“I’m surprised” - no one ever

[Mick]

For once the players on offense left a lot of opportunities on the field this game.

Obviously it would be nice to have a sufficiently competent scheme such that your opponents don’t make fun of it after games,

But at the same time, you can’t blame the scheme when plays fail because the pitch back on a flea flicker is 3 yards off target or the runningback forgets to grab the football on a running play.

[yygy]

No doubt to me Canada is gone. No way Tomlin can justify him given the numbers.

O did miss a couple plays but thing that really got me was the whole left side of their OL is poor. Why call almost every run to that side?

And why no touches for Warren?

Also no question to me that Tomlin dictated the overall O approach which mainly comes down to clock control and no turnovers. But I think a new OC could make some hay here. Once the O humming you take it out of Tomlin’s hands

[langer]

Canada is not completely hosed. The Steelers media hasn’t attacked him yet. They are asking less pointed questions.

[Thrillsseeker]

No doubt to me Canada is gone. No way Tomlin can justify him given the numbers.

O did miss a couple plays but thing that really got me was the whole left side of their OL is poor. Why call almost every run to that side?

And why no touches for Warren?

Also no question to me that Tomlin dictated the overall O approach which mainly comes down to clock control and no turnovers. But I think a new OC could make some hay here. Once the O humming you take it out of Tomlin’s hands

Hamstring issue I believe after converting on a third down.

[Jobu]

And why no touches for Warren?

Warren was injured early, played only 3 snaps. Sounds like he’s going to be out for a while.

[stillthere]

And why no touches for Warren?

He hurt his hammy on his lone catch of the game. That is just bad luck and what it was. I think he had 3 snaps and Snell had 3 snaps at RB all game.

[El Kabong]

On the local Pittsburgh radio post game show, Charlie Batch opined that Rooney will not fire Canada mid-season because Rooney is not going to pay Canada to sit at home and do nothing. Charlie did say he thought Canada's being let go after the season is a done deal.

[Rod & Wire Mill]

On the local Pittsburgh radio post game show, Charlie Batch opined that Rooney will not fire Canada mid-season because Rooney is not going to pay Canada to sit at home and do nothing. Charlie did say he thought Canada's being let go after the season is a done deal.

Paying him to do nothing would amount to something. And depending on who replaced him might be well worth it

[Orangesteel]

I’m pretty sure Art Deuce is currently paying Canada to do nothing…what a dope.

[langer]

I seriously can't listen to Coach Mike talk, it's grating as hell. His bullshit is so old, but some still lap it up like morons.

He is delusional and apparently has had a complete break with reality.

Willard: They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.
Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?
Willard: I don't see any method at all, sir.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYUEKGsGIXM

[the-other-burg]

On the local Pittsburgh radio post game show, Charlie Batch opined that Rooney will not fire Canada mid-season because Rooney is not going to pay Canada to sit at home and do nothing. Charlie did say he thought Canada's being let go after the season is a done deal.

being a coach of the steelers is a great job if you can get it.

[StillerInCT]

We're destroying Pickett. His career is pretty much fucked unless we make drastic changes to the coaching staff.

Lolololz

Yeah Lenny Pickett is really getting a raw deal !!!

Lolololz

Yeah I know. That's why I said it.

[Professor Half Wit]

One extreme:
It doesn't matter how bad the offensive game plan is or how bad the coaching is.
If KP is something special he should be able to overcome it.

As evidence to discount this thesis, I give you Ben in quarters 1-3 last year.

Another extreme:
It doesn't matter how good or special Kenny could be or is.
The coaching and offensive game plan are ruining him and preventing him from showing what he could be / is.

As evidence to discount this thesis, I give you Ben in quarter 4 last year.
(A qualification: stupid to compare ANY rookie to Ben in his last season because Ben has seen it all and is first ballot lock. But the point is, if Kenny has the juice, you should expect to see something special shine through despite coaching.)

The truth is likely in the middle between the extremes, yes?

[langer]

Did the same scenario happen to Ben his rookie year.

Was he thrown into a total grabasstic clusterfuck of a shitshow like this one. Not sure about that.

He has to will himself to overcome all of it. Can he do it. Film at 11.

[Kodiak.]

Did the same scenario happen to Ben his rookie year.

Was he thrown into a total grabasstic clusterfuck of a shitshow like this one. Not sure about that.

He has to will himself to overcome all of it. Can he do it. Film at 11.

A lot of people thought the team absolutely sucked and needed blown up after 2003.

And, frankly, the offense wasn't that good. They did get the running game going, which provided a pretty lethal PA attack. But it was Ben running around, covering for the pass pro and buying time for receivers, that really made that offense work.

I'd guess the defense benefited substantially from an offense that was completely dominating TOP something like 36-24 minutes per game.

I don't know. It's clear there was talent and potential on that 2004 team. But are they even a playoff team without a generational rookie at QB?

[K_C_]

I don't know. It's clear there was talent and potential on that 2004 team. But are they even a playoff team without a generational rookie at QB?

They had 9 Pro Bowlers on that team.

I would hope they could somehow sneak into the playoffs.

[Mick]

They were 5-1 when scoring a Matt Canada Approved less than 19 or less points and 2-1 in games where Ben didn’t start.

[Jobu]

They had 9 Pro Bowlers on that team.

In 2004?
3 pro bowlers.
Hines Ward
Alan Faneca
Casey Hampton.
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/ste ... 0401250192

They were also coming off a 6-10 2003 season when they were dead last in rushing.

[Kodiak.]

They had 9 Pro Bowlers on that team.

I would hope they could somehow sneak into the playoffs.

It was pretty much the exact same team as in 2003, except for QB. How many went to the Pro Bowl in 2003?

