Joe Barry Report Card

Dallas is weak at corner with Scandrick injured again. Their D is beatable via the pass, short and long.

Agreed. Forgot about Scandrick injury, but yes they can't cover what we have. However, normally you run, if they can't stop the run, and eliminate the drops ints etc.
Less risk in the run game. Plus we can't give Dallas time of possession, stop their run, make Dak beat you.
 
MacVay calling running plays or no? Jay says we did not have any balance. If you don't have a more balanced attack, you will be putting a premium on the timing of the run play called. I.e., for it to work, it must be at the right time down and distance and situation. If not, you get what you see....stuffed. The run cannot be an afterthought.

We will be playing right into Dallas' hands if we don't run more than pass against them. They are susceptible to be run gashed. Football 101. If we ignore that playcalling, we are downright dumb on the sidelines. I saw enough dumb already. Just how I see this game.

I agree, whole heartedly...you cannot run 11 times and pass 43 and expect to be successful no matter how pass happy the league has become.

However, MacVay's job is not in jeopardy.
 
While I agree about MacVay, Barry should be. He's had how much time to become "more creative" now ? When you go through a full season sucking, that should be a wake up call, and he's hit the snooze button..... Sure the Steelers are a much better team, but he had the entire off season to come up with something fresh for them. He didn't have the best running record as a DC when he got here, and it shows.

He didn't suck all last year and he is talent bereft, but he did a solid job with the talent he had last year. You, like I have, are judging him based on us hiring him over Wade Phillips. I think it was a mistake, but Barry did not suck last year.
 
We keep throwing up the pass/run ratio as if it indicates what really happened during the game.

Typical set of downs is what... 3 plays and see the result.

All it takes is for one unsuccessful run to produce two passing plays to get to the next set of downs.

What I typically saw was a stuffed run or a successful run called back by some bonehead penalty . So we have down and long distance which calls for passing plays.

That's 2:1 right off the bat and frankly, I'd have no problem with that ratio at all.
Now, had we won with that 4:1 thing, it's doubtful that we'd be yacking this thing up so loud :p

With our receiving corps and the way they played us 'soft'.... the short passing game should have been used and often, trouble is that Kirk looked off.... why I don't know but what I did see was him starting to finally put some 'zip' on the ball, unfortunately too late in the game with our weak run defense already gassed to the max.

And of course there was a defense ranked top 5 against the run that figured into the equation too, so yeah..... let's go with our admittedly weak run game and jam it into one of the best run defenses in the league just get that run to pass ratio a little closer to even regardless of the outcome of each play.

The game was supposed to be a benchmark for the Skins, 'welp'.... we and the team now know now that there is work to be done in order to play with the 'big boys'.

One thing we do know is that this team knows how to work, they just gotta be smarter about where they direct the effort and get pissed about their failures.
 
We keep throwing up the pass/run ratio as if it indicates what really happened during the game.

Typical set of downs is what... 3 plays and see the result.

All it takes is for one unsuccessful run to produce two passing plays to get to the next set of downs.

What I typically saw was a stuffed run or a successful run called back by some bonehead penalty . So we have down and long distance which calls for passing plays.

That's 2:1 right off the bat and frankly, I'd have no problem with that ratio at all.
Now, had we won with that 4:1 thing, it's doubtful that we'd be yacking this thing up so loud :p

With our receiving corps and the way they played us 'soft'.... the short passing game should have been used and often, trouble is that Kirk looked off.... why I don't know but what I did see was him starting to finally put some 'zip' on the ball, unfortunately too late in the game with our weak run defense already gassed to the max.

And of course there was a defense ranked top 5 against the run that figured into the equation too, so yeah..... let's go with our admittedly weak run game and jam it into one of the best run defenses in the league just get that run to pass ratio a little closer to even regardless of the outcome of each play.

The game was supposed to be a benchmark for the Skins, 'welp'.... we and the team now know now that there is work to be done in order to play with the 'big boys'.

One thing we do know is that this team knows how to work, they just gotta be smarter about where they direct the effort and get pissed about their failures.

I see your point, but I disagree. Slightly. Respectfully. :)

Kirk was clearly on edge early in the game, his passes were short and inaccurate. Having a running game that was productive beyond not at all might have helped to settle him down. For whatever reason, his case of the jitters was on full display and as it became painfully apparent that he was going to have to win the game on his own, with no help from our non-existant running game, I suspect those jitters at the very least stayed the same, if not outright worsened.

It's one game. The reports of our season's demise have been greatly exaggerated. But Gruden showed the same troubling tendencies he did last year when Kirk wasn't able to put on his Superman cape and dominate for us.

If Kirk isn't able to do that in a majority of games this year, based on the Steelers game, we're in trouble. It would be nice to be able to be more than one-dimensional instead of having to pin everything on Kirk.

But Gruden has never shown that ability in the past, so I ain't holding my breath now.
 
Tom is correct, we did not see enough of Matt Jones in the backfield coming out to catch a screen to open up some space for him where he excels. When they tried it with Chris Thompson in the backfield, Pittsburgh sent another rusher and blew Thompson up.

Out coached and outplayed with a few unfortunate bounces...it really is that simple.
 
