Black Monday could be a massacre this year

[BD Sullivan]

The Browns didn't wait at all in firing Crennel, letting him go on that Black Monday in 2008. Then-owner Randy Lerner, who lived in NY, was on the verge of wetting himself when he found out during the press conference that Mangini was fired--and soon hired him-before he hired a GM. That began a long run of total incompetence (as opposed to perpetual bungiing ) that finally appears to be fading.

[sheajets]

Mangini is great at evaluating personnel and uncovering talent.

But as a coach he left a lot to be desired. Too distant, too rigid and unfeeling. Not the best of motivators. Seems like he could've been successful if he would just loosen up a bit.

[sluggermatt15]

Again, I'm not on the 'Tomlin-must-go' bus. As much as anyone should want their team to win championships and not just make playoffs, there's no overlooking Tomlin's no losing seasons as far in his, now, 12 seasons. He, like Cowher late-'98-thru-early-'00, went through a little rut - back to back 8-8s being the case. Then Steelers became a playoff-regular again. The D has been the liability. Even before Shazier went out, they were already a bit suspect. They got playmakers, things have got to come around again. I won't blame Tomlin though in the meantime. You can say that Cowher didn't win one until Big Ben, but barring the likes of '00 Ravens and '02 Bucs, how many SB-winners in history have won because they had an elite QB? Just about every one.


McCarthy? Nothing against him (a SB-winner himself as well as a playoff-regular most of his time w GB), and did think GB should have waited until the very end of the season to analyze the situation, but in the hypothetical event of, say, Tomlin resigning end of this year, I'd rather not. The last four HCs Steelers hired in the past 50+years (Austin included) was an outsider who was assistant on an established contender given his first shot as a HC. That's the formula I think Steelers should apply again whenever that time does come to choose Tomlin's successor.

Hey I completely agree about Tomlin. I'm a Steeler fan, too. I don't have a problem with Tomlin, but I think a lot of the fans want him to win more with the players the team's got. It seems as if the defense has been the question mark ever since 2011? 2012 and 2013 were both 8-8 campaigns. Remember the whole Troy Polamalu question mark, too? The Steelers could not win if Troy did not play/was injured? I think Tomlin gets a lot of as well for the draft picks that have come in and not panned out. Is he really drafting the players? It could be a mask for the front office and their poor job in that department.

Also, Super Bowl winners to not have an elite QB. Here are a few I can think of from 2000 and beyond.

2000 Baltimore - Trent Dilfer was an okay QB, but not elite.
2001 New England - at the time Tom Brady was not an "elite" QB. The Patriots defense that year was a Top 10 unit.
2002 Tampa Bay - Brad Johnson was far from an elite QB.
2012 Baltimore - Joe Flacco had a hot postseason but I don't think he was a top QB at the time.

So that's 4 out of 18 years. The rest were won by elite QBs - Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson.

[Rupert Patrick]

Hey I completely agree about Tomlin. I'm a Steeler fan, too. I don't have a problem with Tomlin, but I think a lot of the fans want him to win more with the players the team's got. It seems as if the defense has been the question mark ever since 2011? 2012 and 2013 were both 8-8 campaigns. Remember the whole Troy Polamalu question mark, too? The Steelers could not win if Troy did not play/was injured? I think Tomlin gets a lot of as well for the draft picks that have come in and not panned out. Is he really drafting the players? It could be a mask for the front office and their poor job in that department.

There are some internal problems in the Pittsburgh clubhouse that Tomlin has to deal with. With the news that Antonio Brown was benched after some sort of incident involving Roethlisberger, it seems the Steelers will have to trade him in the off-season. I think the Steelers season was doomed when Bell decided to sit out the season, and James Conner filled Bell's cleats well, but the team had to deal with the impact of losing one of their three offensive stars and team leaders who voluntarily quit the team. If Bell was injured and out all year, he still would have been a teammate and I think the Steelers could have survived it, but Bell left his teammates high and dry. And now it seems they will have to replace Antonio Brown, who is one of the 3-4 best receivers in the NFL, and also a team leader. I doubt the team would go 3-13 with Roethlisberger at the helm, but if he goes down next year with an injury, this team could be on the verge on a total collapse.

[Jay Z]

Eli Manning was not elite in 2007. 2011 was one of his better seasons, so I will give you that one. In 2007 he led the league in INT. That is not elite. Played well in the playoffs, but not elite going in.

[JuggernautJ]

Tomlin has averaged about 10 wins per season in his 10+ years. The Steelers have won 6 AFC North titles under Tomlin and made the playoffs 8 times. Who are you going to get to better that?

Mike McCarthy?

Just for the record, I too am a Steelers fan and have no problem with the current administration.
I was simply offering a possible solution to a hypothetical question.

If Bell was injured and out all year, he still would have been a teammate and I think the Steelers could have survived it, but Bell left his teammates high and dry....

