Tomlin-Extension

[Mojouw]

No, he is off the pace of all the coaches I listed in my earlier post. You need to justify why Tomlin should get a pass for missing the playoffs in 2018 (and to a lesser extent 2012). To me, that's a stark example of Tomlin's weaknesses. I see no reason to just handwave that away. If you can find examples of other Tomlin peers who have had other comparable collapses, then I'd be interested. Until then, we are left with Tomlin being less likely to make the Divisional Round than his peers and with at least one really ugly play-off missing collapse with no obvious explanation (not even the injury excuse that kinda/sorta gives Tomlin a partial excuse for 2020). Your position sounds like the inverse of the Willie Parker detractors who always wanted to take away his big runs when discussing him. If you don't count Tomlin's bad years, then he's a great coach! I don't think your argument that we can't analyze why the Steelers missed the playoffs as part of our critique of Tomlin's body of work makes any sense at all. Besides, 2014 was a playoff year. Tomlin put the team in a horrible position through gross in-season roster mismanagement and overseeing two egregious losses against bottom feeders. But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

Tomlin is a good coach. I have said that a dozen times in this thread. But I don't think he is any better than a half dozen of his peers at least, and I think that by the metric I explained he has underachieved in comparison to them. You might not agree with using "getting past the Wild Card round" as a metric, but I think it provides more useful and illuminating comparison than your initially proposed Super Bowl metric. There is only 1 Super Bowl winner and 2 participants each year. There are 8 divsional round participants each year. Tomlin's well-regarded peers seem to have around a 50% success rate of at least achieving that level of success. Tomlin is around 35%. Why is that?

- - - Updated - - -



And it's clear that I was judging Tomlin's entire body of work. Why should I ignore the bad years just because it's inconvenient for Mojouw's argument? Besides, 2014 was a playoff year. I pointed out why I put that year on Tomlin. He handwaved that away.

As an aside, the level of discourse that would call my comments "hate" is probably what makes people dormant here in the first place. What is the site for if we're not discussing the Steelers? Are we supposed to mindless say everything is great all the time? I love Tomlin. He's arguably my alma mater's greatest success in professional sports. I am not a hater. I just think his time is up.

Again. This was ALL started by the typically (and not my fault if you don't read the literally hundreds) posts here that Tomlin=underachievement because SBs or something. It gets hard to follow.

We have cleared up how that just doesn't really hold up to scrutiny.

Then we have some sort of moving target thing where it started as playoff appearances, then became moving past the WC round, but maybe the divisional round too, and then it circled back to both moving past the WC round AND not missing the playoffs. Honestly I am not sure I really followed it all. So it is bad in some years to make the playoffs and lose in the WC round but it would make other bad years good if the team lost in the WC round instead of staying home at the end of the regular season? This appears to be known as Heisenberg's Playoff Uncertainty Principle. Sometimes a WC is BAD, but other times it is GOOD. Apparently depending on how much you want to fire Tomlin?

You laid a case that Tomlin is behind several active coaches in WC round advances. Agreed. The numbers don't lie. You then stated that it was far more galling/damning in terms of underachievement (the original thing I was attempting to understand how people were measuring) that Tomlin missed the playoffs in seasons. I then showed that using the same WC comparison list, he comes out looking pretty good - or at least comparable. Now, you're back to the WC round thing.

So, back to the original question I posed to start all of this nonsense -- what is the benchmark you are using to designate "underachievement"? If other active (or even recently retired/fired) coaches are evaluated using the same benchmark, how do they fare compared to Mike Tomlin? Scattered throughout this thread are 3-4 names that appear to be doing it "better" than Tomlin over sustained periods of time (Dungy, Belichick, Carroll, and Reid) and a few that are hovering in the same tier as Tomlin. Can shift the names around based on the criteria used. So we are left to conclude, what, Tomlin is roughly one of the 5-10 most successful coaches in the league over the last 15 years? Or have I missed something entirely?

[DesertSteel]

And it's clear that I was judging Tomlin's entire body of work. Why should I ignore the bad years just because it's inconvenient for Mojouw's argument? Besides, 2014 was a playoff year. I pointed out why I put that year on Tomlin. He handwaved that away.

As an aside, the level of discourse that would call my comments "hate" is probably what makes people dormant here in the first place. What is the site for if we're not discussing the Steelers? Are we supposed to mindless say everything is great all the time? I love Tomlin. He's arguably my alma mater's greatest success in professional sports. I am not a hater. I just think his time is up.

You don’t need a reason.

[W&M_Steeler]

Again. This was ALL started by the typically (and not my fault if you don't read the literally hundreds) posts here that Tomlin=underachievement because SBs or something. It gets hard to follow.

We have cleared up how that just doesn't really hold up to scrutiny.

Then we have some sort of moving target thing where it started as playoff appearances, then became moving past the WC round, but maybe the divisional round too, and then it circled back to both moving past the WC round AND not missing the playoffs. Honestly I am not sure I really followed it all. So it is bad in some years to make the playoffs and lose in the WC round but it would make other bad years good if the team lost in the WC round instead of staying home at the end of the regular season? This appears to be known as Heisenberg's Playoff Uncertainty Principle. Sometimes a WC is BAD, but other times it is GOOD. Apparently depending on how much you want to fire Tomlin?

You laid a case that Tomlin is behind several active coaches in WC round advances. Agreed. The numbers don't lie. You then stated that it was far more galling/damning in terms of underachievement (the original thing I was attempting to understand how people were measuring) that Tomlin missed the playoffs in seasons. I then showed that using the same WC comparison list, he comes out looking pretty good - or at least comparable. Now, you're back to the WC round thing.

