Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Tomlin shows LIFE!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Pittsburgh Steelers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
greene91fan


Joined: 27 Jan 2009
Posts: 1751
Location: Steeler Nation!
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 6:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="kethnaab"]
greene91fan wrote:
kethnaab wrote:


greene91fan wrote:
What was Cowher's record with his players in 06? 8-8/no playoffs
What was Tomlin's record with "Cowher's players" in 07?10-6/playoffs

So Tomlin did a better job with "Cowher's players" than Cowher did...


We'll go ahead and pretend that Ben didn't bounce his head off an Oldsmobile and end up having his gizzard removed in 2006. Yeah, I'm sure that wasn't very relevant to his play.

You actually posted that in a public forum. I'm ashamed for you.


I don't need you to be ashamed for me; are you my mother or something?

you made an absolutely ridiculous, shortsighted statement and you got shot down. Don't know if your mother is a football fan, but if she was, she would've been ashamed for you as well

Cowher is not the coaching icon people make him out to be. Yes he was a solid football coach. People tend to remember only his lone triumph, rather than his five or so failures on big stages (SB XXX loss, AFCCG losses in 94, 97, 01, 04). If Ben wasn't healthy enough to play, then why did he? I think that would be a coaching decision, and a bad one at that...don't you?

quite possible.

Cowher also had an undersized kid from Kent State who was buried behind Clark Haggans and Joey Porter on the depth chart...Tomlin exhumed that grave and it worked out. and as James Farrior said, Harrison wasn't even close to being ready Max Starks got benched in favor of Willie [freaking] Colon, which Tomlin and Co. remedied in his first year. you've gotta be kidding me. Starks got moved to LT because Marvel Smith was injured. Tomlin and Co. not only gave Willie [freaking] Colon a raise and a long-term contract, they did it before he played an entire game after he came off a season-long IR. He promptly went on IR in the first game, and then after the season, Tomlin and Co. gave Willie [freaking] Colon a [FREAKING] EXTENSION, which pushed dead money onto the team for 2013 and 2014. Then Willie [freaking] Colon went on the [freaking] IR YET AGAIN. If you are honestly going to try to use the handling of Starks and Colon as a benchmark of Tomlin's competence, you are going to get crushed.

Remember, Tomlin went into the seaosn with Jon [freaking] Scott as "the answer" at LT, and cut Max Starks. You DO remember that, right
?


Could Cowher have done a better job in 07, maybe...maybe not. Nobody wants to take into account that 07 was Tomlin's rookie year as a head coach, that says something. He was a 4-3, cover 2 guy from the Dungy lineage and came here and didn't change a thing defensively. which begs the question...if he isn't the guy for defense, and he isn't the guy for offense, then what, exactly, does he do here?

The following is not directed at ANY SINGLE POSTER on this forum:
Is Tomlin the standard in coaching in professional football...HECK NO. I'm just sick of people itching to put his head in the guillotine every time this team hits a rough stretch.


IF you say so bobbrown. I haven't the time, nor the energy to go through the pointless rants of answering a question with a question.
_________________

Thanks Lysar529 for the sig!

"Arguing with some people is like wrestling with a pig in the mud. The more you do it, the more you realize the pig is enjoying it."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kethnaab


Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 10037
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i don't know who bobbrown is

and as for 'don't have the time', please. there's no amount of time in the world that will suffice. you're wrong. Plain and simple. You could take all the time in the world and you'd still be wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
armsteeld


Joined: 01 Mar 2009
Posts: 3725
Location: In your head
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

With Pouncey's injury, I think this opens the door for him no resigning. I feel that the he will reunite with his twin and former teammate Mike. I feel that Miami will be able to lure him away with Mike and Mike.
_________________




"Sheep follow the flock for direction and security but scatter at the sight of the lone wolf". Rocky
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CKSteeler


Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Posts: 5072
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
and as James Farrior said, Harrison wasn't even close to being ready


You keep repeating this even though it's been pointed out that you are clearly taking it out of context. Farrior is discussing why Harrison was cut early on in his career; not why he was stuck on the bench behind Haggans and Porter by 2006.

Quote:
which begs the question...if he isn't the guy for defense, and he isn't the guy for offense, then what, exactly, does he do here?


