DEN or PIT will win because... (1 Viewer)

[P Boy]

Here's an article from todays Denver Post which I think is relevant. I believe this supports Pony boy's assertations

I guess the Broncos don't read Football Outsiders...

 

[Broncoholic]

With the two highest blitzing teams in the NFL matching up. It could come down to handling the Blitz.Pitt has run more Blitzes than any other team (317) Denver is 2nd with 261 BlitzesDenver has been the most effective team in the NFL against the Blitzwith 174 Blitzes called against, and resulting in 10 Sacks and 0 interceptionsWhile Pitt has been Blitzed against 141 times resulting 11 sacs and 4 interceptions.

 

[jurb26]

Pitt will win because they will be able to establish the run and use PA pass to hit big plays in the game in times of need. Den will win because they will be able to pick up the blitz and hit big passes down the field vs an undiciplined and overmatched Pitt secondary EARLY in the game.I think these are the 2 major keys to the game for each to win. When you take 2 evenly matched teams, big plays make all the difference. This game will hold true to that. I don't see eithe rmaking a lot of mistakes or turning the ball over or that would be a key as well.

 

[Steelers4Life]

With the two highest blitzing teams in the NFL matching up. It could come down to handling the Blitz.

Pitt has run more Blitzes than any other team (317) Denver is 2nd with 261 Blitzes

Denver has been the most effective team in the NFL against the Blitz

with 174 Blitzes called against, and resulting in 10 Sacks and 0 interceptions

While Pitt has been Blitzed against 141 times resulting 11 sacs and 4 interceptions.

I wonder how many of those were Maddox and Batch. Maddox and Batch combined for 5 INTs in 4 games.

Roethlisberger threw 9 INTs in 12 games, with 5 of them coming in 2 games against Indy and Cincy.

Roethlisberger is very good at both escaping the blitz and making defenses pay for it.

Again, like just about everything else, a very even matchup.

 

[gadkins]

After watching the Denver game last week I noticed that they play everyone at the line of scrimmage alot. I must admit I haven't watched many of their games this year. However I will say this. If they do that to Pitt and Willie Parker get passed the first wave of defenders it will be a TD because no one is going to catch him.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

I love the pre-game discussion and debate on this board. If anyone predicted the Patriots 5 turnovers against Denver last week they are a genius. If anyone predicted the Steelers would lose the turnover batte (-2) and still beat Indy in the dome, they are a genius. As a Steelers fan that has lived through many AFC Championship letdowns I can confirm that all the pre-game stats and numbers can be thrown out the window once the game starts. Some players will rise to the occasion, others will not. As a fan it's pretty difficult to determine which players will. Big plays and turnovers decide these games, especially when teams are as evenly matched as these two appear to be.

 

[Steelers4Life]

I love the pre-game discussion and debate on this board. If anyone predicted the Patriots 5 turnovers against Denver last week they are a genius. If anyone predicted the Steelers would lose the turnover batte (-2) and still beat Indy in the dome, they are a genius. As a Steelers fan that has lived through many AFC Championship letdowns I can confirm that all the pre-game stats and numbers can be thrown out the window once the game starts. Some players will rise to the occasion, others will not. As a fan it's pretty difficult to determine which players will. Big plays and turnovers decide these games, especially when teams are as evenly matched as these two appear to be.

But SOMETHING has to be debated this week, right?

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

I love the pre-game discussion and debate on this board.  If anyone predicted the Patriots 5 turnovers against Denver last week they are a genius.  If anyone predicted the Steelers would lose the turnover batte (-2) and still beat Indy in the dome, they are a genius.  As a Steelers fan that has lived through many AFC Championship letdowns I can confirm that all the pre-game stats and numbers can be thrown out the window once the game starts.  Some players will rise to the occasion, others will not.  As a fan it's pretty difficult to determine which players will.  Big plays and turnovers decide these games, especially when teams are as evenly matched as these two appear to be.

But SOMETHING has to be debated this week, right?

Absolutely and I love it! But I guess I mean that there are no right or wrong opinions based on statistics. As we saw last weekend, on any given day even Tom Brady and Peyton Manning can lay an egg.

 

[The Duff Man]

On a neutral field with equal rest I think Pit wins easily.

this is an even fair analysis.

ok maybe that part was slanted to the steelers, but the gist of it is right on. If both teams play the way they did this weekend, the steelers win. The analysis lays out the good reasons that either team could win. i dont think the steelers win "easily" on a neutral field with equal rest, but i think they win for sure.

Is this related to the "NE has never lost a playoff game with Brady as QB"? How do you expect both teams to play exactly the way they did this weekend? The matchups of strengths/weaknesses is different with different teams, turnovers are different, weather can dictate different circumstances, etc. etc. etc. A lot of NE fans & a huge predominance of the "experts" in the media thought NE would win easily in DEN.

You don't think how well a team has played the week before counts? I posted numerous times on here that I thought the Pats would LOSE in Denver because they were coming off a game against Jax where they did not play well. Others wanted to ignore this fact because they were the Pats and somehow they would elevate their game. Not surprisingly, they went into Denver and played the same as the week before. This time the bounces didn't go their way and they weren't at home, so they lost. Denver did not play particularly well either, but the Pats made more mistakes and couldn't overcome the home field advantage (as predicted).

If Denver plays as poorly this week as last week they WILL lose because I don't expect Pitt to make the same mistakes NE did.

I would edit my original statement to say that if played on a neutral field with equal rest I would easily pick Pitt to win (which I acknowledge is much different than saying Pitt would easily win). As it is I still pick Denver to win an ugly one.

 

[P Boy]

As it is I still pick Denver to win an ugly one.

Such is the beauty of football that an ugly game can be extraordinarily entertaining.

 

[The Duff Man]

This seems to be the standard line this week. "If Denver plays like they did against the Pats, they'll lose. Well they didn't lose to NE playing like that, did they? Are you seriously suggesting that if the Bronco defense gets a couple of picks, forces and recovers a couple of fumbles and sets the offense up deep in Steeler territory the Steelers will win?



Denver 27-13

"If Denver plays like they did against the Pats, they'll lose."The presumption in this statement is that Pitt won't play as poorly as NE did so Denver won't be getting those turnovers to help them overcome their poor play.

 

[The Duff Man]

As it is I still pick Denver to win an ugly one.

Such is the beauty of football that an ugly game can be extraordinarily entertaining.

Often moreso!

 

[Ghost Rider]

Denver played poorly last week? Beating New England by 14 points is possible when you play poorly? Wow, I can only imagine what Denver would have done had they not played poorly.As for the mistakes NE made, Denver forced almost of those mistakes (except for Troy Brown's fumble)! Instead of saying NE beat themselves, why not give the Broncos credit for forcing those mistakes and then taking advantage of them? That is what great teams do. It is what New England has done for years.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Denver played poorly last week? Beating New England by 14 points is possible when you play poorly? Wow, I can only imagine what Denver would have done had they not played poorly.

As for the mistakes NE made, Denver forced almost of those mistakes (except for Troy Brown's fumble)! Instead of saying NE beat themselves, why not give the Broncos credit for forcing those mistakes and then taking advantage of them? That is what great teams do. It is what New England has done for years.

I will not opine on whether or not Denver played poorly. I will say this, prior to the home game, had I known Denver was going to recieve two favorable calls from the officials and get 5 turnovers I would have predicted a win by 24 points or more. Five turnovers and two calls leading to possession at the opponents one yard line is the recipe for a 52 to 7 blowout. I am still trying to resolve the matter in my mind.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I will not opine on whether or not Denver played poorly. I will say this, prior to the home game, had I known Denver was going to recieve two favorable calls from the officials and get 5 turnovers I would have predicted a win by 24 points or more. Five turnovers and two calls leading to possession at the opponents one yard line is the recipe for a 52 to 7 blowout. I am still trying to resolve the matter in my mind.

Would you say the Patriots played poorly in Super Bowl 36? They were dominated in total yards by the Rams, but forced three turnovers and also had a questionable game-changing touchdown (Law's INt return featured a blow to Warner's head by the pass rusher). Given that, the Patriots should have won by 21 points, not 3, right?

 

[P Boy]

Would you say the Patriots played poorly in Super Bowl 36? They were dominated in total yards by the Rams, but forced three turnovers and also had a questionable game-changing touchdown (Law's INt return featured a blow to Warner's head by the pass rusher). Given that, the Patriots should have won by 21 points, not 3, right?

Poor example. STL was clearly a better team, but Martz's absolute refusal to run Faulk so that he could show the rest of the football world how superior he was to them lead to the Rams' downfall more than anything NE did, IMO. That was a gift to NE neatly wrapped by Mad Mikey.

 

[Steelers4Life]

Watching the game, I really didn't think Denver played their best game. Not even close. They struggled to run the ball, Plummer didn't look especially sharp to me, and the Patriots had a lot of success throwing the ball. That said, they're obviously capable of playing much better, and I expect the Steelers to face their best effort. Turnovers are part of the game, although they didn't force Faulk to just drop the ball, Vinatieri to miss a field goal, or Troy Brown to drop a punt. I do think the Patriots shot themselves in the foot more times than anyone could've expected them to.The Broncos benefited a lot from the fact that the Patriots really struggled to run the ball this year and Dillon hasn't looked good for a while.No matter what spin anyone wants to put on this game, it's going to be a tough game between 2 evenly matched teams. The only clear advantage I can really see anywhere is the home-field advantage for Denver, but the game will still be won on the field.

 

[SSOG]

I'll be honest right up front because I have not watched a lot of Denver this season. However from what I saw against the Patriots last week, the Broncos like to blitz a lot, especially Lynch.

Brady was getting pummelled pretty good last week by the Denver blitz. If the Steelers are able to pick up the blitz then I can see Miller having a nice game. If not, Ben could be in for a beating.

On the other hand if Denver blitzes a lot they should be ripe for the screen, which the Steelers run pretty well with Parker and Haynes.

Should be interesting.

Denver is second in the NFL in number of blitzes called, behind only Pitt. However, they are a bigger-blitzing team, because they regularly send six, seven, eight, and even very rarely NINE defenders, while Pitt will blitz five or occasionally just six.

Oooooooh Football Outsiders, the be-all-to-end-all in football. "Don't you dare drop that crap".

I never expected you to think that Football Outsiders was the be-all-end-all, which is why I only dropped it in support instead of my main claim. The fact remains that Football Outsiders is the best per-play statistical breakdown around, since it adjusts for opposition, score, and game-time remaining. Everyone knows that teams would have a higher ypc if they only ran when down by 14, but FO adjusts for that, and for every other situation imagineable, which leaves a truer play-by-play accounting.That said, I was only providing those statistics for corroboration. I understand that many people (such as, it seems, you) feel like Football Outsiders is just smoke and mirrors. So I refer you again to the per-carry and per-attempt numbers.

Here are the facts, my friend.

First of all, your initial position presupposes that most if not all of the HCs, OCs, & teams that DEN faced this year are stupid, in fact that they are much, much less knowledgeable about football than you.

If DEN were average against the run & great against the pass, other teams would scheme to run the ball down DEN's throat all game. HCs keep their jobs by determining where other team's strengths and weaknesses are and they scheme to exploit the weaknesses. To say DEN is much worse at playing the run than the pass and then to immediately afterward say that other teams run at DEN less than anyone else is completely and irrevocably contradictory. Unless, of course, we assume that you & the Football Outsiders know much more about football than NFL coaching staffs & players.

Are you seriously making this claim?

I never made any such claim. In fact, it's ironic that you used this arguement against me, because I've used this very same arguement to the Football Outsiders before (after the 2003 season, when they thought that Tennessee's run defense was overrated). I argued that it was possible that Tenn's run defense was so good, other teams didn't test it, which led to Tennessee playing pass more, which led to bigger gains when teams DID run. I just don't think that's the case this time. Denver has led for more time than any team in the NFL except Indy. Denver has a higher first-quarter scoring differential than any other team in the NFL. Here are some cold hard numbers for you:Week 3 vs. KC: Denver raced to a 17-0 first quarter lead. KC called 44 passes to 22 rushes.

Week 4 vs. Jax: Denver led 14-0 in the first half. Jax called 34 passes to 11 rushes.

Week 5 vs. Wash: Denver staked a 21-10 lead midway through the 3rd. Washington called 53 passes to 26 rushes.

Week 6 vs. New England: Denver led 21-3 in the first half. 46pass:19rush.

Week 8 vs. Philly: Denver led 28-0 in the first half. 34pass:19rush.

Week 10 vs. Oakland: Denver led 13-0 in the first half. 50pass:17rush.

Week 11 vs. NYJ: Denver led 17-0 in the first half. 32pass:7rush.

Week 16 vs. Oak: 17-0 lead in the first half. 41pass:17 rush.

In the 8 games where Denver staked a reasonably early double-digit lead, teams passed 334 times and rushed 138 times. In the remaining 8 games, teams passed 279 times and rushed 196 times. The first 8 teams passed 70.8% of the time. The second 8 passed 58.7% of the time. The average NFL team passes 53.4% of the time.

I can further break down the runass ratio by first and second half runass, if you so desire.

Now that we have examined the common sense side of the issue, let's look at the numbers side of the issue. In the first half of games, DEN has scored 224 points while surrendering 105 points. That means that DEN went into halftime up by more than a TD against their opponents. If the first half of games, all RBs for opposing teams rushed 164 times for 603 yds and 5 TDs against DEN. In the second half of games, all RBs rushed 146 times for 602 yds and 4 TDs against DEN.

That's a 3.68 ypc by RBs in the first half, while the RB ypc jumped to 4.12 ypc in the 2nd half. Despite running the ball better in the second half, opposing teams ran their RBs 11% less in the second half against DEN than they did in the first half. For RBs in the NFL with 100+ carries for the season, 3.68 ypc equates to the 35th best RB average per carry, while the 4.12 ypc equates to the average yards per carry of the 20th best RB. I think we can safely say that if teams are running their RBs with an average equal to the #35 RB in the NFL (with 100+ carries, of course) in the first half that the DEN run D is doing a pretty good job against the run. Would you agree?

