junebugz Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I was reading an article on MSN and it had the Seahawks Dyson sharing his thoughts on Pittsburgh since he played them 4 times between 2001-2003 ... maybe it is just me, but he doesn't see to have as much of a grasp as he would like to think. Here is his quote liking the Steelers to the most similar NFC team. Dyson said the NFC offense to which Pittsburgh appears most similar is division-rival St. Louis because of the Rams' multiple playmakers outside and rugged runner Steven Jackson inside. So according to a reference site, here are how similar the playing styles are. STL 2005 Stats Rushing Attempts - 29th Yards - 22nd Yards/Attempt - 13th TDs - 14th Passing Attempts - 4th Yards - 2nd Yards/Attempt - 8th TDs - 9th PIT 2005 Stats Rushing Attempts - 1st Yards - 5th Yards/Attempt - 12th TDs - 5th Passing Attempts - 32nd Yards - 25th Yards/Attempt - 1st TDs - 15th Seems to me that Dyson might be a little off base on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I was reading an article on MSN and it had the Seahawks Dyson sharing his thoughts on Pittsburgh since he played them 4 times between 2001-2003 ... maybe it is just me, but he doesn't see to have as much of a grasp as he would like to think. Here is his quote liking the Steelers to the most similar NFC team.So according to a reference site, here are how similar the playing styles are. STL 2005 Stats Rushing Attempts - 29th Yards - 22nd Yards/Attempt - 13th TDs - 14th Passing Attempts - 4th Yards - 2nd Yards/Attempt - 8th TDs - 9th PIT 2005 Stats Rushing Attempts - 1st Yards - 5th Yards/Attempt - 12th TDs - 5th Passing Attempts - 32nd Yards - 25th Yards/Attempt - 1st TDs - 15th Seems to me that Dyson might be a little off base on this one. 1289286[/snapback] If you asked me which offense the Steelers are least like, the Rams would be one of the first ones to pop into my head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehand Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 (edited) Seems to me that Dyson might be a little off base on this one. 1289286[/snapback] So, are you saying you disagree with the statement that "the Steelers have multiple playmakers outside and (a) rugged runner inside"? Dyson simply compared the Steelers stylistically to the Seahawks biggest rival. There is nothing remotely inflammatory about his comment, so what on earth is the point of this post? Edited January 26, 2006 by Bonehand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brewer Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 ......... so what on earth is the point of this post? 1289327[/snapback] It's a cover to allow Menudo to post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
louisville lip Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I don't think Dyson's comments are off-base. Looking at Pittsburgh's year-to-date stats to assess the way their offense operates is misleading for several reasons. For one, Roethlisberger missed several games, and his backups didn't throw the ball much or well. Equally important, in about ten games during the regular season, Pittsburgh hardly threw the ball after the 3rd quarter. For example, in the first Bengals' game, I believe the Steelers ran the ball on their last 24 plays. That'll skew the numbers! A better measure of Pittsburgh's offensive strategy is their run-pass balance in the first half of games. Although I don't have those statistics, you can bet that those numbers show a run-pass balance that is much closer to 50-50, and in the playoffs, they've passed on perhaps 60% of their first-half plays. So I think Dyson's comments are pretty accurate, particularly if you consider Ward, Randle El, Wilson, Miller and Parker "playmakers." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted January 26, 2006 Author Share Posted January 26, 2006 so what on earth is the point of this post? 1289327[/snapback] Just seeing if people agree with Dyson's view ... It seems to me that several football teams have playmakers on the outside and a rugged runner on the inside. Just in the NFC which he was talking about ... TAM WAS DAL NOR (with a healthy Duece) could all fit the bill too ... and to an extent CAR What good does comparing players on different teams do if the teams have totally different playing styles? He said, "the NFC offense to which Pittsburgh appears most similar is division-rival St. Louis". To base it simply on the types of players and not on playing style seems a little akward to me. Sheesh, I not bashing the Hawks, enjoy your moment ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehand Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 (edited) Sheesh, I not bashing the Hawks, enjoy your moment ... 1289386[/snapback] I hear you, but I am sure he was not analyzing it all that much. The way I read it he was being both complementary and vague. And to read your initial post, it seems that you were postulating that Dyson is an idiot for not knowing that the the Steelers were so statistically superior to the Rams this year. You will hearing a lot of these type of comments from the Seahawks players over the next 2 weeks, as they will not be providing any bulletin board material for PIT. Edited January 26, 2006 by Bonehand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Dyson is not very good. He's a weak link IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Well, as good as Pitt's O has been of late- Pitt has thrown the ball lately- but their passing game is nowhere near as lethal or dangerous as STL when Bulger is healthy. They throw it a ton, and have more speed at WR, more playmakers in Holt/Ike/Curtis. Don't see similarities at all, but previous post is correct in Dyson comparing Pitt's O to StL- is a NICE COMPLIMENT considering it is one of the best in the NFL. Pitt just seems to be making nice calls, and having success throwing the ball of late, but they are not the Rams. Both Pitt's and STL 2005 stats are skewed b/c of injuries to Roth & Bulger. Pitt has a much more balanced O than STL, and obviously had success running the football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Steelers and Rams have almost nothing in common. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted January 26, 2006 Author Share Posted January 26, 2006 Steelers and Rams have almost nothing in common. 1289745[/snapback] their team names both end in "s" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 their team names both end in "s" 1289764[/snapback] Well, if you're gonna get all technical on me, yes. And Bettis played for both teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehand Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 And Bettis played for both teams. 1289816[/snapback] Wha? I know Franco Harris played for the Seahawks, but not Bettis... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted January 26, 2006 Author Share Posted January 26, 2006 Wha? I know Franco Harris played for the Seahawks, but not Bettis... 1289835[/snapback] talkin Steelers and Rams similarities Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehand Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 talkin Steelers and Rams similarities 1289841[/snapback] :doah: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.