Any Tomlin defenders left?

[Drummer Boy]

First half stats:

Steelers ran on 1st and 2nd downs 13 times, passed ten times. They passed on every third and fourth down they had where they didn't kick (9 times).

Second half- all drives until the last one, which was all passing...Steelers were even worse.

They ran 11 times on 1st and second down, while passing only 5 times. Ran and passed twice each on third downs.

So for the game, sans the last drive, the Steelers ran 24 times on first and second downs, while passing only 15 times. First down alone- they ran 15 times while passing 7 times.

They did a LOT of first and second down running when it was still a game.

Yes. The numbers I was using are for 2014, of course, and are intended to counter the notion that Tomlin's regime has been very conservative. I don't believe it has.

For the NE game, IMO they thought they could run effectively (they did) and hoped to shorten the game that way. It worked very well. Missed field goals, jaw-dropping misplay by DHB, and screwing up the goal line situation were what lost the game.

[Legacy User]

I understand but there is KC from the S'hawks. He would certainly fit that scheme. Heyward and Tuitt seem like they could fit either scheme.

First- we are not getting Kam Chancellor. It just ain't happening.

Second, IIRC, the Steelers had Chancellor on their draft board in 2010...they waited too long to get him, and Seattle took him at 133 (their pick in the fifth round was 151).

So apparently, Tomlin recognized he'd be a fit.

Well that makes me feel better. Good thing that we didn't take him in the forth round /sarca off

[randomsteelerfan]

You're absolutely, right. I shouldn't have told anyone how to feel. Wasn't my point. The original point "58 made about Tomlin/Cowher is accurate. He shouldn't be fired. If you think so, then you should agree that Cowher should have been fired around '98 or '99, which would have been a colossal mistake made yearly by other impatient, petulant owners. And, with that logic, you'll realize that considering what Tomlin has done to date, the Rooney's won't be making any changes anytime soon.

News flash, whoever you really are, noone is expecting the Rooneys to make a change.

Doh.

You're kidding, right? This is a fucking 20+ Page thread about Tomlin's coaching my ability with most of the hate wishing or wanting him to be replaced or on the hot seat at the very least.

[RemoAZ]

I hate to be the gork who actually looks things up, but according to this site, the Steelers were 22nd in the league in running play percentage. Before someone says that's still too much for our HOF QB, that's below New England (18th), and well below Green Bay (10th). Not to mention, Seattle and the great innovator Pete Carroll run the ball nearly 52% (!!) of the time. Oh, but what about our plodding RRPP philosophy? We ran on 1st down less than 22 other teams (25.69%, virtually identical w/New England at 25.96%, and, again, well below Green Bay at 29.15%).

In short, the entire premise of this argument is bullshit. Not only do the Steelers not run more than other teams w/great quarterbacks, they run it less. And they run it less on 1st down. And the most successful team of the last 2 years, Seattle, runs on 1st down almost 44% of the time!

First half stats:

Steelers ran on 1st and 2nd downs 13 times, passed ten times. They passed on every third and fourth down they had where they didn't kick (9 times).

Second half- all drives until the last one, which was all passing...Steelers were even worse.

They ran 11 times on 1st and second down, while passing only 5 times. Ran and passed twice each on third downs.

So for the game, sans the last drive, the Steelers ran 24 times on first and second downs, while passing only 15 times. First down alone- they ran 15 times while passing 7 times.

They did a LOT of first and second down running when it was still a game.

-

The problem is people are watching too much of that shitty chuck and duck spread every damn college football team seams to run now. They want to see that in the NFL.God forbid! I already quit watching college football for the most part. Can't stand that arena ball shit.

[Legacy User]

he may not override them in game but the game philosophy and scheme is IMO an agreed upon item and set by Tomlin.
He is not being conservative because his Acs are -- he is conservative
he -- with input -- sets strategy and his assistants implement tactics

Agreed.

Exactly. Tomlin, as head coach, signs off on any and everything this team does. If he isn't, then why the fuck is he the head coach?