First off, I don't like you throwing out all runs by WRs and QBs, because now I can't compare that to other teams. That 3.68 first-half ypc would rate Denver as 7th in the league against the run, but adding back in the QB and WR carries (just like the other teams have) would almost certainly drop that ranking. If it even increases ypc-allowed by a tenth of a point, it drops Denver out of the top-10 run defenses. So sure, I'll agree with your assertion that Denver is a borderline top-10 run defense. Because that's the assertion that you're making by focusing entirely on the first-half ypc numbers.

How do we explain these facts? Why would teams run less, but be more successful in the second half? Well, it was because they were behind in the second half of games and had to throw a lot more to play catch up. In almost half the games this year, DEN was up at halftime by 13 points or more. So, teams come out throwing more, DEN changes its D schemes to adjust to the additional throwing, playing nickel, big nickel, and dime packages, and while RBs get less carries because of the additional throwing, they gain significantly more yards because DEN is playing pass stop rather than run stop. That also explains why there were so many pass attempts against DEN. It also figures that opposing coaches went away from the run because they weren't very successful at it in the first half.

If you really want to make that point, then provide a breakdown of how many pass attempts Denver has faced by each half. What I really think you've just done is contradict your "coaches are smart" arguement. Your "coaches are smart" arguement asserted that coaches pass so much more than they run because they know running won't succeed. What you're doing here is merely demonstrating that Denver has a much more balanced runs-facedasses-faced ratio in the first half, which supports the theory that opposing coaches, who (as you assert) "are smart", like to run on Denver every bit as much as they like to pass on Denver. Which is sort of contrary to your whole "they don't run on Denver because Denver's run defense is good" arguement and more in line with MY "They don't run on Denver because Denver's been posting huge leads" arguement.

Consequently, that also explains the lesser ypa numbers, as with more DBs on the field a greater amount of the time, there is less opportunity to throw deeper downfield, and the holes in the pass D would be underneath, where the missing LB in the special packages would be. The short stuff would be much easier to get in the passing game than the longer passes with extra DBs roaming the field. It is also harder to throw completions against the pass packages. Of course the ypa numbers are good, it only follows the rest of the argument.

You realize that you're basically trying to come up with a stat that is DVOA? You're trying to say "Well, Denver allows fewer yards per pass when up big because of this", while DVOA says that "the average yards per pass drops when a team is up big, so we're going to hold teams to a stricter standard in pass defense".Personally, I suspect that yards-per-completion go drastically up when leading big, but completion percentage goes down.

Here's another argument for DEN's run D. If other teams were playing against an average run D, and they saw how quickly DEN got out in the first half, it would make sense to run the ball more against DEN to try to slow the game down & keep the DEN offense off the field. You wouldn't see very few running attempts against DEN, you'd see a lot more. Teams wouldn't want to get into a track meet in the first half because they could see, just like anyone who looks at stats and watches the games, that DEN starts so well. Of course, that again predisposes that NFL coaches & players aren't stupid, which you apparently think that they are.

Oh, so you're saying that the fact that Denver had such a good offense means teams are more likely to run MORE against them? Well, let's look at the offense chart. Sort by scoring offense... oh, there's Denver, right between Kansas City and Carolina.Now let's look at those teams' rushing defenses. Hmm... Kansas City has faced the second-fewest rushing attempts in the NFL, and Carolina has faced the 6th fewest.

WHAT??? That *HAS* to be a fluke. I mean, like you asserted, coaches aren't STUPID, right? So who's ranked two above and two below Denver in scoring offense. Let's see... we've got San Diego, and Pittsburgh.

Hmm... San Diego has faced the third fewest rushing attempts, and Pittsburgh has faced the fifth fewest.

Okay, okay, okay... Indy. Indy will settle this arguement. I'm sure that EVERYONE can agree that Indy's run defense is really really bad (28th worst ypc against), and that Indy's got the most potent offense in the league, the one that the most teams are going to try to keep off the field. I'm sure that Indy faced a TON of rushing attempts, right?

Wrong. Fourth fewest in the league.

What does all of this mean? It means that the number of rushes a team faces has almost nothing to do with the quality of the team's run defense, and almost EVERYTHING to do with the quality of the team's offense. The top 10 offenses faced the 10th fewest, 11th fewest, 4th fewest, 12th fewest, 3rd fewest, 2nd fewest, 1st fewest, 6th fewest, 5th fewest, and 15th fewest attempts. The bottom 10 offenses faced the 2nd most, 7th most, 10th most, 1st most, 9th most, 4th most, 15th most, 20th most, 8th most, and 3rd most. I would say that there is a VERY STRONG correlation between how potent one's offense is, and how few rushing attempts it faces, and a very WEAK correlation between how potent one's rushing defense is, and how few rushing attempts it faces (unless you're saying that Indy is a top-5 run defense despite allowing 4.4 yards per carry, or Philadelphia is a bottom-5 run defense despite allowing 3.7 yards per carry).

So I leave it you, my friend. The facts are on the board, and the football theory is on the board. Why don't you tell me exactly where I am wrong here, and why NFL teams know so much less about football than you.

NFL teams know a lot more about football than I do. Which is why the number of rushes they attempts is almost entirely a function of how potent the opposing offense is, and has very little to do with how potent the opposing run defense is. Which is why we can look at how few attempts Denver has faced and conclude that it's because they're posting huge leads, NOT because their run defense is so intimidating.

 

[malice]

DEN will win because...Elam is more accurate than Reed, and Sauerbrun's punts are gold when it comes down to a tough, field-position type of game.Also, I think Roethlisberger still tries a bit too hard to force throws to Ward, and Bailey could bait him into making poor reads.

 

[Steelers4Life]

DEN will win because...Elam is more accurate than Reed, and Sauerbrun's punts are gold when it comes down to a tough, field-position type of game.

Also, I think Roethlisberger still tries a bit too hard to force throws to Ward, and Bailey could bait him into making poor reads.

Jeff Reed has a 83% accuracy rate this year (24-29), and he's 6-9 between 40-49 yards. (0-2 beyond 50). He's kicked for the Steelers for 4 years, and aside from his terrible 2003 season, he's had field goal %'s of 89.5, 84.8, and 82.8.Jason Elam is at 75% this year (24-32), and he's 9-13 between 40-49 yards. (1-4 beyond 50). His best 3 seasons are at 87.1, 86.1, and 85.3.

And he kicks in a MUCH better kicker's stadium than Heinz Field.

If you're saying Elam is better than Reed, you're really pushing it. They're both good kickers.

