Watt gets paid

[SteelerInLebanon]

Didn't you say that exact same thing about Russ last season?

For one game he was. Lol. Russ was never half the QB Aaron is and was. Whether he still has it or not physically we will see but Russ never really ever used the middle of the field, Aaron has his whole career. Russ was more like Ben but shorter. A seat of his pants guy. Rodgers had that but also was a bit more cerebral of a player. If his arm is still good and he can still direct an offense, we will be better than we were last year.

Russ was a step up from Fields in the middle of the season but he got figured out.

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

I’ll give you one more chance:

You say you’re for hiring more assistant coaches “if they can and will hire good people”

Why has that been hard in the past and will be tough in the future for the Pittsburgh Steelers, a flagship NFL franchise that holds on to its coaches for a long time? Who controls the hiring and firing of assistant coaches and would be in charge of hiring good/qualified people?

I am not totally unhappy with the current roster of coaches. If they hire more, fine if they don't, I am also content to see what they do with the guys they have. They didn't stand pat and bring back the exact same crew and they added a position.

 

[NoKap#7]

Just turn on any game on any given Sunday during football season and you will see teams throwing to the middle of the field. Hell. If you tune into a Steeler game you will see it every other pass. For some reason our ILBers drop 10 to 15 yards into coverage simply giving up the short underneath pass....usually that will be on a 3rd and short.

https://www.milehighreport.com/2025/6/11/24445980/2024-quarterback-performance-deep-dive

I found this website that did a performance analysis of all QBS in the league last season with at least 200 pass attempts. Contrary to what i thought the middle of the field is thrown to as much as 3 times or more than any other part of the field throughout the league and Russell Wilson was around the league average tied w/ P Mahomes in the 15/16 spots with about 68% of his passes being thrown to that part of the field. Brock Purdy threw more to the middle of the field then any other QB at 87%. Having an offensive minded coach who is really good at what he does easily explains why. On the deep mid balls the % of balls thrown to that part of the field will start to even up with balls thrown to the left or right throughout the league. For R. Wilson his deep left balls were thrown almost twice as much as either his deep mid or deep right.


The analysis pointed out that R Wilson had the best intermediate (11-19 yds) IQR (passer rating) at 143, but he only had 39 intermediate attempts. For comparison Burrow had 134 attempts. This seems like this was a QB issue not a coaching or scheme issue for the Steelers. R. Wilson loved the deep ball and it cost the Steelers more then helped them in last 5 or 6 games of the year as they played against higher tier defenses which is likely why the Steelers looked to move on from him. He seemed to have an issue with taking what the defenses were likely giving to him. This may have made the OL look worse then they actually were when he took coverage sacks trying to wait for routes to come open.

If you look at the short range Wilson had 172 attempts whereas Joe Burrow had 363 attempts (leader) and 61% of those passes were to short middle compared to Wilsons 49%. If anybody is wondering Rodgers had 300 short attempts (2nd) and attempted 58% of those passes to the middle, 74% of his passes overall were attempted BLOS (behind the line of scrimmage) to the middle of the field (compared to Wilson 68%). His Intermediate mid range pass attempts were 44% to the middle of the field (compared to his mid left/26 right/30). He did have over 100 attempts mid range but his Cmp % 44.7 and IQR/52 were really bad. Rodgers had a higher % of pass attempts deep mid then Wilson, but overall his deep ball completion % regardless of where he threw was 10% less than Wilson even though he had more deep ball attempts (57 to 42).

So basically expect the middle of the field to be used more by Rodgers, but dont be surprised if his completion percentages are mid level regardless if the ball is thrown short, intermediate, or deep. I just think with his age his reaction time is just not going to be there and possibly there may be chemistry issues.

 

[diver]

I am not totally unhappy with the current roster of coaches. If they hire more, fine if they don't, I am also content to see what they do with the guys they have. They didn't stand pat and bring back the exact same crew and they added a position.

See, I think Lloyd is right there. The coaching hasn't been good enough. I'm just not sure adding coaches is the sure fire answer. It may be. I'd rather they move on from Tomlin before they add anything. My hope is his arrogance was finally muted some last season after the way it ended and the "that's why I'm highly compensated" comment. It's all we have, since they just won't move on. Let's see if anything really changes.

This has been one of the stranger arguments I've ever been in. I began by conceding that I may be wrong, by conceding that I don't look at football as so complex like others and that I think the requirement should first be better coaches before just adding coaches. By the end of the argument, I was a Tomlin apologist again. I think maybe where the argument begins may be the issue. I'm not even going to waste my time wih the attitude "They should have fired Tomlin!" Yeah, they should have, but they don't, and they probably won't. So start in reality. So do people think adding coaches to this present situation would be that advantageous? As others pointed out, would Tomlin be open to it, or would these extra coaches just be like wall paintings?

All I know is I want better coaching. I don't care if that is more, the same or less.

 

[insaniti]

See, I think Lloyd is right there. The coaching hasn't been good enough. I'm just not sure adding coaches is the sure fire answer. It may be. I'd rather they move on from Tomlin before they add anything. My hope is his arrogance was finally muted some last season after the way it ended and the "that's why I'm highly compensated" comment. It's all we have, since they just won't move on. Let's see if anything really changes.

This has been one of the stranger arguments I've ever been in. I began by conceding that I may be wrong, by conceding that I don't look at football as so complex like others and that I think the requirement should first be better coaches before just adding coaches. By the end of the argument, I was a Tomlin apologist again. I think maybe where the argument begins may be the issue. I'm not even going to waste my time wih the attitude "They should have fired Tomlin!" Yeah, they should have, but they don't, and they probably won't. So start in reality. So do people think adding coaches to this present situation would be that advantageous? As others pointed out, would Tomlin be open to it, or would these extra coaches just be like wall paintings?

All I know is I want better coaching. I don't care if that is more, the same or less.

That's just how arguments on this board go sometimes. Words get twisted and turned to fit agenda's.

To answer the final questions you had there, adding coaches would do nothing to the current situation of coaching. If Tomlin has his hands in everything, and doesn't let his coordinators free range, why would lower assistance get free range to do their job? It's just common sense. We could add in the run game/pass game coordinators/assistance, but they would all answer to Tomlin who has final say anyway.

I agree with you however. As unfortunate as it is, they are not going to fire Mike Tomlin. Our best hope is that he steps away on his own sooner rather than later. If not, the other option is them NOT extending him and he coaches out his current extension. Either way, it seems like we will have Mike Tomlin as the coach of the Steelers as long as Mike Tomlin wants to be the coach of the Steelers. And that's not defending him one bit, that's just the reality of the situation we are in.

So many other coaches from other franchises would have been let go by now, the way we are losing playoff games would have surely ushered them out the door.

 

[Coryea]

See, I think Lloyd is right there. The coaching hasn't been good enough. I'm just not sure adding coaches is the sure fire answer. It may be. I'd rather they move on from Tomlin before they add anything. My hope is his arrogance was finally muted some last season after the way it ended and the "that's why I'm highly compensated" comment. It's all we have, since they just won't move on. Let's see if anything really changes.

This has been one of the stranger arguments I've ever been in. I began by conceding that I may be wrong, by conceding that I don't look at football as so complex like others and that I think the requirement should first be better coaches before just adding coaches. By the end of the argument, I was a Tomlin apologist again. I think maybe where the argument begins may be the issue. I'm not even going to waste my time wih the attitude "They should have fired Tomlin!" Yeah, they should have, but they don't, and they probably won't. So start in reality. So do people think adding coaches to this present situation would be that advantageous? As others pointed out, would Tomlin be open to it, or would these extra coaches just be like wall paintings?

All I know is I want better coaching. I don't care if that is more, the same or less.

No Tomlin isn't and wouldn't be open to it, we just saw that play out here with Flores, we're going to have the highest paid defense for a 4th straight season and we let him walk out the door and kept Austin. Tomlin took control from a HOF DC in LeBeau, there's no way in hell he's going to let someone come in here and not do things his way, that's why we keep hiring the coordinators we do.

 

[Badcat]

No Tomlin isn't and wouldn't be open to it, we just saw that play out here with Flores, we're going to have the highest paid defense for a 4th straight season and we let him walk out the door and kept Austin. Tomlin took control from a HOF DC in LeBeau, there's no way in hell he's going to let someone come in here and not do things his way, that's why we keep hiring the coordinators we do.

 

[Avoid_Lloyd]

See, I think Lloyd is right there. The coaching hasn't been good enough. I'm just not sure adding coaches is the sure fire answer. It may be. I'd rather they move on from Tomlin before they add anything. My hope is his arrogance was finally muted some last season after the way it ended and the "that's why I'm highly compensated" comment. It's all we have, since they just won't move on. Let's see if anything really changes.

This has been one of the stranger arguments I've ever been in. I began by conceding that I may be wrong, by conceding that I don't look at football as so complex like others and that I think the requirement should first be better coaches before just adding coaches. By the end of the argument, I was a Tomlin apologist again. I think maybe where the argument begins may be the issue. I'm not even going to waste my time wih the attitude "They should have fired Tomlin!" Yeah, they should have, but they don't, and they probably won't. So start in reality. So do people think adding coaches to this present situation would be that advantageous? As others pointed out, would Tomlin be open to it, or would these extra coaches just be like wall paintings?

All I know is I want better coaching. I don't care if that is more, the same or less.

Didn’t call you a Tomlin apologist in this thread, I called you an apologist. Although you’ve been an apologist for Tomlin many times before.

You claim to be a critic of the state of this team but you constantly take the devil’s advocate position and pick at people criticizing the team.

I think you’re a status quo advocate and get off on being “above” the people like me who are livid with state of this team.

When people were pissed about trading away Pickens after the draft and leaving a hole in the roster at WR you said something to effect of I’m confused, I thought you guys wanted him gone. Yes we wanted him gone but also a plan in place for replacing him. Thats your routine around here, act like an elitist and pick at people pissed at the ineptitude of this organization

You diminished the role of coaches, whether you meant to or not, you defend the state of affairs by saying hey at least we don’t totally suck.

Im sure you’ll deny all of this but this veiled defense of the past 8 years and superiority complex oozes from all posts.

You’ve got the right to your opinion, but people like you give cover to Rooney and Tomlin, so no I’m not much of a fan of your routine.

 

[diver]

Didn’t call you a Tomlin apologist in this thread, I called you an apologist. Although you’ve been an apologist for Tomlin many times before.

You claim to be a critic of the state of this team but you constantly take the devil’s advocate position and pick at people criticizing the team.

I think you’re a status quo advocate and get off on being “above” the people like me who are livid with state of this team.

When people were pissed about trading away Pickens after the draft and leaving a hole in the roster at WR you said something to effect of I’m confused, I thought you guys wanted him gone. Yes we wanted him gone but also a plan in place for replacing him. Thats your routine around here, act like an elitist and pick at people pissed at the ineptitude of this organization

You diminished the role of coaches, whether you meant to or not, you defend the state of affairs by saying hey at least we don’t totally suck.

Im sure you’ll deny all of this but this veiled defense of the past 8 years and superiority complex oozes from all posts.

You’ve got the right to your opinion, but people like you give cover to Rooney and Tomlin, so no I’m not much of a fan of your routine.

Have I ever argued against the FACTS? For example his record in the playoffs, or that he hasn't won a playoff game since 2016, or he hasn't won a Super bowl since 2008, for example? Or the Canada debacle? Stuff you can SEE. I have never tried to justify those. I have a problem with some of the non factual stuff that we really can't see and speculate about that is spewed.

I have stated in other posts that I understand that I am at the stage in which I do not get as upset or wrapped up in this team as I used to. But not for some deep reason. I'm older, have lots of interests, am a grandfather and so on. I acknowledge it was different when I was younger and it felt like the HAD to win. I try to remember that and empathize with it. Maybe I fail with that at times.

I think the devil's advocate position is good to take at times. I think it helps to examine the whole of an issue.

I wasn't trying to act anyway about the trade of Pickens, outside of the fact that I disagree with your take on it. Until it is shown that the Steelers could have done better than they did in the trade it is hot air. In this case I think they have a plan, which is see what shakes loose in the preseason at a reasonable price. There usually is somebody.

I specifically said more coaches may help, but they also may not. Better coaches are needed. You are purposely distorting what I said about the idea that every team has more coaches than the Steelers apparently. If more coaches was the recipe for success, why aren't the Steelers continually last in the league? That is in no way saying, "at least we don't suck." It is a observation that a larger coaching staff does not necessarily guarantee success.

There is an old saying that people accuse you of what they are. You have called me an elitist many times. I chuckle at that because I don't think anyone that knows me would call me that. Maybe other things. I have not called you any names as far as I know, because I can accept when people disagree with me. I think what is closer to the truth is you have difficulty when anyone challenges your opinion. That there is an aspect of elitism.

 

[diver]

No Tomlin isn't and wouldn't be open to it, we just saw that play out here with Flores, we're going to have the highest paid defense for a 4th straight season and we let him walk out the door and kept Austin. Tomlin took control from a HOF DC in LeBeau, there's no way in hell he's going to let someone come in here and not do things his way, that's why we keep hiring the coordinators we do.

Legitimate question about Flores. Is he really that good, or is it just because he was connected to Belechick? I know he did a nice job with Minnesota last year...until the playoff game against the Rams. Then the defense looked pretty ordinary.

Kinda like Tomlin's defenses.

 

[Avoid_Lloyd]

Have I ever argued against the FACTS? For example his record in the playoffs, or that he hasn't won a playoff game since 2016, or he hasn't won a Super bowl since 2008, for example? Or the Canada debacle? Stuff you can SEE. I have never tried to justify those. I have a problem with some of the non factual stuff that we really can't see and speculate about that is spewed.

I have stated in other posts that I understand that I am at the stage in which I do not get as upset or wrapped up in this team as I used to. But not for some deep reason. I'm older, have lots of interests, am a grandfather and so on. I acknowledge it was different when I was younger and it felt like the HAD to win. I try to remember that and empathize with it. Maybe I fail with that at times.

I think the devil's advocate position is good to take at times. I think it helps to examine the whole of an issue.

I wasn't trying to act anyway about the trade of Pickens, outside of the fact that I disagree with your take on it. Until it is shown that the Steelers could have done better than they did in the trade it is hot air. In this case I think they have a plan, which is see what shakes loose in the preseason at a reasonable price. There usually is somebody.

I specifically said more coaches may help, but they also may not. Better coaches are needed. You are purposely distorting what I said about the idea that every team has more coaches than the Steelers apparently. If more coaches was the recipe for success, why aren't the Steelers continually last in the league? That is in no way saying, "at least we don't suck." It is a observation that a larger coaching staff does not necessarily guarantee success.

There is an old saying that people accuse you of what they are. You have called me an elitist many times. I chuckle at that because I don't think anyone that knows me would call me that. Maybe other things. I have not called you any names as far as I know, because I can accept when people disagree with me. I think what is closer to the truth is you have difficulty when anyone challenges your opinion. That there is an aspect of elitism.

This is arrogance and elitism:

I'm fascinated. All we do is gripe and moan about the divas, then when they get rid of one, we gripe and moan about that.

It was necessary. I like Pickens talent, but I'm tired of all the crap that went with him.

The whole board is pissed we traded Pickens away after free agency was mostly over and you act like you're everybody's dad or 8th grade debate teacher and are giving the final word to shut all the kids up


diver said:
I don't care how big the staff is. I just want a better staff. You don't need that many coaches if the ones you have are good at what they do. You don't want too many voices.

Too many voices? You're a fool. Ever heard of a quality control coach that reviews video and reports back to a positional coach with ways to improve and the positional coach takes the issue to the player so there aren't "too many voices." Or coaches meet together and decide how and who best to address a deficiency with a player so they're aren't "too many voices" We're also talking about professional grown men, who are world class in what they do-they can probably stand to hear more than one voice. The main point is you come off like you know something about being a professional assistant coach when its painfully clear you've got no idea what you're talking about.

diver said:
You may be right, I concede that. But to me, for the love, this is football. They aren't preparing to send a rocket ship into space with people on board. Or doing brain surgery.

I don't care what you meant, this is arrogant and dismissive of what coaches do.

All of this crap is done defending/justfying/rationalizing a defense of a front office that hasn’t won a playoff game in 8 years, which is what you spend most of your time here doing. I'm sure you've got some pify, deflective response to all this but don't expect to come off like this and not get challenged, peace out

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

Too many voices? You're a fool. Ever heard of a quality control coach that reviews video and reports back to a positional coach with ways to improve and the positional coach takes the issue to the player so there aren't "too many voices." Or coaches meet together and decide how and who best to address a deficiency with a player so they're aren't "too many voices" We're also talking about professional grown men, who are world class in what they do-they can probably stand to hear more than one voice. The main point is you come off like you know something about being a professional assistant coach when its painfully clear you've got no idea what you're talking about.

We hired one this year. That should make you happy.

 

[Avoid_Lloyd]

We hired one this year. That should make you happy.

Yup only around a decade after most teams began the practice. You’ve never answered my question on why it would be hard for this team to hire quality assistant coaches but you’re great at knit picking my posts, carry on

 

[Black & Gold Bleeder]

If chuck noll won 4 sb with 8 coaches, why would the coach with no losing seasons need 10 now?

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

If chuck noll won 4 sb with 8 coaches, why would the coach with no losing seasons need 10 now?

Not saying he does but the players today have protections the players back then didn't and are less inclined to listen.

 

[diver]

This is arrogance and elitism:



The whole board is pissed we traded Pickens away after free agency was mostly over and you act like you're everybody's dad or 8th grade debate teacher and are giving the final word to shut all the kids up


diver said:
I don't care how big the staff is. I just want a better staff. You don't need that many coaches if the ones you have are good at what they do. You don't want too many voices.

Too many voices? You're a fool. Ever heard of a quality control coach that reviews video and reports back to a positional coach with ways to improve and the positional coach takes the issue to the player so there aren't "too many voices." Or coaches meet together and decide how and who best to address a deficiency with a player so they're aren't "too many voices" We're also talking about professional grown men, who are world class in what they do-they can probably stand to hear more than one voice. The main point is you come off like you know something about being a professional assistant coach when its painfully clear you've got no idea what you're talking about.

diver said:
You may be right, I concede that. But to me, for the love, this is football. They aren't preparing to send a rocket ship into space with people on board. Or doing brain surgery.

I don't care what you meant, this is arrogant and dismissive of what coaches do.

All of this crap is done defending/justfying/rationalizing a defense of a front office that hasn’t won a playoff game in 8 years, which is what you spend most of your time here doing. I'm sure you've got some pify, deflective response to all this but don't expect to come off like this and not get challenged, peace out

I stand by what I have said concerning Pickens. I don't care how pissed the board was. He was a child problem. Other teams knew that. Until there is some kind of proof they could have gotten the same deal they got from the Cowboys before FA, or better, it's just meaningless talk. And, after the Metcalf deal and contract, they were not going to go after a WR in FA when the cost was highest. They weren't gonna draft one high either unless the DL was gone, and then they may not have either, because the WR talent in this draft wasn't the greatest. This is the crap I object to...it seems like bitching just for the sake of it. But if people are gonna be upset about problem players and why do they get problem players, and why can't they control problem players it's a little hypocritical to gripe about how they get rid of those problem players. It's a funny thing about fans..."that guy sucks," or "that guy is a diva!"... "Maybe we can get a 1st rounder for him!"

