|
Leave YOUR Writing on the Wall! Sound off on our message board with your postgame critiques, analysis, ranting and raving about the last game as well as your predictions, smak, & insults about our upcoming opponent. Whether your message is a simple "Go Steelers" or detailed, in-depth analysis, tell us what you think!
|
|
|
 | Dig This Site?
to Your Favs! |
Steelers vs Rams
 |
|
|
|
Fan Poll |  |
|
|
Who deserves the blame for the Rams loss?
• The Secondary
• Bill Cowher
• Offensive Line
• Tim Lewis
• Tommy Maddox
|
|
|
|
Scoring Summary
First Quarter
STL - TD, Torry Holt, 36 Yd pass from Marc Bulger (kick is good).
PIT - TD, Antwaan Randle El, 84 Yd punt return (kick is good).
Second Quarter
STL - TD, Arlen Harris, 1 Yd run (kick is good).
PIT - TD, Hines Ward, 9 Yd pass from Tommy Maddox (kick is good).
STL - FG, Jeff Wilkins 20 Yd.
Third Quarter
STL - FG, Jeff Wilkins 22 Yd.
PIT - TD, Hines Ward, 22 Yd pass from Tommy Maddox (kick is good).
STL - TD, Arlen Harris, 9 Yd run (kick is good).
Fourth Quarter
STL - TD, Arlen Harris, 9 Yd run (2 Pt. Conversion failed).
Key Stats & Facts
• 11 plays of over 20 yards for Rams: Have the Steelers even had 11 plays over 20 yards this season? Disgusting.
• Time of possession: Rams, 40 minutes... Steelers 20 minutes. 'Nuff Said. Get blasted 2-1 in time of possession and you don't win.
|
Steelers Offensive Leaders | |
PASSING |
ATT |
CMP |
YDS |
TD |
INT | |
T. Maddox |
28 |
12 |
159 |
2 |
3 |
|
RUSHING |
ATT |
YDS |
TD |
LG |
|
J. Bettis |
12 |
42 |
0 |
8 |
|
A. Randle El |
2 |
39 |
0 |
32 |
|
RECEIVING |
REC |
YDS |
TD |
LG |
|
H. Ward |
5 |
90 |
2 |
45 |
|
J. Tuman |
1 |
21 |
0 |
21 |
|
D. Kreider |
1 |
15 |
0 |
15 |
|
|
Rams Offensive Leaders | |
PASSING |
ATT |
CMP |
YDS |
TD |
INT | |
M. Bulger |
37 |
22 |
375 |
1 |
0 |
|
RUSHING |
ATT |
YDS |
TD |
LG |
|
A. Harris |
34 |
81 |
3 |
12 |
|
M. Bulger |
3 |
8 |
0 |
11 |
|
RECEIVING |
REC |
YDS |
TD |
LG |
|
T. Holt |
7 |
174 |
1 |
48 |
|
I. Bruce |
3 |
73 |
0 |
29 |
|
C. Cleeland |
2 |
54 |
0 |
28 |
|
|
|
Key Defensive Players | |
DEFENSE |
T-A |
SCK |
INT |
FF |
|
J. Porter |
6-2 |
2.0 |
0 |
0 |
|
J. Farrior |
11-1 |
0.0 |
0 |
0 |
|
B. Alexander |
7.1 |
0.0 |
0 |
0 |
|
K. Bell |
4-2 |
0.0 |
0 |
0 |
|
M. Logan |
3-3 |
0.0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Key Defensive Players | |
DEFENSE |
T-A |
SCK |
INT |
FF |
|
G. Wistrom |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
L. Little |
3-1 |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
|
J. Duncan |
1-2 |
0.0 |
1 |
0 |
|
D. Groce |
1-0 |
0.0 |
1 |
0 |
|
A. Williams |
1.0 |
0.0 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
Oh, Nooooo!
The Rams played the role of "Sluggo" while squashing Mr. Bill's Steelers like a grape, and the masses in Pittsburgh are now calling for Mr. Bill's head.
|
From the top... DOWN
Focus shifts from players to coach
Article by McMillen & Wife
Man, did I call this one. For my postgame comments, please see my pregame comments.
Coach William Cowher must be starting to feel like Captain William Bligh (Mutiny on the Bounty) about now. Fortunately for Mr. Bill, Mike Mularkey bears little resemblance to a young Marlon Brando (who played the mutinous Fletcher Christian in the movie).
Nonetheless, it's time for Coach Cowher to start looking over his shoulder.
There's little question in my mind that Cowher's unwillingness or inability to move away from our base 3-4 defense is at the heart of our problems. Of course, we ran a pretty steady (and highly ineffective) dime package against the pass-happy Rams. But the failure of the dime is directly related to personnel issues dictated by our adherence to the 3-4 dinosaur.
I'm not gonna rehash the ugly details again. I pointed out this very problem as early as the week 2 Raiders debacle last year and have discussed it repeatedly since then. The bottom line is, we don't have any pass rushers on the defensive line. They're run cloggers meant to open up gaps for our linebackers. If a team can force our linebackers to become coverage guys with a spread offense or get our LBs off the field altogether by forcing us into a dime, we have no pass rush. And that mkaes our already suspect defensive backfield look utterly horrid.
I know this. You know this. Every offensive coordinator in the NFL knows this. So the question is:
Why is Bill Cowher refusing to abandon the 3-4?
In my mind, it's a combination of things.
