PDA

View Full Version : We're underrated... and I love it.


Mr. Stiller
09-04-2007, 10:26 PM
in the NFL section..

we're #11 with the Bengals, Bears, Eagles, Cowboys, Broncos around..

I think we're top 5 or 6...

However, we'll see how we do this season.. we won't be 3rd in the division.. at worst, 2nd.

I can't wait for this season to start.

PalmerToCJ
09-04-2007, 10:30 PM
The Ravens won't repeat, I think we'll split with you and we have been successful vs. the Ravens of late while they destroyed you all last year... While biased (obviously), I think it's the Bengals division to win. Baltimore won't have the luck/health/schedule they had last year, I'm not sure what to expect from you all this year. I could easily see the Bengals/Steelers making the playoffs while the Ravens miss out.

Mr. Stiller
09-04-2007, 10:34 PM
The Ravens won't repeat, I think we'll split with you and we have been successful vs. the Ravens of late while they destroyed you all last year... While biased (obviously), I think it's the Bengals division to win. Baltimore won't have the luck/health/schedule they had last year, I'm not sure what to expect from you all this year. I could easily see the Bengals/Steelers making the playoffs while the Ravens miss out.

I don't know. I know you guys have some trouble up front.. I don't know who but I know everyone is underrating us because of a new coach..

how soon people forget Cowher went 11-5 his rookie season.. and this team is 2x better than that team.

We're actually going to use all of our weapons on offense and our defense is looking the best I've seen it in years..

I know it was just pre-season, but we gave up the 2nd least points this preseason, only 4 more than Baltimore(#1) but we played 1 more game and had the #1 defense in points per game.

PalmerToCJ
09-04-2007, 10:38 PM
IMO we're fine up front on both sides of the ball, I'm just worried about how Brooks matures, Jeanty staying healthy and our secondary playing more aggressive.

I do agree that people might be underrating you because of the new coach, like I said I really don't know what to expect. I do feel like you all have more upside than Baltimore at this point.

Mr. Stiller
09-04-2007, 10:51 PM
IMO we're fine up front on both sides of the ball, I'm just worried about how Brooks matures, Jeanty staying healthy and our secondary playing more aggressive.

I do agree that people might be underrating you because of the new coach, like I said I really don't know what to expect. I do feel like you all have more upside than Baltimore at this point.

I'm really only worried about our OL playing well.. but Mahan and Colon should be upgrades. Mahan is better than Hartings was last year and Colon played head and shoulders above Starks.

BrownsTown
09-04-2007, 11:00 PM
Dude, you realize you were an 8-8 team that didn't do many major changes aside from what is expected to be a downgrade on the coaching staff, and you're rated as a playoff team. If anything, you're overrated.

Top 5 or 6? Come on man, I usually try to agree with you because usually you keep the homerism to a minimum, but right of the top of my head, 8 teams better than the Steelers. Chargers, Pats, Colts, Bears, Saints, Ravens, Bengals, Eagles. Denver and Dallas, debatable but I would say that they are.

Mr. Stiller
09-04-2007, 11:05 PM
Dude, you realize you were an 8-8 team that didn't do many major changes aside from what is expected to be a downgrade on the coaching staff, and you're rated as a playoff team. If anything, you're overrated.

Top 5 or 6? Come on man, I usually try to agree with you because usually you keep the homerism to a minimum, but right of the top of my head, 8 teams better than the Steelers. Chargers, Pats, Colts, Bears, Saints, Ravens, Bengals, Eagles. Denver and Dallas, debatable but I would say that they are.

I would agree except:

Bears, Saints, Eagles and Dallas. Denver is debatable and is the Chargers+Bengals.

What did the chargers do? Only lose their interior LB's, Not upgrade the WR position, Oh and lose their entire Coaching staff..

But through all that they're better than us. We beat the Saints last year.

I'm not being a Homer for stating that we're underrated when we're a better team than most give us credit for.

We added a new Coach.. so did San Diego, why are they above us. We only lost our HC/OC.. they lost HC/OC/DC.

Saints still aren't good enough to beat us. I still dont' think the Eagles or Dallas is are better than us. Denver is because we lost to them last year.

But to act as if they're clearly better than us?? Thats more biased from a Browns fan (I know you despise us and often try to undercut us, you yourself would admit this).


Dude, you realize you were an 8-8 team that didn't do many major changes aside from what is expected to be a downgrade on the coaching staff, and you're rated as a playoff team. If anything, you're overrated.

Overrated? We never get credit on this forum for ****.. We're always overrated. We win the superbowl, the refs handed it to us.

We beat the colts.. We didn't beat them, the Kicker shanked it.. What about Ben's tackle, his stats and the fact Troy got screwed by the refs?

People always underrate our players and talent. So to say we're overrated is a joke, We don't get credit for any of our accomplishments and too much credit for our downfalls.