I don't get this line of argument at all. Do you think it is possible for a fan to critique a team's performance? Do you think that some circumstances make losses more understandable than others? Of course you do- otherwise you wouldn't spend any time on football message boards. I think the 2014 playoff loss was much worse than the 2015 or 2016 playoff losses. I think missing the playoffs in 2018 was far less defensible than missing the playoffs in 2013. I could discuss these points in great detail if we wanted to do so. I am sure you could too. Pretending that this is some incomprehensible concept is a waste of time, frankly. If you don't want to include 2018 in the discussion, then fine- I don't need it to make my point about the Divisional Round (as a stand in for playoff runs). I just think that doing so omits the worst coaching of Tomlin's career, which seems to be relevant to a discussion about the quality of Tomlin's body of work. 2018 was a golden opportunity for the Steelers to make a playoff run that was inexplicably squandered.

So, back to the original question I posed to start all of this nonsense -- what is the benchmark you are using to designate "underachievement"? If other active (or even recently retired/fired) coaches are evaluated using the same benchmark, how do they fare compared to Mike Tomlin? Scattered throughout this thread are 3-4 names that appear to be doing it "better" than Tomlin over sustained periods of time (Dungy, Belichick, Carroll, and Reid) and a few that are hovering in the same tier as Tomlin. Can shift the names around based on the criteria used. So we are left to conclude, what, Tomlin is roughly one of the 5-10 most successful coaches in the league over the last 15 years? Or have I missed something entirely?

No, I think we are in agreement on a lot of things, and I have enjoyed this conversation (in case my tone is somehow not coming off clearly). I agree with you that Tomlin is one of the top 10 or so best coaches of the past 15 years, and I agree that I think it's unreasonable to call Tomlin a failure for not winning a Super Bowl this decade. However, I also think that you can make an argument that, nevertheless, he has underachieved in comparison to his well-regarded peers using the Divisional Round metric. Those are two different arguments. And I have also (needlessly?) inserted a third argument- that Tomlin has grown stale and, despite his past success, should be changed out to increase the chance of greater success going forward (albeit admittedly risking that the Steelers would hire someone less successful- no risk, no reward IMO).

- - - Updated - - -

You don’t need a reason.

Good one. I bet there are 6,000 other similar pearls of wisdom in your posts.

[Mojouw]

I don't get this line of argument at all. Do you think it is possible for a fan to critique a team's performance? Do you think that some circumstances make losses more understandable than others? Of course you do- otherwise you wouldn't spend any time on football message boards. I think the 2014 playoff loss was much worse than the 2015 or 2016 playoff losses. I think missing the playoffs in 2018 was far less defensible than missing the playoffs in 2013. I could discuss these points in great detail if we wanted to do so. I am sure you could too. Pretending that this is some incomprehensible concept is a waste of time, frankly. If you don't want to include 2018 in the discussion, then fine- I don't need it to make my point about the Divisional Round (as a stand in for playoff runs). I just think that doing so omits the worst coaching of Tomlin's career, which seems to be relevant to a discussion about the quality of Tomlin's body of work. 2018 was a golden opportunity for the Steelers to make a playoff run that was inexplicably squandered.



No, I think we are in agreement on a lot of things, and I have enjoyed this conversation (in case my tone is somehow not coming off clearly). I agree with you that Tomlin is one of the top 10 or so best coaches of the past 15 years, and I agree that I think it's unreasonable to call Tomlin a failure for not winning a Super Bowl this decade. However, I also think that you can make an argument that, nevertheless, he has underachieved in comparison to his well-regarded peers using the Divisional Round metric. Those are two different arguments. And I have also (needlessly?) inserted a third argument- that Tomlin has grown stale and, despite his past success, should be changed out to increase the chance of greater success going forward (albeit admittedly risking that the Steelers would hire someone less successful- no risk, no reward IMO).

- - - Updated - - -



Good one. I bet there are 6,000 other similar pearls of wisdom in your posts.

It is a good conversation. No problems at all there. And your last bit is all I wanted to kind of confirm. There are multiple different arguments/positions that get all wrapped up under the banner of "underachievement" and I strongly believe it is importanta and worthwhile to separate them. So if we pull apart and look at SBs we can kinda get one read on Tomlin's performance. Then we can have separate set of parameters that give us a read on Tomlin's overall playoff performance when the team does make a playoff run. Then there is a third set of criteria that we can evaluate Tomlin on from seasons where the team failed to qualify for the playoffs. While I realize (and fully acknowledge in case I didn't do so clearly) that it is very necessary (and fun) to evaluate Tomlin across all three categories, I just argue that we (whoever is doing the evaluating) need to be clear on what we are measuring and what we are using as comparisons/standards of evaluation. Otherwise, we all spend a great deal of time and can get unnecessarily angry at each other as we talk past one another.

I think the "stale" argument is an interesting one. I would counter that this was potentially true at other points in Tomlin's career but not now. Why? Roster turnover. Sure there are some old Tomlin hands on the team (Heyward, DeCastro, Ben, and VW) but there are a lot of guys holding key roster spots that really haven't been with Tomlin for more than one contract cycle. Not sure if you can go stale in 3 years or less. Now...if we extend the argument that Tomlin is complacent...and isn't really doing much anymore....maybe? But I would argue that Mike McCarthy's ouster in Green Bay is a fairly reasonable barometer for what that looks like - a head coach mailing it in. Perhaps because of where I live and being inundated with Packers news, I feel that I do not hear the type of locker room and interview comments that came out of late-stage McCarthy teams with any of Tomlin's teams.

[ETL]

Yeah, I'd hate to jump the gun with a hasty decision after only 14 years...

Hypnotic boobs or not, I have to disagree with you. Do you ever think it is justified to second guess or criticize a Steelers' decision?

You’re a noob. I have been very vocal against retaining Ben but they kept him and I’m not happy about it. But I don’t think HC is a problem. You obviously disagree. But it’s not a reason to judge me and accuse me of agreeing with everything the Steelers do

[86WARD]

So I am curious.

Simply...

What season(s) did Tomlin prevent the Steelers from winning the Super Bowl that they should have won?

Don’t need a lengthy explanation. Maybe just the year(s) and a sentence as to why they should have won the Super Bowl.

