Steelers vs. Ponies

[What!]

Ok Lets get it started. The Steelers are coming in as big underdogs for this game but I see hope that a victory is possible and by game time on Sunday I will have convinced myself of this. Some reasons why the colts could lose.

1. Come in rusty. They had a lot of time off and with so much of the offense centered around timing could take a while to get started.

2. Manning did have some trouble with the Steeler D last time they played.

3. Last time they played Rothlisberger just got back from an injury after missing 3 games now it looks like he is starting to hit his stride. Also M. Smith the starting left tackle did not play and Freeny just killed the backup.

4. If the Steelers get the running game going I think there chances improve greatly in winning the game.

5. Kimo trips and falls again.

My prediction for the game STEELERS 27 colts 23

[matskralc]

1) "Since the current playoff structure was adopted in 1990, home teams in the divisionals are 49-11. In all professional sports, no subset of teams enjoys the advantage known by NFL home teams in the divisionals round. Usually they are the best teams to begin with. They're playing at home. And they just finished a bye week, relaxing in hot tubs as their opponents were out in the cold being pounded." - Gregg Easterbrook

2) 15-25 for 245 yards, 2 TD, 1 INT and a 102.9 rating.

3) The Steelers, as usual, are probably doomed if they are forced to rely on their passing game. There is a reason why they have far-and-away the NFL's most run-reliant play-calling. Because that's how their offense works.

4) Any team's chances improve if they can get the running game going.

5) Probably the Steelers' best bet.

[jamus23]

I agree with you up until here:

Originally Posted by What!

4. If the Steelers get the running game going I think there chances improve greatly in winning the game.

If the Steelers win, it won't be because of the running game. It'll be because of Ben's passing, plain and simple. As Ben goes, so go the Steelers. This season has proven that without a doubt.

[matskralc]

Originally Posted by jamus23

If the Steelers win, it won't be because of the running game. It'll be because of Ben's passing, plain and simple. As Ben goes, so go the Steelers. This season has proven that without a doubt.

In the 5 games the Steelers lost this year:

20-23 New England at home: 79 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 12-28 for 216 and 2 TD.

17-23 Jacksonville at home: 73 yards rushing. Maddox 11-28 for 154, 1 TD, 3 INT.

13-16 @ Baltimore: 70 yards rushing. Maddox 19-36 for 230, 1 TD, 1 INT

7-26 @ Indianapolis: 86 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 17-26 for 133, 1 TD, 2 INT.

31-38 Cincinnati at home: 95 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 29-41 for 386, 3 TD, 3 INT.



The Steelers live and die by the run, quite simply. Their passing game is rendered fairly ineffective if they cannot set it up with the run. Roethlisberger just isn't that good.

[edrooney]

Originally Posted by matskralc

1) "Since the current playoff structure was adopted in 1990, home teams in the divisionals are 49-11. In all professional sports, no subset of teams enjoys the advantage known by NFL home teams in the divisionals round. Usually they are the best teams to begin with. They're playing at home. And they just finished a bye week, relaxing in hot tubs as their opponents were out in the cold being pounded." - Gregg Easterbrook.

Yeah, but the Colts haven't just had a week off in the hot tub. They've been out of truly competitive football for a month. Don't think it'll hurt them that much, but still ...

[matskralc]

Originally Posted by edrooney

Yeah, but the Colts haven't just had a week off in the hot tub. They've been out of truly competitive football for a month. Don't think it'll hurt them that much, but still ...

These guys make their livings playing professional football. I've always thought the "rust" stuff is a bunch of crap.

[edrooney]

Originally Posted by matskralc

These guys make their livings playing professional football. I've always thought the "rust" stuff is a bunch of crap.

Yeah, the 49-11 record is a little hard to counter.

[What!]

Originally Posted by matskralc

The Steelers live and die by the run, quite simply. Their passing game is rendered fairly ineffective if they cannot set it up with the run. Roethlisberger just isn't that good.

By isnt that good what do you mean exactly? I think he is a good quaterback who choked during last year playoffs for whatever reason(some people think he hit the wall). But he also doesnt put up the big numbers because he does not get the oppurtunity to. Im not saying he is in a class with Manning, Brady, or Palmer. I do think he falls into the second tier of QBs. He is very good clutch player and makes big throws with games on the line(once again excluding the playoffs of last year) Just look at all of his comebacks not sure how many but the list is getting impressive.

