PDA

View Full Version : Steelers had 'change of heart' on Arians



fordfixer
01-07-2010, 01:56 AM
ESPN Radio reporter: Steelers had 'change of heart' on Arians

By: Mike Bires
Beaver County Times
http://www.timesonline.com/sports/sport ... rians.html (http://www.timesonline.com/sports/sports_details/article/1424/2010/january/07/espn-radio-reporter-steelers-had-change-of-heart-on-arians.html)
Thursday January 7, 2010 12:00 AM

PITTSBURGH — Ken Laird, a reporter for 1250 ESPN Radio, resorted to damage control Wednesday after learning that his report of Bruce Arians’ demise was wrong.

On Tuesday, Laird reported that the Steelers would fire Arians, the offensive coordinator. That report prompted television stations in Pittsburgh to lead their evening newscasts with Arians’ fate.

As it turns out, Arians won’t be fired.

“Well, offensive coordinator Bruce Arians is still around,” Laird said Wednesday night as he opened his daily “Stillers 365” radio show. “As you may know, yesterday I reported what I heard from various sources within the organization that B.A. was going to be let go in the near future.

“(But) head coach Mike Tomlin has decided to retain Arians … this after a long one-on-one meeting today … Why the change of heart? Because I truly believe that is what happened here.”

News of the Steelers retaining Arians first appeared Wednesday afternoon on the National Football Post Web site.

Arians, 57, has been criticized at times by fans and the media the past two years for turning the Steelers’ once run-oriented offense to a pass-first attack. Despite the criticism Arians has received, Tomlin said, “I accept responsibility for everything.”

fordfixer
01-07-2010, 01:57 AM
On the Steelers: Tomlin sticks with Arians
Thursday, January 07, 2010
By Gerry Dulac, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10007/1026388-66.stm

The Steelers might not be done making changes in their coaching staff, but the biggest development yesterday was the one they didn't make.

After a long and what was termed "productive" meeting with coach Mike Tomlin, offensive coordinator Bruce Arians was told he will return as offensive coordinator in 2010, putting to rest his status after reports surfaced he would be fired.

Arians, who has one year remaining on his contract, was retained after a season in which the Steelers had a 4,000-yard quarterback (Ben Roethlisberger), two 1,000-yard receivers (Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward) and a 1,000-yard rusher (Rashard Mendenhall) for the first time in franchise history.

However, for the first time since he became head coach in 2007, Tomlin fired one of his assistant coaches -- offensive line coach Larry Zierlein, whose unit might have performed better this season than it did during last year's Super Bowl season.

The Steelers had a better per-game rushing average (112.1 yards) than they did in 2008 (105.6, the lowest of any playoff team in franchise history), but they also allowed Roethlisberger to be sacked a personal-high 50 times. In three years under Zierlein, Roethlisberger was sacked 143 times, more than any other NFL quarterback.

But, even before Zierlein joined the Steelers, Roethlisberger was sacked 46 times in the 2006 season when the offensive line coach was Russ Grimm and the line featured two Pro Bowl performers -- guard Alan Faneca and center Jeff Hartings. A number of Roethlisberger's sacks occur because he holds the ball longer than most quarterbacks, trying to make a play.

Tomlin had individual meetings yesterday with some of his coaches, in addition to some of his players, and he might not be done making changes in his staff.

The decision to retain Arians, 57, should really come as no surprise because Tomlin has never publicly questioned the philosophy of the game plan or the performance and execution of the offense. Even when the Steelers attempted 42 pass plays in a Dec. 10 game in Cleveland when the wind-chill was minus-10 and wind gusts reached 45 mph, Tomlin did not blame Arians or criticize the strategy, even when he was asked and had the opportunity to do so.

When Tomlin was questioned why Roethlisberger was attempting a third-down pass with less than two minutes remaining against Baltimore Dec. 27 and the Ravens without any timeouts -- the pass was intercepted but wiped out by a Ravens penalty -- he quickly noted, "We wanted to move the chains. We wanted to control the ball."
Gerry Dulac can be reached at gdulac@post-gazette.com.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10007/10 ... z0bu5DxwG4 (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10007/1026388-66.stm#ixzz0bu5DxwG4)

bostonsteeler
01-07-2010, 03:33 AM
Sadly, I was right.

MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.
We look forward to another brilliant year of BA coaching. By the end of next season Ben will be too beatup to be effective, so look to be drafting a QB in 2013.

Oh well, we did get the two SBs.

Pittsburgh
01-07-2010, 03:43 AM
“I accept responsibility for everything.”

And if things go south next season, it's all on Tomlin. He has put his neck on the line by making the decision to retain Bruce Arians. Here's to hoping the gamble pays off.

proudpittsburgher
01-07-2010, 07:29 AM
“I accept responsibility for everything.”

I thought that quote was from Ken Laird, since, you know, he jumped the gun because he wanted to be the first with the story and all. But no, we get excuses. Nice owning up, Ken.

SteelBucks
01-07-2010, 08:21 AM
Sadly, I was right.

MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.
We look forward to another brilliant year of BA coaching. By the end of next season Ben will be too beatup to be effective, so look to be drafting a QB in 2013.

Oh well, we did get the two SBs.

Bring Cowher back! :stirpot :wink:

Ghost
01-07-2010, 09:01 AM
Arians, who has one year remaining on his contract, was retained after a season in which the Steelers had a 4,000-yard quarterback (Ben Roethlisberger), two 1,000-yard receivers (Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward) and a 1,000-yard rusher (Rashard Mendenhall) for the first time in franchise history.

I'm sick of this stat getting tossed around. The Steelers didn't make the playoffs so this means sh!t.

stlrz d
01-07-2010, 09:56 AM
“I accept responsibility for everything.”

And if things go south next season, it's all on Tomlin. He has put his neck on the line by making the decision to retain Bruce Arians. Here's to hoping the gamble pays off.

You are correct. MT put his neck on the line in a big way with this move.

proudpittsburgher
01-07-2010, 10:04 AM
Arians, who has one year remaining on his contract, was retained after a season in which the Steelers had a 4,000-yard quarterback (Ben Roethlisberger), two 1,000-yard receivers (Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward) and a 1,000-yard rusher (Rashard Mendenhall) for the first time in franchise history.

I'm sick of this stat getting tossed around. The Steelers didn't make the playoffs so this means sh!t.


