This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I thought the Steelers played pretty well this week.
I think it is clear that week in, week out, the best D in the NFL is the Colts.
Yes. Indy and NE do not have the best two defenses. Indy might have one of the two best, but New England does not.
Hopefully no one argues this one
You do realize that NE's defense got torched pretty good by offenses led by Kyle Boller and A.J. Feely, right?
Also, Indy was missing their best WR and their two starting tackles on offense, so that had a lot to do with Indy's struggles on offense in that game. Keep in mind that KC held the Colts to 13 points two weeks later. Pittsburgh's defense is better than New England's. Give the Steelers defense the advantage of an offense that puts up 40 a game, and they would do even better than NE's defense has. Indy and Tennessee (when they have Haynesworth) are also better.
Oh, please. I guess the '85 Bears weren't a great defense, then, because they gave up 38 to the Dolphins, right?
Enough with the 'chip on the shoulder'. It jumped the shark about 3 months ago. Find some new schtick, please. The Steelers are clearly overrated on defense or they would've at least held the Pats down to 20-24. I guess when you aren't playing a winless team in a monsoon it's a little harder to hold a team down.
I apologize for having mistook you for anything other than a troll.A week ago I thought the Steelers would win the game, but it became very apparent leading into this game that the Patriots had the swagger and mean streak that had been missing for a couple of weeks. Had it not been for the "guarantee", things might have been different.
Which is exactly why the Pats defense is better, as noted in my original post.Thank you.Got any more you want to debunk?
I noticed you ignore this post of mine (which demonstrates why it is STUPID to judge a defense off of one bad game):
The Steelers on the road this season have been a good defense at best. Does every NFL season have to have a "great" defense, or multiple great defenses? Can't there only be some very good defenses this season? That is how it looks to me with the Colts having the best of the very good defenses.
Could you expound on that theory a little, please? I find people like you very interesting, and I'm not joking or being sarcastic in any way. I'd be interested in learning about how you pick up on these "mean streaks" during the week, and how would things have gone differently absent that knuckleheaded guarantee.
I agree. And to say it again, but in a slightly different way, it is STUPID to say the Steelers aren't a top defense because of their performance today. Put every other defense in the NFL on the field today, take away their starting safeties, and see how they do against an offense playing like the Patriots offense is. Most would have got shredded for the entire game, and for a lot more points, including NE's own defense.
You do realize that NE's defense got torched pretty good by offenses led by Kyle Boller and A.J. Feely, right?
You're really not making yourself look very good so far.
Those were two bad games, Merlin. Besides, there is no shame in Pitt's defense getting lit up by Tom Brady and the Patriots, as opposed to NE's by Boller and Feely. If you can't see that, then you are not very bright. And NE's run defense has been suspect for most of the season. But keep ignoring my point about the '85 Bears. Until you keep ignoring that question, I won't take anything you say seriously.You do realize that NE's defense got torched pretty good by offenses led by Kyle Boller and A.J. Feely, right?You're really not making yourself look very good so far.
I could be wrong but I think what he is saying is that guarantee fired up the Patriots in practice this week. When a team has a great week of practice it more often then not carries over to the game. I also thought the Steelers had a good chance to win the game, but when Smith made those comments I thought the chances were very slim. I think Smith's biggest f'up was saying Cincy 3 WR are better than the Patriots receivers. You don't even go there unless you are a cocky, ignorate, inexperienced, young man. The Steelers vets didn't say it but I'm sure they were furious with him.
You are making zero sense. Let me help you out. You said: "That great Pittsburgh defense just gave up 34 points. FYI - that is not a great defense."The obvious implication is that a great defense should not allow that many points. The '85 Bears allowed 38 in a game to the Dolphins. Using your line of thinking, that means the '85 Bears were not a great defense. Get it?Lastly, there is a massive difference in allowing 34 points to an offense that might go down as the best ever, as opposed to struggling against offenses led by Kyle Boller and A.J. Feely. You really don't see that?
I'd be interested in finding out how he knew this. The Pats were much the better team, going in as a double digit point favorite at home, and you think that guarantee is what produced a 34-13 beating? From a team who has won 21 straight over 2 seasons, several superbowls, and is 13 and 0 this year? But it was that guarantee that got them 34 points when they've only scored less than that in a couple games this year? No offense, but I really don't think you guys know what you're talking about.
I agree. They are a top 10 defense, but not a top 3 defense. No one has said that their defense isn't good. I have said they struggle against the run (which is true, as they have been middle of the pack all year in yards allowed per rush, and have really struggled recently), and that they benefit from the Patriots offense being so good (which means they are almost always going to be playing from ahead).
