AFFC Preview:
Already, the 2005 Steelers have carved a niche in the ever-expanding corpus that is NFL history, and they are poised to do more. This is the first team in the Cowher Era to capture even one playoff tilt, beyond the tri-rivers. Winning two, they became just the second of ten (playoff) editions with dual wins. Now two down, and one to Detroit. However, it is worth noting that should these PS reach, if the Bus (finally) does stop in the 313, well, that will be (very nearly) unprecedented. See:
The Reign of Bill began in 1992; since then, only five teams came from the Wildcard Round to the Super Bowl:
|
Year |
Team |
Seed |
Regular Season Record |
Remarks |
|
2003 |
Carolina |
#3 |
11-5 |
NFC South champion |
|
2000 |
Baltimore |
#4 |
12-4 |
AFC Central runner-up behind the Titans. 12-4 mark was T-2 in the AFC. Closed the regular season in a rush, winning 7 straight. |
|
1999 |
Tennessee |
#4 |
13-3 |
Like Baltimore above: AFC runner-up (to JAX); 13-3 mark was T-2 in the AFC. Closed winning 4 straight. |
|
1997 |
Denver |
#4 |
12-4 |
AFC West runner-up to KC; 12-4 mark was better than all others in AFC. Denver closed slow, losing two of their final three, and three of six. Denver won it all the following season too. |
|
1992 |
Buffalo |
#4 |
11-5 |
Four AFC teams were 11-5; Buffalo lost the divisional tiebreaker to Miami. This group suffered the third of four straight defeats in the Super Bowl. |
Both Denver and Baltimore won it all; both Carolina and Tennessee came close but the Boys butchered Buffalo. That�s it; that�s the list. Eight teams in each of thirteen seasons began in the Wildcards, 104 in all. Five advanced, which is 4.8%, but that�s not the bad news. This is: each of those teams had one home show. Not since those pre-dynastic Pats of 1985 has a team traveled the road all the way to the Super Bowl. Sadly, that bunch came to a grim end, 46-10 versus the 46 Ditka Bears.
Of course, that was then and, well, this isn�t. Most seasons, fifth and sixth seeds are merely playoff fodder but this time both #5 Carolina and #6 Pittsburgh have come to the brink. Befuddling many a prognosticator, both are 2-0 on the road, in that brutal playoff regime where, coming into this season, home teams had won about 72% in round 1 and over 80% round two. But, this time:
- Home teams are 3-5, so far. Much of that can be ascribed to the Virgin QB Syndrome. Chris Simms, Byron Leftwich, Eli Manning, Palmer/Kitna and Rex Grossman; each made their first playoff start, and each went down. Four flopped before the home volk; only Leftwich was on the road. It�s worth noting that Carolina benefited twice, first drawing Manning, the Least, and then Grossman.
For a change, it wasn�t all about the turnovers, not entirely. True, the Bucs, Jags, Giants and Bengals were (-2), or worse; and the Pats were crushed under the weight of (-4) in Denver. However, the Bears were even with Carolina, in that regard, and both the Seahawks and Steelers won last weekend, even while two down in the takes race.
In the regular season, two takes to the good is a winner at about 90%. In these playoffs, it�s been 71% and that�s not unusual. Consider the 2002 Maddox Steelers: two down beating the Browns, up three going down to the Titans. Then too, take margin in any given game is tough to predict. That figure, season-long, does tell us something about performance, season-long, but very little with regard to any given game. For instance, the Bucs had a yearlong edge over the Skins, as did the Jags over the Pats. Not on the day they met, but on balance. Relying on this year�s rate, we could have predicted Carolina over both of their playoff opponents, but the Steelers over neither.
One edge cuts still, YPA differential. Discovered, here, in our long gone Week in Review series, circa 2002-03, that is calculated easily: (O-side YPA- D-side YPA = YPA differential). This factor was the #2 indicator studied over those two seasons. Then, a winning factor (WF) of ~1.53 but better still in these playoffs, where teams bringing in the better mark are 8-0, presently. That is a WF of 2.0; perfect, to date. So, here�s the good news:
- The Steelers� YPA differential was 1.85. That trumps Denver, in at 1.00. Those are regular season marks; it may be worth mentioning that Indy closed at 1.30 and the Bengals (lacking a playoff worthy defense) 0.09.