[W&M_Steeler]

You’re a noob. I have been very vocal against retaining Ben but they kept him and I’m not happy about it. But I don’t think HC is a problem. You obviously disagree. But it’s not a reason to judge me and accuse me of agreeing with everything the Steelers do

I'm not judging you, and I am not trying to insult or offend you (sorry if I did), I'm just questioning your implication that if someone disagrees with the Steelers' decision on this extension, they should go root for Washington or the Browns. You didn't leave much room for nuance there, and it seemed pretty judgmental to me. Besides, your logic could be turned against you on Ben. Why shouldn't we be thankful for the Steelers' patient consistent ways and be glad they extended Ben? And why shouldn't those who disagree go root for Washington? You could get your new QB fix every 2 or 3 years, and sometimes after one year. The answer: because you have reasons why you disagree with the Steelers on that issue. That doesn't mean you should go root for some other team. Same with me on the Tomlin extension.

[Dissolv]

What it comes down to is: Why were the Steelers not as successful as we wanted? I'll leave aside the "should have been" statements because those are unsupportable. Were we really better than KC last year? Tampa? I mean we might have won over either of those two teams, but I would not have given a straight 50/50 shot for either.

So why do we think that Tomlin specifically is the piece of the puzzle that needs to be removed? Players can be evaluated on how they execute plays, and Ben has been inconsistent for years. A fact explained by age, knee injuries, and a nagging elbow injury. The defense has also given up a ton of points in quite a few games, including the loss to the Browns last year.

I'm not up for the simple reduction of "team didn't win, coach must go" train of thought. It is way too basic. You have to find a way to evaluate the coach, the players, the scheme, and even the organization in a way independent from each other. This is difficult as fans, and since we can't see the work the coach puts in, the mind tends to fill in the blanks. Right now I've got no specific reason why I should think that Tomlin was specifically responsible for post season collapses and the other aspects of the team were not. Now I would buy into the concept that if you can't sort it out, blow it up. Again, some teams do that. But that has never been the Steelers way, so me calling for it as a fan is just kinda.....dumb. We all know they aren't going to do that 99/100 years. And frankly they do a great job of putting a good team on field year in and year out, without benefit of high draft picks -- ever.

So that brings us back to what exactly would put them over the top? Can we even figure that out from the vantage point of fans, i.e. outside the building? This isn't a sport where you get 82 games per season. The team has very limited time to peak, things have to go just right, injuries are a massive part of the game, and sometimes your opponents are just on a roll when you are banged up physically from playing in the AFC North. It happens. The magical alchemy that makes a winning season is one of the great things about the sport, plus "any given Sunday".

Maybe it would help if what another coach would have done differently, and I mean specifically, could be pointed out. I mean like any coach, living or dead. What would 1970 Noll have done differently with the 2017 team that would have resulted in a deep playoff run? At least getting past the Jags? I mean normally 42 points is a sure win, but not this time. :-( That kind of thing. Then at least we could know what people think Tomlin is doing wrong (or right). Right now it seems like a very poor analysis of the Steelers playoff woes -- which are quite real, It's just mumble mumble blame Tomlin. Why not blame Ben? The running game? Colbert? Specifics would go a long way here, is all I am saying.

[W&M_Steeler]

So I am curious.

Simply...

What season(s) did Tomlin prevent the Steelers from winning the Super Bowl that they should have won?

Don’t need a lengthy explanation. Maybe just the year(s) and a sentence as to why they should have won the Super Bowl.

If you're asking me, I don't think it's reasonable for anyone to say "The Steelers definitely would have won a Super Bowl in year X but for Tomlin's decision." But I think there were years where coaching contributed to the team achieving less than they should have. I already went through my thoughts on this in some detail earlier in the thread, so I'll be brief here:

I think 2014 and 2018 were huge missed opportunities for the Steelers, and I think coaching played a significant role in the Steelers' disappointing finishes these years.

-But for losses to the 2-14 Buc and the 4-12 Jets, the 2014 Steelers would have had a bye week (and possibly had a healthy Le'veon, as the Bengals game in week 17 might have been meaningless). That, combined with the mystifying decision to cut Blount early in the season and not find a replacement for him all year put the Steelers in position to lose. 2014 was Ben's prime. This team, with a decent RB in the backfield (not Ben Tate signed three days before the game) and with the benefit of a bye, could have been tough in the playoffs.

-2018 collapse was terrible, and took a team in the running for a bye and put them out of the playoffs. To much inconsistency, too many games in cruise control against bottom feeder opponents. This team beat the eventual Super Bowl Champion Pats and took the NFC #1 Seed Saints to the wire in NO despite home cooking from the refs- they should have been a real contender in the playoffs. Instead, they blew leads and squandered wins against the Browns, Broncos, and Raiders. The Raiders game in particular featured bad clock management at the end of the game.

While not as bad as 2014 and 2018, I put some blame on the coaches for 2017. Losing Shazier was a horrible blow, and the D was further hampered by some draft busts at the time, but the D was probably as bad in 2017 as it was in 2003. There was really nothing that could have been done to shore it up just a little? And while the Jags were a tough match-up for the Steelers, the Steelers wouldn't have had to play them in the Divisional had the Steelers taken care of business against the 5-11 Bears earlier in the season. Mike Glennon is the Tomlin slayer, and dropping games to bottom feeders has hurt Steelers' seeding the entire decade. It was a shame to waste that offense, the only year that Ben, Bell, Brown, and Bryant were all able to play in the playoffs.

I think the team underperformed in 2012 and 2020- 2012 by dropping the customary two games to bottom feeders, thereby missing the playoffs due to tie-breakers, and 2020 by the complete collapse in the last third of the season- but I don't think they were real Super Bowl contenders those years so they don't sting as much.

