Mr. Wing was not great today but clearly not the reason we lost. But it seems a mighty odd pickup. Is there any thought the Steelers thought this was an easy win and they brought in a guy sitting on his couch (vs many other options) so as to avoid someone punting well and creating another Harvin debate? I know, conspiracy theory'ish but I don't get it. Also, this is not intended to be a slam on Wing. Just an odd, odd decision.
So, something different, let's talk about Mr. Wing.
- Thread starter Steel Reign
- Start date
Yes. Hamstring. Why was this thread even started? They had to bring in someone
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2021
- Messages
- 2,042
- Reaction score
- 1,949
- Points
- 113
Might be the same reason Canada is here: good ol' boy network. Wing played for the XFL team( I think it was XFL) that Hines Ward coached and Joey Porter was on that staff as well. Could be a favor to HInes/Porter, could be that Tomlin is retarded along with his staff.
who else should they have picked up with Harvin hurt?
The question was why THAT someone.
To be fair, I can't tell you that. I am not working for an NFL team. I don't monitor players. But, seeing as the NFL has 32 teams and 32 punters and there are a good amount of prior NFL punters and decent college punters that didn't get a shot (due to the scarcity of the position), how do you end up with a guy that is 6 years out and never better than average. Plus, you find a good young guy, you have options. The pickup is STRANGE.
So, again, why him?
Sooooo, what you're saying is that you were throwing **** against the wall and seeing if any of it stuck. I mean, why the heck would they be worried about a punter "debate" when Harvin has been punting at a Pro Bowl level the last two games?
No, I was saying this was an exceptionally odd pickup. If you think differently, let me know why. That's all. Nothing else.
OK, I think differently.
1. Our punter was not playing in this game because he has a hamstring injury
2. That means we needed a punter
3. They were familiar with Wing; having had him in during a previous training camp.
4. Of the guys that were available; they chose to go with one they were familiar with.
5. Happens all the time. Nothing unusual or "exceptionally odd"
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
- Messages
- 2,115
- Reaction score
- 1,918
- Points
- 113
I'll add that they didn't want to disrupt the fg unit to much as well. Since the punter is also the holder. Wing has worked with Boz before.
Ok.
1. True.
2. True.
3. They are familiar with a lot of people out of the NFL for SIX years who was never better than average.
4. This makes no sense.
5. Ok, show me the last time someone, anyone, came off the six year bench that was an average player that got called up.
You think it is "a punter, who cares" I think it is emblematic of bad choice. Not sure who made the choice, but it was bad. And we also saw a lot of bad coaching today too. I think it is relevant where this is coming from.
I mean give me something more than obstinance for the sake of obstinance. Anyone. This was a **** move.
You act like "out of the NFL" means he was sitting on his couch drinking beer and eating potato chips. Dude was punting in the lesser leagues. I know they are lesser leagues, but, I'm sure they had tape/notes on him from those leagues. That's what scouts get paid for.
Like it or not punting is not playing LB. And, they weren't going to be able to find an "above average" punter who wasn't on someone's roster. So, outside of being obstinant, who would you have brought in for one game? Because the way Harvin has been punting this year, whoever they brought in will only be rostered for as long as it takes for him to heal up.
Also re: #4, it makes no sense that they chose to go with the punter that they knew/were familiar with out of the group of punters that was available? mmmkay, sure. I guess they could have rolled the dice on a complete unknown and hoped that worked out.
As far as where it's coming from. (I think you mean the pick up of Wing), who knows? I'm going to guess both the HC and the GM are responsible. But, that would just be a guess.
Regardless of any of the above, punting was not the issue today.
Thanks. Also. Six years. You still haven't answered the question. You are still being obstinate to be obstinate because your entire answer dodges the point. That was a lot of rambling for a non-answer. So, just to be clear, you think this pickup made sense and was a good ownership/coaching decision? Yes or no? Also, you realize Harvin, who has been historically bad for the Burgh has also had as many questionable games this year as good? This isn't about Harvin.