[Kodiak.]

They had 9 Pro Bowlers on that team.

In 2004?
3 pro bowlers.
Hines Ward
Alan Faneca
Casey Hampton.
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/ste ... 0401250192

They were also coming off a 6-10 2003 season when they were dead last in rushing.

Yes, that "great team" around Ben in 2004 is another example of revisionist history to diminish his value and accomplishments.

[K_C_]

They had 9 Pro Bowlers on that team.

In 2004?
3 pro bowlers.
Hines Ward
Alan Faneca
Casey Hampton.
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/ste ... 0401250192

They were also coming off a 6-10 2003 season when they were dead last in rushing.

What?

No. The 2004 Steelers had 9 Pro Bowlers.

Unless Wikipedia is wrong (scroll near the bottom).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Pitt ... ers_season

[K_C_]

They had 9 Pro Bowlers on that team.

In 2004?
3 pro bowlers.
Hines Ward
Alan Faneca
Casey Hampton.
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/ste ... 0401250192

They were also coming off a 6-10 2003 season when they were dead last in rushing.

Yes, that "great team" around Ben in 2004 is another example of revisionist history to diminish his value and accomplishments.

9 Pro Bowlers his rookie year is revisionist history?



Sure, Jan.

[Jobu]

They had 9 Pro Bowlers on that team.

In 2004?
3 pro bowlers.
Hines Ward
Alan Faneca
Casey Hampton.
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/ste ... 0401250192

They were also coming off a 6-10 2003 season when they were dead last in rushing.

What?

No. The 2004 Steelers had 9 Pro Bowlers.

Unless Wikipedia is wrong (scroll near the bottom).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Pitt ... ers_season

Well, Wikipedia has been known to be wrong, but in this case it isn’t. I was wrong. I googled 2004 pro bowl rosters and got the roster of the game played In January 2004…the 2003 season. My bad….

[Professor Half Wit]

Did the same scenario happen to Ben his rookie year.

Was he thrown into a total grabasstic clusterfuck of a shitshow like this one. Not sure about that.

He has to will himself to overcome all of it. Can he do it. Film at 11.

Absolutely not.

But if KP has the juice, you’d expect to see more flashes. Flashes are rare. Therefore, one fears he lacks the juice.

Still too soon to write him off.

[Professor Half Wit]

They had 9 Pro Bowlers on that team.

In 2004?
3 pro bowlers.
Hines Ward
Alan Faneca
Casey Hampton.
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/ste ... 0401250192

They were also coming off a 6-10 2003 season when they were dead last in rushing.

Yes, that "great team" around Ben in 2004 is another example of revisionist history to diminish his value and accomplishments.

Pointing out that Ben had a great team is not being used to diminish Ben. It’s being used to slow the roll on KP can be pronounced a bust in less than half a season.

[Kodiak.]

9 Pro Bowlers his rookie year is revisionist history?



Sure, Jan.

They went to the Pro Bowl because the precocious rookie led them to 15-1.

How many Pro Bowlers on the 2003 team, you know the one that was basically the same as 2004 sans Ben?

Wait, let me look it up for you: 2. T.W.O. Sure, Ben walked onto a "loaded" team that returned about 3/4 of its top players - but only two pro bowlers (more like 1 when Hampton was lost after Wk6) - from the prior year.

Brilliant insights as usual from the village idiot.

[Jobu]

In 2004?
3 pro bowlers.
Hines Ward
Alan Faneca
Casey Hampton.
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/ste ... 0401250192

They were also coming off a 6-10 2003 season when they were dead last in rushing.

Yes, that "great team" around Ben in 2004 is another example of revisionist history to diminish his value and accomplishments.

Pointing out that Ben had a great team is not being used to diminish Ben. It’s being used to slow the roll on KP can be pronounced a bust in less than half a season.

Who’s pronouncing him a bust other than the self proclaimed resident football savant? Pointing out players flaws and issues is what we do here…no? Or is Kenny Pickett the new SteelersFury sacred cow?

[Kodiak.]

Pointing out that Ben had a great team is not being used to diminish Ben.

Ben was drafted in 2004 by a team that had just gone 6-10 with a grand whopping total of 2 Pro Bowlers the year before.

That is NOT a great team without Ben. Look at it starting 2-6 in 2006 while Ben recovered from an appendectomy and going thru a windshield.

Where do you think PIT was predicted to finish in 2004 BEFORE losing Tommy Maddox? I'm thinking it definitely wasn't any better than 8-8.


edit: Vegas had the over/under at 7.5 Yeah, Ben got drafted by a real juggernaut.

[Kodiak.]

Who’s pronouncing him a bust other than the self proclaimed resident football savant? Pointing out players flaws and issues is what we do here…no? Or is Kenny Pickett the new SteelersFury sacred cow?

And it has nothing to do with Kenny. The narratives diminishing rookie Ben came about before Kenny ever picked up a football.

[Professor Half Wit]

Pointing out that Ben had a great team is not being used to diminish Ben.

Ben was drafted in 2004 by a team that had just gone 6-10 with a grand whopping total of 2 Pro Bowlers the year before.

That is NOT a great team without Ben. Look at it starting 2-6 in 2006 while Ben recovered from an appendectomy and going thru a windshield.

Where do you think PIT was predicted to finish in 2004 BEFORE losing Tommy Maddox? I'm thinking it definitely wasn't any better than 8-8.


edit: Vegas had the over/under at 7.5 Yeah, Ben got drafted by a real juggernaut.

Necessary and sufficient conditions, Kodiak. Unless you live in the land of counterfactual hypotheticals, easy enough to say Ben is not great without that team AND that that team is not great without him. Two features can be inter-entailing.

It’s obvious Ben had something special from the get go.