Really all comes down to turnovers

[wig]

I'll play topseed...

Ben is definitely better than Brady.

A) He doesn't have a coordinator telling him the defensive coverage and who precisely to throw to or what run play to audible to at the line of scrimmage on every single play of the game.

B) He's NEVER had to play behind a line as under-performing as Roethlisberger's. While it's true that Ben's style of play causes him to hold the ball for a few seconds longer than he should and thus he takes more sacks than he absolutely needs to, his lines have nevertheless been critically weaker then the lines of Brady OR Manning OR Brees throughout his career. Nonetheless, Roethlisberger has put up numbers as good as those players while reaching the playoffs and the superbowl and winning as often and even more than they do.

Therefore, without question, he's in the top three. Absolutely, he's superior to Tom Brady. His talents are definitely different than those of Peyton Manning, who is clearly more of a cerebral QB. Brees is more of an accurate pure pocket-passer QB (kinda like Marino in my humble estimation) while Roethlisberger brings a certain utter indomitable spirit to the table along with reckless physical abandon and raw talent. Not unlike the player who's number he wears. (And yes, that kills me because I hated Elway, but he was a competitive son of a *****, just like Roethlisberger.) I see Rogers as a guy who's quite a bit like Ben, but with a better line. And in truth Rogers may be a bit more disciplined. But he has to be because he doesn't have the body to take the beating that Ben does. We may see Ben grow a bit less cavalier in a few years as well as he starts feeling the hits a bit more each morning after.

As for Brady, he just cheats. He's relatively accurate. But at the end of the day we'll never have any real idea of how good he really might have been in a real NFL system that wasn't spoon feeding him the defensive plays every single snap.

Sorry. That's just how it is.

If anybody ought to be irritated about the ultimate staining of Tom Brady's legacy it's Tom Brady and Giselle. Cause it's always going to be there. That little "Ya, but..." Like Faust, he sold his soul for some glory but his children and his grandchildren and going to have * by their names too.

And again, that's just how it is.

I see that I've listed 5 QBs and pointed out that I think Ben is among the top three so I suppose it's only fair to rank them accordingly and give my reasons...

While I won't go ahead and say 1, 2 and three per se because I don't think it works exactly like that. I will say why I think a couple of players are beneath Roethlisberger overall in my opinion.

Top Three (In no particular order ;-) )

Rogers
Roethlisberger
Luck

Next in Line

Manning (He chokes in the playoffs, let's face it.)
Brees (He's up and down, One season he can be a world-beater, the next he sort of disappears.)
Manning2 (Eli's a baller. At least he doesn't give up.)
Russel Wilson (I think he needs a few years of consistent performance before I "Crown his ***".)

Brady doesn't even make the list unless there's a category for guys who cheat better than anybody else. Even then he'd be listed below Lyle Alzado.

 

[topseed]

Ben on his better days is as good or better than any QB in the league. That is why he gives you a punchers chance that a lot of guys wouldn't. However he is more prone to the off day than the others. So no he isn't probably as good. That isn't the point. In baseball if I have the top percentage hitter, the near highest home run hitter and the near top base stealer and I'm scratching my *** to make playoffs something else is wrong. Pitching or fielding. In the Steelers case they simply aren't generating enough turnovers.

So he isn't in the top 3, which was my point.

 

[topseed]

I think Ben is LOADS better than Tom Brady when you pressure them both. Brady is a ******* ***** if you get in his face, Tommy threw a nice pick last night because his ***** tightened up when the rush was on. Did you happen to SEE that ******* offensive line Ben was behind last time he won a SuperBowl? With the same protection, I think Ben is as good as any qb in the NFL, when that protection breaks down, he's better than them all. Period. Now, is he the same "type" of qb as Brady? No, he isn't, just like Bradshaw was no Montana. Montana was most likely the best to ever play the game, and it's a long distance between him and the next guy on the list. And HE even had **** games, but more often than not, Montana was gonna get the job done. I still feel that way about Ben, but I don't know how far he can get this year with the defense giving up points like they are candy on Halloween.

Joe

Actually Ben had arguably the best game of career against the Colts this season, when he had hardly any pressure whatsoever to deal with at all the entire game. The problem is, he isn't as consistently good as the others without pressure, and his ability to escape the rush isn't going to get any better at this stage of his career.

