Bruce Arians spoke publicly for the first time since last season here:
I don't know what to say. He's like the idiot that married your sister. Yeah, you love your sister, but every time he opens his mouth, you wonder what she sees in him. What can you do? Just continue to smile and pretend, for her sake, everything is okay.
Fortunately, the Steelers are not my sister.
From what I read, I got the impression that ol' Bruce really doesn't agree that his run game sucked last year. Oh, I get it, the receivers were the running backs, because in his mind, a short pass is really a run. It's all so clear now.
"Take the Super Bowl for example. There were seven catches or six catches Santonio [Holmes] had that were running plays when [there were] safeties blitz that are unblockable, and you have runs called. So it's not a 'number' of runs because we threw the ball out there and got a bunch of yards. 'Oh, that's a good pass.' No, that was a running play. That happens quite often. And what we do, we take some short screen stuff and treat that as [part of the] running game."
No, that wasn't clear at all. Sorry.
But, he did talk about the past success in the short yardage game with - Garry Russell?
"I think the critical runs, short-yardage, goal line, have been a problem," Arians said. "They got addressed (in 2008) with Gary Russell.
I've gotten older, my memory is Swiss Cheese at this point, can anyone refresh me as to when Gary Russell was "Addressing" the short yardage woes of the Steelers? And if he was, why didn't the Steelers keep using him?
This little gem made me choke on my Copenhagen:
"When we came out of training camp last year, we were running the ball as well as we have since Super Bowl XL (in 2005),"
Maybe, just maybe, Ariens was the bad influence on Holmes. He seems to be smoking the same stuff.
Of course, It's not Ariens fault that his team struggled against 4-3 defenses. It's not like it is his job to, you know, get his offense ready to play the next team. What, was it a shock to him when these teams lined up in a 4-3?
"We're having success in training camp, running the ball pretty good. Now the problem occurs when you see a different style, when you see penetrating 4-3 (defensive linemen). It's a totally different technique for the offensive line and tight ends."
That last quote smells like Bruce is the type of guy that doesn't take into account what the other team is doing. You know, the guys that says "Were going to play our game", no matter what. Which is fine when you impose your will on the other team, not when your running game sucks.
I'm hoping that Mr. Arians said this just to be nice to his friend :
Larry did a hell of a job
He is of course speaking of that guy we all know and love, Larry Zierlein. Yeah, he did a hell of a job, unless, the Steelers had to run against a 4-3 defense (or any defense), get short, critical yardage, or had to run a few minutes off the clock at the end of the game. Like I said, I hope Bruce was just showing the flag for a friend, otherwise, he is just delusional - Which I'm not ruling out.
I get the impression from reading these, and this is all just my opinion, that Bruce doesn't really think there was anything wrong with his performance last year. He seems to give excuses (4-3 defense, unblockable defensive plays) for his performance. Or, he says that some of the passing game is really the running game. Really? I get the impression he thinks we are just too dumb to understand all this, or too dumb to see through all his B.S.
It seems to me that he does not see any failure running the ball last year, even though he said it, and he is not really with the program. Kind of like he is being forced to address the running game, and he is doing it reluctantly. I just don't think he believes in what he is being told to do. Does anyone else feel this way, or am I putting a negative slant on what I'm reading because I already don't like the guy (Professionally).