PDA

View Full Version : Hindsight is always 20/20, but...



buckeyehoppy
12-28-2008, 07:25 PM
...if the Steelers take Mangold instead of Holmes.

...if the Steelers take Staley instead of Timmons.

...if the Steelers franchise Faneca instead of Max Sucks. Then...

The left side of your OL would have been set this season. And C and LT would have been set as well beyond this year. Then, even if they had to trade up to get Duke Robinson, they could have done so w/o too much pain.

Granted, you would have been one player short in the LB corps (and LT looks like he will be decent anyway). And not having S'Tonio appears to have not been that large a deal. I would have also forced Sweed to grow into his role much faster. But the OL would have been, for all intents and purposes, set.

I advocated drafting BOTH Mangold AND Staley, even if they were reaches. At worst, the depth on the line would have been better and it would have forced Max Sucks to get his head out of his @$$ A LOT sooner than when he had the LT job handed to him after Marvel's injury.

But, the reality is, that the fix will still take at least a couple off-seasons...and it will take a lot more money and the FO will have to "get it right" the first time. They won't have the luxury of a "project" when they do draft an OL in the first round. And let's not kid ourselves...any pick that isn't an OL in the first round this year is probably a throw away pick.

Ben's being carted off the field on a stretcher better be the last f---ing straw with this OL. That sack was all on them, and the fewer of the current members of this years OL that remain next season, the better.

skyhawk
12-28-2008, 08:18 PM
:Clap

I agree on the OL woes.

While I think the OL had a role in that sack, it also had a role in Ben taking so many hits througout the season. His body finally gave in.

But, that sack is NOT entirely on the OL. When yo uhave McGinest bearing down on you, you need to THROW the ball. You are going to get killed regardless. Maybe someday he will learn.

stlrz d
12-28-2008, 08:31 PM
:Clap

I agree on the OL woes.

While I think the OL had a role in that sack, it also had a role in Ben taking so many hits througout the season. His body finally gave in.

But, that sack is NOT entirely on the OL. When yo uhave McGinest bearing down on you, you need to THROW the ball. You are going to get killed regardless. Maybe someday he will learn.

So then it doesn't matter if it was thrown or not? :P

skyhawk
12-28-2008, 08:39 PM
:Clap

I agree on the OL woes.

While I think the OL had a role in that sack, it also had a role in Ben taking so many hits througout the season. His body finally gave in.

But, that sack is NOT entirely on the OL. When yo uhave McGinest bearing down on you, you need to THROW the ball. You are going to get killed regardless. Maybe someday he will learn.

So then it doesn't matter if it was thrown or not? :P

hehe. I know what you mean.

Throw it away (make McGinest get a roughing the passer call) or at least take a sack and not throw and be exposed for a brutal hit and fall.

He did however, make a play.. I give him credit for that. He always tries to find a way.

SidSmythe
12-28-2008, 08:54 PM
Mangold was my man.
Staley would have been good trade down material.

w/ Mangold and Staley, Faneca wouldn't haven't have been as important. No way do we franchise him.

Steelgal
12-28-2008, 08:55 PM
But with Faneca, he seemed to make it clear that he wasn't happy with the Tomlin hiring. He wanted Grimm. I thought there were comments made at the beginning of this year, after he was gone, that Alan had caused issues in the locker room last year. If that's true, it was good that he left. You don't need that extra distraction in the locker room.

Starlifter
12-28-2008, 09:08 PM
AF no longer wanted to be here. why pay big bucks for someone who's heart is no longer with the organization? yes, we need to rebuild the O-line and it will not be a quick fix. If we do what it takes and totally re-vamp we are looking at a difficult start to next season. If there are new names up front, I would take 4-4 as a good start with the hope they finish strong. But hey, that's next year. I still think we're in great shape this year!!...

stlrz d
12-28-2008, 09:17 PM
But with Faneca, he seemed to make it clear that he wasn't happy with the Tomlin hiring. He wanted Grimm. I thought there were comments made at the beginning of this year, after he was gone, that Alan had caused issues in the locker room last year. If that's true, it was good that he left. You don't need that extra distraction in the locker room.

Correct.

He didn't like the zone blocking scheme either.

NKySteeler
12-28-2008, 09:26 PM
He didn't like the zone blocking scheme either.

I didn't realize he confided in you as to his dislike for the blocking scheme....