 

[ark steel]

Actually Ben had arguably the best game of career against the Colts this season, when he had hardly any pressure whatsoever to deal with at all the entire game. The problem is, he isn't as consistently good as the others without pressure, and his ability to escape the rush isn't going to get any better at this stage of his career.

Oooh. I have a new theory. The FO knows been is mo betta when under pressure. So, the purposely field a ****** OL so Ben is at his best!

I should get paid for this kind of analysis. GCS' post ain't got shot on my legendary posts.

 

[topseed]

I'll play topseed...

Ben is definitely better than Brady.

A) He doesn't have a coordinator telling him the defensive coverage and who precisely to throw to or what run play to audible to at the line of scrimmage on every single play of the game.

B) He's NEVER had to play behind a line as under-performing as Roethlisberger's. While it's true that Ben's style of play causes him to hold the ball for a few seconds longer than he should and thus he takes more sacks than he absolutely needs to, his lines have nevertheless been critically weaker then the lines of Brady OR Manning OR Brees throughout his career. Nonetheless, Roethlisberger has put up numbers as good as those players while reaching the playoffs and the superbowl and winning as often and even more than they do.

Therefore, without question, he's in the top three. Absolutely, he's superior to Tom Brady. His talents are definitely different than those of Peyton Manning, who is clearly more of a cerebral QB. Brees is more of an accurate pure pocket-passer QB (kinda like Marino in my humble estimation) while Roethlisberger brings a certain utter indomitable spirit to the table along with reckless physical abandon and raw talent. Not unlike the player who's number he wears. (And yes, that kills me because I hated Elway, but he was a competitive son of a *****, just like Roethlisberger.) I see Rogers as a guy who's quite a bit like Ben, but with a better line. And in truth Rogers may be a bit more disciplined. But he has to be because he doesn't have the body to take the beating that Ben does. We may see Ben grow a bit less cavalier in a few years as well as he starts feeling the hits a bit more each morning after.

As for Brady, he just cheats. He's relatively accurate. But at the end of the day we'll never have any real idea of how good he really might have been in a real NFL system that wasn't spoon feeding him the defensive plays every single snap.

Sorry. That's just how it is.

If anybody ought to be irritated about the ultimate staining of Tom Brady's legacy it's Tom Brady and Giselle. Cause it's always going to be there. That little "Ya, but..." Like Faust, he sold his soul for some glory but his children and his grandchildren and going to have * by their names too.

And again, that's just how it is.

I see that I've listed 5 QBs and pointed out that I think Ben is among the top three so I suppose it's only fair to rank them accordingly and give my reasons...

While I won't go ahead and say 1, 2 and three per se because I don't think it works exactly like that. I will say why I think a couple of players are beneath Roethlisberger overall in my opinion.

Top Three (In no particular order ;-) )

Rogers
Roethlisberger
Luck

Next in Line

Manning (He chokes in the playoffs, let's face it.)
Brees (He's up and down, One season he can be a world-beater, the next he sort of disappears.)
Manning2 (Eli's a baller. At least he doesn't give up.)
Russel Wilson (I think he needs a few years of consistent performance before I "Crown his ***".)

Brady doesn't even make the list unless there's a category for guys who cheat better than anybody else. Even then he'd be listed below Lyle Alzado.

A) You can attempt to discredit Brady's excellence by whining about stealing signals or whatever, but the bottom line is, he prepares more than Ben. Always has, always will. Manning, Luck, these guys have all the natural ability in the world, yet they accent their talent by working hard at their craft. Ben's never been serious about learning the quarterback position, and as he ages, that will become more and more evident. Ben couldn't call an audible to save his life.

B) I'll agree that Ben hasn't always had the most consistent line play, but as you mentioned yourself, many of the sacks he's taken could have and would have been avoided by quarterbacks who make decisions quickly. And what "numbers as good" are you talking about, exactly? Excluding Luck, who's in his third year, Ben's behind them all. In passer rating, he's a full THIRTEEN points behind Rodgers. TD passes? He's 143 behind Brees. Passing yards? 14,000 behind Brady. Reaching the playoffs? Uh, what? Ben's missed them 4 out of the last 8 seasons.


