Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems Wordio
Log In Create Account

Have the Steelers been Underachieving?

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ Have the Steelers been Underachieving?
P

peoplerfunny

Member

81 posts
Nov 26, 2009 2:23 PM
Thoughts ???
Nov 26, 2009 9:23am
darbypitcher22's avatar

darbypitcher22

Senior Member

8,000 posts
Nov 26, 2009 2:52 PM
To the unrealistic steelers fans I go to school with who think they should go 16-0 every year, YES>
Nov 26, 2009 9:52am
P

Pescara71

Member

48 posts
Nov 26, 2009 3:09 PM
Made alot of mistakes and are not the same team without Troy Palamalou(sp).
Nov 26, 2009 10:09am
C

capninsano

Senior Member

411 posts
Nov 26, 2009 3:48 PM
Special teams has been underachieving big time. Two games where one could argue they cost us the game. I think offensively everything is fine and defensively the performance is almost on par without Troy.
Nov 26, 2009 10:48am
P

Prescott

Senior Member

2,569 posts
Nov 26, 2009 3:54 PM
They aren't playing winning football. When a team sets the NFL record for giving up the most TD's without a defense on the field , they are going to lose some games that they probably shouldn't lose.

Sometimes the special teams under performs, but sometimes the ball bounces the wrong way. Last year, the Steelers got some bounces. This year, the bounces are going to the opponent.Maybe, it is football karma.
Nov 26, 2009 10:54am
Ironman92's avatar

Ironman92

Administrator

49,363 posts
Nov 26, 2009 4:08 PM
No Polamalu = no takeaways

Each loss has been without Polamalu for the majority of the game.

Every single game has been well within reach to win.....no killer instinct on offense and being up 14-0 is no longer a sure thing...which frustrates the hell out of me.

Seems like with Polamalu we barely ever get burnt deep...without him it almost commonplace.

IMO his absence is eyepopping.


How the special team coach has a job is beyond me....it has SEVERLY cost them in the Bengals, Bears and Chiefs games.
Nov 26, 2009 11:08am
David St. Hubbins's avatar

David St. Hubbins

Senior Member

205 posts
Nov 26, 2009 4:12 PM
It seems like the Steelers have always had somewhat suspect special teams, but this year is a new low. They're basically spotting every team a touchdown before the game starts.
Nov 26, 2009 11:12am
THE4RINGZ's avatar

THE4RINGZ

R.I.P Thread Bomber

16,816 posts
Nov 26, 2009 4:13 PM
Troy being out.
Piss poor Special Teams coverage.
Terrible Offensive play calling.

Things that the Steeler's are typically able to overcome seem to have gotten the better of them four times so far this season.

But the league is cyclical every team has a good run then goes through some down seasons.
Nov 26, 2009 11:13am
P

peoplerfunny

Member

81 posts
Nov 26, 2009 4:19 PM
Pescara71 wrote: Made alot of mistakes and are not the same team without Troy Palamalou(sp).
Are you saying the defending super bowl champs rely on 1 player? If the steelers have to rely on Troy to win or lose games, they are in trouble.
Nov 26, 2009 11:19am
Puddle Jumper's avatar

Puddle Jumper

Senior Member

223 posts
Nov 26, 2009 5:06 PM
Pittsburgh hasn't underachieved.

They have dominated every game they lost(except the 2nd Cincy game) but failed to put them away.They could be and should be 10-0 but as I said haven't finished teams off.
Nov 26, 2009 12:06pm
P

Prescott

Senior Member

2,569 posts
Nov 26, 2009 5:11 PM
Are you saying the defending super bowl champs rely on 1 player?
I saw a graphic last night that showed how important Polomalu is to the Steeler's defense.
With him in the line up the Steelers give up 12 fewer ppg and have 7 more takeaways. That is significant.
Nov 26, 2009 12:11pm
THE4RINGZ's avatar

THE4RINGZ

R.I.P Thread Bomber

16,816 posts
Nov 26, 2009 5:16 PM
Here is something I have been thinking about the D. Have the schemes changed much this year with the blitzes? Are the opposing offenses just seeing the same thing they saw last year and are more prepared to pick up some of those wildcat blitzes? Sure Troy being out of the lineup changes things a little bit but not as much as some people are speculating. True when the Steeler's have to drop back into coverage without much pressure on the QB I get a little bit or a lot nervous.

And is it just me or in the latest pictures of Big Benis he looking more and more like Frank the Tank from the movie Old School?
Nov 26, 2009 12:16pm
Fab4Runner's avatar

Fab4Runner

Tits McGee

6,196 posts
Nov 26, 2009 5:40 PM
Puddle Jumper wrote: Pittsburgh hasn't underachieved.

They have dominated every game they lost(except the 2nd Cincy game) but failed to put them away.They could be and should be 10-0 but as I said haven't finished teams off.
underachieve
A verb
1 underachieve, underperform
perform less well or with less success than expected;

I'd say that dominating a game and then not winning is the exact definition on underachieving. If you dominate a game you expect to win it...they didn't. That's less success than expected.
Nov 26, 2009 12:40pm
C

capninsano

Senior Member

411 posts
Nov 26, 2009 6:01 PM
THE4RINGZ wrote: Here is something I have been thinking about the D. Have the schemes changed much this year with the blitzes? Are the opposing offenses just seeing the same thing they saw last year and are more prepared to pick up some of those wildcat blitzes? Sure Troy being out of the lineup changes things a little bit but not as much as some people are speculating. True when the Steeler's have to drop back into coverage without much pressure on the QB I get a little bit or a lot nervous.

And is it just me or in the latest pictures of Big Benis he looking more and more like Frank the Tank from the movie Old School?
The complexity of the blitzes change without Troy. Against the Bengals I saw him lined up as an outside linebacker on the right side, and then AFTER the ball was snapped he dropped into two deep coverage on the LEFT side of the field....no one else can do that but him and that screws a QB up because that's something you don't see.
Nov 26, 2009 1:01pm
wes_mantooth's avatar

wes_mantooth

Tomfoolery & shenanigans

17,977 posts
Nov 26, 2009 10:04 PM
I don't think so. I think they overachieved last year.....they got hot at the right time.

Talentwise, I think they are middle of the pack, but they could still get hot, grab the wildcard and make a deep run in the playoffs.
Nov 26, 2009 5:04pm
R

rock_knutne

Nov 27, 2009 12:59 AM
I think so. They have played down to their opponents all year long. I still think they will win the division, they haven't played their best football yet.
Nov 26, 2009 7:59pm
killer_ewok's avatar

killer_ewok

iRep

11,379 posts
Nov 27, 2009 3:27 AM
I would have to say yes. Gotta get healthy and shore up special teams and then they have as good of a chance as any team.
Nov 26, 2009 10:27pm
Heretic's avatar

Heretic

Son of the Sun

18,820 posts
Nov 27, 2009 3:32 AM
I think so. They should be 9-1 easily, but seem to screw up at crucial times on a regular basis.

Of the four losses:

1. Chicago: Jeff Reed misses two field goals that are easily in his range. Team loses by 3.

2. Cincinnati 1: Pick six by the Bengals and then with the Steelers up by two scores in the fourth quarter, they fall apart.

3. Cincinnati 2: Just got outplayed there.

4. KC: Jebus....where do I start? Kick return for a score, pick that nearly went for six and still resulted in 3. Outgained opponent by a 2-1 margin, but still lose. Defense magically turned into sieve in the clutch. Two quarterbacks get hurt. What didn't go wrong?

And then count that Denver is the only team they've beat that they legit dominated. They play to the level of their opposition, whether it's 9-1 Minnesota or 1-9 Cleveland. To me, that's underachieving. If you're good enough to beat Minnesota, you should just roll the KCs, Detroits and Clevelands on your schedule.
Nov 26, 2009 10:32pm
G

grass_licker

Senior Member

119 posts
Nov 27, 2009 4:51 AM
offensive line is taking a beating with injuries and bad play calling, there relying way way too much on the pass, mendenhall and moore are having carries but then they get away from it?
Nov 26, 2009 11:51pm
bigdaddy2003's avatar

bigdaddy2003

Senior Member

7,384 posts
Nov 27, 2009 5:53 AM
Heretic wrote: I think so. They should be 9-1 easily, but seem to screw up at crucial times on a regular basis.

Of the four losses:

1. Chicago: Jeff Reed misses two field goals that are easily in his range. Team loses by 3.

2. Cincinnati 1: Pick six by the Bengals and then with the Steelers up by two scores in the fourth quarter, they fall apart.

3. Cincinnati 2: Just got outplayed there.

4. KC: Jebus....where do I start? Kick return for a score, pick that nearly went for six and still resulted in 3. Outgained opponent by a 2-1 margin, but still lose. Defense magically turned into sieve in the clutch. Two quarterbacks get hurt. What didn't go wrong?

And then count that Denver is the only team they've beat that they legit dominated. They play to the level of their opposition, whether it's 9-1 Minnesota or 1-9 Cleveland. To me, that's underachieving. If you're good enough to beat Minnesota, you should just roll the KCs, Detroits and Clevelands on your schedule.

Eerily similar to how Baltimore has lost most of their games. They could also easily by 9 and 1. Cincy plain out beat them in the 2nd game but the rest of their losses should have easily been W's.
Nov 27, 2009 12:53am
N

Nate

Formerly Known As Keebler

3,949 posts
Nov 27, 2009 2:10 PM
Heretic wrote: I think so. They should be 9-1 easily, but seem to screw up at crucial times on a regular basis.

Of the four losses:

1. Chicago: Jeff Reed misses two field goals that are easily in his range. Team loses by 3.

2. Cincinnati 1: Pick six by the Bengals and then with the Steelers up by two scores in the fourth quarter, they fall apart.

3. Cincinnati 2: Just got outplayed there.

4. KC: Jebus....where do I start? Kick return for a score, pick that nearly went for six and still resulted in 3. Outgained opponent by a 2-1 margin, but still lose. Defense magically turned into sieve in the clutch. Two quarterbacks get hurt. What didn't go wrong?

And then count that Denver is the only team they've beat that they legit dominated. They play to the level of their opposition, whether it's 9-1 Minnesota or 1-9 Cleveland. To me, that's underachieving. If you're good enough to beat Minnesota, you should just roll the KCs, Detroits and Clevelands on your schedule.
Welcome to the NFL where 1 or 2 mistakes cost you a game. It's been that way since the beginning of time.
Nov 27, 2009 9:10am
Heretic's avatar

Heretic

Son of the Sun

18,820 posts
Nov 27, 2009 4:13 PM
^^
True....but it goes from "welcome to the NFL" to underachieving when you can blame those 1 or 2 mistakes for definitely 3 losses in a 10-game period and perhaps 4 (while, as I said, the Bengals did outplay Pittsburgh in the second game, it can't be ignored that their winning margin came from YET ANOTHER kick return for six).

When it happens once, that's life in the NFL. When it happens with regularity, that's underachieving. That's the difference between the Steelers and a team like the Vikings right now. Minnesota gave up two turnovers for TDs in losing to Pittsburgh. So far, that's been a one-time deal. They don't shoot themselves in the foot on the regular basis.
Nov 27, 2009 11:13am
N

Nate

Formerly Known As Keebler

3,949 posts
Nov 27, 2009 4:49 PM
So when the Browns lost to the Steelers the year they made the playoffs 3 times by a field goal each time.

There's always if's and but's in football. Part of the game.

If Jamal Lewis ran for 300 yards every game, blah blah blah.
Nov 27, 2009 11:49am
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Nov 28, 2009 4:39 PM
The defense and offense have been playing good enough to be considered in the top few best teams.

What has killed the steelers have been the 8 returns for TD's. I think 4 were kick returns and 4 are fumble INT returns. I understand it happens on occassion but man 8 is waaaay too many and is killing the team.
Nov 28, 2009 11:39am
S

slingshot4ever

Senior Member

4,085 posts
Nov 28, 2009 8:20 PM
Absolutely they are. The playoffs were expected of them and they will not be in the playoffs this year.
Nov 28, 2009 3:20pm