I dont think the Colts will be so rusty that Manning overthrows every reciever but there is a chance that they are not firing on all cylinders. Didnt Indy start of the season slow on offense before they started to get their timing down?

[jamus23]

Originally Posted by matskralc

In the 5 games the Steelers lost this year:

20-23 New England at home: 79 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 12-28 for 216 and 2 TD.

17-23 Jacksonville at home: 73 yards rushing. Maddox 11-28 for 154, 1 TD, 3 INT.

13-16 @ Baltimore: 70 yards rushing. Maddox 19-36 for 230, 1 TD, 1 INT

7-26 @ Indianapolis: 86 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 17-26 for 133, 1 TD, 2 INT.

31-38 Cincinnati at home: 95 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 29-41 for 386, 3 TD, 3 INT.



The Steelers live and die by the run, quite simply. Their passing game is rendered fairly ineffective if they cannot set it up with the run. Roethlisberger just isn't that good.

First, two of the losses were with Tommy Maddox at QB- making them relatively meaningless. With Maddox at the helm, there was absolutely no reason for opponents to respect the pass, which meant that they could concentrate completely on the stopping the run.

It's the threat of the passing game that opens up their running game. The ability to throw deep on play actions with Ben forces the defense to respect both the run and the pass, as opposed to selling out to stop the run.

Most of their heavy rushing totals that have come in wins happen because they are winning- in the second half, especially. They don't win because they run well- they run well because they are winning.

I guarantee that if they open the game with the same stupid Willie-Parker-off-tackle-left-that-gains-one-yard that they do in virtually every game, they will get crushed by the Colts. They can't afford to come out and try and "do what they do" or "play their game" or any of that other Bill Cowher crap. Do the unexpected (i.e. throw early and throw often), and they have a chance.

[Jason Moyer]

Originally Posted by matskralc

The Steelers live and die by the run, quite simply. Their passing game is rendered fairly ineffective if they cannot set it up with the run. Roethlisberger just isn't that good.

Random thoughts:

a.) the only time Roethlisberger passes a lot is if they're losing except for
b.) in the second Bengals game when Cowher tried to outgun Cincinnati which was a bad idea because
c.) the Steelers defense is good but not great unless the offense keeps them off the field for long periods of time

I'm more confident in Ben being able to put up tons of points against the Colts than I am in the Steelers defense having an answer for Manning. I think if the Steelers D stays rested and they can pull out an early lead, allowing them to put everyone into coverage, then they have a shot. If they fall behind early and make Ben throw then I wouldn't be surprised if the Steelers scored 28 to 35 points and still lost by 2 touchdowns. The Steelers have a good defense but it seems better than it really is when they're running the ball effectively and keeping them off the field.

[sebastian0622]

Originally Posted by matskralc

In the 5 games the Steelers lost this year:

20-23 New England at home: 79 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 12-28 for 216 and 2 TD.

17-23 Jacksonville at home: 73 yards rushing. Maddox 11-28 for 154, 1 TD, 3 INT.

13-16 @ Baltimore: 70 yards rushing. Maddox 19-36 for 230, 1 TD, 1 INT

7-26 @ Indianapolis: 86 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 17-26 for 133, 1 TD, 2 INT.

31-38 Cincinnati at home: 95 yards rushing. Roethlisberger 29-41 for 386, 3 TD, 3 INT.

The Steelers live and die by the run, quite simply. Their passing game is rendered fairly ineffective if they cannot set it up with the run. Roethlisberger just isn't that good.

Constant conjunction does not equal causality. It's a possibility that the reason the Steelers had fewer than 100 rushing yards in those game was because they were trailing, not vice versa. Teams run more when they are ahead. Notice they had 70 or more yards on the ground in each of them and put up 20+ points in 2 of 3 losses in which Big Ben started. They averaged 3.4 yards per rush in all three losses, which is by no means getting shut down. It's one 13 yard gain from a 4.0 ypc average. NE averaged 2.7 in the game and Indy 4.0. Not a big advantage on the ground for the opponents.

Ben put up almost 8 YPA vs. the Pats and over 9 vs. the Bengals. I wouldn't say he was the reason they lost. I'd be more inclined to look at the 23 and 38 points that the other team scored.

I agree with you that the majority of Pittsburgh's success is the run game, but you can't write off Big Ben and just say he's ineffective. He was quite effective versus both New England and Cincinatti--about as effective as one could expect a QB to be when playing from behind and facing nickel defenses and blitzes. But it's kind of hard to win when the opponent scores 38 points in 26:42 TOP.

[matskralc]

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

Constant conjunction does not equal causality. It's a possibility that the reason the Steelers had fewer than 100 rushing yards in those game was because they were trailing, not vice versa.

The Steelers did not trail against New England until 3:36 into the 4th quarter.

The Steelers rushed 23 times for 79 yards in that game, an average of 3.4 yards per carry. I don't understand what being one 13-yard carry away from a 4.0 average has to do with anything. If you take out Parker's long of 11 yards, they averaged 3.1 yards per carry. So what?

Parker had 17 carries of 6, 2, 2, 0, 1, 10, -2, 3, 11, 3, 3, 3, 4, -1, 2, 6, 2, a total of 55 yards. Sure, he averaged 3.2 yard a carry. 5 of his 17 carries exceeded that average.

Roethlisberger ran 3 times for 17 yards in that game. Subtract that from the Steelers rushing totals, and their ground game was good for 62 yards on 20 carries: 3.1 a rush.



On to Jacksonville. The Steelers trailed early 7-0, and tied it at the start of the 2nd quarter. They did not trail again until Jacksonville scored the winning touchdown in overtime. 30 carries netted then 73 yards, an average of 2.4 per carry. Maddox ran 3 times for 15 yards (including a long of 16): subtract that out and the ground game was good for 58 yards on 27 carries: 2.1 yards per carry. And that includes Parker's long of 12 yards.



The Steelers did trail Baltimore by 7 at the half. They came out of the locker room having not given up on the pass, giving Parker the ball on 4 of the 8 plays on their first drive, and 4 of 10 plays on their second drive of the third.
Parker totaled 59 yards on 18 carries in this game, including runs of 9 and 14 yards, and 7 carries of 1 yard or less.


The Steelers trailed the Colts the entire game, true. But they still ran the ball 25 times, for all of 86 yards, 3.6 per carry. This includes a run of 26 by Parker (during 4th quarter mop up time), as well as eight team carries of 1 yard or less.



The Steelers never trailed the Bengals significantly until the 4th quarter. The Bengals game is the perfect illustration of how important the running game is to their success: if they had been running the ball successfully, Cincinnati's offense is on the field even less than it was. Roethlisberger also probably doesn't throw three picks if the Steelers are successfully running the ball.

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

Teams run more when they are ahead. Notice they had 70 or more yards on the ground in each of them and put up 20+ points in 2 of 3 losses in which Big Ben started. They averaged 3.4 yards per rush in all three losses, which is by no means getting shut down. It's one 13 yard gain from a 4.0 ypc average. NE averaged 2.7 in the game and Indy 4.0. Not a big advantage on the ground for the opponents.

New England and Indianapolis do not have offenses that rely on the running game anywhere near the extent that Pittsburgh's does.

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

Ben put up almost 8 YPA vs. the Pats and over 9 vs. the Bengals. I wouldn't say he was the reason they lost. I'd be more inclined to look at the 23 and 38 points that the other team scored.

If you read closely, you'll see that I didn't say he was the reason they lost, either! I said a lack of a running game is why they lost.

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

But it's kind of hard to win when the opponent scores 38 points in 26:42 TOP.

It is hard to win when you throw two interceptions giving the other guy decent field position leading to touchdowns, yeah. It's also hard to win when you run the ball poorly. It's especially harder for the Steelers since their offense is built around the run like few other NFL offenses are. The only one of those 5 losses in which the passing game rates as "effective" or greater is the Bengals game, and he still went and threw 3 picks.