You evidently don't follow the Packers, because they've had quite a few injuries along their offensive line over several seasons, and Rodgers has done just fine. If your Ben love is so strong that you've concluded he and Rodgers are equals, it explains a lot.

Your panties are obviously in a was about Brady and all of the "cheating." Great. I get that. Except Brady's got more Super Bowl wins, has won 10 or more games for 13 out of the 14 full seasons he's played, and has better career statistics. Sorry, that's just how it is.

 

[CoolieMan]

A) You can attempt to discredit Brady's excellence by whining about stealing signals or whatever, but the bottom line is, he prepares more than Ben. Always has, always will. Manning, Luck, these guys have all the natural ability in the world, yet they accent their talent by working hard at their craft. Ben's never been serious about learning the quarterback position, and as he ages, that will become more and more evident. Ben couldn't call an audible to save his life.

B) I'll agree that Ben hasn't always had the most consistent line play, but as you mentioned yourself, many of the sacks he's taken could have and would have been avoided by quarterbacks who make decisions quickly. And what "numbers as good" are you talking about, exactly? Excluding Luck, who's in his third year, Ben's behind them all. In passer rating, he's a full THIRTEEN points behind Rodgers. TD passes? He's 143 behind Brees. Passing yards? 14,000 behind Brady. Reaching the playoffs? Uh, what? Ben's missed them 4 out of the last 8 seasons.


You evidently don't follow the Packers, because they've had quite a few injuries along their offensive line over several seasons, and Rodgers has done just fine. If your Ben love is so strong that you've concluded he and Rodgers are equals, it explains a lot.

Your panties are obviously in a was about Brady and all of the "cheating." Great. I get that. Except Brady's got more Super Bowl wins, has won 10 or more games for 13 out of the 14 full seasons he's played, and has better career statistics. Sorry, that's just how it is.

so the video assistance didn't help with any of that????

 

[CoolieMan]

A) You can attempt to discredit Brady's excellence by whining about stealing signals or whatever, but the bottom line is, he prepares more than Ben. Always has, always will. Manning, Luck, these guys have all the natural ability in the world, yet they accent their talent by working hard at their craft. Ben's never been serious about learning the quarterback position, and as he ages, that will become more and more evident. Ben couldn't call an audible to save his life.

B) I'll agree that Ben hasn't always had the most consistent line play, but as you mentioned yourself, many of the sacks he's taken could have and would have been avoided by quarterbacks who make decisions quickly. And what "numbers as good" are you talking about, exactly? Excluding Luck, who's in his third year, Ben's behind them all. In passer rating, he's a full THIRTEEN points behind Rodgers. TD passes? He's 143 behind Brees. Passing yards? 14,000 behind Brady. Reaching the playoffs? Uh, what? Ben's missed them 4 out of the last 8 seasons.


You evidently don't follow the Packers, because they've had quite a few injuries along their offensive line over several seasons, and Rodgers has done just fine. If your Ben love is so strong that you've concluded he and Rodgers are equals, it explains a lot.

Your panties are obviously in a was about Brady and all of the "cheating." Great. I get that. Except Brady's got more Super Bowl wins, has won 10 or more games for 13 out of the 14 full seasons he's played, and has better career statistics. Sorry, that's just how it is.

so the video assistance didn't help with any of that????

 

[ark steel]

You evidently don't follow the Packers, because they've had quite a few injuries along their offensive line over several seasons, and Rodgers has done just fine.

In the SB in which Ben and Aaron both played, I believe the Packers played that game with not-very-good OL due to injuries.

 

[topseed]

Oooh. I have a new theory. The FO knows been is mo betta when under pressure. So, the purposely field a ****** OL so Ben is at his best!

I should get paid for this kind of analysis. GCS' post ain't got shot on my legendary posts.

Thanks for your nonsensical input.

Let me know when you manage to find a legendary negative post of yours regarding Tomlin.

 

[topseed]

so the video assistance didn't help with any of that????

Not significantly enough, according to the NFL.

 

[topseed]

In the SB in which Ben and Aaron both played, I believe the Packers played that game with not-very-good OL due to injuries.

