PDA

View Full Version : Tomlins take on getting Mendenhall into lineup


tony hipchest
06-29-2009, 09:06 PM
tomlin was on nfl network (from the rookie symposium i think) and was asked what he was gonna do to get rashard involved in the line up this year.

tomlins answer was simple and i paraphrase-

"its not my responsibility to get him into the line up. thats all up to him. we will see what he has learned and how he does at camp and pre-season. that will be the deciding factor.

absolutely brilliant coachspeak. hes not doing anyone any favors.

Nighthawk
06-29-2009, 09:17 PM
He always has the right words to say to the media, gotta love this guy. You'll never catch him tripping over his tongue.

El-Gonzo Jackson
06-29-2009, 10:27 PM
The cool thing is that he isnt trying to avoid making a mistake in the media. Tomlin believes in what he says and lives it.

He is a guy with a philosophy of "doing things right" and not making any apologies for it. Fact is, somebody will earn playing time and others will earn a pink slip.......its just the way it is.

Men of Steel
06-29-2009, 10:37 PM
He always has the right words to say to the media, gotta love this guy. You'll never catch him tripping over his tongue.

riiight...? and ppl wonder how he did it to sweep the Rooneys off their feet when he was interviewed for the head coaching position.... :chuckle:

Preacher
06-29-2009, 10:41 PM
I think a more important issue is the issue between Mendy and Willie. So much for Mendy being drafted to take over Willie. There's nothing "in the cards". The best guy will get it. Period, just like it should be.

Funny thing is, some people have already determined who that guy is, without putting on any pads.

tony hipchest
06-29-2009, 11:03 PM
1st round pick vs. UDFA veteran "big money".

let the chips fall where they may. tomlin makes no pretenses, nor has an agenda to do anyone any favors.

his ass is pretty much covered either way. and if they cant get it done, im not too worried about a tandem of moore/summers.

Men of Steel
06-29-2009, 11:03 PM
I think a more important issue is the issue between Mendy and Willie. So much for Mendy being drafted to take over Willie.

wow... i thought mendy was drafted to help willie... not necessarily to take over.... :doh: :noidea:

they both gotta be healthy.... a two back system....
the FAST and the Furious :tt02:

tony hipchest
06-29-2009, 11:07 PM
mendenhall was drafted because he was the best player available.

nothing more. nothing less.

mesaSteeler
06-29-2009, 11:44 PM
Here's a link to the interview where Mike Tomlin shares his thoughts on the rookie symposium and a reporter talks about Tomlin's take on Mendenhall getting back into the lineup.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d8110f8fe/Monday-s-Around-the-League

Preacher
06-30-2009, 02:46 AM
mendenhall was drafted because he was the best player available.

nothing more. nothing less.

Yep... though much is made of it.

I, like many around here, long for the day we put the "featured back" system to rest, and start using two and three backs. I can understand needing to get a feel for a game. If I remember right, Jerome didn't really get going until the 3rd quarter. But think the pounding these guys take is just too much at times.

mulldog24
06-30-2009, 05:53 AM
I agree with you preacher, I like having 2 or 3 RB's for injury purposes plus opposing defenses have to plan that much more for them.

Galax Steeler
06-30-2009, 06:16 AM
It will be an interesting trainning camp with Parker and Mendenhall. They both will be playing there butts off to be the man on opening day.

HometownGal
06-30-2009, 08:36 AM
"its not my responsibility to get him into the line up. thats all up to him. we will see what he has learned and how he does at camp and pre-season. that will be the deciding factor."


Absolutely brilliant and spot-on Coach! :drink: Coach always knows when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em with the media.

Coach T's philosophy is very plain and simple - you EARN a spot in the lineup - nothing is handed to you or guaranteed at any given time. Gotta love that.

El-Gonzo Jackson
06-30-2009, 09:51 AM
mendenhall was drafted because he was the best player available.

nothing more. nothing less.

And they knew that Parkers contract was expiring after this season. Just as Woodley was drafted to succeed Haggans, Keenan Lewis- Townsend, Ziggy Hood- Keisel. The Steelers do keep an eye ahead to some expiring contracts.

revefsreleets
06-30-2009, 10:20 AM
I think a more important issue is the issue between Mendy and Willie. So much for Mendy being drafted to take over Willie. There's nothing "in the cards". The best guy will get it. Period, just like it should be.

Funny thing is, some people have already determined who that guy is, without putting on any pads.

The best back on the team is Mewelde Moore, and anybody who says differently is just flat-out wrong!:thumbsup:

fansince'76
06-30-2009, 10:32 AM
The best back on the team is Mewelde Moore, and anybody who says differently is just flat-out wrong!:thumbsup:

His presence on the field during the last drive of the SB is the only reason we won that game, since our offense couldn't score with Willie in there! :chuckle:

revefsreleets
06-30-2009, 10:48 AM
His presence on the field during the last drive of the SB is the only reason we won that game, since our offense couldn't score with Willie in there! :chuckle:
The statistics prove that, too. MM is clearly the only effective back on the roster.

Go Tulane!

El-Gonzo Jackson
06-30-2009, 11:35 AM
His presence on the field during the last drive of the SB is the only reason we won that game, since our offense couldn't score with Willie in there! :chuckle:

You saw that too??? Its still amazing that Ben threw the TD pass to Holmes, because Moore was wide open and is by far the best player on the team. :wink:

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 12:31 PM
I think a more important issue is the issue between Mendy and Willie. So much for Mendy being drafted to take over Willie. There's nothing "in the cards". The best guy will get it. Period, just like it should be.

Funny thing is, some people have already determined who that guy is, without putting on any pads. That is what I thought, which is why it was interesting that the guy who complained the most got the starting spot last year. (I dont walk by 5 rushing titles every morning I walk by 5 Lombardi trophies)

revefsreleets
06-30-2009, 12:49 PM
That is what I thought, which is why it was interesting that the guy who complained the most got the starting spot last year. (I dont walk by 5 rushing titles every morning I walk by 5 Lombardi trophies)

The problem with that theory of yours is that the Steelers caved in to pressure from a single player. If you knew your team a little better, you'd know that is far from SOP of the Pittsburgh Steelers.

This is Occam's Razor. The ONLY person anywhere ever to claim that MM is more effective than Parker is you, and you are biased based on you sharing a common college with Moore.

Is this glaring and obvious bias simply too close to you to see? I mean, don't you think that there would be someone somewhere who agreed with you (other than Mewelde Moore's immediate family) if there were any validity to this hypothesis?

fansince'76
06-30-2009, 12:53 PM
The problem with that theory of yours is that the Steelers caved in to pressure from a single player. If you knew your team a little better, you'd know that is far from SOP of the Pittsburgh Steelers.

That's just it, it isn't his team - he's a Redskins fan, supposedly. Which makes his obsession with the Steelers RB corps, and moreover, Moore's place within it, odd to say the least.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 01:04 PM
The problem with that theory of yours is that the Steelers caved in to pressure from a single player. If you knew your team a little better, you'd know that is far from SOP of the Pittsburgh Steelers.

This is Occam's Razor. The ONLY person anywhere ever to claim that MM is more effective than Parker is you, and you are biased based on you sharing a common college with Moore.

Is this glaring and obvious bias simply too close to you to see? I mean, don't you think that there would be someone somewhere who agreed with you (other than Mewelde Moore's immediate family) if there were any validity to this hypothesis? Once again, I did not make any statements about what should be or say anything about who was better. (As far as my *claim* that MM was more effective...that is a fact and I am asking why no one else acknowledges it elsewhere)

Facts related to this topic--

1) WP and MM split carries more-or-less evenly in weeks 12-13, both wins
2) WP complains about splitting carries (you know, because who gets the carries is more important than who wins)
3) Tomlin smacks down WP (I don't walk by 5 rushing titles....)
4) Tomlin proceeds to make WP the captain and gives him most carries in the final 4 games
5) WPs rushing totals in the final 4 games as starter, 25, 47, 31, 116

Tell me what I missed and where in that sequence WP *earned* the feature back role...since the point of this entire thread is that Tomlin will give it to whoever *earns* it.

MM has nothing to do with this thread.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 01:07 PM
That's just it, it isn't his team - he's a Redskins fan, supposedly. Which makes his obsession with the Steelers RB corps, and moreover, Moore's place within it, odd to say the least. Its actually quite simple. As I look around the league the Steelers RB situation intrigues me the most. So I look for insights from fans/coaches and I guess I am surprised by the pro-WP blinders on around here.

revefsreleets
06-30-2009, 01:14 PM
Its actually quite simple. As I look around the league the Steelers RB situation intrigues me the most. So I look for insights from fans/coaches and I guess I am surprised by the pro-WP blinders on around here.

I'm no Willie bandwagoner. I think he's a better than average back, and that's about that.

So forget about all this "WP-blinders" nonsense.

BUT, let's discuss the MM blinders. This has EVERYTHING to do with Moore, because you went to Tulane, and so did MM. Your name, your company, the school you're an alum of is all pretty easy to find (but there's no reason to disclose that here). You have an agenda, and it's a pro-Melwelde Moore one. Everyone knows this, but, apparently, you...

LVSteelersfan
06-30-2009, 01:15 PM
I like Moore a lot but don't think he is the answer at running back. I love the tandem RB idea with Parker and Mendenhall (if he pans out). Moore needed more carries last year IMO. I think Moore will be pretty much gathering dust on the bench now which is a shame. They should try using him as a slot receiver in the five wide sets. He rarely drops a pass. Make him our Wes Welker.

revefsreleets
06-30-2009, 01:18 PM
Moore will be what he is: A third down/long down back. He's an average to slightly above average runner, not durable enough to be an every down back, but he's excellent catching the ball out of the backfield. He see's the field in situations where the field is stretched, we're running shotguns, 3 and 4 wides, and just generally passing situations, and his stats reflect that.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 01:26 PM
I'm no Willie bandwagoner. I think he's a better than average back, and that's about that.

So forget about all this "WP-blinders" nonsense.

BUT, let's discuss the MM blinders. This has EVERYTHING to do with Moore, because you went to Tulane, and so did MM. Your name, your company, the school you're an alum of is all pretty easy to find (but there's no reason to disclose that here). You have an agenda, and it's a pro-Melwelde Moore one. Everyone knows this, but, apparently, you...Sorry but no. In the context of this thread, which is about how Tomlin will give the role to whoever *earns* it. While last season, he gave it to the RB who acted like a diva complaining that his role was not bi enough. Has nothing to do with MM and as such I will not bring him up in any context in this thread.

Make it about Mendenhall. What happens if Mendenhall outperforms WP throughout the preseason and WP complains that he isn't getting all the carries?

revefsreleets
06-30-2009, 01:33 PM
Sorry but no. In the context of this thread, which is about how Tomlin will give the role to whoever *earns* it. While last season, he gave it to the RB who acted like a diva complaining that his role was not bi enough. Has nothing to do with MM and as such I will not bring him up in any context in this thread.

Make it about Mendenhall. What happens if Mendenhall outperforms WP throughout the preseason and WP complains that he isn't getting all the carries?

Sorry, but no to you, sir. The Steelers are anything but a team of diva's. Their FO does not tolerate that kind of behavior, and they CERTAINLY do not reward it. Never have, and never will.

