Evaluating "That's How We Did It In Pittsburgh"

[ChandlerCard]

It's no secret that since coming on board Whiz and Co. have used the Steelers model as a direction for their team. I give them credit for wanting to model the organization after another whose relatively consistent performance over the past decade we Cards fans wouldn't mind having. I also give them credit for not making a sudden switch, going with the strength of players like KW when different from the Steeler model.

But I wonder if this approach is breaking apart just when it should be succeeding? The organization has made significant progress, but I'm concerned by:

- Depth of Indoctrination. Every year we see challenges with players buying into the system, coming together, etc. Pittsburgh has had a longer history with a system, and while our staff may believe we are following their model I'm not sure they've realized how much they need to emphasize things at a basic level every year. "Same Old Cardinals" is too close to everyone's memories, and even rookies this year know of our unfortunate reputation, whereas the staff may believe that by going about things as "we" [Steelers] have always done it is sufficient. Whiz alluded to this in an interview last week, pointing out the necessity of staying the course and recalling the successes we've had. But is this course clearly mapped out for players, and are they held accountable? Or are we assuming we know the course because that's what the staff has done for so many years in other organizations?

- Exceptions possibly due to politics. I don't recall a Steeler organization in recent memory without an OC. What is it that elevates Grimm to assistant head coach, not to mention run game coordinator, expecting his name to come up when coaching vacancies exist around the league, and yet keeps him from playcalling? And if not Grimm, someone else? Or is he too close to Whiz, who doesn't want to hurt his friend by bringing in another outsider that Grimm would have dotted line responsibilities to?

- Taking coaching strengths into account. We can try all we want to emulate the Steeler defense, but if our DC doesn't have the same strengths as their DC it won't work. If our DC is suited to teaching the Steeler way, are his strengths being leveraged or is he hamstrung trying to imitate another approach?

- Overly relying on ex-Steelers past their prime. I agree that it helps to get veterans who are winners and who know the system. But how much are they being relied upon for their leadership in showing the "way" to everyone else?

Thoughts?

 

[Shane]

I think people overreact. Thats what I think.

The Steelers have had some pretty bad seasons over their "consistent" run. Even under Cowher. It happens. Nothing more or less.

Had some pretty putrid QB's too.

 

[earthsci]

I think people overreact. Thats what I think.

The Steelers have had some pretty bad seasons over there "consistent" run. Even under Cowher. It happens. Nothing more or less.

This.

 

[bg7brd]

I think people overreact. Thats what I think.

The Steelers have had some pretty bad seasons over there "consistent" run. Even under Cowher. It happens. Nothing more or less.

Had some pretty putrid QB's too.

 

[conraddobler]

I think people overreact. Thats what I think.

The Steelers have had some pretty bad seasons over their "consistent" run. Even under Cowher. It happens. Nothing more or less.

Had some pretty putrid QB's too.

Yes they did with pretty rock solid defenses to cover that most of the time.

The Pittsburg model is fine if you have a good / great draft ALL the time, since it's predicated on losing a lot of people to FA.

We got the losing players part down, but bringing in Pittsburg castoffs as our FA is working out swell aint it?

IMO the whole thing will get worse not better because we suck at player evaluation, JMO.

 

[CardLogic]

The Pittsburg model...

Would that be Pittsburg Kansas; Pittsburg, Texas; or Pittsburg, California?

conrad is right, Pittsburgh has been terrific at selecting players that fit their system... They have an excellent "GM" - Kevin Colbert, Director of Football Operations. He has been there a long time, and does a great job!

 

[Mitch]

It's no secret that since coming on board Whiz and Co. have used the Steelers model as a direction for their team. I give them credit for wanting to model the organization after another whose relatively consistent performance over the past decade we Cards fans wouldn't mind having. I also give them credit for not making a sudden switch, going with the strength of players like KW when different from the Steeler model.

