Should the Lions Draft for Need, or Pick Luxury?

Last month, I wrote about the “instant impact” NFL rookie. Wunderkinds from Ndamukong Suh to Dutch Clark have conditioned fans to hope, if not expect, that every first-round pick their team makes will set the NFL on fire. At minimum, we think of a first-round pick as a player who will start from day one; a player who will step in and “fill a hole” or “solve a problem” at their position from day one, and for years to come. The problem, of course, is that it almost never works that way.

The three-ring-circus of 2006 top picks Mario Williams, Vince Young, and Reggie Bush should have taught us all a lesson about rookies. Few seem to remember it now, but the pick of Williams over Young and Bush was roundly panned. Moreover, Williams’ 5.5 sacks in 16 rookie starts had people hanging the “bust” sign on him. Meanwhile, Young’s leading of the Titans to ugly-but-gritty comeback wins landed him a spot in the Pro Bowl (despite a 66.7 passer rating). By dividing “all-purpose yards” by “total touches,” many in the media managed to keep the hype train that Reggie Bush rolled in on stoked for a year or two.

Eventually, Bush revealed himself to be what he always was: a third-down back and kick returner with home-run ability. Young’s “ugly” eventually overwhelmed his “gritty,” and got both he and Jeff Fisher run out of Nashville. Williams eventually developed into the dominant, prototypical defensive end the Texans thought they were getting. You’d think, after all this, that we’d have learned about rookies and the short term . . . but of course, the football hivemind never truly learns.

The Lions find themselves in a particularly tricky spot: their “window” is opening this year. To the extent there will be an NFC in 2011, the Lions are expected to contend for a playoff spot within it. They have a few pressing short-term needs, though; any they fill will drastically boost their chances to make the playoffs, and make some noise therein. Unfortunately, they’re stuck in slot 13, and none of the top prospects at the Lions’ need positions figure to be available. Likely, the Lions will have to pick between two poisons: reach for a need, or the dreaded “luxury pick.” Either way, the Lions will have a hard time impressing those who grade drafts by instant impact.

Two years ago, Forbes.com’s Monte Burke dissected the prior three years’ drafts. He assigned a score to each team based on how many of their picks were still on the roster. He added a small boost—but not much of one—for Pro Bowlers and All-Pros (after all, many are granted those awards based on reputation alone). His dubious conclusions: the Texans were the best-drafting team in the NFL, while the Patriots and Steelers were the worst and third-worst, respectively.

He chalks the Patriots’ lack of success up to having to pick late in every round, and suggests their keen nose for value in the free-agent market has made up for their blundering inability to pick good players. Here, however, are all the Patriots’ first-round  picks since Belichick took over: Devin McCourty, Jerod Mayo, Brandon Meriweather, Laurence Maroney, Logan Mankins, Vince Wilfork, Ben Watson, Ty Warren, Daniel Graham, Richard Seymour, Damien Woody, Andy Katzenmoyer, Robert Edwards, Tebucky Jones, Chris Canty, and Terry Glenn.  Out of 16 picks, that’s at least thirteen solid contributors—and, by my count, ten difference-making pros. I doubt you’ll find another team with a better track record.

How come, then, so few of the Patriots' draft picks stick around? Because it’s hard to make the Patriots’ roster. The Pats have been stacked for a decade, and they’re run by a ruthless dictator who knows exactly what he wants at every position. Every year, their fourth-, fifth-, sixth-, and seventh-round picks must amaze in training camp, or be sent packing. It’s not that the Pats can’t draft; there’s just no room on their roster for long-term backups; either they’ll be starting in three years, or they’re out. Drafting later in the first actually makes it easier on the Pats; they can draft to fit one of their few needs (like Logan Mankins) without blowing a huge amount of salary—or expecting that player to make an impact on day one.