[bradshaw2ben]

I hate to be the gork who actually looks things up, but according to this site, the Steelers were 22nd in the league in running play percentage. Before someone says that's still too much for our HOF QB, that's below New England (18th), and well below Green Bay (10th). Not to mention, Seattle and the great innovator Pete Carroll run the ball nearly 52% (!!) of the time. Oh, but what about our plodding RRPP philosophy? We ran on 1st down less than 22 other teams (25.69%, virtually identical w/New England at 25.96%, and, again, well below Green Bay at 29.15%).

In short, the entire premise of this argument is bullshit. Not only do the Steelers not run more than other teams w/great quarterbacks, they run it less. And they run it less on 1st down. And the most successful team of the last 2 years, Seattle, runs on 1st down almost 44% of the time!

First half stats:

Steelers ran on 1st and 2nd downs 13 times, passed ten times. They passed on every third and fourth down they had where they didn't kick (9 times).

Second half- all drives until the last one, which was all passing...Steelers were even worse.

They ran 11 times on 1st and second down, while passing only 5 times. Ran and passed twice each on third downs.

So for the game, sans the last drive, the Steelers ran 24 times on first and second downs, while passing only 15 times. First down alone- they ran 15 times while passing 7 times.

They did a LOT of first and second down running when it was still a game.

-

The problem is people are watching too much of that shitty chuck and duck spread every damn college football team seams to run now. They want to see that in the NFL.God forbid! I already quit watching college football for the most part. Can't stand that arena ball shit.

they run plenty-- they just don't put a bunch of huge, unathletic bodies out there to do so.

[Legacy User]

Just looking at run/pass ratios is not right. I haven't seen a true analysis, but I recall seeing many lighter box counts on the Pats D. If they are keeping safeties back it makes sense to run more. Regardless, I don't see why even that matters - they moved the ball into NE territory almost every drive of the game. The issue was situational scoring, not converting 3rd downs in NE territory, not converting TD's, and missing FG's.

[Obviously]

Exactly. Tomlin, as head coach, signs off on any and everything this team does. If he isn't, then why the fuck is he the head coach?

Cripes haven't you figured yet? Tomlin is victimized because he's African-American. It's all the whites on the team that are fucking things up. Just ask STD, he knows!

[jebrick]

Just looking at run/pass ratios is not right. I haven't seen a true analysis, but I recall seeing many lighter box counts on the Pats D. If they are keeping safeties back it makes sense to run more. Regardless, I don't see why even that matters - they moved the ball into NE territory almost every drive of the game. The issue was situational scoring, not converting 3rd downs in NE territory, not converting TD's, and missing FG's.

Exactly. The ratios do not matter. it is how successful they are when running or passing. They seemed very successful at it with their 2nd string RB and 2nd string center in the game.

[StillMadAtSlobber]

Bravo. Now for an encore, you can use statistics to prove Jaws was right, that Ben was a game manager/handoff monkey in 2004, with the Steelers passing only 39% of the time.

Ben was a game manager in 2004, a spectacularly talented one.

Apparently you did a lot of LSD on Sundays in the fall of 2004, or you were 8 years old, because you don't remember the games that well.
Your puerile arguments to prove the team philosophy with run-pass ratio fail because they don't take into account, well, anything of value.

In 2004 Ben passed to get us leads (with running also). But more passes in the 1st half. Then Cowher took all the air out of the football in the second half and the ratio was more than reversed because the team was in pure clock-killing mode. Monstrous 7 to 9 minute drives. With a ratio of Run to Pass of 4:1, 5:1 and higher.

Then a retard (Jaws et al.), looks at the statistics and determine that if the pass ratio was .39 for the game/season, then obviously the Steelers werent passing that much, and Ben is a game manager.

So conclusions derived from the base statistic, without situational awareness of how that statistic was derived are worthless.

Like I said, you don't remember that season.
Ben was an aggressive passing surgeon in the 1st half, then a handoff monkey in the 2nd half.

[StillMadAtSlobber]

<...>
you'll realize that considering what Tomlin has done to date, the Rooney's won't be making any changes anytime soon.

News flash, whoever you really are, noone is expecting the Rooneys to make a change.

Doh.

You're kidding, right? This is a fucking 20+ Page thread about Tomlin's coaching my ability with most of the hate wishing or wanting him to be replaced or on the hot seat at the very least.

No fuck its that. And it will happen again, when we underperform against bottom feeders this year.

None of that means anyone here expects the Rooneys to make a change.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Why should that elude you?