We're a good team who people are trying to undersell. Fine, we'll let the season talk. I hate having to give excuses for why we're a good team.

8-8 is a bad season for us. How many losing seasons have we had in the past 20-30 years? Not that many.

GB12
09-04-2007, 11:08 PM
We added a new Coach.. so did San Diego, why are they above us. We only lost our HC/OC.. they lost HC/OC/DC.

Wow, just wow. You are infact a homer.

mcdlaxbonz13
09-04-2007, 11:09 PM
first off love the sig cant wait to see him tear up clausen.

now as for ontopic stuff. the browns are obviously going to be the front runner for worst in the division, what i believe may effect the rest of the division however though is how many games the browns can steal away from the bengals,steelers,ravens when they play them. because right now i think the bengals and steelers are preety equal, and the ravens may repeat if their offense can manage the clock and maybe get some extra points for the d

Mr. Stiller
09-04-2007, 11:10 PM
Wow, just wow. You are infact a homer.

I didn't say we were better than them. I merely asked why they were above us in his opinion.

Because by his logic, they should've dropped quite a few spots. They lost their OC, DC, HC and hired a known Loser. We hired a young DC, promoted our OC, kept our DC..

Yet we downgraded and they're better than Us. I just want to know the logic there.

Mr. Stiller
09-04-2007, 11:12 PM
first off love the sig cant wait to see him tear up clausen.

now as for ontopic stuff. the browns are obviously going to be the front runner for worst in the division, what i believe may effect the rest of the division however though is how many games the browns can steal away from the bengals,steelers,ravens when they play them. because right now i think the bengals and steelers are preety equal, and the ravens may repeat if their offense can manage the clock and maybe get some extra points for the d

I think OL and McNairs health will play a vital role. I don't think McGahee is the power runner they need and McNair doesn't have the arm to utilize Clayton/Williams.

BrownsTown
09-04-2007, 11:12 PM
I would agree except:

Bears, Saints, Eagles and Dallas. Denver is debatable and is the Chargers+Bengals.

What did the chargers do? Only lose their interior LB's, Not upgrade the WR position, Oh and lose their entire Coaching staff..

But through all that they're better than us. We beat the Saints last year.

I'm not being a Homer for stating that we're underrated when we're a better team than most give us credit for.

We added a new Coach.. so did San Diego, why are they above us. We only lost our HC/OC.. they lost HC/OC/DC.

Saints still aren't good enough to beat us. I still dont' think the Eagles or Dallas is are better than us. Denver is because we lost to them last year.

But to act as if they're clearly better than us?? Thats more biased from a Browns fan (I know you despise us and often try to undercut us, you yourself would admit this).

There's a big difference between the Chargers record last year, and the Steelers'. Saints? You realize how young this team is right? You realize all their main weapons aside from Deuce were new to the team last year, right? (referring to Colston, Bush, Brees). Eagles? With Donovan, they could potentially be in the NFC Championship game, it's a whole different team with him in there. Denver, I say because I think Cutler will do good ENOUGH for Denver to ride their running game on offense. Dallas, that's the closest for me, but their basically a big wild card, they could do very very good, or very very bad. As long as TO doesn't explode, they could very well be one of the top teams by season's end.

I'm fine with acting their clearly better. The Steelers aren't a bad team. But they play in a tough division, in a tough conference, with a new head coach and losing more than they gained, come on now. I wouldn't say 9-7, 10-6 is a stretch for a prediction, but 9-7, 10-6 will get you about where you were placed, at 11.

bearsfan_51
09-04-2007, 11:14 PM
The difference in talent between the Chargers and the Steelers isn't even close. It's not even remotely close. The Steelers are better at WR, secondary, and maybe offensive line. That's it.

Mr. Stiller
09-04-2007, 11:17 PM
There's a big difference between the Chargers record last year, and the Steelers'. Saints? You realize how young this team is right? You realize all their main weapons aside from Deuce were new to the team last year, right? (referring to Colston, Bush, Brees). Eagles? With Donovan, they could potentially be in the NFC Championship game, it's a whole different team with him in there. Denver, I say because I think Cutler will do good ENOUGH for Denver to ride their running game on offense. Dallas, that's the closest for me, but their basically a big wild card, they could do very very good, or very very bad. As long as TO doesn't explode, they could very well be one of the top teams by season's end.

I'm fine with acting their clearly better. The Steelers aren't a bad team. But they play in a tough division, in a tough conference, with a new head coach and losing more than they gained, come on now. I wouldn't say 9-7, 10-6 is a stretch for a prediction, but 9-7, 10-6 will get you about where you were placed, at 11.

I was under the assumption that Power rankings had to do with overall record and SOS.

What did we lose? Cowher, Whis and Porter.. We gained Tomlin, Arians, Woodley/Timmons.

