Maximum Grilled Steelers Forum
Nov 27, 2014 at 03:23 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Calendar Media Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 [4] 5  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: play calling  (Read 3527 times)
otismalibu
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 7055
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,918



« Reply #30 on: Nov 28, 2007 at 14:25 »

Quote
C'mon man, otis just got through converting his Huntley jersey to a #44.



No, but I did turn an Amos Zeroue into a Wad Holmes.




 
Logged
Greygrizzly
N00b
*

Karma: 100
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #31 on: Nov 28, 2007 at 17:15 »

Quote
Quote
Quote
Najeh Davenport should not be getting the ball on 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1, matter of fact I question where he should get it at all.
I disagree. Davenport gets yards when Wilie parker doesn't. Davenport is more like the prototypical Steeler tailback. He should be starting because he is big enough to wear down defenses and parker should be brought in as a change of pace back.
Clearly there is no doubt that the leading rusher in the AFC should be benched.

BUM!
Whats the differance weather or not Parker is the the leading rusher or not he doesn't make defenses adjust to stop him. Defenses do it with their front seven.  Parker gets a lot of yards over all,but he just doesn't force a defense to make any adjustment to stop him
 
Logged
Greygrizzly
N00b
*

Karma: 100
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #32 on: Nov 28, 2007 at 17:19 »

Quote
Davenport is a terrible, terrible short yardage back.

He was 5-of-16 in short yardage situations last year (anything with 3 or less yards to go). that's a 31% success rate.

Parker was 25-of-39 in similar situations. That's a 64% success rate.

I don't have the numbers for this year, but from what i've seen, i'd say they aren't much different.

Parker's ability to run between the tackles and, "move the sticks," is alarmingly underrated, while Davenport's is terribly overrated.
Stats can sometimes be misleading. Davenport probably in most of those situations was coming into the game cold off of the bench. And also in those situations when you see that bigger back coming into the game the defense can probably get the idea that the bigger back is going to get the ball right now.
Logged
Greygrizzly
N00b
*

Karma: 100
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #33 on: Nov 28, 2007 at 17:22 »

Quote
Quote

Clearly there is no doubt that the leading rusher in the AFC should be benched.

BUM!
He ain't no Jerome Bettis </sarcasm>
WOW GEE really. While that may be true he is that big back that the Steelers have always relied on.  
Logged
DoctorJohnnyFever
No longer a N00b!
**

Karma: 102
Offline Offline

Posts: 75



WWW
« Reply #34 on: Nov 28, 2007 at 18:46 »

Personally, I don't care what the reason is for Davenport getting stopped, the fact is he gets stopped and it doesn't work.
Logged

"The MGS board is regarded here as a board with adult rated content. There are virtually no rules. There are no words that are inappropriate and no subject that cannot be discussed. Should you feel the need to get crazy, do it there. You will be welcomed with open arms."

 
SCacalaki
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 4449
Offline Offline

Posts: 14,501


WWW
« Reply #35 on: Nov 28, 2007 at 18:51 »

Wes Ours was a big running back
Logged

Words to live by:  "Dick LeBeau is Dick LeBeau," Tomlin said. "Everybody knows Dick."
JackSplat
Jerk Store Proprietor
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1541
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,311



« Reply #36 on: Nov 28, 2007 at 20:52 »

Quote
Parker gets a lot of yards over all,but he just doesn't force a defense to make any adjustment to stop him

I beg to differ...every team we have played this year has done one thing and one thing only.  that is STOP willie parker at all costs.  The only time there is never 8-9 in the box is on 3rd and long.  Hell, the entire game plan of the Ravoons was to stop willie at all costs.  Its very rare that Parker just sees a 7 man front.
Logged

Jerry, it's Frank Costanza, Mr.
Steinbrenner is here, George is dead, call me back!
dcity21
Member
***

Karma: 154
Offline Offline

Posts: 214



WWW
« Reply #37 on: Nov 28, 2007 at 23:09 »

seems to me as though that qualifies as an adjustment being that most teams prefer to play with a 3-4 or 4-3, meaning 7 in the box is normal..  and going away from 7 would be some sort of adjustment..

OWNED by jackSpizzlyat

and i basically agree with everything said here.. i have been cursing our staff every time Najeh is on the field in short yardage, this and LAST year.. Give it to your All-Pro runner and let him start to carry this team.. he isn't a bad player, but if it takes him not being around to get him out of that role then i am ALL for it..

and someone said he should only start if there is an injury.. and well i don't even like that idea.. if that were to happen (knock on wood, please football spirits not our willie) i'd rather see Russell than i would anyone else..

something about him just has me wanting to see him run for this team when it matters.. not that i want him over willie (i would never dare, there are only two or three backs in the league that i would rather have than willie, and all of them cost valuable picks and lots of cash. so, considering all of that, give me willie over anybody), i just want to see him get a chance here at some point, even if minimal..  
Logged

"i don't know Nutting about baseball.. but i know about Nutting over making some cash.." Ownership ROCKS!!!
kchopsteel
Member
***

Karma: 211
Offline Offline

Posts: 311


WWW
« Reply #38 on: Nov 29, 2007 at 07:16 »

Does anyone think that maybe some of the play calling issues are related to Ben making the calls at the line. In these threads it seems the coaching staff gets alot of the blame, and maybe they deserve it, but in the Miami game we were running no huddle and Ben was making alot of calls and adjustments. I guess I am just trying to reserve judgement on this game seeing as the field was an unmitigated disaster and stretching the field was not an option. From what I saw I truly believe we would have hung 40 on the Fins in normal operating conditions.

FWIW, the O-Line is sucking a hind tit alot but it seems that Ben holds the ball to damn long sometimes and if he would just get rid of it the line wouldn't have to hold the blocks for so long. Maybe it's just time to use the pass to set up the run which for our style of play may be the best pathway to success.

 :shrugs:  
Logged

I am the Padiddle champion
Big Virgil
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 3768
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,253



« Reply #39 on: Nov 29, 2007 at 08:11 »

Quote
Does anyone think that maybe some of the play calling issues are related to Ben making the calls at the line. In these threads it seems the coaching staff gets alot of the blame, and maybe they deserve it, but in the Miami game we were running no huddle and Ben was making alot of calls and adjustments. I guess I am just trying to reserve judgement on this game seeing as the field was an unmitigated disaster and stretching the field was not an option. From what I saw I truly believe we would have hung 40 on the Fins in normal operating conditions.

FWIW, the O-Line is sucking a hind tit alot but it seems that Ben holds the ball to damn long sometimes and if he would just get rid of it the line wouldn't have to hold the blocks for so long. Maybe it's just time to use the pass to set up the run which for our style of play may be the best pathway to success.

 :shrugs:
The play calling issues go a lot deeper than one or two drives against the phins.  When Arians is on the sidelines with that big laminated sheet, looking at it, and using it to shield his mouth while speaking into his headset, he is calling the plays, not Ben.  

I don't think we were in "no huddle" in the red zone on the last drive.
Logged

Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.
I wouldn't say I've been *missing* it, Bob.
Pages: 1 ... 3 [4] 5  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal
| Sitemap
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!