Bob Smizik's Blog

Author

Veteran sports commentator Bob Smizik offers his strong views on the major sports topics of the day.

Register to comment
Guide to commenting

Bob's Q&A

Have a question for me on sports? Click here to e-mail your question to me ... I'll answer as many as I can in future blog posts.

 

Blog Roll

Sports blogs
Steelers: Blog 'n' Gold
Penguins: Empty Netters
Pirates: PBC Blog
College Sports: Redshirt Diaries
High School: Varsity Blog
Fantasy Sports: The Fantasy Factor
 
Sports online

No Ben equals big trouble

By Bob Smizik | Saturday 5:45 p.m.

With Ben Roethlisberger out of the starting lineup against the Baltimore Ravens Sunday, the Steelers will be a distinct underdog but not without a chance to win.

Dennis Dixon, a second-year pro, will start in place of Roethlisberger, who suffered the fourth concussion of his career last Sunday against the Kansas City Chiefs. After appearing recovered early in the week, Roethlisberger began having headaches, which have ruled him out of the starting lineup. Dixon, who has been the Steelers No. 3 quarterback since making the team in 2008, was elevated to No. 2 when Charlie Batch broke his wrist against Kansas City while playing in relief of Roethlisberger.

Hopefully, the Steelers have a package to take advantage of Dixon’s considerable running skills. If they’re counting on Dixon to win this game with his arm, they could be in trouble.

Former Pitt star Tyler Palko, who was signed to the practice squad on Thursday, will serve as Dixon's backup. Roethlisberger is expected to dress and be the No. 3 quarterback.

The Steelers running game becomes front and center with Roethlisberger out and not even offensive coordinator Bruce Arians could argue that point. That puts Rashard Mendenhall at the front of the offense and for those who have forgotten, his last appearance against the Ravens did not go well.

Mendenhall started in place of injured Willie Parker in September of last season and on the first play from scrimmage in the second half he was tackled after a 3-yard gain by Ray Lewis and Trevor Pryce The play ended his season. A monumental (and legal) hit by Lewis fractured Mendenhall’s right shoulder.

He carried 9 times for 30 yards in that game. He figures to get considerably more work Sunday, as will Parker.

The fact the Steelers might have to rely on their running game accentuates the absence of starting guard Chris Kemoeatu, the team’s best run blocker, who is out with injury.

The Steelers, 6-4, would make the playoffs if the season ended today. But they cannot afford too many more losses. With Roethlisberger out, the defense -- which is missing Troy Polamalu and Aaron Smith -- would be expected to step up and limit the Baltimore offense. But that defense had trouble late against Kansas City, allowing long drives in the fourth quarter and overtime.

It’s a bleak situation but the Steelers are a strong team and capable of beating Baltimore without Roethlisberger. But it looms as a monumental challenge.

 

 


Posted Nov 28 2009, 05:41 PM by Bob Smizik

Comments

collegesportsfan wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sat, Nov 28 2009 6:07 PM

note that if Dixon gets hurt, it will be Flacco vs Palko

Gary B wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sat, Nov 28 2009 6:27 PM

After it became apparent that Charlie Batch was out  with a wrist injury this team should have had Jeff Garcia in the very next day. I know he's always done his best in a West Coast offense but a good offensive coordinator could find plays within the offense that would work for him. He was and remains the best man out there, if Dixon proves incapable they better not hesitate to correct this oversight the first thing Monday morning.

One last thing. I'd wager anything that the Steelers first offseason move will be to sign Byron Leftwich as Ben's backup.  

daquido_bazzini wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sat, Nov 28 2009 6:52 PM

Per my blog entry after the KC game...I felt the Steelers were finished.

This just makes it all the more official.

It would not be wise to put a 27 year old, 2 time Super Bowl Champion, franchise QB in a situation like this.

Let it go.

Write this season off, take a long rest and re-assess this team for another run next year.

It's the dreaded Super Bowl hangover.....But it brought us trophy #6.

Ya'Zhynka wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sat, Nov 28 2009 7:00 PM

Without Roethlisberger, they can't beat anybody.