You were better (not much, but at least a little) when you tried to stick with the facts. Parker is the starting RB because he's clearly the best running back on the team. Period. I'm sorry, but this isn't Conference-USA, and we aren't talking about tearing it up against second-tier competition. This is the NFL, and MM had his chance under a few different coaches on two different teams, and he has "found his level". He's a third down back.

fansince'76
06-30-2009, 01:36 PM
Sorry but no. In the context of this thread, which is about how Tomlin will give the role to whoever *earns* it. While last season, he gave it to the RB who acted like a diva complaining that his role was not bi enough.

Yeah, Tomlin decided on a starting RB in December. Please, get a clue.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 01:48 PM
Sorry, but no to you, sir. The Steelers are anything but a team of diva's. Their FO does not tolerate that kind of behavior, and they CERTAINLY do not reward it. Never have, and never will.

You were better (not much, but at least a little) when you tried to stick with the facts. Parker is the starting RB because he's clearly the best running back on the team. Period. I'm sorry, but this isn't Conference-USA, and we aren't talking about tearing it up against second-tier competition. This is the NFL, and MM had his chance under a few different coaches on two different teams, and he has "found his level". He's a third down back.

1) The entire point of this thread is that WP acted like a Diva and Tomlin DID change the gameplan because of it. It shocked me then and led me to ask the question now. What part of *I dont walk by 5 rushing titles* is non-diva behavior? What part of complaining about your carries despite winning is non-diva behavior?

2) Regardless of your opinion on WP/MM/RM/Tomlin, your shortsighted stab at Conference USA basically ruins your entire point. That conference produced Matt Forte, Chris Johnson, Deangelo Williams, Ahmad Bradshaw.....so I dont think being from that conference is really any knock and has zero relation to NFL output.

3) And again, I have never claimed to suggest who the *best* RB on the Steelers is. All I have done is point out who was the most effective RB last season. Whether due to inhury or not being a threat out of the backfield or the ever-popular defenses-don't-care about MM, WP was not the most effective RB last year. Who is/was better is irrelevant.

revefsreleets
06-30-2009, 01:59 PM
1) The entire point of this thread is that WP acted like a Diva and Tomlin DID change the gameplan because of it. It shocked me then and led me to ask the question now. What part of *I dont walk by 5 rushing titles* is non-diva behavior? What part of complaining about your carries despite winning is non-diva behavior?

2) Regardless of your opinion on WP/MM/RM/Tomlin, your shortsighted stab at Conference USA basically ruins your entire point. That conference produced Matt Forte, Chris Johnson, Deangelo Williams, Ahmad Bradshaw.....so I dont think being from that conference is really any knock and has zero relation to NFL output.

3) And again, I have never claimed to suggest who the *best* RB on the Steelers is. All I have done is point out who was the most effective RB last season. Whether due to inhury or not being a threat out of the backfield or the ever-popular defenses-don't-care about MM, WP was not the most effective RB last year. Who is/was better is irrelevant.

-Then you are asserting that Tomlin DID award Parker's behavior (which, by the by, was never as bad as you have characterized it as being, but, then again, you have an agenda here). That's just not the case.

-The list of RB's you've provided is nice. There are a couple starters there. No great shakes, but decent talent. I bring up the point because you DO have an agenda concerning MM. You're deflecting off that in the face of overwhelming evidence showing your culpability in that regard, but it doesn't change the fact that you are a Mewelde Moore cheerleader, and your view of the Steelers situation is HIGHLY tainted by your bias. That's completely relevant.

-Moore was effective based on the situations he found himself in, not his ability. Take MM and swap him with Parker situationally and watch his stats drop like a rock. Odds are, he'd never survive carrying the ball more than 150 times a year to begin with, let alone seeing 20-25 carries a game. He's a third down back. Parker is an every down back. Parker is a starter. Moore is a career back-up.

fansince'76
06-30-2009, 02:08 PM
1) The entire point of this thread is that WP acted like a Diva and Tomlin DID change the gameplan because of it.

He did, huh?

Cowboys game (the game immediately preceeding the "5 rushing titles" comment): 26 rushing plays out of 64 total plays

Ravens game (game immediately following "5 rushing titles" comment): 27 rushing plays out of 70 total plays

Titans game : 25 rushing plays out of 69 total plays

Browns game: 35 rushing plays out of 62 total plays

So, where exactly was this "monumental" change in game plan by Tomlin? The Browns game, where we were playing for nothing other than to keep people from getting hurt and took the air out of the ball accordingly? Once again, please, get a clue. :coffee:

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 02:18 PM
-Then you are asserting that Tomlin DID award Parker's behavior (which, by the by, was never as bad as you have characterized it as being, but, then again, you have an agenda here). That's just not the case.

-The list of RB's you've provided is nice. There are a couple starters there. No great shakes, but decent talent. I bring up the point because you DO have an agenda concerning MM. You're deflecting off that in the face of overwhelming evidence showing your culpability in that regard, but it doesn't change the fact that you are a Mewelde Moore cheerleader, and your view of the Steelers situation is HIGHLY tainted by your bias. That's completely relevant.

-Moore was effective based on the situations he found himself in, not his ability. Take MM and swap him with Parker situationally and watch his stats drop like a rock. Odds are, he'd never survive carrying the ball more than 150 times a year to begin with, let alone seeing 20-25 carries a game. He's a third down back. Parker is an every down back. Parker is a starter. Moore is a career back-up.

1) So I am wrong? WP was not made captain after complaining about his role?

2) Nice? No great shakes? I think you would be hard pressed to argue that less 3 of the top 10 RBs in the NFL right now are from Conference USA. That makes your *agenda* comment funnier, since you are the one trying to suggest that the conference does not produce good RBs.

3) This is simply not true and you are the one talking about *odds are* and *situational*. As for titles and labels, what was Tiki Barber going into his 5th season? Serious question.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 02:19 PM
He did, huh?

Cowboys game (the game immediately preceeding the "5 rushing titles" comment): 26 rushing plays out of 64 total plays

Ravens game (game immediately following "5 rushing titles" comment): 27 rushing plays out of 70 total plays

Titans game : 25 rushing plays out of 69 total plays

Browns game: 35 rushing plays out of 62 total plays

So, where exactly was this "monumental" change in game plan by Tomlin? The Browns game, where we were playing for nothing other than to keep people from getting hurt and took the air out of the ball accordingly? Once again, please, get a clue. :coffee: They went from splitting the carries evenly to WP getting 80%+.

And that is what WP was complaining about---number of carries. I think you are arguing for the sake of arguing cause the point was pretty clear.

Psyychoward86
06-30-2009, 02:26 PM
He always has the right words to say to the media, gotta love this guy. You'll never catch him tripping over his tongue.

Except for the hundreds of "Um's" you here at his press conferences:flap:

fansince'76
06-30-2009, 02:30 PM
They went from splitting the carries evenly to WP getting 80%+.

And that is what WP was complaining about---number of carries. I think you are arguing for the sake of arguing cause the point was pretty clear.

Wrong again, but not surprising:

Dallas game: Willie: 12 carries, Memo: 5 carries, Ben: 5 carries, Russell: 4 carries

Ravens game: Willie: 14 carries, Memo: 7 carries, Ben: 4 carries, Washington: 1 carry, Russell: 1 carry

Titans game: Willie: 19 carries, Memo: 3 carries, Ben: 3 carries

Browns game: Willie: 23 carries, Memo: 4 carries, Russell: 4 carries, Davis: 1 carry, Leftwich: 1 carry, Dixon: 2 carries

revefsreleets
06-30-2009, 02:48 PM
Hmmmm...There were some good backs that played out of C-USA last year, but that's just one year. That's why I say no great shakes, because you've twisted Parker's data and sliced it and diced it up in such a way that he gets no credit for the body of his work, and gets ripped up based on thin slices of data. What's good for the goose...Besides, what good is statistical data to a guy who THINKS he has statistical data that shows MM to be the better back than Parker, despite what two NFL franchises have actually determined in real life?

Parker is a starting NFL running back. He earned that role, under two separate coaches, and has played in and contributed to two Super Bowl wins. As for the circumstances surrounding him being made captain, time for some fact over fiction.

The low point came during the lead-up to the second game against the Ravens on Dec. 14, when Parker criticized the team's approach to running the ball. Coach Mike Tomlin favored a two tight-end alignment for blocking instead of an I-formation with a fullback leading the way.

Tomlin was quick to put Parker in his place, remarking, "Every morning I come to work, I walk past five Lombardi (trophies), not five rushing titles."

But Tomlin still wanted to let Parker know how much he valued him. And to demonstrate it, he named Parker a captain for the Ravens game.

The move paid off, helping build the tailback's confidence on the heels of an awkward episode. Parker wasn't dominant, gaining 47 yards, but he had several good runs during the 13-9 road win.

"He has had a rough go of it at times from a health standpoint during the season," Tomlin said. "But he weathered it early, and he appears to be rising at the appropriate time. It's great for him, and it's even better for us."

This is a tempest in a teapot, but certainly can be made to sound really bad if you want it to, you know, by a guy who wants his college RB to look as good as possible by denigrating the guy in front of him on the depth chart.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 05:28 PM
Wrong again, but not surprising:

Dallas game: Willie: 12 carries, Memo: 5 carries, Ben: 5 carries, Russell: 4 carries

Ravens game: Willie: 14 carries, Memo: 7 carries, Ben: 4 carries, Washington: 1 carry, Russell: 1 carry

Titans game: Willie: 19 carries, Memo: 3 carries, Ben: 3 carries

Browns game: Willie: 23 carries, Memo: 4 carries, Russell: 4 carries, Davis: 1 carry, Leftwich: 1 carry, Dixon: 2 carries Well, technically, when Big Ben gets sacked or scrambles, its a carry. And goalline or short yardage packages also went to Rusell, but I was only referring to called running plays for a RB out of base packages, which is all that really matters.

And if you think that makes me technically wrong, great. I am wrong. Thats all you want to prove.....you don't seem to care about the topic at hand. And congrats for catching my error. But it does not change the bigger picture.

fansince'76
06-30-2009, 05:38 PM
Well, technically, when Big Ben gets sacked or scrambles, its a carry. And goalline or short yardage packages also went to Rusell, but I was only referring to called running plays for a RB out of base packages, which is all that really matters.

And if you think that makes me technically wrong, great. I am wrong. Thats all you want to prove.....you don't seem to care about the topic at hand. And congrats for catching my error. But it does not change the bigger picture.

The topic at hand from your perspective is that Tomlin changed the game plan significantly to appease Willie and my contention is he didn't. The numbers reflect that he didn't, IMO. In the 3 games following Willie's "acting like a diva" (in your view), he still had only one game with 20+ carries and that was the final game when we took the air out of the ball to prevent injuries.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 05:44 PM
Hmmmm...There were some good backs that played out of C-USA last year, but that's just one year. That's why I say no great shakes, because you've twisted Parker's data and sliced it and diced it up in such a way that he gets no credit for the body of his work, and gets ripped up based on thin slices of data. What's good for the goose...Besides, what good is statistical data to a guy who THINKS he has statistical data that shows MM to be the better back than Parker, despite what two NFL franchises have actually determined in real life?

Parker is a starting NFL running back. He earned that role, under two separate coaches, and has played in and contributed to two Super Bowl wins. As for the circumstances surrounding him being made captain, time for some fact over fiction.

The low point came during the lead-up to the second game against the Ravens on Dec. 14, when Parker criticized the team's approach to running the ball. Coach Mike Tomlin favored a two tight-end alignment for blocking instead of an I-formation with a fullback leading the way.

Tomlin was quick to put Parker in his place, remarking, "Every morning I come to work, I walk past five Lombardi (trophies), not five rushing titles."