There can absolutely be too many voices. Again, you refuse to answer why there are teams with a lot of coaches who do worse than the Steelers. There could be a number of reasons why they are worse, but there have been cases in which the coaches were not on the same page. I experienced one of those situations, and it sucked. It is just a ridiculous idea to assume more coaches guarantee greater success.

It's football. It's just football. If you interpret that as arrogance and dismissive, ok.

I have never complained about being challenged. I respond to your posts respectfully. The way you respond shows it is you who cannot handle being challenged.

 

[Avoid_Lloyd]

I stand by what I have said concerning Pickens. I don't care how pissed the board was. He was a child problem. Other teams knew that. Until there is some kind of proof they could have gotten the same deal they got from the Cowboys before FA, or better, it's just meaningless talk. And, after the Metcalf deal and contract, they were not going to go after a WR in FA when the cost was highest. They weren't gonna draft one high either unless the DL was gone, and then they may not have either, because the WR talent in this draft wasn't the greatest. This is the crap I object to...it seems like bitching just for the sake of it. But if people are gonna be upset about problem players and why do they get problem players, and why can't they control problem players it's a little hypocritical to gripe about how they get rid of those problem players. It's a funny thing about fans..."that guy sucks," or "that guy is a diva!"... "Maybe we can get a 1st rounder for him!"

There can absolutely be too many voices. Again, you refuse to answer why there are teams with a lot of coaches who do worse than the Steelers. There could be a number of reasons why they are worse, but there have been cases in which the coaches were not on the same page. I experienced one of those situations, and it sucked. It is just a ridiculous idea to assume more coaches guarantee greater success.

It's football. It's just football. If you interpret that as arrogance and dismissive, ok.

I have never complained about being challenged. I respond to your posts respectfully. The way you respond shows it is you who cannot handle being challenged.

Its not hypocritical to criticize the drafting and failure of players drafted, and the implications of those failures

Thats why Art Rooney is a billionaire, Khan has a fat extension, and Tomlin “is highly compensated”

I did answer your dumb question about why they don’t finish last, scroll up through the thread past your analogies about rocket ships and bird dogs, reading comprehension is your friend

By all means keep defending the front office that’s brought us the past 8 years of postseason failure if it gets your rocks off professor, everyone sees right through you

 

[diver]

Its not hypocritical to criticize the drafting and failure of players drafted, and the implications of those failures

Thats why Art Rooney is a billionaire, Khan has a fat extension, and Tomlin “is highly compensated”

I did answer your dumb question about why they don’t finish last, scroll up through the thread past your analogies about rocket ships and bird dogs, reading comprehension is your friend
By all means keep defending the front office that’s brought us the past 8 years of postseason failure if it gets your rocks off professor, everyone sees right through you

I like analogies. They help elitists like me try to explain things to the commoners.

 

[stillwright]

If chuck noll won 4 sb with 8 coaches, why would the coach with no losing seasons need 10 now?

What were the comparisons of how many Chuck had vs....how many the rest of the league had?

 

[diver]

What were the comparisons of how many Chuck had vs....how many the rest of the league had?

I remember reading in "Three Bricks Shy of a Load" that Noll fired Babe Parelli as QB coach after 1973. If I remember right Noll felt he and Parelli were not on the same page. I don't think Bradshaw ever had a QB coach the rest of his career.

 

[BLITZ]

What were the comparisons of how many Chuck had vs....how many the rest of the league had?

I think coaching staffs were super small in the 70s. 8-9 total including the HC on average would be a guess.

 

[Black & Gold Bleeder]

If chuck noll won 4 sb with 8 coaches, why would the coach with no losing seasons need 10 now?

What were the comparisons of how many Chuck had vs....how many the rest of the league had?

no idea.. my numbers were just conjecture

 

[Black & Gold Bleeder]

if a position coach cant handle coaching his 4 - 8 players... then wtf is he there for. Seriously