The "package" for Cunningham is likely more of the rush-first offense that BB put out in the Cam Newton season. This requires a lot more from the OL to be effective, and should have a proper fullback. Pharaoh Brown is likely their FB if they try it, but now they're also without Rham, probably for the rest of the season. None of this adds up to use on a short week against a great defense.Malik got elevated to the active roster and saw zero snaps for an offense that scored zero points in 60 minutes. This is why I'm so fascinated. 2-10, Zappe sucks but who is left?
I’m free on Thursday night. Maybe what the team needs is an aging lefty who can’t throw more than 40 yards?Play anyone that’s going to guarantee us a loss to the Steelers
Hell yes it matters. Because this.Does it really. matter? The season is lost, and there is no magic QB sitting out there ready to take snaps. Let Zappe ride out the season and move on.
Play anyone that’s going to guarantee us a loss to the Steelers
How the hell is Pitt 12 in offensive DVOA.I'm seeing an O/U of 31.5 which is pretty fucking low, but at the same time I don't know how these two teams are going to combine for 31 points unless each defense scores a couple of times. It is going to be an ugly game.
Why not?Play Zappe again and keep getting Cunningham QB reps in practice in order to give him in game opportunities to show something. Can't go back to Mac at this point.
On the road, in a pretty must win game for the Steelers, who have a good defense, on Thursday night football.Zappe.
I think the Patriots are going to end up winning this game. I think they will run enough to avoid the plays that really screwed us -- sacks on third down -- and the defense is balling right now. 17-10. Sorry for the draft watchers. I've been rooting for the team to win all year, and I'm now finally on team tank. So, I'm sorry to say that means we're going to win.
Yeah feels like the team that scores a touchdown will win. Maybe 7-6 in a call back to the 1997 playoffs. McSorely can be Kordell Stewart.On the road, in a pretty must win game for the Steelers, who have a good defense, on Thursday night football.
If there was ever a game that a team could score negative points, it might be this one. I wouldn't bet the over if it was 20.5.
That's 30 yards more than anyone else on the roster can.I’m free on Thursday night. Maybe what the team needs is an aging lefty who can’t throw more than 40 yards?
I know this makes me sound like a WEEI caller, but while I agree Zappe is who will and should start, the only decision that would get me to watch this game would be Cunningham at QB.I think they play Zappe and I think that's OK. He wasn't good yesterday but he was marginally more dynamic than Mac has ever been, he is a touch more decisive and frankly more enjoyable to watch given his psyche isn't completely destroyed yet.
Zappe moves around in the pocket so much better than Mac. Granted his physical tools are terrible but at least he moves.
They have may been better off with Marty McSorley.Oooh, the Steelers have signed Trace McSorley
Fucking adorable that you think this team is suddenly scoring 17 points. I missed where they signed people who can throw and catch footballs!Zappe.
I think the Patriots are going to end up winning this game. I think they will run enough to avoid the plays that really screwed us -- sacks on third down -- and the defense is balling right now. 17-10. Sorry for the draft watchers. I've been rooting for the team to win all year, and I'm now finally on team tank. So, I'm sorry to say that means we're going to win.
Because aside from being as terrible as the alternative he was also a headcase? Starters don't lose their jobs just to get them back the following week, they went away from him for a reason and if Mac deserved 30 games of suckitude before being pulled, maybe extend the other guys a fraction of that rope.Why not?
Putting aside the snark, I think it's quite possible that 17 won't be needed to win this game. The Steelers have been outgained in all but one game this season, and even in the one game had trouble scoring points. The Patriots, meanwhile, have shown (if nothing else) that they can defensively clamp down on offensively-challenged teams. Combine all that with Trubisky starting on a short week, and this could easily be a 10-7, 13-10 type of game -- one in which the Patriots could find a way to win, even with their own offensive struggles.Fucking adorable that you think this team is suddenly scoring 17 points. I missed where they signed people who can throw and catch footballs!
they’ve scored 17 or more in half their games this year despite not having “people who can throw and catch footballs”Fucking adorable that you think this team is suddenly scoring 17 points. I missed where they signed people who can throw and catch footballs!
they’ve scored 17 or more in half their games this year despite not having “people who can throw and catch footballs”
Rham being out is an issue. But Trubisky is horrendous.There’s a chance the Pats offense gets some shorter fields if they win the field position battle or get a couple of INT.
Pittsburgh’s D is very tough obviously but, like the Pats, they’ll give up some points if their offense is consistently putting them in holes. They’ve given up 17+ to the Raiders, Rams, Packers and Cardinals.
not saying it will happen, but it’s certainly within the realm of realistic outcomes.
The argument would be that Mac’s problems can (but haven’t and likely won’t) be corrected while Zappe’s can’t. There is evidence that Mac, albeit broken, has successfully run an NFL offense. No such evidence exists for Zappe.What is there to gain by starting Mac? We have a large enough sample to know he stinks. We're pretty sure Zappe stinks too but might as well give him full reps as the starter for a few weeks.