But Tomlin still wanted to let Parker know how much he valued him. And to demonstrate it, he named Parker a captain for the Ravens game.

The move paid off, helping build the tailback's confidence on the heels of an awkward episode. Parker wasn't dominant, gaining 47 yards, but he had several good runs during the 13-9 road win.

"He has had a rough go of it at times from a health standpoint during the season," Tomlin said. "But he weathered it early, and he appears to be rising at the appropriate time. It's great for him, and it's even better for us."

This is a tempest in a teapot, but certainly can be made to sound really bad if you want it to, you know, by a guy who wants his college RB to look as good as possible by denigrating the guy in front of him on the depth chart. You have some fundamental problems with your argument here.

1) CHris Johnson and Matt Forte are the only two to come out of that conference last year. Again, you are the one trying to slice and dice the data. Deangelo Williams has been in the league for years and so has Moore.

2) You say that Parker is a starting RB and earned that role. Well his colllege coach did not see it that way. So thats a pretty good example that you cant use a coaches judgment as fact. Need further evidence? Look at the Giants and Tiki Barber. They were so convinced he was only a 3rd down back that they drafted Ron Dayne in the 1st round.

3) I dont THINK I have the statistical data that says Moore > Parker. I KNOW that I have data that proves that the Steelers offense was far more effective in 2008 with Moore rather than Parker (please re-read that comment and find the enormous differences between what I said and what you said).

There is no slicing of data, in fact, you are the one slicing the data (Moores stats due to down/distance, etc). The raw data is pretty clear. Show me one instance where I gave anything other than the raw data.

4) Again, you have a problem with the definition of FACT. The FACT is that Parker talked to the coaches about being unhappy with his role on a team that was winning. That is the fact. How Tomlin dealt with it is his choice of how to manage his players and their egos...

But Tomlin still wanted to let Parker know how much he valued him.

That is the definition of managing someones ego....a diva. The team was winning but Parker needed something extra...being named captain, more carries, whatever.

What part of this am I missing?

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 06:09 PM
The topic at hand from your perspective is that Tomlin changed the game plan significantly to appease Willie and my contention is he didn't. The numbers reflect that he didn't, IMO. In the 3 games following Willie's "acting like a diva" (in your view), he still had only one game with 20+ carries and that was the final game when we took the air out of the ball to prevent injuries. The numbers most certainly reflect that he did.

Here are WP and MM weeks 12 and 13...

WP 30 carries 124 yds
MM 27 carries 123 yds (and 6 rec for 50 yds)
And the Steelers averaged 30 points per game

Parker started in New England, then shared time at halfback with Mewelde Moore, who chipped in with 12 carries for 67 yards in New England. That rotation could continue.

"We will evaluate that this week," Tomlin said. "There is no doubt that that was a successful venture for us last week. Mewelde is a good player who has shown that he is capable of helping us win. We all know what Willie is capable of doing. I am sure that we are going to continue to see both of those guys in some fashion. The minute details of the rotation just have not been worked out yet for this week."
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08338/932311-66.stm

That was when the WP/Tomlin issue came up. Then after the WP/Tomlin issue, the next 4 weeks...

WP 68 carries 219 yds
MM 19 carries 89 yds (and 7 catches for 66 yds)
And the Steelers averaged 19.5 points per game

So even though WP got 42 more touches than MM over the final four games, he only had 64 more yards than MM. Draw any conclusion you want, but that looks pretty damning.

Again, thats the raw data. Hence the questions about what happens if/when Mendenhall outperforms Parker and Parker complains to Tomlin about his role.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 06:13 PM
One more stat....

Over the final 6 games-

WP- 98 touches, 343 yards
MM- 59 touches, 328 yards

That sums it up for me.

tony hipchest
06-30-2009, 06:22 PM
ufn do you understand the really simple concept that as willie got closer to 100% his work load increased? thats not appeasement. that is football.

are you really poo-pooing the defenses of dallas, titans, and ravens?

do you really believe m. moore woulda helped the steelers hang up 28 points a week against some of the stingiest defenses in the league?

lol. moore is good, but hes not THAT good. when it comes to yards allowed and points allowed, the ravens and titans were right behind the almighty steelers.

you can bet if the steelers had to face moore, or sproles, or portis, or any other running back you wanna name, they woulda shut him down.

thats how it works. that is football. NFL games arent won with raw stats. fanatasy football championships are.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 09:38 PM
ufn do you understand the really simple concept that as willie got closer to 100% his work load increased? thats not appeasement. that is football.

are you really poo-pooing the defenses of dallas, titans, and ravens?

do you really believe m. moore woulda helped the steelers hang up 28 points a week against some of the stingiest defenses in the league?

lol. moore is good, but hes not THAT good. when it comes to yards allowed and points allowed, the ravens and titans were right behind the almighty steelers.

you can bet if the steelers had to face moore, or sproles, or portis, or any other running back you wanna name, they woulda shut him down.

thats how it works. that is football. NFL games arent won with raw stats. fanatasy football championships are. No. Thats appeasement. As the stats show, APPLES-TO-APPLES, Moore was effective against Dallas, Tennesee and Baltimore whereas Parker was not.

Do I believe Moore would have helped the Steelers score 28 against those teams? No. Not at all. But the Steelers only scored 4 offensive TDs in those 3 games and 2 of them (Dallas and Baltimore) were last minute, no-huddle drives (no FWP on the field). Regardless of who you are playing, thats not good enough in the NFL.

Whether it was the Patriots when they were splitting carries, or vs the Giants or Indianapolis with Moore starting, the Steelers offense was plenty good with the same OL, same playcalling, etc. When the offense went to WP as the feature back, it struggled.

UltimateFootballNetwork
06-30-2009, 09:43 PM
I feel it is kind of a moot point regardless, what is the point of arguing?

Willie is going to be the starter ... he was hurt almost the entire last year, he seems to have an even bigger chip on his shoulder this year.

The fact the Moore played better in some games vs. others has so many more factors involved in it than simply the raw stats.

Do you think the steelers cared that Tashard Choice ran for almost 100 on the ground and added another 50 or so through passes? NO. They weren't however, going to let Tony Romo light up the scoreboard with T.O./Witten/Williams. It's chess not checkers.

This always seems to happen, a backup comes in and has a huge game and a bunch of hoopla is spit about a changing of the guard. (the fact that someone is a tulane homer or wherever MM went to college only adds to the ignorance)

Willie parker was on his way to a rushing title two years ago before he broke a bone ... a RUSHING TITLE ... now all of a sudden our "biggest" free agent pick up from a year ago should be the starter?

Then if not the starter, have his praises sang? No one disputes that MM did a great job when called upon, but he's a career third down back, not the lone feature back for the steelers ... and as it stands right now he's buried three deep on the depth chart, I think it's time to put this arguement to rest But I am not talking about a good game. I am pointing out that over the course of the entire season, Moore outperformed Parker in every way possible. (Again, not an opinion. Moore finished 2nd on the team in yards from scrimmage behind Ward).

And no one said anything about who should be a feature back. That term is widely misunderstood. There are maybe 5 feature backs in the NFL today and even if there are 10, Willie Parker is not one of them. And so the question is not silly and has nothing to do with feature backs.

Why, when splitting carries was working (Per Tomlins own quote), did he appease a player who complained about playing time when it clearly hurt the team to do so.

tony hipchest
06-30-2009, 10:05 PM
parker outgained moore vs. patriots.

parker couldnt play due to injury vs. indy and giants.

moore had 7 carries for 16 yds vs. the ravens. :cheer:

moore torched dallas with 58 yds on 9 touches. :rolleyes:

5 touches and 48 yds vs. titans. :thumbsup:

congrats! you have just proven he is a great third down back.... but if you really think he can keep up that pace as a 20-25 touch back in the nfl you are kidding yourself.

you are not football smarter than tomlin, and if he thought moore gave the team a better chance of winning he wouldnt hesitate to start moore.

to make it simple for you, reverse rolles in all the games you cite. make moore the starter and willie the reserve. willie is the one putting up 40 yds on 8 touches and moore is the one getting 30 yds on 16 touches.

one doesnt become the youngest coach to win a sb in nfl history by appeasemant.

X-Terminator
07-01-2009, 12:16 AM
This UFN guy is STILL here with his tedious arguments about how much Parker sucks and his boy from his alma mater is the bee's knees?

Dude seriously...obsession is bad.

JackHammer
07-01-2009, 01:56 AM
That is what I thought, which is why it was interesting that the guy who complained the most got the starting spot last year. (I dont walk by 5 rushing titles every morning I walk by 5 Lombardi trophies)

IMO, Tomlin wanted to keep his RB's fresh for the long haul(as evidenced by him splitting carries between the two at times), but he also wanted them to have defined roles. Moore is the best option as our 3rd down back, and Parker was never a real good 3rd down back(yet has proven he can be an effective starter). Moore being the 3rd down back would make Parker the starter by default. Tomlin is going to try to spread out the RB duties after the whole "ride Willie til his wheels fall off" comment that was followed by Willie breaking a wheel. The best way to take pressure off of our RB's, while maintaining defined roles for them, was to have FWP starting and MM as a 3rd down/situational back.

revefsreleets
07-01-2009, 09:04 AM
You have some fundamental problems with your argument here.

One at a time...easy peasy.

1) CHris Johnson and Matt Forte are the only two to come out of that conference last year. Again, you are the one trying to slice and dice the data. Deangelo Williams has been in the league for years and so has Moore.

One-hit wonders as far as I'm concerned. Prior to last year, the only guy from C-USA to show up in the top 30 was Williams, and he was #29. Since YOU use stats from Willie's games/years when he was injured, purposefully taking his least productive numbers to make your point, why can't I? If these guys can maintain this high level, then your argument gains some vaidity. Until then, the one year success of C-USA backs is a moot point.

2) You say that Parker is a starting RB and earned that role. Well his colllege coach did not see it that way. So thats a pretty good example that you cant use a coaches judgment as fact. Need further evidence? Look at the Giants and Tiki Barber. They were so convinced he was only a 3rd down back that they drafted Ron Dayne in the 1st round.

Parker is a 4 year starter IN THE NFL. He stepped right in and earned a spot. Barber is a decent example of a back making the leap, but do you have any others? And Barber also played for one team, meaning only one staff made their evaluations that found him better used as a third down back. I believe Moore has played on two teams under 3 different coaches and they all have made the same evaluation. Are you suggesting that you know better than not one, not two, but THREE separate NFL coaching staffs?

3) I dont THINK I have the statistical data that says Moore > Parker. I KNOW that I have data that proves that the Steelers offense was far more effective in 2008 with Moore rather than Parker (please re-read that comment and find the enormous differences between what I said and what you said).

Again, you FAIL to take into account the situations that Moore was presented with compared to Parker. PARKER carried the day-day between-the-tackles load, and Moore was given the spread packages, the passing look downs, all advantages to Moore. You simply cannot ignore this aspect of the comparison. If we were able to flip-flop the two, it's no stretch to assume that Parker's numbers would jump up (with the exception pass catching...he is not Moore's equal in that category) and Moore's would drop. It's the KISS principle: The coaches know this to be true. Moore CANNOT carry the load, cannot run between the tackles in obvious run situations and last, so he's utilized in a different fashion, and it ARTIFICIALLY INFLATES HIS STATS. Everyone else here who isn't Moore's boy and didn't go to Tulane understands that very simple concept.

There is no slicing of data, in fact, you are the one slicing the data (Moores stats due to down/distance, etc). The raw data is pretty clear. Show me one instance where I gave anything other than the raw data.

