Now in sync, Ben Roethlisberger and Todd Haley a deadly Steelers combo (article)

PITTSBURGH — One aggressive call underscored how Pittsburgh Steelers offensive coordinator Todd Haley and quarterback Ben Roethlisberger forged a trust in the wake of occasional storms between the pair of strong-willed competitors in previous seasons.

Facing third-and-1 from the Atlanta Falcons 39-yard-line last Sunday, Roethlisberger trotted to the sideline during the two-minute warning with his team leading 27-20.

Haley proceeded to put the game into Roethlisberger's hands after proposing two passes. Big Ben selected a play-action shotgun option, rolled to his right and hit tight end Heath Miller with a dart down the middle of the field for 25 yards.

Roethlisberger's next play? Taking a knee

Haley has morphed from a lightning rod into Roethlisberger's collaborator while serving as the chief architect of the league's most prolific offense at nearly 425 yards per game.

"It makes you feel good when they have that trust in you on that third-and-1, and the whole world thinks you're going to run it because we have one of the best backs in the league," Roethlisberger told USA TODAY Sports.

"Todd and I just understand each other from working together — whether in meetings, talking through texts at night or at dinner — (asking), 'Hey, what do you think about this?' ... We've just been able to continue and grow our relationship both on and off the field.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/steelers/2014/12/18/ben-roethlisberger-big-ben-pittsburgh-todd-haley/20609321/

Maybe Ben will take Haley with him to Arizona next year.

Quote :

Haley possible candidate for first Assistant Coach of the Year award

By Jeff.Hartman

From being blasted by rapper Snoop Dogg on Instagram to potential candidate for the first Assistant Coach of the Year award? Welcome to the life of Pittsburgh Steelers' offensive coordinator Todd Haley.

Haley has been publicly criticized by everyone imaginable in his three seasons with the Steelers, but what he has achieved from a results standpoint is difficult to ignore. In 2014 under Haley, the Steelers' offense is first in total yards, second in passing yards and sixth in points.

Pretty solid numbers, and a large reason why Barry Wilner of the Associated Press included Haley in his potential candidates for the first-time Assistant Coach of the Year award being given to the league's top assistant at the 'NFL Honors' show the day before Super Bowl on January 31st.

READ MORE: http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/nfl-pittsburgh-steelers-news/2014/12/20/7426755/todd-haley-possible-candidate-for-first-assistant-coach-of-the-year

He's useless, it's all Ben.

FIRE HIM!

Hopefully the combo will get better and better.

steelerdude15 wrote:

Hopefully the combo will get better and better.

It looks like they've finally been able to build that bond. Haley is able to trust Ben and Ben is able to work in Haley's system.

You can see the growth in the play calling since the beginning of the season. I think there is a direct correlation between that and the team's recent success.

I agree with both statements above. Just think what this offense could be like next year and the year after that if everyone sticks around.

Tonight's play calling has been ok tonight against the bungals, but the execution has not been up to standard.

Interesting they fail to mention the steeler's inability to break the 20 point mark 8 times in a season versus a cream puff schedule. Basically they scored a bunch of points in a couple games and were very mediocre for the rest.

supytalpeht wrote:

Interesting they fail to mention the steeler's inability to break the 20 point mark 8 times in a season versus a cream puff schedule. Basically they scored a bunch of points in a couple games and were very mediocre for the rest.

In 2008 (Super Bowl year), they also failed to break the 20 point mark 8 times (if we count the two games they scored exactly 20 points).

Here's some points they put up against some playoff teams (records in parentheses):

6 points against the Eagles (9-6-1)
14 points against the Giants (12-4)
11 points against the Chargers (8-8 ... they won the West and beat the Colts in the first round)
13 points against the Ravens (11-5)
14 points against the Titans (13-3).

They even managed to score 10 points in the first game against the mighty Browns.

Here's the bad teams they scored a lot of points against:

38 against the Texans (8-8)
38 against the Bengals (4-12)
31 against the Browns (4-12)
27 against the Bengals (4-12)
26 against the Jaguars (5-11)

The only game where the offense scored a lot of points against a good team:

33 against the Patriots** (11-5)

To sum this up ... the Super Bowl offense under Arians scored a lot of points against bad teams, and not so many points against good teams. There's one key difference between the 2008 and 2014 offenses ... unlike the 2008 offense, the 2014 offense didn't have the No. 1 defense in the league putting it in good positions. In 2014, the Steelers offense was 30th in average starting position.

The ole numbers game. Ben was tied for 1st in the league for passing yards. Hard to argue with that.

