for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read this

The New York Giants won Super Bowl XLVI because ultimately, their receivers made big plays and New England's didn't. After 56 minutes of thrilling, occasionally sloppy, dink-and-dunk chess, the Patriots tried to go deep, and couldn't, while the Giants tried to go deep, and did. And looking forward to next season, there is one team more than any other that should draw inspiration from the Giants' success: the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Like the Giants, the Steelers are a venerable franchise and a smart organization, run by old-school ownership and led by a quarterback drafted in 2004 who has made a boatload of clutch plays on his way to winning two Super Bowls. And like the Giants, the Steelers are proud of their blue-collar identity: These are teams with long traditions of smashing opponents at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball.

But while the Giants successfully morphed into a big-play offense this season -- Eli Manning not only threw for 4,933 yards, but averaged 13.7 yards per completion, third-best in the NFL -- the Steelers were in flux. It's not just that Ben Roethlisberger suffered a broken thumb and a high ankle sprain, or that injuries kept Pittsburgh's offense from any semblance of continuity.

-It's that the Steelers kept relying on RB Rashard Mendenhall even though he completely lacked explosiveness, averaging just 1.6 yards after contact per carry last year, 46th in the NFL. (And you can't lay that on the O-line, because Isaac Redman ranked second in the league, but had fewer than half as many carries as Mendenhall.)

-It's that TE Heath Miller was effective but targeted just 75 times, 20th among tight ends, and often seemed to disappear toward the end of games.

-It's that WR Mike Wallace started out as a superstar, with 43 catches for 800 yards in the first eight games of the season, but then drifted to just 29 receptions for 393 yards in the last eight.

Does Wallace need more help with double coverages? Does he need to run better routes? Did his rapport with Big Ben lose something when Antonio Brown arrived? Nobody's quite sure. But the bombs stopped falling his way after Halloween.

Steelers fans loved to bash former offensive coordinator Bruce Arians for everything wrong with their team, and last month Arians packed his bags and went back to work for the Colts, where he was quarterbacks coach from 1998 to 2000. But Arians wasn't responsible for the fundamental problem that underlies all of Pittsburgh's issues: The Steelers want to remain a running team, but they're more effective when they pass. Without Arians, the big question is: How should they run the offense under Roethlisberger now?" If he were, I don't want to say 'allowed,' but his preference would be to throw the ball more, use the weapons we have and throw it," Roethlisberger said last April, referring to Arians. "We both think ... that we call a lot more runs because we know that's what we're supposed to do. And I don't know if that's 'supposed to' from the fans, the media, the owner, who knows?"

Well, we know. It's from all three. The Steelers define themselves as a hard-working, lunch pail kind of squad, and it's hard for their proletarian-identifying owner, their traditionalist fans and their stuck-in-the-days-of-Chuck-Noll beat writers to see them as anything but bruisers. But these days, if you're plodding forward, you're really moving backward, because your competition is probably taking to the air.This season, we've analyzed how successful teams understand that offensive balance doesn't mean rushing and passing an equal amount of times, but maximizing total yards per play, and how the best teams are adding passing yards by throwing deep and by targeting new-breed tight ends.

Yet at Art Rooney's behest and under coach Mike Tomlin's direction, the Steelers ran the ball on 47.4 percent of plays in 2010 and 42.8 percent of plays in 2011 -- huge numbers for a team with a quarterback many consider one of the five best in the league. (The Giants, Packers and Saints all rushed on fewer than 40 percent of plays this season; the Lions were at 33.6 percent.)

The statistical case for finally switching gears is simple. Roethlisberger can throw deep: Even with his injuries, he averaged 9.1 yards per attempt in 2011, seventh-best in the NFL. He has reliable receivers: The Steelers dropped just 2.9 percent of targets in 2011, the lowest rate in football. And those receivers make plays: Pittsburgh averaged 5.8 yards after catch per reception, sixth-most in the league. Wallace and Brown each averaged more than 16 yards a catch, and they're both just 25 years old -- and Emmanuel Sanders is a heck of a third wideout.

It's actually fairly amazing that with Roethlisberger, Wallace and Brown operating as effectively as they did, the Steelers managed to score only 325 points last year. But that's what conservative play calling will do. Because runs are generally less effective than passes, rushing too often in critical situations will kill drive after drive. Through most of last season, Football Outsiders ranked Pittsburgh as a top-10 offense based on how efficient the Steelers were per play. But while they ended the season ranked ninth in net yards per passing attempt (which includes sacks) and 12th in offensive yards, they were just 21st in points.