But what about the other poison, the luxury pick?  Turns out, the Steelers are a great example of that, as well. Back in 2007, the Steelers’ linebacking corps—as always, the strength of the team—consisted of James Harrison, James Farrior, Larry Foote, and Clark Haggans. They were 29, 32, 27, and 30, respectively; all in their primes. So, who did the Steelers draft that spring? In the first round, with the 15th overall pick, they chose Lawrence Timmons, an inside linebacker. In the second round, with the 14th pick, they took outside linebacker LaMarr Woodley.

What on earth were the Steelers thinking?  Well, the year after that, Haggans left as a free agent. The year after that, Woodley had a breakout year in his first as a starter, and Foote was made expendable by the growth of Timmons. They released Foote after winning a Super Bowl with their “luxury picks” leading the way—and the Steelers continued to be great at what they’re great at without missing a beat. By drafting high at a position of current strength, with an eye towards a year or two down the road, the Steelers maintained their perpetual success . . . it’s what great teams do.

So, when the Lions are on the clock—presuming they stay at 13—they’ll be faced with this choice. What they WON’T do is what the Lions did in 2008: gather their list of immediate needs and draft at those positions, crossing them off with a crayon as they go. With the 2007 2.14, the Steelers drafted LaMarr Woodley because they knew they’d need a new outside linebacker in 2008. With the 2008 2.14, the Lions drafted Jordon Dizon because they needed a middle linebacker to start right away. They didn’t “fill the hole” because Dizon couldn’t fill that hole. They didn’t “meet their needs” because Dizon couldn’t meet that need.

Despite the CBA uncertainty putting the kibosh on free agency, the Lions cannot approach the draft as a way to meet immediate needs—not without moving up and getting a true blue-chipper. They may take a good player to fill a less flashy need, like OLB or safety. They may take a talented project who has no chance of cracking the starting lineup this year—like an OT or DE. But what I said last month holds true:

Not every good player is an instant-impact player. Not every instant-impact player evolves into a Hall of Famer. “Great for a rookie” is only “decent” overall. As the Lions round the bend into this draft season, they do so with only a few pressing needs. I trust the Lions leadership not to reach for those needs, but I’m cautioning us as fans to do the same. As this roster matures, the Lions should indeed be drafting to develop, not to start; the second- or third-round pick may not start right away and that’s okay. The likes of Sammie Hill will have to hustle to make the team, and that’s okay. The Lions have a much bigger need for a Mike Williams type, who slowly develops into a quality starter, than a Michael Clayton—who set the world on fire in his rookie year, and has barely moved the needle since.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,nfl draft,pittsburgh steelers,new england patriots

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Preseason Week 1

Last year at this time, I started a regular Monday post I called “Three Cups Deep,” and the rationale went a little something like this:

On Mondays, it takes little bit more of the good stuff to get me going. The first desperately-needed cup is often not until nine o'clock or so, often because I’m such a complete zombie that I forget to go get coffee. I’m lucky to make it back to my desk with that first cup before I’m trekking back to the office Bunn—desperately hoping I won’t be the sucker who kills the joe, and therefore beholden to make some mo’.

The second cup I down steadily, solidly, workmanlike. By the end of that second helping, I’m starting to get the tingle; my eyes aren’t drooping quite so much. I realize I’m slouching so badly in my chair that the backrest is supporting my head instead, and move to an upright position. But the third cup . . . ahh, the third cup. The initial sip of the third cup is like Zeus’s lighting; a bolt from the heavens igniting my nervous system! I lean forward in my chair, attacking the problems of the day with emphatic keyboard strikes, pummeling my dreary to-do list into submission. It is now, at the beginning of that third cup, that I write this.

For the first time this season, there was Lions football over the weekend—so Three Cups Deep makes its triumphant return.  I spoke at length about my impressions on last night’s Fireside Chat podcast, but a good night’s sleep—or in my case, a bad night’s sleep and three cups of coffee—always provides valuable perspective.

