Blitz's post this morning got me thinking about how the off-season has thus far affected the state of the AFC.  When I look at what has transpired since the Super Bowl, I can't help but like how it bodes for us.  None of the teams who were better than us in '09 appear to have strengthened themselves in what I would call a definitive way.  Consider:

Indy?  Status quo.  They resigned Gary Brackett, which was a good move, and I'm sure they'll be right there again in 2010.  But this is a team we've had decent success with.  I would not consider Indy considerably better than us heading into next season.

San Diego?  They've lost LT, Kassim Osgood, Jamal Williams, Antonio Cromartie and Brandon Manumaleuna while bringing in Kerry Rhodes.   Plus, Norv Turner is still the HC.  Enough said. 

Cincy?  $28 million for Antonio Bryant?  Please.  He's had one Pro Bowl-quality season (in '08, when he was 83-1,248-7 td's) and last year he caught 39 balls.  Carson Palmer is immobile and they'll play a 1st place schedule next season.  They have not gotten better.

Baltimore?  Yes, they've upgraded.  But it would have been a war between us and Baltimore no matter what, so this is pretty much a wash.

NY Jets?   They seem better with the acquisition of Cromartie, but there are a lot of variables there.  How will a guy who's fathered 7 kids with 6 different women in 5 states adjust to life in NYC?  How much will losing Thomas Jones affect the run game?  Shonn Greene really only had a couple of big playoff games.  Otherwise he had a marginal rookie season.  Can he really carry the load?  And Leon Washington, their big game-breaker, will be 28 and coming off of a gruesome leg injury.  Will he still have the same burst?  The Jets are good but they have some unanswered questions.

New England?  Well, as Johnny_S wrote in Blitz's post, they're definitely not the team they once were.  Honestly, does New England scare you anymore?  I'm not saying they're not good.  But do they scare you?  Not me.

Which brings us to the Steelers.  We've added depth at receiver and on special teams, retained our stable starting safety, will get two All-Pro defenders back who were absent from most of last season, and will have had a long off-season to prepare for 2010 (unlike the shortened one that was a product of winning SB 43).  There is, of course, that tricky mess involving the franchise QB, but nothing I've heard yet suggests that his case will infringe upon his playing status.  Whether he can patch things up with the Rooneys and his coaches and teammates is another matter, but if he has any sense at all he'll return a humbled and determined individual.  Provided things go his way in the assault case, I would not be surprised if Big Ben has a monster season next year.  And that too bodes well for us.

All things considered, then, there isn't a team in the conference right now that is better than we are.  That's exciting.  And I know it's only March, and a lot can change between now and September, but I'm already looking forward to us making a deep run at Lombardi  #7 in 2010.

I was reading the excerpt from Mr. Rooney about Mike Tomlin's job status and some of the corresponding reactions to it here on the site, and it struck me as amazing that we're even having a discussion about Coach Tomlin's job status.  I don't know if Mr. Rooney's endorsement of Coach Tomlin was designed to quiet any rumors about him being fired or not, but if so I wouldn't be surprised.  In the Internet age, rumor and fact are often passed off as interchangable.

I've been a Steeler fan since the 70s, so I remember the dark period between 1979 and 2005 when each and every season ended in disappointment.  I especially remember the end of the Chuck Noll era, which was depressing in the sense that the man who had won four Super Bowls for the franchise now seemed to struggle to keep pace with the rapidly changing NFL.  Granted, his teams lacked the talent to compete many seaons, but the league had converted to zone blocking schemes and run-and-shoot or West Coast passing games while Coach Noll stuck mostly to his inside traps and vertical routes.  When he retired, I think most of Steeler Nation was relieved.

It was with great enthusiasm, then, that Bill Cowher was received as our new head coach.  Much like it would be with Mike Tomlin, few knew who he was or what to expect.  But he got off to a quick start, and in his first three years he compiled a 32-16 regular season record and three straight playoff appearences.  There was an infusion of young talent on offense, including the dynamic Barry Foster at tailback, aggressive new schemes under coordinator Dom Capers on defense, and a general sense of optimism among the fan base that the Steelers were back.  And even though Coach Cowher's teams went 1-3 in the playoffs those first three seasons, including the absolutely devestating 17-13 loss at home to San Diego in the 1994 AFC Championship game, no one suggested Coach Cowher couldn't lead us or couldn't get it done.  His failures in the post-season those first three years seemed like speed bumps on the road to glory.

Contrast this to the current discussion about Mike Tomlin.  In his first three seasons in Pittsburgh, Coach Tomlin has gone 31-17 in the regular season, a record that is nearly identical to Coach Cowher's.  More impressively, he has gone 3-1 in the playoffs, including, of course, last season's Super Bowl win over Arizona.  This season's 9-7 finish and failure to make the playoffs was disappointing, but it doesn't seem in any way worthy of a single discussion about Coach Tomlin's job status.  So why are people even hinting that his job might be in jeopardy?  Why, considering he's been even more successful than the revered Bill Cowher was in his first three seasons here?

Three thoughts to answer those questions. 

Thought One: Style.  It's obvious that Steeler Nation dislikes Bruce Arians and his brand of football.  It's obvious that we long for a return to Tim Lester or Dan Krieder or Jon Witman leading the Bus into an angry  pile of humanity.  The Empty set was not conceived with the Pittsburgh Steelers in mind, and the Nation, unlike Coach Arians, is fully aware of that.  And so, for right or for wrong, we blame Coach Tomlin for not featuring a style of football that we're comfortable with or that we feel is best suited for this team.  Coach Cowher didn't go unscathed for his run-run-pass on third down philosophy, but it made more sense to us than the seemingly haphazard way this year's team went about it.  In short, we were more comfortable with Coach Cowher's style.  It was tougher and it felt more sound and it seemed to validate who we were.

