ShareThis Page
Steelers can’t find formula to stop Raiders tight ends in 24-21 loss |

Steelers can’t find formula to stop Raiders tight ends in 24-21 loss

| Sunday, December 9, 2018 10:21 p.m
Oakland Raiders tight end Derek Carrier (85) scores against the Pittsburgh Steelers during the second half of an NFL football game in Oakland, Calif., Sunday, Dec. 9, 2018. (AP Photo/Ben Margot)

The Oakland Raiders exploited a weakness on the Pittsburgh Steelers defense Sunday afternoon by continually getting the ball into the hands of their tight ends.

Sound familiar?

The strategy came one week after the Los Angeles Chargers took advantage of a mismatch by getting wide receiver Keenan Allen continually open against Steelers linebackers. In that loss, the Steelers didn’t have safety Morgan Burnett available for sub-package situations, leaving linebackers to cover Allen, who had 14 catches for 148 yards and a touchdown.

Burnett returned Sunday, but again it was the linebackers who were continually challenged by Raiders tight end Jared Cook, who had seven receptions for 116 yards.

“(Cook) is their leading receiver. We knew that going into the game and whoever was on top of 87 was in the hot seat,” safety Sean Davis said. “We didn’t make enough plays.”

That was evident on the opening drive of the game when Cook got behind linebacker L.J. Fort for a 30-yard gain and linebacker Jon Bostic for a 19-yard catch.

Not to be outdone, backup tight ends Lee Smith and Derek Carrier had short touchdown receptions in the fourth quarter, with Carrier’s 6-yard TD catch on fourth down giving the Raiders a 24-21 lead with 21 seconds remaining. “They had three different tight ends and all had different personalities,” slot cornerback Mike Hilton said. “Eighty-seven is a downfield, athletic guy, 86 (Smith) is a mix and 85 (Carrier) is a blocking guy. They found a way to get them all involved.”

Joe Rutter is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Joe at or via Twitter @tribjoerutter.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.