I was thinking in head to head matchups.. this team isn't much different than the same team that beat NO last year, Chicago, Philly, and NE the year before.

So the Saints were young, so now that they're a year older their immediately better. Forget the fact their LB's are still porous and their CB's can't cover. They can have all the weapons they want, they still can't hold a team. We're more balanced and our defense can hold them.

Now if your going by overall records, then I can understand the #11. But the Saints and Bears are not better than us when it comes to 1 on 1 as we're far more complete on offense than the bears and defensively against the Saints.

Mr. Stiller
09-04-2007, 11:18 PM
The difference in talent between the Chargers and the Steelers isn't even close. It's not even remotely close. The Steelers are better at WR, secondary, and maybe offensive line. That's it.

I'd say DL Is a push.

I'm not going to argue who's better, I just wanted to understand his logic on why we get knocked a few pegs for getting a new coach, and SD doesn't.

Like I said in previous posts. I'll let our season do the talking.

BrownsTown
09-04-2007, 11:20 PM
I was under the assumption that Power rankings had to do with overall record and SOS.

What did we lose? Cowher, Whis and Porter.. We gained Tomlin, Arians, Woodley/Timmons.

I was thinking in head to head matchups.. this team isn't much different than the same team that beat NO last year, Chicago, Philly, and NE the year before.

So the Saints were young, so now that they're a year older their immediately better. Forget the fact their LB's are still porous and their CB's can't cover. They can have all the weapons they want, they still can't hold a team. We're more balanced and our defense can hold them.

Now if your going by overall records, then I can understand the #11. But the Saints and Bears are not better than us when it comes to 1 on 1 as we're far more complete on offense than the bears and defensively against the Saints.

The thing is, what you lost was proven, what you gained isn't. I think the Bears aren't going to be that good. That's just me, that's just a hunch, but if this all plays out as expected, though it never does, the Saints have enough on defense to get by. I mean, look at the Colts last year. Horrid defense, Offense carried it. The Bears...I can't see the Steelers O putting up much against them.

BrownsTown
09-04-2007, 11:21 PM
I'd say DL Is a push.

I'm not going to argue who's better, I just wanted to understand his logic on why we get knocked a few pegs for getting a new coach, and SD doesn't.

Like I said in previous posts. I'll let our season do the talking.

Ok, I was gonna go to bed, but I gotta say DL is completely, and totally, San Diego. Pitt is better at no spot in the Dline than San Diego is. Now I'm out.

Man_Of_Steel
09-04-2007, 11:24 PM
The difference in talent between the Chargers and the Steelers isn't even close. It's not even remotely close. The Steelers are better at WR, secondary, and maybe offensive line. That's it.

SD oline is far better than ours.

PittPete
09-05-2007, 09:48 AM
First of all, since 1993 only Greenbay has a better record than our steelers. Recent history includes, in order, a 15-1 season, a SUPERBOWL champion, and last year where we finished 6-2, only losing to the Ravens where we had some matchup problems. You want homerism? This years steelers are going to KICKASS!!! We have the flatout best defense in football, the preseason is no fluke. Our coverage teams have not let anyone get to the 30, and wait until you try returning one of Sepulveda's spacelaunches. Our offense needs some tuning, but when Arians gets it right, we have some serious weapons; fast Willie is going to have his best year and we are loaded at wideout.

Sniper
09-05-2007, 10:01 AM
First of all, since 1993 only Greenbay has a better record than our steelers. Recent history includes, in order, a 15-1 season, a SUPERBOWL champion, and last year where we finished 6-2, only losing to the Ravens where we had some matchup problems. You want homerism? This years steelers are going to KICKASS!!! We have the flatout best defense in football, the preseason is no fluke. Our coverage teams have not let anyone get to the 30, and wait until you try returning one of Sepulveda's spacelaunches. Our offense needs some tuning, but when Arians gets it right, we have some serious weapons; fast Willie is going to have his best year and we are loaded at wideout.

Yes I love rookie posters. LOLZ MY TEAM IS AMAZING OMGGGGGGGGGGGGG.

Flat out best defense? Chargers, Ravens, Bears, Dolphins off the top of my head
That's impressive about 1993, but it doesn't impact this year.
Loaded at wideout? You have Hines Ward, who is very good but on the decline. Holmes, we don't know if that's a one year wonder or not. Sepulveda's "space launch" vs. the Eagles looked beastly. May have gone 15 yards. Chill on the homerism there slugger. 9-7, 10-6

JK17
09-05-2007, 10:01 AM
Denver is debatable and is the Chargers+Bengals.

What did the chargers do? Only lose their interior LB's, Not upgrade the WR position, Oh and lose their entire Coaching staff..

But through all that they're better than us.
We added a new Coach.. so did San Diego, why are they above us. We only lost our HC/OC.. they lost HC/OC/DC.

