Week 9: The Good, Bad and Ugly vent thread

[redrum52]

5 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

LMAO...that's not me.  Only reason I posted that was to head off the claim that the D was expected to be tired with 10 minutes left in the game. 21 points.  They were leading by 21 points. I'm not into the offense vs. defense debate, not my bag. I'm a fan of the Ravens football team.

The truth is that if I'm a Steelers fan I'm calling the coaches out.  I thought they would come out passing 2nd half cause every team should know by now not to run on us but they stuck with it.  I think they had a 3rd and 4 and still tried to run the ball.  The gameplan was awful.

 

And you can't say you don't get into offense vs defense when you claim another defensive collapse, but maybe that's just my opinion.  

Most of these "collapses" are due to the fact we barely have a significant and the offense waiting til the end to score (so I guess the other teams are going prevent too).  We just seem to be the only offense that when it needs to score with last possession, we can't.  Serious question.  When was the last time we had ball with last possession, 2 min or less to start drive, and moved the ball to get a td? 

 

[Militant X 1]

49 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

ummmm......no, that's not why me and my whole family(and guessing a lot of other folks) felt uncomfortable with a 21 point lead.  While I don't disagree with much that you said, we're just too used to and conditioned to expect a defensive collapse at the end of every game.  No matter how well they have played the rest of the game it just seems to happen, and it sucks. Of course the offense was of no help, but the 180 degree turn around is maddening.  

Imo, you can't expect a defense that plays lights out for 3 1/2 quarters to constantly "hold" a offense out or down the entire game when the Ravens offense is constantly getting 3 & outs, Flacco's tossing INT's in the redzone and the offense is piling up penalty after penalty.  The defense even picked Big Ben to help the Ravens offense.  To me, at some point this offense has to carry their own weight!  Again, minus Wallace's TD run, Tucker's FG's (special teams) and the Punt block and scoop for a TD (special teams)...the offense did absolutely nothing of significance the remainder of the game with their"multiple opportunities"  to add to their lead to truly finish off the Steelers.

Edited November 7, 2016 by Militant X 1
spelling

[rmcjacket23]

2 minutes ago, redrum52 said:

The truth is that if I'm a Steelers fan I'm calling the coaches out.  I thought they would come out passing 2nd half cause every team should know by now not to run on us but they stuck with it.  I think they had a 3rd and 4 and still tried to run the ball.  The gameplan was awful.

 

And you can't say you don't get into offense vs defense when you claim another defensive collapse, but maybe that's just my opinion.  

Most of these "collapses" are due to the fact we barely have a significant and the offense waiting til the end to score (so I guess the other teams are going prevent too).  We just seem to be the only offense that when it needs to score with last possession, we can't.  Serious question.  When was the last time we had ball with last possession, 2 min or less to start drive, and moved the ball to get a td? 

 

Thought it was pretty clear they didn't want to expose Ben to an all-out aerial attack, in which (even with a limited pass rush) we would just pin our ears back and hit him often.

And frankly, the Steelers offense would be highly unimpressive if they didn't have a running game. Even when Bell is out they commit to running the ball. Their entire offense is predicated on the threat of being able to run the ball effectively, because outside of Brown, they have a lot of big play WRs who need one-on-one matchups on the outside in order to break teams.

If they went all out pass in the 2nd half, I guarantee Ben throws at least two picks, and they may have even scored less than they did.

[Tank 92]

Just now, Militant X 1 said:

Imo, you can't expect a defense that plays lights out for 3 1/2 quarters to constantly "hold" a offense out or down the entire game WHEN the Ravens offense is constantly getting 3 & outs, Flacco's tossing INT's in the redzone and the offense is piling up penalty after penalty.  The defense even picked Big Ben to help the Ravens offense.  To me, at some point this offense has to carry their own weight!  Again, minus Wallace's TD run, Tucker's FG's (special teams) and the Punt block and scoop for a TD (special teams)...the offense did absolutely NOTHING of significance the remainder of the game with their"multiple opportunities"  to add to their lead to truly finish off the Steelers.

lol!  How big of a lead do we need?  21 points Mili!  21 freaking points!  What should have been needed "finish them off"? If we never toched the ball again surely we should feel comfortable with such a lead and 10 minutes remaining. 

Like I said, I don't disagree with much that you said, but we have to find an answer to the end of game collapses. 

