Friday, September 03, 2010

Deconstructing Batch

Now that Byron Leftwich hurt his knee -- he needs an MRI, but it looked pretty bad and he hasn't exactly been able to bounce back from injuries in previous seasons -- the Steelers have a decision to make at quarterback.

From what I heard, it's the most obvious thing in the world that Charlie Batch should start while Roethlisberger is serving his suspension. I know I've been a huge Dennis Dixon advocate for some time now, but I really don't think he's the second best quarterback on the roster right now. I think he's the best option and that has more to do with the fact that I think Batch is bad option than the fact that I think Dixon is the greatest thing since sliced beer.

By all accounts, Dixon had a craptastic game in Week 3 of the preseason and made many people inside and outside the organization question how much he has developed since the Steelers drafted him. But, Batch barely played this preseason and there was a possibility that he would have been released had Leftwich not gotten hurt.

So, the best course of action for the Steelers would be to start a guy that they were thinking about cutting?

There are some basic arguments for starting Batch that all the pundits keep beating into the ground. All of these arguments are old and tired and are either on based old information or information that isn't relevant to the discussion.

1. Batch is an experienced veteran.

Experienced veteran is a popular euphemism for "old dude that used to be good." Batch has started 50 games throughout the course of his NFL career, but 46 of those starts came with Detroit. He's actually been with Pittsburgh for six years (seven seasons) and has appeared in 24 games (mostly at the end of a blowout) with four starts.

In those 24 appearances, he attempted 135 passes and completed 75 of them (56.1 percent). That's 5.7 attempts per appearance. He's not Bob Freakin' Griese, he's going to need to throw the ball to win games. Even if you only count games that he started, that's 33.7 attempts per start, which is what Roethlisberger averaged per start last season. But, when you really look at it, he hasn't been a passing machine throughout the course of his Steelers career.

Plus which, when you look at experience, Batch has attempted two passes the past two seasons and his last start was in 2007. He lost that start to... the hated Ravens, completing only 51.6 percent of his passes with two touchdowns, two interceptions, and finishing with a quarterback rating of 69.0. Dixon has more recent experience, also against the hated Ravens. He lost that game, completed 46.2 percent of his passes with one touchdown, one interception, and a quarterback rating of 60.6.

2. Batch knows the offense.

The idea is that, since Batch is more experience and has been with the team longer, he knows the offense better than Dixon. Well, that's probably true. From a fundamental standpoint, he has a broader base of knowledge regarding the Steelers offense than Dennis Dixon does. But, Batch has barely been practicing and hasn't had any reps with the first team. Dixon has had more practice time in training camp, during the preseason, and he's actually had in-game experience with the first team. I know he didn't perform well when he got that shot, but I'll get to that in a minute.

It's great to have a deep base of knowledge about something, but that knowledge doesn't do you much good if you haven't practiced it. I had a pretty extensive base of knowledge of differential equations before I started my Econ class last semester. When it actually came time to do the math and work out the equations, it took me a while to figure it out and get comfortable with it. Now, football is a young man's game. I'm betting that I could do a differential equation faster than my Dad because I've had recent experience with them and I'm younger, even though he took several levels of Engineering Calculus.

Also, the implication is that Dennis Dixon doesn't know the offense. Really? He hasn't learned anything the past two and a half years? You're sure?

OK, well, Dixon probably doesn't know everything about the offense and there are more than likely facets of the offense that Batch knows that Dixon doesn't. That means the Steelers will need to "dumb down" or "strip down" the offense so that Dixon can run it.

The other side of that is that they'd run the full offense with Batch under center, which is a piece of utter fiction created by a "stripped down" brain. That argument asserts that the Steelers are going to take a guy who has only attempted two passes in almost three years, hasn't practiced or played with the first team this offseason, and has started only four games since the George W. Bush's first term, and give him the keys to the entire offense? The one that it took Ben Roethlisberger the better part of his career to master? Really?