1) The talent on hand: We're built to run a 3-4 defense... and nothing else. We're loaded with unbelieveable linebacker talent in Bell, Porter, Gildon and Farrior. We have excellent run-stopping defensive lineman in Casey, Kimo and Aaron Smith. But running a 4-3 for us is impossible. We don't have the personnel to do it. You've gotta have at least one dominant pass-rushing lineman in a 4-3, and we don't. Linebackers are way too small to be a reasonable subsitute. Therefore, we're stuck unless we're prepared to go into rebuilding mode. Which brings me to the next point...
2) A gamble: It's my belief that Bill Cowher decided to try to make things work NOW rather than gutting the defense and retooling for a 4-3 scheme over the next couple of years. In otherwords, Cowher decided to take his chances with the considerable talent at hand, hoping that we would be able to adjust. It's a gamble that, so far, isn't paying off, but I understand the thinking behind it.
3) The ticking clock: Teams don't repeat in the Super Bowl very often these days. The window closes very quickly. Bill hears the clock ticking on this team. He hears the clock ticking on him. Let's face it... 2001 should've been our year. Everything was in place and we choked. It's hard to be that close and come away empty. Since then, I think Cowher has been trying to cling to the team that "could've been" in hopes that what's left of that team still has enough gas to get it done. They don't.
So where do we go from here?
Up. We go up. We keep clawing, fighting, scratching our way back into contention. It can be done. The Steelers have been very playing poorly against some very good teams. But we are a talented team in a very weak division, so all is not lost. We just need to start doing some of the little things.
A perfect example is the offensive line. It's no secret that our offense has been struggling behind some very shaky line play, and Sunday vs. St. Louis was no exception. But the move of Faneca to left tackle was a good one, and there's no denying that things are slowly getting better as a result of the change. If we are able to turn things around, I suspect that when we look back on this season, it will be Faneca's sacrifice that stands out as the catalyst for that turnaround (much like Carnell Lake's move to CB in '95).
It's not over... YET.
Do I think we'll make it to the Super Bowl? No way. Do I think we'll make it to the playoffs? Well... maybe. Call me a dreamer, but I still vividly remember 1989. The season opened with the Steelers get pasted (at home) by the Browns 51-0, and the Bengals humiliated us 42-10 the following week. Does losing 92-10 sound like a team headed to the playoffs? Yet we made it with an 8-8 record, beat the Oilers in the Wildcard round, and were a John Elway comeback away from facing the Browns in the '89 AFC Championship. You guys can give up if you want, but I still believe.
It all starts with one win, folks. Gotta get that first win. It would be great to get it in Seattle, THIS Sunday, because 2-6 -- even in the AFC North -- may be insurmountable.
A word of caution for the anti-Cowher faction: BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.
At this stage of the game, I think it's a safe bet that many of you Cowher haters out there would like nothing better than to see this team completely flame out & lose their final 9 games simply so we could be rid of Bill Cowher. A little food for thought: wouldn't it be awful to get the first half of your wish (a disasterous season) and not get the second half (the ousting of Cowher)? Face it, guys... in all likelyhood, you'll be staring at Bill Cowher on the sidelines come the 2004 season regardless of what happens this season.
If you can't root for Cowher, root for Ward.
In other words, you may as well root for your team. Forget about Cowher, forget about the record and try to get some enjoyment out of watching guys like Hines Ward and Kendrell Bell and Joey Porter play their asses off. Football season will be gone before you know it. Find a way to enjoy what's left of it by supporting your team without letting your distaste for Cowher get in the way.
GO STEELERS!!!
Tim McMillen
Webmaster, McMillen & Wife
Mac & Wife is Hosted and Sponsored by Pittsburgh's Finest!
|
|
|
|
Fan Smak & Analysis
| |
The following articles are listed in the order they were received (with the most recent entries at the BOTTOM). This isn't a "guestbook" format... I read and manually insert every message, so you may not see your submission show up immediately. Thanks a million for your comments, people!
|
|
Author: McSteelerfan
Comment: Re: If you can't root for Cowher, root for Ward.
I can't disagree with much you have to say , Tim...and this time , it would be hard to disagree with anything you had to say.
When I was watching ... absolutely rapt , as our old Steelers were introduced , my one thought was "Man , Ward would fit right in with these guys.".
There are others on the team who fit the bill....(I'm not even close to giving up on Maddox....ask Terry Bradshaw...) , but with all the talent.....Porter....Bell....Bettis....Burriss....Alan-the-Manica....
the one player I'd pick to build a team around , based on toughness and heart......Has to be Hines Ward......and he deserves better than this year's effort from his team.....be it coaches or players.
We're very lucky to have him.
|
Author: Plaxico80
Comment: Tim, Although I Admire Your Optimism....
....It's misguided. You place Gildon in with our "unbelievable" linebacking talent. WRONG. So, completely WRONG. You say that most likely (probably because of contract issues) that Bill Cowher will be back next year. Don't be so sure. I'm sure there are buyout clauses in his contract and if this slide continues, I'll bet anything he's replaced. Sure if we end up 7-9 or maybe even 6-10, there's a chance he stays, but ANYTHING LOWER THAN THAT and he had better go to McDonalds and pick up an application.
You mention the 3-4, which you believe should be changed and I completely disagree. The same 2001 team, the Super Bowl team in '95 and several other teams that might have been the best in the league, used that format. While Cowher's offensive philosophy is completely F-D UP, his defensive philosophy is fine (although the blitz packages could be a little more creative.) The problem is the TALENT. Our defensive backs, to the man, are the WORST IN FOOTBALL. Mike Logan is the ONLY ONE WORTH KEEPING and he wouldn't be starting for 60 + % of the teams in this league (maybe more.) Gildon MUST GO. NOW. On our defensive line, Hampton is great - Smith has UNDERACHIEVED (again) and although Kimo works his ass off, his position should be upgraded. Rather than draft to replace these DB's, I would look to free agency to improve this side of the ball. Look at what KC did with Shawn Barber and Dexter McLeon.