[jeemie]

Just looking at run/pass ratios is not right. I haven't seen a true analysis, but I recall seeing many lighter box counts on the Pats D. If they are keeping safeties back it makes sense to run more. Regardless, I don't see why even that matters - they moved the ball into NE territory almost every drive of the game. The issue was situational scoring, not converting 3rd downs in NE territory, not converting TD's, and missing FG's.

At some point, especially when you've fallen behind by 14 points, you don't have to be such a slave to box counts.

And you're right- when drives don't translate to points, you kill yorself.

Even worse when you've run the ball so much that you've limited your chances to atone for your mistakes because you've run so much clock off by running so much.

And being a slave to box counts results in games like the Cleveland game last year where they ran the ball on 20 of 22 plays, including 17 straight at one point.

In what universe do you not want your QB trying to make more plays than a few per game?

Hell- in the Pats' game, Ben threw the ball one time (a quick screen) and then the next pass was attempted by Antonio Brown.

Being slavish to taking what the defense gives you is not the way to win games, especially against superior opponents. Isn't that why we used to laugh at Peyton Manning?

[Legacy User]

When you force throws against coverage you end up with back-breaking INT's... like the one Ben threw in this game actually, deep into double coverage with the safety all over it.

They rang up 464 yards of offense. The amount they moved the ball and the speed at which they did it were not a problem in any way.

If Scobee hits his FG's and DHB keeps his damn feet in bounds then they likely win the game. If they convert for a TD on the goal line like the Pats then they definitely win the game.

[bradshaw2ben]

limiting your chances to score when you have the best offense in the NFL seems like a good strategy. Actually it would be if our offense consistently scored points, which it doesn't. Our offense makes mistakes and also tons of huge plays... it seems like over the course of many opportunities, they might outperform most other teams' offenses vs our admittedly crappy D.

[jeemie]

When you force throws against coverage you end up with back-breaking INT's... like the one Ben threw in this game actually, deep into double coverage with the safety all over it.

Just because there are 5 in coverage does not mean you can't scheme open throws as opposed to just mindlessly saying "Duh- there's six in the box- let's run!"

[jeemie]

limiting your chances to score when you have the best offense in the NFL seems like a good strategy. Actually it would be if our offense consistently scored points, which it doesn't. Our offense makes mistakes and also tons of huge plays... it seems like over the course of many opportunities, they might outperform most other teams' offenses vs our admittedly crappy D.

Exactly- it's because they make so many mistakes that I advocate creating more scoring opportunities.

If they cleaned up their game and stopped tripping on their own feet, I'd be all for a more conservative appproach.

[Gonzo]

Aha - we have finally come full circle to my point for the last few years
I don't necessarily agree with a TOP game but it may be appropriate at times or in general - it's open for discussion. What chaps my ass aboutthis staff/team is - the foundation of TOP football is execution, discipline/preparation and toughness which are all things this team appears to despise. How can you build a TOP team if you admittedly don't sweat the small staff - it is exactly the small stuff that must be mastered. Their plan never gets off the ground in big games especially because they kill it with sloppy shit and ignorance of all the little things that win close games.

How can you want to play it close but not want to do the small things that win close games ?
It seems they just want to waste time and then hope and pray someone does Somehting

Very weak-minded and lazy approach IMO

[Drummer Boy]

Apparently you did a lot of LSD on Sundays in the fall of 2004, or you were 8 years old, because you don't remember the games that well.
Your puerile arguments to prove the team philosophy with run-pass ratio fail because they don't take into account, well, anything of value.

In 2004 Ben passed to get us leads (with running also). But more passes in the 1st half. Then Cowher took all the air out of the football in the second half and the ratio was more than reversed because the team was in pure clock-killing mode. Monstrous 7 to 9 minute drives. With a ratio of Run to Pass of 4:1, 5:1 and higher.

Then a retard (Jaws et al.), looks at the statistics and determine that if the pass ratio was .39 for the game/season, then obviously the Steelers werent passing that much, and Ben is a game manager.

So conclusions derived from the base statistic, without situational awareness of how that statistic was derived are worthless.

Like I said, you don't remember that season.
Ben was an aggressive passing surgeon in the 1st half, then a handoff monkey in the 2nd half.

