Running NFL Conference Championships Thread

Jim Plunkett before Big Ben and then not much of a chance for either

 

Sweed's hit might have broken the rules more, but until they start fining guys from sticking a ballcarrier who is 18 inches from the ground and falling, I have no problem with a WR blocking until the end of the play.

If a WR can keep a player from hitting his teammate, then the hit is fair.

 

Holmes still had to run 50 yards to the endzone. And Roethlisberger did what great quarterbacks do -- he put the ball out there and gave his playmaker a chance to make plays.

 

That's the line that convinced me this cannot possibly be real.

 

Flacco's drive in that game was 75 yards not 92 yards and it was in the middle of the fourth quarter and both teams had one more possession after it -- it wasn't in the two-minute drill and it wasn't to win the game -- and in fact, the Ravens had so much faith in Flacco taking them down the field that when he got the ball back with 1:40 to play and a time-out -- in a tie game meaning, he only had to go about 50 yards to get a field goal try, they opted to run out the clock and go to overtime.

Please don't try and distort the facts and try to compare apples to oranges.


But more to the point...

Are saying that the Ravens have a better offense than the Steelers?

Are you saying that you'd rather have Joe Flacco than Ben Roethlisberger?

Are you saying that the Steelers offense in the last two weeks with a healthy Willie Parker is a much different animal than the one even a few weeks ago?

Are you saying that the Steelers offensive line wasn't much better in the second half of the season than in the first -- and in the first half of the season the line not being able to protect Roethlisberger was a big reason the offense sputtered?

Are you saying if you asked the other 30 defensive coordinators which offense they'd rather face -- you'd find one who'd say the Steelers?

Are you saying if you asked the other 30 defensive coordinaotrs which quarterback they'd rather face - you'd find one who'd say Roethlisberger?

I didn't think so.

I'm sorry if reality is such a difficult concept for you to understand, or that there are often explanations for statistics which are not reflective of reality, but that's just the way it is.

And since you love stats so much -- the Steelers, despite their line struggles early in the season, were 17th in the league in passing -- the Ravens were 28th.

More importantly -- take a look at the postseason stats -- which aren't watered down because all of your opponents are quality opponents.

In the postseason the Steelers offense has been far better than the Ravens -- and the Ravens have in fact had the worst offense in the postseason of the 12 teams which made it.

 

Nice speech. Too bad it doesn't address the issue at hand.

The issue here is a comparison of the defenses of the Ravens and Steelers. You are insisting that the reason the Steelers have better numbers is because they got to face the Ravens twice, even though Baltimore clearly had the better offense during the regular season. They gained more yards and scored more points.

Yes, the Steelers' offense got better as the season went on, but the line is still below average and the running game was terrible more often than not from weeks three through 15.

Certainly, Roethlisberger is better than Flacco, but the comparison goes beyond that. The Ravens ran the ball much more effectively than the Steelers did during the regular season and they do a better job protecting their quarterback.

Back to the main point. The Steelers defense gave up fewer points, fewer yards rushing and fewer yards passing than the Ravens. They also faced the tougher schedule. They played 14 games against the same opponents. In the other two, Pittsburgh played New England and San Diego. Baltimore played Miami and Oakland. Are you going to try to tell me the Patriots and Chargers aren't better offensively, particularly in the passing game?

The validity of the AFC Championship as a measure of the two defenses is debatable. I think it is a little more evidence in favor of Pittsburgh, but I can see the argument. But keep in mind, Pittsburgh's offensive line was terrible yesterday. For example, both of Suggs' sacks were blown assignments, not great plays by the defender.

Also, the Steelers lost Ward early on, which was a huge break for the Ravens. That significantly cut into Pittsburgh's ability to attack the weakness of the Baltimore defense, which is its cornerbacks.

 

So that was a long-winded way of you saying -- "you are right, the Steelers offense, with a healthy Parker -- which they did not have during the most of the regular season -- and an offensive line that has settled in and found its stride is far better than the Ravens. And even during the regular season, Ben Roethlisberger was far better than Joe Flacco."

I never said the Steelers defense wasn't better than the Ravens or anything about the Ravens versus the Steelers statistically on defense -- I said yesterday's game didn't prove a thing about either defense because they did not face equal or even close to equal quarterbacks and/or offenses.

There is no way to argue that -- and like I pointed in my last post, take a look at the playoff numbers of the offenses and tell me you still think the Ravens are in the same league as the Steelers in terms of which offense you'd rather face.

Learn how to comprehend, it will save you from having these long drawn out arguments on every single thread in the place with every single poster.

 

I'm thrilled the Steelers made it, but something keeps telling me -- regardless of what the defense has done -- that this team isn't Super Bowl quality. Wish I could explain it.

Whatever the case, I really need to get over this whole "the o-line sucks" thing. It's affecting my fanboishness.

 

I understand fine. You were disputing both points. You just backed off of the overall comparison of the defenses overall because the facts don't back you up.

I also said that the importance of yesterday's game in that discussion was open to debate, but you apparently missed that part.

Even just looking at yesterday's game, it is not a fair comparison to use just the quarterbacks. The Steelers had to play most of that game without Ward. The Steelers' offensive line has improved, but the Ravens still have the better offensive front.

It's not like the performances of the defenses were even that close yesteday. The Steelers forced four turnovers to one for the Ravens and they scored on defense. The Ravens' offense scored twice, but they didn't even have five total yards on the first "drive." They got a big punt return to the 15 and a pass interference call to move it to the Pittsburgh three.

If you don't agree that Pittsburgh's defense was better yesterday, you are entitled to your opinion. I think you are wrong, but that is nothing new.

 

Maybe we're just pessimists, Trey, because I feel the same way. Or perhaps it is because it seems like every victory has been a struggle, though part of that was the brutal schedule.

 

I'm not sold on the greatness that is Ben Roethlisberger. He's a decent but nowhere near great QB.

With the Steelers, they win because of they dominate the line of scrimmage. Big Ben's just along for the ride.

 

They may dominate the line of scrimmage defensively, but that hasn't been true of their offense for at least two years now.