As predicted TMQ calls us out...

[nick in* england]

I just thought too - that if we pound Willis into the line and fail to get the 1st - we just do it again. That shown confidence in the OL, the RB and challenges the team to go out an win in an agressive fashion. With so much on the line, running twice from inside their 40 yard line is a no brainer. Get the first and we are rolling and even if we don't get aTD we have a better percentage figgie available and the coaches have shown the players they have faith.

 

We have not heard the last of this call - TMQ will lament our mincing call. The football gods frowned on us there.

190111[/snapback]

 

Above - my post from the pther day.

Below - TMQ...

 

 

Tis Better to Have Rushed and Lost Than Never to Have Rushed At All (Playoff-Bound Collapse Edition)

 

Leading 17-16 at the end of the third quarter at home with Steelers starters leaving to take comfortable seats, the seemingly playoff-bound Bills faced third-and-1 on the Pittsburgh 11, on a day when Willis McGahee averaged 4.4 yards per rush. Run up the middle? Instead pass, offensive interference against Buffalo. A third-down gain brings the ball back to the same point, but now it's fourth-and-1. Run up the middle? If you fail, the opponent's third-string gentlemen are pinned deep in their own territory with the crowd roaring at experimental-scramjet decibels. Instead field-goal attempt, missed from 28. These two mincing fraidy-cat calls on third-and-1 and fourth-and-1 are promptly punished by the football gods with 10 lightning points for Pittsburgh.

 

Now it's Steelers 26, Bills 17 early in the fourth quarter, with Pittsburgh practice-squad guys populating the field. Buffalo faces third-and-1 on the Steelers 48. Run up the middle? Instead attempted trick play, loss of yardage. On fourth-and-6 from midfield, Buffalo punts, even though the whole season is on the line and you're playing against third-stringers. Emboldened by this mincing fraidy-cat failure to seize the day, the Pittsburgh third-stringers staged their clock-killer drive, and the home team did not get the ball back until almost the two-minute warning. For everything else that went wrong for the Bills on Sunday, had Buffalo simply run up the middle on even one of three late-game short-yardage downs, the Bills would likely now be preparing for the playoffs.

 

See?

[KurtGodel77]

Good post.

[nick in* england]

Good post.

193167[/snapback]

In that case - - BUMP... LAMP!

[scribo]

MM certainly needs to learn when to be more aggresive. Why didn't Sam Wyche say something? Isn't that suppose to be the benifit of having a coach like him around?

[stevewin]

I agree completely - this was discussed in another thread yesterday

 

Yesterday's TMQ thread

[Simon]

Buffalo faces third-and-1 on the Steelers 48. Run up the middle? Instead attempted trick play,

It wasn't a trick play, it was a simple little counter pitch which would likely have gone for big chunky yards had it simply been executed properly. Instead our QB double clutches on the pitch and then decides to fire it overhanded behind the back's ear.

That TMQ guy lives in a sheltered little world of numbers and I've never seen him display any real grasp of the game.

Personally I liked the call that would have had us 1st/goal at the 5 if Reed keeps his arms down, I agreed with Mularkey's decision to take the 3 at that point in the game and I also liked the counter call and think it was going to be a big gainer.

Cya

[dave mcbride]

It wasn't a trick play, it was a simple little counter pitch which would likely have gone for big chunky yards had it simply been executed properly. Instead our QB double clutches on the pitch and then decides to fire it overhanded behind the back's ear.

That TMQ guy lives in a sheltered little world of numbers and I've never seen him display any real grasp of the game.

Personally I liked the call that would have had us 1st/goal at the 5 if Reed keeps his arms down, I agreed with Mularkey's decision to take the 3 at that point in the game and I also liked the counter call and think it was going to be a big gainer.

Cya

193867[/snapback]

 

simon, i agree that it wasn't a trick play, but that was not bledsoe's fault - it was shaud williams, who pulled a travis and went the wrong way.

[dave mcbride]

It wasn't a trick play, it was a simple little counter pitch which would likely have gone for big chunky yards had it simply been executed properly. Instead our QB double clutches on the pitch and then decides to fire it overhanded behind the back's ear.

That TMQ guy lives in a sheltered little world of numbers and I've never seen him display any real grasp of the game.

