Why fans don't like this draft.

[Joel Buchsbaum]

Should teams want a 3-down back?

I think one of our problems in the Bell era was that we were too reliant on him in the running game. And not having a good 2nd option bit us multiple times in the playoffs. I think that this has generally been an issue throughout Tomlin's tenure.

Having one "bell cow" or "work horse" back means that you typically don't have depth and the running game has a single point of failure...at an oft injured position. At least this was what happened to us when we had a great back in Bell.

I think I'd rather have back by committee. It does mean that you probably have 2 guys that aren't as talented as one single guy. But it prevents you from giving a guy like Toussant almost as many carries in a playoff run (29 carries in 2 games) than the rest of his career with the team (38 carries spread over 3 seasons).

I did want an upgrade at RB, but I think that Snell / McFarland could have been an average duo with good blocking. And average would have been a huge step up from where we were last year.

But the water is under the bridge now and it's time to start hoping for the best with the decisions that have been made. And I don't think that the 1st pick was unreasonable.

I think the problem was Bell himself. A me first, team 15th type of player who lied to the team ( about failing his drug test ) and used social media to attack the GM. Thankfully he opted out of a season a passing on a long term deal from the Steelers. Where he is now? See my point, he's DONE. Screw him. I wish Tomlin was tougher with him.

He was highly over rated in terms of being a pass catcher and runner with a low yards per carry and yards per catch, and had little big play ability. Oh he missed one time with injury and off the field stuff too. Yeah he could catch it and run it, but at the end of the day had few impactful plays.

Should teams want a 3-down back? Heck yes, if he does damage running or catching the football while doing it, which Harris can. Harris can run outside, inside , Catch it well, or pass block well. You don't have to take him out. He's scheme versatile, and unpredictability is a big part of offensive football.

If you going with Snell, he's slow, and you can pretty much take away the outside runs. If the player is McFarland, forget the inside running he can be tackled too easily. His vision sucks too.

Now don't get me wrong, Harris isn't going to play ever snap. I'm just saying the playbook is limited with these two carrying it and much more diversified with Harris running it.

[Northern_Blitz]

We had RB by committee past year and it didn’t work. When people say they want RB by committee they still want really good RB’s.. not dudes missing wide open holes or struggling to get to the second level because they are slow as dirt.

Our OL wasn’t anything special but watch breakdowns of McFarland and Conner. Those dudes missed some serious opportunities to cash in on yards simply because they lacked vision and that feel that 3 down backs like Najee have.

Also, when Samuels comes in you know its like 3 plays we are going to pick from and all of them took forever to develop.

The biggest issue with this draft and ANY draft is fans actually expect all the players selected to start on day 1.

That ain’t happening.

Half these dudes prolly wont even dress this year for games.

1) I don't think you use a committee approach if you have an above average to elite back. Especially not the Steelers. We do not seem to believe in load management for RBs. And I don't think we had a back by committee approach so much as we had backs getting injured.

2) I absolutely don't think it's reasonable to expect all draft picks to start day 1. That's why I think we should have drafted a C in round 2 (because I think Green's PT will look more like Dotson's last season). Especially since the Freiermuth's ceiling this year is back up TE (which is probably also his floor given the depth chart).

[Northern_Blitz]

I think the problem was Bell himself. A me first, team 15th type of player who lied to the team ( about failing his drug test ) and used social media to attack the GM. Thankful he opted out of a season a pass on a long term deal. Where he is now? See my point, he's DONE. Screw him. I wish Tomlin was tougher with him.

He was highly over rated in terms of being a pass catch and runner with a low yards per carry and yards per catch, and had little big play ability. Oh he missed one time with injury and off the field stuff too. Yeah he could catch it and run it, but at the end of the day had few impactful plays.

Should teams want a 3-down back? Heck yes, if he does damage running or catching the football while doing it, which Harris can. Harris can run outside, inside , Catch it well, or pass block well. You don't have to take him out.

If you going with Snell, he's slow, and you can pretty much take away the outside runs. If the player is McFarland, forget the inside running he can be tackled too easily. His vision sucks too.

Now don't get me wrong, Harris isn't going to play ever snap. I'm just saying the playbook is limited with these two carrying it.