He's the head coach. It's not his job to micromanage either side of the ball, and the head coaches who do that are generally unsuccessful. He supervises the entire team and provides the direction.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobikus


Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 8874
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kethnaab wrote:
FourThreeMafia wrote:
kethnaab wrote:


on one hand:
- you say we don't suck

on the other hand:
- 0-4 says we suck
- a YPC that's 1 yard underneath the NFL average says we suck
- being the only team in the NFL who hasn't generated a turnover says we suck
- 20th ranked passing TDs says we suck
- 20th in 3rd down conversion % says we suck
- 21st in opponent's passer rating allowed says we suck
- 25th in points allowed says we suck
- 25th ranked points scored says we suck
- 28th in rushing first downs says we suck
- 29th ranked rushing offense says we suck
- 29th in point differential says we suck
- 30th in sacks allowed says we suck
- 31st in rushing first downs allowed says we suck
- 32nd in rushing TDs allowed says we suck
- 32nd in forced fumbles says we suck
- 32nd in interceptions says we suck
- 32nd in turnovers generated says we suck
- 32nd in sacks generated says we suck
- 32nd in fumbles lost says we suck
- 32nd in turnover differential says we suck
- 32nd in sack differential says we suck


so yeah. we suck.


There are different ways of sucking though.... Confused

How we are playing on the field...we absolutely suck. There is really no way to argue it, as you just showed.

We do not, however, suck in terms of talent. We are not the Jags. We are lacking in certain areas, absolutely, but we still have plenty of talent on the roster. Obviously, the talent means nothing if its not executing, but the talent is there nonetheless. We arent the most talented team in the league, but we are better than we are showing now.


no arguments there.


All the more reason to hold Tomlin as the main one accountable for how the team's playing right now.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kethnaab


Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 10037
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CKSteeler wrote:
Quote:
and as James Farrior said, Harrison wasn't even close to being ready


You keep repeating this even though it's been pointed out that you are clearly taking it out of context. Farrior is discussing why Harrison was cut early on in his career; not why he was stuck on the bench behind Haggans and Porter by 2006.



well, Porter was still a big impact player in 2005, arguably the MVP of our defense, and he was only 29 in 2006. Considering he still had a 17.5-sack season in him and is one of the best coverage LBs the Steelers have had in ages, having an unknown spazz who didn't understand the defense sit behind Porter makes sense.

Haggans? Well he was darn good for us in 2005. It was obvious by 2006 it was time for him to go. No idea if Harrison would/could play the left side, although I think it's fairly OBVIOUS right now that he could.

this is what is known as TRUE "hindsight". This is bitching that we didn't play Keenan Lewis INSTEAD of Ike Taylor in 2012.

Like Lewis, Harrison had shown ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER prior to 2007 and we had a great LB in Porter and a decent, serviceable LB in Haggans playing instead of him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FourThreeMafia


Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 50495
Location: East of Sixburgh
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobikus wrote:
kethnaab wrote:
FourThreeMafia wrote:
kethnaab wrote:


on one hand:
- you say we don't suck

on the other hand:
- 0-4 says we suck
- a YPC that's 1 yard underneath the NFL average says we suck
- being the only team in the NFL who hasn't generated a turnover says we suck
- 20th ranked passing TDs says we suck
- 20th in 3rd down conversion % says we suck
- 21st in opponent's passer rating allowed says we suck
- 25th in points allowed says we suck
- 25th ranked points scored says we suck
- 28th in rushing first downs says we suck
- 29th ranked rushing offense says we suck
- 29th in point differential says we suck
- 30th in sacks allowed says we suck
- 31st in rushing first downs allowed says we suck
- 32nd in rushing TDs allowed says we suck
- 32nd in forced fumbles says we suck
- 32nd in interceptions says we suck
- 32nd in turnovers generated says we suck
- 32nd in sacks generated says we suck
- 32nd in fumbles lost says we suck
- 32nd in turnover differential says we suck
- 32nd in sack differential says we suck


so yeah. we suck.


There are different ways of sucking though.... Confused

How we are playing on the field...we absolutely suck. There is really no way to argue it, as you just showed.

We do not, however, suck in terms of talent. We are not the Jags. We are lacking in certain areas, absolutely, but we still have plenty of talent on the roster. Obviously, the talent means nothing if its not executing, but the talent is there nonetheless. We arent the most talented team in the league, but we are better than we are showing now.


no arguments there.


All the more reason to hold Tomlin as the main one accountable for how the team's playing right now.