In my guest Gameday post over at The Steelers N'At, the first sentence I wrote was, “On offense, I want to see a lot of completed passes.”  I got what I wanted on an impressive scale: Lions quarterbacks combined to complete 23 of 32 passes.  Stafford was 8-of-11; two of those were attempted TD strikes to Calvin, and one was the ill-fated swing pass to Jahvid Best.  Other than that, Stafford was nearly perfect.  The Lions spread it around a lot, too: those 23 passes went to 15 different Lions, with no receiver catching more than two balls each.

It was bizarre to watch the offense simply work.  Dropback, pass, complete.  Dropback, pass, complete.  Handoff, run forward, gain yards.  Dropback, pass, complete.  It was practically boring.  I thought to myself, “This is . . . easy.  Just, you know, complete the passes.  Why didn’t they just do this before?”  After all the wailing and lamentations, after decades of quarterback purgatory, duh, just throw and catch!  It didn’t hurt that this was the preseason, where the reaction from the Steelers crowd was a combination of silent puzzlement and total indifference.  The whole thing felt surreal.

What was even more surreal was every single end-zone replay showing a perfect pocket for Stafford to throw from.  I don’t know if the Steelers were just laying off, or what—but there was no heat on Stafford whatsoever, and he was getting rid of it quickly anyway.  Kudos to the line for keeping him clean, regardless of the pressure.

Save for the unfortunate swing pass (assigning blame is irrelevant), Jahvid Best was very impressive, and absolutely looked like an NFL every-down back.  Speed, moves, vision, yes—but strong between the tackles, and fast to the hole.  I’ve said for quite some time that the questions about his size and toughness were unfounded, but anyone who watched Best run this weekend came away knowing he’ll be just fine.

Defensively, Cliff Avril made his presence known immediately, and the starting defensive line looked every bit as impressive as advertised.  The linebackers weren’t quite as impressive; Zack Follett looked like he was a step slow to react on a lot of things, but at least looked credible out there.  Of course, the loss of Jordon Dizon is unfortunate—but at this point in his career, I can’t tell you how much better he is than Vinny Ciurciu, which says a lot about both him and Ciurciu.

In the secondary, I was impressed by the ball skills of Chris Houston and Eric King, and undrafted free agent safety Randy Phillips.  We’ll see how long that lasts once things get a little more “for real”, but the starting secondary held their own out there, which is a fantastic first sign.  I still anticipate some real struggles in the back seven over the course of the season, but I’ll take any reason for optimism I can get.

And now, for the fourth cup . . .

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,pittsburgh steelers,preseason,matthew stafford,jahvid best,cliff avril

Read more...

Fireside Chat Reminder

Don’t forget to tune in to tonight’s Fireside Chat.  Up for discussion: the Lions’ rain-addled loss to the Steelers, the loss of Jordon Dizon, and the loss of people’s ignorance about how good Jahvid Best will be.  Don’t forget to pop in the chat room, and chat with me during the podcast!

Read more...

Gameday Post, 2010 Preseason: Lions at Steelers

 
we won’t be seeing a whole lot of this tonight

The starters won’t play for long.  The schemes will be vanilla.  The crowd will be slow to cheer, and quick to head for the exits.  Everything is made up, and the points don’t matter.  But tonight, at 7:30, the Detroit Lions  will play football for the first time this season.

It seems as though this offseason has evaporated, the long bleak period of silence unexpectedly filled with the chatter and buzz of building expectations.  The call for, and drafting of, Ndamukong Suh has stoked the little blue flame.  More and more folks are coming ‘round to see what’s happening in Detroit: Matthew Stafford developing into a real leader, Calvin Johnson coming out of his shell, Jahvid Best primed to explode onto the scene, and Kyle Vanden Bosch cranking up the intensity on one of the most talented defensive lines in football. 

