@rich4eagle said:

Actually, I really like what you said above and referenced below, It represents a thoughful intelligence based viewpoint,

So because a team got sacked a lot and still won the game you are jumping to the conclusion that offensive linemen are a dime a dozen? Pittsburgh also won the turnover battle which is a much bigger factor in winning games. I have stated this before, but I'll do it again. Sacks aren't everything. Dalton wasn't sacked but how much was he hurried and flushed out of the pocket? The answer is a lot. He was 15-30 with 2 picks. The Steelers defense combined with Leon Hall and A.J. Green's injuries helped to win that game. Roethisberger, while good, hangs around in the pocket too long to try and make plays which results in more sacks than your average quarterback. It was a close game and still could have gone either way, so you really don't have any substance to support your dime a dozen theory here.

So my many decades of viewing and understanding the game and what constitutes winning doesn't have substance and is typical, There is nothing typical about understanding and knowing "OL guys are a dime a dozen", rather it is atypical and based who wins and loses games and what factor the oline really played. I your reference above, you clearly stressed the importance of turnovers, which they are. I used my premise about sacks not jumping to any conclusions but another example of "OL being a dime a dozen".

If Ben had not gotten sacked at all would you be giving credit to the OLine for getting it done, hell yah, if they had lost, would you be blaming on the OL, hell yah. The fallacy of it all is that any of the 32 olines in the game playing for the Steelers in that game would have won. What does suppport my dime a dozen theory is fourty years of pro football winners and losers and rag tag patchwork OLines winning Super Bowls. Check the starters on the OL in NO's Super Bowl win, and where they came from. Check and see how many OL guys are cut by one team and then starting for another, an often and regular occurance.. The easiest part of a team to fix is the Oline and that is why they are a dime a dozen. And you are correct, sacks aren't everything and turnovers are more important, and vastly more important than both is scoring and that is mostly a byproduct of offensive players who touch the ball and defensive players who make turnovers, the former way more important. When you add all the positions up on a football team in importance, at the bottom of the list is the OL

The least talented guys in pee wee football are put on the offensive line and that never changes right up through the pros, and the least talented guys are the easiest to replace in any sport, unjump that conclusion

Further, three players cut by the Browns and one dumped started in the Super Bowl three of them on winning teams, in recent years. LT Oben, LT Brown, C O"Hara, and C Faine, dime a dozen, not good enough to start or even play for the Browns but good enough to be a starter in the Super Bowl

I agree with this post.

@bringbackbrownie2 said:

In other words, you can't refute any facts I just threw at you. Typical..

Actually, I really like what you said above and referenced below, It represents a thoughful intelligence based viewpoint,

So because a team got sacked a lot and still won the game you are jumping to the conclusion that offensive linemen are a dime a dozen? Pittsburgh also won the turnover battle which is a much bigger factor in winning games. I have stated this before, but I'll do it again. Sacks aren't everything. Dalton wasn't sacked but how much was he hurried and flushed out of the pocket? The answer is a lot. He was 15-30 with 2 picks. The Steelers defense combined with Leon Hall and A.J. Green's injuries helped to win that game. Roethisberger, while good, hangs around in the pocket too long to try and make plays which results in more sacks than your average quarterback. It was a close game and still could have gone either way, so you really don't have any substance to support your dime a dozen theory here.

So my many decades of viewing and understanding the game and what constitutes winning doesn't have substance and is typical, There is nothing typical about understanding and knowing "OL guys are a dime a dozen", rather it is atypical and based who wins and loses games and what factor the oline really played. I your reference above, you clearly stressed the importance of turnovers, which they are. I used my premise about sacks not jumping to any conclusions but another example of "OL being a dime a dozen".

If Ben had not gotten sacked at all would you be giving credit to the OLine for getting it done, hell yah, if they had lost, would you be blaming on the OL, hell yah. The fallacy of it all is that any of the 32 olines in the game playing for the Steelers in that game would have won. What does suppport my dime a dozen theory is fourty years of pro football winners and losers and rag tag patchwork OLines winning Super Bowls. Check the starters on the OL in NO's Super Bowl win, and where they came from. Check and see how many OL guys are cut by one team and then starting for another, an often and regular occurance.. The easiest part of a team to fix is the Oline and that is why they are a dime a dozen. And you are correct, sacks aren't everything and turnovers are more important, and vastly more important than both is scoring and that is mostly a byproduct of offensive players who touch the ball and defensive players who make turnovers, the former way more important. When you add all the positions up on a football team in importance, at the bottom of the list is the OL

The least talented guys in pee wee football are put on the offensive line and that never changes right up through the pros, and the least talented guys are the easiest to replace in any sport, unjump that conclusion

