What was the biggest difference yesterday?

[Stosh-67]

You guys hoping for the next Jimmy Graham are going to be disappointed.

Heath Miller. Seam Splitter.

Why, are they opposed to playing the game the way it should be played in 2014 and going forward?

I don't know, but it seems like stopping people from scoring is "exactly" as important as being able to score.

The best way to stop people from scoring is to pressure the QB.

You can win in this league without a seam splitter. You cannot win in this league if you can't pressure the QB.

Lifelong.............with the way offenses are going, the league is trending and WR's are protected..............getting the players that can get after the QB is probably the best way to build a defense going forward.
Rush 4 and drop 7 is the most successful game plan.................finding those 4 to get the QB is the hard part............finding 5 or 6 to rotate with-in that group of 4 is hopefully what we can do going forward.

[Legacy User]

The Law of Diminishing Returns states that comes a point where anything else you add will not produce results to justify adding more. Like adding an 3rd person on fries when you only have 2 fryers.

Adding pieces to the offense thinking that its going to be more dynamic is foolish thinking IMO. Does adding Benjamin/Eifert/Graham/V Jackson get us to 60 points on Sunday?Scoring was taken care of, what needs to happen is having enough defense so that scoring 51 points is a laugher not a nail biter.

This team needs the defense to start getting after people and playing better (which it has), not more offensive weapons. If this team scores 50 we should win by 30 not 17.

[lifelongsteel]

The Law of Diminishing Returns states that comes a point where anything else you add will not produce results to justify adding more. Like adding an 3rd person on fries when you only have 2 fryers.

Adding pieces to the offense thinking that its going to be more dynamic is foolish thinking IMO. Does adding Benjamin/Eifert/Graham/V Jackson get us to 60 points on Sunday?Scoring was taken care of, what needs to happen is having enough defense so that scoring 51 points is a laugher not a nail biter.

This team needs the defense to start getting after people and playing better (which it has), not more offensive weapons. If this team scores 50 we should win by 30 not 17.

Nice post. And now i want fries.

[Legacy User]

The Law of Diminishing Returns states that comes a point where anything else you add will not produce results to justify adding more. Like adding an 3rd person on fries when you only have 2 fryers.

Adding pieces to the offense thinking that its going to be more dynamic is foolish thinking IMO. Does adding Benjamin/Eifert/Graham/V Jackson get us to 60 points on Sunday?Scoring was taken care of, what needs to happen is having enough defense so that scoring 51 points is a laugher not a nail biter.

This team needs the defense to start getting after people and playing better (which it has), not more offensive weapons. If this team scores 50 we should win by 30 not 17.

I don't think a legit, above average to elite LT would fall into the category of diminishing returns.

[jeemie]

The biggest difference was the game plan put in place...... was for the PS to score alot of points.
Was to be aggressive, more un-predictable, to pass more on first and attack all parts of the field.

Mike Tomlin mentioned that he knew Indy had a potent offense and that the PS would have to score alot of points to keep pace and win.
Which tells me the plan vs. bottom feeding teams with average to below average, to bad QB's...............is the exact opposite and would not require those inferior skill position players to be exposed and not require them to keep pace with a HOF QB, All-Pro WR and RB.

The offensive game plan was completly different than the game we have seen............from half time of the opening game until kick off on Sunday.

So, to answer the original post..................This teams approach and game plan for Sunday was the biggest difference.

Tomlin should be assuming that against his defense, EVERY offense is a high powered offense capable of scoring a lot of points.

[Legacy User]

The biggest difference was the game plan put in place...... was for the PS to score alot of points.
Was to be aggressive, more un-predictable, to pass more on first and attack all parts of the field.

Mike Tomlin mentioned that he knew Indy had a potent offense and that the PS would have to score alot of points to keep pace and win.
Which tells me the plan vs. bottom feeding teams with average to below average, to bad QB's...............is the exact opposite and would not require those inferior skill position players to be exposed and not require them to keep pace with a HOF QB, All-Pro WR and RB.