Thought Two:  the Internet.  Had the Internet existed in the 1980s, Coach Noll's name would have been dragged through the cyber-mud from coast to coast.  Had it existed as it does today in the latter years of the Cowher era, people would have clamored for his head because he couldn't get it done in the big game.  As we all know, the Internet allows us to blurt out our most immediate, empassioned thoughts, sometimes without pausing to allow logic or reason to intercede.  Therefore, Coach Tomlin's capability as head coach of this team is called into question despite his significant success (so far) simply because we have a means to voice our immediate frustrations.  In a society that microwaves everything, we want things now.  And now, for the Steelers, is disappointing.  That disappointment, coupled with the Internet's access to instant gratification, has clouded some people's judgment of him.

Thought Three:  Success.  Why else didn't the critics come full-throated after Coach Cowher in 1994 after that dreadful San Diego loss?  Because we hadn't won a Super Bowl in fifteen years.  The fan base was disappointed and pissed-off, but we recognized that Coach Cowher had us on the brink of that then-elusive One for the Thumb.  At the time, being on the brink was good enough.  It's not anymore.  Once we got over the hump in 2005, and then again last season, many of our fans lost their patience for losing.  We're not going to win the Super Bowl every year but some of our fans believe that we should.  Or at least that we should make the playoffs every year.  Perhaps we should have made the playoffs this season.  Perhaps, given our talent and the terrible losses to some bad teams, we underachieved.  Then again, given the string of narrow victories and last-minute heroics, perhaps we shouldn't have won the Super Bowl last February.  "Should" is a difficult thing to define.  So often the results hinge on delicate and unforseen matters.  The important thing is to know that you have a Coach who will keep the organization competitive and in the hunt each year.  In Coach Tomlin, we have that man.  And I, for one, am glad that Mr. Rooney sees this.

To the fans who would like for Coach Tomlin to get more assertive with BA, I'm with you.  But isn't that really our biggest gripe?  Isn't that more than managable?  To use an old cliche here, let's not fail to see the forest for the trees.  Coach Tomlin will chop some wood if he needs to.  But he's got the bigger picture in mind.  And that's what really counts.

I, like many of you, have been searching for an explanation as to why our beloved Steelers had such a frustrating and unfulfilling 2009 football season, and after digging into the offensive numbers I think I've uncovered it:  Bruce Arians is Lucifer.

Don't believe me?  Find yourself skeptical?  Saying to yourself, "Well, shoot, I don't like him as our OC, but clearly he's not the devil."  Well, look at these numbers and think again:

Ben Roethlisberger's completion percentage:  337-506  (66.6%)

Team 4th-down conversion rate:  8/12  (66.6%)

Team leaders in touchdown catches:  Mike Wallace (6), Hines Ward (6), Heath Miller (6)

% of 3rd-down plays from an empty set resulting in sacks:  66.6%

OK, I made that last one up.  But the proof, as they say, is in the pudding.  Bruce Arians is Lucifer, and he sabotaged 2009 to collect his debt for last year's Super Bowl win.  

And of course, this also explains why Mike Tomlin didn't fire him...

With 2009 just about complete, I'd thought I'd offer up some New Year's wishes for the Pittsburgh Steelers for the coming year:

For MIKE TOMLIN, the courage to find his edgier, less player-friendly self.  Maybe he buddied up to the players too much this past season, maybe not.  Either way, I hope he tweaks his style back to 2008 mode.  His players need to feel a little less comfortable around him...

For MR. ROONEY, a return from Ireland.  Somehow, in some way, his presence was missed this year...

For BEN ROETHLISBERGER, a cute, sane girlfriend who he falls deeply and monogomously in love with and who whispers into his ear at night, "Just throw it away every once in awhile, honey.  For me..."

For BRUCE ARIANS,  the Texas Tech head coaching job.  His pass-happy, no-fullback scheme would look great out there...

For WILLIE COLON, longer arms...

For LaMARR WOODLEY, continued emergence as a Pro Bowl-level player and as a team leader.  May 2010 bring him NFL Defensive Player of the Year honors!

For TROY POLAMALU, a return to health and to greatness...

For RASHARD MENDENHALL, square shoulders in the hole...

For WILLIE PARKER,  a return to the 'Burgh as a change-of-pace guy capable of breaking off big 2nd half runs against tired defenses that have been worn down by the revamped Steeler running game...

For IKE TAYLOR, an off-season tutoring session with Charles Woodson and Darren Sharper on why catching the football as a defensive player is a good thing...

For DENNIS DIXON, an offensive coordinator who figures out how to take advantage of his special skill set two or three times a game...

For AARON SMITH, (see Troy Polamalu).

For KEVIN COLBERT, an off-season of free agent signings that include a fullback for the offense and some guys who are hungry to play special teams, as well as some competent DB's in the draft.  Oh, and the will to just say no when Bill Cowher comes calling...

For SANTONIO HOLMES, the realization that top-of-the-market contracts and beautiful weather aren't as important as establishing a legacy...

For DICK LEBEAU, continued health and energy so he can coach the D back to prominence...

For LIMAS SWEED, a green light that goes on...

For JAMES HARRISON, a bunch of parking tickets to keep him pissed off and surly...

For JAMES FARRIOR, a dip in the fountain of youth.  And some Rogaine...

For HINES WARD, a bone-crushing crack block on an opposing LB on the first play of 2010 to set the tone for the new season...

For CASEY HAMPTON, a return to the 'Burgh to anchor the d-line for another few seasons.  And if not, thank you for your time here.  We wouldn't have won #'s 5 and 6 without you!

For MATT SPAETH, a spot on the Bengals active roster...

For LeCHARLES BENTLEY and T.J. DUCKETT, welcome to Pittsburgh at last!

And to all at BTSC, good health and good fortune in the coming year!  Go Steelers!

It was with sadness today that I read the news of the passing of Chris Spielman's wife, Stefanie, who died yesterday after a long battle with breast cancer.  She had been battling the disease for 11 years and evidently she and Chris had raised over $6 million for research to fight it.  I didn't know of that, and I applaud the Spielman's for it.

What I did know was that Chris Spielman was a rugged, intelligent linebacker who would have looked great in the Black and Gold.  As an Ohio State fan, I followed his All-American career closely and rooted for him as he made Pro Bowls for both the Lions and the Bills.  It seems unfortunate that he wound up on those teams.  Chris Spielman was meant to be a Steeler.  His grit, his effort, his toughness.  For an Ohio guy he had Pittsburgh all over him.

Even though most of us are turning our attention to the Steelers-Chiefs game, the mention of Chris Spielman has gotten me to thinking.  What opposing players, either current or past, would you most liked to have seen in the Black and Gold?  For me, Spielman tops the list, followed closely by Ronnie Lott and Earl Campbell (imagine Earl Campbell as a Steeler!  Now that would have been something!).  Anyone else?  I'm curious as to who the Nation would list...

I couldn't bring myself to write "Who are you rooting for?" since the notion of rooting for either of those teams is like rooting for tuberculosis over menengitis.  Still, it's an important division game and we should pay it some mind.  Since both franchises register an almost perfect 10 on the chart of things I truly despise in life (the Ratbirds being slightly less objectionable on the grounds that at least they play the game the way it should be played, unlike the Bengals who have long epitomized both futility and classlessness), the ultimate outcome here would of course be a tie.  Unfulfilling for both teams and ultimately beneficial to the Steelers in the standings.  That's not likely, though.  One of these teams is going to win. 

The Bengals are tied with the Steelers atop the division at 5-2.  Baltimore sits one back at 4-3.  A Bengals win puts Baltimore two back of Cincy, and working from the standpoint that we take care of business in Denver next Monday night, two back of us as well.  Wins by the Ratbirds and Steelers puts both teams a game behind us.  So which scenario do you like best?  Would you rather lead both teams by a game or be tied with Cincy with the Ravens two back? 

To help answer the question, let's look at the remaining schedules for each team:

BALT                         CINCY                      PITT

@Cincy                    Balt                         @ Denver

@Cleve                  @Pitt                        Cincy

Indy                         @Oak                      @KC

Pitt                          Cleve                       @Balt

@GB                      Detroit                     Oak

Detroit                    @Minn                     @Cleve

Chicago                @SD                        GB

@Pitt                      KC                            Balt

@Oak                    @NYJ                      @Miami

It's hard to project how each team will finish.  Injuries can obviously play a part (although, to paraphrase Coach Tomlin, injuries shouldn't matter to the Steelers because the expectation doesn't change).   The Ratbirds have three tough road games left (at Cincy, Green Bay and Pittsburgh) and two difficult games at home (Indy and Pitt, with a potential third in the Bears).  Cincy has to go to Pitt, Minnesota, San Diego and the Jets, plus a cross-country trip to Oakland which they should win but will be taxing nonetheless due to the travel.  All of those games will be tough for them.  However, other than Baltimore next weekend, their remaining home schedule is a breeze (Cleve, Detroit and KC).  The Steelers have to go to Denver and Baltimore, both of which will be tough, and then they host Cincy and Baltimore.    The rest of their schedule (@KC, Oak, @Cle, GB, @Miami) looks very managable.

Based on the schedules, I'd say the Steelers enjoy a slight advantage in that they have less tough road games and they get 2 of their 3 big divisional games against Cincy and Baltimore at home.  Cincy looks to have it the toughest.  Their road schedule will be a bitch.  That's why, as much as I hate to say it, I'm rooting for them to beat the Ratbirds.  Or rather, that's why I'm rooting against the Ratbirds.  I think Cincy's road schedule will keep them for staying with us down the stretch.  Inevitably, I believe the division will once again come down to us against Baltimore.  So if Cincy can push Baltimore two games behind us, I say please do.

Now let's do our part and take care of business up in the Rockies.  Go Steelers!

Hey everyone... I was just looking over the starting lineups for the game on Sunday ("Da Bears!") and a few things jumped out at me.  Hopefully these are things we can exploit:

1.  James Harrison will largely be blocked by Orlando Pace.

I know Pace was a great OT back in the day, but that day was awhile ago.  He's slower and less agile now and Deebo's speed rush should give him fits.  If Pace overcompensates to the outside, Deebo should be able to get plenty of leverage under Pace's 6'8 frame and bull rush him.  Either way, there's a good chance Jay Cutler will take a few well-deserved blind-side shots courtesy of Mr. Harrison.

2.  If Deebo dominates Pace, Matt Forte might be less effective.

Blitz's post the other day made some great points about the effectiveness of Matt Forte in the short passing game.  And as we saw last year with Tennessee, the quick game seems to be one of the few remedies for this Steeler defense.  However, no team can rely on the quick game for 60 minutes, and I'm sure Coach LeBeau has worked on some things designed to take those screens and quicks away (dropping DE's or maybe even Big Snack into coverage?)  At some point the Bears will have to challenge the Steelers downfield.  And if they do so, it's likely they'll have to double Deebo with their back (presumably Forte).   Because Cutler probably hasn't had enough time with the WR's to get on the same page as far as hot reads vs. the blitz is concerned, there's a good chance they'll have to max protect.  The more snaps Matt Forte spends in protection, the better things will be for us.

