NFL Week 2 - Seattle Seahawks (0-1) at Pittsburgh Steelers (0-1)
-
BR1986FB
Before or after being dismantled by Baltimore?killer_ewok;894479 wrote:2 of the 5 CBS NFL analysts picked the Steelers to go to the Super Bowl. -
killer_ewok
BR1986FB;894482 wrote:Before or after being dismantled by Baltimore?
Before, of course. I mean, if it's silly for non to change his prediction after one week why would it make sense for them to? LOL
Anyways, I heard the "old and slow" stuff after the first preseason game against the Redskins. Then they looked pretty damn good against Philly the following week. Another way to look at it....a "veteran" club isn't going to be mentally shattered after one game - ass kicking or not.
Two ways to look at the "age" factor. -
BR1986FBI have no doubt that they "can" bounce back but at that age, time isn't in their favor. They do have a young, fast, potent offense but that defense is looking at the downside of their careers.
-
Gblock
considering it was 7 turnovers im not sure i would blame the defenseBR1986FB;894494 wrote:I have no doubt that they "can" bounce back but at that age, time isn't in their favor. They do have a young, fast, potent offense but that defense is looking at the downside of their careers. -
killer_ewok
Which is why hitting homeruns with draft picks like LaMarr Woodley and Lawrence Timmons and then locking them up long term is crucial. I'm hoping Cam Heyward follows suit in a year or two. Ziggy Hood showed some signs of being a good player too. All young players. I trust the Steelers FO as they've had far more hits than misses.
-
BR1986FB
Point taken but Baltimore's offense made that D look like they were walking in quicksand. I was stunned that Rice almost had 100 yards rushing at the half. Polamalu has looked like shit in the last 2 games he's played. I know he was dinged up in the Super Bowl but is he completely healthy now?Gblock;894497 wrote:considering it was 7 turnovers im not sure i would blame the defense -
Automatik
Of course they will, because it gives you an idea that they actually know wtf they are talking about. This isn't the first time I've heard the Pitts D labeled as "old." From what I took from the game is Pittsburgh was actually playing ok, then the mistakes started, snowballed, then a full on implosion/beatdown. It happens...in all sports at all levels. Now the real test is how will they respond, and from similar situations in the past, the outcome is usually positive.BR1986FB;894441 wrote:That was when they were younger. You look at these national analysts/pundits and almost EVERY one is saying Pittsburgh looks "old and slow" on defense. It won't show this week because Seattle just flat out blows but if the trend continues they'll get steamrolled by the better teams in the league.
We have a lonnggg way too go and IMO the division is still and will be for a while, a two team race. Pittsburgh's schedule is pretty favorable this year. I expect them to fully be in the playoff race barring any major injuries.
As for the comments about Cleveland's game. That was a game where they absolutely had to "take care of business." I was surprised that they lost. They showed a lot of positives in the preseason, while I felt Cincy looked awful. Starting off the year with a win over your weak in state rival obviously would have built confidence going into this week. Then you end of losing in terrible fashion and its all out the door. -
Non
I think you might be reading too much into it.BR1986FB;894504 wrote:Point taken but Baltimore's offense made that D look like they were walking in quicksand. I was stunned that Rice almost had 100 yards rushing at the half. Polamalu has looked like **** in the last 2 games he's played. I know he was dinged up in the Super Bowl but is he completely healthy now?
Green Bay is a great team. Baltimore is close to great if they're not already. Baltimore has a lot of talent and they're also a team that knows the Steelers well. They were motivated the entire offseason to beat the Steelers after losing to them in the playoffs. Then they got them at home the first game.
Most teams don't have the firepower of a Green Bay or Baltimore.
I think the Steelers will be fine as long as they don't have a rash of injuries.
A few players they probably need to be legitimately concerned about are Farrior and Harrison. Farrior is coming to the end. Larry Foote is a solid replacement but they might want to work in Stevenson Sylvester a bit more early in the season. He's more of an up and comer. Harrison is dealing with the back issues and though he's still effective, it's not at the consistent level as he's been the past few years. They need to keep Jason Worilds in the rotation with Harrison and Woodley. -
Non
They did lose Willie Colon again. Probably for the season.
Rookie Marcus Gilbert will start at right tackle. -
Non
Browns fans and others were saying the same thing before last season that the Steelers were old and on the decline. They went out and won the division again and made the Super Bowl.
-
killer_ewok
Non;894522 wrote:They did lose Willie Colon again. Probably for the season.
Rookie Marcus Gilbert will start at right tackle.
Yeah, I posted earlier on here that Flozell turned down the Steelers because of money. -
Non
The point is still the same.Raw Dawgin' it;894463 wrote:Really? It's not? Read that sentence and try and convince yourself that you don't sound like an idiot.
The Browns need to win a lot of those types of games if they're going to have a 10-win season, which is often where you need to be to have a shot at the playoffs. -
BR1986FB
We're not the only ones saying it. See my comment about the national analysts.Non;894526 wrote:Browns fans and others were saying the same thing before last season that the Steelers were old and on the decline. They went out and won the division again and made the Super Bowl. -
Non
I'd rather go with the rookie since it's early in the year. Gilbert will have some struggles but it's a good opportunity for him to settle in. Better that it's right tackle than left tackle.killer_ewok;894528 wrote:Yeah, I posted earlier on here that Flozell turned down the Steelers because of money. -
Non
That's why I said "and others." I realize some others, including national analysts, are looking at them as on the decline after that performance.BR1986FB;894530 wrote:We're not the only ones saying it. See my comment about the national analysts.