In the days following that upset in Indy, major commentators, simple brutes that they are, stood dumbstruck, or struck dumber, at the Steelers� early aerial assault. Few had a clue; maybe, the venerable Dr. Z did get a whiff but, if so, he didn�t follow that down. Evidently, most screening these Steelers saw, not the 2005 edition, but some earlier set, one with a truly dominating run game: 2004, 2001 or 1997. Not here, and to their credit, not at Football-except-at-Fox-Outsiders either, where, following that Game 11 debacle in Hoosierville, the estimable Ned Macey made mention that, to win next time, the PSO must open up. Of course, that was the conclusion reached pre-Game 11 here but, in fairness, it should be acknowledged that FO scans all the action while this site does not.
Ok then.
It�s a good bet that the boyz at League HQ, like their kindred at the networks, were fixing for a Pats-Colts rematch. So it goes. Last Saturday, the Broncos knocked out the Steelers� nemesis, New England; the next day, the Steelers returned the favor. Both wins featured considerable pressure exerted on two QB, Manning and Brady, previously considered immune. Certainly, both D-coordinators must hope to accomplish the same Sunday, especially as neither Plummer nor Roethlisberger tote that rep, presently.
In the past two playoffs, Denver met the Colts under their Dome; twice, they were destroyed, the cumulative score being Indy 90, Denver 34. Then strafed repetitively, and sharing a division with both the resurgent Bolts and perennial O-side powerhouse Chiefs, Denver GM, HC and resident genius (or, resident evil) Mike Shanahan spent the past off-season recasting his defense. That set entered this campaign with five new starters. Generally, that�s a recipe for disaster but not this time, not in the Mile High. Beginning there:
Denver Defense:
Conventional wisdom has it that the Broncos are stout against the run but can be had in the air. As shown below, the opposite is closer to the truth.
Bronco-D stats:
|
|
YPG |
Plays faced |
Average per play |
TD allowed |
Remarks |
|
Denver run-D |
85.2 #2 |
344 Fewest |
4.0 YPC T-15th |
10 T-7th |
Denver faced (39) fewer runs than #2 KC, and (42) less than #3 San Diego. There�s your AFC West. |
|
Denver pass-D |
227.7 #29 |
613 Most |
6.25 YPA #4 |
20 T-7th |
Denver faced (33) more passes than #31, the NYG, (46) fewer than #28 San Diego and (54) fewer than #27 KC. Again, AFC West. |
Notes:
- The Steelers yielded (10) rush TD too, on (402) carries. Others yielding (10) faced even more runs, Tampa Bay (438) and Green Bay (504).
- Both the Giants and Bolts yielded (20) aerial TD too; their PA against is noted above. New Orleans was there, but the hapless Saints gave (20) TD on just (418) attempts. Of note: the PSD was T-2 with (15) TD against and #24 at (549) attempts against.
Of course, a good deal of that has to do with game situation; opponents forced to catch up chucking. Like the Steelers, Denver generally played on the lead. Like the Steelers, theirs is a run heavy, clock chewing attack. The Denver-O was #2 in RA, with (542) rushes, (7) back of #1 Pittsburgh. Just as these teams have a similar O-side modus, so too for the D-group:
Four teams, four pass-D stats:
|
|
Sack Rate (per FO) |
YPA |
Completion % |
Passer Rating Against |
Denver |
4.6% #32 |
6.25 #4 |
56.1% #3 |
72.2 #4 |
Pittsburgh |
8.0% T-3 |
6.35 #5 |
57.4% #8 |
74.8 #8 |
|
Indianapolis |
8.2% #2 |
6.82 #20 |
67.4% #32 |
83.0 #23 |
|
Cincinnati |
4.8% #30 |
7.22 #28 |
62.4% #28 |
73.1 #5 |
Notes:
- Denver�s sack rate looks like Cincinnati�s. Both teams have had issues upfront. The Bengals� D-linemen could not play the run; stacking the line, Cincinnati was exposed in the air. Denver�s D-linemen cannot pressure the passer; blitzing LB and/or S, they have generated considerable pressure, but few takedowns.
- Denver�s YPA looks like Pittsburgh�s. Both have lead CB who have, in some games, removed an opponents� #1 receiver. Both have rushed effectively; Denver has generated pressure, if not sacks; for the Steelers, the opposite is so.
- Denver�s completion rate looks like Pittsburgh�s too. Of note: the Colts and Steelers have similar sack rates. However, Indy rarely blitzed while the PS did so, often. Evidently though, seven Colts weren�t enough in coverage; note that #32 completion % against.
- Denver�s passer rating looks like Cincinnati�s. As we saw, per our Wildcard Preview, the Bengals� mark was propped up by their outsized INT haul (31). Factoring that to normal, the Bengal-D spiraled to the bottom. Then, for purposes of this discussion, it�s fair to say that Denver�s number matches Pittsburgh�s, again.