And Chris Gardocki hasn't had a punt blocked in his entire NFL career.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I do expect Denver to have shaken off the rust and to play a sharper game against the Steelers than they did against the Pats. I don't know if the Steelers can get much sharper. It is a shame that the traveling team is also the team playing on a shorter week. Of course the playoffs are not a pure test of the best team on a nuetral field, they are designed to reward the regular season, and I would have it no other way.I do wonder if this will be the year we have a repeat of Superbowl #3 where teams from the clearly better conference beat on each other allowing the favorite from the lesser conference to waltz on in healthy and ready to go. I hope whichever team emerges does so realitively intact.

 

[LuckyOne]

Just thought I'd add one more reason I think Denver wins this game.

Altitude...

Watching the Pat vs. Bronco game I saw 2 or 3 times the Pats using Oxygen Masks.

Now we all know of Bettis's Asthma problems, Throw in the Altitude and it's just one more weapon the Bronco's have against the Visiting Teams.

Actually, a lot of people with severe asthma choose Colorado to live in. I think the dry climate and altitude are actually good for it.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Just thought I'd add one more reason I think Denver wins this game.

Altitude...

Watching the Pat vs. Bronco game I saw 2 or 3 times the Pats using Oxygen Masks.

Now we all know of Bettis's Asthma problems, Throw in the Altitude and it's just one more weapon the Bronco's have against the Visiting Teams.

Actually, a lot of people with severe asthma choose Colorado to live in. I think the dry climate and altitude are actually good for it.

They choose Colorado for the climate and for National Jewish Hospital in Denver, they do not, however, voluntarily live in Denver which is among the dirtier air quality cities around, particularly during the winter months. The brown cloud hanging over Denver right now would make any asthmatic want to get right back on a plane and head on out of here.

 

[Gamejockey99]

Altitude and oxygen is going to play a big roll. 9-0 at home speaks for itself this season. The Pats rolled into Denver on Tuesday, which doesn fall into either school of thinking that of: get there early and acclimate or get there last minute and run the game before you're effected. They got there midway and with not enough time to acclimate and that's how I thought they played, less energy than Denver. Regardless of whether they get to Denver early or late, I think Pit will win because Ben is on a roll, healthy and they want it more after always blowing it late in the playoffs.

 

[SSOG]

I do wonder if this will be the year we have a repeat of Superbowl #3 where teams from the clearly better conference beat on each other allowing the favorite from the lesser conference to waltz on in healthy and ready to go. I hope whichever team emerges does so realitively intact.

Good point. Vegas oddsmakers have already said that both the Broncos *AND* the Steelers would be favored to win the superbowl over the NFC teams. Whoever wins, I'll certainly be rooting for the AFC to survive healthy and to dominate the big game.

 

[malice]

DEN will win because...Elam is more accurate than Reed, and Sauerbrun's punts are gold when it comes down to a tough, field-position type of game.

Also, I think Roethlisberger still tries a bit too hard to force throws to Ward, and Bailey could bait him into making poor reads.

Jeff Reed has a 83% accuracy rate this year (24-29), and he's 6-9 between 40-49 yards. (0-2 beyond 50). He's kicked for the Steelers for 4 years, and aside from his terrible 2003 season, he's had field goal %'s of 89.5, 84.8, and 82.8.Jason Elam is at 75% this year (24-32), and he's 9-13 between 40-49 yards. (1-4 beyond 50). His best 3 seasons are at 87.1, 86.1, and 85.3.

And he kicks in a MUCH better kicker's stadium than Heinz Field.

If you're saying Elam is better than Reed, you're really pushing it. They're both good kickers.

And Chris Gardocki hasn't had a punt blocked in his entire NFL career.

9-13 > 6-91-4 > 0-2

So if the defenses hold and it comes down to who can hit longer FGs more often, Elam has a better rate, correct? He's also tried more long ones while Cowher typically won't try Reed from close to 50. I think one (or more) of Elam's attempts were in the 55-60 yd range at the end of the half which also affects those numbers.

Gardocki not having a kick blocked is a testament to special teams. My reference to Sauerbrun was how he can drop a kick inside the 15 and give the opposing team tough starting position. I'm trying to find rankings of which teams give their opponents the deepest starting field position, but so far I haven't had any luck. Last week though, NE had 6 starts inside their own 15, while IND had 3.

 

[The Duff Man]

Denver played poorly last week? Beating New England by 14 points is possible when you play poorly? Wow, I can only imagine what Denver would have done had they not played poorly.

As for the mistakes NE made, Denver forced almost of those mistakes (except for Troy Brown's fumble)! Instead of saying NE beat themselves, why not give the Broncos credit for forcing those mistakes and then taking advantage of them? That is what great teams do. It is what New England has done for years.

Here are Denver's drives:FIRST HALF

First drive – 3 and out

Second drive – one first down

Third drive – very impressive, but questionable play calling at the goal line made them come up empty

Fourth drive – Plummer INT (either a rollout or he was flushed out of the pocket, can’t remember which)

Fifth drive – 3 and out

Sixth drive – Questionable pass interference call – Touchdown

Seventh drive – Off NE kickoff fumble. 3 and out for a FG.

SECOND HALF

First drive – 3 and out

Second drive – one first down

Third drive – Short TD set up by Bailey’s INT, questionable call of a non-touchback on the fumble

Fourth drive – one first down before a muffed punt leads to a 15 yard touchdown drive

Fifth drive – great game ending drive, eating the clock and adding a FG

Sixth drive – A couple of game sealing runs and kneel down

I only saw two good drives by the Broncs and on one of those they came up empty. On the other they got stopped for a FG. So I don't think there is any question thier offense did not play well.

Their defense DID play well, there is no dispute there. But keep in mind NE played poorly (offensively) against Jax and that several of the mistakes were not induced by Denver.

 

[The Duff Man]

Denver played poorly last week? Beating New England by 14 points is possible when you play poorly? Wow, I can only imagine what Denver would have done had they not played poorly.

As for the mistakes NE made, Denver forced almost of those mistakes (except for Troy Brown's fumble)! Instead of saying NE beat themselves, why not give the Broncos credit for forcing those mistakes and then taking advantage of them? That is what great teams do. It is what New England has done for years.

When I posted that NE played poorly in thier win against JAX a couple of Pats fans replied that JAX was a great team and NE couldn't have played that poorly given the final score.We saw how that turned out when NE went up against better opposition (as Denver will do this week) so I reject the argument that beating NE by 14 proves that Denver played well.

 

[Steelers4Life]

DEN will win because...Elam is more accurate than Reed, and Sauerbrun's punts are gold when it comes down to a tough, field-position type of game.

Also, I think Roethlisberger still tries a bit too hard to force throws to Ward, and Bailey could bait him into making poor reads.

Jeff Reed has a 83% accuracy rate this year (24-29), and he's 6-9 between 40-49 yards. (0-2 beyond 50). He's kicked for the Steelers for 4 years, and aside from his terrible 2003 season, he's had field goal %'s of 89.5, 84.8, and 82.8.Jason Elam is at 75% this year (24-32), and he's 9-13 between 40-49 yards. (1-4 beyond 50). His best 3 seasons are at 87.1, 86.1, and 85.3.