4) Again, you have a problem with the definition of FACT. The FACT is that Parker talked to the coaches about being unhappy with his role on a team that was winning. That is the fact. How Tomlin dealt with it is his choice of how to manage his players and their egos...

I have no idea what this has to do with anything. If Moore is such a great back, than THIS would have been his golden opportunity to snatch the sterters jobs away. You've continually over-emphasized this tiny blip of a matter into some giant rift causing incident, when all the evidence points towards the contrary.

Speaking of ego's, it's clear that YOU have an enormous one. This creates problems because you will NEVER, EVER admit to being wrong, and will continue to massage data and provide "analysis" (no matter how absurd or shortsighted) that backs up your assertions. The facts don't change though. Melwelde Moore is a back-up and third down/situational back. That's what he is, and that's what he will be. If he plays for 6 more teams, that's where he'll end up leveling out at. Time will bear this out, which will ultimately be the undoing of your argument.

mmalone
07-01-2009, 11:43 AM
Moore is the god hands RB - 3rd downs.

Parker is the up the middle 1st and second down back. hence his stats by UFN.

Mendy will be the backup for 1st and 2nd down.
Mendy has hands too. if he plays well he will give the defenses a hard time.

Summers will be the short yardage FB

If Mendy plays well Willie is gone.
If Mendy fumbles and cant take the load.
we sign willie. then mendy is gone.

either way.

Moore/Summers are here to stay.

Willie/Mendy are up to Mendy to make the call.

Willie is next out if all the other RB's work well.

then tomlin needs to force Arians to call real running plays. lol...

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 01:00 PM
You have some fundamental problems with your argument here.

One at a time...easy peasy.

1) One-hit wonders as far as I'm concerned. Prior to last year, the only guy from C-USA to show up in the top 30 was Williams, and he was #29. Since YOU use stats from Willie's games/years when he was injured, purposefully taking his least productive numbers to make your point, why can't I? If these guys can maintain this high level, then your argument gains some vaidity. Until then, the one year success of C-USA backs is a moot point.

2) Parker is a 4 year starter IN THE NFL. He stepped right in and earned a spot. Barber is a decent example of a back making the leap, but do you have any others? And Barber also played for one team, meaning only one staff made their evaluations that found him better used as a third down back. I believe Moore has played on two teams under 3 different coaches and they all have made the same evaluation. Are you suggesting that you know better than not one, not two, but THREE separate NFL coaching staffs?


3) Again, you FAIL to take into account the situations that Moore was presented with compared to Parker. PARKER carried the day-day between-the-tackles load, and Moore was given the spread packages, the passing look downs, all advantages to Moore. You simply cannot ignore this aspect of the comparison. If we were able to flip-flop the two, it's no stretch to assume that Parker's numbers would jump up (with the exception pass catching...he is not Moore's equal in that category) and Moore's would drop. It's the KISS principle: The coaches know this to be true. Moore CANNOT carry the load, cannot run between the tackles in obvious run situations and last, so he's utilized in a different fashion, and it ARTIFICIALLY INFLATES HIS STATS. Everyone else here who isn't Moore's boy and didn't go to Tulane understands that very simple concept.


4)I have no idea what this has to do with anything. If Moore is such a great back, than THIS would have been his golden opportunity to snatch the sterters jobs away. You've continually over-emphasized this tiny blip of a matter into some giant rift causing incident, when all the evidence points towards the contrary.

Speaking of ego's, it's clear that YOU have an enormous one. This creates problems because you will NEVER, EVER admit to being wrong, and will continue to massage data and provide "analysis" (no matter how absurd or shortsighted) that backs up your assertions. The facts don't change though. Melwelde Moore is a back-up and third down/situational back. That's what he is, and that's what he will be. If he plays for 6 more teams, that's where he'll end up leveling out at. Time will bear this out, which will ultimately be the undoing of your argument.

1) That is not what you suggested. You argued that Conference USA RBs were inferior and thus only qualified to be 3rd down backs. As I pointed out, there are a handful of top NFL backs that came from that conference, and if by one-hit-wonders you mean that Forte and Johnson are going to become average RBs this year then you would be correct. So are they one-hit wonders? A fluke? If so, then you have a point. If not, then not.

2) Barber is not the only example. Brian Westbrook was only a 3rd down back, with Correll Buckhalter getting 1st/2nd down carries, Priest Holmes was a 3rd down back who was waived in Baltimore, Ryan Grant was 5th string with NYG who was waived, it took Marion Barber 3 years to become the starter in Dallas, I could go on....and you are forgetting that Moore was the starter in Minnesota until Brad Tarvaris ackson is better than Donovan McNabb Childress demoted him.

3) NO I did not. I listed Moores number as the starter. I linked to Moore having a higher avg on 1st downs than 3rd downs. Most of Moores carries came as the starter when Parker was hurt, not vice versa. You seem to be in denial of what the facts say.

4) This is the entire point. You suggest that Moore had a chance and did not seize it. Once again, 90 yds rushing, 4.5 ypc, 20 yds receiving in his 4 starts. Would he have needed to rush for 180 yards/game to have seized the opportunity in your mind? Willie Parker only topped 110 yds in a game 3 times all season.

We will see what happens in time for sure. As much as you think I am the one with the blind agenda, ironically I am seemingly the only one who isnt.

fansince'76
07-01-2009, 01:13 PM
As much as you think I am the one with the blind agenda, ironically I am seemingly the only one who isnt.

Right. :rolleyes:

Hey Steeler fans,

I'm a Redskins fan but am also a Tulane grad and was coming to check out the scoop on Mewelde....

....For the sake of my fantasy team (and a lethal Steelers offense), I've been waiting to see the no huddle with Moore used in a Brian Westbrook role.

http://www.steelersfever.com/forums/showthread.php?p=446507#post446507

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 01:28 PM
IMO, Tomlin wanted to keep his RB's fresh for the long haul(as evidenced by him splitting carries between the two at times), but he also wanted them to have defined roles. Moore is the best option as our 3rd down back, and Parker was never a real good 3rd down back(yet has proven he can be an effective starter). Moore being the 3rd down back would make Parker the starter by default. Tomlin is going to try to spread out the RB duties after the whole "ride Willie til his wheels fall off" comment that was followed by Willie breaking a wheel. The best way to take pressure off of our RB's, while maintaining defined roles for them, was to have FWP starting and MM as a 3rd down/situational back. This is a good take and would be a logical explanation for the division of labor in the backfield.

I appreciate your having an opinion that did not involve a personal attack.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 01:29 PM
Right. :rolleyes:



http://www.steelersfever.com/forums/showthread.php?p=446507#post446507
While I am a little scared that you are so concerned with my posting history....wasnt I right?

In retrospect, wasnt the no huddle with Moore the Steelers best offensive package by far?

fansince'76
07-01-2009, 01:32 PM
While I am a little scared that you are so concerned with my posting history....

It's called a "keyword search" - "fantasy" was the keyword, your screenname was the user to search under. Took all of 5 seconds to dig that up. :coffee:

Dino 6 Rings
07-01-2009, 01:33 PM
No, you were not right.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 01:34 PM
It's called a "keyword search" - "fantasy" was the keyword, your screenname was the user to search under. Took all of 5 seconds to dig that up. :coffee: Excellent. As long as we have established that I am trying to talk about football and you are trying to talk about me.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 01:35 PM
No, you were not right. Do you have anything to back up that statement? I do.

fansince'76
07-01-2009, 01:35 PM
Excellent. As long as we have established that I am trying to talk about football and you are trying to talk about me.

Only when you say you have no agenda when your history indicates quite the opposite....

Dino 6 Rings
07-01-2009, 01:40 PM
Do you have anything to back up that statement? I do.

Oh yes in fact I've proven time and time again that your stat analysis is flawed but you don't recognize that you've lost the argument time and time again.

You are not right, the offense is not better with Moore starting in place over Parker.

8-2 with Parker as Starter, 3-0 in Playoffs with Parker as Starter.

2-2 with Moore as Starter.

You can not refute those Facts, so you make up other stuff.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 01:42 PM
Only when you say you have no agenda when your history indicates quite the opposite.... Really? Am I trying to influence the posters at Steelers Fever so that Tomlin gives Moore more carries in the 2008 season to help my fantasy squad? Does that make sense?

Dino 6 Rings
07-01-2009, 01:46 PM
Really? Am I trying to influence the posters at Steelers Fever so that Tomlin gives Moore more carries in the 2008 season to help my fantasy squad? Does that make sense?

No you're enjoying attempting to upset Steelers fans by making us compare our running backs to each other and break down why one (Parker) is better than the other (Moore) Really, they are both important to our team. So really, you're just mad that we have Moore who is statistically, last season, better than Portis.

fansince'76
07-01-2009, 01:46 PM
Really? Am I trying to influence the posters at Steelers Fever so that Tomlin gives Moore more carries in the 2008 season to help my fantasy squad? Does that make sense?

No, it makes no sense, but it hasn't prevented you from attempting to do so anyway, for whatever reason.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 01:54 PM
No, it makes no sense, but it hasn't prevented you from attempting to do so anyway, for whatever reason. Maybe I have a football point, one that I have supported with data, that I am trying to understand/discuss but I am being met with nothing but personal attacks.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 01:57 PM
No you're enjoying attempting to upset Steelers fans by making us compare our running backs to each other and break down why one (Parker) is better than the other (Moore) Really, they are both important to our team. So really, you're just mad that we have Moore who is statistically, last season, better than Portis.

I am not trying to upset anyone. I am trying to discuss an issue, and Steeler fans are the ones getting upset at the notion that Willie Parker might not be the superstar they think he is.

What does Moore have to do with Portis? Portis was 13 yards short of 1500 yards last season.

scsteeler
07-01-2009, 02:10 PM
The best back on the team is Mewelde Moore, and anybody who says differently is just flat-out wrong!:thumbsup:


Based on last years numbers Moore was the best back but overall NO!!!!!

This is a new year and I like the fact that we may have 3 or 4 great backs in the backfield.
No team will survive with just one feature back now you need to have at least 2 guys that produce for you.

mmalone
07-01-2009, 02:15 PM
I am not trying to upset anyone. I am trying to discuss an issue, and Steeler fans are the ones getting upset at the notion that Willie Parker might not be the superstar they think he is.

What does Moore have to do with Portis? Portis was 13 yards short of 1500 yards last season.

Good Luck UFN... Talking football here is hard ... lots of flak.

When i watch a game with our crew here at home we have opinions of the plays and the players. the coaches and the calls. the refs calls and the cheerleading style... is'nt that football....

Or maybe im wrong and we just have to say after each play good or bad, its ok... we won the super bowl...

people lets talk football. let thumper and UFN talk football.

if mendy plays great this year willie is gone next year. my opinion...

if mendy fumbles all year, willie is signed for big dollars and mendy is gone. mt opinion...

either way moore and summers stay. my opinion....

thanks

fansince'76
07-01-2009, 02:30 PM
Good Luck UFN... Talking football here is hard ... lots of flak.

When i watch a game with our crew here at home we have opinions of the plays and the players. the coaches and the calls. the refs calls and the cheerleading style... is'nt that football....

Or maybe im wrong and we just have to say after each play good or bad, its ok... we won the super bowl...

people lets talk football. let thumper and UFN talk football.

if mendy plays great this year willie is gone next year. my opinion...

if mendy fumbles all year, willie is signed for big dollars and mendy is gone. mt opinion...

either way moore and summers stay. my opinion....

thanks

So nobody's entitled to disagree with anyone else? Whatever.

mmalone
07-01-2009, 02:37 PM
So nobody's entitled to disagree with anyone else? Whatever.

no.. thats the point ... half the posts change the subject, add other players, start a new topic or make up stuff thats non sense without talking about the opinion of the post... you just did it.....

no one has said anything about my opinion of the rbs. i posted it twice.

you changed the subject...

UFN, had his players and discussions changed like 6 times from his posts.

its hard to stay in focus with that.

Fire Haley
07-01-2009, 03:12 PM
ha ha - running backs are old and busted


Passing wins Super Bowls!

5 WIDE!!!

http://community.post-gazette.com/resized-image.ashx/__size/500x400/__key/CommunityServer.Components.PostAttachments/00.00.07.08.32/freed_5F00_holmescatch.jpg

fansince'76
07-01-2009, 03:28 PM
no.. thats the point ... half the posts change the subject, add other players, start a new topic or make up stuff thats non sense without talking about the opinion of the post... you just did it.....

no one has said anything about my opinion of the rbs. i posted it twice.

you changed the subject...

UFN, had his players and discussions changed like 6 times from his posts.

its hard to stay in focus with that.

How exactly did I change the subject? I specifically addressed a part of a previous post. Sorry, but if anyone changed the subject of this thread initially (which was Tomlin's take on Mendenhall getting into the lineup) it was UFN with his BS about Willie being a malcontent and a diva and Tomlin taking a "grease to the squeaky wheel" approach when deciding who starts. Additionally, when a thread becomes longer it does tend to meander a bit. It happens.

And as far as your opinions on the RB situation goes, I think Willie is gone either way after 2009 due to age and/or salary issues.

Dino 6 Rings
07-01-2009, 04:17 PM
no.. thats the point ... half the posts change the subject, add other players, start a new topic or make up stuff thats non sense without talking about the opinion of the post... you just did it.....

no one has said anything about my opinion of the rbs. i posted it twice.

you changed the subject...

UFN, had his players and discussions changed like 6 times from his posts.

its hard to stay in focus with that.

I think we keep both Willie and Mendy and Moore will likely be the odd man out. Willie will end up being designated as the 3rd down guy IF Mendy can show that he can handle the load in 2010. Then, Willie knowing he's hit that Over 30 wall that RBs tend to hit, will willingly sign for easy money for a 3 year (retire with the only team that gave him a shot) deal. I'll take screen passes and draws to Willie Parker vs a Spread out Defense all day long as opposed to him vs an 8 man front.

That's what I think...but heck, I thought last year that Ward would do the "retire a Steeler contract" thing so what the heck do I know.

Moore will be the odd man out next season. Sorry but if ever there was an example of a "Hired Gun" Moore is that guy. Which also, per my opinion, means Moore is not the Future Starter, and Full Time Starter that people seem to hope for to replace Willie. Moore is a 3rd down guy, 3rd on the depth chart guy who fills in when he is needed but not the kind of guy you build a running game around.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 04:30 PM
Based on last years numbers Moore was the best back but overall NO!!!!!

This is a new year and I like the fact that we may have 3 or 4 great backs in the backfield.
No team will survive with just one feature back now you need to have at least 2 guys that produce for you.

Thank you. ONE person willing to admit that, for whatever reason, last year, Moore was the more effective (NOT NECESSARILY BETTER) RB.

At no point has better/worse feature back/3rd down back even been relevant to any of these topics.

So back to the original point of this thread, where Tomlin suggested that playing time is based on a meritocracy...

1)Why did Tomlin play the less effective RB last season?

2)Why werent carries at least split?

3)What does this mean for if/when Mendenhall outperforms WP and WP complains to coaches?

Dino 6 Rings
07-01-2009, 04:46 PM
Because Tomlin knew that feeding the horse named Parker was the best way to keep Moore as the 3rd down back where he was needed and by keeping Parker as the "work horse" Tomling forced the defense of the other team to play the run first which opened up the passing game the way it was designed to work.

That's Why.

Preacher
07-01-2009, 04:49 PM
Thank you. ONE person willing to admit that, for whatever reason, last year, Moore was the more effective (NOT NECESSARILY BETTER) RB.

At no point has better/worse feature back/3rd down back even been relevant to any of these topics.

So back to the original point of this thread, where Tomlin suggested that playing time is based on a meritocracy...

1)Why did Tomlin play the less effective RB last season?

2)Why werent carries at least split?

3)What does this mean for if/when Mendenhall outperforms WP and WP complains to coaches?

You are a one man show... and don't listen to anyone else but yourself, unless you like the answer someone else gives you.

One more time, before the iggy button is hit.

1. Moore played against worse defenses

2. Moore played healthy, Parker played hurt... to get himself up to gamespeed for the playoffs.

3. When willie played, Moore came in on passing downs-3rd downs which are usually more susceptible to runs.

So your premise that Moore was "more effective" is flawed, because a proper comparison can not be made.

Thus, the coaches played who they KNEW was the better back.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 04:57 PM
You are a one man show... and don't listen to anyone else but yourself, unless you like the answer someone else gives you.

One more time, before the iggy button is hit.

1. Moore played against worse defenses

2. Moore played healthy, Parker played hurt... to get himself up to gamespeed for the playoffs.

3. When willie played, Moore came in on passing downs-3rd downs which are usually more susceptible to runs.

So your premise that Moore was "more effective" is flawed, because a proper comparison can not be made.

Thus, the coaches played who they KNEW was the better back.

That would be ironic, you putting me on ignore.

1) Not true and I can back that up with the facts.

2) Does it matter? So why did Tomlin play a hurt RB? Parker was mostly terrible in the playoffs.

3) Again, I have already pointed to Moore having almost half of his carries in 08 on 1st down and him being a league leader in that category. http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2008&type=Rushing&range=NFL&rank=229

So since the coaches had Moore behind Carey Davis on the depth chart at RB until the 4th game did they have it wrong then? What does that say about what the coaches know?

You can put me on ignore if you want, but I cannot help it if reality does not work for you. It would be ironic.

Preacher
07-01-2009, 05:12 PM
That would be ironic, you putting me on ignore.

1) Not true and I can back that up with the facts.

2) Does it matter? So why did Tomlin play a hurt RB? Parker was mostly terrible in the playoffs.

3) Again, I have already pointed to Moore having almost half of his carries in 08 on 1st down and him being a league leader in that category. http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2008&type=Rushing&range=NFL&rank=229

So since the coaches had Moore behind Carey Davis on the depth chart at RB until the 4th game did they have it wrong then? What does that say about what the coaches know?


You can put me on ignore if you want, but I cannot help it if reality does not work for you. It would be ironic.

Ironic? There is nothing Ironic about finally putting someone on ignore after listening to them say the exact same thing over and over and over.

People disagree with you. Leave it alone. Your stats prove something to you, others, like myself, have read them, and see holes in them. We have tried to point those out, but to no avail. So we are at a stand off.

the problem is that you continue to harp on the single issue.

BTW, Willie's 146 yards rushing and 2 TD's against San Diego are hardly "terrible"

His game against the Ravens? The number 2 defense in the league that played with 6 in the box the entire game... Sorry, NO ONE gains rushing yards against he Ravens... or the Steelers.

Which leaves the SB. Go back and watch the game. Willie had quite a few nice rushes.

SB? We had 58 yards rushing... to to 33 yards for the Cards. A number of his rushes were trying to pick up 1 or two yards, are were pretty much designed that way. Furthermore, there are 2 and 3 bodies in the backfield. Are you REALLY telling me that you thing MeMo can run through 2 and 3 bodies?

Face it... just because YOU beleive it, doesn't mean others agree. It is not a fact, it is your opinion. You are welcome to it. But when you continue to be a one-trick pony, it gets tiring, boring, and makes people want to send you off to iggy land.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-01-2009, 05:48 PM
Ironic? There is nothing Ironic about finally putting someone on ignore after listening to them say the exact same thing over and over and over.

People disagree with you. Leave it alone. Your stats prove something to you, others, like myself, have read them, and see holes in them. We have tried to point those out, but to no avail. So we are at a stand off.

the problem is that you continue to harp on the single issue.

BTW, Willie's 146 yards rushing and 2 TD's against San Diego are hardly "terrible"

His game against the Ravens? The number 2 defense in the league that played with 6 in the box the entire game... Sorry, NO ONE gains rushing yards against he Ravens... or the Steelers.

Which leaves the SB. Go back and watch the game. Willie had quite a few nice rushes.

SB? We had 58 yards rushing... to to 33 yards for the Cards. A number of his rushes were trying to pick up 1 or two yards, are were pretty much designed that way. Furthermore, there are 2 and 3 bodies in the backfield. Are you REALLY telling me that you thing MeMo can run through 2 and 3 bodies?

Face it... just because YOU beleive it, doesn't mean others agree. It is not a fact, it is your opinion. You are welcome to it. But when you continue to be a one-trick pony, it gets tiring, boring, and makes people want to send you off to iggy land.

I would not say the same thing over and over if we could all agree on reality. Like your point about thinking that Moore padded his stats on 3rd downs or against inferior defenses....those points are factually incorrect. Thats not a disagreement of opinion, thats one party being incorrect.

You then go ahead and do the same things you are suggesting (however incorrectly), that I am doing with Moore.

You talk about Parker burning SD defense, Well SD was the 25th ranked defense in 08. Parkers other 100+ yard games were against the Browns (26th) and Houston (23rd).

Moores starts, and most of his carries/touches, came against Jacksonville (17th), Bengals (12th), Indy (11th) and NYG (4th).

So your point was not a disagreement over an opinion. It was factually incorrect, and thus I push back. In fact, it was Parker who padded his stats against the bottom feeders and not the other way around.

thumper
07-01-2009, 06:00 PM
I heard that and thought to myself: "Nails. F'n Tomlin. Perfect answer...again."

It's not up to MT to worry about getting anything out of RM - it's up to RM to prove to have so much value that they can't help but use him. They aren't going to baby sit him and say (in so many words and actions) "Ewwwwwwwww, please try real hard. Pretty please?"

Nope. It's either "show us" or "Too bad you didn't man up, go grab some bench."

Tomlin is tough but totally fair. This guy is a gem. He crushes Cowher as far as being a great head coach.

mmalone
07-01-2009, 09:42 PM
ha ha - running backs are old and busted


Passing wins Super Bowls!

5 WIDE!!!

http://community.post-gazette.com/resized-image.ashx/__size/500x400/__key/CommunityServer.Components.PostAttachments/00.00.07.08.32/freed_5F00_holmescatch.jpg

get real folks. without a running game. we are dead..

ufn, thumper, and anyone else that understands the turth of our backs are right . . we are doomed without a running offense strategy. this is the year the steelers show a big running back attack.... go summers. FB

arians is dead after this year if he doesnt wake up. bye bye arians....

if you cant run an offense with moore, willie, mendy, summers, davis.... your done....

no excuses ... your done...
.

Shoes
07-01-2009, 09:45 PM
get real folks. without a running game. we are dead..

ufn, thumper, and anyone else that understands the turth of our backs are right . . we are doomed without a running offense strategy. this is the year the steelers show a big running back attack.... go summers. FB

arians is dead after this year if he doesnt wake up. bye bye arians....

if you cant run an offense with moore, willie, mendy, summers, davis.... your done....

no excuses ... your done...
.