Personally I liked the call that would have had us 1st/goal at the 5 if Reed keeps his arms down, I agreed with Mularkey's decision to take the 3 at that point in the game and I also liked the counter call and think it was going to be a big gainer.

Cya

193867[/snapback]

p.s. that call on reed was hoooooooooooooooooooorible. his block occurred within 5 yards of the LOS, which is legal. plus, given what receivers get away with these days, to call that was criminal.

[Simon]

simon, i agree that it wasn't a trick play, but that was not bledsoe's fault - it was shaud williams, who pulled a travis and went the wrong way.

 

You positive about that? It sure seemed to me like the play was designed for Drew to fake the pitch left then pivot and pitch it right.

 

p.s. that call on reed was hoooooooooooooooooooorible. his block occurred within 5 yards of the LOS, which is legal. plus, given what receivers get away with these days, to call that was criminal.

I have the same gripe about what receivers are getting away with and certainly agree that the stripes should be consistent in how they call a game. But I think the ball was in the air when Reed set his pick so it was hands-off no matter how far beyond the LOS they were. And the reason P'burgh didn't get called for the obvious pick play was because the receiver had the sense to just rub his man off (shut up you hogs) as opposed to Reed who felt the need to get his arms up and step into the block instead of just running a route that would force the guy to go around him.

I'm starting to believe that kid is dumber 'n a chicken......

 

Cya

[dave mcbride]

You positive about that? It sure seemed to me like the play was designed for Drew to fake the pitch left then pivot and pitch it right.

I have the same gripe about what receivers are getting away with and certainly agree that the stripes should be consistent in how they call a game. But I think the ball was in the air when Reed set his pick so it was hands-off no matter how far beyond the LOS they were. And the reason P'burgh didn't get called for the obvious pick play was because the receiver had the sense to just rub his man off (shut up you hogs) as opposed to Reed who felt the need to get his arms up and step into the block instead of just running a route that would force the guy to go around him.

I'm starting to believe that kid is dumber 'n a chicken...... 

 

Cya

193908[/snapback]

yeah, reed is a real disappointment. i know you've been a defender for some time, so i feel for your disappointment. too bad - i think he's done in buffalo. he's simply unproductive. getting back to the block, though: if an offensive lineman blows a d-lineman off the ball and nails him beyond the line of scrimmage while the ball is in the air, wouldn't that constitute the same thing? that happens all the time, right?

 

where do you stand on jennings? do you agree with me that letting him go is a huge mistake?

[dave mcbride]

You positive about that? It sure seemed to me like the play was designed for Drew to fake the pitch left then pivot and pitch it right.

 

193908[/snapback]

 

when i watched them coming off the field, williams appeared to be hanging his head and drew had a look of disgust. i know that you can't judge a book by the cover, but it did appear during the replay that bledsoe expected him to come out one way and he went the other way. given that he's an undrafted free agent fresh off the practice squad and that knowing the playbook is an actual strength of DB's, i'll assign blame to williams in this one.

[Simon]

yeah, reed is a real disappointment. i know you've been a defender for some time, so i feel for your disappointment. too bad - i think he's done in buffalo. he's simply unproductive.

For a long time I was holding out hope that his lack of productivity was a result of a QB who sees the field very poorly, but the kid just keeps making too many mistakes on his own to maintain that denial any longer. It's too bad too, because if he could get his head out of his arse he could be a dynamite #3 guy on this team.

if an offensive lineman blows a d-lineman off the ball and nails him beyond the line of scrimmage while the ball is in the air, wouldn't that constitute the same thing? that happens all the time, right?

I saw an OLineman get called for interference on a screen just this year, but I think that may be the first time I remember seeing it called. I don't know how it's written in hte rulebook, but stripes certainly call it differently for OLineman and eligible receivers. I didn't care for the call much either, but I though Reed really brought it on himself with his complete lack of subtlety and craft.

where do you stand on jennings? do you agree with me that letting him go is a huge mistake?

I don't know if I'd use the term "huge mistake" with so many variables involved. I think Jennings is rock-steady and would certainly prefer he stays right where he is, but I don't want to see the Bills fork over a 25mil bonus (nor do I think they will) when MWilliams may be ready to flip to LT and you also have former LT Teague already on the roster. If worse comes to worse and Jennings demands a huge contract, I think it's be easier to move Mike/Trey over and then fill the RT/C spot via FA. But I'd much rather pay Jennings a fairmarket contract and maintain continuity and keep a guy who has been a very solid LT for a few years now. I guess it's just a matter of what the two sides see as fair market.