If Denver�s air-D is similar to that of the Steelers, the same is true upfront. Both teams play a gap conscious scheme, D-linemen absorbing protection, LB and S coming to the ball. There are some differences; the Bronco D-line slants far more than the PS. However, gap control is job #1 for both. Denver is a 4-3 team but conceptually they are more akin to the 3-4 Steelers than, say, the 4-3 Colts. Front to back:
RDT Gerard Warren is the latest in a line of Bronco space-eaters, stretching back through (the immensely disappointing) Daryl Gardner to Lionel Dalton. Over four seasons in Cleveland, Big Money, aka Penny, made eight starts against the PS (inactive @ Heinz, 2004). He had one impact game but in six Faneca beat him up and down the field and, in one other (2001 season finale), Keydrick Vincent did the same. LDT Michael Myers is an active, penetrating type; a career rotation player, Myers shares time with last season�s starter Monsanto Pope. Both are Tommy Harris-size DT, but neither so sudden. Like Warren, Myers came over from Cleveland, as did backup RDE Ebenezer Ekuban, this in a deal sending Reuben Droughns to the Erie shore. Ekuban is mainly a pass down player.
A fourth x-Clevelander, Courtney Brown, starts at LDE. Brown replaces Reggie Hayward, who went to Jacksonville last winter, following Bert Berry out of the Mile High (pre-2004, Berry had taken the FA tollway to AZ). Once upon a time, Brown was a star in waiting but that�s all over now. Injuries have taken their toll so, at this point, while he is better at the POA than either Berry or Hayward, he doesn�t bring it off the edge. The fourth starter, RDE Trevor Pryce, is the sole D-side survivor from Denver�s 1998 Super Bowl aggregate. At that time Pryce was a pass rush DT; a few seasons later, he moved outside full time. Pryce is a decent run defender, on point, but is susceptible wide. A sack-master early in his career (five seasons with 9-13 from the DT spot), Pryce, since, has been hobbled with chronic back problems. He had just (4) sacks this season; last week, the Pats blanked him entirely, stats-wise. Marvel Smith has struggled with speed this year, but that is not a commodity Pryce can ply. Once, he was sudden but now he is not.
From 2001 thru �04, the PSO generally ground down the Cleveland Browns, mainly facing those D-linemen noted above. However, those yards didn�t come easily, for the most part, and, regardless, the difference between the respective LB sets, at Erie and Rocky Bottom, is night and day. Andra Davis, Cleveland�s best, wouldn�t start at the Mile High; it�s not likely another Brown LB would make the team.
The Denver LB corps is similar to Indy�s: on the small side, but they do play fast and they do play with force. That�s bad news for the PO: in two games against the Colts, Steeler RB gained 180 yards on 59 carries, close enough to 3.0 yards per trip. Colt LB combined for (44) T; little Gary Brackett put one on the behemoth Bus, stopping hearts (figuratively) throughout Steeler Nation (and, literally, one).
MLB Al Wilson leads the Denver unit. Wilson has exceptional range, his (9) PD ranks 4th on the team; however, playing with a cast on one hand, he may struggle to wrap. Athletically, LOLB DJ Williams is as good as it gets; production-wise not so much: Williams has (0) sacks, (0) INT, (3) PD and (1) FF. He is highly susceptible to misdirection. Returning from a year�s exile in Tampa Bay, WOLB Ian Gold, cut into Williams� PT; he remains in packages but Williams does not. Gold led the team in T and is on the lead with (4) FF. He is an exceptional chase player, but questionable at the POA.
If there is a lockdown CB extant, operating under the Manning Rules in this NFL, that man is LCB Champ Bailey. Early in the season, Bailey had some hamstring problems and he was victimized, to some extent. Restored, Champ had an INT in five straight games; on the season (8) of Denver�s (20), two that he returned for TD. Few CB defended more passes than Pittsburgh�s own Ike Taylor, but Bailey was one. Playing in fourteen games, Bailey had (23) PD; Taylor (20) in sixteen tilts. True, the Pats did make some plays to Bailey�s side last week. However, Champ made the game-changer. The short form is: Bailey can be had, but he cannot be trifled with.
Rookie Dominique Foxworth is on the other side. Last spring�s draft featured a deep crop of smallish, quick CB. Of those, Foxworth was foremost closing with (2) INT and (16) PD, Townsend numbers. Earlier in the season, Foxworth played NCB, with rookie Darrent Williams starting. Williams was injured mid-season (groin), missed a few; on his return, he moved into the nickel role. Williams is small, but plays big. In early action, he established with (2) INT and (10) PD. Healthy, he�s a player, but that core injury may have sapped some quickness.