[W&M_Steeler]

I'm not up for the simple reduction of "team didn't win, coach must go" train of thought. It is way too basic. You have to find a way to evaluate the coach, the players, the scheme, and even the organization in a way independent from each other. This is difficult as fans, and since we can't see the work the coach puts in, the mind tends to fill in the blanks. Right now I've got no specific reason why I should think that Tomlin was specifically responsible for post season collapses and the other aspects of the team were not.

No one rational is saying that Tomlin is solely responsible for the team's underperformance (as some see it) over the past decade. The argument is that Tomlin, as head coach, is ultimately responsible for the team's results and that the past decade gives some indication that he no longer has what it takes to lead a Super Bowl team, or in most cases even a team that can win a playoff game. Does he get coach for life status because he's a good coach and good guy who's probably not going to preside over a terrible stretch of seasons? Or do the Steelers take a chance and try to shake things up like they did when they encouraged Noll to retire, or like the Bucs did when they replaced Dungy, or even like the Steelers did when bringing in Tomlin (albeit with Cowher's decision)? It's human nature- many people in secure positions for long periods of time get complacent, especially if they have already reached the highest level of success possible for their roles. You make great points about us not really knowing what's going on. All I am saying is that from an outsiders perspective, 2018 and 2020 had times where the team and coaching staff just seemed complacent, sluggish with no fire, going through the motions. I think it's a tough call, and I think there are good arguments on both sides. I would not have issued an extension based on what I see, but maybe I would think differently if I were in the room.

Maybe it would help if what another coach would have done differently, and I mean specifically, could be pointed out. I mean like any coach, living or dead. What would 1970 Noll have done differently with the 2017 team that would have resulted in a deep playoff run? At least getting past the Jags? I mean normally 42 points is a sure win, but not this time. :-( That kind of thing. Then at least we could know what people think Tomlin is doing wrong (or right). Right now it seems like a very poor analysis of the Steelers playoff woes -- which are quite real, It's just mumble mumble blame Tomlin. Why not blame Ben? The running game? Colbert? Specifics would go a long way here, is all I am saying.

I'm no Xs and Os genius, so I can't provide a specific scheme or coverage or personnel grouping that would have been better in the Jacksonville game than what they used. Did they use the best possible scheme given the circumstances? Maybe they did. Maybe the Jags were just a bad match for the Steelers. My answer to what they could have done better in 2017- not have lost to the Bears earlier in the season so they wouldn't have had to play the Jags.

That gets to my underlying problem with the Tomlin era. I get "any given Sunday," but it's ridiculous how many times the Steelers have lost to teams that finished the season 5-11 or worse over the past decade. But even when the Steelers beat the bottom feeders, it's usually a close game. It's never a good sign to see the Steelers favored by double digits, because it means they're probably going to come in flat. The Mike Glennons and the Jeff Driskells and the Ryan Finleys and the Garrett Gilberts of the world routinely give this team fits, and they have for years. Losing to bottom feeders turns bye weeks into Wild Card round berths, and Wild Card round berths into missing the playoffs. The more playoff games you need to play, the less likely you are to make it to the Super Bowl (and of course you can't make it at all if you miss the playoffs entirely). When this happens year in and year out, you have to at least wonder what role the coaching staff plays in these let downs. I would like to see a more consistent level of effort from the Steelers, and I'd like to see them blow out a team starting a 3rd string QB every once in awhile.

[fansince'76]

It's just mumble mumble blame Tomlin.

mumble, mumble...Rire Romlin!...mumble, mumble...

[W&M_Steeler]

I think the "stale" argument is an interesting one. I would counter that this was potentially true at other points in Tomlin's career but not now. Why? Roster turnover. Sure there are some old Tomlin hands on the team (Heyward, DeCastro, Ben, and VW) but there are a lot of guys holding key roster spots that really haven't been with Tomlin for more than one contract cycle. Not sure if you can go stale in 3 years or less. Now...if we extend the argument that Tomlin is complacent...and isn't really doing much anymore....maybe? But I would argue that Mike McCarthy's ouster in Green Bay is a fairly reasonable barometer for what that looks like - a head coach mailing it in. Perhaps because of where I live and being inundated with Packers news, I feel that I do not hear the type of locker room and interview comments that came out of late-stage McCarthy teams with any of Tomlin's teams.

Good reference to McCarthy in Green Bay. I don't think it's as bad as that with Tomlin (I haven't heard about Tomlin delegating meetings so he could go get massages or watch tv or the other things McCarthy was accused of doing), but I do get whiffs of complacency, usually when the Steelers come out and struggle against (and often lose to) terrible teams, especially when those terrible teams are riddled with injuries and are starting back-ups. The point about player turnover is interesting- Tomlin's message won't be stale to the new guys. But when I say "stale" I am more concerned with internal complacency. As I mention in another post, I think there's a risk that people in secure positions who have already reached the top can get complacent and lose their fire. I'm concerned that the "good enough" has become the enemy of the "great". Also, organizations can become susceptible to group think. I think this was a big problem recently, with the Steelers' coaching staff turning into the Arkansas State club. I'm not in the room, so don't know for sure, but it seemed like that staff wasn't chosen because they were the best hires out there. It reeked of the old boy's club. I am glad to see Fichtner go, and I think Butler probably should have been swapped out for someone with a fresh vision.

[Mojouw]

Good reference to McCarthy in Green Bay. I don't think it's as bad as that with Tomlin (I haven't heard about Tomlin delegating meetings so he could go get massages or watch tv or the other things McCarthy was accused of doing), but I do get whiffs of complacency, usually when the Steelers come out and struggle against (and often lose to) terrible teams, especially when those terrible teams are riddled with injuries and are starting back-ups. The point about player turnover is interesting- Tomlin's message won't be stale to the new guys. But when I say "stale" I am more concerned with internal complacency. As I mention in another post, I think there's a risk that people in secure positions who have already reached the top can get complacent and lose their fire. Also, organizations can become susceptible to group think. I think this was a big problem recently, with the Steelers' coaching staff turning into the Arkansas State club. I'm not in the room, so don't know for sure, but it seemed like that staff wasn't chosen because they were the best hires out there. It reeked of the old boy's club. I am glad to see Fichtner go, and I think Butler probably should have been swapped out for someone with a fresh vision.