The offensive game plan was completly different than the game we have seen............from half time of the opening game until kick off on Sunday.

So, to answer the original post..................This teams approach and game plan for Sunday was the biggest difference.

Tomlin should be assuming that against his defense, EVERY offense is a high powered offense capable of scoring a lot of points.

I tip my hat to Mike Glennon, if you will.

[Legacy User]

The Law of Diminishing Returns states that comes a point where anything else you add will not produce results to justify adding more. Like adding an 3rd person on fries when you only have 2 fryers.

Adding pieces to the offense thinking that its going to be more dynamic is foolish thinking IMO. Does adding Benjamin/Eifert/Graham/V Jackson get us to 60 points on Sunday?Scoring was taken care of, what needs to happen is having enough defense so that scoring 51 points is a laugher not a nail biter.

This team needs the defense to start getting after people and playing better (which it has), not more offensive weapons. If this team scores 50 we should win by 30 not 17.

I don't think a legit, above average to elite LT would fall into the category of diminishing returns.

I agree I thought I put that in a previous post. I was talking about the skill position here.

[Legacy User]

The biggest difference was the game plan put in place...... was for the PS to score alot of points.
Was to be aggressive, more un-predictable, to pass more on first and attack all parts of the field.

Mike Tomlin mentioned that he knew Indy had a potent offense and that the PS would have to score alot of points to keep pace and win.
Which tells me the plan vs. bottom feeding teams with average to below average, to bad QB's...............is the exact opposite and would not require those inferior skill position players to be exposed and not require them to keep pace with a HOF QB, All-Pro WR and RB.

The offensive game plan was completly different than the game we have seen............from half time of the opening game until kick off on Sunday.

So, to answer the original post..................This teams approach and game plan for Sunday was the biggest difference.

Hi, nice post. The reason the game plan looked different is the way Indy attacks on defense. You saw much of the same kinds of play calls by Steelers in the first half of week 1 when Cleveland tried to press the WR's and sit in single high safety.

Since then, we've seen many games where the defense sat back and the play calling was forced to change. TB and Cleveland #2 come to mind, and 1st half of Carolina game before run forced their hands into certain defenses.

Going forward, any time you see a team play that kind of defense against the Steelers I think you'll see a similar approach. My best guess after a 51 point 522 yard effort you won't see much of it anymore.

[Stosh-67]

The biggest difference was the game plan put in place...... was for the PS to score alot of points.
Was to be aggressive, more un-predictable, to pass more on first and attack all parts of the field.

Mike Tomlin mentioned that he knew Indy had a potent offense and that the PS would have to score alot of points to keep pace and win.
Which tells me the plan vs. bottom feeding teams with average to below average, to bad QB's...............is the exact opposite and would not require those inferior skill position players to be exposed and not require them to keep pace with a HOF QB, All-Pro WR and RB.

The offensive game plan was completly different than the game we have seen............from half time of the opening game until kick off on Sunday.

So, to answer the original post..................This teams approach and game plan for Sunday was the biggest difference.

Hi, nice post. The reason the game plan looked different is the way Indy attacks on defense. You saw much of the same kinds of play calls by Steelers in the first half of week 1 when Cleveland tried to press the WR's and sit in single high safety.

Since then, we've seen many games where the defense sat back and the play calling was forced to change. TB and Cleveland #2 come to mind, and 1st half of Carolina game before run forced their hands into certain defenses.

Going forward, any time you see a team play that kind of defense against the Steelers I think you'll see a similar approach. My best guess after a 51 point 522 yard effort you won't see much of it anymore.

I certainly hope we do not see more of the game plan from Cleveland-2.........17 run and 4 pass will continue to result in 8-8's. They had such good success in the run that first quarter that mixing in PA passes like they did on Sunday would have resulted in a much more productive offense. You certainly can make a point that how a defense lines up may dictate offensive play calling...........but a defensive strategy "can not" back a team into a corner of offensive simplification without diversity, without unpredictablity and without the element of surprise.

