Steelers Game Preview

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,470
Reaction score
8,624
Location
Scottsdale
It's actually quite simple... Stop Bell - period! If Bell is able to go all Todd Gurley on us, we're toast.

Vick will not be able to pass well enough to beat us - Period!

I think our offense will move the ball. But, if Bell is running well and eating up both yards and clock, while wearing out our defense, Palmer & Co will have limited/minimal chances to put up points.

So, if we can control Bell, I see a Cards victory along the lines of 24 - 13. However, if Bell is rushing at a 4.5 or greater YPC, I can see a Steeler victory along the lines of 21 - 17.
 
Last edited:

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,570
Reaction score
71,376
I hope you are wrong. I really do. I think if we get out ahead early, Bell will be neutralized. Brown can't utilize his speed when Vick is throwing ducks. Their DL is good, but if we give them a healthy dose of CJ, DJ, and Ellington in the first half, they will be gassed by the second half because they stay in for every play.

Their secondary, which isn't all that good to begin with, is banged up.

Even with all that, I don't have a good comfort level with going into that stadium and winning.

This sums up my thoughts to a T. Really have no idea what to expect, but that's a team with a lot of weapons on O, even with a backup QB and is notoriously a tough place to play.
 

Buckybird

Hoist the Lombardi Trophy
Joined
Nov 11, 2002
Posts
25,308
Reaction score
6,339
Location
Dallas, TX
Because those include points of turnovers, and I'm not sure how representative that is — or how sustainable for the long-term. We didn't get turnovers in the Rams game, had to settle for field goals, and only scored 22 points.

Here's where I'm concerned: we're 29th in the NFL in plays per drive (5.21), 8th in yards per drive (33.9) and 2nd in points per drive (2.78). I'm not sure that's a sustainable variance for the long-term — both because big plays are relatively rare and have a high potential for turnover and because of regression toward the mean.

But I've been pretty consistently wrong about Carson Palmer's ability to continue to protect the ball and be productive carrying over his performance from last year, but we're 22nd in the NFL in passing attempts per game and 10th in passing yardage. I could pretty easily be wrong about this.

Fair points. I'm not worried because our offense was pretty good last year until #3 existed stage left & it's better this year because we can actually run it with multiple RBs who all 3 are different, with somewhat different skill sets. Pick your poison :D

Plus I'm not sure Floyd is totally healthy enough yet & yet to be much involved in the O.
 

BigRedRage

Reckless
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Posts
48,274
Reaction score
12,526
Location
SE valley
Because those include points of turnovers, and I'm not sure how representative that is — or how sustainable for the long-term. We didn't get turnovers in the Rams game, had to settle for field goals, and only scored 22 points.

Here's where I'm concerned: we're 29th in the NFL in plays per drive (5.21), 8th in yards per drive (33.9) and 2nd in points per drive (2.78). I'm not sure that's a sustainable variance for the long-term — both because big plays are relatively rare and have a high potential for turnover and because of regression toward the mean.

But I've been pretty consistently wrong about Carson Palmer's ability to continue to protect the ball and be productive carrying over his performance from last year, but we're 22nd in the NFL in passing attempts per game and 10th in passing yardage. I could pretty easily be wrong about this.

So our offense did not completely dominate one of the best defenses in the league like they have everyone else to the offense really might not be good at all.

We have been great of taking advantage of turnovers but of 5 games, 4 of them the offense was stellar. One of them the offense moved the ball but failed in the redzone against one of the top defenses in the league. Color me unconcerned at this point.
 

CardsFan88

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 28, 2002
Posts
7,709
Reaction score
4,890
Well remember folks, we generally have Mick Vick's number. Maybe that doesn't transpire, but usually we kick his butt.

I also wouldn't read too much into our plays per drive. Our # of big plays alters that number giving a false representation to what it means. It doesn't mean we aren't sustaining drives, it means we are scoring faster then what most drives in most offenses would normally showcase. Also because we've done this through the first five games, that stat is basically going to be meaningless the entire season.
 