The demotion of Butler and the continued influence of Austin and Tomlin would seem to indicate that things have and are changing on the defensive side of the ball. The development of Watt and Dupree and hopefully Highsmith likely keeps Butler and Dunbar around and the increase in effeciency and turnovers likely keeps Austin-Tomlin more in control of the defense.

On offense, Fichtner was hired to placate the franchise QB and make the offense more efficient and streamline from the weird game-day playcalling of Haley. And for one glorious year, he did exactly that. Then the wheels came off due to injury in 2019 and the fact that Ben wasn't able to do "Ben things" in 2020. Fichtner's offense (if you want to call it that) requires hitting on chunk plays both over the middle and along the sideline to back the defense off and make all those hitches, screens, and wide run plays have space to happen in. Or at least that is how I see it. When (post the Ravens game and definitely after the WFT game) NFL defenses realized that the Steelers of 2020 were not the "big passing play" team they used to be, teams squished the field down and the offense fell apart. Part of that is because Ben was not good in 2020 and part of that was because Butler had no answers to difficult questions. So Butler gets fired and Ben gets another rodeo. Plus, it is pretty clear that Tomlin (or someone) was already trying to innovate and change on offense or Canada would have never been let in the building.

I think the coaches were in place too long narrative is a great one to debate and makes for really solid talk radio and blog posts on the internet. I think it is harder to connect that in tangible ways to actual on the field performance. The way I always see it done is that Butler is a moron because he played zone against the Patriots and they lost. Ok. Fine. Many other NFL teams played zone against the Patriots. A great deal of the time. Additionally, look at the DBs and LBs on the roster for many of those losses. They were not capable of playing single man coverages. Over a several year cycle, the defensive roster turned over and the Steelers got flexible DBs capable of playing a variety of coverage styles. Almost certainly not coincidentally, the defense got better. Like Parcells always said...you can only cook the meal you have the groceries for.

[W&M_Steeler]

The demotion of Butler and the continued influence of Austin and Tomlin would seem to indicate that things have and are changing on the defensive side of the ball. The development of Watt and Dupree and hopefully Highsmith likely keeps Butler and Dunbar around and the increase in effeciency and turnovers likely keeps Austin-Tomlin more in control of the defense.

On offense, Fichtner was hired to placate the franchise QB and make the offense more efficient and streamline from the weird game-day playcalling of Haley. And for one glorious year, he did exactly that. Then the wheels came off due to injury in 2019 and the fact that Ben wasn't able to do "Ben things" in 2020. Fichtner's offense (if you want to call it that) requires hitting on chunk plays both over the middle and along the sideline to back the defense off and make all those hitches, screens, and wide run plays have space to happen in. Or at least that is how I see it. When (post the Ravens game and definitely after the WFT game) NFL defenses realized that the Steelers of 2020 were not the "big passing play" team they used to be, teams squished the field down and the offense fell apart. Part of that is because Ben was not good in 2020 and part of that was because Butler had no answers to difficult questions. So Butler gets fired and Ben gets another rodeo. Plus, it is pretty clear that Tomlin (or someone) was already trying to innovate and change on offense or Canada would have never been let in the building.

I think the coaches were in place too long narrative is a great one to debate and makes for really solid talk radio and blog posts on the internet. I think it is harder to connect that in tangible ways to actual on the field performance. The way I always see it done is that Butler is a moron because he played zone against the Patriots and they lost. Ok. Fine. Many other NFL teams played zone against the Patriots. A great deal of the time. Additionally, look at the DBs and LBs on the roster for many of those losses. They were not capable of playing single man coverages. Over a several year cycle, the defensive roster turned over and the Steelers got flexible DBs capable of playing a variety of coverage styles. Almost certainly not coincidentally, the defense got better. Like Parcells always said...you can only cook the meal you have the groceries for.

I am not sure that Fichtner can be entirely pinned on Ben- he was Tomlin's old colleague. Tomlin brought Fichtner to the Steelers as WR coach in 2007. I have a hard time believing Tomlin didn't think he was a good fit, and I wonder how much outside search they did before promoting Fichtner from inside. I also think everyone was ready for Todd "Tequila Cowboy" Haley to hit the road.

I agree with you that the defensive personnel mid-decade were substandard. The 2017 team would have looked much better had Jarvis Jones, Artie Burns, Senquez Golson, and Sean Davis all turned out to be good starters and had Bud Dupree been a bit swifter on the development curve. Throw in losing Shazier permanently and you have a stalled defensive rebuild that hurt the team in the middle of the decade. How much is Colbert to blame, how much are Tomlin / Butler to blame, and how much just came down to bad luck? I don't know how that question could be resolved.

[Mojouw]

I am not sure that Fichtner can be entirely pinned on Ben- he was Tomlin's old colleague. Tomlin brought Fichtner to the Steelers as WR coach in 2007. I have a hard time believing Tomlin didn't think he was a good fit, and I wonder how much outside search they did before promoting Fichtner from inside. I also think everyone was ready for Todd "Tequila Cowboy" Haley to hit the road.

I agree with you that the defensive personnel mid-decade were substandard. The 2017 team would have looked much better had Jarvis Jones, Artie Burns, Senquez Golson, and Sean Davis all turned out to be good starters and had Bud Dupree been a bit swifter on the development curve. Throw in losing Shazier permanently and you have a stalled defensive rebuild that hurt the team in the middle of the decade. How much is Colbert to blame, how much are Tomlin / Butler to blame, and how much just came down to bad luck? I don't know how that question could be resolved.

I think Fichtner got in the door on the strength of his personal connection with Tomlin - a fairly typical way to get coaching jobs. Then, i think he stuck around and rose through the ranks based on the fact that the franchise QB loved him some Randy Fichtner. Unless Ben is/was lying for years across several interviews, he got along with Randy better than anyone since Clement.