On the offensive side of the ball, sure the o-line has been banged up, but they (again) played MUCH BETTER, during the Rams game. They weren't the reason we lost. The problem here is (as I said earlier) PHILOSOPHY. Mularkey has outsmarted himself to the point where the players don't believe in him anymore. As the Browns fan said earlier on your board, Mularkey has F-D UP on 3rd and short, for 3 straight weeks. These are GAME CHANGING PLAYS and they aren't going our way. Cowher's decision to start Zereoue instead of Bettis and to sign Riemersma has come back to haunt us. The entire backfield (along with the offensive line) must be looked at. If we lose our next game, there is no reason that Verron Haynes and even Daute Brown shouldn't be given a chance at a whole bunch of playing time. Bettis is no longer the answer and Zereoue is nothing more than a change of pace back.
The Receivers are fine, but utilized completely wrong. As a writer for the Post Gazette wrote after the Rams game; "why not go back to the jump ball to Burress?" What is the worst thing that can happen? The guy is almost 6' 6" and can jump. They should use that play 2-3 times a game, but after he didn't come down with the first one, end of story. In Mularkey's system, if it doesn't work once, don't go back to it. Mularkey and his system must either change and adapt, or he must go.
This season may not be completely over, but I really can't see some kind of miraculous comeback this year. There is absolutely no fire in this team. No Greg Lloyd, Carnell Lake or Rod Woodson to get this team through the tough times.
Leadership, both on and off the field, is lacking. Many changes are needed, but this may just be the most important component.
|
Author: Baltimore1967
Comment: Tim.......
Your post is very good, however, the RB situation needs to be addressed. You have 2 good ones, Cowher needs for one to be great. It is possible. Unfortunately, you have an aging vetereran versus inexperience. Pick one and work him. Also, Maddox is a no count. He showed greatness last year, this year, his true colors showed up......again. How Boller and Baltimore are in 1st, I do not know, there is way to much talent on the Steelers. The season is not over for you guys.
|
Author: mcmillenandwife
Comment: Re: Tim, Although I Admire Your Optimism....
Quote:
Tim, Although I Admire Your Optimism, It's misguided.
Wait a minute... aren't you the same guy who last week said the Steelers would force turnovers & Bettis would dominate en route to a win over the Rams? Talk about misguided optimism... 
Quote:
You say that most likely (probably because of contract issues) that Bill Cowher will be back next year. Don't be so sure. I'm sure there are buyout clauses in his contract and if this slide continues, I'll bet anything he's replaced. Sure if we end up 7-9 or maybe even 6-10, there's a chance he stays, but ANYTHING LOWER THAN THAT and he had better go to McDonalds and pick up an application.
Cowher will still be here next year. Wake up, Plex. I know you want him gone, but it's not gonna happen.
First of all, we won't finish lower than 6-10. Look at our schedule from here on out. A cakewalk compared to what we've endured so far.
But I admire your pessimism...
Secondly, 6-10 amounts to the "disasterous season" I was talking about.
Quote:
You mention the 3-4, which you believe should be changed and I completely disagree. The same 2001 team, the Super Bowl team in '95 and several other teams that might have been the best in the league, used that format. While Cowher's offensive philosophy is completely F-D UP, his defensive philosophy is fine (although the blitz packages could be a little more creative.) The problem is the TALENT.
Again, you're a walking contradiction on this one, bro.
The problem is talent? No friggin' way. We have the same guys!
Tell me, Plex... how has our defensive talent downgraded since 2001? Our linebackers have upgraded (Farrior is an improvement over Holmes and Bell is far more experienced now). Our CBs are the same. Our D-line is the same. Our safeties are considerably faster. Overall, our defense now is the exact same group of players from 2001 with a few upgrades.
The problem is that our philosophy is the same even though the entire NFL now knows how to neutralize what was so effective during the years you mentioned.
As an anti-Cowher guy, one would think you'd be sharp enough to pick up on that and run with it for all it's worth.
Quote:
Our defensive backs, to the man, are the WORST IN FOOTBALL.
Proves the point I made above. As bad as they seem, these guys are an upgrade over what we had in 2001. Yet they're getting torched now, and they weren't then. Why? No pass rush. Which leads me to the next quote & point...
Quote:
On our defensive line, Hampton is great - Smith has UNDERACHIEVED (again) and although Kimo works his ass off, his position should be upgraded. Rather than draft to replace these DB's, I would look to free agency to improve this side of the ball. Look at what KC did with Shawn Barber and Dexter McLeon.
Here's where you're right, and if you re-read my post, that's exactly my point: the lack of pass rush from our D-lin is a HUGE problem!
However, I think you might still be missing the fact that we can't abandon the 3-4 because we don't have the D-linemen to run anything else. If we hadn't been schemed out of running our 3-4 and forced into the dime, our DBs would only have to cover their man for a short time because in the "old days", our linebackers were constantly breathing down the QB's neck.
That is obviously no longer the case. When we use the 3-4 now days, our linebackers are forced into coverage roles. Therefore, no pressure on the QB. So, our DBs have to cover longer. Which gives us games like we saw last Sunday where we give up a dozen or so plays of over 20 yards.