And just to refresh Wig's memory, which team won that game?

 

[ark steel]

Thanks for your nonsensical input.

Let me know when you manage to find a legendary negative post of yours regarding Tomlin.

Do I have to have posted negatively or can I be relatively neutral about the whole thing? Or do you just want to be a duck about a post intended to be light hearted?

 

[ark steel]

And just to refresh Wig's memory, which team won that game?

I was going to add that th Packers OL was probably even worse than ours at the time, even thou ours wasn't good. However, I'm not entirely sure of that and was going to research some tomorrow. You may have better memory of the specifics.

 

[topseed]

Do I have to have posted negatively or can I be relatively neutral about the whole thing? Or do you just want to be a duck about a post intended to be light hearted?

Well, you never responded in the Tomlin thread, I just thought I'd take this opportunity to give you a light-hearted reminder about it. You've certainly responded positively more than your fair share, have you not?

 

[CoolieMan]

Not significantly enough, according to the NFL.

I've posted before that the cheating was more of a threat to the shield that other issues (like Ben's bar episode) They downplayed the significance of the issue to save face and public impression of the fairness of the games.

 

[ark steel]

Well, you never responded in the Tomlin thread, I just thought I'd take this opportunity to give you a light-hearted reminder about it. You've certainly responded positively more than your fair share, have you not?

Well ****. Hate typing responses on tablet. Lost whole response. Shorter version.

I think MT is better than this site gives him credit for. Doesn't mean I think he is great, just that he doesn't suck. Many of my "positive" responses are more of a "this might be a reason for that other than MT sucks" rather than a specific defense of MT. Sometimes, it might be that something not so great going on, but something else on the team gives me optimism that improvement can happen. Of course it isn't taken that way.

I could jump into some threads on a specific negative point with "yeah, me too", but that seems silly with so much of it already going on.

In addition, there are a few people who like to read a different, more positive, outlook.

Does that cover it?

 

[topseed]

I've posted before that the cheating was more of a threat to the shield that other issues (like Ben's bar episode) They downplayed the significance of the issue to save face and public impression of the fairness of the games.

That's possible, but given the hard line the NFL has taken on other non-football related issues, I think it's more likely that the league would have made a bigger example out of the Patriots had the "video assistance" been of great and substantial import.

 

[topseed]

Well ****. Hate typing responses on tablet. Lost whole response. Shorter version.

I think MT is better than this site gives him credit for. Doesn't mean I think he is great, just that he doesn't suck. Many of my "positive" responses are more of a "this might be a reason for that other than MT sucks" rather than a specific defense of MT. Sometimes, it might be that something not so great going on, but something else on the team gives me optimism that improvement can happen. Of course it isn't taken that way.

I could jump into some threads on a specific negative point with "yeah, me too", but that seems silly with so much of it already going on.

In addition, there are a few people who like to read a different, more positive, outlook.

Does that cover it?

If you say so. Personally, I'd rather have someone coaching the Steelers who is better than the level of "he doesn't suck."

Stan Savran asked him a question on The Mike Tomlin Show earlier this season about how he was preparing the team for a certain opponent. His reply was something along the lines of: We don't specifically set out to gameplan against other team's players or style of play...we only concern ourselves with our own game, and just need to execute better.

That short statement confirmed everything I needed to know about why I don't believe Tomlin is an adequate NFL head coach, because taking advantage of matchups and/or reducing the other team's strengths is crucially important to having success in this league. To me, that's something a high school or low-level college coach might say.

Given his track record of poor in-game management, suspect drafting ability, bad record against awful teams, and the gradual decline of depth on defense during his tenure, I just don't see why the Steelers would want to extend his contract again. Other than that being "The Steeler Way," of course.

It's been asked many times before...but what is it exactly that Tomlin does particularly well?

 

[obxsteeler]

If you say so. Personally, I'd rather have someone coaching the Steelers who is better than the level of "he doesn't suck."

Stan Savran asked him a question on The Mike Tomlin Show earlier this season about how he was preparing the team for a certain opponent. His reply was something along the lines of: We don't specifically set out to gameplan against other team's players or style of play...we only concern ourselves with our own game, and just need to execute better.