[W&M_Steeler]

I think Fichtner got in the door on the strength of his personal connection with Tomlin - a fairly typical way to get coaching jobs. Then, i think he stuck around and rose through the ranks based on the fact that the franchise QB loved him some Randy Fichtner. Unless Ben is/was lying for years across several interviews, he got along with Randy better than anyone since Clement.

I am sure Ben liked him too. Tomlin liked him, Ben liked him, Rooney probably liked him, so why look outside and possibly rock the boat with a new hire that doesn't quite fit the culture when you can promote from within? Pretty lazy and complacent for an organization in a field as competitive as the NFL if that's the way it went down. I think Ben has likely contributed to that culture too. I wonder if any other team would have hired Fichtner as OC had he been a "free agent" prior to the 2018 season.

[Mojouw]

I am sure Ben liked him too. Tomlin liked him, Ben liked him, Rooney probably liked him, so why look outside and possibly rock the boat with a new hire that doesn't quite fit the culture when you can promote from within? Pretty lazy and complacent for an organization in a field as competitive as the NFL if that's the way it went down. I think Ben has likely contributed to that culture too. I wonder if any other team would have hired Fichtner as OC had he been a "free agent" prior to the 2018 season.

We will never know. I really don't have a problem with a team catering to their franchise QB. Happens year in and year out across the league. Until it does "bad" then you either dump the QB or push a new coach on him. Like GB did with Rodgers and whatever his name is that doesn't go for it on 4th downs. And like Steelers did with Haley and now Canada. The other option is to keep pissing in your franchise QB's cheerios like the Seahawks are doing. They are gonna mess around and Wilson is gonna split.

We will never really know for sure, but there is a tale to tell about what was Fichtner and what was Ben for the Steelers offense. By all reports available, Ben doesn't like motion, play-action, being under center anymore, and a slew of other things that around the NFL are making QBs jobs easier and offenses more efficient. So was Fichtner a full on dum-dum or was he a one legged man in ass-kicking contest because too much authority/control had been ceded to the QB?

Honestly, I could see either being true. Like most things in life, some sort of middle case is likely what happened. Ben was stubborn and Randy was not good.

[hawaiiansteeler]

Is the Steelers' Mike Tomlin on a path that could lead to Canton? It sure looks like it

Mike Tomlin hasn't had a losing season in 14 years of NFL head coaching. That puts him in rarified air.

CLARK JUDGEA
APR 21, 2021

When people today talk about NFL coaches on a Hall-of-Fame trajectory, they start with Bill Belichick, move to Andy Reid and might throw in a Pete Carroll or Sean Payton. Fair enough. Nine Lombardi Trophies and 15 Super Bowl appearances are in there.

But how come almost nobody includes the Steelers' Mike Tomlin?

He’s won a Super Bowl like Reid, Carroll and Payton. He’s been to two, like Carroll. And he’s never had a losing season … unlike Reid, Carroll, Payton and Belichick. You can look it up. In 14 NFL seasons of head coaching he never finished worse than 8-8.

Unusual? Nope. More like unheard of. Only Marty Schottenheimer went 14 straight non-losing seasons after becoming a head coach, and his first year was really a half season (4-4).

Granted, Tomlin’s 153 victories (including playoffs) aren’t close to Belichick (311) and Reid (238), but the guy just turned 49, for crying out loud. Plus, his total is only three behind Carroll (156) and one ahead of Payton (152).

Now look at his overall winning percentage. It’s .640, better than Reid (.621), better than Carroll (.600) and better than Payton (.631). In fact, it’s so good that he trails only Belichick (.678) among active coaches with 100 or more games. What’s more, his .650 regular-season percentage (145-78-1) ranks 11th all-time.

One more thing: He has as many Super Bowl victories and appearances as his predecessor in Pittsburgh, Bill Cowher.

I mention that because Cowher was one of two coaches named to the Pro Football Hall-of-Fame’s Centennial Class of 2020. Including the playoffs, Cowher won 161 games, or eight more than Tomlin, and eight division titles … or one more than Tomlin. He also produced nine seasons with double-digit victories. But so has Tomlin. And while Cowher’s overall winning percentage of .623 is good, it’s not as good as Mike Tomlin’s.

to read rest of article:

https://www.si.com/nfl/talkoffame/nf...d-hall-of-fame

[Dissolv]

Does he get coach for life status because he's a good coach and good guy who's probably not going to preside over a terrible stretch of seasons? Or do the Steelers take a chance and try to shake things up like they did when they encouraged Noll to retire, or like the Bucs did when they replaced Dungy, or even like the Steelers did when bringing in Tomlin

Neither. That's kind of my point. A prudent move is to break out the components of a team and a season and determine what worked, and what went wrong. They won't keep Tomlin, or any other coach (or player for that matter) because they are "good" or a "good guy". They will evaluate overall needs, what was responsible for victory and defeat, and what can they upgrade -- and for what cost.

I'm 99% sure that the internal evaluation is that they believe that Tomlin wasn't the component of the team that cost them playoff runs. Also that they likely can't upgrade Tomlin with any measure of certainty. Likely a replacement would be a downgrade, or just a temporary breath of fresh air that quickly goes stale.

What I don't see here is any reasonable way to judge the performance of a head coach from the fan point of view other than "we have a great team and should have done better." With a player you can at least go to the stats and have (sometimes) an idea about responsibilities on the field for blown plays. Sometimes it is easy because you see it all. Pouncey hikes the ball over the head of his QB -- easily 95% of that is on Pouncey. Other times you actually can't tell which defender had which assignment, you only know that there was a miscommunication.

But I can't see whatever the coaches are doing within the facility, and I don't know if Tomlin is doing something wrong, the OC has a crazy scheme in the first place, the players didn't execute properly despite coaching, or if the players given to the team by Colbert and Epps just weren't up to NFL standards. And of course, the other team gets a say in how successful any given play is.

So what do I do? Always fire the coach because he is in charge (he isn't, the ownership is)? Or do we break things down and try to figure out where we need to change and get better? I see the Steelers taking more of that approach, and also not attributing the losses to Tomlin. Sometimes as a fan I also blame Tomlin for stuff. Bad clock management, poor challenges, and so on. But if you see something that the Steelers don't, I'm all for hearing it. But so far the entire sum of the argument has been "not enough playoff wins in the last decade, ditch coach". I'm pretty sure he bears part of the blame, but is he the correct piece of the puzzle to replace to actually get better? Not so sure it is as simple as all that.

[Steeler-in-west]

Last year the problems were mainly on the offensive side of the ball. The Steelers addressed that with a new OC and line coach but kept Ben. That’s where they identified part of the immediate problem. The other part of the problem was - will be solved through FA and draft. It’s obvious that the problem isn’t all on player execution, at least a good chunk was on coaching. The coordinators are responsible for making the players play to the best of their ability, the head coach is responsible to make sure that happens (he’s also responsible for direct teaching too). Hopefully the change in coordinators and line coach along with a better running game will produce better results than last year. if there’s lack of improvement followed by a few bad to mediocre years, whether Rudolph or someone else is the QB. it will catch up to the head coach, it always does. Tomlin will have about 20 years by then (happened to Scottenheimer even Noll). I think the only thing that would prolong Tomlin’s career would be to get another franchise Ben level QB

[fansince'76]

Or do the Steelers take a chance and try to shake things up like they did when they encouraged Noll to retire, or like the Bucs did when they replaced Dungy...

If anything, a Super Bowl victory by Gruden with what was essentially Dungy's team against his former team (who literally didn't change a thing after Gruden departed the previous season) followed by an extremely rapid return to being a perennial sub-.500 team and a perpetual head coach merry-go-round for the next decade-and-a-half afterwards kinda bolsters the argument to keep Tomlin around for a little while longer, IMO.

I think it's quite safe to say in retrospect that Gruden did not improve team culture in Tampa Bay. And team culture seems to be one of the biggest reasons that people want to see the Steelers cut ties with Tomlin.

[teegre]

If anything, a Super Bowl victory by Gruden with what was essentially Dungy's team against his former team (who literally didn't change a thing after Gruden departed the previous season) followed by an extremely rapid return to being a perennial sub-.500 team and a perpetual head coach merry-go-round for the next decade-and-a-half afterwards kinda bolsters the argument to keep Tomlin around for a little while longer, IMO.

I think it's quite safe to say in retrospect that Gruden did not improve team culture in Tampa Bay. And team culture seems to be one of the biggest reasons that people want to see the Steelers cut ties with Tomlin.

And, the Bucs won that Super Bowl due to the advanced coverages used by their secondary, coverages which confused Rich Gannon & caused him to throw four INTs. The secondary coach for the Bucs was... (dramatic pause)... Mike Tomlin.

[Steel Peon]

How many of you had ever heard of Tomlin before he was hired? Are you seriously saying there's no one in the world better than Tomlin than Belichick?

This was a point I've used in conversation many times, and I would bet that scarcely 1% of all Steelers fans and experts even mentioned his name when hypothesizing about who the next head coach should be. When he was first hired he had a pretty steep learning curve going from DC to HC, and his in-game decisions immediately fell well below the standard his predecessor set, but the thought was these things would improve over time. Well they didn't improve, never have, and never will, coupled with his inability to control certain players from making asses out of themselves, and general personnel decisions, are the things I don't like about him. As far as who could replace Tomlin, I would never say Belichick because I can't stand that piece of shit or anyone ever associated with him, and would cease to be a football fan if we ever hired him. Rather, I would just use the same process that hired Tomlin and Cowher (or anyone applying for any job really), which is to have interviews and pick the best candidate. This will never be my decision to make, so I just have to hope that Art II knows something beyond what I see on TV.

[DesertSteel]

How many had heard of the 14 head coaches that the Browns have hired over the past 5 years? The idea that you can just hire some nobody that’s unknown and end up with one of the best W/L records in football is just asinine.

[W&M_Steeler]

Originally Posted by fansince'76

If anything, a Super Bowl victory by Gruden with what was essentially Dungy's team against his former team (who literally didn't change a thing after Gruden departed the previous season) followed by an extremely rapid return to being a perennial sub-.500 team and a perpetual head coach merry-go-round for the next decade-and-a-half afterwards kinda bolsters the argument to keep Tomlin around for a little while longer, IMO.

I think it's quite safe to say in retrospect that Gruden did not improve team culture in Tampa Bay. And team culture seems to be one of the biggest reasons that people want to see the Steelers cut ties with Tomlin

And, the Bucs won that Super Bowl due to the advanced coverages used by their secondary, coverages which confused Rich Gannon & caused him to throw four INTs. The secondary coach for the Bucs was... (dramatic pause)... Mike Tomlin.

Personally, I'd rather have a 5 year stretch with 1 SB win and 4 losing seasons than I would have 5 seasons, none worse than 8-8 regular season (though 2 featuring a late season collapse), in which the Steelers make the Wild Card round 4 times and the Divisional once. Different philosophies I guess.

No doubt about it, Tomlin was a fantastic hire in 2007. He was innovative, cutting edge, hungry, and passionate- 15 years ago. I'm not sure he hits all those qualifications circa 2021. He's had a good run here, though I think he's had diminishing returns lately and in some respects has underachieved. We know what we're going to get with Tomlin. Do you want to stick with good / very good, or would you want to take a risk to try to find someone who is able to spark the team to greatness (like Tomlin did from 2007-2010)? The question is probably less important because the team is on the verge of a total offensive rebuild and I doubt any coach could go very far with them with them. Maybe they want a steady hand to oversee the rebuild, which makes sense.

[W&M_Steeler]

Neither. That's kind of my point. A prudent move is to break out the components of a team and a season and determine what worked, and what went wrong. They won't keep Tomlin, or any other coach (or player for that matter) because they are "good" or a "good guy". They will evaluate overall needs, what was responsible for victory and defeat, and what can they upgrade -- and for what cost.

I'm 99% sure that the internal evaluation is that they believe that Tomlin wasn't the component of the team that cost them playoff runs. Also that they likely can't upgrade Tomlin with any measure of certainty. Likely a replacement would be a downgrade, or just a temporary breath of fresh air that quickly goes stale.

What I don't see here is any reasonable way to judge the performance of a head coach from the fan point of view other than "we have a great team and should have done better." With a player you can at least go to the stats and have (sometimes) an idea about responsibilities on the field for blown plays. Sometimes it is easy because you see it all. Pouncey hikes the ball over the head of his QB -- easily 95% of that is on Pouncey. Other times you actually can't tell which defender had which assignment, you only know that there was a miscommunication.

But I can't see whatever the coaches are doing within the facility, and I don't know if Tomlin is doing something wrong, the OC has a crazy scheme in the first place, the players didn't execute properly despite coaching, or if the players given to the team by Colbert and Epps just weren't up to NFL standards. And of course, the other team gets a say in how successful any given play is.

So what do I do? Always fire the coach because he is in charge (he isn't, the ownership is)? Or do we break things down and try to figure out where we need to change and get better? I see the Steelers taking more of that approach, and also not attributing the losses to Tomlin. Sometimes as a fan I also blame Tomlin for stuff. Bad clock management, poor challenges, and so on. But if you see something that the Steelers don't, I'm all for hearing it. But so far the entire sum of the argument has been "not enough playoff wins in the last decade, ditch coach". I'm pretty sure he bears part of the blame, but is he the correct piece of the puzzle to replace to actually get better? Not so sure it is as simple as all that.

Agreed, no one here has better knowledge of the team than the Steelers organization themselves. But we're not totally ignorant, either- we see the product, we have some understanding of football and how it should be played (it's not theoretical physics or something so esoteric that lay people can't hope to comprehend), so we can have opinions (albeit less informed opinions). In general, we're more likely to be wrong in our opinions when compared to the organization due to our relative lack of information, but sometimes outsiders, who are unburdened by internal considerations, group think, and emotions stemming from having a personal relationship with the people being discussed, have insights that the insiders can't / don't. In other words, the less informed opinion isn't always the wrong opinion.

If you don't think fans can have legitimate opinions about coaching because (1) we don't know what happens at the facility and (2) we can't judge coaching based on the results of what happens on the field, then you're essentially saying that we as fans shouldn't have an opinion on coaching at all because we aren't qualified to hold one. That's one way to look at it, I guess, but it makes chatting on football message boards seem like even a bigger waste of time than it already does

[Mojouw]

I am wondering how Tomlin was innovative? Tomlin is a great deal of things...but innovative?

He came in and ran the same offense and defense with the same roster. I know he changed motivation tactics, practice regimes, and was more aggressive in-game....but what were his innovations?

If anything...Tomlin has innovated MORE the past handful of seasons as he has finally implemented HIS version of the defense and oversaw moving the offense to a full spread 'em out approach...

[pczach]

Personally, I'd rather have a 5 year stretch with 1 SB win and 4 losing seasons than I would have 5 seasons, none worse than 8-8 regular season (though 2 featuring a late season collapse), in which the Steelers make the Wild Card round 4 times and the Divisional once. Different philosophies I guess.

That's the part of your argument that doesn't make sense. If Tomlin or any coach was having losing seasons over and over again, there is nothing that tells you that the man can coach....and he'd be fired. It's easy to say what you would take for a 5 year stretch in hindsight, but that wouldn't work in reality. The coach would never survive....and frankly, it the team performed that badly over an extended period of time with mostly the same talent....there's no way in hell they win a Super Bowl with that coach at the helm.

That's just common sense.

[teegre]

I am wondering how Tomlin was innovative? Tomlin is a great deal of things...but innovative?

He came in and ran the same offense and defense with the same roster. I know he changed motivation tactics, practice regimes, and was more aggressive in-game....but what were his innovations?

If anything...Tomlin has innovated MORE the past handful of seasons as he has finally implemented HIS version of the defense and oversaw moving the offense to a full spread 'em out approach...

Before Super Bowl XLIII, the defense was dogging it (during practice) after one of them got an INT. Tomlin laid into them... and made them practice returns (as a team) over & over & over. He cited the Buccaneers Super Bowl during his tirade... about how "When you get an INT, you SCORE."

We all know about Harrison's return.

Troy has stated that those repetitions during practice led directly to Harrison's success on that return. (Yes, it was mostly Harrison, but if you watch, you can see 10 other guys busting their asses, as well.)

[Mojouw]

Before Super Bowl XLIII, the defense was dogging it (during practice) after one of them got an INT. Tomlin laid into them... and made them practice returns (as a team) over & over & over. He cited the Buccaneers Super Bowl during his tirade... about how "When you get an INT, you SCORE."

We all know about Harrison's return.

Troy has stated that those repetitions during practice led directly to Harrison's success on that return. (Yes, it was mostly Harrison, but if you watch, you can see 10 other guys busting their asses, as well.)

Agreed, 100%. That is kinda what I meant on practice regimes and motivation stuff.

But, I took innovation to mean like some fancy-schmancy X's and O's thing. And I have never felt that was Tomlin. And that is fine. I always felt that Tomlin was running similar "stuff" to everyone else, but just demanding that his guys run it faster and better.

I read an interview once with one of the current (or former) Steelers defensive coaches. Said that during games in real-time Tomlin could diagnose why the offense was succeeding down to the technique of individual defensive players. I always have seen that as Tomlin's biggest strength. This is what Player X was intended to do on play A. This is what you failed to execute correctly. Here is how to fix it. Now go get it done and if not, I have a guy on the bench that I will totally replace you with next series.