They definitely had a high powered offense this year. But I do agree with Supy's point that there were games that the offense didn't look all that stellar. And unfortunately, those poor performances were against teams that the Steelers should have handily come out with a win. The Bucs, Jets, Browns, Jaguars, and Ravens all followed a similar defensive approach. They had a strong front 7 against the run (making the Steelers offense one dimensional) and dropped their safeties to prevent the big play. And the front 7 would disguise their blitzes so Ben never knew who was rushing, and more importantly, who was dropping into coverage.

None of those teams had a great secondary (in fact, the Ravens' secondary sucked), yet Ben struggled. I'm not sure if it was an issue with the offensive scheme, or Ben not understanding where to go with the ball, or what. However, they need to fix that next year, because every opposing DC will be watching those tapes.

kirklandrules wrote:

But I do agree with Supy's point that there were games that the offense didn't look all that stellar. And unfortunately, those poor performances were against teams that the Steelers should have handily come out with a win.

I'll go a step farther and say that the offense looked like garbage in a few games. If the argument is that the offense is far from perfect and has a lot of room for improvement, then I agree. If the argument is that the offense wasn't good (except statistically) and was better in the Arians era, then I disagree.

I understand where Supy is coming from with his comments. He was a strong Arians supporter (that's why I made the comparison to the 2008 offense).

Let's look at the second part of Supy's comments:

Quote :

Basically they scored a bunch of points in a couple games and were very mediocre for the rest.

That's not true. They had this 3-game stretch in the middle of the season:

30 points against the Texans
51 points against the Colts
43 points against the Ravens

Yes, those three games elevated the point total. But look at the last 6 games:

27 points against the Titans
32 points against the Saints
42 points against the Bengals
27 points against the Falcons
20 points against the Chiefs
27 points against the Bengals

And lets not forget the 30 and 37 we dropped on the Browns and Panthers at the beginning of the season.

I'm not sure how we can look at those point totals and conclude that they scored a bunch of points in a couple of games and were mediocre in the rest.

There were 4 games where the offense looked like total garbage:

6 points against the Ravens
17 points against the Jaguars
10 points against the Browns
13 points against the Jets

Other than those 4 games, the offense did more than enough to win games. If we would have had a consistent and solid defense, this team would have looked much differently.

In a nutshell, my argument is this ...
Was our offense great in 2014? No. It struggled at times, and there's lots of room for improvement, especially in the red zone. But it has made steady progress and is every bit as good as when another OC was here. However, we want it to be better than that, not just as good. I don't accept the argument that we scored a lot of points in only a few games against a cream puff schedule (with the insinuation that we beat up on bad teams). We dropped 37, 43 and 42 points on 3 playoff teams, and 51 points on a team that was in the AFC Championship. Actually, in the 4 games where our offense struggled the most, 3 of those games were against the cream puffs. If we would have had a few more playoff teams on the schedule, our offense probably would have done even better.

Yeah, I agree Wally. The Steelers scored over 30 points in 7 of their games in 2014. Had they done that in any season under BA?

kirklandrules wrote:

The Steelers scored over 30 points in 7 of their games in 2014. Had they done that in any season under BA?

Nope.

Number of 30+ games under BA:

2007: 5
2008: 4
2009: 3
2010: 3
2011: 3

There's two ways of looking at it. The first way is that the low number of 30-point games might be misleading because of the strength of our defense at the time. The offense didn't have to put up 30 points to win games. Controlling the ball and giving the defense a rest was more important than blowing up the scoreboard. The second way of looking at it is, generally speaking, BA wasn't one for controlling the ball. His mindset is to score quickly and score often, so the low number has little to do with the strength of the defense.

The last thing we need is for this to turn into another BA thread, but until we win a Super Bowl with Haley, the comparison is hard to avoid and is going to be part of the discussion when judging Haley.

Arians was an offensive juggernaut coach!!!!! How dare you tarnish his name

Wallace108 wrote:

kirklandrules wrote:

But I do agree with Supy's point that there were games that the offense didn't look all that stellar. And unfortunately, those poor performances were against teams that the Steelers should have handily come out with a win.

I'll go a step farther and say that the offense looked like garbage in a few games. If the argument is that the offense is far from perfect and has a lot of room for improvement, then I agree. If the argument is that the offense wasn't good (except statistically) and was better in the Arians era, then I disagree.

I understand where Supy is coming from with his comments. He was a strong Arians supporter (that's why I made the comparison to the 2008 offense).