You are correct, but that doesn't mean it was his fault. I think it is pretty clear that the injuries on defense and poor special teams coverage were the two main reasons the Steelers didn't make the playoffs.

proudpittsburgher
01-07-2010, 10:05 AM
MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.


Actually, isn't it the other way around? Didn't it take more balls to keep him, since most of the fanbase pretty much decided that he should be gone?

RussBII
01-07-2010, 11:15 AM
MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.


Actually, isn't it the other way around? Didn't it take more balls to keep him, since most of the fanbase pretty much decided that he should be gone?

I agree with this.

I keep flip flopping on Bruce though. The offense didn't lose us any games this year. Maybe one, tops. The other two units screwed us.

Those stats get tossed around because they are fairly incredible. Also, his problem is pretty much situational play calling. Perhaps MT gets a veto on third and short or something. I feel like he can learn this. Basically, never let BA watch any Andy Reid called game. Everything else worked pretty ok... It was a record setting year for the Steelers' offense. Tough to get rid of the OC after that...

At the same time, if i see an empty back set on 3rd and 1 again, i'll hunt him down myself.... and i'm REALLY lazy...

proudpittsburgher
01-07-2010, 11:20 AM
At the same time, if i see an empty back set on 3rd and 1 again, i'll hunt him down myself.... and i'm REALLY lazy...

:lol:

bostonsteeler
01-07-2010, 11:21 AM
MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.


Actually, isn't it the other way around? Didn't it take more balls to keep him, since most of the fanbase pretty much decided that he should be gone?

No, it doesn't take cojones to tee off the fans. It needs cojones to take a decision and let someone who your star QB loves go.

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 11:21 AM
Sadly, I was right.

MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.
We look forward to another brilliant year of BA coaching. By the end of next season Ben will be too beatup to be effective, so look to be drafting a QB in 2013.

Oh well, we did get the two SBs.
Didn't you read where Ben had 45 sacks with Grimm and 2 pro bowl linemen? He finds creative ways to get beat up on and off the field. The guy took a crushing hit in a meaningless game against the Browns 2 years ago. People say it all the time... It's how he plays the game.

He loves contact and actually waits for it at times.

phillyesq
01-07-2010, 11:27 AM
“I accept responsibility for everything.”

And if things go south next season, it's all on Tomlin. He has put his neck on the line by making the decision to retain Bruce Arians. Here's to hoping the gamble pays off.

He says that he accepts responsibility for everything, but does he really?

Reading the transcript from his last press conference, he blamed the Cleveland loss on the players, not on the attrocious game plan that he and Arians put together.

SteelAbility
01-07-2010, 12:04 PM
MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.


Actually, isn't it the other way around? Didn't it take more balls to keep him, since most of the fanbase pretty much decided that he should be gone?

I agree with this.

I keep flip flopping on Bruce though. The offense didn't lose us any games this year. Maybe one, tops. The other two units screwed us.

Those stats get tossed around because they are fairly incredible. Also, his problem is pretty much situational play calling. Perhaps MT gets a veto on third and short or something. I feel like he can learn this. Basically, never let BA watch any Andy Reid called game. Everything else worked pretty ok... It was a record setting year for the Steelers' offense. Tough to get rid of the OC after that...

At the same time, if i see an empty back set on 3rd and 1 again, i'll hunt him down myself.... and i'm REALLY lazy...

I don't think I agree with that.

CLE game 2 (O mustered only 6 points)
CIN game 1 (Ben threw a pick6; The O also needed just one more 1st down at the end to close it out)
CHI (O needed just one more 1st down to close it out; multiple dropped passes on O; therefore the O made significant contributions to this loss)
BAL (threw INT with the ball at about our own 40 in OT; returned well within FG range)

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 12:31 PM
MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.


Actually, isn't it the other way around? Didn't it take more balls to keep him, since most of the fanbase pretty much decided that he should be gone?

I agree with this.

I keep flip flopping on Bruce though. The offense didn't lose us any games this year. Maybe one, tops. The other two units screwed us.

Those stats get tossed around because they are fairly incredible. Also, his problem is pretty much situational play calling. Perhaps MT gets a veto on third and short or something. I feel like he can learn this. Basically, never let BA watch any Andy Reid called game. Everything else worked pretty ok... It was a record setting year for the Steelers' offense. Tough to get rid of the OC after that...

At the same time, if i see an empty back set on 3rd and 1 again, i'll hunt him down myself.... and i'm REALLY lazy...

I don't think I agree with that.

CLE game 2 (O mustered only 6 points)
CIN game 1 (Ben threw a pick6; The O also needed just one more 1st down at the end to close it out)
CHI (O needed just one more 1st down to close it out; multiple dropped passes on O; therefore the O made significant contributions to this loss)
BAL (threw INT with the ball at about our own 40 in OT; returned well within FG range)

CLE game is all O..
CINCI game is all SWEED..

CHI was all Reed and the D. It's Cutler.. he had 26 INT's, we couldn't get our hands on 1? I will admit the lack of Mendenhall after the 50 yard run was crazy.. and he was benched the next game. What the hell could he have done that was so bad?

BAL is all Defense.. shouldn't have even gone to OT. 3rd and 20 and in 2 plays Baltimore gained 60 yards...

SteelTorch
01-07-2010, 12:41 PM
Arians, who has one year remaining on his contract, was retained after a season in which the Steelers had a 4,000-yard quarterback (Ben Roethlisberger), two 1,000-yard receivers (Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward) and a 1,000-yard rusher (Rashard Mendenhall) for the first time in franchise history.

I'm sick of this stat getting tossed around. The Steelers didn't make the playoffs so this means sh!t.
I agree. Yards don't win games. It doesn't change the fact that since BA came into the picture, the offense has proven to be inefficient and unreliable.

As far as Big Ben is concerned, he was effective even before BA was our offensive coordinator. He's a top 5 quarterback in the league. He doesn't owe any of his success to Bruce Arians.

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 12:52 PM
Arians, who has one year remaining on his contract, was retained after a season in which the Steelers had a 4,000-yard quarterback (Ben Roethlisberger), two 1,000-yard receivers (Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward) and a 1,000-yard rusher (Rashard Mendenhall) for the first time in franchise history.

I'm sick of this stat getting tossed around. The Steelers didn't make the playoffs so this means sh!t.
I agree. Yards don't win games. It doesn't change the fact that since BA came into the picture, the offense has proven to be inefficient and unreliable.

