More Thoughts On Steelers vs. Browns

by Blitzburgh on Nov 12, 2007 3:33 PM EST in News Comment 25 comments

Great discussion going on in the previous threads, so I don't have too much more to add on this game. But I did have a few other random thoughts that I wanted to throw out there for us to hopefully discuss.

* Not much more to say about Big Ben. His INT in the first half wasn't a great throw or decision, but it wasn't of the same variety as his unacceptable picks against Arizona, Cincy or Denver. Ben's playing Pro-Bowl caliber football and there simply aren't enough superlatives for how he's played since the Denver defeat.

* Nate Washington is finally playing with some consistency, and if he keeps it up, this offense is going to be ridiculously dangerous. Hines, Santonio, Heath, Big Ben's legs, Fast Willie, Spaeth, and Nate as viable offensive options? Sounds downright scary to me if I were an opposing defensive coordinator. Big Ben isn't quite as comfortable with him yet as he is with Santonio and Hines, but Big Ben and Arians' trust in Washington is clearly growing. Nate's got 7 catches for 107 yards and 2 TDs in his past two outings.

* As for Hines, he's definitely back and feeling well. Great game for Hines yesterday, making several tough, crucial catches.

* Willie Colon was overmatched yesterday. He tried, he really did, but his footwork just isn't good enough to be a good tackle in the NFL.

* Kendall Simmons' performance? Better. I will give him props for just barely clipping that Browns defender as Ben took off to run for that critical 3rd down run on our last drive. Had he not gotten a piece of the defender, Ben gets brought down and we're forced to go for it on 4th down.

* More fine work from Jeff Reed in the kicking game. I still want to see him perform in the clutch, but he's looked cool as a cucumber so far this year.

* It was nice to have Aaron Smith back wasn't it? He really makes our interior rush defense so much better. I don't think he missed too much time to preclude him from Pro-Bowl consideration.

* It's hard to argue with the way we're playing defense, but when oh when are we going to see some LaMarr Woodley for pass-rushing purposes? It's somewhat of a gamble I realize to put in an inexperienced rookie when you have veteran players most always in the correct spot on the field, but we're sacrificing an awful lot in the pressure department.

* Our first taste of red-zone futility in a long while yesterday, at least in the first half. No real cause for concern here just yet as we rebounded nicely in the second half to finish off drives, but it just goes to show you how important red-zone production is. Had we finished off even one of those first three drives that resulted in just FGs, we probably secure control of the game late in the third quarter or early fourth quarter.

What else guys?

* UPDATE: There's been plenty of good discussion within the comments section of this and the previous thread about putting the starters in on kickoff coverage, and I put up a poll to see what people thought as well. I wanted to add on the main page that I'm all for it, but I get a little weary when I hear Keisel say things like :

Maybe I got to come out of retirement

I have no problem with Tomlin saying 'We stink', but I don't like a player basically saying, 'I guess I gotta go in and save the day because clearly the guys in there can't get it done.'

He may be right, but leave it for the coaches to say and implement. I don't want to go overly psycho-analytical, but I'm pretty confident that someone in that locker room would take offense to that type of comment. I've lauded Keisel's leadership qualities all year, so I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt, but be careful Brett and help keep this team motivated and unified as we move towards the playoffs.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Big Ben is my hero

He looks like he is the absolute leader of this team. I wondered how they'd respond with losing leaders like Bettis and Porter but Ben has filled any void that might have existed. In any other year, you'd have to think he'd be in the MVP discussion. I don't think any quarterback in the league could be a better fit for this team right now. Brady and Manning could never shrug off as many sacks as Ben has this year.

That run yesterday was a thing of beauty.

"The more violent team will win tonight" - Mike Tomlin.

by cgolden on Nov 12, 2007 4:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

yea

I want to write sometime soon about how its unfortunate that Bradys putting up such sick numbers. I don't think hes the most valuable player in the league, but he's going to be given the award because of the numbers alone.

I'd say Favre is far more valuable to his team this year. Perhaps Ben too, but in all honesty, this team would still probably be competitive with a lesser QB in there. Not 7-2 competitive, but competitive none the less.

by Blitzburgh on Nov 12, 2007 4:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Brady not MVP?

Let me begin by saying that I hate the Patriots and I hate Tom Brady. As a person and as a steeler fan, I'd like our guys to smack those obnoxious smirks off their faces.

That being said, Tom Brady is fantastic. Without him, my bet is the Pats are at best a 9-7 team.

That's da truth.

by pola maul youns on Nov 12, 2007 5:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

As much as I can't stand, if Brady goes down, this is not a great team. I guess with the weapons, Cassell could be brought along. But, if he played well, then Belichick might cut Brady like he did to Kosar.