Let's look at the second part of Supy's comments:

Quote :

Basically they scored a bunch of points in a couple games and were very mediocre for the rest.

That's not true. They had this 3-game stretch in the middle of the season:

30 points against the Texans
51 points against the Colts
43 points against the Ravens

Yes, those three games elevated the point total. But look at the last 6 games:

27 points against the Titans
32 points against the Saints
42 points against the Bengals
27 points against the Falcons
20 points against the Chiefs
27 points against the Bengals

And lets not forget the 30 and 37 we dropped on the Browns and Panthers at the beginning of the season.

I'm not sure how we can look at those point totals and conclude that they scored a bunch of points in a couple of games and were mediocre in the rest.

There were 4 games where the offense looked like total garbage:

6 points against the Ravens
17 points against the Jaguars
10 points against the Browns
13 points against the Jets

Other than those 4 games, the offense did more than enough to win games. If we would have had a consistent and solid defense, this team would have looked much differently.

In a nutshell, my argument is this ...
Was our offense great in 2014? No. It struggled at times, and there's lots of room for improvement, especially in the red zone. But it has made steady progress and is every bit as good as when another OC was here. However, we want it to be better than that, not just as good. I don't accept the argument that we scored a lot of points in only a few games against a cream puff schedule (with the insinuation that we beat up on bad teams). We dropped 37, 43 and 42 points on 3 playoff teams, and 51 points on a team that was in the AFC Championship. Actually, in the 4 games where our offense struggled the most, 3 of those games were against the cream puffs. If we would have had a few more playoff teams on the schedule, our offense probably would have done even better.

I think the only reason you brought up Arians is to deflect. Arians is gone and still successful. THere's nothing to my initial comment other than the totals don't tell the whole story. We were explosive at times and very very mediocre at times. To ignore how poor this offense was against some awful defenses is foolish. Which is what the article in question does in my opinion.
There's one major problem with your assessment.  You're including points scored by the defense.
Offensively we scored 15 points against the Falcons
20 against the Titans
13 points against the Jets
10 points against the Browns
10 points against the Jaguars
6 points against the Ravens
and 15(or 17) against the Ravens

I was an Arians supporter, because it was abundantly clear there was significantly more going on than "arians sucks". Our redzone offense has been bad for 10 years through 3 different coordinators. THe one common denominator is Ben. That doesn't mean I hate Ben, but it should be pretty clear that he's the link. Ignoring it is foolish.

Since you brought up 2008 let's look a little deeper.

In 2008 we played the #2 defense 2x, the #3 defense 1x, #4 defense 1x, #5 defense 1x, #7 defense 1x, #8 defense 1x, #10 defense 1x, #11 defense 1x, and the #12 defense 1x. In 2014 we played the #6 1x, #7 1x, #9 2x, and #10 1x. We had a better defense in 2008, but our offense faced far better defenses with fewer weapons. We had something like the toughest schedule in 30 years and went 12-4 while in 2014 we had a creampuff schedule. Here are the rest of the defenses we faced in 2014 #32, #31, #29,#27,#26,#23 2x, #22 2x.

In 2008 10 of our games are against top 10 defenses while in 2014 9 of our games are against the bottom 10.

Too many numbers.... brain cannot compute....

supytalpeht wrote:

I think the only reason you brought up Arians is to deflect.

Not at all. We both know the history of our Arians' debates.

supytalpeht wrote:

Arians is gone and still successful.

Who knew he was such a defensive genius? It's a good thing the Cardinals have an excellent defense with the way their offense keeps getting QBs killed.

supytalpeht wrote:

We were explosive at times and very very mediocre at times. To ignore how poor this offense was against some awful defenses is foolish.

I agree with you on this.

I argued throughout much of the season that our offense under Haley isn't that much different than it was under Arians (production-wise). A lot of the same complaints I had about Arians, I also have about Haley. The reason I like Haley more is because he's not as stubborn. It's not his way or the highway. He's willing to change the offense to fit the players, rather than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. What happened in Arizona last season with Palmer going down exemplifies Arian's mentality:

Quote :

The game plan for Sunday's game against the Lions will be the same as if Palmer was playing.
"Nothing's changing because we're playing with a different quarterback," Arians said.

http://www.covers.com/articles/articles.aspx?theArt=393906

That's Arians ... full speed ahead. Logic and strategy be damned.

You know how I feel about Arians, but don't mistake how I feel about Haley. I give him credit for getting the offense heading in the right direction, but I'm not putting him in the Hall of Fame. I'm holding Haley to the same standards I held Arians to. And I appreciate when others do the same.