This seems like a super-revisionist take on Bell to me.

He was in the conversation for best back in the league for multiple seasons. Kind of like how I remember Priest Holmes: high YPC, but few huge runs. Very consistent, but didn't have the break away speed.

Maybe check out the playoff run in 2016? I think we make (and maybe win) the SB if he stays healthy in the playoffs. He was insanely good that year before the injury.

And that was kind of the problem with Bell. Too good and too well rounded that we didn't want to take him off the field (although we've basically always had a "run the wheels off the RB" approch under Tomlin, which I think is an issue).

Even when we had a competent RB2 in Blount. I have said several times on here that biggest mistake of Tomlin's career was not managing Bell's load that year. If Blount got more touches, it's pretty likely that he doesn't get disgruntled. We'd reduce the chances that Bell gets hurt. And we'd have had a competent backup if he still did get hurt.

I was not in favor of keeping him, but he was great in his prime.

Also, you are only looking at the upside of a workhorse back and not the downside (single point of failure and the whole running game implodes). And that was my point.

[Oviedo]

I think the problem was Bell himself. A me first, team 15th type of player who lied to the team ( about failing his drug test ) and used social media to attack the GM. Thankfully he opted out of a season a passing on a long term deal from the Steelers. Where he is now? See my point, he's DONE. Screw him. I wish Tomlin was tougher with him.

He was highly over rated in terms of being a pass catcher and runner with a low yards per carry and yards per catch, and had little big play ability. Oh he missed one time with injury and off the field stuff too. Yeah he could catch it and run it, but at the end of the day had few impactful plays.

Should teams want a 3-down back? Heck yes, if he does damage running or catching the football while doing it, which Harris can. Harris can run outside, inside , Catch it well, or pass block well. You don't have to take him out. He's scheme versatile, and unpredictability is a big part of offensive football.

If you going with Snell, he's slow, and you can pretty much take away the outside runs. If the player is McFarland, forget the inside running he can be tackled too easily. His vision sucks too.

Now don't get me wrong, Harris isn't going to play ever snap. I'm just saying the playbook is limited with these two carrying it and much more diversified with Harris running it.

I agree with most of this. An example of how a team makes a player look better than he is.

Harris opens up the playbook and keeps the other RBs as complimentary pieces like they should

[NorthCoast]

Let me give you doubters a few things to ponder about this draft. Canada's is known to design plays that stress a defense and put players in conflict with various groupings (I'm not sure Fichtner even knew what that concept is).

• The Steelers ran 11-personnel 75% of the time last season (second only to CIN 76%). This was usually a combination of Conner/Ebron+Juju/Claypool/DJ, sometimes Snell/Ebron+Juju/Washington/DJ. Good groupings but not exactly terrorizing to a defense. I expect frequency of 11-personnel to be reduced for much more intriguing combinations.
• 12-personnel (12% frequency); this is where Canada will earn his keeps; imagine Harris/Snell+Ebron/Frie+Juju/Claypool... Harris and/or Frie could stay in to block or run a route, let's see how Patrick Queen or JOK handle these dudes; Juju & Claypool will occupy CBs#1 & 2. Defenses better have guys that can tackle with those guys on the field.
• 22 & 01-personnel was next most often played; again some interesting combinations emerge; Harris/Snell or Harris/McFly + Ebron/Frie, better blocking for a run or challenges as receivers. McFly can run outside or hand the ball off to Harris for an inside run.
• 21-personnel - more interesting combinations; Harris/McFly + Frie + Juju/DJ; Frie and Juju stay in to help block if it's a run, McFly on a run to the outside or Harris up the middle? or send three of 'em on a route with two helping block.

If the OL can hold it's own, I can see where this offense just might sneak back into the top 10. The thing is even if they only end up with one or two OL starters from this draft, they've also got potential franchise TE and RB. So come back next draft to fill in the rest of pieces on the line.

[Northern_Blitz]

Let me give you doubters a few things to ponder about this draft. Canada's is known to design plays that stress a defense and put players in conflict with various groupings (I'm not sure Fichtner even knew what that concept is).