I agree that i also can not see the PS come out with the same game plan as they did against Indy........knowing how Tomlin has played these rivalry games before. Lets hope they find some happy medium that makes this team equally as dangerous thru the air and on the ground.

[Legacy User]

Tomlin pretty much came out said the reason we saw such a different looking steelers team on offense was because they were afraid of Luck and the Indy offense. They knew they would need points. Straight from Tomlins mouth. It had a lot less to do with what Indys defense was doing in other words. I gather that's the same reason we saw aggressiveness on defense as well. I for one hope we come out with similar aggressiveness on both sides of the ball vs the Ravens but I do agree we will most likely revert back to the minimizing mistakes mentality

[Nick79]

Tomlin pretty much came out said the reason we saw such a different looking steelers team on offense was because they were afraid of Luck and the Indy offense. They knew they would need points. Straight from Tomlins mouth. It had a lot less to do with what Indys defense was doing in other words. I gather that's the same reason we saw aggressiveness on defense as well. I for one hope we come out with similar aggressiveness on both sides of the ball vs the Ravens but I do agree we will most likely revert back to the minimizing mistakes mentality

I've been saying this all along, why not assume that you need to score a lot every game? If you're playing a team with a poor offense and can't score musch, why "keep it close" or "shorten the game", why not try to "put it away early/build a multi-score cushion" instead so you don't need stops with a one score lead late in the 4th?

[Legacy User]

Tomlin pretty much came out said the reason we saw such a different looking steelers team on offense was because they were afraid of Luck and the Indy offense. They knew they would need points. Straight from Tomlins mouth. It had a lot less to do with what Indys defense was doing in other words. I gather that's the same reason we saw aggressiveness on defense as well. I for one hope we come out with similar aggressiveness on both sides of the ball vs the Ravens but I do agree we will most likely revert back to the minimizing mistakes mentality

Tomlin should be scared of Flacco too since he bent us over in game 1.

[jeemie]

Tomlin pretty much came out said the reason we saw such a different looking steelers team on offense was because they were afraid of Luck and the Indy offense. They knew they would need points. Straight from Tomlins mouth. It had a lot less to do with what Indys defense was doing in other words. I gather that's the same reason we saw aggressiveness on defense as well. I for one hope we come out with similar aggressiveness on both sides of the ball vs the Ravens but I do agree we will most likely revert back to the minimizing mistakes mentality

Tomlin should be scared of Flacco too since he bent us over in game 1.

It was more Dumervil swallowing up Gilbert and Owen Daniels torching Terrance Garvin.

Luckily Daniels is coming off knee surgery so hopefully that's one problem dealt with.

[Legacy User]

Tomlin pretty much came out said the reason we saw such a different looking steelers team on offense was because they were afraid of Luck and the Indy offense. They knew they would need points. Straight from Tomlins mouth. It had a lot less to do with what Indys defense was doing in other words. I gather that's the same reason we saw aggressiveness on defense as well. I for one hope we come out with similar aggressiveness on both sides of the ball vs the Ravens but I do agree we will most likely revert back to the minimizing mistakes mentality

I've been saying this all along, why not assume that you need to score a lot every game? If you're playing a team with a poor offense and can't score musch, why "keep it close" or "shorten the game", why not try to "put it away early/build a multi-score cushion" instead so you don't need stops with a one score lead late in the 4th?

Agreed Nick. I still want some degree of balance but I do agree with you.

