What's wrong with our offense?

No doubt. He was horrible in game 2 versus the Ravens.

 

It is Ben and his football IQ . I am not bashing him he has become much better , but he still has a problem getting fooled after the snap from time to time ....He used to have a huge problem before the snap he has worked his way past those ....He does very well after the play breaks down and the scramble drill for the most part he needs to work on the route combo's more and learn the space that certain coverages create ....

This is Coaching and reps against certain looks with all your weapons in different spots ...Defenses react different to the same play because of the skill set lined up in specific places ... This is why I am so huge on DHB.. Because speed kills and it forces types of coverage. This will help Ben big time..It is great for his confidence if he sees single high he knows he has single coverage somewhere..Now he needs to learn to manipulate that and get the guy you want deep with no help by using motion or use that deep guy to get your underneath guy 1 on 1 ...Basically Ben needs to learn a old football secret a bit better ... You run and throw where they are not ...The great QB'S know how to make that happen....

 

Ben and Haley are both so fascinated with the long ball they lack the patience to take what the defense gives you. I hate when they go long when it's short and manageable. Even when it works I would rather then just get the first down and move the chains.

 

D. Williams has proven a valuable asset in replacing what Bell brought to the table. He is not Bell, by any stretch. However, his body of work is impressive. He also doesn't drop passes. This should not be an issue for a franchise QB. If Ben doesn't make that throw it is because either it simply is not there (scheme by Haley; personnel on/off the field) or Ben chooses not to throw to D. Williams (and/or other options in the intermediate and short levels of play development). Herein lies the problem. There are less throws to Heath for this reason, as well. This was proven in film review of game 2 versus the Ravens.

 

Ben is 5 of 10 for 269 yards and 1 TD/0 INT when throwing deep on 3rd and 3 or less.

Complaints are illogical and misplaced

 

Being that we're converting 3rd downs at a rate of just over 38% I would say there's plenty to complain about.

 

While I think you are correct in identifying that the offense has had recurring issues periodically with simply driving the field for awhile, I think your statement on Bell and Bryant having nothing to do with Ben's performance to be a bit silly. There are a lot of things that can factor in to an offense chugging along, just as they can throw a wrench into the works. Take away a QB's #2 target in the passing game and an emerging deep threat on the outside and it's very likely going to impact the balance, and result in some of the poorer numbers Ben has posted.

This doesn't have to do with exonerating Ben; it's just a simple part of the equation. Ben (and Haley) have to adjust their game plans accordingly and find a rhythm with the pieces they have. Sometimes they have, sometimes they haven't.

 

I think the main thing is the drop in play from Bryant these last few games. When he is playing well and catching, the offense is electric. The issue is when he is not playing well. I thought this was the year he was supposed to explode? Now he did miss the first 5 games, but other than a few performances, he hardly looks like a consistently explosive threat that everyone seemed to be sure he was going to be. We are fortunate that Wheaton has gotten a lot better as the year went on as this somewhat helps make up for Bryant's decline, but its like comparing apples to oranges, Wheaton is a very different WR than Bryant.

It will be interesting to see how Bryant does in the playoffs and next year. If he doesn't prove to be consistent, or if he regresses, I would hope the Steelers keep Wheaton (next year is his last on his rookie deal), and move Coats in to be the 3rd (assuming he isn't a Sweed).

If Bryant proves to be consistent, I would keep him assuming we could afford him. Right now though, I am liking Wheaton slightly better. Fun fact: Wheaton led the team in YPC with 17.0. Bryant was 15.5.

 

So we are better converting 3rd and short by going long, better than we are converting 3rd downs as a whole. Thank you for making my point...

Complaining about going deep on 3rd and short are misplaced at best.

 

You say we are at 50% on 3rd and 3 or less,what about 3rd and 4-5 which still should be considered short yardage. If we are at 38% as a whole then that's where we're at and that's a problem. How many of our 3rd downs could of been successful if we took what was there. We should probably be completing more than 50% of our passes on 3rd and 3.