That short statement confirmed everything I needed to know about why I don't believe Tomlin is an adequate NFL head coach, because taking advantage of matchups and/or reducing the other team's strengths is crucially important to having success in this league. To me, that's something a high school or low-level college coach might say.

Given his track record of poor in-game management, suspect drafting ability, bad record against awful teams, and the gradual decline of depth on defense during his tenure, I just don't see why the Steelers would want to extend his contract again. Other than that being "The Steeler Way," of course.

It's been asked many times before...but what is it exactly that Tomlin does particularly well?

I think your question has been answered many times before-he wins at as good or better a rate as his predecessors who I felt were great coaches. That includes 2 SB appearances. That to me would make any reasonable person consider extending him-at least until you see the result of the current rebuilding. That is especially true given the "Steeler way" which has been a damn sight more successful than most other ways I've seen in the NFL. But I'm sure that won't influence your thinking and so be it. It's up to the Rooneys anyhow and that is probably a really good thing.

 

[ark steel]

Part of the reason I hadn't responded before. Latching onto the "just doesn't suck" as if I'm saying "Yay! He doesn't suck". Tis not what I meant. People here say he sucks and should be fired. I'm ok with him, at least, finishing the contract. I think if you are firing a guy from this position, you should have someone specific in mind the hat will be better, rather than "just no worse".

I guess, the point is, while the team is rebuilding, we haven't completely collapsed into 4-12 and 5-11 seasons. Lots of teams do. If he can get some he team moving upwards to finish out this season, especially with a playoff win or two, that is a vast improvement. Considering he would be doing it with all of these ****** players he has accumulated, well he would have to be a genius. Before you get your panties in awad, that was a joke.

 

[Wingman]

I think your question has been answered many times before-he wins at as good or better a rate as his predecessors who I felt were great coaches. That includes 2 SB appearances. That to me would make any reasonable person consider extending him-at least until you see the result of the current rebuilding. That is especially true given the "Steeler way" which has been a damn sight more successful than most other ways I've seen in the NFL. But I'm sure that won't influence your thinking and so be it. It's up to the Rooneys anyhow and that is probably a really good thing.

One other thing that has been pointed out on here is the schedule we played maybe an important part of our win loss record. We have played a much softer schedule than many teams and have not won a lot of games we should have won if we were a good team. I think many more things need to be examined than just the record as there are lots of things that play into win loss records besides the abilities of one person. The job that has been done from a leadership role needs to be examined, which is one of the most important aspects of the head guy in any organization. Much of the evidence for or against his leadership ability will be in the form of anecdotal evidence rather than win loss statistics. A great deal of this evidence will be available to someone other than us because of the closed nature of the business.

For example who was the guy doing all the campaigning for Worilds to be franchised? Who was the guy that wanted Dri Archer so bad, or Laundry Jones, or Jarvis Jones. Who was the guy that decided the secondary did not need any help with a high level free agent at corner when there were some out there? Who has been failing to have the team ready to execute the plays as sharp as they should. What decisions are being made on the sideline in real time to keep us in games or to cost us games. How is time management going in that is the team better now than it was or still the same.

From what I have been able to see as a fan MT was not good at most of those things when he came in. In comparison in the last game he had a couple of good decisions that were made in the heat of the game and he seemed much more aware of leadership and provided it than in the past. He is also at 8 and 5 not a great record compared to the leaders of the conference. We have 3 games left and are not even in the lead for our division. If we were going only on win loss records that would not be good. As it stands he is having flashes that show promise and development and is looking better than he has in the past. Big question at this point, does he continue to do so, or does he not.

 

[SCSteeler4life]

One other thing that has been pointed out on here is the schedule we played maybe an important part of our win loss record. We have played a much softer schedule than many teams and have not won a lot of games we should have won if we were a good team. I think many more things need to be examined than just the record as there are lots of things that play into win loss records besides the abilities of one person. The job that has been done from a leadership role needs to be examined, which is one of the most important aspects of the head guy in any organization. Much of the evidence for or against his leadership ability will be in the form of anecdotal evidence rather than win loss statistics. A great deal of this evidence will be available to someone other than us because of the closed nature of the business.