As far as Big Ben is concerned, he was effective even before BA was our offensive coordinator. He's a top 5 quarterback in the league. He doesn't owe any of his success to Bruce Arians.

get used to that stat being tossed around because its a great stat.

if we missed the playoffs but Ike had 6 INT's and Gay had 5 INT's, our turn over ratio was +22 and Woodley and Harrison had 14 sacks each I bet people would use that stat all day long to prove how bad BA is...

it's a stat to show how beast we could be next year if Troy and Aaron are healthy and our D is back on track...

Oviedo
01-07-2010, 12:56 PM
MT lacks the Cojones to bounce BA.


Actually, isn't it the other way around? Didn't it take more balls to keep him, since most of the fanbase pretty much decided that he should be gone?

Exactly. The easiest thing in the world would have been to do what the know nothing fans and media were demandoing and that would be to fire Arians. Instead he has a come to Jesus meeting with Arians and we can only assume he set some very specific guidelines on expectations or his last year of his contract will really be the last.

Here's what we have seen:

Coach Z fired because the sacks his OL gave up got worse from last year to this year
Ligashevky got fired because his Special Teams got worse from last year to this year

If you read between the lines and try to infer Tomlin's management style is he will give you one strike but don't make it two strikes.

You fault Arians because you presume you know what the right play call was or wasn't but statistically the offense improved but performance in the redzone and short yardage at the same level. IMO this was Arians' strike one, if the same happens next year it is strike two and he is gone.

I would love to hear what is said in the meeting with LeBeau. If it is just

SteelTorch
01-07-2010, 01:01 PM
Arians, who has one year remaining on his contract, was retained after a season in which the Steelers had a 4,000-yard quarterback (Ben Roethlisberger), two 1,000-yard receivers (Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward) and a 1,000-yard rusher (Rashard Mendenhall) for the first time in franchise history.

I'm sick of this stat getting tossed around. The Steelers didn't make the playoffs so this means sh!t.
I agree. Yards don't win games. It doesn't change the fact that since BA came into the picture, the offense has proven to be inefficient and unreliable.

As far as Big Ben is concerned, he was effective even before BA was our offensive coordinator. He's a top 5 quarterback in the league. He doesn't owe any of his success to Bruce Arians.

get used to that stat being tossed around because its a great stat.

if we missed the playoffs but Ike had 6 INT's and Gay had 5 INT's, our turn over ratio was +22 and Woodley and Harrison had 14 sacks each I bet people would use that stat all day long to prove how bad BA is...

it's a stat to show how beast we could be next year if Troy and Aaron are healthy and our D is back on track...

No, it's not. It looks pretty, but in the long run, yards alone really don't mean jack in winning games.

You're rationalizing by bringing up something that's pure speculation AND irrelevant. Sorry bro, not buying it. How about sticking with the facts?

Did you know that our offense's 3rd down conversion percentage was 17th? Or that our yards per rush attempt was 17th as well? Or that we were ranked 18th in our scoring efficiency? Maybe you don't see that as a problem, but I do.

BradshawsHairdresser
01-07-2010, 01:26 PM
Fly on the wall report...Tomlin's meeting with Arians:

Tomlin: Brucie, I don't think this team can take any more of your head-scratching,
inept, play-calling. You couldn't game-plan a high school game. Your mind-bogglingly
stupid lack of adjustments cost this team dearly. Your inability to manufacture points in the red zone is inexcusable. What were you thinking, continuing to go with those 7-step drops and empty backfields when Ben is getting pummeled? Why would you go with 40 passes in the frigid wind in Cleveland? Why the bonehead calls on third and short? When Mendy's been running wild in the first half, why go away from him in the second? And then I hear you've been leaking stories to reporters that you're getting the pink slip. Give me one good reason why I should keep you on this staff.

Arians: Ben likes me. If you fire me, Ben will not be happy. If Ben isn't happy, guess who will get fired NEXT year.

Tomlin: Well....uh....I think we can live together for another go-around...

Slapstick
01-07-2010, 01:29 PM
CINCI game is all SWEED...

...because asking our STs not to allow a return TD is asking too much...

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 01:40 PM
Arians, who has one year remaining on his contract, was retained after a season in which the Steelers had a 4,000-yard quarterback (Ben Roethlisberger), two 1,000-yard receivers (Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward) and a 1,000-yard rusher (Rashard Mendenhall) for the first time in franchise history.

I'm sick of this stat getting tossed around. The Steelers didn't make the playoffs so this means sh!t.
I agree. Yards don't win games. It doesn't change the fact that since BA came into the picture, the offense has proven to be inefficient and unreliable.

As far as Big Ben is concerned, he was effective even before BA was our offensive coordinator. He's a top 5 quarterback in the league. He doesn't owe any of his success to Bruce Arians.

get used to that stat being tossed around because its a great stat.

if we missed the playoffs but Ike had 6 INT's and Gay had 5 INT's, our turn over ratio was +22 and Woodley and Harrison had 14 sacks each I bet people would use that stat all day long to prove how bad BA is...

it's a stat to show how beast we could be next year if Troy and Aaron are healthy and our D is back on track...

No, it's not. It looks pretty, but in the long run, yards alone really don't mean jack in winning games.

You're rationalizing by bringing up something that's pure speculation AND irrelevant. Sorry bro, not buying it. How about sticking with the facts?

Did you know that our offense's 3rd down conversion percentage was 17th? Or that our yards per rush attempt was 17th as well? Or that we were ranked 18th in our scoring efficiency? Maybe you don't see that as a problem, but I do.

look at the D's stats then get at me... I know the O deficiencies are part of the reason..
no one is denying it.. but when you look at the other side of the ball or watch how the games played out it's obvious why our season went down the way it did.

those stats are part of the reason BA stays...

I know it's hard to look at both sides of the ball but you have to. For every 3rd down on O, someone can bring a 3rd down on D.

The reality is we weren't trailing by 10 points in most games.. people keep talking about the O like it didn't put points on the board. Sure we had a few down games on offense and those are games you can clearly blame on the O. Cincy the second time around and the Cleveland game.

But it makes no sense to keep pointing at the offense this year.. they did there job.
Did the D? Without Troy they did not. Even when we won our last 3 games the D was walked on in the closing minutes.

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 01:41 PM
CINCI game is all SWEED...

...because asking our STs not to allow a return TD is asking too much...

ST coach has been fired...

