Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Football: You know what I'm about to talk about....

FortKnox (169099) writes | more than 9 years ago

User Journal 49

I'm about to talk about the rookie of the year (yup, he's already earned that honor) Ben Roethlisburger.
I'm about to talk about the streak that really matters, Ben Roethlisburger... no losses in any NFL game he has started.
If you don't know what I'm talking about, here's a link.I'm about to talk about the rookie of the year (yup, he's already earned that honor) Ben Roethlisburger.
I'm about to talk about the streak that really matters, Ben Roethlisburger... no losses in any NFL game he has started.
If you don't know what I'm talking about, here's a link.

I was SO DAMN SICK of hearing about "Well, here's what's happened since the past lost last time" and "Everytime since the streak started that the Pats got scored against, they march down the field and score." Want to know the next things those analysts will say "The last time the Pats had any sort of screw up, the Steelers caused it."

They were utterly dominated. Dominated on the ground, dominated in the air, dominated defensively (once the Steelers had a giant lead, they just started playing soft to avoid big plays and keep the lead).

Now, baldass_newbie and buffer_overflowed... tell me you aren't quaking in your boots that your iggles have to come into Pittsburgh to play the giant killers. They are Baltimores defense (that you had a tough time with) and an offense capable of giving the Pats a thrashing. Oh, and the Pats had to STOP blitzing Big Ben, cause everytime they did, he lit up their secondary...

Fear.... be afraid.....

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

*Bows to FK* (1)

SamTheButcher (574069) | more than 9 years ago | (#10682308)

Nice work. I didn't see any of the game, but was surprised.

Credit where due. :)

My berds eat steel (1)

blinder (153117) | more than 9 years ago | (#10682476)

My Eagles are going to be adding steel to their diet next week.

watch out.. 8-0, here we come!

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

buffer-overflowed (588867) | more than 9 years ago | (#10683415)

Blinder-man, aren't you supposed to cheer for the Ravens? :-P

Oh and FK, if they start choking, I'll be booing them*. Other than that, see above post, 8-0. It's a coming.

* - We got moxy in Philly holmes.

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

blinder (153117) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685226)

d00d, down with the ravens! that degenerate group of criminals :D

been a iggles fan for 22 years... yeah for me

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685383)

Thanks for helping put distance between the Steelers and the Ravens. Absolutely loved the dance T.O. did after his touchdown- not exactly a fan of the criminal Ray Lewis (think he is over-rated for one thing).

The Eagles at Steelers game should be interesting. I am still not sold on the Steelers being legit but from what I have seen from the Eagles a truly objective Eagles' fan would have to say the same thing about the Eagles.

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684756)

Lets see, the Eagles have trouble defending the run and the Steelers just rushed for 221 yards. Big Ben will play better than Boller. The Eagles' record is a very soft 7-0. The best team that the Eagles have beaten so far are the Vikings- a non-playoff team last year. The Steelers just knocked-off the defending Super Bowl champs.

I applaude on you avoiding the Jim Johnson is going to really screw with your rookie QB rhetoric.

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

LordBodak (561365) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685557)

And the Vikings just embarassed themselves against the Giants.

The Steeler D is not as good as the Ravens D, but they are coming into their own. For the first time in years they finally have an offense effective enough to motivate the D. The Steelers will run all over the Eagles and Big Ben will knock off the Eagles.

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685864)

For total defense the NFL uses yards allowed and using that the Steelers are 6th while the Ravens are 7th- so using that the Steelers are better. The Ravens though allow fewer points though. What is more telling? I don't know but the Steelers have more wins.

I really don't understand your "offense effective enough to motivate the defense" comment. Just three years ago they were the league leaders in rushing and scoring points like they were going out of style towards the end of the year. Then two years ago when they brought in Maddox he was throwing the rock for scores with regularity. Last year the interceptions caught up with Maddox and the offense. Offense has not exactly been the problem with the Steelers but rather ball control- for the Patriot game they had the ball for 42 minutes and 58 seconds. Actually I think ball control is the problem with most teams. Too many teams have a quick strike offense that does not control the tempo of the game- this is why teams with 100 yard rushers are losing more than usual.

I wish the Steelers and Big Ben luck against the Eagles and hope they win. It should be a great game.

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

LordBodak (561365) | more than 9 years ago | (#10686268)

The Steelers offense has always been streaky under Cowher. They do things well but other things poorly, or do everything right for a few weeks and then fall apart when it counts. The offense this season since Maddox was hurt has been extremely consistent, they haven't let anything rattle them, and they certainly performed when it counted yesterday.

