Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

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

Pittsburgh Steelers signing

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ Pittsburgh Steelers signing
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 10, 2010 11:45 AM
Steelers need to think about getting another quarterback, regardless of what happens with Ben.

Dennis Dixon I think can do ok but they would have to change their offense. He ran the spread at Oregon but isn't right for the shotgun spread that the Steelers have gone to where they pass a lot and the QB has to make a lot of checks at the line of scrimmage. They would have to run more and use play-action and rollouts to give him some easy reads. This wouldn't be too bad of an offense because it would force the Steelers to be more of a running, possession team but the drawback is they wouldn't give their receivers as many chances.

I think they should get another backup QB that is more of a pocket passer. Somebody that would be comfortable in the same offense they run now so that if Dixon had to play and wasn't cutting it, they had another viable option.
Mar 10, 2010 11:45am
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 10, 2010 12:55 PM
Before the BR fiasco....I looked for them to maybe draft one late to compete for the third spot to be honest. Batch is pretty much done. They seem to have decent confidence in Dixon..not as their future but as someone who will fill in for BR.

but.........now.....
Id prefer bringing in a vet QB who has started in the league. We dont know whats gonna happen with BR. We may need a starter. If the season is to start with him suspended I dont want dixon for an xtended period of time. I dont care for having backups who dont have experiernce. I like an older guy, like batch, Leftwich, et al, to be the guy behind an established starter. They know what it takes to prepare and what it takes to compete in this league.

This...as an uncapped year....could allow them to bring in a vet just in case. I know they said they wanna sta within a so called cap space..and the guys they signed were too expensive..but this could change things a lil bit. A short term deal...1-2 years (I say two because a vet may not wanna do a one yr deal) and ffront load it so no prorated SB BS wont bit us later if the cap comes back.......might be doable this year.
Mar 10, 2010 12:55pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 10, 2010 2:46 PM
I agree with all of that. Except there aren't too many veterans floating around.

Jake Delhomme? Derek Anderson?

I'd actually rather turn to Dixon if Ben is out or even suspended to start the year. I think he has good poise and could survive with his athleticism and with the pieces around him and the coaching staff getting him prepared each week for a simplified plan. I think the Steelers could be a 9/10 win team next season if Dixon had to start the entire season. It wouldn't be easy. The defense would have to be back to great which would put him in more of a managing role.

Beyond that, I'd be ok with bringing in a veteran at No. 3 but the problem is what kind of worthy veteran would go someplace as a No. 3?
Mar 10, 2010 2:46pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 10, 2010 2:50 PM
I'd take Leftwich back.

He's still with the Bucs but it won't be too difficult to get him.

Bucs will likely go with Josh Freeman or Josh Johnson.
Mar 10, 2010 2:50pm
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 10, 2010 4:04 PM
Delhomme prolly will get snatched up by a team that can say he would compete for a starting job and not one like Pitt where it would be only if ben is supended or incarcerated.

DA....well....he has SOME potential. Cleveland is a cancerous organization for awhile DA was good for awhile..then atrocious.

I dont really know what otehr vet QBs are or could be out there to be had.

I know they have faith in Dixon...shoulda beaten Balt with him I think the gameplan handcuffed him a bit.
Mar 10, 2010 4:04pm
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Mar 10, 2010 5:04 PM
It's hilarious when you look at these threads, that capone is more prevalent in the browns threads than he is his "favorite" team
Mar 10, 2010 5:04pm
77Legend's avatar

77Legend

Senior Member

615 posts
Mar 10, 2010 6:18 PM
We need DB's and O-Lineman. Until then, I won't be happy. And we may finish 2nd or 3rd this season. WR's were not our weakness, it's the DB's, O-Line, and a Horny Azz Quarterback.
Mar 10, 2010 6:18pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 11, 2010 12:56 AM
The Clark signing is big because now they don't have to draft a safety to replace him.

That wasn't a good scenario because the Steelers would've just been losing one guy and replacing him through the draft. You're not really getting better just replacing what you lost.

The Steelers avoided that scenario at safety and nose tackle so therefore they are probably no better or no worse than they were when the season ended, just the same.

However, they will now improve in draft because they can add pieces at CB, OL, etc. rather than just get back what they lost.

This is not taking into account the Ben situation.
Mar 11, 2010 12:56am
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 11, 2010 10:38 AM
77Legend wrote: We need DB's and O-Lineman. Until then, I won't be happy. And we may finish 2nd or 3rd this season. WR's were not our weakness, it's the DB's, O-Line, and a Horny Azz Quarterback.
The QB was NOT a weakness. NO WAY.

Again..this team wasnt that far away from being great. I think a lil tweak to the offense, TP returning on the other side and some additions and improvements to the DB's...this team can be a SB contender again this year.

Hard for an OL to be asked to run "on occassion" and partake only in a token running game. Cowher always said that the running game is a mentality the offense as a whole, and the OL, has.

By only running when expected and putting little importance on it makes that OL rusty in run blocking. Its a totally diff style.

im not defending the OL....they havent been very good..but BR has brought some sacks on his own but also great plays from holding onot the ball...we HAVE TO TAKE THE GOOD WITH THE BAD with BR doing that.
Mar 11, 2010 10:38am
R

rock_knutne

Mar 11, 2010 10:50 AM
These signings are all good for Pittsburgh, IMO, need to draft a CB, OL and DL. BTW, Pittsburgh doesn't need another QB, unless Ben goes to jail and/or is suspended (which I doubt happens) they will be fine, Dixon is capable as a backup.
Mar 11, 2010 10:50am
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 11, 2010 10:59 AM
^^Oh i agree. I think they may draft one late or bring in a UFA to compete for the third spot or at leaset an arm in training camp. Ya pretyt much always have 4 QBs in camp.
Mar 11, 2010 10:59am
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 11, 2010 12:18 PM
I would be ok with Derek Anderson actually.

He played decent when he had players around him.

The Steelers are loaded on offense with Mendenhall, Moore, Holmes, Ward, Wallace, Randle El, Miller.

He wouldn't necessarily have to play unless it comes to that but with his arm he might do ok with those guys around him.
Mar 11, 2010 12:18pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 11, 2010 12:24 PM
The Steelers have made the playofffs with different QBs since 1992.

O'Donnell, Tomczak, Stewart, Maddox, Roethlisberger.

I think they could go 10-6 with another QB although they're probably not a legit contender without Ben.
Mar 11, 2010 12:24pm
R

rock_knutne

Mar 11, 2010 12:25 PM
^^^^^Game manager, but my only fear with Anderson is he is extremely mistake prone when under pressure. Maybe I'm spoiled because Ben makes a ton of plays when under the gun, plus, his price might be too steep, Pittsburgh has already handed out a bunch of FA money.
Mar 11, 2010 12:25pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 11, 2010 12:31 PM
Since Heinz Field opened in 2001, the Steelers have gone

2001 - 13-3 (AFC Championship)
2002 - 10-5-1
2003 - 6-10
2004 - 15-1 (AFC Championship)
2005 - 11-5 (Super Bowl)
2006 - 8-8
2007 - 10-6
2008 - 12-4 (Super Bowl)
2009 - 9-7

Really only one season were they not in the playoff race in 2003. In 2006 they were still mathematically alive until Week 16 and last year they were alive until Week 17.

When they've missed the playoffs, they've rebounded the next year.

At worse, this is a 9-7 team as was reflected last year. If they truly are only as good as what they showed last year. They're not worse than that. I think with the injuries and some close losses they're probably a little better than that but even if you said they are only a 9-7 team right now, a few players added in the draft could them back into the playoffs.

What they've done so far in free agency is maintain, giving them the opportunity to improve in the draft.
Mar 11, 2010 12:31pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 11, 2010 12:38 PM
I still think they've improved a little, though, because Randle El is a better No. 4 option than they had last year.

And the two guys they added on special teams should improve that weak area.
Mar 11, 2010 12:38pm
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 11, 2010 12:40 PM
Wait a minute here....until VERY recently this was a team build on a solid running game and the QBs were game managers and not asked to win the game with their arms like ben is now.

We threw alot wtih ODonnel in SB XXX season when they started 3-4 and by LUCK......they put Slash at WR in practice becuase of some injuries and it caught on. They were one of the first teams to really go 5 wide in the league but they also still ran the ball very well with Bam Morris, Pegram and JL Williams to catch the ball outta the backfield.

I dont think ANY Of those QBs stated would be able to win with the team they had last season with solely their arm. Remember the season he tried the Tommy GUn and sat Bettis as the starter? Forget the RB...what was his name...dammit...cannot remember.....whatever...still.

I think DA would be serviceable. I think Celveland is a cancerous team and city and brings everyone down who plays there.
Mar 11, 2010 12:40pm
A

Al Capone

18-3 since 2000

1,727 posts
Mar 11, 2010 1:52 PM
Are thinking of the free agent from philly or the RB from WVU? There names escape me too.
Mar 11, 2010 1:52pm
A

Al Capone

18-3 since 2000

1,727 posts
Mar 11, 2010 1:56 PM
Just remembered. Duce Staley or Amos Zereoue
Mar 11, 2010 1:56pm
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 11, 2010 2:01 PM
Yep..amos.

Dont know how I forgot that.
Mar 11, 2010 2:01pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Mar 11, 2010 2:03 PM
When Browns fans think Derek Anderson, they think of him as a starter.

In that context, he's not that great.

But can be another Charlie Batch, a veteran who can come in and play once in awhile? I think so compared to the other bums out there.
Mar 11, 2010 2:03pm
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 11, 2010 2:05 PM
Non wrote: When Browns fans think Derek Anderson, they think of him as a starter.

In that context, he's not that great.

But can be another Charlie Batch, a veteran who can come in and play once in awhile? I think so compared to the other bums out there.
I think so too. I think he just got caught up in all that negative energy up there.

that has the tendancy to wear on players.

I think in a new place he can be productive when called upon
Mar 11, 2010 2:05pm
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 12, 2010 10:16 AM
I think they should bring in Delhomme.

One...to show they mean business to ben.....
two...to see if they can bring him in as a backup....(which i kno he wont do...paper said he wasnt into Clev much cause he wasnt gonna be given th job.
three.....maybe make another team spend too much on him..like cleveland. he would use the steelers as a way to get a bigger contract.


I know..wont happen..but hey..
Mar 12, 2010 10:16am
Pick6's avatar

Pick6

A USA American

14,946 posts
Mar 12, 2010 10:57 AM
whats the chances they draft that sex offender prospect? I mean he is an o-lineman, which the steelers desperately need. Plus he fits right in with the qb.
Mar 12, 2010 10:57am
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Mar 12, 2010 11:17 AM
^^about as likely as you making an intelligent post.
Mar 12, 2010 11:17am