Mike Tomlin

That's probably true of most teams

 

You are projecting my friend. We are talking about the last 10 years. We have missed the playoffs and been knocked out quickly to lesser opponents ....largely due to poor prep, defensive issues, and getting blown off the field early to good teams like the patriots. The one playoff game we won was a gift wrapped victory from the Bengals and that psycho Burfict.

Ben may have some bad games here and there but we were not losing consistently because of Ben. We were in the hunt and expected to be SB contenders because of Ben. The offensive passing game was the ONLY thing working on this team for a while now. This rewriting history and making up your own facts thing that has plagued the country apparently affects football fans also.

 

Would you please, for the love of God, stop making sense with this? Do you have any idea the damage that comments like these does to my Tomlin bashing???

 

If you think QB %'s fall squarely on the QB then no point on having this debate. Run your little stat math with teams down by 10 points or more at the half. Oh and there's thing called a game plan. Is it Ben ****ting the bed in the playoffs or is the coaching staff meeting superior coaching staffs in the playoffs? Brady's post season #'s probably aren't so amazing if you take out the games against the Steelers. One dimensional game plans typically struggle come playoff time. It's easier for good coaches and good teams to exploit. The last 10 years we have largely been 1 dimensional and predictable.

 

Is this a joke? I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. My perception was and still is that we did not have good QB's during Cowher's tenure...and when we did we were in SB contention or actually winning SB rings. That's a perception because it's actually truth.

 

I don't believe in lesser opponents at the professional level. Watch enough games and you will see that too. If you witness something enough than you should start to believe it's a reality. So maybe the opposition isn't as bad as you believe?

The Steelers were never superior in comparison to the opposition. That's something some members of this fan base like to imagine or something. Even if the Steelers were considered the "better team" they had weaknesses. Add in poor play, mistakes, and turnovers then the playing field becomes level.

Some to you like to make football into rocket science. When you analyze why a team won or loss the evidence is generally clear. Coaches and players tell fans all the time.

It is a fact that turnovers were the main factor in the Steelers playoff losses. It's a fact that the outcome of most games generally boils down to the execution by the players.

 

Hi Tom Brady, Big Ben, Brett Favre, Joe Montana, and about 50 of your HOF friends that own a SB ring......I'd like to introduce you to Kordel Stewart, Kent Graham, Mike Tomczak, and Charlie Batch.

 

The point is that players don't need to have great careers to have great games or seasons. There were times Kordell had good enough seasons to help take this team to the playoffs. Kordell helped lead the Steelers to two AFCC games.

There were times the team had adequate QB play under Cowher. Adequate enough to make the playoffs and be in contention for the SB. Do you follow my point?

 

At no time was Kordell ever a good QB. He might have had a few good games but over the course of a season he was a disaster that turned the ball over at an alarming rate. He easily lost more games for us then he did win for us. SO your point that he was serviceable is crazy. We were in the playoffs because of a great defense and great running game and a great coach. end of story.

 

Yeah and players like Kordell, Eli Manning, Hostetler ect ect ect don't need have as good careers as those QBs to help their teams win games and compete for Superbowls.

Obviously if we are talking about careers I would take the better players with the better careers if I had a choice. Lesser players don't need to have great player careers to be able to compete. Lesser players can out play better players in a one game situation. Especially in a team sport where many factors can decide the out come of games. Can you follow me?

 

You don't know what you are talking about. Kordell played well enough to help this team make 2 AFCCG.

 

Kordell couldn't be Eli's water boy. Comparing Eli and Kordel is ridiculous. The # of bad to average QB's that have won SB's are small compared to the QB's that win SB's. You don't need HOF career to win a SB but you have to at least win games for your team...and for the most part we did not have a QB that could do that. You essentially said it does not matter who your players are. There could be some truth to that but when it comes to QB's and playmakers...you are wrong. You need a good QB to win SB's. Sure there are exceptions but lets not pretend the exceptions are the rule.

 

We were in 2 AFCCG in spite of Kordel Stewart. Sorry but it's just a fact. the turnovers the turnovers the turnovers. Oh and if we needed him to win a game on his arm..yea good luck. No team in the NFL could win in the playoffs with KS. No coach would have ever gotten more out of him then we did. It was a sad fact that he was the best option we had because he was Slash. He could run.

 

In 4 playoff games KS completed 2 TD's and 8 INT's AND 3 fumbles. Good luck winning in the playoffs with that.

Since we are counting:

48% completions in the playoffs
744 yards (186 per game avg) in 4 playoff games.

Steeler career : 80 INT's and 46 fumbles

Ben's worst full season was better than Kordel's best season.

 

If this is the case, why do point spreads exist?

 

Kordell was good enough to help the team win in the regular season then he was good enough to help the team win in the playoffs. The team won 2 playoff games with Kordell as QB.

I am not advocating that Kordell was a good or great passer. In 1997 he passed for 3000 yards and 21 TDs. He ran for 11 TDs in 1997.

In 2001 he passed for 3100 yards 14 TDs, 5 rushing TDs. He wasn't a great passer but he could pass. His issue was maintaining consistency as a passer.

At least I am providing some facts to back up my points to refute your claims. He passed and he helped this team win.

 

Point spreads don't mean anything to the people who play the game.

Gambling is part of sports. I am not foolish enough to risk my money on that endeavor.

 

I liked Kordell overall, mainly due to his 'Awe factor" (in his earlier years), but it could also be said that Kordell played poorly enough to keep this team out of 2 Super Bowls.

 

That doesn't answer the question.

 

I can't disagree with that assessment. He was also one reason why they were in position to compete for the SB. Kordell teased us with his potential.

 

Point spreads are part of sports because of gambling. You think there would be point spreads without gambling? Come on man.

 

If Ben had either one of those seasons he'd be boo'ed off the field.

 

Mistakes are mistakes regardless of who commits them. Ben had his share of poor play, mistakes, and turnovers in the playoffs.

I'm not here to knock or compare Kordell with Ben. Ben is clearly the better player. Lesser players can rise up and have great games, seasons, ect.

What you remember about Kordell isn't 100% accurate . Kordell gave us some hope and good moments. It wasn't all bad.

 

That's my point. Money is the great equalizer.

 

Kordell was almost always awful in the playoffs.He was awful in 3 of his 4 playoffs games in fact.Only good game was against Baltimore in 2001 and it was nothing special.He had also 2 awful regular season in 1998 and 1999.