Originally Posted by
Craic
Not my point. My point is Tomlin's teams were in the position to play meaningful games. Period. That's better than the Cowher teams that couldn't even get that far that several others seem not willing to remember. And if you want to talk about historic collapses, all we have to do is go back to AFCCGs. Top-ranked defenses. Top-ranked running games. And we lost how many times? Five or something like that?
The funny thing is, I'm not completely sold on Tomlin right now either. But, it's this historical revision thing that makes me cringe so much, as if Tomlin has done jack-all and Cowher was the man year in and year out. No one has came out and said it, but go back and read this thread and several other threads with the same theme, and that's exactly the context between the lines, and it's simply wrong. The both have their strong points and they both have their weaknesses. On top of that, we're almost talking two different eras, to be honest. And, while Cowher left Tomlin with a good QB for the new era of QB-focused football, he also left Tomlin with an aging O Line and a defensive system that had been a relic five years before Tomlin even came to the team, and it was just being covered up by great LB and Safety play. (For instance, the 2008 defense looks great on paper, but if you look at the fourth quarter TDs aloud by that defense late in the season and playoffs, you'll see exactly what I mean. It became even clearer in 2010-2011.