Okay, now usually I don't get involved in other team's forums, but if you're going to bring San Diego into this, I'll step in. Are you serious? We just came off an NFL best 14-2 season, with talent at every single position. You just came off an 8-8 season, nowhere near comparable. That's one reason why we are clearly ahead.

What did the Chargers do? We lost our ILB's yes, but the rest of ur information is either irrelevant or misconstrued. First of all, not only was the lack of WR not a problem last year, but we did add on it. We drafted Craig Davis to play WR, and he's a slot/#2 guy for us this year. He's a rookie, but what are you talking about did nothing? We lost our coaching is all you have.

And even so, say we did lose/gain the same amount, its not comparable because we were a better team last year too. These things you say we didnt fix, weren't a problem last year. You had more you had to fix anyway, so it doesn't matter even if we are on par.

Considering San Diego is a consensus top 3-4 team, how you think the Steelers are comparable is beyond me. We have a better QB, a Better RB, a better FB, better O-Line, A better D-Line, Better pass rush (OLB's)....

8-8 is a bad season for us. How many losing seasons have we had in the past 20-30 years? Not that many.

I forgot about how this year we were going to just use previous records from 30 years ago in lieu of the regular season.

Sniper
09-05-2007, 10:04 AM
Okay, now usually I don't get involved in other team's forums, but if you're going to bring San Diego into this, I'll step in. Are you serious? We just came off an NFL best 14-2 season, with talent at every single position. You just came off an 8-8 season, nowhere near comparable. That's one reason why we are clearly ahead.

What did the Chargers do? We lost our ILB's yes, but the rest of ur information is either irrelevant or misconstrued. First of all, not only was the lack of WR not a problem last year, but we did add on it. We drafted Craig Davis to play WR, and he's a slot/#2 guy for us this year. He's a rookie, but what are you talking about did nothing? We lost our coaching is all you have.

And even so, say we did lose/gain the same amount, its not comparable because we were a better team last year too. These things you say we didnt fix, weren't a problem last year. You had more you had to fix anyway, so it doesn't matter even if we are on par.

Considering San Diego is a consensus top 3-4 team, how you think the Steelers are comparable is beyond me. We have a better QB, a Better RB, a better FB, better O-Line, A better D-Line, Better pass rush (OLB's)....



I forgot about how this year we were going to just use previous records from 30 years ago in lieu of the regular season.

Plus, God's back at RB for the Chargers last I checked.

steelernation77
09-05-2007, 11:18 AM
I really don't mind this team being underrated, it usually tends to work out best for us. Was this an 8-8 team last year? Yes, but the two years before that they won a super bowl and had a 15-1 season. There aren't that many personnel changes on the team. There's a new coach, but an in-house offensive and defensive coordinator. Arians isn't installing a whole new offense, he merely tweaked with the playbook already in place by streamlining it and adding in some more quick routes. Ben is returning to form, and all signs show that the defense, like usual, should be good.

It's not ridiculous to think this could easily be a top-tier team. Is it a guaranteed? No, but what is in the NFL? The Saints could easily have a down year, the Chargers too.

Mr. Stiller
09-05-2007, 11:31 AM
Exactly,

JK17. For the 15th time. I wasn't saying we were better. I merely said, Why are we being knocked for getting a new coach, and you weren't?

The Chargers lost Schotty, Cam, and Wade. We lost Cowher/Whis..

We're a bad team because we have new coaches, yet you're without a doubt better than anyone with a proven loser Head coach.

If you're going to use logic that "New coaches will be Pittsburghs downfall." Then act like it's not a big deal that The coaching staff in SD was gutted.

So I wasn't saying that we were better. Though it would be a good match. I was merely saying you can't take us down a few pegs, then not let it hamper another team.

I can't say your team sucks because you lost coaches, but our team will be Ok.

It doesn't make sense. You can't apply logic like that at will.

If you believe new coaches will have bumpy roads, then it is very possible you guys go 8-8. Yes you have LT. You have Merriman... You had them in 2005 when you went 9-7.

Again, it's possible for you to go from 9-7 to 14-2.. but not us to be better than 8-8?

Mr. Stiller
09-05-2007, 11:35 AM
Flat out best defense? Chargers, Ravens, Bears, Dolphins off the top of my head
That's impressive about 1993, but it doesn't impact this year.


Agreed, I was merely making a point that we're often in the hunt. Every season


Loaded at wideout? You have Hines Ward, who is very good but on the decline. Holmes, we don't know if that's a one year wonder or not.

Then by all means, I shouldn't Credit Philip Rivers. He should still be a huge question mark. Right? I mean, we don't know if he's going to go out and be horrible because he's only played 1 year? Why don't we have the "1 year Stigma" about him?

