Even if we don't win the AFC North, all is not lost. If the current standings hold up, the AFC playoff seedings would be:

1. Colts
2. Bengals
3. Patriots
4. Broncos (tiebreaker over SD)
5. Steelers
6. Chargers

In the first round, Steelers at Denver is a game that we just won, so we should be able to handle that. Assuming other seedings hold, in the second round we would play the Colts at Indy. A tough assignment, to be sure, but the Colts routinely fold in the playoffs. A win there could send the Steelers into Cincinnati for the big re-rematch, winner-take-all for a Super Bowl berth. Can the Bengals beat the Steelers three times in one season? It would be fun to find out.

If these playoff matchups sound familiar, it's because in 2005, the Steelers won road playoff games in Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Denver. I'm not saying it will happen again. But it could. So for the 77% percent of you that think the Steelers will be a wild-card team, that's not such a bad thing.

When the 2009 schedules were released, the AFC North caught a break by matching up against the weak AFC West and mediocre NFC North. In fact, the Steelers' schedule was rated the 4th easiest in the NFL, the Ravens' schedule was 5th easiest, and the Bengals' was 11th (mainly because they had to play the Ravens and Steelers twice each). These ratings were based on opponents' 2008 winning percentages.

At nearly the midpoint of the 2009 season, things are not looking so easy, due to the improvement of teams such as the Vikings, Packers,  Broncos, and the Bengals themselves. Let's take a look at how the schedules are rated now, based on 2009 opponent winning percentage (opp pct), and more important, which AFC North team has the most favorable schedule remaining.

The Ravens' schedule has become much more difficult at 0.550. In addition to the aforementioned teams, the Ravens must play the undefeated Colts and have already lost to the Patriots. Having completed the brutal (0.571) portion of their schedule, the Ravens now face the merely difficult (0.534) portion, which includes the Colts, the Bengals, two games against the Steelers, and a road game against the 4-3 Packers. So far, the Ravens are 2-3 against tough opponents; if they continue at the same pace, they could finish 10-6.

Continue reading this post »

When the 2009 schedules were released, the AFC North caught a break by matching up against the weak AFC West and mediocre NFC North. In fact, the Steelers' schedule was rated the 4th easiest in the NFL, the Ravens' schedule was 5th easiest, and the Bengals' was 11th (mainly because they had to play the Ravens and Steelers twice each). These ratings were based on opponents' 2008 winning percentages.

At nearly the midpoint of the 2009 season, things are not looking so easy, due to the improvement of teams such as the Vikings, Packers,  Broncos, and the Bengals themselves. Let's take a look at how the schedules are rated now, based on 2009 opponent winning percentage (opp pct), and more important, which AFC North team has the most favorable schedule remaining.

The Steelers' opponents had a 0.434 winning percentage in 2008, but so far in 2009, they have a 0.461 percentage. The improvement in the aforementioned teams has been softened a bit by the collapse of the Titans and, to a lesser extent, the Dolphins. So far this season, the Steelers are 3-0 against lousy teams and 2-2 against teams with a winning record, both losses coming on the road. If the Steelers maintain this pattern, they will finish 12-4 or 11-5.

Continue reading this post »

The 3-0 Ravens visit the 2-1 Patriots this Sunday. Whenever I watch a game, it's hard for me not to favor one team or the other. Sometimes I like certain players or coaches, sometimes I root for the underdog. So my question to you is, if you watch this game, who do you root for? Yeah, I know, the easy answer is neither, so maybe the question should be, who do you root against less? After all, someone has to win.

After some thought, I came up with a few things I like (or at least respect) about the Ravens:

1) They have a tough D, like the Steelers.

2) Their QB looks like he came from a steel town instead of a men's fashion show.

3) Their coach doesn't act like a hoodie-wearing android.

4) They're not cheaters.

And my favorite thing about the Ravens:  they are polite enough to lose to us in the playoffs.

After some thought, I cannot think of anything that I like about the Patriots.

Assuming that Ben calls the plays when we go to the no-huddle offense, here is a quick summary of the Steelers' drives from last night, broken down by play caller. Note that we ran the no-huddle for the last two drives of each half, plus overtime.

Arians: 8 drives, 35 plays, 62 yards (1.8 yards per play), 0 points

Ben: 5 drives, 37 plays, 270 yards (7.3 yards per play), 13 points

7.3 yards per play!  That's just sick. And 1.8 yards per play, that is, well, sick in a bad way.

Here is the outcome of each drive:

Arians: punt, punt, punt, interception, punt, punt, punt, punt

Ben: TD, end of half, FG, fumble on opponents 5-yard line, FG

The only things that stopped the "Ben" drives from scoring every time was running out of time at the end of the first half (officially, an interception on the Hail Mary, but only because there wasn't time for anything else) and Hines' fumble. In fact, the third drive was well on its way to being a touchdown, with a 2nd-and-2 from the Tennessee 10, when the team suddenly stopped passing and failed to convert the third down. (I wonder who called those two running plays?) The final drive could also have generated a touchdown, but the Steelers opted for a game-winning FG on first down from the Tennessee 15.

So the two obvious questions are (1) Why don't we run the no-huddle all the time? (2) Why is Arians still calling any plays?

Bumped. I'm absolutely beat to shreds from real work obligations this past week so I'm happy to promote something to the main page that's well written and a potential conversation starter. Thanks to Steelin for the post. Not sure I agree on every last front, at least in terms of how he rates the likelihood of each action item, but just about everything is still in play with the front office priorities noted below. - Blitz-

*************

With everyone mocking the draft, here are some non-draft items that might or might not be on Kevin Colbert’s to-do list, along with my personal prediction of how likely each one is to be completed before the season starts. Please chime in with your thoughts on whether the Steelers should be doing these or other things.

1) Extend James Harrison’s Contract

As has been extensively discussed, Harrison’s contract expires after 2009. Harrison is a crucial part of the defense, and the team has indicated that extending Harrison is a top priority. The reigning Defensive Player of the Year is likely to want a long-term deal for $8 million to $10 million per year, however, and the Steelers do not like to give big contracts to players that are over 30 years old. Even if the Steelers wanted to grant such a contract, it is not clear that they have the cap room to do so....LIKELIHOOD:  LOW

2) Sign Max Starks To A Long-Term Contract

For the second year in a row, the Steelers have tagged Starks to avoid losing him. Although Starks was the team’s starting left tackle throughout their Super Bowl season, he is generally not considered among the league’s elite OTs, yet the Steelers are slated to pay him nearly $8.5 million in 2009. Furthermore, if the Steelers are forced to tag Starks again for 2010, his salary would increase to more than $10 million. The Steelers should be able to negotiate a long-term contract at a fair salary of $6-$7 million per year, locking up their left tackle for multiple years and gaining cap room. Starks would benefit by having guaranteed money (the franchise salary is not guaranteed) and long-term stability. Thus, both sides should be motivated to make this happen....LIKELIHOOD:  HIGH

3) Extend Hines Ward’s Contract

Ward remains the Steelers’ #1 receiver, despite Santonio Holmes’ heroics in the Super Bowl (a game in which an injured Ward did not contribute at his usual level). In 2008, Ward posted his best season since 2004, gaining 1,043 yards on 81 receptions and scoring 7 touchdowns. Ward’s cap number for 2009, the final year of his current contract, is $7.8 million (third highest on the team). Although Ward’s production is likely to decline with age, he is more valuable to the Steelers than any other NFL team, due to his ferocious blocking and veteran leadership. If Ward and his agent realize this, they should accept a three-year extension at a moderate salary. Such a deal would reduce the Steeler’s 2009 cap number, help ensure that Ward retires as a Steeler, and give the team leverage when negotiating Holmes’ contract in 2010.....LIKELIHOOD:  MEDIUM TO HIGH

4) Extend Heath Miller’s Contract

Starting TE Miller, playing in the last year of his rookie contract, is set to make only $800,000 in 2009, counting $2.4 million against the cap due to prorated bonuses. Miller has never made the Pro Bowl but is one of the better tight ends in the NFL and a solid contributor to the Steelers’ offense, both as a blocker and as a receiver. His backup, Matt Spaeth, has not shown consistency in either area, despite being a third-round draft pick, and does not appear ready to step in to a starting role. Thus, the Steelers would be well served to sign Miller to new long-term contract. If the contract is structured as an extension, with a signing bonus paid in 2009, it should not significantly burden the Steeler’s 2009 cap figure. But if Miller’s agent demands a top-end salary, the deal might not get done. ....LIKELIHOOD:  MEDIUM TO HIGH

5) Sign A Veteran Wide Receiver

With the departure of Nate Washington, the inexperienced Limas Sweed is penciled into the #3 receiver role, and the #4 receiver could be an even less experienced Dallas Baker, Martin Nance, or a rookie draft pick. Given how often the Steelers line up in three- and four-wide sets, this lineup is problematic. A veteran WR would provide insurance in case Sweed falters or if an injury occurs to Ward, Holmes, or Sweed. The Steelers can’t afford to pay a significant salary to a player likely to be the #4 receiver, but a number of experienced players might be willing to sign at or slightly above the veteran minimum. Possibilities include Mike Furrey (ex-Lions), David Patten (ex-Saints), Marty Booker (ex-Bears), Joe Jurevicius (ex-Browns), and Ike Hillard (ex-Bucs).....LIKELIHOOD:  MEDIUM

6) Sign A Veteran Offensive Tackle

Although the Steelers now have Starks, Willie Colon, and Trai Essex under contract for 2009, the quality level at OT still needs improvement. Both Colon and Essex are essentially being paid backup money, so the team could spring for a midrange veteran free agent to compete with Colon for the starting RT position. Possibilities include Mark Tauscher (ex-Packers) and Jon Runyan (ex-Eagles). If the Steelers could sign either for $3-$4 million per year, it could upgrade the o-line and offer protection in the case of injury to Starks. Such a signing would also give the team more flexibility in the draft, as they would not need to choose an OT on the first day. But the signing of Essex probably indicates the Steelers plan to stay out of free-agent OT market.....LIKELIHOOD:  LOW

**************

That’s my list. Other Steelers in the last year of their contracts include Ryan Clark, Deshea Townsend, Brett Keisel, Casey Hampton, Larry Foote, Justin Hartwig, and Jeff Reed, but you guys can work on those. P.S. Thanks to Maryrose for all the cap figures.

At the end of three quarters, it looked like the Steelers game plan was working almost perfectly. To wit:

• Stop the Cardinals running game without trying (check)
  
• Use double-coverage to eliminate Fitzgerald from offense (check)
• Pressure Warner into at least one turnover (check)
• Execute long drives to reduce chances for Cardinals offense (check)
• Minimize turnovers so Cardinals must work a long field (mostly)
• Establish Steelers running game to open passing lanes (kinda sorta)
• Take advantage of Cardinals' inability to cover tight end (check)

And as a special, unplanned bonus, a 100-yard interception return from Harrison. As a result, we are ahead 20-7. With 13:34 to go, we even get the ball back at midfield after a Timmons near-block forces a crappy punt.

Then, the wheels fall off the wagon. On offense, three consecutive three-and-outs, the third one resulting in a safety. On defense, we give up an 87-yard scoring drive, a 39-yard near-scoring drive (saved by a holding penalty), and a 64-yard pass to Fitzgerald that gives the Cardinals the lead for the first time all game. Only the heroics of Ben and Santonio saved this from going down as the biggest fourth-quarter choke in Super Bowl history.

Maybe someone who knows more about football than I do can explain what happened. The best the announcers could come up with was that Arizona went to a four-WR personnel group with Arrington at RB and went no-huddle. Did this somehow catch the Steelers off-guard? It looked like the Steelers went to a dime package with Timmons at LB, which should have countered this strategy.

On offense, we continued to mix pass and run, but after moving the ball consistently earlier in the game, suddenly nothing was working. Two of the possessions were killed by sacks, and the third one by the holding penalty in the end zone. Then, on the final drive, the Steelers again cut through the defense like a knife through butter. That made it exciting, but a few first downs on any of the previous three drives would have eliminated the need for such excitement. Any ideas why our offense and defense suddenly floundered after playing so well for three quarters?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/01/19/mcgahee.ap/index.html?eref=si_topstories

Good news, football fans!  Willis McGahee appears to have no serious damage from the scary hit he took from Ryan Clark yesterday. Despite leaving the field on a backboard, the player was released from the hospital after staying overnight for observation.

"It is expected that Willis will have a complete recovery from the head and neck injuries he suffered last night," Ravens spokesman Kevin Byrne said.

Despite the hard feelings between the two teams and between the respective fan bases, I for one am glad to see that McGahee has no permanent damage.

Check out this link. Or, if you are too lazy to click, here is the gist of it:

Looking for a consistently reliable indicator of postseason success? How about our Defensive Hog Index. Since we introduced the indicator last year, it has correctly identified the winner in 18 of 19 playoff games – that’s a .947 batting average for those of you keeping score at home.   If all goes according to plan, the Steelers (No. 1 in the Defensive Hog Index) will beat the Eagles (No. 2 in the Defensive Hog Index) three weeks from now in Super Bowl XLIII.

CHFF's "Defensive Hog Index" combines three metrics:  opponent's yards per rush attempt, negative pass play percentage (combination of sacks and INTs), and third-down conversions. The Steelers not only led the NFL in this index, they also led in each of the three components. Although CHFF has been ragging on the Steelers for their poor offensive statistics, playoff success seems to correlate much better with these defensive statistics.

The Ravens, not surprisingly, are no slouches, ranking No. 3 in the Defensive Hog Index.

After jinxing the Steelers earlier this season by putting them on the cover before the Titans game, Sports Illustrated this week features the Chargers and Darren Sproles on the cover. This cover is only for West Coast editions (the East Coast cover features the Eagles), so maybe it is worth only half a jinx. Still, maybe Tomlin can use it for motivational material. "Bring on the Steelers" indeed!  We'll see.

via i.cdn.turner.com