yards, and Mendy could only get some off tackle runs for 3 yards at most. Something is not right here?

 

Sorry but it's not that simple. That example is one series of downs from one game. It's not as if Mendy hasn't already scored rushing TD's this year from inside the 5 yard line. I too would have liked to seen Redman have at least 2 carries in that series but I'm talking about an improved running game in general and simply inserting Redman with no additional upgrades to the OL isn't going to fix the problem.