Brew Crew Grrl Posted October 9, 2007 Report Share Posted October 9, 2007 [quote name='oftt4' post='565675' date='Oct 9 2007, 09:18 AM']Yeah....you guys are a ray of intelligence on an otherwise stupid day....especially you. I dont think I have ever seen you post anything even remotely fact based. But I digress....[/quote] Why don't you take you happy ass, your *[i]five superbowl rings[/i]*, and go back to the delusional [i]Steelers/Rooney can never do wrong[/i] dreamworld you live in. The rest of us in the real world will continue to discuss and debate the ups and down of our unfortunately broke down team. Oh and BTW offt, I have stated fact.... to you as a matter of fact. Brew Crew Grrl @ Sep 4 2007, 03:01 PM Brooks was a second stringer because HE WAS A ROOKIE LAST YEAR!!! You don't throw all rookies into the fire and see if they don't fall apart. Some of them sit back and learn their craft before getting the chance to start. Your response... I dont disagree with what you are saying, but there is no guarantee that he is going to transform your D in any positive way. Final summation... I was correct. Our defense went to SHIT without Brooks in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 [quote name='Brew Crew Grrl' post='565878' date='Oct 9 2007, 01:58 PM']Why don't you take you happy ass, your *[i]five superbowl rings[/i]*, and go back to the delusional [i]Steelers/Rooney can never do wrong[/i] dreamworld you live in. The rest of us in the real world will continue to discuss and debate the ups and down of our unfortunately broke down team. Oh and BTW offt, I have stated fact.... to you as a matter of fact. Brew Crew Grrl @ Sep 4 2007, 03:01 PM Brooks was a second stringer because HE WAS A ROOKIE LAST YEAR!!! You don't throw all rookies into the fire and see if they don't fall apart. Some of them sit back and learn their craft before getting the chance to start. Your response... I dont disagree with what you are saying, but there is no guarantee that he is going to transform your D in any positive way. Final summation... I was correct. Our defense went to SHIT without Brooks in the middle.[/quote] How is it fact to assume that Brooks being in the lineup would turn the leagues worst defense into anything other than SHIT? That is exactly what I was talking about. How were you correct? Your defense sucks ass. The Browns dropped 51 on you...you are telling me that Brooks being in there would have stopped that? OK. He may be good, but he is not a miracle worker. Oh...I read last night that you guys have another drug related suspension? Nice. And just to address your rant...do I really brag about the 5 SB's? When have I done that? When have I said that the Steelers can do no wrong? I am the first to point out their faults where I see them. Their Oline is still bad this year, and it is going to cost us at some point. I have never denied that...I actually pointed it out BEFORE the season started. And enough of the broke down team garbage. Pitt DOMINATED a game without their #1 and #2 receivers, their probowl NT, their pro bowl S, their #3 CB, and their starting LT left early in the game. (yes jaime, I understand you lost most of your LB's, I dont need to read the rant again). It comes down to what was identified as a weakness of your team before the season...DEPTH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brew Crew Grrl Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 [quote name='oftt4' post='566360' date='Oct 10 2007, 07:24 AM']How is it fact to assume that Brooks being in the lineup would turn the leagues worst defense into anything other than SHIT? That is exactly what I was talking about. How were you correct? Your defense sucks ass. The Browns dropped 51 on you...you are telling me that Brooks being in there would have stopped that? OK. He may be good, but he is not a miracle worker. [b]I never said Brooks was a miracle worker, but I'll be the first to say that your starting MLB is the equivalent to the QB of the offense. He's the brains of the D. Without an adept MLB your defense as a whole is exposed.[/b] Oh...I read last night that you guys have another drug related suspension? Nice. [b]Over a bunch of shit that happened 9 months ago. GODell has a hard on for big money teams and shits on the ones that aren't. Why do you think Porter merely got a slap on the wrist for jumping Levi with his thugs and robbing him? Why did the Patriots simply get a fine for cheating instead of the suspension of one or more of their coaches? And why the hell would anyone even think of shortening Tank Johnson's suspension after all the thug shit hes pulled... oh wait I know! He's with [i]America's Team[/i] now [/b] And just to address your rant...do I really brag about the 5 SB's? When have I done that? When have I said that the Steelers can do no wrong? I am the first to point out their faults where I see them. Their Oline is still bad this year, and it is going to cost us at some point. I have never denied that...I actually pointed it out BEFORE the season started. [b]Sorry... because of the inbreeding I guess I get you and all of your Steeler bretheren confused.