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sat, Nov 28 2009 7:58 PM

I take no pleasure in writing this comment but: Ben Roethlisberger IS the Bruce Arians game plan, which is just one of the problems with the BA concept. No Ben? Forget about it! Damn.

Crazy Packers Fan wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sat, Nov 28 2009 8:38 PM

The Steelers better hope it doesn't come down to Palko. Still can't forget Palko's 2005 game against Ohio - 2 TD's to the other team.

JL wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sat, Nov 28 2009 9:38 PM

And here we are: the key issues of all of the heated arguments we've had on these threads during this season, will be played out on national television, tomorrow.

As for the fate of the Steeler's season, let's not forget that both during '05 and last year's Super Bowl runs, Tommy Maddox and then Byron Leftwich came off the bench to win games when Ben went down. So it's not like we can't win without our ace. But Dixon is so wet behind the ears -and we KNOW Baltimore is going to blitz the bejeezus out of him. I'm neither optimistic nor pessimistic; just "wait and see." But a return to form by our D, and a little Steeler rookie magic a la Mike Kruczek and Big Ben himself, could do the trick.

kevin morris wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sat, Nov 28 2009 11:15 PM

I really hope that they never planned to to put Ben on the field and were just perpetrating a ruse by saying he would start. This would mean they had time to install a package to take advantage of Dixon's skills.

I know this would be totally against the league rules regarding reporting injuries, but those rules are only n place to make it fairer for the betting public.  

(Ben had a relapse later in the week, according to published reports. There was no ruse. -- Bob Smizik)

wordshark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 12:46 AM

Bob, I swear your columns attract some of the most negative comments from the most negative commenters on the net...

As a long-time, lifelong Steeler fanatic, I'm actually looking forward to seeing how Dennis Dixon performs. Anyone who remembers the wins the Steelers accomplished with Mike Kruczek at QB knows that such things are possible -- IF the rest of the team is comprised of great players. This two-time Super Bowl winning team now has just such an opportunity to prove its mettle. If an injured Ben does NOT force every member of the D, the special teams, and especially the O line, RBs and receivers to play to their full potential, then they just don't deserve to win...

And please, PLEASE, do NOT bring in Jeff Garcia or any other washed up, washed out veteran as a stop-gap replacement. Double D looked good in spurts in the preseason. Turn the game over to the kid and lets see if he has the tools that attracted the organization's attention in the first place.

SteelBlitz56 wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 5:00 AM

Bob,

I love it the sky is falling all is lost! By the tone of most of these post the Steelers should just forfeit they don't stand a chance! As a matter of they should forfeit the rest of the season too. I read one posting that they should sit Ben, Hines, Tone, Miller and a host of others for the rest of the season crazy!  If you did not know football is a contact sports. Player get injured and injuries affect teams, but the good ones like the Patriots and Colts to name few overcome them. As the saying goes "when the going gets tough that's when these Steelers fans give up i.e. hop off the bandwagon!" FYI that's why games are not played on paper if so they would be at least 8-2 or 9-1! For the record I don't have my head in the sand. I understand that this game has become even more difficult to win now that # 7 is not playing! This game will tell us allot about the team, coaching will they close ranks and fight or collapse? Will Arians be able to adapt he play calling for DD according to his critics no. Will Lebeau's # 1 ranked defense step up and have a signature game? We already know for many it's sacrilegious to criticize him even though his defense has collapsed and lost 4th quarter leads this year. Last but not least will Tomlin show some fire and have these guys ready to play? They can win I believe if DD can manage the game, limit turnovers and make a few passing plays to keep the Ravens honest! Should they be in a better position yep but it is what it is. As long as they are not eliminated for the playoffs they are still the champs! If and when that happens I'll start looking forward to next year not a second before. Go Steelers!  

kevin morris wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 7:59 AM

Bob, I know that is the official story. I also know that generally speaking guys don't play the week after suffering a concussion these days, and the league is probably going to codify that standard this off-season. When they initially announced plans for him to start I thought it was a bad idea. The idea of Ben at less than 100% alertness being attacked by the Ravens D scares me.

