What is Tomlin's record vs. 25% winning record teams or lower?

[antdrewjosh]

Yes I think some coaches would have success ( win vs bad to average teams ) without Ben. We have Bell and Williams. Neither were used enough with the lead. The coach in New England can win without Brady because he and his staff prepare their players and are smart to know what to use.

I aloe think a smarter GM would have upgraded from Landry Jones by now.

Belicheat went 3-1 without Brady that was done here in 2010 and was yawned upon. And the list is very short of Coaches who had great success with out a Great QB. Gibbs and Ditka come to mind anybody have more?

 

[antdrewjosh]

I would like to see a game plan featuring Bell. When you mention Triplets it was Emmit Smith who was the straw who stirred that Dallas drink. Irvin and Aikman was still able to get their shine with Emmit starring

 

[Steel G]

The thing that sucks about this year's team is that they get pounded when they lose. They used to choke but be in the game till the end. Now, they are getting double digit whipped.

 

[Coach]

Belicheat went 3-1 without Brady that was done here in 2010 and was yawned upon. And the list is very short of Coaches who had great success with out a Great QB. Gibbs and Ditka come to mind anybody have more?

The Vikings are doing just fine without Bridgewater. Cowher went 10-6 with Mke Tomzack. There are plenty of examples.

 

[antdrewjosh]

The Vikings are doing just fine without Bridgewater. Cowher went 10-6 with Mke Tomzack. There are plenty of examples.

So who is the Vikings QB?? Sam Bradford. Who was a no 1 pick in the draft. Career curtailed so far by injuries. Also they have the best defense in the NFL. 10-6 with Tomzack is only looked at as good in hindsight..when it happened it wasn't great or good. Something tells me if Tomlin goes 10-6 with Joe ******** after Ben retires it won't be looked at in the same light as a great accomplishment. I mentioned Gibbs and Ditka because they won lowB repuSs with Doug Williams and Mark Rypien and Ditka with McMahon. Cowher going 10-6 with Tomzack wasn't it smh

 

[deljzc]

So here is Tomlin's breakdown of wins/losses by point spread:

Favored > 7 points
2007-2011 = 22-4
2012-2016 = 7-4

Favored 3.5 to 7 points
2007-2011 = 17-8
2012-2016 = 11-6

Any Line -3 to +3 (35 as favorites, 1 as push, 19 as underdogs)
2007-2011 = 13-9
2012-2016 = 18-15

Underdogs 3.5 - 7 points
2007-2011 = 2-3
2012-2016 = 5-4

Underdogs > 7 points
2007-2011 = 0-2
2012-2016 = 0-0

Edit: this is REGULAR SEASON ONLY

 

[deljzc]

Follow up...

As I've said numerous times, my analysis is Tomlin against point spreads and money lines is actually he is extremely average.

His overall record of high favorites (29-8, .784) is below average. It should be 82-85%
His overall record as mid-favorites (28-14, .666) is almost dead on with historic averages.
His overall record in low favorites/underdogs (31-24, .564) is also very close when considering we are favorites here much more than not. He might be +1 or +2 wins in this on average against the mean.
His overall record as mid-underdogs is very good (7-7, .500). This is where Tomlin makes up for some of his stupid losses as heavy favorites. But the sample size here is pretty small. Again, historic averages would be a record of 5-9. So Tomlin is +2 wins against the mean here.
His record of 0-2 as heavy underdogs probably isn't a large enough sample size to mean anything.

 

[deljzc]

Tomlins record in the playoffs is 6-5. These games can be broken down by point spread as follows:

Favored > 7 points = 0-1
Favored 3.5-7 points = 4-0
-3 to +3 points = 2-3
Underdogs 3.5-7 points = 0-1

 

[ark steel]

Honestly, im not sure why I would care about the win % vs bad teams. I care about the win % overall and, for Tomlin it is better than average.

as Andrew said earlier, when Tomlin was able to go 3-1 without Ben to start a season, no one here gave a ****. Many coaches would be .500 or worse without Ben. Well, heck, look around the league, many coaches ARE!!

This game was a letdown by the whole team. Both sides of the ball seemed to try to see who could suck worse. It wasn't Tomlin that threw into triple coverage twice for an int (although the second one might have been an overthrow to a 6'7" TE as the announcers said....).

