11th commandment, Never, Ever, rush 3

[wist43]

Dah...

[MOBB DEEP]

reminds me of 4th and 26...

[wist43]

Capers will puke this kind of stuff up now and again...

His nature is to be conservative... there never a rationale, and never justification to rush 3.

All you're doing in that situation is giving receivers time to come uncovered, and giving the QB time to find them...

It's stupid.

[red]

i'll add a 12th

NEVER EVER PLAY JARRETT BUSH, don't let that worthless asshole anywhere near the field

[Bretsky]

i'll add a 12th

NEVER EVER PLAY JARRETT BUSH, don't let that worthless asshole anywhere near the field

didn't the Saints cut one of their vet CB's who use to star for the Ravens a couple weeks ago ?

[Fritz]

I'm just not a fan of rushing three, especially when your team's strength is in down linemen and linebackers.

Anybody know why Poopinga was on the field on that last drive?

[Bossman641]

I'm just not a fan of rushing three, especially when your team's strength is in down linemen and linebackers.

Anybody know why Poopinga was on the field on that last drive?

I'm guessing Matthews was gassed. It looked like he wasn't rushing on the final 3-4 snaps.

[channtheman]

Did that last drive remind you all of every game last year? Eerie to think about.

[wist43]

In that situation, the clock should not be a consideration...

It is about getting a stop on 4 successive downs... and the best way to do that is generate pressure. On the few snaps that we did get pressure, we almost put the game away.

By going "prevent"... all you do is allow the opposition to put themselves in a position to take shots into the endzone... dink and dunk their way down to the 15-20 yard line, still 20 seconds or so left... plenty of time to take shots into the endzone.

Rushing 3 is just as idiotic today, as it was 20 years... painful to watch too.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm just not a fan of rushing three, especially when your team's strength is in down linemen and linebackers.

Anybody know why Poopinga was on the field on that last drive?

I'm guessing Matthews was gassed. It looked like he wasn't rushing on the final 3-4 snaps.

Matthews was in the game. He was playing coverage on most plays.

[Fosco33]

Prevent D generally prevents a W

[channtheman]

Prevent D generally prevents a W

This is true. I am constantly amazed at how many dumb shit coaches run the defense. It NEVER works and you lose the game. They have to run it though. Stupid stupid stupid.

[mraynrand]

I hate to get on the refs, but if they're going to call everything, they needed to call the gross holding on Jolly on that last play. That was absurd. If you guys didn't see a close up, it will make you steaming mad when you get your chance. O-lineman had a fistful of jersey. Disgusting, especially since they called everything else on that last drive.

[Patler]

Penalties on the final drive hurt more than just rushing three.

[Fosco33]

I hate to get on the refs, but if they're going to call everything, they needed to call the gross holding on Jolly on that last play. That was absurd. If you guys didn't see a close up, it will make you steaming mad when you get your chance. O-lineman had a fistful of jersey. Disgusting, especially since they called everything else on that last drive.

There was a decent hold on either the 3rd and 15 or 4th and 7 on that drive as well. They only called one of the 3 on that drive. They weren't calling it very consistently all day - on either team.

By the 2nd Q - you can pretty much figure out how the refs will call the game. The Pack should have realized we'd get hit for most of the def holding/PI calls and wouldn't get oline holds very often. Which is even more amazing that we didn't try some more running plays. 2 min left - on the 40. We score in lightening fashion.

With a running game and confident kicker - we get 2 first downs, run the clock down and kick the FG. In hind sight, the onside penalty worked in Pitt's favor as neither D wasn't stopping anything - whoever had the ball last would win.

[Bossman641]

I'm just not a fan of rushing three, especially when your team's strength is in down linemen and linebackers.

Anybody know why Poopinga was on the field on that last drive?

I'm guessing Matthews was gassed. It looked like he wasn't rushing on the final 3-4 snaps.

Matthews was in the game. He was playing coverage on most plays.

Why? Why take one of the best pass-rushing threats and play him in coverage?