By the way I'm not saying he didn't have a relapse, I'm postulating (actually hoping) that even if he hadn't had one they might have chosen not to play him prior to it.

Obviously those closer to the team would have actual info on this subject; I'm just out here in Des Moines hoping for the best.

(I think Ben took most of the snaps on Wed. and Thurs., which would indicate they planned on him playing. -- Bob Smizik)

sonnydrysdale wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 8:16 AM

This is not the perfect stage for Dennis Dixon to make his debut, but he is a winner on the field and in life. If his Steeler teammates play up to their capabilities they will be victorious.

The character of this team is front and center and I for one believe they will succeed. The 2009 Ravens are a major disappointment to their fans. Their defense is over worked and thin. Their offense has problems scoring in the red zone and their kicker is a band-aid. Tomlin's coaching prowess will be tested today.

(Extremely rose-colored glasses, sonny.  Wish it were as easy as you make it sound. -- Bob Smizik)

jayroB wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 9:07 AM

While this is a desperate situation and the negativity in the comments understable, take a stroll with me as I try to find a way the Stillers can win today....I admit, this is quite a leap of faith.  

This is a veteran championship team - They know what is at stake today and have "circled the wagons".  

Defense needs to pitch a shutout - very possible against the Ravens.

NO ABSOLUTELY NO RETURNS OF ANY KIND FOR A TOUCHDOWN. I think they know this and will actually pull this off today.

Dixon, while inexperienced, must know this offense pretty well.  Been with it for almost two years now, and while meetings, camps, practices and pre-season are not even close to game situations, he should know the playbook.

Coaches will tailor a game plan to minimize Dixon mistakes.  

Need a big rushing day, and the Ravens have given up some 100 yard rushers lately.

Dixon will not have a very good day on the stat sheet - maybe 12-20, 120 yards, but if he can convert some 3rd downs with those 12 completions, that will go a long way.   I can see Dixon improvising alot today (ie- running, both in a scramble and designed runs).  Need to do whatever they have to do today to move chains and pick up points any way they can.

this could be a 12-9 game - not sure who gets 12 though.  

Like I said, It is quite a leap, but for now, it is something to believe in.

snoel wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 9:19 AM

Bob:

I'm pleased to see Palko on the roster.  He would be my first choice as the point man in kickoff return coverage.  I remember his block in the Pitt/Boston College game a few years ago, and this stud will probably not be afraid to hit anyone returning a kickoff or punt.

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 9:39 AM

The Steeler offense, by design, is NOT built for this very circumstance, i.e. functioning without Ben. The Ravens will commit to stopping the run (and they are one team that can do that when they commit to it) and we don't have a true running game. The Ravens will force the Steelers and D. Dixon to pass. How do you like our odds now??

Our offense will be more than happy to oblige the Ravens D, putting our defense, as per usual, in tough spot after tough spot. What else is new??

UNLESS Dixon does his best Mike Vick impression, we're toast.

And you Steeler Defense naysayers- WE'RE RANKED #1 IN THE NFL!!!! PERENIALLY AMONG THE BEST IN THE LEAGUE!!!!

With an OC who doesn't understand winning TEAM football.

 

(The Steelers rushing offense is 18th in the NFL, not good but better than it was last when the team whose offensive coordinator doesn't ``understand winning team football'' won the Super Bowl.

Very few NFL teams are built to function without their starting QB. -- Bob Smizik)

jayroB wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 9:52 AM

SteelerMark

Good points regarding Balt stopping the run and the Stees D...

Even with all the inuries, I still this being a close game, thanks to the Stees D.

Who knows, keep it close anything can happen.  

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 10:09 AM

Bob- As we all know (except you for some reason) the Steelers won the Super Bowl with defense and Ben running around like a kid on a playground, and in spite of Arians poor coaching philosophy.

I just can't spend the time listing all the examples of BA's shortcomings (see past Blitz posts) but let me mention one...

How many come from behind losses did Cowher teams give up as opposed to Tomlin teams? Has the defense ever been better than during the Tomlin years?