[Tru11]

3 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

lol!  How big of a lead do we need?  21 points Mili!  21 freaking points!  What should have been needed "finish them off"? If we never toched the ball again surely we should feel comfortable with such a lead and 10 minutes remaining. 

Like I said, I don't disagree with much that you said, but we have to find an answer to the end of game collapses. 

pick up first downs on offense.
maybe score some points.

thinking out of the box here though.

 

 

[redrum52]

7 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Thought it was pretty clear they didn't want to expose Ben to an all-out aerial attack, in which (even with a limited pass rush) we would just pin our ears back and hit him often.

And frankly, the Steelers offense would be highly unimpressive if they didn't have a running game. Even when Bell is out they commit to running the ball. Their entire offense is predicated on the threat of being able to run the ball effectively, because outside of Brown, they have a lot of big play WRs who need one-on-one matchups on the outside in order to break teams.

If they went all out pass in the 2nd half, I guarantee Ben throws at least two picks, and they may have even scored less than they did.

I fully understand that, but if you're not going to do it earlier why put him in harms way down 21 in the 4th when the pass is then expected?  I don't mean fully abandon the run either, like we did with Trestman, just using it less.

[Militant X 1]

2 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

lol!  How big of a lead do we need?  21 points Mili!  21 freaking points!  What should have been needed "finish them off"? If we never toched the ball again surely we should feel comfortable with such a lead and 10 minutes remaining. 

Like I said, I don't disagree with much that you said, but we have to find an answer to the end of game collapses. 

I get you Tank!  

I knew that 21 pts wasn't enough but for a different reason than you.  I told a few fans sitting near me in the stands yesterday that in my view, the Steelers fight to the end and that Big Ben would get the opportunity to do his thing if we can't get consistent pressure/sacks on him and sure enough he did!  

Perhaps on one hand, your take is that...no matter how poorly the offense is playing, the defense should hold up or close out the game...especially with a lead...no matter how that lead came about.  On the other hand, my take is that it's the offenses job to score and score some more when they have the opportunities to extend leads and when that is not done, it may allow the opponents the opportunity to get their offenses into a rhythm to finally get going.

So Tank, we both want the same thing but see how to get there differently. 

[rudywasoffsides]

2 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Lol. Wow. I see there is no discussion to be had here.

You have nothing to say because you love and adore Stanley. Now if it was Hurst who had 4 penalties, gave up two sacks including a strip fumble, you would be out here screaming for him to be on the streets. I just want you to acknowledge that you are extremely bias because the cold truth is Stanley has not been much better than Hurst this year. I expected more from our number 6 overall pick. I expected to not watch him get dominated by old man Harrison who the Steelers literally picked up at the retirement home on the way to M&T. Stanley made a slow, past his prime 38 year old pass rusher look like an all pro yesterday even though he had no sacks the rest of the season. 

[GrimCoconut]

Here are my thoughts on the game:

On defense, 

The secondary played very well although Ben was injured and looked the part, throwing wobbly balls at times that weren't sharp. Flacco understandably takes heat but I thought Ben looked worse. That said, Weddle, Jimmy, Jernigan, Mosley and Williams are pieces around which we can build. Judon and Young both look promising but I'll wait until their second year because Za'Darius also looked good late in the year as a rookie but looks bad this year. Time will tell on both, and while I like Pierce I wouldn't bank so easily on him replacing Williams who had a great game yesterday. If anyone looked bad it was our edge defenders except Judon. They need to work because they're not getting the pass rush we need. 

On offense what's there to say really? The offense looked mostly bad. OL failed to consistently hold up, Flacco wasn't sharp, WR failed to separate at times. You name it, it probably happened. I liked Waller except for the ST penalty which was an honest mistake. Dixon looks just okay. I hope he steps up because we really need some explosiveness at RB. I don't think Pitta looks all that good out there. I do think Perriman is showing signs of development and growth but he still needs work but Aiken looked decent. As for OL, Stanley didn't play well but we won and we're perfect 4-0 with him and 0-4 without

On ST we need someone to replace Hester. I know Campanaro is a popular name to replace Hester but I wonder if Reynolds may be the one to get the call eventually. We'll see. I always like Campanaro but he's so snakebit. I hope he stays healthy 

Edited November 7, 2016 by GrimCoconut

[Edgar]

Why are our tight ends non existent? I have not had opportunity to re-watch games for awhile. Can anyone shed some light?

