2022 GDT Week Four Da Steelers Vs. Da Jets

[August4th]

thinking more about it..there is a good amount of teams who could use someone like claypool. if the season is lost by the deadline, why not field offers for him? might get a 2nd rd pick...imagine what Mcvay would do with claypool

[Dcash4]

9 minutes ago, August4th said:

one of my hopes for claypool breaking out was trading him for a 2nd RD pick in the offseason to a team like the bears

Taking productive receivers and crushing their value is starting to look more like a hobby than an accident for this team. 

[warfelg]

2 hours ago, Dcash4 said:

That's what happens when your QB can't hit a receiver

You could have stopped here and been correct.  The number of diving, jumping, reaching, or traffic plays our WR’s have to make is absurd.  Of course (I wish NGS tracked after catch movements) it doesn’t help when guys move more sideways than N-S after the route.

I still feel ‘good’ about my everyone pressing to make a play comment.  I think Tomlin’s “spread the playmaking” comment was taken the wrong way by guys.  I rather see DJ/Pool/Pickens catch the ball and turn upfield getting 2-4 more yards than catching it, running 30 yards to the MOF or sideline, and only getting 1 yard upfield or losing a few yards in the process of trying to make a play.

Edited September 28, 2022 by warfelg

[Dcash4]

39 minutes ago, warfelg said:

You could have stopped here and been correct.

For sure. We have talked about it before -- it's both. The same way Mitch hitting a deep shot in stride adds 30 yards RAC so does Canada playing matchmaker instead of play caller and hitting/forcing concept vs coverage.

The score on Monday night sucked, but it was truly fun to watch Daboll/Kafka and Moore create space for playmakers. Their teams are held back for a variety of reasons, but we have yet to see the Steelers scheme beat anyone, but we have seen players beat people (hi, Pickens!). Those teams top receivers on the Giants and Cowboys account for over 30% of their receiving yards from YAC where the Steelers have......7% between DJ, Claypool, and Pickens. I..... I really, didn't expect that. That number made me swear out loud. 

Giants and Cowboys have good scheme and bad QBs. Steelers have bad scheme and bad QB. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Dcash4

[warfelg]

1 minute ago, Dcash4 said:

For sure. We have talked about it before -- it's both. The same way Mitch hitting a deep shot in stride adds 30 yards RAC so does Canada playing matchmaker instead of play caller and hitting/forcing concept vs coverage.

The score on Monday night sucked, but it was truly fun to watch Daboll/Kafka and Moore create space for playmakers. Their teams are held back for a variety of reasons, but we have yet to see the Steelers scheme beat anyone, but we have seen players beat people (hi, Pickens!). Those teams top receivers on the Giants and Cowboys account for over 30% of their receiving yards from YAC where the Steelers have......7% between DJ, Claypool, and Pickens. I..... I really, didn't expect that. That number made me swear out loud. 

Giants and Cowboys have good scheme and bad QBs. Steelers have bad scheme and bad QB. 

But that’s why I ask if things in the scheme would be built off of hitting these “unschemed” openings are in there, and these just aren’t getting done to get to that.  Yesterday’s Locked On mused on that some of how much is Mitch holding back the offense vs how much is the offense holding back Mitch.  And the guys came to….there’s no good answer.  Could more be there based on guys not being open? Maybe.  Is this it and the offense is just that? Maybe.  But they agreed, you can’t know if Mitch is holding back the offense answer unless you try Kenny in there and he hits some guys that are 2nd 3rd reads.

[Dcash4]

31 minutes ago, warfelg said:

But that’s why I ask if things in the scheme would be built off of hitting these “unschemed” openings are in there, and these just aren’t getting done to get to that.  Yesterday’s Locked On mused on that some of how much is Mitch holding back the offense vs how much is the offense holding back Mitch.

I would just be more inclined to agree if there were more schemed openings. So far, it's a guy like Pickens running verticals 80% of the time and occasionally roasting a guy or DJ hitting a comeback with space. 