SteelTorch
01-07-2010, 02:16 PM
look at the D's stats then get at me... I know the O deficiencies are part of the reason..
no one is denying it.. but when you look at the other side of the ball or watch how the games played out it's obvious why our season went down the way it did.

those stats are part of the reason BA stays...

I know it's hard to look at both sides of the ball but you have to. For every 3rd down on O, someone can bring a 3rd down on D.

The reality is we weren't trailing by 10 points in most games.. people keep talking about the O like it didn't put points on the board. Sure we had a few down games on offense and those are games you can clearly blame on the O. Cincy the second time around and the Cleveland game.

But it makes no sense to keep pointing at the offense this year.. they did there job.
Did the D? Without Troy they did not. Even when we won our last 3 games the D was walked on in the closing minutes.
Why do you keep bringing up the defense? Did I mention the defense? Is this thread about D1ck Lebeau or the defense? No. So stop bringing it up.

Sure the defense is to blame too for our losses - so are ST's. But none of that changes the fact that Bruce Arians' offense is still inefficient and unreliable. You can bring up yards all you want, but they don't mean anything. And that doesn't change the fact even though the D blew a lot of leads, the O blew a lot of opportunities - not converting on 3rd down, not being efficient in the red zone, calling the wrong plays in certain situations, etc. They were good, but they still underperformed no matter how you cut it, and have done so since 2007.

So far all you've done is bring up the defense's stats to make excuses for the offense. I know what you're doing - you're trying to deflect attention, and it's not working. Stick to the topic at hand.

Oviedo
01-07-2010, 02:28 PM
look at the D's stats then get at me... I know the O deficiencies are part of the reason..
no one is denying it.. but when you look at the other side of the ball or watch how the games played out it's obvious why our season went down the way it did.

those stats are part of the reason BA stays...

I know it's hard to look at both sides of the ball but you have to. For every 3rd down on O, someone can bring a 3rd down on D.

The reality is we weren't trailing by 10 points in most games.. people keep talking about the O like it didn't put points on the board. Sure we had a few down games on offense and those are games you can clearly blame on the O. Cincy the second time around and the Cleveland game.

But it makes no sense to keep pointing at the offense this year.. they did there job.
Did the D? Without Troy they did not. Even when we won our last 3 games the D was walked on in the closing minutes.
Why do you keep bringing up the defense? Did I mention the defense? Is this thread about D1ck Lebeau or the defense? No. So stop bringing it up.

Sure the defense is to blame too for our losses - so are ST's. But none of that changes the fact that Bruce Arians' offense is still inefficient and unreliable. You can bring up yards all you want, but they don't mean anything. And that doesn't change the fact even though the D blew a lot of leads, the O blew a lot of opportunities - not converting on 3rd down, not being efficient in the red zone, calling the wrong plays in certain situations, etc. They were good, but they still underperformed no matter how you cut it, and have done so since 2007.

So far all you've done is bring up the defense's stats to make excuses for the offense. I know what you're doing - you're trying to deflect attention, and it's not working. Stick to the topic at hand.

Even a Arians offense that a fan perceives as "inefficient and unreliable" handed our defense a fourth quarter lead that they so inefficiently and unreliably blew. That is why it is valid to temper animosity towards Arians with some facts about the defense unless Arians is expected to make sure the offense scores 40+ points per game to cover for the defense.

What consitutues a reliable and efficient offense? 30 points per game to "protect" the defense? 40 points per game to "protect" the defense? 45 minutes time of position every game to keep our own defense off the field so they can't blow it? Just curious?

SteelTorch
01-07-2010, 02:34 PM
look at the D's stats then get at me... I know the O deficiencies are part of the reason..
no one is denying it.. but when you look at the other side of the ball or watch how the games played out it's obvious why our season went down the way it did.

those stats are part of the reason BA stays...

I know it's hard to look at both sides of the ball but you have to. For every 3rd down on O, someone can bring a 3rd down on D.

The reality is we weren't trailing by 10 points in most games.. people keep talking about the O like it didn't put points on the board. Sure we had a few down games on offense and those are games you can clearly blame on the O. Cincy the second time around and the Cleveland game.

But it makes no sense to keep pointing at the offense this year.. they did there job.
Did the D? Without Troy they did not. Even when we won our last 3 games the D was walked on in the closing minutes.
Why do you keep bringing up the defense? Did I mention the defense? Is this thread about D1ck Lebeau or the defense? No. So stop bringing it up.

Sure the defense is to blame too for our losses - so are ST's. But none of that changes the fact that Bruce Arians' offense is still inefficient and unreliable. You can bring up yards all you want, but they don't mean anything. And that doesn't change the fact even though the D blew a lot of leads, the O blew a lot of opportunities - not converting on 3rd down, not being efficient in the red zone, calling the wrong plays in certain situations, etc. They were good, but they still underperformed no matter how you cut it, and have done so since 2007.

So far all you've done is bring up the defense's stats to make excuses for the offense. I know what you're doing - you're trying to deflect attention, and it's not working. Stick to the topic at hand.

Even a Arians offense that a fan perceives as "inefficient and unreliable" handed our defense a fourth quarter lead that they so inefficiently and unreliably blew. That is why it is valid to temper animosity towards Arians with some facts about the defense unless Arians is expected to make sure the offense scores 40+ points per game to cover for the defense.

What consitutues a reliable and efficient offense? 30 points per game to "protect" the defense? 40 points per game to "protect" the defense? 45 minutes time of position every game to keep our own defense off the field so they can't blow it? Just curious?

I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here. Neither is it about whether the offense puts up 30 or 40 points a game. Again...the issue is the offense making the most of their opportunities and performing to their level. A reliable offense is one that can do that. If you look at how bad we were at situational football - red zone offense, 3rd down, playcalling, etc - how can you be happy with that? How can you call that good, or reliable?

Again, I know the D blew leads. But if the offense is run better, then they score that extra touchdown or field goal to put us further ahead, then we win, and suddenly the lapses on defense don't hurt us as much. Don't assume that by saying this, I'm freeing the defense from blame. I'm not. But the lapses on D don't change the fact that the offense also made their share of mistakes, and have done so since Arians came into the picture.

Oviedo
01-07-2010, 03:20 PM
look at the D's stats then get at me... I know the O deficiencies are part of the reason..
no one is denying it.. but when you look at the other side of the ball or watch how the games played out it's obvious why our season went down the way it did.

those stats are part of the reason BA stays...

I know it's hard to look at both sides of the ball but you have to. For every 3rd down on O, someone can bring a 3rd down on D.

