heels, sox & steelers
In the past 10 years, I've lived in Chicago (until 2002), St. Louis and Minneapolis. Which means Wannstedt/Jauron, Martz, Tice and "Secret Squirrel" Brad Childress. I understand what mediocre-to-crappy coaching can do to a franchise and its fan base, so it's not like I'm eager to test the waters of average-dom here.
Nevertheless, any die-hard Steelers fan can point to more than a few times when Cowher wasn't exactly the smartest coach or tactician on the field -- and, amazingly, some of those happened during playoff games, which tends to linger in the mind's eye longer than, say, a blown game in Houston or Green Bay.
Cowher was the "King of Pittsburgh" last year mainly because he brought back One for the Thumb, and not because unenlightened Steelers fans suddenly realized that Cowher was the reincarnation of Paul Brown's fedora. He won the game he was supposed to win -- hell, the game he was supposed to get to how many times over his 15 years? -- and for that we'll always let him wear the crown. He and Jerome and Ben will be heroes at Dapper Dan banquets long after their grandchildren are making the guest appearances there.
It's time for Cowher to go. It's not the team's right to go to the Super Bowl every year, but if you add up the goofy coaching decisions, questionable personnel moves and overall soap opera that had become the Bill Cowher Show ... It's like a relationship that's lasted just a bit too long.
As the Emperor Chaz. Noll might have put it, I think it's time for him to get on with his life's work. While we'll all be sad -- and might not appreciate what we had until it's coaching in Charlotte in 2007 -- we'll all be able to move on, accept and maybe even love someone else.
In a manly, Pittsburgh kind of way, of course.
Oh, and for whom are we rooting in the playoffs, as Steelers fans?
its been a great run for cowher, the steelers, and the fans.
nothing lasts forever...except goofy photos people post on the internet.
http://www.montheyrhinos.com/Rhi...bill-
cowher.jpg
As I see it, the Steelers fan has a few choices for playoff rooting interests:
The Colts, because them winning would really tick off most Ravens fans.
The Chargers, because of Marty Schottenheimer and coaching-tree and style relations to Pittsburgh
Anybody who happens to be playing the Ravens that week.
The Chiefs, so we can say that we beat the Superbowl winner 45-7
Here's an interesting question: If we go back to the early 90's when Cowher first took over the team, I believe he took the Steelers to the playoffs the first 6 years on the job. There was a lot of speculation that it was Chuck Noll's core players and his coaching of those players that took those teams to the playoffs, and that speculation even lasted with some people I know until after the superbowl loss to the hated Cowboys. Assuming Cowher retires, and we make the playoffs the next 4, 5, or even 6 years in a row, which I feel we are capable of doing, do you think that people will continue to say that it is still Cowher's players and team and the next coach just inherited something great?
whether we'll all miss cowher when we're stuck with the next guy is debatable.
what isn't debatable is that i already miss those kicking shades bill was sporting in the the video ryan linked to.
I think I'll miss those horrible sweaters he wore to his press conferences about the first 10 years on the job.
If you read the transcripts from Art Rooney's talk yesterday to the press about Cowher you might have been surprised to learn that Rooney would be pleased if Cowher came back to coach for the one remaining year on his contract.
A one-year swan song? Rooney's joking, right? This is just some PR spin to make the organization look kind and supportive for the good of the team, isn't it?
If not, is this a good decision?
If Cowher continues to coach next year as his last year with the Steelers, the consequences of his impending retirement will overwhelm everything else going on with the team both on and off the field. It will be the focus of every story. It will turn the season into a morose death watch (or a drunken wake, depending on how the season goes). Imagine the signs in the stands: "Oh No, Mr. Bill!” “You Were Great!” “We Love You!” “Say It Ain't So!” “Please Don't Go!”
Where is the good in that? How does that bode well not only for next season but for the many seasons after that?
How would you react as a player knowing full well that you won't have to deal with your boss much longer? Is that coach going to command your respect? What if next season the team again falters out of the gate, dropping 3 of 4 games? Who in the locker room is going to pay any attention to a lame duck coach on his way to the (albeit temporary) retirement home?
Worse, it undermines your next new head coach. Win or lose next season, where's the upside for him? If the Steelers put together a winning team, Cowher will be deified—no one else will ever be good enough. If the team loses, foundering as it did this year, the new guy will have to cope with a locker room in a deep funk, fearful and confused, and in need of a major overhaul.
Again, don't get me wrong. I like Cowher. Sure there are times you'd like to put his head in a vice and squeeze out the goofy-juice, but all in all, the guy has been a pretty solid. His numbers don't lie.
But, please, no swan songs. If it's time to go, get him out of there—for his sake, the team's sake, and our.
> "Assuming Cowher retires, and we make the playoffs the next 4, 5, or even 6 years in a row, which I feel we are capable of doing, do you think that people will continue to say that it is still Cowher's players and team and the next coach just inherited something great?"
No, if that happens I think the new guy will receive his due credit, mostly because he's not inheriting "something great" (this is no 49ers/Seifert or Cowboys/Switzer situation). I also disagree with the original premise that Cowher didn't likewise receive proper credit when he took over for Noll. There are always exceptions of course, but to me the prevailing wisdom was that Cowher came in and energized a very average team in both talent and attitude and took it to another level, regardless of the fact that he inherited some (but not all) of the players (Cowher loosed Barry Foster and Neil O'Donnell for starters). In fact in this period Cowher was at his most beloved and respected in Pittsburgh in my opinion, before some of the more disappointing playoff losses occurred.
> But, please, no swan songs. If it's time to go, get him out of there—for his sake, the team's sake, and our.
I'd prefer to see Cowher stay *with an extension*, but I agree with you on this much at least Randy. I wouldn't take Art II's public statements too seriously though. I don't think the Rooneys want to be perceived as kicking Cowher to the curb, nor behind the practicalities of this situation do they even feel that way about the man, in all sincerity. If by some miracle Cowher were to decide to return for one year and one year only though, I'm not sure what you'd do. I'd probably be inclined to let him play it out...
I'm not so sure the Broncos and Jaguars aren't the tougher matchup.
Do you really want to chase Vince Young all over the field?
Rooting: I think I'll go for the NFC. The Bears, the Saints or the Eagles would all be OK. San Diego, too, I suppose, or Kansas City or even the Jets as a good story.
I'm all for Cowher bolting to Miami if the Steelers can get a couple of first rounders and maybe a few second and third rounder as compensation. When Parcells bolted for the Jets, I think the Pats made out okay. And the Raiders, when Gruden left for the Bucs? Um, not so much.
Ryan
I don't see it happening, the Steelers don't seem to be an organization who would trade their coach. I don't now why, I just get the feeling that they would perceive a lack of dignity in it.
I have to facts to back this up, just a feeling.
As for one more year, I honestly wouldn't mind it. That way we get to keep this team together and see if we can string out one more great season and if not, its time to go with someone outside of the organization with fresh ideas.
Other than that, I want Norm Chow.
That sentence should read
I have no facts...
I don't think it will happen either, but if it does ... I'm just sayin'...
Right now, my inclination is to hire from within if only because it won't mean a lot of upheaval in terms of learning new offensive and defensive systems. I'm still not convinced Whisenhunt is the answer, but I have no reason to believe he won't do a good job either.
I guess there are cases for change -- Sean Payton won 10 games with a three-win team year, but I'd argue that change is exactly what the Saints needs. Just something -- anything -- different than what they were doing before. The Steelers aren't in that situation.
Ryan says "Right now, my inclination is to hire from within if only because it won't mean a lot of upheaval in terms of learning new offensive and defensive systems."
This is exactly why I wouldn't mind Bill coming back for one year. I feel if he retires, we are best off hiring from within for the same reasons you state. But what is better than hiring from within? Not having to hire at all. If it only pushes back the decison for 1 year, so be it.
I'm hoping that the Chargers win the Super Bowl this year, just for Schottenheimer. I remember seeing something about Dungy, Schottenhiemer, and Cowher being 3 of the remaining 4 AFC coaches in the 2004 playoffs, and that none of them or anyone else from the Marty tree had every won a Super Bowl. And who ended up winning? The Patriots, of course, the only other AFC team that was still in the playoffs.
For the NFC, I'm in agreement with Israel - I'd be ok with Chicago, New Orleans, or Philly winning a ring.
Funny enough, I really harbor no animosity toward the Eagles, and many others that I have run into not from PA finds that very difficult to believe. Has anyone else found that there is a perceived rivalry between Pittsburgh and Philly around the rest of the country?
There is more metaphorical distance between Pittsburgh and Philly than there is between, say, Cincinnati and Cleveland. I don't see a rivalry in PA at all.
from the steelers side there is no feeling towards the eagles.
however, i know many eagles fans and they are slightly bitter about the steelers success. of course, they're slightly bitter about everyone elses success, so i'm not sure it even counts.
An intrastate rivalry between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia? Not for me, at least as far as the Steelers and Eagles are concerned. Plus, I don't know of anyone who loves one team and hates the other. In fact, lots of people I know root for both. (Face it: Their helmets look pretty cool.)
But Philadelphia never really felt like part of Pennsylvania to me. It's not a rustbelt city, but it is pretty beat up. It's sort of mushed together with Baltimore and a bit of Washington DC. It seems more like the capital of South Jersey.
They do have the best cheesesteaks though.
ESPN:
"Pittsburgh Steelers offensive coordinator Ken Whisenhunt will be the first candidate to interview for the Atlanta Falcons' coaching vacancy, ESPN.com has learned.
Whisenhunt, 44, will meet on Thursday with Falcons officials. He has already spoken by phone with Falcons' owner Arthur Blank about the position, but he is not necessarily the front-runner for the position."
That was my feeling as well, and I have thought it strange that there is a perception among others (not Steelers and Eagles fans) that there is an intrastate rivalry in PA. Plus, how could you not like Philly at least a little after watching Invincible and the Rocky movies?
I much prefer to direct my hatred at Baltimore, New England, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Jacksonville, and Tennessee -- in that order. Of course, Cleveland always the potential to move way up the list if they could ever put a team together.
If Bill leaves..we could see a complete change in coaching staff with Grimm being favoured by a few teams as HC..Whisenhunt WILL be a HC regardless..either with the Steelers or whomever. That's a little scary to contemplate...HC, OC, RB coach (Hoak), Asst. HC/O-line (Grimm), ST coach (Spencer probably gone,,debatable if he deserves it), and possibly QB coach (Whipple)who seems to get Ben on the straight and narrow when he falters. whoooofff..
That is a heck of a lot of turnover for one year if it all plays out that way.
Rob
Man. the changes that could happen this year..HC, OC, Asst. HC/O-line, ST, QB C (whipple has interviewed with Boston College), RB Coach (Hoak retires)...that's a lot of turnover..scary..
Rob, that is a great point. And what happens if (realizing it is a big IF) Cowher stays, we'll still lose Grimm and Whiz....
Which brings me to my next point - I'm thinking that neither one of those guy's will make a quick decision knowing that they still have the possibility of coaching in Pittsburgh. However, what happens if Arthur Blank makes a ridiculous offer to Whiz???
Question of the Day: If Chicago played in the AFC, what do you think their record would have been this year? Also, if you were an AFC team looking for a head coach, would this realization effect your opinion of Ron Rivera?
Good question Randy. I think that they would have won a game or two less -- (Arizona anyone??). But no, it wouldn't change my opinion; they still play against NFL teams every week and have had a pretty good defense for a couple of years, not just this year, so the guy can obviously coach defense. Not sure whether that translates into a good head coach, but I guess that is the million dollar question (or the 4-5 million dollar per year question), isn't it?
Re: coach turnover - I'm assuming that if there is any consistency in the current coaching staff, that Whipple will be next year's OC, assuming that Whiz is either coaching the Steelers or somewhere else.
MJD said over at his aolsportsblog that if Detroit takes Calvin Johnston with the #2 pick he wouldn't make fun of Matt Millen. I guess I picked the right year to advocate taking a WR - or maybe Matt Millen picked the wrong year to stop doing so.
Anyway, I guess when I'm called out in an actual blog post I should answer the question. I say 1st round we should take an OL. In 2006 we ranked 22nd in Adjusted Line Yards (ALY), 20th in Power Success % (PS%), 16th in Stuffs, and 25th in Adjusted Sack Rate (ASR). That 22-20-16-25 is down from 12-12-9-23 in 2005 and 4-10-9-28 in 2004. Our run blocking has been in pretty steady decline for the last couple of years, although our pass blocking has never been good, and its pretty much a cliche at this point for me to point out that we need to be a passing team going forward (regardless of whether Ben took a step back this year or not). Additionally, if rumors are correct, Hartings is done, and I don't think anybody really wants to go into next season without other options on the right side of our OL. We're going to need to sign somebody in FA as well as draft (that and I'm never comfortable expecting rookie OLs to start). I'd further point out that Faneca is getting old, but he's only just turned 30, and somehow OLs (especially interior OLs) manage to play forever, so I wouldn't be surprised if he's got 5 more pro-bowl years left.
People above have been suggesting switching Marvel back to RT, and while I don't necessarily think that's bad, I'd also point out that FO did a study on what players you need to draft high, and part of its results were that you need one stud OT, and one average OT, but not necessarily on which side. If we draft a stud OT and put him on the right, we can have Faneca and/or a TE helping out Marvel, instead of leaving Marvel 1-on-1 and having whomever helping out Starks.