It's possible but I would wait and see. I mean they could lose twice to Baltimore and a few other games and still go 11-5 or something like that. There are a lot of games on the schedule that the Steelers should be the favored team. They just happened to play one of the best teams on their schedule the first game. It was a blowout but it really doesn't make a difference if they had lost 16-13 or 35-7. They're still 0-1 and you don't know how that performance is going to carry over considering the other opponents are not all going to be as strong as Baltimore. -
BR1986FBOh, I think they could easily go 11-5 or 10-6 but definitely don't see championship material. On offense, perhaps...defense no way.
The earlier comment that was made about their showing against the Eagles in preseason was a "meh" for me because the Eagles O-Line absolutely sucks. The Browns who have NO pass rush were in Vick's face all night. -
Non
That's one of the toughest games on the schedule every year. I look at it as a huge bonus if the Steelers win at Baltimore. Not everything is as it seems. If that was the fifth game of the season, the Steelers could've been 4-0 heading in and then dropped to 4-1 and still in good shape. The next few weeks they play Seattle, at Indianapolis and at Houston. I'll take 2-2 but it would not surprise me if they win all three, including at Houston.
-
killer_ewok
Bottom line...It was one game. We'll see if it's a trend in the coming weeks. Personally, I think they just got their asses kicked by their rival who must've finally got pissed off enough to step up and deliver a huge blow. They might still have to find a way to beat the Steelers in the playoffs. Now THAT is a trend.
-
Non
We'll probably agree to disagree on this point, but I think in most instances when you make the playoffs you then have a chance to get hot and make a run.BR1986FB;894536 wrote:Oh, I think they could easily go 11-5 or 10-6 but definitely don't see championship material. On offense, perhaps...defense no way.
Not always, like Kansas City last year was out of their league and had no shot. But the New Englands, Baltimores, Pittsburghs, teams that are often in the playoffs, they all can go on the road and be in tough situations and win. -
Non
Agree 100 percent on this post.killer_ewok;894541 wrote:Bottom line...It was one game. We'll see if it's a trend in the coming weeks. Personally, I think they just got their asses kicked by their rival who must've finally got pissed off enough to step up and deliver a huge blow. They might still have to find a way to beat the Steelers in the playoffs. Now THAT is a trend. -
Heretic
Yeah. One game means nothing in the grand scheme of things. During Ben's first year as a starter during the mid-season, they made New England and Philly look pathetic in back-to-back weeks. Those two teams wound up in the Super Bowl. Pittsburgh was just a speed bump for the Pats when it really mattered.Non;894526 wrote:Browns fans and others were saying the same thing before last season that the Steelers were old and on the decline. They went out and won the division again and made the Super Bowl.
Obviously, Baltimore made a statement, but a week one statement is all that it is. Depending on how things unfold, it could wind up being significant or it could wind up meaning nothing. That's what makes this week's game important. A good showing against Seattle does a lot to negate that one bad game. A blah showing could help things along the way to snowballing into a big pile of shit.
Kind of like how losing to a team without its HoF quarterback after losing at home to a team widely considered horrible could lead to a projected 6-8 win team winding up as the frontrunner in the race to the first pick in the draft...while winning could keep them on the fast track to average-ville. -
killer_ewok
Heretic;894549 wrote:Yeah. One game means nothing in the grand scheme of things. During Ben's first year as a starter during the mid-season, they made New England and Philly look pathetic in back-to-back weeks. Those two teams wound up in the Super Bowl. Pittsburgh was just a speed bump for the Pats when it really mattered.
Obviously, Baltimore made a statement, but a week one statement is all that it is. Depending on how things unfold, it could wind up being significant or it could wind up meaning nothing. That's what makes this week's game important. A good showing against Seattle does a lot to negate that one bad game. A blah showing could help things along the way to snowballing into a big pile of shit.
Kind of like how losing to a team without its HoF quarterback after losing at home to a team widely considered horrible could lead to a projected 6-8 win team winding up as the frontrunner in the race to the first pick in the draft...while winning could keep them on the fast track to average-ville.
LOL. Very true. -
BR1986FB
I wouldn't expect it to be a trend. Except for Houston their next three games will be cakewalks.killer_ewok;894541 wrote:Bottom line...It was one game. We'll see if it's a trend in the coming weeks. Personally, I think they just got their asses kicked by their rival who must've finally got pissed off enough to step up and deliver a huge blow. They might still have to find a way to beat the Steelers in the playoffs. Now THAT is a trend. -
DeyDurkie5
I'm glad to see you base the entire season on one game, really adds credibility to your opinions.Non;894337 wrote:I'm encouraged by this:
It's early but it would appear the playoff caliber teams in the AFC are...
New England
New York Jets
Baltimore
Houston
San Diego
after that the 6th team is really up for grabs
maybe there will be a surprise, like a Buffalo who looked good in Week 1, but Pittsburgh still looks like the best of the rest
Buffalo-maybe
Miami-no
Cincinnati-maybe but probably not
Cleveland-no
Jacksonville-no
Tennessee-no
Indianapolis-maybe but probably not without Manning
Oakland-no, that was a lousy game, two bad teams one had to win
Denver-no
Kansas City-no -
Heretic
No different than people mentioning how the Steelers look old or might be in trouble based on one game.DeyDurkie5;894642 wrote:I'm glad to see you base the entire season on one game, really adds credibility to your opinions.