[/b] And enough of the broke down team garbage. Pitt DOMINATED a game without their #1 and #2 receivers, their probowl NT, their pro bowl S, their #3 CB, and their starting LT left early in the game. (yes jaime, I understand you lost most of your LB's, I dont need to read the rant again). [b]I realize you have injured players. I know.... Holmes is on my fantasy team(damn him for getting hurt in warm-ups). You still have Parker and Davenport to keep your offense moving. We've had our #2 RB out for the year since the get go and Rudi taking a beating and then not even playing last week. As for you injuries on defense... they're spread out across your whole D, our LB core (the heart of the D) is completely decimated.[/b] It comes down to what was identified as a weakness of your team before the season...DEPTH. [b]Kinda hard to have depth when you start off the season with multiple injuries[/b][/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 Your D is awful. You D has alway been awful. The injuries this year are not the cause of it. 2006 - 31st 2005 - 28th 2004 - 22nd Your D has been getting progressively worse pretty much since Lewis got there (and no, I am not saying it is entirely his fault). As for missing most of your LB's. That is where, and remember this word, "scheming" comes into play. You should be able to nullify weakness at a single position if your coach is capable. It is actually harder to compensate for losing starters at multiple positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 [quote name='oftt4' post='566524' date='Oct 10 2007, 12:22 PM']Your D is awful. You D has alway been awful. The injuries this year are not the cause of it. 2006 - 31st 2005 - 28th 2004 - 22nd Your D has been getting progressively worse pretty much since Lewis got there (and no, I am not saying it is entirely his fault). [color="#FF0000"]As for missing most of your LB's. That is where, and remember this word, "scheming" comes into play. You should be able to nullify weakness at a single position if your coach is capable.[/color] It is actually harder to compensate for losing starters at multiple positions.[/quote] Oh come on, you arent stupid (though I do wonder sometimes), would you like to PLEASE tell me how you scheme 2 healthy LBs, with 1 of them being on the team for 11 days. Just stop, this is the kind of nonsence I expect out of cavemen .. er steelers fans.. please tell you you dont actually believe your own bs here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='566566' date='Oct 10 2007, 01:07 PM']Oh come on, you arent stupid (though I do wonder sometimes), would you like to PLEASE tell me how you scheme 2 healthy LBs, with 1 of them being on the team for 11 days. Just stop, this is the kind of nonsence I expect out of cavemen .. er steelers fans.. please tell you you dont actually believe your own bs here.[/quote] You guys play a 4-3 right? At least I think you do...I dont really know. If that is the case, then your linemen are more important than your LB's. You would have to play alot of nickle and bring pressure from different areas...zone blitz. I am not an NFL coach, so I really cant give you all of the answers...but there are ways. Anyway, you were only down to 2 LB's in the NE game...and lets face it...you guys were going to get blown up in that game one way or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 [quote name='oftt4' post='566617' date='Oct 10 2007, 02:28 PM']You guys play a 4-3 right? At least I think you do...I dont really know. If that is the case, then your linemen are more important than your LB's. You would have to play alot of nickle and bring pressure from different areas...zone blitz. I am not an NFL coach, so I really cant give you all of the answers...but there are ways. Anyway, you were only down to 2 LB's in the NE game...and lets face it...you guys were going to get blown up in that game one way or the other.