Edited and added on: And to be clear, I am questioning organizational choices while you are .... well, I don't know what you are arguing.
Last edited:
Actually, it IS about Harvin to an extent since you originally asked: " Is there any thought the Steelers thought this was an easy win and they brought in a guy sitting on his couch (vs many other options) so as to avoid someone punting well and creating another Harvin debate?" So, you either intentionally moved the goal line on this when you said it isn't about Harvin, or, you forgot you even made it about Harvin. Either way is not a good look for you.
As far as a player being non-rostered for 6 years and coming in to do an average job ... nope can't think of a one. Before today that is. Wing's avg today was 47.6 ypp.
As far as Harvin having questionable game(s) this year. I count one. The first one. He's only played in 3. And Cleveland and Las Vegas were nowhere near questionable. Hell against Vegas, his punts were pretty damn awesome.
And to be clear, I addressed your question about organizational choices previously. While you are ... jumping from subject to subject: Harvin debate, organizational choices.... why it's almost as if once your theories have been debunked you just change the topic a little.
Thanks for playing. I don't have time for this bullshit. Your original hypothesis was crap. And every one after that has been more of the same.
Outside of your wall of text, answer the basic question. This is tiring. I am not debating Harvin outside of the oddity of the choice. You are. The question is how does the choice make any sense. Tell me, in your opinion, based on anything but being defensive, how the choice makes sense. Please start at the beginning of my post and answer again. I asked if the Havrvin reason COULD be the reason for such an odd choice. I did NOT say that was the reason for the choice. If we wanted to make it a reason, we could point out he has been terrible for 2+ years including during this season (vs your PRO BOWL argument). I didn't do that, I gave one option vs other answers. You have no other answer outside of "well, Harvin was good in two games" which has NOTHING to do with whom they brought in while he was gone.
Give an answer about why a team picks up someone on the sidelines for six years (and give examples how other teams do the same) or just STFU. As a Buckeyes fan too, you are being an embarrassment to common sense. As most Buckeye Fans are (being a Buckeye fan myself). I don't usually call anyone out but you are being obstinate, again, for the sake of being obstinate. Just answer the simple question about how you (and any NFL team) get to Brad Wing.
And to be fair, most won't care about this. But the Steelers organization made a pretty newb analysis for being one for the best (.500) teams in the NFL. Also, I am not afraid to dive deeper than the surface on analysis. It seems, maybe, you are.
Sorry, no more time for this. Rant all you want. About .... punters. 
No independent answer. An apologist. Thank you.Sorry, no more time for this. Rant all you want. About .... punters.
Also, decisions about anything, including punters, matter. If you don't think so then that is your prerogative. But, to be fair, you brought nothing here but bitching, retreating and towing the fandom line. You never gave an answer. Odd though, you spent a lot of time not to answer and now you have no time to answer. Open your mind my friend.
But he did answer the question,...the best he could. I'm not sure what answer you're looking for.
Like you, he doesn't work for an NFL team either.
An opinion can be an answer. First his answer was Harvin was great. Then it was the organization knows better. So, do you have an opinion beyond that? He doesn't. Also, unlike him, let us know how this plays into your thoughts about the organization.
Your opinion was that it was an exceptionally odd pick. His opinion was that it was not.
Thats my opinion too.
Ok, that is fair. Now tell me why. I mean, it isn't that I am trying to be problematic, but why? Noone seems to want to give an answer to the easiest question about why we would make, as an organization, that unusual choice.
And, to be fair, this question applies to many of our offensive and defensive plays. But no one wants to answer this or why we, as an organization, ignore common sensical changes. But I appreciate you forthcoming answer not on my response to your post but your response to the question.
Last edited:
It is really simple. We first had bring a buddy, then we had grillin and too much apparently chillin. We simply needed a new attraction.
So now in light of our team being spear fished twice already in a four game season we went back to the lab and came up with.
A Wing and a Prayer
, Saturday night half price wings BYOB and bring plenty I I say plenty of prayers.
We are going to need them.
Similar threads