Situational awareness of how the run/pass ratio was compiled is great! Get back to me after you have done a detailed analysis of same, which of course will also be worthless without a comparison to the same analysis for 31 other NFL teams.

I took two minutes to look at the run/pass ratio, because I disagreed with the thread-meme that the Steelers under Tomlin are particularly conservative or "afraid to pass," and the only argument is over who is at fault for that. They are not afraid to pass. That is horseshit. It's just like last year where everybody just assumed the Steelers didn't have any long plays, but actually they were 2nd or 3rd in the league in plays over 20 yards. Or the year before when Tomlin couldn't maintain discipline because he was a "player's coach," but were actually year-in and year-out one of the least penalized teams in the league.

As for 2004, I think you're right. I was thinking of "game manager" as being like a business manager, someone who executes but does not make policy. Which I think is fair to say of Ben in 2004. But really, like you say, "game manager" is usually used to denigrate a QB's passing ability. And Ben is one of the two or three great passers of all-time, I truly believe.

[Drummer Boy]

limiting your chances to score when you have the best offense in the NFL seems like a good strategy. Actually it would be if our offense consistently scored points, which it doesn't. Our offense makes mistakes and also tons of huge plays... it seems like over the course of many opportunities, they might outperform most other teams' offenses vs our admittedly crappy D.

Exactly- it's because they make so many mistakes that I advocate creating more scoring opportunities.

If they cleaned up their game and stopped tripping on their own feet, I'd be all for a more conservative appproach.

Against another team, you're probably right. Against ridiculously efficient New England, with our raw opening-game D, they needed to shorten the game. And it worked. Our fuck-ups killed us, not our game strategy.

[bradshaw2ben]

Gonzo, I don't think the coaches despise or don't sweat the details-- I think the players... some of whom are entrenched or difficult to replace... they're the ones who seem to melt at crunch time.

I'm not the first to say this, but I think it's two things: 1. team scouting doesn't value intelligence and football intelligence as much as it should 2. conditioning is still a major issue.

2. is not just the fault of the S&C staff, who apparently are not so good... it's the fault of the coordinators and HC, who dictate the pace of practice. I think they practice too slowly and don't give enough reps to young guys or older guys or starters in general. They value rest and recovery more than physical reps. They have guys in camp and on roster who are there pretty much to eat up reps so that no one goes through camp and preseason worn out. I do think that this generally improves as year goes on, yet another sign that they approach the season as prep for a postseason run.

The criticisms of the HC sometimes chap me because the arguments are that he's "clueless" or "does nothing". I actually think there is a very specific plan for virtually everything... you can see shadowy reflections of it everywhere.

I think you've got young players (or even outside vets) coming into a very team-oriented approach that is unfamiliar for most of them, used to freelancing and winning because of their athletic skills. I think the HC protects young players from failure, so they don't end up like Cortez Allen 2014. I think he protects old players from being tired down the stretch. He protects his QB and his young OL/WR by slowing down the tempo on O, so that mistakes can be minimized. For those goals, he's willing to trade higher highs for higher floor, at least early in the season... as long as his team gets better week-to-week, and as long as his team has a chance to make the tournament... and be healthy/playing its best ball then.

[lifelongsteel]

Gonzo, I don't think the coaches despise or don't sweat the details-- I think the players... some of whom are entrenched or difficult to replace... they're the ones who seem to melt at crunch time.

I'm not the first to say this, but I think it's two things: 1. team scouting doesn't value intelligence and football intelligence as much as it should 2. conditioning is still a major issue.

2. is not just the fault of the S&C staff, who apparently are not so good... it's the fault of the coordinators and HC, who dictate the pace of practice. I think they practice too slowly and don't give enough reps to young guys or older guys or starters in general. They value rest and recovery more than physical reps. They have guys in camp and on roster who are there pretty much to eat up reps so that no one goes through camp and preseason worn out. I do think that this generally improves as year goes on, yet another sign that they approach the season as prep for a postseason run.

The criticisms of the HC sometimes chap me because the arguments are that he's "clueless" or "does nothing". I actually think there is a very specific plan for virtually everything... you can see shadowy reflections of it everywhere.