• The Steelers ran 11-personnel 75% of the time last season (second only to CIN 76%). This was usually a combination of Conner/Ebron+Juju/Claypool/DJ, sometimes Snell/Ebron+Juju/Washington/DJ. Good groupings but not exactly terrorizing to a defense. I expect frequency of 11-personnel to be reduced for much more intriguing combinations.
• 12-personnel (12% frequency); this is where Canada will earn his keeps; imagine Harris/Snell+Ebron/Frie+Juju/Claypool... Harris and/or Frie could stay in to block or run a route, let's see how Patrick Queen or JOK handle these dudes; Juju & Claypool will occupy CBs#1 & 2. Defenses better have guys that can tackle with those guys on the field.
• 22 & 01-personnel was next most often played; again some interesting combinations emerge; Harris/Snell or Harris/McFly + Ebron/Frie, better blocking for a run or challenges as receivers. McFly can run outside or hand the ball off to Harris for an inside run.
• 21-personnel - more interesting combinations; Harris/McFly + Frie + Juju/DJ; Frie and Juju stay in to help block if it's a run, McFly on a run to the outside or Harris up the middle? or send three of 'em on a route with two helping block.

If the OL can hold it's own, I can see where this offense just might sneak back into the top 10. The thing is even if they only end up with one or two OL starters from this draft, they've also got potential franchise TE and RB. So come back next draft to fill in the rest of pieces on the line.

This year might be a pretty interesting study in the importance of coaching.

I believe that Canada will be a better OC than Fitchner. We'll see what kind of impact that can have.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

basically what i keep reading is this: "the team didn't address needs when i wanted. and that's why i don't like this draft."

I could make one change, keep the same rookies and most that dislike it would be happy.

If they traded back into the 5th round, took Shakur Brown, then signed Loudermilk as a UDFA, most of the folks who dislike this draft would be happy.

It's dumb. but, true. Same rookies. just when/where they got them...

[steeler_fan_in_t.o.]

basically what i keep reading is this: "the team didn't address needs when i wanted. and that's why i don't like this draft."

I also think that fans read scouting reports ahead of time, and depending on whose report they read, they decide whether or not they like a player. Mock drafts are mostly based on generic reports for players to display only what they have produced on tape in their college system.

A perfect example is the difference between how fans view the pick of Green versus how the FO likely does. Fans are wondering why the Steelers picked the 5th (or 6th, or 7th) best rated guard, just to move him to C. In the meantime, the Steelers sent Adrian Klemm to the Illinois pro day and told him "this is what we want to do with our O under Canada. Look to see if he can do this."

If the Steelers were looking for a C to take on the guy standing in front of him, they likely choose differently. I would think that they are looking for someone who has the athleticism to pull and get to the second level in the running game, and they have determined that Green can do that. Furthermore, I'm guessing that they also believed that he would be available in the third, and that the guy they want at tackle will be there even longer. That is why they were able to take the risk and improve the running game another way in the second with a player who would not be around at pick #87.

[Northern_Blitz]

basically what i keep reading is this: "the team didn't address needs when i wanted. and that's why i don't like this draft."

I could make one change, keep the same rookies and most that dislike it would be happy.

If they traded back into the 5th round, took Shakur Brown, then signed Loudermilk as a UDFA, most of the folks who dislike this draft would be happy.

It's dumb. but, true. Same rookies. just when/where they got them...

I agree that if a 5th round pick is your biggest problem, it's probably not much of a problem.

Especially in a year where information was sparse and the number of eligible players was low because the NCAA let guys stay an extra year.

I think most of the complaints I've seen are centered around not taking Humphrey. But maybe that's just my perception because that's the player they passed on that I really wanted.

Like always, my guess is that they probably did make reasonable choices even if they weren't necessarily the ones I wanted them to make.

A perfect example is the difference between how fans view the pick of Green versus how the FO likely does. Fans are wondering why the Steelers picked the 5th (or 6th, or 7th) best rated guard, just to move him to C. In the meantime, the Steelers sent Adrian Klemm to the Illinois pro day and told him "this is what we want to do with our O under Canada. Look to see if he can do this."