....Everyone can gripe and complain as to the current situation of our O-line, and I'll be first in line... But nothing is gonna change... Let me re-interate for you all.... NOTHING IS GONNA CHANGE anytime soon... Do you think we'll pick up a few FAs' ?..... Yea, right, put down the pipe if you think so.... It will take several years before we can rebuild the O-line back to the status level that we are accustomed to.... Until then, we are relegated to simply complaining about it.

stlrz d
12-28-2008, 09:34 PM
He didn't like the zone blocking scheme either.

I didn't realize he confided in you as to his dislike for the blocking scheme....

....Everyone can gripe and complain as to the current situation of our O-line, and I'll be first in line... But nothing is gonna change... Let me re-interate for you all.... NOTHING IS GONNA CHANGE anytime soon... Do you think we'll pick up a few FAs' ?..... Yea, right, put down the pipe if you think so.... It will take several years before we can rebuild the O-line back to the status level that we are accustomed to.... Until then, we are relegated to simply complaining about it.

After he went to the Jets someone here posted a story in which some of the Steelers O linemen stated he didn't like the ZBS, and that actually he was kind of a disruption.

I've never met the dude. :P

buckeyehoppy
12-28-2008, 09:56 PM
Mangold was my man.
Staley would have been good trade down material.

w/ Mangold and Staley, Faneca wouldn't haven't have been as important. No way do we franchise him.

Then do ya think the Steelers would have gone after a G instead of Sweed in the second last year? Not that that wouldn't have been a bad idea anyway. That probably would have happened if they already had Mangold and Staley in place.


....Everyone can gripe and complain as to the current situation of our O-line, and I'll be first in line... But nothing is gonna change... Let me re-interate for you all.... NOTHING IS GONNA CHANGE anytime soon... Do you think we'll pick up a few FAs' ?..... Yea, right, put down the pipe if you think so.... It will take several years before we can rebuild the O-line back to the status level that we are accustomed to.... Until then, we are relegated to simply complaining about it.

If the Steelers would have conducted the drafts that brought Holmes and Timmons with the idea that the OL had a priority, then it would have taken three years worth of 1st and 2nd Round draft picks(half of those picks) just to adequately revamp the line w/o FA. Bearing in mind, of course, that the Mangold acquisition nullifies the need for Mahan and Hartwig.

I'm with you when you say nothing will change anytime soon. Basically, if you take buckeyehoppy's draft logic, it would have taken three years anyway w/o FA. But "several years" isn't a luxury a team has if they want to be in the playoff mix from year to year. If the Steelers want to do it w/ no FA acquisitions, then it will probably take a minimum of three first day OL picks the next 3 years, pretty much ignoring every other need to reconstruct the line.

That's a heavy price to pay. And I'm not so sure that Colbert is anywhere near capable enough in talent evaluation to score an OL trifecta like that.

You're right. There are no easy answers. But the OL as it is presently constituted is unacceptable and needs to be dismantled. The only wildcard in that equation is when Ariens and Zierlein get the ax, do the replacements change enough of the playbook to streamline the operation to get the most out of the talent on hand? If that's the case, then the surgery gets a little less radical and the options improve for the rest of the team.

Big Kahuna Burgher
12-28-2008, 10:04 PM
...if the Steelers take Mangold instead of Holmes.

...if the Steelers take Staley instead of Timmons.

...if the Steelers franchise Faneca instead of Max Sucks. Then...

The left side of your OL would have been set this season. And C and LT would have been set as well beyond this year. Then, even if they had to trade up to get Duke Robinson, they could have done so w/o too much pain.



Staley? The left side would be set with him? Last I checked, he has given up more sacks at LT
than anyone else in the NFL over the past 2 seasons at LT.

buckeyehoppy
12-28-2008, 10:13 PM
...if the Steelers take Mangold instead of Holmes.

...if the Steelers take Staley instead of Timmons.

...if the Steelers franchise Faneca instead of Max Sucks. Then...

The left side of your OL would have been set this season. And C and LT would have been set as well beyond this year. Then, even if they had to trade up to get Duke Robinson, they could have done so w/o too much pain.



Staley? The left side would be set with him? Last I checked, he has given up more sacks at LT
than anyone else in the NFL over the past 2 seasons at LT.