Besides new national attention, old friends are coming back home to sit by the fire.  I’m seeing Lions hats and T-shirts more than I have in years.  I’m talking Lions with people—really talking about what’s happening, not just “Oh you’re still a fan, huh?”  People really are eager to see the Lions take take the next step: they’ve gone from oblivion to existence; now from existence to worthwhile existence.

Of course, as I’ve said multiple times, there’s a danger in this: now that the Lions have taken one step forward, it’s possible that they could take a step back.   Now that they’ve made progress, they may regress.  It’s no longer true that the only way to go from here is up.  Of course, it’s evident that this year’s Lions are more talented than last year’s iteration—but that safety net is gone.  With the possibility of hope fulfilled, comes the possibility of hope denied.

In terms of the mechanics of the game, I did a guest game preview column for a very cool Steelers blog, The Steelers N'at.  Pop over there and check it out (I included a little Aaron Brown highlight action for ya).

So, friends, are you ready?  Is your parka off, and your jersey on?  Are you feeling the heat of the blue bonfire?  Let’s pour some cider, clink our mugs, and hang out in the comments section!

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,pittsburgh steelers,matthew stafford,ben roethlisberger,the steelers n'at,ndamukong suh,calvin johnson,kyle vanden bosch

Read more...

three cups deep: apple turnovers

On Saturday, Clan TLIW went to an apple orchard with several other families and friends.  It’s always a big event; we mark our calendars months ahead for the still-warm pumpkin donuts and fresh-pressed hot apple cider.  Whether it’s so warm we need to cool off with cider slushies, or--like Saturday--cold enough to demand jackets on top of sweatshirts, the weather’s always great.

There really isn’t anything quite like picking apples right off the stem: fresh, juicy, delicious, crisp, waxless.  There’s nothing like biting into an apple that was part of a tree three seconds ago, the juice running down your chin--and seeing dozens more apples on that tree, dozens of trees in that row, and knowing there are many more rows in the orchard.  Unlike at the supermarket, where apples are pretty much apples, the wildly different flavors of the various varieties–sweet, tart, spicy, sour, savory, tangy--hit you in the mouth like a blitzing linebacker.

What? Oh yeah:

Daniel Mears / The Detroit News

Sunday, we saw Daunte being Daunte: 282 yards passing, a 32-yard scramble, a beautiful drive and TD pass that turned a rout-in-the-making into a close, winnable game . . . and three fumbles, the ugliest interception I've ever seen, and seven sacks.  Three of those, as you all know, came just after the two-minute warning--when the Lions had 1st-and-10, deep in the Steelers' side of the field, down 20-28, and just 21 yards away from taking the reigning world champions to overtime.  Then, as Mitch Albom said, “Sack.  Sack.  Sack.”

When I say that Daunte isn't a winning quarterback, this is what I'm talking about.  When I say that he compiles decent stats, but loses games with his at-the-worst time mistakes, this is what I’m talking about.  When I say that he's the opposite of clutch, this is what I'm talking about.

In a sad, wierd, twisted sort of way, this was the best we could have hoped for.  The defense, who I'd dismissed as having no chance at keeping the Steelers under 30, did so. Will James, a player I’d often pigeonholed as a scrub, had a beautiful pick-six--the only Lions TD in the first three quarters; it kept the game a game. The running game wasn't exactly working, per se, but the Lions staff neither abandoned it completely, nor stuck with it longer than was useful. Third down efficiency was a stunning 11-of-18 (61%)--especially stunning when you realize how many of those were 3rd-and-7, 3rd-and-8, -11, -16, etc.

It was also the best we could have hoped for in terms of the quarterback situation. Daunte proved himself a worthwhile backup—and indeed, exactly that.  Anyone who is claiming that Daunte "gives us a better chance to win" than Matt Stafford going forward is safely ignorable on all Lions-related (and probably football-related) subjects going forward.  While Stafford may or may not have made a few of the plays that Daunte did, he never would have done this, and he probably would have noticed, you know, all of those angry Steelers coming to kill him.

