PDA

View Full Version : It has to be asked...



Mojouw
09-17-2013, 11:59 AM
Anyone miss Mike Wallace now?

NJarhead
09-17-2013, 12:01 PM
Not really. I miss Alan Faneca, Jerome Bettis and Hines Ward though.

zulater
09-17-2013, 12:04 PM
Anyone miss Mike Wallace now?

Nah. I don't think he'd make that much difference. It's hard for a downfield threat to come into play when you're not giving the qb time to get to the end of his drop.

- - - Updated - - -


Not really. I miss Alan Faneca, Jerome Bettis and Hines Ward though.

I miss Marvel Smith and Max Starks too.

http://sinfl.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/heath-miller.jpg?w=298&h=292



And this guy of course most of all.

steeldawg
09-17-2013, 12:06 PM
Anyone miss Mike Wallace now?

Yep I miss wallace and so does ben

NJarhead
09-17-2013, 12:08 PM
Nah. I don't think he'd make that much difference. It's hard for a downfield threat to come into play when you're not giving the qb time to get to the end of his drop.

- - - Updated - - -



I miss Marvel Smith and Max Starks too.

http://sinfl.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/heath-miller.jpg?w=298&h=292



And this guy of course most of all.

My hope is:

1). Another week of practice for the newbs will pay dividends.

2). We get Heath back

3). We get Le'veon Bell back

4). Someone stops serving "we suck" to our o-line at breakfast.

Bonus: Cortez comes back too.

zulater
09-17-2013, 12:14 PM
My hope is:

1). Another week of practice for the newbs will pay dividends.

2). We get Heath back

3). We get Le'veon Bell back

4). Someone stops serving "we suck" to our o-line at breakfast.

Bonus: Cortez comes back too.

All good points, but number 4 literally made me laugh out loud. :chuckle:

- - - Updated - - -


Yep I miss wallace and so does ben

Yeah we all know you miss him! :lol: :wink02: By the way nice game last week for Wallace. I still don't think he was worth the price tag that he comes with.

Dwinsgames
09-17-2013, 12:15 PM
Anyone miss Mike Wallace now?


nope ...

miss the Chin though

Mojouw
09-17-2013, 12:49 PM
SO one several threads I see that the Tomlin hate is out in force. That's fine, the team is o-2 has perfected the go in reverse offense, and generally seems to suck. So what exactly is it that people think Cowher could do to fix it? Would shoving his chin out, spitting up a storm and spewing about physical blue collar football actually do anything? Or would he be as hamstrung by injuries, a roster stagnating under the cap, and critical underperformance by highly drafted players?

What would the mythical chin be able to do any different? I mean I guess he could fire Haley and call a series of innovative dive plays with Redman...

zulater
09-17-2013, 12:59 PM
SO one several threads I see that the Tomlin hate is out in force. That's fine, the team is o-2 has perfected the go in reverse offense, and generally seems to suck. So what exactly is it that people think Cowher could do to fix it? Would shoving his chin out, spitting up a storm and spewing about physical blue collar football actually do anything? Or would he be as hamstrung by injuries, a roster stagnating under the cap, and critical underperformance by highly drafted players?

What would the mythical chin be able to do any different? I mean I guess he could fire Haley and call a series of innovative dive plays with Redman...

It's not Tomlin hate. It's Tomlin doubt. I haven't seen anything yet in Tomlin's repertoire that would suggest he can turn this slide around. He couldn't turn it around in 2009 with a more talented team, and he couldn't stop it last year with much of the same roster.

Mojouw
09-17-2013, 01:08 PM
It's not Tomlin hate. It's Tomlin doubt. I haven't seen anything yet in Tomlin's repertoire that would suggest he can turn this slide around. He couldn't turn it around in 2009 with a more talented team, and he couldn't stop it last year with much of the same roster.

Still dodged the question. What do you think can realistically be done? Not some fantasy of who we could have drafted 3 years ago or we need more depth...etc. What is it that you remember from Cowher's tenure as coach that is so vastly different that he could make chicken salad out of the current shit situation? I do not remember Cowher being an innovative strategist. Nor was he some play-calling guru. I don't remember him being some sort of amazing teacher of the game that kept polishing up turds to go on to star in the NFL.

I remember Cowher a lot like Tomlin. A motivator, a coach who was dependent on his position coaches and coordinators to draw up and implement schemes. Also a guy who went with his gut a lot of the time.

zulater
09-17-2013, 01:19 PM
Still dodged the question. What do you think can realistically be done? Not some fantasy of who we could have drafted 3 years ago or we need more depth...etc. What is it that you remember from Cowher's tenure as coach that is so vastly different that he could make chicken salad out of the current shit situation? I do not remember Cowher being an innovative strategist. Nor was he some play-calling guru. I don't remember him being some sort of amazing teacher of the game that kept polishing up turds to go on to star in the NFL.

I remember Cowher a lot like Tomlin. A motivator, a coach who was dependent on his position coaches and coordinators to draw up and implement schemes. Also a guy who went with his gut a lot of the time.

I don't remember him losing with a top tier quarterback. I don't remember him having one shitty offensive line after the next ad infinitum as our current administrator has made his coaching calling card. I don't ever remember Cowher to take the field with such an inept stable of running backs. So it's hard for me to envision how he'd handle these circumstances because quite frankly I don't think he'd have ever allowed this particular set of circumstances to come into existence in the first place.

Yes Cowher had his issues. But fielding a poor offensive line every single year, and not having a running game to fall back on weren't among them. .

NJarhead
09-17-2013, 01:26 PM
I don't remember him losing with a top tier quarterback. I don't remember him having one shitty offensive line after the next ad infinitum as our current administrator has made his coaching calling card. I don't ever remember Cowher to take the field with such an inept stable of running backs. So it's hard for me to envision how he'd handle these circumstances because quite frankly I don't think he'd have ever allowed this particular set of circumstances to come into existence in the first place.

Yes Cowher had his issues. But fielding a poor offensive line every single year, and not having a running game to fall back on weren't among them. .

Cowher employed a run first offense. Tomlin gave Arians the reigns and we dumped the FB and went to a passing offense (and went to two SB's in the process). Now we're trying to transition back to the run (which I'm all for). We drafted a good RB and we have talented youth on the o-line. The line needs some coaching and cohesion and the RB needs to get healthy. I think a little bit of patience is warranted here.

Mojouw
09-17-2013, 01:26 PM
I don't remember him losing with a top tier quarterback. I don't remember him having one shitty offensive line after the next ad infinitum as our current administrator has made his coaching calling card. I don't ever remember Cowher to take the field with such an inept stable of running backs. So it's hard for me to envision how he'd handle these circumstances because quite frankly I don't think he'd have ever allowed this particular set of circumstances to come into existence in the first place.

Yes Cowher had his issues. But fielding a poor offensive line every single year, and not having a running game to fall back on weren't among them. .

I don't even know where to begin with the amount of logical inconsistencies in that post. I think it is best for us to disagree and allow you to continue to think that Cowher would have somehow fixed the current state of affairs by waving his magic chin across the sidelines.

fansince'76
09-17-2013, 01:47 PM
Does anybody truly believe that Cowher, being Martyball disciple numero uno, could get more out of Ben? I don't. Ben's $100M contract would have been wasted money in Cowher's system, IMO. And Wallace DEFINITELY would have been wasted.

If Cowher had stayed on after '06, I would have probably started a thread imploring the Rooneys to trade Ben because he deserved more and is too good of a QB to be directed to hand the ball off 50-60 times a game.

zulater
09-17-2013, 02:00 PM
Does anybody truly believe that Cowher, being Martyball disciple numero uno, could get more out of Ben? I don't. Ben's $100M contract would have been wasted money in Cowher's system, IMO. And Wallace DEFINITELY would have been wasted.