Nah, probably not.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Nov 13, 2007 11:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ike Taylor

Great play out of Ike again. B. Edwards had one completion, yes a TD, but even in that instance Ike was in great coverage and Edwards had to make a fantastic catch on an undefendable throw. I hope he can make the Pro Bowl but it will be tough in the AFC since Bailey will get in on rep alone (not having a typical Bailey year) but Ike has been phenomenal. A 3-4, zone-blitzing defense requires great corner play for the defense to be at its best (see 2005), and Ike is giving it to us. Can't wait to see him on Randy Moss, he always seems to play better against better receivers.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Nov 12, 2007 5:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

good point

Ike is another reason this defense has returned as a league leading unit. He played lights out yesterday but he doesn't have the interceptions to make the Pro Bowl.

This is off topic but does anyone think the Pro Bowl is vastly overrated? So many guys get in on name recognition alone because fans get all of the vote. I'd rather see players and coaches vote, as long as they can't vote for teammates. Just a thought, though.

"The more violent team will win tonight" - Mike Tomlin.

by cgolden on Nov 12, 2007 5:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Players and coaches vote too...

From NFL.com: "The AFC and NFC All-Star squads are made up of the consensus votes of fans, players and coaches. Each group's vote counts one-third towards determining the 43-man rosters"

The ironic thing is that the players (and possibly coaches) vote tends to favor recognized names as well - Ray Lewis, self-proclaimed baddest man on the planet, has been getting that free pass for years now.

by santhome on Nov 12, 2007 6:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

9-7??

9-7 with Maroney, a good O-line, Welker Moss and Stallworth, and a veteran defense in that crappy division?

They win 11 games even with JP Losman playing for them.

by Blitzburgh on Nov 12, 2007 5:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

But

that said, I'm not trying to say Brady's not fantastic. He is, I just don't think he's the most valuable player to his team's success. Most outstanding this year? No doubt, but not most valuable, at least in my mind.

by Blitzburgh on Nov 12, 2007 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

best 3 receivers in football? for one reason only

No question it's a well balanced team. But let's not go crazy with the best 3 receivers in football thing. They're the best 3 receivers BECAUSE of Brady.

A year ago, noone knew who Welker was. Moss was a hasbeen malcontent. And Stallworth was bouncing out of his 2nd team in 3 years.

I guess I just disagree.

by pola maul youns on Nov 13, 2007 12:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

you do have a point

Brady has a way of making WRs look real good, but even though Welker was relatively unknown to the average fan and Stallworth had some consistency and health issues the past several years, there was a sound consensus among scouts, GMs and draft 'experts' that those two guys were the cream of the crop in this year's FA crop.

by Blitzburgh on Nov 13, 2007 12:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Moss has been best

Moss has been the best receiver in the league this year, hands down. I say without him drawing coverage off of them, Stallworth and Welker are pretty much Deion Branch and Troy Brown. They would step and probably win big games because Brady is throwing to them, but their decent number 2's, not great receivers.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Nov 13, 2007 11:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I was thinking one of us might be able to

lead that team to 9-7. He has the best top 3 WR in the league, a RB that is pretty good and a solid if not really good OL. Not to mention a top 5 defense. Almost any QB in the league could have that team 7-2 right now.

"The more violent team will win tonight" - Mike Tomlin.

by cgolden on Nov 12, 2007 5:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Favre, Brady, Ben

The MVP is up for grabs between Brady and Favre, depending on how things go the rest of the season. Ben is not out of the picture but I think he is No. 3 at this point. Moss will get some votes too but he is a distant fourth in my mind, possibly even behind Jon Kitna.

Favre is a great leader who is having his best season in several years. Some of his numbers pale in comparison to Brady (16-8 TD-Int ratio, compared to 33-4), but he's passed for more yards. Overall he has been more important to his team's 8-1 record than Brady has to the Pats' 9-0. He has had six 300-yard passing games to Brady's four, and his team has won a number of close games in large part because of Favre.

Favre will get a lot of senitmental and anti-Patriot votes but he has to stay hot. and his team has to keep winning for him to beat out Brady for MVP.

If Favre has somewhat of a letdown, even for a couple games, or his team loses two or three of the last seven games, then I would expect Brady to be the MVP. Not only because of the great numbers, but because on his team he is absolutely essential to his team's success.

I agree that any established QB could play for the Pats and they would still win a ton of games and perhaps even a Super Bowl. But the reality is Matt Cassel (37 career pass attempts) is the backup and if he has to play, the Pats are screwed. Projectimg someone else as the Pats' QB is hypothetical and shouldn't detract from from how valuable Brady is.

All that said, I would rather have Ben as the Steelers QB than anyone else.

by steeler lifer on Nov 12, 2007 8:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Farve will get some votes

I heard a great breakdown of Farve's season this year and he's actually having the best statistical season of his career. Farve and the Pack will be plenty of people's sentimental favorite.

"The more violent team will win tonight" - Mike Tomlin.

by cgolden on Nov 12, 2007 10:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Am I the only one...

...who didn't think the pass rush was nearly as bad as people are saying? Sure, we had no sacks, but instead forced Anderson to make a lot of really bad throws. It's not like he was sitting back there comfortably.

And, by the way, I can only ask, "Why?" with regards to this statement:

More fine work from Jeff Reed in the kicking game. I still want to see him perform in the clutch, but he's looked cool as a cucumber so far this year.

