1. Hi Guest, Registrations are now open. See you on the inside.
    Dismiss Notice

"Bad" Tomlin no worse then "bad" Cowher

Discussion in 'Steelers Talk' started by Blast Furnace, Oct 7, 2013.

  1. Blast Furnace

    Blast Furnace Staff Member Mod Team

    44,657
    10,208
    Oct 16, 2011
  2. Thigpen82

    Thigpen82 Bitter optimist

    10,527
    1,534
    Oct 17, 2011
    I'm glad that wasn't just my memory...
     
  3. freakfontana

    freakfontana

    5,481
    37
    Oct 19, 2011
    infact cowher was not very good too ..
     
  4. Blast Furnace

    Blast Furnace Staff Member Mod Team

    44,657
    10,208
    Oct 16, 2011
    Nope, pretty much identical and yet Cowher managed to turn things around and bring us back to the promise land. I believe Tomlin can too.

    That sounds kind of silly Freak, you're talking about 2 SB winning coaches with multiple trips to the SB. When are you guys going to realize you don't get to multiple SB's by sucking. In Cowhers case, he did it 10 years apart with different rosters, can't take that away from him. He had his short comings as they all do.

    I'd like to know who this magical coach is out there that is flawless? My guess is that it falls under the label as unicorn.
     
  5. RobVos

    RobVos Well-Known Member

    978
    8
    Oct 16, 2011
    I found it quite humorous that he used the "in the barrel" analogy. :rolleyes:
     
  6. freakfontana

    freakfontana

    5,481
    37
    Oct 19, 2011
    i prefered cowher than tomlin but i don't think he was elite , he was more tenacious and agresssive more or less like the harbaughs , not a genious like belicheak or payton , it's my opinion i'm not sure i remember very well cowher .
     
  7. mac daddyo

    mac daddyo Well-Known Member

    30,199
    6,290
    Oct 22, 2011
    the first two to ever lose a SB in Pittsburgh and i'm still not over that.:threaten::cool:
     
  8. NM Steelers Fan

    NM Steelers Fan Well-Known Member

    276
    0
    Jan 2, 2012
    I really think the difference between then and now is simply, the players. Or better yet, the caliber of players. Yes, DL has been around quite a while, but he had also been around quite a while under BC. We don't surprise now like we didn't then, we just had better players. Do we have a RB like the Bus, no. If we did would we be better, probably. We had a better O line too. We didn't surprise anyone with our blitzes, we just had better players to execute the blitzes. Just a thought.
     
  9. rutan74

    rutan74 Well-Known Member

    613
    81
    Oct 18, 2011
    I disagree with this article in total. What we are led to believe is that it is O.K. that history repeats itself and it is no big deal. I could pick this article apart without to much trouble but if you purely want to look at records, then yep, the team was stinky for a couple of years under Cowher, but Cowher did not have a top flight QB either. Noll did not have a good first couple of years or late in the 80's either. Do we want to compare those years too? I could go on and on, but the facts remain that SOMETHING has to be DONE.

    Sitting around the campfire singing songs is not going to get it done. Comparing Cowher's lean years with those of Tomlin's is counter productive and deflects from the real issues at hand. It may make one feel a bit better, but in the long run, the cancer is still there.

    I think what any Steeler fan wants to know is what is being done to fix the current problems. Comparing generations is not productive nor is is comparable. The league is entirely different than it was 14-15 years ago.

    rutan
     
  10. Blast Furnace

    Blast Furnace Staff Member Mod Team

    44,657
    10,208
    Oct 16, 2011
    The point is that every franchise has it's ups and downs and the fact is the Steelers have experienced more ups for longer stretches of times then most franchises, most likely due to their way of running it, which means not firing the coach every time you hit a rough patch and continuing to build through the draft, not that they have a choice, no cap room to go the FA route.
     
  11. shadowmaker

    shadowmaker Well-Known Member

    1,652
    104
    Nov 3, 2011
  12. SteelerJJ

    SteelerJJ Well-Known Member

    8,423
    498
    Oct 16, 2011
    From one of the comments on that article.


    "The 1998 Steelers lost their last 5 games. The 1999 team lost 6 games in a row. The 2003 team lost 5 in a row. "


    Those teams did not go 0-4 but they were equally lousy.
     