[Legacy User]

run run pass short kick tackle the catch

[Nick79]

Tomlin pretty much came out said the reason we saw such a different looking steelers team on offense was because they were afraid of Luck and the Indy offense. They knew they would need points. Straight from Tomlins mouth. It had a lot less to do with what Indys defense was doing in other words. I gather that's the same reason we saw aggressiveness on defense as well. I for one hope we come out with similar aggressiveness on both sides of the ball vs the Ravens but I do agree we will most likely revert back to the minimizing mistakes mentality

I've been saying this all along, why not assume that you need to score a lot every game? If you're playing a team with a poor offense and can't score musch, why "keep it close" or "shorten the game", why not try to "put it away early/build a multi-score cushion" instead so you don't need stops with a one score lead late in the 4th?

Agreed Nick. I still want some degree of balance but I do agree with you.

I agree, Bell ran for 94 yards last week, was anybody disappointed that there wasn't enough running and "better" running, as Art2 supposedly asked for? My point is, Ben may have thrown 49 times, but there was good, solid running in that game too.

[Legacy User]

No argument there Nick. I want that same aggressive attitude on both sides of the ball that they showed vs Indy. Except for Allen I thought the defense held their own. When I say they held their own I mean as compared to the vanilla passive defenses we usually see every week. No reason we cant be balanced their as well, mix it up

[Nick79]

No argument there Nick. I want that same aggressive attitude on both sides of the ball that they showed vs Indy. Except for Allen I thought the defense held their own. When I say they held their own I mean as compared to the vanilla passive defenses we usually see every week. No reason we cant be balanced their as well, mix it up

And even if the D is giving up yards and points, making some turnovers that lead to points for us can even things out, and that's been lacking in recent years, the last two weeks they've delivered in that area.

[Legacy User]

People who want us to attack Baltimore from the gun on Sunday night are going to be upset. The vertical passing game is only going to work if the OL holds up and even then its going to take a few adjustments to make sure. There will be a lot of running plays and quick passes to see if our protection will hold. Its been a while since we've seen a full seven step drop in this offense and that was all on the OL. If Gilbert does his job could be a great night.

[955876]

The Law of Diminishing Returns states that comes a point where anything else you add will not produce results to justify adding more. Like adding an 3rd person on fries when you only have 2 fryers.

Adding pieces to the offense thinking that its going to be more dynamic is foolish thinking IMO. Does adding Benjamin/Eifert/Graham/V Jackson get us to 60 points on Sunday?Scoring was taken care of, what needs to happen is having enough defense so that scoring 51 points is a laugher not a nail biter.

This team needs the defense to start getting after people and playing better (which it has), not more offensive weapons. If this team scores 50 we should win by 30 not 17.

It was just a few weeks ago we scored but a single touchdown against the worst D in football.

Just saying.

[Legacy User]

It was just a few weeks ago we scored but a single touchdown against the worst D in football.

Just saying.

And we scored 6 against a top 5 defense. The difference between the two is OL maturity.

I think we can all see the talent on offense- at the skill position. And if Bryant continues to develop and Markus finds himself- the sky is the limit for this unit. Provided the OL plays within 5% of where they played on Sunday. IMO we need to stop wringing our hands about the offense and trying to throw draft picks at it when the evidence starting to show that it has turned the corner. A target is only good if you can get the ball to him

The point Im trying to make is outside of a LT that is going to be there for the next 10 years soaking up edge rushers-what does this offense need? If the line keeps playing like that- then nothing. I could see the first 4 picks go defense unless a gift on offense falls to us.

[V DUB]

The biggest difference was the game plan put in place...... was for the PS to score alot of points.
Was to be aggressive, more un-predictable, to pass more on first and attack all parts of the field.

Mike Tomlin mentioned that he knew Indy had a potent offense and that the PS would have to score alot of points to keep pace and win.
Which tells me the plan vs. bottom feeding teams with average to below average, to bad QB's...............is the exact opposite and would not require those inferior skill position players to be exposed and not require them to keep pace with a HOF QB, All-Pro WR and RB.

The offensive game plan was completly different than the game we have seen............from half time of the opening game until kick off on Sunday.

So, to answer the original post..................This teams approach and game plan for Sunday was the biggest difference.