Coaches should always be the held responsible for team failures outside of maybe their first 2 years with the team while they implement things...especially with bad teams.

Tomlin has been here awhile and deserves a lions share of the blame.

HOWEVER...in the end, the players play the game. Even talented players have to execute, and while coaching plays a part in that, there is a level of individual focus each player has to bring that coaches cant be held accountable for.
_________________

Madden 25 Steelers Franchise
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FourThreeMafia


Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 50495
Location: East of Sixburgh
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

armsteeld wrote:
With Pouncey's injury, I think this opens the door for him no resigning. I feel that the he will reunite with his twin and former teammate Mike. I feel that Miami will be able to lure him away with Mike and Mike.


Miami may very well have a worse cap situation than us in the coming years, so I dont see that...especially since they still have to pay Mike.

I dont see Pouncey leaving here, but if he does, I dont see him going to Miami.
_________________

Madden 25 Steelers Franchise
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CKSteeler


Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Posts: 5072
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
well, Porter was still a big impact player in 2005, arguably the MVP of our defense, and he was only 29 in 2006. Considering he still had a 17.5-sack season in him and is one of the best coverage LBs the Steelers have had in ages, having an unknown spazz who didn't understand the defense sit behind Porter makes sense.

Haggans? Well he was darn good for us in 2005. It was obvious by 2006 it was time for him to go. No idea if Harrison would/could play the left side, although I think it's fairly OBVIOUS right now that he could.

this is what is known as TRUE "hindsight". This is bitching that we didn't play Keenan Lewis INSTEAD of Ike Taylor in 2012.

Like Lewis, Harrison had shown ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER prior to 2007 and we had a great LB in Porter and a decent, serviceable LB in Haggans playing instead of him.


Well, at least you backed off your out of context quote. Haggans wasn't decent in 2006 and neither was Porter. The two combined for 13 sacks. Even in 2005 the pass rush vanished for stretches of the season. Harrison had 3 sacks in limited playing time along with an INT in 2005 in 3 and some games he filled in for Haggans. When put on the field, he made plays.

Porter was cut for a reason after 2006. He was overpaid and his pass rushing ability was overrated at that point. Neither OLB could get sacks outside of the scheme. Porter did have productive seasons in Miami, but it was a completely different role than 3-4 OLB under Lebeau.

You claim there was no evidence that Haggans could play the left side of the defense, yet by 2005 he was already the top back-up at both spots. He filled in for Haggans there when he was hurt. If Harrison didn't know the defense by that point, he wouldn't have been the first man off the bench.

Tomlin owns the [inappropriate/removed] show going on right now. He also deserves credit for the teams success in 2008 and other seasons. Not only is he the one who built that LB core, which was key to winning, but the team rose to the challenge like few Cowher teams ever did despite their talent.

The 2008 defense had an ability that Cowher defenses didn't have for a long time - two OLB's who could take on OT's man-up and beat them consistently.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FourThreeMafia


Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 50495
Location: East of Sixburgh
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CKSteeler wrote:
You claim there was no evidence that Haggans could play the left side of the defense, yet by 2005 he was already the top back-up at both spots. He filled in for Haggans there when he was hurt. If Harrison didn't know the defense by that point, he wouldn't have been the first man off the bench.


I am assuming you meant Harrison there.

Im sure you know this, but being a good backup/situational player isnt the same as being a full time starter. There are alot of players who have looked good in limited roles and then struggled once they became starters.

Also, him being the first player off the bench had alot to do with the lack of depth we had at OLB those years.

In terms of Harrison, he MIGHT have been able to start by 2005, but even LeBeau stated he struggled learning the entire playbook for several years and was completely undisciplined and they didnt trust him to be on the field full time. LeBeau said they always saw the potential in Harrison but were waiting for the light to come on.

Not really worth debating too much, though. No real way of knowing.
_________________

Madden 25 Steelers Franchise
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CKSteeler


Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Posts: 5072
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The actual issue here is whether Cowher would have cut Porter and drafted Woodley/Timmons. Most of the signs point to those, especially in the case of Timmons, being Tomlin picks. And both guys were pretty important for both Super Bowl runs the team made.