[ravensdfan]

5 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Not a pees defender but it's true. The dbs choose their depth. The problem is the philosophy. At the end of the game we take what was working and then scrap it. Off man and tight zones and mixed blitzes work for 3 quarters and then suddenly we play soft zones and 4 Man rushes and get wrecked. But the dbs DO choose their depth.

I've said this for years and been told I'm so wrong. It isn't a Pees' philosophy. But we all know that it most certainly is what he does, pretty much 100% of the time. We'll never know about the choosing for sure, but I seriously doubt they choose their depth in that situation. I mean, what are the odds that we'd get DBs that choose to give a zillion yard cushion down to every single man? Not very good. There is definitely input going on there. Suggestions. Whatever you wish to use to describe it.

[ravensdfan]

7 hours ago, rmw10 said:

Someone clearly doesn't understand how zone coverages work...

Yep sure do. Also understand that zone coverage does NOT mean the huge cushions we routinely offer. Newsflash: Other teams use zone coverages too - and they aren't giving those huge cushions.

 

[jdynamite]

The good : Beating Steelers. Tavon Young continues to impress me. Judon got his first taste of sacking Big Ben hope it leaves his mouth watering for more.   The run defense was great! 

The bad: after starting off getting 5 yards a pop running in the first series the running game did absolutely nothing. Stanley had a bad game in terms of penalities and Harrison gave him an official NFL welcome  ( but it's his 4th NFL game total and 1st game in over a month... people need to relax he will be a good one  )

The ugly: the entire division looks weak this year, this could benefit the Ravens with a playoff push.  

[ravensdfan]

2 hours ago, Militant X 1 said:

Imo, you can't expect a defense that plays lights out for 3 1/2 quarters to constantly "hold" a offense out or down the entire game when the Ravens offense is constantly getting 3 & outs, Flacco's tossing INT's in the redzone and the offense is piling up penalty after penalty.  The defense even picked Big Ben to help the Ravens offense.  To me, at some point this offense has to carry their own weight!  Again, minus Wallace's TD run, Tucker's FG's (special teams) and the Punt block and scoop for a TD (special teams)...the offense did absolutely nothing of significance the remainder of the game with their"multiple opportunities"  to add to their lead to truly finish off the Steelers.

I didn't expect them to constantly hold in the least. I did not expect for the Steelers to never get a first down. I didn't even expect them to hold to a shut out. However, regardless of how that 21 pt lead came about, yes, a defense should be able to hold that lead for one freaking quarter. Whether the offense scores again or not. It should not be the case that we require the other team to play horribly in order to hold it.

 

 

Edited November 7, 2016 by ravensdfan

[jdynamite]

1 hour ago, Edgar said:

Why are our tight ends non existent? I have not had opportunity to re-watch games for awhile. Can anyone shed some light?

It's unexplainable. I felt coming into the year even minus Watson, the team would use a diverse array of TE packages to manipulate the defense. That has yet to occur. Maxx was underutilized in the passing game in the few games he played before injury. 

It was nice to see Waller get a few passes tossed his way Sunday. Flacco and Pitta timing has been off the last few games. 

[VermontRaven]

9 minutes ago, jdynamite said:

The ugly: the entire division looks weak this year, this could benefit the Ravens with a playoff push.  

I agree. We should be very thankful for this because I don't see us as a wild card team. I think both wildcards are coming out of the west this year. Winning the division is our path to the playoffs--Fortunatwly we are i. The lead after 1/2 season.  I think it will be a 3 team race to the end. I have't counted Bengals out. They have played the hardest part of their schedule already amd could easily still make a run.

[Militant X 1]

1 hour ago, Militant X 1 said:

I get you Tank!  

I knew that 21 pts wasn't enough but for a different reason than you.  I told a few fans sitting near me in the stands yesterday that in my view, the Steelers fight to the end and that Big Ben would get the opportunity to do his thing if we can't get consistent pressure/sacks on him and sure enough he did!  

Perhaps on one hand, your take is that...no matter how poorly the offense is playing, the defense should hold up or close out the game...especially with a lead...no matter how that lead came about.  On the other hand, my take is that it's the offenses job to score and score some more when they have the opportunities to extend leads and when that is not done, it may allow the opponents the opportunity to get their offenses into a rhythm to finally get going.

So Tank, we both want the same thing but see how to get there differently. 

 

7 minutes ago, ravensdfan said:

I didn't expect them to constantly hold in the least. I did not expect for the Steelers to never get a first down. I didn't even expect them to hold to a shut out. However, regardless of how that 21 pt lead came about, yes, a defense should be able to hold that lead for one freaking quarter. Whether the offense scores again or not. It should not be the case that we require the other team to play horribly in order to hold it.

 

 

While the Ravens defense was holding the Steelers offense to 0 pts for 3 1/2 quarters (45 mins) what did the Ravens offense do...besides Wallace's TD...in those quarters and in that enormous amount of time to further extend the lead?  

 

[rmw10]

1 hour ago, ravensdfan said:

Yep sure do. Also understand that zone coverage does NOT mean the huge cushions we routinely offer. Newsflash: Other teams use zone coverages too - and they aren't giving those huge cushions.

 

Or you actually have no idea what you're talking about.

What would even be the point of a 4 yard deep zone by the CB? The whole idea of soft zone coverage is to let them complete a pass and keep the clock moving, instead of giving up the deep ball.  If you have a CB playing 4 deep, who is covering behind them for the deep ball?  No one, and that's why it makes absolutely no sense.

In all reality, you're just believing what you want to believe because you have some irrational hatred for Pees.  Playing soft zone in the 4th is a standard process for every team. It's not just the Ravens like you seem to believe.

[BmoreBird22]

5 hours ago, redrum52 said:

Ask them what changed in the 4th.  that will make for interesting  discussion.  People say 3 man rush, but both plays they got tds there were at least 4 rushing.  They claim off coverage, but all game long Tavon showed press and backed up off his man before the ball was snapped.  I love how it's Pees fault the offense can't get a first down or milk the clock with a 21 point lead.

The offense had two three and outs for a total of 4 yards and 2:40 on the two drives before the final :40 seconds. So, in the final 15 minutes, the offense literally managed to take off only 3:20. That's unacceptable.

[BmoreBird22]

2 hours ago, ravensdfan said:

Yep sure do. Also understand that zone coverage does NOT mean the huge cushions we routinely offer. Newsflash: Other teams use zone coverages too - and they aren't giving those huge cushions.

Do you watch the Redskins often?

[Rav'n Maniac]

4 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

The offense had two three and outs for a total of 4 yards and 2:40 on the two drives before the final :40 seconds. So, in the final 15 minutes, the offense literally managed to take off only 3:20. That's unacceptable.

Yeah our offense was pitiful the last couple drives.

[BmoreBird22]

I wouldn't classify this as a defensive collapse at all. There were about 11 minutes left in the game when the Steelers started their first touchdown drive and three of their drives took up almost 10 minutes. That's a huge job done well by the defense.

Excluding the touchdown drive and the final kneel downs, the Ravens had six drives go for three plays or less offensively. The offense clearly wasn't getting the clock to run down. There was no chance of that.

Do you all understand that the two units have to work cohesively to end a game? The offense is getting two, three minute drives, at best, so they're not an option. In that case, it's up to the defense.

The final score may have been 14-21, but it was not a close game whatsoever.

[BmoreBird22]

3 minutes ago, Rav'n Maniac said:

Yeah our offense was pitiful the last couple drives.

I think they had six three and outs. The Steelers had 10, so the Ravens weren't as pitiful, but their third down percentage managed to be ever worse than the Steelers by coming in under 25%. 

The defense was the unit that had to bleed the clock and now all of the haters are going to come out instead of looking to see that the offense was not going to do it.

I mean, does anyone really not find it coincidental that the Ravens are up 21-0 and hadn't surrendered a damn third down, but magically they start getting chunked down after they go three scores up? Do you all truly believe that's sheer coincidence?

[Noppie]

I simply wish to express my opinion.  

I had in the past spend time defending Joe Flacco.  BUT in my opinion he was really bad against the Pittsburg.  I have NEVER played Professional football and currently 56. It appeared that Flacco was very concern with being re-injuried.  I was only injured twice in martial arts that required being hospitalized.  After those injuries getting hurt again was a major concern.  I am certain that there are NFL players who have injuries that effect the rest of their lives.  SO I am as human very sympathetic.  BUT it appears effecting him to point he will not anything near what he was in the past.  

The Ravens running games along OL as far a I was concern was doing pretty well.  I would had pulled Flacco and put in 2 running backs in shot gun and did old school football.  Mallett or even Tucker would have done better.  Anyone would have done better

 It appeared that Pittsburgh defense was OFTEN face masking on almost every play.  Far more often then actually called.  I still expected a far more aggressive game.  

I hope the defense that played against pittsburgh shows up on every game.

I hope the Ravens can win against the BROWN this Thursday 

[Rav'n Maniac]

No, I agree with you totally. If the offence had been able to get at least 1 first down in each of the final drives prior to the kneel downs, it would have relieved more pressure off the defense by reducing the clock. You are right it has to go hand in hand.

[terrynjulia03]

6 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Dude - if we're in zone coverage, and the outside CB's job is to defend the deep or intermediate boundary zone, why would you press the receiver at the line??

Do you understand zone coverage? Like, covering a space on the field - not an individual player. If his job is to cover a space from, say, 15-25 yds deep from the right hash to the sideline, why in the world would you press at the line?? And when they then get an easy 30 yd completion with huge catch and run potential... are you gonna say "ok well at least he was aggressive and pressed at the line!"

Now, thats not the case on every play. But, even if we're in man, we werent getting pressure on Ben all day... so, why would you jam a guy at the line which has great effect if your front 7 is getting pressure bc you disrupt the timing. But if Ben's got all day to throw - all that does is get you beat deep. 

So, if I'm any CB with half a brain, with a 21-0 or 21-7 lead with time expiring... I'm not jamming Antonio Brown at the line even if im manned up with him. I'm gonna drop 7-10 yds off him, let him make that underneath catch, and then come up and make the tackle as opposed to giving him a chance to get behind me and get a huge chunk play without taking much time off the clock.

 

And you talk about being so far off the ball that they have no chance to break anything up... how many uncontested catches did they make?? How many of their chunk plays late were big plays bc of YAC? If we were so far off, and it was so ineffective, why werent they getting tons of yards after the catch? Oh, so we pretty much made the tackles, bang bang, on all those plays? 

Does anyone know how many YAC they got on their final two drives? I don't remember it being very much.

I also dont recall us jamming guys at the line regularly all day. So, again... my question is - if the complaint is "Stupid Pees... calls a brilliant game through 3 quarters and then gets ultra conservative late and almost blows the game... he should just stick with what worked..." point to something that he did differently. Back it up with something factual - not just the same old tired "he tells the DBs to give 10 yds of cushion!" and "he instructs the front 3 or 4 not to even try to pressure!" 

We rushed 3-4 the majority of the game. Other than Jimmy, none of our guys really excel at playing press and rarely do it. It worked for 3 quarters.

So, really - youre advocating for Pees to switch up from what worked for 3 quarters and call the game differently down the stretch. Which doesnt make an ounce of sense since we were so effective for 3 quarters. They just happened to get on a roll, hurried up to get one personnel group stuck on the field which really limits what the Defense can do, and allows the offense to see the same looks again and again, and figure out how to beat it.

 

And its not really defending Pees... but the issue isnt him getting conservative or doing anything different from what worked early. If anything, the only complaint would be that he needs to do something different late. But, I cant advocate that when its worked brilliantly for the entire game. We have a Top 5, and argument for top D in the league. idk what more we want.

But my thing is - if you're going to complain about something, at least have the relevant facts to back it up. Prove that we were jamming guys or playing close to the line early, which worked, and then suddenly starting playing off late - which led to success. Or that we were blitzing 5-6 guys often early, and then only rushed 3-4 at the end.

Up the level of the conversation a bit beyond "Pees tells em give up 20 yd cushions, and wont rush the passer" because if we were doing the same thing for 3 quarters with success - it just comes of as uneducated and whining.

I'm not saying you're 100% wrong, because honestly i havent rewatched this game to be sure. But I did when the same complaints came up in earlier games - and the narrative proved to be 100% false. So, if you feel so strongly - prove it.

 

 

Ok so I watched the compressed game, twice just to make sure. Someone else stated that we were playing a lot of single high, which was true up until about 3min left in the 3rd. As in we were pressing the box,hard. Antonio was constantly shadowed by either a safety(deep) or LB(short) all game to aid Jimmy or at times Trayvon. In the 4th we went more into a cover 2 over deep, I don't know what he Ravens call it but that's the basis. It backs the linebackers to the rear edge of the box and pushes both safeties to their deep coverage slots. Now of course this isn't Madden and you don't just have a couple plays for each base. Anyone who has ever played knows there's dozens for any base and even particular packages. And that's even just HS. But you are correct that we continued to just bring 4. The difference was we changed from basically stacking the box to playing off, and got caught in that soft zone package and Ben abused it. But it WAS a shift from what we had been doing all game. Short version. Didn't want to write a entire essay. Lol. 