As for D, I think the only worry is the injuries up front for the Steelers. But they certainly got to Brady yesterday. The Pats didn't bother to run the ball though, and I don't understand that-- knowing the Steelers starting nose tackle was out, why didn't they try to move the ball on the ground?

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 9 years ago | (#10686404)

Two reasons:
1.) They did try, but weren't getting anywhere with Kevin Faulk (Corey Dillon was injured and out for the game).
2.) They fell into a 21-3 deficit in the first quarter. Had to fight to get back.

The Iggles won't be able to run on the Steelers, either, but I worry about containing McNabb. He'll be the reason the Steelers lose, if they lose.

And Chris Hoke is a pretty good backup. Even got to Brady a couple times. He's no Casey Hampton, but is definately salvagable for the position.

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

LordBodak (561365) | more than 9 years ago | (#10686545)

I know Dillon was hurt, but Faulk was the starter last season. Do they really have that little faith in him?

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10687405)

I have to agree with you that the Eagles should not be able to run on the Steelers and McNabb does scare me. Not so much about containing him but tackling and sacking him- the Steelers seem to have trouble with the big strong mobile QB. I can't count how many times the Steelers had McNair wrapped up only to him escape and make a play.

The test for Hoke will come against Baltimore, Buffalo, the New York teams, and hopefully the playoffs. Hopefully Bell will come back soon to help out and be who he was as a rookie.

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10686435)

Well the Steelers' offense has been streaky under Cowher but they have had some good offenses; especially in 2001. I just did not understand the "for the first time in years" part of the comment more than anything- I should of been more specific I guess.

As for the D and injuries in general, this is the NFL no team is ever truly 100% healthy. Yes Casey Hampton anchors the defense and is a huge loss but the Patriots had injuries also. It has been awhile since I have been a fan of the secondary but we are depleted back there too. As for the Patriots not running- you got me. I know there feature back, Dillon, was out but still they have other backs. I don't know why the Yankees' and Cardnials' allowed Schilling to pitch without testing his mobility either.

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

curtisk (191737) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685157)

hell yeah brother! The eagles are on a tear this season...

BTW,How'd a Baltimore guy end up liking the Eagles? No Ravens or 'Skins love? Ah hell, this area is a big mix with teams too close to each other...

Re:My berds eat steel (1)

blinder (153117) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685338)

heh, i've only been here since '98... but i grew up mostly in PA... and in 1982 i opted to be an Eagles fan. Have been ever since :D

Red Sox Nation doesn't care (1)

John Harrison (223649) | more than 9 years ago | (#10682477)

in fact, they wouldn't care if the Pats evaporated tomorrow. But congrats on a good win.

even though (1)

ObitMan (550793) | more than 9 years ago | (#10683241)

the Steelers are the Raider's eternal playoff enemies I'm glad to see them finally get a QB.
Good job killing the Patsies.

Maybe next year Emperor Davis will retire...


Re:even though (1)

baldass_newbie (136609) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684228)

I was just thinking yesterday, "Wow, the Steelers have a quarterback they can get excited about since, uh, since, uh, well, I guess they finally have a quarterback..."

Good for the Steelers.

And you're right, FK, the Steelers look great. They won't lose another game this season. Their running game will crush the Eagles and their D-Line will handle the Birds O-Line like the Pats injury ridden line.

Get a grip, dude. It might be close. The Steelers may actually win. Rutlessburger looks like he might even be good one day. But can you remember the last guy who went 6-0 to start as a rookie? Didn't think so.

BTW, did you see the sandwich? Holy smokes, talk about a cardiac clogger.

Re:even though (1)

ObitMan (550793) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684374)

That Bradshaw guy was probably their last great QB.

Re:even though (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684677)

I would have to agree with you there. I would think any legit pro football fan should be able to name Bradshaw as a great Steeler quarterback.

Re:even though (1)

baldass_newbie (136609) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684729)

Oh, I know Bradshaw was great, however, when he was playing, he was not considered great.
In fact, for many years after the fact, Bradshaw was not considered great.
FWIW, I love Bradshaw. But the sentiment both from the coach and from a lot of football fans was that Terry was 'just alright'.
That's all I meant. Personally, I think the guy is fantastic. A great ambassador of the game.
Heck, I even liked his acting in Hooper [] .

Re:even though (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684839)

Whatever people think or have thought about him I think the 4 rings speak for themselves. I can't remember who but someone like to say Bradsaw was stupid and all Terry ever did with that arguement would be to shrug and say something like maybe he isn't the smartest guy and flash the rings.