The reality is we weren't trailing by 10 points in most games.. people keep talking about the O like it didn't put points on the board. Sure we had a few down games on offense and those are games you can clearly blame on the O. Cincy the second time around and the Cleveland game.

But it makes no sense to keep pointing at the offense this year.. they did there job.
Did the D? Without Troy they did not. Even when we won our last 3 games the D was walked on in the closing minutes.
Why do you keep bringing up the defense? Did I mention the defense? Is this thread about D1ck Lebeau or the defense? No. So stop bringing it up.

Sure the defense is to blame too for our losses - so are ST's. But none of that changes the fact that Bruce Arians' offense is still inefficient and unreliable. You can bring up yards all you want, but they don't mean anything. And that doesn't change the fact even though the D blew a lot of leads, the O blew a lot of opportunities - not converting on 3rd down, not being efficient in the red zone, calling the wrong plays in certain situations, etc. They were good, but they still underperformed no matter how you cut it, and have done so since 2007.

So far all you've done is bring up the defense's stats to make excuses for the offense. I know what you're doing - you're trying to deflect attention, and it's not working. Stick to the topic at hand.

Even a Arians offense that a fan perceives as "inefficient and unreliable" handed our defense a fourth quarter lead that they so inefficiently and unreliably blew. That is why it is valid to temper animosity towards Arians with some facts about the defense unless Arians is expected to make sure the offense scores 40+ points per game to cover for the defense.

What consitutues a reliable and efficient offense? 30 points per game to "protect" the defense? 40 points per game to "protect" the defense? 45 minutes time of position every game to keep our own defense off the field so they can't blow it? Just curious?

I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here. Neither is it about whether the offense puts up 30 or 40 points a game. Again...the issue is the offense making the most of their opportunities and performing to their level. A reliable offense is one that can do that. If you look at how bad we were at situational football - red zone offense, 3rd down, playcalling, etc - how can you be happy with that? How can you call that good, or reliable?

Again, I know the D blew leads. But if the offense is run better, then they score that extra touchdown or field goal to put us further ahead, then we win, and suddenly the lapses on defense don't hurt us as much. Don't assume that by saying this, I'm freeing the defense from blame. I'm not. But the lapses on D don't change the fact that the offense also made their share of mistakes, and have done so since Arians came into the picture.

I beg to differ. The only metric that matters is wins and losses and the defense was primarily responsible for the majority of the losses.

You can't say that having a 4000 yard passer, a 1000 yard rusher and two 1000 yard receivers are statistics that don't matter and then try to use other statistics to criticize the same offense that generated those statistics. Either statsistics, all of them, matter or they don't.

Like I said "wins" matter and the defense cost us 5 of them. The perceived unreliable and efficient offense put us in a position to win in the 4th quarter of 5 games in spite of their inefficiency and unreliablity but the defense still blew those games.

No problem criticizing Arians that he can do better but even though he fell short of the mark he and his offense still put us in the ahead late in games and it was LeBeau and the defense that pushed this team over the edge and out of the play offs. However, it is so much easier to become blinded by irrational dislike like for one coordinator that we ignore the deficiencies of the other who really torpedoed our season.

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 03:30 PM
I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here. Neither is it about whether the offense puts up 30 or 40 points a game. Again...the issue is the offense making the most of their opportunities and performing to their level. A reliable offense is one that can do that. If you look at how bad we were at situational football - red zone offense, 3rd down, playcalling, etc - how can you be happy with that? How can you call that good, or reliable?

Again, I know the D blew leads. But if the offense is run better, then they score that extra touchdown or field goal to put us further ahead, then we win, and suddenly the lapses on defense don't hurt us as much. Don't assume that by saying this, I'm freeing the defense from blame. I'm not. But the lapses on D don't change the fact that the offense also made their share of mistakes, and have done so since Arians came into the picture.
:wft dude.... dude.. DUDE!!!!


You lost me at the first sentence..

you are trying to change history by knowing the opponents final score then saying the O screwed us by not scoring one more time...

why not read you first sentence again.. then sit and think about it...

RuthlessBurgher
01-07-2010, 04:03 PM
I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here. Neither is it about whether the offense puts up 30 or 40 points a game. Again...the issue is the offense making the most of their opportunities and performing to their level. A reliable offense is one that can do that. If you look at how bad we were at situational football - red zone offense, 3rd down, playcalling, etc - how can you be happy with that? How can you call that good, or reliable?

Again, I know the D blew leads. But if the offense is run better, then they score that extra touchdown or field goal to put us further ahead, then we win, and suddenly the lapses on defense don't hurt us as much. Don't assume that by saying this, I'm freeing the defense from blame. I'm not. But the lapses on D don't change the fact that the offense also made their share of mistakes, and have done so since Arians came into the picture.
:wft dude.... dude.. DUDE!!!!


You lost me at the first sentence..

you are trying to change history by knowing the opponents final score then saying the O screwed us by not scoring one more time...

why not read you first sentence again.. then sit and think about it...

It would appear that the initial sentence "I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here" is saying that this particular thread is about Arians. He wants to be able to discuss Arians in an Arians thread without a "but what about the defensive deficiencies!" response every other post.

Sugar
01-07-2010, 04:07 PM
I guess I just look at it this way: There are three phases to the game. The coach of the most underperforming phase, ST, got canned. The coach of the next underperformer, D, was given slack for track record and personnel reasons.

Sure, there were issues here and there on the O, but in general they performed well. The most underperforming area of the O was probably the line. The number of sacks was unacceptable so the coach of that area was let go as well. With that in mind, what executive would get rid of the leader of the group that actually had reasonably good performance?

cruzer8
01-07-2010, 04:08 PM
Hopefully they'll have another change of heart.

Oviedo
01-07-2010, 04:26 PM
I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here. Neither is it about whether the offense puts up 30 or 40 points a game. Again...the issue is the offense making the most of their opportunities and performing to their level. A reliable offense is one that can do that. If you look at how bad we were at situational football - red zone offense, 3rd down, playcalling, etc - how can you be happy with that? How can you call that good, or reliable?

Again, I know the D blew leads. But if the offense is run better, then they score that extra touchdown or field goal to put us further ahead, then we win, and suddenly the lapses on defense don't hurt us as much. Don't assume that by saying this, I'm freeing the defense from blame. I'm not. But the lapses on D don't change the fact that the offense also made their share of mistakes, and have done so since Arians came into the picture.
:wft dude.... dude.. DUDE!!!!