[/quote] We play a base 4-3 but we do mix in other formations as well. I dont know that I agree that the linemen are [i]more[/i] important and espessally not in a Marvin Lewis defence, that is predicated on good linebackers. I agree we would have lost to NE, but only because I think they will go undefeted untill they secure homefield, and maybe for the season if Bellicheck wants to try to break Miami's record. (yes this means your going to lose to them too) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 Offt is right about one thing: our defense sucks. It has never been what you could consider "good" since ML came here, and it wasn't good before that, either. I disagree with Offt about the importance of the dlinemen versus LB's, but...our dlinemen pretty much suck anyway, so the point is moot. Geathers is servicable, Peko has developed well, Smith is high motor, 8 million dollars and little else, and the rest of the rotation is average. Not a single impact player amongst them, IMO. Brooks was becoming an impact player, and now he's out, too. Fuck, we better hope our offense rains down on KC with a vengeance. I can't stand the thought of us potentially being 1-4, which will almost doom our season to mediocrity or worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted October 11, 2007 Report Share Posted October 11, 2007 [quote name='Bunghole' post='566653' date='Oct 10 2007, 02:53 PM']Offt is right about one thing: our defense sucks. It has never been what you could consider "good" since ML came here, and it wasn't good before that, either. I disagree with Offt about the importance of the dlinemen versus LB's, but...[b]our dlinemen pretty much suck anyway[/b], so the point is moot. Geathers is servicable, Peko has developed well, Smith is high motor, 8 million dollars and little else, and the rest of the rotation is average. Not a single impact player amongst them, IMO. Brooks was becoming an impact player, and now he's out, too. Fuck, we better hope our offense rains down on KC with a vengeance. I can't stand the thought of us potentially being 1-4, which will almost doom our season to mediocrity or worse.[/quote] Well then, in my humble opinion, that is why your defense sucks. In a 4-3 you rely on the linemen to generate pressure...that is why there are 4 of them. The LB's generally drop into coverage, or stuff gaps, and stop everything that gets to the 2nd level. If your linemen suck, then there is no pressure on the QB...which puts too much pressure on the pass coverage (28th in yardage). Furthermore...if your linemen suck, then too many run plays get to the second level...and too much pressure is put on your hurting LB's to stop the play. (29th in yardage) In a 4-3 it ALL starts with the line. Great LB's make a 4-3 defense stellar...but they need a line. An example...Chicago plays a great 4-3 right? Sure they do. Urlacher, Briggs, and Hillenmeyer are good to great LB's right? Sure they are. But what most people fail to realize is that Ogunleye (pro bowler), Harris (pro bowler), etc are just as...if not more important that the LB's. Give the Bears a below average line...and you dont hear much about Urlacher and Briggs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankie martin Posted October 13, 2007 Report Share Posted October 13, 2007 [quote name='oftt4' post='566958' date='Oct 11 2007, 07:43 AM']Well then, in my humble opinion, that is why your defense sucks. In a 4-3 you rely on the linemen to generate pressure...that is why there are 4 of them. The LB's generally drop into coverage, or stuff gaps, and stop everything that gets to the 2nd level. If your linemen suck, then there is no pressure on the QB...which puts too much pressure on the pass coverage (28th in yardage). Furthermore...if your linemen suck, then too many run plays get to the second level...and too much pressure is put on your hurting LB's to stop the play. (29th in yardage) In a 4-3 it ALL starts with the line. Great LB's make a 4-3 defense stellar...but they need a line. An example...Chicago plays a great 4-3 right? Sure they do. Urlacher, Briggs, and Hillenmeyer are good to great LB's right? Sure they are. But what most people fail to realize is that Ogunleye (pro bowler), Harris (pro bowler), etc are just as...if not more important that the LB's. Give the Bears a below average line...and you dont hear much about Urlacher and Briggs.[/quote] D-line is also somewhat important with a 3-4 as well. Not as important as with a 4-3 of course. But especially looking at nose tackle, Casey eats up 2-3 lineman for every play. This allows our LBs to make plays on the ball. Without a decent nose tackle, a 3-4 D isn't nearly as effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumble In the Jungle Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 [quote name='frankie martin' post='567990' date='Oct 13 2007, 02:13 PM']D-line is also somewhat important with a 3-4 as well. Not as important as with a 4-3 of course. But especially looking at nose tackle, Casey eats up 2-3 lineman for every play. This allows our LBs to make plays on the ball. Without a decent nose tackle, a 3-4 D isn't nearly as effective.[/quote] couldn't agree more. a good nose tackle will free up the LB's and thats a key position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.