Supy, you make some good points in the rest of your post. I'll address them when I have more time. As always, I enjoy the discussion.

Quote :

The game plan for Sunday's game against the Lions will be the same as if Palmer was playing.
"Nothing's changing because we're playing with a different quarterback," Arians said.

http://www.covers.com/articles/articles.aspx?theArt=393906

That's Arians ... full speed ahead. Logic and strategy be damned.

You know how I feel about Arians, but don't mistake how I feel about Haley. I give him credit for getting the offense heading in the right direction, but I'm not putting him in the Hall of Fame. I'm holding Haley to the same standards I held Arians to. And I appreciate when others do the same.

Supy, you make some good points in the rest of your post. I'll address them when I have more time. As always, I enjoy the discussion. [/quote]


The only logic that's been damned is yours. I almost forgot the lengths you'll go to try and discredit BA. Coaches and General Managers sign players that fit their system. They don't sign read option quarterbacks to run pro set offenses. They don't sign 4-3 defensive tackles and play them at 3-4 olb. That was one of the problems with Tebow at QB. He was a good football player, but an awful qb. THey had to change their entire offense for one player. Arians' comments about not changing makes total sense and is quite normal. Haley doesn't have 3 separate playbooks for Ben, Grad, and Jones.

Regarding your comment and Haley utilizing the players he has. Redman had no business running east-west. Heath Miller has no business taking a screen pass. His obsession with 170lb speedsters is annoying. He got lucky in KC and now we've wasted two draft picks trying to replicate that success. Successful 170lb running backs are the anomaly,not the norm.

supytalpeht wrote:

I almost forgot the lengths you'll go to try and discredit BA.

I don't have to say anything to discredit BA. It's not like he's still our OC and I'm arguing that he should be fired. They already fired him, for the same exact reasons me and many others argued that he should be fired for.

He was named Coach of the Year, so kudos to him. Although I don't believe that works as an argument that we were wrong to get rid of him. Arians is probably a better head coach than an OC. His greatest strength (which is important for a head coach) is that players love playing for him, and they play hard for him. (See, I give credit where credit is due.)

supytalpeht wrote:

Arians' comments about not changing makes total sense and is quite normal. Haley doesn't have 3 separate playbooks for Ben, Grad, and Jones.

If Ben and Gradkowski went down and we had to go with Jones, do you honestly believe they wouldn't change the offensive game plan? Do you think they'd have Jones dropping back and throwing the ball down the field 35 times a game?

In response to the rest of your earlier post ...

supytalpeht wrote:

To ignore how poor this offense was against some awful defenses is foolish.

I don't disagree with you on this. Our offense looked horrible in a few games, especially against teams we should have dominated. The point I was trying to make in my earlier post is that the same thing happened under Arians. There were plenty of games where our offense looked like crap, and we couldn't score against weaker teams. You don't want to acknowledge that. Or you don't want to blame Arians for it.

supytalpeht wrote:

There's one major problem with your assessment.  You're including points scored by the defense.

True, and I thought about that when I made the post. It really doesn't affect my argument all that much though. In the post I made after the one you quoted, I also didn't deduct any non-offensive points from Arians' totals.

In 2014, the Steelers were 7th in the league in scoring. In 2008 (the year we won the Super Bowl because of Bruce Arians), the Steelers were 20th in scoring. Even if the Steelers had played a tougher schedule in 2014, I highly doubt they would have slipped to 20th in scoring. Regardless, the big difference between the 2008 team and the 2014 team is not the offense. It's the defense.

supytalpeht wrote:

In 2008 we played the #2 defense 2x, the #3 defense 1x, #4 defense 1x, #5 defense 1x, #7 defense 1x, #8 defense 1x, #10 defense 1x, #11 defense 1x, and the #12 defense 1x. In 2014 we played the #6 1x, #7 1x, #9 2x, and #10 1x.

So we're going to play the game of "stats only matter when they support your argument?" On the one hand, you're arguing that the defensive rankings from 2008 and 2014 prove your point. On the other hand, you're arguing that the offensive rankings from 2014 are misleading and mean nothing. Either the rankings matter or they don't. You can't have it both ways.

You'll counter by saying that the Steelers had a cream puff schedule. But they can only play the teams on their schedule. And the bottom line is that they finished 7th in scoring. And they actually put up more of their points against good teams. So it's wrong to think that they were just racking up points against bad teams.

supytalpeht wrote:

Our redzone offense has been bad for 10 years through 3 different coordinators. THe one common denominator is Ben. That doesn't mean I hate Ben, but it should be pretty clear that he's the link. Ignoring it is foolish.

