For all those dozen or so BA backers on this board

rukus4ever · Jan 19, 2012

TheWanderer said:

as it was mentioned before, just because someone doesn't pile on this ridiculous 'fire BA' bandwagon doesn't mean they're a "BA supporter." it seems to me that the so-called 'supporters' are the only ones looking at this thing rationally. a change wouldn't necessarily mean an improvement. like john kerry in '04, you just don't scream about how you need to change and how leadership needs to implement a better plan while not being able to, yourself, offer a better plan. what's your plan? get rid of BA and then what? bring in who? who is this messiah of offensive coordinators that has exhibited tremendous success over an extended period of time that is going to take this same core group of players and catapult us into the packers/lions/saints/pats/chargers league of offensive excellence? pray tell . . .

i've been to every stadium in the country and i can say with confidence that pittsburgh has the most negative, whiney fanbase i've ever encountered. it's downright comical to sit in the seats at heinz and see these fat slobs squeezed into replica jerseys crying to run the ball. then, when the run doesn't get anywhere, they cry we should throw the ball. then, when the pass is incomplete, they cry that we threw it to the wrong guy. ben is going deep too much, we don't use the tight end, we don't throw enough screen passes, we throw too many bubble screens . . . it's just funny. if the organization catered to every whim of the fans, this organization would be a disaster. terry bradshaw certainly wouldn't have lasted. yinz geniuses wanted hanratty or gilliam. probably figured kruczek was just as good in '76. thank god the organization has a philosophy that leans towards stability. for every whisenhunt, gailey, mularkey, and erhart there are joe waltons and kevin gilbrides. be careful what you wish for.

after reading the bleacherreport 'article' written by . . . ? . . . a fifteen-year old kid? an amateur hack with no experience? who? who wrote this? some message board castoff? at any rate, i'll give it a gander and, as somebody completely impartial to the BA situation (but certainly not carrying a pitchfork and lantern), i'll provide the opposte view of the article's heavy slant. it will probably be lengthy so i can understand that it probably won't hold many attention spans as it isn't anti-arians.

"red zone production" some factors that play into the lack of production can be the following: our competition. do you realize that these defenses we couldn't score on were pretty damn good? i'm not going to figure it out, but i can't imagine anyone played a schedule against tougher defenses than we did. we were the #1 scoring defense in the nfl. we played against #2 (san francisco), two games against #3 (baltimore), #4 (houston), two games against #5 (cleveland), #7 (seattle), #8 (tennessee), two games against #9 (cincinnati), #11 (jacksonville), and #12 (kansas city). that's 12 of our 16 games against the top eleven scoring defenses (behind us) in the league. please spare us all the argument that these teams were ranked where they were because they played one or two of their sixteen games against our anemic offense.

injuries. we also played a quarter of our season either without our starting qb, or with our starting qb hopping around on one leg. we spent the same amount of time without our pro bowl, nay, our ALL-PRO center. we lost a starting offensive lineman for the year (colon) during the summer. we were forced to start a rookie due to injuries. we had to bring back a left tackle that we had released for being overweight and injury-prone because of injuries. that same left tackle had been released, tried out for at least one other team, and nobody in the league wanted him.

our qb's skill sets. does it occur to anyone that maybe we don't score much in the red zone because our qb isn't a very good red zone qb? ben's strength is running around with a huge, open field as receivers break routes, improvise, and try to get open as he scrambles around. often times, it works. well, with a much shorter field, that style of play simply isn't going to be effective. think ben is throwing back-shoulder darts like rodgers and brees do? think heath has the athletic ability to get open and make leaping grabs like finley and graham? do we have a calvin johnson to throw jump balls to? aside from the lack of red zone weapons, again, is ben a precision/timing qb? when i think of ben trying to make throws near the goalline i'm reminded of rodney harrison in the afccg and some seahawk in XL. perhaps the bleacherreport 'writer' should post an article about how we need a better red zone qb . . .

"illogical use of screens": "they refuse to attempt . . . traditional screens, an element of an offensive game plan that can be deadly if executed well . . . " can't it be said that all of the offensive plays "can be deadly if executed well?" does the responsibility of the execution of a play fall on the shoulders of the players or the coach. the, ahem, 'writer' . . . points out that suggs jumped a screen pass and turned our season around. is it ben's responsibility to recognize the defense, audible out if the advantage isn't there (tom brady has said that the gets to the line, reads the defense, and audibles and moves his players around until there is a clear advantage over the defense before they snap the ball -- would you say ben does the same?), and then make a clean throw. when throwing a screen pass, wouldn't you put an even greater emphasis on ball security when throwing a screen pass or lateral (like the bounce pass he threw in the denver game that really should have ended the game for us)?

"predictability, especially when leading the 2nd half" run, run, pass. really? you've got a problem with run, run, pass when trying to close out a game? i guess you missed the entire bill cowher era. of course, that was more like, run, run, run. again, this comes down to execution. of course, when have of your horses are on the sideline, it's a bit tougher for the cart to run. you want to pass more when leading in the 2nd half? that's a more sound philosophy? that's fascinating. not running 30-40 second chunks of time off the clock when working with a lead makes more since than running the ball? stopping the clock with incomplete passes and running the risk of negative plays (like the one at the end of regulation of the denver game that everyone was so critical of) makes more sense than lining up and running the football? we were notorious for this in the 90s. running the ball down their throats and putting games away. we couldn't have been more predictable. and, under cowher, we were 108-1-1 in the process. everyone proudly exclaimed it was 'steelers football.' now they're blaming our oc for the same approach?

"abandoning the run and the odds way too prematurely" here, the amateur hack contradicts his entire thesis. in his previous argument he blames arians for being too predictable (run, run, pass) and in the very next thought blames arians for not being predictable enough ("sometimes, just going by the numbers and doing the smart thing is the right damn thing to do!"). welcome to the mind of the arians-haters. if we run on second-and-one and it gets stuffed they cry, "well, duh!! they KNEW we were going to run! how about a pass on second-and-short every now and then, bruce?! what an idiot!" if we try to pass and it's incomplete then it's, "damnit, bruce! just pick up the first down!! play the odds!" or, worse, if we try to pass and ben gets sacked, it's "can you believe how dumb arians is?! THAT'S why this team sucks! instead of second-and-one, it's third-and-nine! fire arians!"

"the hurry-up offense" this is probably THE one area (so far) that i agree with the writer on. i've stated this many times before. i think we should have an approach like the bills and bengals did in the late eighties. implement cincy's 'sugar huddle.' it makes defenses tired, keeps them from substituting the personnel they want, and gets our qb into rhythm. we've got a sandlot qb, why not run a sandlot offense? denver abandoned their offensive approach when jesus christ took the reigns, why can't we do the same?

"pitiful road play in 2011" i don't know what kind of an argument the writer is trying to make here. he doesn't either. in fact, he points out that arians isn't the primary source of blame here. in fact, he mentions areas that are completely out of arians' hands. namely, turnovers and penalties. that's about execution. turnovers are solely on the players. and, at the professional level, penalties are on the players too. this isn't pee-wee ball, high school, or even college where 'discipline' is on the coaching staff. when professionals commit penalties, it's on them.

"the treatment of big ben during his injury" the writer admits that this decision was on tomlin, not bruce. however, we all know that anything from the temperature of the water in the gatorade buckets to the cleanliness of the uniforms falls on bruce so . . . might as well throw this ire on the fire. i don't even know what to say. we were fighting for our playoff lives (the difference between the #1 or #2 seed vs the #5 seed was everything - it just was). to approach crucial games without ben or to play ben and expect him to do nothing but hand the football off . . . well, hindsight is 20/20. and pointing out a disdain for having ben throw the ball forty times at denver, well . . . we were in hurry-up mode for most of the second half so i can only imagine the heat arians would have taken if we ran off tackle forty times down two possessions late in the game.

