Thanks for nothing Kordell Stewart!

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7147578

Thanks Kordell. Way to pick the Patriots so it seems like you actually know how to analyze football games and aren't just a homer. Maybe if you could have won at least one big game in your career you'd feel better. Even Skip Bayless picked us to win in a shootout and he pisses me off more than any other talking head on ESPN.

 

Thanks for sharing the link. While I was watching Kordell crowning Brady and the patsies, I swear that black growth on the side of Korky's face was saying, ARRRRGH, The Steelers will crush the patsies and Tom Brady will be broken in half. Did anybody else see that?

 

Those who can, do. Those who can't, talk about it on ESPN.

 

+1000

 

I'm a Kordell supporter who thinks he was screwed over by the fluxation of systems and lack of confidence in his coaches around him. Not saying he would have been a Hall of Famer, but he took way too much blame for the team's problems, and his potential was squashed instead of nurtured by some of his OCs (he had the "new OC every year" problem most recently suffered by Alex Smith, who has a 95 rating this year). People forget that when he played like he was designed to play, he was a Pro Bowler, team MVP, and one of the most feared players in the NFL. You'd think we'd use that to our advantage, but we didn't. He was definitely somewhat sabotaged by his own organization. I will say, however, that he was too quick to jump on board with the Ray Sherman/Kevin Gilbride garbage. He took it on as a challenge like, "I wanna show 'em I can be a pocket QB." He should have just been himself like he was with Gailey and Mularkey.

I bring this up all the time, but in regard to the "never won a big game": he did quarterback the 2001 AFC championship game, which we lost to New England by 7 points and our special teams gave NE 17 points. Without those 17 ST points, he takes us to the Super Bowl. That's simple math, and it's accurate too. But Stewart took and still takes blame because he was unable to rally us to a win from a 21-3 deficit. He threw 2 interceptions in the final minutes, basically desperation time. Yes, he did have an opportunity to tie it, and he didn't. But just because he didn't pull a John Elway comeback doesn't mean he cost us the game. He did engineer drives that amounted to 17 (20) points in a game where the defense allowed 10. Without a catastrophic meltdown on special teams, he wins the big game.

I know he wasn't the perfect QB. He wasn't as good as Ben by a long shot. But so many fans are quick to badmouth him like he was detrimental to the team. Like he didn't show us stuff the league had never seen before, or win a ton of games for us, or give us chances to go to the Super Bowl. I can't stand the "good riddance" attitude for someone that did a lot more for this team than guys no one has a problem with. We didn't win a Super Bowl with him, but there are many places to put blame for that, most of them the Steelers' Regulars (pass defense, poor special teams).

But NOT in his defense, I saw him for a sec doing some lame demonstration with Cris Carter, and I thought, "I wonder if he's any good on TV. Hope he's not like Jerry Rice." Well he wasn't as bad as Rice, but about 10 seconds in he said, "It's like taking food from a candy." But he could get better in time. Rice is. Slowly.

 

Skip Bayless is dead to me. HE knows what he did...

 

He could mix up positions, so he can mix up similes. It's a new style of "slash" presenting.

Otherwise, I agree with your defence of Kordell 100% - particularly about the different OCs.

 

To Skippy's credit he's one of the very few ESPNrs that has anything good to say about Ben. I've seen him defending Ben and his style of play countless times.

 

Me as well. Just the sight of that guy pisses me off!

 

What bothered me is that Kordell said we had no chance. Eric Mangini picks up the slack and says there is always a chance. We had to rely on an ex Browns coach to help us out. Just the way it was portrayed it seemed like they were all getting on Kordell's case because of the Steelers and he picked the Patriots to make it seem like he was an expert analyst. Bill Cowher sometimes doesn't pick us, but he never forgoes an opportunity to show his Black and Gold Pride!

I grew up watching Kordell, and while I don't remember the different OC's because I was so young, I do remember even as a kid that what bothered me the most is when he stopped being Slash and started trying to be a pocket passer. I think that is where he hurt us.

 

The reality is the producers sit down with the talent at the production meetings for that day and decide who will take which point of view. It is scripted and managed so there is always debate. If you think that is all spontaneous you are kidding yourself.

 

I didn't see the segment you're talking about, but I can definitely see how the outsider perspective is that we have no chance. Yeah, there's always a chance the Jags will somehow beat the Ravens. All that has to happen is the Ravens play one of the worst offensive games in team history. But that was a "no chance" game. These guys are paid to exaggerate and talk sh--. I don't like it, but they all do it. As for this game's specifics, the Patriots are one of a few teams to ever say, "Hey, wait a minute... We can't run on them, and they stink when there's more than 3 receivers, so why don't we just throw it with 4 or 5 guys 50 times per game?" Which I've been hoping teams wouldn't realize my whole life. Since New England does that, they "have our number." They simply match up well against us like the Jets match up against them and we match up well against the Jets. Add to that that our defense has not been its usual self and our offense is only as good as our offensive line plays. There's only a chance of us winning if our OL get something going on the ground and protects Ben, and if our defense can hold NE to under 30. It's easy to believe we won't be able to do all that. My God, the Colts are 0-7, and lost by 55 points last week. Remember how we couldn't seem to gain a yard against them?

You're absolutely right about how he played badly. By trying to become a pocket passer and running less. But that was the team's decision, and he went along with it and tried to play the offense they gave him. He should have said, "NO! ARE YOU CRAZY??" But he didn't. He was such an effective scrambler, it seemed he got a first down or touchdown every time he tried. Defenses were so frustrated they'd be throwing sh-- on the sidelines. They couldn't stop it. He was best when his third read was Run. Check your first two receivers, and if they aren't open, just go. Don't waste any time checking 3 and 4. But they took that running away from him, and he started to force passes to prove he could be Dan Marino.

I do place blame on him for not resisting, but keep in mind that even though this was the late 90s and early 21st century, the culture was still of the mindset that a running QB is less than, not more than a pocket QB (McNabb). I always said what he had was a gift and a bonus, and I'm sure Marino would have killed to be able to run a 4.3-40. Most people did not see it that way, they saw it as "Oh, he's that kind of guy." That's less of a problem now, and I can't believe it was a problem as recently as it was, but there it is.

 

No duh its scripted but it's still fun to talk about