But I wonder if this approach is breaking apart just when it should be succeeding? The organization has made significant progress, but I'm concerned by:

- Depth of Indoctrination. Every year we see challenges with players buying into the system, coming together, etc. Pittsburg has had a longer history with a system, and while our staff may believe we are following their model I'm not sure they've realized how much they need to emphasize things at a basic level every year. "Same Old Cardinals" is too close to everyone's memories, and even rookies this year know of our unfortunate reputation, whereas the staff may believe that by going about things as "we" [Steelers] have always done it is sufficient. Whiz alluded to this in an interview last week, pointing out the necessity of staying the course and recalling the successes we've had. But is this course clearly mapped out for players, and are they held accountable? Or are we assuming we know the course because that's what the staff has done for so many years in other organizations?

- Exceptions possibly due to politics. I don't recall a Steeler organization in recent memory without an OC. What is it that elevates Grimm to assistant head coach, not to mention run game coordinator, expecting his name to come up when coaching vacancies exist around the league, and yet keeps him from playcalling? And if not Grimm, someone else? Or is he too close to Whiz, who doesn't want to hurt his friend by bringing in another outsider that Grimm would have dotted line responsibilities to?

- Taking coaching strengths into account. We can try all we want to emulate the Steeler defense, but if our DC doesn't have the same strengths as their DC it won't work. If our DC is suited to teaching the Steeler way, are his strengths being leveraged or is he hamstrung trying to imitate another approach?

- Overly relying on ex-Steelers past their prime. I agree that it helps to get veterans who are winners and who know the system. But how much are they being relied upon for their leadership in showing the "way" to everyone else?

Thoughts?

I think you wrote a stellar post, ChandlerCard. Great points. Kudos!

 

[Duckjake]

I think people overreact. Thats what I think.

The Steelers have had some pretty bad seasons over their "consistent" run. Even under Cowher. It happens. Nothing more or less.

Had some pretty putrid QB's too.

Cowher had only 3 losing seasons in 15 years. Tomlin has had none. That's 18.5 years with only 3 losing seasons.

Their defense has been ranked in the top ten 11 years in a row.

The losing records were 6-10, 6-10, and 7-9.

 

[seesred]

WE are not the Steelers. We are the Cardinals. We never had a Bradshaw or Rothenberger. We are still looking for that running back. Johnny Johnson was the last one that might have made it. THe Bean is our only hope. We had Warner for what 2 1/2 seasons. We won. We have a great fan base, but not like the Steelers! If we don't get a QB next year watch how they run. The Steelers have been in Pittsburgh forever. Our Cardinals are still trying to build something here. I hope that we can be the Cardinals a team everyone wants to be.


GBR
40

 

[oaken1]

The problem is,....this coach was not making the decisions in Pittsburgh.

 

[Catfish]

Chandler Card-----you are definitely a man of substance. You make some terrifically wonderful points. We DON'T have Pittsburgh's GM, and Whiz tries his darndest to get Rod Graves to bring in players who will carry on ' how it should be done'. Many are ex-Steelers who know the system. Others are seasoned veterans, (some even pro-bowlers), who have been through the wars and know what is what, (at least to Whiz). You can see that with his opting to keep Berry and Okeafor last year, and bringing back Bryan Robinson, and FA Joey Porter this year. All of them were very knowlegable players, but sadly, all of them lacked the athleticism they all had at one point in their careers.

But to Whiz, knowlege seems to trump athleticism. Remember, he benched Daryl Washington this week for being lined up in the wrong spot on one play in the Tampa Game. He started Gerald Hayes instead, despite the fact that Washington had 10 tackles and a sack in the TAmpa game. That is also why he starts Bryan Robinson at the nose, and inactivates Watson. Robinson is the consumate fountain of knowlege when it comes to playing the nose. He is always in the right place at the right time to make plays-----despite his physical inability to actually make them anymore. He never is lined up where he shouldn't be-----yet he isn't physical enough to make plays anymore.