Harrison was still completely lost by 2006, yet they kept him as the primary back-up for two seasons without trying to add too many others to take his spot? The thing about Harrison learning the defense almost certainly applies to 2002-04. By 2005, they clearly trusted. And if they didn't by that point, his play in '05 filling in for Haggans surely let them know the guy wasn't a complete liability.

By 2006, I can't believe Harrison knowing the defense was the issue. He had been bouncing around with the team since 2002. The reason they kept Haggans and Porter on the field is the same reason they stick with older guys now. They trust them and don't like to rock the boat. With Porter, that wasn't a Tomlin guy, his play had declined and his salary made him expendable.

But who really think Cowher cuts him after the season? My memory is failing me, but I remember Porter saying something along the same lines. 2008 Joey Porter with Harrison potentially still rotting on the bench and no Woodley = no Super Bowl.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kethnaab


Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 10037
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CKSteeler wrote:
Quote:
well, Porter was still a big impact player in 2005, arguably the MVP of our defense, and he was only 29 in 2006. Considering he still had a 17.5-sack season in him and is one of the best coverage LBs the Steelers have had in ages, having an unknown spazz who didn't understand the defense sit behind Porter makes sense.

Haggans? Well he was darn good for us in 2005. It was obvious by 2006 it was time for him to go. No idea if Harrison would/could play the left side, although I think it's fairly OBVIOUS right now that he could.

this is what is known as TRUE "hindsight". This is bitching that we didn't play Keenan Lewis INSTEAD of Ike Taylor in 2012.

Like Lewis, Harrison had shown ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER prior to 2007 and we had a great LB in Porter and a decent, serviceable LB in Haggans playing instead of him.


Well, at least you backed off your out of context quote. I don't really know what this means Haggans wasn't decent in 2006 and neither was Porter. The two combined for 13 sacks. Even in 2005 the pass rush vanished for stretches of the season. Harrison had 3 sacks in limited playing time along with an INT in 2005 in 3 and some games he filled in for Haggans. When put on the field, he made plays.


and Porter was our defensive MVP for several years, and both Haggans and Porter were ENORMOUS reasons for our 2005 Super Bowl.

CKSteeler wrote:
Porter was cut for a reason after 2006. He was overpaid and his pass rushing ability was overrated at that point. Neither OLB could get sacks outside of the scheme.


well I guess Miami must have had the ideal scheme since he put up 17.5 sacks 2 seasons after he left us.

CKSteeler wrote:
You claim there was no evidence that Haggans could play the left side of the defense, yet by 2005 he was already the top back-up at both spots.


no, I didn't. I'll assume that was a typo?

CKSteeler wrote:
Tomlin owns the [inappropriate/removed] show going on right now. He also deserves credit for the teams success in 2008 and other seasons. Not only is he the one who built that LB core, which was key to winning, but the team rose to the challenge like few Cowher teams ever did despite their talent.


actually, Cowher teams rose to the challenge once they had a franchise QB.

CKSteeler wrote:
The 2008 defense had an ability that Cowher defenses didn't have for a long time - two OLB's who could take on OT's man-up and beat them consistently.


Yes but let's be realistic, name the teams in the entire NFL that have a pair of edge rushers that can take on OTs and beat them consistently? Not too many. Let's hope like hell we get that back again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kethnaab


Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 10037
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CKSteeler wrote:
The actual issue here is whether Cowher would have cut Porter and drafted Woodley/Timmons. Most of the signs point to those, especially in the case of Timmons, being Tomlin picks. And both guys were pretty important for both Super Bowl runs the team made.


I'd pretty much guarantee Cowher wouldn't have gone after Timmons. Woodley perhaps, but not Timmons.

CKSteeler wrote:
Harrison was still completely lost by 2006, yet they kept him as the primary back-up for two seasons without trying to add too many others to take his spot?


well, other than Tomlin making a pair of OLBs the 1st and 2nd draft choices of his career as an NFL head coach, sure.

Rolling Eyes

CKSteeler wrote:
The thing about Harrison learning the defense almost certainly applies to 2002-04. By 2005, they clearly trusted.


well, they trusted him more than Clint Kriewaldt and rookie Andre Frazier, yes.


CKSteeler wrote:
The reason they kept Haggans and Porter on the field is the same reason they stick with older guys now. They trust them and don't like to rock the boat.


no, the reason they kept Porter on the field is because he was all of 1 season removed from outstanding play in 2005, and Haggans was pure money in the 2004 and 2005 postseasons, leading the team in sacks.