I will grant you his stats are not great but Terry was rarely the main focus of our offense. We were (and still are) a running team but whenever we needed him to make a play I think he did alright. And don't forget he called his own plays- how many pro qb's today call their own plays with regularity? One- Peyton Manning.

Re:even though (1)

baldass_newbie (136609) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685091)

Please re-read what I wrote.
And don't be so defensive.

Re:even though (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685279)

Dude, I never said anything like "you are wrong." I was trying to expand on the idea of why Bradsaw is great despite what people thought of him while he was playing.

Dude, I was not being defensive. I just thought it was worth pointing out why people can consider him great today (does any starting qb besides Montana have four rings?) even if they thought different of him at the time.

My reply was not meant to be an attack but was meant to expand and add substance to your comment. Okay?

Re:even though (1)

Abm0raz (668337) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685284)

Last rookie to go 6-0 was ... A STEELER! Mike Kruczek in 1976. Bradshaw got injured early in the season. The steelers were 1-4 behind their back-up quaterback and both of their running back were injured. Coach Noll put in Kruczek and everything turned around.

Kruczek also holds another dubious record: most career passes without a touchdown pass (154).


yeah, that was nice (1)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684754)

but did you *see* the bears win?


The Bears are so bad the frigging sucky-assed 49ers played them close.


I watched some of the Steelers game. Twas a good one.

I'm just glad they won, would have been interesting to hear the excuses had they lost :)

Re:yeah, that was nice (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684785)

I am hearing some sad excuses on why/how the Patriots lost. People are complaining that Dillon did not play and that their secondary was completed. But remember people, this is football- a team is never completely healthy. Was Dillon there last year when they won the Super Bowl? As for the secondary- the Steelers are playing with a depleted secondary also because they are without Chad Scott and Mike Logan (a starting safety from last year) is on IR. Maybe Ty Law is the Patriots best defender but the Steelers were without Casey Hampton who anchors our defense. We are also without Bell- who as a rookie in 2001 was lighting in a bottle. No team is ever completely healthy- this is the NFL.

Re:yeah, that was nice (1)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685507)

So Ben isn't the only rookie QB that's undefeated in starts... go Craig Krentzel ;-)

who looked like the rookie? (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10684937)

Every week we hear all this rhetoric how Roethlisberger is going to be seriously tested this week and going to look like a rookie blah blah blah. Every stinking team (or their stinking fans) he has started against this year have said this and it is yet to be true. If either quarterback looked like a rookie this past game it would be Tom Brady. I am starting to hear rumbles about the Patriots being depleted on both sides- but Brady is the largest reason the Pats lost. Brady had three turnovers! Brady cannot blame anybody but himself for those turnovers.

Wow, what a great game Joey Porter had. The man was due.

How classless of the Ted Johnson to celebrate and try start a fight after tackling Bettis behind the scrimmage line when the Pats were down by 18 or 21 points. I am tired of players celebrating meaningless things- it was not a big play. I did not see the Steelers offensive line celebrating the Patriots lack of success at generating pressure.

I still am not sold on my Steelers but it was their best game of the season. Good game men of steel.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

baldass_newbie (136609) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685151)

What defenses [] has he played against?

Miami (7th)

Cleveland (18th)

Dallas (28th)

Cincinatti (26th)

New England (11th)

So Miami is the toughest D he's faced and he's got number 2 coming to town next week.
We shall see.
I'm curious as to what the birds O will do against the 14th ranked D of Pittsburgh as they've already beaten 3 of the top 10 (Baltimore, NY Giants and Chicago).

Should be a good game. As long as the Steelers don't have to play 'ketchup'.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685467)

Lets not forget he played Miami's defense in hurricane weather... How many passes can you throw on target with extreme winds?

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685679)

Yeah, the conditions were so bad that I don't think anything meaningful statistic-wise can really come out of it but everybody is beating the Fins.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685627)

Well first of all, I believe the official NFL defensive rankings go by yards allowed and not points. Using those standings Miami is 5th, Pittsburgh is 6th, and Philly is 18th! We can argue/debate over the meaning of the statistics and which one is more telling but I think that is just a waste of time and recommend that in the future you better quantify which statistics/rankings you are talking about. Of course, the Eagles allow a ton of rushing yards and that will hurt them with the (official) ranking I am using- but I am sure you Philly fans are sick of hearing about that as much as I am getting sick of the Big Ben is going to look like a rookie rhetoric.