As to teams functioning with back up QBs- Most teams start "back up" QBs compared to Big Ben. Look at Jax just this year. Look at Denver just this year. Look at the Steelers of Ben's rookie year (14-0). Look at the Dolphins with Chad Henne this year. Look at Baltimore of Flaccos rookie year. The point is running teams can do just fine with average QB play. Look at the Vikings with Favre this season. Passing teams not so much.

(The Steelers won the Super Bowl with Roethlisberger executing the Arian's no-huddle offense. Yes, defense was the dominant force on that team last year, but the offense also contributed, although having lost Hartings, Faneca and Smith (by injury) from the 2005 Super Bowl line. --- Bob Smizik)

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 10:11 AM

Bob- By the way- Last season you we're telling me that the Steeler's run game was as good as ever. Now your saying it isn't too good this year, but better than last? LOL

 

(The Steelers had one of the worst rushing offenses in the NFL last season. So, yes, this year's is better. -- Bob Smizik)

chilco99 wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 10:39 AM

Signing Jeff Garcia to the team asap would have been the best move. He is an improvisor and hustler on the field, in great physical condition, and could have stepped right in to help this team.

Apparently the Steeler organization feels it would be best to fold up tent and treat this game like a pre-season scrimmage game.

Steeler faithful: sometimes you need to live in reality and recognize and admit a bad product when you see it.

A win isn't out of the realm of possibilities, BUT then what would this say about this AFC Division????

If you start drinking now it won't matter come game time!

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 10:39 AM

Sorry Bob, unless the no huddle is dropping back to avoid a sack, then scrambling out of the pocket to hit a WR who has had to run to open ground after abandoning the original route, it wasn't the no huddle.

And BTW the Steeler offense was terrible in the Super Bowl, against a poor Arizona defense.

Tomlin should tell BA to run the ball 60% of the time through the first 3 quarters of each game, and 66% of the runs should be with a fullback. Then post season, Tomlin should get a coordinator who believes in that philosophy.

jayroB wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 10:56 AM

Steeler Mark -

Now you have lost your mind  -

Criticizing an offense for it's performance in the Super Bowl?  A game that they won!  

Ben - 21-30, 234 yards with a game winning drive as time expired to win it...sounds pretty good to me.

and as far as going against a poor Arizona defense?  they were in the SUPER BOWL!  must have been a pretty good defense to get to the super bowl.

Run 60% of the time?  that's silly - don't you think the Ravens are going to force the stees to pass the ball today....you must take what the defense gives you at times.

You need to realize that the steeler offense under Arians has been pretty good.  Not great, but very good.  

The past two seasons this team has an 21-9 record, including a super bowl.   I don't think that is the sign of a troubled offense or an incompetent OC.  

chilco99 wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 10:58 AM

Bob,

You seem to be more of a statitician and bean counter when it comes to measuring a sports team, but sometime's you need to look at the intangibles and do a gut check.

As exciting as Bruce Arian's offense can be at times, something just doesn't seem to jive with this offense???

IMO I think that physical beat'em up/grind down the clock in the 4th quarter is missing. I know you say they are grinding down the clock, but I also know the last thing a defensive lineman want's to do is tackle a BIG fast RB busting up the middle in the 4th quarter (i.e., shoulders ache, arms are weary, and lungs are gassed,) you get the idea.

(I measure a sports team lots of way. Statistics are one of them. Accomplishments are another.  The Steelers were in the playoffs in 2007, won the Super Bowl in 2008 and, at the moment, are headed back to the playoffs. What's your problem with that?

And who's to say if Arians had Bettis at RB and Kordell Stewart at QB, he wouldn't emphasize the running game.  ---  Bob Smizik)

chilco99 wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 11:05 AM

BTW: does anyone other than me think Ben looks a little soft and pudgy this year?

I guess Vegas can do that to a guy? Well...... I'd rather be overfed than underfed.

pens01 wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 11:11 AM

Hi Bob,

I wanted to encourage you to cover the Penguins a bit more in your blog. You tackle all of the other sports, but hockey seems to be a real blind spot. I was hoping to maybe see a mention of Sidny Crosby's epic hat trick last night  on hat giveaway night which sent more hats than I've ever seen to the ice. Other than the lack of hockey coverage, great blog though! Thanks for all the hard work.

jayroB wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 11:12 AM

Chilco99

Not sure if he looks soft and pudgy, but at times it looks like he has lost a step or two of speed..... which, is completely understandable.  