Further, three players cut by the Browns and one dumped started in the Super Bowl three of them on winning teams, in recent years. LT Oben, LT Brown, C O"Hara, and C Faine, dime a dozen, not good enough to start or even play for the Browns but good enough to be a starter in the Super Bowl

@rich4eagle said:

I do not jump to conclusiions, all i say is based on numbers and facts for fifty years

the best is OL is a "dime a dozen"

keep spinning otherwise bs while we keep losing and spending our best resources on teh OL over and over

In other words, you can't refute any facts I just threw at you. Typical..

the best is OL is a "dime a dozen"

keep spinning otherwise bs while we keep losing and spending our best resources on teh OL over and over

@rich4eagle said:

The future is now, losers say wait till next year

And you misterpreted what I said about Peterson, I said as bad as Minny is and as good as he is doing is indicative of how great he is and that he would be way better on a team with a complete offense

ok good. We agree here.

for the cover two cover three and cover 0 guys, like these defenses are something invented recently they been around as long as football..................back in the day the cover 2 was called the deep zone when people could actually spell deep and understood what zone coverage meant. The alternative is man to man. Everything else is a variation of each of these or combination of the two concepts. That includes covers 0,1,2,3,4,5 and duck and cover!

btw, ben got sacked 5 times sunday and the steelers won 24-17 so much for "dime a dozen OL guys"

So because a team got sacked a lot and still won the game you are jumping to the conclusion that offensive linemen are a dime a dozen? Pittsburgh also won the turnover battle which is a much bigger factor in winning games. I have stated this before, but I'll do it again. Sacks aren't everything. Dalton wasn't sacked but how much was he hurried and flushed out of the pocket? The answer is a lot. He was 15-30 with 2 picks. The Steelers defense combined with Leon Hall and A.J. Green's injuries helped to win that game. Roethisberger, while good, hangs around in the pocket too long to try and make plays which results in more sacks than your average quarterback. It was a close game and still could have gone either way, so you really don't have any substance to support your dime a dozen theory here.

Man lock Haden, Cover 2, and combo the other side of the field. That's playing to our strengths, of which there are few.

Or we can try the Tony Dungy Tampa 2, although were not getting beat deep middle enough to warrant that.

@bringbackbrownie2 said:

You can't hate on the Atlanta trade until we see who the Browns draft next year with Atlanta's 1st and 4th rounders..

And you don't think Peterson has been effective this year? 800 yards rushing (out of Minnesota's 1200 total) and 9 TD's seems a lot better than the Browns 600 yards and 2 TD's. If Minnesota had zippo offensively and was worse on offense than the Browns, why are they ranked 18th in total offense while the Browns are 31st? The Vikings offense has averaged 21.5 pts per game compared to the Browns 14.9. More proof you have no idea what you are talking about.

The future is now, losers say wait till next year

And you misterpreted what I said about Peterson, I said as bad as Minny is and as good as he is doing is indicative of how great he is and that he would be way better on a team with a complete offense

for the cover two cover three and cover 0 guys, like these defenses are something invented recently they been around as long as football..................back in the day the cover 2 was called the deep zone when people could actually spell deep and understood what zone coverage meant. The alternative is man to man. Everything else is a variation of each of these or combination of the two concepts. That includes covers 0,1,2,3,4,5 and duck and cover!

btw, ben got sacked 5 times sunday and the steelers won 24-17 so much for "dime a dozen OL guys"

@nickers said:

Uh no,you couldnt be more wrong..where the FS shifts in most cases predetermines what defense is gonna be run along with the def alignment. You almost always read the FS first. This isnt xxxxing Madden dude.

Actually I'm right. I don't think you ever played or analyzed football. The free safety is playing a deep zone in most coverages with the exception of cover 0. Do you even know what a cover 0 is?

@websterslaughter said:

Actually I'm in my 20's and I still play football instead of just watching it on TV like you.

yeah, i'm too old for that crap. i think if someone hit me coming free off the line i might explode into a bag of dust.

20's. i think i'd give my left nut to be in my 20's again. those were the days.

@websterslaughter said:

Both safeties line up on or near the hashes and their 1st step is backwards in a cover 2. And if your making a basic 3-step drop read you're most likely going to be reading a linebacker or SS. Reading the free safety is usually only important if you plan on throwing deep.

Uh no,you couldnt be more wrong..where the FS shifts in most cases predetermines what defense is gonna be run along with the def alignment. You almost always read the FS first. This isnt xxxxing Madden dude.

@miktoxic said:

just proved my point kid.

who's the idiot? you spend $60 for a video game, play it for a month or two, sit in your mom's basement smoking weed at 40 years old.

at least i know how to waste money. a bottle of cuervo, some fine ladies and some loud prog rock (maybe some camel or some hawkwind) and a football game on the widescreen. now that's the way to go there buddy boy.

talk to me when you're done weening off of teet milk.

Actually I'm in my 20's and I still play football instead of just watching it on TV like you. FYI I don't even play Madden anymore, no time for it. I did play it everyday while in college though. At least we can agree on the prog rock. Good stuff.

@nickers said:

Reading defenses is predicated on what the Free Safety does and where he cheats pre snap...Just ask Bernie Kosar

Both safeties line up on or near the hashes and their 1st step is backwards in a cover 2. And if your making a basic 3-step drop read you're most likely going to be reading a linebacker or SS. Reading the free safety is usually only important if you plan on throwing deep.

@websterslaughter said:

You're an idiot. And the game is called Call of Duty.

just proved my point kid.

who's the idiot? you spend $60 for a video game, play it for a month or two, sit in your mom's basement smoking weed at 40 years old.

at least i know how to waste money. a bottle of cuervo, some fine ladies and some loud prog rock (maybe some camel or some hawkwind) and a football game on the widescreen. now that's the way to go there buddy boy.

talk to me when you're done weening off of teet milk.

@websterslaughter said:

You're an idiot. And the game is called Call of Duty. NFL players do play Madden, and some have even said that it helps them recognize coverage and make reads. I bet you don't know the difference between a cover 2 and a cover 4. What's the strong safety's first move in a cover 2? What's a zone dog? How do you recognize if a defense is playing man under or zone? Whats the best way to attack a cover 3? Guess where I learned those things? Yes playing Madden.

Reading defenses is predicated on what the Free Safety does and where he cheats pre snap...Just ask Bernie Kosar

"Looka me ! Looka me ! I'm a race car driver because I won a race on my XBox ! YAY ! "

@miktoxic said:

:lol: :lol:

just like playing 'tour of duty' will make you an ass kickin soldier. GTFO!

You're an idiot. And the game is called Call of Duty. NFL players do play Madden, and some have even said that it helps them recognize coverage and make reads. I bet you don't know the difference between a cover 2 and a cover 4. What's the strong safety's first move in a cover 2? What's a zone dog? How do you recognize if a defense is playing man under or zone? Whats the best way to attack a cover 3? Guess where I learned those things? Yes playing Madden.

@websterslaughter said:

or have never even played Madden.

:lol: :lol:

just like playing 'tour of duty' will make you an ass kickin soldier. GTFO!

4. Lack of strength at WR

I know otheres have brought this topic up, but without a good core of WR's the def can blitz more often and get away with 1 on 1 coverage.

Of course you do. "Gosh, why didn't he just make them pay for the blitz by quickly throwing the ball?" you ask?

Because nobody was available. Nobody was open. The rush came too fast, and his oline is strong, but not invincible.

It just doesn't happen to butt R very often.

It happens to Colt most of the time. The squeelers drafted the guy I wanted for the Browns... Gilbert, RT, in the second round.

The squeelers have bookend tackles and a #1 draft pick at center. butt R has more time and faster, far more elusive receivers...

(with Little being the exception). That RT problem has been ruining a lot of the Browns' chances on offense, running and passing. You watch them fix that problem next spring.

This stupid stuff about dissing olinemen as being "dime a dozen"... then why the hell have the squeelers spent any draft picks at all on them?

Why didn't the squeeeelers just sign their entire offensive line from some little college somewhere as FA's ?

because my point was, that to make the defense pay, you

MUST have an outlet. The only wr the Browns have, who can

do that quickly, is Little. And he gets double coverage on passing downs

often. But not even Little can get open 1.5 seconds after the ball is snapped.

The Browns don't have a blazing downfield threat that can get open before Colt gets

slammed into the turf, or has to take off to avoid the rush.

Perhaps you missed the play last week - the blitz was on, and Colt

had to throw way early... and he threw downfield in a high arc, at the sideline,

where Little made a fantastic catch.

You just don't expect to make that work every down. On all sorts of plays, Colt doesn't have THAT much time.

Who the hell does Colt throw to when he can't even take two steps before getting slammed into,

and nobody is open?

Come on, man. Colt isn't perfect at all, but seriously? You don't see the right side of the oline collapsing on the snap of the ball?

I have seen defensive LINEMEN cover some of Colts targets.

The right side of the oline is so weak, you can't even run a lot of plays. The defenses know that. They also know that Little is Colt's only legit threat.

@websterslaughter said:

Philadelphia's offense is doing quite well actually. It's their defense that is complete garbage.

Colt McCoy doesn't seem to be very good at reading blitzes, anticipating pressure or making hot reads. If there are 6 guys coming on the blitz and we only have 5 guys blocking its not the OL fault when he gets hit. He has to learn to get rid of the ball and make the defense pay for blitzing.

Well, as I understand it, in Shurmur's offense there is no such thing as a "Hot Receiver"....so there are no "hot reads" for McCoy to make.