Cya

 

when i watched them coming off the field, williams appeared to be hanging his head and drew had a look of disgust. i know that you can't judge a book by the cover, but it did appear during the replay that bledsoe expected him to come out one way and he went the other way. given that he's an undrafted free agent fresh off the practice squad and that knowing the playbook is an actual strength of DB's, i'll assign blame to williams in this one.

We're both just guessing here, but I think if you see the play again(I haven't either) and look closely you might change your mind. Watch how quickly Drew steps out and then fakes the pitch hard; had it been an actual pitchleft, he would have eyeballed Shaud and then went to make the pitch instead of coming right out from center and selling the pitch w/o even lookng at the back. I also think I remember Williams taking a hard step to his left and then coming back right at the same time Drew pivots his feet and body to position himself to pitch it the other way, which would indicate a designed counter. Finally check the LG and see if he doesn't come out and pull back to the right.

Regardless of the looks on anybody's faces or who has been practicing with who, I really got the sense from what happened on the field that the play was sort of a variation on the fakesneak throwback to the wideside they ran a couple weeks ago. Instead of faking the sneak they faked the pitchleft, and then countered back to the nearhash instead of the far hash; but instead of just simply pitching it like he was supposed to, Drew got jumpy and tried to deliver it overhand like had to Willis on the other play.

Cya

[stuckincincy]

yeah, reed is a real disappointment. i know you've been a defender for some time, so i feel for your disappointment. too bad - i think he's done in buffalo. he's simply unproductive.  getting back to the block, though: if an offensive lineman blows a d-lineman off the ball and nails him beyond the line of scrimmage while the ball is in the air, wouldn't that constitute the same thing? that happens all the time, right?

 

where do you stand on jennings? do you agree with me that letting him go is a huge mistake?

193921[/snapback]

 

I guess that would be an ineligible receiver downfield. Dunno if that's called before the pass is launched, while it's in the air, or both.

[dave mcbride]

I don't know if I'd use the term "huge mistake" with so many variables involved. I think Jennings is rock-steady and would certainly prefer he stays right where he is, but I don't want to see the Bills fork over a 25mil bonus (nor do I think they will) when MWilliams may be ready to flip to LT and you also have former LT Teague already on the roster. If worse comes to worse and Jennings demands a huge contract, I think it's be easier to move Mike/Trey over and then fill the RT/C spot via FA. But I'd much rather pay Jennings a fairmarket contract and maintain continuity and keep a guy who has been a very solid LT for a few years now. I guess it's just a matter of what the two sides see as fair market.

Cya

193958[/snapback]

since you're in steeltown country, who did the steelers replace john jackson with when he left? my recollection is that they struggled at lt for some time afterwards. i always thought jackson was a sensational player for the steelers when they were in their mid-90s prime. i bring this up for obvious reasons, of course ...

[34-78-83]

Shaud was on the bench sulking with a towel on his head for a long period after the failed counter pitch play. It was my belief at the time that the pitch was a little high but certainly something he should have handled. Simon is right that the play would have gone for a big gainer if successful (atleast 15 to 20 yards). In spite of this , I agree with those who feel that a much less risky philosophy should have been employed. The Steelers had two undersized DT's in the game at the time and a dive play or sneak surely would have been successful though unspectacular.

[Simon]

since you're in steeltown country, who did the steelers replace john jackson with when he left? my recollection is that they struggled at lt for some time afterwards. i always thought jackson was a sensational player for the steelers when they were in their mid-90s prime. i bring this up for obvious reasons, of course ...

 

I liked your JohnJackson comparison in the other thread (and not jsut because they're both JJ's) but didn't say anything because I've been agreeing with you too much lately and didn't want to be a butt-smoocher.

I'm not 100% positive on this but I think around the time Jackson left for Cinci, the Stillers drafted ChrisConrad with a highpick(he blew a knee and was never the same), drafted Outland winner Kris Ferris with a midround pick(more injury trouble), drafted Jamain Stephens(who was just a bust) and maybe eventually flipped Strelczyk over before he got hurt and came unglued. That's also around the time they signed Wayne Gandy (not sure on the exact year but he was a decent stopgap) and I think they may have also had Wolford on the roster at that point.

If we do lose Jennings, I expect Donahoe to attack the LT/RT positions with numbers as opposed to a big name/big money FA.

Cya

[Simon]

It was my belief at the time that the pitch was a little high but certainly something he should have handled.

I don't know Tre, it was just an awful awful pitch. Even if he had been able to handle the overhand throw behind his ear from 5 feet away, gathering it in would have killed any momentum he had and the play would have likely been stopped short anyway.

Otoh, at least if he'd have handled it he might have gotten close enough to the sticks that they would have had the option of going for it on 4th/short at midfield.

I like the call on 3rddown and if they just execute it I agree that he busts it for a real nice gain. Even if the Stillers sniff it out and stop it they can still run a blast or sneak on 4thdown to get the yard. I just thought it was a good place to roll the dice with some big upside to be had.

Watching the lamentable OU QB easily execute the same play last night for a nice gain didn't help my attitude any. Arrrggghhh

[34-78-83]

I don't know Tre, it was just an awful awful pitch. Even if he had been able to handle the overhand throw behind his ear from 5 feet away, gathering it in would have killed any momentum he had and the play would have likely been stopped short anyway.

Otoh, at least if he'd have handled it he might have gotten close enough to the sticks that they would have had the option of going for it on 4th/short at midfield.

I like the call on 3rddown and if they just execute it I agree that he busts it for a real nice gain. Even if the Stillers sniff it out and stop it they can still run a blast or sneak on 4thdown to get the yard. I just thought it was a good place to roll the dice with some big upside to be had.

Watching the lamentable OU QB easily execute the same play last night for a nice gain didn't help my attitude any.  Arrrggghhh

194027[/snapback]

 

You certainly had the advantage of seeing the replay on TV which I did not, so if you say the pitch was unmanageable I will take your word for it. I still think the dive was the play to call though. Did you see the size (or lack of) of those defensive tackles? No back side whatsoever on 'em

[Simon]

You certainly had the advantage of seeing the replay on TV which I did not, so if you say the pitch was unmanageable I will take your word for it.

 

I wouldn't say unmanageable because he actually could have pulled it in. It's just that he would have had to come to a complete stop, reach back behind his head with both hands, make a difficult catch and then secure it, which would have been the end of that play. Instead he tried to maintain his momentum and pull it in on the run to keep the play alive but it just didn't happen.

On second thought you may be right about the call. I don't think that because of the game situation, but because of the fact that it was Shaud in there instead of Willis. While normally you'd rather have a smaller back like Williams working in space than trying to pound it up inside(which that play would have accomplished), in this case maybe it wasn't a good idea to run something so dependant on timing with a guy who probably hadn't practiced it very much at all. I'm sure the play was designed for Willis and that he and Drew had some semblance of timing down, but with Shaud in there the whole thing was herkyjerky right from the start. I'm thinking Drew's double clutch and then his bizarre decision to throw it overhand may have had something to do with his unfamiliarity with running that play with Shaud as opposed to Willis.

[34-78-83]

I wouldn't say unmanageable because he actually could have pulled it in. It's just that he would have had to come to a complete stop, reach back behind his head with both hands, make a difficult catch and then secure it, which would have been the end of that play. Instead he tried to maintain his momentum and pull it in on the run to keep the play alive but it just didn't happen.

On second thought you may be right about the call. I don't think that because of the game situation, but because of the fact that it was Shaud in there instead of Willis. While normally you'd rather have a smaller back like Williams working in space than trying to pound it up inside(which that play would have accomplished), in this case maybe it wasn't a good idea to run something so dependant on timing with a guy who probably hadn't practiced it very much at all. I'm sure the play was designed for Willis and that he and Drew had some semblance of timing down, but with Shaud in there the whole thing was herkyjerky right from the start. I'm thinking Drew's double clutch and then his bizarre decision to throw it overhand may have had something to do with his unfamiliarity with running that play with Shaud as opposed to Willis.

194071[/snapback]

 

Speaking of player packages, was that the time when Shaud was in because Willis had a stinger and missed a few plays, or no? I was questioning WTF Shaud was in for at the time over Willis myself. Also, while were referencing TV replays what did you think of the interference call when the Steelers had third and long and threw deep down the right seem? It looked to most of us (even Steeler fans) like any of the contact was incidental....