[MOBB DEEP]

JARRETT BUSH, don't let that worthless asshole anywhere near the field

lol...crazy

[pbmax]

Capers will puke this kind of stuff up now and again...

His nature is to be conservative... there never a rationale, and never justification to rush 3.

All you're doing in that situation is giving receivers time to come uncovered, and giving the QB time to find them...

It's stupid.
Of course there is, to entice a short throw in front of the first down markers. There is less of a reason to do it near your own endzone because the throw is going deep regardless. Same might be said for certain 4th down situations.

[pbmax]

Penalties on the final drive hurt more than just rushing three.
Bingo.

[pbmax]

Prevent D generally prevents a W
That wasn't a prevent until they were inside the 25 yard line. Then they sent Woodson deep rather than play coverage. That was your prevent defense.

[jklowan]

phuck Bush and Crosby, this loss hurts and we should have won this game...

who ever was responsible for putting bush in after getting burnt twice should be packing there bags, I'm looking at you McCarthy!!!!!

[pbmax]

phuck Bush and Crosby, this loss hurts and we should have won this game...

who ever was responsible for putting bush in after getting burnt twice should be packing there bags, I'm looking at you McCarthy!!!!!
How many CBs are on this team? Who are the 4 CBs that should be on the field ahead of him?

[Brohm]

Bad year for us with CB injuries. Harris, Lee and Blackmon. Thats a starter and 2 players before Bush even sees the field. Hard to replace that kind of experience/depth. Nevermind, bottom-lilne, Crosby does his job we're not having this conversation.

[red]

phuck Bush and Crosby, this loss hurts and we should have won this game...

who ever was responsible for putting bush in after getting burnt twice should be packing there bags, I'm looking at you McCarthy!!!!!
How many CBs are on this team? Who are the 4 CBs that should be on the field ahead of him?

bring in anyone that might have a chance at breaking up a pass or covering a guy

we've watched the same thing from bush for 4 seasons. by now we have to know he can't do anything

get anyone with even just a sliver of hope. that would be an improvement

[pbmax]

phuck Bush and Crosby, this loss hurts and we should have won this game...

who ever was responsible for putting bush in after getting burnt twice should be packing there bags, I'm looking at you McCarthy!!!!!
How many CBs are on this team? Who are the 4 CBs that should be on the field ahead of him?

bring in anyone that might have a chance at breaking up a pass or covering a guy

we've watched the same thing from bush for 4 seasons. by now we have to know he can't do anything

get anyone with even just a sliver of hope. that would be an improvement
There is a reason the Chris McCallister's are on the street.

[Packers4Ever]

In that situation, the clock should not be a consideration...

It is about getting a stop on 4 successive downs... and the best way to do that is generate pressure. On the few snaps that we did get pressure, we almost put the game away.

By going "prevent"... all you do is allow the opposition to put themselves in a position to take shots into the endzone... dink and dunk their way down to the 15-20 yard line, still 20 seconds or so left... plenty of time to take shots into the endzone.

Rushing 3 is just as idiotic today, as it was 20 years... painful to watch too.


Makes one wonder - if it was so idiotic 20 years ago, why use it today ?
:wink:

[wist43]

In that situation, the clock should not be a consideration...

It is about getting a stop on 4 successive downs... and the best way to do that is generate pressure. On the few snaps that we did get pressure, we almost put the game away.

By going "prevent"... all you do is allow the opposition to put themselves in a position to take shots into the endzone... dink and dunk their way down to the 15-20 yard line, still 20 seconds or so left... plenty of time to take shots into the endzone.

Rushing 3 is just as idiotic today, as it was 20 years... painful to watch too.


Makes one wonder - if it was so idiotic 20 years ago, why use it today ?
:wink:

I know... amazing, isn't it :lol:

For how many years, have how many announcers been apoplectic about it???

The oldage is an adage for a reason - "the only thing the prevent defense does, is prevent you from winning".

Happens over and over and over... Capers is old school though, so I guess that why it makes sense to him.

NEVER, EVER, RUSH 3 - EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[wist43]

Capers will puke this kind of stuff up now and again...

