Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

  1. #1
    Legend hawaiiansteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hawaii 5-0
    Posts
    16,078

    Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?



    Farrior done wrong?

    September 11th, 2011


    BALTIMORE — Mike Tomlin is widely considered one of the better player’s coaches in the NFL.

    Tomlin has a reputation of relating to his players in a fashion to get them to play hard because of his honesty, straight-forwardness and his no-nonsense approach — all attributes that players love.

    Saying that, Tomlin is doing wrong with the most influential player on the Steelers’ defense.

    Tomlin made the decision to remove veteran linebacker James Farrior for the final two series of the first half of Sunday’s 35-7 loss to the Ravens because what he said afterwards was because “we had made a commitment to play Larry Foote some.”

    Huh?

    At any other position, I’d buy that as a logical reason. At cornerback, I’d buy that reason.

    But when you are talking about the unquestioned leader of your defense; the eight-time defensive captain; and the all-around most-respected person on the Steelers’ roster, it’s hogwash.

    Farrior deserves better.

    “I’m healthy and everything is fine,” disappointed Farrior said afterward.

    But obviously everything isn’t fine … or should I say won’t be fine.

    For Tomlin to make a drastic decision to remove Farrior for series at a time, there’s a problem, and that problem may get worse before it gets better.

    Foote has no way surpassed Farrior in quality of play on the field. Off the field, Farrior is invaluable.

    Just think, a guy like Farrior is replaced because of his decline while William Gay and Bryant McFadden remain on the field.

    I’d be shaking my head if I was Farrior.

    The Steelers were trailing just 14-7 at the time of Farrior’s removal in the second quarter, and the Ravens quickly went on an 11-play drive that resulted in a touchdown. Foote missed a tackle and covered the wrong guy on a play, but that’s beside the point.

    Well, maybe that is the point. Foote is a backup for a reason.

    Farrior doesn’t deserve to be treated like he did Sunday because even if the man is in his 15th year in the league, he still hasn’t lost it.

    Foote is not head-and-shoulders better than Farrior to warrant the change, which makes it all the more head-scratching.

    Apparently, Tomlin doesn’t agree with my assessment.

    “Larry had a good preseason,” Tomlin said. “We respect both of them. We know that both men are capable of standing in front of our defense and make calls, and we would like to play both men.”

    But at what cost?

    There is an old adage that if you have two quarterbacks then you really don’t have any.

    Same can be applied here.

    You can’t just switch out an important position as the inside linebacker in a defense like the Steelers and think there won’t be problems internally and externally.

    “We made a commitment early on that both me were going to play, and we stood up to it,” Tomlin said.

    If it’s just for one game then that’s fine.

    Farrior doesn’t match up very well with speedy running backs like Ray Rice anyway so the reason would be logical against the Ravens.

    Putting Foote in on obvious passing downs because Farrior lost a step is one thing but taking him out series at a time is another — one that is puzzling at best.

    Remember, Farrior was one of the best players on the defense a year ago. He lost it that quick?

    It’s going to be interesting how this plays out, but next week against Seattle should tell plenty.

    http://blog.triblive.com/steel-mill/201 ... n0.twitter

  2. #2
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,701

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    Quote Originally Posted by hawaiiansteel


    Farrior done wrong?

    September 11th, 2011


    BALTIMORE — Mike Tomlin is widely considered one of the better player’s coaches in the NFL.

    Tomlin has a reputation of relating to his players in a fashion to get them to play hard because of his honesty, straight-forwardness and his no-nonsense approach — all attributes that players love.

    Saying that, Tomlin is doing wrong with the most influential player on the Steelers’ defense.

    Tomlin made the decision to remove veteran linebacker James Farrior for the final two series of the first half of Sunday’s 35-7 loss to the Ravens because what he said afterwards was because “we had made a commitment to play Larry Foote some.”

    Huh?

    At any other position, I’d buy that as a logical reason. At cornerback, I’d buy that reason.

    But when you are talking about the unquestioned leader of your defense; the eight-time defensive captain; and the all-around most-respected person on the Steelers’ roster, it’s hogwash.

    Farrior deserves better.

    “I’m healthy and everything is fine,” disappointed Farrior said afterward.

    But obviously everything isn’t fine … or should I say won’t be fine.