The Steelers have shown that if you shut down their running game, they are especially vulnerable. That's all I was saying. A quick look shows that about the only game the Steelers won without being truly successful with the run was against San Diego, when they totalled "only" 104 yards on 34 carries (3.2 YPC).

[marc]

Originally Posted by edrooney

Yeah, but the Colts haven't just had a week off in the hot tub. They've been out of truly competitive football for a month. Don't think it'll hurt them that much, but still ...

The same thing was said about the Eagles last year and they still cruised without T.O.

I think teams that are mentally prepared and focused can easily overcome a long layoff.

[sebastian0622]

The Steelers also beat Baltimore on 3.6 YPC (101 total yards), with Big Ben throwing 30 times (18-30, 2 TD, 1 INT).

They beat Minnesota on 3.6 YPC, with the defense holding Minny to 3 points.

The Steelers don't always win because they run the ball 30 times. They just as often win because their defense shuts teams down and that enables them to run 30 times a game, play the field position game, and take 3 points now and then and get some big plays on defense to get them in position for 7. The 30 rushing attempts is as often a symptom of their style of play as much as it is the determining factor in their success.

The Steelers rushed 30, 23, 25, 25, and 28 times in their losses. It's not like they abandoned the run, and you can't say they lost because they didn't run. They just weren't able to run because they were behind or the game was close (sorry, I wasn't clear above--teams run less when they are either behind or the opponent is within one score).

But Pittsburgh probably won't beat Indy with a running game. They'll need Big Ben to come through. If Pittsburgh runs 40 times, they'll lose. That's why they won't run 40 times. And when they lose, some idiot commentator is going to break out some stupid stat like, "When the Steelers run 35+ times, their record is...." No crap. You think they're going to pass when they're beating Tenn 34-7 or Minn 18-3 or Cleveland 41-0?

[Jonzard]

I think Indy is going to beat the Steelers by a large margin

[Asshat]

Originally Posted by edrooney

Yeah, but the Colts haven't just had a week off in the hot tub. They've been out of truly competitive football for a month. Don't think it'll hurt them that much, but still ...

When they pulled their starters out against Seattle they trailed 14-3, second to last game of the regular season. If they weren't competing that's on them...but they haven't "been out of competitive football".

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by Asshat

When they pulled their starters out against Seattle they trailed 14-3, second to last game of the regular season. If they weren't competing that's on them...but they haven't "been out of competitive football".

Colts have the ability to come back from 11 points. They pulled their starters because the game was meaningless.

[Sublimity]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

Colts have the ability to come back from 11 points. They pulled their starters because the game was meaningless.

I think that's kind of his point. Seattle was still playing, and Indy's starters were in there, so they were in competitive football. It's not like it was a scrimmage or something.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by Sublimity

I think that's kind of his point. Seattle was still playing, and Indy's starters were in there, so they were in competitive football. It's not like it was a scrimmage or something.

I have played in a game like that where we were both in the playoffs and the game meant nothing. Our team went vanilla on Offense. We thought we might see the team again so we refused to show them anything. We ran up the middle every play. We didn't even try to pass the ball. I would be willing to put 100 dollars that the Colts had a script of plays to run that showed very little or none of their offensive prowless. And I bet their defense played less than 100% as well. The game meant nothing. There was no reason to show anything to a team that you might play in the Super Bowl.

[Sublimity]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I have played in a game like that where we were both in the playoffs and the game meant nothing. Our team went vanilla on Offense. We thought we might see the team again so we refused to show them anything. We ran up the middle every play. We didn't even try to pass the ball. I would be willing to put 100 dollars that the Colts had a script of plays to run that showed very little or none of their offensive prowless. And I bet their defense played less than 100% as well. The game meant nothing. There was no reason to show anything to a team that you might play in the Super Bowl.

Agreed. But at least they were out there. Oh, hell, I don't even really care about this conversation. The "rusty" argument is a pretty poor one. The Colts offense took a while to warm up in the beginning of the season because 1) they ran the ball more as teams backed off the line to defend the pass, and 2) Peyton wanted to trade for Harrison in a fantasy league, so he wanted to depress his value. He might have even had James, and traded him for Harrison, so it was like killing two birds with one stone; inflate James' stats and value, depress Harrison's, trade is done in no time.