His nature is to be conservative... there never a rationale, and never justification to rush 3.

All you're doing in that situation is giving receivers time to come uncovered, and giving the QB time to find them...

It's stupid.
Of course there is, to entice a short throw in front of the first down markers. There is less of a reason to do it near your own endzone because the throw is going deep regardless. Same might be said for certain 4th down situations.

Sorry PB, but I disagree with every word, every syllable, and every letter of what you wrote there :D

The name of the game is pressure... if you want to FORCE (as opposed to "entice") a short throw... then put enough pressure on the QB that he has to get rid of the ball.

If he is forced to get rid of the ball either short, or trying to force it into a seam, the defenses percentages go way up.

If you leave a guy to sit back there and write a dissertation, it's only a matter of time before coverage breaks down. It is inevitable that a receiver will come free, a seam will pop open, a DB will drop coverage... given enough time, Shirley Temple could drive a team down the field.

Rushing 3 is just far too passive of an approach... as I said, forget the clock, what you need is a turnover, or 4 successive stops. Playing prevent you're taking the aggression away from your players, and simply hoping the other team screws up... that's no way to play defense.

It is all about pressure, and FORCING them into mistakes :soap:

[Noodle]

When I saw Matthews go in to coverage on the last drive, I figured it was because he's the most athletic of the bunch and would have the best chance of staying with a receiver.

And can we place the Psycho package in the same trash heap as the U71? Seemed like every time we ran that package, the Steelers through to the TE for a nice gain. Enough Psycho!

[pbmax]

Capers will puke this kind of stuff up now and again...

His nature is to be conservative... there never a rationale, and never justification to rush 3.

All you're doing in that situation is giving receivers time to come uncovered, and giving the QB time to find them...

It's stupid.
Of course there is, to entice a short throw in front of the first down markers. There is less of a reason to do it near your own endzone because the throw is going deep regardless. Same might be said for certain 4th down situations.

Sorry PB, but I disagree with every word, every syllable, and every letter of what you wrote there :D

The name of the game is pressure... if you want to FORCE (as opposed to "entice") a short throw... then put enough pressure on the QB that he has to get rid of the ball.

If he is forced to get rid of the ball either short, or trying to force it into a seam, the defenses percentages go way up.

If you leave a guy to sit back there and write a dissertation, it's only a matter of time before coverage breaks down. It is inevitable that a receiver will come free, a seam will pop open, a DB will drop coverage... given enough time, Shirley Temple could drive a team down the field.

Rushing 3 is just far too passive of an approach... as I said, forget the clock, what you need is a turnover, or 4 successive stops. Playing prevent you're taking the aggression away from your players, and simply hoping the other team screws up... that's no way to play defense.

It is all about pressure, and FORCING them into mistakes :soap:
Of course the odds go up for the D, but so do the odds of someone being uncovered as a result of the pressure. On the whole, you probably drive the completion percentage lower and the average yards per completion higher. At the end of the game where the clock is with you, that is a problem. Bring pressure and they only need to complete 1 out of every 4 throws for a first down. And the incompletions help them have more attempts.

I do agree that this doesn't apply to the Red Zone. And pressure to change the pace and shake someone free on an overload would be fine.

[channtheman]

Capers will puke this kind of stuff up now and again...

His nature is to be conservative... there never a rationale, and never justification to rush 3.

All you're doing in that situation is giving receivers time to come uncovered, and giving the QB time to find them...

It's stupid.
Of course there is, to entice a short throw in front of the first down markers. There is less of a reason to do it near your own endzone because the throw is going deep regardless. Same might be said for certain 4th down situations.

Sorry PB, but I disagree with every word, every syllable, and every letter of what you wrote there :D

The name of the game is pressure... if you want to FORCE (as opposed to "entice") a short throw... then put enough pressure on the QB that he has to get rid of the ball.

If he is forced to get rid of the ball either short, or trying to force it into a seam, the defenses percentages go way up.

If you leave a guy to sit back there and write a dissertation, it's only a matter of time before coverage breaks down. It is inevitable that a receiver will come free, a seam will pop open, a DB will drop coverage... given enough time, Shirley Temple could drive a team down the field.