Also what message does it send? Mac was laregely benched because of turnovers. Then we're going to turnaround and bench Zappe after a turnover free game?
I mean clearly he isn’t the answer at QB but also clearly nobody else on the roster is. So yeah it would be weird to go back to Mac but sure they could do it.Because aside from being as terrible as the alternative he was also a headcase? Starters don't lose their jobs just to get them back the following week, they went away from him for a reason and if Mac deserved 30 games of suckitude before being pulled, maybe extend the other guys a fraction of that rope.
The guy who scored 17 points is gone. The new guy scores 0 points. Gonna need a better argument why this team can win a game.
The only game i can see is the Jets because they are in a super special place that, while not exactly the same, is pretty close. They might be capable of out dumpster-firing us.
To me, only in the case of injury. I don't think they'd bench him with any intention of having him play again this year. But who knows, this whole organization is a clusterfuck, maybe he's out there again for whatever reason.I mean clearly he isn’t the answer at QB but also clearly nobody else on the roster is. So yeah it would be weird to go back to Mac but sure they could do it.
When your arguments are based on a sample size of one, they're not likely to be very good arguments.The guy who scored 17 points is gone. The new guy scores 0 points. Gonna need a better argument why this team can win a game.
The only game i can see is the Jets because they are in a super special place that, while not exactly the same, is pretty close. They might be capable of out dumpster-firing us.
It's a shite state of affairs when you reach the point where you have to say something like, "It's not like they are going to get shut out *every* game. They might actually score points at some point."When your arguments are based on a sample size of one, they're not likely to be very good arguments.
The Pats scored 29 and 38 in the two games he started last year. The idea that they *might* score 17 in a game this year really isn't that stupid.
It's extremely unlikely that the Pats continue to perform as poorly as they've done on offense in the last three games, and we know this because NFL teams just don't perform that poorly over long stretches. At some point they're going to get a break or two, successfully make a field goal, convert a 4th down that turns into points. All of this stuff will happen. Maybe not this week, but it will, and pretending like they're going to score 0 every week from now until Bill is fired is getting really boring for the rest of us.
Start whoever gives you the best chance of losing.I made the observation in another thread that someone has to start at QB over the next 5 games. I forgot the additional fun that the next game is in 4 days.
You're BB. What do you do?
Putting aside the snark, I think it's quite possible that 17 won't be needed to win this game. The Steelers have been outgained in all but one game this season, and even in the one game had trouble scoring points. The Patriots, meanwhile, have shown (if nothing else) that they can defensively clamp down on offensively-challenged teams. Combine all that with Trubisky starting on a short week, and this could easily be a 10-7, 13-10 type of game -- one in which the Patriots could find a way to win, even with their own offensive struggles.
My only hedge is that it's in Pittsburgh. At home, I'd be confident of victory.
That's not it at all, it was an answer to your point about scoring 17 points. All I'm saying is I think it's possible they can win this game without having to score 17 pointsAll of this is a brag about the defense. I don't see any argument in favor of this team scoring points.
You being confident in a victory for a team who can't score points, even if this game were played on Mars is a fun but bold choice.
You're right, my bad. But still bold that Zappe is scoring points.That's not it at all, it was an answer to your point about scoring 17 points. All I'm saying is I think it's possible they can win this game without having to score 17 points
A minus-37 point differential is 69 points better than the Pats. Also, the Steelers’ offense has looked markedly better in the two games since they sacked Matt Canada — 400+ yards last week, and 300+ in a downpour yesterday. They’re still struggling to convert those yards into points, but they’re a cut or two above the Pats.I think the Steelers are basically the Patriots except with lady luck shining down on them. Good defense, abysmal offense. 7-1 in one score games, 2 to 1 turnover margin, 7-5 despite a -37 point differential.
On the other hand, the Steelers have been outgained in 10 of their 12 games. Pats meanwhile have actually outgained their opponents in 6 of their 12. But the Steelers have won a lot of close games (7-1 in one-score games) while the Pats haven't (2-7). So the Steelers are perhaps getting a bit lucky turning yards into points, and a bit more lucky turning points into wins. While the Pats are the opposite.A minus-37 point differential is 69 points better than the Pats. Also, the Steelers’ offense has looked markedly better in the two games since they sacked Matt Canada — 400+ yards last week, and 300+ in a downpour yesterday. They’re still struggling to convert those yards into points, but they’re a cut or two above the Pats.
I don't think the Patriots are better than the Steelers, it's more that I think the Steelers are smoke and mirrors and Patriots win on Thursday wouldn't surprise me. I think the gap between the two teams closer than 2-10 vs 7-5 looks like on paper. As noted above, the Steelers have been outgained in 10 of 12 games and are 7-1 in one scoree games which usually is unsustainable.A minus-37 point differential is 69 points better than the Pats. Also, the Steelers’ offense has looked markedly better in the two games since they sacked Matt Canada — 400+ yards last week, and 300+ in a downpour yesterday. They’re still struggling to convert those yards into points, but they’re a cut or two above the Pats.