Third and Long:
The Steelers problems on defense certainly illustrate the Law of Unintended Consequences.� It is exactly due to their success last season in re-asserting their run-D that both opponents so far this year have, pretty much, abandoned that mode of attack.� Since time immemorial, Coach Cowher and his brain-trust have sought to �force teams into passing situations�; stuff the run then bring the dime, keep receivers underneath, come up and hit; you know the drill.� Now, every down is a passing down and what began last winter (probably out of desperation on the Bengals� side) has evolved, this fall, into a non-stop nightmare.
Part of the problem is structural; teams that have had success against high voltage passing attacks (for example, against the Rams) generally have 3 or 4 D-linemen who can rush the passer.� Think New Orleans throughout 99-�00, Tampa Bay in the �99 NFC championship, Philadelphia in the �01 opener and the NYG last week.� For those teams, pressure with (4) covered up fairly mediocre D-backs, except of course for those in the Eagle�s nest.� In fact, the Eagle secondary is so talented that Jim Johnson could bring blitzes from all over the field, even including sending both CB, while relying on the rest to cover up.� For those other teams, it was generally rush 4, Cover Two with some variant of 4 zone or man underneath.
The teams noted above do not furnish a template for the Steelers.� Our team has, at most, (1) D-lineman who is a rush threat, not (3) and certainly not (4).� Further, except for Derrick Brooks in Tampa Bay, LB have figured little, if at all, in those teams� success vs. the pass.� That can�t happen here because, here, the LB are the elite group.� The Steelers will succeed, or fail, on that unit�s play; obviously, they will not be acquiring Leroi Glover, Warren Sapp, Hugh Douglas or Michael Strahan to say nothing of Troy Vincent or Brian Dawkins between now and the Browns tilt on the 29th.� What they�ve got is what they�ve got; given their against-the-grain personnel, whatever fix the coaching staff can kluge together will be largely unprecedented.
At one time, the Steelers schemed to force their opponents to pass.� Well, they�ve gotten what they wanted.� Now what?� The opposition have accepted the premise that they must play one-dimensional ball and in doing so have turned what was, by lore a decided disadvantage into a huge competitive edge.� Logically, the Steelers have to follow the same route.� It has been said that the no-huddle is designed to force the Steelers to stay in their base defense; it is evident that the spread attacks the LB and safeties by forcing them to play in space.� History suggests that Porter and Bell flourish in an open game; maybe, Farrior and Logan can perform there too but the rest of LB/S corps work best in close quarters.� Still, the Steelers are a 3-4 team; if that set is a mismatch against the pass, well, the coaching staff has to accept that premise and then turn it to advantage, exactly as their Pat/Raider colleagues have done previously.
In fact, given the Steelers personnel, you�ve got to wonder why they ever use a 6-back set.� The Steelers don�t have (6) DB with coverage skills; it is questionable whether they have (5), or even (4).� Beyond that:
- The dime takes their best stuffer, Hampton, and their brand new cover ILB, Farrior, off the field.� Very strange: in the 2001 draft, the Steelers passed on Nate Clement to select Hampton.� Now, by translation, when the Steelers sub their 5th or 6th DB for Casey, essentially they have passed on Clement for either Townsend or Logan.� That�s a step down.��
Hampton isn�t going to get to the QB but he doesn�t make many run stops either. Hampton�s job is to soak up blockers; given he does that in the run game it follows that he can soak up pass protectors too.� Despite his low stat count, Hampton is essential towards stopping the run.� IMO that may be true for the pass as well.� Consider that if Hampton cancels two then when the Steelers rush 4 against 5, three would be in 1 on 1 situations.� That ought to help Aaron Smith�� Beyond that, Hampton could pave the way for an inside blitz, by safety, by Porter, Farrior or by Bell.� So much for the three-step drop.
As we all know, the Steelers were 8 of 20 stopping third down conversions last Sunday.� Aside from the KO return TD, the plays that gutted their chances were (2) inside shovels including one to Kirby near the Raider goal, and the Garner draw.� Hampton was off the field on each play; I�m willing to bet he would have stuffed both shovel passes though I�ll concede the draw was a hell of a call.�
Essentially, those shovels are running plays; for sure, neither the LB nor DB could be in positions to defend.� Add that shovel yardage to the Steelers current 4.5 YPC against figure and, in the dime pack, you have a team set up to stop neither the run nor the pass.
- A couple years ago, Kirkland was the cover ILB; last season, Holmes took over.� Farrior was brought in as a coverage upgrade.� Why then would you plan to have him off the field in coverage conditions?� Maybe, a LB isn�t a great match-up against a WR but, for the most part, the Steelers have seen just (3) WR with some combination of RB, FB or TE to make the 5-eligible.� Presumably, a coverage LB can handle a TE or RB; so far, our starting safeties have not.
In (5) years, Farrior has 3 INT and 18 PD including 9 last season.� In (7) years, Lee Flowers has 2 INT and 24 PD including 9 in 1999.� I keep wondering what the difference is between our SS and coverage LB.� So far, all I�ve got is that one is bigger and faster than the other.
In point of fact, every safety on the roster is a big hit, shaky coverage SS type. Of those, Flowers is clearly the best.� The players best suited for FS are starting at CB; however, since the Steelers have only (4) healthy at that position, they�ll stick.� That said if Coach Lewis does nothing else, I hope he�ll move Logan in ahead of Alexander at FS.� Alex looks all done; never a strong coverage guy, he has missed far too many tackles.� Sit Alex, start Logan and, when there�s a package, it�s got to be a nickel.
Going into their third game, the Steelers are facing exactly the kind of third and long condition that have baffled them so far.� The playoff odds are long for teams opening 0-2; I think 17 of 176 have made the grade.� If the Steelers go down in the third game, those odds must trend towards the astronomical.� Now, the problems on offense are all about turnovers; sure, this team has to run the ball more often but, against the Browns, that�s a no-brainer.� The real drama is all about the defense flopping from first to near worst; as usual, the burden is on that side.� I�m encouraged that Coach Lewis is focused on the Steelers third down failures; in ten days, he�ll see what he�s developed. �������