The play where Ben was hurt seemed pretty minor and unlikely to be as serious as it turned out to be. Maybe the extra playing time made it worse, who knows. The real point is, up to that point the fabulous O had scored 8 points. What was it 16-8 or something at that time? Well within reach if ANYTHING starts to go right. it never did.

so, the story early in the week is that Tomlin's practices are too physical. So, they go into meetings and he is, suddenly, lackadaisical? does your $100m QB need to be inspired to play more better?

Again, top-down loss that, ultimately, falls to Tomlin as HC, but, to anyone with eyes, was a loss across the board from coaches down to players not executing.

 

[antdrewjosh]

Roethlisberger’s totals on the road have him at 18 touchdown passes and 18 interceptions since the start of the 2014 season. At home it’s 51-13. Not that we’re counting.

Mike Tomlin takes a lot of heat for his team’s record against “bad” teams on the road – it’s not 5-11 vs. sub.-500 teams in the past 16 games – but it’s as much Roethlisberger not playing well on the road as anything.


http://www.observer-reporter.com/20161016/post-steelers_vs_dolphins_thoughts#.WARgZp3Ce3k.twitter

Exactly what the hell I've been saying but what do I know

 

[antdrewjosh]

Pittsburgh’s defense is what it is, especially missing defensive end Cameron Heyward and inside linebacker Ryan Shazier, arguably its two best or most impactful players.

That does not explain the struggles of the offense, which, after scoring on a 60-yard end-around by wide receiver Darrius Heyward-Bey on its second possession, had six-straight possessions – not including the end of the first half – end in interceptions or punts.

That’s not supposed to happen to a team with perhaps the best quarterback-wide receiver-running back trio in the league.

Roethlisberger looked off for much of the game, even before leaving in the second quarter for two series with a knee injury. And wide receiver Antonio Brown was limited to four catches for 39 yards.

Only running back Le’Veon Bell made any kind of impact, gaining 53 yards on 10 carries and catching six passes for 55 yards. But that’s not enough to sustain an offense.

Roethlisberger has to be better. He threw nine touchdowns and no interceptions in his previous two games, both of which were played at home. That’s nothing new. He has 12 touchdown passes against two interceptions in three home games this season. In three road games, he’s at four TDs and four interceptions. It’s been the same thing the past three seasons.


http://www.observer-reporter.com/20161016/road_show_has_reached_dead_end#.WARgAIMgnp8.twitter

 

[ark steel]

Pittsburgh’s defense is what it is, especially missing defensive end Cameron Heyward and inside linebacker Ryan Shazier, arguably its two best or most impactful players.

That does not explain the struggles of the offense, which, after scoring on a 60-yard end-around by wide receiver Darrius Heyward-Bey on its second possession, had six-straight possessions – not including the end of the first half – end in interceptions or punts.

That’s not supposed to happen to a team with perhaps the best quarterback-wide receiver-running back trio in the league.

Roethlisberger looked off for much of the game, even before leaving in the second quarter for two series with a knee injury. And wide receiver Antonio Brown was limited to four catches for 39 yards.

Only running back Le’Veon Bell made any kind of impact, gaining 53 yards on 10 carries and catching six passes for 55 yards. But that’s not enough to sustain an offense.

Roethlisberger has to be better. He threw nine touchdowns and no interceptions in his previous two games, both of which were played at home. That’s nothing new. He has 12 touchdown passes against two interceptions in three home games this season. In three road games, he’s at four TDs and four interceptions. It’s been the same thing the past three seasons.


http://www.observer-reporter.com/20161016/road_show_has_reached_dead_end#.WARgAIMgnp8.twitter

So, the on-the-road game plan that Tomlin trots out is to have Ben throw more ints. Stupid as far as game plans go, amiright?

 

[antdrewjosh]

Big Ben’s Road Showings Leaving Much To Be Desired

http://www.Invalid Link - Check SN Home Page/2016/10/big-bens-road-showings-leaving-much-desired/

 

[ark steel]

Honestly, im not sure why I would care about the win % vs bad teams. I care about the win % overall and, for Tomlin it is better than average.

as Andrew said earlier, when Tomlin was able to go 3-1 without Ben to start a season, no one here gave a ****. Many coaches would be .500 or worse without Ben. Well, heck, look around the league, many coaches ARE!!