And again, they "trusted" Harrison so much, they drafted a pair of OLBs in the 1st and 2nd rounds.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CKSteeler


Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Posts: 5072
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 12:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

and Porter was our defensive MVP for several years, and both Haggans and Porter were ENORMOUS reasons for our 2005 Super Bowl.


That's all well and good for 2006. They were both also enormous reasons for the teams slide in 2006. They were both subpar.

Quote:

well I guess Miami must have had the ideal scheme since he put up 17.5 sacks 2 seasons after he left us.


It was a fluke season in which he was their only pass rusher and they moved him all around. And he was released one year later after they wanted to make him a situational guy. He only had 5 sacks his first year there. 9 his third. What's the outlier there? Most of his sacks that season were unblocked.

Quote:

no, I didn't. I'll assume that was a typo?


I meant Harrison. You had said it's unknown if he could play on the left side, yet that's where he played for Haggans in 2005.

Quote:

actually, Cowher teams rose to the challenge once they had a franchise QB.


Unless it was 2006. Cowher missed the playoffs one of his three seasons with Ben, and it wasn't all the appendectomy.

Quote:

Yes but let's be realistic, name the teams in the entire NFL that have a pair of edge rushers that can take on OTs and beat them consistently? Not too many. Let's hope like hell we get that back again.


The point was that the decisions Tomlin had a large hand in gave them that bookend pair which was crucial for that team's success. You can put Joey Porter on that 2008 squad. I highly doubt he comes close to 17.5 sacks or James Harrison's actual production.

Quote:

I'd pretty much guarantee Cowher wouldn't have gone after Timmons. Woodley perhaps, but not Timmons.


An OLB in the 2nd round itself would have been an oddity. You may be giving a backhanded compliment to Timmons here, but it doesn't matter. He made huge plays in 2008 and 2010. Game changing plays. Regardless of what either Woodley or Timmons does, their draft selections were validated with that Super Bowl win.

Quote:

well, other than Tomlin making a pair of OLBs the 1st and 2nd draft choices of his career as an NFL head coach, sure.


The idea of Timmons at OLB in the 3-4 was given up before the first training camp even started. They had one old, and one mediocre player at ILB. The team was going into that season with Harrison starting. That was the plan from the moment Porter was cut. Neither rookie LB was drafted to start right away. Timmons was drafted as a very young prospect to develop.

Quote:

well, they trusted him more than Clint Kriewaldt and rookie Andre Frazier, yes.


And they had four seasons before Harrison became a starter to add other players to the mix. It didn't happen. He was the top back-up for two years. If the team had doubts about his discipline heading into the '06 season, don't you think they make some effort to add competition?

Quote:

no, the reason they kept Porter on the field is because he was all of 1 season removed from outstanding play in 2005, and Haggans was pure money in the 2004 and 2005 postseasons, leading the team in sacks.


Porter was clearly the better of the two and there wasn't a 2nd option. The main issue is Haggans, who was pretty mediocre all season and yet never came off the field. Both players actually were pretty damn mediocre that year and it may be kind to say it. There was barely a pass rush to speak of. It wasn't because Harrison didn't know the playbook that he didn't get on the field. You said it yourself - they were two guys kept on the field because of what they had done in the past. That's not good coaching.

Ryan Clark is looking awful this year. If that continues for another few games and the team is bad I'm not going to be happy about him staying on the field. I don't care if he was maybe the best player on the defense last year. This year, he's been sucking. Clark's actually been better for longer than Haggans was.

Point here is simple. Cowher wasn't perfect and had he been the coach the 2008 defense, one of the most dominant of the decade, doesn't exist. Actually, he exhibited some of the same conservative tendencies Tomlin has. Yet, when Tomlin was hired he did bring something to the table.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kethnaab


Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 10037
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CKSteeler wrote:
Quote:

and Porter was our defensive MVP for several years, and both Haggans and Porter were ENORMOUS reasons for our 2005 Super Bowl.


That's all well and good for 2006. They were both also enormous reasons for the teams slide in 2006. They were both subpar.


enormous? Hardly. The reason for the team's slide in 2006 was Ben leading the NFL in interceptions. Porter wasn't great, but guess what? He was every bit as good, if not better, than Woodley or Harrison in 2011. So should we have let them go before 2012?