I'd rather win games without relying on a Jeff Reed game-winner, especially at Heinz Field, one of the league's most notoriously unkickable stadiums.

by HinesField on Nov 12, 2007 8:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

haha...

Seems like a lot of Super Bowls have been won on late FGs. Reed's kind of a quirky dude, or at least so it seems from the outside looking in. I just want to see if he has the same routine and looks as nonchalant under pressure as he does on easy 35 yarders when the game's not on the line.

by Blitzburgh on Nov 12, 2007 10:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Good Point

I agree that the rush on Sunday looked decent. Keisel especially had a good game forcing a lot of bad throws from Anderson. It's a credit to Anderson though that he was recognizing the pressure early and getting rid of the ball. Perhaps he could teach Steve McNair a few things.

by Chicago Steeler on Nov 13, 2007 10:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

another thing

I think something thats key right now is the Steelers look like they're having a great time on the field. The way Ben and Heinz Ward were rolling around on the ground after CLE missed the field goal at the end made me feel better about this team's chances in the long run than any breakdown of the numbers - they might not have the best offense or best defense in the league (although they're damn close) but they've got more heart in my opinion than any other team in the league right now. X-factors like that are critical in the stretch.

by dcfan85 on Nov 12, 2007 8:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

that was a good sight

they are a close knit group and it reminded me of the team during Bettis' last couple of years.

"The more violent team will win tonight" - Mike Tomlin.

by cgolden on Nov 12, 2007 10:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That will definitely help

down the line. The best teams in the league in recent years haven't always been the most talented, but they've always had a cohesiveness and closeness that made them play above their talent.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Nov 13, 2007 11:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What's Up with Willie Parker?

Just wondering if anyone can shed some light on this for me. You all probably know a lot more about football than I do.

The Steelers have always been about stellar defense and an offense that can rely on the run to win football games. I know that Fast Willie can break out some amazing runs, but it doesn't seem like he should be our main running back. My husband alternates between calling him "Third and Long Willie" or "Behind the Line of Scrimmage Willie" for his propensity to force Ben into throwing third and long and for also losing yardage on carries. His 100 yard games are great, but they don't seem to translate into scoring like they should.

It seemed to me that if we lost to Cleveland on Sunday, the fault would have rested on Willie. Shouldn't a reliable running back be able to run out the clock at less than two minutes left in the game? Instead, he only got a couple of yards and we were forced to punt, setting up Cleveland to potentially tie the game.

While Ben's running plays were impressive, had he beome injured on either of those plays, wouldn't the responsibility for that be fairly placed on Willie's shoulders? If Willie were reliable as a running back, as the Bus was, for example, would Ben have had to run in the first place?

What I can't figure out is, given the Burgh's love of the running game, why people aren't calling for Parker's head on a pike. People seem to be satisfied with him, and I was wondering if anyone could explain to me why I should have more patience with him. Thanks! :-)

by SLCFan on Nov 13, 2007 6:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

hey there

This is a very fair question you and your husband have.

Basically I think most of us would say that the problem rests with the offensive line, not Fast Willie himself. Imagine if we didn't have a RB who had the burst of speed Parker had...we'd have even less success running the ball.

Here's where I think Parker falls short of some other RBs: when he's running between the tackles, he rarely, if ever, is able to keep driving and fall forward for a few extra yards. The result is a lot of 1 and 2 yard gains as opposed to 3 and 4 yard gains. Sounds trivial, but there's probably about 100 carries per year for him that get stuffed around the line of scrimmage. An extra couple hundred yards rushing for Willie Parker would have him on pace for nearly a 2000 yard season.

If there is anywhere to run, Parker's got the vision, cuts, and speed to bust through holes, and we all know he's good at breaking long ones and also at turning 15 yard runs into 25 yard runs with his speed.

It would be nice if he was a bit better at not getting taken immediately down or backwards when running inside, but we can't always have it all :)

Anyway, the line's just not mashing in the run game like we used to. That's fine, it's still a pretty good offensive line to run the football behind. It's just not great. Simmons and Mahan are just not Jeff Hartings/Dermonti Dawson/Faneca (in his prime a few years ago) type players. The result is that Parker is left to do more on his own, and I'd say he does a pretty good job making things happen for us.

by Blitzburgh on Nov 13, 2007 10:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

good points

FWP is a good back but he has limitations. Blitzburgh spelled out his problems between the tackles perfectly. FWP is a back that can hit a hole and take it to the house but the key is he has to have a hole. He can't run into a wall and push the pile for a couple of extra yards.

I've been thinking this for a couple of weeks now and I've got to know if I'm the only one. Does it look like FWP may have lost a little bit of his speed by bulking up a bit?

"The more violent team will win tonight" - Mike Tomlin.

by cgolden on Nov 14, 2007 8:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I dont think so

He's still fast as can be. He's still breaking at least one 25-35 yard run per game (except on the muddy track against the Ravens), and he just hasn't yet had the right angles on those runs to take them the distance. But to just get those huge runs has taken all his speed, which I believe hasnt diminished noticeably at all.

by Blitzburgh on Nov 14, 2007 12:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs