• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

We are the Pittsburgh TEMU Eagles

carbonsteel

Regular Member
Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
196
Reaction score
393
Points
63
The Eagles winning the Super Bowl made me feel better about the Steelers. A team won it all with a great defense. And a run first offense. Same blueprint the Steelers are using. Now they need better players. And a better head coach.

— Andrew Fillipponi (@ThePoniExpress) February 10, 2025
This quote is hilarious. We TALK about wanting to be a great team, but we don't change anything that matters to re-direct our team on a path to success. EVERYONE by now realizes that our problem is our coaching.

We can't even develop a strategy or scheme to utilize the best OLB in the league in an effort to get pressure on the QB. Complete waste of talent. During the Roethlisberger years - we completely squandered the talent the could have taken us to multiple Super Bowls because of our insistence of maintaining substandard coaching. The Eagles devoted themselves to a dominating front 4 on their DL that can apply pressure without a blitz. When things fell apart for them last year, they changed their coaching and added players that worked towards a plan.

We on the other hand do NOT have the coaching to - in any way - take advantage of what talent we do have. Our four worst coaching situations --- Defensive Coordinator, OL coach, Head Coach, Strength and Conditioning are STILL currently in place after yet another collapse at the end of a season. Is there ANY talented player on this team that we could say has been developed under the tutelage of our coaching staff over the past 5-10 years?

We are the Pittsburgh TEMU Eagles. Substandard quality, doesn't last, no commitment to long term success. We say we want to be great, but deep down you know we have substandard quality (coaching) that will fail prematurely and never compare against a quality product.
 
Pittsburgh Sports Media do not understand sports... they always think we need better players... its utterly idiotic.
They legitimately seem to think we need all pros at every position and pro bowl depth players to win...
This is likely because they cannot understand the coaching impact of games...
 
Pittsburgh Sports Media do not understand sports... they always think we need better players... its utterly idiotic.
They legitimately seem to think we need all pros at every position and pro bowl depth players to win...
This is likely because they cannot understand the coaching impact of games...
The defense is stacked with good players. Better coaching and this group should've been elite this year.

The entire OL has pedigree, just terrible coaching that has two tackles pulling at the end of the season. Buy the best college OL coach in the nation and have him coach up this OL.
 
Pittsburgh Sports Media do not understand sports... they always think we need better players... its utterly idiotic.
They legitimately seem to think we need all pros at every position and pro bowl depth players to win...
This is likely because they cannot understand the coaching impact of games...

When I look at Philly I see way better players.
I want players that can impose their will on their opponents. Worry about schemes later.
 
When I look at Philly I see way better players.
I want players that can impose their will on their opponents. Worry about schemes later.

The reason you see that is they are coached better. Looking at their stats, tells me that they aren't better players, they are a better TEAM.

Individually, nothing all that special (aside from Barkley). Hurts threw for just under 3,000 yards, ran for another 600. AJ Brown had just over 1000 yards receiving, Smith had a little over 800, and Goedert was under 500 on the year.

Defensively, their top sack guy was Sweat with 8, and as a team only had 41 sacks. INT's Gardner-Johnson had 6, Blankenship had 4, as a team they had 13.

Jake Elliot didn't have a good year, was 77% on the year.

What you saw in the Super Bowl was a team that exploited the weakness of their opponent and their opponent couldn't adjust. It was the scheme that fit the players that allowed them to impose their will on their opponents. The one player they had all year that was sensational, Barkley, was relatively quiet in Super Bowl.
 
The reason you see that is they are coached better. Looking at their stats, tells me that they aren't better players, they are a better TEAM.

Individually, nothing all that special (aside from Barkley). Hurts threw for just under 3,000 yards, ran for another 600. AJ Brown had just over 1000 yards receiving, Smith had a little over 800, and Goedert was under 500 on the year.

Defensively, their top sack guy was Sweat with 8, and as a team only had 41 sacks. INT's Gardner-Johnson had 6, Blankenship had 4, as a team they had 13.

Jake Elliot didn't have a good year, was 77% on the year.

What you saw in the Super Bowl was a team that exploited the weakness of their opponent and their opponent couldn't adjust. It was the scheme that fit the players that allowed them to impose their will on their opponents. The one player they had all year that was sensational, Barkley, was relatively quiet in Super Bowl.

the dlne is why they won that game hands down. no blitz and 6 sacks plus the added pressure with just 4 guys. That dlne is dominant and they drafted most of it to be so.
 
the dlne is why they won that game hands down. no blitz and 6 sacks plus the added pressure with just 4 guys. That dlne is dominant and they drafted most of it to be so.
Yes, it was dominant in THAT game. But as the numbers show, it wasn't like that all year. They went in with a plan, they attacked a weakness, they moved their players around. The Chiefs tackles are suspect to say the least, they had such an issue there at LT they moved Thuney, a guard, out to LT late in the season. That weakened the interior of the line more than it helped the tackles.

The Eagles were in a 3 way tie for 13th in the league with 41 sacks, tied Cleveland and Arizona. They had one more sack than we did, and that's the lowest sack total we've had in a season since 2016 when we had 38. Their D stopped the pass, and didn't allow points. It's a great TEAM defense.

Basically my point is this, that performance was not typical for the DL of the Eagles.
 
the dlne is why they won that game hands down. no blitz and 6 sacks plus the added pressure with just 4 guys. That dlne is dominant and they drafted most of it to be so.

Agree 100%
That O line, the largest in SB history is quite impressive too.
It’s been said that are the ones that got them to the SB…

Regarding Madinsomniacs comment stating that you don’t need All Pros at every position (which is true), take a look at Phillys line, all 5 got votes:

Eagles' path to the Super Bowl was paved by the prowess of their offensive line​


NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The Philadelphia Eagles' offensive line could prove to be a pivotal factor in the outcome of their Super Bowl matchup with the Kansas City Chiefs.

All five starters received AP All-Pro votes this season and tackles Jordan Mailata and Lane Johnson were named second-team All-Pro.

That unit has paved the way for a ground game that ranked second in the NFL this season and was led by All-Pro running back Saquon Barkley.

Mailata says the unit’s average height of 6-foot-6 and average weight of 338 pounds has been a considerable factor in its success.
 
Last edited:
An ancient football philosophy that stands to this day…that it all starts in the trenches.
 
Yes, it was dominant in THAT game. But as the numbers show, it wasn't like that all year. They went in with a plan, they attacked a weakness, they moved their players around. The Chiefs tackles are suspect to say the least, they had such an issue there at LT they moved Thuney, a guard, out to LT late in the season. That weakened the interior of the line more than it helped the tackles.

The Eagles were in a 3 way tie for 13th in the league with 41 sacks, tied Cleveland and Arizona. They had one more sack than we did, and that's the lowest sack total we've had in a season since 2016 when we had 38. Their D stopped the pass, and didn't allow points. It's a great TEAM defense.

Basically my point is this, that performance was not typical for the DL of the Eagles.
They may not have gotten the sacks, but n in the several games I watched this year the dline was alway dominate
 
I remember the days when the Steelers had Kimo, Big Snack, and Diesel on the Dline. Back when the Steelers really controlled the trenches.


Dick L. Had an unbelievable string of defenses when he was here. The rankings were out of this world and yet, he was not brought back.

I’m watching as I type, the Dallas @ Pittsburgh 2008. That defense was just unreal good.


Salute the nation
 
Don't forget about Aaron Smith


One of my all time greats. A lot of his attraction was his “lunch pail” work ethic. Loved that about him.

Of course his “above the line” stellar play made it easy to appreciate him. One of the lowest rated players ever.

Thank you Aaron, for all the lifetime memories.


Salute the nation
 
The reason you see that is they are coached better. Looking at their stats, tells me that they aren't better players, they are a better TEAM.

Individually, nothing all that special (aside from Barkley). Hurts threw for just under 3,000 yards, ran for another 600. AJ Brown had just over 1000 yards receiving, Smith had a little over 800, and Goedert was under 500 on the year.

Defensively, their top sack guy was Sweat with 8, and as a team only had 41 sacks. INT's Gardner-Johnson had 6, Blankenship had 4, as a team they had 13.

Jake Elliot didn't have a good year, was 77% on the year.

What you saw in the Super Bowl was a team that exploited the weakness of their opponent and their opponent couldn't adjust. It was the scheme that fit the players that allowed them to impose their will on their opponents. The one player they had all year that was sensational, Barkley, was relatively quiet in Super Bowl.

I don’t completely disagree, but if it’s all about coaching and schemes then what is the point of even bringing up our players ineptitudes?…and there have been plenty of those discussions.

Both QB’s have deficiencies.
Najee is too slow, can’t shoot the gap. Poor vision.
Moore is a turnstile.
Player X is a good run blocker but a bad pass blocker.
Minkah has disappeared.
Neither Austin or Williams are legit #2 receivers.
Warren fumbles too often.
Broderick Jones a disappointment so far.
Pickens takes plays off.

I probably missed a couple.

Then on the flip side we rave about only a few players…Watt, Muth, Heyward, Highsmith, Herbig… they’re good not because they’re coached well (remember our coaching is bad), they’re good because they’re good.
I believe when teams draft they look for the best, most talented players. Not players they think will be the easiest to coach up.
 
I don’t completely disagree, but if it’s all about coaching and schemes then what is the point of even bringing up our players ineptitudes?…and there have been plenty of those discussions.

Both QB’s have deficiencies.
Najee is too slow, can’t shoot the gap. Poor vision.
Moore is a turnstile.
Player X is a good run blocker but a bad pass blocker.
Minkah has disappeared.
Neither Austin or Williams are legit #2 receivers.
Warren fumbles too often.
Broderick Jones a disappointment so far.
Pickens takes plays off.

I probably missed a couple.

Then on the flip side we rave about only a few players…Watt, Muth, Heyward, Highsmith, Herbig… they’re good not because they’re coached well (remember our coaching is bad), they’re good because they’re good.
I believe when teams draft they look for the best, most talented players. Not players they think will be the easiest to coach up.

You can have GREAT players, or even GOOD players on your team and be a bad team. Case in point, the Lions several years ago. Is there ANY argument on the planet that Calvin Johnson isn't one of the greatest WR ever? Was Stafford a horrible QB? And yet, they went 0-16. The Eagles are a talented team, but I wouldn't say the talent gap between the Eagles and Steelers is ALL that great. Sure there are spots, RB for example that they are clearly ahead of us. QB is another one. And we do have holes to fill, but we have TALENT. What we don't have is a coaching staff that puts OUR talent in the best position to consistently win.

You bring up Minkah as a great example. Tomlin is so scared of the "big splash plays" that the SCHEME has him playing 30 yards off the LOS. With how Minkah was playing his first few years with us, is that to his strengths? We traded up for a raw but talented LEFT TACKLE, but because Moore literally can't play on the right side, Tomlin forces Jones to the right. It's not his natural position. He did the same thing to Dotson, and look at him now. I disagree that Williams isn't a WR2, he never got the chance to prove it. He is certainly better than Van Jefferson was, but he got a quarter of the snaps.

The reason you bring up player ineptitudes as you put it, is you have to fit the scheme to the players strengths, negate their weaknesses as much as possible. We don't do that. We have our system and our system never changes. The inevitable square peg round hole analogy.

You even heard the announcers talking about it during the Super Bowl. Kellen Moore was known as a more pass happy OC, but he adjusted to the players he had and the Eagles became more run oriented. They have MASSIVE O-linemen, one of the top two backs in the league, and a QB that can run. Scheming to players strengths. And when you do that, the players buy in, and play hard, and the result is positive.

There are reports coming out now that not everyone on the Steelers buys into the offensive and defensive schemes or gameplans, that is HUGE!!

Look at when the Steelers really started to struggle under Tomlin. What were the changes made? He came in to a situation where we already had an offensive system with a HOF DC running one of the greatest defensive schemes every created and all he had to do was manage. As soon as he started getting his hands into the O and D and changing things, the success went away. And as the more talented players left, the glaring holes and weaknesses in the schemes started to show more and more.
 
Top