And he kicks in a MUCH better kicker's stadium than Heinz Field.

If you're saying Elam is better than Reed, you're really pushing it. They're both good kickers.

And Chris Gardocki hasn't had a punt blocked in his entire NFL career.

9-13 > 6-91-4 > 0-2

So if the defenses hold and it comes down to who can hit longer FGs more often, Elam has a better rate, correct? He's also tried more long ones while Cowher typically won't try Reed from close to 50. I think one (or more) of Elam's attempts were in the 55-60 yd range at the end of the half which also affects those numbers.

Gardocki not having a kick blocked is a testament to special teams. My reference to Sauerbrun was how he can drop a kick inside the 15 and give the opposing team tough starting position. I'm trying to find rankings of which teams give their opponents the deepest starting field position, but so far I haven't had any luck. Last week though, NE had 6 starts inside their own 15, while IND had 3.

Yes, 68% > 66% regarding 40-49 yard field goals. Of course, Reed is at 83% for the year while Elam is at 75% for the year... and that doesn't matter either. Both kickers are very good, and I wouldn't expect many misses, if any.

I'd also guess that if Cowher played half of his games in Denver, he'd probably have Reed trying some longer field goals. He's got the leg for it. Since the longest field goal ever at Heinz Field is 48 or 49 yards, that speaks volumes about how hard it is to kick there.

Sauerbrun is a great punter, too. Punting in Denver is a nice perk, and I don't see much of an advantage with either punter, either.

 

[SSOG]

DEN will win because...Elam is more accurate than Reed, and Sauerbrun's punts are gold when it comes down to a tough, field-position type of game.

Also, I think Roethlisberger still tries a bit too hard to force throws to Ward, and Bailey could bait him into making poor reads.

Jeff Reed has a 83% accuracy rate this year (24-29), and he's 6-9 between 40-49 yards. (0-2 beyond 50). He's kicked for the Steelers for 4 years, and aside from his terrible 2003 season, he's had field goal %'s of 89.5, 84.8, and 82.8.Jason Elam is at 75% this year (24-32), and he's 9-13 between 40-49 yards. (1-4 beyond 50). His best 3 seasons are at 87.1, 86.1, and 85.3.

And he kicks in a MUCH better kicker's stadium than Heinz Field.

If you're saying Elam is better than Reed, you're really pushing it. They're both good kickers.

And Chris Gardocki hasn't had a punt blocked in his entire NFL career.

9-13 > 6-91-4 > 0-2

So if the defenses hold and it comes down to who can hit longer FGs more often, Elam has a better rate, correct? He's also tried more long ones while Cowher typically won't try Reed from close to 50. I think one (or more) of Elam's attempts were in the 55-60 yd range at the end of the half which also affects those numbers.

Gardocki not having a kick blocked is a testament to special teams. My reference to Sauerbrun was how he can drop a kick inside the 15 and give the opposing team tough starting position. I'm trying to find rankings of which teams give their opponents the deepest starting field position, but so far I haven't had any luck. Last week though, NE had 6 starts inside their own 15, while IND had 3.

According to Football Outsiders, which charts all special teams plays and adjusts them for distance *AND* situation (long kicks in Denver aren't worth as much as long kicks in Pittsburgh)...Pittsburgh's placekicking unit was worth 7.6 points more than Denver's over the course of the season.

Denver's kickoff unit was worth 1.4 points more than Pittsburgh's over the course of the season.

Pittsburgh's kick return unit was worth 3.3 points more than Denver's over the course of the season.

Denver's punting unit was worth 7.3 points more than Pittsburgh's over the course of the season.

Pittsburgh's punt return unit was worth 0.1 points more than Denver's over the course of the season.

Pittsburgh's total special teams were ranked 19th, and were trending upwards, with a weighted rank of 14th.

Denver's total special teams were ranked 21st, and were trending upwards, with a weighted rank of 16th.

Of course, that's not including the playoffs. Denver's special teams were HUGE last week. If you include the playoffs, Denver's weighted special teams were NINTH in the NFL, and Pittsburgh's remain at 14th.

Either way, there's not going to be any huge advantages anywhere. Denver CLEARLY has the advantage in the battle between punters, and Pittsburgh just as clearly has the advantage on placekicks. Kickoffs are reasonably close.

 

[mcintyre1]

PIT will win because ... Joey Porter was shot in Denver. Looking for some payback perhaps?

 

[Challenge Everything]

Denver or Pittsburgh will win because one of them has to lose.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Denver's Defensive line is used to playing against Pittsburgh.

... and quite used to getting whipped by them.

 

[pghrob]

Altitude and oxygen is going to play a big roll. 9-0 at home speaks for itself this season. The Pats rolled into Denver on Tuesday, which doesn fall into either school of thinking that of: get there early and acclimate or get there last minute and run the game before you're effected. They got there midway and with not enough time to acclimate and that's how I thought they played, less energy than Denver.

Regardless of whether they get to Denver early or late, I think Pit will win because Ben is on a roll, healthy and they want it more after always blowing it late in the playoffs.

Cowher doesn't think so....the Steelers will get there 24 hours before kick off, play the game and leave.Steelers Notebook: Less time in thin air, the better

 

[Cookiemonster]

Cowher's gameplan... don't fumble every kickoff and punt. Don't coat the inside of the officials' cleats w/ pepper.

 

[pghrob]

Pittsburgh will win because they appear to be the same team (sans plaxico) that they were last year, except better (more seasoned). The Steelers will win becasue Cowher needs to get the "can't win the big one" monkey off his back. The Steelers will win because as a team, the want their beloved teammate Jerome Bettis to go out on top. They will win because they are focused on the road, and they know how much their winning will do to please their fans at home. They will win because they can play damn good football and they simply won't accept defeat. The collective will of this Steelers team is too strong not to win. They are incredibly focused and will not be denied.Steelers 24Broncos 21

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Love to see that Plummer is on the cover of SI this week.

 

[jurb26]

Love to see that Plummer is on the cover of SI this week.

So are Ben, Hassy and Delhomme. It's a regonial cover this week.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Love to see that Plummer is on the cover of SI this week.

So are Ben, Hassy and Delhomme. It's a regonial cover this week.

Ahhh...SI is going to beat their own jinx then.

 

[Franknbeans]

Love to see that Plummer is on the cover of SI this week.

So are Ben, Hassy and Delhomme. It's a regonial cover this week.

Ahhh...SI is going to beat their own jinx then.

Unless all those QB's get injured.

 

[malice]

DEN will win because...Elam is more accurate than Reed, and Sauerbrun's punts are gold when it comes down to a tough, field-position type of game.

Also, I think Roethlisberger still tries a bit too hard to force throws to Ward, and Bailey could bait him into making poor reads.