    For Tomlin to make a drastic decision to remove Farrior for series at a time, there’s a problem, and that problem may get worse before it gets better.

    Foote has no way surpassed Farrior in quality of play on the field. Off the field, Farrior is invaluable.

    Just think, a guy like Farrior is replaced because of his decline while William Gay and Bryant McFadden remain on the field.

    I’d be shaking my head if I was Farrior.

    The Steelers were trailing just 14-7 at the time of Farrior’s removal in the second quarter, and the Ravens quickly went on an 11-play drive that resulted in a touchdown. Foote missed a tackle and covered the wrong guy on a play, but that’s beside the point.

    Well, maybe that is the point. Foote is a backup for a reason.

    Farrior doesn’t deserve to be treated like he did Sunday because even if the man is in his 15th year in the league, he still hasn’t lost it.Foote is not head-and-shoulders better than Farrior to warrant the change, which makes it all the more head-scratching.

    Apparently, Tomlin doesn’t agree with my assessment.

    “Larry had a good preseason,” Tomlin said. “We respect both of them. We know that both men are capable of standing in front of our defense and make calls, and we would like to play both men.”

    But at what cost?

    There is an old adage that if you have two quarterbacks then you really don’t have any.

    Same can be applied here.

    You can’t just switch out an important position as the inside linebacker in a defense like the Steelers and think there won’t be problems internally and externally.

    “We made a commitment early on that both me were going to play, and we stood up to it,” Tomlin said.

    If it’s just for one game then that’s fine.

    Farrior doesn’t match up very well with speedy running backs like Ray Rice anyway so the reason would be logical against the Ravens.

    Putting Foote in on obvious passing downs because Farrior lost a step is one thing but taking him out series at a time is another — one that is puzzling at best.

    Remember, Farrior was one of the best players on the defense a year ago. He lost it that quick?

    It’s going to be interesting how this plays out, but next week against Seattle should tell plenty.

    http://blog.triblive.com/steel-mill/201 ... n0.twitter
    As the great Clint Eastwood once said, "Deserves got nothing to do with it."

    The writing has been on the wall for a couple years now. Farrior is/was slipping. If he chose to ignore that, then I'm sorry--that's his problem. (The writing on the wall was apparent that one game against Cincinnati a couple years back, when Brian Leonard was able to run through his tackles with alarming ease.) Farrior remained a starter, and frankly remains a starter and good player because of his savvy.

    That being said, you can't ignore the slippage. At a point, you have to try to compensate for that slippage by doing something. The article is citing Foote as some garbage player too BTW, which I wouldn't agree with. He's surely slipped too, to be sure. But he still brings quality to the position when he is out there.

    Bottom line, when I read he "deserves" this, that... he doesn't deserve to be on the field, if he's not the best option at the time. I guess Tomlin didn't think he was the best option at the time.
    Guys and gals,
    If you play fantasy football, go to the FF forum here and read my thread. I'd appreciate some feedback on it.

  3. #3
    Legend papillon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Under your bed
    Posts
    7,341

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    It could be as much an issue that the defensive line played poorly and weren't keeping any blockers off the LBS as it was the LBs poor play. The numbers for Woodley and Harrison look like typical numbers, but they weren't that good; Woodley and Farrior were basically invisible. It was a bad day for the Steeler line backing corps (or, is it corpse?).

    The defensive line was manhandled at the point of attack like I haven't seen in long, long time. Smitty and Hampton were pushed back with ease and Keisel was only marginally better. Heyward and Hood didn't fair much better either, the Ravens wanted this game more than the Steelers and it showed.

    Maybe a few more benchings are in order to get a point across to the vets, just sayin.

    Pappy


    1.15) Ryan Shazier - ILB/OLB
    2.46) Stephon Tuitt - DE
    3.97) Dri Archer - RB
    4.118 ) Martavis Bryant - WR
    5.157) Shaquille Richardson - CB
    6.173) Wesley Johnson - OT
    6.192) Jordan Zumwalt - ILB
    7.215) Daniel McCullers - DT
    7.230) Rob Blanchflower - TE

    "Before you can win a game, you have to not lose it." -- Chuck Noll

  4. #4
    Pro Bowler Steelhere10's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    man from Sudan
    Posts
    2,169

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    The problem is that you replace an ancient slow lb for an old slow lb.