In contrast, the Giants scored 394 points, eighth-most in the NFL, despite a running game that averaged a league-worst 3.5 YPA and that was particularly horrendous in critical short-yardage situations. Why? Because adding deep throws allowed them to extend Manning's proficiency over a greater number of plays. Advanced metrics indicate that approximately zero percent of you are going to believe this, but on a per-play basis, Manning didn't actually play better in 2011 than he did in 2010. Yes, he threw for more yards and more yards per attempt, with fewer interceptions. But, as we explored way back in September, Manning's 2010 was considerably better than it appeared from his raw stats: His picks were largely the fault of his teammates, and he was exceptionally good at avoiding sacks and fumbles. And many of Manning's passes in 2011 -- and in 2012! -- were so big and so exciting that at the moment, it seems like he has no flaws at all.

The reality: Manning's Total Quarterback Rating, which takes into account all of a QB's contributions to every game, play by play -- the interceptions that were on Manning this year, and the extra sacks, as well as all the bombs to Victor Cruz andJake Ballard -- was 61.0 in 2011, and 64.2 in 2010. What changed this season wasn't Manning's efficiency, but the volume of his production. In 2011, he added an estimated 93 points to the Giants' offense through his passing, up from 66.1 points in 2010, because he was on the field more: 725 action plays, versus 654 a year earlier. Because Manning threw more -- and maintained his effectiveness as the number and depth of his attempts increased -- the Giants gained more yards and more first downs through the air, and more yards per play overall, than in 2010.

The big lesson here is that passing generally keeps an offense going far more effectively than rushing. And because the Giants assigned Manning more responsibility, they got more out of his excellence. Which brings us back to Big Ben.

Roethlisberger had a QBR of 63.3 this year, but he was in on only 654 action plays. That might sound like a lot, but it ranked just 13th in the league -- and the 10 most active QBs had an average of 732 action plays in 2011, up from 677 in just the past two seasons. It's pretty clear the Steelers aren't getting as much as they could out of Roethlisberger. Todd Haley, Pittsburgh's soon-to-be new offensive coordinator, has run some amazing offenses dominated by wideouts, topped by the 2008 Arizona Cardinals, who had three 1,000-yard receivers. His most important job now isn't to get Wallace straightened out or to involve the Steelers' running backs more in the passing game. It's to convince Rooney and all those who still see the Steelers as hard hats that it's time to take the cuffs off Big Ben. Maybe if Roethlisberger gets to air the ball out early, he won't have to scramble to win so many games late, reducing the punishment he takes.

Or maybe he'll have a lot of fun doing both -- like Manning.

I hope you don't mind, but I took the (masochistic) liberty of editing your post into a more readable format. It's far easier on the eyes and people will be more inclined to read it. Now, agreeing may be another matter, but that's what forums are for.

- Ray D

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Saw this too D...Couldnt read it either....Im going to guess what this says is..Both teams sucked running the ball most of the year but still got to the big game....

SO...Why would we STEELERS fans want to go back to running the ball?

Just my guess...Im not reading all this crap either!!!!

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

I can't read it either, but i read some it from someone else's post in a different thread and can derive much from the title.

Anyone who thinks having a balanced offensive is out of date is out of their minds and I don't give a damn about the new rules. I'm too bored to really type my opinion in FULL detail.

But, I will say that I hope that every other team in the league goes with that all out passing mind set (it won't happen). That will leave the best RB's and defensive back talent for us to scoop up and play against a style they have not built against. since they were stupid enough to give up on defending the offense.

We will dominate!

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Scanned it enough to do irreparable harm to my eyes, heart, and soul, but I think I got the gist of it.

Response: Get back on your meds. The run game was very important to the Giants season and ultimate victory.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

For crying out loud...have you ever heard of paragraphs? Jeeez! Nobody is gonna read that garbage.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Take some pepto and please re type!

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

I assume its a Don Coryell manifesto against running the ball

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

One thing you fail to mention, The Steelers OL and pass blocking skills!