For example who was the guy doing all the campaigning for worlds to be franchised? Who was the guy that wanted dri archer so bad, or laundry jones, or jarvis jones. Who was the guy that decided the secondary did not need any help with a high level free agent at corner when there were some out there? Who has been failing to have the team ready to execute the plays as sharp as they should. What decisions are being made on the sideline in real time to keep us in games or to cost us games. How is time management going in that is the team better now than it was or still the same.

From what I have been able to see as a fan MT was not good at most of those things when he came in. In comparison in the last game he had a couple of good decisions that were made in the heat of the game and he seemed much more aware of leadership and provided it than in the past. He is also at 8 and 5 not a great record compared to the leaders of the conference. We have 3 games left and are not even in the lead for our division. If we were going only on win loss records that would not be good. As it stands he is having flashes that show promise and development and is looking better than he has in the past. Big question at this point, does he continue to do so, or does he not.

Look on the bright side if some how we make the playoffs , the teams in the playoffs are good. So we have a better chance. Go figure.

 

[topseed]

I think your question has been answered many times before-he wins at as good or better a rate as his predecessors who I felt were great coaches. That includes 2 SB appearances. That to me would make any reasonable person consider extending him-at least until you see the result of the current rebuilding. That is especially true given the "Steeler way" which has been a damn sight more successful than most other ways I've seen in the NFL. But I'm sure that won't influence your thinking and so be it. It's up to the Rooneys anyhow and that is probably a really good thing.

OK. I feel Chuck Noll was a great coach too. He's #50 on the all-time win percentage list. Does it make one shred of difference to me that guys like Barry Switzer, Mike Martz, Mike Smith, Mike Sherman, and Jim Caldwell all have better win rates? No, it doesn't. Does it make them better coaches than he was? No, it doesn't.

What is it that Tomlin does well that propels his teams to win at such a high rate?

Most "reasonable" people would wait and see how Tomlin "rebuilds" before handing him yet another extension. He's got two years left on his current deal. What's the rush?

 

[topseed]

Part of the reason I hadn't responded before. Latching onto the "just doesn't suck" as if I'm saying "Yay! He doesn't suck". Tis not what I meant. People here say he sucks and should be fired. I'm ok with him, at least, finishing the contract. I think if you are firing a guy from this position, you should have someone specific in mind the hat will be better, rather than "just no worse".

I guess, the point is, while the team is rebuilding, we haven't completely collapsed into 4-12 and 5-11 seasons. Lots of teams do. If he can get some he team moving upwards to finish out this season, especially with a playoff win or two, that is a vast improvement. Considering he would be doing it with all of these ****** players he has accumulated, well he would have to be a genius. Before you get your panties in awad, that was a joke.

I've been told over and over again how great Ben is -- he's a franchise quarterback, top three in the league, a sure-fire future hall-of-famer. How many other teams with this type of QB haven't won a playoff game in four years and are officially "rebuilding"?

So, before your man-thong causes any more anal irritation, please try to answer the question...what is it that Tomlin does well?

 

[diver]

If you say so. Personally, I'd rather have someone coaching the Steelers who is better than the level of "he doesn't suck."

Stan Savran asked him a question on The Mike Tomlin Show earlier this season about how he was preparing the team for a certain opponent. His reply was something along the lines of: We don't specifically set out to gameplan against other team's players or style of play...we only concern ourselves with our own game, and just need to execute better.[/I]

That short statement confirmed everything I needed to know about why I don't believe Tomlin is an adequate NFL head coach, because taking advantage of matchups and/or reducing the other team's strengths is crucially important to having success in this league. To me, that's something a high school or low-level college coach might say.

Given his track record of poor in-game management, suspect drafting ability, bad record against awful teams, and the gradual decline of depth on defense during his tenure, I just don't see why the Steelers would want to extend his contract again. Other than that being "The Steeler Way," of course.

It's been asked many times before...but what is it exactly that Tomlin does particularly well?

I'd like to, but I just can't let you get away with that. Cowher said similar stuff all the time, for example. Things like, "You can't change who you are," and "We are who we are," and so on. How is that really any different?

I agree with the statement about what he does well. I just don't know. I try to figure out what he brings to the table, and the best I can come up with is that he never does seem to lose the team. That is important, but it needs to be more than that, right?