 

Personally breaking it down to 3rd and 3 or less only is splitting hairs. The goal is to win football games and part of that is converting 3rd downs which we've been well below the line. If I remember correctly the same source that you're using also brings up 3rd and 4 or 5 yards to go where we're 1-7 or something. When you look at the whole thing it paints a better picture. It might not be pretty, but it's more accurate. Let's not forget we're talking about statistics here and a sample size of 10 isn't the most accurate by any stretch of the imagination.

To add to this a bit. Look at the Seattle game. We went all Air Haley in that game, yes we scored 30 points, but we gave up 39. Personally, I would rather go for higher percentage plays and move the chains as opposed to giving the ball back to the opponent. If your defense is having problems stopping the opposing offense then putting them back on the field repeatedly is asinine.

 

Given that the complaints in this thread were about going long on "3rd and 1" and "3rd and short"... Using 3rd and 3 is more than fair. But I understand if people don't like facts that contradict their belief.

I find the complaints... Interesting

 

3rd and 4-5 is not considered short yardage.

You are also implying that when we go deep, that we aren't "taking what's there". In my viewing that is not the case most of the time.

 

Look at the whole picture. The whole article sites 17 plays. Take all of them into account and we're 35% on 3rd and 5 or less which sucks. While 50% looks all nice and pretty it's a tiny sample size. Now granted increasing it to 17 plays isn't much, but it's all the info given from your source. That 35% success rate is far closer to our abysmal season long 3rd down conversion rate.

Now I'm not one that's going to sit here clamoring for 3yards and a cloud of dust. We are a pass first team and that's fine. However, opting for higher percentage plays and moving the chains should be our priority.

 

Totally agree ,with the struggles of this defense especially the less time they see the field the better. I think the all or nothing approach is starting to average out and is now costing us in our offensive production and consistency. It's no coincidence our 3rd down struggles have been catching up to us and slowing our O down. The fact that we are not converting and not getting off the field on defense are our biggest issues right now......besides no D Will that is.

 

Yea, people are complaining about 10 plays... Over 16 games...Which in and of itself is pretty hilarious.


With a 50% success rate. And combined with our overall success rate on 3rd down AND the fact that these plays pick up chunk yardage... They should be calling for us to do it more, not less.

Adding in plays of 4and 5 yards changes the dynamic. One of the reasons that you can be successful deep on 3rd and short is the threat of the run, it brings a safety in the box, it gets you cover 1 and cover 0 looks. 3rd and 4 and 3rd and 5 are far less likely to be runs, and thus far less likely to get you those singled up matchups deep.

 

It's not splitting hairs at all... It's understanding football. 3rd and 1,2,3 is a significantly different down/distance from a playbook/play calling perspective than 3rd and 4,5

 

I believe the loss of Bell would either limit or change overall offensive production, but I don't believe it should affect the ability of a franchise QB to distribute the ball. Either a receiver is open, or he isn't. Either the RB is available for the check down, or he isn't. Ben still finds Bryant and Wheaton (whom he is not as confident in as AB; just as he is probably more comfortable with Bell than Williams). However, his ability to distribute the ball to these other players is a factor of his skill set and ability. To say that Ben cannot continue to distribute the ball simply because a certain player is not on the field strips a lot away from Big Ben as a quarterback.

 

What is silly about it? Can you explain how the situations with Bell and Bryant directly relate to Ben's TD/INT ratio? How do those other players impact Ben's personal choices regarding protecting the football?

 

Something you'll find out around here is that alot of people tend to pass off their opinion as fact.

 

Bradshaw - 4 SB Titles ........... long, painful years of nothing......... Big Ben - 3 SB appearances and 2 Titles. Let's go Ben!

 

We actually agree on something.

The Steelers offense is geared for big plays above all else and the TOP has put the D in bad spots over and over during the last few seasons.

This was an issue with Arians too and the Rooneys actually demanded the Steelers run the ball and control the game more.

Tomlin wants a big play offense and doesn't see the point in controlling the game from a possession standpoint. He wants points points points.

Maybe the Rooneys will check him again but Tomlin will pull back to the "big pass offense."