The Giants had a really fun play a couple weeks ago. They started in a 3x1 to the right. Motioned to 2x2. At the snap they took the TE across the formation to the flat left, creating a 3x1 to the left, and added Jones to the mix on PA and a roll to the left to put pressure on too. They changed the strength drastically from a 3x1 to the right to a 4x1 to the left. It leaves 3 defenders to account for 4 guys and it scored an easy TD. That's a really good example of concept beating a defense. Put in whatever players you want -- that play wins in that instance. I watched this play like 100 times and kept thinking this is what Canada's offense is supposed to look like. 

But that's what I don't see rewatching our games. I don't see instances you would say "damn, good call Matt....Mitch has to have that". It's usually players like DJ or Pickens winning, and Mitch not seeing/hitting them. Asking a guy to run the rail 70% of the game isn't a tremendously well thought out plan, but it will occasionally work. Mitch needs to hit on those occasions -- and maybe Kenny will -- but that doesn't make it schemed, and that's where I see the real downfall. 

[warfelg]

 

[warfelg]

You scheme guys open if they can’t get open on their own. Our guys are getting open on their own and aren’t being hit. Like that’s why I don’t get why the not being schemed open is something to continually go on about. I literally could not care less right now about scheming guys open when you can’t get the ball to guys who are open. 

[Dcash4]

8 minutes ago, warfelg said:

You scheme guys open if they can’t get open on their own. Our guys are getting open on their own and aren’t being hit. Like that’s why I don’t get why the not being schemed open is something to continually go on about. I literally could not care less right now about scheming guys open when you can’t get the ball to guys who are open. 

I'm gonna guess you do when Justin Herbert isn't walking through the door anytime soon. You cannot be this simple in the NFL if you do not have studs -- specifically at QB. I don't believe that much in Kenny, but maybe you do. Tampa gets away with simplicity because of Brady and they had been massively talented. Chargers have Herbert. Those dudes make up for schematic simplicities. 

From what I have said before -- you are talking about the minority of plays with dudes wide open being missed. This isn't 60 out of 60 plays. There's going to come a time when we circle back after Mitch is benched to "boy, we still suck huh?". 

[Dcash4]

21 minutes ago, warfelg said:

You scheme guys open if they can’t get open on their own

Sorry for the double post, but this is just an egregiously bad take. This is the NFL. You get away without scheming for great players, but it doesn't mean you don't do it at all. Andy Reid and now McDaniels scheme to get Tyreek Hill the ball, because as good as he is on his own he is devastating with scheme. And not just about getting HIM in on the scheme, but using that player and the defenses reaction to him for the rest of the teams benefit. 

Davante Adams: Green Bay schemed for him. Jefferson is schemed for. Cupp, Brown, Deebo, Diggs....all of these guys are schemed for despite the fact that they can all get open on their own. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Dcash4

[Chieferific]

2 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

Sorry for the double post, but this is just an egregiously bad take. This is the NFL. You get away without scheming for great players, but it doesn't mean you don't do it at all. Andy Reid and now McDaniels scheme to get Tyreek Hill the ball, because as good as he is on his own he is devastating with scheme. And not just about getting HIM in on the scheme, but using that player and the defenses reaction to him for the rest of the teams benefit. 

Davante Adams: Green Bay schemed for him. Jefferson is schemed for. Cupp, Brown, Deebo, Diggs....all of these guys are schemed for despite the fact that they can all get open on their own. 

Pardon the butt in, but the way I read the post @warfelgisn't suggesting top players aren't schemed.  What he is asking is, what's the point of scheming guys open if you can't even get the ball to guys that got open on their own.  Meaning, the focus needs to be more on QB accuracy.  Could be wrong tho. 

[warfelg]

19 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

Pardon the butt in, but the way I read the post @warfelgisn't suggesting top players aren't schemed.  What he is asking is, what's the point of scheming guys open if you can't even get the ball to guys that got open on their own.  Meaning, the focus needs to be more on QB accuracy.  Could be wrong tho. 

You are 100% on. If Mitch can’t even see Pickens winning a comeback, what chance does he have to see the read in a 3x1 set. If he can’t even finish a drop without getting out of the pocket, how do you expect him to let pick plays develop. 