We have arguably one of the best WR depths in the league. Washington, though not a big name player. Was the 2nd best #3 in the league. Only behind Bryant Johnson from Arizona. Wilson is also a valuable #4 WR.

Sepulveda's "space launch" vs. the Eagles looked beastly. May have gone 15 yards. Chill on the homerism there slugger. 9-7, 10-6

I'm sure 10-6 is feasible, but this team could just as likely end up 14-2 or 13-3 as it could 6-10 or 5-11 as most people seem to underrate us.

Mr. Stiller
09-05-2007, 11:40 AM
Okay, now usually I don't get involved in other team's forums, but if you're going to bring San Diego into this, I'll step in. Are you serious? We just came off an NFL best 14-2 season, with talent at every single position. You just came off an 8-8 season, nowhere near comparable. That's one reason why we are clearly ahead.

What did the Chargers do? We lost our ILB's yes, but the rest of ur information is either irrelevant or misconstrued. First of all, not only was the lack of WR not a problem last year, but we did add on it. We drafted Craig Davis to play WR, and he's a slot/#2 guy for us this year. He's a rookie, but what are you talking about did nothing? We lost our coaching is all you have.

And even so, say we did lose/gain the same amount, its not comparable because we were a better team last year too. These things you say we didnt fix, weren't a problem last year. You had more you had to fix anyway, so it doesn't matter even if we are on par.

Considering San Diego is a consensus top 3-4 team, how you think the Steelers are comparable is beyond me. We have a better QB, a Better RB, a better FB, better O-Line, A better D-Line, Better pass rush (OLB's)....


Rivers has only played 1 year. You don't know how good he really is, at least not by Snipers logic.

We may not have the big name players, but we're always tough and always in the hunt.

You were better than us in 2005 when we beat you. It's not who's better on paper, which I guess is moronic because It's what I'm arguing.

I wish we'd play this year. However we won't.

But here's another question my friend.

We can't use our past records to determine how good we consistently are but you're going to tell me your team is better because it went 14-2 last season.

Isn't that a little hypocritical?

You came off a 9-7 season to go 14-2. We came off a 6-10 season to go 15-1.

<Sarcasm> You're right, it is infinitely impossible for us to win more games, or beat you because you were 14-2 last season and we were 8-8. There is absolutely no way we'll win more games than you because your record last year was better than us. By that logic you would have sucked in 2006 as well since we won the superbowl.

trkaline
09-05-2007, 12:07 PM
Damn this is a heated debate...I'm just gonna pull up a chair, pop some popcorn, and enjoy...

Shere Khan
09-05-2007, 12:40 PM
I don't know. I know you guys have some trouble

how soon people forget Cowher went 11-5 his rookie season.. and this team is 2x better than that team.



rofl

that was like 15 years ago, man.
Of course they'll forget....

and double rofl @ playing the underrated card. I'm not buying your sympathy angle.
There's still many pundits out there that think you guys will do damage this year.

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 12:52 PM
Yes I love rookie posters. LOLZ MY TEAM IS AMAZING OMGGGGGGGGGGGGG.

Flat out best defense? Chargers, Ravens, Bears, Dolphins off the top of my head
That's impressive about 1993, but it doesn't impact this year.
Loaded at wideout? You have Hines Ward, who is very good but on the decline. Holmes, we don't know if that's a one year wonder or not. Sepulveda's "space launch" vs. the Eagles looked beastly. May have gone 15 yards. Chill on the homerism there slugger. 9-7, 10-6

bitter michigan fan ^^^

Sniper
09-05-2007, 12:58 PM
bitter michigan fan ^^^

How does Michigan have anything to do with this topic?

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 01:01 PM
How does Michigan have anything to do with this topic?

not a damn thing

Sniper
09-05-2007, 01:02 PM
Then by all means, I shouldn't Credit Philip Rivers. He should still be a huge question mark. Right? I mean, we don't know if he's going to go out and be horrible because he's only played 1 year? Why don't we have the "1 year Stigma" about him?

.

You're right, you shouldn't. He is unproven. He's had one year with a great )-line, best RB, best TE etc... Kind of like Roethlisberger was a great game manager his rookie year and struggled last year

Sniper
09-05-2007, 01:03 PM
not a damn thing

So what was your "^^^^^^Bitter Michigan fan" comment for other than you having nothing to bring to the table in the conversation?

