Register

Board index » Stillers Talk » Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Anything and everything about the Pittsburgh Steelers
Seasoned Veteran
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby mckeesrockstheburg » Tue Sep 01, 2009 7:47 pm

lloydGreene: Good points BUT if you read some earlier posts, WHY DOES BEN HAVE TO BRING US FROM BEHIND WITH 2-MINUTE OFFENSE SSSOOOOOOOO MANY TIMES?

Exciting, yes, but with talent pool of receivers we have, no way should there be that many 2-minute "Hail Mary" drives (ala SB, etc.) We move the ball best when Ben in charge because, as you said, BA is useless.

Predictable "BUNCH" formation and 1-back crap will lead to his shortened career. 9 guys(defenders) in the box and WE CAN'T AUDIBLE OUT OF AN OFF-TACKLE OR TRAP PLAY? Come on, how many times will we see this again this year and Mendy and FWP will get booed because they can't break 2 or 3 tackles just to get to LOS?

I put this idiocy at the feet of MT (whom I really like as HC) but he has to see this crap in film sessions, doesn't he?

Read other posts by StillMill and myself about getting the linebackers off the line and slow their rush a step or two. Make them think a little out there. BA is WHY we can't even run a screen pass anymore. Line doesn't help but it is OC's job to lighten the pressure, aka Wes Welker.

Seasoned Veteran
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:15 am

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby lloydgreene » Tue Sep 01, 2009 8:20 pm

I agree. But I hear we have been prcticing the screen. All of our problems are solved.

:celebrate:

Seasoned Veteran
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby mckeesrockstheburg » Tue Sep 01, 2009 9:53 pm

Right again, Lloyd!

That's right. We've been practicing the screen. Of course, that does NOT guarantee it's place in a formal game plan. Remember, 2 run formations and 3 pass plays will keep Bruce occupied for months. Throw in a screen pass and now we're talkin' new contract, baby!

Yessirreee! Problem solved!

Now that Sweed appears to be able to handle the "tough" catch, wouldn't we all love to see him (or wallace) matched up with a linebacker, a delay crossing pattern or a 3rd & 2, 3rd & 3 or 4? Geez, now I'm thinking "move the chains, move the chains". Heck, Pats do it with Welker, EVERY game, 5 - 7 times, and it works! We have every bit the talent. Our problem is the idiot with the clipboard.

Grizzled Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 592
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:01 am

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby Pump-N-Iron » Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:03 am

mckeesrockstheburg wrote:Our problem is the idiot with the clipboard.

To quote/paraphrase Still Mill from NUMEROUS articles last season, "The biggest hurdle the Steelers face in winning another Super Bowl is NOT any team in the AFC or NFC, but their own internal saboteur, Bruce Arians."

He remains the ONLY glaring weakness from last season that has not been addressed.

Seasoned Veteran
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby mckeesrockstheburg » Wed Sep 02, 2009 12:22 pm

ROCK ON!!! ROCK-FREAKING- -ON!!!
Exactly right on!

N.A.I. = NO ARIANS INTERFERENCE

Grizzled Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 592
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:01 am

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby Pump-N-Iron » Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:29 pm

Bruce Arians is nothing more than a Blood Clot! The sooner he is removed the healthier we will be as a team.

Seasoned Veteran
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby mckeesrockstheburg » Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:19 pm

[*Bruce Arians is nothing more than a Blood Clot]

Too funny! "Blood Clot Bruce"!

You're right. You would think to beat 12-14 teams in this league each year, then to have the "O" go against our "D" everyday would be hard enough, but then to have to overcome your OC ?

Maybe we DON'T give the "O" enough credit!

"N.A.I." Are we sure they can't cut him?

Seasoned Veteran
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:15 am

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby lloydgreene » Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:47 pm

lloydgreene wrote:I agree. But I hear we have been prcticing the screen. All of our problems are solved.

:celebrate:


OBVIOUSLY MEANT WITH TONGUE IN CHEEK!

Seasoned Veteran
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:15 am

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby lloydgreene » Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:54 pm

This just in from a person inside the Steelers organization.

BA has added 33% more plays to his playbook.

The previous plays were:

RUN (give ball to running back and let him try to find a hole)
PASS (let QB keep the ball and try to avoid getting his head caved in and then throw it to Ward)

And now he has added: SCREEN PASS (QB run one way with ball, RB run the other way and then QB throws to RB)

Seriously, BA owes LeBeau head or something for allowing him to put "Super Bowl Champion" on his suck-ass resume!

Seasoned Veteran
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby mckeesrockstheburg » Fri Sep 04, 2009 7:29 am

What's nice for the players, and BA of course, is the play"book" still remains in "memo" form. The screen pass can use up some on the space remaining on the backside of the 2nd page.

Can we hope"The Turk" finds Arians today and asks for both pages of his playbook?

We can dream...

I do hope it is Redman over Carey Davis, Mundy over Carter. I like the hustle I saw in Bailey on ST as well as linebacker. Keep him over Davis there. McDonald as #5 receiver not a bad choice there.

I think this team will be better than last year. I said "Team", not "Staff".

N.A.I.

Practice Squad
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:50 am

Re: Bengals claim Russell off waivers

Postby STillCharlie » Sun Sep 06, 2009 5:22 am

. Are they saying something about their faith in Dixon?


Did you like what you saw in Dixon this preseason?

Previous

Return to Stillers Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Don't be stingy, share: