PIT@NE is a no brainer. This should have been the AFC championship matchup if Bell was healthy last year.
I don't agree. Squealers secondary was absolutely pathetic (and it still is) and that's the main reason, why they lost. Bell couldn't have bailed them out.
Comment
lakerboy
SBR Aristocracy
04-02-09
94379
#18
Originally posted by SharkAA
I don't agree. Squealers secondary was absolutely pathetic (and it still is) and that's the main reason, why they lost. Bell couldn't have bailed them out.
Doesn't matter. Season is done.
Comment
slacker00
SBR Posting Legend
10-06-05
12262
#19
Originally posted by SharkAA
I don't agree. Squealers secondary was absolutely pathetic (and it still is) and that's the main reason, why they lost. Bell couldn't have bailed them out.
Bailed them out? Without Bell there was no offense. They started Ben Tate on Saturday after signing him on Tuesday.
It goes back to them releasing LeGarrette Blount. There was no legit depth behind Bell and it came back to bite them.
Comment
SharkAA
SBR MVP
11-10-13
2005
#20
Originally posted by slacker00
Bailed them out? Without Bell there was no offense. They started Ben Tate on Saturday after signing him on Tuesday.
It goes back to them releasing LeGarrette Blount. There was no legit depth behind Bell and it came back to bite them.
How is there no offense, when they had Brown, Bryant and Miller?? That just doesn't make sense. And to be honest, that Ravens D-Line was good enough to stop Bell.
Let's face it; Flacco with Smith Sr. and others, owned PIT that night.
Comment
jjgold
SBR Aristocracy
07-20-05
388179
#21
Pitt was good last year
Injuries hurt them in playoffs
Bigben played very well
Comment
slacker00
SBR Posting Legend
10-06-05
12262
#22
Originally posted by SharkAA
How is there no offense, when they had Brown, Bryant and Miller?? That just doesn't make sense. And to be honest, that Ravens D-Line was good enough to stop Bell.
Let's face it; Flacco with Smith Sr. and others, owned PIT that night.
None of those guys play RB. Ravens were begging PIT to run Tate and his 2 YPC. The offense was a shell without Bell.
Comment
SharkAA
SBR MVP
11-10-13
2005
#23
Originally posted by slacker00
None of those guys play RB. Ravens were begging PIT to run Tate and his 2 YPC. The offense was a shell without Bell.
RB isn't the offensive weapon, that does the most on offense. RB helps to move the chains and potentially scoring a TD, while being really close to the goal line. PIT can be still good on offense without Bell, but they will be terrible without AB.
Comment
slacker00
SBR Posting Legend
10-06-05
12262
#24
Originally posted by SharkAA
RB isn't the offensive weapon, that does the most on offense. RB helps to move the chains and potentially scoring a TD, while being really close to the goal line. PIT can be still good on offense without Bell, but they will be terrible without AB.
Bell accounted for 33% of PIT's offensive output. Again, Blount could have filled those shoes reasonably, Tate no.
Comment
SharkAA
SBR MVP
11-10-13
2005
#25
Originally posted by slacker00
Bell accounted for 33% of PIT's offensive output. Again, Blount could have filled those shoes reasonably, Tate no.
33%?? Number seems to be a little high, because it was their O-Line, who made things a little bit easier for Bell. Don't get me wrong, he's good, but the Ravens would still win with him in the game.
Comment
slacker00
SBR Posting Legend
10-06-05
12262
#26
Originally posted by SharkAA
33%?? Number seems to be a little high, because it was their O-Line, who made things a little bit easier for Bell. Don't get me wrong, he's good, but the Ravens would still win with him in the game.
Bell had 2215 of PIT's 6577 yards (33.7%). Also, the Ravens lost @PIT 43-23 week 9 with Bell. Just sayin'.