Ben is terrible, but our O-line might be worse

Can't expect any team/defense to hold up under the pressure of 3 turnovers. Sometimes turnovers are created and sometimes they are luck. Living and dying by creating turnovers is a dangerous way to live. Can't always control when turnovers happen. What can be controlled to an extent is taking care of the ball and not committing turnovers to hurt the team.

This game was a debacle by the offense and not the defense.

 

Any chance the Hogs come out of retirement For you young ones they were a great O-line for the Washington Football Team that powered them to Super Bowl victory.

 

Actually yes, you can expect teams to hold up despite three turnovers. Also, that was the excuse in the first half. The offense didn't turn it over at all in the second half, yet the defense came up small twice. When the Bengals got the ball back with about five minutes left, everyone in the stadium knew all we were going to see was three consecutive running plays, but the Steelers couldn't stop them.

At least two of the stops the defense had in the second half were due only to the incompetence of Finley as a passer. He had guys open on third downs twice, but couldn't make the throws. Sutton also got away with what should have been interference on Higgins. I thought it was fair because the officials let the Bengals get away with it three or four times that night, but it still points to the Steelers being more lucky than good in the third quarter on defense.

Again, I understand why it happened. The linebacking corps is a mess and the Bengals did a great job of taking advantage of those guys, but let's not fool ourselves. The defense was not good Monday night.

 

Well the %'s disagree with you in regard to turnovers. The more teams turn the ball over the higher the % teams lose regardless of the final score. It's a fact and not something I made up.

Those turnovers gave the Bengals extra chances to score. Those turnover changed momentum. Those turnovers deflated the team. Those turnovers kept the Steelers defense on the field longer.

The Steelers made a push in the 2nd half. The football turnover gods said, "no those 1st half turnovers are to much to let you win".

 

I doesn't matter what we know about scales. . He plays the position. He's not brand new here. We are back to square peg in round hole. Allen had just gone out injured too, the Bengals took full advantage of him with those runs in the second half. Scales was a very good LB at indiana.

 

Your argument relies on football gods and your ability to read the minds of the Steelers while watching the game on television. ‘Nuff said.

 

No my argument is based on statistical data of what turnovers mean to the outcome of games.

 

The Steelers coaches didn't believe Scales was ready. They believed Allen was the better option.

 

turnovers were ugly.
vinny and dotson should help alot. scratch the turnovers and play as they did in the 2nd half. could have a chance, as there is still hope

 

It’s easier just to say the Steelers suck lol.

 

Sorry, but no. You started with that idea, then drifted into foolishness about football gods and the team being deflated.

Now, if we want to just stick to those statistics, I will remind you that those include all games. The percentages get better when the opponent is a dumpster fire like the Bengals. Also, I never said that the turnovers weren't a factor. I said that they don't absolve the defense of its poor play. The turnovers in the first half were not the reason the defense failed to hold up in the fourth quarter. That was simply the Bengals taking advantage of the holes the injuries have created on the Steelers' defense.

Go back to my original argument, that it wasn't just the offense's fault. That is true. The defense faced an opponent with a terrible offensive line and a terrible quarterback, yet they couldn't come up with stops when the team needed them.

 

The football gods was more of a statement that no matter what a team does that 3 turnovers comes back to bite a team regardless of whatever happens.

The turnovers were the determining factor in the game. The high % of the time that's what turnovers mean to the impact of games. The turnovers impacted the entire team. 3 turnovers usually impacts the entire team. That's the bottom line. The statistical data backs that up regardless of team's record or any other factors. Where are your stats?

Look dude. It doesn't matter how what your OPINION is about the Bengals terrible Oline, QB, or whatever. They have professionals on both sides of the ball. As was proven and proven more often than not, TURNOVERS are the great equalizer.

The turnovers were a factor that impacted everything that influenced the out come of the game. Turnovers left the defense on the field longer. Turnovers gave the Bengals opportunities to score. ect ect ect.

The proof is in the pudding. Do you get it?

 

nice write up in Steelers depot right after I said this. Allen isn't a good option. Especially after the film is out. Even Williamson talks about it. The Steelers coaches have been wrong before.

 

Well considering the team was snake bit at the LB position this year................ What do you expect them to do? Put in a guy who has little experience in the system or a guy that has experience in the system? There are no easy answers for the LB position at this point. Sometimes it's trial and error. Fans that want to be overly critical about this ish is beyond my comprehension at this point.

In any event, having Allen in the game didn't decide the out come of the game. The offenses turnovers and poor performance were the key factors.

 

Turnovers are one thing but even if they turn into 3s instead of 7s it makes a big difference. We gave up 7s. That's on the defense just like the scores in the second half. They gave up easy scores.

 

scales is not brand new here.

 

Safe to say Scales isn't the answer. He will probably out of the league in a couple of years.

 

Turnovers were a factor in the game, not the factor. The factor implies that it was the only reason the Steelers lost. It wasn't. The poor play of Roethlisberger was a factor. The defense's inability to come up with a key stop against a terrible offense was a factor. The Bengals have a terrible offensive line. They have not been running the ball well, but suddenly they were able to do it against the Steelers. That wasn't caused by the turnovers. That was caused by the defense not doing its job. Your view of what went wrong is overly simplistic. You are trying too hard to put it on one factor, when it was actually many factors that led to the defeat.

What I wrote about the offense isn't based on opinion. It is based on fact. They are 27th in the NFL in rushing yards even after piling up 152 against the Steelers Monday night. It was their second-most all season, with only the Jaguars doing a worse job. That was with Joe Burrow throwing for 300 yards and Joe Mixon available. (He had 152 on the ground against the Jaguars.) Bernard entered the game averaging 24.6 yards per game, but he had 83 Monday night. The Bengals have allowed 48 sacks this season. Only the Eagles have allowed more. The Steelers had two Monday night.

So, the Bengals normally are among the worst rushing teams in the league and they are among the worst in the NFL in pass protection. So dismissing my point about them having a terrible offensive line just shows you don't know what you are talking about. I could keep going, but I will just leave you with this.


Do you get it?

 

Turnovers were the KEY factor. Stats, rankings, records ect ect don't matter when a team gives the ball away 3 times. The statistical data backs that up.

Dude you just never mind. I am wasting my time with you.

 

No what is safe to say is Allen isn't the answer. We have proof of that.

 

Trial and error. I guess we will find out. Scales isn't the answer.

So what solution do you have coach Mac?

 

The defense gave up 150 yards rushing to the Bengals

 

Ben is making bad decisions, and it's killing the team.

 

That's an NFL team. When you turn the ball over 3 times do you expect to win the game? Based on the history of the league and the percentages I expect the team that turns the ball over 3 times to lose regardless of the other stats. This ish isn't rocket science people.