Understand that defensive linemen in the 3-4 have one goal. Clog rushing lanes and create gaps for linebackers to run through. That's why we've rarely had DL's with significant sack numbers under Cowher. Our LB's get the sacks. If our LBs are off the field (in the dime), who pressures the QB? Our run-stopping, non-pass-rushing D-linemen? Nope. NOBODY.
Conversely, back when we ran a 4-3, who got the sacks? Joe Greene & L.C. Greenewood. Dig?
Quote:
On the offensive side of the ball, sure the o-line has been banged up, but they (again) played MUCH BETTER, during the Rams game. They weren't the reason we lost. The problem here is (as I said earlier) PHILOSOPHY. Mularkey has outsmarted himself to the point where the players don't believe in him anymore.
I agree that Mularkey's play-calling has been a problem, as has a jittery (rightfully so) Tommy Maddox. But unlike the defense, philosophy isn't the issue here. Execution is.
You've got it bass-akwards, son. The O-line is improving, yes. But they haven't played a good game yet. Far from it. Furthermore, it wasn't Mularkey's play calling that was lacking, it was execution. Dropped passes. Off-target throws. Missed blocks. Fumbles. Interceptions.
Quote:
Cowher's decision to start Zereoue instead of Bettis and to sign Riemersma has come back to haunt us. The entire backfield (along with the offensive line) must be looked at. If we lose our next game, there is no reason that Verron Haynes and even Daute Brown shouldn't be given a chance at a whole bunch of playing time. Bettis is no longer the answer and Zereoue is nothing more than a change of pace back.
See, you're contradicting yourself. In one breath, you say it's philosophy. In the next breath, you indict the Bus, Zero, Reemer and the entire O-line and advocate starting Haynes (who fumbles) and Brown (who barely made the team).
Which is it? Philosophy, or the players?
Quote:
This season may not be completely over, but I really can't see some kind of miraculous comeback this year. There is absolutely no fire in this team. No Greg Lloyd, Carnell Lake or Rod Woodson to get this team through the tough times.
Joey Porter may not be Greg Lloyd, but he is full of "fire" and a good leader on defense.
As for Rod Woodson & Carnell Lake, they were great players, but they were hardly what I'd call "fire-em-up" leader-types. They pretty much just suited up and played. Hines Ward and Kendrell Bell offer that kind of leadership now.
BTW, we're gonna beat the Seahawks this Sunday. I'm right on this. 
|
Author: mcmillenandwife
Comment: Re: '67
Quote:
Your post is very good, however, the RB situation needs to be addressed. You have 2 good ones, Cowher needs for one to be great. It is possible.
The problem with our running game hasn't been who's carrying the ball... it's poor execution by our O-line. Period.
Quote:
Also, Maddox is a no count. He showed greatness last year, this year, his true colors showed up......again.
Maybe, maybe not. Give him a reliable running game and a little protection and I suspect he'll make you eat those words.
|
Author: MickM
Comment: 3-4 D
I have always loved the 3-4 defence and it has always made me proud the the Steelers were one of the few teams that played it and made it work well.
Following your assessment our our Defence and the 3-4 I would say the following;
If we were to switch to a 4-3 D surely we would still see Opposing offenses exploiting mismatches with the 3 remaining Linebackers on the field?
I don't see what this switch would achieve, as I beleive that the 3-4 is not dead, but we are just being outcoached and outschemed by opposing teams. The 3-4 can still work and work well, the coaching staff need to get it done.
A pass rush will help to prevent the deep pass that we see week in week out when our two average and declining corners get burned for 40+ yards but will not stop these mismatches. Only the coaches can counter that.
Our problems seems to have started when this team started playing more man coverage and less zone coverage.
Also, Switching to the 4-3 does not equal a pass rush.
As for DE in the 4-3, well I beleive that arron Smith could play end in a 4-3 as would draw less double teams and could do well, but all our lineman are touching 290-300 so you are right about having the wrong personnel for the 4-3.
|
Author: Bill from Hanover
Comment: Awesome Article Tim (RB Question)
This is what I love about the site other then all the fellow fans and some of the other teams fans showing up .... Tim, you are an amazing writer ! Thanks for making this in my opinion the Best Steeler Site Going, heck, this might be the best site for football related material !!
I have a general question to everyone, being our running game is a little soft and with the issues down in Bengal Land, would it not be worth sitting down with Cory Dillon and talking to him about the possible chance to come on over to our team or would he carry some old baggage with him ? The old baggage would be referring to his attitude that we hear about ! With his speed and a fresh start and if we retain Bettis for the short bursts, would this not be a good pick up for us ?
I think Maddox is fine, I keep hearing that our O-Line is seriously hurt but do not see many players listed on the injury report ? Seems the play calling from the sidelines or upstairs has little to be desired, is it the same plays as last season or what that these teams are picking up on ? I think Ward is a class act and should be considered a very serious player whom plays with heart and has that driven desire to win games at any costs. We are not done yet for the season, there is a chance but it needs to begin in Seattle and continue ! We also need some breaks from Baltimore and Cleveland and also Cincy ..... It will be an uphill challenge for us and I think we can do it !
|
Author: mcmillenandwife
Comment: Re: 3-4 D
Quote:
If we were to switch to a 4-3 D surely we would still see Opposing offenses exploiting mismatches with the 3 remaining Linebackers on the field? I don't see what this switch would achieve, as I beleive that the 3-4 is not dead, but we are just being outcoached and outschemed by opposing teams.
