Cowher vs Tomlin

Tomlin defines success as winning Super Bowls.

I'm not sure how anyone can say the HC wasn't the issue.

If you want to blame the offense well Tomlin liked what he saw and is bringing back the OV.

If you want to blame the defense well that is Tomlin's defense.

 

You my friend simply don't get it.

Can anyone explain to me why he can't follow the simple logic I wrote? I even broke it down in numbers. Does it not make sense?

Oh well.

 

Show me a quote where Tomlin said Superbowls are the only measure of success.

Tomlin didn't turn the ball over 5 times vs the Browns.

Tomlin didn't say he liked what he saw. He said something to the effect that they all need to get better. I am sure they are evaluating everything as an organization. They might still let Canada go.

They failed to win as an organization. The defense did what it could early in the game. The defense received no offensive support. But what do you expect when the Oline was a patch work unit, QB missing open WR, Wr dropping passes, not converting on third down and short? The HC couldn't control any of these factors. The defense was going to eventually crack vs the Chiefs once the Chiefs offense got their act together.

This is how you break down a game without simply blaming the HC.

 

KC had 12 offensive possessions. That is a normal amount. Chiefs ran about 60 plays. A normal amount. Pittsburgh controlled the ball as much as KC did. I don't buy fatigue as an excuse.

Tomlin has failed to establish a ground game for 80% of his career. Yes, Roethlisberger throwing as much as he did vs. Browns is on coaching. Came out in the shotgun just like vs. Jax. When the plan is to have Ben throw 50 times don't be surprised at turnovers.

38 year old QB no running game.

 

So, the same as every other team with a big name.

 

The Steelers of the 2000s weren't a dynasty

 

If Cowher didn’t retire absolutely

 

Making an appearance 5 times in 8 years vs making the championship game 5 times in 8 years is not even close to the same

 

Another post started by someone in need of attention

 

Well you're basically repeating the mainstream talking point that having a franchise QB on a rookie deal guarantees a Super Bowl or at least is the best way to win a Super Bowl. Only Russell Wilson and Patrick Mahomes have accomplished this in the last 10 years. Flacco was on his 5th year option I believe so that was still a decent amount of cap. Same thing for Eli his first Super Bowl no? So really since Ben won Super Bowls the only QBs to win on rookie contracts (outside 5th year options) are Mahomes and Wilson.

Someone can double check the contracts for Eli and Flacco. I've been wrong before.

I think that talking point arose with Mahomes' win. If Allen wins it will be back. If Rodgers, Stafford, Brady, Jimmy G, Mahomes, Tannehill win it will not because your premise only applies to 2/8 QBs remaining.

Nobody was talking about rookie QBs when 44 year-old Brady won a Super Bowl or Manning with his debilitating injury.

...

Look at Dallas. If they had to pay Diggs and Parsons like veterans they couldn't afford them. They would cost at least $30M in cap combined as veterans.

That adds up to a franchise QB. So good drafting and star players on rookie contracts is a benefit regardless of position even if that benefit is largest at QB.

The Seahawks had Wilson on rookie contract but they also had Wagner, ETIII, Chancellor, Sherman etc. at the same time.

I don't see how Tomlin gets the crutch of a veteran franchise QB contract as an excuse when Arians, Kubiak, Belichick and others didn't need it. And I've never heard anyone say anything nice about Gary Kubiak. It's like he doesn't exist.

 

Cowher couldn't beat New England in the playoffs, so tell me how were they going to be a dynasty?

 

beating Green Bay and getting a third super bowl is a dynasty. He had to be barely better than Tomlin to get the third ring. Cowher is a lot more than slightly better

 

Tomlin has yet to make it 5 times and we are at 15 years and counting. He could coach another 30 years and never finish the job.

 

Some would argue 2 super bowl win and a super bowl loss is a dynasty. If it’s not it’s as close as you can get without it being a dynasty

 

Going 14-2 and losing in the championship game is a lot different than one and done. The 49ers and Cowboys kept alternating years with Dion Sanders and Charles Haley.

 

If the Steelers win Super Bowl XLV, we likely aren't having this conversation.

Mike Tomlin with 2 Super Bowls and his record and Big Ben going 3-0 in the Super Bowl would lesson the hurt of 3 playoff wins in the last 10 years.

 

Most QBs wouldn’t have been able to do what Ben did to bring home those rings.

 

EVERY year a different excuse, and every year NEVER Tomlins fault!

How about.....We DON'T get blown out, and WIN a playoff game!

 

Yes ..But it didn't so...

 

That’s a lot more post season success (4 more wins is a lot). Plus going forward it will be easier to make the playoffs. The seven seed this year would not have made the post season in the past.