I think you're right that this is the process they're following. I just hope they aren't trying to be too cute. Living in TO, I assume that you're familiar with organizations that make frequently poor decisions (although maybe this year the team looks really good...outside the net anyway <insert Leafs emoji>).

[SteelerOfDeVille]

I also think that fans read scouting reports ahead of time, and depending on whose report they read, they decide whether or not they like a player. Mock drafts are mostly based on generic reports for players to display only what they have produced on tape in their college system.

A perfect example is the difference between how fans view the pick of Green versus how the FO likely does. Fans are wondering why the Steelers picked the 5th (or 6th, or 7th) best rated guard, just to move him to C. In the meantime, the Steelers sent Adrian Klemm to the Illinois pro day and told him "this is what we want to do with our O under Canada. Look to see if he can do this."

If the Steelers were looking for a C to take on the guy standing in front of him, they likely choose differently. I would think that they are looking for someone who has the athleticism to pull and get to the second level in the running game, and they have determined that Green can do that. Furthermore, I'm guessing that they also believed that he would be available in the third, and that the guy they want at tackle will be there even longer. That is why they were able to take the risk and improve the running game another way in the second with a player who would not be around at pick #87.

YES...
People wanted Creed because he was the best "healthy" C per scouting reports. They knew NOTHING about him and how he fit (or did not fit) in the Steelers system. It was like an Edge rusher whose size and athleticism is clearly a 4-3 DE and not a 3-4 OLB. But, because Kiper or someone said he was the best on the board, you want him. But, he would have been a horrible fit - he was NOT agile enough to comfortably draft there because of what the Steelers want from their C.

I don't know that Green will succeed, but he at least has the athleticism. But, Creed would have been a busted pick with the guy constantly missing second-level blocks, pulls, etc. I thank the heavens Colbert's making the picks, not some of these armchair GMs we have here.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

I think most of the complaints I've seen are centered around not taking Humphrey. But maybe that's just my perception because that's the player they passed on that I really wanted.

Good timing - just addressed that above... bad fit... (43 DE vs 34 OLB is actually a really good comp as to why)

[Northern_Blitz]

YES...
People wanted Creed because he was the best "healthy" C per scouting reports. They knew NOTHING about him and how he fit (or did not fit) in the Steelers system. It was like an Edge rusher whose size and athleticism is clearly a 4-3 DE and not a 3-4 OLB. But, because Kiper or someone said he was the best on the board, you want him. But, he would have been a horrible fit - he was NOT agile enough to comfortably draft there because of what the Steelers want from their C.

I don't know that Green will succeed, but he at least has the athleticism. But, Creed would have been a busted pick with the guy constantly missing second-level blocks, pulls, etc. I thank the heavens Colbert's making the picks, not some of these armchair GMs we have here.

Are you arguing that Green is a better fit because he's more athletic?

Humphrey's RAS is 10.0 / 10.0.



Green also has a high relative athletic score (9.23/10), but it's less than Humphrey's. I don't know if they are relative to different pools because Green was listed as a G and not a C.



For the record, I'm also glad that Colbert is making decisions and not me. He's good at a difficult job. And that's true even when I would have preferred a different decision. Pretending that I know I'm right would be silly. But it's also silly to pretend that the expert is always right.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

Are you arguing that Green is a better fit because he's more athletic?

Humphrey's RAS is 10.0 / 10.0.



Green also has a high relative athletic score (9.23/10), but it's less than Humphrey's. I don't know if they are relative to different pools because Green was listed as a G and not a C.



For the record, I'm also glad that Colbert is making decisions and not me. He's good at a difficult job. And that's true even when I would have preferred a different decision. Pretending that I know I'm right would be silly. But it's also silly to pretend that the expert is always right.

that metric considers height, weight and bench. so basically, if Green eats a few cheeseburgers, he's suddenly MORE athletic. That's odd?

In any event, Green is better in vertical, broad, 40, 20, 10... basically, he MOVES better with more explosion... which is what i just said... and your screen shots support... THANKS!!

[Northern_Blitz]

that metric considers height, weight and bench. so basically, if Green eats a few cheeseburgers, he's suddenly MORE athletic. That's odd?