Lets keep Davis out of this group:chuckle:

steelerchad
07-01-2009, 11:16 PM
I think our running game was fair to poor last year mostly due to predictable play calling and below average run blocking.
Decent running backs are a dime a dozen in the NFL. I think ours as a group are average for the most part.
If the line plays better, which I think it will improve slightly, I think our running game will also. If Mendenhall can step in and contribute that's great as well. RB is a position that a young inexperienced guy can be effective.
We were a little spoiled with the Bus for alot of years. There aren't many big backs with light feet that can make moves and drag linebackers for 2 or 3 extra yards after contact. I guess that's why he'll be in Canton in 2 more years.

tony hipchest
07-01-2009, 11:27 PM
I think our running game was fair to poor last year mostly due to predictable play calling and below average run blocking.
. our running game was average- way above average the prior year.

why do you think that was?

Preacher
07-02-2009, 02:24 AM
I would not say the same thing over and over if we could all agree on reality. Like your point about thinking that Moore padded his stats on 3rd downs or against inferior defenses....those points are factually incorrect. Thats not a disagreement of opinion, thats one party being incorrect.

You then go ahead and do the same things you are suggesting (however incorrectly), that I am doing with Moore.

You talk about Parker burning SD defense, Well SD was the 25th ranked defense in 08. Parkers other 100+ yard games were against the Browns (26th) and Houston (23rd).

Moores starts, and most of his carries/touches, came against Jacksonville (17th), Bengals (12th), Indy (11th) and NYG (4th).

So your point was not a disagreement over an opinion. It was factually incorrect, and thus I push back. In fact, it was Parker who padded his stats against the bottom feeders and not the other way around.

Funny thing.

1. The Chargers are actually almost in the top 3rd of the league in RUN DEFENSE. Furthermore, their defense was BETTER in the second half, when Willie gained MORE YARDS, which means that Willie ran BETTER against a BETTER defense.

2. What part of INJURED do you not understand?

3. According to your method of understanding football, the Steelers would be better off last year with Brees, Cutler, Wsarner, McNabb, Manning, Rodgers, Garrard, Favre, Cassel, Campbell, Manning (eli) Rivers, and CHAD PENNINGTON, since they all through for more yards then Ben did.

Or, the best QB is Pennington, with us being better off with him and Warner, P. Manning, Schuab, Favre, Edwardees, Rivers, Brees, Garcia, Rodgers, Cassel, Hill, Garrard, Campbell, Cutler, Romo, Ryan, McNabb, Manning, and Flacco., if you go by completion percentage.

Of course, there are 16 guys ahead of Ben in Yards per pass attempt, so they must be better there. Also, 16 guys that are better than Ben in yards per game. GUess they are more effective than Ben, and we should trade for them right? After all, wants Ben when we can have a SHAUN HILL or a Matt SCHAUB on our team?

Oh wait... ON OUR OWN TEAM... Byron Leftwich had a BETTER QB RATING and a better YDS per Attempt, and almost hte same completion rating with NO INTs. Guess we should have signed Lefty to a multi year contract and released Ben. Because Lefty was SO MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE right?

Arguing facts as a basis of reality shows that you understand neither facts nor the basis of reality. I am not being ugly here, I am talking serious philosphical and statistical analysis. First, you produce ONLY raw numbers, instead of T-testing or chi square testing, depending on what you are looking at and comparing, or Fisher's exact test to check for probability of variables... all which you argue.

You produce no data showing a statistical signifcant change... meaning 95% assurance that the variance was not by chance (which you would achieve via statistical testing).

So what you are actually giving, is opinion. Furthermore, if you WERE to t-test, chi-test, or Fisher's exact test the statistics, you need to make sure that you are drawing on PROPER statistics, such as RUN DEFENSE vs. OVERALL defense. Furthermore, you then need to make sure your ascertations and following statements are based SQUARELY on teh test result, without leaps. Such as, on 3rd and longs, MeMo has gained more yards then Willie... That may be the "fact" but "MeMo is thus the more efficient back" is still opinion, because the "facts' only argue how many yards each back picked up. A second test of average yardage on 3rd down, and average yardage on 3rd down passing would help determine the best EFFECTIVE back, depending on how you define "effective." Is "effective" meaning a back that gains more yards? Or does it mean when that back is in the game, more third downs are converted? Furthermore, You would also have to test for a statistically significant difference between 3rd and short and 3rd and long yardage.

That is just the beginning.

Anything short of that is opinion. as it is picking only select data sets and extrapolating full pictures. It is called a "Tainted Source Fallacy"

Then, you state the term "reality" Do you REALLY want to get into the metaphysical question of "reality"?

I am not being a smart alec here. You are stating things that are Far from absolute, though you try and make them absolute. Then you keep repeating yourself because other people don't see it your way. Fact is, many other people understand that "Effective" isn't a term that you can associate with Fantasy Football Stats... and that is exactly what you are trying to do.

Preacher
07-02-2009, 02:40 AM
I heard that and thought to myself: "Nails. F'n Tomlin. Perfect answer...again."

It's not up to MT to worry about getting anything out of RM - it's up to RM to prove to have so much value that they can't help but use him. They aren't going to baby sit him and say (in so many words and actions) "Ewwwwwwwww, please try real hard. Pretty please?"

Nope. It's either "show us" or "Too bad you didn't man up, go grab some bench."

Tomlin is tough but totally fair. This guy is a gem. He crushes Cowher as far as being a great head coach.

Actually, I pretty much agree with you right up to the last line. I don't think he "crushes" Cowher on being a great head coach. I think they both are pretty dang good, and MT has the potential to be Chuck Noll good. Don't forget, Cowher's win record was one of the absolute BEST in the league during his time. His record in protecting the lead was great. Its just that he got WAY too conservative in playoff games, and then never developed the pass offense enough to pull the team out of it in the 4th quarter.

But yeah, I am total agreement with you when it comes to Tomlin. I think the Rooney's have thrice struck gold.

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 08:37 AM
Wasn't Marty Shottenheimer, Bill Cowher's Mentor? Kind of explains the "conservative" in the playoffs thing.

As for the Moore argument. I'm pretty sure its been put to bed by Preacher.

Moore's job and role is to be the 3rd down back. That's what he was brought in for, that's his job and he's damn good at it. I like him on our team. Big Fan.

I'm confident our running game will be improved, and we will continue to have a very balanced attack, that will win it all for us again this season. As Preacher says, I want 3 in 5.

mmalone
07-02-2009, 09:17 AM
Moore's job and role is to be the 3rd down back. That's what he was brought in for, that's his job and he's damn good at it. I like him on our team. Big Fan.

I'm confident our running game will be improved, and we will continue to have a very balanced attack, that will win it all for us again this season. As Preacher says, I want 3 in 5.

moore is the hands guy. the counter blitz play goto man..

but this is the Tomlins take on getting Mendenhall into lineup.... thread..

If mendy makes it this year and hangs on to the ball..... we will have a great super bowl run for sure.... willie, mendy, moore, summers, davis... most teams do not have this solid of a crew. loaded with speed and good hands...

we just need the OC to make a good game plan for these guys....

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 09:44 AM
I love Tomlin's take on how Mendy gets into the lineup. Its up to him to do the work and put himself into the lineup, not for the coach to decide he gets to play just because he was a 1st round pick.

Timmons had to work himself into the lineup, Woodley did too, Its how it works in our organization and I love it. Sweed still has a ton of work to do and now has competition to push him to work harder. I love it.

mmalone
07-02-2009, 10:34 AM
I love Tomlin's take on how Mendy gets into the lineup. Its up to him to do the work and put himself into the lineup, not for the coach to decide he gets to play just because he was a 1st round pick.

Timmons had to work himself into the lineup, Woodley did too, Its how it works in our organization and I love it. Sweed still has a ton of work to do and now has competition to push him to work harder. I love it.

this will be a very exciting year... Woodley, Sweed, Mendy, Summers, Hood, Gay

jeez...

is it august yet...

revefsreleets
07-02-2009, 10:39 AM
Moore is, was, and will always be a back-up, third down, situational back.

Trying to glean his value to the Steelers offense from a very small set of data is, at best, inconclusive, at worst, horribly unscientific and a silly exercise in futility.

There are two arguments here: You either agree with Mike Tice, Brad Childress, and Mike Tomlin that Moore is a back-up and third down back, or you agree with UFN that he's actually a starting-quality back and everyone else has just been wrong about him, that UFN is right and all the coaches are wrong.

Sorry, but I'm going with the professional organizations, their front offices and coaches over some random internet dude with a calculator and an agenda...

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 12:07 PM
Funny thing.

1. The Chargers are actually almost in the top 3rd of the league in RUN DEFENSE. Furthermore, their defense was BETTER in the second half, when Willie gained MORE YARDS, which means that Willie ran BETTER against a BETTER defense.

2. What part of INJURED do you not understand?

3. According to your method of understanding football, the Steelers would be better off last year with Brees, Cutler, Wsarner, McNabb, Manning, Rodgers, Garrard, Favre, Cassel, Campbell, Manning (eli) Rivers, and CHAD PENNINGTON, since they all through for more yards then Ben did.

Or, the best QB is Pennington, with us being better off with him and Warner, P. Manning, Schuab, Favre, Edwardees, Rivers, Brees, Garcia, Rodgers, Cassel, Hill, Garrard, Campbell, Cutler, Romo, Ryan, McNabb, Manning, and Flacco., if you go by completion percentage.

Of course, there are 16 guys ahead of Ben in Yards per pass attempt, so they must be better there. Also, 16 guys that are better than Ben in yards per game. GUess they are more effective than Ben, and we should trade for them right? After all, wants Ben when we can have a SHAUN HILL or a Matt SCHAUB on our team?

Oh wait... ON OUR OWN TEAM... Byron Leftwich had a BETTER QB RATING and a better YDS per Attempt, and almost hte same completion rating with NO INTs. Guess we should have signed Lefty to a multi year contract and released Ben. Because Lefty was SO MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE right?

Arguing facts as a basis of reality shows that you understand neither facts nor the basis of reality. I am not being ugly here, I am talking serious philosphical and statistical analysis. First, you produce ONLY raw numbers, instead of T-testing or chi square testing, depending on what you are looking at and comparing, or Fisher's exact test to check for probability of variables... all which you argue.

You produce no data showing a statistical signifcant change... meaning 95% assurance that the variance was not by chance (which you would achieve via statistical testing).

So what you are actually giving, is opinion. Furthermore, if you WERE to t-test, chi-test, or Fisher's exact test the statistics, you need to make sure that you are drawing on PROPER statistics, such as RUN DEFENSE vs. OVERALL defense. Furthermore, you then need to make sure your ascertations and following statements are based SQUARELY on teh test result, without leaps. Such as, on 3rd and longs, MeMo has gained more yards then Willie... That may be the "fact" but "MeMo is thus the more efficient back" is still opinion, because the "facts' only argue how many yards each back picked up. A second test of average yardage on 3rd down, and average yardage on 3rd down passing would help determine the best EFFECTIVE back, depending on how you define "effective." Is "effective" meaning a back that gains more yards? Or does it mean when that back is in the game, more third downs are converted? Furthermore, You would also have to test for a statistically significant difference between 3rd and short and 3rd and long yardage.

That is just the beginning.

Anything short of that is opinion. as it is picking only select data sets and extrapolating full pictures. It is called a "Tainted Source Fallacy"

Then, you state the term "reality" Do you REALLY want to get into the metaphysical question of "reality"?

I am not being a smart alec here. You are stating things that are Far from absolute, though you try and make them absolute. Then you keep repeating yourself because other people don't see it your way. Fact is, many other people understand that "Effective" isn't a term that you can associate with Fantasy Football Stats... and that is exactly what you are trying to do.

1) You are correct, San Diego was ranked much higher as a rush defense than as a pass defense, so I will go ahead and concede that WP smashed a better than average rush defense twice. However, his only other 100+ yard games were against Houston (23rd rush def) and Cleveland (28th) so is this really a point you want to argue? 1 team out of 10 is the exception, not the rule.

2)I understand INJURED perfectly and thats exactly my point. If you want to argue that WP is really a great RB who was simply hurt in 2008....then why did Tomlin stick exclusively with a player who was less than 100% when he had effective alternatives? THAT is the question?

3) No. I have said nothing about QBs and that is not at all an apples-to-apples comparison. And your trying to equate this to Big Ben/Leftwich or something similar gives your argument no credibility. Leftwich played 1 half of meaningful football all season so there is obviously no comparison to the QB who played 15 and 1/2 games.

You seem to be in denial here. It doesnt matter how you slice it, reality is important.

Arguing facts as a basis of reality shows that you understand neither facts nor the basis of reality. Please re-read what you wrote here. This is a ridiculous statement.

You produce no data showing a statistical signifcant change... meaning 95% assurance that the variance was not by chance (which you would achieve via statistical testing).

While I have most certainly provided data that showed an extremely significant change, lets take both season totals and averages.

WP 213 touches, 804 yds, 3.8 yds/touch, 29 1st downs, 4 plays 20+ yds
MM 180 touches, 908 yds, 5.0 yds/touch, 53 1st downs, 7 plays 20+ yds

So you tell me what these SEASON TOTALS mean, because the differences across the board are statistically extremely significant.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 12:14 PM
And the fact that Moore had 53 1st downs to Parkers 29 100% PROVES that Moores numbers were not padded by passing downs.

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 12:18 PM
UFN, I answered your question.

Tomlin kept Parker as the Starter because he knew, as proven by your quote of the Jacksonville Coach, that defenses were playing the run first with Parker in the game and were playing Pass first with Moore as the starter. In keeping Parker as the Starter, it allowed Moore to fill the role, for which he is excellent at, as 3rd down back, more effectively without wearing out during the game, and made the Defenses on the other team focus on stopping the Run, since Parker was the starter. That in turn, opened up the passing game. Not as good as the previous year, but neither the running game or passing game were as good as they were in the 07 season, however, in 07 we didn't win the super bowl, and in 08 we did. So the effectiveness of having Parker as the Starter seems to have worked since with him as the Starter throughout the playoffs we did win it all this year.

That is the cause and effect of having Parker as the starter. It causes the defense to have to pay attention to the running game, which in effect, opens up more of the passing game. It worked. It was a good plan. Moore did his job, Parker did his job, Ben did his job, the WRs did their job and the Oline did an ok job of doing their job.

revefsreleets
07-02-2009, 12:42 PM
You guys are all silly.

UFN knows better than not only us, but also several coaching staffs and front offices in the NFL.

There is simply a league-wide conspiracy against Mewelde Moore to limit his carries and keep him from being what he really is: The single greatest running back who ever walked the face of the Earth.

We really shouldn't feed these interlopers when they show up with this kind of garbage, but, then again, it IS the offseason, so...

Psyychoward86
07-02-2009, 12:48 PM
^^^Lol at the stat geek posts above me^^^


Someone's been incorporating Fantasy Football into real life a little too much...

revefsreleets
07-02-2009, 01:12 PM
^^^Lol at the stat geek posts above me^^^


Someone's been incorporating Fantasy Football into real life a little too much...

I'm reasonably sure this is exactly how this all started. This dude plugged the two guys into some kind of "head-to-head" fantasy calculator and it spit out that Moore was better fantasy player.

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 01:33 PM
I tend the think the argument could be used about Holmes being the full time returner instead of just in "specialty" situations. I mean, he clearly is the best big play threat we have as a Punt Returner, but, if he were to do that all the time, it could lead to an injury and effect his performance at the WR Position.

Moore is a very good, if not great, 3rd down change of pace back, that's his "specialty" but if he were to start all game, it would have to by default, negatively affect his Effectiveness during those key 3rd down situations.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 01:58 PM
You guys are all silly.

UFN knows better than not only us, but also several coaching staffs and front offices in the NFL.

There is simply a league-wide conspiracy against Mewelde Moore to limit his carries and keep him from being what he really is: The single greatest running back who ever walked the face of the Earth.

We really shouldn't feed these interlopers when they show up with this kind of garbage, but, then again, it IS the offseason, so... See, thats the kind of strawman, absurd exaggeration that makes it hard to be constructive around here.

I have provided a long list of evidence that shows, pretty clearly, that Moore was more effective than Parker last year. Never even said Moore was better than Parker much less that Moore was the best RB ever. And back to the topic of this thread, which is that Tomlin says he will play whoever earns it, why did he play the less effective RB?

It seems that people are so freaked out by the possibility that Wiliie Parker is not as good as he is thought to be that they then go to strawmen or attack me. No one wants to discuss the topic of this thread.

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 02:06 PM
And back to the topic of this thread, which is that Tomlin says he will play whoever earns it, why did he play the less effective RB?

He didn't. He played each player in the most effective position for the over all performance of the offense. Moore as the 3rd down specialty back is more effective than Moore as the starter and staying as the 3rd down back.

Parker starts, Moore fills in as needed and specializes on 3rd down. It benefits the entire offense that way.

revefsreleets
07-02-2009, 02:17 PM
See, thats the kind of strawman, absurd exaggeration that makes it hard to be constructive around here.

I have provided a long list of evidence that shows, pretty clearly, that Moore was more effective than Parker last year. Never even said Moore was better than Parker much less that Moore was the best RB ever. And back to the topic of this thread, which is that Tomlin says he will play whoever earns it, why did he play the less effective RB?

It seems that people are so freaked out by the possibility that Wiliie Parker is not as good as he is thought to be that they then go to strawmen or attack me. No one wants to discuss the topic of this thread.

For the last time, I'm not a Willie cheerleader. But I also don't base a players real worth off of what school he went to and what his fantasy numbers are.

You have your agenda whether you admit to it or not.

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 02:36 PM
I think I did a pretty good job explaining why Tomlin decided to stick with Parker as the starter and keep Moore as the 3rd down guy once Parker was back and established that he was healthy enough to carry the load.

Preacher
07-02-2009, 03:22 PM
So you tell me what these SEASON TOTALS mean, because the differences across the board are statistically extremely significant.


You obviously didn't read my post, if you are stating "statistically Exremely significant."

There is not such thing. Either it is statistically significant, or it is not. So which statistical test did you run to come up with the statistical significance?

revefsreleets
07-02-2009, 03:28 PM
You obviously didn't read my post, if you are stating "statistically Exremely significant."

There is not such thing. Either it is statistically significant, or it is not. So which statistical test did you run to come up with the statistical significance?

It's called "The Green Wave" test. Filter everything through a college-based bias and you'll come out the other end with whatever numbers you need to "prove" your point.

If I slice the data thin enough, I probably COULD make a case that Parker is the greatest RB of all time...statistically speaking.

Preacher
07-02-2009, 03:30 PM
It's called "The Green Wave" test. Filter everything through a college-based bias and you'll come out the other end with whatever numbers you need to "prove" your point.

If I slice the data thin enough, I probably COULD make a case that Parker is the greatest RB of all time...statistically speaking.

The most ironic thing on this board, Suit.. Is ME arguing for the scientific models.... :chuckle: :poke:

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 03:34 PM
For the last time, I'm not a Willie cheerleader. But I also don't base a players real worth off of what school he went to and what his fantasy numbers are.

You have your agenda whether you admit to it or not. I agree, those things are irrelevant. How about we base a players worth on yards, yards per carry, big plays and first downs?

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 03:35 PM
I think I did a pretty good job explaining why Tomlin decided to stick with Parker as the starter and keep Moore as the 3rd down guy once Parker was back and established that he was healthy enough to carry the load. What? Others here are arguing that it was WPs health that made him ineffective.

Either he wasnt healthy enough to carry the load or WP is not very good. Which is it?

revefsreleets
07-02-2009, 03:37 PM
Ready: Here goes.

Willie Parker made the longest run from scrimmage in Super Bowl history. Because we're only looking at that one run, his average for really long super bowl runs is 75 yards per carry.

Because it's the biggest game of the year, it automatically becomes the biggest RUN of the year, and since it's the longest run in the biggest game, it becomes the GREATEST run of all time.

Since it's the greatest run of all time, it makes Parker the most EFFECTIVE Steelers back of all time.

And so on and so forth.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 03:38 PM
It's called "The Green Wave" test. Filter everything through a college-based bias and you'll come out the other end with whatever numbers you need to "prove" your point.

If I slice the data thin enough, I probably COULD make a case that Parker is the greatest RB of all time...statistically speaking.

This is mind boggling. What bias am I using? What data did I slice? Total yards, total first downs, total big plays, total touchdowns...which of these TOTALS did I slice with the Greenwave-lens to make WP look so bad?

And please enlighten me and make the statistical case that WP is the greatest RB of all time.

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 03:46 PM
What? Others here are arguing that it was WPs health that made him ineffective.

Either he wasnt healthy enough to carry the load or WP is not very good. Which is it?

Ok, I understand how you are seeing that. But what that poster was saying, is that Willie did play hurt, before sitting on the bench, and when he first came back, played hurt again before hitting the bench again. But by the time the end of the season rolled around, Parker was ready to carry the load again, going into the last games of the season and the Playoffs. That being established, it was better for the entire offense that Moore resume his role as 3rd down back, which, he was great at, while inserting Willie back as the starter on 1st and 2nd downs. That helped the entire Offense be more successful, including the passing game and during the key 3rd down conversions.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 03:49 PM
Ready: Here goes.

Willie Parker made the longest run from scrimmage in Super Bowl history. Because we're only looking at that one run, his average for really long super bowl runs is 75 yards per carry.

Because it's the biggest game of the year, it automatically becomes the biggest RUN of the year, and since it's the longest run in the biggest game, it becomes the GREATEST run of all time.

Since it's the greatest run of all time, it makes Parker the most EFFECTIVE Steelers back of all time.

And so on and so forth.
When you compare something to itself, it is quite literally impossible to draw a comparative conclusion, so even though you were trying to prove some point you didnt even manage to do it.

In your comparison that long run is not only the GREATEST run of alltime but also the WORST run of all time.

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 03:51 PM
Oh and its funny how you ignore 4 of my other posts to just throw out a post asking me to answer for other people.

Listen, Tomlin believed that having Parker as the Starter made the Entire Offense more productive. That includes on 3rd when he knew he'd need a guy like Moore to make plays in the passing game. Having Moore as the Starter makes him less effective on the 3rd downs simply because of wear and tear on the body over the coarse of a game and if he had been the starter since mid season, 8 games.

It was better for the Steelers that on a key 3rd down, we had a "ready to go" Moore, instead of a "just got my head beat in on 2nd down but I'll give it my best" Moore.

That is why, I believe, Coach Tomlin, decided to go with Parker back in the Starting Lineup and Moved Moore back to his position as the 3rd Down back.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 03:52 PM
Ok, I understand how you are seeing that. But what that poster was saying, is that Willie did play hurt, before sitting on the bench, and when he first came back, played hurt again before hitting the bench again. But by the time the end of the season rolled around, Parker was ready to carry the load again, going into the last games of the season and the Playoffs. That being established, it was better for the entire offense that Moore resume his role as 3rd down back, which, he was great at, while inserting Willie back as the starter on 1st and 2nd downs. That helped the entire Offense be more successful, including the passing game and during the key 3rd down conversions. I can see your perspective and can see that reasoning for how they managed the RB position down the stretch...