A few years of age and in the NFL will do that to anyone..you get slower not faster over the years  - even just a few

SteelBlitz56 wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 12:47 PM

Bob,

I need your help in contacting Steelers management. I figured out how to fix the Steelers. Seriously it came to me as I was playing Madden my Steeler team is in first place!. First fire Arians right before kick off he's a looser never won an important game as OC. That would put fear into the offense. Then ban the forward pass it's bad. Hire Weis he's a winner! Line up with two extra linemen in place of wide receivers and run. I'm telling you it worked on Madden my team smashed the Raven with zero pass plays. Then let the fans you know with years of coaching experience call in the plays 32 dive will work. Oh yeah fire Lebeau too if his defenses gives up one play of more than twenty yards can't have that from # 1 ranked defense. Shoot we know it's never the players fault for mistakes on the field it's the schemes! Take all authority away from Tomlin like Redskins have done to Zorn working fine there. Fly Garcia in to start even though he's a west coast guy and does not know the system he will adapt.  Bob this works I traded for him on the game. If they follow my example they will win I have an extensive football background which includes pee wee, midget, junior high and high school ( 4 TD's in a single game baby). Last but not least beg Cowher to leave CBS and come back and coach!. They will never win without him on the sidelines thank you.

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 1:01 PM

Just to be clear in regard to SB victory last year- I didn't say the team has bad offensive personnel, and certainly not Ben, I just said that the offense plan smells, and that plan is instituted by the OC, who should take his brilliance elsewhere next season. I said Ben and the defense won the SB last season in spite of BA because... they did!

I am as die hard as the next die hard. I'd just like to see more championships than BA can give us.

(So far Arians is one Super Bowl championship in two seasons. That's a pretty fair percentage. -- Bob Smizik)

jayroB wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 1:43 PM

I can't take it SteelerMark....

you wrote:

" And BTW the Steeler offense was terrible in the Super Bowl, against a poor Arizona defense"

It wasn't anywhere close to terrible - it won the SB.

Then....you wrote:

"I'd just like to see more championships than BA can give us. "

BA has two full seasons as OC (this is his third season as OC) and the stees have made the playoffs both years with him as OC and won a SB.  

2 seasons, one SB - how many championships do you expect a guy to win in 2 years?

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 2:05 PM

Again- The Super Bowl was in spite of a poor offensive strategy. So I sat on the bench of a varsity baseball champioship team in HS. So I was one for two. Did I win it?

(He calls the plays. It's his offense. They scored 31 points in the first round of the playoffs vs. San Diego. Give it a rest.  They're defending Super Bowl champions who are  6-4 and if the defense had played close to its ability in the 4th quarter and overtime last week, they'd be 7-3 and there would be no discussion about Arians. -- Bob Smizik)

Hey Bob- How did Arians do in Cleveland? Or does that not count? Hey Bob- When Cowher could have hired Arians as OC did he? When he could have promoted him did he? He's a WR coach at best, face it.

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 2:09 PM

It's Ok- Bob you can tell me how good Arians is this year and then tell me how bad he was next year... Just like you told me how good the Steeler run game was last year only to tell me how bad they were now.

(At what point last season did I tell you the Steelers had a good running game? -- Bob Smizik)

jayroB wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 2:16 PM

Question.....can anyone give a clear ruling on the "emergency QB rule"  

Something does not make sense to me this afternoon.  

If Ben is out for concussion symptons, then he should be out - end of story.... Not, out unless we have an emergency.

He should not even be dressed for this game.  But, if he is dressed and prepared to play in an "emergency situation", then in my opinion he should be dressed as a the back-up #2 QB.  

what is the actual rule.

 

The No. 3 quarterback cannot enter the game until the fourth quarter unless one or both (I'm not sure) of the other QBs is injured.  You're right. It makes no sense.  He can either play or he can't.  I expect more light will be shed on this after the game. -- Bob Smizik)

jayroB wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 2:20 PM

Steeler Mark -

I am beginning to worry about your obsession with Arians.

His and the team's record and stats the past 2+ seasons speak for themselves.

You want them to run 2/3 of the plays,with a fullback - this would create a situation where the offense is running against 9 people "in the box"   - near impossible to do

SteelBlitz56 wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 2:40 PM

Wow SteelerMark,

So because Cowher did not hire Arians to be his OC he's a bum!  According to your logic why did he have him on his staff if he was so bad?  I guess that means that any coach he did not hire is a bum and should not be in the NFL. The Roonies did not hire Whiz or Grim they must be bums they did loose the SB lost right. From what I heard Cowher did not recommend Whiz or Grim as HC! Oh by the way, like I said before BA will be gone only when MT get fed up with him. So get use to him as the OC he's going to be here I think for a while.  

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 2:52 PM

Hey Bob- Whether Steelers win KC or not, people want BA gone. Steeler defense is #1 in NFL! Even the best D gets beat (and Im tired of pointing out how often the D gets put in bad fiels position by the O, AND how often the O scores because the D sets them up in scoring position). Look at your own archives for your support of the run game under Arians.

And Jay- I'm not suggesting anything that other NFL teams don't do with run game. Guess what you do when there are 9 in box?

Passing TD baby!

(``People'' always want the offensive coordinator gone because they truly believe they can call the plays better.  I've seen no indication that Tomlin wants him gone.

All I can do is point out the Steelers record under Arians and they are about fifth or sixth in total offense in the NFL this season.  It is possible to win with a quarterback dominated offense (Indianpolis and New England). -- Bob Smizik

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 4:47 PM

Let the words of Coach LeBeau be commentary on the Steeler offensive approach:

"You just have to be able to contain the ball-carrier and not let him control the game," LeBeau explained. "If all they have to do is hand the ball to the running back and they continue to move the ball consistently, there's not a whole lot of things they can mess up. You may get a holding call every now and then, but they don't have to pass protect you, they don't have to throw it, they don't have to catch it, all they have to do is turn around and hand it to somebody, and their percentage of execution is going to be pretty high on that.

"So, you have to force them into something else other than that or you're going to have a tough time"

"A lot of good things can happen for the defense when they're passing," LeBeau said.

So we pass the ball in spite of this wisdom, and play right into the defenses hands.

BTW Bob- Sacks and Interceptions don't count in offensive rankings do they? But they do count in W's an L's!!

SteelerMark wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Sun, Nov 29 2009 5:20 PM

And I didn't want Erhardt gone. Gailey I didn't like I'll admit. I didnt want Mularkey gone. I didn't want Whisenhunt gone. I do want BA gone, because his offensive philosphy is fundamentally flawed. Ask Coach LeBeau.

SteelBlitz56 wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Mon, Nov 30 2009 12:39 AM

SteelMark,

I know after this game you will be calling for Lebeau head right? Yes his # 1 ranked defense could not hold a 4th quarter lead again! No excuses like the offense put them in a bad position. They let the Ravens drive over 70 yards to tie the game. Third and 21 Ravens get 17. Fourth and 5 they get about 10. This game should have never gone to OT. By the way, # 51 gets beat on the RB screen every time.

BlitzBurghDude wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Wed, Dec 2 2009 12:02 PM

Of the last 8 Raven possessions,  after halftime & prior to the OT game winning FG drive, which was set up via turnover by the offense:

ONLY 1 ended with points allowed...a FG (3 pts.)

4 - Raven drives ended with punts, 2 were 3 & out!

2 - Raven drives ended with takeaways by the Steeler D!!!

*** Of note: One drive of the eight started in Steeler territory & 3 times the defense put the Steeler offense within 5 yds. of mid-field to start drives after halftime.

BlitzBurghDude wrote re: No Ben equals big trouble
on Wed, Dec 2 2009 2:13 PM

JL wrote-

"As for the fate of the Steeler's season, let's not forget that both during '05 and last year's Super Bowl runs, Tommy Maddox and then Byron Leftwich came off the bench to win games when Ben went down."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maddox didn't win any games on the road to XL...C-Batch did!