i've said it before, i think this core of players is difficult to game-plan for. i think the reason why is because our qb is ben roethlisberger. he's not going to throw the back-shoulder dart. he's not going to throw a good deep ball. he's not going to read the defenses, react, audible out to an advantage, make precision throws . . . he's just not. he's not an elite 'quarterback.' he's a leader. he's a winner. i love the guy. but if you think some oc is going to come in here and have him playing the qb position like rodgers, brees, or brady, you're disillusioned. BA is working with what he's got. a sandlot qb, a young receiving corps, a blocking tight end who catches fairly well but isn't very athletic, a below-average line, and average running backs, and a wrath of injuries. if you think bill walsh himself could have us looking like montana/rice, you're crazy. maybe there is another guy out there who could have this offense producing better results. who is he? i'd love to know who he is. in the meantime, i'll embrace this organization's fondness for stability. it's kept us competitive for the better part of forty straight years now. a run that ANY team's fan base would be thrilled to experience.
Click to expand...

Whoa! Wall of text off the starboard bow, captain!

All jokes aside, this was a good response to the article. Keep it coming. I agree with much of what you have said. And I have posted as much in other articles. I hope others took the time to read this.

BobbyBiz · Jan 19, 2012

TheWanderer said:

as it was mentioned before, just because someone doesn't pile on this ridiculous 'fire BA' bandwagon doesn't mean they're a "BA supporter." it seems to me that the so-called 'supporters' are the only ones looking at this thing rationally. a change wouldn't necessarily mean an improvement. like john kerry in '04, you just don't scream about how you need to change and how leadership needs to implement a better plan while not being able to, yourself, offer a better plan. what's your plan? get rid of BA and then what? bring in who? who is this messiah of offensive coordinators that has exhibited tremendous success over an extended period of time that is going to take this same core group of players and catapult us into the packers/lions/saints/pats/chargers league of offensive excellence? pray tell . . .

i've been to every stadium in the country and i can say with confidence that pittsburgh has the most negative, whiney fanbase i've ever encountered. it's downright comical to sit in the seats at heinz and see these fat slobs squeezed into replica jerseys crying to run the ball. then, when the run doesn't get anywhere, they cry we should throw the ball. then, when the pass is incomplete, they cry that we threw it to the wrong guy. ben is going deep too much, we don't use the tight end, we don't throw enough screen passes, we throw too many bubble screens . . . it's just funny. if the organization catered to every whim of the fans, this organization would be a disaster. terry bradshaw certainly wouldn't have lasted. yinz geniuses wanted hanratty or gilliam. probably figured kruczek was just as good in '76. thank god the organization has a philosophy that leans towards stability. for every whisenhunt, gailey, mularkey, and erhart there are joe waltons and kevin gilbrides. be careful what you wish for.

after reading the bleacherreport 'article' written by . . . ? . . . a fifteen-year old kid? an amateur hack with no experience? who? who wrote this? some message board castoff? at any rate, i'll give it a gander and, as somebody completely impartial to the BA situation (but certainly not carrying a pitchfork and lantern), i'll provide the opposte view of the article's heavy slant. it will probably be lengthy so i can understand that it probably won't hold many attention spans as it isn't anti-arians.

"red zone production" some factors that play into the lack of production can be the following: our competition. do you realize that these defenses we couldn't score on were pretty damn good? i'm not going to figure it out, but i can't imagine anyone played a schedule against tougher defenses than we did. we were the #1 scoring defense in the nfl. we played against #2 (san francisco), two games against #3 (baltimore), #4 (houston), two games against #5 (cleveland), #7 (seattle), #8 (tennessee), two games against #9 (cincinnati), #11 (jacksonville), and #12 (kansas city). that's 12 of our 16 games against the top eleven scoring defenses (behind us) in the league. please spare us all the argument that these teams were ranked where they were because they played one or two of their sixteen games against our anemic offense.

injuries. we also played a quarter of our season either without our starting qb, or with our starting qb hopping around on one leg. we spent the same amount of time without our pro bowl, nay, our ALL-PRO center. we lost a starting offensive lineman for the year (colon) during the summer. we were forced to start a rookie due to injuries. we had to bring back a left tackle that we had released for being overweight and injury-prone because of injuries. that same left tackle had been released, tried out for at least one other team, and nobody in the league wanted him.

our qb's skill sets. does it occur to anyone that maybe we don't score much in the red zone because our qb isn't a very good red zone qb? ben's strength is running around with a huge, open field as receivers break routes, improvise, and try to get open as he scrambles around. often times, it works. well, with a much shorter field, that style of play simply isn't going to be effective. think ben is throwing back-shoulder darts like rodgers and brees do? think heath has the athletic ability to get open and make leaping grabs like finley and graham? do we have a calvin johnson to throw jump balls to? aside from the lack of red zone weapons, again, is ben a precision/timing qb? when i think of ben trying to make throws near the goalline i'm reminded of rodney harrison in the afccg and some seahawk in XL. perhaps the bleacherreport 'writer' should post an article about how we need a better red zone qb . . .

"illogical use of screens": "they refuse to attempt . . . traditional screens, an element of an offensive game plan that can be deadly if executed well . . . " can't it be said that all of the offensive plays "can be deadly if executed well?" does the responsibility of the execution of a play fall on the shoulders of the players or the coach. the, ahem, 'writer' . . . points out that suggs jumped a screen pass and turned our season around. is it ben's responsibility to recognize the defense, audible out if the advantage isn't there (tom brady has said that the gets to the line, reads the defense, and audibles and moves his players around until there is a clear advantage over the defense before they snap the ball -- would you say ben does the same?), and then make a clean throw. when throwing a screen pass, wouldn't you put an even greater emphasis on ball security when throwing a screen pass or lateral (like the bounce pass he threw in the denver game that really should have ended the game for us)?

"predictability, especially when leading the 2nd half" run, run, pass. really? you've got a problem with run, run, pass when trying to close out a game? i guess you missed the entire bill cowher era. of course, that was more like, run, run, run. again, this comes down to execution. of course, when have of your horses are on the sideline, it's a bit tougher for the cart to run. you want to pass more when leading in the 2nd half? that's a more sound philosophy? that's fascinating. not running 30-40 second chunks of time off the clock when working with a lead makes more since than running the ball? stopping the clock with incomplete passes and running the risk of negative plays (like the one at the end of regulation of the denver game that everyone was so critical of) makes more sense than lining up and running the football? we were notorious for this in the 90s. running the ball down their throats and putting games away. we couldn't have been more predictable. and, under cowher, we were 108-1-1 in the process. everyone proudly exclaimed it was 'steelers football.' now they're blaming our oc for the same approach?

"abandoning the run and the odds way too prematurely" here, the amateur hack contradicts his entire thesis. in his previous argument he blames arians for being too predictable (run, run, pass) and in the very next thought blames arians for not being predictable enough ("sometimes, just going by the numbers and doing the smart thing is the right damn thing to do!"). welcome to the mind of the arians-haters. if we run on second-and-one and it gets stuffed they cry, "well, duh!! they KNEW we were going to run! how about a pass on second-and-short every now and then, bruce?! what an idiot!" if we try to pass and it's incomplete then it's, "damnit, bruce! just pick up the first down!! play the odds!" or, worse, if we try to pass and ben gets sacked, it's "can you believe how dumb arians is?! THAT'S why this team sucks! instead of second-and-one, it's third-and-nine! fire arians!"

"the hurry-up offense" this is probably THE one area (so far) that i agree with the writer on. i've stated this many times before. i think we should have an approach like the bills and bengals did in the late eighties. implement cincy's 'sugar huddle.' it makes defenses tired, keeps them from substituting the personnel they want, and gets our qb into rhythm. we've got a sandlot qb, why not run a sandlot offense? denver abandoned their offensive approach when jesus christ took the reigns, why can't we do the same?