In any event, Green is better in vertical, broad, 40, 20, 10... basically, he MOVES better with more explosion... which is what i just said... and your screen shots support... THANKS!!

What the screen shot shows is that they are about the same in explosion and speed, and that Humphrey has better agility.

Humphrey is also bigger...and size is important for linemen IMO.

You said that Green was more athletic than Humphrey. And I think that's demonstrably false. Green is among the most athletic interior OL in the draft. Just like Humphrey (who is probably a slightly better athlete based on better agility. He also happens to be bigger).

And Humphrey is a center (3 years at the position vs. 4 games). So he's less of a projection (read lower risk of failure). That's what I meant by saying that I hope that the Green pick isn't too cute. I like the pick more now than when it was first announced.

Part of that is me learning more about Green (who I admittedly didn't know much about before), and part of that is almost certainly me wanting to like the pick more so I end up liking what I read.

And he might turn out to be great. Lord knows that's what I'm hoping for.

But I think the potential for failure is higher here since he's a projection at the position. Just like Meinerz would have been.

I think the interesting question is: would I have felt the same about this pick if it was Meinerz (who I heard about and liked) and not Green? And I think the answer is yes. Because I don't think my issue is that I don't like Green. My issue is that I don't like taking a TE who will probably play less than 20% of the snaps in the reasonable best case scenario (based on last year's TE2 snaps) over a C who sounded like a plug and play guy that would play every offense snap if he got to his reasonable best case scenario (starting C).

[SteelerOfDeVille]

What the screen shot shows is that they are about the same in explosion and speed, and that Humphrey has better agility.

You can't say about "the same" on one, then say "better" on the other... c'mon man...

Humphrey is also bigger...and size is important for linemen IMO.

You said that Green was more athletic than Humphrey. And I think that's demonstrably false.

well, if we can't even agree on the facts, this discussion is lost. broad jump, long jump, 40, 20, 10... that's 5 ATHLETIC measurables.

how many chicken nuggets a guy eats is NOT an ATHLETIC measurable. As long as you're legitimately trying to say he's more athletic cuz his got a more giggly belly, i'm not even sure how to respond to that.

I mean, Big Dan McCullers must have been the most athletic guy in the league. And since Zach Banner's also 6'8", 360, we have ZERO need at tackle, we have the biggest one in the league so it's all covered.

While i don't disagree that you cannot teach size (height). And that is absolutely is a factor in ones ability to play, it's a lot less than you might think. Otherwise, we might not have a James Harrison. And Antonio Brown is too short to be an all-pro WR. Russell Wilson's a 5'11" non-athletic scrub. And Aaron Donald isn't athletic, either... You get the point, i could keep going.

Ok, off my soapbox for that silly definition of "athleticism"

Green is among the most athletic interior OL in the draft. Just like Humphrey (who is probably a slightly better athlete based on better agility. He also happens to be bigger).

And Humphrey is a center (3 years at the position vs. 4 games). So he's less of a projection (read lower risk of failure). That's what I meant by saying that I hope that the Green pick isn't too cute. I like the pick more now than when it was first announced.

Part of that is me learning more about Green (who I admittedly didn't know much about before), and part of that is almost certainly me wanting to like the pick more so I end up liking what I read.

And he might turn out to be great. Lord knows that's what I'm hoping for.

But I think the potential for failure is higher here since he's a projection at the position. Just like Meinerz would have been.

I think the interesting question is: would I have felt the same about this pick if it was Meinerz (who I heard about and liked) and not Green? And I think the answer is yes. Because I don't think my issue is that I don't like Green. My issue is that I don't like taking a TE who will probably play less than 20% of the snaps in the reasonable best case scenario (based on last year's TE2 snaps) over a C who sounded like a plug and play guy that would play every offense snap if he got to his reasonable best case scenario (starting C).

I think what you say here is the biggest problem - most of the folks here hadn't heard of Green. I kid you not, I did PFF's mock draft simulator a number of times and THAT graded him an A when taken in the 3rd round. That made me go check him out. I was blown away how low he was mocked based on what the simulators kept doing.

Apparently, Kiper doesn't know squat vs the PFF simulator... either that, or the steelers did the sim a few times, too.