Jeff Reed has a 83% accuracy rate this year (24-29), and he's 6-9 between 40-49 yards. (0-2 beyond 50). He's kicked for the Steelers for 4 years, and aside from his terrible 2003 season, he's had field goal %'s of 89.5, 84.8, and 82.8.Jason Elam is at 75% this year (24-32), and he's 9-13 between 40-49 yards. (1-4 beyond 50). His best 3 seasons are at 87.1, 86.1, and 85.3.

And he kicks in a MUCH better kicker's stadium than Heinz Field.

If you're saying Elam is better than Reed, you're really pushing it. They're both good kickers.

And Chris Gardocki hasn't had a punt blocked in his entire NFL career.

9-13 > 6-91-4 > 0-2

So if the defenses hold and it comes down to who can hit longer FGs more often, Elam has a better rate, correct? He's also tried more long ones while Cowher typically won't try Reed from close to 50. I think one (or more) of Elam's attempts were in the 55-60 yd range at the end of the half which also affects those numbers.

Gardocki not having a kick blocked is a testament to special teams. My reference to Sauerbrun was how he can drop a kick inside the 15 and give the opposing team tough starting position. I'm trying to find rankings of which teams give their opponents the deepest starting field position, but so far I haven't had any luck. Last week though, NE had 6 starts inside their own 15, while IND had 3.

Yes, 68% > 66% regarding 40-49 yard field goals. Of course, Reed is at 83% for the year while Elam is at 75% for the year... and that doesn't matter either. Both kickers are very good, and I wouldn't expect many misses, if any.

I'd also guess that if Cowher played half of his games in Denver, he'd probably have Reed trying some longer field goals. He's got the leg for it. Since the longest field goal ever at Heinz Field is 48 or 49 yards, that speaks volumes about how hard it is to kick there.

Sauerbrun is a great punter, too. Punting in Denver is a nice perk, and I don't see much of an advantage with either punter, either.

Reed's longest successful FG is 44 yds. Elam's is 51 this year. It's not strength I'm judging them on- Reed's legs are like tree trunks- but Elam's ability to hit the long one along with Shanahan's trust in his abilities give them a better shot at getting points out of drives. PIT had two shots at 50 yd FGs vs. IND, and they settled for punts on both. Do you think the decision would be different at Mile High?

 

[SSOG]

Love to see that Plummer is on the cover of SI this week.

So are Ben, Hassy and Delhomme. It's a regonial cover this week.

Ahhh...SI is going to beat their own jinx then.

Maybe, maybe not. It's true that all 4 QBs are on the SI covers in their home regions, but Plummer is the national cover. Maybe he's a little more jinxed than the other guys.

 

[jurb26]

Love to see that Plummer is on the cover of SI this week.

So are Ben, Hassy and Delhomme. It's a regonial cover this week.

Ahhh...SI is going to beat their own jinx then.

Maybe, maybe not. It's true that all 4 QBs are on the SI covers in their home regions, but Plummer is the national cover. Maybe he's a little more jinxed than the other guys.

I'm confused. I thought that having the cover for every region meant that there was no National one.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The Steelers will win becasue Cowher needs to get the "can't win the big one" monkey off his back.

That is what Buffalo fans said about Marv Levy for years.

The Steelers will win because as a team, the want their beloved teammate Jerome Bettis to go out on top.

Are the Steelers the first team to be going for a Super Bowl knowing a possible future Hall of Famer is probably retiring?

They will win because they are focused on the road, and they know how much their winning will do to please their fans at home.

Are the other 31 teams in the league not as concerned with winning to make their fans happy?

They will win because they can play damn good football and they simply won't accept defeat.

Do the Broncos not play damn good football? Do the Broncos accept defeat?

The collective will of this Steelers team is too strong not to win.

Should the Broncos even show up then or just concede now?

They are incredibly focused and will not be denied.

Are the other conference finalist teams not focused?

 

[brobe4]

Denver will win because three road wins in a row are very tough.

 

[SSOG]

Love to see that Plummer is on the cover of SI this week.

So are Ben, Hassy and Delhomme. It's a regonial cover this week.

Ahhh...SI is going to beat their own jinx then.

Maybe, maybe not. It's true that all 4 QBs are on the SI covers in their home regions, but Plummer is the national cover. Maybe he's a little more jinxed than the other guys.

I'm confused. I thought that having the cover for every region meant that there was no National one.

In Pittsburgh, the cover is Rooflesburger. In North and South Carolina, the cover is Delhomme. In Denver, the cover is Plummer. In Seattle, the cover is Hasselbeck. In Florida, the cover is Plummer. In Alaska, the cover is Plummer. In Hawaii, the cover is Plummer. In New Mexico, the cover is Plummer. In Maine, the cover is Plummer. So Plummer is the national cover, but he's superceded in regions with a primary rooting interest with a more fan-relevant QB... but in areas with no primary rooting interest, he's the guy.

 

[pghrob]

  The Steelers will win becasue Cowher needs to get the "can't win the big one" monkey off his back. 

That is what Buffalo fans said about Marv Levy for years. True.

  The Steelers will win because as a team, the want their beloved teammate Jerome Bettis to go out on top. 

Are the Steelers the first team to be going for a Super Bowl knowing a possible future Hall of Famer is probably retiring? IIRC, Elway and the Broncos were in a similar position, and I am sure some of the Bills felt that way...so, no, I am sure the Steelers aren't the first team to be in this position.

They will win because they are focused on the road, and they know how much their winning will do to please their fans at home. 

Are the other 31 teams in the league not as concerned with winning to make their fans happy? I am sure they are

  They will win because they can play damn good football and they simply won't accept defeat. 

Do the Broncos not play damn good football? Do the Broncos accept defeat? Yes they play good football, and I am sure that they find losing unpalatable.

  The collective will of this Steelers team is too strong not to win.   

Should the Broncos even show up then or just concede now? Of course they shoudl show and play. Would any respectable team concede?

  They are incredibly focused and will not be denied.

Are the other conference finalist teams not focused? I would hope they are focused.

I would say your questions easily demonstrated that my answers were lacking any concrete reasoning. As any one can see, I am identifying intangible threads that can bond a team and allow their collective will to put them over the top. Is it completely subjective and wreaking of homerism? Hell yes. Is written so as to dramatize this quest?Absolutely so. But these reasons I listed are very real for these Steelers. They are not exclusive situations or goals for just the Steelers team, but they are reasons nonetheless. The teams are fairly well evenly matched. We can X and O analyze all day long. Right or wrong, I found enjoyment in thinking about my reasons and think these more nebulous, dramatized, homer driven love/lust musings of my Steelers are very real considerations for this team. I hope each team has these dramatic storybook reasons why they will believe they can win. It makes the games that much more enjoyable. I am defintitely a romantic when it comes to the Steelers.

You can take my story and write it for the Colts next year if they are in this same position and it still wouldn't make them any less real considerations for the Steelers this year.

 

[P Boy]

I'll be honest right up front because I have not watched a lot of Denver this season.  However from what I saw against the Patriots last week, the Broncos like to blitz a lot, especially Lynch. 

Brady was getting pummelled pretty good last week by the Denver blitz.  If the Steelers are able to pick up the blitz then I can see Miller having a nice game.  If not, Ben could be in for a beating.