That's exactly what I'm saying.I'm not saying the guarantee made the difference, because the Patriots probably would have gotten up for a game vs. the Steelers anyway, but I do think that if the Pats showed up with the same (lack of) energy they had vs. the Eagles and Ravens, the Steelers probably would have won. The guarantee substantially diminished the chances that the Patriots would show up with the same lack of energy.I do think that motivation is important in football, although less important in the NFL than in college (probably because NFL players are, well, professionals and tend to be more consistent than college players). There are many things about the Patriots dynasty that amaze me; one of them is their ability to play so consistently well. For whatever reason, they seemed to be lolligagging a bit and they seemed "back" in the interviews I saw the last week.As for the Pats D vs. Steelers D, with my own two eyes the Pats D has not looked very good, especially given how much they are assisted by the big leads the offense gives them. The Pats D is clearly good, but not scary in the way the Colts and Steelers are (this year).
The implication clearly is that Pittsburgh padded stats against chumps in the rain, while NE was playing San Diego, Indy, and Dallas. When faced with a quality offense Pittsburgh was exposed as not that great. I didn't say they were horrible, just clearly not elite, so don't be so sensitive about it. I'm pretty sure I can find 2 games where Pittsburgh gave up points, too.
The Pats D is much like the Rams D when they one the Superbowl. Decent, but their shortcomings are masked because teams are always playing from behind. Take a closer look at their rush defense, before last game they were allowing a meaty 4.1 ypr. Now, they havent surrendered many yards, primarily because teams have had to abandon the run against them so often.
You do realize that the Steelers held the Browns to 163 total yards (around 190 LESS than their average this season) a month ago, right? And 221 in week 1? In fact, the Browns 6th ranked offense has been held to less than 300 total yards only twice this season: the two games against Pittsburgh.And if you are going to say the Steelers played chumps, do I really have to mention the sorry division the Patriots play in?
Well, they were also missing their best player on D.
How does the Steelers D look even remotely scary?? Unless maybe if you're San Fran or Miami.....wait, sorry, I just checked and they actually gave up 16 to San Fran, which would be the third best game of the season for the NFL's worst offense. That's what you get working from memory. Ok, how about the Jets........
Yeah, because SF scoring a garbage TD at the end of a blowout to give them 16 points instead of 9 must mean they are overrated.
I think maybe you should be taking that closer look. How many players do they typically commit to stopping the run, vs dropping into coverage? I think Baltimore was running all over us in the first 3 quarters, so why don't you pull me up stats for the 4th quarter and explain to me what happened when the game was on the line? How many yards did powerhouse Dallas run for when they played NE?I'll admit it's a little embarrassing to watch Miami drive down the field late in the game, but it also eats 6-7 more minutes off the clock when they need 28+. It's about winning, not stat padding. Hey --- how about Westbrook, while we're talking -- I'm guessing 52 yards on 17 carries isn't such a great game for him against a soft NE run D.....I guess it's only Westbrook....and Barber.....and Tomlinson......
Now, check out GB defensive #'s vs NE, add in schedule, and let me know how that cooks out.I think some of you guys in this thread are far more defensive than Pittsburgh ever will be this season.
What's your point with this thread, anyway? Everyone acknowledges the Pats have probably the best offense ever. Everyone agrees they are by far the best team this year, and one of the best teams ever. Why are you going out of your way to try to disparage other teams in the league? Shouldn't you be celebrating your great victory today? You seem bent on rubbing it into all our faces just how awesome your team is and how shabby all of our teams are.
I know you are new here, so let me spell it out for you: I am not a Steelers fan. But if you are going to keep spouting off uninformed nonsense, then you are going to be called out on it. Also, nice job avoiding my point about how Pittsburgh shut down Cleveland's great offense down TWICE, just like you avoided the '85 Bears question for a while (and never really answered). Kudos!!!
I'm not sure debunking Pittsburgh as the #1 D is "disparaging" them, or calling them out as "shabby". Like I said earlier, you guys are getting a little emotional and defensive about this. The fact is, the Pats simply have the better D. There's no shame in admitting it. I eagerly look forward to a rematch of the class of the NFL in the AFC championship --- Pats + Indy.
I've seen several posts talking about the Pats D as "sieve like" After Feeley and Boller had career days against them, there was a resounding collection here that were saying that the Pats D is poor. This Pats D looks to me to be similar to some of the Pats D's from years past, where they were among the better scoring defenses, but often softer against yardage rankings. Top 5 scoring D looks pretty strong. The most points given up this year by the D is 28, and they've allowed over 20 only 5 times. This is a good unit that is hard to score on, even if you can move the ball between the 20s.
This looks a little more like 8itching and spamming than football discussion to me. Was this kind of post par for the good old days here?
The 2000 Ravens gave up 36 points in a home game against Jacksonville. The 1985 Bears gave up 38 points to Miami.