I think you've got young players (or even outside vets) coming into a very team-oriented approach that is unfamiliar for most of them, used to freelancing and winning because of their athletic skills. I think the HC protects young players from failure, so they don't end up like Cortez Allen 2014. I think he protects old players from being tired down the stretch. He protects his QB and his young OL/WR by slowing down the tempo on O, so that mistakes can be minimized. For those goals, he's willing to trade higher highs for higher floor, at least early in the season... as long as his team gets better week-to-week, and as long as his team has a chance to make the tournament... and be healthy/playing its best ball then.

homerun post

[StillMadAtSlobber]

I think you've got young players (or even outside vets) coming into a very team-oriented approach that is unfamiliar for most of them, used to freelancing and winning because of their athletic skills. I think the HC protects young players from failure, so they don't end up like Cortez Allen 2014. I think he protects old players from being tired down the stretch. He protects his QB and his young OL/WR by slowing down the tempo on O, so that mistakes can be minimized. For those goals, he's willing to trade higher highs for higher floor, at least early in the season... as long as his team gets better week-to-week, and as long as his team has a chance to make the tournament... and be healthy/playing its best ball then.

I think while this paragraph maybe accurate in some respects, its not entirely accurate.

Your position that he "protects" players falls against the reality of full-retard "running the wheels off" your star/workhorse RB. Then there is the utter insanity of adopting that position and then driving your backup RB off the team due to infinitismal playing time. That approach sure had our long term post season chances in good shape last season.

[Gonzo]

B2b - I take issue with tow of the points.
First, it seems ludicrous to have that disconnect between preferred style and devaluing football intelligence. I believe the emphasis on athleticism and flexibility over smarts for a hybrid D has failed badly. Second, the build for the end of the season has also failed as their playoff performance has been poor. IMO the issue seen isnt a build to post season but supremely struggling with quality opponents. I actually don't mind as much the "bad losses" as every team has them throughout the season. It's the shitting the bed in big games - quite often due to "easing in" and I am using that as a term of art - I am well aware it isnt that simple.

Despite what you say above - they aren't firing on all cylinders at the end of the year. Not even close,
Their big game losses almost always follow a pattern.

Perhaps, I am interpeting Tomlin speak wrong when he off handedly rejects criticism of certain aspects such ad time mgmt or consistently quotes to their TOP. I see a rigid formulaic approach especially to big games. And, yes I am exaggerating for effect when I call it all lazy and weak-minded. I think it is a purposeful conservative approach and to me that is the easier approach

[jeemie]

Against ridiculously efficient New England, with our raw opening-game D, they needed to shorten the game. And it worked. Our fuck-ups killed us, not our game strategy.

We always have those fuck-ups. They are a constant.

So if we are pursuing a strategy that relies on us not fucking up, but then don't put in the necessary work to clean up those fuck-ups, guess what? Our strategy and tactics ARE partially to blame!

Antonio Brown's fuck-up isn't there to hurt us if we don't script in that high-risk play right at the beginning of the game. Remember the stat I showed where a non-QB has not attempted a pass in a game Tom Brady has started since 2003? Why do you think that is?

DHB's fuck-up doesn't hurt us as badly if we don't stupidly let the clock tick down to 19 seconds before running that play (and B2B- you can't put that fuck-up on the players. Tomlin controls that- and he has also created a culture about being blase about time management, so you can't expect Ben to have the wherewithal to overrule Tomlin on that score).

The goal-line fuck-up may not be there to hurt us if the team maybe went beyond "seeing New england's defensive line shift tactic on film" and actually practiced against it enough times until it became second nature to stay rooted until BEN signaled the start of the play (OK, this last one is supposition- maybe our players are just stupid).

You can't "leave the small stuff" in the hands of the players. If your head man sets an attitude that he "doesn't sweat the small stuff", then the players won't either.

All cheating aside, New England is "ridiculously efficient" because they SWEAT the small stuff...they do things over and over until it's second nature when they're on the field.

[Legacy User]

Bravo. Now for an encore, you can use statistics to prove Jaws was right, that Ben was a game manager/handoff monkey in 2004, with the Steelers passing only 39% of the time.

Ben was a game manager in 2004, a spectacularly talented one.

Apparently you did a lot of LSD on Sundays in the fall of 2004, or you were 8 years old, because you don't remember the games that well.
Your puerile arguments to prove the team philosophy with run-pass ratio fail because they don't take into account, well, anything of value.