  5. #5
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Cincitucky (Stinktown, U.S.A.)
    Posts
    4,039

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    Harrison had an okay game. But Timmons, Woodley, Farrior, and Foote played poorly.
    Even if Bill Belichick was getting an atomic wedgie, his face would look exactly the same.

  6. #6

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    This is Silly.. Sly should be Getting more Reps, he is suppose to be the future.. Why are We subbing A guy who is obviously playing his last year in Pitt with another guy who is Doing the same.

    I am a huge Tomlin supporter but this doesnt make any sense.

  7. #7
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, Australia
    Posts
    5,588

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    Quote Originally Posted by chiken
    This is Silly.. Sly should be Getting more Reps, he is suppose to be the future.. Why are We subbing A guy who is obviously playing his last year in Pitt with another guy who is Doing the same.

    I am a huge Tomlin supporter but this doesnt make any sense.
    Because Foote will get another go-around after Farrior's gone. Sly will need to prove he can make the Defense calls before he becomes a starter- IMO.
    Schiavone's Race Career:

    Starts- 9
    Wins- 1
    2nd- 4
    3rd- 0
    Other- 4

    Prizemoney- $28,050.00


  8. #8

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steelhere10
    The problem is that you replace an ancient slow lb for an old slow lb.
    $$$$$$$$$
    Got to start working the younger guys in.

  9. #9
    Legend RuthlessBurgher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Where the Rubber Meets the Road (in NEPA)
    Posts
    22,018

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    Is Farrior still wearing the helmet with the capability of communicating with the coaches? If he's removed for series at a time, doesn't that mess with your ability to call defensive plays like you normally do? You can't just swap helmets with someone else, so maybe it is time to give the helmet with the communication device to someone who is on the field more often, such as Timmons or Woodley.

  10. #10
    Legend hawaiiansteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hawaii 5-0
    Posts
    16,078

    Re: Was Farrior done wrong when he was benched?

    Farrior finds himself sidelined in favor of Foote

    By Scott Brown, PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
    Monday, September 12, 2011



    BALTIMORE -- Steelers defensive captain James Farrior spent time in unfamiliar territory Sunday: the sidelines.

    Larry Foote replaced Farrior at left inside linebacker for three series in the first half of the Steelers' 35-7 loss to the Ravens.

    Coach Mike Tomlin said that was by design -- not because of an injury to Farrior, who hasn't missed a game since 2005.

    "Larry had a good preseason," Tomlin said. "We would like to play both men, so we made a commitment early on that both men were going to play, and we stood up to that."

    The 36-year-old Farrior said, "I'm healthy. Everything's fine," when asked if sharing time with Foote had anything to do with an injury.

    • Outside linebacker James Harrison left yesterday's game in the fourth quarter with a right knee bruise, but Tomlin said it "doesn't appear to be serious." Harrison would only say he is "hoping" to play Sunday against the visiting Seattle Seahawks.

    • Cornerback Ike Taylor received an unsportsmanlike penalty near the end of the third quarter for head-butting Ravens right tackle Michael Oher. "If you watch on tape, the young man punched me in my leg," Taylor said. "In those situations, I've got to be the bigger man, but at the same time if he wants to pick on somebody, pick on one of my defensive linemen." Taylor could be fined, as could strong safety Troy Polamalu, who threw a punch during the altercation but did not get penalized.

    • Third-year receiver Mike Wallace proved to be one of the few bright spot for the Steelers, who lost their first season opener since 2002. Wallace tied a career-high with eight catches. He also had 107 yards receiving. Both were game highs. It also marked the fourth consecutive regular-season game that Wallace has gone over 100 yards receiving.

    • Receiver Jerricho Cotchery (hamstring) and outside linebacker Chris Carter (hamstring) didn't suit up yesterday. Joining them on the Steelers' inactives list were quarterback Dennis Dixon, cornerback Curtis Brown, running back Jonathan Dwyer, and offensive linemen Ramon Foster and Chris Scott. Four Steelers dressed but didn't play, including quarterback Charlie Batch, offensive tackle Marcus Gilbert, guard Trai Essex and defensive tackle Steve McLendon.

    http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsbu ... z1XklhXRzX

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •