Rooney is happy

[Chadman]

"I don't think I've ever seen Chadman so far off in his analysis as he is in this post."

Really? Chadman has been WAY more inacurate in the past! This is just a drop in an ever expanding ocean of inaccuracy!

"First wrong point ... Rooney NEVER said we needed to run the ball more. He said we need to run the ball more EFFECTIVELY. Did we do that? Not over the course of the season but if you look at games 7, 8, and 9 you will see we were on track."

You are right- it wasn't that the Steelers should run more, but more effectively. There was something about placing an emphasis on the running game in there too, somewhere. But to say the Steelers were 'on track' through games 7,8 & 9, while completely bypassing games 1-6, and then games 10-17 is like saying that the Steelers Defense were on track with improving turnovers this season, as game 17 proves...

Thing is- Chadman wasn't overly unhappy with the running game. What it wasn't, however, is an improvement on the running game implemented by the guy they fired... because his running game was no good.

"Again you missed the point. Rooney said we were on track through game 9. Through the first 9 games in 2011 Ben was sacked 26 times. Through the first 9 games in 2012 Ben was sacked 17 times and almost a third of those sacks came in the first game. I would say knocking your average down by 1 sack a game is a significant improvement."

Ok- Chadman will give you that. For 9 games, there was some improvement. For what it's worth, however, regardless of who the OC is, and his gameplan- if you invest in 2 1st round OL, and 2 2nd round OL- there's going to be improvement on that OL, at some point. Here's betting that over the course of the next 3-4 years we see Ben's sack numbers drop even more. Regardless of who calls the plays.

"So now you don't want the team to make coaching changes because it will cause them to lose "focus"? So you don't want the owner to try and improve an offense that is an inconsistent mess and would never win anything without its star QB. That doesn't make any sense. You want your offense to be solely dependent on one person so if that person has a bad day you are almost guaranteed a loss. It's a good thing the 49ers of the 80s didn't think that way. If Montana had a bad day then Craig, Rice, Taylor, or Brent Jones would take over."

Chadman thinks you missed the point a bit- making coaching changes is fine. Sacking Arians is fine. Hiring Haley is fine.

But let the HC make those decisions, not the owner. The owner hires the HC, the HC picks his staff. Pretty sure we all agree that Tomlin wasn't about to fire Arians- that was Rooney's call. When you take that control off the guy you pay to make that decision- how does that effect focus & morale?

"As far as the receivers contract I don't see a problem. They tried to sign Wallace and when he turned down their final offer they moved on to whom they considered their next highest priority ... Antonio Brown. I think Wallace was going to be a distraction whether they signed Brown or not. He, or his agent, think he is worth more than the Steelers do. Do you want them to just back up the Brinks truck to Wallace's house and pay him whatever he wants so he doesn't lose focus? I don't think that is a very smart plan."

It's entirely possible Chadman started to rant at this point. Still- signing a guy who was going to be a RFA to a $42m contract extension when the team is supposedly trying to resign a guy that they termed as a 'priority', and in doing so, drying up the available cap space for Wallace's contract... is likely to put someone's nose out of joint.

"I agree that Rooney didn't handle the Arians situation correctly. They should have just fired him instead of trying to be nice and say he retired. That's what happens when you try and be nice ... it comes back to bite you in the azz. Other than that I think you are just tilting at windmills."

Knew we'd agree on something.... even though Chadman disagrees with you that ROONEY should have fired Arians... that should have been TOMLIN's call.

[Crash]

Haley's problem with the run game is his constant rotating.

Injuries forced him not too in New York, Washington, and in Cincy.

But once they all got healthy again? He couldn't leave well enough alone.

Pick one. Stick with him.

[Chadman]

"No way can all the fault be laid at the feet of getting rid of BA. That is FAR too simplistic to be accurate."- agreed, it wasn't 'just' that, but the impact of the owner firing a guy that the HC didn't want to fire started a chain reaction.

"How about the spoiled brat, selfish, self centered, diva QB who chose to undermine the new OC at every turn? He isn't to blame at all, right?"- Of course that's a factor. Care to explain why people think Ben acted this way? What was the catalyst to Ben not being happy?


"How about an undisciplined coach who screwed up on game day with moron decisions costing us games?"- the same undisciplined HC that won games last season, and the seasons before? Steelers have overcome his 'undisciplined coaching' & 'moron decisions' in the past. Tomlin didn't cost this team any more wins than any other year.


"How about an aloof #1 WR who didn't even bother to give an effort on the field?"- the same aloof #1 WR that lead in yards & TD's? How about the highly motivated & awesome, and well paid #2 that didn't emulate the previous season's work, and lost the Dallas game all on his lonesome? Why was Wallace 'aloof' & 'not giving effort' this season? What was the reason for that?


"How about a DC who had CBs play off 10 yards when the opponent needed 8 yards for a 1st down?"- the same DC that has coached the same way, and won how many SB's now? The Steelers have 'overcome' LeBeau's failings in the past too, so what was different this year?


"How about a team, who, in general, chose to quibble and not get along, destroying team chemistry?"- why? Why did they quibble & not get along? Where does the problem stem from?

Who messed with the team chemistry?

[lloydroid]

"No way can all the fault be laid at the feet of getting rid of BA. That is FAR too simplistic to be accurate."- agreed, it wasn't 'just' that, but the impact of the owner firing a guy that the HC didn't want to fire started a chain reaction.

OK, I can buy that as a possibility.

"How about the spoiled brat, selfish, self centered, diva QB who chose to undermine the new OC at every turn? He isn't to blame at all, right?"- Of course that's a factor. Care to explain why people think Ben acted this way? What was the catalyst to Ben not being happy?

Yes, I will take a crack at it. Ben is fairly lazy and sloppy. He likes just wining it. It's his personality and he's been successful with this mode, so he finds no reason to change it. Under BA, he got his way mostly: playing back yard football, moving around and whipping it deep. And, with two SB wins, he could argue that the mode wasn't broke so why fix it? I'm not totally buying it but the point can be argued. However, success in the past doesn't ensure that no changes should be made. For instance, the Steelers first few Super Bowl wins were mostly built on a rushing game and D. In the later two, they threw deep much more. Once could argue since the heavy rush play calling produced two rings, that nothing should be changed but we all know the 2 later rings were won with far more passing down field. So, I believe Ben was ticked off that a mode that was winning had forced change brought on upon it with the firing of BA. But, he is the QB; he isn't the coach, the OC or the owner. Should he be so prickly or should he respect his role and do what he is told?

"How about an undisciplined coach who screwed up on game day with moron decisions costing us games?"- the same undisciplined HC that won games last season, and the seasons before? Steelers have overcome his 'undisciplined coaching' & 'moron decisions' in the past. Tomlin didn't cost this team any more wins than any other year.

A couple things here. 1.) The team had more players acting as iron clad leaders prior to this year. A HC can get away with not doing so much discipline with leaders on the roster - players like Farrior, Ward, Aaron Smith. Those are giant leadership roles to fill. All of a sudden, Tomlin lacked that leadership, so a huge hole opened up that was once covered by those guys. With players like that, the team was self-policed. I don't think Tomlin realized what a gaping hole losing those guys would produce. And, worse yet, players who filled in their spots are pretty much non-leaders; players like Wallace, who has shown to be an immature punk when it comes down to it. Imagine the difference between a leader like Ward vs. a player like Wallace? 2.) Tomlin, through success, might have taken it easier, feeling he was "already there." This is just human nature. When you first take on a new job (and a new position, one that you have never filled before) you are highly motivated to not fail. But once you are perceived as successful, you might mellow a bit and not quite have the same due diligence that you once had. Not everyone falls into this trap, but certainly it's not uncommon at all. I believe Tomlin showed an increase is sloppiness and lacking of discipline from this human nature trait.

"How about an aloof #1 WR who didn't even bother to give an effort on the field?"- the same aloof #1 WR that lead in yards & TD's? How about the highly motivated & awesome, and well paid #2 that didn't emulate the previous season's work, and lost the Dallas game all on his lonesome? Why was Wallace 'aloof' & 'not giving effort' this season? What was the reason for that?

How does point A negate point B? In other words, if Brown also reduced his production what does that have to do with Wallace being obvious in his lacking of effort? I don't care if he was still the leader in yards and TDs, as we all know, the team's over all performance was not satisfactory. In other words, if you are the best-looking turd in a lot, you are still a turd, nonetheless. I don't care if MW was the leading producer when he still dropped endless balls, showed no hustle, acted like a baby, etc. Think I am wrong? Well, I heard 10s of thousands Steeler fans agree with me at the Cinci game where they booed every time he touched the ball.

"How about a DC who had CBs play off 10 yards when the opponent needed 8 yards for a 1st down?"- the same DC that has coached the same way, and won how many SB's now? The Steelers have 'overcome' LeBeau's failings in the past too, so what was different this year?

Time change. If you don't, you will fail. What if I had the fastest car in 1930? Should I keep racing that same car since it won races in the 1930s or should I advance with the times? How is this any different?

"How about a team, who, in general, chose to quibble and not get along, destroying team chemistry?"- why? Why did they quibble & not get along? Where does the problem stem from?

Who messed with the team chemistry?

I chalk it up to loss of leadership players combined with a coach who didn't know how to handle it. Do you know why they brought back 3 former Steelers a few years ago, including Foote and Randel El? Because they knew they suffered from a leadership void. Now, compare that void to the one experienced after losing Ward, Smith and Farrior. That is a massive chasm and Tomlin simply wasn't able to manage it, as, to be fair, I don't know that many coaches could. Oh, and one more point: Ben is no Tom Brady. Brady could single handily keep a team in line as far as being disciplined, especially combined with Belichick. Ben presence doesn't have that sort of avoirdupois; he is "shoot from the hip" guy all day long, and only gets serious in his on-mic, pre-game, sideline speeches. I don't think the players buy into it since his actions speak louder than his words.

[Crash]

Ben is no Tom Brady. Brady could single handily keep a team in line as far as being disciplined, especially combined with Belichick.

Yeah he really stopped Randy Moss from quitting on him didn't he?

Spare me.

[supersteeler]

As for the run game, I agree we should pick one back to carry the load as many steeler fans suggested. Even Max Starks said the same thing, but we know that one back can't be Dwyer with him waiving to come out after two runs.