3.  With Urlacher out, the Tampa-2 is vulnerable down the field.

I suppose the logic might be that now, because Brian Urlacher's out, it will be easier for us to run the football.  I'm not sure that's how we can best exploit his absence, though.  The Tampa-2 scheme Lovie Smith has always run relies on a fast Mike backer to sprint down the middle of the field with slot receivers so the safeties can cheat to the hashmarks and take away the outside Vert and Smash routes.  We've seen Hines Ward run countless cover-2 beaters in which he lines up in the slot, bends his route to the hash and then arrows back between the safeties.  Off of play-action, this is a great play vs. cover-2.  With Urlacher the Bears might have been able to get under it.  Without him?  I don't know.  I anticipate Hines having a big day and ripping off some big chunks of yardage downfield.

All in all, I agree with Blitz that this will be a tough game but I like some of the match-ups I see.  What about you all?

Hey All,

One of my favorite football-related sites is Chris Brown's smartfootball.com.  If you like analyzing X's and O's, this site is for you.  Today he linked to a piece he posted in the N.Y. Times Fifth Down blog on the Steeler offense.  The link is at the bottom of this post.  I highly recommend it as he does a great job breaking down the Steelers counter run play (made famous by FWP's 75 yd TD vs. the Seahawks in SB40) and the Smash passing concept (immortalized by Ben-to-Santonio to win SB43).  There are video clips of both the Parker and Santonio plays in the link as well.  He also has some remarks about Bruce Arians I know many of you will find interesting.  Hope you enjoy...

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/28/smart-football-with-chris-brown-a-look-at-steelers-strategy/#comments

I just watched Rod Woodson's Hall of Fame acceptance speech.  As expected, it was classy, insightful and reverent.  He offered some profound thoughts on his life and his experiences as an NFL player.  I thought I'd share five topics of note with those of you who didn't catch it.

1.  His comments about growing up a mixed-race kid in rural Indiana were poignant.  "Don't let them make you choose sides," he offered to other mixed-race children.  "Just be the person God made you."  I thought this topic was an important one and I was glad he addressed it.  We forget sometimes that these fabulous athletes are human beings with real day-to-day struggles.  He was so physically gifted that I doubt football was as tough for him as growing up bi-racial in the 1970s.

2.  He made a strong and compelling case for Dick LeBeau to be elected to the Hall.  There seems to be a growing push for this, both from current Steelers and, as with Woodson, former players as well.  The topic of long-time assistants making the Hall came up recently in my area (southern New Jersey) with the passing of Eagles DC Jim Johnson.  The Hall should certainly have room for them, and Coach LeBeau should be the first one in.  It was good to hear Woodson take up the cause.

3.  He had brilliant things to say about the Rooneys (of course) and specifically about his coaches in Pittsburgh.  He made a special point to single out Rod Rust, who he said taught him to read offensive formations and to anticipate what they would do out of them.  "The game got 50% easier after Coach Rust taught me that," Woodson said.  He rattled off name after name -- Chuck Noll, LeBeau, Rust, Tony Dungy, Dom Capers, Bill Cowher.  What stellar coaches he was fortunate enough to learn from.  It made me think the following: IF WE'D ONLY HAD A DAMN QB BACK THEN!

4.  He had this comment about how Steeler fans treated him after he left Pittsburgh:  "You booed me when I played against you, and frankly, I'm glad you did.  If you had cheered for me as an opponent I would have lost a little respect for you."  I remember how sad I was when he left.  I couldn't bring myself to boo him when he went to San Francisco.  But when he went to Baltimore I booed like hell.  I love you, Rod, but when you put on the purple it made me want to puke.

5.  He left the following message for coaches, and for those of you who coach at any level, especially with younger kids, I thought it was perfect.  In reference to a high school coach of his who had talked him out of quitting after his sophomore year, he said, "You didn't let me quit.  You made me want to come back and keep trying, and that's what coaches should do."  So many youth coaches these days just want to win that they lose sight of what it is they should be doing.  Namely, nurturing kids, teaching them a work ethic and a love for the game, instilling in them a desire to compete and building them up rather than tearing them down.  Of all the things Rod had to say, this was the one I thought was most important.

Anyway, for those of you who missed it,  I'm sure you can catch it on YouTube pretty soon.  It was a rewarding experience both as a Steeler fan and as a human being.

It's also on again at midnight for those of you who want to record it or who are insomniacs.  For those of you who were too young to remember the Steelers of the 70s, this is a great look at them because the game is being shown in its entirety (I was only 11 at the time, so it's cool to see it again for me as well).  Guys who really stood out in that game include Terry Bradshaw (fearless with the football), John Stallworth (better than Swann by far) and Jack Lambert (not simply menacing but a true field general as well).  Also, check out the size of the offensive lines.  Frank Summers would be a guard on the '79 team. 

Anyway, sorry for the late notice but I just saw it myself.  Hope some of you catch it and enjoy...

OK, I don't have 56 other reasons in mind, but if you give me some time I'm sure I can come up with them.  Read the link below for one that's sure to make the list.  We all know he's a brilliant football player, but this is the sort of under-the-radar stuff that makes him a brilliant human being as well.  It is such a privilege to have him as a Steeler.

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1157038/index.htm

(Disclaimer: I understand college football and pro football are way different and that running the spread in the pros is difficult because of the speed of the defense.  Still...)

I'm probably revisiting an old topic here, but I caught some video of a 2007 game between Oregon and Washington the other day and it got me thinking: why shouldn't we use Dennis Dixon for 5-10 snaps a game this year as a situational change-up on offense?  In terms of the coaching and the personnel, it makes sense.  Like it or not, Bruce Arians is already committed to the zone scheme, meaning the foundation is in place for the zone-read concept Dixon ran so beautifully at Oregon.  And with Hines Ward in the slot, we have a wide receiver who is tough enough to block outside backers or safeties who would be the primary alley defenders against Dixon when he pulls the ball and runs.  Plus, the addition of Mike Wallace gives us a speedster to play in the opposite slot (should we go four wides) to take advantage of matchups against underneath coverage (Sean McDonald might work there, too, as the crafty veteran who can find holes in a zone).  Throw Mewelde Moore into that package at TB, who can both blitz protect and catch the ball out of the backfield, and Santonio and Sweed on the outside, both of whom should be able to exploit one-on-one matchups, and the foundation for a formidable spread package is in place.  Here's why I think we should use it:

1.  it'll get Dixon valuable playing experience, which he'll need since he's likely to be the #2 QB in 2010 (and possibly in '09, depending on his progress).  It should help Wallace learn the slot as well, which is a position he may inherit from Hines when he retires.

2.  it'll get Ben off the field for 5-10 snaps a game, which will reduce the number of hits he'll take by 1 or 2 a game.  That might not seem like much, but 20-30 less hits per season has to be a good thing for Ben. 

3.  defenses would be forced to prepare for it.  Any time they spend game-planning for something other than our base package is a good thing.

and 4.  Dixon is dynamic.  Many of us remember the early days of Kordell Stewart, who was electrifying in a limited role.  Dixon can provide that spark as well.  As persuasion, check out this video of him at Oregon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DeznD1ccv4
 

The key is to trust that the coaches will know when to use the package and what in a particular situation they're trying to exploit.  Me?  I trust the coaches.  Even BA.

How about you?

I read the Robert Dvorchak story posted by PsychSalameh over the weekend (great read, by the way), and at the end of it he included a poll question that asked "How many Super Bowls will the Steelers win from 2010-2020?  I don't have an answer to that question, but I see some parallels between the first 2 Supes we won in the 70s and the two we've won recently.  To me, those parallels suggest we have at least two more in us in the near future.

Our Super Bowl 40 win over Seattle was very similar to the Super Bowl 9 victory over the Vikings.  It was an inartistic game against an opponent we had virtually no history with.  Both Terry Bradshaw and Ben Roethlisberger completed only 9 passes as the Steeler run game carried the offense (158 yds rushing for Franco in SB9 and 181 for the team in SB40, including the 75 yd TD run by FWP).  Most significantly, both victories ended long draughts without a title, as SB9 was our first title of any kind and SB40 ended a 26 year title-less run.  We were not expected to win the Super Bowl in either of those years and pulled off big upsets en route: we were underdogs vs. the Vikings despite having upset the Raiders in the AFC championship game, and in '05 we were a six-seed when the playoffs began and KO'd the heavily favored Colts in the divisional round.  Each of those titles were treated by the national media as singular accomplishments unlikely to be repeated any time soon.  No one outside of Pittsburgh anticipated a dynasty.

(Even the beards were similar...)

However, we won it all again in SB10 by beating the Cowboys in a game (and perhaps rivalry) that was not very different from SB43.  The 1975 Cowboys and 2008 Cardinals both featured wide-open offenses and dangerous quarterbacks.  Both teams were more glitz than grit.  And though the Steelers did not yet enjoy a great rivalry with either, the game would lead to one.  Pittsburgh-Dallas became the marquee cross-conference rivalry of the decade, much like Pittsburgh-Arizona could in coming years (the Whisenhunt/Grimm situation having already laid the foundation for one).  As for the games, each featured huge moments by Steeler QB's (Bradshaw's bombs vs. Ben's two-minute drive) and even bigger ones by Steeler receivers (the Swann catches vs. Santonio's tap-dance).  There were memorable defensive moments by Steeler tough-guy linebackers (the Jack Lambert/Cliff Harris altercation vs. the James Harrison pick-six); and both games ended on turnovers by the opponent with the Steelers up four in the final seconds (Glen Edwards picking off Staubach in the end zone on SB10's final play vs. the Woodley sack and Kiesel fumble recovery to end SB43).  By knocking off "America's Team" in SB10, we beat the media darlings just as we did in SB43, where the two weeks leading up to the game were dominated by warm and fuzzy Kurt Warner stories.  As if these parallels aren't convincing enough, both games were played in the state of Florida and drew a 42 Nielsen rating for national television viewership. 

(Great catches at the expense of hapless defenders...)

So what does all of this suggest?  Well, Ben is just entering his prime (ala Bradshaw in the mid-70s); the defense, although not quite the Steel Curtain, is filled with tough guys and playmakers; like Chuck Noll, Mike Tomlin is a young, sharp head coach with a solid staff; the front office remains committed to financial sensibility (Max Starks aside) and to building through the draft; the Rooneys remain the best owners in pro football; and the fan base is more loyal and rabid than ever.  The parallels between that 70s dynasty and the one we're building now seem undeniable.  And though nothing is guaranteed in this sport, I see another two titles in the near future to match our run of four in the 70s. 

How about you?

After reading Blitz's post this morning about how much he misses football, I dug up this classic Jack Lambert story in an attempt to fill the void.  I don't know about you, but it immediately made me want to hit something.

Two months to training camp...                          

Don't Mess with Jack Lambert
By Phil Musick, The Pittsburgh Press

 

Miami, Jan. 18, 1976 -- It was, Jack Lambert thought, bad enough that Dallas had been leading all day and acting as though the Steelers didn't really invent defense back in 1972.

That was injury enough.

But accept insults? Never. So, when Dallas free safety Cliff Harris came up and taunted Roy Gerela by patting him on the helmet & congratulating him after he missed his second field goal try of the game, Lambert took what he deemed proper action.

He tried to unscrew Harris' head from his shoulders.

"I felt he jumped in Roy's face, and that it was uncalled for, and someone had to do something about it," Lambert said.

A brawl was averted, so Lambert did the next best thing. He started tearing up a Dallas offense already plagued by the ineffectiveness of the shotgun.

On the ensuing series, Lambert made three tackles, two of them resounding enough to register on the Richter scale, and the Steeler defenders caught fire.

"We were getting intimidated and we're supposed to be the intimidators," Lambert said, incredulity creeping into his voice at the thought of it. "So I decided to do something."

Earlier, Lambert had taken the situation less intensely, swatting at ex-teammate Preston Pearson, who'd objected to Lambert trying to bury him in the poly-turf surface on an incompletion.

"I felt him on my neck, and I just swiped at him," Lambert said. "Then he smiled at me and I smiled at him. He's a heck of a competitor and so am I."

Although Joe Greene credited him with being "our spark... our spearhead," Lambert denied he sought to be an inspiration.

"I wasn't trying to get anyone fired up," he said. "I just play emotionally. Jack Ham plays and never says a word. I yell and scream a lot."

"Sometimes they don't pay any attention to me."

But had he felt a change after his outburst at Harris and trying to singlehandedly dismantle the Cowboys on the next series?

"After that, we had some hitting," Lambert allowed.

He has a very definite idea of the game's purpose. You try to knock the other guy's head off; you do not in any way attempt to humiliate him.

"I tackle somebody as hard as I can and then I get up and go back to the huddle," he said. "I don't like the idea of people slapping our kicker or jumping up in his face and laughing when he misses a FG.

"That stuff you don't need."

If Lambert wouldn't admit he had provided a Steeler defense that held Dallas to a paltry 108 yards rushing with an inspirational lift, he hinted at it rather broadly.

"Sometimes it's like in hockey," he smiled. "You need to take a penalty to get things juiced up."

What really irritated Lambert were Cowboy insinuations that he had taken a few cheap shots at Dallas players. He implied that he had given tit for tat.

"I'll play clean if you want to play clean," he said. "If you don't, I'll play it that way. But I don't care what they're saying.

"I'm sitting in the winners' dressing room, they're in the losers."

A reporter gingerly approached the player he obviously thought was a real Steeler meanie. In fact, Lambert plays the game fearlessly, but is a good-natured young man stuck with an unfortunate stereotype as some sort of ogre in shoulderpads. Which, occasionally, he seems to foster.

"I play the way I think it should be played," he said. "It's nice to be able to take your frustrations out on a football field and stay out of trouble at home."

Just a tid-bit to throw out there on a Monday morning...

Peter King, whose work I love even though I don't always agree with him, has come out with an early NFL Power Ranking in which he puts the Steelers at #2 behind...

I'm sure you can guess.

Anyway, here's the link to the article (I hope it takes).  His thoughts on Big Ben's motivation for the upcoming season are encouraging.  As for his thoughts on the Steelers at #2, I'll let BTSC weigh in...

here's the link:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/index.html

it rained like hell today and there was nothing interesting on TV, so i took the opportunity to watch the super bowl again.  it gets better every time i watch it.  i'm still confused what the safeties were doing on fitzgerald's long touchdown.  i still can't believe we won with the way our O-line was manhandled.  i'm still thankful the cardinals didn't go no-huddle for the first 50 minutes.  and i still can't believe 7 made that throw to santonio.

for me, it's the greatest throw in super bowl history, and it isn't even close.  there are only two throws that can compete with it --  montana's slant to john taylor with :34 seconds to play to beat the bungles in '89 and eli manning's slant-fade to plaxico with :35 left to beat the pats in '08.  other throws may have been more artful (bradshaw's longballs in supes XIII and XIV) or more dramatic (the david tyree catch) but these were the only three to directly decide the outcome of the game.  so only they can be considered.

here's why ben's is the best: when you look at it, you see, amazingly, that santonio is his third read.  both montana and manning threw to their primary receivers.  montana holds the safety with his eyes for a count but a slant on the goal-line is a pre-snap read; he knows he's going to taylor the whole time.  ditto the slant-fade to burress.  eli makes a nice pump fake and the ball's thrown with nice touch.  but that play is called for burress in the huddle, and plax shakes ellis hobbes out of his shoes so bad a high school kid could have gotten him the ball.  ben's throw to santonio is not only the most brilliant of the three (fitting the ball into that spot was like flipping a quarter into a shot glass from twenty feet), it's the most professional.  his eyes go inside first to hines, then to moore in the flat, and finally, after sliding in the pocket and buying a final second, to santonio in the back corner.  the poise he shows is brilliant.  it's art.  it's the greatest throw in super bowl history.

anyway, if you find yourself with nothing to do one day, watch the game again.  watch ben on the final drive, and specifically on that final throw.  he's rare, our QB.  it's a pleasure to get to root for him. 

for about the last twenty years, or as long as ESPN has been televising it, i've been in front of a tv whenever the steelers have made their first draft pick.  most drafts i'm there when they make every pick, but the first rounder i never miss.  next to my son's birthday, it's the most important date on my calender.  there's something so interesting and intriguing about the process... i get to play GM and to think about how cool it would be to be drafted by the steelers and to consider how the team's shaping up for the coming fall.  i don't know if that makes me a dreamer or a die-hard or a geek.  probably a little of each.

each draft presents its own drama, but there are three that stand out for me.  i'll briefly share those stories, and i encourage you to share your own.  maybe we can get a little feel for what the Nation will be up to come saturday...

1999:  i'm with a bunch of my buddies at a local bar here in jersey.  it's all eagles fans, one more obnoxious than the next, but there's always a core group of black-and-gold and here it's no different.  we know the steelers are thinking receiver, and we all want them to take torry holt.  he goes off the board early, though, and at 13 we reach for troy edwards.  all the eagles fans (who had booed their own selection of donovan mcnabb, by the way, because they'd wanted ricky williams) start busting our balls.  "troy edwards?" they're laughing, "who the hell is troy edwards?"  but i've a few jack and cokes and i'm feeling good, so i screaming about how troy edwards caught like 20 balls against nebraska and i'll bet anyone in the bar $100 he makes the pro bowl before donovan mcnabb does.  no one takes the bet, thank god, but to this day when i show my face in there the bartender still calls me troy.

2004:  i can't take any more tommy maddox.  i know he's been comeback player of the year and all, but there are 3 promising QB's on the board and we draft 11th and we have to, i mean HAVE TO, get one of them.  i don't even care which one.  just no more tommy maddox.  when he moves around the pocket he looks like a new-born colt trying to figure out how to work its legs.  he's freakin' killing me.  so the draft begins, and manning and rivers go off the board right away.  i've seen some of roethlisberger, though, and my impression of him is he's gutsy.  he's gutsy, he's a leader and he his teammates seem to love him.  and that's who we need at QB, right?  a guy who will command the huddle.  not neal o'donnell.  not mike tomczak.  not kordell.  and sure as hell not tommy maddox.  we need this roethlisberger guy.  but  jacksonville is sitting there at #9, and mark brunnell is old and there's no one behind him.  they'll take him for sure.  they have to.  and then the card comes in...  and they take some receiver named reggie williams.  i can't believe it.  i'm stunned.  houston is up next, but they're invested in david carr, and when they pass i phone my friend ed and scream into his answering machine "TAKE F***ING ROETHLISBERGER!"  an hour later he calls me back and tells me his 80 year-old grandmother, who was sitting next to the machine when i called, almost had a heart attack.  but i don't care.  because we've got ben...

2006:  my parents are coming home from vacation in arizona and they ask if i can  pick them up from the airport.  the steelers have just won ring #5 and they pick 32nd, so i'm pretty sure i can make it home before they do.  i tell my parents ok and i make the hour-long drive to philly to get them.  we're twenty minutes from  home, though, and listening on the radio when it's announced that the steelers have just traded with the giants and are now on the clock.  i immediately exit the atlantic city expressway and drive to the nearest bar.  "i'll be right back," i tell my parents, and i duck inside just in time to catch the announcement that we've taken santonio holmes.  of course there's a group of guys in steelers jerseys there, and we high-five each other before i get back into the car and take my parents home.  maybe that makes me a bad person.  but damn, i love this team...

so who's got draft say stories to share?

sorry for the redundancy if anyone beats me to this... but james walker of espn is reporting that deebo's deal is for $51 mill over 6 seasons with $20 mill of it in potential bonuses.  wow.  i love james but i have to admit i'm a little conflicted over the amount.  we'll have to wait to see the whole language before we assess how it affects the cap for next year and in terms of who we can re-sign.  glad to have james in the fold for the rest of his career though.

thoughts?

there's an interesting list in yesterday's post-gazette showing the steelers free agent signings over the past 15 years.  here's the link: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09091/959735-66.stm.  after looking at it, i've compiled some quick thoughts on the best and worst pickups over that period.  just some food for thought...

best signings:

1.  james farrior (2002):  defensive signal-caller has brought leadership, stability and inspiration.  HUGE and very underrated part of the last two super bowl runs.  thank you, new york jets, for giving up on him...

2.  jeff hartings (2001):  did for the o-line precisely what farrior did for the defense.  i only wish his knees had held up so he could have stuck around a bit longer...

3.  kevin greene (1993):  not a typical steeler signing in that he was high-profile and high-maintenance, but man, what a bookend he was to greg lloyd.  without greene there may never have been a blitzburgh.  he did for that first cowher defense what woodley has done for tomlin's first d...

4. ryan clark (2006):  a perfect partner in crime for troy polamalu.  clark's smarts, discipline and intimidating presence allow dick lebeau to play mad scientist with troy.  and his comeback from losing his spleen is flat-out amazing...

5.  (tie) kimo von oelhoffen (2000) and mewelde moore (2008).  both were steady players on super bowl squads.  kimo was a great bookend for aaron smith and i will forever love moore for his blitz pickup on aaron francisco on the 3rd and 6 play early in the game-winning drive in the super bowl.  francisco had  ben dead to rights but moore stoned him, allowing ben to step into his throw and then into history.  those are the little things that win super bowls...

HONORABLE MENTION:  Norm Johnson ("Norm!"), Clint Kriewaldt, Wayne Gandy

worst signings --

most of these players barely made a blip on the steelers radar screen, which may or may not qualify them as bad signings (if they came cheaply and filled a need, they may have been more functional than bad).  of the ones who do stand out as bad, however...

1.  Duce Staley (2004):  I loved Duce when he was healthy, but what did we get out of him?  7 games and a couple of carries against the Jets in the Doug Brien playoff game?  My expectations for Duce were just so high.  I thought he was going to be a fabulous pickup.  I guess that's why running backs over 30 are an endangered species...

2.  Dwayne Washington (1998):  I will never forget that Dwayne Washington wore #20.  That's because every time a team threw deep down his sideline the first thing that came into the TV picture was the back of his jersey and that big #20 chasing some receiver who was five yards ahead of him. 

3.  Kent Graham (2000):  i remember this because my friend nick, who lived in japan at the time, wrote me to bust my balls.  when people mail you from asia to make fun of the guy you just signed, that's a bad signing.

4.  Sean Mahan (2007):  should have changed his name to Sean Manhandled.

5.  The Entire 1998 Free Agent Class

there you have it.  pick away, if you'd like...

i don't mean to beat a dead horse with all of this talk about the new rules that just passed, but two things stand out.

one, in case you haven't heard, there's a rule going into effect that says a defender who's been knocked to the ground must get back to his feet before he hits a quarterback.  the party line from the league is that this is necessary because QB's need to be protected from defenders lunging at their legs from a prone position (think kimo/carson palmer in '05 or bernard pollard/brady last year) while the QB's have their stride foot in the ground and are vulnerable to snapping a knee.  what this really is, of course, is a measure to protect the brady's and manning's of the league.  as bob kraft was quoted as saying, when a player like tom brady is lost for the season it's like going to a much anticipated movie only to find out the star is no longer in it.  how elitist is that!   not only is it naive to demand that defenders, who have been trained their entire lives to play with reckless abandon until the whistle blows, now stop themselves from making a play, it's demeaning to the other players.  the rule clearly says the following: star QB's are the most important players in the league and they need to be protected at any cost.  when jack lambert famously said that quarterbacks should wear dresses, he was seeing the future.  the worst part is that it's not just ANY quarterback for whom this rule was initiated.  it's the tom brady rule.  tom brady, whose name induces spontaneous orgasms at the league offices any time it comes up.  the only other person they would have made a rule this contrary to the nature of the game for is peyton manning.  no way they would have made the rule for a scrapper like ben.  when ben gets hit it's because he holds the ball too long or he keeps plays alive.  when brady, who stands statuesque in the pocket just begging to be knocked out (think about it: in his last two games he's been pummeled by the giants in the SB and KO'd by the chiefs... think it has something to do with the fact that HE NEVER FRICKIN' MOVES???) gets hit it's time to change the rules.  no one wants injuries but this is the most pretty boy rule i've ever seen.  it's a CFO's rule.  it's a rule for the chicks and the advertisers and the suits and the business school nerds who never screwed on a helmet.  and it's a rule that, like the hines ward rule, i hope the black and gold get flagged for early and often.

what makes this rule even more appalling is that, as peter king reported on NFL Network tonight, there likely will be a 17th or even 18th regular season game by 2011.  so let's clarify:  quarterbacks should be protected at all costs, even if the rules have to be changed to force defenders to defy their instincts and everything they've ever been taught about playing defense, but regular season games can be added to make more money for the suits even if it means the men in the trenches -- the men who make this game so brilliant and who define what football is -- get more concussions, more surgeries, more crippling injuries and die more at age 50 from complications from their playing days.  who's running this league?  AIG?  it really makes me sick...

Fighting off a bad cold and basically confined to the house for the day, i read the post about Amos Zereoue's restaurant and got to thinking about the Steelers with the best names over the past forty or so years.  With nothing more constructive to do, I went position by position and compiled a list, picking players who's names sounded either: a) cool  b) exotic  c) descriptive  or d) just plain funny.   this was a good exercise given all of the cold medication i'm on since many of the names made me laugh out loud.  so did the play of some of those who made the list.  feel free to weigh in on the selections...

OFFENSE:

T -- Justin Strzelczyk  (quick story: was out to the 'burgh with my buds from jersey for the steelers-patriots playoff game in '96  --  was driving the turnpike back to jersey when the blizzard hit... didn't make it past harrisburg -- ...  anyway, we're staying at the hilton, where the team is, and on the morning of the game we walk across the foot bridge to three rivers.  well, strzelczyk is walking about twenty feet ahead of us.  he's listening to a walkman and air drumming the entire way across the bridge and make cymbal-crash gestures and noises at the end of long rolls.  my friends and i got so pumped up by this that we started head-butting one another.  this was at 8:30 in the morning, by the way)...

G --  Jim Clack  (great 70s name)...

C -- Dermotti Dawson  (miss him!)...

G -- Carlton Haselrig  (just sounds like a wrestler, doesn't it?)...

T -- Tunch Ilkin  (if you got in a scrap at a bar with a guy named tunch ilkin, wouldn't you just back off?  even if the dude was like 5'4?  i don't care... any dude named tunch ilkin can mess you up)...

TE  -- Jay Riemersma  (the matt spaeth of five years ago)...

QB -- with apologies to Mr. Roethlisberger, i gotta go with Bubby Brister.  has a guy ever looked more like his name than Bubby Brister?

TB -- with apologies to Frenchy Fuqua and Famous Amos, it's gotta be Fuamatu-Ma'afala.  when my son was three he went out for Halloween as Fu, in full steelers uni with Fu jersey and afro.  That was a killer costume...

WRs -- hard to leave Yancey Thigpen out, but Louis Lipps and Weegie Thompson have him beat...  (hey, I'll bet Weegie would sign on the cheap to take Nate W's #3 receiver spot)...

DEFENSE

DE --  Dwight White and Brentson Buckner.  Dwight White because the name and the man were both pure poetry.  As for Brentson Buckner...  I hated that dude.  First, his was named Brentson, which makes him sound like a spoiled New England tennis geek, and second he was lazy as hell.  I put him on the list just so I could make fun of him...

NT -- Kimo von Oelhoffen.  I know he wasn't a nose tackle but that's a nose tackle's name...

OLB -- Rod Breedlove.  Found him on the team's 1965 roster.  wish he was on the '75 team, though, because i picture him with sideburns and a porn mustache...

OLB -- Loren Toews.  Gay-est Steeler name since William Gay...

ILBs -- Hardy Nickerson and Levin Kirkland.  Those two bad-asses were named Hardy and Levon?  Funny...

C -- Chidi Iwuoma.  say that like twenty times fast.  it's better if you're on a lot of cold medication...

C -- Ricardo Colclough.  on the list because i wanted to make fun of him, too.  damn, he sucked.  and i think he's still in the league somehow.  who does he have compromising pictures of?

S -- Lethon Flowers.  Thankfully for him Elvis Patterson got the nickname "Toast" first...

S -- Troy Polamalu.  God bless him...

SPECIAL TEAMS

KR --  Najeh Davenport.  The original Mike Tomlin "Big Dudes Who Return Kickoffs For No Particular Reason" designee...

PR -- Antwan Randle-El.  Run right, run left, run right, run left, run right, run left, tackled for one yard gain...  but we loved you Eight-Deuce!

P --  None.  I hate punters.

K -- None.  Ditto..