On the edges, Denver�s secondary is young, fast and talented; in the middle: old, slow and ordinary. SS Nick Ferguson is 32 years old; FS John Lynch, 34. Both can play going forward; both are used (heavily) blitzing from the slot; neither can cover. As noted earlier, Indianapolis humiliated Denver in last season�s playoffs, precipitating big changes on the D-side. Upfront, with those Browns; at LB, with Gold�s return; and at CB, where (3) rookies (two noted and ST fixture Karl Paymuh) replaced former UDFA Kelly Herndon, bumped former UDFA Roc Alexander down-chart and knocked former UDFA Lenny Walls off the roster altogether. Excluding LDE, all were upgrades (no more so than at CB) but that renovation did not carry through to the S slot. Ferguson was the 3rd S last season, behind Lynch and Kenoye Kennedy. John Lynch was the first casualty of Peyton Manning�s now-year-old aerial assault.
What to watch:
Contrary to popular perception, the Denver-D is more effective against the pass than the run. Contrary to popular perception (until most recently anyway), the PSO is more effective in the air than on the ground. That is especially so early: the PSO run game was effective H1 against Tennessee and Houston, but in just two of sixteen games since: at Cincinnati ,Week 7 and at vs. Chicago, Week 13.
The Steelers have not run effectively at any time in either playoff game: three PS RB having just 251 yards on 66 carries. That�s 3.80 per, which isn�t awful, except as we consider the inflation factor, 2 for 42 by Haynes on the last possession in Cincinnati, when the Bengals were all done. So this:
- Throwing early, as has been SOP, the PSO will confront Denver�s strength.
- Running early, the PSO would rely on their weaker component.
Denver is far better against the pass than the Steelers� prior playoff victims, Cincinnati and Indianapolis. Still, the PS are what they are, and this Steeler team throws to win, and runs to salt it. Surely Coach Coyer, Denver�s D-coordinator, understands that. Throughout this season, most teams crashed their safeties early, and were gouged by air. Certainly that was so for both the Bengals and Colts.
Coach Coyer may elect otherwise, gambling that the PSO cannot establish the run against 7-in. It�s a decent bet; the Broncos do have both crowd noise and the altitude factor on their side. Stopping the PS early would keep the crowd in it; keeping it close early, the Broncos may gain that thin (air) margin late.
Denver�s defense amounts to this: Bailey locks down, the D-line controls their gaps, and Al Wilson does what he does. Within that, the key ingredient is the interchange between Ian Gold and John Lynch, one showing cover while the other supports, or vice versa. That interchange is concealed by the Broncos� blitz-heavy persona, but there it is. If the PS can isolate Lynch in coverage and Gold in the run game, they can move it effectively by ground or by air.
Keys, PSO v. Denver-D:
- Run game: Denver has been first quartile in most aspects but awful on wide runs left. On the flip side, the Steelers, an excellent left side running team from 2001 thru 2004, have been bad this year. Still, it figures Marvel Smith can seal Trevor Pryce, Kreider can iso 227# Ian Gold, leaving #170 Dominique Foxworth to grapple with run support. On the other side, DJ Williams can be influenced and Max Starks, who has emerged as the Steelers� best on-point run blocker, can engulf Courtney Brown. Inside? Denver run blitzes inside; the PS might hit one early but more likely will replicate the kind of futility experienced throughout most H1 this season. It is not likely Parker will flip it; Denver�s speed at LB has limited long gains all season. Late in the game, the PS IOL may get it going, but early, not so much.
- Pass game: Denver blitzes to pressure the passer. Except as they send their S, they cannot get pressure on the edges. This plays to Roethlisberger�s strength, making plays outside the pocket. It�s worth noting that although Roethlisberger has shown ability to sense an edge rush, he has been susceptible to gut force. Therefore, it�s highly likely the Steelers will move him wide, allowing him to set and spot downfield. Heath Miller may be there, as, in my opinion, the Broncos cannot defend the deep middle. However, Denver does a superb job on TE; to survive in the AFC West, they must. This season, they limited Tony Gonzalez and Antonio Gates to 15R/153yard and 1 TD in 4 games (totaled). Decent numbers, but not Pro Bowl numbers so, if not Miller, instead, look for El Ced deep, sometime. Hines Ward? Not likely: Bailey can take any WR out of any game, including Ward. The PS may move Hines away from Bailey, forcing Denver to declare, man or zone. They may use Ward in the slot. Regardless, presuming Bailey is assigned to Ward, and that�s a good bet, Hines must make him pay. Physicality; that is one area where Ward has the edge; in this game, that appetite for destruction may be his signal contribution.
On the other side of the ball:
Denver offense:
As was true on the D-side, these teams share concepts. Both are run-first units; as noted, Pittsburgh was #1 in RA, Denver #2. Both teams� QBs have taken care of the ball: Jake Plummer closed the season with an exceptional 18 TD/7INT ratio; Roethlisberger trailed at 17/9 but led in QB rating (#3, 98.6 to Plummer�s #7, 90.2) and (that all-important) YPA (#1, 8.90 to Plummer�s #9, 7.38). Either way, good years for both players.
The difference is upfront. The PSO-linemen are, mainly, road graders; the Broncos ply a zone blocking scheme, similar to the Colts. The personnel is similar: like Jeff Saturday, OC Tom Nalen is a quality vet; like Ryan Diem, RT George Foster is a behemoth; like the Colts tandem, Denver OG, LG Ben Hamilton and RG Cooper Carlisle are on the small side. There is a difference at LT between Bronco LT Matt Lepsis and last week�s goat, Tarik Glenn. Lepsis is the smaller man, 6�-5�, 295# but does have exceptional feet. Not long ago, the PS made good use of a similar sized player, John Jackson.
On balance, Denver�s set is better than Indy�s, mainly on the margin of Hamilton over Lilja. However, neither come to the level of some other PSD opponents, notably Cincinnati. For Denver, the problem is the same as for Indy; zone blocking flounders against odd fronts, those sets featuring NT. For the Colts, Saturday, and for the Broncos, Nalen: both, unquestionably, are the best IOL on their respective units. Neutralize them, and, for the skill guys behind, things will come apart.
2005 Denver run game v. NT led run-D, regular season:
|
|
D-set |
NT |
Anderson C/Y |
Bell C/Y |
Dayne C/Y |
RB/WR totals |
Remarks |
|
@ Miami |
4-3-4 |
Traylor |
4/5 |
13/47* |
DNP |
20/70 |
Bell, 30 yard run. Denver�s 10 pts was a season low. |
|
San Diego |
3-4-4 |
Williams |
15/49 |
0/0 |
8/44* |
26/98* |
Dayne 6/38 on last drive. Thru 55 minutes, Denver had 20/60 |
|
NE |
3-4-4 |
Wilfork |
15/57 |
13/114* |
|
34/178* |
Bell, 68 yard run. |
|
@ Oakland |
4-2-5 |
Washington |
17/65 |
16/44 |
0/0 |
38/121 |
|
|
Dallas |
3-4-4 |
Ferguson |
11/31 |
DNP |
7/98* |
X/144 * |
*OT; Denver had 89 yards thru regulation. Dayne 55 yard run in OT |
|
Baltimore |
4-4-3 |
Kemoeatu |
8/21 |
16/63 |
4/7 |
32/96 |
Denver�s 12 pts was 2nd lowest season total. |
|
@ Oakland |
4-2-5 |
Washington |
10/46 |
17/71* |
8/22 |
40/155 |
* Bell, 35 yard run By Game 15, Oakland had quit |
|
@ San Diego |
3-3-4 |
Williams |
DNP |
17/52 |
13/64 |
40/155 |
By Game 16, San Diego had quit |
Notes:
- Miami is nominally a 4-3 team but Jason Taylor does provide some 3-4 looks. Regardless, it�s fair to say that heat and humidity factored in this opening tilt. Anderson was hurt, playing just Q1.
- In the regular season, NE played in Denver without Seymour and Bruschi; rook SS James Sanders made his first start. Back to full strength in the playoffs, the Pats limited all Denver RB to 32/96. That time, Anderson led the way with 19/69. That was his 2nd best 2005 outing against an odd front. Strangely, Dayne didn�t get a touch.
- Both Oakland and San Diego were effective the first time; both had quit by the second tilt.
- Baltimore�s 4-4-3 destroyed the Denver-O in Denver, just as it destroyed the PSO in Charm City.
Denver RB summation, v. NT fronts and all others:
|
|
Anderson C for Y at YPC |
Bell C for Y at YPC |
Dayne C for Y at YPC |
|
Season totals |
239 for 1014 at 4.20 |
173 for 921 at 5.31 |
53 for 270 at 5.1 |
Against NT fronts |
80 for 274 at 3.42 |
92 for 391 at 4.25 |
40 for 235 at 5.88 |
|
Against all others |
159 for 740 at 4.65 |
81 for 630 at 7.78 |
13 for 35 at 2.69 |
- Anderson fared poorly against odd fronts.
- Bell did okay but was far more effective against standard 4-3 sets. Bell can flip it: this player gouged two teams for their longest run allowed: NE as noted above, and Philly. Those runs went 68 and 67 yards; additionally, T-Bell had runs of 55, 37, 35 and 30.
- Dayne was more effective against odd fronts v. even. Dayne had the rock on Denver�s game-winning drive v. San Diego (Game 2) and in the finale v. a dispirited Bolts squad too. His 55-yarder v. Dallas was the Boys LG allowed.
There it is. Denver prefers to use Mike Anderson early, softening opposing fronts, then to bring Bell to run by. However, since Anderson has been ineffective against odd fronts, that strategy has floundered. In the games studied above, Bell broke (3) big runs totaling 133 yards; otherwise, little. Of Denver�s three horsemen, Dayne has been the most effective against these sets, and the least used.
Defeat Nalen and Denver is done running inside. Casey Hampton can accomplish that but Chris Hoke cannot. Unfortunately, Hampton is likely to gas a mile up; that altitude factor will inform the pace of the game and, possibly, the Steelers� strategy on the other side of the ball. Alternatively, the PSD can accomplish what they�ve done only intermittently all year. That is: get off the field on 3rd down. Now more than ever: Big Casey is going to be the guy Sunday. He will need his rest.
Early in the season, Denver struggled converting 3rd downs; lately, they�ve come on. Languishing below 30% for much of the year, the Broncos closed at 36.2%. Their struggles were uncharacteristic: Denver can run the ball and does distribute to tertiary targets, . TE or RB combining for 120 of 279 receptions. That is 43% of all Bronc-receptions, well within the 40-50% range found to be standard good, conversion-wise. Plummer�s preferred targets:
Denver receivers, ranked by 3rd down conversion %:
|
|
Player |
Total Receptions |
For 3rd down |
% |
Remarks |
|
TE |
Jeb Putzier |
37 |
28 |
75.5% |
Under-rated chain mover, in some aspects similar to Heath Miller. |
|
WR |
Ashley Lelie |
42 |
30 |
71.4% |
3rd and long |
|
FB |
Kyle Johnson |
17 |
12 |
70.6% |
Red meat FB, preferred RZ target with 5 TD |
|
WR |
Rod Smith |
85 |
55 |
64.7% |
Ageless wonder |
|
TE |
Stephen Alexander |
21 |
8 |
38.7% |
At this stage, just a guy |
|
RB |
Mike Anderson |
18 |
6 |
33% |
Will play on passing downs, good in blitz pickup |
|
RB |
Tatum Bell |
18 |
5 |
27.8% |
Worthless on passing downs; picks up the blitz like the Elephant Man picked up women. |
Of the five auxiliary receivers shown above, only Johnson and Putzier have been effective converting. Crunch time, Plummer�s tool kit will include: Smith, Lelie, Putzier and Johnson; Anderson is the short yardage/RZ guy, with Bell spotted. Denver does not have an effective 3rd WR: Charles Adams and Todd Devoe have combined for 30 R at 9.7 YPC and 1 TD. Devoe did make a play, 44 yards, but neither figure to factor.
As is well known, Jake Plummer is a threat outside the pocket but fairly ordinary within. Facing the (former) champs last week, Plummer managed the flow fairly well; however, he did toss one pick, and put a couple more up for grabs. Plummer comes sidearm or three quarters frequently; he does not (always) set his feet in the pocket. On the plus side, he can make plays with his legs, he does throw a nice deep ball and he does lead his team. As to those reports that he�s turned his game around? Well, that�s not hype, not entirely.
Jake Plummer, 3 seasons:
|
|
QB rating |
YPA |
TD |
INT |
|
2003 |
91.2 |
7.23 |
15 |
7 |
|
2004 |
84.5 |
7.85 |
27 |
20 |
|
2005 |
90.4 |
7.38 |
18 |
7 |
Plummer has played nine seasons in all. In four, he�s had a positive TD/INT ratio, three of those four in Denver. In those three years, his TD/INT ratio is 60/34, 1.76/1, which is outstanding. In sum: Plummer�s rep as a turnover machine is greatly overstated; true in AZ, not so much in the Mile High. However, it�s fair to say, over those three goes in Denver, he�s played in an ideal environment:
- Since Plummer came in, Denver has ranked: 2nd, 4th and 2nd in rushing yards.
- Plummer has been sacked (51) times in 3 seasons. By way of context, that�s (4) fewer than Roethlisberger, in the past two campaigns.
What to watch:
Facing those multiple threats found beneath the Hoosier Dome, and down in Queen City, Coach LeBeau found a way to form a 3-3-5 from his 3-4 base. He accomplished this, in large measure, by using Joey Porter as a sort of nickel back. Porter had the left slot, drawing extensive coverage duty against: Clark, James and Fletcher in Indy, Perry and Houshmandzadeh on the Ohio.