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 01:13 PM
So what was your "^^^^^^Bitter Michigan fan" comment for other than you having nothing to bring to the table in the conversation?

just stating the fact that you are a bitter michigan fan, i mean if i were you id take that thing outa my sig and never mention that i liked michigan again.

just embarrassing.

as for bringing something to the table of conversation?

i think that SD may be a better team than us, however, given the matchup i think we prevail...

both our front 7's will stop the run, thus making our biggest 2 offensive threats useless

and like previously mentioned, we have better receivers and a better secondary, itll have to come down to a controlled passing game, and in such a scenario i think we win with a healthy ben

also, our d-cord, saw you all play us last year, whereas yours wasnt with SD...

on paper you guys have the better team... but i think we matchup better

Sniper
09-05-2007, 01:16 PM
just stating the fact that you are a bitter michigan fan, i mean if i were you id take that thing outa my sig and never mention that i liked michigan again.

just embarrassing.

as for bringing something to the table of conversation?

i think that SD may be a better team than us, however, given the matchup i think we prevail...

both our front 7's will stop the run, thus making our biggest 2 offensive threats useless

and like previously mentioned, we have better receivers and a better secondary, itll have to come down to a controlled passing game, and in such a scenario i think we win with a healthy ben

also, our d-cord, saw you all play us last year, whereas yours wasnt with SD...

on paper you guys have the better team... but i think we matchup better

Yeah because one loss is going to change who I like. Coming from a Maryland fan, I think I'll survive. I'm not a San Diego fan buddy, it's just ridiculous to state the Steelers are currently better than San Diego. Turns out there's a guy on SD who no one matches up with, and so I like SD in that matchup.

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 01:21 PM
Yeah because one loss is going to change who I like. Coming from a Maryland fan, I think I'll survive. I'm not a San Diego fan buddy, it's just ridiculous to state the Steelers are currently better than San Diego. Turns out there's a guy on SD who no one matches up with, and so I like SD in that matchup.

at least we lose to 1-A teams

never said you were a SD fan

I didn't say the steelers are currently better

A. Gates? Yeah, he is a problem.

Sniper
09-05-2007, 01:24 PM
LT? Yeah, he is a problem.

Fixed that for you

JK17
09-05-2007, 01:27 PM
Exactly,

JK17. For the 15th time. I wasn't saying we were better. I merely said, Why are we being knocked for getting a new coach, and you weren't?

The Chargers lost Schotty, Cam, and Wade. We lost Cowher/Whis..

We're a bad team because we have new coaches, yet you're without a doubt better than anyone with a proven loser Head coach.

Where have you been, that you feel the Chargers haven't been knocked for having new coaches? Last I checked, thats their biggest question mark going into the season and everyone has acknowledged it.

If you're going to use logic that "New coaches will be Pittsburghs downfall." Then act like it's not a big deal that The coaching staff in SD was gutted.

So I wasn't saying that we were better. Though it would be a good match. I was merely saying you can't take us down a few pegs, then not let it hamper another team.

I don't remember using that logic for saying Pittsburgh won't be a good team. Actaully, I don't remember saying that at all...I do remember you specifically saying its debatable as to who is better between San Diego, and Pittsburgh, so don't try to backtrack now and pretned that you were just bringing up a point about coaching changes.

I can't say your team sucks because you lost coaches, but our team will be Ok.

It doesn't make sense. You can't apply logic like that at will.

Again, you just miss the point. I didn't say anything about your team being bad because they have new coaches. Actually, I didn't say anything about Pittsburgh being bad at all, just that its ridiculous you compared them to San Diego.

If you believe new coaches will have bumpy roads, then it is very possible you guys go 8-8. Yes you have LT. You have Merriman... You had them in 2005 when you went 9-7.

Again, it's possible for you to go from 9-7 to 14-2.. but not us to be better than 8-8?

Again, where are you coming from with this argument? I never said that, not once, yet you directed this reply at me? Of course its possible for us to go 8-8. Yes we had LT then. We had Merriman as a rookie. We also didn't have players like Marcus McNeill, Shaun Phillips, An established Quentin Jammer, Luis Castillo and Igor Olshansky as established players...the list could go on and on, we are more talented team now then we were than. But again, thats not the point. I don't remember saying Pittsburgh or us will or won't struggle because of coaching. But our talent level is far superior to yours, right now.

Rivers has only played 1 year. You don't know
how good he really is, at least not by Snipers logic.

We may not have the big name players, but we're always tough and always in the hunt.

Right, didn't say you wouldn't be, just can't understand why you think San Diego vs. Pitt, from a power rankings standpoint is debatable.

You were better than us in 2005 when we beat you. It's not who's better on paper, which I guess is moronic because It's what I'm arguing.

I wish we'd play this year. However we won't.
What do you mean its not whose better on paper? What do you have to base power rankings on before the season starts?

But here's another question my friend.

We can't use our past records to determine how good we consistently are but you're going to tell me your team is better because it went 14-2 last season.

Isn't that a little hypocritical?

Not in the least bit. You made a comment about being good for the past 20-30 years. What relevance does that have to this season. Which season is a better indicator of how a team will do, the 2004 or 2005 season, or the 2006 season?

You came off a 9-7 season to go 14-2. We came off a 6-10 season to go 15-1.