Stafford, for his part, was the emergency quarterback on Sunday—per NFL rules, he could have come in in the fourth quarter if he was healthy enough to go.  However, coming in cold, having taken so few reps in practice, wouldn’t have been putting Stafford in a position to win.  Tom Kowalski has suggested that if the Lions coaches think Daunte can play well enough to not make the Lions lose next week, they’d rather sit Stafford and bring him back after the bye—fully healed, and facing the tender underbelly of the Lions’ schedule.

This is sort for the best of both worlds for the Lions: they get a confidence boost from hosting the world champs and taking them down to the final minute.  They'll go to Lambeau, probably play the Packers tough--and maybe even win.  Then, after a week of rest, and with a little luck, the franchise quarterback comes back just in time to administer the first real live tail whoopin' seen ‘round here in a long, long time.

My wife was kind enough to bring me an apple at work--a Spygold, if memory serves. I can tell you with absolute certainty that it's clean, midly tart flavor and crisp, juicy texture goes horribly with my third cup of coffee.

Read more...

holding my nose . . . and my breath

When the announcement came down that Matt Stafford would be the Week 1 starting quarterback, I reacted with mixed emotions.  I was pleased because I thought it was the right decision, for now and for the future.  I was excited because I was pumped to see the kid play right away.  I was relieved because I wanted the ridiculous QB "controversy" to die as quickly as possible; I knew that after a couple of games with Stafford at the helm--and, especially, after the first win--all the arguing would settle down.

There was a part of me, however, was overjoyed to be able to cling to a small hope: that Daunte Culpepper would never take another snap for the Detroit Lions.  That he'd never do that ridiculous "rolling" thing in Honolulu Blue ever again.  That this would be our lasting memory of Culpepper in a Detroit Lions uniform:

I often get questioned about this . . . why all the vitriol?  Why all the scorn and derision?  Why am I, Mister Let’s Look At The Bright Side, downright angry about Daunte Culpepper playing for the Lions?

It goes back to my roots as a Lions fan, really. Of course, I hated the Vikings in general. But I especially hated how the national media seemed to have an undying love for the Dennis Green-era Vikes, annually anointing them the "sexy pick" for the Super Bowl.  From around 1997 to about 2007, the Vikings put up amazing offensive numbers, played mediocre football, and were constantly worshipped as an great team. To my eyes, Daunte Culpepper was merely one of several flawed quarterbacks who lined up under a perennially excellent offensive line, threw to two superlative receivers, lit up the stat sheet, won little plastic football trophies for legions of nerds*, and played amazingly mediocre football.

The Rise of the Overrated Vikings occurred while I was in high school, and the pigskin places of the nascent World Wide Web were just firing up their servers.  On chat rooms, email lists, USENET--and eventually Web forums and message boards--I fought the good fight, railing against Culpepper, his supporters, and his smoke and mirrors.

It was so obvious!  So transparent!  Daunte Culpepper was out there winging it, accumulating many yards and touchdowns--but his inefficiency, inability to read defenses, and knack for making rotten mistakes at the most critical times had his team playing .500 ball.  Just like Randall Cunningham, Jeff George, and Brad Johnson before/alongside him, Culpepper put up incredible numbers, but never won anything.

Culpepper became, to me, the avatar of all I disliked about sports, everything bad about fans and analysts and boo birds and bandwagon jumpers. Everything easy and cheesey, "BOOM!" and Budweiser, fake tans . . . and twins! about football.  I've never, ever, been one of those "sports is for the cretins" types, even in my most intellectual of "intellectual phases".  But the constant praise of Culpepper as some sort of megastar, unstoppable force, or--heaven help us--MVP smacked of meatheads praising a meathead; of cavemen watching a caveman and his big cannon arm spray that rock around to whoever comes up with it, and going "OOG WIN FANTASY LEAGUE! OOG VOTE DAUNTE PRO BOWL!