This game was a letdown by the whole team. Both sides of the ball seemed to try to see who could suck worse. It wasn't Tomlin that threw into triple coverage twice for an int (although the second one might have been an overthrow to a 6'7" TE as the announcers said....).

The play where Ben was hurt seemed pretty minor and unlikely to be as serious as it turned out to be. Maybe the extra playing time made it worse, who knows. The real point is, up to that point the fabulous O had scored 8 points. What was it 16-8 or something at that time? Well within reach if ANYTHING starts to go right. it never did.

so, the story early in the week is that Tomlin's practices are too physical. So, they go into meetings and he is, suddenly, lackadaisical? does your $100m QB need to be inspired to play more better?

Again, top-down loss that, ultimately, falls to Tomlin as HC, but, to anyone with eyes, was a loss across the board from coaches down to players not executing.

I'd also note that, if Tomlin's record was exactly the same but won against the sub .500 teams and lost against good teams, would you feel any better? I think the mantra would be "he cant beat good teams".. ..even when the team makes the playoffs and wins the first game, the mantra changes from "hasn't won a playoff game in 5 years" to "yeah, we played backup QB's all year"...

 

[Acereros]

He is the franchise QB not many considered in the league and he is going against under 500 teams he should be 12 for 12 or how many games it's been. That's FRANCHISE. Especially when you are the focal point of the game plan as Ben has been for a while now

First you asked for 1 game. Now is 12 for 12. Keep moving the post goals to suit your argument.

 

[antdrewjosh]

First you asked for 1 game. Now is 12 for 12. Keep moving the post goals to suit your argument.

I was was asking for one because off the top of my head I didn't remember any. coryea gave me more then one. Doesn't change the fact that if we are playing teams who are sub 500 or teams without a franchise QB. I would expect Ben to play well in those games considering we all consider him a franchise QB. I then went on to say just posting stats doesn't mean he played well. Being a franchise QB doesn't mean you just put up stats. It also means making crucial plays at critical junctures in the game.

Post again

Roethlisberger’s totals on the road have him at 18 touchdown passes and 18 interceptions since the start of the 2014 season. At home it’s 51-13. Not that we’re counting.

Mike Tomlin takes a lot of heat for his team’s record against “bad” teams on the road – it’s not 5-11 vs. sub.-500 teams in the past 16 games – but it’s as much Roethlisberger not playing well on the road as anything.

 

[AggieSteel]

I'd also note that, if Tomlin's record was exactly the same but won against the sub .500 teams and lost against good teams, would you feel any better? I think the mantra would be "he cant beat good teams".. ..even when the team makes the playoffs and wins the first game, the mantra changes from "hasn't won a playoff game in 5 years" to "yeah, we played backup QB's all year"...

Yeah I get it, but it's more frustrating this way. The premise of "would you rather he have the same record but..." seems invalid because the whole point is that the overall record could be so much better. If we can have such a stellar record against equal or better competition, imagine what the overall success would look like if we just took care of business against the dregs? Why do we have to choose one or the other if we are perfectly capable of taking care of the actual more difficult part?

 

[Acereros]

Lastly to answer your Question again no I don't think Tomlin or any other coach would have as much success with out Ben. Every good or great team has a good or great QB. But you can also be a bad Coach and ruin a QB that hasn't happened here. Ben has become one of the best. But theses type of games happen to often to him and the team. And that's the reason why he hasn't entered that MVP discussion every year yet.

Were you a Steeler fan during 1992-2003? Were they not great teams without a great QB?

 

[antdrewjosh]

Were you a Steeler fan during 1992-2003? Were they not great teams without a great QB?

And I always thought Cowher was a great coach..your point?? But what did they win?? Any Super Bowls??

 

[slashsteel]

The D is suspect

the O is talented.....

if I really had to put a finger on it I would guess it is Ben's preparation leading up to the game.

His focus or lack there of depending on who he is facing...


And because the coaches probably don't burst his bubble, it has allowed this trend to continue.


This is my opinion based on numerous occasions talking with various people, andddddddddd watching these trends, and seeing the common variable.


Here me out.

Say he is unprepared, comes in **** storms the game or at least half of it.