He didn't suck all last year and he is talent bereft, but he did a solid job with the talent he had last year. You, like I have, are judging him based on us hiring him over Wade Phillips. I think it was a mistake, but Barry did not suck last year.

Really nothing to do with Phillips. Our run D sucked last year IMO, and I don't hold out any hope it will get better any time soon. I hear the talent thing all the time, yet other teams make it happen with no name players. Why can't we ?
 
What I saw from Kirk I don't like is that he was "aiming" the ball, i.e., trying to guide it in there. That resulted in inaccuracy. Or maybe his accuracy was "off" and he knew it and tried to guide it. At any rate, his game suffered early, compounded by judgement errors. The announcer noted that the first down was available for him if he ran, yet he chose to air it past the end zone for a FG. On another play, I saw him stare down Reed, only to see another, Garcon, WR open further behind Reed downfield. Chose the wrong guy. Kirk was not ready to play imho.

Other offensive play calling mistakes, imho, was throwing to the sidelines too much. Hoping for the WR to make a move. Most times, the defenders don't bite and make the tackle. I don't like those sideways plays.

I don't like running on first down with our RB's, I've said that before. But we still need some effective runs. I would like to see more misdirection, traps sweeps etc. We can go up the middle on the Cows. But I don't want to see backs trying to break outside. Usually doesn't work out too well. I want to see more "bread and butter" plays. You know, those plays that work, so we run them more than once. The go to plays. Not enough of that.
 
Kirk could be pressing, trying to justify the big contract. It happens to guys once they are the man, getting paid like the man.

He just needs to settle down.

Oh, and a ****ing running game. So he doesn't have to be a one man show every week.
 
For those interested, Mark Bullock is breaking down what Cousins did wrong on twitter today with pictures.

In short, his footwork was bad, his stride was too long, and it was causing him to throw balls too low. He was also missing open receivers and making bad decisions.

On Barry Fear, Josh Norman always played on the left side in Carolina. Also, if we moved him all over the field, Pittsburgh would have known that we were playing man coverage, thereby allowing them to set pick plays and run interference on Norman, allowing Brown to get open. They wanted to keep them guessing.
 
Why didn't he line up our best corner, against the best receiver in the league ?

Bash had an excellent camp and they figured he could handle the job with some backend help when he was on the guy.
The plays made on him were excellent throws with high dollar catches in game situations that normally are played a different way, not even sure if Norman could have handled them better but it should have been at least 'looked at' during the game.

Other than that, I got nuttin' and we'll see if they make that adjustment in the future.
 
I had/have no problem with Norman playing one side of the field.

And I still love Breeland.
 
For those interested, Mark Bullock is breaking down what Cousins did wrong on twitter today with pictures.

In short, his footwork was bad, his stride was too long, and it was causing him to throw balls too low. He was also missing open receivers and making bad decisions.

On Barry Fear, Josh Norman always played on the left side in Carolina. Also, if we moved him all over the field, Pittsburgh would have known that we were playing man coverage, thereby allowing them to set pick plays and run interference on Norman, allowing Brown to get open. They wanted to keep them guessing.

Well THAT worked great. Kept 'em guessing all the way to the endzone.
 
I had/have no problem with Norman playing one side of the field.

And I still love Breeland.

I agree. Breeland has shut down some of the best before, so he's earned the benefit of the doubt.

There's also nothing saying that Norman would have done any better.

Ben and Brown were just on fire. It happens.
 
On Barry Fear, Josh Norman always played on the left side in Carolina.

You have GOT to be kidding me. (Not you, McD5 ... just a general 'you').

We gave a $75 million contract to a guy who only covers the left side of the field? You mean he's NOT a shut-down corner, but a system corner? And we paid the guy SEVENTY FIVE MILLION?

That is Dan Snyder stupid. Wow.

Also, if we moved him all over the field, Pittsburgh would have known that we were playing man coverage, thereby allowing them to set pick plays and run interference on Norman, allowing Brown to get open. They wanted to keep them guessing.

And that is, uh, Joe Barry stupid? They would have known we were in man coverage? So what? I'm not expert, but I'm pretty sure there wasn't a lot of guessing going on last night.

No. You say "Josh, take out 84. We'll worry about the rest of the guys." Done. If their best guy beats your best guy, so be it, but to not even try it because you're afraid of being out-schemed?

You have got to be kidding me.
 
There's also nothing saying that Norman would have done any better.

$75 million says Norman would have done better. If not, we're wasting our money.
 
Agreed with Henry. The production we got out of Norman, based on the Pittsburgh game, was that of a guy, with about a 2 Million dollar, or less, annual salary.
I wouldn't say he played poorly.
But he wasn't used correctly, and he surely came nowhere remotely close to the value of his contract, even in today's liberal NFL player value terms.
 
I'm with Henry on this one. Revis doesn't get burned by pick plays, manages to shut a guy down following him all over the field. Norman is being paid and given the reputation in a way that says he should be able to do the same.

On occasion sticking to one side of the field to disguise coverage? Sure. After a guy keeps burning one CB, it might be worth it to switch things up, since apparently the WR has his number. Not something against Breeland overall, but if you see a guy getting taken out, it could just be the matchup, so you make the adjustment since the situation has dictated it.

As many have said...adjustments(or lack thereof) seem suspect often with this staff.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top