Thoughts ???

To the unrealistic steelers fans I go to school with who think they should go 16-0 every year, YES>

Made alot of mistakes and are not the same team without Troy Palamalou(sp).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

^^
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.

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.

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.

Absolutely they are. The playoffs were expected of them and they will not be in the playoffs this year.