AFCCG: Steelers at Patriots Discussion (2 Viewers)

[Bayhawks]

He definitely had a slow start, but from there he went on to complete 11 or 12 passes in a row. That throw to Coates was on target and should have been a big gain early on. He had another great TD pass that was just flat out dropped by Hamilton, plus the TD pass where Hamilton just inexplicably ran out of bounds in the end zone before catching the ball. He wasn't great, but he wasn't awful by any stretch IMO.

It was 11 passes, but they were for a total of like 75 yards; also a number of those 75 yards were YAC.  It's not like he was fitting balls into tight windows down the field.  He was throwing screens/check-downs to Williams who ran for 10 yards, he was throwing slants to Rodgers (who at least once caught a pass that was low & behind him & ran for 10+ more yards).  I get that a completion is a completion, but he wasn't able to make any big, clutch throws.  And his slow start allowed the Pats to build a lead.  The Pitt D held NE to a FG on the first drive, then forced a 3-and-out.  Ben threw the 2 Pitt possessions away (again, the coaching/play-calling didn't help).  You can't give possessions away against NE (or any good team).  He couldn't get them into the endzone when it mattered (for the 2nd week in a row). 

I thought he played poorly, but even if you want to say he was average; average still isn't good enough in this big a game, especially when one of your other stars goes out. 

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I thought he played poorly, but even if you want to say he was average; average still isn't good enough in this big a game, especially when one of your other stars goes out. 

That we can agree on -- no one on the team really played well enough to win given what they were up against.

 

[Steeler]

The Bell injury didn't have any effect on the outcome of the game.  He is undoubtedly a great player, but he doesn't play D.

 

[Bayhawks]

The Bell injury didn't have any effect on the outcome of the game.  He is undoubtedly a great player, but he doesn't play D.

Right, I prefaced my post with the Pats dominated the game, and I ended it with NE deserved to win. 

However, NE didn't "have Bell's number."  4 carries isn't enough to make that claim, especially when those carries were for 4.5 YPC.

 

[fred_1_15301]

If I'm a Steelers fan today, I am irate at the coaching staff and the secondary.  Sticking with that soft zone that Brady has historically picked apart was asinine.  After Edelman abused Timmons in the regular season game, you would have thought Timmons would have told his coaching staff off when asked to do the same again.  But as if that wasn't bad enough, the Steelers gave up two touchdowns to receivers standing all alone in the endzone.  They didn't even have to run away from anyone in coverage.  The flea flicker was just the cherry on top when the safety bit even though the front 7 were handling the run game fine up to that point.

That might have been the worst pass defense the Pats have faced all season.

Well stated

 

[Cookiemonster]

I think Pitt would have lost to any of the other 3 teams this weekend.  A very good passing attack will almost always sink this underachieving defense.

Ben played alright.  Not great, but he didn't cost them the game.  My only complaint with Ben was being greedy on too many plays where a shorter, safer option would have been more reasonable.  Going for the home run and making the game a track meet is a bad strategy vs Brady and the Pats D. If their D wants to bend and not break, make them bend and see if you can squeeze in a couple TDs between FGs.  Sustaining long, boring drives and letting the cold sink into Tom's 39 year old body on the sideline seems to make much more sense to me.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

I don't think anyone has done this in about 3 years now. Unless you're in those Pat homer threads too much that you buy into their "Brady is responsible for their success" garbage.

Pretty much wrong all around SP, there are many posts in this very thread about NEs D not being good, heck there is already one in the SB thread. I see in the other thread you have quickly moved to the Pitt wasn't a very good team schtick and we are all wondering what nonsense you will come up with should NE beat atl in the SB.

Yep BB is a great coach and he deserves a tremendous amount of credit for NEs success, as does Brady. Hell even the Pitt radio guys are freely admitting what most knowledgeable football people/fans know. Tom Brady is a great player. Denial aint a river in Egypt my friend, give it a rest.

 

[pats3in4]

Agreed, it's easy to say Belichick out-coached the Steelers, but that didn't take much.  Rushing 3, and dropping 9 into coverage, then seeing those 9 getting destroyed should have prompted some kind of change in their game-plan, but they stuck with what wasn't working, so I'd be hard-pressed to think of a coach who couldn't have out-coached the Steelers yesterday.

ETA-this is not a slam of BB; he's a great coach, but he didn't need to be yesterday, IMO.

To BB's and his staff's credit, the Steelers tried at times to disguise the blitz or bring it up the gut like Houston did, but the Pats OL did an outstanding job every time.  And I do understand that the secondary is the least talented part of the D so perhaps the Steelers thought the zone would prevent the least damage.  Yet that doesn't explain Hogan all by himself in the endzone.  It doesn't explain Edelman all by himself in the front of the endzone with Steelers pointing fingers at each other on who should have had him.  That Steelers D just wasn't ready to play.

Tomlin has to own that.

 

[Bossman]

While the Pats dominated the game, these comments are well off the mark, IMO.

Bell had 4 carries before he got hurt for 18 yards.  4.5 YPC is not the "D having his number." (I know, small sample size, but it's also too small a sample size to claim "NE had Bells number").

It absolutely mattered that Bell got hurt.  NE's D played great, and Bell playing the whole game may not have changed the outcome, but 4 carries in 1/2 a quarter for 18 yards is a damn good start for a RB.  Williams is a fine player, but he isn't Bell.  If Bell had continued to get yardage (and Haley had pulled his head out of his ### and realized 3rd and 1 is a good time to go with Bell rather than throwing a long pass to Sammie freakin' Coates), the Pats safeties might have been unable to keep playing the deep shell, thus opening up the pass game.

I want to reiterate, these aren't excuses.  I'm not even a Pitt fan.  NE deserved to win, they played a great game on offense and defense, and they thoroughly out-coached the Steelers as well.  I just disagree with the ideas that NE "had Bell's number" based on 4 plays where he averaged 4.5 YPC, and that his presence couldn't have changed the way the game played out.

I watched as the Pats lined up 8 guys to stop the run and had 3 guys in the hole Bell was trying to run thru.

No one runs on NE as of late (last 10 games?).

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017012201/2016/POST20/steelers@patriots#contentId=0ap3000000777969

 

[Boston]

I think playing Clowney and Mercilus the prior week helped the Pats...those two were a handful and were a nice wakeup call for the O line...I feel like I didn't hear Dupree's name all game long...

 

[Bayhawks]

I watched as the Pats lined up 8 guys to stop the run and had 3 guys in the hole Bell was trying to run thru.

No one runs on NE as of late (last 10 games?).

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017012201/2016/POST20/steelers@patriots#contentId=0ap3000000777969

I watched as Bell had 4 rushes: for 6 yards, 6 yards, 3 yards, & 3 yards, before he got hurt. 

Bell has run on everybody the last 9 games, before he got hurt.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BellLe00/gamelog/2016/

Bell was rushing for 4.5 YPC with 8 guys trying to stop the run & 3 guys in the hole he was trying to run thu.  I can't say he would have continued to do so, but you can't so he wouldn't have either (at least, neither of us can state that with any accuracy).

Good luck to your Pats in the SB.

 

[Bossman]

I watched as Bell had 4 rushes: for 6 yards, 6 yards, 3 yards, & 3 yards, before he got hurt. 

Bell has run on everybody the last 9 games, before he got hurt.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BellLe00/gamelog/2016/

Bell was rushing for 4.5 YPC with 8 guys trying to stop the run & 3 guys in the hole he was trying to run thu.  I can't say he would have continued to do so, but you can't so he wouldn't have either (at least, neither of us can state that with any accuracy).

Good luck to your Pats in the SB.

Guess his 5th carry for no gain didn't count?

5 carries for 18 yards = 3.6 ypc  ....which is well below his avg I would assume. 

 

[Anarchy99]

Unless Bell went in and could make a major impact on defense, his injury had very little impact on the outcome of the game. Given the Steelers game plan on defense (or lack thereof), they were going to get lit up . . . Bell or no Bell.

 

[Bayhawks]

Guess his 5th carry for no gain didn't count?

5 carries for 18 yards = 3.6 ypc  ....which is well below his avg I would assume. 

No, as I posted before, I didn't count the carry he got hurt on, nor did I count the 1 carry after he got hurt where he tried to play.

if you want to claim that Bell sustaining an injury was in some way due to NEs run defense, go for it.

 

[Godsbrother]

Unless Bell went in and could make a major impact on defense, his injury had very little impact on the outcome of the game. Given the Steelers game plan on defense (or lack thereof), they were going to get lit up . . . Bell or no Bell.

Having Bell may have helped the Steelers offense sustain a drive or two that might have kept Brady on the sideline a bit more which theoretically could have helped the defense.  But those are a whole lot of maybe's and could-haves and it was extremely unlikely to result in a Steelers win.   Brady was playing out of his mind yesterday and the Steelers defense had no answers -- they were going to lose even with Bell.

 

[fred_1_15301]

No, as I posted before, I didn't count the carry he got hurt on, nor did I count the 1 carry after he got hurt where he tried to play.

if you want to claim that Bell sustaining an injury was in some way due to NEs run defense, go for it.

Apparently he was actually hurt going into the game.  

 

[Bad_Mo]

No, as I posted before, I didn't count the carry he got hurt on, nor did I count the 1 carry after he got hurt where he tried to play.

if you want to claim that Bell sustaining an injury was in some way due to NEs run defense, go for it.

So what is the reason he got hurt?  Nothing to do with NE's defense?

