Why the Standard are so low for the steelers now?

You mean when they messed up drafts and coaching hires and time management, etc., the team started losing. I agree.

 

Two things:

Just because Tomlin or Canada or someone in the organization doesn't admit that canada's system requires a mobile QB doesn't mean it isn't true. There are plenty of analysts who say it does. And Canada himself stupidly gives it away in that 2021 interview. If you watch there are alot of passes to the sideline with KP or Mitch rolling to that side. More division II college stuff like this then NFL level plays and Defensive coordinators around the league know it. I don't know why you keep stubbornly sticking with this inane issue of wanting a quote from your own wish list, i think its just your way of trying to win an argument.

I know the Steelers don't like to fire coaches, they're probably proud of that fact. They have fired assistants before and i'm glad they at least did that, its healthy to get rid of unproductive employees. It doesn't make sense not to do it. I think you put too much credence into this Steelers Way dogma as you call it, maybe its true to an extent but it doesn't invalidate my assertion at all. In fact if ARII is sticking with Canada to follow some Steelers dogma it reinforces my assertion that he's being lazy and un-proactive (and cheap). Again, I think your trying real hard to win an argument with this issue you can't let go of.

The Steelers are lucky they had assistants like LeBeau, Widenhofer, Whisenhunt, Arians, Haley (he's better than anyone we've had in a while) and Bradshaw (the de facto OC of the 70's), but when you have a stinker of this magnitude you have to cut ties.

 

I have been clear since well before this particular discussion in saying that Canada should be fired. It would be great if you would post without misrepresenting what I wrote or making it personal. That would help keep the discussion productive.

You and others have claimed that Canada said he needed a mobile quarterback to run his offense. None of you has provided evidence for that claim. You can't find any evidence of Canada, Tomlin, or anybody on the team supporting your claim. That was my point. I was never arguing whether or not his offense does require a mobile quarterback. It was the unsupported claim about what he has said that I disputed. This isn't about my personal wishes. If you want to tell us Canada said something, you need a quote with him saying it. Your evidence did not do that.

You also falsely claimed that holding on to Canada is not the Steelers' way. It is their way, to show patience with coaches. I don't agree with their decision, but there is logic to it beyond your silly claim that it is laziness. One of those years was a playoff team with a disaster of an offensive line and Roethlisberger on his last legs. The other was a transition to their rookie quarterback with the youngest offense in the league. There were factors other than Canada holding the offense back. I'm not sure why that is so difficult for you to accept.

There is evidence that the Steelers are cheap in their decisions to hire and fire coaches. That they are usually among the smallest coaching staffs in the league demonstrates that. The argument that it is only money or that it is laziness, however, just doesn't hold up.

 

I don't think the standard is low per se but the Steelers seem to think doing the same old, same old will work. We are kinda like Blockbuster competing in a Netflix world.

 

The decision that set off all these threads was not firing the offensive coordinator after two years in that job. Do we really think constantly firing coaches is the wave of the future? The Browns are trend setters?

 

Adding to your thought the Broncos have fired 3 head coaches since January 2019

That seems to be going well for them

 

Whether Canada said it or not doesn't really matter - that's what he wants in his system. The evidence is ample. If I said he said it maybe i was off, anyway it seems he didn't say it publicly. But it doesn't really matter - his intention is to use a mobile QB in his 'system'

Of course its laziness and money driven - that's the only logical conclusion. Its not because the system is good or it even got better - i think we've gone through that already. So what is left? Maybe it's ARII's interpretation of the Steelers Way - but i think its a misinterpretation of that Way. If that's the case its a bad sign. The Steelers way is to give good coaches time to build a team and implement their philosophy - not let clearly bad coordinators finish out their contracts. Bottom of the league in total offense for most of the season; It is what it is. And if ARII thinks Canada's system will suddenly get better after 20 years of college II level QB roll outs and jet sweeps - he's fooling himself.

 

How do you know he wants that in his system if he didn't say it? Are you reading his mind now? All Canada has said is that he can run his system with or without a mobile quarterback. I believe the team has shown a preference for mobile quarterbacks, but that goes back before Canada, including Tomlin's fascination with Michael Vick.

If Rooney is following what he believes is the Steelers way, then no, it isn't laziness or money driven. It is him following a model that has worked for about 50 years. You are frustrated with Rooney, so you want to insult him with the laziness comment, but the evidence does not support that conclusion.

Why is it a misinterpretation of the Steelers' way? They are patient with coaches, including assistants, especially when there are circumstances beyond that coach's control. There has been plenty wrong with that offense beyond the coordinator the last two years. The logic of allowing him a year with his quarterback and most of the offense in place does make some sense. I don't agree with it, but I get it.

I really do understand your frustration. I didn't want Canada back, either. I think it is a mistake that will set the development of the offense back. I just don't agree with some of the hysterics about it or the insults being directed at Rooney.