Should be an interesting game because the strength of both offenses is the weakness of the opposing defense.

Should be a good game.

As for the ketchup thing- hopefully that will be Presidential ketchup :) I don't know if you watched the Steeler-Patriot game but who was playing catch-up? It was not even close.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

baldass_newbie (136609) | more than 9 years ago | (#10686639)

First off, I hate to interrupt the gushing going on betwixt you and FortKnox.
Secondly, last time I checked, scores determined outcomes of games, not yardage. If you look at yardage, one of the 'best' teams was the Redskins, followed by Buffalo, Tampa Bay and Denver [] . I'll let you determine how good a measure that is. If that's the kind of teams you want to be compared to, good on you.
Personally, I like points because that shows you who scores and who doesn't. The Birds have been big yardage allowers for the last 3 years and have gone to the NFC Championship game for 3 years.
I'll take that.

So while you may have played 'great' teams in terms of yardage (big whoops) you haven't played great teams in terms of scoring defense (where it counts).
Consider Miami is better on both counts and what that tells you about the Miami offense.

Pittsburgh is a good team that may even win on Sunday. However, let's not kid ourselves...despite the Philly papers saying this might be a Super Bowl preview.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10687300)

Ugh, I see you went the waste of time route. I really don't like statistics. Truth be told, my first thought when I hear statistics being thrown around is that something is being hidden. I really do not think either statistical ranking is that telling- teams with a decent lead regularly give up late scores which are meaningless to everyone except for the idiots betting on the spread. Likewise teams may give up a lot of yards but allow few points. Arguments can be made to render both statistical rankings meaningless. The most telling statistics are in context of single games. It is like obvious you disagree with the official NFL rankings but that is not my fault. When you were throwing around your rankings I thought you were talking about yards- you need to quantify your statistical rankings if you want to talk about them buddy. I was merely asking you quantify your statistical rankings because we need a common language if you really do wish to have a meaningful discussion.

The only statistic I am concerned with at the end of the day are W's and L's. Going by that the Eagle-Steeler should be good. Do I think either team is as good as their record though- no. The Eagles schedule is especially soft and the Steeler schedule has not been that much tougher. So one could even argue that a teams record is meaningless and guess what- it is! That is why you play the game.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10687749)

I hate to reply twice to the same comment but here I go.

One could argue that it is stupid to compare defensive statistics of teams that you have already played. A great offensive team will likely have played weaker defenses statistically because they gauged those defenses and lowered their rankings. It is not crazy to infer that Philly have played "stronger" defenses because of the Eagles offensive impotence and the Steelers have played against weaker defenses because their offense is better. While I do not believe that to be (completely) true it is a legit inference.

Just something to think about.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

baldass_newbie (136609) | more than 9 years ago | (#10688230)

This would make sense if the Eagles Offense wasn't ranked seventh while the Steelers is ranked 15th. []

That would mean that those teams the Eagles played were really, really good when they didn't play the Eagles.

And you do know who leads the league in TD receptions. He's a member of that 'impotent' offense you mentioned.

There are teams in the league besides the Steelers. Some of them are even good.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 9 years ago | (#10689029)

If you wanna play the stats game, then look at defenses. Pitt #6, Philly #15.... and now look... Baltimore is #7. Looks like you are up against a better defense, but this team has a good offense, too....

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10689473)

Well like I said it is just something to thing about and I also said that I did not believe it to to be true but something that could be inferred. It is just further proof that statistical rankings paint a blurry picture at best.

I hate to repeat myself but maybe it will get through this time- statistical rankings don't mean shit. There are many reasons but here are two big ones- strength of schedule and football being non-deterministic. Face it, not all schedules are the same or fair. Some marginally good teams have easy schedules and are elevated to the next level only because of their schedule and not because of any improved play. A team with an easy schedule might have a defense ranked higher than a team with a hard schedule- does it mean the team with easy schedule has the better defense? It is impossible to say. Believing you can accurately and meaningfully rank the whole NFL is just foolish. Sixteen games is not a large enough sample and teams play the same teams too often.

Now lets imagine that we can put together a large enough sample- it has to be some sort of round robin so that each team plays every other team an equal amount of times. You are still not going to have accurate and meaningful rankings because football is not deterministic game. A player might make a play to win a game that he never makes in the same situation ever again. Chance is part of the game.

Oppps, you seemed to take that impotent comment wrong. I did not call the Eagle offense impotent- what I said was that it could be inferred that the Eagle offense is impotent because they have played against good defenses and padded those defenses stats. I even went on to say that I did not believe it to be true. You might want to read more carefully next time.

Anyhow, any truth to the rumor that TD reception leader you mentioned has a body odor problem? Just kidding.

Well I really do not understand you comment about there being more teams than just the Steelers. I never implied that the Steelers were the only team. If I wanted to make such an goofy remark I would say something like you obviously don't understand football since you were using points allowed to rank a defense instead of the (official) yards allowed ranking- such statements are unfair.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685641)

How classless of the Ted Johnson to celebrate and try start a fight after tackling Bettis behind the scrimmage line when the Pats were down by 18 or 21 points.

Don't be discouraged by this! Everytime someone pushes around the future hall of famer, it just gets him fired up. You'll note that the next snap was a run for 11 yards. Bettis was sure to walk right over Johnson to make sure he knew his place. I enjoy it when players push Bettis around... gives him incentive to shove the football right down their throat on the next play.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685935)

Well cream always comes to the top so I was not concerned or anything. I just thought it was classless. I am tired of the meaningless self-promotion that goes on way too often anymore. Meaningful self-promotion (or mocking) does not bother me so much- like T.O.'s knock-off of Ray Lewis' dance.

Re:who looked like the rookie? (1)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 9 years ago | (#10686067)

I hate people that mock others... especially T.O.... but I hate the Ravens even worse, so I'll let that one slide ;-)

hehe (1)

Aggrazel (13616) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685286)

You know who else is undefeated as a rookie QB in the NFL?

Craig Krenzel ... hehe. ;)

OK OK, maybe 1-0 is a little too early to be celebrating but I think people sold him short too quickly. I think he's better than people say he is. After all, he did lead a team to the national championship and all.

Re:hehe (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10686657)

Judging/rating QB's is just impossible. A lot of things matter and a lot of things do not matter. The verdict was that Kurt Warner was washed before this season- he looks pretty good right now. Heck, I don't even think Warner was drafted and I am talking about a Super Bowl MVP and two-time league MVP! Look at the names of young QB's that the Steelers of have cut. They include Unitas, Dawson, and Kemp- two hall of famers and another decent QB. Tom Brady was a fifth rounder- maybe considered good backup material but not much more. Quarterback is just a really tough position to rate. The offensive system does matter but the system is not everything.

I don't know what to think of Krenzel yet (did catch some of that game). I was impressed that he took some sacks and held onto the ball but some of his passes looked questionable. I guess the Bears have something there if they work with it.

game of the season (1)

asv108 (141455) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685307)

This Sunday's game between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia is going to be the game of the season. I have been impressed with Ben since I saw him play Penn State but I never expected him to get off to this good of a start. Especially in Pittsburgh, where they don't have a history of producing 1-st tier QB's. I'm hoping that Philly can pull this one out but its going to be real tough.

Re:game of the season (1)

duder (86761) | more than 9 years ago | (#10686111)

I think everybody is surprised at how well Ben is doing. Big name rookie quarterbacks might not have a history of playing well right away but the Steelers are a better team than what most such rookie quarterbacks start with. Good running game, solid O-line, and good defense goes a long way when you have talent. Oh and Hines Ward is All-World as far as I am concerned.

I'm hoping that the Steelers can pull this one out but I think its going to be real tough. This win against the Patriots was the first real convincing win I thought they have had. I really have thought it has been more smoke and mirrors until now- but perhaps I am just slow to jump on the wagon since I have been bitten before.

Game on!

Re:game of the season (1)

blueforce (192332) | more than 9 years ago | (#10706107)

That's gotta be tough being right in the middle of the state with two good NFL teams on either end. :)

I guess I'm no better - According to mapquest I'm 77.89 miles from Brown's stadium and 76.64 miles from Heinz field.

Still a Brown's fan.

I was impressed with the Steelers on Sunday against the Pats. They looked good. I have to admit - If I ever played in the NFL, I'd definitely want to play for Bill Cowher.

Congrats FK (1)

LordBodak (561365) | more than 9 years ago | (#10685607)

Watching the Steelers play the Cowboys and Patriots was, without a doubt, the most fun I have had watching the NFL in years. I grew up watching the Steelers despite being a Dolphins fan (parents being from the 'burgh and all), and there is something in this team I've never seen before. Look at the way Big Ben handles himself-- he looks like he's out there having fun, he's doing a damn good job, and the team is feeding off of him.

The Steelers (1)

The Bungi (221687) | more than 9 years ago | (#10706301)

Are going to the Super Bowl babeeee....*




* Well I can hope.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?