On the other hand if Denver blitzes a lot they should be ripe for the screen, which the Steelers run pretty well with Parker and Haynes.

Should be interesting.

Denver is second in the NFL in number of blitzes called, behind only Pitt. However, they are a bigger-blitzing team, because they regularly send six, seven, eight, and even very rarely NINE defenders, while Pitt will blitz five or occasionally just six.

Oooooooh  Football Outsiders, the be-all-to-end-all in football.  "Don't you dare drop that crap".

I never expected you to think that Football Outsiders was the be-all-end-all, which is why I only dropped it in support instead of my main claim. The fact remains that Football Outsiders is the best per-play statistical breakdown around, since it adjusts for opposition, score, and game-time remaining. Everyone knows that teams would have a higher ypc if they only ran when down by 14, but FO adjusts for that, and for every other situation imagineable, which leaves a truer play-by-play accounting.That said, I was only providing those statistics for corroboration. I understand that many people (such as, it seems, you) feel like Football Outsiders is just smoke and mirrors. So I refer you again to the per-carry and per-attempt numbers.

Here are the facts, my friend.

First of all, your initial position presupposes that most if not all of the HCs, OCs, & teams that DEN faced this year are stupid, in fact that they are much, much less knowledgeable about football than you.

If DEN were average against the run & great against the pass, other teams would scheme to run the ball down DEN's throat all game.  HCs keep their jobs by determining where other team's strengths and weaknesses are and they scheme to exploit the weaknesses.  To say DEN is much worse at playing the run than the pass and then to immediately afterward say that other teams run at DEN less than anyone else is completely and irrevocably contradictory.  Unless, of course, we assume that you & the Football Outsiders know much more about football than NFL coaching staffs & players. 

Are you seriously making this claim?

I never made any such claim. In fact, it's ironic that you used this arguement against me, because I've used this very same arguement to the Football Outsiders before (after the 2003 season, when they thought that Tennessee's run defense was overrated). I argued that it was possible that Tenn's run defense was so good, other teams didn't test it, which led to Tennessee playing pass more, which led to bigger gains when teams DID run. I just don't think that's the case this time. Denver has led for more time than any team in the NFL except Indy. Denver has a higher first-quarter scoring differential than any other team in the NFL. Here are some cold hard numbers for you:Week 3 vs. KC: Denver raced to a 17-0 first quarter lead. KC called 44 passes to 22 rushes.

Week 4 vs. Jax: Denver led 14-0 in the first half. Jax called 34 passes to 11 rushes.

Week 5 vs. Wash: Denver staked a 21-10 lead midway through the 3rd. Washington called 53 passes to 26 rushes.

Week 6 vs. New England: Denver led 21-3 in the first half. 46pass:19rush.

Week 8 vs. Philly: Denver led 28-0 in the first half. 34pass:19rush.

Week 10 vs. Oakland: Denver led 13-0 in the first half. 50pass:17rush.

Week 11 vs. NYJ: Denver led 17-0 in the first half. 32pass:7rush.

Week 16 vs. Oak: 17-0 lead in the first half. 41pass:17 rush.

In the 8 games where Denver staked a reasonably early double-digit lead, teams passed 334 times and rushed 138 times. In the remaining 8 games, teams passed 279 times and rushed 196 times. The first 8 teams passed 70.8% of the time. The second 8 passed 58.7% of the time. The average NFL team passes 53.4% of the time.

I can further break down the runass ratio by first and second half runass, if you so desire.

Now that we have examined the common sense side of the issue, let's look at the numbers side of the issue.  In the first half of games, DEN has scored 224 points while surrendering 105 points.  That means that DEN went into halftime up by more than a TD against their opponents.  If the first half of games, all RBs for opposing teams rushed 164 times for 603 yds and 5 TDs against DEN.  In the second half of games, all RBs rushed 146 times for 602 yds and 4 TDs against DEN. 

That's a 3.68 ypc by RBs in the first half, while the RB ypc jumped to 4.12 ypc in the 2nd half.  Despite running the ball better in the second half, opposing teams ran their RBs 11% less in the second half against DEN than they did in the first half.  For RBs in the NFL with 100+ carries for the season, 3.68 ypc equates to the 35th best RB average per carry, while the 4.12 ypc equates to the average yards per carry of the 20th best RB. I think we can safely say that if teams are running their RBs with an average equal to the #35 RB in the NFL (with 100+ carries, of course) in the first half that the DEN run D is doing a pretty good job against the run.  Would you agree?

First off, I don't like you throwing out all runs by WRs and QBs, because now I can't compare that to other teams. That 3.68 first-half ypc would rate Denver as 7th in the league against the run, but adding back in the QB and WR carries (just like the other teams have) would almost certainly drop that ranking. If it even increases ypc-allowed by a tenth of a point, it drops Denver out of the top-10 run defenses. So sure, I'll agree with your assertion that Denver is a borderline top-10 run defense. Because that's the assertion that you're making by focusing entirely on the first-half ypc numbers.

How do we explain these facts?  Why would teams run less, but be more successful in the second half?  Well, it was because they were behind in the second half of games and had to throw a lot more to play catch up.  In almost half the games this year, DEN was up at halftime by 13 points or more.  So, teams come out throwing more, DEN changes its D schemes to adjust to the additional throwing, playing nickel, big nickel, and dime packages, and while RBs get less carries because of the additional throwing, they gain significantly more yards because DEN is playing pass stop rather than run stop.  That also explains why there were so many pass attempts against DEN.  It also figures that opposing coaches went away from the run because they weren't very successful at it in the first half.

If you really want to make that point, then provide a breakdown of how many pass attempts Denver has faced by each half. What I really think you've just done is contradict your "coaches are smart" arguement. Your "coaches are smart" arguement asserted that coaches pass so much more than they run because they know running won't succeed. What you're doing here is merely demonstrating that Denver has a much more balanced runs-facedasses-faced ratio in the first half, which supports the theory that opposing coaches, who (as you assert) "are smart", like to run on Denver every bit as much as they like to pass on Denver. Which is sort of contrary to your whole "they don't run on Denver because Denver's run defense is good" arguement and more in line with MY "They don't run on Denver because Denver's been posting huge leads" arguement.

Consequently, that also explains the lesser ypa numbers, as with more DBs on the field a greater amount of the time, there is less opportunity to throw deeper downfield, and the holes in the pass D would be underneath, where the missing LB in the special packages would be.  The short stuff would be much easier to get in the passing game than the longer passes with extra DBs roaming the field.  It is also harder to throw completions against the pass packages.  Of course the ypa numbers are good, it only follows the rest of the argument.

You realize that you're basically trying to come up with a stat that is DVOA? You're trying to say "Well, Denver allows fewer yards per pass when up big because of this", while DVOA says that "the average yards per pass drops when a team is up big, so we're going to hold teams to a stricter standard in pass defense".Personally, I suspect that yards-per-completion go drastically up when leading big, but completion percentage goes down.