Tomlin should be assuming that against his defense, EVERY offense is a high powered offense capable of scoring a lot of points.

ETA- Quoted the wrong post, sorry Jeems. Speaking about our O.

I feel like that's a great way to be successful in the regular season & not having a surprise element in the PO's. Tomlin said as much in a PC last year. Saving shit for the PO's. Probably why Peyton is a great reg season QB & below average post season. He calls the entire tool box in games that its unnecessary, & pads stats. Rarely can catch a team that hasn't studied a ful season of his & studied 16 games worth of film.

[Havoc]

The biggest difference was the game plan put in place...... was for the PS to score alot of points.
Was to be aggressive, more un-predictable, to pass more on first and attack all parts of the field.

Mike Tomlin mentioned that he knew Indy had a potent offense and that the PS would have to score alot of points to keep pace and win.
Which tells me the plan vs. bottom feeding teams with average to below average, to bad QB's...............is the exact opposite and would not require those inferior skill position players to be exposed and not require them to keep pace with a HOF QB, All-Pro WR and RB.

The offensive game plan was completly different than the game we have seen............from half time of the opening game until kick off on Sunday.

So, to answer the original post..................This teams approach and game plan for Sunday was the biggest difference.

Tomlin should be assuming that against his defense, EVERY offense is a high powered offense capable of scoring a lot of points.

ETA- Quoted the wrong post, sorry Jeems. Speaking about our O.

I feel like that's a great way to be successful in the regular season & not having a surprise element in the PO's. Tomlin said as much in a PC last year. Saving shit for the PO's. Probably why Peyton is a great reg season QB & below average post season. He calls the entire tool box in games that its unnecessary, & pads stats. Rarely can catch a team that hasn't studied a ful season of his & studied 16 games worth of film.

Peyton is not as effective in the post season because he is not a playmaker.

We need to be playing wide open offense every game. If we are a great offense, everyone is going to know the things we do well, but it won't matter.

Anything less than wide open offense makes it about the coaches instead of being about the players. Put your players in optimal position to have the highest impact they are capable of, and let it be about them.

Having said that, if we can't protect the qb, then the offense is going to look different than it did vs the colts.

[jeemie]

It was just a few weeks ago we scored but a single touchdown against the worst D in football.

Just saying.

And we scored 6 against a top 5 defense. The difference between the two is OL maturity.

I think we can all see the talent on offense- at the skill position. And if Bryant continues to develop and Markus finds himself- the sky is the limit for this unit. Provided the OL plays within 5% of where they played on Sunday. IMO we need to stop wringing our hands about the offense and trying to throw draft picks at it when the evidence starting to show that it has turned the corner. A target is only good if you can get the ball to him

The point Im trying to make is outside of a LT that is going to be there for the next 10 years soaking up edge rushers-what does this offense need? If the line keeps playing like that- then nothing. I could see the first 4 picks go defense unless a gift on offense falls to us.

They are going to need a tight end.

After Miller there is nothing.

[Stosh-67]

It was just a few weeks ago we scored but a single touchdown against the worst D in football.

Just saying.

And we scored 6 against a top 5 defense. The difference between the two is OL maturity.

I think we can all see the talent on offense- at the skill position. And if Bryant continues to develop and Markus finds himself- the sky is the limit for this unit. Provided the OL plays within 5% of where they played on Sunday. IMO we need to stop wringing our hands about the offense and trying to throw draft picks at it when the evidence starting to show that it has turned the corner. A target is only good if you can get the ball to him

The point Im trying to make is outside of a LT that is going to be there for the next 10 years soaking up edge rushers-what does this offense need? If the line keeps playing like that- then nothing. I could see the first 4 picks go defense unless a gift on offense falls to us.