Rushing 3 is just far too passive of an approach... as I said, forget the clock, what you need is a turnover, or 4 successive stops. Playing prevent you're taking the aggression away from your players, and simply hoping the other team screws up... that's no way to play defense.

It is all about pressure, and FORCING them into mistakes :soap:
Of course the odds go up for the D, but so do the odds of someone being uncovered as a result of the pressure. On the whole, you probably drive the completion percentage lower and the average yards per completion higher. At the end of the game where the clock is with you, that is a problem. Bring pressure and they only need to complete 1 out of every 4 throws for a first down. And the incompletions help them have more attempts.

I do agree that this doesn't apply to the Red Zone. And pressure to change the pace and shake someone free on an overload would be fine.

The problem with your argument is that we see so often a team that only rushes three lose the game.

[pbmax]

What you don't remember are teams that follow wist's logic to its full conclusion and blitz every critical series. Then you see big plays that blow up in their face.

Now, there is no reason Capers could not rush four in such situations and occasionally blitz, but you can't simply blitz every time you need a stop.

[channtheman]

What you don't remember are teams that follow wist's logic to its full conclusion and blitz every critical series. Then you see big plays that blow up in their face.

Now, there is no reason Capers could not rush four in such situations and occasionally blitz, but you can't simply blitz every time you need a stop.

Oh absolutely, I agree with that. I even wish on the psycho package that we would have a linebacker show blitz but then drop back into coverage on the TE or RB that was wide open after the first few teams we ran it.

Here's something I was thinking though. I don't know if I've seen this done ever or if coaches ever do it. But what if since rushing three is basically conceding the pass, why not drop 2 more guys into coverage and just leave one pass rusher?

[Sparkey]

On the second to last play, if Jenkins wraps up Big Ben for the sack, the game is over. No way the receivers get back in time for a spike to kill the clock.

It was there for them, just didn't get the job done.

Was a fun game to watch, a bit stressful, but fun none the less. Wouldn't it be great to see Pittsburgh/Green Bay against each other in the Super Bowl!!!

[gbgary]

Penalties on the final drive hurt more than just rushing three.


yup...but not by much. i hope they (the coaches) learn from this.

[gbgary]

It was there for them, just didn't get the job done.

Was a fun game to watch, a bit stressful, but fun none the less.

yup and like i said before, no real harm done. need to win the next two and to into the playoffs with momentum.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Wist will be thrilled to read this:


Capers was steadfast in his belief that rushing three against Roethlisberger and dropping eight in coverage was the right thing to do on the final drive. He said he stuck to mostly four-man pressures during the game after calling a blitz on the Steelers' first offensive play and watching Bush get beaten for a 60-yard touchdown.

More at: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/79869442.html

Article also quotes McStubby as saying that "making wholesale changes in the secondary would be a blatant overreaction."

McStubby adds: "Tryouts are over."

I actually agree with him. :)

[mraynrand]

Wist will be thrilled to read this:


Capers was steadfast in his belief that rushing three against Roethlisberger and dropping eight in coverage was the right thing to do on the final drive. He said he stuck to mostly four-man pressures during the game after calling a blitz on the Steelers' first offensive play and watching Bush get beaten for a 60-yard touchdown.

More at: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/79869442.html

Article also quotes McStubby as saying that "making wholesale changes in the secondary would be a blatant overreaction."

McStubby adds: "Tryouts are over."

I actually agree with him. :)

What the hell else can you do at this point? All teams have weaknesses and every team will game plan to expose them. Try like hell to hide them and hope that your strengths elsewhere will compensate. Hope to hell the Four D linemen are completely healthy for the playoffs - it is their play (assuming the LB play continues to be the same) that will decide whether other teams will have the time to expose 24 and 26. The dings to the D line are probably what contributed to the diminished effectiveness of the pass rush.

[Noodle]

Article also quotes McStubby as saying that "making wholesale changes in the secondary would be a blatant overreaction."

McStubby adds: "Tryouts are over."