OK, so that means that whoever is under center for those first four-to-six games is going to be working with a stripped down offense. If that factor is constant, then why not put a guy behind center that's younger, faster, and can make more of the throws?

3. Duh. Because Charlie Batch is better at protecting the ball.

I will concede the fact that, as a Steeler, Batch has a 2-to-1 touchdown-to-interception ratio. But, it's a very small sample size at eight touchdowns and four picks. Also, if you look at the numbers since 2007, he's got two touchdowns and three picks. If you take out 2006 -- in particular the game where he came in against Atlanta and threw for a bajillion yards and touchdowns against a horrible defense -- where he had five touchdowns and zero interceptions, he has three touchdowns and four picks. Dixon has one touchdown and one interception.

For his career, he has 57 touchdown passes to 44 interceptions. That's an important stat and goes to show that he's not a turnover machine. But, it also doesn't show that he's particularly adept at protecting the ball.

If you have two guys and you need to strip down the playbook for them and all they need to do is protect the ball and not lose the game... why not go with the guy with more upside that gives a defense more to deal with?

4. Because Charlie Batch is a winner.

I get it. He's 3-1 as a Steelers starting quarterback. I know.

But, he lost his last start. Here's a reminder that that start occurred a full year before we had a black president. For his career, he's 22-28. The last time he started more than two games in a row -- when he started ten games for the Lions in 2001 -- he was 0-9.

I know that the Lions really, really, really suck and that you can't hang those losses on Batch. But, then, you can't give him credit for going 2-0 in 2005 for the eventual Super Bowl XL Champion Pittsburgh Steelers. The fact that he went 0-1 on a 2007 squad that won the division and had the number one defense then becomes fairly damning.

Then there's the elephant in the room. If you're stripping down the offense, hoping that he just protects the ball, and only task him to "not lose" the game instead of winning it... what, exactly, makes having a guy that's "a winner" important?

Don't get me wrong...

I like Batch. I do. I think he's a great story and he seems like a terrific person. I have never liked Byron Leftwich. I don't think he's a spectacular player, but at least he does have a history of protecting the ball, he can make all the throws, and he actually has a recent track record of success with the Steelers. He has also had extensive practice time with the first team offense.

I had eventually talked myself into Leftwich being the best choice. Unfortunately, I think it was Wednesday when that happened and he blew out his knee the following day.

But, if Batch is so awesome, why couldn't he beat out Leftwich -- who joined the team late and wasn't with the Steelers last year -- for the top back-up job? Why did the Steelers sign Leftwich if they knew they had a winner like Batch waiting in the wings? If Batch is so great, why didn't the Lions keep him as a veteran starter with a decent TD-Int ratio who, at that point, was only 27? Why didn't Cowher pull Tommy Maddox and put the younger Batch in when the Steelers were downright terrible in 2003? Batch was hurt in 2004 when Maddox went down and the Ben Roethlisberger Era started... but why did the Steelers keep Maddox in 2005? Why didn't Batch start against the Jaguars in 2005? Why did it take an epic meltdown by Maddox for Batch to go in?

I know that Dixon lost a lot of his credibility with Steelers fans after that cover-your-eyes-awful performance in Week 3. But, it's the preseason. Really, the preseason is a good way to judge rookies, gauge how good the back-ups are, and try some stuff out on offense and defense.

Dixon choked away his chance when he played with the first team, but most of those guys were trying not to get hurt instead of actively competing. It's really difficult to project how far along someone is or how well they'll do in game situations by looking at them in the preseason.

The Carolina Panthers didn't score a touchdown in the preseason. Does that mean they won't score one all through the regular season? No. The Colts went 0-4. Does that mean they'll suck this year? No. The Steelers went 3-1. Are they for sures going to the Super Bowl? No.

With nine days to practice with the first team, a full week of practice, and a supporting cast that will be giving their all and not worrying about getting hurt, things will probably be different for Dixon against the Falcons in the first regular season game.

No one knows for sure. But, given the other options, isn't it time we found out?

No comments:

Post a Comment