Please elaborate if you think the Steelers OL is better than the Giants, Saints,
or if Ben R. can read defenses as well as Drew Breese,Eli. We will be waiting.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Lol dont mind at all...i copied and pasted it on my tablet and thats how it came out ....for all of u trashing me for writing this id like to take credit for such logical thinking towards the steelers...and i know some message boards really lack logical thinking...but its an espn insider story...

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Just so u know the giants were last in the league in rushing this year...and middle of the pack during the playoffs...which is skewed a bit because some teams only played 1 game....

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Well the article is not very good logically, at least not for where we are. All the stats are based on yardage. Last time I looked, yardage wasn't our problem. Our offense had any number of OTHER issues.

That being said, to use team X, Y, or Z and say, look they had success throwing the ball, therefore throwing the ball makes an offense better is poor logic. All it says is that throwing the ball makes an offense better for teams X, Y, and Z. Denver would probably statistically say just the opposite. The reality is, if you can run the ball, OR if you can pass the ball, you can win games in the NFL. Your commitment and ability to do what you want to do makes more difference than which of those it is.

If you look back at that year we beat Indy in the playoffs, we were a running team. What did we do, we scored about 14 points before we became that running team by passing the ball.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

I pointed this out in another thread on here somewhere. The Giants were terrible at running the ball this past season. Just save your breath though because those calling for a return of the true fullback (which Haley's offense doesn't use btw) won't care to open their minds to the facts presented in the article

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

we only want a offense that has a plan or more than one per game , not an offense that is :ok let's snap the ball and see what can we do .

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Excellent post. Scoring points is essentially the issue, and everything tiers down from that - o-line protection, play-calling, reliable short yeardgae running etc.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Any article trying to defend the way BA and Ben routinely ran their version of the run and shoot yourself in the foot is a load of to me. Take all those stats and throw em out the window they mean nothing. Many of these articles are written by stat 'geeks' with nothing better to do then crunch numbers. Sit down and watch the games like I do and tons of other Steeler fans do. Watch it like some sort of 'religion' like many of us do then try to tell me there wasn't something fundamentally wrong about the way this O was run.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

Didn't you see the movie "Remember the Titans"? The scene where coach goes to the math teacher and had him analyze all the plays, tendencies and so on. The Titans went on to win their championship. If it worked in the movie it has to work in real life, right?

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

That DID happen in real life. The movie was based on a true story. That movie was based on the 1971 season of "T. C. Williams High School" in Alexandria, Virginia. They ended up being the 2nd ranked high school in the USA that year.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

The article came from an "Insider" column on ESPN in response to the Haley hiring.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

The article makes no sense. The author criticizes the Steelers for overusing Mendenhall, underusing Miller, and not getting Wallace the ball after October. BUT...don't blame Bruce. It's not his fault.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

It's worth noting, while the Giants were 32nd in rushing yardage, they were 6th in scoring rushing TD's. It's all about being more efficient and effective. Bradshaw missed 5 1/2 games due to injury as well. What this really means is the giants moved the ball down field by passing, but punched it in running in the red zone.

I think anyone here would be ecstatic to see our team finish in the top 5 scoring (rushing, passing or anything) offense. It's not about yardage, it's about points.

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

exactly...and thank goodness the team isnt run by the same closed minded fans that want the second coming of jerome bettis...im surprised of the lack of "big back" threads ..or owen schmiddt threads...gasp

but facts are the NFL is a QB league...We have a top 5 QB...we do not utilize him the right way...do saints or chargers or packers etc... scream give the ball less to our HOF qb and lets pound it??? NO...put it in your best players hands...

...the article talks about throwing to miller more ( look how the pats used their TEs) and the RBs more( which we never do) ... one thing i can say is i hope that damn bubble screen is gone!

 

Re: for all u who want 3 yards and a cloud of dust read thi

I don't think there is many ,if any of those who want or expect to go back to a ground and pound game.Many of us are just clamoring for running a offense with at least the threat of a run and also the ability to run successfully when the situation calls for it. BA had no clue on how to use formations to his advantage ,you don't go five-wide on third and short eliminating any threat of actually being able to run for a 1st down.I think that kinda gives the play away,no? Ben has always been his most successful and efficient when we used to use PA passes,then if things broke down his escapability was a huge asset. The O shouldn't be designed around that though. This O needs structure, something BA couldn't devise.