Lack of a vertical passing game
 

Did anybody else notice that we seem to have abandoned the vertical passing game? It was a huge empasis when Sherman was OC but I didn't see one pass over 20 yards in that game even attempted? Nor did I notice one in the Cowboys game or the Bucanneers game?

That would be a huge error as we have a WR core that can stretch the field. Any thoughts on this?

for sure didn't see much of long passes this game, but did some in preseason.

well, sometimes when things change, and they have changed a lot since last year on offense, 3 new OL, two new coaches, new OCordinator, playbook, RB, blocking schemes, and opposition, then it gets worse before it gets better, so hoping in another game or two the improvements show up.

i was getting pretty peeved at the dump off passes. we needed yards, not completions...

It had nothing to do with the playcalling. Kubiak called some routes downfield, Matt just didn't throw to them. There was one play in particular that Davis was open downfield and Matt just missed it.

How could we possibly have a vertical passing game when Matt was getting killed? Think about that. We could not protect him. The Steelers had the lead, they were playing pass every down. Taking 7 step drops would have gotten him killed.

We could not run the offense. Matt did have a rollout in the fist half when it was still a game and hit AJ along the sideline.

If we could have run it a bit, and protected Matt, we would have tried to throw it. With what was going on, Matt or any QB would have been taking off on a stretcher.

2 ways i can think of:

keep in leach, bruener, dreessen, for like a max-protect pocket

or

run trick plays. the steelers d was so blood thirsty by about the 3rd quarter that they probably would've bitten on a reverse or flea flicker or the brady-to-moss-to-brady-to-what'shisface type of play.

it seemed we had no counter, that what we were doing was just going to have to work or not.

Yeah sure - a 2 man route would work. They would have 4 to cover 2. next.

Trickery. We could not gain a yard, they were in the backfield on every snap. They sniffed out screens. yeah, a reverse or flea flicker would have worked, except Pitt would have been in the backfield to take the ball from whatever texan had it. Any other great ideas?

We are a young team, and it is all about momentum, Since the stupid zebras took away an early first down we made and they took away, the MO went to Pgh. From there it was all downhill, as they got ahead they blitzed every hole. Not only could we not pass, we couldn't run. To reiterate, to beat Pgh. you have to come out and control the LOS. We didn't. Simple

I almost agree with that entire post. Except I am tired of the BS that we are a young team. We got whipped.

To quote Jim Mora "We could not run the ball, we could not stop the run, we could not pass the ball, we could not stop the pass." "We played like diddly pooh." throw in "Playoffs... Playoffs? I hope we win a game."

We had 3 new Olinemen, Pgh had 3 new Olinemen, the difference, Willie Parker ran for 138 yds. I think Slaton had 43 yds to lead the Texans. The difference was in the defenses. Pgh just over and through us, we couldn't do squat against them. Simply embarrassed.:(

1) There were plays on which Schaub had time. The way to punish pressure defenses, is to go over the top. One deep pass would have backed the defense off some, by not doing so you are doing exactly what the defense wanted you to do. Thus you would be letting the defense dictate your gameplan. It is difficult to win in such a situation.

2) Nothing else we did was effective so why not take the chance? What the hell the twelve bubble screens the offense ran netted crap, yet you would have them continue to beat thier heads against the wall as they did...

Do I have tour logic on this right: continue to do the same thing even though it hasn't worked; we didn't try the vertical passing game because it might not work; it is a terrible idea to try something different because it might not work...

3) Ignoring that though, the steelers were blitzing 5 or 6 on every down, which means that if they were blitzing 6 that leaves 5 in coverage. If you leave 2 in that leaves three running routes which means that somewhere on the field there is a person in man coverage, or the zone is soft.

There is time to get up the field, even if AJ and Walter cleared out downfield there is still 15 or 20 yard gains to be had, eventually that would force the D to crunch down on thier deep coverage, leaving space open over the top.

maybe it's just me counting, but 7 on the line + 1 qb is 8 = 3 routes being run. since andre was slicing them up by himself, i think we could've tried it. or maybe we could've seen how far ahman could get it on another screen pass? yea why not, there was nothing they could do. no one had any ideas as to how to slow down the rush. oh wait, i had 2 pretty solid ideas that they didn't try...where are yours? i can't seem to find them in this thread...oh well, at least your neg-ing on the posts which have something to contribute.

the point of misdirection is to take advantage of over-aggressive defenses.

I was trying to be like you and replying to every post on the board.

What you are proposing might work on Madden but after the first drive in the third quarter, the game was over. Matt's head was not right. You could not pull him to start a QB controversy or shake his confidence. The receivers struggled getting open all game. At that time, they were trying to get to the bus without getting anyone killed.

I'm done thinking about that game and arguing. Goodbye.

Thats one way to end an informed discussion...:p

i do what i can. :D
the game was over after the triple-zeros hit in the 4th, there are no white-flag rules. furthermore, if we were just trying to get out with no deaths and keeping schaub's confidence intact, keeping in 2 extra blockers is a perfect idea.

i don't know what exactly you're arguing. you asked for ideas and got 'em.