 

Calling a decision lazy is not insulting someone. Its calling their decision lazy and i'll throw cheap in there too cause that's what it looks like as well. Its constructive criticism. I hope Canada proves us doubters wrong and we see KP attacking the middle of the field but i kind of doubt that will happen. I just see KP taking alot on his shoulders if the offense is really going to take that next step. At least they should get him better pass protection. Otherwise its going to be another year of mediocre offensive production and modest improvement.

 

Of course, it is insulting to Rooney to claim he is making a decision out of laziness. Please stop with that nonsense.

Given the team's traditions and its small staff, cheap is fair, but lazy is not.

They absolutely need to attack the middle of the field more. It has been a huge flaw in the offense the last two seasons. Given that it was the case with Roethlisberger and Trubisky as well as Pickett, that has to fall entirely on Canada.

 

Lazy, un proactive, not taking corrective action, however you want to slice it.

 

So the clock is ticking on Tomlin as well?! Not surprised. Perhaps AR 2 wants Andy Weidl and Omar Kahn to pair up with a New HC; possibly the same for Pickett. Could this be the first ever time the Steelers get an Offensive Minded HC?!


Way too soon to tell of course but Weidl did come from an NFL Franchise who were long known for their successes with them; Nick Sirianni being the latest one.

 

Neutral Site votes via NFL Owners?! Only a handful I can think of but I would be guessing which begets nothing but baseless, unfounded statements. Agree though that such an idea is truly dumb as all hell.

 

Don't forget that "Mr. Unlimited" was supposed to be the final piece!!! He was the savior and was expected to lead the Broncos deep into the Playoffs!! Russell Wilson was supposed to best Patrick Mahomes and finally get Denver over the hump!!!.....


.... Oh wait...

 

Everybody keeps saying the Steelers didn't attack the middle of the field. I recall many passes thrown by Trubisky and Pickett to Friermuth, Harris and Warren over the middle. I also remember a nice TD pass to Pickens over the middle. The whole not passing to the middle of the field thing is a myth, IMO.

 

The thread that wouldn't die.... lol...

Yes, I agree. I have no idea what this 'middle of the field' deal is.
You do attack the edges - to get angles.
But you go to the middle as well.

I think the old saying; "You don't throw late to the middle" is playing here, especially with a rookie.

 

Translation: Not doing what you want him to do.

It's not lazy and it is very much in keeping with the Steelers' approach over the last 50 years.

 

No, it isn't, and the passing charts people posted here the last two seasons clearly showed it. That doesn't mean they never do it at all, but it was rare and often made them way too easy to defend.

 

Actually, he is right.
You cannot just look at the Steelers and make that sort of determination.
The entire league is prone to the "safe" sideline routes.
The middle of the field is more dangerous, via traffic, hits, tipped passes, etc....
Now in the most common passing areas, you get those slants, drags, curls, etc in that 0 to 10 yards (the philosophy is more to get the ball out quickly and into the hands of the skilled play makers.)
The Steelers are slightly under the league averages, most likely bringing on a rookie has something to do with it.
However, Ben wasn't a whole lot different, but did post league averages.

Note: This chart is a little dated, but not much off from my newer chart which isn't much different but unfinished.
The sideline is just a safer place to throw.
Now I will admit, when I take it down another level, there are some QB's who throw to the middle more than others, just like some will throw in the 10 to 20yard range more than others.

So all in all, you attack with the safest passes to create angles and/or to allow a player like Pickens who can make plays even when covered, to make those.
The bottom line: Yes, we are slightly below average but we do make plays there. I guess some blame is on OC and some on a rookie QB (you want to make the safest throws).





In lieu of my not having data ready, I saw this.
I don't like it so much but we can Kenny like deep middle and deep right, and the shorts right sidelines.
Hopefully, his passing vocabulary keeps improving. That 10-20 middle isn't good.

 

I said this for Years, but some only pay attention to what Steelers do....so they think nobody does it. Like the whole throw short of the sticks(which everyone does), or another favorite....a LB covering a Wrs.....I tried to explain it was a offenses scheme tring to do that....We do it, and everyone does it....you try not to let it happen, but do You want to take all LBs off the field the whole game.
Anyways those are a few things some think only happen with the Steelers.

 

Plenty of teams get stuck with linebackers on receivers. Watch the 49ers play. The difference is that they have linebackers who can actually do it with some level of competence.

 

True.
There are some QB's that are exceptional.
But the general rule is that is the safest pass. (I am aware of the number of throw-a-ways too and try to keep those numbers out but, that's a tall order)

 

That's where my call for faster LB's stems from.
In this NFL, they are going to have to do various coverages.
The 49ers are a prime example.

On a side note, it irked me to no end that the wrong team from the NFC went to the Super Bowl.
I knew that defense wasn't all it was cracked up to be.... and they got manhandled.
SF just ran out of QB's.

 

Maybe, but I'm not sure they stop the Eagles enough to win even with Purdy. It's not as if the Eagles got blown out. They lost by three to a damn good offensive team that had the help of some poorly-timed, inconsistent officiating. (Seriously, that was the first hold all game? Seriously!?)