San Antonio Express-News (Sunday)
Limits on Roethlisberger aren’t helping
PITTSBURGH — “We’re going to do what Ben (Roethlisberger) wants to do and how Ben wants to do it,” Steelers offensive coordinator Matt Canada said June 15.
“Roethlisberger’s freedom to run the Steelers offense is being limited, if not stripped, by coordinator Matt Canada and coach Mike Tomlin,” wrote PostGazette Steelers writer Gerry Dulac on Oct. 6.
Those two things are not alike. This marriage is failing.
We’re talking Pamela Anderson-Kid Rock levels here. Their union lasted all of 122 days, and when Ellen DeGeneres later asked Rock if the two were still in touch, he delivered this beauty: “I try not to go in the same circles. I touched stove, stove was hot, I think I not touch stove anymore.”
It’s getting pretty hot around here, too.
Last year, Roethlisberger scrapped the offense when he saw fit, sometimes to great effect.
This year, the offense has scrapped him.
Wouldn’t you love to have been listening when Roethlisberger found out his favored no-huddle offense was nixed? How about when he apparently was told, in so many words, “Don’t change the play, no matter what you see,” on fourth-down calls, at least in Green Bay?
This is a guy who literally flushed Randy Fichtner’s bush-league offense down the toilet in at least two games last season (at Baltimore, home against Indianapolis) and led his team to wins by using plays out of old playbooks and making them up on the fly.
NFL.com’s Michael Silver
reported as much after the Indy game, reflected in this tweet from Warren Sharp of sharpfootballanalysis.com: “If you want to know why the Steelers offense looked better in the 2nd half, it’s because the Colts were calling out Fichtner’s terrible, predictable plays … so Ben called his own plays that were not part of Fichtner’s game plan in the 2nd half.”
I can’t help but wonder what the passive-aggressive South Side conversations have been like in recent weeks.
I would imagine them
sounding something like this:
Canada: “So, Ben, if we have another one of those fourth-down plays — like the one where you threw to Najee (Harris) at the 17 on fourth-and-10 from the 11 when you knew we had guys in the end zone — you can’t change the call, OK? Mike said so.”
Roethlisberger: “OK, Matt. Sure. Whatever you say. Maybe we could use one of your LSU plays. Don’t mind me. All I’ve done is win for 18 years in the NFL.”
What could Tomlin possibly
be thinking in restricting Roethlisberger in this manner? Anyone with eyes can see he is reaching the end physically. But if there’s one body part still functioning, it’s his brain.
Not that he should be absolved for the plays in question. Far from it.
These two things can both be true:
Tomlin’s crazy for handcuffing his quarterback.
Roethlisberger mangled the oft-discussed fourth-down plays to Harris and likely the one to JuJu Smith-Schuster.
In other words, Roethlisberger not having the option to change plays hardly excuses him for making the worst possible reads on the plays that were called.
On the legendary fourthand-10 dump to Harris against Cincinnati, Roethlisberger must have thought the Bengals were blitzing. That’s the only logical explanation, unless you believe in conspiracy theories like “maybe Roethlisberger sabotaged Canada’s play call by going with the doomed first option.”
Canada made it clear “we had guys in the end zone.” He didn’t mean the guys already were there when Roethlisberger threw. Usain Bolt couldn’t have gotten there that fast.
Canada didn’t necessarily mean they were open, either. The only play was to throw it up to one of the giants (Chase Claypool, Pat Freiermuth). Roethlisberger later admitted as much.
On the failed fourthand-4 pass to Harris in Green Bay, Roethlisberger again made a wretched decision. Replays showed Freiermuth breaking open off the line. Ben never looked at him.
At least on the fourthdown pass to Smith-Schuster, Roethlisberger threw past the line of scrimmage, albeit short of the sticks (the ridiculous sight of Smith-Schuster trying to stretch his arm 3 yards for a first down conjured images of Rosie Nix signaling first down on the failed fake punt in New Orleans).
In addressing the Green Bay plays, Tomlin made it a point to mention there were “other eligibles (receivers) beyond the line,” which I read as “Roethlisberger should have looked for one.”
On Thursday, Canada made sure to point out — amid blaming himself for everything but the national deficit — that “all our plays have answers for zone or man.”
Which I read as, “The plays are fine if the quarterback makes the right read.”
It all makes for wonderful theater, and I won’t be surprised if Roethlisberger plays well Sunday. He probably has some good moments left, just like Eli Manning did in his final days.
But that might only provide a temporary distraction from the fact that he is losing to both Father Time and Canada.