Just bad luck...?

And, not counting all of his carries seems to me that you are cherry picking.  Count them all, bro.

 

[fred_1_15301]

So what is the reason he got hurt?  Nothing to do with NE's defense?

Just bad luck...?

And, not counting all of his carries seems to me that you are cherry picking.  Count them all, bro.

See my post above.  He admits that the groin injury occurred before the game. 

 

[Bayhawks]

So what is the reason he got hurt?  Nothing to do with NE's defense?

Just bad luck...?

And, not counting all of his carries seems to me that you are cherry picking.  Count them all, bro.

He evidently had an injury that he tweaked, aggravated, worsened (however you want to word it) on that 5th carry. The NE defense had nothing to do with the injury.  When watching that play, I said he looked like he went down funny, without anyone really hitting him until after he started to fall.  Then he limped off, tried to come back for one play, couldn't do anything (again, b/c of the injury, not NEs defense).  

Hogan came into the game with a thigh injury.  If on his 1st TD, he just falls down when he was wide open (b/c he aggravated the thigh), would it be fair to say Pitt held him in check?  No, b/c the injury stopped him, not Pitt.  Sames true with Bell.  Before he aggravated the groin, he was getting 4.5 YPC; NE wasn't holding him in check; the injury did, bro.

Again, NE won convincingly, and they dominated the game.  If Bell hadn't been hurt, the game might have gone a little differently, but Brady wasn't being stopped.  Perhaps Pitt could have made it closer, but they weren't stopping NEs offense.

Again, good luck to your team in the SB.

 

[ShamrockPride]

Pretty much wrong all around SP, there are many posts in this very thread about NEs D not being good, heck there is already one in the SB thread. I see in the other thread you have quickly moved to the Pitt wasn't a very good team schtick and we are all wondering what nonsense you will come up with should NE beat atl in the SB.

Never said Pitt was a great team. Only thing I said about Pitt was IF they were healthy, amd they were on on Sunday given their extreme inconsistency, is that they could beat NE. That went out the window on about the second or third drive. Pitt with Bell isn't a good team. They have one gamechanging offensive threat without him. Easy for NE to shut down at that point.

 

[Run It Up]

NE was a missed kick away from being in the superbowl last year, with possibly the most injured team to make it to a conference championship game.

A handful of injuries is nothing.

 

[Niles Standish]

While the Pats dominated the game, these comments are well off the mark, IMO.

Bell had 4 carries before he got hurt for 18 yards.  4.5 YPC is not the "D having his number." (I know, small sample size, but it's also too small a sample size to claim "NE had Bells number").

It absolutely mattered that Bell got hurt.  NE's D played great, and Bell playing the whole game may not have changed the outcome, but 4 carries in 1/2 a quarter for 18 yards is a damn good start for a RB.  Williams is a fine player, but he isn't Bell.  If Bell had continued to get yardage (and Haley had pulled his head out of his ### and realized 3rd and 1 is a good time to go with Bell rather than throwing a long pass to Sammie freakin' Coates), the Pats safeties might have been unable to keep playing the deep shell, thus opening up the pass game.

I want to reiterate, these aren't excuses.  I'm not even a Pitt fan.  NE deserved to win, they played a great game on offense and defense, and they thoroughly out-coached the Steelers as well.  I just disagree with the ideas that NE "had Bell's number" based on 4 plays where he averaged 4.5 YPC, and that his presence couldn't have changed the way the game played out.

Not saying he wouldn't have had a big game.  But he was injured with ~2 minutes in the 1st quarter.  Not halfway through.  There was 2:36 on the clock.  Odds are since it was the first and Pitt wasn't running the hurry up the next play would have happened with under 2 minutes had Bell not been hurt.  It did in reality of course.  18 yards in the first 10 minutes of the game on 5 carries is on pace for around 25 for 90.  Again way too early to tell but your post is a bit misleading as to what actually happened.  Considering he basically admitted to having the groin injury prior in the week that easily could have been a factor.  But just trying to keep everything accurate.

The interesting question is if the Steelers will be penalized for circumventing the injury report like Seattle was.  I think they won't because as we all know the NFL is pretty erratic in punishment.  And taking a 2nd from Seattle (I understand it was not the first circumstance) will probably translate into a $100,000 slap on the wrist fine for Pitt.

 

[Bayhawks]

Not saying he wouldn't have had a big game.  But he was injured with ~2 minutes in the 1st quarter.  Not halfway through.  There was 2:36 on the clock.  Odds are since it was the first and Pitt wasn't running the hurry up the next play would have happened with under 2 minutes had Bell not been hurt.  It did in reality of course.  18 yards in the first 10 minutes of the game on 5 carries is on pace for around 25 for 90.  Again way too early to tell but your post is a bit misleading as to what actually happened.  Considering he basically admitted to having the groin injury prior in the week that easily could have been a factor.  But just trying to keep everything accurate.