OTOH, does he play the last 33 games at LT for the Steelers? Marvel was healthy most of last season and did play the first month of this year. At very least, he probably would have started at RT with the option of him spelling Marvel at LT. His role probably would have been quite different here than in SF. He would have had the luxury to apprentice at LT while playing RT. In SF, he started at LT right out of the box.

pittpete
12-28-2008, 10:19 PM
While I think the OL had a role in that sack

What the hell do you mean OL has some blame.
Kemo was in FN loddy doody fart on the brain land.
Rewatch it, he was setting up for a screen.
Kemo has totally blown it more than a few times this year.
On the Parker TD run the announcers were blithering idiots in saying what a block Kemo threw.
Rewatch it, he stumbled and barely hit the defender.
Our OL problems are with Kemo and Colon.

MeetJoeGreene
12-29-2008, 09:16 AM
Look at it this way -- Marvell is probably gone.

We MUST do one of the following:
- resign Starks to a longer term deal
- sign another quality, FA to play LT.
- in the unlikely event Marvel is not gone, resign to a 1 year min deal


We can't go into next year with Colon at RT and Hills at LT? Or chance a rookie?

They will (probably) let Kemo go and go w/ Simmons/Stapleton at G.

And draft another G.

We aren't going to sign anyone from the outside for big$$ until/unless we resign James Harrison and other key FA that we want to keep. Just they way we work.

Steel Life
12-29-2008, 07:57 PM
Hindsight is always 20/20, but...I'm sure Colbert's offensive line plan seemed like a good idea at the time.

Place the blame where it belongs...Colbert drafted - or not drafted - the players, Colbert hired both the OC & O-Line coaches, & Colbert signed - or not - the veteran players to contracts that put the team into this predicament. Face it Colbert FFFFF'd this one up with shoddy drafting, poor contract negotiation, & forgetting how this team succeeds. He hired coaching personnel that was coaching a style not suited to the type of player he'd been acquiring & neglected bringing in real talent in the hopes of finding "bargains". The only reprieve he may get (other than Max playing WAY above his head at LT) is that hopefully Simmons will retire & that way his contract won't hurt as much against the cap as it would if he were cut & that money could be targeted for use with a premium FA talent...

Nahhh, that would make too much sense.

NorthCoast
12-29-2008, 10:34 PM
[quote="stlrz d":a8wmso1f]He didn't like the zone blocking scheme either.

I didn't realize he confided in you as to his dislike for the blocking scheme....

....Everyone can gripe and complain as to the current situation of our O-line, and I'll be first in line... But nothing is gonna change... Let me re-interate for you all.... NOTHING IS GONNA CHANGE anytime soon... Do you think we'll pick up a few FAs' ?..... Yea, right, put down the pipe if you think so.... It will take several years before we can rebuild the O-line back to the status level that we are accustomed to.... Until then, we are relegated to simply complaining about it.

After he went to the Jets someone here posted a story in which some of the Steelers O linemen stated he didn't like the ZBS, and that actually he was kind of a disruption.

I've never met the dude. :P[/quote:a8wmso1f]

This is correct...I think it was written in a P-G article. It almost hinted of AF sabotaging the planned change in blocking schemes and the other players said as much. When I read this I lost some of the respect I had for him as a Steeler. Take the high road and just leave.

Steeler Shades
12-30-2008, 12:23 AM
This is correct...I think it was written in a P-G article. It almost hinted of AF sabotaging the planned change in blocking schemes and the other players said as much. When I read this I lost some of the respect I had for him as a Steeler. Take the high road and just leave.
If he sabotaged the planned changes in blocking schemes, he must have done a really good job. Despite getting rid of Faneca and Mahan the O-line is still struggling with blocking. 8)

RuthlessBurgher
12-30-2008, 12:48 AM
Hindsight is always 20/20, but...I'm sure Colbert's offensive line plan seemed like a good idea at the time.

Place the blame where it belongs...Colbert drafted - or not drafted - the players, Colbert hired both the OC & O-Line coaches, & Colbert signed - or not - the veteran players to contracts that put the team into this predicament. Face it Colbert FFFFF'd this one up with shoddy drafting, poor contract negotiation, & forgetting how this team succeeds. He hired coaching personnel that was coaching a style not suited to the type of player he'd been acquiring & neglected bringing in real talent in the hopes of finding "bargains". The only reprieve he may get (other than Max playing WAY above his head at LT) is that hopefully Simmons will retire & that way his contract won't hurt as much against the cap as it would if he were cut & that money could be targeted for use with a premium FA talent...

Nahhh, that would make too much sense.

While Colbert was in charge of draft decisions and free agent acquisitions (with input from the scouts and coaches as well, of course), a GM is not responsible for assembling a coaching staff. The head coach decides what assistant coaches are hired and fired.