We would definitely get exploited with our current personnel if we ran a 4-3, and that's why we haven't made the switch (and won't anytime soon). That's kinda my point, bro.
However, if we had a defensive line that could collapse the pocket, our linebackers would do fantastic. We actually have pretty good cover linebackers now. Lots of speed. They just can't cover guys all over the field. But if a QB has less than three seconds to throw (which is often the case against good D-lines and used to be the case before the 3-4 was cracked), our linebackers are capable of covering just about anyone.
Quote:
A pass rush will help to prevent the deep pass that we see week in week out when our two average and declining corners get burned for 40+ yards but will not stop these mismatches.
Yes, a strong pass rush will absolutely stop these mismatches. Look, the point is kinda moot because we can't run a 4-3 anyway. But if we could, we'd be far better off.
Furthermore, if we had a strong pass rush from our linemen, the performance of our nickel and dime packages would improve dramatically.
Quote:
Our problems seems to have started when this team started playing more man coverage and less zone coverage.
I don't know if you saw the Rams game or not, Mick, but they were torching everything. Whether is was man coverage on the outside, two-deep zones, zone blitzes, underneath, deep, whatever... there were guys running open everywhere because Bulger had enough time to eat a hoagie in the pocket. He wasn't sacked once, and was only pressured a handful of times. It was pretty sickening.
Quote:
Also, Switching to the 4-3 does not equal a pass rush.
Yeah, here we agree. That's why we haven't and won't do it. If the 3-4 doesn't somehow miraculously start working, we're gonna have to rebuild on defense next year. I don't think there's any way around it, and it's a real shame. There is so much great talent on this team, and by the time we get the problems on defense solved, much of our offensive talent will probably be playing for another team.
Welcome to today's NFL.
|
Author: mcmillenandwife
Comment: Re: Thanks for the kudos, Bill
Quote:
I have a general question to everyone, being our running game is a little soft and with the issues down in Bengal Land, would it not be worth sitting down with Cory Dillon and talking to him about the possible chance to come on over to our team or would he carry some old baggage with him ? The old baggage would be referring to his attitude that we hear about ! With his speed and a fresh start and if we retain Bettis for the short bursts, would this not be a good pick up for us?
Wow. Corey Dillon a Steeler? Makes my mouth water.
We've become pretty good at picking up players from the garbage heap and reviving their careers (Bettis & Maddox, for instance). But Dillon is still a top rung player and I doubt we could muster the cap room to sign him. Maybe cut Gildon... let Bettis and Zero go... jetison Riemersma... draft an OT in the first round... who knows?
Fun to think about.
|
Author: Baltimore1967
Comment: Tim.......
Like I said, you need to stick with someone, I personally think the bus is done, so, start Amos Zeroeue (Spellcheck) and give him 20 to 30 carries a game. Sure, any QB that depends on the running game has less pressure, Maddox, has looked like a deer staring into headlights a lot this year.
The AFC North, anything could happen any given Sunday!!!!!!!
|
Author: Tommy Coleman
Comment: Just a couple of points
Quote:
our linebackers are forced into coverage roles
Yeah...forced by the coaches not the plays that are being run against them.
It isn't the 3-4 that is the problem; it is the fact that we are not running the 3-4. The 3-4 is a base D to describe a basic setup or philosophy, so to speak. The Dime is not a 3-4 D.
Rushing 3 or our D-Line only is not the 3-4.
If you look at the Rams game when we put pressure on Bulger he was way off. I think he completed all of two passes when under pressure. Mind you the commentators said "...under pressure" almost every time he (Bulger) dropped back but that was not the case. While I mention the commentary; what is up with that freak "Bill Maas"?
Paraphrase of Mr. Maas; " He might pull a submarine sandwich out of his pants and eat it"... what that means is beyond me but he is the same guy who talked about "fantasizing about a certain 49ers WR's hands.
FREAK!
When you let a QB...ANY QB, get into a rhythm it is Dime time. You can't blitz every down but look at the Rams game it was working until Lewis got smart and the soft zone crap killed us. At that point any pressure becomes less effective because the QB is in a zone himself.
Anyway my point is this: Since, like Tim points out, Bill isn't going anywhere and neither is the 3-4 (so called) this year, why not, like Joey Porter said; "TAKE THE HANDCUFFS OFF"???
How many times did you see Bulger hit a Rams WR right in the center of a "triangulated ZONE D".
Soft Zone Crap!
When you zone there is always a soft spot but THAT spot is where teams have figured the Steelers out. When was the last time you saw a QB throw up the middle and a Steelers LB or DB step in front of it? I don't mean last second dives I mean anticipation and position and a Int!
The Steelers have ALWAYS played some bend don't break in the Cowher Era. Often in the latter parts of a game when they have completly dominated the other team and...wah-lah the other team scores enough points to get back in it. Everytime the Steelers knock a QB out of a game, regardless of who the back-ups are they go into a soft zone hoping to disguise something and hoping that the back-up will make a bad read. That is the time to turn it up not dial down and "Get Smart" (insert tommy g Don Adams ref here :b )
I'd be happy with some sacks but knocking out QBs is a almost forgotten art in Pittsburgh.
Stop playing not to lose!
Stop playing bend don't break!
Keep it in front of you...FINE but not 8-10 yards in front of you!
Soft zone crap!
Pressure equals mistakes and the "3-4" is predicated on "PRESSURE" not by just the front 3 or a 4 man rush but a scheme of unrelenting fury that the Steelers used to employ...