It's easy to see why I, the self-appointed keeper of the spirit of Lions fandom, would be just a little bit put off by my chosen team signing Jabba the Daunte off the street, and putting him on the field just a few days later. It's easier to see why I absolutely did not want him under center for The New Detroit Lions.  Schwartz has said he's made a point of changing practically everything about the Lions, down to the pictures on the walls.  He’s wanted nothing the same between last year and this year, nothing any returning player could point at and go, "Oh, that's still here? Heh, this place'll never change".

Well, come Sunday, there might be a 6'-6", 250-plus-pound leftover from 0-16 calling signals for the New Lions. The Captain of the Failboat might be at the tiller as we sail towards a battle with the reigning World Champion Steelers. Ugh, it's all so wrong to me.

Okay, time to look at the bright side.  Daunte has proven that the last five years have changed him; instead of being reckless with the ball to generate points, he's now a walking check-down.  Maybe eliminating turnovers will be enough to keep the Lions in the game.  Maybe Kevin Smith returns to form, and the defense comes up huge.  Maybe, just maybe, the Lions win despite who's under center . . . as always, no matter what, I'll be cheering my guts out for them to do so.

*I'm a fantasy football nut, and nerds are my brothers-and-sisters-in-arms!

Read more...

the watchtower: lions vs. steelers

I never could leave well enough alone.

the most likely outcome involves Stafford getting rattled by the Bears, getting sacked 3-to-5 times and surrendering at least two turnovers. Despite moving the ball as well as they have all season, the Lions should score below expectations (currently 19, though a 3-game average is nearly useless). This is much less well defined, but my guess is that the Bears will match or slightly outperform their scoring expecations (also currently 19, equally shakily), with one dimension of the offense working much better than the other.

• Stafford was sacked five times, for a loss of 42 yards.
• Stafford lost a fumble on one of those sacks, and threw an interception.
• The Lions generated a season-high 398 yards of total offense, and scored 24 points--for reference, they scored 20 points off of 231 offensive yards in Week 1.
• The Bears scored 41 offensive points. As a team, they ran 20 times for 151 yards (7.55 YpC) and 3 TDs. They passed 28 times for 141 yards (5.04 YpA) and 2 TDs.

That's some profound prognostication. Unfortunately, I threw the data to the wind and kept talking:

I'm calling for another low-scoring, ugly, sack-and-turnover filled game, and a probable (but probably narrow) Bears victory.

I've said before that I'm going to continue to expand the data sets as I find appropriate.  I've decided to start including average defensive yards-per-attempt and yards-per-carry numbers. It should help highlight when the fit of offensive and defensive scheme are actually resulting in performance deltas.

Unfortunately, this week is another matchup with a paucity of reliable data. Pittsburgh offensive coordinator Bruce Arians technically came up through the NFL ranks as an assistant to Tom Moore, joining him in Peyton Manning's rookie season. However, he also spent many years in the college ranks, even serving as an assistant Bear Bryant . . . so he clearly has had many influences, and doesn't come from any specific "tree".

His first stint running his own offense was calling the plays for Butch Davis in Cleveland. After a few subpar seasons, Davis was swept aside, and Arians was hired as a WR coach by his old colleague, Bill Cowher.  Arians assisted then-OC Ken Whisenhunt for several years, ascending back into the playcalling role when Whisenhunt left for the Cardinals.

Trying to find more details about Arians' scheme, I gleefully stumbled upon a Bruce Arians breakdown by Chris Brown of Smart Football.  Arians, as Brown explains, tried to port what he learned from Tom Moore over to Cleveland, but a lack of quality quarterback play tripped him up.  Brown asserts that Arians, today, executes those principles from a modified version of the Whisenhunt offense with the Steelers.  My own eyeballs tell me there are a lot of Colts-esque 3-wide and 4-wide packages being trotted out in the Steel City than there were in ‘05.