Last edited:

Redneck Voodoo

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Posts
2,178
Reaction score
855
Dont see Mike Vick beating us. And everyone is talking about the Colts/Pats game as FU game.....to me this is a very very underatted one. He has played coy (as he should) but Arians is going to bring the kitchen sink and coach the game of his life imo. With Vick i see the opportunity to really put it on them but i do think defense is good and Bell will be a handful. But we always get up for good backs so I think well be okay there.

31 - 17 Cardinals

If Big Ben was playing it would be a different story. But you better believe Arians has this game and the first game at Seattle as circled on the calendar.

I personally think he is going to depants Tomlin especially with the limited Mike Vick under center. He was atrocious for 3 Q and that is NOT a good SD defense.
All of this except it will be 35-10 Cards. :)
 

crisper57

Open the Roof!
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Posts
14,950
Reaction score
1,019
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I am tired of the Cardinals not getting respect for beating up on inferior teams. Here is the combined record of the opponents that the undefeated teams have played:

Panthers (4-0): 5-15

Broncos (5-0): 6-18

Falcons (5-0): 10-15

Packers (5-0): 8-17

Patriots (4-0): 9-11

Bengals (5-0): 8-17

Of the 28 games played, the undefeated teams have faced exactly 3 teams with a current winning record. New England beat the Steelers (3-2) and the Bills (3-2). Atlanta defeated the Giants (3-2).

Also, Denver beat a .500 team in Minnesota (2-2).
 

Darkside

ASFN Addict
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
May 27, 2010
Posts
8,107
Reaction score
191
Location
Tempe, AZ
The lack of # of plays on offense, offensive time of possession, etc is because we get so many turnovers we're playing on short field's.
 

Capital Card

The Kobayashi of Kool-Aid
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
3,132
Reaction score
289
Location
Pigskin Slaughter House-Smithfield, VA
I am tired of the Cardinals not getting respect for beating up on inferior teams. Here is the combined record of the opponents that the undefeated teams have played:

Panthers (4-0): 5-15

Broncos (5-0): 6-18

Falcons (5-0): 10-15

Packers (5-0): 8-17

Patriots (4-0): 9-11

Bengals (5-0): 8-17

Of the 28 games played, the undefeated teams have faced exactly 3 teams with a current winning record. New England beat the Steelers (3-2) and the Bills (3-2). Atlanta defeated the Giants (3-2).

Also, Denver beat a .500 team in Minnesota (2-2).

Wow, didn't realize. Makes sense though.
Thanks for the stat.
 
OP
OP
kerouac9

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
39,028
Reaction score
31,358
Location
Gilbert, AZ
The lack of # of plays on offense, offensive time of possession, etc is because we get so many turnovers we're playing on short field's.

We're actually right in the middle of the league in TOP per drive and possessions.
 

unseenaz

ASFN Addict
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Posts
7,008
Reaction score
5,973
Location
Gilbert
We're actually right in the middle of the league in TOP per drive and possessions.

11 ints 7 forced fumbles 2 of which were recovered, and we're only middle of the pack??? yeesh

last year we had 18 total ints and 9 forced fumbles, we're on pace to blase those numbers
 

TJ

Frank Kaminsky is my Hero.
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
35,355
Reaction score
21,745
Location
South Bay
The lack of # of plays on offense, offensive time of possession, etc is because we get so many turnovers we're playing on short field's.


The offense has been opportunistic with turnovers and overall efficient. The team ran 49 plays last week and scored 42 points. Nearly a point per play!!
 

Milgod

Hall of Famer
Joined
May 21, 2007
Posts
1,210
Reaction score
246
Location
Peterborough, UK
Because those include points of turnovers, and I'm not sure how representative that is — or how sustainable for the long-term. We didn't get turnovers in the Rams game, had to settle for field goals, and only scored 22 points.

Here's where I'm concerned: we're 29th in the NFL in plays per drive (5.21), 8th in yards per drive (33.9) and 2nd in points per drive (2.78). I'm not sure that's a sustainable variance for the long-term — both because big plays are relatively rare and have a high potential for turnover and because of regression toward the mean.

But I've been pretty consistently wrong about Carson Palmer's ability to continue to protect the ball and be productive carrying over his performance from last year, but we're 22nd in the NFL in passing attempts per game and 10th in passing yardage. I could pretty easily be wrong about this.