Here's another argument for DEN's run D.  If other teams were playing against an average run D, and they saw how quickly DEN got out in the first half, it would make sense to run the ball more against DEN to try to slow the game down & keep the DEN offense off the field.  You wouldn't see very few running attempts against DEN, you'd see a lot more.  Teams wouldn't want to get into a track meet in the first half because they could see, just like anyone who looks at stats and watches the games, that DEN starts so well.  Of course, that again predisposes that NFL coaches & players aren't stupid, which you apparently think that they are.

Oh, so you're saying that the fact that Denver had such a good offense means teams are more likely to run MORE against them? Well, let's look at the offense chart. Sort by scoring offense... oh, there's Denver, right between Kansas City and Carolina.Now let's look at those teams' rushing defenses. Hmm... Kansas City has faced the second-fewest rushing attempts in the NFL, and Carolina has faced the 6th fewest.

WHAT??? That *HAS* to be a fluke. I mean, like you asserted, coaches aren't STUPID, right? So who's ranked two above and two below Denver in scoring offense. Let's see... we've got San Diego, and Pittsburgh.

Hmm... San Diego has faced the third fewest rushing attempts, and Pittsburgh has faced the fifth fewest.

Okay, okay, okay... Indy. Indy will settle this arguement. I'm sure that EVERYONE can agree that Indy's run defense is really really bad (28th worst ypc against), and that Indy's got the most potent offense in the league, the one that the most teams are going to try to keep off the field. I'm sure that Indy faced a TON of rushing attempts, right?

Wrong. Fourth fewest in the league.

What does all of this mean? It means that the number of rushes a team faces has almost nothing to do with the quality of the team's run defense, and almost EVERYTHING to do with the quality of the team's offense. The top 10 offenses faced the 10th fewest, 11th fewest, 4th fewest, 12th fewest, 3rd fewest, 2nd fewest, 1st fewest, 6th fewest, 5th fewest, and 15th fewest attempts. The bottom 10 offenses faced the 2nd most, 7th most, 10th most, 1st most, 9th most, 4th most, 15th most, 20th most, 8th most, and 3rd most. I would say that there is a VERY STRONG correlation between how potent one's offense is, and how few rushing attempts it faces, and a very WEAK correlation between how potent one's rushing defense is, and how few rushing attempts it faces (unless you're saying that Indy is a top-5 run defense despite allowing 4.4 yards per carry, or Philadelphia is a bottom-5 run defense despite allowing 3.7 yards per carry).

So I leave it you, my friend.  The facts are on the board, and the football theory is on the board.  Why don't you tell me exactly where I am wrong here, and why NFL teams know so much less about football than you.

NFL teams know a lot more about football than I do. Which is why the number of rushes they attempts is almost entirely a function of how potent the opposing offense is, and has very little to do with how potent the opposing run defense is. Which is why we can look at how few attempts Denver has faced and conclude that it's because they're posting huge leads, NOT because their run defense is so intimidating.

I now stand by my original assertion. You pick one stat from one site and some of their convoluted rationale, and then you run with it like it is gospel. Football is more than stats. There is logic behind virtually every number, and watching games gives much more insight than just relying on that one stat from one football site with their "insight".

That you think the DEN run D is average despite claiming to have seen them so much merely emphasizes my point. There's obviously no argument that I can make that will shake your belief in what Football Outsiders states.

Until later....

 

[Cookiemonster]

THANK-YOU PONY!!!

 

[moleculo]

Ok, after much internal debate, here is how I see this game breaking down:

DEN rushing O vs PIT rushing D: Denver traditionally struggles with the 3-4 D. LeBeau is one of the leading innovators from this formation, and PIT has the personnel to run it to perfection. I don’t see DEN rushing O having a huge game; I see similar production to the NE game - +/- 100 yds, TD’s if they are fortunately to be spotted inside the 5. Now, just because the DEN rushing attack will be contained in no way indicates that Shanahan will stop rushing like Dungy did.

DEN passing O vs PIT passing D: I believe that the combination of Jakes mobility, the threat of the rushing game, and the aggressiveness of the LB’s/secondary will definitely open up the passing game through play-action pass and the bootleg. I look to a couple of deep strikes to Lelie and ball control type receptions from Putzier. I see Plummer putting up 250 yds, maybe one pick.

DEN O vs PIT D: in summary, this will be the most intriguing part of the game. The offensive mastermind of Shanahan vs the defensive brilliance of cower and LeBeau. Strength vs Strength. I believe DEN will be able to move the ball better then they did vs NE, with a couple of big gains caused by PIT over-aggressiveness – cutback lanes being open, biting on the play-action, etc. Your opinion on this game likely boils down to this phase of the game – whom do you believe in more? My money is on the man with the rings – Shanahan.

PIT rushing O vs DEN rush D: Denver has not faced a rushing attack like Bettis and Parker all year – most teams haven’t. They will definitely get carries and will get yards. Denver will be expecting a stout rushing attack and will NOT be putting 9 on the line like they did vs NE. LB’s will be forced to stay home to play the run, which should open up the passing game. I see Pitt putting up about 120 yds overall on the ground, plus a couple of TDs.

PIT passing O vs DEN passing D: Hines Ward is exactly the type of WR that Bailey covers the best. Champ has gotten burnt deep several times, but I believe that he is absolutely the best when it comes to covering the short stuff – most of his picks, IIRC, come from jumping in front of out routes or comeback routes. I believe DEN LBs and safeties excel at covering TE’s, so I wouldn’t expect much from Miller. Remember, Den has played 10 games vs the top 7 TE’s this year, and given up only 3 TD’s. so, it comes down to what type of pressure can be applied to Roethelisberger and what Randle El can do. I see Big Ben putting up 200 yds, two picks.

Pitt O vs DEN D: I give the edge to the Steelers overall – I see their running game having a good day, better than what they did vs Indy. I don’t expect Parker to break anything over 15 yards, however. I see Pitt moving the ball well overall, but a couple of turnovers and a couple of drives stalling at inopportune times.

Special Teams: I think this is a wash. I think that Denvers kicking game is a strength, as is Pitt return game. Both placekickers are decent and can be counted on for short-medium range kicks. Can Reed kick the deep stuff? A better question is – will Cowher allow Reed to kick the deep stuff? This game may very well come down to a 50+ yard FG…

Intangibles: Pitt has been playing do-or-die games for about six weeks now, and they are on a six game winning streak. That does wonders for confidence, but has to be emotionally draining. I wonder what they have left in the tank. Denver, on the other hand, comes off of an emotional win at home vs defending SB champs. Confidence is high there as well, expect the rust from last week to be knocked off. Add to this list Mile High stadium – you cannot deny that there is magic in the air in Denver in the post-season. SOMETHING unusual will happen, and it WILL favor the Broncos.

OVERALL: edge goes to Denver. I see Broncos winning a close one with both scores in the 20’s – 27-24 perhaps.

Additional prediction: we will all be tired of hearing how quick Bettis’ feet are.