The Whisenhunt/Arians Steelers didn’t face a Cunningham or Schwartz/Cunningham defense (for the record, new readers, I don’t count the 2006-2008 Chiefs as a “Cunningham defense”, because he merely executed Herm Edwards’ Tampa 2 scheme).  The only data we have to look at is Arians’ Browns against the Schwartz/Cunningham Titans defense.

I’ve used the Schwartz/Cunningham data sparingly in previous weeks, because we heard a lot of talk about 40% blitz and 3-3-5 nickel and Derrick Thomas and Julian Peterson and whatnot.  However, the inability of the Lions’s secondary to cover anybody at all has constricted Cunningham to calling a more conservative 4-3, in the style of Schwartz’s Titans.  

BA	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
CLE	TEN	25th	17.8	6.01	3.24	25th	24.2	7.31	3.53	15	5.89	1	3.82	2-7
CLE	TEN	25th	17.8	6.01	3.24	25th	24.2	7.31	3.53	41	12.44	1	3.00	3-14
CLE	TEN	19th	21.5	6.65	3.98	11th	20.2	6.30	3.83	31	6.52	1	4.60	3-15

In 2001, pre-re-alignment, the Browns and Titans shared a division.  This is cool because, as regular readers of this feature know, the numbers get much stronger when there are two data points from the same year to work with.  Arians's Browns were not a potent crew, ranked 25th in the NFL with 17.8 points per game. They averaged 6.01 yards per attempt through the air, and 3.24 yards per carry on the ground.  Meanwhile, Schwartz's Titans weren't any great shakes either: also ranked 25th; allowing an average of 24.2 PpG, getting torched for 7.31 YpA, but holding runners to 3.53 YpC.

The expectations for this game would be the Browns scoring around 21 points, passing more effectively than usual, and running about at their average.  Astonishingly, the Browns' passing attack was bottled up, gaining only 5.89 yards per attempt.  Rushing for 3.82 YpC could only do so much: between 2 lost fumbles, a pick, and two sacks for seven yards lost, the Browns' ineffectiveness through the air held them to just 15 points scored.

Immediately upon seeing these numbers, I went sensed something was up. Ahh, there's the problem.  Tim Couch was rotten that day, and benched midgame. Kelly Holcomb got his first taste of NFL action that afternoon, and was mildly decent.

The second matchup between Arians's Browns and Schwartz's Titans was interesting indeed: a 41-38 shootout!  The Browns exploded for 12.44 yards per passing attempt, eviscerating the Titans' suspect pass defense.  We see that Tim Couch was every bit the Golden Boy on this day, going 20-of-27 for 336 yards and 3 TDs.  He also threw a pick, and was sacked 3 times--but when the ground game got only 87 yards on 29 caries (3.00 YpC), there's only so perfect you can be.

This illustrates Brown's point above: quality quarterback play makes Arians's downfield passing offense much more powerful.

In the final meeting between these two coordinators, Arians's Browns were the 19th-ranked scoring offense, scoring 21.5 PpG on the wings of a pretty-potent 6.65 YpA passing attack.  They also improved their ground attack, using a two-back combo of Jamel White and William Green to gain 3.98 YpC.  However, Schwartz's Titans had taken a much bigger step forward, being the 11th-ranked scoring defense, allowing 6.30 YpA and only 3.83 YpC.

I'd expect scoring to be right about at average for the Browns--and instead, they put up 31 points.  Couch was again incredibly efficient, completing 36 of 50 passes for 326 yards, 3 TDs, and just one INT. He wasn't blowing the Titans up downfield, as the 6.52 YpA shows--but completing 72% of your passes, and throwing one pick in 50 attempts is truly excellent quarterback play.  If the Browns hadn't lost three fumbles, and if Couch's only pick hadn't been taken back to the house by Andre Dyson, this would have been a Browns blowout.