Not only will I not ignore it, but I'm going to agree with you. And I know it's blasphemy to criticize Ben, but I'll raise the stakes with a similar argument. Throughout Ben's career, the O-line has been consistent ... consistently bad or mediocre. We've had three different OCs. Without doing some research, I don't know how many different O-line coaches, but it's been more than a few. And dozens of different O-linemen. Yet until this year, the results have always been the same ... a consistently bad O-line. With 3 different OCs and many different coaches and O-linemen, what's been the one common denominator? Ben.
What does the QB have to do with the performance of the O-line? Plenty.

Supy, you and I often find ourselves on opposite sides of almost every argument. But I think we'll agree more than disagree when it comes to how we view Ben. That might make for a fun discussion. Like you, I certainly don't hate Ben ... but I also don't think he walks on water, and there are some things that can't be ignored.

Quote :

So we're going to play the game of "stats only matter when they support your argument?" On the one hand, you're arguing that the defensive rankings from 2008 and 2014 prove your point. On the other hand, you're arguing that the offensive rankings from 2014 are misleading and mean nothing. Either the rankings matter or they don't. You can't have it both ways.

You'll counter by saying that the Steelers had a cream puff schedule. But they can only play the teams on their schedule. And the bottom line is that they finished 7th in scoring. And they actually put up more of their points against good teams. So it's wrong to think that they were just racking up points against bad teams.

I'm not using stats to prove my point. YOu brought up 2008 as a comparison. Personally I think it's asinine because you're comparing apples and oranges. We have a better offensive line now. It appears that we have a better running back as well. If not better than certainly more versatile. Mendy was solid running behind an awful Offensive line. It's possible the 2008 oline could have gelled into something,but I'm sure we all remember the injury bug that plagued us for years. An argument could be made that we're better at wr. To me looking at our offensive stats in 2014 and ignoring who we played against is tantamount to a division I school playing a bunch of games against Troy and Kent and calling them national champions. We simply weren't that good and for the most part struggled against the better defenses. Next year we have what should be a brutal schedule, watch our offensive ranking come crashing back to earth.




Do you really think Haley is going to change the offense much? He still had Tyler Palko throwing the ball 30 times a game. You bring players in that fit your system. That way if/when a starter goes down you're not starting from scratch.

supytalpeht wrote:

To me looking at our offensive stats in 2014 and ignoring who we played against is tantamount to a division I school playing a bunch of games against Troy and Kent and calling them national champions.

If they would have had their highest scoring production against the Falcons (#32), Saints (#31), Titans (#27), Jaguars (#26), and Buccaneers (#25), then I'd agree with you. That would be a case of racking up points against bad defenses. But they scored 30 against the Texans (#16), 51 against the Colts (#11), 37 against the Panthers (#10), and 43 against the Ravens (#8).

If we look at just points allowed, we scored more than 20 points against 5 of the 12 teams that allowed the fewest points ... 20 against the Chiefs (#2), 43 against the Ravens (#6), 30 against the Texans (#7), 30 against the Browns (#9), and 42 and 27 against the Bengals (#12).

We put up a lot of points against good defenses that were among the league's best in points allowed. We didn't just rack up tons of points against bad defenses and suck against good defenses. If our highest point totals came against bad defenses that allowed the most points in the league, then I'd agree with your argument. But that's not the case.

supytalpeht wrote:

We simply weren't that good and for the most part struggled against the better defenses.

Actually, I think we played well against the good defenses and struggled against the weaker defenses. And that's what's frustrating. We struggled against teams we should have dominated.

supytalpeht wrote:

Next year we have what should be a brutal schedule, watch our offensive ranking come crashing back to earth.

That's always possible. We'll just have to wait and see.

Alex Kozora @Alex_Kozora -

The more I go back and watch tape, more I realize Todd Haley calls one of the best games of any OC. Uses one play to set up another so well.

https://twitter.com/Alex_Kozora

I admit not being a big fan of Arians, for several reasons. However, I think the days of allowing Ben to make the plays on improvisation are in the past. Even if Ben and team helped revise the playbook, Haley is asking Ben to make the plays with less sand-lotting. Last year was the first time I saw Ben consistently making plays as designed that went for big results. His sacks per attempt were down (under Haley: 6.4%; Under Arians: 9.4%) and, therefore, he'll have a longer, more productive career.

And we have a FB, even if we don't use him as a FB ... but we have one!