In 2004 Ben passed to get us leads (with running also). But more passes in the 1st half. Then Cowher took all the air out of the football in the second half and the ratio was more than reversed because the team was in pure clock-killing mode. Monstrous 7 to 9 minute drives. With a ratio of Run to Pass of 4:1, 5:1 and higher.

Then a retard (Jaws et al.), looks at the statistics and determine that if the pass ratio was .39 for the game/season, then obviously the Steelers werent passing that much, and Ben is a game manager.

So conclusions derived from the base statistic, without situational awareness of how that statistic was derived are worthless.

Like I said, you don't remember that season.
Ben was an aggressive passing surgeon in the 1st half, then a handoff monkey in the 2nd half.

Yep Cowher ball, blast your way to the lead with SuperBen and then chew on antacid for the back half of the game while the O goes whole hog Steelers4Tim and the Defense goes super softy turtle D.

[bradshaw2ben]

1. we didn't really run the wheels off Bell... we used him a lot but he's one of the two or three best conditioned athletes on the team (by the way, the three or four best I can think of ALL have one thing in common: a personal strategy and offseason work outside the S&C from the team). You can debate whether it was necessary for him to be in there for the exact play he was injured but he wasn't worn down. He is the guy who makes our offense go-- as it's presently construed. He is one of the very top YAC guys as a receiver and the best RB in the game, so feeding him the football is maximizing your strengths when you have Haley (and likely Tomlin) attitude toward offensive style.

2. Greek, the injury situations late in the year have really hampered his playoff record. Pouncey and Sanders in Super Bowl. Clark in Denver. 4th string LT having to play in 2007. Bell last year. Those are his 4 postseason losses. Ben and Troy being injured probably dimmed playoff chances in a couple of other seasons. Should we have a better plan for overcoming those injuries? Valid question. Overall, I think his plan has been okay for most of his postseason games.

3. the focus on athleticism was in reaction to TEs becoming more athletic everywhere but Pittsburgh and the stretch play + spread becoming de rigeur in the NFL. We were getting killed by teams that spread us out, used quick throws, have athletic mismatch TEs. IMO we tried a certain drafting strategy to address this but a combination of draft failures and poor on field strategic choices/personnel choices have stalled that effort.

4. I think the conservatism has been long based on having a superior late-game QB and also protecting the defense. As we have seen, this strategy leaves little margin for errors and mistakes and it also requires the QB to make the most of opportunities, even when the playcalling doesn't put him into a rhythm-- something all QBs need. It also requires the team oriented approaches on O and D are executed well at big moments. You can't have WRs who don't know where to line up or RBs that don't know who to pick up in pass pro or OL that get penalized or false start when you're rolling. I'd trade taking your time and playing it slow for making fewer mistakes because of it-- only we still seem to make a lot of mistakes. Maybe it would be worse if we went fast but my opinion is we'd have more opportunities to overcome the mistakes.

[Gonzo]

We are in full agreement on 2 and 3
Just distribute blame a little differently
And I think number 2 was a bad idea in practice

[JackLambert58]

Please help me out on this one, and I'm not trying to be sarcastic or a smart ass. If the Steelers' strategy leaves very little room for mistakes the why in God's name are they running abortion plats like the option to AB and taking the ball out of Ben's hands?

[Legacy User]

When you force throws against coverage you end up with back-breaking INT's... like the one Ben threw in this game actually, deep into double coverage with the safety all over it.

Just because there are 5 in coverage does not mean you can't scheme open throws as opposed to just mindlessly saying "Duh- there's six in the box- let's run!"

But they schemed plenty of throws. Ben threw 38 times for 351 yards. The offense performed at an elite level up until about the Patriots 40 yard line. Run or pass it all pretty much worked for most of the field until they got close and then neither worked very well.

[lifelongsteel]

I disagree with the premise that we have a conservative offense.

Here are two basic measures of offensive aggresiveness
1) yardage per passing attempt: Steelers were 3rd in 2014.
2) pass % on first down: Steelers were 10th. Note: only 2 other teams in the top 10 made the playoffs.

Conclusion: we have an aggressive offense that throws often on first down and throws downfield more than almost any team in the league.