[MOSteelers56]

Looks like full participation from everyone that was on the injury report except for Witherspoon. Dotson, Harvin, and Minkah were full goes. 

[Dcash4]

1 hour ago, Chieferific said:

Pardon the butt in, but the way I read the post @warfelgisn't suggesting top players aren't schemed.  What he is asking is, what's the point of scheming guys open if you can't even get the ball to guys that got open on their own.  Meaning, the focus needs to be more on QB accuracy.  Could be wrong tho. 

That's fine, but that's still not "You scheme guys open if they can't get open on their own". 

I am fine with the idea of QB accuracy needing to be better -- it does. But my issue still remains that increase the frequency of connection on the plays we are missing and you still do not have a good offense the vast majority of the time. The plays we are missing are downfield, the lowest percentage completion throws. The NFL has good players. Yes, our guys have won...occasionally...straight up. But so do the others teams, and that showed up on Thursday night too. 

Third downs against the Browns:

- 3rd and 5, 2 verticals concept and a lazy TE over. All well covered. Trubisky can make a better throw to DJ who has Ward pinned -- but this is not a high percentage throw. 
- 3rd and 8, 3 vertical routes. No receiver breaks until past 12 yards. QB hurried into a checkdown. Kenny doesn't make this play better. 
- 3rd and 9, repeated play first third down play, this time with Claypool running the lazy over. Move Mitch, no ones open, but he avoids pressure and fires to the sideline to a well covered Claypool. Our only conversion, and it's off a broken part of the play. 
- 3rd and 5, The play they called Claypool for PI on a "pick", but Pickens is running a vertical and just gets his butt kicked. The play is a vert with an out underneath it.....Claypool probably does pick up the first here. Hey, props to Matt! Not 3 verts. 
- 3rd and 15, ......4 verts, but, well, is 3rd and 15. Airmailed to Freiermuth over the middle. Maybe Kenny connects? Still 4th and 3. 
- 3rd and 3, 2 verts and a lazy over (Claypool). This is the ball DJ drops, but this is also well defended. Maybe Kenny does get this ball higher and outside? Maybe. 
- 3rd and 3, By now I think you know....it's 3 verts and a TE option. Najee wiffs (but hey! Pickens is open!), Mitch bails and gets sacked. Nothing here. 
-3rd and 5, Surprisingly, not 3 verts! Though, no route outside of RB/TE starts before 12 yards. Incomplete on the out to Freiermuth. Mitch does leave the pocket because a defender flashed in his face. 

I show 3rd downs because this is high leverage situation. This is MUST have. And we run....the same thing over and over. How many of these plays does Kenny change? 1? 2? Some of these end up being comebacks/stops, but the moral is still the same. It's the same concept over, and over, and over, and over. 

There are plays where he could have thrown DJ open. There's been plays this year down the field to Pickens we should connect on. But down the field are lower percentage plays. There is not some tidal wave of offensive success coming if those plays up there are all we have in the holster. There's more success to be sure, but I'd question just how much. 

TLDR version: Yes, Kenny makes things better -- but this offense needs a complete facelift to remove itself from suck. We are talking about the minority of plays improving with Kenny at QB. I am asking to improve the majority. 

[43M]

1 hour ago, Dcash4 said:

TLDR version: Yes, Kenny makes things better -- but this offense needs a complete facelift to remove itself from suck. We are talking about the minority of plays improving with Kenny at QB. I am asking to improve the majority. 

But you cant give a facelift to an offense in the middle of the season.    Obviously we would all like to see it, but its not feasible.   All you can do is make some minor tweaks and hope they can make a difference and see what you can take with you going forward.    Kenny might not improve the offense much, but he might offer certain things that Trubisky does not, and even if he doesn't play significantly better, at least he is learning and the coaches are learning what he has going into 23.

I was willing to give Mitch a chance.   That chance is over when your vision and accuracy leave that much to be desired.   Im not even convinced Mitch is an upgrade from Rudolph.   The pass blocking isnt bad enough to justify holding Pickett out much longer.   

However, I honestly dont think Pickett will play until after the bye.    I seriously doubt they are going to toss him in during the hardest part of our schedule.