Yes our offense may have turned a corner........ but keep in mind... this team is six+ quarters removed from getting booed into the locker room before the Houston offense kept giving the ball back to us inside the 20......and has not looked great vs the Ravens last few years

I do feel the pieces are falling in place. Not just adding Bryant into the mix.... but the continued development of Wheaton.
As well as the re-emergence of Mike Adams to the OL......whether he plays or not .....the OL got deeper
I still think Archer will have some big plays in the second half....maybe

I agree the defense should be addressed heavy in the draft........ but we do need to add a TE threat to complete a weapons overhaul for Ben.
Heath is still a comfortable piece of Bens arsenal....... but he may be the slowest #1 TE in football.

With at least 7 picks in the draft.......I would go 2 CBs TE OT OLB RB S
Can we also expect a comp pick for Emmanuel Sanders?

[Legacy User]

It was just a few weeks ago we scored but a single touchdown against the worst D in football.

Just saying.

And we scored 6 against a top 5 defense. The difference between the two is OL maturity.

I think we can all see the talent on offense- at the skill position. And if Bryant continues to develop and Markus finds himself- the sky is the limit for this unit. Provided the OL plays within 5% of where they played on Sunday. IMO we need to stop wringing our hands about the offense and trying to throw draft picks at it when the evidence starting to show that it has turned the corner. A target is only good if you can get the ball to him

The point Im trying to make is outside of a LT that is going to be there for the next 10 years soaking up edge rushers-what does this offense need? If the line keeps playing like that- then nothing. I could see the first 4 picks go defense unless a gift on offense falls to us.

Yes our offense may have turned a corner........ but keep in mind... this team is six+ quarters removed from getting booed into the locker room before the Houston offense kept giving the ball back to us inside the 20......and has not looked great vs the Ravens last few years

I do feel the pieces are falling in place. Not just adding Bryant into the mix.... but the continued development of Wheaton.
As well as the re-emergence of Mike Adams to the OL......whether he plays or not .....the OL got deeper
I still think Archer will have some big plays in the second half....maybe

I agree the defense should be addressed heavy in the draft........ but we do need to add a TE threat to complete a weapons overhaul for Ben.
Heath is still a comfortable piece of Bens arsenal....... but he may be the slowest #1 TE in football.

With at least 7 picks in the draft.......I would go 2 CBs TE OT OLB RB S
Can we also expect a comp pick for Emmanuel Sanders?

probably a 4th for Sanders.

[Havoc]

I agree, Stosh... our O looking hideous far too often are recent events.

I am not counting any offensive chickens yet.

I can't wait to see more, though.

[Kodiak]

Great to see the way the OL played against IND....that's a level I've never seen the OL come close to achieving while Ben has been QB.

Problem is, have to do something close to that every week to be a strength and considered a good OL. Good OL play every other week is not a staple of a top offense and prevents a QB from being elite.

[955876]

The point Im trying to make is outside of a LT that is going to be there for the next 10 years soaking up edge rushers-what does this offense need? If the line keeps playing like that- then nothing. I could see the first 4 picks go defense unless a gift on offense falls to us.

Like Jeemie said, a TE.

I've been asking for one for a couple years now.

[Havoc]

The Law of Diminishing Returns states that comes a point where anything else you add will not produce results to justify adding more. Like adding an 3rd person on fries when you only have 2 fryers.

Adding pieces to the offense thinking that its going to be more dynamic is foolish thinking IMO. Does adding Benjamin/Eifert/Graham/V Jackson get us to 60 points on Sunday?Scoring was taken care of, what needs to happen is having enough defense so that scoring 51 points is a laugher not a nail biter.

This team needs the defense to start getting after people and playing better (which it has), not more offensive weapons. If this team scores 50 we should win by 30 not 17.

I want 3 fryers and 3 people on fries.

It might not have made much difference sunday, but it would against some teams.

We had both Swann and Stallworth in the 70's.

You can never have too many weapons on offense. The more you have, the more you can do, and the more dominant you can be.

I agree that we need to add talent to the defense.