"pitiful road play in 2011" i don't know what kind of an argument the writer is trying to make here. he doesn't either. in fact, he points out that arians isn't the primary source of blame here. in fact, he mentions areas that are completely out of arians' hands. namely, turnovers and penalties. that's about execution. turnovers are solely on the players. and, at the professional level, penalties are on the players too. this isn't pee-wee ball, high school, or even college where 'discipline' is on the coaching staff. when professionals commit penalties, it's on them.

"the treatment of big ben during his injury" the writer admits that this decision was on tomlin, not bruce. however, we all know that anything from the temperature of the water in the gatorade buckets to the cleanliness of the uniforms falls on bruce so . . . might as well throw this ire on the fire. i don't even know what to say. we were fighting for our playoff lives (the difference between the #1 or #2 seed vs the #5 seed was everything - it just was). to approach crucial games without ben or to play ben and expect him to do nothing but hand the football off . . . well, hindsight is 20/20. and pointing out a disdain for having ben throw the ball forty times at denver, well . . . we were in hurry-up mode for most of the second half so i can only imagine the heat arians would have taken if we ran off tackle forty times down two possessions late in the game.

i've said it before, i think this core of players is difficult to game-plan for. i think the reason why is because our qb is ben roethlisberger. he's not going to throw the back-shoulder dart. he's not going to throw a good deep ball. he's not going to read the defenses, react, audible out to an advantage, make precision throws . . . he's just not. he's not an elite 'quarterback.' he's a leader. he's a winner. i love the guy. but if you think some oc is going to come in here and have him playing the qb position like rodgers, brees, or brady, you're disillusioned. BA is working with what he's got. a sandlot qb, a young receiving corps, a blocking tight end who catches fairly well but isn't very athletic, a below-average line, and average running backs, and a wrath of injuries. if you think bill walsh himself could have us looking like montana/rice, you're crazy. maybe there is another guy out there who could have this offense producing better results. who is he? i'd love to know who he is. in the meantime, i'll embrace this organization's fondness for stability. it's kept us competitive for the better part of forty straight years now. a run that ANY team's fan base would be thrilled to experience.
Click to expand...

:goodpost: :thumbsup:

Great post HPB

lostyank · Jan 19, 2012

BLACKnGOLDsince72 said:

I don't see any BA BACKERS on this board as you call them. I see people who blame him for everything that goes wrong offensively and want him burned at the stake and then there are people like me who think player execution issues have contributed to the poor offensive production just as much and probably more than BA's coaching has. Matter of fact the people in this camp often reference in their posts they have no alliegance to BA whatsoever and could care less whether he stays or goes. If you're called a BA BACKER simply because your position is that player performance, especially the OL issues, has hurt us as much and even more than BA's coaching then so be it I guess but you're not being honest about our position on the issue. There seems to be this perception on here by some that we have the greatest offensive skill players in the NFL and if they were only coached better we'd be blowing teams out of every game. That's nothing but Steeler bias. Ben's clearly nowhere near the best QB even on 2 good legs. Mendy one of the best RB's in the NFL, really ? Yes our WR's are very talented but also very young and lack experience. We do have a probowl TE but after Heath then what do we have ? Finally an offensive line that was nothing more than a revolving door of players all year long of which most of them wouldn't be talented enough to start for the majority of teams in the NFL.

As I've said many times on here and on the old official MB I could care less if BA stays or goes. I just know that when he goes it won't take very long for some here to hate his replacement because the Steelers will not be the offensive scoring machine they think it's going to be and if that does happen it will have more to do with moves the Steelers made with player personnel versus bringing in a new OC.
Click to expand...

Exactly! Player execution, injuries, an OL made of swiss cheese, disgusting turnover differential and plain old laying goose eggs in a couple of big games. The list goes on and on. Work on these issues first. Sure, BA can make some dumb calls, but so do plenty of other OCs. I highly doubt that substituting one of the OCs from one of the fan-tab-a-doobie offenses in this league would have made that much of a difference. Most of those teams are on the couch with their Cheetos, just like us.

Log in

For all those dozen or so BA backers on this board

rukus4ever Well-Known Member

BobbyBiz Well-Known Member

lostyank Well-Known Member

Share This Page