You lost me at the first sentence..

you are trying to change history by knowing the opponents final score then saying the O screwed us by not scoring one more time...

why not read you first sentence again.. then sit and think about it...

It would appear that the initial sentence "I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here" is saying that this particular thread is about Arians. He wants to be able to discuss Arians in an Arians thread without a "but what about the defensive deficiencies!" response every other post.


The problem with that is there becomes a sliding scale where Arians will never meet the "standard" regardless of what that is determined to be to allow a free fire zone of criticism. Last year, we read threads about how he did not do enough with the talent he had. Then this year our QB has a record setting season for a Steelers QB, we have a 1000 yard ruaher and two 1000 yard receivers for the first time ever and then we hear that those statistics don't mean anything and there are other statistics that mean more this season.

Totally ignored however is that in 80% of the games the offense scored enough points to win and had the team ahead in the last quarter of five game but because the defense failed the standard changes and the offense didn't do enough.

Bottomline is that Arians is the OC next year. That won't change because fans "feel horrible." People take this too serious and worse yet personally if they don't feel validated by having someone pay attention to their opinions. It is millionaires playing a game.

SteelTorch
01-07-2010, 05:46 PM
I beg to differ. The only metric that matters is wins and losses and the defense was primarily responsible for the majority of the losses.

You can't say that having a 4000 yard passer, a 1000 yard rusher and two 1000 yard receivers are statistics that don't matter and then try to use other statistics to criticize the same offense that generated those statistics. Either statsistics, all of them, matter or they don't.

Like I said "wins" matter and the defense cost us 5 of them. The perceived unreliable and efficient offense put us in a position to win in the 4th quarter of 5 games in spite of their inefficiency and unreliablity but the defense still blew those games.

No problem criticizing Arians that he can do better but even though he fell short of the mark he and his offense still put us in the ahead late in games and it was LeBeau and the defense that pushed this team over the edge and out of the play offs. However, it is so much easier to become blinded by irrational dislike like for one coordinator that we ignore the deficiencies of the other who really torpedoed our season.
Actually, yes I can. Some stats matter more than others. Fact. If you don't believe me, read this: http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=889 And don't just glance at it, READ it. If you still can't see my point, I can't help you.

And for the last time, WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE DEFENSE. For the last time, answer me this: do you believe that being ranked 18th in efficiency, 17th in 3rd down conversions, 26th in sack percentage, and 17th in rushing YPA is acceptable? Yes, or no?

SteelTorch
01-07-2010, 05:52 PM
I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here. Neither is it about whether the offense puts up 30 or 40 points a game. Again...the issue is the offense making the most of their opportunities and performing to their level. A reliable offense is one that can do that. If you look at how bad we were at situational football - red zone offense, 3rd down, playcalling, etc - how can you be happy with that? How can you call that good, or reliable?

Again, I know the D blew leads. But if the offense is run better, then they score that extra touchdown or field goal to put us further ahead, then we win, and suddenly the lapses on defense don't hurt us as much. Don't assume that by saying this, I'm freeing the defense from blame. I'm not. But the lapses on D don't change the fact that the offense also made their share of mistakes, and have done so since Arians came into the picture.
:wft dude.... dude.. DUDE!!!!


You lost me at the first sentence..

you are trying to change history by knowing the opponents final score then saying the O screwed us by not scoring one more time...

why not read you first sentence again.. then sit and think about it...

It would appear that the initial sentence "I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here" is saying that this particular thread is about Arians. He wants to be able to discuss Arians in an Arians thread without a "but what about the defensive deficiencies!" response every other post.
Yes, thank you. :wink:

@feltdizz: I honestly don't know how much clearer than I can be. Re-read my post without trying to play dumb or dodge the argument.

We aren't trying to change history. I'm pointing out that the offense didn't perform as well as it should have. We were ranked 18th in efficiency, 17th in third down conversions, 17th in yards per rush attempt, and 26th in sack percentage. Our '08 numbers weren't any better. You mean to tell me those rankings are acceptable???? Are they? Yes or no? I can't be any clearer than that.

:HeadBanger

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 06:14 PM
I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here. Neither is it about whether the offense puts up 30 or 40 points a game. Again...the issue is the offense making the most of their opportunities and performing to their level. A reliable offense is one that can do that. If you look at how bad we were at situational football - red zone offense, 3rd down, playcalling, etc - how can you be happy with that? How can you call that good, or reliable?

Again, I know the D blew leads. But if the offense is run better, then they score that extra touchdown or field goal to put us further ahead, then we win, and suddenly the lapses on defense don't hurt us as much. Don't assume that by saying this, I'm freeing the defense from blame. I'm not. But the lapses on D don't change the fact that the offense also made their share of mistakes, and have done so since Arians came into the picture.
:wft dude.... dude.. DUDE!!!!


You lost me at the first sentence..

you are trying to change history by knowing the opponents final score then saying the O screwed us by not scoring one more time...

why not read you first sentence again.. then sit and think about it...

It would appear that the initial sentence "I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here" is saying that this particular thread is about Arians. He wants to be able to discuss Arians in an Arians thread without a "but what about the defensive deficiencies!" response every other post.

Fair enough... It is an Arians thread.

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 06:21 PM
I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here. Neither is it about whether the offense puts up 30 or 40 points a game. Again...the issue is the offense making the most of their opportunities and performing to their level. A reliable offense is one that can do that. If you look at how bad we were at situational football - red zone offense, 3rd down, playcalling, etc - how can you be happy with that? How can you call that good, or reliable?

Again, I know the D blew leads. But if the offense is run better, then they score that extra touchdown or field goal to put us further ahead, then we win, and suddenly the lapses on defense don't hurt us as much. Don't assume that by saying this, I'm freeing the defense from blame. I'm not. But the lapses on D don't change the fact that the offense also made their share of mistakes, and have done so since Arians came into the picture.
:wft dude.... dude.. DUDE!!!!


You lost me at the first sentence..

you are trying to change history by knowing the opponents final score then saying the O screwed us by not scoring one more time...

why not read you first sentence again.. then sit and think about it...

It would appear that the initial sentence "I know the D blew a lot of leads, but that's not the issue here" is saying that this particular thread is about Arians. He wants to be able to discuss Arians in an Arians thread without a "but what about the defensive deficiencies!" response every other post.
Yes, thank you. :wink:

@feltdizz: I honestly don't know how much clearer than I can be. Re-read my post without trying to play dumb or dodge the argument.