I actually agree with him. :)

I agree as well. I like the way he's reacting to the secondary as well as his support for Crosby. Sure, he'd love to have better CBs and a more reliable kicker, but the reality is, those guys are not going to walk in to the locker room off the street at this point in the season.

So he shows good judgment in supporting his guys and being assertive about it. This is a good thing.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Article also quotes McStubby as saying that "making wholesale changes in the secondary would be a blatant overreaction."

McStubby adds: "Tryouts are over."

I actually agree with him. :)

I agree as well. I like the way he's reacting to the secondary as well as his support for Crosby. Sure, he'd love to have better CBs and a more reliable kicker, but the reality is, those guys are not going to walk in to the locker room off the street at this point in the season.

So he shows good judgment in supporting his guys and being assertive about it. This is a good thing.

That's one reason I like the nickname "McStubby." I don't have too many quarrels with McCarthy. I think on balance he's a very good coach. He's stubborn about his loyalty to his players and coaches, which is -- on balance -- a good thing. He's also stubborn about his schemes on offense and defense and he wouldn't change horses in the middle of the stream for anything. My major disagreement with him is rushing and game management on offense. And he's going to stay stubborn on that too. We'll see how far he takes us.

[gbgary]

Wist will be thrilled to read this:


Capers was steadfast in his belief that rushing three against Roethlisberger and dropping eight in coverage was the right thing to do on the final drive.



well...never mind about my hoping they learned something on that last drive. :roll:

[wist43]

Wist will be thrilled to read this:


Capers was steadfast in his belief that rushing three against Roethlisberger and dropping eight in coverage was the right thing to do on the final drive.



well...never mind about my hoping they learned something on that last drive. :roll:

Your odds are just better by being aggressive... not only from the standpoint of forcing a turnover, mistake, or 4 successive stops; but also from the standpoint that if you do give up the big play, there will likely be enough time left on the clock for your offense to get in position for a GW FG.

By playing the, lets bleed the clock, let's bleed to death game... you're essentially entering into an agreement with your opponent which says,

"... we do hereby agree to give you the ball on our 20 yard line, with 20 seconds on the clock, and allow you 4 shots into the endzone. Furthermore, we do also agree not to put any undo pressure on your QB, as this would be impolite" :shock:

Capers has a history of going conservative and playing the "prevent"... just my basic recollection of games I've watched. Whenever a team goes prevent... my first thought is "stupid"; and, more often than not, you see the result we saw on Sunday.

As many an announcer over the years has chanted, "the only thing a "prevent defense" does, is prevent you from winning.

Exhibit A: Pittsburgh 37 GB 36

[Maxie the Taxi]

Wist will be thrilled to read this:


Capers was steadfast in his belief that rushing three against Roethlisberger and dropping eight in coverage was the right thing to do on the final drive.



well...never mind about my hoping they learned something on that last drive. :roll:

Your odds are just better by being aggressive... not only from the standpoint of forcing a turnover, mistake, or 4 successive stops; but also from the standpoint that if you do give up the big play, there will likely be enough time left on the clock for your offense to get in position for a GW FG.

By playing the, lets bleed the clock, let's bleed to death game... you're essentially entering into an agreement with your opponent which says,

"... we do hereby agree to give you the ball on our 20 yard line, with 20 seconds on the clock, and allow you 4 shots into the endzone. Furthermore, we do also agree not to put any undo pressure on your QB, as this would be impolite" :shock:

Capers has a history of going conservative and playing the "prevent"... just my basic recollection of games I've watched. Whenever a team goes prevent... my first thought is "stupid"; and, more often than not, you see the result we saw on Sunday.

As many an announcer over the years has chanted, "the only thing a "prevent defense" does, is prevent you from winning.

Exhibit A: Pittsburgh 37 GB 36

I agree completely. Let's hope we don't get into such situations in the future, because Capers won't change. He's gotten away with playing it "conservative" too many times.

Sometimes it does work out. I can't remember what game it was this year, but Capers played prevent, the other team drove down to deep in our territory and then either ran out of time or we got a turnover. Can't remember which.