The already suspect D stays on the field even longer. (which leads to more points)

Less points early by Ben, so the combo between the two effects lead to similar outcomes we seen against Philly, Dolphins, Jags, etc.

With the coaches in the second part of the season, crunching numbers and playoff scenarios. It probably has a ripple effect.

Easier for everyone to be more focused, Ben included.


My scenario makes sense.............

 

[ark steel]

Yeah I get it, but it's more frustrating this way. The premise of "would you rather he have the same record but..." seems invalid because the whole point is that the overall record could be so much better. If we can have such a stellar record against equal or better competition, imagine what the overall success would look like if we just took care of business against the dregs? Why do we have to choose one or the other if we are perfectly capable of taking care of the actual more difficult part?

Oh, it frustrates me, too. Just easier for me to deal with when we are showing that we CAN beat good team, I guess. I don't focus so much on the bad. **** happens. Good teams (and I think this is overall) play bad games. I'd rather play bad against bad teams as, in the end, you may still have a chance of winning. Up until the mid 4th Quarter, as bad as they played all game, there was still a reasonable possibility of a comeback.

 

[deljzc]

The thing we should be asking is why was Tomlin 22-4 when favored by more than 7 points to START his career but over the last 11 games he is 7-4.

That's a problem that needs to be answered.

 

[ark steel]

The thing we should be asking is why was Tomlin 22-4 when favored by more than 7 points to START his career but over the last 11 games he is 7-4.

That's a problem that needs to be answered.

Isn't, "favored by 7 points" set by people trying to get others to bet one way or the other rather than a thorough analysis of team strengths versus weaknesses?

Just looking at this one game, I think it is clear that whatever we were favored by yesterday didn't take into account that Ben couldn't step into throws for half the game and be missing for several minutes of the 2nd quarter, right? Doesn't really explain how, with Bell, Ben and Brown on the field we could only score 8 points in the first half, but it has something to do with the ability to come back to win and/or changes momentum.

For Miami it is the first game this season, other than the season opener (the only other game they won), where they had their full starting OL back. Does that make the team the same as the one who lost 4 in a row. Certainly helps them play better, although we still should have dominated them pretty handily with our Offense.

 

[deljzc]

Isn't, "favored by 7 points" set by people trying to get others to bet one way or the other rather than a thorough analysis of team strengths versus weaknesses?

Just looking at this one game, I think it is clear that whatever we were favored by yesterday didn't take into account that Ben couldn't step into throws for half the game and be missing for several minutes of the 2nd quarter, right? Doesn't really explain how, with Bell, Ben and Brown on the field we could only score 8 points in the first half, but it has something to do with the ability to come back to win and/or changes momentum.

For Miami it is the first game this season, other than the season opener (the only other game they won), where they had their full starting OL back. Does that make the team the same as the one who lost 4 in a row. Certainly helps them play better, although we still should have dominated them pretty handily with our Offense.

I understand Vegas wants money on both side, but it's also true HISTORICALLY the team that is favored by 7.5 points or more wins almost 80-85% of the games. That's a fact.

We've LOST 4 of our last 11 games, which is almost triple expected outcomes.

That's bad and you can't sugar coat it or explain it away with a bad Roethlisberger performance or injuries.

 

[ark steel]

I understand Vegas wants money on both side, but it's also true HISTORICALLY the team that is favored by 7.5 points or more wins almost 80-85% of the games. That's a fact.

We've LOST 4 of our last 11 games, which is almost triple expected outcomes.

That's bad and you can't sugar coat it or explain it away with a bad Roethlisberger performance or injuries.

I'm assuming you mean they actually lost those 4 games rather than beat the spread, right?

In any event, saying triple expected outcomes with an 11 game sample when it is really 2 games that went one way or the other.

80% would be 8.8 wins, so let's go with 9 which is 81.8%, which means we should be 9-2 in those games right? All you need to show is that, in two of those games, Ben played badly and/or there was a significant injury. We know of one that happened yesterday. That leaves 1 in 3 games.

This last game had a bad outing by Ben and some injuries that might, at least partially, explain the outcome, yes? If Ben doesn't get injured, our chances for a comeback increase a great deal, IMO. After seeing the first half performance, I'm not so sure how much more certain that comeback would be, but still higher.

What were those other three games? Did Ben play great and we still lost? Did we have some significant injuries during the game or stay healthy and still lost?