We aren't trying to change history. I'm pointing out that the offense didn't perform as well as it should have. We were ranked 18th in efficiency, 17th in third down conversions, 17th in yards per rush attempt, and 26th in sack percentage. Our '08 numbers weren't any better. You mean to tell me those rankings are acceptable???? Are they? Yes or no? I can't be any clearer than that.

:HeadBanger

OK... I'll keep it Arians.. my bad on the Dtour..

They are not acceptable rankings.. however I think this is why the OL coach was fired..
How many holding penalties or false starts did we have the past 2 seasons on the OL?
We can run more.. we should run more..
Sacks are always going to be high.. Ben had 46 with Hartings and Faneca..

we are still up by 7 to 10 points in most games.. I think these things can be corrected but some will stick around because of our brand of football.

SteelTorch
01-07-2010, 06:58 PM
OK... I'll keep it Arians.. my bad on the Dtour..

They are not acceptable rankings.. however I think this is why the OL coach was fired..
How many holding penalties or false starts did we have the past 2 seasons on the OL?
We can run more.. we should run more..
Sacks are always going to be high.. Ben had 46 with Hartings and Faneca..

we are still up by 7 to 10 points in most games.. I think these things can be corrected but some will stick around because of our brand of football.
Thanks. :roll:


And THANK YOU for admitting those aren't good rankings. They were similar in 08, too. When you factor in the number of head-scratching plays that have been called and flopped, it doesn't create a good track record for BA. He has been the one consistent thing since '07.

As far as running the ball, yes we can and should, blah blah blah. But the real problem on offense here is the fact that they are just not making good plays or executing when they need too. The only reason they didn't do worse this season is thanks to the great playmaking ability of our guys on offense, with the possible exception of the OL. Big Ben and our WR's are the main reason BA is not out of a job.

feltdizz
01-07-2010, 07:16 PM
OK... I'll keep it Arians.. my bad on the Dtour..

They are not acceptable rankings.. however I think this is why the OL coach was fired..
How many holding penalties or false starts did we have the past 2 seasons on the OL?
We can run more.. we should run more..
Sacks are always going to be high.. Ben had 46 with Hartings and Faneca..

we are still up by 7 to 10 points in most games.. I think these things can be corrected but some will stick around because of our brand of football.
Thanks. :roll:


And THANK YOU for admitting those aren't good rankings. They were similar in 08, too. When you factor in the number of head-scratching plays that have been called and flopped, it doesn't create a good track record for BA. He has been the one consistent thing since '07.

As far as running the ball, yes we can and should, blah blah blah. But the real problem on offense here is the fact that they are just not making good plays or executing when they need too. The only reason they didn't do worse this season is thanks to the great playmaking ability of our guys on offense, with the possible exception of the OL. Big Ben and our WR's are the main reason BA is not out of a job.

your welcome :roll:

we did much better this season then last on the offensive side of the ball. Last year we were inept. This year we were pretty good at it. The problem is Ben.. he is not a dink and dunk QB, nor is he methodical. He takes sacks and throws deep.. and this year he really improved underneath. Last year he would throw underneath much unless if he was about to get sacked.

Speaking of sacks... Ben has been sacked about 150 times the last 3 years.. you can run on 3rd and 3.. you cannot run on 3rd and 14.. I think Ben takes so many sacks because it puts us in an automatic passing down.

stlrz d
01-08-2010, 12:34 AM
OK... I'll keep it Arians.. my bad on the Dtour..

They are not acceptable rankings.. however I think this is why the OL coach was fired..
How many holding penalties or false starts did we have the past 2 seasons on the OL?
We can run more.. we should run more..
Sacks are always going to be high.. Ben had 46 with Hartings and Faneca..

we are still up by 7 to 10 points in most games.. I think these things can be corrected but some will stick around because of our brand of football.
Thanks. :roll:


And THANK YOU for admitting those aren't good rankings. They were similar in 08, too. When you factor in the number of head-scratching plays that have been called and flopped, it doesn't create a good track record for BA. He has been the one consistent thing since '07.

As far as running the ball, yes we can and should, blah blah blah. But the real problem on offense here is the fact that they are just not making good plays or executing when they need too. The only reason they didn't do worse this season is thanks to the great playmaking ability of our guys on offense, with the possible exception of the OL. Big Ben and our WR's are the main reason BA is not out of a job.

your welcome :roll:

we did much better this season then last on the offensive side of the ball. Last year we were inept. This year we were pretty good at it. The problem is Ben.. he is not a dink and dunk QB, nor is he methodical. He takes sacks and throws deep.. and this year he really improved underneath. Last year he would throw underneath much unless if he was about to get sacked.

Speaking of sacks... Ben has been sacked about 150 times the last 3 years.. you can run on 3rd and 3.. you cannot run on 3rd and 14.. I think Ben takes so many sacks because it puts us in an automatic passing down.

QFS

(quoted for stupidity)

feltdizz
01-08-2010, 10:33 AM
OK... I'll keep it Arians.. my bad on the Dtour..

They are not acceptable rankings.. however I think this is why the OL coach was fired..
How many holding penalties or false starts did we have the past 2 seasons on the OL?
We can run more.. we should run more..
Sacks are always going to be high.. Ben had 46 with Hartings and Faneca..

we are still up by 7 to 10 points in most games.. I think these things can be corrected but some will stick around because of our brand of football.
Thanks. :roll:


And THANK YOU for admitting those aren't good rankings. They were similar in 08, too. When you factor in the number of head-scratching plays that have been called and flopped, it doesn't create a good track record for BA. He has been the one consistent thing since '07.

As far as running the ball, yes we can and should, blah blah blah. But the real problem on offense here is the fact that they are just not making good plays or executing when they need too. The only reason they didn't do worse this season is thanks to the great playmaking ability of our guys on offense, with the possible exception of the OL. Big Ben and our WR's are the main reason BA is not out of a job.

your welcome :roll:

we did much better this season then last on the offensive side of the ball. Last year we were inept. This year we were pretty good at it. The problem is Ben.. he is not a dink and dunk QB, nor is he methodical. He takes sacks and throws deep.. and this year he really improved underneath. Last year he would throw underneath much unless if he was about to get sacked.

Speaking of sacks... Ben has been sacked about 150 times the last 3 years.. you can run on 3rd and 3.. you cannot run on 3rd and 14.. I think Ben takes so many sacks because it puts us in an automatic passing down.