<Sarcasm> You're right, it is infinitely impossible for us to win more games, or beat you because you were 14-2 last season and we were 8-8. There is absolutely no way we'll win more games than you because your record last year was better than us. By that logic you would have sucked in 2006 as well since we won the superbowl.

Riiiiiiiight. Remember how I didn't once say anything about the Steelers not improving or San Diego not regressing? Exactly, so your misplaced sarcasm, and outrage at a fair power rankings position for Pittsburgh is severely out of place here. I didn't say anyhting about improving, regressing, or even who would win head to head. Just, for the record there.

Mr. Stiller
09-05-2007, 01:28 PM
You're right, you shouldn't. He is unproven. He's had one year with a great )-line, best RB, best TE etc... Kind of like Roethlisberger was a great game manager his rookie year and struggled last year

Ben had 2 seasons where he was a Great Game manager.

I love how "Game Manager" is a compliment to Brady/Manning yet a negative for Roethlisberger.

Roethlisberger had Duce Staley, Jerame Tuman, and a piss-poor OL his rookie season and went 15-1

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 01:31 PM
Fixed that for you

last year he had:

13 rushes for 36 yards
and 8 receptions for 34 yards
0 TD's

against pitt

not really a problem last time

JK17
09-05-2007, 01:32 PM
i think that SD may be a better team than us, however, given the matchup i think we prevail...

both our front 7's will stop the run, thus making our biggest 2 offensive threats useless

and like previously mentioned, we have better receivers and a better secondary, itll have to come down to a controlled passing game, and in such a scenario i think we win with a healthy ben

also, our d-cord, saw you all play us last year, whereas yours wasnt with SD...

on paper you guys have the better team... but i think we matchup better

Wait a minute, hold on.

Both our front 7's may be good, but did you just cancel out LT like that? Patriots fans said the same thing in the playoffs. They won that game, but did they stop LT? You can't just snap your fingers and stop him. It doens't work that way. Rivers, I will say is better then Roethlisberger. There are arguments both ways, so don't bother coming back with a retliation, its just a difference of opinion and the argument will go back and forth. But if you want a stable passing game, thinking that will win the game, how about the guy who barely threw any interceptions last year, as opposed to the guy who led the league? And when factoring in passing weapons, Gates, LT, and Vincent Jackson aren't too shabby themselves.

I'm not saying there's a concrete winner of such a matchup, but your reasons aren't so great. A good front 7 doesn't shut down the best player in the game just like that. Any team can win, thats why they play the game. But the edge is with us, at least for the majority of the times.

Sniper
09-05-2007, 01:33 PM
last year he had:

13 rushes for 36 yards
and 8 receptions for 34 yards
0 TD's

against pitt

not really a problem last time

Because clearly, LT never gets better. You're telling me you want to face LT? I sure as **** don't.

Sniper
09-05-2007, 01:34 PM
Ben had 2 seasons where he was a Great Game manager.

I love how "Game Manager" is a compliment to Brady/Manning yet a negative for Roethlisberger.

Roethlisberger had Duce Staley, Jerame Tuman, and a piss-poor OL his rookie season and went 15-1

Brady and Manning run the show. Roethlisberger is asked to make 15 throws per game

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 01:34 PM
Because clearly, LT never gets better. You're telling me you want to face LT? I sure as **** don't.

our defense stopped him last year, they can stop him again... just like we do with all great backs

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 01:35 PM
Wait a minute, hold on.

Both our front 7's may be good, but did you just cancel out LT like that? Patriots fans said the same thing in the playoffs. They won that game, but did they stop LT? You can't just snap your fingers and stop him. It doens't work that way. Rivers, I will say is better then Roethlisberger. There are arguments both ways, so don't bother coming back with a retliation, its just a difference of opinion and the argument will go back and forth. But if you want a stable passing game, thinking that will win the game, how about the guy who barely threw any interceptions last year, as opposed to the guy who led the league? And when factoring in passing weapons, Gates, LT, and Vincent Jackson aren't too shabby themselves.

I'm not saying there's a concrete winner of such a matchup, but your reasons aren't so great. A good front 7 doesn't shut down the best player in the game just like that. Any team can win, thats why they play the game. But the edge is with us, at least for the majority of the times.

we shut him down last year, i just gave the stats

JK17
09-05-2007, 01:42 PM
we shut him down last year, i just gave the stats

You're right. That game last year is a guarantee that LT will be a non-factor. Because you shut him down before. Because the best back in the leauge, will never be able to recover from such a performance.

Pats fans said the same thing. They won the game, but they sure as hell didn't stop LT. You can't just take that as a given.