I don't disagree with Rupert but perhaps someone needs to point out there was a rational behind Bell's decision.
The Steelers would not make Bell a serious, long-term contract offer. And I can understand that. Given the nature of running backs in today's NFL, the short careers, injuries, rapid decline in skills, etc it makes sense for a team with as great back to exploit him by playing the hell out of him while he's on his rookie contract and then string him along year-by-year with franchise tags until his usefulness is at an end. Then unceremoniously dump him when he is no longer elite. This leaves the team with no "cap" responsibilities after the player is gone.

But this is an extremely mercenary approach to using a player.
It offers no long-term security for the individual and one can understand how being exploited in this manner might leave one hoping for better treatment from the organization for which one risks life and limb repeatedly.

Other backs have been given long term contracts that ensure their financial future.
I don't think it unreasonable that Bell wants the same.

What if Bell signed his franchise tender and then was injured in such a way that his career was ended? How much would that cost he and his family? It may be that in the future we look back at the Bell holdout as a watershed moment in team/player interactions.

I understand the position of the employer. And I understand why management is behaving in this manner.
But is it the morally correct position?

[7DnBrnc53]

2001 New England - at the time Tom Brady was not an "elite" QB. The Patriots defense that year was a Top 10 unit.

I don't think that Brady was elite in 2003 or 04, either.

In 2003, NE's defense was #1 in points allowed with 238, and forced seven turnovers in the playoffs (including five in the AFC Title Game against the Colts. That is the game where Brady should have thrown four INT's) en route to their second title in three years.

That year, Brady had 3,620 yards passing and 23 TD's, but he only had an 85.9 rating.

The next year, the Pats were second in scoring defense (260 allowed, 16.3 ppg) and forced 11 postseason turnovers en route to their third title in four years. Brady was a little bit better that year (3,692 yards passing, 28 TD's, 92.6 rating), but he was aided by a new RB in Corey Dillon (1,635 yards rushing in 04).

In fact, I don't think that Brady is as elite as people make him out to be. He didn't have a rating over 100 until 2007, when Welker and Moss came on the scene (Brady threw for 50 TD's, and Moss caught 23 of them). The year before, with a way worse WR core, he only had an 87.9 rating. That shows me that the voters got the MVP wrong in 2007.

After that, his next year with a rating over 100 was 2010, when they added the two star TE's in Gronk and Hernandez (he also had a rating over 100 in 2011 with those two). By 2013, though, when he had no Welker, no Hernandez, and only seven games of Gronk, he had an 87.3 rating.

In addition, he always seems to have a defense on his side that is in the top-10 in the NFL in points allowed (2002, 05, and 11 are the exceptions).

[sluggermatt15]

I agree with you guys about Eli Manning and Brady.

The Giants defense in '07 and in '11 were also pretty good. That '07 team had a very strong front four, maybe a Top 5 unit this century.

[sheajets]

2001 New England - at the time Tom Brady was not an "elite" QB. The Patriots defense that year was a Top 10 unit.

I don't think that Brady was elite in 2003 or 04, either.

In 2003, NE's defense was #1 in points allowed with 238, and forced seven turnovers in the playoffs (including five in the AFC Title Game against the Colts. That is the game where Brady should have thrown four INT's) en route to their second title in three years.

That year, Brady had 3,620 yards passing and 23 TD's, but he only had an 85.9 rating.

The next year, the Pats were second in scoring defense (260 allowed, 16.3 ppg) and forced 11 postseason turnovers en route to their third title in four years. Brady was a little bit better that year (3,692 yards passing, 28 TD's, 92.6 rating), but he was aided by a new RB in Corey Dillon (1,635 yards rushing in 04).

In fact, I don't think that Brady is as elite as people make him out to be. He didn't have a rating over 100 until 2007, when Welker and Moss came on the scene (Brady threw for 50 TD's, and Moss caught 23 of them). The year before, with a way worse WR core, he only had an 87.9 rating. That shows me that the voters got the MVP wrong in 2007.

After that, his next year with a rating over 100 was 2010, when they added the two star TE's in Gronk and Hernandez (he also had a rating over 100 in 2011 with those two). By 2013, though, when he had no Welker, no Hernandez, and only seven games of Gronk, he had an 87.3 rating.

In addition, he always seems to have a defense on his side that is in the top-10 in the NFL in points allowed (2002, 05, and 11 are the exceptions).

I'll agree that Brady wasn't elite until he got a bit older, but even in his non elite years he did come up huge in many playoffs spots where it was all on him. He was always good to very good, and never cost his team

[7DnBrnc53]

I'll agree that Brady wasn't elite until he got a bit older, but even in his non elite years he did come up huge in many playoffs spots where it was all on him. He was always good to very good, and never cost his team

In 01, he kind of did in the Tuck Rule game, but that game should have been over (with the Raiders winning). And, while he did lead them to the game winning drive in SB 36, J.R. Redmond made the biggest play when he was able to get out of bounds. He also missed a wide open WR in the second half at some point on third down.

And, in the other two years, he really wasn't that clutch in the postseason. In 03, he almost threw four INT's in the AFC Title Game, and he threw a key INT in the fourth quarter of SB 38 in the end zone with NE up 21-10 that got the Panthers back in it. Then, in 04, Dillon (in the AFC Divisional Round) and the defense (forcing key turnovers) carried them to another SB victory.