The Broncos could not be more different. They don�t have a 3rd receiver, excluding FB Kyle Johnson, their backs have done little in the pass game. The PS base is configured to thwart the pro set, which is Denver�s preferred mode. The Steelers� odd fronts should stop the Bronco�s inside run. Denver does run wide well, so this week, job #1 for Porter, and for Haggans: set the edge. As noted, Bell is the big play guy; given a crease, he can split it but if not, not. Set the edge: done, and Denver�s fate will be in the Snake�s hands. Few QB can carry the load solo; it�s a good bet Plummer is not in that elite group.
Match-ups:
- Casey Hampton v. Tom Nalen: See RB tables above.
- Ike Taylor v. Ashley Lelie: Taylor can take Lelie out of the game, allowing the PSD to combo cover Rod Smith and Jeb Putzier. Changing up coverage assignments is tantamount to concealing the PSD�s pressure packages. Within that, the greatness of Coach LeBeau. Past that: Denver has two field-flippers, Lelie and Bell. To the extent that big plays will decide this one (a good bet), Lelie must be neutralized.
- Coach Shanahan v. Coach LeBeau: Shanahan is the best O-side signal-caller in the game. Old school pedal to the metal, Coach Mike will take his shots, all game. One key: 2nd and short, where the Broncos will go downfield; another, immediately following any PS turnover, when the same is true. Coach LeBeau is as good as it gets too; still, he caught a couple breaks in these PO rounds, especially as both the Bengals and Colts removed their feature RB, for no good reason. Shanahan groks balance; this time, the PSD will get no such reprieve.
Back of the Book: three tables, re-posted.
The Steelers ran it effectively H1 throughout much of 2004. That was true against Cleveland Game 1, with Ekuban and Myers, and Game 2 too, with Warren rejoining that duo. (Note: Courtney Brown missed 14 of 16 in 2004, including both PS tilts). That season, that was no anomaly; in 2004, the PSO generally ran it effectively H1. This year? Well, as we�ll see (well, as we�ve seen) in table 3, not so this here.
Table 1: 2004 PSO run stats (from Divisional Preview).
|
Opponent |
H1 Carries for yards |
H2 Carries for yards |
Total Carries for Yards |
|
Oakland |
19 for 60 (3.15) |
11 for 34 |
30 for 94 (3.13) |
|
@ Baltimore |
9 for 46 |
15 for 46 |
24 for 92 (3.83) |
|
@ Miami |
19 for 56 (2.94) |
18 for 95 |
37 for 151 |
|
Cincinnati |
17 for 73 |
19 for 90 |
36 for 163 |
|
Cleveland |
15 for 68 |
22 for 89 |
37 for 157 |
|
@Dallas |
12 for 56 |
15 for 61 |
27 for 117 |
|
NE |
19 for 81 |
25 for 137 |
44 for 218 |
|
Philadelphia |
23 for 124 |
27 for 118 |
50 for 242 |
|
@ Cleveland |
19 for 70 (3.68) |
21 for 72 |
40 for 142 (3.55) |
|
@ Cincinnati |
14 for 63 |
17 for 72 |
31 for 135 |
|
Washington |
16 for 33 (2.06) |
16 for 70 |
32 for 103 (3.21) |
|
@Jacksonville |
13 for 42 (3.23) |
9 for 38 |
22 for 80 (3.63) |
|
Jersey Jets |
11 for 40 (3.63) |
16 for 82 |
27 for 122 |
|
@ NJG |
21 for 82 (3.90) |
17 for 79 |
38 for 161 |
|
Baltimore |
11 for 64 |
25 for 109 |
36 for 173 |
|
@Buffalo |
20 for 55 (2.75) |
18 for 101 |
38 for 156 |
|
Jersey Jets (PO) |
12 for 48 |
27 for 115 (includes OT) |
39 for 163 |
|
NE (PO) |
20 for 51 (2.50) |
12 for 67 |
32 for 118 (3.68) |
Note:
- All QB rush stats are excluded.