  13. 12to88

    12to88 Well-Known Member

    3,344
    70
    Dec 2, 2011
    I remember there being a lot of talk that Cowher had lost the team and it was time to replace him. But here are the differences:

    1. Cowher wasn't playing with an elite, two-time SB champion QB. He had a head case in Kordell Stewart and, in 2000, Kent Graham.
    2. Despite those teams' struggles, they were still relatively competitive. The 1999 team, for instance, was +3 in T/O margin. The 1998 and 99 teams fell apart late in the season, but many of those losses were to good teams.
    3. Cowher's teams had fallen off a lot due to personnel decisions affected by the salary cap, which, at the time, did NOT count signing bonuses. The Steelers were regularly having to let players go because they couldn't afford them. OK, same thing as now, except for one thing: the Steelers' main competitors in the AFC were awash in cash due to new stadium deals. Today's cap rules are the same for everyone.
     
  14. Blast Furnace

    Blast Furnace Staff Member Mod Team

    44,657
    10,208
    Oct 16, 2011
    How was Kordell a head case? I saw a coaching staff trying to use him incorrectly and change him, much like I am witnessing with Ben today. And while Tomlin has Ben, Cowher had a good offensive line.
     
  15. 12to88

    12to88 Well-Known Member

    3,344
    70
    Dec 2, 2011
    I don't mean he was causing the team a headache (well, he was, sort of). I meant the team was causing Kordell a headache. I agree: he was completely misused. The again, Kordell almost demanded he be treated like a pocket passer. I think Kordell came along about fifteen years too early.
     
  16. Blast Furnace

    Blast Furnace Staff Member Mod Team

    44,657
    10,208
    Oct 16, 2011
    I agree with that 100%
     
  17. biggbunch68

    biggbunch68

    13,844
    2,349
    Apr 26, 2012
    I always liked Kordell as a QB, till they tried to change him...... Cowher hadd a great O-LINE and pleather of great runningbacks while he was here.. Seems like we always drafted well under Cowher while he was here to
     
  18. SteelerJJ

    SteelerJJ Well-Known Member

    8,423
    498
    Oct 16, 2011
    It would be interesting to watch Kordell in one of today's spread offense type teams. In some ways, he and Randall Cunningham were ahead of their time.
     
  19. Thigpen82

    Thigpen82 Bitter optimist

    10,527
    1,534
    Oct 17, 2011
    Differences to be sure. You could add: Cowher always had a very good o-line, and set of RBs. There was a reason why he didn't have a top-flight QB - he never picked one, because he never wanted one.
     
  20. Iowasteeljim

    Iowasteeljim

    2,524
    492
    Oct 26, 2011
    Didn't you read the other thread...Belichick is the unicorn!
     
  21. 58stillers

    58stillers

    2,188
    284
    Nov 14, 2011
    IMHO, the difference is the personnel. Back in 99 or so, you could see that there were some bright spots on the roster, some solid young playmakers. Where are those playmakers now? Who can you say right now is showing flashes of brilliance on offense or defense? Sorry, I support my team as much as any die hard fan, but our cupboards are bare and there is no easy fix to this team. Too much "young money" attitude and not enough humble talent
     
  22. SteelerJJ

    SteelerJJ Well-Known Member

    8,423
    498
    Oct 16, 2011
    I wish I could say Jarvis Jones but he looks very slow out there to me. Perhaps I'm over judging.
     
  23. Thigpen82

    Thigpen82 Bitter optimist

    10,527
    1,534
    Oct 17, 2011
    You're talking about two different things there.

    I don't see a huge difference, talent-wise between those we had in 1999, and the likes of A.Brown, Bell, J.Jones, Decastro, S.Thomas, etc. The problem with comparing is that we know how the guys in 1999 turned out. Now, people are jumping to all sorts of conclusions because someone like Decastro, who has played, what, 7 games or something, isn't pancaking defenders on every single play.

    In short, if we look back to the players then, we can't help but see them in terms of the several seasons they played for us, and naturally enough we'll pick out the best performances. (In the same way that when I remember Kordell, I remember the great plays, whilst others remember only the bad). Then, we're looking at four games - four torrid games - and comparing them, which results in people writing off our young guys completely. Which is a rash move.

    The "young money" attitude, meanwhile, is a different debate.
     
  24. RobVos

    RobVos Well-Known Member

    978
    8
    Oct 16, 2011
    This.
     
  25. scruffy

    scruffy Well-Known Member

    1,249
    0
    Jan 3, 2012
    At this point "Bad Tomlin" could turn into "Great Tomlin", if he turns this around or into "Very Bad Tomlin" if the current trend continues. Too soon to tell at this point.
     

Share This Page

Welcome to the ultimate resource for Steelers fans. Sign Up Here!