...but it didnt end up helping the entire offense be more successful. My point being, it ended up making the offense worse.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 03:53 PM
Oh and its funny how you ignore 4 of my other posts to just throw out a post asking me to answer for other people.

Listen, Tomlin believed that having Parker as the Starter made the Entire Offense more productive. That includes on 3rd when he knew he'd need a guy like Moore to make plays in the passing game. Having Moore as the Starter makes him less effective on the 3rd downs simply because of wear and tear on the body over the coarse of a game and if he had been the starter since mid season, 8 games.

It was better for the Steelers that on a key 3rd down, we had a "ready to go" Moore, instead of a "just got my head beat in on 2nd down but I'll give it my best" Moore.

That is why, I believe, Coach Tomlin, decided to go with Parker back in the Starting Lineup and Moved Moore back to his position as the 3rd Down back.Was not ignoring your posts. As I noted, good theory, but it did not work out that way in practice and they stuck with it anyway...

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 03:56 PM
I can see your perspective and can see that reasoning for how they managed the RB position down the stretch...

...but it didnt end up helping the entire offense be more successful. My point being, it ended up making the offense worse.

See that is where I disagree, when the Offense as a Unit HAD to get the Job done, the current set up, being a proven commodity, as a Unit with Willie as the Starter and Moore inserted when needed in Passing Situations, actually Worked to help the Steelers get that 80 yard drive with 2 and change left in the biggest game of the year.

On paper, statistically, the offense wasn't as successful as the year prior, passing or rushing, but this offense worked when it absolutely positively had to work.

Dino 6 Rings
07-02-2009, 03:57 PM
Was not ignoring your posts. As I noted, good theory, but it did not work out that way in practice and they stuck with it anyway...

But it did work out. They drove the Field in the Super Bowl and scored a Game Winning Touchdown with under a minute to go in the game.

That is exactly my point. Every piece of the machine, as established by Arians and Tomlin did its job when it absolutely had to do the job.

Preacher
07-02-2009, 04:03 PM
I agree, those things are irrelevant. How about we base a players worth on yards, yards per carry, big plays and first downs?

sigh.

I am finished here. This kid just doesn't get it.

According to his method, most of our team sucks. . . because none of them have better stats.

Indo
07-02-2009, 05:04 PM
sigh.

I am finished here. This kid just doesn't get it.

According to his method, most of our team sucks. . . because none of them have better stats.

Preach,

Give it up---like the vast majority of the Huddled Masses he doesn't understand that there is a difference in Stats----a football player's "records" and
Statistics---the Scientific Laws which govern probability and cause/effect predictions.
I am fairly certain (and, correct me if I am wrong, UFN) that he has no idea what a Chi-Square or Fisher's Exact test or ANOVA or Beta Power is...
I'm also guessing that if one asked him what the probability is that one will roll a "6" on a die (dice!) if one has already rolled 7 in a row his answer will be 100%...no understanding that it's 17% (16.6666666%).

MACH1
07-02-2009, 05:08 PM
Just what we need, another Willie sucks thread. :banging:

Oh and..........:yawn::yawn::yawn:

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 05:48 PM
See that is where I disagree, when the Offense as a Unit HAD to get the Job done, the current set up, being a proven commodity, as a Unit with Willie as the Starter and Moore inserted when needed in Passing Situations, actually Worked to help the Steelers get that 80 yard drive with 2 and change left in the biggest game of the year.

On paper, statistically, the offense wasn't as successful as the year prior, passing or rushing, but this offense worked when it absolutely positively had to work. Actually, no and you made my point for me. The no huddle/shotgun,2-minute drill packages have Moore in and not Parker. And thats my point. Parker wasnt in on any of those drives.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 05:52 PM
But it did work out. They drove the Field in the Super Bowl and scored a Game Winning Touchdown with under a minute to go in the game.

That is exactly my point. Every piece of the machine, as established by Arians and Tomlin did its job when it absolutely had to do the job.

3. Mewelde Moore should go down as the unsung hero of the final drive. First he made a crushing, crucial block on a blitzing Aaron Francisco that allowed Roethlisberger to convert a third-and-six into a first down. Later he sold a flat pattern so well that Roethlisberger's arm motion to Moore took cornerback Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie off double-coverage on Holmes and onto Moore -- freeing Ben to throw it to Holmes, who, after a slip from Francisco, scampered 40 yards to set up the winning touchdown.
per Peter King (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/02/08/steelers/)

Willie Parker was on the sidelines.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 05:54 PM
sigh.

I am finished here. This kid just doesn't get it.

According to his method, most of our team sucks. . . because none of them have better stats. Once again, personal attacks and strawmen. I said nothing about any other position and never said anything or anyone sucks.

tony hipchest
07-02-2009, 05:55 PM
Actually, no and you made my point for me. The no huddle/shotgun,2-minute drill packages have Moore in and not Parker. And thats my point. Parker wasnt in on any of those drives.can you tell us how many packages moore knew? he was a third down back, trained for 3rd down duty, and no huddle/shotgun, 2-minute drill packages.

do you really need to ask why davis was initially ahead of moore on the depth chart, and why moore wasnt thrust into a prominent role.

you you really think moore would have 6-8 in the box 20-30 snaps a game? do you really think the steelers would switch their entire offensive playbook and philosophy to accomodate a 4th string 3rd down backs strengths?

do you really think they would go an entire game with no runs up the middle and call nothing but off edge runs and swing passes?

why do you refuse to answer these questions or even aknowledge they point out the major flaw in your analysis.

games are not won on paper. yet you continue to ignore this.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 06:15 PM
can you tell us how many packages moore knew? he was a third down back, trained for 3rd down duty, and no huddle/shotgun, 2-minute drill packages.

do you really need to ask why davis was initially ahead of moore on the depth chart, and why moore wasnt thrust into a prominent role.

you you really think moore would have 6-8 in the box 20-30 snaps a game? do you really think the steelers would switch their entire offensive playbook and philosophy to accomodate a 4th string 3rd down backs strengths?

do you really think they would go an entire game with no runs up the middle and call nothing but off edge runs and swing passes?

why do you refuse to answer these questions or even aknowledge they point out the major flaw in your analysis.

games are not won on paper. yet you continue to ignore this. Absurd strawman. No one is suggesting anything about switching playbooks or philosophy or defense.

Are you trying to suggest Parker started because Moore didnt know the packages? I am confused on that one.

1) You dont have to *guess* what would happen if Moore started. He started 4 games last year and the results are not bad.

2) Who said anything about 20-30 carries? First of, there may be zero RBs in the NFL who can take 20-30 carries for 16 games and stay healthy.

tony hipchest
07-02-2009, 06:29 PM
Absurd strawman. No one is suggesting anything about switching playbooks or philosophy or defense.

1) You dont have to *guess* what would happen if Moore started. He started 4 games last year and the results are not bad.

2) Who said anything about 20-30 carries? First of, there may be zero RBs in the NFL who can take 20-30 carries for 16 games and stay healthy.

WRONG. ignore yards. go look at big bens efficiency and winning percentage when willie has 20+ carries vs. mewelde 20+ carries.

the passing game is more effective with willie in the game and getting touches. why? it takes defenders out of the backfield and puts them in the box. why do you think ben threw so many interceptions when moore was playing?

thats right.... 3rd down back in the game who is not a threat to pound it up the middle takes defenders out of the box and has them in coverage.

what part of these siimple football concepts do you not understand?

ben is better with willie in the game. moore did the team no favors as the featured back however was great in his featured role. thats why mendenhall (a rookie) was ahead of him on the depth chart.

UltimateFootballNetwork
07-02-2009, 06:47 PM
WRONG. ignore yards. go look at big bens efficiency and winning percentage when willie has 20+ carries vs. mewelde 20+ carries.

the passing game is more effective with willie in the game and getting touches. why? it takes defenders out of the backfield and puts them in the box. why do you think ben threw so many interceptions when moore was playing?

thats right.... 3rd down back in the game who is not a threat to pound it up the middle takes defenders out of the box and has them in coverage.

what part of these siimple football concepts do you not understand?

ben is better with willie in the game. moore did the team no favors as the featured back however was great in his featured role. thats why mendenhall (a rookie) was ahead of him on the depth chart.
I respect that take. That is a legitimate posibility.

In Moores 4 starts Big Ben threw a ton of interceptions but the offense averaged an additional 40 yds rushing and 50 yds receiving and about 10 points per game, so all of the other trends were positive.

tony hipchest
07-02-2009, 07:16 PM
it was always said in bens young career that if he has to throw it 30+ times in a game he will lose. this was true early because it meant the steelers were abandoning the run (not the yards gained from the run but the actual attempts themselves).

this changed the last 2 years. ben can easilly throw it 40 times a game and WIN as long as willie is still getting his attempts. it doesnt matter if willie has 25 carries for 60 yds. ben wins regardless. this wasnt the case when moore had 20+ carries.

people (many steelerfans included) always bitch about the same 3 willie running plays into the pile that go for no gain, but fail to recognize when that exact same formation is used for a 4th time and the play action leads to a santonio or h. ward bomb for a td.

those plays by willie actually help moore be productive on 3rd down because the opposing defense cannot assume that the steelers wont run it with him.

tony hipchest
07-02-2009, 07:50 PM
i think most outsiders dont realize our defensive philosophy and the importance of rushing attempts (not to gain yards per se but to wind down the clock) and ball control.

our #1 defense needs this time to recoup. when our defense is great, our offense almost always leads the league in ball control.

it is no coincidence, that when arizona scored against us in the superbowl, the steelers defenders were almost glad it happened so quickly.

ben had enough time to use our weapon-x, ace in the hole, no huddle, and woodley had enough juice to seal the deal with a sack and a forced fumble.

that is steelers football.

Preacher
07-02-2009, 08:34 PM
Once again, personal attacks and strawmen. I said nothing about any other position and never said anything or anyone sucks.

... This kid doesn't get it isn't a personal attack, it is an opinion. Please learn what an opinion is. It would greatly benefit everyone on this board.

... and also learn what a strawman argument is, because I was referring to MY argument that your system is flawed since it is not usable in any other comparison... hence, Rev's response.

Funny thing, you have YET to answer. . . nope, like I said, I am finished here.

7/39/43
07-03-2009, 07:51 AM
I just want to see if he can takea hit! We know he has the potential to run they all do when you draft them!

revefsreleets
07-03-2009, 09:17 AM
... isn't a personal attack, it is an opinion. Please learn what an opinion is. It would greatly benefit everyone on this board.

... and also learn what a strawman argument is, because I was referring to MY argument that your system is flawed since it is not usable in any other comparison... hence, Rev's response.

Funny thing, you have YET to answer. . . nope, like I said, I am finished here.

Yup...I was thinking "Absurdity, meet the apotheosis of absurdity!"

First principles, though:
1. Parker > Moore (according to everyone but UFN)
2. Parker better equipped to handle day-to-day load (and this is not sexy, stat padding duty)
3. Moore better equipped for 3rd/long down duty, where yards will come in chunks, not grind-it-out fights for every inch.
4. Neither is a great back. Parker is slightly overrated. Moore may be slightly UNDERrated.
5. Parker still > Moore.