The evidence is clear, and the verdict is terrifying: With quality quarterback play, and/or suspect secondary play, Bruce Arians's multi-WR downfield passing offense is disproportionately successful against Jim Schwartz's balanced 4-3, regardless of talent.

Lin	Dick	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
STL	PIT	28th	16.4	5.63	3.78	2nd	16.8	5.27	3.98	24	5.60	2	6.00	1-9
MIN	HOU	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	21st	19.3	6.89	3.92	34	7.92	0	4.69	3-8

This table looks a little stubby; that's because we only have one real data point to work with.  I fleshed it out a little with his protegé, former Steelers DC Dom Capers, but that data point is really for "entertainment purposes only".

In 2007, Linehan's hobbled Rams offense met Lebeau's typically terrifying Steeler defense.  The Rams were the 28th-best scoring offense, mustering 16.4 PpG.  They passed for only 5.63 yards per attempt, but managed to grind out 3.78 yards per carry behind a decimated O-line.  Meanwhile, the vicious Steelers D allowed only 16.8 points per game, 5.27 YpA, and 3.98 YpC.  Note how eerily similar those numbers are . . . it’s almost like the Steelers were the #2 defense in the league just by turning every team they played into the Rams.

One would expect that the Terrible Towels would transform the Rams into, like, the Double Rams, with a logarithmically smaller offensive output. What happened instead was a relative offensive explosion: 24 points. The Rams balanced their typical 5.60 YpA passing game with a surprisingly effective ground game; they averaged six yards per carry. Though they carried only 15 times, pounding Steven Jackson inside was clearly enough to keep the Steelers honest; Bulger was sacked only once.

One might think that the Rams came back in garbage time, but no: the Rams trailed 17-24 at the half, 24-31 after three quarters, and the final margin came on a Bulger pick-six at the bitter end. The Rams were legitimately in this game, moving the ball and keeping pace for 50+ minutes, despite having no real business doing so. We saw a similar effect with Linehan's track record against Gregg Williams's similar defense: the balance of an inside running game and downfield passing game gives a high-edge-blitz defense fits.

Let's look briefly at the scorched-earth napalming that Linehan's 6th-ranked Vikings offense put on Dom Capers' 21st-ranked Texans defense. 34 points, 7.92 YpA, 4.69 YpC. Culpepper was 36-of-50 for 396 yards, 5 TDs, and 0 INTs. Vikings backs ran 26 times for 122 yards. It probably would have been worse if the Vikes hadn't been flagged 10 times for 75 yards.

Given the only data point on LeBeau, and fitting it into the broader picture painted by the Capers and Williams info, I think I'm safe to say that Scott Linehan's balanced offense significantly outperforms expectations against aggressive, blitzing 3-4 defenses like LeBeau's.

Roethlisberger should have an incredibly effective day, smoking the Lions' subpar secondary; completing at least 70% of his passes. Whether that's for 350 yards and 4 TDs or 250 yards and 2 TDs will depend on the Lions' ability to stop Rashard Mendenhall--and then blitz to get pressure on Ben.

Likewise, if Matt Stafford, Kevin Jones Smith [Great Googily Moogily! I knew I'd make this typo someday], and Calvin Johnson are healthy enough to play, and play well, this could be an intense shootout. The Steelers will likely give Johnson & Johnson plenty of cushion on the outside, and blitz the OLBs. Look for Linehan to attack this space with routes out of the backfield and TEs. Likewise, the Steelers will do a lot of blitzing off the edge; Smith should be able to find seams up the middle.

Duante Culpepper proved last week that he's a dumpoff artist and no more. If Stafford can't go, the corners will press, the safeties will creep up, and the ground game will be ground to a halt. Either way, though, I think we're just talking about margin of loss. As I said about the similar pass-first, blitz-heavy Saints, the most likely outcome of this game is a shootout that the Lions lose. Unless and until the Lions can rush the passer and cover the pass . . . get used to this.

Read more...