Anyway, my preference 1st round is OT, but if there's a stud interior OL who's better than whatever OT is available mid-1st then grab him. I honestly have absolutely no idea what the draft class looks like right now, but I'm sure Spencer will before FA starts and will have a good idea of what kind of OL will be there to draft, and what kind of OL he needs to go after in FA.
I don't really buy into the idea that we need to draft an OLB in the 1st round. We did drop from 3rd to 15th in ASR, but we have depth at OLB with Harrison, and neither Porter nor Haggans are really that old. Plus, we have a very long history of drafting great OLBs in later rounds. As was pointed out last year, that may get harder with more teams running the 3-4, but at the very least I say wait a year and see if our pass rush rebounds. If we were to draft an LB, ILB makes the most sense, as Foote is probably the least talented of our stating 4, and Farrior is the oldest. But, with rare exceptions, ILBs don't go in the first round.
I also think we shouldn't worry too much about DBs. Ike looked like the old Ike against Cincy (dropped INTs and all), and, hopefully, he won't be randomly benched for half of 2007. Anthony Smith should be on the field the whole year, and will hopefully do a better Chris Hope impression than Ryan Clark did. Plus, the FO pass coverage, while not impressive for this year, showed absolutely no correlation between 2005 and 2006 (the only two years for which they exist). So, at some level, pass coverage might be a highly random event.
Anyway, to lengthen an already overlong post, discussing a few points mentioned above:
* I personally think Cowher is burnt out and ready to go, whether he is willing to admit it or not. Just remembering how poorly the team played the first half, how unready they looked, and how little fire he seemed to have - playing well down the stretch doesn't undo that, especially the way they folded up twice against Baltimore. If nothing else, the way he bitched about calls after the Atlanta game speaks volumes.
* I'm all for hiring from within. However, if we go outside, I'd be happy with Chow or either of the Ryans. Moreso with Chow, because LeBeau could stick around and run his defense, while if we brought in one of the Ryans we'd need a new OC, plus Buddy was a terrible head coach.
* As to the list of coaches we're losing above, I'd fully expect that Whipple will get strong consideration as OC next year, and will probably fill that role.
FWIW, in 2004 Schottenheimer was out after 1 round of playoffs. Herm Edwards was around instead. Dungy coached under Marty in KC, as did Herm, but I think its a stretch to suggest either of them come from the Marty tree. Dungy is more of a Noll disciple, and Herm a Dungy disciple.
Also, if Ryan's gonna start posting more frequently, how about picking up where he left off with with offseason round files. After this year, I could use a look back to 2005.
So, DJ: You think the Steelers are going to pay Porter and you're OK with that? Some fans are really down on his play and attitude.
I wouldn't claim to be a good evaluator of talent (other than knowing that Garocki has become a horrible punter), but Porter's production certainly seems to have fallen off. Also, I think the DL got most of the sacks this year. Maybe that's the defensive scheme's fault and not Porter's.
Harrison, Haggans, and Porter are all about 30, if I remember right. So, it seems like we should start replacing them slowly now, to avoid needing to replace them all at once.
I'm not arguing that we should draft any LB's in the first round. I think FO has made a good case that an elite tackle is clearly the best choice. But, it seems that we should definitely draft a future starting OLB this year.
I don't think you cut Porter. He's only got one year left on his deal, although if he starts holding out unless he gets a new one I don't know what you do. Somehow, given he's coming off a sub-par year, I doubt he'd hold out. (Note: everybody says it was subpar, but Joey had rougly the same number of tackles, passes defensed, and INTs as 2005 in 2006, and in 2 less games - he had 4 less sacks and 4 less forced fumbles, but, again, missed two games).
You're correct about everyone's ages. Porter and Haggans will both be 30 next year, Harrison will be 29. However, I'd be surprised if they all collapsed at the same time, simply due to natural random variation.
I'm not saying don't take a OLB later on in the draft, but it shouldn't be a super-priority.
Also, I forgot to mention above, as to 2nd day picks by KC, current starters and key contributors not drafted on day 1:
Verron Haynes (5th round)
Dan Kreider (undrafted)
Willie Parker (undrafted)
Nate Washington (undrafted)
Chukky Okobi (5th round)
Brett Keisel (7th round)
Chris Hoke (undrafted)
Clark Haggans (5th round)
Larry Foote (4th round)
Ike Taylor (4th round)
All taken after the 1st day by KC. The years after you go 15-1, and then 11-5 and win the superbowl, its going to be harder for players to make your roster. That said, given the list above includes 6 starters (including Ike as a starter) in 7 drafts (including one that just happened, from which there are currently 0 starters, even our 1st rounder), I can't say KC has been doing that bad of a job on day 2 and beyond.
Commenting by HaloScan