CKSteelers wrote:
Quote:

actually, Cowher teams rose to the challenge once they had a franchise QB.


Unless it was 2006. Cowher missed the playoffs one of his three seasons with Ben, and it wasn't all the appendectomy.


agreed, but leading the NFL in interceptions plays a pretty big role. That said, Tomlin has missed the playoffs twice. So where are we going here, other than back and forth?



CKSteeler wrote:
Quote:

I'd pretty much guarantee Cowher wouldn't have gone after Timmons. Woodley perhaps, but not Timmons.


An OLB in the 2nd round itself would have been an oddity.


Levon Kirkland, Chad Brown, Kendrell Bell.

?

Not sure what you mean here.

CKSteeler wrote:
well, he You may be giving a backhanded compliment to Timmons here, but it doesn't matter. He made huge plays in 2008 and 2010. Game changing plays. Regardless of what either Woodley or Timmons does, their draft selections were validated with that Super Bowl win.


never said otherwise, didn't mean to imply anything different. Cowher tended toward larger ILBs

CKSteeler wrote:
Quote:

well, other than Tomlin making a pair of OLBs the 1st and 2nd draft choices of his career as an NFL head coach, sure.


The idea of Timmons at OLB in the 3-4 was given up before the first training camp even started.


but after he was drafted.

Besides, I thought for sure Timmons played OLB initially and then got gimped up or something? Can't quite remember. Regardless, the point remains. The pick was made. OLB round 1. OLB round 2.

CKSteeler wrote:
Quote:

well, they trusted him more than Clint Kriewaldt and rookie Andre Frazier, yes.


And they had four seasons before Harrison became a starter to add other players to the mix. It didn't happen. He was the top back-up for two years. If the team had doubts about his discipline heading into the '06 season, don't you think they make some effort to add competition?


Sure. But that's still rather irrelevant, since he was not trusted enough to take the starting position, and he wasn't trusted enough to keep Tomlin from drafting OLB in the first 2 rounds of his first draft as an NFL head coach.

So we're right back to where we started, still going in circles.

CKSteeler wrote:
Quote:

no, the reason they kept Porter on the field is because he was all of 1 season removed from outstanding play in 2005, and Haggans was pure money in the 2004 and 2005 postseasons, leading the team in sacks.


Porter was clearly the better of the two and there wasn't a 2nd option. The main issue is Haggans, who was pretty mediocre all season and yet never came off the field. Both players actually were pretty damn mediocre that year and it may be kind to say it. There was barely a pass rush to speak of. It wasn't because Harrison didn't know the playbook that he didn't get on the field. You said it yourself - they were two guys kept on the field because of what they had done in the past. That's not good coaching.


ah, well then Tomlin should've been taken to task for not putting in Jason Worilds in 2011 and 2012 when Harrison and Woodley were subpar. Do you agree or disagree?

CKSteeler wrote:
Ryan Clark is looking awful this year. If that continues for another few games and the team is bad I'm not going to be happy about him staying on the field. I don't care if he was maybe the best player on the defense last year. This year, he's been sucking. Clark's actually been better for longer than Haggans was.


but Clark is 35 years old, and Haggans was 29. Otherwise, I agree with everything.

CKSteeler wrote:
Point here is simple. Cowher wasn't perfect


agreed. never said he was

CKSteeler wrote:
and had he been the coach the 2008 defense, one of the most dominant of the decade, doesn't exist.


probably not. Of course, since we're now tossing around complete, absolute speculation, maybe Cowher moves up and gets Revis or Willis? Perhaps he goes after Eric Weddle? Or perhaps he goes after Joe Staley in the 1st and Ryan Kalil in the 2nd, and Marshal Yanda in the 3rd, and all of a sudden our offensive line ends up being the best in the NFL?

Would he draft identically as Tomlin did? Probably not. i agree with you. HOwever, I assume the primary point you're trying to make is that without Tomlin, the Steelers don't win the Super Bowl in 2008, and I don't think that is even feasible (or worthwhile) to truly and support or discuss.

CKSteeler wrote:
Actually, he exhibited some of the same conservative tendencies Tomlin has. Yet, when Tomlin was hired he did bring something to the table.


Yes, he brought an ideal guy to lead a bunch of experienced veterans who knew how to win with someone else's players. 7 years later, he's unable to win with his own players. Hopefully he turns that around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Pittsburgh Steelers All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group