QFS

(quoted for stupidity)

The guy who is counting days like a sesame street puppet is calling me names...

pfelix73
01-08-2010, 11:29 AM
This team still needs to have a 'real' FB on the roster. One that can help in the running game especially late in a game when it's time to run out the clock. A single back 2 TE set is just not the answer and is no way a power formation. It's fine to use in the offense, just not all the time.

I hope that Tomlin has the balls to tell Arians that we're going to put a FB on the roster and that "you are going to use him in the offense."

:tt1

Steeler Mafia
01-08-2010, 12:06 PM
This puts the 2010 season entirely on Tomlin. It was his decision to keep Arians and it should be his head in the noose when we see Arians offense doing the same things as previous seasons. I mean does anyone really expect things to change next year, new offensive line sheme or not?

As for Ben, his input should be minimal. Until he becomes the head coach, he should keep his pie hole shut and just do his job. I agree with Wexell, it is way too much power for one player, and will only fester into locker room problems down the road. His man love for Arians should of had no bearing on wheather Arians kept his job or not. As soon as you allow a high dollar player free reign in the team decisions and politics, you are just creating a Prima Donna. Ben was just afraid that if a new OC was broght in, he would actually have to do some real work and film study.

This will come back and bite us in the a$$, I promise you. This decision ranks right up there with keeping Kordell a starting QB for us. Pathetic.

feltdizz
01-08-2010, 12:41 PM
This puts the 2010 season entirely on Tomlin. It was his decision to keep Arians and it should be his head in the noose when we see Arians offense doing the same things as previous seasons. I mean does anyone really expect things to change next year, new offensive line sheme or not?

As for Ben, his input should be minimal. Until he becomes the head coach, he should keep his pie hole shut and just do his job. I agree with Wexell, it is way too much power for one player, and will only fester into locker room problems down the road. His man love for Arians should of had no bearing on wheather Arians kept his job or not. As soon as you allow a high dollar player free reign in the team decisions and politics, you are just creating a Prima Donna. Ben was just afraid that if a new OC was broght in, he would actually have to do some real work and film study.

This will come back and bite us in the a$$, I promise you. This decision ranks right up there with keeping Kordell a starting QB for us. Pathetic.

I guess we want the game manager back :roll:

then half the board will claim disrespect for Ben based on his record and stats and SB rings...

and every season is on Tomlin.. if he fired BA and the new OC and Ben didn't click you or others would blame Tomlin for not picking one of the great OC's on this board

Steeler Mafia
01-08-2010, 12:44 PM
This puts the 2010 season entirely on Tomlin. It was his decision to keep Arians and it should be his head in the noose when we see Arians offense doing the same things as previous seasons. I mean does anyone really expect things to change next year, new offensive line sheme or not?

As for Ben, his input should be minimal. Until he becomes the head coach, he should keep his pie hole shut and just do his job. I agree with Wexell, it is way too much power for one player, and will only fester into locker room problems down the road. His man love for Arians should of had no bearing on wheather Arians kept his job or not. As soon as you allow a high dollar player free reign in the team decisions and politics, you are just creating a Prima Donna. Ben was just afraid that if a new OC was broght in, he would actually have to do some real work and film study.

This will come back and bite us in the a$$, I promise you. This decision ranks right up there with keeping Kordell a starting QB for us. Pathetic.

I guess we want the game manager back :roll:

then half the board will claim disrespect for Ben based on his record and stats and SB rings...

How did I know you would be the first to respond? :lol:

To clarify, at no point did I mention Ben's play on the field. His opinion though, of who the Steelers should retain on the coaching staff, should have no weight on who stays or who goes. I mean, whose team is this really, Mike's or Ben's? that is one of the biggest problems I see on this team. Too many chiefs and not enough indians.

feltdizz
01-08-2010, 01:00 PM
[quote="Steeler Mafia":3b77xnkd]This puts the 2010 season entirely on Tomlin. It was his decision to keep Arians and it should be his head in the noose when we see Arians offense doing the same things as previous seasons. I mean does anyone really expect things to change next year, new offensive line sheme or not?

As for Ben, his input should be minimal. Until he becomes the head coach, he should keep his pie hole shut and just do his job. I agree with Wexell, it is way too much power for one player, and will only fester into locker room problems down the road. His man love for Arians should of had no bearing on wheather Arians kept his job or not. As soon as you allow a high dollar player free reign in the team decisions and politics, you are just creating a Prima Donna. Ben was just afraid that if a new OC was broght in, he would actually have to do some real work and film study.

This will come back and bite us in the a$$, I promise you. This decision ranks right up there with keeping Kordell a starting QB for us. Pathetic.

I guess we want the game manager back :roll:

then half the board will claim disrespect for Ben based on his record and stats and SB rings...

How did I know you would be the first to respond? :lol:

To clarify, at no point did I mention Ben's play on the field. His opinion though, of who the Steelers should retain on the coaching staff, should have no weight on who stays or who goes. I mean, whose team is this really, Mike's or Ben's? that is one of the biggest problems I see on this team. Too many chiefs and not enough indians.[/quote:3b77xnkd]

:D It's Ben's team.. we all know that.

decleater
01-08-2010, 02:28 PM
Arians, who has one year remaining on his contract, was retained after a season in which the Steelers had a 4,000-yard quarterback (Ben Roethlisberger), two 1,000-yard receivers (Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward) and a 1,000-yard rusher (Rashard Mendenhall) for the first time in franchise history.

I'm sick of this stat getting tossed around. The Steelers didn't make the playoffs so this means sh!t.


You are correct, but that doesn't mean it was his fault. I think it is pretty clear that the injuries on defense and poor special teams coverage were the two main reasons the Steelers didn't make the playoffs.
Not to mention an OL that couldn't open up holes under the tutelage of Larry Z.

RuthlessBurgher
01-08-2010, 03:00 PM
This team still needs to have a 'real' FB on the roster. One that can help in the running game especially late in a game when it's time to run out the clock. A single back 2 TE set is just not the answer and is no way a power formation. It's fine to use in the offense, just not all the time.

I hope that Tomlin has the balls to tell Arians that we're going to put a FB on the roster and that "you are going to use him in the offense."

:tt1

If the team drafts Mount Cody, people can't complain about using a mid-first-round-pick in a two-down d-lineman, because we could also use him on offense as the true fullback in short yardage situations.

:stirpot