[Rav'n Maniac]

7 minutes ago, terrynjulia03 said:

Ok so I watched the compressed game, twice just to make sure. Someone else stated that we were playing a lot of single high, which was true up until about 3min left in the 3rd. As in we were pressing the box,hard. Antonio was constantly shadowed by either a safety(deep) or LB(short) all game to aid Jimmy or at times Trayvon. In the 4th we went more into a cover 2 over deep, I don't know what he Ravens call it but that's the basis. It backs the linebackers to the rear edge of the box and pushes both safeties to their deep coverage slots. Now of course this isn't Madden and you don't just have a couple plays for each base. Anyone who has ever played knows there's dozens for any base and even particular packages. And that's even just HS. But you are correct that we continued to just bring 4. The difference was we changed from basically stacking the box to playing off, and got caught in that soft zone package and Ben abused it. But it WAS a shift from what we had been doing all game. Short version. Didn't want to write a entire essay. Lol. 

Haven't reviewed the tape yet but, Harbs said it was the Tampa 2 we went into.

[ravens rule]

Are we sure Pitta is good anymore ? 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

5 hours ago, Tank 92 said:

lol!  How big of a lead do we need?  21 points Mili!  21 freaking points!  What should have been needed "finish them off"? If we never toched the ball again surely we should feel comfortable with such a lead and 10 minutes remaining. 

Like I said, I don't disagree with much that you said, but we have to find an answer to the end of game collapses. 

I don't think it's about the points. 

Its about the offense maybe getting a first down. Flipping field position. Something. 

Instead of quick 3 and outs where we punt from our own 5 and expect the D to go back on the field with 2 minutes rest and defend a 50 yd field. 

They did it for 3.5 quarters. But with 42 total yards of offense in the 2nd half the pressure was solely on the defense to hold the game. It's tough to stay a step ahead for that long... and if you give Big Ben 5 redo's he'Il eventually throw some strikes. 

I think if our offense could put together a 4 minute clock chewing drive... even if they don't score.. but just pick up 3 or 4 first downs - the defense doesn't have to hold off a desperate, hurry up offensive barrage 5 straight drives. Cut that down to giving them only 2-3 drives and I bet the D does the job a lot more comfortably. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

23 minutes ago, terrynjulia03 said:

Ok so I watched the compressed game, twice just to make sure. Someone else stated that we were playing a lot of single high, which was true up until about 3min left in the 3rd. As in we were pressing the box,hard. Antonio was constantly shadowed by either a safety(deep) or LB(short) all game to aid Jimmy or at times Trayvon. In the 4th we went more into a cover 2 over deep, I don't know what he Ravens call it but that's the basis. It backs the linebackers to the rear edge of the box and pushes both safeties to their deep coverage slots. Now of course this isn't Madden and you don't just have a couple plays for each base. Anyone who has ever played knows there's dozens for any base and even particular packages. And that's even just HS. But you are correct that we continued to just bring 4. The difference was we changed from basically stacking the box to playing off, and got caught in that soft zone package and Ben abused it. But it WAS a shift from what we had been doing all game. Short version. Didn't want to write a entire essay. Lol. 

Thank you for taking the time to actually point to something factual that we can discuss - aside from the usual "Pees and his prevent."

To the overall point though... The Steelers stuck with the run a majority of the game... up until we scored off the blocked punt. After that they pretty much abandoned it which seems to correlate with the change to more of deep cover 2. 

To me, that's not Pees getting conservative... rather adjusting to what they were doing. They abandoned the run at that point so why continue to stack the box? Doing so would've exposed us more to the deep throws down the seam. 

They started attacking deeper down the field so we dropped the LBs and Safeties to account for the offensive shift. Take away the deep, especially outside throws and force everything inside, underneath. 

Ben made a couple spectacular throws in tight windows for chunk plays. Those you just have to tip your hat. I expect a great QB to make a handful of throws like that in a game... just so happened Big Ben saved all of his for the final 2 drives. 

Honestly id probably have more of a problem if Pees didn't make that adjustment once they abandoned the run. I don't see that as a conservative, prevent scheme to ride the game out.... but just a schematic adjustment to how their offensive game plan changed. 

Id expect he would've done the same in the beginning of the 2nd qtr had they abandoned the run and started atttacking the deep thirds and seams.