You are correct about the time in the 1st quarter, my mistake.  That being said the point of my post was not to suggest that Bell going to have a record day, it was to refute the point that, based on 4 carries, NE "had Bell's number."  That just wasn't the case.  Over his 4 healthy carries, he was putting up good RB numbers.  That is too small a sample size to say he was playing great, but it is also too small a sample size to claim NE was shutting him down.

 

[Anarchy99]

You are correct about the time in the 1st quarter, my mistake.  That being said the point of my post was not to suggest that Bell going to have a record day, it was to refute the point that, based on 4 carries, NE "had Bell's number."  That just wasn't the case.  Over his 4 healthy carries, he was putting up good RB numbers.  That is too small a sample size to say he was playing great, but it is also too small a sample size to claim NE was shutting him down.

Maybe getting him 254 touches over the previous 8 games was a bit extreme? That's 32 touches a game on average.

 

[Bossman]

Guess his 5th carry for no gain didn't count?

5 carries for 18 yards = 3.6 ypc  ....which is well below his avg I would assume. 

No, as I posted before, I didn't count the carry he got hurt on, nor did I count the 1 carry after he got hurt where he tried to play.

if you want to claim that Bell sustaining an injury was in some way due to NEs run defense, go for it.

I never said the NE defense was responsible for Bells injury.

What I said was NE defense had his number. He was stopped for no gain as three Patriots met him in the hole on that run.

Are you claiming that Bell would have ran for 4.5 yards on that play had he not been injured? I think you should watch that play again. Earl Campbell in his prime wasn't gaining a yard on that play.

NFL Play by Play ... it's about the 6th "watch highlight" down  http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017012201/2016/POST20/steelers@patriots#menu=gameinfo|contentId%3A0ap3000000777969&tab=analyze&analyze=playbyplay

 

[Steeler]

Heard another stat today that Brady made one "tight window" throw on his 42 attempts.  The average for a typical game is about 20% of the throws - Steelers logged 2.4%.  Lame.

 

[Steeler]

I don't get the discussion about whether or not the "Pats had Bell's number" and his YPC - who cares at this point?  Everyone says Bell wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game so it seems pointless to argue about those things now  

 

[Godsbrother]

I don't get the discussion about whether or not the "Pats had Bell's number" and his YPC - who cares at this point?  Everyone says Bell wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game so it seems pointless to argue about those things now  

Agreed.  The truth is the sample size is too small to make any conclusions but who cares?  The Pats won the game and are going to the Super Bowl.  Nothing else matters...

 

[Bayhawks]

I never said the NE defense was responsible for Bells injury.

What I said was NE defense had his number. He was stopped for no gain as three Patriots met him in the hole on that run.

Are you claiming that Bell would have ran for 4.5 yards on that play had he not been injured? I think you should watch that play again. Earl Campbell in his prime wasn't gaining a yard on that play.

NFL Play by Play ... it's about the 6th "watch highlight" down  http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017012201/2016/POST20/steelers@patriots#menu=gameinfo|contentId%3A0ap3000000777969&tab=analyze&analyze=playbyplay

So, one l play = "having his number?" I guess Pitt had Brady's number too then, huh?  Because on NEs 2nd drive, he got swamped & had to take a big sack.  Pitt didn't have Brady's number b/c they stopped him on 1 play, and NE didn't have Bells number b/c they stopped him on 1 play where he aggravated a groin injury.

Again, NE thoroughly beat Pitt; if you need to make up the narrative that they shut Bell down, you're welcome to do so.

 

[Bayhawks]

Maybe getting him 254 touches over the previous 8 games was a bit extreme? That's 32 touches a game on average.

No maybe about it.  Not sure what that has to do with the mistaken belief that NE "had Bells number" based on 4 carries.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Maybe getting him 254 touches over the previous 8 games was a bit extreme? That's 32 touches a game on average.

It really is crazy that they didn't use Deangelo more.  The Steelers style was to make Bell the workhorse and not take him out under pretty much any circumstance (minus a meaningless game against the Browns).  But how can argue with results?  It got them all the way to the AFC championship game.  

 

[fred_1_15301]

I don't get the discussion about whether or not the "Pats had Bell's number" and his YPC - who cares at this point?  Everyone says Bell wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game so it seems pointless to argue about those things now  

Would he have changed the outcome of the game?  Probably not.  Is there a chance that he could have.  Absolutely.  If the Steelers score that TD before halftime rather than the FG, it potentially changes the whole complexion of the game.  But deep in my heart, I just don't think it would have mattered.  This team cannot beat the Patriots.  

 

[Bossman]

It's a shame the Steelers don't have a guy like Blount to get those tough yards on 3rd and 1 ... or goal line.