...ironic... Greg Lloyd was at the game.
|
Author: FETCH
Comment: DILLON A STEELER
SOUNDS GREAT BUT I'D FIRST WANT TO KNOW HOW LONG HE'S BEEN IN THE NFL AND HAS HE LOST A STEP ? IF THIS YEAR TURNS OUT TO BE AS BAD AS IT LOOKS NOW, SOME HARD DECISIONS MUST BE MADE. LIKE DO WE START REBUILDING FOR A FEW YEARS DOWN THE ROAD THROUGH THE DRAFT OR TRY TO SIGN SOME FREE AGENTS FOR THE IMMEDIATE. IF WE ARE REBUILDING FOR DOWN THE ROAD THEN I WOULD SAY PASS ON DILLION BECAUSE EVEN IF WE HAD HIM RIGHT NOW HE WOULDNT GET MUCH WITH OUR 1 MAN LINE.BUT IF WE GET SOME O-LINEMAN WHO CAN PLAY THEN GET HIM. DILLION HAS TAKEN A LOT OF PUNISHMENT IN CINCY SO HOW MUCH DOES HE HAVE LEFT?
|
Author: The Ghost
Comment: Greg Lloyd was at the game
And probably throwing up after watching that poor excuse for a defense!
Also, Tim, this may surprise you but I agree that the season is not over! The next two games are absolutely critical. If the Steelers lose one, then it is over. I fear a let down against the Cardinals more than a loss at Seattle! ( Remember the Texans last year).
Another thing, if Cowher is making the personnel decisions for this team should we re-construct, it does not make me confident!
|
Author: poppadenny
Comment: leader
The biggest problem on defense is NO LEADER. Second is no Tough Guy (like Lambert). Linebackers? Bell has done nothing since last years Tampa Bay game. Porter and Gildon have played below par. Farrior leads in tackles but most are down field.
|
Author: Jackhammer
Comment: 3-4 Defense
Tim, You hit it right on the button on this one. Your execution of the english language is impecible.
Ever since those Patriot & Raider games last year exposing this defensive scheme its been in disarray. It reminds me of the Houston Oiler "Run & Shoot" offense. Once the league figured it out it never worked again & now a days is non existend in the NFL. The Oilers signed personnel to "FIT" that offense & once exposed they were stuck with that personnel similar to what we have on our 3-4 Steeler Defense. The cats out of the bag around the NFL. I truly think the coaching staff is "TRING" to make adjustments but don't have the right personnel to change what needs to be done.
I'm not ready to pack it in yet. We MUST win the Seattle game & get a frickin win to start feelin good about something. Gotta start somewhere & this Sunday has to be it.
Once again I commend you on your writing abilities. You fly off the handle every once in a while but are always crystal clear doing so.
|
Author: baday12345
Comment: schemes and dreams
our 3-4 scheme is fine. it is not any greater liability against the spread than a 4-3. in fact as a 'base' you could say it is better. we have a nickel & dime just like everybody else in the league to handle the spread but its success/failure is not the problem of the 3-4 or 4-3.
the truth is (as some have already pointed out) is that we don't have a 4th & 5th down linemen for a 4-3 that could generate any push/pressure and the 3 we have now are really trained to occupy and free up lanes for our "big play" LB's. in a 3-4 that rush is primarly supposed to come from the LB's. the scheme is in conflict here, and our current personnel aren't
getting it done.
we do need a pass rush from somewhere, somehow. our corners are okay, certainly not great.
offense:
definitly the line.
bettis is definitley better suited for our o-line that is barely holding it together. i understand the switch and support it. where the hell is bruener?
we need his game NOW.
maddox is okay, and is capable of running this offense effectively if given time.
bottom line:
fix our o line problem and everything works better. everything!
|
Author: mcmillenandwife
Comment: Re: Just a couple of points
Quote:
Yeah...forced by the coaches not the plays that are being run against them.
It isn't the 3-4 that is the problem; it is the fact that we are not running the 3-4. The 3-4 is a base D to describe a basic setup or philosophy, so to speak. The Dime is not a 3-4 D.
Rushing 3 or our D-Line only is not the 3-4.
Yeah, but if you re-read my posts, I've already addressed our extensive use of the dime, its ineffectiveness and its 3-4 connection.
We've been forced into the dime because we can't generate pass rush with our run-clogging D-linemen. Thus, we need to fill the field with DBs who can hopefully keep up with speedy receivers, TEs and RBs who can easily outrun our linebackers with all that free time our non-pass-rushing defensive line is allowing the QB.
In other words, it IS the 3-4 that is at the root of the problem, because we've stocked our roster based on running it.
We don't have any pass rush because we built the defense to get its pass rush from the linebackers. But we've been successfully schemed to the point that we a) can't put our linebackers on the field, or b) we force them into coverage roles they're ill-equipped for.
Teams with lots of decent (not even necessarily great) receivers are gonna give us trouble every time. Just look back at the Cleveland game. Open receivers were running around everywhere. An speaking of that Cleveland debacle...
Quote:
Anyway my point is this: Since, like Tim points out, Bill isn't going anywhere and neither is the 3-4 (so called) this year, why not, like Joey Porter said; "TAKE THE HANDCUFFS OFF"???
Tommy, do you remember what passing teams did to our 3-4 last year? It was no different than what is happening to our nickel and dime packages now. It's all about pass rush. We don't have any. All teams have to do to neutralize our once-feared 3-4 package is go 4 or 5 wide. We simply can't deal with it. We can still victimize teams that don't have a wealth of talent at wide receiver with it, and it's still great against the run. But that's about it.