Tom Brady had a bad game against the Dolphins. I guess its guaranteed they will shut him down next year right?

terribletowel39
09-05-2007, 02:04 PM
i'm not really a homer fan usually, but i agree with mike on this one, i don't fear any RB in the league and that includes LT when it comes to them doing good against Pitts D. only RB i somewhat fear is Fred Taylor. he is the only back i have seen us have a problem containing in the last 5-7 yrs. hell we are going on almost 3 yrs without allowing a 100 yrd rusher. i think it is an understandable statement to say that no RB scares the pitt D.

skarocksoi
09-05-2007, 02:18 PM
I think we should hand out maps to understanding the back-and-forths in this conversation, cause I dont think anybody knows who is really addressing who correctly.

And yes, we do have a tendancy to shut down even the best of backs, but of course you couldn't guarantee it. We may not shut LT down, but I'm betting we could limit him so that someone else will have to step up to win the game. Anyways, back to the madness.

Smooth Criminal
09-05-2007, 02:24 PM
I think people like to look at what happend last year when they rate teams for this year. People seem to forget that before we went 8-8 (which is a record the browns would kill for), we went 11-5 with a superbowl, and 15-1. There are very few differences between this team and the team that went 15-1, and most of the differneces are upgrades. We have alot of young guys on our team, esspecially on offense, that have gotten experience and should be better.

I'm expecting atleast 10-6.

And just curious. Why does no one bring up that Cincy was 8-8 aswell last year? They can rebound and be in the top 5 or 6 without any major upgrades and alot of downgrades but the Steelers can't after only losing Porter and Hartings?

steelernation77
09-05-2007, 02:26 PM
i'm not really a homer fan usually, but i agree with mike on this one, i don't fear any RB in the league and that includes LT when it comes to them doing good against Pitts D. only RB i somewhat fear is Fred Taylor. he is the only back i have seen us have a problem containing in the last 5-7 yrs. hell we are going on almost 3 yrs without allowing a 100 yrd rusher. i think it is an understandable statement to say that no RB scares the pitt D.

Agreed. Except Edge ran for a 100+ the first time we played Indy in '05. That was more poor game planning on our part than anything else.

Smooth Criminal
09-05-2007, 02:29 PM
You're right. That game last year is a guarantee that LT will be a non-factor. Because you shut him down before. Because the best back in the leauge, will never be able to recover from such a performance.

Pats fans said the same thing. They won the game, but they sure as hell didn't stop LT. You can't just take that as a given.

Tom Brady had a bad game against the Dolphins. I guess its guaranteed they will shut him down next year right?


The Steelers defense very rarely gives up 100 yard rushers. Even to the best backs in the league.

Not saying it can't happen but when the Steelers play teams its not the opposing runningback that up fans worry about. Its our D-backs gettting torched that cause most of our problems.

steelernation77
09-05-2007, 02:32 PM
I think people like to look at what happend last year when they rate teams for this year. People seem to forget that before we went 8-8 (which is a record the browns would kill for), we went 11-5 with a superbowl, and 15-1. There are very few differences between this team and the team that went 15-1, and most of the differneces are upgrades. We have alot of young guys on our team, esspecially on offense, that have gotten experience and should be better.

I'm expecting atleast 10-6.

And just curious. Why does no one bring up that Cincy was 8-8 aswell last year? They can rebound and be in the top 5 or 6 without any major upgrades and alot of downgrades but the Steelers can't after only losing Porter and Hartings?

Because Cincy can go 8-8, 8-8, 11-5, and 8-8 in the last four seasons and as long as they have clowns like "ocho-cinco" they're AMAZING!#!#!

BrownsTown
09-05-2007, 02:58 PM
Because Cincy can go 8-8, 8-8, 11-5, and 8-8 in the last four seasons and as long as they have clowns like "ocho-cinco" they're AMAZING!#!#!

Or it's because they have one of the most explosive offenses in the league and keep drafting to improve their defense...

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 03:05 PM
Or it's because they have one of the most explosive offenses in the league and keep drafting to improve their defense...

and those defensive players keep getting hurt / suspended...

mikehop05
09-05-2007, 03:06 PM
You're right. That game last year is a guarantee that LT will be a non-factor. Because you shut him down before. Because the best back in the leauge, will never be able to recover from such a performance.

Pats fans said the same thing. They won the game, but they sure as hell didn't stop LT. You can't just take that as a given.

Tom Brady had a bad game against the Dolphins. I guess its guaranteed they will shut him down next year right?

thank you for agreeing with me.

and your analogy with tom brady and the dolphins sucks...

if most QB's played bad against the dolphins then yes, i would say he has a bad chance

just like most RB's play bad against us, so yes, LT has a bad chance

Mr. Stiller
09-05-2007, 03:25 PM
Or it's because they have one of the most explosive offenses in the league and keep drafting to improve their defense...

did you look at their draft?

They drafted Hall and White.. And Toeina in round 6.

with a team as deficient in the defense..

They invested more in a 3rd down RB, and a Backup QB than they did their DL or LB's.

They drafted not one player for that front 7 until round 6..