Cowher had Big Ben for 3 seasons. In two of those seasons the Steelers had tremendous years. Yeah we lost to a very good Patriot team at home with a rookie qb.in 04. But I don't think that was a point of shame. Also Cowher's third season with Ben was very much shaded by Ben's accident, his appendectomy ( which Cowher admittedly mismanaged tremendously) and then his concussion. ( again mismanaged by the chin)

So two out of three years together they made tremendous music together. ( even if Ben wasn't entirely happy, which I couldn't care less about anyway if the results are there) The third and final season was adversely influenced by unusual events aforementioned. So in my opinion if Cowher had stayed and had his heart in coaching the results would have been great with him and Ben going forward.Bradshaw hated Noll, and Noll was married to the running game. But they grew together and had tremendous results. I think the same would have held true had Cowher got Ben earlier in his coaching tenure when he was fully immersed in the job.

tube517
09-17-2013, 02:24 PM
I don't remember him losing with a top tier quarterback. I don't remember him having one shitty offensive line after the next ad infinitum as our current administrator has made his coaching calling card. I don't ever remember Cowher to take the field with such an inept stable of running backs. So it's hard for me to envision how he'd handle these circumstances because quite frankly I don't think he'd have ever allowed this particular set of circumstances to come into existence in the first place.

Yes Cowher had his issues. But fielding a poor offensive line every single year, and not having a running game to fall back on weren't among them. .

The argument of cowher vs Tomlin will go on forever but who was the OL coach in 2004. Not only did they recommit to the run, make Duce Staley look good for 7 games and lose 2 starters on the O line and not miss a beat.

Sent from my SGH-I717 using Tapatalk 4

zulater
09-17-2013, 02:24 PM
I don't even know where to begin with the amount of logical inconsistencies in that post. I think it is best for us to disagree and allow you to continue to think that Cowher would have somehow fixed the current state of affairs by waving his magic chin across the sidelines.

Ok let's go through it sentence by sentence and see where these inconsistencies are.

I don't remember him losing with a top tier quarterback.

Amend that, he went .500 with a top tier qb in an injury plagued year for said qb in 06. I stand corrected


I don't remember him having one shitty offensive line after the next ad infinitum as our current administrator has made his coaching calling card.

I stand by that.


I don't ever remember Cowher to take the field with such an inept stable of running backs. So it's hard for me to envision how he'd handle these circumstances because quite frankly I don't think he'd have ever allowed this particular set of circumstances to come into existence in the first place.

I stand by this as well. Why do I have to assume that Tomlin's current problem's would be Cowher's problems? That would mean they would have had to have followed the same exact course. Given their fundamental differences I can't see how that would be true at all?

Yes Cowher had his issues. But fielding a poor offensive line every single year, and not having a running game to fall back on weren't among them. .

Again I stand by this and fail to see any inconsistencies in my thought process.

Mojouw
09-17-2013, 02:48 PM
Ok let's go through it sentence by sentence and see where these inconsistencies are.

I don't remember him losing with a top tier quarterback.

Amend that, he went .500 with a top tier qb in an injury plagued year for said qb in 06. I stand corrected


I don't remember him having one shitty offensive line after the next ad infinitum as our current administrator has made his coaching calling card.

I stand by that.


I don't ever remember Cowher to take the field with such an inept stable of running backs. So it's hard for me to envision how he'd handle these circumstances because quite frankly I don't think he'd have ever allowed this particular set of circumstances to come into existence in the first place.

I stand by this as well. Why do I have to assume that Tomlin's current problem's would be Cowher's problems? That would mean they would have had to have followed the same exact course. Given their fundamental differences I can't see how that would be true at all?

Yes Cowher had his issues. But fielding a poor offensive line every single year, and not having a running game to fall back on weren't among them. .

Again I stand by this and fail to see any inconsistencies in my thought process.

Cowher was a 3.5 yards a carry power I ball control coach. He was off the Schottenheimer tree after all. His "gameplan" would not work in the NFL today. So arguing that he would have a good offensive line now is kinda comparing apples and oranges. In fact the players we are criticizing now as poor lineman, are exactly the massive, slow footed, road grading run game maulers that Cowher loved. Noll loved small athletic lineman he could trap block with. How well do you think he would do in the current NFL running 265 lb guards out there? Basically let me re-phrase. Your post is logical, I guess. But it is largely reactionary comparisons with no context.

Context is everything. Also remembering the facts, not the nostalgia is key. Bettis was a HOF back. I bet he made a few of those lines seem better than they were!

Again what do you propose that should have been done differently? Let's focus (again) on the o-line. The Steelers have a $100+ million Qb. That means that high priced FA lineman are off the table for all of Ben's career as a Steeler. So it is the draft. They are starting 2 first round picks and 2 second round picks on the line. What do you think they should have done differently? Unless the answer is to lose more games so that they can fall in the top 3 and get a shot at one of the elite LT prospects in a draft year. Drafting in the teens or 20's year in and year out means you are constantly selecting from the 2nd or 3rd tier of tackle prospects. Now we can talk about other tackles taken in the late first or 2nd round that may be better than Adams or Gilbert. That is legitimate. However, Cowher did not exactly have a track record of great tackles either....Again he wanted the LT prospect they year they took the QB because the Steelers never get near either prospects in the draft. A side rant - the fact that Cowher wanted a oline prospect that did not really have a great career over the franchise QB prospect leads me to think that he might not have done well in the pass-wacky NFL game of recent years.

So fine, you can claim logically consistency. But it is about the same as me saying that Noll never had defensive backfields that are as bad as some of the recent Steelers teams. Noll would fix this. Well except that you can't club people as they go over the middle anymore....

HollywoodSteel
09-17-2013, 03:24 PM
Unless the answer is to lose more games so that they can fall in the top 3 and get a shot at one of the elite LT prospects in a draft year.

If this is the strategy then it seems like we already have the right man for the job. :)

zulater
09-17-2013, 04:21 PM
Cowher was a 3.5 yards a carry power I ball control coach. He was off the Schottenheimer tree after all. His "gameplan" would not work in the NFL today. So arguing that he would have a good offensive line now is kinda comparing apples and oranges. In fact the players we are criticizing now as poor lineman, are exactly the massive, slow footed, road grading run game maulers that Cowher loved. Noll loved small athletic lineman he could trap block with. How well do you think he would do in the current NFL running 265 lb guards out there? Basically let me re-phrase. Your post is logical, I guess. But it is largely reactionary comparisons with no context.

Context is everything. Also remembering the facts, not the nostalgia is key. Bettis was a HOF back. I bet he made a few of those lines seem better than they were!

Again what do you propose that should have been done differently? Let's focus (again) on the o-line. The Steelers have a $100+ million Qb. That means that high priced FA lineman are off the table for all of Ben's career as a Steeler. So it is the draft. They are starting 2 first round picks and 2 second round picks on the line. What do you think they should have done differently? Unless the answer is to lose more games so that they can fall in the top 3 and get a shot at one of the elite LT prospects in a draft year. Drafting in the teens or 20's year in and year out means you are constantly selecting from the 2nd or 3rd tier of tackle prospects. Now we can talk about other tackles taken in the late first or 2nd round that may be better than Adams or Gilbert. That is legitimate. However, Cowher did not exactly have a track record of great tackles either....Again he wanted the LT prospect they year they took the QB because the Steelers never get near either prospects in the draft. A side rant - the fact that Cowher wanted a oline prospect that did not really have a great career over the franchise QB prospect leads me to think that he might not have done well in the pass-wacky NFL game of recent years.

So fine, you can claim logically consistency. But it is about the same as me saying that Noll never had defensive backfields that are as bad as some of the recent Steelers teams. Noll would fix this. Well except that you can't club people as they go over the middle anymore....

You coach the era you're in. If you're a good coach you adapt. I think Cowher could and would have adapted. And I don't think the game has changed so much since 2006 that Cowher and his philosophy would be gone with the dinosaurs. Neither do most teams. Because I can guarantee you that if Cowher announced that he was going to return to coaching in 2014 he'd be on top of nearly every team with a vacancy's shopping list.

- - - Updated - - -


If this is the strategy then it seems like we already have the right man for the job. :)

Touche! :lol:

- - - Updated - - -


The argument of cowher vs Tomlin will go on forever but who was the OL coach in 2004. Not only did they recommit to the run, make Duce Staley look good for 7 games and lose 2 starters on the O line and not miss a beat.

Sent from my SGH-I717 using Tapatalk 4

Duce Staley was a good back when he came to the Steelers. I saw him plenty as an Eagle and he had game back then.

Mojouw
09-17-2013, 04:30 PM
Zu, I respect your posts and your opinion. I get that you are frustrated. I get that you are upset and concerned about the direction of the team, etc. But you still, in multiple threads over the course of a day, have failed to state what it is you think that Cowher would have or would do differently. "Get better players" is not really an answer, nor is "coach awesomer". Those seem to be the two popular opinions floating around this board today. All I am trying to say is that I do not really see what this team can do outside of a few severely limited options. They can try throwing downfield a bit more, take more chances on defense to generate sacks and turnovers, and other than that they can hold the line and hope that Miller, Bell, Cortez Allen, return quickly and have a massive impact...

That's it. It is either that or they start pressing the panic button repeatedly and start firing people. A lot of people.

zulater
09-17-2013, 04:40 PM
Zu, I respect your posts and your opinion. I get that you are frustrated. I get that you are upset and concerned about the direction of the team, etc. But you still, in multiple threads over the course of a day, have failed to state what it is you think that Cowher would have or would do differently. "Get better players" is not really an answer, nor is "coach awesomer". Those seem to be the two popular opinions floating around this board today. All I am trying to say is that I do not really see what this team can do outside of a few severely limited options. They can try throwing downfield a bit more, take more chances on defense to generate sacks and turnovers, and other than that they can hold the line and hope that Miller, Bell, Cortez Allen, return quickly and have a massive impact...

That's it. It is either that or they start pressing the panic button repeatedly and start firing people. A lot of people.

No way to prove it, but I don't think Cowher would have let it denigrate to this point at running back and OL. Most of Cowher's problems stemmed from inadequate qb play. Though he did suffer through a mass exodus of talent on defense, losing Woodson, Llloyd, Lake, Greene, Kirkland, Chad Brown etc.. in a condensed period.

Don't get me wrong though, I get your point. It's Tomlin's team, and he needs to fix it. So good luck to him and to all of us.

I still wouldn't mind Haley's head on a platter ( figuratively speaking of course :chuckle:) outside Heinz field tonight though.

steeldawg
09-17-2013, 04:55 PM
No way of knowing if cowher would be doing any better, The only we know for sure is we don't have any impact players on offense right now. There are somethings that can definetly be called into question the coaching staff and that's the gameday personnel management.

1. Felix jones not starting and getting the bulk of the carries, head scratcher.
2. Marcus Wheaton standing on the sideline while the defense continues to play press man coverage, take a shot tomlin!
3. Jarvis jones taken out on crucial drives in favor of worilds when jones was actually getting penetration.
4. Too many runs out of the shotgun, put our full back in there and let him block.
5. Don't ever run a reverse with Jericho cotchery we have plenty of other more effective options.
6. We don't run a running back screen with felix jones but as soon as redman comes back we call one. Head scratcher.

Dwinsgames
09-17-2013, 05:50 PM
Cowher was a 3.5 yards a carry power I ball control coach. He was off the Schottenheimer tree after all. His "gameplan" would not work in the NFL today.

no disrespect old friend but that is where I stopped reading ...

dead ass wrong IMO ....

and to prove that point look no further than our week 1 loss the Titans ran the football and ran it some more , they where not getting 6 yards a clip in the process ( sure a few good runs ) but most where 3 yards ...they threw it 22 or 23 times ( sounds just like Cowher football to me ) ....


Seattle vs 49ers this past week The Seahawks threw the football just 19 times with a mere 8 completions and blew out the 49ers 29-3 ....

if you play solid Def and maximize your opportunities while limited the opponents opportunities it does not matter what the oppositions wants to do they may have a game plan to throw it 50 times on you but if they are limited to 18-20 min of possession time and you can stop them a couple times a game on Def you are going to win more often than not ... Passing era or not ..they can not score if they do not have the football and the more you have the football the more rested your def becomes and the more tired theirs becomes

- - - Updated - - -


No way of knowing if cowher would be doing any better, The only we know for sure is we don't have any impact players on offense right now. There are somethings that can definetly be called into question the coaching staff and that's the gameday personnel management.

1. Felix jones not starting and getting the bulk of the carries, head scratcher.
2. Marcus Wheaton standing on the sideline while the defense continues to play press man coverage, take a shot tomlin!
3. Jarvis jones taken out on crucial drives in favor of worilds when jones was actually getting penetration.
4. Too many runs out of the shotgun, put our full back in there and let him block.
5. Don't ever run a reverse with Jericho cotchery we have plenty of other more effective options.
6. We don't run a running back screen with felix jones but as soon as redman comes back we call one. Head scratcher.

can not believe I am saying this .....

Good post

GoSlash27
09-17-2013, 05:52 PM
No, I don't miss Wallace. Antonio has been golden for us. If there's one guy I miss, it's Heath.

steelreserve
09-17-2013, 05:56 PM
Again what do you propose that should have been done differently? Let's focus (again) on the o-line. The Steelers have a $100+ million Qb. That means that high priced FA lineman are off the table for all of Ben's career as a Steeler. So it is the draft. They are starting 2 first round picks and 2 second round picks on the line. What do you think they should have done differently? Unless the answer is to lose more games so that they can fall in the top 3 and get a shot at one of the elite LT prospects in a draft year. Drafting in the teens or 20's year in and year out means you are constantly selecting from the 2nd or 3rd tier of tackle prospects. Now we can talk about other tackles taken in the late first or 2nd round that may be better than Adams or Gilbert. That is legitimate. However, Cowher did not exactly have a track record of great tackles either....Again he wanted the LT prospect they year they took the QB because the Steelers never get near either prospects in the draft. A side rant - the fact that Cowher wanted a oline prospect that did not really have a great career over the franchise QB prospect leads me to think that he might not have done well in the pass-wacky NFL game of recent years.

Since this has turned intoa Cowher vs. Tomlin debate, I'll say this: I don't think Cowher's overall style of offense would work very well in today's game. On the other hand, I think coaching does make a difference, and given the same exact roster of players we have now, I would expect the offensive line to be performing better under Cowher than it is right now. Our high draft picks on the lines would be performing like they're supposed to, instead of drifting along aimlessly like they are today. We've had basically zero player development along either line since the end of the Cowher era; guys show up and however they play as rookies, that's how they play their entire time here.

Seriously, think about it - we have two first-round and two second-round picks starting on the OL, and two first-round picks on the DL, and they're all still playing the same as they were their first day in the league. It would be INCREDIBLE to me if we had that bad of luck in the draft, whiffing on all those #1 or #2 picks for no reason. That tells me guys like Adams or Heyward may actually be better than that, but something's keeping them stuck at square one. I don't know whether it was Cowher or his staff that was actually making it happen, but developing talent along the lines was a focus back then and they made it work.

Would the makeup of the team be different? Probably. But then you're getting into so many what-ifs (as if we aren't already) that you might as well just be making shit up. This group of players, I can't help but feel would be a bit stronger in some ares where we're lacking ... yes, Cowher left something to be desired in the passing game, but then again so does this team now. Eh. I hope whatever it is, they get it fixed, and fast. This might not be the greatest Steelers team ever assembled, but there's still no way they ought to be playing like THIS.

steeldawg
09-17-2013, 06:31 PM
No, I don't miss Wallace. Antonio has been golden for us. If there's one guy I miss, it's Heath.

Golden?

GoSlash27
09-17-2013, 07:08 PM
Yessir. Right now he's the only viable target Ben's got. He's pulling in pretty much everything that's coming his way, and he's being sent on some ugly routes with heavy traffic. God forbid *he* gets hurt, or we'll be really screwed.

NCSteeler
09-17-2013, 07:43 PM
No way of knowing if cowher would be doing any better, The only we know for sure is we don't have any impact players on offense right now. There are somethings that can definetly be called into question the coaching staff and that's the gameday personnel management.

1. Felix jones not starting and getting the bulk of the carries, head scratcher.
2. Marcus Wheaton standing on the sideline while the defense continues to play press man coverage, take a shot tomlin!
3. Jarvis jones taken out on crucial drives in favor of worilds when jones was actually getting penetration.
4. Too many runs out of the shotgun, put our full back in there and let him block.
5. Don't ever run a reverse with Jericho cotchery we have plenty of other more effective options.
6. We don't run a running back screen with felix jones but as soon as redman comes back we call one. Head scratcher.

Dawg, best post of the week. Bout sums it up. These are all coaching problems and can be fixed, but they gotta own, wear it, accept it, whatever Tomlin would say


And no I don't miss Wallace

steeldawg
09-17-2013, 07:56 PM
Yessir. Right now he's the only viable target Ben's got. He's pulling in pretty much everything that's coming his way, and he's being sent on some ugly routes with heavy traffic. God forbid *he* gets hurt, or we'll be really screwed.

Cant really say he's done a lot he hasn't really done more than cotchery or sanders, If anything as the number one receiver I would say he has grossly under performed. Last game for example ya he had 6 catches but for 57 yards that's less than 10 yards a catch and he hasn't even sniffed the endzone.

Craic
09-17-2013, 08:02 PM
Cant really say he's done a lot he hasn't really done more than cotchery or sanders, If anything as the number one receiver I would say he has grossly under performed. Last game for example ya he had 6 catches but for 57 yards that's less than 10 yards a catch and he hasn't even sniffed the endzone.

Let it go, man, just let it go.

tube517
09-17-2013, 08:44 PM
You coach the era you're in. If you're a good coach you adapt. I think Cowher could and would have adapted. And I don't think the game has changed so much since 2006 that Cowher and his philosophy would be gone with the dinosaurs. Neither do most teams. Because I can guarantee you that if Cowher announced that he was going to return to coaching in 2014 he'd be on top of nearly every team with a vacancy's shopping list.

- - - Updated - - -



Touche! :lol:

- - - Updated - - -



Duce Staley was a good back when he came to the Steelers. I saw him plenty as an Eagle and he had game back then.

Yeah, he was alright but he had an injury plagued 2003 and the Eagles didn't want him. He was on his way to a 1400 yard season before he had an affinity for sweatpants.

Seven
09-17-2013, 09:18 PM
No. We need a big play threat but the price we would have had to pay for Wallace wouldn't have been worth it. Add to that the fact that he needs a babysitter and letting him walk was a no brainer. Sanders or Wheaton should turn into that guy for us now that the offensive line is playing better.

fansince'76
09-17-2013, 09:35 PM
Cant really say he's done a lot he hasn't really done more than cotchery or sanders, If anything as the number one receiver I would say he has grossly under performed.

Then so has your $60 million hero, who has 2 more receiving yards and 1 more TD on the season thus far. And who I'm also sure is not breaking long punt returns.

steeldawg
09-18-2013, 05:50 AM
Then so has your $60 million hero, who has 2 more receiving yards and 1 more TD on the season thus far. And who I'm also sure is not breaking long punt returns.

Except he has changed the entire dynamics of that offense and he has opened things up for tannehill. I don't care if brown has 0 catches I was just referring to his point that he has been golden because he's been catching everything. A huge problem with our offense is our wide receivers, they are no threat to defenses we are getting shut down by man to man coverage. Wallace in the first game ran down the field routes the entire game against cloud coverage but his supporting cast had huge days and they got a win, last week more attention was paid to hartline and Gibson and Wallace and clay had big days they get another win. A number one should be your threat he should be able to change the coverage. I will say it again if defenses can continue to play bump & run and stack the box we are doomed.

steeldawg
09-18-2013, 05:59 AM
No. We need a big play threat but the price we would have had to pay for Wallace wouldn't have been worth it. Add to that the fact that he needs a babysitter and letting him walk was a no brainer. Sanders or Wheaton should turn into that guy for us now that the offensive line is playing better.

The price we would of paid for Wallace would of been worth it, we just couldn't afford it. It came down to guaranteed money, and with our cap situation we had to let him go, it was a no brainer because we had no choice. As far as him needing a babysitter I don't even know what that means? Whos his babysitter and what does he need one for? Sanders and wheaton are not just going to turn into mike Wallace, we think his production is so easily replaced but so far I am not convinced that many sanders is going to wake up and catch 8 tds.

Master Blaster
09-18-2013, 06:12 AM
Anyone miss Mike Wallace now?
Not for sixty million dollars I don't. I also don't miss his selfish, me, me, me, prima Donna attitude.

The team does miss the double teams he would draw, thus freeing up A.B. to play the slot position, the position he's best suited for.

Master Blaster
09-18-2013, 06:33 AM
The price we would of paid for Wallace would of been worth it, we just couldn't afford it. It came down to guaranteed money, and with our cap situation we had to let him go, it was a no brainer because we had no choice. As far as him needing a babysitter I don't even know what that means? Whos his babysitter and what does he need one for? Sanders and wheaton are not just going to turn into mike Wallace, we think his production is so easily replaced but so far I am not convinced that many sanders is going to wake up and catch 8 tds.
There is no way he's worth the sixty-five million dollar contract he got. Furthermore, you can also count on the fact that he's going to be asked to restructure his contract in order for them to keep other players they want to re-sign and to be cap compliant. It will be interesting to see how he conducts himself when that happens, and it will.

steeldawg
09-18-2013, 03:42 PM
There is no way he's worth the sixty-five million dollar contract he got. Furthermore, you can also count on the fact that he's going to be asked to restructure his contract in order for them to keep other players they want to re-sign and to be cap compliant. It will be interesting to see how he conducts himself when that happens, and it will.

Why is he not worth sixty million? In the market for nfl receivers he is paid right where he should be, If brown can get 43 million Wallace can get 60 million. Dolphins are set up well for their cap situation he will restructure but it wont be a pay cut it will just be changed to bonus money and spaced out over the length of the contract he gets all his money dolphins don't take a big cap hit and they get a good receiver for years. The only negative side to doing that is if 2 years from now they decide to cut Wallace the rest of that contract would be dead money but I see them keeping him. Just because someone signs a big deal does not mean its going to be devastating to the cap, its all in how the deal is structured. This will be the deal for the restructure with all of the free agents the dolphins signed. So with restructuring it this way it actually works out well for both parties if Wallace is there long term. This is not uncommon for the nfl and the player still gets paid so I don't think Wallace is going to have any problem with that. Even after signing all of their free agents the dolphins came in at like 23 million under the cap.

ALLD
09-18-2013, 04:49 PM
Yes, we should bring back the bubble screen... to see how much more it can suck.

Mojouw
09-18-2013, 07:14 PM
So no one figures that the safeties in the box and the press man coverage has anything to do with Wallace not being there?

I mean I know the bubble screens are awful, but geez....losing Wallace has hurt this offense.

Let's hope that Wheaton can get on the field and get open...help move some of those DB's outta the box.

steeldawg
09-18-2013, 07:16 PM
So no one figures that the safeties in the box and the press man coverage has anything to do with Wallace not being there?

I mean I know the bubble screens are awful, but geez....losing Wallace has hurt this offense.

Let's hope that Wheaton can get on the field and get open...help move some of those DB's outta the box.

I agree and support this message 100%!!

st33lersguy
09-18-2013, 07:16 PM
After the crap he pulled last year, why are we having this discussion?

Craic
09-18-2013, 07:17 PM
After the crap he pulled last year, why are we having this discussion?

Who? Steeldawg?

steeldawg
09-18-2013, 07:19 PM
After the crap he pulled last year, why are we having this discussion?

Uh did you not watch the last 2 games? We traded away our most productive receiver and our touchdown maker and now our offense has started off dead last in the league and we are 0-2, its a legitimate question.

st33lersguy
09-18-2013, 07:20 PM
Who? Steeldawg?

I'm mainly talking about mojouw who started this stupid thread.

Count Steeler
09-18-2013, 07:25 PM
So no one figures that the safeties in the box and the press man coverage has anything to do with Wallace not being there?

I mean I know the bubble screens are awful, but geez....losing Wallace has hurt this offense.

Let's hope that Wheaton can get on the field and get open...help move some of those DB's outta the box.

I would say the lack of completing passes deep has contributed. But also, the majority of the plays are either runs or bubble screens or 5 yard dump offs. Even Ben has been off on throwing over the 10-15 yard range.

Wallace would be no help with the play selections that have been chosen.

st33lersguy
09-18-2013, 07:26 PM
Uh did you not watch the last 2 games? We traded away our most productive receiver and our touchdown maker and now our offense has started off dead last in the league and we are 0-2, its a legitimate question.

He QUIT ON THE TEAM last year. He gave NO EFFORT and all he did his contract year was create locker room tension. He had been unproductive since October 2011. You wanted the Steelers to sign a HUGE CONTRACT when they were CAP-STRAPPED to a guy who QUIT ON THE TEAM because he wasn't paid Larry Fitzgerald money despite the fact that he hadn't earned that much money. How does that make an inkling of sense.
Were the Eagles at fault for releasing T.O midseason in 2005 when he was being a complete jerk and causing locker room discourse?

steeldawg
09-18-2013, 07:40 PM
He QUIT ON THE TEAM last year. He gave NO EFFORT and all he did his contract year was create locker room tension. He had been unproductive since October 2011. You wanted the Steelers to sign a HUGE CONTRACT when they were CAP-STRAPPED to a guy who QUIT ON THE TEAM because he wasn't paid Larry Fitzgerald money despite the fact that he hadn't earned that much money. How does that make an inkling of sense.
Were the Eagles at fault for releasing T.O midseason in 2005 when he was being a complete jerk and causing locker room discourse?

What locker room discourse did he cause give me a specific incident? When did he ask the steelers or any team for that matter to get paid like fitzgerald? He gave no effort, so your telling me he stepped on to an nfl field and without trying caught 64 passes for 836 yards and 8 tds through 15 games? Tell me what sense it made to give brown 43 million when he had only scored a career 2 tds and then your telling me Wallace isn't worth the money when he can catch 8 in a season without trying. You think wallaces numbers taking a little dip is due to lack of effort or maybe it was bringing in a brand new offense and a dink and dunk philosophy. And you got your wish he is gone its should be harmonious in that locker room and our offense should be soaring, right? afterall he was obviously the problem?

st33lersguy
09-18-2013, 08:03 PM
What locker room discourse did he cause give me a specific incident? When did he ask the steelers or any team for that matter to get paid like fitzgerald? He gave no effort, so your telling me he stepped on to an nfl field and without trying caught 64 passes for 836 yards and 8 tds through 15 games? Tell me what sense it made to give brown 43 million when he had only scored a career 2 tds and then your telling me Wallace isn't worth the money when he can catch 8 in a season without trying. You think wallaces numbers taking a little dip is due to lack of effort or maybe it was bringing in a brand new offense and a dink and dunk philosophy. And you got your wish he is gone its should be harmonious in that locker room and our offense should be soaring, right? afterall he was obviously the problem?

There were reports of him having a bad attitude last year and carrying it over into the locker room. Anyone who saw him could see that he slacked off last year. I saw too many times him dropping passes, short-arming passes, and fumbling, his lethargy was evident. I guess you missed him asking for Larry Fitzgerald money last year and him turning down a $50 million dollar contract. Plus what is the logic behind paying ANYONE $60 million dollars with barely anyone cap room to start especially for a guy who had 2 100 yard games in the past 25? If Wallace was worth $60 million, Tomlin wouldn't have bothered publicly condemned him by saying he would demote him to co-starter

steeldawg
09-20-2013, 05:52 AM
There were reports of him having a bad attitude last year and carrying it over into the locker room. Anyone who saw him could see that he slacked off last year. I saw too many times him dropping passes, short-arming passes, and fumbling, his lethargy was evident. I guess you missed him asking for Larry Fitzgerald money last year and him turning down a $50 million dollar contract. Plus what is the logic behind paying ANYONE $60 million dollars with barely anyone cap room to start especially for a guy who had 2 100 yard games in the past 25? If Wallace was worth $60 million, Tomlin wouldn't have bothered publicly condemned him by saying he would demote him to co-starter

I don't see any locker room confrontations with mike Wallace, in fact Ben spoke very highly of mike as a teammate and surprise surprise the same thing coming out of Miami. Yes there were some reports of him asking for that money but nothing from wallaces camp and he even tweeted after that don't believe everything you read. So he turned down a $50 million dollar contract he also turned down a $70million dollar with the Vikings to take a $60 million dollar contract with the dolphins. And by the way he turned down our contract because we couldn't offer the guaranteed money he wanted, so that doesn't make him a problem it makes him smart. But your ok paying a guy 43 million who has 2 career tds and 3 career 100 games? You are not paying Wallace based off of last season its based on his body of work, the steelers thought he was worth the money that's why they offered him 50 million but our cap situation wouldn't allow us to pay him the guaranteed money he wanted. Your trying to blame his dip in numbers last year on attitude while we are starring at an offense that is completely inept, don't you think the current direction of the offense probably had something to do with the dip in numbers. Also we miss his ability to change the defense and stretch the field, deny it all you want but it will only become more evident with every game.

st33lersguy
09-20-2013, 07:12 PM
I don't see any locker room confrontations with mike Wallace, in fact Ben spoke very highly of mike as a teammate and surprise surprise the same thing coming out of Miami. Yes there were some reports of him asking for that money but nothing from wallaces camp and he even tweeted after that don't believe everything you read. So he turned down a $50 million dollar contract he also turned down a $70million dollar with the Vikings to take a $60 million dollar contract with the dolphins. And by the way he turned down our contract because we couldn't offer the guaranteed money he wanted, so that doesn't make him a problem it makes him smart. But your ok paying a guy 43 million who has 2 career tds and 3 career 100 games? You are not paying Wallace based off of last season its based on his body of work, the steelers thought he was worth the money that's why they offered him 50 million but our cap situation wouldn't allow us to pay him the guaranteed money he wanted. Your trying to blame his dip in numbers last year on attitude while we are starring at an offense that is completely inept, don't you think the current direction of the offense probably had something to do with the dip in numbers. Also we miss his ability to change the defense and stretch the field, deny it all you want but it will only become more evident with every game.

Explain the logic behind a capped strapped team giving $60 million to a player, particularly a player who had 2 100 yard games dating back to around midseason 2011?

Psycho Ward 86
09-20-2013, 08:11 PM
i miss wallace's ability to stretch the damn field and break the game wide open. But it just wouldnt have been worth what he got paid with our shitty cap space. To say that he wouldnt have made a difference because our O-line isnt allowing enough time is bullshit though. We've tried going downtown to sanders and brown several times these past 2 games and neither of them are giving DB's anything to worry about when they're running deep downfield. talk about getting zero separation. where are all the people who were saying they could be sufficient deep threats?

i expected such shit-tastic production from sanders, who is and always has been a #3 receiver at best. But i am thoroughly disappointed in brown. step it up. good lord.

and someone unleash wheaton for cripes sake. god knows we need something offensively for teams to respect

GoSlash27
09-20-2013, 08:17 PM
Explain the logic behind a capped strapped team giving $60 million to a player, particularly a player who had 2 100 yard games dating back to around midseason 2011?

The logic that puzzles me is the idea that somebody fussing on this forum is anything more than useless bellyaching. As if the FO is gonna read this, say "whoops", restructure everyone's contract, talk Miami out of their deal, and bring him back.
/he's gone, he ain't comin' back, and I don't miss him

steeldawg
09-20-2013, 09:20 PM
Explain the logic behind a capped strapped team giving $60 million to a player, particularly a player who had 2 100 yard games dating back to around midseason 2011?

What good is cap space if you cant move the ball? My logic is if 60 million helps you move the ball you do it, its not the 60 million that made the deal fall through its the guaranteed money we couldn't afford. What is the logic behind giving brown 43 million he had 3 career 100yd games and 2 career tds, and your worried about the guy who scored 8 tds last season getting paid. Its a joke Wallace put points on the board and changed the dynamics of our offense he opened the whole field up, definetly worth 60 million over 5 years. Again you don't base a long term contract over his last 25 games especially when you changed the offensive coordinator and installed a short ball control brand new offense. You simply don't like Wallace because he wanted to get paid.

Craic
09-20-2013, 11:05 PM
What good is cap space if you cant move the ball? My logic is if 60 million helps you move the ball you do it, its not the 60 million that made the deal fall through its the guaranteed money we couldn't afford. What is the logic behind giving brown 43 million he had 3 career 100yd games and 2 career tds, and your worried about the guy who scored 8 tds last season getting paid. Its a joke Wallace put points on the board and changed the dynamics of our offense he opened the whole field up, definetly worth 60 million over 5 years. Again you don't base a long term contract over his last 25 games especially when you changed the offensive coordinator and installed a short ball control brand new offense. You simply don't like Wallace because he wanted to get paid.

This sentence in itself should be framed as example number #1 why it's so difficult to actually debate with you.

steeldawg
09-20-2013, 11:26 PM
This sentence in itself should be framed as example number #1 why it's so difficult to actually debate with you.

Lol you don't debate with me, you just make your smug snarky little comments. Hey go ahead and frame that comment, It rings true though. saving money and getting less production isnt actually saving, its wasting. What good is saving money if you suck?

st33lersguy
09-20-2013, 11:56 PM
The logic that puzzles me is the idea that somebody fussing on this forum is anything more than useless bellyaching. As if the FO is gonna read this, say "whoops", restructure everyone's contract, talk Miami out of their deal, and bring him back.
/he's gone, he ain't comin' back, and I don't miss him

I am not complaining about anything, I was just asking steeldawg a question that everyone who is complaining about Wallace not being re-signed should ask

Craic
09-21-2013, 12:36 AM
Lol you don't debate with me, you just make your smug snarky little comments. Hey go ahead and frame that comment, It rings true though. saving money and getting less production isnt actually saving, its wasting. What good is saving money if you suck?

Yes, Steeldawg, I've tried debating with you before. You're right, I don't do it anymore.

No, your comment doesn't ring true, because there is so much fallacy in it. There was no cap space. We did not have, nor do we now have cap space. The issue was getting under the cap itself. It was a mandate, rather than a choice to get further under the cap.

And we got under the cap so that we could sign guys on both ​sides of the ball. In other words, so that we could actually field a team.

GoSlash27
09-21-2013, 06:19 AM
I am not complaining about anything, I was just asking steeldawg a question that everyone who is complaining about Wallace not being re-signed should ask

I understand. That was posted in response to your question, but wasn't directed at you.
Best,
-Slashy

steeldawg
09-21-2013, 07:19 AM
I am not complaining about anything, I was just asking steeldawg a question that everyone who is complaining about Wallace not being re-signed should ask

whoa whoa whoa I didn't complain about Wallace not being resigned, the question and topic in this thread is do you miss mike Wallace and my answer is yes. You brought up the cap situation, the question should isn't if we should of resigned him because he brings so much to the table he would only help us. The question is could we resign him, the steelers put forth their best offer and he turned it down. But trying to make the point that he isn't worth 60 million because you feel he didn't have enough 100yd games in his last 25 games is insane. Its insane when you look at what we paid Antonio brown which your ok with and his production especially in your ever so crucial 100yd game category.

steeldawg
09-21-2013, 07:47 AM
Yes, Steeldawg, I've tried debating with you before. You're right, I don't do it anymore.

No, your comment doesn't ring true, because there is so much fallacy in it. There was no cap space. We did not have, nor do we now have cap space. The issue was getting under the cap itself. It was a mandate, rather than a choice to get further under the cap.

And we got under the cap so that we could sign guys on both ​sides of the ball. In other words, so that we could actually field a team.


Well his question was directed at a player getting a 60 million dollar contract for a cap strapped team. We could afford it if the contract was structured correctly and we didn't give brown a big deal. It came down to the guaranteed money with Wallace which is the most important part to the player the 60 million vs. the 50 million im guessing was not a deal breaker nor would of it had any major cap implications especially for this season. The point is if this is what your offense looks like with out him and 60 million was his price but you chose to give brown 43 million to save that little bit of cap room over 5 years then you have actually wasted your money because although your cap situation is a little better your offense is inept.

Dwinsgames
09-21-2013, 08:38 AM
this line has a tough enough time blocking for a TEN yard pattern what on earth makes anyone think it magically becomes better with Wallace and is able to block for 20+ yard patterns ??????

that for me is the most mind boggling aspect of the entire conversation

zulater
09-21-2013, 08:52 AM
this line has a tough enough time blocking for a TEN yard pattern what on earth makes anyone think it magically becomes better with Wallace and is able to block for 20+ yard patterns ??????

that for me is the most mind boggling aspect of the entire conversation

If the Steelers had kept Mike Wallace they currently would be 2-0. Ben would be leading the league in passing and Isaac Redman would be the league's top rusher. Pouncey and Foote never would have got hurt, and Miller would already be back playing. Also the Pirates would have clinched the NL Central, Assad would be out of Syria, and the Muslim Brotherhood would have converted to Christianity. You guys just don't get it! :nono:

Dwinsgames
09-21-2013, 08:56 AM
If the Steelers had kept Mike Wallace they currently would be 2-0. Ben would be leading the league in passing and Isaac Redman would be the league's top rusher. Pouncey and Foote never would have got hurt, and Miller would already be back playing. Also the Pirates would have clinched the NL Central, Assad would be out of Syria, and the Muslim Brotherhood would have converted to Christianity and atheists would find Jesus and be saved . You guys just don't get it! :nono:


fixed it for ya

Mojouw
09-21-2013, 09:17 AM
Or alternatively, Antonio Brown is not being locked up by the other team's top CB, Sanders is in the slot where he belongs, Cotchery is on the bench where he belongs, and Wallace is running deep patterns that pull the #1 CB and a safety away from the line of scrimmage creating space for the other WR's to work and at least one less potential run defender in the box. Hell, you don't even have to complete many passes to Wallace, his speed alone would alter the way defenses scheme.

Hopefully, Wheaton can have some success and by the latter third of the season teams will have to change their coverages to account for him. I think that it is foolish and illogical to claim that Wallace being on the roster would not improve the current offensive situation. Whether he would improve it $60 million worth...that is another discussion entirely. As for him being a "diva"...Antonio Brown is starting to do some of the same things that got Wallace criticized and he has nowhere near the production.

GoSlash27
09-21-2013, 09:27 AM
Well his question was directed at a player getting a 60 million dollar contract for a cap strapped team. We could afford it if the contract was structured correctly and we didn't give brown a big deal. It came down to the guaranteed money with Wallace which is the most important part to the player the 60 million vs. the 50 million im guessing was not a deal breaker nor would of it had any major cap implications especially for this season. The point is if this is what your offense looks like with out him and 60 million was his price but you chose to give brown 43 million to save that little bit of cap room over 5 years then you have actually wasted your money because although your cap situation is a little better your offense is inept.

At the risk of repeating myself (and, seemingly, everybody else in this thread besides you), Mike Wallace's absence isn't the reason our offense sucks. Our O- line play and turnovers is the reason our offense sucks. Having a dude who can get open downfield and catch a ball isn't going to make our offense magically delicious.
There are people who are gone who we miss. Mike Wallace isn't one of them, especially not at that price tag.

steeldawg
09-21-2013, 01:27 PM
At the risk of repeating myself (and, seemingly, everybody else in this thread besides you), Mike Wallace's absence isn't the reason our offense sucks. Our O- line play and turnovers is the reason our offense sucks. Having a dude who can get open downfield and catch a ball isn't going to make our offense magically delicious.
There are people who are gone who we miss. Mike Wallace isn't one of them, especially not at that price tag.

It will make our offense better and yes missing mike Wallace right now is a hole in our offense. Having a guy who can open the field up and keep the safeties back helps the run game and the short passing game and the o-line. You can watch it with the dolphins right now, their o-line is terrible and so are their running backs but they can move the ball and they are 2-0, while their defense is good its not as good as ours.

- - - Updated - - -


Or alternatively, Antonio Brown is not being locked up by the other team's top CB, Sanders is in the slot where he belongs, Cotchery is on the bench where he belongs, and Wallace is running deep patterns that pull the #1 CB and a safety away from the line of scrimmage creating space for the other WR's to work and at least one less potential run defender in the box. Hell, you don't even have to complete many passes to Wallace, his speed alone would alter the way defenses scheme.

Hopefully, Wheaton can have some success and by the latter third of the season teams will have to change their coverages to account for him. I think that it is foolish and illogical to claim that Wallace being on the roster would not improve the current offensive situation. Whether he would improve it $60 million worth...that is another discussion entirely. As for him being a "diva"...Antonio Brown is starting to do some of the same things that got Wallace criticized and he has nowhere near the production.

Absolutely correct

Moose
09-21-2013, 05:00 PM
Nope !

Steeldude
09-21-2013, 06:11 PM
Anyone miss Mike Wallace now?

No. Why would I miss a player who tries only when he wants to?

st33lersguy
09-22-2013, 06:03 PM
For those that are interested, Mike Wallace came away with only 2 receptions for 22 yards. That's 2 of 3 games where he has failed to get 3 receptions or 25 yards.

Dwinsgames
09-22-2013, 06:15 PM
For those that are interested, Mike Wallace came away with only 2 receptions for 22 yards. That's 2 of 3 games where he has failed to get 3 receptions or 25 yards.

feast or famine ... nothing different than when he was in the Burgh

zulater
09-22-2013, 06:20 PM
For those that are interested, Mike Wallace came away with only 2 receptions for 22 yards. That's 2 of 3 games where he has failed to get 3 receptions or 25 yards.


But he made everyone else better. :wink02:

fansince'76
09-22-2013, 06:22 PM
But he made everyone else better. :wink02:

Yep. :rolleyes:

st33lersguy
09-22-2013, 06:30 PM
He finished 5th on his team in both receiving yards and receptions. Based on his total stats so far, I doubt he would have made much of an impact and I am glad he is gone

Mojouw
09-22-2013, 06:39 PM
Brian Hartline went off because he is awesome and super talented, one of the crappier o-lines in the league opened up almost 100 yards of rushing, and Tannehill is the next young elite QB. Stats without context are useless information. The Falcons D is bad and injury ravaged. Wallace's and almost any offensive player's impact can be felt in the team's offensive stats/performance -- not just individual metrics. I was not able to watch the game, but I bet a few shots Wallace's way opened up room for others to perform.

Meanwhile in the 'Burgh, there are struggles to get separation, jams at the line, bad schemes, extra defenders in the box...but we hate Mike Wallace because he left the Steelers and that makes him a terrible human being.

http://i.stack.imgur.com/jiFfM.jpg

Count Steeler
09-22-2013, 06:43 PM
His team is 3-0. The Steelers are 0-2. Do we really have to pick apart every game that Wallace plays in?

I'm only interested how he performs on Dec 08.

zulater
09-22-2013, 06:48 PM
Brian Hartline went off because he is awesome and super talented, one of the crappier o-lines in the league opened up almost 100 yards of rushing, and Tannehill is the next young elite QB. Stats without context are useless information. The Falcons D is bad and injury ravaged. Wallace's and almost any offensive player's impact can be felt in the team's offensive stats/performance -- not just individual metrics. I was not able to watch the game, but I bet a few shots Wallace's way opened up room for others to perform.

Meanwhile in the 'Burgh, there are struggles to get separation, jams at the line, bad schemes, extra defenders in the box...but we hate Mike Wallace because he left the Steelers and that makes him a terrible human being.

http://i.stack.imgur.com/jiFfM.jpg

No we don't hate Mike Wallace. We just don't think he was worth 60 million dollars in a league that has a salary cap on a team with salary cap issues. The only thing we hate is when people can't make that distinction.

zulater
09-22-2013, 07:17 PM
By the way if you gave me the choice between former Steeler receivers Santokio or Wallace, I'll take Sandoobio.

Nadroj 20
09-22-2013, 07:23 PM
By the way if you gave me the choice between former Steeler receivers Santokio or Wallace, I'll take Sandoobio.

I'll take Brian Hartline.

Mojouw
09-22-2013, 08:37 PM
No we don't hate Mike Wallace. We just don't think he was worth 60 million dollars in a league that has a salary cap on a team with salary cap issues. The only thing we hate is when people can't make that distinction.

As I have repeatedly said, I am not arguing that Wallace is worth $60 million. I am arguing that the denial that his loss has had a major negative impact on this offense is to deny all the available evidence. While this team has major issues on the line and offensive scheme, losing an elite weapon on offense has had a cascading negative effect throughout the skill positions.

bayz101
09-22-2013, 10:12 PM
Antonio Brown has more yards tonight than Wallace's high of 123 yards last year. He also has the same amount of touchdowns as Wallace's high last year.

st33lersguy
09-22-2013, 10:24 PM
We probably were just missing Heath Miller, the offense has picked up since then

Psycho Ward 86
09-22-2013, 11:08 PM
lol @ all these people refuting that they arent butt hurt because of wallace. this is a PASSIONATE fan base. there is HELL to pay for everyone who leaves us and doesnt kiss our nuts as they are leaving. its comical really. we probably dont show anymore or less class than any other fan base. What Mojouw just posted is one of the truest things ever said, but it doesnt just apply to Wallace.

zulater
09-22-2013, 11:13 PM
[QUOTE=Psycho Ward 86;397301]lol @ all these people refuting that they arent butt hurt because of wallace. this is a PASSIONATE fan base. there is HELL to pay for everyone who leaves us and doesnt kiss our nuts as they are leaving. its comical reall

We win tonight if he's there?

Very fucking doubtful.

Heath Miller's back and we started to look like we had some semblance of an offense for the first time all year. Now if Leveon Bell can come back and look like a real NFL running back then maybe we can see a real offense again.

And the line is still a clusterfuck.


But it has nothing, as in zero fucking zilch to do with Wallace!

bayz101
09-22-2013, 11:24 PM
Antonio Brown can be every bit as effective as Mike Wallace, and he proved that tonight. Clutch catches all around. Hell, i'm pretty sure he had more receiving yards tonight than Mike Wallace has ever had in a single game in his career. Same amount of touchdowns, too. All i'm saying is you have to give him credit: He CAN be the #1 guy and, in my opinion, he's a better all-around receiver.

Dwinsgames
09-22-2013, 11:32 PM
Brown has more yards tonight than Wallace has had through 3 weeks of play this season

Psycho Ward 86
09-22-2013, 11:58 PM
[QUOTE=Psycho Ward 86;397301]lol @ all these people refuting that they arent butt hurt because of wallace. this is a PASSIONATE fan base. there is HELL to pay for everyone who leaves us and doesnt kiss our nuts as they are leaving. its comical reall

We win tonight if he's there?

Very fucking doubtful.

Heath Miller's back and we started to look like we had some semblance of an offense for the first time all year. Now if Leveon Bell can come back and look like a real NFL running back then maybe we can see a real offense again.

And the line is still a clusterfuck.


But it has nothing, as in zero fucking zilch to do with Wallace!

Uh, where to begin...

1) Never said, or even implied in the slightest that we would win if Wallace was there

2) Never said anything about miller or leveon bell or any other players at all, so not sure what that has to do with anything

3) gee, i had no idea the line was a clusterfuck, thanks for the epiphany

4) i really dont think you get it yet. you seem to think anybody that says anything against brown at all is a Wallace dick rider. And if anybody points out the honesty of many fans being mostly just bitter with wallace somehow has something against brown. im neither so that must come across as extremely confusing to you. i did not want wallace back. i was happy to have brown back. but i fucking laugh at the pitiful attempts people have made in the past year in trying to justify that Sanders is actually capable of being a starting receiver in the NFL.

zulater
09-23-2013, 12:04 AM
Living in the past doesn't get us anywhere. Might as well bring Mendenhall, and Santonio Holmes into the conversation, if that's where we're headed.

Mojouw
09-23-2013, 12:14 AM
Look at it this way, how many other teams would Cotchery even play for, much less essentially start for?

Brown is good and capable of putting up big production. I did not think that was under debate. The question for Brown is bringing the consistency of high-end production while seeing the defensive scheme tilted in his direction. 2 out of 3 games this year he was not able to accomplish that. Tonight, clearly, Brown demonstrated that he can put up a huge game when he is made the focal point. Now, it will be about consistency and beating #1 corners and coverage schemes weekly.

Wallace provided Brown with a running mate. And for the record, I always saw it that way. Wallace is not going to carry a passing game all by himself. It will never be his game. But the way he takes the top off of a defense, dictates coverages, and alters defensive schemes has a ripple effect. I do not really understand why this is so hard to accept. Having a player with an undeniably elite skill (in this case deep threat) makes any offense better. It makes the players around that player better.

The only way this offense is better, from a talent standpoint, without Wallace is if Wheaton is able to replace that big-play deep threat capability. If Wheaton can get on the field and bring that to the table, then Sanders can go back to working the slot and Cotchery can go try (and fail) to gain separation from the bench.

But we can continue to take stats out of context, argue about who is worth what contract dollars, and on and on.

After the first three weeks can anyone deny that Ben is better when is pushing the ball down the field? He has never been nor will he ever be a precision passing short timing pass QB. So, again, I ask, how the hell did removing one of the best deep threats in the league help anything?

steelreserve
09-23-2013, 12:17 AM
Living in the past doesn't get us anywhere. Might as well bring Mendenhall, and Santonio Holmes into the conversation, if that's where we're headed.

Or for that matter - think how much better off we'd be if we still had Plaxico Bur-

wait. Never mind.

Mojouw
09-23-2013, 12:18 AM
Living in the past doesn't get us anywhere. Might as well bring Mendenhall, and Santonio Holmes into the conversation, if that's where we're headed.

Or reflecting on the nature of personnel changes can reveal flaws in the current roster construction, potential paths for future upgrades, and provide insight into how schematic changes on offense are or are not working.

After tonight, would you argue that Ben shouldn't be turned loose to throw deep more often?

steeldawg
09-23-2013, 05:52 AM
Look at it this way, how many other teams would Cotchery even play for, much less essentially start for?

Brown is good and capable of putting up big production. I did not think that was under debate. The question for Brown is bringing the consistency of high-end production while seeing the defensive scheme tilted in his direction. 2 out of 3 games this year he was not able to accomplish that. Tonight, clearly, Brown demonstrated that he can put up a huge game when he is made the focal point. Now, it will be about consistency and beating #1 corners and coverage schemes weekly.

Wallace provided Brown with a running mate. And for the record, I always saw it that way. Wallace is not going to carry a passing game all by himself. It will never be his game. But the way he takes the top off of a defense, dictates coverages, and alters defensive schemes has a ripple effect. I do not really understand why this is so hard to accept. Having a player with an undeniably elite skill (in this case deep threat) makes any offense better. It makes the players around that player better.

The only way this offense is better, from a talent standpoint, without Wallace is if Wheaton is able to replace that big-play deep threat capability. If Wheaton can get on the field and bring that to the table, then Sanders can go back to working the slot and Cotchery can go try (and fail) to gain separation from the bench.

But we can continue to take stats out of context, argue about who is worth what contract dollars, and on and on.

After the first three weeks can anyone deny that Ben is better when is pushing the ball down the field? He has never been nor will he ever be a precision passing short timing pass QB. So, again, I ask, how the hell did removing one of the best deep threats in the league help anything?

Its so true! Yes Brown had a monster night, and we lost by 17 and only managed 23 points. If we have to rely on ben dodging tacklers and heaving the ball up, brown making acrobatic catches for 196 and 2 tds all to muster 23 points in a 17 point loss we really aren't that good.

Dwinsgames
09-23-2013, 06:53 AM
Or reflecting on the nature of personnel changes can reveal flaws in the current roster construction, potential paths for future upgrades, and provide insight into how schematic changes on offense are or are not working.

After tonight, would you argue that Ben shouldn't be turned loose to throw deep more often?

when Ben throws for 300 or more yards the last 6 times it was in a losing effort ... just sayin

zulater
09-23-2013, 07:00 AM
d
Its so true! Yes Brown had a monster night, and we lost by 17 and only managed 23 points. If we have to rely on ben dodging tacklers and heaving the ball up, brown making acrobatic catches for 196 and 2 tds all to muster 23 points in a 17 point loss we really aren't that good.


Well Duh! That's part of what we've been saying. And a 60 million dollar 9 route specialist wouldn't do Jack to change that.

steeldawg
09-23-2013, 09:32 AM
d


Well Duh! That's part of what we've been saying. And a 60 million dollar 9 route specialist wouldn't do Jack to change that.
Sure it would make difference I don't know how adding a weapon would hurt

Psycho Ward 86
09-23-2013, 10:40 AM
Brown made some beautiful plays downfield last night. But as long Sanders sucks so much ass, i want to see Wheaton get a shit ton of extra playing time, especially downtown. We need someone to take the load off of Brown. There are exactly zero areas where Sanders is even close to half as good as Brown.

- - - Updated - - -


Its so true! Yes Brown had a monster night, and we lost by 17 and only managed 23 points. If we have to rely on ben dodging tacklers and heaving the ball up, brown making acrobatic catches for 196 and 2 tds all to muster 23 points in a 17 point loss we really aren't that good.

this. so much.

GoSlash27
09-23-2013, 04:28 PM
Still don't miss Wallace :D

zulater
09-24-2013, 07:47 AM
Sure it would make difference I don't know how adding a weapon would hurt

Adding a weapon would help, but not a 60 million dollar one that will subtract from other area's of the field. Or at least that 60 million dollar "weapon". Give me an in his prime Larry Fitzgerald for that and yeah I'm on board. But not Mike Wallace at that price.

I mean a Holiday Inn express is a nice enough hotel, but if I have to pay Four Season rate for it, no thanks, I'll take a room at the Best Western or La Quinta instead.