The same can also be said of Adrian Wilson, a multiple time pro-bowler who Whis loves at Strong Safety. Here is a guy with 'papers'. What Whiz doesn't consider however, is that Wilson loves to hit. That was why the fans voted him to the pro bowl, not for his coverage ability. He knocked people out. Whiz likes to use him in coverage deep, something that Wilson detests. When Whiz reviews fillm, Wilson is always lined up to make plays in coverage, he just doesn't make many. If Whis really wanted to use Wilson, he would bring him into the box and blitz him as often as is reasonable. Wilson excells at this, and would certainly help our ineffective pass rush. In coverage, the more he gets called out for poor performance, the sooner he will lay back just enough to lay a huge hit on an unprotected receiver just as the ball arrives, and more than likely will be suspended for it, because of his prior history. Whiz is not thinking in terms of Wilson's likes and dislikes, he is thinking in terms of having a pro-bowl strong safety who is always lined up in the right place to make plays.

When you consider Whiz's propensity for doing this, and then couple it with the points that you make, one can see just how badly off course we are becoming. Yet all the while, Whiz is returning to the films to find out how come we aren't making all those plays we should be making.

 

[mrbyte]

Great post Cardchandler and catfish!!
For me the thing is, I think Whiz is caught himself up no mans land he wants to be Pittsburgh and drafts for a tough smash mouth running game but he cannot leave the success he had with Kurt and the pass happy days the result is we are not one or the other and we are asking our players to play to there weaknesses not strengths

 

[LarryStalling]

Remember that Pittsburgh did not hire Whiz when they had the chance. Maybe their system is not broken?

 

[splitsecond]

I think people overreact. Thats what I think.

The Steelers have had some pretty bad seasons over their "consistent" run. Even under Cowher. It happens. Nothing more or less.

Had some pretty putrid QB's too.

For example, their 6-10 season in 2003, which was followed immediately by a 15-1 season in 2004.

 

[Duckjake]

For example, their 6-10 season in 2003, which was followed immediately by a 15-1 season in 2004.

That was only the Steelers 3rd losing season in the last 18 years.

Meanwhile last year was only the Cards 3rd winning season in the last 25 years.

I'll take the former over the latter.

Like Jeff the Shark said we want long term success.

So who is going to be our Ben Roethlisberger and take us from 11-5 this season to 15-1 next year?

 

[Cardiac]

I concur that this is a quality post Chandlercard. No hatred or phenom to be found, just honest questions.

I believe that most (all) new HC's from an outside organization bring in explayers and coaches. How many ex Cards went to KC with Haley? How many times did we see Parcells bring in his guys when he changed teams (again and again).

Brian St Piere wasn't recruited because he was an obvious talent but because he knew the offense and would help with the installation. Steve Morey was an excellent ST's player and had an incredible work ethic. I can't think of an ex steeler that was brought in that didn't perform at a decent level or better. Well maybe St Piere but he really was only the 3rd string QB.

I agree that drafting well is necessary but that could be said about any system in the modern NFL. Acquiring FA's and trading for players is only a small part of the equation.

Is Graves the issue? We do seem to have a very talented personnel guy in Keim. We will know better in the next couple of years how the Whiz regime has done with drafting players. Buster and Cody were the only real misses so far. Let's see how the rest develop before we make our final decision.

Whiz did also experience Gibbs during his NFL career and I believe that he uses some of his philosophies as well.

Inquiring minds want to know why Whiz is calling so many pass plays when our QB's stink and we had injuries at the WR position and the O-line appears to be built to run the ball and (I'm sure I'm forgetting some).

A team must be able to pass the ball to be a realistic threat to succeed in the playoffs.

Our O-line is gelling and unfortunately still a work in progress.

Teams are stacking the box to take away the run and have been rather successful at this.

Our Defense is very inconsistent and at times gives up numerous long drives in a game.

TO's have created game plans to be scuttled early in several games.

I don't think that Whiz hates to run the ball. Any team must have some sort of decent running game to be a threat in the playoffs. At this point in time teams have to respect our passing game enough to give the running game a chance. Even the Vikings went against there tendancy and brought more defenders into the box then they normally do.
The reasoning is stifle the Cards running game because their QB play has been awful. They Run Blitz on the way to the QB.

I don't agree with the run into a wall countless times a game just to say we are running the ball. To me that's giving up and not trying to win. Keep working with your O-line but setting them up for failure by running into 8/9 men in the box non stop is not a recipe for success.

We have had some very nice drives and most of those were pass heavy. IMWO these drives illustrate what this Offense could be if we had better play from the QB position. That's why Whiz "makes excuses" for every other unit and or position but flatly states we need better play from our QB's.

I've rambled on enough.

 

[TJ]

That was only the Steelers 3rd losing season in the last 18 years.

Meanwhile last year was only the Cards 3rd winning season in the last 25 years.

I'll take the former over the latter.

Like Jeff the Shark said we want long term success.

So who is going to be our Ben Roethlisberger and take us from 11-5 this season to 15-1 next year?

All this is pointing out is that even the best franchises have losing seasons. The Cardinals has had tremendous turnover, with the biggest coming at QB. By all intents and purposes, this team is no better than 8-8 (I think Ive said this 100 times). Right now, It's about how we rebound the following season.

Too many on the board are calling for Whis' head on a platter when in fact, our situation is not unique. Most NFL franchises with the exception of the Lions, Browns, etc. go through ebbs and flows. We just have to learn to accept this as reality and not come to silly conclusions such as firing Whisenhunt, the most successful AZ Cards coach, unequivocally.

If we rebound next season and are a double digit win team, then 2010 means nothing. If the following season is bunk, then we can press the panic button.

 

[JeffGollin]

I don't buy into the premise (that Wiz and the Cardinals wanted to build a carbon-copy of an earlier Steelers team).

Those teams were good and, no doubt, the Cardinals or any other team would love to have a Steel Curtain or Lambert or Ham or Bettis or Woodson or their smashmouth O-lines etc.

But Wiz's MO since he's gotten here has been to "live off the land"; to make lemon-aid out of lemons. To go to a no-huddle and Warner when Leinart wasn't getting it done. To start off with a 4 -3 when he didn't have the horses needed to execute a 4-3.

That's not to say that there are many elements of those Steeler teams he'd like to steer toward, but Wiz simply isn't close to having the right horses - & he knows it.

He doesn't have a Steeler-type QB (nor does he have a slash-backup).

Beanie sure ain't Bettis (at least not yet).

Our O-line is far from being smashmouth.

Our LB's aren't nearly as big or physical.

And so, Wiz works with what he has. (And that's OK because, to resemble any of those Steeler teams will involve a lot of luck, front office scouting and negotiating skill and somewhere around 5 years to get there).

 

[Shane]

For example, their 6-10 season in 2003, which was followed immediately by a 15-1 season in 2004.

Your right. We could go 6-10 this year. Then turn around and go 11-5 next year and you all would still moan and complain because we didnt go 15-1.

:number1:

 

[Duckjake]

Your right. We could go 6-10 this year. Then turn around and go 11-5 next year and you all would still moan and complain because we didnt go 15-1.

:number1:

No you would moan and complain because the reason we went 11-5 was that Wells ran for 2000 yards and 18 TDs while TH sat on the bench.



But everybody needs to stop complaining because we are going to be, not the Steelers, but the Titans of 2009, and win 6 of our last 8, finish 9-7 and get revenge against the Bucs in the wildcard round at UPS.

(Note it's a good thing it is University of Phoenix and not Phoenix University)

 

[Duckjake]

BTW: The Cards were 11-5 last season. That game against Green Bay in week 17 doesn't count because we took the day off and then kta the next week so the second game replaces the first.