ONLY scored 22. You're acting as if it was a terrible number of points. It was against a good D and we had some horrible calls go against us (fumble decision the main one).
 

BigRedRage

Reckless
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Posts
48,274
Reaction score
12,526
Location
SE valley
11 ints 7 forced fumbles 2 of which were recovered, and we're only middle of the pack??? yeesh

last year we had 18 total ints and 9 forced fumbles, we're on pace to blase those numbers

he was referencing time of possession (TOP) not turnovers
 

ajcardfan

I see you.
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
39,259
Reaction score
27,093
And while I don't think that highly of Foles myself, he is better than Michael Vick in the year of 2015.

Plus, the Cardinals, have always played Vick very tough. And, those defenses didn't have "The Flock".We have the perfect personnel to keep Vick in the pocket and force him to throw.

If Pittsburgh scores that much on us, it will be because Bell tears us up. And, that is possible.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,470
Reaction score
8,624
Location
Scottsdale
I am tired of the Cardinals not getting respect for beating up on inferior teams. Here is the combined record of the opponents that the undefeated teams have played:

Panthers (4-0): 5-15

Broncos (5-0): 6-18

Falcons (5-0): 10-15

Packers (5-0): 8-17

Patriots (4-0): 9-11

Bengals (5-0): 8-17

Of the 28 games played, the undefeated teams have faced exactly 3 teams with a current winning record. New England beat the Steelers (3-2) and the Bills (3-2). Atlanta defeated the Giants (3-2).

Also, Denver beat a .500 team in Minnesota (2-2).

For what it's worth, looking at the next 5 weeks for these teams and the Cards, the opponent current W/L records look like this:

Panthers: 13 & 11

Broncos: 13 & 12

Falcons: 5 & 14

Packers: 11 & 8

Patriots: 12 & 11

Bengals: 9 & 11

Cardinals: 8 & 12

So it appears that the Cards have a relatively easier schedule over the next 5 weeks... We shall see...
 

Jim Otis

Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Posts
1,262
Reaction score
187
Location
Mississippi
I hate numbers , there's like to many of them . I choose to use gut logic like do I think the undefeated Panthers will defeat the 2 and 3 Hags in Seattle this Sunday ?
NOT REALLY !!!!!!!!
 

Chaz

observationist
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Posts
11,327
Reaction score
7
Location
Wandering the Universe
I hate numbers , there's like to many of them . I choose to use gut logic like do I think the undefeated Panthers will defeat the 2 and 3 Hags in Seattle this Sunday ?
NOT REALLY !!!!!!!!


With the Panthers defense that isn't completely unlikely.
They will be motivated since the Hawks eliminated them last year but can they (Cam) score enough points?

Wilson often pulls a rabbit out of his hat in these situations.
 

MrYeahBut

4 Food groups: beans, chili, cheese, bacon
Supporting Member
Joined
May 20, 2002
Posts
17,990
Reaction score
13,849
Location
Albq
I hate numbers , there's like to many of them . I choose to use gut logic like do I think the undefeated Panthers will defeat the 2 and 3 Hags in Seattle this Sunday ?
NOT REALLY !!!!!!!!


Funny to hate numbers because there's too many of them... Good one, lmao
 

Cbus cardsfan

Back to Back ASFN FFL Champion
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
21,619
Reaction score
7,996
Because those include points of turnovers, and I'm not sure how representative that is — or how sustainable for the long-term. We didn't get turnovers in the Rams game, had to settle for field goals, and only scored 22 points.

Here's where I'm concerned: we're 29th in the NFL in plays per drive (5.21), 8th in yards per drive (33.9) and 2nd in points per drive (2.78). I'm not sure that's a sustainable variance for the long-term — both because big plays are relatively rare and have a high potential for turnover and because of regression toward the mean.

But I've been pretty consistently wrong about Carson Palmer's ability to continue to protect the ball and be productive carrying over his performance from last year, but we're 22nd in the NFL in passing attempts per game and 10th in passing yardage. I could pretty easily be wrong about this.

You must be registered for see images


Stats are for losers
final score is for winners
and that really what it's all about.
 

Latest posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
558,889
Posts
5,459,203
Members
6,337
Latest member
rattle
Top