Following an article posted here in August, The Run Game, then and now, this, to be updated as the season progresses:
Table 2: 2005 PS run/pass ratio, by half and tally:
|
|
First Half |
Second Half |
Final | ||||||
|
|
Run |
Pass |
Scoring |
Run |
Pass |
Scoring |
Run |
Pass |
Score |
|
v. Titans |
16 |
9 |
20-7 |
25 |
2 |
14-0 |
41 |
11 |
34-7 |
|
@ Texans |
15 |
16 |
20-0 |
17 |
6 |
7-7 |
32 |
22 |
27-7 |
|
v. Patriots |
11 |
12 |
10-7 |
10 |
21 |
10-16 |
21 |
33 |
20-23 |
|
@ Chargers |
18 |
16 |
14-7 |
13 |
12 |
10-15 |
31 |
28 |
24-22 |
|
v. Jaguars |
11 |
14 |
14-10 |
14 OT: 3 |
17 OT: 2 |
3-7 0-06 |
28 |
33 |
17-23 |
|
@Bengals |
14 |
9 |
7-6 |
29 |
6 |
20-7 |
43 |
15 |
27-13 |
|
v. Ravens |
13 |
19 |
10-10 |
13 |
15 |
10-9 |
26 |
34 |
20-19 |
|
@ Packers |
9 |
10 |
13-3 |
16 |
11 |
7-7 |
25 |
21 |
20-10 |
|
v. Browns |
14 |
21 |
17-7 |
24 |
8 |
17-14 |
38 |
29 |
34-21 |
|
@ Ravens |
6 |
17 |
6-13 |
11 OT: 4 |
26 OT: 5 |
7-0 0- 3 |
21 |
48 |
13-16 |
|
@ Colts |
14 |
16 |
7-16 |
10 |
15 |
0-10 |
24 |
31 |
7-26 |
|
v. Bengals |
16 |
20 |
17-21 |
12 |
23 |
14-17 |
28 |
43 |
31-38 |
|
v. Bears |
14 |
12 |
14-3 |
30 |
8 |
7-6 |
44 |
20 |
21-9 |
|
@Vikings |
10 |
13 |
10-3 |
23 |
9 |
8-0 |
33 |
22 |
18-3 |
|
@ Browns |
21 |
16 |
20-0 |
14 |
7 |
21-0 |
35 |
23 |
41-0 |
|
v. Lions |
13 |
12 |
21-14 |
29 |
6 |
14-7 |
42 |
18 |
35-21 |
By definition:
� Kneeldowns are deleted from run totals.
� Pass attempts include both sacks and scrambles.
� Aborted snaps, ala v. Green Bay and Jacksonville, are not counted either as runs or passes.
Notes:
� The Steelers have run more than passed just 6 times in all H1. Those included 5 of the more impressive wins this season: Tennessee, @ San Diego, @ Cincinnati, Chicago and @ Cleveland; the 6th was at Heinz, hosting Detroit. However, this run differential was slight; 22 total and never more than 7 in any single game.
� The largest H1 unbalance came in Baltimore, Ravens 2. Surprisingly (considering their #3 QB had the reins), the Steelers were 11 to the pass side. No surprise, they got nothing done.
� Most of the Steelers� run/pass bulge was built over 7 second halves: Tennessee, Houston, Cincinnati 1, Cleveland 1, Chicago Minnesota and Detroit. A double-digit differential each time: overall the edge is 142, 187 runs and 45 passes. It is worth noting that 3 came in the last 4 games; the 4th, Cleveland 2, showed a H2 run bulge of +7.
� The Steelers were 10-2 in games when they led at the break, 1-0 when tied and 0-3 when trailing. Adding in playoff tilts: 11-2, 1-0 and 1-3.
Table 3: 2005 PS run game stats; QB rushes are excluded (from Divisional Preview).
|
Opponent |
H1 Carries for yards |
H2 Carries for yards |
Total Carries for Yards |
|
Tennessee |
15 for 72 |
23 for 129 |
38 for 201 |
|
@ Houston |
15 for 73 |
17 for 62 |
32 for 135 |
|
NE |
10 for 36 |
10 for 26 |
20 for 62 |
|
@ SD |
17 for 52 |
13 for 37 |
30 for 89 |
|
Jacksonville |
11 for 24 |
16 for 34 |
27 for 58 |
|
@ Cincinnati |
14 for 72 |
29 for 154 |
43 for 226 |
|
Baltimore |
11 for 41 |
13 for 56 |
24 for 97 |
|
@ GB |
9 for 72 |
16 for 68 |
25 for 140 |
|
Cleveland |
13 for 45 |
24 for 98 |
37 for 143 |
|
@ Baltimore |
6 for 9 |
15 for 50 |
21 for 59 |
|
@ Indy |
14 for 22 |
8 for 43 |
22 for 65 |
|
Cincinnati |
16 for 44 |
11 for 49 |
27 for 93 |
|
Chicago |
14 for 64 |
30 for 128 |
44 for 192 |
|
@ Minnesota |
10 for 20 |
23 for 115 |
33 for 135 |
|
@Cleveland |
21 for 66 |
14 for 143 |
35 for 209 |
|
Detroit |
13 for 52 |
28 for 142 |
41 for 194 |
|
@ Cincinnati (PO) |
11 for 32 |
19 for 109 |
30 for 141 |