Quote:
How many times did you see Bulger hit a Rams WR right in the center of a "triangulated ZONE D".
Soft Zone Crap!
When you zone there is always a soft spot but THAT spot is where teams have figured the Steelers out. When was the last time you saw a QB throw up the middle and a Steelers LB or DB step in front of it? I don't mean last second dives I mean anticipation and position and a Int!
Couldn't agree more, bro. Not sure what to do about it, but it was pretty awful to watch.
Having said that, soft zone is where we are. We don't have anyone on the team capable of handling consistent man-to-man coverage, so we pretty much have to run zones and hope help arrives quickly enough to avoid disaster.
The bottom line: the answers this season will have to come from the offense in the form of scoring points, time of possession and 3rd down conversions. If we right that ship, we may be able to keep from sinking.
P.S. -- Even in the glory days of the 3-4, time of possession was as much a factor as anything. We used to dominate that stat via our running game. We've GOT to find a way to get back to that.
|
Author: mcmillenandwife
Comment: Re: Jackhammer and the Run-N-Shoot
Quote:
It reminds me of the Houston Oiler "Run & Shoot" offense. Once the league figured it out it never worked again & now a days is non existend in the NFL. The Oilers signed personnel to "FIT" that offense & once exposed they were stuck with that personnel similar to what we have on our 3-4 Steeler Defense.
Wow. Great analogy... probably the best comparison I've heard.
Dammit. 
|
Author: dbsfgyd1
Comment: Re: schemes and dreams
Unless I'm mistaken, when we are in pass defense, most of the time we are rushing 4 players, right? 3 lineman and a linbacker. 3-4 or 4-3 it's still 4 players. The logical question would be, would a larger, slightly slower person, or smaller faster person create more pressure?
Back in the heyday of this defense (LLoyd & Green era) we were rushing 5 + backed by a zone. What I've notice is now is were are rushing 4, one of which is an undersized linebacker or DB against 5 offensive lineman and a running back that goes to the flats if there is no blitz. And we wonder why there is no pressure. It's a constant mismatch.
One other point to note, as opposed to say 6 years ago, is what an offensive lineman can get a way in mugging the outside rushers. We aren't getting the heat from the outside that we used to get. A 250 pound linebacker is not going to bull rush a 330 pound tackle all day. You can't go around them any more or they'll just grab or fall on you.
The 3-4 defense is still a good pass defense, although our execution has been substandard lately, and is darn near impossible to run on. It should stay. As for the players and coaches who can't seem to get it together, they can be replaced.
Tim, we don't get a lot of Steeler games here in Richmond (satelite dishes are not allowed in our subdivision) so I'm counting on keen observations to get me through the season. Thanks for keep me in tuned.
|
Author: Plaxico80
Comment: Contradictions and more....
Tim, I'll address a few of your points, but read this post I just saw from Ed Bouchette. Read it closely (he seems to contradict himself, but the end is the most important part
"BOUCHETTE: As you can tell by now, Bill Cowher is a hot topic this week, as the coach should be when his team is playing far below expectations. I believe Cowher has been making personnel decisions long enough that he would not feel comfortable with someone else calling all those shots. They also will not fire Cowher after this season, no matter the record. Chuck Noll had full power too, but when they took some of it away after a 5-11 season and also made him fire some coaches, he nearly resigned. He stayed on, but after the 1991 season and two years out of the playoffs, he retired because I believe he knew they were going to give Tom Donahoe more say in the personnel decisions and Noll could not live with that. He made a nice, clean exit instead. Would Cowher do the same if they made a similar move? I believe he could. Would they make such a move anytime soon? I don't know. Art Rooney II, not Dan, is now president of the Steelers, although Dan still wields plenty of say in what goes on. I do believe if this team continues on its current path, something will happen after the season, but I'm not yet sure what it might be."
Now, regarding your post that we "have the same guys" on our 3-4, but let's look at that further (in other words, the 3-4 is FINE, but these guys, plus what they're being asked to do within that defense = where we are now.)
Gildon - in 2001 was fine, now he's a shell of his former self.
Bell - Kendrell's my favorite Steeler player, but whoever said that he hasn't played that well since the Tampa game last year is right on the money (there are still flashes, but NOTHING NEAR what he was in 2001.) His crushing blitzes up the middle his rookie year scared everyone, now he rarely blitzes up the middle and is pretty ineffective rushing from the end spot (he's been replaced by Porter.) Why he is EVER back in coverage is beyond me.
Aaron Smith - Possibly the most disappointing Steeler player on the roster. Was EXPECTED to become a star after the 2001 season (he was phenomenal) but has taken several steps backwards, to the point where they may have to look for an upgrade.
Washington & Scott - In 2001, they played well enough to warrant new contracts. Now, they should be forced to pay back every cent they've stolen from the Rooney family.
Kimo - Still trying and sometimes still effective, but he was a better player in 2001.
Farrior - I like James Farrior and he makes plays all over the field, but Earl Holmes sometimes WILLED THIS TEAM to victory and seemed to keep the defense together, even through the worst of times. His leadership skills were amazing and other Steeler players have echoed this. Farrior's great, but I doubt Holmes WOULD ALLOW THIS DEFENSE to play this poorly. Heads would roll, if he were still around.
Brent Alexander - Was serviceable years back, is a complete waste of space now - this is undeniable.
Tim Lewis - Bright young defensive coordinator, just waiting for a head coaching job, back in 2001 - now he may be looking for work ANYWHERE, after this year's finished.
So, in closing, yes we have basically the same personnel, but you need to look closer at that personnel. It's NOWHERE NEAR what in was back in 2001.
|
Author: mcmillenandwife
Comment: Re: Plex, Plex, Plex...
Gosh, Plex... it's amazing how just about every friggin' player on our defense fell apart at the exact same time.
What an amazing coincidence! 
Funny how everyone and their brother sites the Bengals game from 2001 as the game that cracked the Steelers' 3-4 code. The Bengals spread us out and we were powerless to stop it. Nevermind that the Pats used the same philosophy against us in the 2001 AFC Championship, as well as the 2002 season opener. Nevermind that the Raiders followed New England's lead and creamed us in week two. Nevermind that the Saints, Falcons, Ravens, Browns and Titans (2x) did it to us in 2002.
Get real, folks. This is a system breakdown, not the spontaneous, simultaneous combustion of nearly every defensive player on our roster.
|
Author: Davidman
Comment: 3-4 or 4-3
I'm not clear if the 3-4 or 4-3 is better...I just know that our defensive backs, especially our corners, are just not talented enough with the way people attack us through the air...yeah back in 2001 when people didn't pass against us like this, Scott and Washington were o.k., we just didn't know the full extent of how bad they were...
with our current group of defensive backs, I'm not sure fixing our defensive line personnel for a 4-3 look will make a difference 'cause it looks to me like even when we do get pressure, the quarterback is able to complete it to some receiver out there waiting wide open for the ball...
our secondary just kills me, that's why I'd like to see us go with the youngsters (can Ike, Polamalu & Deshea be any worse?)...I know we are in a weak division and play mostly weak teams in the rest of our schedule, so hopefully the Steelers can go out and win one on Sunday and turn this ship around, but needless to say we still have some big problems in the secondary that scare me every single time an opposing quarterback drops back....
|
Author: Davidman
Comment: Alonzo Jackson
For those of you who got to see more of the fleeting glimpses of Alonzo Jackson play, than I did, does he look like he could be a quality DE? I know they are looking for him to be an OLB, but does he have the size to be a DE in a 4-3?
|
Author: frank
Comment: Tim is absolutely correct
Hey all Steelers fans,
I've never posted here before, but read the posts quite a bit. This problem with the 3-4 and the secondary bothers me so much because it seems like with just one or two better DB's (they don't have to be great, but just DECENT), the linebackers might be able to blitz more because we won't have to worry about Dewayne or Scott getting burned. More LB blitzes (they won't have to play coverage as much) leads to more pressure and more sacks and INT's.
What pisses me off the most is reading this article:
NFL_20011230_PIT@CIN
You'd think that the problem would have been addressed by now. When Tim said that the Bengal game was the turning point, it sure seems like he's right. No way all of our defensive studs just start playing like crap all of a sudden. Teams just know how to beat us now...
|
Author: Tommy Coleman
Comment: re: "Tommy do you remember" & other things
Despite using your quote in my post on page one of this thread, my comments were not meant for you personally Tim. If that is how it came off I apologize. However you say some things in retort that I must disagree with. Not all my comments are directed at you so please read them with a perspective that I do disagree with a few of your points but not all of them ...of course.
Quote:
--------------------------------
it IS the 3-4 that is at the root of the problem
--------------------------------
No it isn't. Bill Cowher, Tim Lewis & the other coaches decided to fix what wasn't broke, aka Kendrell, where are you, Bell. They don't blitz at the right times with the right people anymore. They take Hampton out on third downs and passing downs because what...THE FREAKING DIME! Hampton warrants a double team every play yet he becomes a liability on third down?
Plain short sighted and please don't read me NFL 2003 football 101, it is dumb to take out your best player on D. THAT is why they wanted Kendrell in there but...and it is a big BUT ... they CHANGED HIS POSITION... again if it isn't broke...
Quote:
--------------------------------
Tommy, do you remember what passing teams did to our 3-4 last year? It was no different than what is happening to our nickel and dime packages now.
--------------------------------
That was the same drop back crap that got us toasted not a relentless fury as I wrote about earlier. 2002 was when Tim Lewis got smart and started the trend of using our LBs as DBs. When Levon used to drop back, a DB usually Blitzed.Not always but, they never new and even if they did the QBs where scattered and shattered. Until in every season the coached decide to play BEND and PREVENT and #$%^#&^#^U%$%^$*$^
Remember the game, a few seasons ago, when we knocked the snot out of Kneel O'Dollar against the Tenn Oiliness??? Remember when the too hurt to play McNugget came in and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...TDed us and beat us. THAT was the seed of what is wrong with our D...not a 3-4 scheme.
Of course time of possession has a lot to do with a fresh D and that can't be over looked here. Our O line is weak and Maddox is way off. We have the best WRs in the NFL but we have no running game. The greatest D of all time the 76' Steelers couldn't even over come that!
Yeah! I feel better now...
_______________________________________________
When we played the Old School real deal Steeler D against the Rams, Bulger didn't do squat! Plain and Simple!
THEY ARE THINKING TOO MUCH!
BACK TO BASICS...
SCHEME THIS...
ONE THING...
JUST ONE THING TO REMEMBER OUT THERE...
EVERY PLAY...
EVERY DOWN...
NO MATTER WHAT...
IT...
IS...
The BALL !
You either want it or have it...that's it!
What you do with it is the final result of every game.
Sounds simple doesn't it?
I think these guys are so far inside their own world they forgot about the BALL !
|
Author: Your name here
Comment: Coming soon
Send us your comments!
|
|
