PDA

View Full Version : Charlie Batch vs Brian St. Pierre


RichmondVA
11-09-2005, 04:05 PM
How many of you were upset when Brian St. Pierre was cut (with the Steelers intentions of bringing Charlie Batch back after week one).

I felt better having Charlie start at Green Bay and feel better having Charlie start this week too instead of who it could have been... Brian St. Pierre.

Any thought where we might be with Brian St. Pierre at the helm?

clevestinks
11-09-2005, 04:16 PM
I agree, and a great point that some of us have overlooked. I have liked batch since we picked him up.
Another question is Maddox or Batch? Did Tommy just have one bad game? It looks like Tommy will be done at the end of the season

Tim
11-09-2005, 04:17 PM
Could you imagine how hard that would be for a rookie QB, no experience as a starter, forced into the job of starting an away game, at one of the most hallowed fields playing against one of the all time greatest QBs?

BlitzburghRockCity
11-09-2005, 05:20 PM
Tommy needs to be on the field alot to get into a rythmn..he doesnt appear to be well suited as a backup and have to come in cold and rally the team if need be..

BSP, I wish we could have kept him..but I think Batch will be ok, but yes TOmmy does appear to be done after 2005

soniczilla
11-09-2005, 06:16 PM
Brian might be back next season... when we dump Maddox.

clevestinks
11-09-2005, 06:28 PM
Why wait, put him on the practice squad now.

I.C. Lights
11-09-2005, 07:48 PM
I guess I disagree with most of you. I think St. Pierre is better and a better prospect than Batch. I like Batch, but I think St. Pierre has a better arm and a better sense of the game. He was pretty good at BC and I think he would have been fine against GB. It's a shame he's gone.

Atlanta Dan
11-09-2005, 07:48 PM
As far as needing time to get in a rythym, Maddox actually got his big break when he came in off the bench to pull out the Browns game in September 2002 and ended Kordell's reign as the starter. Of course, with the fans (including me) screaming to dump Kordell there was no pressure to perform back then and Maddox had a great run for most of 2002.

From what I read, Maddox had issues with Ben's status from the time he was drafted. When Maddox had his "I'll show them I can still be a starter" moment against Jax the pressure to get it done apparently was too great and it fell apart right away.

To echo prior posts, I was one of those against "wasting" a position to hold Batch on the team, figuring Maddox could handle any backup requirements - shows once again the coaches have a clue and I don't when it comes to personnel decisions.

Cape Cod Steel Head
11-09-2005, 08:38 PM
Batch did take the Lions to the playoffs once, and I think he still has some wheels. I would rather have his veteran leadership in there than someone with considerably less expierence.We just need to get off to a good start on Sunday and get some TD,s instead of field goals.

BlitzburghRockCity
11-09-2005, 09:53 PM
I was screaming for, and alot of people were, to dump batch and keep tommy and BSP... only because in the last 2 years, none of them have had signifcant playing experience so it was a role of the dice either way..

but highsight is 2020, and now everybody who was screaming to release tommy may have been the right ones.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-09-2005, 10:07 PM
i hope ben plays some next week against the ratbirds but not the whole game, he needs to be healthy for the colts

SteelerFanInATL
11-11-2005, 09:43 AM
Another question is Maddox or Batch? Did Tommy just have one bad game? It looks like Tommy will be done at the end of the season[/QUOTE]


Tommy did have a bad game. (I still would have choked him if I could have reached into the TV and grabbed him) Remember the season he had a few years ago, he was awsome.
I think he is very capable as a backup. He was VERY RUSTY THAT GAME. Look at Batch last week, he looked rusty also. If Maddox was in the situation to play two consecutive games he would look totally different as Batch will this week. If Tommy is gone next year a more mobile backup is needed.